cabinet secrecy is good... for planning WAR CRIMES

labour's Jack Straw will go down in history for his decision to keep the Iraq invasion discussion in cabinet secret for another 30 years.
I can understand the need for secrecy in sensitive matters. However, Iraq is not , or was not, a politically-sensitive area. The only vested interests Britain and British companies had in Iraq was the purchase, transport and sale of oil. So, what is Straw trying to hide?
Does he not want us to know that cabinet had decided, as Crash Gordon admitted in an Alzheimer moment, that the British economy was benefitting from the Iraq slaughter?
So, will he and his colleagues look bloodthirsty and greedy if the minutes are revealed?
I can draw no other conclusions.
And since we don't have the minutes, then it is our duty as democrats to question authority and decide how politicians, our representatives, will be judged, based on the available facts. They are hiding the facts because it will make them look even worse than conjecture would.

Hello, the Hague? Put me through to the tribunal.
Have I got war-crimes suspects for YOU!

The opposition's conspiracy of silence is quite laughable as well. Especially since Labour outed the Conservatives by releasing cabinet minutes of other sensitive meetings. Now, the Tories have fallen into line as they also do not care about the senseless slaughter of innocent people. Their election chances are likely to blame for this. You see, they too will take similar opportunities after they win the next election.

UPDATE: We'll be getting a whitewash, I mean, an inquiry into Iraq, in 2000-never, which will, in any case, exonerate Tony Blair and will not even say that Britain broke international law in order to rob Iraq of its oil and oil revenues, with the Americans, and keep it permanently under their control, while snooping over the border, into Iran. So, what's the big secret?
-Costick67 (8^P