Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Dr David Kelly
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 53, 54, 55  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 26657
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 19-12-2011 17:13    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr David Kelly inquest ruling challenge fails

A bid to bring a High Court challenge over the attorney general's refusal to give his consent for a new inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly has failed.
Government scientist Dr Kelly was found dead in July 2003 aged 59 after he was exposed as the source of a BBC story about Iraq intelligence.
Campaigners had sought a judicial review of the decision, which backed a finding that Dr Kelly killed himself.

The attorney general said in June the evidence for this was "overwhelming".
Dominic Grieve concluded there was no possibility that an inquest would reach any verdict other than suicide - the conclusion drawn from an inquiry into the death by Lord Hutton - and he rejected claims of a "cover-up".

But a group of doctors said Hutton's ruling was unsafe, claiming the evidence did not point to suicide. They mounted a long-running campaign for the inquest to be re-opened.

On Monday, Mr Justice Nicol refused permission for one of the group, retired orthopaedic surgeon David Halpin, to seek a ruling that the attorney general had acted "unlawfully and irrationally".

Mr Halpin's lawyer, John Cooper QC, had told the court "public anguish" remained over the case, along with concerns the Hutton Inquiry had failed to get to the truth.
As the decision was announced there were cries of "shame" and "this is not justice" from members of the public.
Outside court, Mr Halpin said he was disappointed but not surprised by the decision.

Dr Kelly's body was found in woods near his home in Oxfordshire, after he was exposed as the source of a controversial BBC report casting doubt on the government's claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction capable of being fired within 45 minutes.
The report led to a fierce row between the BBC and the then Labour government.

An inquest was opened but suspended when the Hutton Inquiry was set up in 2004 to look into the circumstances of Dr Kelly's death.
Its report concluded Dr Kelly had killed himself by cutting an artery in his wrist. The original inquest was never concluded.

In March this year, the campaigners handed to Mr Grieve a new dossier containing details about the absence of fingerprints on items found near his body.
But Mr Grieve concluded in June that the inquiry was "tantamount to an inquest". He said he could not find any legal basis for referring the case to the High Court, which has the legal authority to order an inquest.
His department published full medical and pathology reports on Dr Kelly's death.

In September, the campaigners lodged papers to seek a judicial review of the decision not to hold a new inquest.

Rejecting Mr Halpin's application to seek judicial review, the judge described how it was the attorney general's role to act as a "filter" before matters reached court.
"Parliament considered it necessary for such a filter," he said. "In my judgment he (the attorney general) has exercised that discretion and power lawfully."

The court said there was "no impropriety" or procedural flaw in the way Mr Grieve had considered the evidence and concluded a new inquest was unnecessary.

Mr Halpin, 71, from Haytor, Newton Abbott, Devon, was ordered to pay £5,568 towards the attorney general's legal costs.
"Dr Kelly's death has not been investigated properly. There has been no inquest," he said outside court.
"The Hutton Inquiry had more holes than a Gruyere cheese."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16249783
Back to top
View user's profile 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 26657
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 22-04-2012 11:28    Post subject: Reply with quote

Conspiracy - or coincidence? Blowed if I know!

Suicide riddle of weapons expert who worked with David Kelly: Scientist tells wife he is going for a walk, then takes his life in a field... just like his friend
By Nick Constable and Ian Gallagher
PUBLISHED: 22:58, 21 April 2012 | UPDATED: 23:45, 21 April 2012

A weapons expert who worked with Dr David Kelly at the Government’s secret chemical warfare laboratory has been found dead in an apparent suicide.
In circumstances strongly reminiscent of Dr Kelly’s own mysterious death nine years ago, the body of Dr Richard Holmes was discovered in a field four miles from the Porton Down defence establishment in Wiltshire. It is not yet known how he died.

Mr Holmes, 48, had gone missing two days earlier after telling his wife he was going out for a walk – just as Dr Kelly did before he was found dead at an Oxfordshire beauty spot in July 2003.

Police said there were no suspicious circumstances in the latest case but revealed that Dr Holmes had ‘recently been under a great deal of stress’.
He resigned from Porton Down last month, although the centre yesterday refused to explain why.

Inevitably, the parallels between the two cases will arouse the suspicions of conspiracy theorists.
Despite Lord Hutton’s ruling eight years ago that Dr Kelly committed suicide, many people – among them a group of doctors – believe his inquiry was insufficient and have demanded a full inquest.

Some believe Dr Kelly, who kept an office at Porton Down right up until his death, was murdered. He was outed as being the source of a BBC report that Downing Street ‘sexed up’ evidence of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction to justify going to war.

Although it is not clear if the two scientists were close, one source told The Mail on Sunday that they were friendly when they worked at Porton Down in the Nineties.
At the time, Dr Holmes ran a project organising the installation of chemical protection equipment in RAF Sentinel spy planes, while Dr Kelly was head of microbiology and frequently toured the former Soviet Union as a weapons inspector.

After the first Gulf War, Dr Holmes is also thought to have worked on the production of chemical protection suits for troops. In 1991 he was the joint author of a scientific paper about an RAF chemical and biological protection system.

Yesterday, a Porton Down spokesman confirmed Dr Holmes had quit his job but declined to comment further. ‘It is not our policy to speak openly about any individual who works for us,’ she said.

Before finding his body, Wiltshire Police made a public appeal for information but warned people not to approach Dr Holmes for their own safety because they believed he had been ‘looking at information on the internet regarding self-harm and the use of toxic substances’.
Friends of Dr Holmes say this disclosure irritated his family, who questioned why a scientist engaged in chemical warfare research would ‘need to Google toxic substances’.

Dr Holmes’s widow, Susan, is a chemist who also works at Porton Down as head of business administration.
One of the Government’s most sensitive and secretive military facilities, the site has long been the focus of controversy.

Three years ago hundreds of ex-servicemen who were used as chemical warfare guinea pigs there between 1939 and 1989 were given compensation and an apology from the Ministry of Defence.
They were tested with the nerve agent sarin, but some of those involved claimed they had been told they were taking part in cold-remedy trials.
Many suffered serious illnesses after exposure to the gas, which was developed by the Nazis during the Second World War.

An inquest into Dr Holmes’s death was opened and adjourned by Wiltshire Coroner David Ridley last week. Coroner’s officer Paul Tranter said Dr Holmes’s family had grown concerned for his wellbeing after he failed to return from a walk on April 11.

A search party involving police and members of the other emergency services began combing waste ground close to his home in the Bishopsdown area of Salisbury.
Police discovered his body half a mile away in a field used regularly by dog-walkers and joggers in the village of Laverstock.

Mr Tranter said the results of tests carried out to establish the cause of death would not be known for several weeks.
He added: ‘Police do not consider this death to be suspicious in any way, nor do they believe there was any third-party involvement.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2133201/Dr-Richard-Holmes-Suicide-riddle-weapons-expert-worked-David-Kelly.html#ixzz1slcfKDVP
Back to top
View user's profile 
MythopoeikaOffline
Joined: 18 Sep 2001
Total posts: 9795
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 22-04-2012 12:19    Post subject: Reply with quote

Note to government:
This has got to stop happening, otherwise no scientist worth his salt is going to want to work at one of these establishments.
Back to top
View user's profile 
SameOldVardoger
Justified and Ancient of the Mu Mu(The Jams)
Location: Scandinavia
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 22-04-2012 17:49    Post subject: Reply with quote

Suicided?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Justified and Ancient
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1110
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 22-04-2012 20:26    Post subject: Reply with quote

You couldn't make this up.


Quote:
Before finding his body, Wiltshire Police made a public appeal for information but warned people not to approach Dr Holmes for their own safety because they believed he had been ‘looking at information on the internet regarding self-harm and the use of toxic substances’.
Friends of Dr Holmes say this disclosure irritated his family, who questioned why a scientist engaged in chemical warfare research would ‘need to Google toxic substances’.


These toxic substances being the equivalent of Dr. Kelly's prescription medication ?! Highly suspect.
Back to top
View user's profile 
JonfairwayOffline
Justified and Ancient
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1278
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 13-05-2013 12:03    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Diplomat was banned from talking about Dr David Kelly when giving evidence at Iraq Inquiry

Carne Ross told if he discussed Dr Kelly in testimony, he would be silenced
He intended to say a few words about him as a tribute which he had submitted earlier


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2298248/Diplomat-banned-talking-Dr-David-Kelly-Iraq-Inquiry.html#ixzz2TAkwwiGH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2298248/Diplomat-banned-talking-Dr-David-Kelly-Iraq-Inquiry.html

all this time and still this issue hurts people in the loop at the time....

does make me wonder !! if the truth will ever be known...
Back to top
View user's profile 
sherbetbizarreOffline
Justified and Ancient
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Total posts: 1825
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 14-07-2013 11:51    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Foul play vs suicide: Ten years on, the row still rages over the death of Dr David Kelly

The weapons expert's body was discovered in lonely woodland – wrists slashed – but journalist Miles Goslett has always pushed for an inquest. He goes head-to-head with John Rentoul of The IoS, who insists that Dr Kelly killed himself, as Lord Hutton found, and that to think otherwise is to believe a ridiculous and tasteless fairy story

The Independant

Interesting back-and-forth, and I think this reader comment sums up my thoughts -

Quote:
If I had absolutely nothing else to go on, this exchange would strongly set me on the side of demanding a proper inquest into Kelly's death. John Rentoul proves himself to be a mean-spirited condescending mouthpiece for the powers-that-be.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
CochiseOffline
Justified and Ancient
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1909
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 59
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 18-07-2013 04:45    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with the comment in this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2367671/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Ten-years-ago-today-Dr-Kellys-body-The-subsequent-cover-great-scandals-age.html

to the effect that many people's disillusion with government in this country dates back to the Iraq war lies and the failure to properly investigate Dr. Kelly's death.

Others will go back to earlier incidents, no doubt, but this was so blatant and involved so many levels of the government, legal profession and civil service that I can honestly point to it as the thing that made me (and many others of my acquaintance) cease to believe that we lived in an honest democratic society. I had never trusted Blair anyway, but I had imagined that the normal checks and balances - the Sir Humphreys, if you like - would have kept him in check. On the contrary, it revealed that the civil service , far from being impartial, had become completely politicised, much as Margaret Thatcher had done to the Police.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Bigfoot73Offline
Justified and Ancient
Joined: 19 May 2009
Total posts: 1110
Location: Leeds
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 18-07-2013 17:50    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://intellihub.com/2013/05/18/porton-downs-legacy-of-death-inquest-to-take-place-shortly-concerning-death-of-scientist/

Whatever is to be made of the article in general, it seems that Dr Holmes's inquest is yet to take place.
Back to top
View user's profile 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 26657
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 21-07-2013 09:48    Post subject: Reply with quote

The betrayal of Dr David Kelly, 10 years on
Andrew Gilligan, the journalist at the centre of the 'dodgy dossier’ row, reflects on the shocking facts that have emerged since Dr David Kelly’s death
By Andrew Gilligan
7:00AM BST 21 Jul 2013

I still remember, of course, how I heard about David Kelly’s death. It started with an early-morning phone call from my friend Mick Smith, then defence correspondent of The Daily Telegraph. Dr Kelly had gone missing, and the police were looking for a body.

Even then, I couldn’t really believe that he had died. Surely it was some sort of misunderstanding? Perhaps he’d just decided to go off for a few days and would turn up in some hotel, à la Stephen Fry? As soon as I got to the BBC, the director of news, Richard Sambrook, called me to his office. While I had been on the way in, he said, not sounding like he believed it himself, Dr Kelly’s body had been found, and it looked like suicide. He’d taken painkilling tablets and slashed one of his wrists.

If Sambrook sounded shaken, it was nothing to how I sounded. He had to get me a glass of water to calm me down. But as well as being upset, I was very, very surprised. I hadn’t known David all that well, but he didn’t strike me as the suicidal type, if there is such a thing.

He was quite used to confrontation and pressure: he’d been a weapons inspector in Iraq, for goodness’ sake. I thought his famous grilling by the Foreign Affairs Committee had been distasteful, and symptomatic of the committee’s stupidity, but it hadn’t been that bad. And the affair was tailing off. Politics was breaking for the summer, both the BBC and I had refused to confirm or deny whether David was my source, and the battle between us and Downing Street had essentially reached stalemate.

What a lot I didn’t know. Even now, almost precisely 10 years since David Kelly’s last journey, we are still learning just how extraordinary and inexcusable the behaviour of our rulers was – both towards him, and in the wider cause, defending the Iraq war, for which he was outed and died. On July 18 2003, I did not consider myself a shockable person; I was an experienced, sceptical journalist with, I thought, a realistic idea of how politicians, intelligence officers and civil servants behaved. But over the months and years that followed, my views, and those of most of the country, changed. To borrow the famous words of David Astor over Suez, we had not realised that our government was capable of such folly and such crookedness.

You probably remember Dr Kelly’s main contention, which became the centrepiece of my BBC story – that a government dossier making the case against Iraq had been “transformed” at the behest of Downing Street and Alastair Campbell “to make it sexier”, with the “classic example” being the insertion in the final week of a claim, based on a single source, that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction could be deployed within 45 minutes. The intelligence services were unhappy about the 45-minute claim, David said. They believed it was unreliable. In the first of my 18 broadcasts on the story, I added a claim, mistakenly attributing it to David, that the Government probably knew the 45-minute claim was wrong.

What we now know is that at precisely the same moment as the Government was launching hysterical attacks on the BBC and on me for reporting this, Whitehall had quietly conceded that it was true. In July 2003, literally as David Kelly was outed, MI6 secretly withdrew the 45-minute intelligence as unreliable and badly-sourced.

What we now know is that according to Major General Michael Laurie, the head of the Defence Intelligence Staff at the time of the dossier, “we could find no evidence of planes, missiles or equipment that related to weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It was clear to me that pressure was being applied to the Joint Intelligence Committee and its drafters. Every fact was managed to make the dossier as strong as possible. The final statements in the dossier reached beyond the conclusions intelligence assessments would normally draw from such facts.”

What we now know is that, according to an MI6 officer working on the dossier, the 45-minute claim was “based in part on wishful thinking” and was not “fully validated”. Another MI6 officer said that “there were from the outset concerns” in the intelligence services about “the extent to which the intelligence could support some of the judgments that were being made”.

What we now know is that on September 17 and 18 2002, a week before the dossier was published, Alastair Campbell sent memos to its author, Sir John Scarlett, saying that he and Tony Blair were “worried” that on Saddam’s nuclear capability the dossier gave the (accurate) impression that “there’s nothing much to worry about”. On September 19, Campbell emailed Scarlett again, suggesting the insertion of a totally false claim that, in certain circumstances, Saddam could produce nuclear weapons in as little as a year. This fabrication duly appeared in the dossier.

What we now know is that in his September 17 memo, Campbell suggested 15 other changes to the text of the dossier. Most were accepted; their effect was to harden the document’s language from possibility to probability, or probability to certainty. Campbell lied to Parliament about the content of this memo, giving the Foreign Affairs Committee an altered copy which omitted his comments on the 45-minute claim and played down his interventions on most of the other issues.

And what we now know is that, contrary to his campaigning certainty at the time, Blair admits in his memoirs that he privately saw the case for war against Iraq as “finely balanced”. No wonder a little tipping of the scales was needed – or, as Blair also put it in his book, “politicians are obliged from time to time to conceal the full truth, to bend it and even distort it, where the interests of the bigger strategic goal demand that it be done”.

We knew nothing of this then. Indeed, in his evidence to the Hutton inquiry, Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of MI6, described the 45-minute claim, straight-faced, as “a piece of well-sourced intelligence”, two months after his own service had discredited it. Despite his key role as Dearlove’s military counterpart, General Laurie was never called to Hutton at all; his explosive statement, and that of the two MI6 people, emerged only in 2011, at the Chilcot inquiry.

I don’t blame you if you knew nothing of all this until now; most of it, by happy coincidence, came out only long after public attention had moved on, and the government could no longer be damaged.

But the government knew – and this is what makes its behaviour towards the BBC and David Kelly so incredible. He came forward to his bosses as my source under a promise that his identity would be kept secret, but was effectively given up to the world after Campbell, in his words, decided to “open a flank on the BBC” to distract attention from his difficulties over the dossier.

Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, the FAC, was inquiring into the dossier. After it failed to denounce me to Campbell’s satisfaction, he confided to his diary that “the biggest thing needed was the source out”. That afternoon, on Downing Street’s orders, Ministry of Defence press officers announced that a source had come forward, handed out clues allowing anyone with Google to guess who he was, then kindly confirmed it to any reporter who guessed right. One newspaper was allowed to put more than 20 names to the MoD before it got to Dr Kelly’s.

Once outed, Dr Kelly was openly belittled by the foreign secretary, Jack Straw. The FAC, by the way, didn’t want to question him – its inquiry had finished and its report had already been published – but Downing Street forced it to hold a special hearing anyway. The day before, for several hours, he was intensively coached in the need to “f---” me. Under great pressure, he blurted an untruth in the glare of the TV lights; an untruth which, on the morning of his death, his bosses told him they would investigate.

Dr Kelly defined himself by his work and his reputation for integrity. The fear of losing it must have been terrifying, even if it was almost certainly unfounded. Understanding that is one reason why I am certain that he did indeed kill himself, for all some people’s obsession to the contrary.

They’ll hate this comparison, but there’s an odd symmetry between the Kelly conspiracy theorists and Mr Blair. In both cases, their convictions seem to require them to fit the facts into unusual shapes. For Dr Kelly to have been murdered, as the pathologist’s report makes clear, it would have needed someone to force 29 pills down his throat, making him swallow them without protest. Then they would have had to get him to sit on the ground without any restraint, making no attempt to defend himself, while they had sawn away at his wrist with a knife. That knife, by the way, came from the desk drawer in Dr Kelly’s study, so they’d also have had to burgle his house to get it.

The even more telling question, though, is what motive anyone could have had for murder. Even if you believe the British government goes round bumping off its employees in cold blood, killing David Kelly would simply not have been in its interest. It was guaranteed to create a scandal and a crisis, as anyone with an iota of sense would have known. There’s no need to claim that David Kelly was murdered; his suicide is scandal enough.

Ten years on, there are some Groundhog Day elements. Over successive crises, the BBC’s management has been as incompetent as ever. Politicians still appear to think that set-piece inquiries are worth the paper they’re written on – despite the evidence from Lord Hutton’s and Sir John Chilcot’s efforts on Iraq, the latter entering its fifth year with few signs of a report.

Whatever Chilcot may eventually say, the debate on the war appears to have been decided. Few would now dispute the dossier was sexed up. But there is still a fascinating degree of dispute about David Kelly. I have sometimes asked myself why the self-inflicted death of one scientist should matter to us as much as, if not more than, the violent deaths of perhaps 120,000 Iraqis (535 of them this month alone, by the way – so much for making Iraq safe for democracy).

I think it’s partly because there may still be some excuses for what the Government did in Iraq. They expected it to be like Kosovo: the operation would succeed, the troops be welcomed and the predictions of doom confounded. They expected, too, that a few barrels of WMD would probably be found that could have been cast as a threat. Even the charge of “lying” about those weapons is not quite cast-iron: I prefer the charge I made, of sexing-up, or exaggeration. I and most others always thought Iraq had something in the WMD line; the exaggeration lay in the fact that it was nowhere near threatening enough to justify a war.

But there are no excuses for what the government did to the BBC and to Dr Kelly. He was outed to further a series of denials which we can, quite plainly, call lies. An explanation, if not an excuse, may rest in Campbell’s mental state: even Blair, in his memoirs, called him a “crazy person” who by that stage “had probably gone over the edge”. But that doesn’t explain the really scary part: how the machinery of government, in a mature democracy such as Britain’s, allowed itself to be captured by someone in that state.

Sir Richard Dearlove, the former MI6 chief responsible for the dossier, was once asked what he thought of me. Flatteringly, he said: “I wouldn’t want you to print my views on Andrew Gilligan.” My own views on Sir Richard, Sir John Scarlett and the other distinguished knights of Iraq who got too close to New Labour are perfectly printable: they failed catastrophically in their duty, bringing their professions, their services – and their country – into deep, possibly permanent, disrepute.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10192271/The-betrayal-of-Dr-David-Kelly-10-years-on.html
Back to top
View user's profile 
escargot1Offline
Joined: 24 Aug 2001
Total posts: 13730
Location: Farkham Hall
Age: 5
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 08-10-2013 12:13    Post subject: Reply with quote

Norman Baker: finally the conspiracy theorists have an inside man

Quote:
Baker is not the first man to see secret plots in every corner – but he is the first such man to be made the Home Office's no 2

...
… Baker is, as Sir Humphrey might put it, a brave choice for the Home Office, the department that deals with public safety. For Baker is what you'd call a conspiracy theorist, one so dedicated he took a year out of frontline politics to write a book suggesting the former government weapons inspector Dr David Kelly did not commit suicide in 2003 but was in fact murdered by an Iraqi hit squad, a crime known to, but secretly covered up by, the UK authorities.

Most who have studied the question believe that's nonsense: indeed the one finding of Lord Hutton's public inquiry that few disputed was that Kelly had taken his own life. But Baker remains unconvinced. As the Guardian's Nicholas Watt and Rowena Mason report, Baker has also spoken publicly of his doubts over the death of Robin Cook, seeing mystery in the fact that the one-time foreign secretary – who resigned his cabinet post over Iraq – died while out walking "on Ministry of Defence land"

etc



Jonathan Freedland
theguardian.com, Tuesday 8 October 2013 10.25 BST
Back to top
View user's profile 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 26657
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 09-10-2013 09:24    Post subject: Reply with quote

escargot1 wrote:
Norman Baker: finally the conspiracy theorists have an inside man
Jonathan Freedland
theguardian.com, Tuesday 8 October 2013 10.25 BST


Similar piece in the Telegraph, goes into all sorts of conspiracy theories! Cool

Did the Freemasons stage the moon landings? If so, new Home Office minister Norman Baker will find out…

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100240509/did-the-freemasons-stage-the-moon-landings-if-so-new-home-office-minister-norman-baker-will-find-out/
Back to top
View user's profile 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 09-10-2013 10:44    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting bit of pre-meditative rubbishing going on. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile 
CochiseOffline
Justified and Ancient
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Total posts: 1909
Location: Gwynedd, Wales
Age: 59
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 16-11-2013 10:55    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent editorial re the Chilcot enquiry in the DM:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/debatesearch/article-2508182/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-Still-Establishment-hides-truth-Iraq.html
Quote:

More than a decade has now passed since Tony Blair, in the face of overwhelming public opposition, dragged this country into a shameful war that has cost the lives of countless innocent people in Iraq and around the world.

In 2009, with public anger over Mr Blair’s actions showing no sign of dissipating, his successor Gordon Brown established the Chilcot Inquiry.

This inquiry, we were promised, would reveal the full unvarnished truth about how Britain came to participate in a foreign policy adventure that, to this day, stains our national conscience and has done so much to damage relations between Islamic and Western cultures.

Yet almost three years after the last witness gave evidence to Chilcot, and £7.4million later, the report remains unpublished. Worse, it now looks highly unlikely it will be made public before the 2015 General Election – if at all.

The problem is that Sir John Chilcot, rightly, wants permission to publish records of dozens of telephone conversations between Mr Blair and George W. Bush in the run-up to war.

Disgracefully, however, Mr Blair – backed by Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood, the perfect exemplar of the modern, unprincipled civil servant – is blocking their disclosure.

There can be no question of the importance of the phone records to Chilcot’s conclusions.

For the charge against Mr Blair is that, along with his spin doctor, Alastair Campbell, he wildly exaggerated evidence that Saddam Hussein posed a deadly threat to Britain, while suppressing advice that the war might be illegal.

His purpose, we believe, was to trick the Cabinet, Parliament and British public into backing an invasion he had already agreed privately with the US President.

The notes of the phone calls between the two men, it is widely suspected, will confirm this devastating scenario.

Yesterday, ex foreign secretary Lord Owen savaged the now multi-millionaire Mr Blair for blocking their release – saying his position was an ‘intolerable affront to democratic accountability’.

Lord Owen has also written to David Cameron over the role being played by Sir Jeremy, who, of course, was Mr Blair’s principal private secretary from 1999 to 2003, ‘when the decisions to go to war were being taken’.

Truly, it is incredible that Sir Jeremy should be allowed to play any part in the Chilcot process. For integrity’s sake, the Prime Minister must strip him of his responsibilities. Mr Cameron must then find a way of breaking the stalemate and, finally, allow the full squalid truth about Iraq to be known.

We remind Mr Cameron that the Leveson Inquiry (into the criminal but hardly life-and-death matter of telephone voicemail hacking) published every scrap of relevant private correspondence.

At significant expense, Leveson – which had powers denied to Chilcot – also managed to convene and report in 17 months.

Yet when our political masters lie and deceive in order to wage an illegal war, the British Establishment unforgivably brings the walls of secrecy slamming down.
Back to top
View user's profile 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 26657
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 16-11-2013 13:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cochise wrote:
Excellent editorial re the Chilcot enquiry in the DM:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/debatesearch/article-2508182/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-Still-Establishment-hides-truth-Iraq.html

But it doesn't mention David Kelly!

Perhaps it would have been better in the Iraq Aftermath thread...?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 53, 54, 55  Next
Page 54 of 55

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group