Julian Assange wins Sam Adams Award for Integrity

by craig on August 19, 2010 12:15 pm in Afghanistan

The award is judged by a group of retired senior US military and intelligence personnel, and past winners. This year the award to Julian Assange was unanimous.

Previous winners and ceremony locations:

Coleen Rowley of the FBI; in Washington, D.C.

Katharine Gun of British intelligence; in Copenhagen, Denmark

Sibel Edmonds of the FBI; in Washington, D.C.

Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan; in New York City

Sam Provance, former sergeant, U.S. Army, truth-teller about Abu Ghraib; in Washington, D.C.

Frank Grevil, major, Danish army intelligence, imprisoned for giving the Danish press documents showing that Denmark’s prime minister disregarded warnings that there was no authentic evidence of WMDs in Iraq; in Copenhagen, Denmark

Larry Wilkerson, colonel, U.S. Army (retired), former chief of staff to Secretary Colin Powell at the State Department, who has exposed what he called the “Cheney-Rumsfeld cabal”; in Washington, D.C.

http://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/2010/08/15/can-wikileaks-help-save-lives/

Not sure yet where this year’s award ceremony will be held, but I’ll be there.

Tweet this post

564 Comments

1 2 3

  1. Congratulations to Assange – this is a richly deserved recognition.

  2. Great to see you back to blogging after a few days – how’s the house coming on?

  3. Congratulations to Mr. Assange!! Open disclosure is an essential precondition for democracy since for a meaningful public debate to take place one has to be made aware of the facts. But it is not just democracy that benefits from the disclosures in wikileaks, but human rights and civil liberties as well. Again, well done Mr. Assange, and well done Craig Murray for so eloquently bringing your issues to the public eye.

  4. http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2010/08/pilger-wikileaks-afghanistan

    Shame on the British government for cowering in the face of Washington’s threats to Assange.

  5. Assange has put lives at risk by revealing classified documents containing details about informers. In my view he has been gravely irresponsible and deserves not an award but a stiff jail sentence.

  6. Assange for the Nobel Peace Prize too.

    You kept that award quiet Craig. Well done.

    How is the house refit going. Are you knackered? And will we get the ‘after’ photos having had the ‘before’ set?

  7. Is Julian Assange a hero or an intelligence operative.

    Here’s Webster Tarpley’s analysis:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BabOOgTPtE&feature=related

  8. Abe Rene

    Lives are always at risk when the war mongers get their way. Not only are they at risk, they’re lost on a daily basis often in staggering numbers and attended by horrendous injuries for those who manage to survive.

    However, I’m sure a stiff jail sentence for Assange will ensure the war mongers can sleep safer in their beds.

  9. John Pilger on “Why Wikileaks must be Protected”:

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26192.htm

    Abe Rene, here’s a paragraph:

    “On 31 July, the American celebrity reporter Christiane Amanpour interviewed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on the ABC network. She invited Gates to describe to her viewers his “anger” at WikiLeaks. She echoed the Pentagon line that “this leak has blood on its hands,” thereby cueing Gates to find WikiLeaks “guilty” of “moral culpability.” Such hypocrisy coming from a regime drenched in the blood of the people of Afghanistan and Iraq ?” as its own files make clear ?” is apparently not for journalistic enquiry.”

    The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

  10. Yes! What excellent news.

    Craig,

    thanks for reporting this, and good to see a post from you. What a list of fine people you share this award with. I hope your new home is coming along well.

    Abe Rene

    (if that really was you), Wikileaks did check the material before they released, and withheld a substantial proportion to prevent people being put at risk.

  11. OK, so it’s great to have someone like Assange, Wikileaks, and of course Craig Murray. But so what..we know most of this shit anyway and when was the last time we did anything about what these people bring to our attention.

  12. I applaud the stated aims of Wikileaks and support them 100%. And Julian Assange is clearly a bright, techno-savvy young man – but a young man with a burning ambition.

    According to John Young of Cryptome (and the original front-man for Wikileaks who resigned over its astronomical fund-raising ambitions), the market for illicit, classified and otherwise confidential information is vast – and VERY lucrative indeed.

    Unfortunately, big-money potential, burning ambition, and the explosive emotionally-charged nature of Wilileaks recent leaks (and potentially of those it allegedly holds in reserve) is a combination that is manna from heaven for the Spooks.

    Have a look at:

    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Wikileaks_and_the_Mighty_Wurlitzer

    For a disturbing alternative view of the Wikileaks saga. It expands on the Webster Tarpley analysis refered to at 5:45 above.

    As for Abe Rene – yet another believer in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy – and an angry one too it seems. Oh dear.

  13. Cid,

    some of us do a little, some do more. Craig does a lot. But just knowing helps – we bear witness. That the Powers That Be know this influences their decisions.

  14. Well done to Julian Assange, keep it coming. The public should be able to make decisions on fact not fiction… I would love to say “the truth sets you free” and mean it… unfortunately for some of my friends round the world its landed them in prison for subversion…though perhaps their minds remain free…

  15. Clark: yes, it is me. Sabretache: I ceased to believe in the tooth fairy a few decades ago. Bush and Rumsfeld’s screw-up over the bad planning as well as the questionable decisions to go to war (especially Iraq) in the first place is no reason for Assange to release a great deal of material most which he admits he has not thoroughly read, let alone vetted. Most imprtantly, disclosure is not his decision to make. The informers who risk their lives do so on the understanding that anything they say will be completely secure. So I would say to Assange as would Col. Nathan Jessup to Lt. Kaffee in “A few good men”, but with justice: “You put people in danger. Sweet dreams, son.”

  16. Like the wiki leaks thing was not endorsed by the Good ole Obama Administration and those monkeys at the CIA. Leak?? my butt. Just grooming the sheep

  17. Obama, the drone-firing Peace Laureate should hand over his Nobel Prize to Assange and apologize for embarrassing it. Thank you, Julian.

  18. Abe Rene

    Hmm – I wouldn’t have gone that far but, now you mention it, your take on the issue would make a good Nathan Jessop (amoral, Orwellian “our business is saving lives”, wouldn’t bat an eye about killing if his childish sense of honour dictated – so long as it remained secret or he thought he would get away with it, massive ego, blind as a bat to the real issues) to Assanges Kaffee.

    Nice one.

  19. Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t Assanges ask for the leaks to be vetted by the US Military then throw a hissy fit?

    Don’t get me wrong I’m all for disclosure but be careful about making this guy a saint. This is from the wikileaks twitter

    “Pentagon wants to bankrupt us by refusing to assist review.Media won’t take responsibility.Amnesty won’t.What to do?” see “https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/20664647314″ Wikileaks whilst laudable is all about the ego of it’s main man what with his never sleep in the same place twice crap. FFS have you read about the ’1.4 gigabyte mystery file named “Insurance” on the WikiLeaks website’ ? Have a look at http://cryptome.org

    Guess it will all go the way of Google, remember “Do No Evil (unless the Chinese ask us to remove the references to a certain Square).

  20. Abe Rene

    “Assange has put lives at risk by revealing classified documents containing details about informers.”

    These informers, by collaborating with a foreign occupying armed force, are traitors to their own people. Is that really where your sympathy lies?

  21. Paul,

    I can’t find that Cryptome article from the Cryptome home page. Could you give a more specific reference please?

  22. Paul,

    is this what you were referring to?

    http://cryptome.org/0002/wl-diary-mirror.htm

  23. “These informers, by collaborating with a foreign occupying armed force, are traitors to their own people. Is that really where your sympathy lies?”

    Informers are a very sensitive topic in Ireland, since we were bedevilled by them for centuries … I remember being taught that at the age of 8 or 9. However, Julian Assange says they contacted the Pentagon beforehand, and asked them to indicate where sensitive names might be, and they received no reply. So their whining now is two-faced.

  24. “John Young of Cryptome”

    Is he not a one-man amateur operation?

    “(and the original front-man for Wikileaks who resigned over its astronomical fund-raising ambitions)”

    Assange argues that their safety, secrecy and online anonymity cost money. He says they need new staff to handle all the material they have — which needs to be assessed and sometimes unencrypted. He claims they need people they can rely on, people who can be trusted, and they do a lot of background checks on potential employees. I imagine all that costs money.

    I think his collaboration with Iceland can only be a good thing.

    “The WikiLeaks advised proposal to build an international “new media haven” in Iceland, with the world’s strongest press and whistleblower protection laws, and a “Nobel” prize for for Freedom of Expression, has unaminously passed the Icelandic Parliament.”

    http://www.countercurrents.org/assange170610.htm

  25. Paul,

    as I understood it, Google got to supply search facilities to China by brokering a deal: the Chinese government wanted certain search results not to be displayed. Google negotiated that such results would be acknowledged with a notice reading “This information is withheld by the Chinese government” or something similar. So they negotiated a compromise that was better than nothing; the Chinese government would not have accepted Google otherwise.

  26. I found the recent activities of Wikileaks most odd.

    The US and UK governments being so corrupt must live in perpetual fear of leaks. So, how much better if they could publicise Wikileaks extensively and gather up the leaks and decide which to publish and which not to. Also they could quite easily find out the source.

    Read this excellent article and see what I mean:

    Hidden Intelligence Operation Behind the Wikileaks Release of “Secret” Documents?

    The real story of Wikileaks has clearly not yet been told.

    at

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?aid=20580&context=va

  27. Larry from St. Louis

    20 Aug, 2010 - 5:30 am

    So when do you think Assange will publish documents that detail 911 being an inside job? Answer: never. They don’t exist, you silly gooses.

    I can’t imagine how annoyed Assange gets with 911 Truthy Truthers bothering him all the time.

  28. Is that the book ‘How I got WTC7 Collapsed and Collected the Insurance’ by Larry Silverstein?

  29. I can’t help but feel that a call to throw Assange in jail is specifically hawkish, pro-war. As has been said earlier in the thread, putting the truth-tellers in jail helps the amoral warmongers sleep soundly in their beds.

    It does rather seem that WL have taken care to filter the material, along with the journalists with whom they worked. But if that is not enough for the conservatives here, what would be? To have had the material released to WL and then for it to be destroyed, or never released? Isn’t that rather like telling Ellsberg he should not have released the Pentagon Papers – which were part of the building domestic pressure that ended the war against Vietnam?

  30. Arthur Silber treats the issue of Wikileaks very well, as always. I find him one of the best and most honest bloggers.

  31. Congrats, Julian

    You deserved the award and I hope you get new ones every year.

  32. John Van Rooyen: ‘traitor’ is a loaded word. The people who work for the Americans are fighting the Taleban, who are Islamists who would impose a lunatic and oppressive regime, treat women as slaves, and give support to Al-Qaeda. My sympathies are certainly against them. Assange has high-handedly put people at risk and deserves punishment, not sympathy as far as I am concerned.

  33. I could give Abe Rene a long list of ‘loaded’ words connected to the illegal wars on Iraq and Afghanistan.

    This is from one of the doctors in the original group. Remember that they have been going at this for nearly seven years. I admire their tenacity throughout and their resistance to the cold water poured on them by the likes of Mangold and Aaronovitch, Blair’s pals Rentoul and Campbell and even Gilligan recently. The cold water has ended up just muddying the water but has so far failed to silence those who call for justice.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/19/david-kelly-inquest-disgrace

  34. Antidote,

    i’ll second that comment about Arthur Silber – he’s one of the most uncompromising and consistently brilliant bloggers out there.

  35. Does anyone else see what’s really going on here? Assange has conjured up one of the most elaborate spider’s web ever spun. I strongly urge everyone to be extra cautious.

  36. ASSange. Enough said.

  37. So much for any hope that the ConDems would act honourably to find the truth and to give justice to the late doctor.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1304588/Attorney-General-refuses-open-secret-David-Kelly-files.html

  38. Larry said,

    “So when do you think Assange will publish documents that detail 911 being an inside job? Answer: never. They don’t exist, you silly gooses.”

    Larry, no one here raised the issue of 911. Did you by chance post this on the wrong thread, or perhaps the wrong web site?

    And despite the name, aren’t you really a girl. I mean, how many guys go around calling people “silly gooses”?

    Any how, it’s geese. So, run along you silly goose.

  39. I take cognisance of F. William Engdahl’s view of the topic, as noted upthread^ (copy also here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/2dbr3a4).

    Engdahl is one of the few to analyse the implicity of the leaks, rather than the (overwhelming) content of the leaks themselves (has anyone done that? – links please!)

    Craig, I wouldn’t be assuaged at all by the rostrum that Julian Assange now shares with you. After all the ‘award’ is ‘_judged by a group of retired senior US military and intelligence personnel_’…… When was it you were awarded this similar ‘accolade’? & did the retired military and intelligence bods explain in detail their reasonings?

    I ask with the greatest respect for you…

    It is hard to discover the corollary of so many of the events of today/yesterday.

    & totally off-topic, but worthy of a mention (particularly for the analysis in [youtube] parts 1-6 of historical events) is the new documentary ‘Seeds of Deconstruction’.

    Further info on the film ‘Seeds of Deconstruction’ is available here:

    http://tinyurl.com/35b78ow

  40. Sorry for misplacing this comment!

    i didn’t find the “post a comment” on that page.

    i just ordered the “The Catholic Orangmen of Togo”, but i missed the “Special Instructions to Merchant” box for a signed copy. It’s the one for 16 Richards. Mille Grazie! Dio vi benedica!

  41. Julian Assange is a good ‘C’ programmer and has written software tools for Unix including a port scanner:

    http://ftp.cerias.purdue.edu/pub/tools/unix/scanners/strobe/

    and an encryption program called ‘Marutukku’ for Linux

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubberhose_(file_system)

    Marutukku or ‘rubberhose’ as it was later called was used by doctors in Iraq in 2003/4 for storing data on abuses to Iraqi civilians who ended up in trauma.

    Julian is no agent, his own emails have been hacked and he warns against sending sensitive information by this route, preferring good ‘ol ‘snail-mail’ to a PO Box No.

    Bert,

    Thanks – Seeds of Deconstruction is a ‘must-see.’

    Attorney General Dominic Grieve has sloping shoulders preferring to leave the decision to release the ‘post-mortem examination report and other sensitive medical notes on David Kelly to Ken Clarke; the ‘Big Society’ awaits a positive outcome Mr Clarke -

    open government is de rigeur n’est-ce pas?

  42. alan campbell

    21 Aug, 2010 - 3:27 am

    Hippy.

  43. Craig, if you ever bump into Sibel Edmonds – do have a chat with her about 9/11, OBL and AQ etc

  44. Assange has now been accused of rape:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047025

    Like Scott Ritter.

  45. Yes the dirty tricks dept have been working o/t. It must be very distressing for Assange all the same. Didn’t something similar happen to a presidential candidate.

  46. Larry from St. Louis

    21 Aug, 2010 - 12:37 pm

    technicolour, did Scott Ritter ever make the argument that the Vast Conspiracy had falsified the charges against him?

  47. This will get you ROTFLOL Larry. Watch carefully @ 2.09 to see the smile wiped off Regev’s physog.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME_NpnH7jDc

  48. The ‘dirty trick’ is a plot to make the hosting and security of Wikileaks on Internet servers problematic.

    A recent contract with The Pirate Party in Sweden serves to enforce the security of Wikileaks hosting.

    Julian had dinner with the Pirate Party Chairman Rick Falk Vinge last Sunday when an agreement was signed that would offer some protection in Swedish law to maintain a Wikileak presence.

    The Pirate Party does have about 10% support in Sweden (growing) and I believe has two representatives in the European parliament.

    Since its defence against P2P file sharing, the Pirate Party is gaining strength, saying: “the proposals to censor The Pirate Bay from the Internet [are] an attempt to silence one of today’s most important voices related to civil liberties and freedom on the net. It is nothing less than political censorship, which every democratically minded person must condemn.”

    I am very interested in the framework of this party and whether it could be applied successfully to British politics.

    Let face it, in Britain, we are becoming sick to death of a defunct, obsolete and burdening political system that drains taxes, supports a ‘deep’ foreign policy and humiliates local community organisers by proposing a stupid ‘big society’ plan that is undermining hard working groups the width and breadth of Great Britain.

  49. Further to my first comment here and at the risk of gilding the lilly on site promotion: The Wikispooks article on Wikileaks now has probably the most comprehensive set of non-MSM links to insightful information you will find anywhere. They include both Arthur Silber, Zahir Ebrahim and John Pilger articles, together with a tuned Google search of the Cryptome site and some commentary. John Young of Cryptome you will recall was the original registrant of the Wikileaks domain but resigned over their fund-raising ambitions.

    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Wikileaks

  50. Arrest warranty has been issued in Sweden today for Wikileaks founder with rape charges. CIA seems to be working pretty well.

  51. Now he’ll have to spend all his time defending the rape allegations. Oh, it’s so transparent.

  52. Peter,

    I remind you that PGP can be broken and again I advise everyone to change your ‘PGP keys’ on a regular basis (special thanks to the ‘locksmith’ who gave me a ‘laugh’ by advertising key-cutting on this site).

  53. Larry from St. Louis

    21 Aug, 2010 - 3:09 pm

  54. You people have NO right to know the contents of classified info. Where in the law does it state you are entitled to this infO?

    This man was a hacker. He is a crook, a theif and, like most radical liberals, one who only cares about those who are no threat to him.

    DOes he help try to topple radical islam or dangerous criminals? No

    Does he try to topple Iran or VZ? No

    Why is that? Because he’s a scumbag. Just like you phonies

  55. Ooh er missus!

    Troll alert

    Troll alert

    Calling

    Calling

  56. “Chief prosecutor Eva Finne has come to the decision that Julian Assange is not suspected of rape. Considering that, Assange is no longer arrested in his absence”.

    http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/

  57. How bizarre. Sounds like a typical disinformation/ mud-slinging black (or grey) op.

  58. Suhayl said,

    “Now he’ll have to spend all his time defending the rape allegations. Oh, it’s so transparent. ”

    Ha! Who are the conspiracy theorists now?

  59. Glenn Greenwald on Assange:

    “Charges against Julian Assange withdrawn, unfounded”

    http://tinyurl.com/36dt937

    Since he says Scott Ritter was the subject of a ‘media smear campaign’, can I assume he was never convicted? Google throws up nothing.

  60. dreoilin from St Louis

    21 Aug, 2010 - 5:58 pm

    I’ll do just about anything “to see the smile wiped off Regev’s physog” so I’m off to watch.

  61. Alfred, I know. Although I never called you or anyone that, as far as I can recall. In fact, I – and many others – have supplied links to various articles, etc. across these boards over the years which have demonstrated how the intelligence services create and disseminate disinformation of various kinds in pursuit of political goals.

    Anyhow, it’s pretty obvious. Assange will probably be accused of ‘child porn’ next. That’s the usual mud – because it’s the accusation whence refutation and redemption are hard to attain. And as always, there will be ‘sympathetic’ journalists ready with their poison pens, ready to follow their master’s voice. Woof-woof!

  62. “Assange will probably be accused of ‘child porn’ next”.

    No, they can’t access his computer. Hence the trumped up rape charge instead.

  63. Hey, Suhayl:

    I did not mean to suggest that you had called anyone a conspiracy theorist. I was just struck by the interesting fact that some conspiracy theories, as mere hypotheses, whether stated or implied, seem more acceptable than others.

    My own view is that anyone who refuses to entertain a conspiracy theory is nutty, and anyone who believes a conspiracy theory without very good evidence is nuttier.

    Incidentally, isn’t there some thing oxymoronic about the Sam Adams award for “integrity in intelligence”?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Adams_Award

    I mean, after Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and the dodgy dossier, would any person of integrity be in intelligence to begin with?

  64. Trenchcoats are sexy.

  65. The wikileaks documents, particularly as relayed by the Guardian convey a few very simple ideas. See if you can identify whose agenda they serve:

    Covert units hunt ‘taliban’ leaders for ‘kill or capture’

    There has been a steep rise in ‘Taliban’ bomb attacks on NATO

    The ‘Taliban’ have killed 2000 civilians, while US troops have killed just a few hundred.

    Iran and Pakistan are helping the ‘Taliban’

  66. There seem to be a load of people who are just *sure* that Wikileaks is an intelligence agencies’ front. I suggest they go and spend some time looking around the Wikileaks site – there’s a lot more there than just the latest Afghan War Diaries.

    Yes, the Taliban do get shown up in the War Diaries; did someone think they were saints? Just because the Taliban are wrong doesn’t make US/NATO actions right.

  67. Congrats Julian on latest award.Stay safe!

  68. Congrats to Julian Assange. I don’t believe the rape allegations crap.

    BTW:

    For 9/11ers there’s a debate on this radio station here, now. It’s on for four hours!

    http://www.ksfo560.com/article.asp?id=723446

    I know it’s off-topic but it is live and thought some people might be interested.

  69. Clark, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Angrysoba, Alfred thanks both for your sensible comments, above. Dreoilin, re. trenchcoats… (!)

    Joe, the first three of those assertions we already knew, did we not, though I’m sure that if one takes the 8 year-war as a whole, NATO actions will have killed more civilians than that (many more than ‘hundreds’) in Afghanistan.

    The fourth, well, let’s see how it pans out. Everyone I ask, I get a different view. I too am suspicious of ‘conveniently-timed’ information linking Iran – and the current regime in Pakistan – to anything (if US intel knew of this 5 years or more ago, why didn’t they put more pressure on the dictator Musharraf? Right now, there are very reactionary, military-Islamist elements in Pakistan trying to promote another military coup), but of course just because the USA says that Iran/ elements in Pakistan might be doing this and that and because some in the US hierarchy seem to want to weaken and maybe even then attack Iran (as happened with Iraq) doesn’t mean Iran is not doing the other (if you see what I mean). What would you do, if you were Iran and were being threatened and economically hemmed-in by a superpower? You’d deal with your enemy’s enemy, wouldn’t you? You’d deal with the devil himself, wouldn’t you, even though he murdered your diplomats? Just as China supplied the monsters, Pinochet in Chile and Mobutu in Zaire, with weapons to counterbalance Soviet influence in ‘Latin’ America and Africa, respectively.

    Basically, I think we need to stop looking for white and black in all this; as in the Cold War. The USSR and the USA were (as we might say in Glasgow) ‘systemic shites’ in different ways and different places.

    There are many one might admire, eg. the people working on the ground like the ordinary members of the Awami National Party (democratically elected) in Pakhtunwala, Pakistan and teachers, etc., who have been slaughtered by the (electorally-defeated) Pakistani Taliban. These are the types of people – grassroots – whom we ought to be supporting. Nurses, doctors, teachers who work in these areas and who are from the local community.

    In this regard, think Khymer Rouge; the USA bombed Cambodia ‘into the Stone Age’ and Cambodia got the Khymer Rouge, who were supported by China but opposed by the USSR (who supported North Vietnam). The USSR and USA/ Pakistan, together, managed to destroy Afghanistan and what did ‘we’ get? The ‘Mujaheddin’/'Taliban’/'Northern Alliance’ – all a bunch of murderous bastards.

    One has to understand that states behave coldly and with amorality. It’s a power struggle and that’s all it is; sadly, human rights/ morality do not enter the equation. Or rather, the ‘morality’ is Machiavellian and is that of the CIA/KGB/SAVAK/ISI/MOSSAD/SIS et al. It’s about wealth and strategic geopolitical power. This is part of the overall narrative of history aka the tragedy of the human condition.

  70. “Britain scraps annual assessment of human rights abuses across the world”

    ‘NGOs concerned that ministers are ‘blindly’ pursuing commercial interests in countries where atrocities are taking place’

    Observer:

    http://tinyurl.com/2f4uazn

  71. Ah, the authorities must be desperate, to be hauling out walking ‘cadavers’ like Dr Hunt, who seems to change his story every five minutes. A “textbook suicide”? No, even those who believe it was suicide would hesitate to call it that. Any doctor ought to be more cautious the Hunt seems to be being. I suspect he’s been fed a line and possibly put under pressure. ‘The Sunday Times’ – ah, that organ of truth, none of whose contributors have any links whatsoever with the security and intelligence services. If ‘The Sunday Times’ says the world is flat, we can be fairly certain that it is at the very least elliptical:

    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20100822/tuk-pathologist-calls-kelly-death-textbo-a7ad41d.html

  72. “The fourth, well, let’s see how it pans out. Everyone I ask, I get a different view. I too am suspicious of ‘conveniently-timed’ information linking Iran – and the current regime in Pakistan – to anything (if US intel knew of this 5 years or more ago, why didn’t they put more pressure on the dictator Musharraf?”

    We had definitely heard these allegations before the Wikileaks thing came out.

    LSE, not usually considered a bastion of CIA thought, had produced a study about ISI assistance of the Taliban, IIRC.

    Iran’s backing of the Taliban would surprise me slightly and I didn’t believe it for a long time based on the extreme animosity between the Iranian regime and the Taliban. But…as you say, Suhayl, states will make deals with all kinds.

    In fact, the US ambassador to Afghanistan was likely murdered by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s group Hizb-i-Islami (I think) but that group became the largest recipient of CIA-funneled cash against the Soviets in the eighties.

    Anyway, back to the radio show for me…

  73. Saving you all £1 here for sight of the S Times editorial and article. Hunt has come out the woodwork now. Why? An extract of the evidence at the Hutton whitewash is at the bottom. NOTE that the doctors are asking for an inquest which was never held. Read the extract from the evidence and compare to what Hunt is saying here.

    LEADER

    Time to nail the David Kelly story for good

    Conspiracy theories are unhealthy and it is time the government seized its opportunity finally to resolve the real cause of the doctor’s death

    The Sunday Times

    Published: 2010-08-22 00:01:00.0

    Comment (1)

    Recommend (0)

    The rumour mill is churning over the death of Dr David Kelly

    Conspiracy theories have a habit of getting such a grip on the popular imagination that the delusion can only be eradicated by extraordinary measures. This was true of the deaths of John F Kennedy and Diana, Princess of Wales where a stubborn body of opinion maintained they had been murdered by the mafia or MI6. In those cases it needed the Warren commission to nail the rumours about the president’s murder, while a three-year inquiry by Lord Stevens sought to quash the belief that Diana had been assassinated in a Paris tunnel. The same rumour mill is now churning over the death of David Kelly, the government scientist who was found dead on the edge of woods near his home seven years ago after becoming embroiled in the controversy over the war in Iraq.

    Although it looked like suicide, many voices soon began to express doubts. Ambulance crews noted a lack of blood and said it was extremely unusual for anyone to die from cutting an ulnar artery. Others spotted further anomalies. The Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker became convinced that Dr Kelly had been murdered by Iraqi agents seeking revenge for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and even wrote a book to that effect.

    That was where the story may have remained had it not been reignited recently when nine seemingly eminent doctors and lawyers wrote to a newspaper questioning whether Dr Kelly could have died from such a small loss of blood. Until then it had been the conclusion of the Hutton inquiry that he had taken his own life and there were no suspicious circumstances. Lord Hutton’s report into the controversy had replaced the inquest that would routinely have followed such an unusual death.

    A further complication was that Lord Hutton’s inquiry was seen as a whitewash of the government and as a result his conclusions over the death of Dr Kelly, and his decision to keep the pathologist’s report secret for 70 years, further fuelled the conspiracy theories.

    These have been disseminated so widely that a good bulk of the population now believes that, at best, there was something murky about the death of Dr Kelly, and at worst he was murdered either by Iraqi agents or by people acting on behalf of shadowy British agencies. Such beliefs in what should be a transparent democracy are unhealthy and it is time the government seized its opportunity finally to resolve the real cause of the doctor’s death.

    The recent controversy certainly encouraged Nicholas Hunt, the Home Office pathologist, to speak out to this newspaper. He presents a convincing case for suicide after admitting he was so angry about Dr Kelly’s death and the pressure put on the weapons inspector that he consciously set out to find evidence of foul play. His examination looked minutely for the coercion or the drugging of Dr Kelly. After hours of work he could find nothing suspicious and came to the measured conclusion that the man had killed himself in despair at his public exposure. “It was an absolutely classic case of self-inflicted injury,” he said.

    Dominic Grieve, the attorney-general, said last week that he would request a review if evidence emerged that cast doubt over the suicide verdict. That evidence seems not to be there, but there is still a strong case for an open inquest in which the evidence can be tested. Sometimes a government has to accept that lies proliferate and the only way to kill them off is to expose them to one of its favourite new mantras: transparency.

    …….

    Revealed: how David Kelly died

    A post-mortem report into the death of the weapons inspector has been released as a pathologist moves to quash rumours of foul play

    Steven Swinford

    Published: 22 August 2010

    Recommend (0)

    A post mortem report shows David Kelly died as a result of a ‘textbook’ suicide (PA) The pathologist who did the autopsy on David Kelly has broken his silence to reveal how the scientist died and says it was a “textbook case” of suicide.

    Nicholas Hunt says he was horrified at the way the Labour government treated the 59-year-old weapons inspector and set out to look for evidence of murder. After eight hours examining the body he found none.

    Hunt has spoken out for the first time in seven years to quash rumours of foul play and to challenge doctors who have questioned his findings. The Home Office pathologist has also disclosed details from his post-mortem report, which the official inquiry into Kelly’s death banned from publication for 70 years.

  74. “nine seemingly eminent doctors and lawyers…”

    Why “seemingly”? Even if one disagrees with their suggestion, there is no question about their professional eminence.

    Why has Hunt come out of the ‘closet’ now, rather than waiting for an inquest? The stuff about him dearly loving to have found evidence of murder is (arguably) unprofessional. He ought not to have been pre-judging anything. Is this in, simply to convince people that he was anti-Blair, etc. and is not a stooge?

    If the ‘evidence is so clear wrt Ischaemic Heart disease, why was it not released in detail seven years ago? It’s not as though anyone is suggesting that he had tertiary syphilitic heart disease!

    Why does the journalist pre-suppose the outcome of the inquest and why is his call identical to that of Dominic Grieve – for an inquest to reassure the public, rather than an inquest to discern the truth, whatever that might be? Indeed why was there no inquest at the time?

    It’s so, so patronising and in some ways it tells us more about the ‘ruling class’ in the UK than it does about Kelly’s death.

  75. “Conspiracy theories have a habit of getting such a grip on the popular imagination that the delusion can only be eradicated by extraordinary measures. This was true of the deaths of John F Kennedy and Diana, Princess of Wales where a stubborn body of opinion maintained they had been murdered by the mafia or MI6″.

    The ST appears oblivious to the fact that the second official inquiry into the death of JFK, conducted by the House of Representatives in 1974, concluded that Kennedy was murdered by the msfia.

  76. Sorry to butt in like this, but, like many others, I am very curious about the Dr Kelly case.

    I see that the post-mortem report states that “Kelly’s death was caused by bleeding from the cuts to his wrist, severe heart disease and an overdose of painkillers.” ?” i.e. “a combination of three factors”.

    Nine eminent doctors and lawyers argued that the official explanation for Dr Kelly’s death was “extremely unlikely”.

    Dr Andrew Davison, however, said that the experts’ disbelief in the official findings was due to their lack of “relevant pathology expertise”.

    But, as far as I know, Dr Kelly did not have any relevant pathology expertise either. Why did he choose to commit suicide by using such complicated method? How did he know that the “combination of three factors” will result in his demise? Could he not have found a simpler, surer, method?

  77. “it was a “textbook case” of suicide”.

    Don’t think so. A textbook case would at the very least include a suicide note.

  78. Suhayl: “Ah, the authorities must be desperate, to be hauling out walking ‘cadavers’ like Dr Hunt, who seems to change his story every five minutes. A “textbook suicide”?”

    Somebody: “Hunt has come out the woodwork now. Why?”

    It is possible that some shadowy organization (some call it the “deep state” or the “hard state”, others the “NWO” or the “Illuminati”) pushed Dr Hunt onto the stage with a broom handle with instructions. I accept that as a possibility.

    However, another possibility occurs to me.

    It’s possible that Dr Hunt, who was the pathologist in Dr Kelly’s case, has noticed an increased media speculation and the possibility that Dr Kelly’s death is going to be re-examined and has come to the only reasonable conclusion that at best his competence is being questioned and, at worst, he is being implicated in the coverup of a murder.

    So when somebody asks: “Hunt has come out the woodwork now. Why?” it might be because he objects to the rather obvious innuendo being thrust his way. Just a thought.

    By the way, what exactly is there in the Q&A with Hutton that differs from what he said in the paper today?

  79. Gilbert: “But, as far as I know, Dr Kelly did not have any relevant pathology expertise either. Why did he choose to commit suicide by using such complicated method? How did he know that the “combination of three factors” will result in his demise? Could he not have found a simpler, surer, method?”

    I suppose he could have jumped in front of a train, or shot himself or leapt off a very, very tall tower. Then again, those methods may have been unavailable to him and his depression may not have been the most conducive thing for clear thinking.

    Essentially, we don’t know why David Kelly decided to do what he did.

    MJ: “A textbook case would at the very least include a suicide note.”

    Are you sure about that? I know that a storybook suicide is likely to include a suicide note but why should it be expected?

    According to Wikipedia:

    “It is estimated that 12?”20% of suicides are accompanied by a note.”

  80. The coalition government is plunged into a major row today over its commitment to human rights amid claims that it will scrap the Foreign Office’s landmark annual assessment of abuses across the world.

    The Observer has learned that civil servants have been told to stop working on the next edition of the FCO Annual Report on Human Rights, which highlights incidents of torture and oppression, monitors use of the death penalty and aims to expose the illegal arms trade. The report also acts as a guide to MPs and businesses over which countries it is ethical to trade with.

    The former Liberal Democrat leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, broke ranks last night to claim that any move to end the annual report risked “downgrading human rights” and would be met with “fierce resistance”. NGOs said that doubts over the future of the report, which was introduced by Robin Cook in 1997, fuelled their concerns that coalition ministers were “blindly” pursuing commercial interests in countries where atrocities were taking place.

    Last year the former Labour government used the report to publicly declare its concerns with 22 countries, including China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Zimbabwe. David Miliband, the shadow foreign secretary and Labour leadership candidate, said that it had “saved lives”, revealing atrocities in Burma, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Gaza and Sri Lanka. “Britain has led the world in standing up for human rights and the coalition is taking a serious step back,” he said, arguing that the audit was not just “nice to have” but a crucial tool.

    A Foreign Office source said a huge amount of effort went into the report each year, with some embassy staff spending months uncovering atrocities. He said the team had been told the future of the study was “under review” and staff had been asked to “hold fire on it”. He added: “The word has already gone out to the embassies that we need to concentrate on trade. It’s not surprising, but it’s very sad.”

    NGOs fear the coalition is putting economic interests above the drive to stamp out abuses. Last week Tom Porteous, the director of Human Rights Watch in London, warned in an article on Comment is Free that by “blindly pursuing commercial interests” the UK risked undermining efforts to protect human rights.

    Kate Allen, the director of Amnesty International UK, said she had deep concerns about plans to axe the report, saying the move would “raise serious questions about how much they value human rights”.

    “The government has already stressed that it will concentrate on trade when it comes to foreign policy” Allen said. “But that move cannot be at any cost. Amnesty International’s fear is that this is the latest step in putting economics before human rights.”

    An FCO spokeswoman said: “The foreign secretary is determined that the UK’s foreign policy should reflect the values that we uphold at home and that our actions overseas be consistent with support for human rights.

    “In the current financial climate …we need to look carefully at how best to communicate and ensure transparency with parliament and the public on our human rights activity.”

    This is one cut way too far over the boundaries of fairness and decency. What the hell has Nick Clegg got himself involved with here ? Does he really support this shit ?

  81. MJ: “The ST appears oblivious to the fact that the second official inquiry into the death of JFK, conducted by the House of Representatives in 1974, concluded that Kennedy was murdered by the msfia.”

    MJ, I’m not sure if that is quite true. The House Select Committee on Assassinations did indeed conclude that there was likely a second shooter but they based this from “acoustic evidence” (I think it was a recording in which the Committee was partially convinced that they could hear four shots) that was highly disputed.

    They didn’t implicate the mafia however – in fact I think they ruled out the mafia – they merely suggested a second shooter may have fired a bullet which missed. They still concluded that Oswald had fired the two bullets that counted and was responsible for Kennedy’s death.

    The evidence for a second shooter appears to be very unreliable though.

    Actually, as far as I can work out the Warren Commission’s purpose was indeed to be a reassurance but more to reassure the public that Kennedy hadn’t been killed by Soviet or Cuban agents. The HSCA also concluded that the Warren Commission had been conducted in good faith and not set up to deceive.

  82. SO WHAT IS GOING ON?!

    I criticised Dominic Grieve for passing the buck on the release of David Kelly’s medical documents to Ken Clarke as reported by the Telegraph on 19th August 2010.

    The Guardian reporting on the Sunday Times revelation that David’s death was a ‘textbook suicide’ today Sunday 22nd August refers back with a link to Grieve’s ‘consideration’ statement dated 13th August – guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/13/david-kelly-death-inquest

    I suggest MI5 get it’s act together and give their ‘stooges’ in the main media a slightly more conclusive ‘thread’ of misinformation.

    I personally believe Boris Karpichkov, he is right with his assumption David Kelly was assassinated -

    dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1297444/KGB-agent-Boris-Karpichkovs-claim-David-Kelly-exterminated-faces-probe.html

    Anthrax is the key – shape up or MORE will be revealed.

  83. Angrysoba is working overtime.

    Are there such things as stooges of stooges?

  84. “A textbook case would at the very least include a suicide note.”

    “Are you sure about that?”

    Of course. A “textbook” case would have to establish beyond reasonable doubt the intention of the victim to take his own life.

    “They didn’t implicate the mafia however”

    Although the Committee refrained from making definitive accusations the mafia was heavily implicated owing to Ruby’s mafia connections and those of CIA agent David Ferrie, who was Oswald’s handler and died (suicide?) before he could give evidence.

  85. “Of course. A “textbook” case would have to establish beyond reasonable doubt the intention of the victim to take his own life.”

    Why?

  86. “Why?”

    As in why would only a suicide note provide that given that suicide notes are considered to be a feature in only a minority of cases?

  87. The people who are so determined to believe that there was foul play involved in the death of Dr. David Kelly are not forensic pathologists. Even Kelly’s family has said nothing favouring the conspiracy theorists. The report in today’s Sunday Times appears to vindicate the chapter on Dr. David Kelly in David Aaaronovich’s Voodoo Histories. Time to put away such nonsense.

  88. Abe, thanks, but somehow I do not share your faith in what to date has not been due process in this case. That’s not say I definitively buy either hypothesis, merely that like many others not normally given to wild paranoia I am dissatisfied with the official explanation and with the actions of the authorities.

    Furthermore, from reading his previous output, I’m afraid that I do not regard Aaronovich as not a reliable commentator on any of these matters; that’s not to say he doesn’t have interesting things to say, but simply that both he and The Sunday Times remain deeply tainted as sources of information, as opposed to choir-stalls of official propaganda.

  89. Mark, by “anthrax is the key…”, do you mean Porton Down and anthrax and God-knows-what-else? Please would elaborate? Thanks.

  90. Angrysober,

    re – David Kelly’s family here from:

    http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/06/doune_the_rabbi.html

    “Janice Kelly and the family of Dr David Kelly have endured misery for far too long. Since being turfed out into the garden in the cold in her dressing gown while ‘police’ stripped the wall-paper of her house; witnessed a death certificate that bluntly said ‘found’ as the place of death and unsigned by a doctor; told that friends and colleagues should not attend the burial; told by Hoon MP that he had evidence in this case that could bring Blair down as Prime-Minister; forced to sell up and move away by intimidation.”

    - least we forget?

  91. Zionist Troll

    22 Aug, 2010 - 4:31 pm

  92. “Of course. A “textbook” case would have to establish beyond reasonable doubt the intention of the victim to take his own life.”

    “Why?”

    Because without evidence that the victim intended to take his own life there remains some doubt that it was really suicide. This is obvious stuff.

    Of course many suicides occur without this evidence but these are not “textbook” cases, which was the point at issue.

  93. “Time to put away such nonsense”.

    All that is being demanded is that there is a proper inquest, conducted by a coroner with the powers of a court to call witnesses and experts to testify under oath. This is a legal requirement in cases such as these. The only nonsense thus far is that this requirement has not yet been met.

  94. There was also David Kelly’s cousin who very recently voiced her concern. I’m not sure how reliable the ex-KGB man is, though. But he has presented potentially explosive information. And who is this Everett person? Mai Pederson. The whole matter becomes murkier and murkier, with spies and ‘ex-spies’ circling around like black crows.

    The MSM and our politicians, etc. – were all very eager to believe that Litvinenko was assassinated and willing to believe that Russia did it. No-one talked about ‘conspiracy theories’ then. It was simply accepted that there had been a conspiracy to murder. Someone obviously murdered Anna Politkovskaya; there was a conspiracy there, too, which, unfortunately, successfully eliminated this brave journalist.

  95. “Because without evidence that the victim intended to take his own life there remains some doubt that it was really suicide. This is obvious stuff.

    Of course many suicides occur without this evidence but these are not “textbook” cases, which was the point at issue.”

    This is false. All you are doing is creating your own definition of a “textbook” case and then saying David Kelly’s didn’t match yours. How do you know this is Dr Hunt’s definition?

    It appears to me, that instead he is basing it on the fact that there is no evidence for anyone else being there when David Kelly died. No sign of a struggle but signs of hesitancy in the act of suicide.

  96. “The MSM and our politicians, etc. – were all very eager to believe that Litvinenko was assassinated and willing to believe that Russia did it. No-one talked about ‘conspiracy theories’ then.”

    Do you think there was a plausible case for suicide?

    ” It was simply accepted that there had been a conspiracy to murder. Someone obviously murdered Anna Politkovskaya; there was a conspiracy there, too, which, unfortunately, successfully eliminated this brave journalist.”

    She was gunned down in her apartment building and her murder caught on camera.

    These analogies are NOTHING LIKE David Kelly’s death.

  97. Well, yes, but Litvinenko’s death may not have been so clearcut; there were aspersions cast that he may have been handling radioactive material; others have pointed fingers towards various other possible dynamics. I’m not saying that’s the case, not at all, simply that at various stages in the case, there might have been other possibilities. Yet the MSM mostly leapt immediately and conclusively at the ‘Russia assassinates’ conspiracy theory.

    Politkovskaya was assassinated, though we don;t really know yet by whom. My point in mentioning her death was that there was likely to have been a conspiracy against her – by those who plotted her death.

    Yet in neither of these cases – each very different from the other, really almost as different as they both are from the David Kelly case – was the phrase, ‘conspiracy theory’ used.

    There seems to have been a presupposition and dominant assumption on the part of our authorities here in the UK that in two of the cases (the Russian ones), there was a conspiracy to murder but that in the third (Kelly) there was not. The language used by most of the MSM (in this case, The Daily Mail excepted!) then tends to support the initial, dominant thesis.

  98. “The language used by most of the MSM (in this case, The Daily Mail excepted!) then tends to support the initial, dominant thesis.”

    Yes. What’s sauce for the goose is not acceptable sauce for the gander. Or to put it another way, an “acceptable” thesis is put to the media by an “official” source, and following that all other theories are labelled “conspiracy theories”. No matter what holes are in the “official” one. Like ulnar arteries closing up after being severed? Or how clots can soak into the ground and disappear, when they don’t even soak into soft cloth? Or why the 80% blocked coronary artery is only being mentioned now? Dr Michael Powers QC has said there is more evidence in the Sunday Times than was put before Hutton. (Channel 4 Snowmail) He’s due on Channel 4 News at 6.30.

    And as Angry knows very, very well, this subject was thrashed out on an earlier David Kelly thread where he lost out badly, but he’s still insisting on bringing up his objections here …

    I find myself wondering why he finds his own blog so boring.

  99. I seem to remember Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace prize. This award to Assange is in the same league.

  100. “And as Angry knows very, very well, this subject was thrashed out on an earlier David Kelly thread where he lost out badly, but he’s still insisting on bringing up his objections here …”

    This isn’t true. I only pointed out that David Kelly died months after the Iraq War started and that his death couldn’t have smoothed the way for the Iraq invasion.

    My objections here are to the insinuations that the pathologist is being “wheeled out” as if not of his own volition when the fact is that he’s being casually accused of conspiracy to murder and may want to defend his name.

  101. they killed a million people in Iraq. they’re killing people every day in Afghanistan. people are dying from state-sponsored violence everywhere. politskvaya’s murder means that the press can focus on her death, and ignore the atrocities she uncovered. i bet elements are delighted that kelly’s death looks so dodgy, whether they were responsible for it or not.

    sorry, have gone a bit Diceman recently. carry on.

  102. Having read some of Politkovskaya’s work I would agree that there were quite a number of people who would want to kill her and jumping to the Kremlin conclusion rules out too many other possibilities. She had been quite a thorn in the side of organized crime and of certain people in Russia’s military and the government installed by Russia in Chechnya. As a journalist she was astonishingly brave and more so because of the fact that power politics in Russia is almost certainly a far more cut-throat business than it is in Britain. That really is the truth, and messing with the military, the police (in its various forms), the mafia and the corrupt politicians is extremely hazardous. (No doubt attempts to equate Britain will now be made but such attempts are ludicrous.)

    The fact is that a lot of people had a motive for going after Politkovskaya and they weren’t shy about doing it.

    Journalism in Russia is a seriously dangerous occupation:

    http://cpj.org/killed/europe/russia/

    In David Kelly’s case there is hugely compelling evidence (if not completely conclusive according to some) that he killed himself and had apparently telegraphed his intent (at least in hindsight) there appeared to be no obvious motive for his murder (so one is often surmised) and the people closest to him are convinced it was suicide as was the pathologist and the police officer who found him.

  103. But eddie, if Kissinger were in govt today, I’ll bet you’d be supporting him in his proposal to bomb [insert name of country] into the Stone Age on behalf of the security of the USA and the ‘Free World’.

    Good point, anonymous at 6:31pm. But it is the possible link and leverage b/w the alleged individual state assassinations and the mass state atrocities that is key. In terms of critique, both tracks must proceed apace. They are not mutually exclusive.

  104. Zionist troll,

    yes, we have all read the words of Cohen, the radical author of “Waiting for the Etonians: Reports from the Sickbed of Liberal England”

    He challenges the left as hypocrites ‘standing on their heads’ after the blood-bath of an illegal Iraq war. Cohen’s drift towards neo-conservatism over the last eight years seems to have beeen caused by a perceived view that the liberal left has apologised for a militant Islam while neglected the aspirations of moderate Muslims. His radar has obviously missed the diverse range of democratic Muslim voices.

    Cohen’s attempts at ‘purifying’ the left from within are misguided and in clear view are a dangerous pursuit of a ‘war on terrorism’ as confronting one homogeneous army of radically different Muslims many of which are strands of the intelligence services.

    Poke your liberal interventionism Cohen and start rowing back to the facts; the starving Iraqi children, crucified by sanctions; the shock & awe; the divide and conquer rules in Iraq that ordained our own special forces to dress as Arabs and plant bombs and explosives; the refusal of Mrs Blair, Dr Barnardo’s President to answer my cries of help for the malnourished Iraqi children. Fuck your money Mr Blair’s donated to veterans – who needs blood money?

    We live in a confused and topsy-turvy time but true liberals see thru the mist of deception and Nick Cohen’s ‘follies of the Left’ are in the real world our fight, our battle and our atonement.

  105. “This isn’t true. I only pointed out that David Kelly died months after the Iraq War started and that his death couldn’t have smoothed the way for the Iraq invasion.”

    –angrysoba

    Excuse me??? You don’t remember telling me that people had died from cutting one ulnar artery and when I asked you where those reports were you had nothing?? You don’t remember the discussion about how there were 20+ tablets missing but the post mortem found that he had only ingested a normal dose, i.e. one or two??

  106. I agree, angrysoba, that Anna Politkovskaya was a very courageous woman who was working in a terrifying environment, in which editors and journalists across Russia are murdered on a frequent basis, esp. if they try to expose corruption. She remained in Russia even when she knew that her life was in grave danger, because, she said, it was her job and how would she have been able to do her job from a position of exile? Also, I wonder whether, having faced death several times (at least); she’d been subjected to a mock-execution in a pit and had been poisoned on an aeroplane; perhaps she’d come to be fearless and/ or to feel that she would survive anything. I met her a book festival in (I think 2005), when we shared a stage for a PEN event. She seemed like a lovely woman whose account on stage brought tears to the eyes of her translator, a veritable and mature British academic.

    At another book festival (I know I sound like a luvvie!), Tarun Tejan, Editor of Tehelka (whistle-blowing Indian newspaper), who sent a journalist undercover posing as an arms-dealer to expose the Bofors Scandal, an act which ultimately helped to bring down the right-wing Hindu fundamentalist BJP Government, recalled the year-long period during which he had to be under 24-hour armed guard.

    He said that at first he spent a lot of time understandably in abject fear; after all, he was up against the arms lobby, the Swedish Govt., the Indian Govt. and the Indian (Hindu) religious extremists; but that one day, he thought, “Well, the worst that can happen is that someone will come into the office and put a bullet in my head. After I’d come to that realisation, it was easy”.

    One can only salute such people, and marvel.

  107. technicolour

    22 Aug, 2010 - 7:01 pm

    anonymous above was me.

  108. “You don’t remember telling me that people had died from cutting one ulnar artery and when I asked you where those reports were you had nothing?”

    I told you my source and posted it. I asked you where your source was that said death from a cut ulnar artery was impossible was and you came up with nothing. In fact, I think you said something along the lines of “Look for it yourself!”

    Funny Dreiloin.

    “You don’t remember the discussion about how there were 20+ tablets missing but the post mortem found that he had only ingested a normal dose, i.e. one or two??”

    Where’s your source?

  109. “In David Kelly’s case there is hugely compelling evidence (if not completely conclusive according to some) that he killed himself”

    –angry

    Bullshit! Have you ever seen anyone having an angiogram? Both femoral arteries open, for the use of a camera and the injection of dye up and into the heart. What do the docs do afterwards? They allow these femoral arteries to close up, with the aid of doctors’ fists shoved hard into the groin. No stitches or clamps. That is what arteries do.

    And that is what the very tiny ulnar artery does when severed. How did Kelly bleed out from that?? And since when do clots soak into the ground? Was all of his blood up his sleeve?

    And how come it was said originally that his coronary arteries were in much the shape that would be expected for any man of his age, and now suddenly he had one or two blocked 80%? Suddenly I don’t trust Hunt.

    “I told you my source and posted it.”

    Yes, Angry, and it didn’t fit. It wasn’t ONE severed ulnar artery. You were trying to be smart.

  110. “Where’s your source?”

    Go to hell, Angry, I’m not re-doing a debate with you that was finished long ago.

  111. “Bullshit!”

    No, not “bullshit!” I did tell you before that you can be needlessly petulant. I think your response to that was “Bullshit!” But it is the truth and you continue to be petulant.

    “Yes, Angry, and it didn’t fit. It wasn’t ONE severed ulnar artery. You were trying to be smart.”

    No, I posted a source. It’s up to you to decide if it is believable. I don’t care either way but I am not lying about what the source said:

    “However, according to the National Statistician and Registrar General there are other recorded cases of death being caused by a severed ulnar artery, two in 2001, one in 2002, and one in 2004.”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6378681.stm#3

    Note, the source I am quoting says there are other recorded cases of death being caused by A severed ulnar artery. This is what I said and I backed it up. Now stop lying about me and I might stop telling the truth about you.

    On the tablets, you say, “You don’t remember the discussion about how there were 20+ tablets missing but the post mortem found that he had only ingested a normal dose, i.e. one or two??”

    Yet the toxicologist (what does he know) disagrees with you:

    “But the toxicologist who gave evidence to the Hutton Inquiry could not be definitive about how many tablets were taken.

    Tests the toxicologist carried out suggested it was an overdose, and that Dr Kelly had 10 times more than a typical medical dose of co-proxamol. But he also said that the concentrations of the constituents of co-proxamol found in Dr Kelly were less than is usually fatal.”

    The dose wasn’t usually considered to be fatal but it was not the “normal dose” at all.

    On the heart condition, I know you have said, over and over again that there was no problem with his heart and you haven’t provided any thing but your say so on that one either but here is Dr Hunt at the Hutton inquiry:

    “It was noted that he has a significant degree of coronary artery disease and this may have played some small part in the rapidity of death but not the major part in the cause of death”

    This is completely contrary to your claim:

    “And how come it was said originally that his coronary arteries were in much the shape that would be expected for any man of his age”

    So it appears that you are the one who is untrustworthy. You completely misrepresent and at the same time blithely accuse Dr Hunt of some kind of conspiracy.

  112. “No, I posted a source.”

    “This is what I said and I backed it up.”

    What source did you give? The BBC one above? Give me a link to the thread please.

    Because it doesn’t appear to be this one

    http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/david_kellys_mu.html

  113. technicolour

    22 Aug, 2010 - 7:46 pm

    OK, let’s say it was proved he was murdered. What does one conclude?

    Let’s say it was proved that he wasn’t. What does one conclude?

  114. INTELLIGENCE INSIDER ALLEGES CSIS USES SOMETHING SIMILAR TO ZERZETSEN IN CANADA

    Talking about conspiracies… Under the following Indymedia URL is a rather interesting story. It is by a writer asking Indymedia to withdraw several articles he published earlier in April, because his employer is threatening to fire him if he doesn’t remove the Articles. What is interesting is that he is a self professed “Intelligence Analyst” who allegedly works for the Canadian Government, and the withdrawn articles have headlines such as – “CSIS abuse”- and – “In the event of my death … life under CSIS rule.” As most of you know, CSIS is Canada’s equivalent of MI5, and adopts similar methods.

    The 3 articles seem to appear and disappear from Indymedia, perhaps indicative of an intelligence operation – I have Adobe PDF copies of them all. As of this morning, some of it appears under this URL:

    http://publish.indymedia.org/en/2010/04/937189.shtlm

    What the withdrawn articles alleged is that CSIS practices torture in Canada against innocent citizens – The writer alleges that CSIS regularly uses what they call “D & D” tactics (apparently their name for Zerzetsen) to persecute perceived enemies (of CSIS, whistleblowers, former mistresses of top politicians (apparently called “bimbo control”), etc) in Canada, and that amongst those being victimized by CSIS are himself and his wife. And, of course, if asked, allegedly CSIS and Canadian Law Enforcement go into cover-up conspiracy mode. My interest is that all these allegations are remarkably similar to what I have experienced myself, and been complaining about for years – except that unlike this complainant, I am not alleging that I am a 25 year intelligence insider in the Canadian government.

    Do I know for certain if his allegations are true? No, I don’t know for certain. Either way it is an important story. But, it does appear to me from the retraction, that rather than prosecute on these allegations, the Canadian Government and CSIS are going into cover-up-mode.

    Indeed the same gentleman has also contacted the Canadian press with the same story, but in much more detail than the original articles published in Indymedia. A journalist, who believes his allegations, sent me a copy of what the press have received, and I spoke on the phone to the gentleman himself for over an hour. What was even more interesting to me was that the information sent to the press alleges some involvement in all this by a very prominent Canadian, which, if true, would suggest to me why these issues (including my own) are being covered-up. Will the press publish the story, or will the story be that the press have been censored yet again?

  115. technicolour

    22 Aug, 2010 - 7:53 pm

    er, yes, Roderick. Could you not just link to your own website when you have a new piece to write?

  116. technicolour

    22 Aug, 2010 - 7:56 pm

    sorry didn’t mean to sound rude. ignore me.

  117. Thanks to Julian Assange and a well deserved award indeed.

    May he keep safe for the next few weeks until he releases the really crucial evidence.

    Kelly facts and time line clashes and why is it nhecessary to make this a 70 year secret?

    I do not buy the family protective argument whenb they already have been dragged through the media by this.

    With this I leave you for another two weeks of blissfull ignorance of media, computers, TV or Radio.

  118. Angry,

    None of what I’m talking about (and did talk about) seems to appear on the thread entitled ‘David Kelly’s Murder’.

    I’d like a link to the relevant thread, please, and to know what source you gave at the time for your “one ulnar artery” claim.

  119. Either Angry is being primed from the inside or else he/she is a fully qualified and experienced

    physician

    surgeon

    pathologist

    toxicologist

    lawyer expert in coronial law

    or perhaps just comes here when the stuctures of the state are threatened.

    Interesting that on such a highly topical subject there are only three comments under the ST article and one from one of the doctors. Some scope for Angry there.

    An inquest is required to test the evidence. One has NOT been held.

  120. “I know you have said, over and over again that there was no problem with his heart”

    –angry

    I said nothing of the sort. I quoted some report that said that his heart was ‘much as it would be expected’ for any man of his age.

    For some reason you wrote above, “I only pointed out that David Kelly died months after the Iraq War started and that his death couldn’t have smoothed the way for the Iraq invasion.”

    We’re not talking about the same thread, are we??

    I didn’t say you were ‘lying’ either. I said you were being ‘smart’. I’d appreciate a link to our whole discussion, as I can’t find it on the David Kelly Murder thread. What thread did you re-quote that BBC source from?

  121. “Our criticism of the Hutton report is that its verdict of “suicide” is an inappropriate finding. To bleed to death from a transected artery goes against classical medical teaching, which is that a transected artery retracts, narrows, clots and stops bleeding within minutes. Even if a person continues to bleed, the body compensates for the loss of blood through vasoconstriction (closing down of non-essential arteries). This allows a partially exsanguinated individual to live for many hours, even days.

    “Professor Milroy expands on the finding of Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry – that haemorrhage was the main cause of death (possibly finding it inadequate) – and falls back on the toxicology: “The toxicology showed a significant overdose of co-proxamol. The standard text, Baselt, records deaths with concentrations at 1 mg/l, the concentration found in Kelly.” But Dr Allan, the toxicogist in the case, considered this nowhere near toxic. Each of the two components was a third of what is normally considered a fatal level. Professor Milroy then talks of “ischaemic heart disease”. But Dr Hunt is explicit that Dr Kelly did not suffer a heart attack. Thus, one must assume that no changes attributable to myocardial ischaemia were actually found at autopsy.”

    (signed by various docs)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/feb/12/davidkelly.huttonreport

    [via Angry's BBC link above]

    “One of them is vascular surgeon John Scurr, a specialist in veins and arteries. He told the programme: “I don’t think I’ve ever seen anybody die from wrist injuries. I have seen a lot of wrist injuries. It is a very common cry for help type of attempt at suicide, rather than a genuine attempt at killing themselves.

    “Frankly I don’t believe that simply cutting an ulnar artery will cause death. The thing we know about the ulnar artery is it’s quite small and so if Dr Kelly had cut it clean it would have gone into spasm and it would have, you know, probably oozed for a little while trickled.

    “He might have lost a few hundred mills of blood. And then it would have stopped.”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/6378681.stm

    from Angry’s BBC link above.

  122. Suhayl

    Kissinger was a very evil man so your comment is pointless and silly. Today’s Sunday Times article closes the case on the Kelly suicide so why don’e you all go off and do something useful instead of this constant faffle.

  123. Consider whether it is right for Dr Hunt to be speaking to the media especially if these allegations have truth in them.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300935/Official-probe-Dr-Kellys-post-mortem-pathologist-mixed-servicemens-remains.html

  124. Good lord.

    And I had written, “Suddenly I don’t trust Hunt”.

  125. Whatever, my playlist currently includes this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-S90Uch2as&feature=related

    Sound of Silence, Simon & Garfunkel

  126. so grateful for debates & this board

  127. Why would UK intelligence service want to kill Dr Kelly?

    I’d say it’s really quite obvious. He knew things the government didn’t want let out. Humilating him in public was no doubt a tactic to make him appear to have a reason to commit suicide.

    The Express of 5 July 2009 has an interesting article part of which I reproduced here:

    WEAPONS inspector David Kelly was writing a book exposing highly damaging government secrets before his

  128. Gilbert – ‘How did he know that the “combination of three factors” will result in his demise?’

    Good analysis there. Not that I needed any more good analysis to figure out the truth. Still, more fodder for the undecided mind.

  129. technicolour]

    22 Aug, 2010 - 10:48 pm

    but what does it prove, either way?

  130. Dr Hunt looks like a very useful idiot.

    Technicolour at August 22, 7:46 PM

    I like this line of reasoning. We’re stymied with the investigation, and will probably continue to be so, seeing as the stated aim is to “reassure the public”. So it’s a nice idea.

  131. Technicolour – ‘but what does it prove, either way?’

    What does what prove? The fact that he was murdered you mean?

  132. I think Ruth’s point is strongest – it was Dr Kelly’s book. This doesn’t mean it was necessarily UK Intelligence that killed him, but the UK establishment certainly covered up, and presumably continue to do so, so it’s not a Blair / Labour thing.

  133. Eddie,

    Err – far from closed…

    Paramedics Dave Bartlett and Vanessa Hunt (15yrs experience) arrived at Harrowdown Hill and witnessed many people, “‘There were a lot of police around,’ said Hunt. ‘Some were in civilian clothes and others in black jackets and army fatigues.”

    Both saw that the left sleeves of his jacket and shirt had been PULLED UP to just below the elbow and there was dried blood around his left wrist.

    There was no gaping wound… there wasn’t a puddle of blood around,’ said Hunt. ‘There was a little bit of blood on the nettles to the left of his left arm. But there was no real blood on the body of the shirt. The only other bit of blood I saw was on his clothing. It was the size of a 50p piece above the right knee on his trousers.’

    Hunt found this very strange. ‘If you manage to cut a wrist and catch an artery you would get a spraying of blood, regardless of whether it’s an accident… Because of the nature of an arterial cut, you get a pumping action. I would certainly expect a lot more blood on his clothing, on his shirt. If you choose to cut your wrists, you don’t worry about getting blood on your clothes.

    A heat-seeking helicopter had searched the woods(witnesses on a Thames boat had seen the helicopter and ‘police officers’) called Harrowdown Hill the night before David Kelly’s body was found by an air-scenting dog called Brock. His owner Louis Holmes, a hearing dog trainer saw Brock was indicating near a tree, but he returned to Louise and lay down prompting her to think something was unusual.

    Louise went to where Brock had indicated and found “a body slumped against the bottom of a tree.”

    “He was at the base of the tree with almost his head and his shoulders just slumped back against the tree.

    His legs were straight in front of him. His right arm

    was to the side of him. His left arm had a lot of blood

    on it and was bent back in a funny position.”

    Detective Coe had been to David Kelly’s house and questioned neighbours on the morning of the search and then walked towards the River Thames and Harrowdown Hill.

    He said, at the Hutton Inquiry when asked “Who were you with at this time?”

    1 Detective Constable Shields.

    2 Q. It is just the two of you?

    3 A. Yes.

    In fact there were three people, all in civilian clothes and the third was MI5?

  134. The gics (gangsters-in-charge) are trying too hard. Gary O’Donoghue reporting on the BBC 1 Ten O’Clock News referred to the need for a *second* inquest (no inquest has ever been held). He also lumped together the phrases ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘group of doctors’. How dare he cast aspersions and speak such untruths.

  135. If Dr Kelly had decided to publish, then he had lost faith in the state. He had changed his mind about the benefits of maintaining secrecy.

  136. I believe you are right ‘Clark’ like me, after Iraq and the promises David Kelly made about ‘inspections guarantee NO war’ he made to Iraq, he felt betrayed and decided to publish.

    David Kelly was an expert and knew about top secret spray devices associated with *drones* to stealthily contaminate areas at night with sarin, VX and mustard to botulinum toxin, anthrax spores and smallpox, all under remote control from vast distances.

    Interestingly and little reported, Iraq weapons analyst, John J. Kokal, 58, was found dead in the late afternoon of November 7 2003. Police indicated he may have jumped from the roof of the State Department. Kokal’s body was found at the bottom of a 20 foot window well, 8 floors below the roof of the State Department headquarters near the 23rd and D Street location.

    At risk of humiliation I stick my neck out – I personally believe David was injected with a lethal dose of dextropropoxyphene and the muscle relaxant succinylcholine which metabolises even after death. An attempt was made to force him to swallow the pills which he could not.

    Dried regurgatative material was found in a line from both corners of David Kelly’s mouth to his ears – more was distributed on the ground beside his body. This suggests that a substantial amount of any pills ingested would have been ejected, hence only a fifth of one tablet was found in his stomach.

    The cuts found on his wrist were there to disguise the injection site.

    Who did it and why?

    Certainly not MI5/6 or any British intelligence/secret service – No – David was a British intelligence asset – the order I believe came from America – David worked very closely with the United States intelligence and worked very closely with Sergeant Mai Pederson in particular, he was also very highly thought of in the US intelligence community prior to his disclosures.

    Britain gave the tasking nod and I believe certain persons in Whitehall knew in advance. But it was the French Direction Ginirale de la Sicuriti Extirieure that got a three man Iraqi team to do the evil deed and then executed them.

    What did David Kelly know? Too much.

  137. AS: “I know you have said, over and over again that there was no problem with his heart”

    Dreiolin: “I said nothing of the sort. I quoted some report that said that his heart was ‘much as it would be expected’ for any man of his age.”

    This amounts to the same thing. The point I am making is that it had already been said that Dr Kelly had significant heart disease and the pathologist had testified to that at the Hutton inquiry.

    “None of what I’m talking about (and did talk about) seems to appear on the thread entitled ‘David Kelly’s Murder’.

    I’d like a link to the relevant thread, please, and to know what source you gave at the time for your “one ulnar artery” claim.”

    This issue seems to crop up on a number of threads which weren’t to do with David Kelly. Anyway, the source I gave was the same, the officially recorded statistics. I may not have provided a link to the BBC Conspiracy Files webpage though which features a lot of the claims and counterclaims in the case.

  138. The vast majority of suicides are simple, obvious and uncomplicated affairs.

    Most everything about the Dr David Kelly death is complex, secret and hidden and involving a multiplicity of areas of dispute.

    There ought to be immense concern amongst reasonable people, and serious questions asked of those harbour the bizarre notion that everything is above board and totally straightforward.

    It ain’t, and won’t be, no matter how much the increasingly useless and tiresome BBC and its acolytes pretend otherwise.

  139. Angry “This amounts to the same thing.”

    No, it certainly does not. The newspaper report I was quoting stated (correctly) that most men of his age would have some thickening/blocking of the arteries. Not necessarily major, but not remotely akin to “no problem with his heart” either.

    Angry: “This issue seems to crop up on a number of threads which weren’t to do with David Kelly. Anyway, the source I gave was the same, the officially recorded statistics.”

    But not necessarily from the same webpage or with the same commentary. You see, I remember that what you linked to mentioned “ulnar arteries” (plural) and it wasn’t at all clear whether one or both had been severed in the deaths listed. And I made a remark to that effect on the thread. At which point you disappeared. Whether you came back later or not I don’t know.

    Angry: “I may not have provided a link to the BBC Conspiracy Files webpage”

    MAY not? You implied above that you had. But I don’t believe that you did. Because that BBC page says “a severed ulnar artery”, so I would have had no reason to scoff at that source if you had used it previously. But you didn’t use that page, Angry, did you. (Was that a fortuitous find yesterday?) You accused me of lying about you, and you then called me “untrustworthy” and said I “completely misrepresent”, when all along it appears you had no idea what webpage you quoted in the original argument, or whether my memory of events is in fact correct. (Or maybe you do know, but you’re not telling here?)

    You also suggested that when you called me ‘petulant’ I responded with “Bullshit!” which is not the truth either, is it. Nor did I accuse Dr Hunt of any conspiracy, did I.

    Let’s stick to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, Angry.

    You said, “This issue seems to crop up on a number of threads which weren’t to do with David Kelly”. List those threads for me, please. I’d like to read them for myself.

  140. Dreiolin says: “Go to hell, Angry, I’m not re-doing a debate with you that was finished long ago.”

    But, later…

    “Let’s stick to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, Angry.

    You said, “This issue seems to crop up on a number of threads which weren’t to do with David Kelly”. List those threads for me, please. I’d like to read them for myself.”

    I’ve no idea why it is that I should search through all the threads in which this issue came up given that you don’t want to go through the debate again. It’s far too much trouble for what I am sure will be little gratitude.

    If you want to prove your assertions then maybe YOU should search through the threads.

    I’m only interested in this:

    You say that:

    a) cutting one ulnar artery can’t cause death. My source says it can. That’s more substantive than our bickering.

    b) that “the original reporting” was that David Kelly had no more than a regular amount of thickening/blocking of the arteries than expected from someone his age. Yet Dr Hunt said at the Hutton inquiry that it was significant and has elaborated on that since then to say 80% blocked.

    c) that the amount of co-proxamol in his blood was a normal dosage. Yet this isn’t true and none of the sources say it was a normal dosage but rather that it was an overdose.

    So, I say that you are untrustworthy because I have to check everything you say against other sources and find that you have downplayed every factor that his death was attributed to.

    But, yes, I am wrong for saying you accused Dr Hunt of being part of a conspiracy, you only said you didn’t trust him.

    I apologize for that.

    “MAY not? You implied above that you had. But I don’t believe that you did. Because that BBC page says “a severed ulnar artery”, so I would have had no reason to scoff at that source if you had used it previously. But you didn’t use that page, Angry, did you. (Was that a fortuitous find yesterday?)”

    As far as this goes I certainly did know of the statistics and it is possible that that is all I posted. It would be HIGHLY fortuitous if I had simply made up the statistics and then found a source which agreed with me.

    That’s not what happened.

    Anyway, this is getting rather pointless. Clearly we’ll just have to see what the inquiry says.

  141. “I personally believe David was injected with a lethal dose of dextropropoxyphene and the muscle relaxant succinylcholine”

    Thanks for sticking your neck out Mark. Given that the known evidence casts some doubt as to the accuracy of the cause of death suggested by Hutton, speculation over what might be the actual cause is remarkably thin on the ground. But wouldn’t these drugs have shown up in the toxicology report?

  142. “As far as this goes I certainly did know of the statistics and it is possible that that is all I posted”

    –angry

    No, Angry, you didn’t link to any official statistics page, or if by any chance you did, then THEY were unclear in what they said.

    “I’ve no idea why it is that I should search through all the threads in which this issue came up given that you don’t want to go through the debate again.”

    It’s simple, Angry, it’s because you accused me of lying. I didn’t ask you to search through all the threads, I asked you for the thread names. I’ll happily read them for you – and then come back and quote.

    “If you want to prove your assertions then maybe YOU should search through the threads.”

    No, Angry, YOU accused ME of lying, of being untrustworthy, and of ‘misrepresenting’ so YOU need to prove your assertions. You have said the issue came up on more than one thread. So provide those thread names so I can read them please. Or withdraw your allegations.

    “Anyway, this is getting rather pointless.”

    It is? You fling accusations around and when asked to back them up, you announce that it’s pointless? In fact you say that you’ll get ‘little gratitude’?

    Nice try, Angry.

    You know, ‘Larry’ accused me of lying too. And when I asked where (and I asked it about four times) I got no answer from ‘him’ either. You’re a right pair.

  143. “It’s simple, Angry, it’s because you accused me of lying.”

    Well in that case I can’t back that up so I apologize and retract.

    It can’t find any posting of the BBC link previously, so I was probably mistaken.

    Sorry.

  144. Thank you.

  145. Dreoilin,

    always count to ten and take a few deep breaths before replying to Angrysoba. He is a crafty so-and-so.

    Angrysoba says: “Clearly we’ll just have to see what the inquiry says”. Ha! As if it’ll say anything significantly different from the previous whitewash!

    But two whitewashes prove that Angrysoba is whiter-than-white, the new blue whiteness you only get with SuperSoap!

  146. Dreoilin,

    well done. Angrysoba and his new ally Tomk have certainly been giving you a hard time recently.

    “Nothing to see here, move along please!”

  147. Thanks, Clark. :)

  148. Change of theme. I’ve just been listening to an excellent BBC Radio 4 programme on “British Muslims – Father and Son” – an extended account of the world seen from the perspectives of Moazzam Beg and his father.

    Three voices stick in my mind: Moazzam Begg (born Birmingham, family Moslem immigrants from India/Pakistan; his father; and Jack Straw (born Buckhurst Hill, with great-grandfather a German Jewish immigrant). All represent different values. I generally reject the term “British values”; but many of the values I respect are upheld by the Beggs and are dishonoured by Straw.

    From the BBC website: “Moazzam Begg spent three years as a prisoner in Bagram and Guatanamo Bay before being released without charge. Throughout that that time his father fought for his son’s release. Since his release Moazzam Begg has remained in the headlines. He is a controversial figure – for some he is an innocent victim, while others have hard questions about his beliefs and actions. Steve Evans tells an extraordinary story of a father and son and their very different experiences of being a British Muslim. From the generations of Begg family military history, to Moazzam almost joining the British army, to his support for Muslim causes around the world – there are many contradictions and paradoxes in the Begg family story. The exceptional bond between father and son, though, is clear throughout.”

  149. Gita Sahgal lost her job at Amnesty International for protesting at AI giving public support to Moazzam Begg’s organisation as poorly judged. Human rights lawyers appear to be reluctant to help her. Her statement may be of interest:

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/martinbright/5759197/gita-sahgal-a-statement.thtml

    Here’s a wiki article:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gita_Sahgal

    I see a parallel with Craig’s story. In both cases, a a senior member of an important organisation was forced out for publicly protesting aganist official policy, and then had a hard time finding public support.

  150. MJ, yes, I’m no toxicologist, but I think that both dextropopoxyphene and succinylcholine would be detectable (directly or indirectly via metabolites) in the tox. screen at PM. The MOSSAD Dubai hit victim had succinylcholine in his blood, picked-up at PM.

    I’m sure there are respiratory-paralytic toxic drugs with very short half-lives which degrade quickly into natural compounds even after death (?insulin and potassium chloride, which causes unconsciousness and cardiac arrest?), but I’d have to look up the textbooks again to find out; an anaesthetist, toxicologist, crime writer, pharmacologist – or a Public Executioner! – would know – though of course the execiutioner doesn’t have to worry about the chemicals being undetectable. The injection of large quantities of air directly into the venous system will also cause death and apart from the injection-mark, is undetectable. It’s also very problematic to interpret PM blood-levels of drugs and compare them to ‘fatal’ blood-levels of drugs.

  151. MJ,

    Thank-you for your confidence – Of course you are right, toxicology would have found dextropropoxyphene and it did – as the now banned (and dangerous) component of co-proxamol.

    succinylcholine metabolises and is thus very difficult to detect without enzyme analysis. Dr Hunt, the pathologist, we know is somewhat incompetent having confused the identity of serviceman’s remains:

    dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300935/Official-probe-Dr-Kellys-post-mortem-pathologist-mixed-servicemens-remains.html

    His mm by mm inspection of David Kelly’s body found nothing – the left wrist injection site was obscured/obliterated by the many so called ‘tentative’ cuts that is indicative of overcoming the natural ‘suicide barrier’ in the majority of sane humans who attempt to kill themselves by bleeding out.

    The prescription only co-proxamol strips had no fingerprints or DNA (neither did the knife); David we remember was NOT prescribed co-proxamol and would have been aware of the dangers associated with dextropropoxyphene:

    bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7397/1006

    My wife’s (fuzzy) brother survived an overdose of 11 grams of paracetamol (22 tablets) some years ago – a real case and I expose the details to you reluctantly with his permission, such is the importance of obtaining an inquiry to the satisfaction of Janice and her three beautiful daughters.

    A British detective lied at the Hutton inquiry -

    Why?

  152. Yes, Iain (and Abe), Begg, in my view, is a ‘problematic’ figure; the Gita Sahgal whistleblowing-and-loss-of-job was an example of this. He’s not the only such figure.

    Apart from all that, it irks me a little (a lot) that for years, on the basis of ‘Unity in Diversity’, Islamist figures and some organisations seemed able to leverage tons of money form the Government/ Govt-associated bodies, allowing them to attain a position of prominence in the UK in relation to ‘representing’ the ‘UK Muslim community’ (as though that were a monolithic entity!). Then, after ’9/11′, some of these individuals and organisations seemed to re-invent themselves (trimmed beards, two-piece suits, no fists, lots of fessing-up, self-improvement books) in favour of ‘Community Cohesion’ and ‘Anti-Terrorist Facilitators’ (I’ve invented the latter term, but it’s not much of an exagerration) and again to leverage piles of dosh from the government and assocaited bodies and again to ‘represent’ ‘UK Muslims’ from the highest to the most grassroots level.

    Secular organisations face a much more difficult process, not least because they have to operate in a field where it has become convenient and mutually beneficial for both Islamists (the term being used here in its broadest sense) and authorities to deal with each other in an ongoing systemic manner.

  153. “Thank-you for your confidence – Of course you are right, toxicology would have found dextropropoxyphene and it did – as the now banned (and dangerous) component of co-proxamol.”

    Mark, can you see what you have just done here?

    “David we remember was NOT prescribed co-proxamol and would have been aware of the dangers associated with dextropropoxyphene”

    Can you also see what you have done here?

    nvm

  154. Mark:

    “toxicology would have found dextropropoxyphene and it did – as the now banned (and dangerous) component of co-proxamol”

    But as I understand it only a therapeutic, non-lethal dose was found; a couple of tablets.

    “The prescription only co-proxamol strips had no fingerprints or DNA (neither did the knife)”

    Well well.

    “I expose the details to you reluctantly with his permission”

    Many thanks.

    “A British detective lied at the Hutton inquiry -

    Why?”

    You can say what you like at inquiries. At inquests you’re under oath.

    Correct me if I’m wrong but I seem to recall that it was originally reported that Kelly was found with pads on his chest, under his shirt, the type that are used by doctors for monitoring cardiac activity. I haven’t heard this detail mentioned of late. Or I might be dreaming it.

    Suhayl:

    “I’m sure there are respiratory-paralytic toxic drugs with very short half-lives which degrade quickly into natural compounds even after death”

    “The injection of large quantities of air directly into the venous system will also cause death and apart from the injection-mark, is undetectable”

    Interesting.

  155. MJ

    The sticky pads were put there by the paramedic.

    Alistar Hay, Professor of Toxicology, questions findings of the Hutton inquiry. Alexander Allan, the forensic toxicologist at the inquiry, considered the amount ingested of Co-Proxamol insufficient to have caused death less than a third of what would normally be found in a fatal overdose. The toxicology report on David Kelly reports blood level concentrations of 97 micrograms of paracetamol and 1.0 micrograms of dextropropoxyphene per millilitre. He calculated that it was equivalent to approximately 20 tablets.

    Angrysober,

    explain?

  156. So detropops did not kill him, so he wasn’t injected with dextropos. PCM doesn’t kill suddenly in any case, so PCM didn’t kill him. So we’re left with the ischaemic heart disease and presumed blood loss (if one is considering that it wasn’t murder).

  157. ‘The Assassin’s Cookbook’ – good title for a graphic novel, eh? Sick, though.

  158. “The toxicology report on David Kelly reports blood level concentrations of 97 micrograms of paracetamol and 1.0 micrograms of dextropropoxyphene per millilitre. He calculated that it was equivalent to approximately 20 tablets”.

    OK, so he had the equivalent of 20 tabs in his blood, but the remains of only a couple of tabs in his stomach if I’m not mistaken. This suggests either that he took a larger quantity of tabs much earlier, which had already been absorbed, or he had been injected with dextropropoxyphene then forced to take tablets to give the impression of a self-inflicted overdose. The latter scenario is supported by the wounds in his mouth and the trail of undigested tablets on his clothes, suggesting he had spat them out. But this still doesn’t explain the non-lethal concentrations in his blood.

    Thanks for the clarification re the pads.

  159. Summary of incompetence

    Doubt – Doubt – Doubt

    1. David Kelly’s body was propped up against a tree. (Hutton Photo? Louise Holmes) and *moved* so he was laying flat ‘a short distance from the tree.’

    2. Livor mortis (post mortem lividity), which indicates that Kelly died on his back, or at least was moved to that position shortly after his death. Propping the body against the tree was a mistake that had to be rectified. Rigor mortis present? – who knows.

    3. Coe maintained there was only one other person besides himself. He was not questioned about the discrepancy.

    In fact the third young man with a ‘posh sounding voice’ was according to my source collecting documents/evidence on behalf of MI5/secret service. MI5 were ‘fuming’ over Kelly’s ‘death’

    4. The police took over 300 statements from witnesses but less than 70 were forwarded to the Hutton inquiry. Witness statements were not to be released (even to the inquiry) unless the witness signed an authorization permitting it.

    5. A listing of evidence provided to the Hutton inquiry by Thames Valley Police shows a reference to a document described, ‘TVP Tactical Support Major Incident Policy Book

  160. Suhayl,

    Enough muscle relaxant and opiate to stop David breathing? Fuzzy’s brother’s breathing stopped and he had to be resuscitated after 22 tabs of paracetamol.

  161. That’s very odd. PCM causes liver failure which usually takes several days to become apparent. The liver failure then causes (as well as the panoply of liver failure effects) gradually deteriorating consciousness, jaundice, ‘flapping’ tremor, etc. On its own (and that’s the key point), prior to the liver damage, why would PCM cause loss of consciousness or respiratory depression? PCM overdose is a horrible way to die.

    http://www.pharmweb.net/pwmirror/pwy/paracetamol/pharmwebpic9.html

  162. Having said all that, as you know, Mark, I think David Kelly’s death very suspicious and the fact that all of these eminent scientists (who know far more than I) have raised concerns in suhc a public manner is good reason to maintain a high level of skepicism about the case.

  163. “explain?”

    Okay, Mark.

    a) We know David Kelly didn’t kill himself because there wasn’t enough dextropropoxyphene from the co-proxamol he supposedly swallowed in his blood to be fatal.

    b) Yet, we know that he was given a lethal injection of dextropropoxyphene because the toxicologist found it and put it in his report.

    Are you not struck by the illogicality of a) & b)?

    You appear to be saying he wouldn’t swallow co-proxamol himself because he knew how dangerous it was. Yet, if it was his intention to commit suicide then clearly its dangerousness was very much the point!

    Also if a lethal injection explained the presence of dextropropoxyphene then what explains the paracetamol? Oh, the co-proxamol!

    But he wasn’t prescribed them. No, but his wife was.

  164. “a) We know David Kelly didn’t kill himself because there wasn’t enough dextropropoxyphene from the co-proxamol he supposedly swallowed in his blood to be fatal.

    b) Yet, we know that he was given a lethal injection of dextropropoxyphene because the toxicologist found it and put it in his report.

    Are you not struck by the illogicality of a) & b)?”

    The low levels of dextropropoxyphene found cast doubt only the theory that it was this that caused Kelly’s death. Mark said nothing about “knowing” there was a lethal injection. It was pure supposition and clearly prefaced as such. Please pay attention.

    “But he wasn’t prescribed them. No, but his wife was”.

    Any views on the fingerprint/DNA business?

  165. MJ: “Mark said nothing about “knowing” there was a lethal injection. It was pure supposition and clearly prefaced as such. Please pay attention.”

    Don’t be silly. The point is that Mark was positing a lethal injection on the basis that dextropropoxyphene was found on the toxicology report when it was obviously better explained as being from co-proxamol, especially given the presence of paracetamol as well.

    What I find odd is that now the very things the pathologist reported as cause of death which were considered insufficient for suicide or even a cause of death are now being put forward as sufficient for homicide.

    “Any views on the fingerprint/DNA business?”

    I don’t know much about forensic science. But I have heard that the taped handle of the knife, which was apparently quite small was less likely to retain fingerprints than, say, a steel-handled knife.

    It sounds a bit like something called CSI effect:

    “The CSI effect (sometimes referred to as the CSI syndrome) is a reference to the phenomenon of popular television shows such as the CSI franchise raising crime victims’ and jury members’, even criminals’, real-world expectations of forensic science, especially crime scene investigation and DNA testing… The CSI effect is purported to skew public perceptions of real-world forensic science, as well as the behavior of criminal justice system actors; this is of particular concern in the courtroom setting, where many prosecutors feel pressured to deliver more forensic evidence.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect

  166. Am I the only one here who finds Angrysoba — Yawn — a bore.

  167. “The point is that Mark was positing a lethal injection on the basis that dextropropoxyphene was found on the toxicology report”

    I thought the point was that you claimed that Mark “knew” this was the case, when in fact he was clearly hypothesising.

    The wider point is that co-proxamol is an equally speculative suspect, given the amounts found in Kelly’s blood and stomach.

    “…the taped handle of the knife, which was apparently quite small was less likely to retain fingerprints than, say, a steel-handled knife”.

    I’m sure cotton gaffer tape is hopeless at retaining fingerprints, but pretty good at absorbing and retaining DNA. There is also the question of the co-proxamol packets. Were they wrapped in tape too?

  168. To return briefly to the original topic of this post, I see that Assange has made a rather interesting remark today:

    “Australian intelligence services had warned WikiLeaks of “dirty tricks” before Swedish authorities issued a short-lived arrest warrant for founder Julian Assange over a rape claim, he said Monday.

    “We were warned on the 11th (of August) by Australian intelligence that we should expect this sort of thing,” Assange said in a telephone interview with broadcaster Al-Jazeera from a secret location in Sweden”.

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/0823/wikileaks-australia-intelligence-warned-dirty-tricks/

    I don’t quite know what to make of the fact that he is on such good terms with the Australian Intelligence service.

  169. Yes, that is somewhat odd, isn’t it, MJ. Also, everyone knows about honeytraps.

    Someone who has stirred-up such ire from the ‘establishment’ would need to understand that esp. at the present time, they would need to behave almost like a monk – otherwise the tabloids and/or the intelligence services will get stuff on them, even if there is no real basis for the stuff: mud sticks.

    Now, if he’s saying he was warned and if – I say if – he still got into some kind of ‘intimate interaction’, well, all one can say is: Tommy Sheridan and the SSP (!) – allegedly.

    But think for a moment of the allegations swirling around against Arthur Scargill specifically (and the NUM in general) during the 1980s – every single one was proven to be a load of tripe and to have been manufactured by the intelligence services. That’s part of their job description – to bring down anyone who threatens power.

  170. Also, why on earth would anyone trust the Australian intelligence services? They are very close to the CIA et al. There has recently been (another) de facto constitutional coup in Australia – with the sudden toppling of the former Labour PM and his replacement with his Deputy (I’m not talking about the General Election).

    It seems incredibly naive – and Assange cannot be naive. Maybe he’s playing a game with Australian Intelligence, roping them in somehow. I sense he must have powerful protectors – maybe wise to have some if you’re going up against the hyperpower.

    This reminds me a little, just a little and perhaps unfairly, of the stories floating around relating to Gerry Gable, Editor of anti-fascist ‘Searchlight’ magazine. I emphasise that these are merely allegations. But it’s not just the fascists who’ve issue them; highly respected outlets also have explored his provenance.

    So, if you’d just ‘outed’ 90,000 (or whatever it is) secret US state documents re. to war, war and more war, and the SS or SIS came to you and said, “Be careful, we think that the Pentagon are going to play dirty tricks on you” (as if you hadn’t guessed), would you say, “Why, thank you kindly, gentlemen. Cup of tea?” or would you say, “Get tae…”, or would you say, “Gie’s a job, then” (!)

  171. ‘Am I the only one here who finds Angrysoba — Yawn — a bore.’

    No, I don’t. I take a contrary view to him on just about every subject discussed here but I think he fights his corner very well.

  172. But it’s also important to understand, I think, that Western intelligence services are not monolithic and that they engage in turf wars with one another – and indeed that they routinely spy on one another’s (mainly commercial) operations.

  173. What a dirty messy business to be in. I wonder do they all fancy themselves as 007s.

  174. I suppose that, in a sense, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that a country’s security service is offering a measure of support and assistance to one of its own citizens, particularly one who appears to be in some danger, though that seems an awfully out-dated view of how things really are.

    Maybe the tacit agreement is that they’ll look out for him and he’ll back off from material that might compromise Australian security interests.

    I don’t know; I’d be interested to hear the views of the Australian chap who posts here occasionally under the name of ‘nobody’.

    i have to confess that, until I read that news item, it hadn’t quite occurred to me that Australia even had a security service. It just doesn’t seem that sort of place. A few jokes about Australian secrets came to mind that I was going to share, but I have thought better of it.

  175. Dreoilin: “I wonder do they all fancy themselves as 007s.”

    You might get an idea by reading the autobiographies of real spies, like Richard Tomlinson’s “The Big Breach”, or Victor Ostrovsky’s “By Way of Deception”. These were not in good standing, but an example of one who was would be Greville Wynne’s “The Man from Odessa” (he recruited Oleg Penkovsky).

  176. MJ,

    There’s a fake Aussie security service on Twitter and he can be very funny. He issues ‘alerts’. Which reminds me, he’s been quiet for some time. I must look him up.

    Speaking of Twitter, I have no idea how far the Twitter campaign effort went, but apparently donations to the DEC for flood victims in Pakistan have increased hugely, which is great news.

  177. Thanks Abe! I’ve got myself a Kindle and will be registering it shortly. Book recommendations are exactly what I need!

  178. Dr Michael Powers QC speaking on Radio 5 this morning on the Victoria Derbyshire Show to a presenter called Stephen Nolan who seems to have been primed. Nolan 0 Powers 1

    1hr 7mins in

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00tjn6m/Victoria_Derbyshire_23_08_2010/

    http://www.medneg.co.uk/index.htm

  179. The College of Shame

    The Air Marshal

    Sir Joe French, 57, was Chief of Defence Intelligence.

    Salary: up to £95,000.

    Role: Testified before Hutton, defending the notorious – now disproved – claim that Saddam’s weapons could be launched within 45 minutes.

    Now: Retired ex Commander-in-Chief of RAF Strike Command on £154,000 a year.

    The MP

    Ann Taylor, 59, Labour MP, was chairwoman of Parliament’s Intelligence Committee.

    Salary: £56,000.

    Role: She headed the committee that published a report which exonerated Downing Street over allegations of manipulating the Iraq intelligence.

    Now: Ennobled as Baroness Taylor of Bolton. In her first year in the Lords she claimed more than £30,000 in tax-free “subsistence allowances”.

    The Select Committee Chairman

    Donald Anderson, 67, was Labour chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

    Salary: £56,000.

    Role: Caved in to Government request not to ask David Kelly awkward questions about Iraq’s WMD. Kelly was found dead two days after he appeared before Anderson’s committee.

    Now: Elevated to Lords as Baron Anderson of Swansea. Claimed £25,000 in tax-free attendance allowances in return for attending Lords on a total of 94 days.

    The Defence Secretary

    Geoff Hoon, 53, was Defence Secretary.

    Salary: £129,000.

    Role: Accused of neglecting his duty of care towards MoD employee David Kelly by sanctioning the release of his name to the media. Hoon admitted he could have done more to help the scientist.

    Now: Jobseeker, cluster bomb expert

    Blair’s mouthpiece

    Godric Smith, 41, was one of Blair’s two Official Spokesmen.

    Salary: £80,000.

    Role: Announced Kelly’s death to reporters on the then PM’s plane as it arrived in Tokyo – responsible for many subsequent briefings.

    Now: Honoured with CBE. Sports-mad Smith landed dream job as chief spin doctor for the 2012 London Olympics. Paid £120,000 a year.

    The spin doctor

    Alastair Campbell, 49, was Blair’s Director of Communications and Strategy.

    Salary: £130,000.

    Role: Allegedly masterminded the “sexing up” of the official report on Iraq’s WMD, author of the second so-called “dodgy dossier”, and was the man behind the strategy that led to the public naming of David Kelly.

    Now: Charged Labour £40,000 plus VAT for a few weeks as a consultant during 2005 Election. Sports writer for Rupert Murdoch’s Times newspaper. Stands to make £1 million for his memoirs.

    Blair’s other spokesman

    Tom Kelly, 51, was Blair’s Official Spokesman (joint post).

    Salary: £80,000.

    Role: Briefed reporters that David Kelly was “Walter Mitty” character.

    Now: FSA Communications Director £100K+

    The Whitehall intelligence chief

    Sir John Scarlett, 58, was chairman of Whitehall’s Joint Intelligence Committee.

    Salary: £130,000.

    Role: Accused of acting as “human shield” for Alastair Campbell. Scarlett insisted he had “overall charge and responsibility” of the Iraq intelligence report – No 10 had not meddled.

    Now: Promoted in 2005 to the most glamorous job in British intelligence: Chief of MI6. Known as “C”. Salary up to £200,000. Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George now retired.

    The deputy intelligence chief

    Martin Howard, 52, was Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence.

    Salary: £90,000.

    Role: Insisted Downing Street had no knowledge that 45-minute claim was wrong.

    Now: Assistant Secretary General for Operations NATO £100,000 plus

    The Chief of Staff

    Julian Miller, 51, was Chief of the Intelligence Assessment Staff, Cabinet Office.

    Salary: £80,000.

    Role: Defended Alastair Campbell, suggested David Kelly was too junior to have had access to crucial intelligence.

    Now: Made Companion of the Order of the Bath. Was Director-General of Resources and Plans in the MoD on £100,000.

    The Inquiry Secretary

    Lee Hughes, late 40s, was Secretary to the Hutton Inquiry.

    Salary: £50,000.

    Role: Managed day-to-day logistics of the hearing.

    Now: Made CBE. Was promoted to senior role in Department of Constitutional Affairs, on £60,000. Unknown

    The MoD Press Officer

    Kate Wilson, late 30s, was chief Press officer at MoD.

    Salary: £50,000.

    Role: Responsible for strategy that led to Kelly’s “outing”. Journalists were told in advance that if they gave the correct name, the MoD would confirm it.

    Now: Honoured with an OBE “in recognition of gallant and distinguished services in connection with operations in Iraq”. Was chief Press officer at MoD. Salary around £60,000.

    The PM’s top foreign adviser

    Sir David Manning, 57, was Tony Blair’s chief foreign policy adviser.

    Salary: £120,000.

    Role: Present at all Downing Street sofa summits leading up to the war.

    Now: Promoted to Washington Ambassador, the most sought-after job in the diplomatic service. Basic salary £130,000 plus tax-free allowances of £90,000. Now adviser to the Princes & an intelligence company staffed by ex MI6 officers.

    The top civil servant

    Sir Kevin Tebbit, 60, was Permanent Under Secretary of State at MoD.

    Salary: up to £264,250.

    Role: Sir Kevin admitted “responsibility” but not “culpability” for Kelly’s death.

    Now: Enjoying comfortable semi-retirement as non-executive director of the Smiths Aerospace group on £60,000 a year and is also a visiting professor at Queen Mary College, London.

    The MI6 supremo

    Sir Richard Dearlove, 61, was Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service – MI6.

    Salary: up to £200,000.

    Role: Insisted to Hutton he was not aware of any unhappiness within the intelligence community over the 45-minute claim.

    Now: Living in genteel retirement as Master of Pembroke College, Cambridge, on Civil Service pension of up to £100,000.

    Thanks Rowena – we love you

  180. The truth is, in my view, that the top spooks aren’t the heads of MI5 and MI6. There’s probably one smaller hidden organisation that oversees everything to do with state tyranny. It would be permanently staffed by the same control freak douchebags who would even put Blair to shame. And like Blair, despite being private and not public, they’ll just never fuck off. Just in case they ever read Craig’s blog…

    ‘HI THERE YOU EVIL FUCKTARDS.’

    MJ, yes ‘nobody’ knows his stuff, especially about the paedophilia. I don’t think he was too thrilled about Craig not officially stating 9/11 was an inside job. :-0 He certainly hasn’t appeared as much since then.

    For anyone that may not have seen this, it has a great angle of WTC7 collapsing. The guy’s channel has loads of vids on it and is quite funny too. He lives in Arizona and calls his local cops, who he frequently films, the Phoenix Pirates. :-0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=972ETepp4GI&NR=1&feature=fvwp

  181. “Dr Michael Powers QC speaking on Radio 5 this morning on the Victoria Derbyshire Show to a presenter called Stephen Nolan who seems to have been primed. Nolan 0 Powers 1″

    Stephen Nolan is a fat ugly little shit on the make.

    The best critique of fattie Nolan is that provided by Gerry Anderson, a colleague of his on Radio 4 Northern Ireland. They had adjoining progs on the station and Anderson used to take the piss out of fattie Nolan’s shock jock efforts on regular occasions as they handed over.

    The clue is that fattie Nolan has been promoted to BBC national broadcasting precisely because of his Faustian instincts. London notices those without integrity rather quickly. They have much need of them in these propagandist times.

    Such scumbags are still relatively rare.

  182. “I thought the point was that you claimed that Mark “knew” this was the case, when in fact he was clearly hypothesising.”

    NoOooOoOOoOooooOOOoOOo! I’m pointing out the absurdity of any investigation concluding that. How can you keep switching from non-lethal dose to lethal dose depending upon how convenient it is for your theory?

    “The wider point is that co-proxamol is an equally speculative suspect, given the amounts found in Kelly’s blood and stomach.”

    There’s nothing equal about them at all. Because co-proxamol WAS found at the scene and in his stomach and it was accompanied by the presence of paracetamol in the blood. This is explained by co-proxamol whereas there is absolutely NO evidence of a lethal injection at all.

    ***This is not to say that co-proxamol was obviously THE cause of death; it wasn’t determined to be. But co-proxamol clearly explains the presence of dextropropoxyphene better than anything else.***

    “I’m sure cotton gaffer tape is hopeless at retaining fingerprints, but pretty good at absorbing and retaining DNA. There is also the question of the co-proxamol packets. Were they wrapped in tape too?”

    Now, you’re just being absurd. Was forensic evidence expected to be found on the co-proxamol packets? Would the absence cause concern in a regular police investigation? Was the packet even tested for forensic evidence or are we just trying to create doubt where none really exists?

    That’s why I referred to the CSI effect when juries require far higher levels of forensic evidence than is usually possible to obtain.

  183. “No, I don’t. I take a contrary view to him on just about every subject discussed here but I think he fights his corner very well.”

    Thanks King of Welsh Noir!
    :D

  184. You are pointing out absurdity stupidsoba? Ha ha ha. What about the absurdity of you LITERALLY LIVING on Craig’s blog for a minimum wage income to disseminate government propaganda? Freak!!! When you first showed your nasty mug, a year ago I think, you said you were on holiday when queried about the amount of time you spent here. Some holiday eh?

    Stupidsoba, ‘This IS your life.’ No red book i’m afraid. Sorry.

  185. “What about the absurdity of you LITERALLY LIVING on Craig’s blog”

    That is pretty absurd. Maybe you should look up the word “literally”.

  186. Mark – thanks for the info. on toadies being promoted and handsomely rewarded. Nice work if you can get it, eh?

  187. Jaded, how d’you know it’s minimum wage?

  188. “Freak!!!”

    Three exclamation marks, no less. It’ll give you away every time, you know.

  189. If you want to know the Real Secret Establishment, consider the Brotherhood of the Bell:

    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=brotherhood+of+the+bell+xooberant&aq=f

    Damn good film! See clip 9 to see how a talk show host (William Conrad, who later played the P.I. in the excellent series “Cannon”) deals with conspiracy enthusiasts of different types.

  190. I think Angrysoba makes important points at August 23, 4:59 PM. However, how do these poisons’ concentrations in the bloodstream decrease with respect to time when (a) ingested via the stomach and (b) injected in pure form?

  191. “How can you keep switching from non-lethal dose to lethal dose depending upon how convenient it is for your theory?”

    Whether one leans toward the suicide theory or the murder theory the dextropropoxyphene issue is problematic because, although Kelly had quite a lot in his blood, it was way short of what is generally considered a lethal dose. The matter is complicated further by the small amounts of co-proxamol found in his stomach and the evidence that he had spat several tablets out. So where did the high – but non-lethal – dose of dextropropoxyphene come from? I agree that there is no evidence of an injection but in the absence of an inquest it is legitimate to indulge in conjecture. You may prefer to point the finger at co-proxamol and you may be right but the forensic evidence does not particularly support it.

    Rather weighty expert opinion also casts doubt on the notion that Kelly died as a result of his severed artery, so we are actually left not knowing for sure how Kelly died at all. The case is clearly screaming out for an inquest.

    “Was forensic evidence expected to be found on the co-proxamol packets?”

    Yes. On each bit of the blister pack pushed out to release a tablet one might reasonably expect to find a thumb print, or part thereof.

    “Would the absence cause concern in a regular police investigation?”

    The absence would be noted.

    “Was the packet even tested for forensic evidence”

    It was a potential crime-scene so forensic examination would have been thorough. Fingerprinting of found items is part of the routine of helping demonstrate or eliminate the possibility of foul play.

  192. “Whether one leans toward the suicide theory or the murder theory the dextropropoxyphene issue is problematic because, although Kelly had quite a lot in his blood, it was way short of what is generally considered a lethal dose. ”

    Exactly, so while the pathologist thought it wasn’t sufficient to have been the cause of death ON ITS OWN, according to Mark’s hypothesis it was.

    That’s the problem I am pointing out and which you seem to be at pains to avoid.

    “It was a potential crime-scene so forensic examination would have been thorough. Fingerprinting of found items is part of the routine of helping demonstrate or eliminate the possibility of foul play.”

    Fine, but Mark said there had been no fingerprints found on the strips of co-proxamol but I can’t find this being said anywhere but here.

    Mark, do you have a source for this?

  193. “Exactly, so while the pathologist thought it wasn’t sufficient to have been the cause of death ON ITS OWN”

    That’s not what was said.

    From the doctors’ letter:

    “Professor Milroy expands on the finding of Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry – that haemorrhage was the main cause of death (possibly finding it inadequate) – and falls back on the toxicology”

  194. Assange’s revelations damaged no establishment figure. Their primary impact was to release ‘secret’ information connecting Pakistani government with the activities of the Taliban in Afghanistan, thus providing a pretext for further US expansion of its war against Pakistan.

    Assange is not be trusted, imo. These leaks look like a CIA operation.

    The recent charge of rape against him and then its withdrawal looks, to the public mind, like a CIA dirty tricks operation further boosting his credibility as an anti-establishment truth teller.

    Let’s see what he comes up with next and how damaging it is to the US/UK/Israel Imperial ‘make war for peace’ project.

  195. ‘Kelly’s death was caused by bleeding from the cuts to his wrist, severe heart disease and an overdose of painkillers …’

    “It was an absolute classic case of self-inflicted injury. You could illustrate a textbook with it.” –Nicholas Hunt (Sunday Times)

    Dr Kelly couldn’t have known if he had partially-blocked coronary arteries since he wasn’t being treated for them, was he.

    So how was he trying to kill himself? By cutting one wrist and half-swallowing some tablets? But Hunt’s version would make heart disease one of a trio of vital causes. So how then is it a “textbook” case?

  196. Given what ‘somebody’ posted about Nicholas Hunt at August 22, 2010 9:41 PM, how do we know if he’s competent? or if anything he says can be trusted? And if that doubt is there, why can’t someone theorise about injections? an injection site can be easily covered up under “numerous cuts” to the left wrist.

  197. And references to ‘CSI effect’ are downright silly since ‘fingerprinting’ has been in use since the late nineteenth century.

  198. “So how then is it a “textbook” case?”

    He was probably referring to “The Textbook of Baffling, Ambiguous, Suspicious and Downright Dodgy Deaths” (OUP 2004).

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos