A jaw-dropping White House memorandum describing the “deal in blood” between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former president George W. Bush has been revealed. According to The Mail on Sunday, the details surrounding Blair’s support of Bush’s efforts to bring down Saddam Hussein were found in a memo to Colin Powell, then Secretary of State, to Bush. The deal in blood came shortly before Blair’s highly publicized summit with Bush in Crawford, Texas.
Now, it has been confirmed that the memo titled, “Secret… Memorandum for the President,” was nothing more than a fake. It has been reported that the deal in blood was actually forged an entire year before the invasion even began. Both memos were reportedly written in April of 2002. However, the Iraq war did not begin until March 20, 2003. So, how is it that the memo has surfaced? Numerous reports have revealed that it was uncovered from one of Hilary Clinton’s private servers, within 30,000 emails that have also been leaked.
Although Blair has always made a gratuitous effort to deny the claims of a deal in blood every being written, initially implicating that he’d prefer a diplomatic response as opposed to a military resolution, the incriminating memo insists that there was indeed a deal.
Here is a copy of the memo shared via Daily Mail:
However, that’s not all. According to Telegraph, Blair and Bush also divulged a plan to convince the public that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, but the deal in blood reportedly implies that those weapons never even existed. Bush allegedly responded by agreeing to be “an equal partner in the ‘special relationship.'”
The Daily Mail has also reported that another document, written by Colin Powell in relation to the deal in blood, has also been uncovered. That particular memorandum, only dated April ’02, reportedly detailed Blair’s position if he were to back the United States.
“A sizeable number of his [Blair’s] MPs remain at present opposed to military action against Iraq… some would favor shifting from a policy of containment of Iraq if they had recent (and publicly usable) proof that Iraq is developing WMD/missiles… most seem to want some sort of UN endorsement for military action,” the document states. “Blair’s challenge now is to judge the timing and evolution of America’s Iraq policy and to bring his party and the British people on board. There have been a few speculative pieces in the more feverish press about Labor [sic] unease re Iraq policy… which have gone on to identify the beginnings of a challenge to Blair’s leadership of the party. Former Cabinet member Peter Mandelson, still an insider, called it all ‘froth.’ Nonetheless, this is the first time since the 1997 election that such a story is even being printed.”
According to Press TV, both of the documents about the deal in blood were exclusively obtained by The Mail on Sunday. Needless to say, many readers are absolutely outraged. For those who don’t know, Brown University’s Costs of War Project details the financial breakdown of the Iraq war indicates that conflict has cost American taxpayers an estimated $1.7 trillion along with an additional $490 billion in government benefits for war veterans. However, that’s not all.
This is the memo that suggests Tony Blair backed the Iraq war a year before invading http://t.co/rfpjlvwy12— Quartz (@qz) October 18, 2015
The projected aftermath of the war could amount to more than $6 trillion, with interest, over the next four decades. So, if the forged memos are authentic, the deal in blood will affect the United States for many, many years to come.
[Image(s) via Mark Wilson/Getty Images; Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images]