Say what you will about them, the stiff upper lips gets tiresome, and their food sucks.  But the Brits are still not morons lobotomized by a cult of celebrity peccadilloes.

The London First Post:

Tony Blair's extraordinary admission on Sunday to the BBC's Fern Britton - that he would have gone to war to topple Saddam Hussein regardless of the issue of Iraq's alleged WMDs - is sure to give fresh impetus to moves to prosecute our former prime minister for war crimes.

The case against Blair, strong enough before this latest comment, now appears rock solid.

Note that this kind of admission is pretty much almost exactly what Dick Cheney once said to Tim Russert on Meet the Press:

Asked by "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert whether the United States would have gone ahead with the invasion anyway if the CIA had reported that Saddam did not, in fact, have such weapons, Cheney said yes.

Reagan's former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts, told us this week in Counterpunch:

Former PM Tony Blair, who provided cover for President Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq, is being damned for his crimes by UK officialdom testifying before the Chilcot Inquiry.

The London Times on December 14 summed up the case against Blair in a headline: "Intoxicated by Power, Blair Tricked Us Into War." Two days later the British First Post declared: "War Crime Case Against Tony Blair Now Rock-solid." In an unguarded moment Blair let it slip that he favored a conspiracy for war regardless of the validity of the excuse [weapons of mass destruction] used to justify the invasion...The movement to bring Blair to trial as a war criminal is gathering steam.

The London Times article says "Ominously for the former Prime Minister, his growing distance from power appears to be loosening some well-placed Whitehall tongues."

This is about as quiet a tree falling in the forest for the American media as can be imagined.  As Americans wonder haplessly how their economic fortunes could have tanked so suddenly (unless you are Halliburton or a "defense" contractor,) could it be fear that this moral outrage thing could be catchy?  Roberts notes:

In the US, of course, there is no such attempt to hold to account Bush, Cheney, Condi Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the large number of war criminals that comprised the Bush Regime. Indeed, Obama, whom Republicans love to hate, has gone out of his way to protect the Bush cohort from being held accountable.

Well, not exactly, Bob.  The second part is true, yes.  But there are quite a few still outside of John Yoo's, the torture lawyer's, house in Berkeley every Sunday, as well as his classroom, carrying signs and plastic handcuffs.  And there is motion, as citizens turn to the last branch of government with some semblance of independence, the Judicial branch. From No Lies Radio:

Federal Judge Jeffrey White ruled on June 12 that U.S. citizen Jose Padilla can sue John Yoo for the torture he was subjected to based on Yoo's legal advice. Several speakers pointed to the fact that the aim of the torture was precisely to get the detainees to make false statements that could then be used to justify the war on Iraq. These statements were not good enough to use in court, but they were good enough to go to wars which maimed and murdered millions.

The tactic of the activists is to go after the underlings in the administration who wrote the fig leafs for breaking the law, then hope they will turn rat on the big guys.  But the Brits say, F- that.  Tony, we're starting with you.

What's left of the good America we used to know, according to Roberts, is being further flushed down the toilet by both parties, with Obama doing his part for the new tyranny.  Of closing Guantanamo and moving it someplace else Roberts writes:

In truth, Obama has handed his supporters another defeat. Closing Guantanamo meant ceasing to hold people in violation of our legal principles of habeas corpus and due process and ceasing to torture them in violation of US and international laws...All Obama would be doing would be moving 100 people, against whom the US government is unable to bring a case, from the prison in Guantanamo to a prison in Thomson, Illinois...Neither the public nor the media have ever shown any interest in how the detainees came to be incarcerated. Most of the detainees were unprotected people who were captured by Afghan war lords and sold to the Americans as "terrorists" in order to collect a proffered bounty.

The 100 who are slated to be removed to Illinois have apparently been so badly abused that the US government is afraid to release them because of the testimony the prisoners could give to human rights organizations and foreign media about their mistreatment.

So let's see.  You capture the wrong guys, torture them for years, find out they had nothing against us but now you can't let them go because now we have created a terrorist?  How All-American.

There are Americans keeping the candle burning if and when folks wake up and fan it into a fire, UK-style, at ProsecuteBushCheney.org, and ProsecuteGeorgeBush.com. The latter site rhetorically asks "why should someone who accidentally kills a person in a liquor store holdup be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, yet someone who creates death and destruction on an unimaginable scale sail off into the sunset and have a library named after them?"

The candle burns, for when we throw off the party blinders which have been wrapped around our heads.  Now the important thing: couldn't you guys put a pinch of paprika, anything, in those boiled vegetables?
READ: False Pretenses, the 935 Lies Which Led Us Into War.