Here's a link to the detailed summary of Goldsmith's many deliberations re. Iraq, as promised yesterday:
Goldsmith and the legality of the assault on Iraq
It's taken years, but it's finally happening. Attorney General Goldsmith has been ordered to turn over all information underlying his advice to Blair concerning the legality of attacking Iraq.
Those who have followed the twists and turns of the case will realize that this is of significantly greater importance than The Downing Street Memo.
The British military chiefs demanded an unequivocal declaration from the Attorney General that attacking Iraq would not be in contravention of domestic or international law. Originally, Goldsmith was unwilling to deliver such a pronouncement, and he gave one that was equivocal, and that questioned the legality. Washington pressured Blair, and Goldsmith returned a new assessment, that was torturous in the extreme in how it applied precedents. (more)
UPDATE AT BOTTOM:
===
YESTERDAY's POST:
I have previously diaried this. UK Commander Sir Michael Boyce threatened Blair at one time, due to the perceived manipulation that lay behind the AG's advice:
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Since the invasion, the British High Command has expressed fears the war was illegal: http://www.dailykos.com/...
Several legal advisors resigned, when the AG's findings became known (as did politicians):
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Jack Straw tried to keep these documents from being made public:
http://www.dailykos.com/...
At any rate - rejoice. And who knows whether Straw's recent demotion in Blair's cabinet isn't connected to the stunning news:
Information Commissioner Richard Thomas has upheld a request for Goldsmith's statements on March 17, 2003, to be fully documented, and has ordered the AG's office to release all papers relevant to the March 17 change of mind.
The AG's confidential assessment, on March 7th, was quite different from what was released on March 17.
The discrepancy actually caused Robin Cook to resign as Majority Leader, after which he repeatedly severely denounced Blair for attacking Iraq on false charges:
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Today, the Information Commissioner's ruling has sent waves through Whitehall and Downing Street. The article mentions that certain documents can be withheld - however, the ruling is for full disclosure of those that were relevant to the difference between the March 7 and 17, 2003 recommendations.
From The Independent: http://news.independent.co.uk/...
Here's The Guardian on the same topic:
Watchdog forces Iraq Information from Goldsmith
UPDATE:
The AG's office have made a limited disclosure. However, the various parties that have sued for a release of the documents are taking the case onwards. The Independent will sue for a release of all memoranda, e-mails and other communications showing who was influencing the AG as "he changed his mind" between the two crucial dates. Already, the fallout is substantial, with claims that it's clear the AG was manipulated and lied to.
The shadow Attorney General from the Tory party is claiming that Blair deceived his own AG, and as many have believed, it's on this point that the whole matter stands. Anyone who remembers Blair's repeated "I am convinced WMD will be found" immediately after the invasion of Iraq should keep in mind that his entire case was built upon finding WMD.
Today's The Independent article: Goldsmith broke rules on disclosing Iraq war advice
As this is becoming "Blair's War", the Tories can criticize Blair and claim that they, too, were deceived into supporting the invasion. Likewise, there are those in Labour who want Blair gone, and who may be lending a shoulder.
This is not going away. Given the amount of interest expressed here, I will post a detailed summation of "The Legal March to War" this evening. The pre-war machinations will give you an interesting perspective on the panic in The White House and at Downing Street that gave us Plame, Kelly, David Kay abandoning his mission and the shift to "humanitarian grounds for invasion."