mr. joseph whelan. [applause] >> i want to thank you for coming, and i want to thank quail ridge for inviting me. this is my third visit here. really appreciate it. um, let's start by talking about what the mexican war was and was not, and then i'll go into some more of the details. mexican war is one of america's o forgotten wars. the civil war 15 years later all but erased its memory. this has robbed us of insight into the origins of other wars. for example, in important ways the mexican war is a distant echo of the iraqi war. and mexico's abiding distrust and resentment of the united states can be traced to the mexican war. the mexican war also hastened the civil war. it might not have been fought if the mexican war had not opened the volatile slavery debate. now, the mexican war's often confused with the texan war for independence from mexico ten years earlier in 1836. the texas revolution is known for the battles of the alamo and san ha sin toe -- ha seen toe and the exploits of sam houston and dav

mr. powell points the finger of blame in a particular place. he says the special advisers like the charlie whelans not department spokesmen who specialize in character assassination. what always surprised me was they managed to persuade the press to keep quiet about their activities. however, many incriminating e-mails or texts they sent. >> that is a very good point. in other words -- >> is all of that correct? >> well, no, not all of it but if you ask me to single out, then i would single out charlie whelan and i've always been clear about that and i was always clear with gordon brown that i thought it danieled to have him there. likewise damon mcbride. but the point i'm making is that -- i mean i can remember for example one briefing where at the end of yet another frenzy and journalist accusing me of lying and the politicians getting roped into saying i should resign and blah, blah, blah, i can remember saying right, come on. just say the what the lie is and then provide any evidence whatsoever. they never could. so -- and that in itself is a form of spin. you sent meet peter oborn's essay he

whelan were telling you the truth. it was our job to analyze it. >> you told us you were friends with mr. blair. was your relationship with mr. brown at the same level? were you friends with him? >> i was, um, i was actually friends with czar rehr brown -- sarah brown, his amazing lady, and that was the friendship. so probably not. >> no. so you were more friendly with mr. blair than you were with mr. brown, weren't you? >> by the end, yes. but not at the beginning, no. and, actually, as mr. murdoch said in his testimony, um, he had a very warm relationship with mr. brown, and i would see him, i would see gordon brown quite regularly too. >> all the commentators say, let me come back to this, that in relation to this feud you took the side of mr. blair and not mr. brown. did you or didn't you? >> i think you have to say which part of the feud. there were many, many elements to the feud. so, for example, in the famous curry house coup i think we did, in fact, take mr. blair's side because the country hadn't been, was almost on ice because of the hostilities. and i felt an injustice, and on behalf