MPACUK. A member of the Iraq War Inquiry has spoken publicly about what he says is the anti-Semitism which greeted his appointment to the Chilcot committee. He gave the interview to a small right-wing radio station in Israel, the Israel National Radio station, operating from stolen land in the West Bank.

Sir Martin Gilbert seemed to be confused as to why an openly proud Zionist would not be the ideal candidate to get to the bottom of the Iraq war and why we went to war in the first place.

To the Muslim world however it is akin to putting a Nazi in charge of the Nuremberg trials. Zionists were the chief architects of the war against Iraq and Israel one of the main agitators demanding Washington act against it.

Sir Martin offered a spurious argument that Israel wanted Iran to be attacked and thus had nothing to do with Iraq, but this is nothing short of ludicrous and a very poor diversion.

Indeed Israel did have something to do with the invasion of Iraq, just like it does much of the Muslim world, including Afghanistan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and of course Lebanon – according to published documents and recorded interviews by senior Israeli government officials it was heavily involved in the push to attack Iraq. Behind the scenes it also worked closely with JINSA and AIPAC two of the most powerful pro-Israel lobbies in Washington. It was no surprise then that the senior Government official in Israel stated that, ‘The day after Iraq falls we must concentrate on Iran’.

The neo-conservatives, too, were heavily linked to Zionists in Israel and were lock-step with their counterparts in Israel over Iraq; this was well documented in the great book ‘Israel Clash of Civilisation’ by a former Guardian journalist.

The fact that Sir Gilbert was even being interviewed by a tiny, little-known radio station in Palestine built on stolen land by right-wing settlers shows how involved he is with the Zionist movement.

The softly, softly approach by members of the enquiry to uncover the truth behind the Iraq war, of course, has proved that the enquiry was nothing short of a ‘whitewash’. How much of this is due to the bias of the Zionists on the inside like Gilbert we will never know. One thing is sure – the Zionist connection has thus far not been mentioned at all.

Sir Gilbert might not want the public to debate this, but throwing the old, tired political slur of ‘anti-Semitism’ at those who ask the question ‘is he biased?’ is laughable and indicative of those who wish to get to the bottom of this tragic war.