The Iraq Inquiry has taken us back again to that period where the government had engaged in a massive military build up ready to invade Iraq, and was desperately looking for evidence on WMD to trigger the invasion – an invasion on which the Washington neo-cons had pinned their entire hopes for the future of the Bush presidency.
Just at that crucial time, one of the UK’s foremost experts on Iraqi WMD had let slip to the BBC that the government’s claims did not stand up. As a result, he was found dead in a wood, while the BBC journalist, Andrew Gilligan, who correctly reported that there were no WMD, was fired for telling the truth.
The punishment of the BBC for failing to unquestioningly echo Blair lies went much further. The Chairman and Director General were forced out. All because the BBC said there may have been no WMD, when there were not.
It is almost incredible even now to state what New Labour have done. God know what future historians will make of it.
The BBC was traumatised, and went through an acceleration of cultural change that prized “managers” over journalists, and stopped criticising government. A foundation stone of democracy had been blasted away by Tony Blair.
Kelly’s death was extremely convenient for Blair, Cheney and a myriad of other ultra ruthless people. It paved the way for war. We should not forget how very crucial the WMD issue was in convincing enough reluctant New Labour MPs to go along. Without the UK there would have been no coalition – most of the other Europeans would have quickly dropped out too. It is by no means clear that, despite Cheney’s bluster, the Americans would have invaded Iraq alone.
So Kelly was the first man killed in the Iraq war. Hundreds of thousands of people died in Iraq after Kelly. Arms manufacturers, mercenary companies and the security industry made tens of billions in profit. That’s a powerful motive to remove an obstacle. The Western oil companies are getting back into Iraq.
We will never know if Kelly would have gone on to repeat his – perfectly correct – doubts about Iraqi WMD, or if he would have shut up, as ordered by Tony Blair through the MOD. I do know, as many doctors have attested, it is extremely unlikely to bleed to death by cutting a wrist. I do know that the paramedics who attended said there was very little blood at the scene. I do know that the painkillers he took were a tiny proportion of a fatal dose and were not an anticoagulant. I do know that a chemical weapons expert like Dr Kelly would know better ways to kill himself.
And I do know that the government is keeping the evidence hidden for seventy years.
Returning to David Kelly, I had not previously seen this article by Kelly, published in The Guardian days before the Iraq war.
His final sentence: “The long-term threat, however, remains Iraq’s development to military maturity of weapons of mass destruction – something that only regime change will avert.”
So if Kelly believed in WMD, and believed that regime change was the only way to avert their development a) how was his death/murder convenient to Blair? (Kelly’s evidence at subsequent enquiries would have been very convenient) and b) how, if one of his chief weapons’ inspectors believed in WMD, does this prove Blair is a liar?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/aug/31/huttonreport.iraq
Still waiting, Larry – where are those pictures?
But because you don’t have them, of course, just carry on blowing smoke as per usual.
soba wrote: “By the way, what do you think hit the Pentagon if it wasn’t a plane and where did the plane go?”
I’m not even going to speculate – what would be the point? I’d just like to see some photographic evidence that it was a plane that hit the Pentagon. Where did the plane go that hit that? There usual crash scene for a jumbo hitting it is missing. Every camera that would have captured it has the pictures missing. Where do you suppose all those pictures are, and why haven’t they been released – assuming they exist?
I note Eddie got the Guardian piece from Harry’s Place. Credit where due, Eddie. Don’t ya think?
I still think Kelly expired of ‘natural causes’, having been the terrified subject of a nationwide man hunt and a public trial, and the security services set it up to look like murder.
The key points about the Kelly fiasco is that the government adjourned a coroner’s court unconstitutionally and that they used the Hutton Inquiry as an excuse to witch hunt the anti-war media (See Chilcot, Hutton and the death of Dr David Kelly Sam should read this.). This witch hunt was also outside the bounds of the amendment to the coroner’s act under which the Hutton Inquiry was instituted.
What do we do when the government deliberately abandons the rule of law?
Parliament is the guardian of the British constitution but the MPs seem to be corrupt. They allowed “Lord” Falconer to become a political head of the justice system and just lay supine when the government co-opted a law about train crash inquiries to be used to whitewash the Kelly affair.
The free British press is also supposed to guard our democratic liberties but they are mute. Why?
Sam – correct, Harry’s Place has been discussing this today. But no one seems to be able to answer the simple question: why was Kelly’s death useful to the security services or to the government when in fact the exact opposite is the case? He stated that Iraq had WMD and confirmed that regime change was the only way to deal with the problem. Blair’s position too.
Eddie: No he didn’t. Kelly told Gilligan that the government claims did not stand up. What you are claiming is the opposite of the truth. But surely you’d know that?
You seem to have edited or mixed up my comment.
It contained a link:
http://pol-check.blogspot.com/2010/01/strange-case-of-death-of-david-kelly.html
I don’t accept that the key point is whether or not Kelly was murdered. The key points are that the government drove a coach and horses through the law, even allowing Hutton to embargo key information for 70 years!
Incidently, the government was worried about an “open verdict” (common in coroners courts – even when someone falls (jumps) under a train if no-one saw them do it). This is why they bent the law.
David Aaronovitch previously issued this challenge, but no one took him up on it. So I’ll issue it again, but make it much simpler.
Forget about cutting your ulnar artery.
Just take 29 co-proxamol tablets and take a long walk in a forest.
Come on folks – have the courage of your convictions!
Angrysoba:
‘”I know. That’s the whole point. :)”
And it means…?’
Well, it means you are still on vacation obviously. When is your holiday due to end by the way? 😉
Lamby:
‘David Aaronovitch previously issued this challenge, but no one took him up on it. So I’ll issue it again, but make it much simpler.
Forget about cutting your ulnar artery.
Just take 29 co-proxamol tablets and take a long walk in a forest.
Come on folks – have the courage of your convictions!’
You are not in Kansas any more Lamby.. 😉
Glenn
I suggest you read David Kelly’s article or was that a conspiracy too? The english is pretty clear.
“Just take 29 co-proxamol tablets and take a long walk in a forest.”
…and then try and cut your wrists without leaving any fingerprints on the knife.
From Global Research:
‘Most intriguingly, at 8am, half an hour before Dr Kelly’s body was discovered under the tree, three officers in dark suits from MI5’s Technical Assessment Unit were at his house.
The computers and the hard-disk containing the 40,000 words of the explosive book were carried away. They have never been seen since.’
Hutton must be charged with perverting the course of justice and concealing a murder.
Ruth, did globalresearch.ca identify one of the Men in Black as Tommy Lee Jones?
“Hutton must be charged with perverting the course of justice and concealing a murder.”
Well, it would be Falconer rather than Hutton who is responsible for perverting the course of justice, murder or not.
The real problem here is that the British Constitution depends upon some degree of separation between the judiciary and the executive and requires the vigilance of Parliament.
That Lord Falconer could be appointed as a nakedly political Lord Chancellor without any demur from Parliament shows that MPs do not care about the Constitution.
That Falconer could then use legislation to deal with rail crashes to set up the Hutton Inquiry because Blair etc. were scared of an “open verdict” also shows that MPs did not care or were unaware of the liberty being taken.
That Hutton could, without the necessary powers, embargo evidence for 70 years also shows a total disregard by Parliament of the Constitution.
Put all these components together and you have a Parliament that just does not care about arbitrary rule. (Notice the recent willingness to abandon Habeas Corpus). If the party in power has a big enough majority MPs will just let them do what they like.
I really wonder whether the supremacy of Parliament and its role as guardian of the Constitution is acceptable. Our constitution depends on strong MPs and the current lot are corrupt, ignorant and weak. Perhaps the UK must have a written constitution and a constitutional court to stop these excesses from happening again.
Larry the Lamb,angri,technicolor and all the other gamers on this site-take a walk in the woods,swallow the tabs and take your friend Aaronovitch with you.
Aaronovitch deserves a long slow agonizing death and so do you for mentioning his unholy name in polite conversation.
John:
‘Our constitution depends on strong MPs and the current lot are corrupt, ignorant and weak.’
That’s the whole problem with the party political system we currently suffer under! It needs to be scrapped. We all need to vote in independent M.P.’s with proven track records in society!
If I have a 30 blister pack of tablets… why bother to leave 1 in the pack ?
Is there proof that the absence of 29 of the tablets from the blister pack means that David Kelly consumed them all prior to his death.
Can we see the toxicologist’s report to confirm the dosage level was lethal.
Why did early media reports say that only 4 tablets were consumed ?
Where did they get that information from ?
What purpose does it serve to withhold the information for 70 years ?
Why do the police hold onto David Kelly’s work and not return it to his family so they may publish it ? (as I guess would be David Kelly’s wish)
“The long-term threat, however, remains Iraq’s development to military maturity of weapons of mass destruction – something that only regime change will avert.” Dr David Kelly The Guardian
So if Kelly believed that Iraq had WMD, and believed that regime change was the only way to avert their development a) how was his death/murder convenient to Blair? (Kelly’s evidence at subsequent enquiries would have been very convenient) and b) how, if one of his chief weapons’ inspectors believed in WMD, does this prove Blair is a liar?
Anyone care to respond to this?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/aug/31/huttonreport.iraq
Not jumped ship yet you disgusting little weasel? Won’t be long now, won’t be long… You will undoubtedly be one of the first turncoats once the leaks become unpluggable. You aren’t worthy of licking turd from my boots. Go and crawl back in your dirty little hole you foul specimen. The forum air has a rank odour to it!
Well said, Jaded.
I did hear that Eddie’s IP address is located in the House of Commons – interesting, eh?
It seems more than likely that Kelly was murdered for what he was about to expose.
Sam:
‘Well said, Jaded.
I did hear that Eddie’s IP address is located in the House of Commons – interesting, eh?’
More like right up Tony Blair’s arse. I really, really wonder about these people. Do you think he has a family and goes home at night preteding not to be subhuman? Seriously, he comes on here to defend the indefensible! How does he do it? I pity him. Wake up for your own good eddie. I’m not religious with a capital ‘R’, but i’m sure none of us are spiritually beyond redemption. I will hold back some hope for you.
Jaded, your vile anti-Semitism is well recorded on these boards, but your language really is foul.
So no answers then, just abuse. Sad people. I asked a simple question. Why would Blair want Kelly dead when his evidence would be useful to him? Kelly’s views are a matter of public record. Is anyone here able to respond sensibly or do you just prefer to resort to silly abuse? Cat got your tongues yet again? What was he about to expose Ruth?
Care to provide a quote of mine to support that BNP eddie? No, thought not. 😉 What exactly do you tell your family that you get up to? Would you like them to find out???
Belsen Eddie?
I think he has gone home for the ‘pretend i’m human’ part of his life…