Rather surprisingly to me, the Chilcot inquiry in Britain into the causes of the Iraq War has barely registered with the cis- Atlantic media. As their recriminations and second-guessing on this very subject were all the rage during the second administration of President George W. Bush, and as his successor gave early signs of appealing to his left-wing and anti-war base by hinting at inquiries of his own—possibly even criminal charges—it would have stood to reason that the MoveOn types would have been only too happy to belie their name and, instead of Moving On, park themselves before Sir John Chilcot’s committee, or, at least, among the vocal and hate-filled demonstrators outside. Even inside the committee room, there were shouts from the gallery, in reply to testimony by the former Prime Minister Tony Blair, that he was a murderer and a liar. The story was barely reported here, though it was all over the papers in Britain—which, after all, had only been a junior partner in the war.

And that was part of the reason for the disparity. For much of the British media, Mr. Blair’s having willingly played Robin to Mr. Bush’s Batman, or Tonto to his Lone Ranger, was a far worse sin than having allegedly “sexed up” the terrorist threat from Saddam Hussein in order to exaggerate the urgency of going to war. That helps to explain why the level of the British media’s hatred for Mr. Blair today appears to exceed even that