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

[detective-boy]

The trouble with todays world is that there are so many conspiracy theories flying about left, right and centre.

No. The trouble with today's world is there's too many fucking nutters about who think they're fucking Miss Marple, Quincy or some fucking reincarnation of Sherlock Holnmes ... and who "solve" everything based on the bits and pieces of ACTUAL evidence they have to hand, working on the principle that if THEY don't know it, then it doesn't exist.

 

[fela fan]

Or possibly it means the thorough investigation launched into an "unexplained death" has established sufficient evidence for the investigating officer to conclude that it is suicide (or, at least, that it is not some other things).

Well in that case someone forgot to tell the bbc website, coz they never stopped referring to his death as a 'suspected suicide'.

Everybody else called it a suicide.

Although editor called me wrong on that, but has yet to show me the articles at the time questioning the official government account.

 

[fela fan]

Yes. Worryingly wrong, but not, IMO, government toppling wrong - read the BBC link. And wouldn't you knock him off before he had chance to talk to any journalists rather than after?

<edit to correct emphasis>

Your history revisionist instincts are playing up again. I'm still waiting for all those articles at the time of kelly's death that questioned the government's possible role in his death. You know, the ones you told me existed.

Now you're trying to pretend that kelly's information wasn't important enough to topple the government.

That is precisely the opposite of the situation. Blair would have had to go, and quite likely bush may have fallen too as a result.

Luckily for all concerned kelly decided to kill himself....

 

[editor]

Your history revisionist instincts are playing up again.

Your stupidity is paying up again.

Here's the question I was answering:

So you wouldn't mind posting up major articles in the current mainstream press that seriously questions Kellys 'suicide'?

Which I've done.

As for comments at the time, most newspapers wisely waited until the facts emerged before making wild conspiracy-tastic claims.

Something you could learn from.

But they had no problem publishing their doubts afterwards.
Was Dr Kelly murdered? (Jan 2004)

Looks like you haven't bothered to read the BBC link I posted up earlier. Oh well. Stick to your mirrors, eh?

 

[fela fan]

As for comments at the time, most newspapers wisely waited until the facts emerged before making wild conspiracy-tastic claims.

Facts? You what? You're having a laugh.

The facts have yet to emerge, hence the renewed speculation over his death.

What facts are these that you and 'most' newspapers obtained?

[or is it just more history revision on your part?]

 

[squeegee]

So if you were going to knock off a high profile scientist who you believe was about to turn whistle blower, would you do it before he's had chance to have a private interview with a senior journalist, Andrew Gilligan and given evidence to two foreign affairs committee meetings or after?

And could you comment on why the government would want too silence him when he was parroting much of their line about WMDs and describing Saddam as an "immediate threat"?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/3411073.stm

I haven't said the government knocked him off. But they took political advantage of the situation. Before the death Blair was getting calls for a public inquiry to look into the events leading up to the iraq invasion. THen came Kelly's death and the gravity of the situation forced Blair and co to launch the Hutton inquiry. I'm sure they would rather have not had to answer to anyone, but they controlled the whole pantomime from then on and there was not a thorough enough investigation into the doubts about whether or not Kelly committed suicide.

If there was foul play involved it would be foolish to attaempt to guess who might have done it. To say Tony Blair or Alaistar Campbell had a hand in it is simply wild conjecture.

But it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Dr Kelly seemed on the brink of revealing more about the workings of the secret services and government than either would have liked to have been made public.

We don't know what he would have said. But Hutton did not answer enough questions and was restricted anyway by Blair's parameters.

Four medical professionals question whether Dr Kelly took his own life. The pathologist says it was suicide. Clearly there is a professional difference of opinion. A full independent inquiry would establish more clearly what this discrepancy is.

But this is as unlikely to happen as is Blair, Bush and co. being indicted for war crimes even though in any objective assessment that is exactly what they should be put on trial for. And that includes Israel's monstrous bombardment of Gaza and Lebanon.

 

[squeegee]

Saying that, I always thought Alaister Campbell looked like the type of man who could strangle someone with his bare hands if they got in the way of his plans

 

[smokedout]

lots of speculation about why they would kill him after he had already spoken to the press on this thread, and also about his state of mind on both sides of the argument

so heres my speculation

david kelly was a doctor and would have known thats there are lots of lovely ways to kill yourself, morphine overdose being one

so why would a doctor choose a method of suicide thats a) very painful, slow and distressing for his family and b) not very likely to work?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Yes. Worryingly wrong, but not, IMO, government toppling wrong - read the BBC link. And wouldn't you knock him off before he had chance to talk to any journalists rather than after?

<edit to correct emphasis>

No, because they didn't even know that it was him that was talking to the journalist, his identity came out after he had given the interview to Gilligan. This was also before a vote on whether to go to war and a government scientist saying it was all a pack of lies would have affected this.

 

[editor]

so why would a doctor choose a method of suicide thats a) very painful, slow and distressing for his family and b) not very likely to work?

AFAIK, he was a scientific adviser on weapons of mass destruction and not a medical GP.

And, sadly, I know from close personal experience (i.e. my best mate) that suicidal people don't always worry about whether the aftermath will be 'disturbing for the family' or not, neither do they always pick the 'best' for of suicide.

 

[editor]

No, because they didn't even know that it was him that was talking to the journalist, his identity came out after he had given the interview to Gilligan. .

You don't think the government knew who he was?!!

 

[sleaterkinney]

You don't think the government knew who he was?!!

I don't think the Government knew who talked to Gilligan, no, why would they have put all the pressure on the BBC to reveal who it was otherwise?

The Government began to demand that the BBC name the source for Gilligan's report. Gilligan and the BBC refused to do so. However, after rumours began to circulate amongst his colleagues, Kelly himself eventually revealed to his employers that he had spoken to Gilligan, though he denied making the more critical comments

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

 

[editor]

I don't think the Government knew who talked to Gilligan, no, why would they have put all the pressure on the BBC to reveal who it was otherwise?

Maybe because they needed to have him publicly named and outed?

My suspicion is that they knew (or had a very good idea), but it's unlikely it can be proved either way right now so I'll reserve judgement until such a time that it becomes clarified.

 

[sleaterkinney]

My suspicion is that they knew (or had a very good idea), but it's unlikely it can be proved either way right now so I'll reserve judgement until such a time that it becomes clarified.

But his own boss didn't know that he was the one that talked to Gilligan, how could the government have known?.

Do you have any evidence to back your suspicions up?

 

[editor]

Do you have any evidence to back your suspicions up?

FFS: It's a suspicion - that I qualified very carefully.

Have you any evidence to prove that the government categorically didn't have a good idea it was him?

No? Then why bother pursuing me on this point?

I'm not making any outright claims here at all.

 

[detective-boy]

Well in that case someone forgot to tell the bbc website, coz they never stopped referring to his death as a 'suspected suicide'.

Which would be an accurate representation of what the police would be saying - investigating officers establish the facts - it is not for them to state categorically what happened. That is a matter for the Courts or whoever.

And it does tend to suggest there was no D notice preventing it doesn't it? Don't you think the State would be able to silence the ... er ... State broadcaster first, not last?

 

[sleaterkinney]

FFS: It's a suspicion - that I qualified very carefully.

Have you any evidence to prove that the government categorically didn't have a good idea it was him?

Because it put pressure on the BBC journalists to say who their source was. If they had already known, then they would have leaked it in the way they did later.

 

[Jazzz]

So when did the British secret state, with all it's funding and decades of collective experience of stuff like this, start sending incompetent amatuers out to do highly sensitive work like bumping off a whistleblower who's still very much in the public eye?

And why would they do something so rediculously onto? Wouldn't it be easier to just plant kiddy porn on his computer or something?


I'm still unconvinced that it looks like anything other than suicide. All you have is a handful of individuals, none of whom got a close enough look at the body to know exactly what was going on, saying that they feel it's a bit suspicious.

I don't know who murdered Dr. Kelly. Perhaps it was the US military? And before editor suggests they wouldn't mess it up, let's note that he claims their incredible incompetence is the reason for all their lies to the 9/11 commission.

Or it could have been someone else altogether. It might well be hard to get a British secret service agent to bump off an MOD employee as part of their job. In fact I don't think that's how it works.

What we know is that our state is covering it up.

An interesting comparison is the murder of Roberto Calvi - another extremely improbable suicide, yet our police and judiciary took twenty years to decide he might have been murdered after all.

 

[exosculate]

The way I see it.


Fact 1 : We are told Kelly killed himself by cutting his wrists.

Fact2 : A paramedic says there was no blood

Fact 3 : Cutting wrists is typified by a mass loss of blood at the scene

Fact 4 : If a persons wrists were cut after they had died one would expect there to be little blood

Fact 5 : A dead person cannot cut their own wrists

All points to a conspiracy to me.