Iraq Inquiry: Good Acting to Support Big Lies?

Blair arrived two hours early to attend six hours of scheduled hearing at the Queen Elizabeth Hall in central London, as he tried to avoid protesters and media outside.

The former prime minister was totally unrepentant over the war, insisting that 9/11 had changed everything and speaking of the "threat" posed by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, insisted "you could not take risks with this issue at all."

So Blair took what was to him the non-risky route, waging a war against Iraq which, nearly seven years later, still sees over 100,000 international troops occupying the nation.

He conceded that Saddam never had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks, but repeatedly turned to them as proof that "religious fanatics" couldn't be allowed to have WMDs. It was unclear how Saddam's largely secular state fit in to this model, but he insisted that the "absolutely key issue was the WMD issue." Of course, after seven years, no WMDs were ever found and most officials have conceded they never will be.

But Blair, the supporter of devastating wars "just in case," appeared quite contented with his decision, to the revulsion of the parents of slain soldiers, who sat quietly watching as the crowds outside called for the former prime minister to face war crimes charges.

Not content with starting just one major war on false pretense, Blair ended his talk by declaring that Iraq's neighbor Iran posed a similar threat for its also illusory WMDs, and urged the leaders of today to not "take any risks" with Iran either.

"We haven't come here expecting an apology," one protester, Gary Walker, 31, told the New York Times. "But it's important to show seven years on that people still care about the illegal war."

The White House is yet to decide whether to ask President Bush to account for his war decisions.