Yes, I know that there’s been an awful happening in Dallas, and people have died.  I do not write about that.  I would not know what I was talking about at all.

The Chilcot Report is something I have at least read a little bit of, and I believe I know a bit more.

The Chilcot Report is a British analysis of the Iraq War throughout UK involvement until withdrawal in 2009.  Upon change of Government from Labor to Conservative, Gordon Brown commissioned a penetrating inquiry into the UK’s role in the war, asking about how the decision was reached to become involved, how the war was managed, and whether its goals were met.

The report was anticipated to take a year.  It took seven years to thoroughly answer the questions asked.  In doing so, it appears to be also, by its very existence, pointing out the vast cultural and intellectual separation between the United States and the UK.  It will, I expect, merely underline and justify Brexit.  If it does so, I believe that it will be a great refreshing of the UK’s identity.  It may further separate the US and the UK.  From the UK’s point of view, that would only be for the good.

For American doctors, it serves as a nice weight on the balance scale between the Chilcot Report and the IOM’s To Err Is Human which preceded it by ten years.  Chilcot investigated prior actions; To Err Is Human affect later actions.  The first is history; the second, news-as-history.

I have only read the  tiniest bit of the executive summary of Chilcot’s Report.  It is damning from the perspective of the British mind, and incomprehensible to the American.  It is truly written in a language which we Americans cannot read any longer.

So far, the damning centerpiece of Chilcot is that the Government at the time, led by Tony Blair, did not engage in the leadup to war, the war itself and its aftermath, with any competence.  Blair did not effectively govern the UK regarding the matter.  He did not engage the British resources and capacities needed to plan and decide the matter independently. 

Worse, he left the decision to a sovereign foreign nation, the United States, and trusted in the US’s having engaged in these things competently.  The US did not.  He left Britain in the posture of helpless dependence of a lesser ally upon its superior.  The British Army and the country paid the price for his fundamental misjudgment.

From what I can see of Chilcot, it upbraids Tony Blair for taking on dictatorial powers in a representative democracy.  It reads as a damning indictment.  It is silent on the actions of other sovereign nations – it is all about the UK.  But it soberly considers whether the Blair Government committed something of the gravity of crimes against humanity in its reckless pursuit of the war. 

If Chilcot is the Nuremberg Indictments, To Err Is Human resembles the Gleiwicz Incident.  TEIH gave cover for a broad-reaching Blitzkreig takeover of American medicine.  There was no pretext of justification.  There was no pretext of discussion.  The Authorities acted decisively to turn over the entirety of Modern Medicine into the creation of Corporate Retail Medicine.  The goal closely resembles the type of medical care available in many Third World Countries.  Resistance is ignored, or crushed.

There is Obama who, like Blair, truly believes that this decision in the best interests of humanity.  The British are now stating that atrocities committed under an earnest and benificent strategy may still merit punishment.  Will we think that way about the overthrow of American Medicine?