BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 09:42 AM

Fionn,

The Mail article by Gilligan was written in such a way that Dr. Kelly could be identified, it's content was, however, so much at variance with what Dr. Kelly had discussed with Gilligan, that when Dr Kelly approached his employers his words were something in the nature of, " I think I might be the source referred to."

While the BBC, as an organisation, may aspire to the highest standards of ethics and integrity, some of it's employees obviously do not.

"In practice it gets close enough to those standards to be the most dependable news source in the world, by a country mile." Once upon a time Fionn, once upon a time.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 09:12 AM

Ard, I'm glad someone else saw that amazing confrontation between Alistair Campbell and Jon Snow. "Gob-smacking" was Andrew Marr's word for it, and he wasn't over-stating it.

Teribus, the inquiry will probably make things clearer, but it's clear enough already that your theory about Gilligan's Mail article is sheer drivel. If that article was so revealing that it forced Kelly to out himself, how come he managed to lie low for another five weeks? Even when he outed himsslf, he did so only within the MoD and his identity was not known to newspapers. The three that did eventually did put Kelly's name to the MoD all did so within an hour of their editors being phoned by Campbell. Did Campbell plant clues? Let's wait and see.

After Kelly's suicide I thought the widespread assumption would be that he had been less than frank with the foreign affairs committee and that as a man of honour he could no longer live with himself. That was certainly my assumption, though I see no point attaching much weight to it until more is known about the circumstances.

In the meantime any suggestion that Kelly was out of his depth or was led astray by the media is misleading. He was world-renowned in his field, and was widely respected among senior investigative jouranlists for both his knowledge and his readyness to provide off-the-record background briefings. Kelly had lifelong friendships with some of those journalists, and indeed he was discussing personal issues via email with a friend at the New York Times shortly before he died.

From the outset I thought it unlikely that the BBC, including its governors and its chairman - who has a longstanding family connection with Downing Street and is a Blair appointee - would stand four-square behind Watts and Gilligan without the strongest of good reasons. We'll see.

More than any here-today-gone-tomorrow government, obsessed exclusively with short-term intereste, the BBC apires to the highest standards of ethics and integrity. In practice it gets close enough to those standards to be the most dependable news source in the world, by a country mile.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: ard mhacha
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 08:08 AM

And the present "Labour" gang, would you trust any of them?. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 06:30 AM

Well - yes perhaps that was a bit OTT.

But would you trust them to even spell your name correctly? More to the point - would you trust them to keep your name out of it - if the rewards were seen to be great enough or any resulting fall-out was looking to land on them?

Good folk, hard-working and underpaid the majority may be - but would you trust them as above? Them or the few more highly paid ones?

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 05:24 AM

"The majority of journalists in this country are scum, totally bereft of honour".

Offensive rubbish. That's no different from making the same kind of all-embracing smear against any other group of people. The majority of journalists in this country are actually hard-working underpaid reporters working on local papers.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 04:08 AM

DG of 22 Jul 03 - 02:39 PM

"The BBC has already dealt with the problems caused by Gilligan's Mail article..... The BBC has taken action to forbid it's journalists from moonlighting for other media outlets which don't have as high standards as the BBC."

I.E. They have shut the stable door after the damage has been done and the horse has bolted - How good of them.

You consider, "that the BBC, or even Gilligan, is (NOT) guilty of any wrongdoing in the reporting of the story as they saw it." Except that when confronted with the statements made in Gilligans article, before the select house committee, Dr. David Kelly refuted practically everything Gilligan said in his article. That same committee who granted "Smug Slug" Gilligan the comfort of a closed interview found the same to be an extremely unreliable and discredited witness. My personal experience with the British media is that their reporters have the story written before they leave the office - I totally agree with Goik's summation above,

"The majority of journalists in this country are scum, totally bereft of honour, and blessed with the ability to sell even their Granny down the river for a storyline."

MGoH:

"A basic principle for any journalist is that, if you have promised a contact that you will not disclose their name, you do not disclose it, no matter what."

I say again, Dr. Kelly when meeting Gilligan, was under the impression that he was talking to a BBC Reporter. Gilligan acting as a BBC Reporter then made his report for the BBC in which there was no way that Dr. Kelly could have been identified - up to now all well and good. What Gilligan then does is park his BBC "hat", don that of his other employer, the Mail, and then proceeds to go into print with the same material in such a way as to make it possible (for at least three other newspapers) to identify that his source was Dr. Kelly. That displays a total and utter lack of integrity on the part of Mr. Gilligan - please do not try and dress it up as being anything different, or in any way honourable.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 23 Jul 03 - 03:19 AM

Unfortunately Kevin this is the only honourable thing about journalists, and even that little code is adhered to more to protect themselves than their source. The majority of journalists in this country are scum, totally bereft of honour, and blessed with the ability to sell even their Granny down the river for a storyline.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jul 03 - 07:25 PM

And if the BBC had ratted on David Kelly and disclosed that he was the source, and he had then killed himself? What then?

A basic principle for any journalist is that, if you have promised a contact that you will not disclose their name, you do not disclose it, no matter what. Reporters and editors have gone to jail for that.

The occasional exception who has failed to maintain that principle - like the Guardian editor a few years ago who handed over an incriminating leak, just because a court ordered him to, as a result of which the source, civil servant Sarah Tisdell was jailed - has rightly been held in contempt for the rest of his career.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 03 - 02:39 PM

"Had the BBC then had the guts to declare that Dr. Kelly was their source and handed over the interview notes instead of standing on their line of protecting our sources confidentiality (which their own reporter had blown asunder) - It could have easily been established who was altering, or putting spin on what Dr.Kelly had stated. I believe that one result may well have been that Dr.Kelly might have lost his job, but I also believe that the pressures, and media interst on him would have been less and that he might still be alive.

As a result of the forthcoming independent judicial review I do not think that the BBC or Andrew Gilligan are going to come out of it too well."

Bullshit. The BBC has already dealt with the problems caused by Gilligan's Mail article. A serious lapse in one reporter's judgment while under hostile fire from an already beleagured and besieged government demanding the outing of a confidential source, doesn't prove anything. The BBC has taken action to forbid it's journalists from moonlighting for other media outlets which don't have as high standards as the BBC.

The media in Britain isn't "anti-government" at all. It is doing the job the media is supposed to do, by reporting critically about the policies and decisions made by the British government. The media is certainly nowhere near beyond reproach in the way it covers the government, but that doesn't mean that the BBC, or even Gilligan, is guilty of any wrongdoing in the reporting of the story as they saw it.

The real issue underlying the WMD public relations debacle in both the UK and the US, is the government's manipulation of media, and the political uses of spin and hyperbole to sway public opinion. Both governments are damn guilty of engaging in a highly disingenuous war of words to justify using military force to gain control of Iraq's oil, the same way they used 9/11 to justify the use of military force to gain access to the Caspian oil fields in Afghanistan.

We haven't all forgotten that dirty little Afghan war yet, you know. You do remember that valiant war, don't you Teribus? The one that did nothing to bring order to the rogue state harboring Al Qaida, except bring in armed Anglo and American guards to provide access to the oil fields once the 2004 American elections have been bought by Big Oil?

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST,karen
Date: 22 Jul 03 - 02:18 PM

I don't have anything to add, but I do feel SO sorry for his family. This will live with them for the rest of their lives.

How terribly sad.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Jul 03 - 05:08 AM

Guest Redhorse at work,

Thanks for the correction re Polly Toynbee and the anecdote - very amusing, gave me a good chuckle!!

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST,Redhorse at work
Date: 21 Jul 03 - 08:27 AM

Do not believe people's claimed reason for leaving a job. Polly (sic) Toynbee's reputation as a reporter at the BBC was so high that she was reputedly known as the Eternal Flame on the grounds that she never went out.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Gareth
Date: 21 Jul 03 - 07:40 AM

Ive checked back against the original HMSO document pages 3 & 4

"Saddam has used chemical weapons, not only against an enemy state, but against his own
people. Intelligence reports make clear that he sees the building up of his WMD
capability, and the belief overseas that he would use these weapons, as vital to his
strategic interests, and in particular his goal of regional domination. And the document
discloses that his military planning allows for some of the WMD to be ready within
45 minutes of an order to use them."

(My underlining)

Seems clear to me what the intelligence services reported.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: harvey andrews
Date: 21 Jul 03 - 06:39 AM

It's strange how life imitates art sometimes. I recorded this song of mine a few years ago on a cd called "The Journey". I thought the title "Press-ganged" would be self explanatory, but people ask me what is it about and i say it's a made up story about an ordinary quiet man whose life is ruined by tabloids.They seemed to need to know what he had done and I tried to explain that that was not the point of the song. After this sad tale of this poor man I can give them a more concrete explanation.


harvey andrews         
                  press ganged                           

there's a crowd outside peering through his window
and he strains to hear the words the people say
there's a crowd outside peering through his window
and he wishes that the crowd would go away

he was happy, he was working one fine morning
then a friend waving a paper ran his way
now there's a crowd outside peering through his window
and he wishes that the crowd would go away

he was just a joe, a john, a phil, a michael,
just an ordinary man with feet of clay
now every move he makes the camera follows
and all he's ever done is on display

he'd never hurt a soul, he'd never argued
he'd never dreamed his life could go astray
now there's a crowd outside peering through his window
and he wishes that the crowd would go away


friends he trusted once have turned their faces               
now he sits alone there every day
ex-lovers have been paid for their confessions
for photographs and lies and hearsay


he reads and reads and reads again the letters
from strangers saying god comes if you pray
but there's a crowd outside peering through his window
and he wishes that the crowd would go away


the phone rings in the hall he does not answer
they're beating on his door, he stands at bay
there's a crowd outside, a stone comes through the
window
now he knows the crowd will never go away.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jul 03 - 05:40 AM

Watched Dateline London yesterday afternoon, where this topic was discussed. One member of the panel was Julie Toynbee, ex-BBC employee and now correspondent for the Guardian. She came up with a number of very interesting points:

- The BBC as a government sponsored organisation is (or should be) constrained to factual, non-biased, reporting of events.

- It has become increasingly the case that BBC Reporters work for other media outlets - In Gilligan's case the Mail and Spectator. Julie Toynbee left the BBC to work for the Guardian because she could not resolve what she saw as a conflict of interest with regard to working for both simultaneously. Mr Gilligan obviously saw no such conflict of interest.

- The whole WMD topic and the evaluation, spin, hype, or whatever term you wish to describe it was seized upon by the UK press, which is predominantly anti-government, and reported upon and used to damage the current UK Government.

- Andrew Gilligan held meetings and interviews with Dr. David Kelly wearing his BBC Reporters "hat". Dr Kelly agreed to these interviews solely to ensure that the BBC's reporting of the issue was factually correct. Andrew Gilligan in his BBC reports respected Dr. Kelly's right to anonimity and there was no way that Dr. Kelly could have been identified on the strength of the BBC's reporting.

- Two days later, however, Andrew Gilligan, writing as a "Mail" reporter, uses the same interview material in such a way as to make it possible for anyone who knew Dr. Kelly, knew is work, or, who worked with him, to easily identify the source as Dr. Kelly. That is what prompted Dr. Kelly to come forward to his employers and clearly state that he thought he might be the source.

Had the BBC then had the guts to declare that Dr. Kelly was their source and handed over the interview notes instead of standing on their line of protecting our sources confidentiality (which their own reporter had blown asunder) - It could have easily been established who was altering, or putting spin on what Dr.Kelly had stated. I believe that one result may well have been that Dr.Kelly might have lost his job, but I also believe that the pressures, and media interst on him would have been less and that he might still be alive.

As a result of the forthcoming independent judicial review I do not think that the BBC or Andrew Gilligan are going to come out of it too well.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 09:26 PM

"Which is slightly different to what Gilligan reported."

And very different from what Tony Blair told the House of Commons.

I'd have thought that just authorising just about anything is something that Saddam could do just about instantaneously. Forty-Five minutes would really be dragging it out absurdly. Getting it actually done, well that takes longer, but "authorisation" just means saying "Do it!"

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 08:53 PM

The whole thing is a mess.

At the least, the BBC's reporting did show that one senior person involved with intellegence had reasonable concerns about the dossier. That seems beyond any doubt.

Even the government seems to concede that the use of the plaguriesed document was a mistake and that the 45 minute claim was questionable.

I want to forget the smoke screens even if, it is as it appears to be the case, they have resulted in the unfortunate suicide of doctor Kelley.

Why was the dossier produced as it was, why wouldn't the UK and the US governments take the information from the UN weapons inspectors which has proved itelf to be more accurate than suggestions of imminent threats which could not have existed?

Who put pressure on who? A large number of the general public could spot something was wrong. Do our intellegence services have this power to con the governments but not the public, or do the governemnt have power to influence what gets into dossiers to suit thier ends?

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Gareth
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 07:58 PM

Err ! Giok - a correction - The BBC say that Dr Kelly was Andrew Gilligan's source. They do not say that Dr Kelly was the source of the story that Saddam Hussain could launch missiles in 45 minutes, for if I recall, the original dossier the claim was that Hussain couls authorise a launch within 45 minutes. Which is slightly different to what Gilligan reported.

But why spoil a good story because of fundemental inaccuracies.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 05:05 PM

As I predicted, the BBC now confirm that Dr David Kelly was the source of the information used by Andrew Gilligan in his report. I'm not going to get into conspiracy theories, as it's probably true, but that won't stop the theorists from giving vent to their suspicions. Still a sad sad story.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 10:53 AM

Guest Jo,
Remember that this site is for people with an interest in a particular kind of music to chat among ourselves.

The unsolicited opinions of an outsider is just spam and we would want it blocked.

If you were to take an interest in our music and intersperse your discussion of it with BS threads on your theories, that would be different. Perhaps a place to start would be Chapmore End

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 10:11 AM

Conspiracy theories about this are bound to arise, they always do - however I'd say that David Kelly's death has done far more damage to Tony Blair than would have been done, no matter what kind of information he might have been in aposition to reveal.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Ed.
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 08:55 AM

Guest Joe,

You are talking complete shit.

I could give a point by point rebuttal of your assertions, but I have better things to do.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Deckman
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 08:50 AM

An American's observation: As an American, I would NOT PRESUME to be qualified to make any judgements. However, one thing is very clear to me. It doesn't seem to matter which side of the pond you're on, bad actions bring on political repercussions. I find it somewhat interesting that politicans who 'go to bed together', so to speak, get washed with the same brush! CHEERS, Bob(deckman)Nelson ... Washington state, USA

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST,Joe
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 06:52 AM

--- Spam deleted. ---

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 06:27 AM

I think we all know now that this Government will do what it thinks it must and that anyone, (like Mr Kelly) whose actions threaten the Government - must have been aware of this - when he spoke to who ever he spoke to.

So unless he was a complete innocent - defined as one who would trust journalists - concerns about his pension or future career would have hardly surprised him or been likely to drive him to suicide.

The fact that he took these risks and then (presumably) took his own life - leads me to believe that possibly Mr Kelly knew more than he has so far revealed.

The questions then are:

- was it the pressure to reveal information?

- Or the pressure to conceal information?

That finally pushed him to the edge?

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Jul 03 - 06:02 AM

Voltaire`s conclusion rings true, " For evil to prevail, it requires only that good men do nothing", and we have the sickening spectacle of Blair receiving 20 standing ovations from the most right wing US warmongering government in living memory, and this ass-licker calls himself a socialist. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Gareth
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 07:10 PM

Kevin, whilst I don't agree with your interpretation of our Lord and Masters speach, I concur with your analysis, that many people are trying to pretend that they were deceived.

The question is what are thier motives ?

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Ed.
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 07:09 PM

It's awful that David Kelly is dead, and I sympathise with his family.

So far, this 'war' has killed thosands of Iraq's. Mabe we should stop and think about their families?

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 07:04 PM

I'll agree there's a smokescreen, Gareth. Covers up a lot of failures.

I felt that in his "History will Absolve Me" speech, Tony came as close as he dared to admitting that he deceived Parliament because he thought it was necessary.

Though actually I don't think too many people actually were that much deceived, but it's convenient for some people to be able to make out retrospectively that they were, and that they actually believed the story Tony told them about the 45 minutes and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Gareth
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 06:45 PM

Well said Ebbie, and no this is not toungue in cheek.

Kevin - Click 'Ere -as you say, a smokescreen is trying to be erected to cover up the failure of the anti-war brigade to address the main problem.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 06:41 PM

Guest/11:34, I take it you were there? I suggest you turn yourself in.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 06:30 PM

Seems pretty clear that the case for believing that Saddam had "Weapons of Mass Destruction" at his fingertips was hyped up, with a view to persuading wayward backbenchers to support the war.

What difference does it make if that was done at the direct request of the Government, or by agents of the Government doing what they knew was required of them?

The purpose of focussing on this non-issue was to divert attention from the real issue, and it appears that David Kelly cracked under the pressure of being used in this way. Assuming that it was in fact suicide.

The whole murky business is very reminiscent indeed of the recent TV serial State of Play.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: ard mhacha
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 04:00 PM

In a Poll on ITV a few days after Campbell`s finger pointing histrionics, the viewers were asked did they back the BBC in their spat with Campbell, the vote was 93 per cent in the BEEBS favour.
Also to-day Glenda Jackson a Labour back-bencher asked Blair to resign, the revolt is only beginning. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 11:34 AM

One of the 'Arkancides' during Clinton's time as governor shot himself from 8 feet away. Then the gun jumped into his hand. Suicide is a curious thing.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: redhorse
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 11:33 AM

The issue was not Andrew Gilligan. Various newspapers had made the same allegations as the BBC, but Alistair Cambell and Blair are both aware that attacking the BBC guarantees the support of the Murdoch press.
It was essential for Campbell to keep the pressure on the BBC to ensure he had at least two national newspapers on his side.
David Kelly was just collateral damage.
Like Gareth I am Old Labour, but I am reaching the point where even 5 years of real Tories under Ian Duncan Smith seems preferable to the self-serving crypto-Tory party that Blair/Straw/Blunkett/Hoon are running.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Billy the Bus
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 10:17 AM

This AP report from The Guardian quotes Police sources. Alas, it seems suicide.

Sadly - Sam

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Tam the Bam (Nutter)
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 09:15 AM

I agree with both Ard mhacha and Giok.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 06:49 AM

Gets more and more like Harry Potter.

I see they've ruled out "natural causes", which seems to leave either suicide or murder.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 06:09 AM

Blair surrounds himself with bullies and bulldogs, John Reid,Alastair Campbell,and David Blunkett. Then there are the cronies, Lord Irvine,and Lord Falconer. They used to say there are only two types of MPs, those who are lawyers, and those who aren't. I think we could add sycophantic bullies as a third category.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: ard mhacha
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 04:42 AM

How can anyone overlook Alister Campbell`s role in this tragedy,
his performance on Channel 4 News was amazing.
John Snow interviewing Campell was lucky to emerge with both eyes intact, Campbell showed himself to be a brow-beating bully, and this from the Rev Blairs chief advisor, thankfully for the viewers he was up against the best newscaster on TV. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 04:15 AM

As I said in another thread, David Kelly almost exactly fits the dictionary definition of a scapegoat. That he died for the sins of others would seem to be the inescapable conclusion, however the one sure thing is we will never know for certain whos sins he died for. My greatest fear is that he may be blamed in the end, it would be convenient for a lot of people, and after all he won't be able to defend himself will he?
I weep for his wife and daughters, why is it mostly the innocent that suffer?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Tam the Bam (Nutter)
Date: 19 Jul 03 - 03:58 AM

I don't want to get invovled with politics, because I'll might say the wrong thing, however I am sad about the death of Mr Kelly.

Tom

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Leo Condie
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 07:48 PM

Well Gareth, I'm a bit less terrified now but as a socialist I find it very difficult to have any time for a man who has introduced more right-wing policies than most tory governments! And yes, I know Gilligan is a slimey little toad, and to be honest I see the feud between him and Campbell as nothing more than two slimey little toads battling it out. Whatever the result of that, whether it's in the BBC's favour or in the government's, it's clearly alienated the public who have got to the point where they couldn't give a toss, which is exactly what Andrew Campbell intended it to do, presumably.

I'm by no means of the imagination backing the BBC here, rather saying that as far as I can see it the whole argument over sexing up seems to have been put forth by the spinners to divert attention from the WMD's. So I really have no idea where this death is going to take it.

I guess Rod Liddle was sacked because the BBC discovered they had a lefty in a fairly influential position. Gilligan is just a boring little blob wandering from newsroom to newsroom, i guess, and where it not for this he would have no influence whatsoever.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 07:36 PM

Could have been the Mossad. After all, Israel has the most to lose if the 'allies' pull out of the mid-east. This reminds me of the Dead Microbiologists a while back. We're used to people who cross the Bushes turning up dead in Texas, and I'd wager Kelly's death is just an extension of this type of hardball politics. Buy guns.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Gareth
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 07:34 PM

Leo - Yes I am "Old Labour", the "Old Old Labour", and as one of those who took the abuse and violence from the Trots, and "Viscunt" Stansgate fans in the 70's and 80's, and did not run away to the SDP I think I have a right to be so.

Blair ain't perfect, but if the alternative was Major, Hague, IDS, or gawd help us Hairy Mellon Jones (Welsh reference)then I will back Blair.

On Galloway - there were two sets of documents - One set the "Telegraph" refused to print, but the Christian Seince Minitor did, and had to appologise for. And the other set that is now the subject of Legal action.

As a seperate issue, this is not the first time there have been accusations of misfeasance with "Charitable" funds connected with Galloway.

Re the BBC - Gilligan also writes for the "Spectator" and "Mail", not Labour friendly papers, nor have they reputations for accuracy. Rod Liddle was sacked by the BBC for writting for the Gaurdian - Double standards by the BBC?

I leave you this ULR - It seems Gilligan has a problem. Click 'Ere

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Leo Condie
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 06:56 PM

Gareth: well I actually called them innocent iraqis, but now that we've got the pedantries out of the way...

George Galloway should never have been on the hook, for a start. Granted he's a sleazy little man but if that whole affair with the documents doesn't stink of complete and utter set-up then i'm Lee Harvey Oswald. The BBC have been dragged into this to distract/bore the public, but I doubt this'll let them off the hook - it could really go either way just now as far as I can tell. Of course if the government continues to talk hard talk about discontinuing the BBC's licence when it comes up for review, because the BBC refuses to well, disagree with them, that's a sure sign of cracks. Anyway, I thought you were an old labour sort of fellow? Your pal Rhodri certainly seems as such. Please don't get a taste for the licking of backsides, there's enough of that about...

pardon the language, but well, I get riled up when e'er I smell fresh Blairite hanging in the air!

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Gareth
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 06:38 PM

Regrets and condolances - Unfortunatley this may let the BBC and George Galloway off the hook.

Incidently why call then "Inocent Iraqui's", on Saddams figures something like 98% of the Iraqui People voted for Saddam, and as every 'Catter knows, Saddam Hussain ALWAYS told/tells the truth.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: Leo Condie
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 06:23 PM

Tory Plan B is definitely not stupid enough to get someone murdered (unless they're innocent iraqis, of course), which is why i'm inclined to think that Mr Kelly must have become privy to more information than he felt able to cope with, I suppose. Either way, the government and the BBC should be ashamed. But of course, they won't be.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 06:15 PM

Whether it turns out to have been suicide or a heart attack or something like that, brought on by the pressure he was placed under makes no difference. (Murder I'd be inclined to discount, not because I am naive enough to think any British Government isn't quite capable of it, but because it would have been self-defeating.)

In all the arguments about this, the reality of life and death has tended to be sidetracked in favour of a kind of office politics - a bit strange, in view of the fact that life and death has what it has all been about.

Subject: RE: BS: David Kelly (UK govt. WMD thing)
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Jul 03 - 05:57 PM

How tragic. It will be very interesting to follow this through, if they choose to tell the truth about it at all...dark days, indeed.