Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Norman Baker MP: Kelly's death may have been murder

I think Baker is seen as a lone wolf, you rarely even see his own party picking up on what he is saying.

A shame, because the reality is that men of Dr Kelly's age and social background very, very rarely commit suicide...........
 
Paul Marsh said:
A shame, because the reality is that men of Dr Kelly's age and social background very, very rarely commit suicide...........

I'd be very interested in any evidence you might have to help prove this very dubious statement.
 
Paul Marsh said:
A shame, because the reality is that men of Dr Kelly's age and social background very, very rarely commit suicide...........
I'd suggest that men of Dr Kelly's age and social background rarely come under such immense and cruel public pressure or get let down as badly by those they trusted too.
 
Have our regular conspiracy theorists picked up on this? It's certainly plausible, unlike claims that the 7/7 bombings never happened.
 
I think the was probably murdered. The paramedics on the scene doubted the suicide - I remember their letter to the Guardian - I understand they've been on tv as well, looking bewildered at subsequent claims.
He didn't leave a suicide note, he had emailed a friend to say he was coming over, only 2 Comproximole in his system and not enough blood at the scene or a deep enough cut on his wrist (with a blunt gardening knife) to kill him. His daughter was about to get married and his religion forbid him from doing so.

He'd fucked off the intelligence services so he was surplus.

I don't think you have to be a conspiracy theorist to think all this is dubious.
 
Lock&Light said:
So, if profesionals very, very rarely commit suicide, what does that tell you when one does? That's right. Nothing.

it tells me that when you said that the statement "men of Dr Kelly's age and social background very, very rarely commit suicide" was "very dubious" you didn't then apologise or say, like i might have done when suprised by new information "wow, i didn't know that" and explain how this new information affects (or doesn't) my current opinions, instead you swiftly moved on to pretending you'd never made used as an argument something you now know to be false. thus making you a wriggler, IMO.

personally i can believe both the official story and the conspiracy. both make sense within the contexts of what i know and understand about the world.
 
And not a shred of evidence to support the suicide theory - no witness evidence or pathological evidence or anything. Still, who cares? Let's roll.
 
BootyLove said:
I don't think you have to be a conspiracy theorist to think all this is dubious.
Without any actual new evidence I'm not sure what's to be gained from another long bout of wild conjecture and speculation here.

It'll only drag in the usual nutters, after all.
 
I'd probably have a bit more time for the claims if they'd appeared in newspapers other than the Mail and Scotsman TBH.

And the stats about suicide simply mean Dr Kelly was in the group least likely to commit suicide on a 3 year rolling average (on data that is 3-6 yrs old), not that it doesn't happen.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
And not a shred of evidence to support the suicide theory - no witness evidence or pathological evidence or anything. Still, who cares? Let's roll.


^^^conspiraloon! Nonbeliever, Kill the heretic!

Look what a few months away from the Guardian has done. :p

It won't be long until the penny drops that the very same mind bendingly powerful neocons that requested a new pearl harbour and then massively exploited an attack, seemingly custom made, on 9/11/2001 for their own profit might of had a hand in it.

....or probably not.
 
editor said:
Without any actual new evidence I'm not sure what's to be gained from another long bout of wild conjecture and speculation here.

You mean 'it's my ball and I'm going home'.

Last in!
 
bluestreak said:
it tells me that when you said that the statement "men of Dr Kelly's age and social background very, very rarely commit suicide" was "very dubious" you didn't then apologise or say, like i might have done when suprised by new information "wow, i didn't know that" and explain how this new information affects (or doesn't) my current opinions, instead you swiftly moved on to pretending you'd never made used as an argument something you now know to be false. thus making you a wriggler, IMO.

If I'm a wriggler then you're a nitpicker. Get over it, mate.
 
i think this is a whole different order of conspiracy from the usual 9/11 or 7/7 stuff.. State sanctioned murder on an individual scale is, IMO, entirely plausible and involves no robots, missing planes or tinfoil hats. I think he may very well have been murdered.

However, to write suicide off on the basis that it was statistically unlikely is a bit daft - as the ed. said, Kelly was under awful pressure.
 
I actually have some time for Norman Baker's investigative skills. If I recall correctly it was his questioning over many months that led to one of the Mandelson resignations...

Matt
 
editor said:
Without any actual new evidence I'm not sure what's to be gained from another long bout of wild conjecture and speculation here.

It'll only drag in the usual nutters, after all.

V. true. :D
 
Matt S said:
I actually have some time for Norman Baker's investigative skills. If I recall correctly it was his questioning over many months that led to one of the Mandelson resignations...

Matt

He was?
 
Back
Top Bottom