Dr David Kelly - Britsh Cover-up or not? Your verdict!

Biggins

Dr David Kelly records ordered to be locked away for 70 years!

Many people has followed the events surrounding British Government weapons inspector Dr David Kelly and his eventual mysterious death.
Now it has been discovered that the details surrounding his death has been quietly ordered to be kept secret for 70 years!

Dr David Kelly was at one time supposed to give evidence that he was pressurised into giving possible false reports for the British government (under Tony Blair) that they were justified into going to war with Iraq because of the possession of WMD's (weapons of mass destruction). An early report (with Dr Kelly's name on it) was submitted by the British government to their parliament in order to justify going to war with Iraq.

It emerged later that Dr David Kelly's report might have been altered. Dr David Kelly himself stated later that pressure was brought to bear upon him to write a report that was favourable to the position of the government. Following up on this admission to a war inquiry, he was to give further evidence and name names, give further evidence to the falseness of the report and expose some of the lies used to justify going to war.
...but shortly before he could do so, he supposedly committed suicide!

The medical reports as to the circumstances surrounding his death has now been ordered buried for 70 years! See HERE
Why?

The poll question for forum members:
Do you think there is an attempt to hide the real truth?

My name is URL

Definitely not as straight forward as it seems. I'd be more surprised if there wasn't some sort of cover up, than if there was

galwayrush

We shall never know the truth, i think it's a cover up, but it's only my gut feeling.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Absolutely. Thought so at the time. More a case of him being blackmailed rather than murdered, though.

Beasty

I would suggest anyone clicking on either of the yes options steer clear of the UK for the next 70 years or so (following last week's incident British Intelligence are believed have all our details)

brummytom

Oh definitely, it was dodgy from the start. Poor bloke

ejmaztec

I'd only be surprised if there wasn't a cover-up.

As soon as any government (including this one) announces openness and transparency, you know full well that they're talking through their holes.

builttospill

Nah, that was definitely him in Fawlty Towers and there's no way an imposter could have pulled off Sylvie.

Zimovane

Very fishy.

Agonist

Why are there four options in the poll when you only needed two? Is this a test and if so who's behind it?

Biggins

Agonist wrote: »

Why are there four options in the poll when you only needed two? Is this a test and if so who's behind it?

Its an attempt to fool the public. I work for the Bilderberg group, an elite coterie of Western thinkers and power-brokers who want to overthrow secular forms of organisations.
One of our methods is to undermine the present forms of government by planting seeds of doubt.
We know who you are, where you are and we are coming...

ejmaztec

Biggins wrote: »

Its an attempt to fool the public. I work for the Bilderberg group, an elite coterie of Western thinkers and power-brokers who want to overthrow secular forms of organisations.
One of our methods is to undermine the present forms of government by planting seeds of doubt.
We know who you are, where you are and we are coming...

I work for an organisation that's so secret, I don't even know what it's called, and we're apparently watching all of the watchers.

The Bilderberg Group would tremble at the very mention of our name, if they knew what it was.

Read, remember and swallow.:cool:

Sea Sharp

My initial reaction to hearing on the news that David Kelly had killed himself was: "Bull$hit!!"

It was an illegal war and Dave Kelly knew Iraq's weapons were obsolete. Everyone forgets that they invaded Iraq because they supposedly had weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to American and British citizens.

I've always assumed that he was murdered.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

What a load of bollocks... how can these scumbags get away with this shít? How can they order this type of thing to be hidden for so long? Who has ordered this? Is it perfectly legal to do?

TheZohanS

70 years....they're hiding something...but we'll all be dead before it comes out.

Biggins

GaNjaHaN wrote: »

My initial reaction to hearing on the news that David Kelly had killed himself was: "Bull$hit!!"

It was an illegal war and Dave Kelly knew Iraq's weapons were obsolete. Everyone forgets that they invaded Iraq because they supposedly had weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to American and British citizens.

I've always assumed that he was murdered.

Yep, Same here.
Now we will in our own lifetime, never know the truth about who could be guilty and subsequently they get away with it.

Sea Sharp

That's the way big governments operate. If you get in their way you're a goner. It's crappy but true.

dsmythy

He killed himself.

Diana died in a car crash.

Elvis is dead.

Sea Sharp

dsmythy wrote: »

He killed himself.

Diana died in a car crash.

Elvis is dead.

And governments don't lie to cover their tracks. :rolleyes:

OutlawPete

dsmythy wrote: »

He killed himself.

Not true.

This video is proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLSPJi51T34

dsmythy wrote: »

Diana died in a car crash.

No, she wrote that it would happen the way it did.

This Letter is proof.

dsmythy wrote: »

Elvis is dead.

Nope, this Pic is proof.

dlofnep

British Government suppress evidence? Never!

OutlawPete

TheZohan wrote: »

70 years....they're hiding something...but we'll all be dead before it comes out.

Brummy won't.

He'll be flying around in his Hovercar and the news will come on the virtual wimax radio chip that he got embedded in his ear that Dr Kelley was exterminated by MI5.

He'll lift the girl's head from his lap and press the button on the side of his jeans that does up his zip and say..

"When I was a young, not far off your age little miss .. I used to frequent this silly little place full of Irish folk and there was a guy called Biggins and .. ahh never mind".

/Brummy presses button on side of jeans again and smiles at girl.

The_B_Man

That first option - "An attempt to hide the truth". That goes without saying coz they're obviously hiding facts. Facts which are obviously the truth.

The thing we have to think about is whether or not the truth is that he was murdered or that he committed suicide.

If he was murdered, which we dont know and can only guess, then fair enoughits a cover up.

But if he did kill himself then they're probably just hiding the fact that they caused him depression by leaking his name so they're indirectly responsible/catalysts for his suicide.

But sure how can we know without seeing the documents, which we'll never get a chance to do. I suppose we could guess, or pick the scenario thats the most interesting, that can give us something to complain about!

MaybeLogic

David Kelly-has information regarding Iraqs' WMD-found dead walking alone.
Robin Cook- Ex-Foreign Secretary,also in possession of info regarding Iraq. 4 weeks after publishing an article saying Al-Qaeda is a product of Western Intelligence is found dead out walking (albeit with the secretary with whom he had an affair). Several doubts remain about the circumstances of his death.
Mike Todd- Senior police officer-investigating extraordinary rendition flights-found dead walking alone.

Linky.

Biggins

MaybeLogic wrote: »

David Kelly-has information regarding Iraqs' WMD-found dead walking alone.

...AND he is not the first I suspect:

Gordon Brown is being urged to intervene in an investigation into the mysterious death of British scientist Timothy Hampton.
The nuclear expert fell to his death from the 17th floor of a UN building in Vienna last month.

Local police and UN officials have suggested that the 47-year-old, who was involved in monitoring illegal nuclear tests by Iran and North Korea, killed himself.

But tests commissioned by his family have raised doubts about the findings of a first post-mortem examination and suggest that Mr Hampton, from Newbury, may have been murdered.

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1227885/British-UN-scientists-death-suicide-Gordon-Brown-told.html

Then there is others: HERE
And another 22!!! HERE
All coincidence of course. Nothing suspicious at all.


Seriously though, the hushing up of Kelly's results DOES tell us something - the British government does NOT want the public to know something that might lead to someone being held responsible and wants to stop further questions being asked to a certain direction, state organisation (official/unofficial) or people.

At least that much is obvious I think.

MaybeLogic

Dangerous occupation,scientist.
Who'd have thought?

Terry

TheZohan wrote: »

70 years....they're hiding something...but we'll all be dead before it comes out.

I drink and smoke heavily, buy I'm going to be one of the people you always hear about living to be 200.


In the shoes of David Kelly, I'd probably kill myself if I had played a large part in the innocent deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Can't be an easy thing to live with if you have a conscience.

Michael B

It's all very odd, always been baffled by it. Why cover something up if there's nothing to cover up? They shouln't be allowed to just sweep it under the carpet like that.

anonymous_joe

Michael B wrote: »

It's all very odd, always been baffled by it. Why cover something up if there's nothing to cover up? They shouln't be allowed to just sweep it under the carpet like that.

Define something to cover up though...

I'd be amazed if anything involved in what happened to Kelly reflected well on anyone involved. Moreover, issues of national security would undoubtedly be involved. I think it'd be best for honesty if it was made free and told to the world, but I can understand the reluctance.

MaybeLogic

Terry wrote: »

I drink and smoke heavily, buy I'm going to be one of the people you always hear about living to be 200.


In the shoes of David Kelly, I'd probably kill myself if I had played a large part in the innocent deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Can't be an easy thing to live with if you have a conscience.

He played a minor role and was a dissenting voice in the compiling of the Iraq Dossier..

Rhyme

TheZohan wrote: »

70 years....they're hiding something...but we'll all be dead before it comes out.

/steps into Cryo tube

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Terry wrote: »

I drink and smoke heavily, buy I'm going to be one of the people you always hear about living to be 200.

I'll drink to that

In the shoes of David Kelly, I'd probably kill myself if I had played a large part in the innocent deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. Can't be an easy thing to live with if you have a conscience.

This is quite true. It's very possible that he just killed himself, but... why hide his files from public view? I don't think this should be allowed at all. It's so very very wrong.

MaybeLogic wrote: »

He played a minor role and was a dissenting voice in the compiling of the Iraq Dossier..

Minor or major role, he still played a role. That may have played on his mind, tipping him over the edge.

ascanbe

This song was written about the Dr.Kelly situation.
Don't know if it really throws any light upon it; it's a damn good song, though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS37ZSYOwTA

nacho libre

i'd like the those who believe that it's just another wacky conspiracies theory to explain, why the records need to be sealed for 70 years?

let me guess national security;)

this just further demonstrates that while certain people may have a need to believe in conspiracy theories in the absence of credible evidence, there are also people who have a need to believe the offical narrative of events regardless of weighty evidence to the contrary.

hooradiation

nacho libre wrote: »

i'd like the those who believe that it's just another wacky conspiracies theory to explain, why the records need to be sealed for 70 years?

let me guess national security;)

this just further demonstrates that while certain people may have a need to believe in conspiracy theories in the absence of credible evidence, there are also people who have a need to believe the offical narrative of events regardless of weighty evidence to the contrary.

Except there is none.

All we actually know for certain is that the records have been sealed for 70 years. Everything beyond that is nothing but speculation.

humanji

Biggins wrote: »

Seriously though, the hushing up of Kelly's results DOES tell us something - the British government does NOT want the public to know something that might lead to someone being held responsible and wants to stop further questions being asked to a certain direction, state organisation (official/unofficial) or people.

At least that much is obvious I think.

No, it tells us that there's something related to the case that is of apparent national importance and not for the publics eyes. That's the only thing it tells you. Everything else is just a guess.

Personally, I see Kelly's death as suspicious, but as pointed out above, it doesn't seem likely that he'd have any information that would of been of any importance. Maybe he was killed by a gay lover? Who knows?

Dravokivich

TheZohan wrote: »

70 years....they're hiding something...but we'll all be dead before it comes out.

Don't worry man, when we discover time travel we'll have it back no in a matter of moments from someone in the future.

- Drav!

Biggins

humanji wrote: »

No, it tells us that there's something related to the case that is of apparent national importance and not for the publics eyes. That's the only thing it tells you. Everything else is just a guess.

Either it WAS suicide or it wasn't.
Its a "yes" or "no" answer.

If he killed himself, let the public corner have the details and medical records.
If he didn't, why the secrecy about how he died?

humanji wrote: »

Personally, I see Kelly's death as suspicious, but as pointed out above, it doesn't seem likely that he'd have any information that would of been of any importance.

Other than he was going to state clearer for the record who put pressure on him to falsify a report, name names and give further direction to an inquiry that might head in a direction, those guilty or partly responsible don't want them to look at!

humanji wrote: »

Maybe he was killed by a gay lover? Who knows?

That would be a matter for a high court judge and for a LIVING individual to impose the media to a blackout under the Human Rights Act and the right to privacy.
See todays news for an example of this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246925/Court-gagging-order-soccer-stars-secret-affair.html

General Zod

I think it was about something else, not just the WMD.

I don't know what that something else is.

humanji

Biggins wrote: »

Either it WAS suicide or it wasn't.
Its a "yes" or "no" answer.

If he killed himself, let the public corner have the details and medical records.
If he didn't, why the secrecy about how he died?

Who knows? We'd be guessing, since we don't hav the facts.

Biggins wrote: »

Other than he was going to state clearer for the record who put pressure on him to falsify a report, name names and give further direction to an inquiry that might head in a direction, those guilty or partly responsible don't want them to look at!

But it was all unsubstantiated. That's the problem. And who knows, maybe he lied about all that because someone else put pressure on him to say that he falsified the reports? Again, non of us know.

hooradiation

Biggins wrote: »

Either is WAS suicude or it wasn't.
Its a "yes" or "no" answer.

If he killed himself, let the public corner have the details and medical records.
If he didn't, why the secrecy about how he died?

Look, we don't know. That's because the records are sealed. Nobody is disputing this.

What people are saying is that when you go

"They are sealed THEREFORE it's to stop <insert X, Y Z here>" that you are talking out of your arse, because there is no way on earth for you to be certain of that.
None.

You can speculate wildly, nobody can stop you, but if you try and pass off your fevered imaginings as objective fact....well they're not and please stop, theres an entire CT forum for that nonsense.

And the Daily Mail? Try linking to something that isn't that horrible shitrag.

Biggins

hooradiation wrote: »

Look, we don't know. That's because the records are sealed. Nobody is disputing this.

What people are saying is that when you go (???)

"They are sealed THEREFORE it's to stop <insert X, Y Z here>" that you are talking out of your arse, because there is no way on earth for you to be certain of that.
None.

You can speculate wildly, nobody can stop you, but if you try and pass off your fevered imaginings as objective fact....well they're not and please stop, theres an entire CT forum for that nonsense.

And the Daily Mail? Try linking to something that isn't that horrible shitrag.

Pardon me!

I reported on the 90 year closure, asked a question and posted a poll.
People are still free to give opinions as far as I know.

And as for the Mail - the same "news Blackout " and those entitled to do it as regards privacy, has been reported today and yesterday in a number of papers. I just used the Mail as a quick reference. The basic underlying facts are still the same: "That would be a matter for a high court judge and for a LIVING individual to impose the media to a blackout under the Human Rights Act and the right to privacy."

hooradiation

Biggins wrote: »

Pardon me!

I reported on the 90 year closure, asked a question and posted a poll.
People are still free to give opinions as far as I know.

And as for the Mail - the same "news Blackout " and those entitled to do it as regards privacy, has been reported today and yesterday in a number of papers. I just used the Mail as a quick reference. The basic underlying facts are still the same: "That would be a matter for a high court judge and for a LIVING individual to impose the media to a blackout under the Human Rights Act and the right to privacy."

Oh for fucks sake.

Look, you stated this:

Seriously though, the hushing up of Kelly's results DOES tell us something - the British government does NOT want the public to know something that might lead to someone being held responsible and wants to stop further questions being asked to a certain direction, state organisation (official/unofficial) or people.

I'm calling you on everything after the bit I've bolded being total speculation and nothing more.
If you want to move the goalposts and play at being shocked, fine, if you want to argue that it's more than speculation then your more than welcome to try.


And i don't buy the whole "ohh the mail was the quickest one", nearly every thread i've seen you start of late contains a link to that odious fucking rag.

Nick_oliveri

Well then, why do YOU think the records were sealed? Just for the lulz?

Biggins

hooradiation wrote: »

Oh for fucks sake.

Look, you stated this:

Seriously though, the hushing up of Kelly's results DOES tell us something - the British government does NOT want the public to know something that might lead to someone being held responsible and wants to stop further questions being asked to a certain direction, state organisation (official/unofficial) or people.

I think you might have over looked the "MIGHT" wording in the sentence - it was an open question to the forum, not a statement of fact other than "the British government does NOT want the public to know something" and thats obvious - but hell we can over look "might" for convenience too...

...and you still haven't explained why Lord Hutton's decision to classify documents about the death of Dr David Kelly applies when the right to privacy and non-disclosure applies and is used under the human right act.

Its an easy kop-out to just say "state secret" but what the hell is so secret about telling a family if their husband/father killed himself or not?
(its a black or white question for them)
The cornier don't have to go into details about the death. He can be allowed to state if he was murdered or not.
They won't even allow him or the family that - why???

If he killed himself, right, fair enough. Let the family know for gods sake.
If he didn't say otherwise. Its not that hard to do.


Just as an additional follow up of thoughts:

Clearly there is more to this case than is known.
The only reasons I can personally think of that might force a blackout, is that there is more to this case than meets the eye as regards the time-line surrounding the afternoon of his death. This raises may questions. Some being: was he under observation at the time? By who (if so)? Was any possible killers seen? Why weren't they stopped if it was murder? ...and so on to an endless amount of questions that would drive conspiracy's crazy.

If it was a straight forwards suicide, why not just say so now and move on?
I'm probably stupid but I can't see why they don't say "Yes, he killed himself" or "No, he was unlawfully killed but details of his death we cannot release due to further inquiries or state secrecy"

Thats all the family is asking for. Peace of mind.

humanji

Biggins wrote: »

I think you might have over looked the "MIGHT" wording in the sentence - it was an open question to the forum, not a statement of fact other than "the British government does NOT want the public to know something" and thats obvious - but hell we can over look "might" for convenience too...

In fairness, the way you phrased the statement makes it look like you are declaring it as a fact:

Biggins wrote:

the British government does NOT want the public to know something that might lead to someone being held responsible

This looks like you are saying that someone is responsible and the British government are trying to hide information that will lead to the culprit being uncovered. Having "might" in there doesn't change the meaning in the way you think it does.

Biggins

humanji wrote: »

In fairness, the way you phrased the statement makes it look like you are declaring it as a fact:

This looks like you are saying that someone is responsible and the British government are trying to hide information that will lead to the culprit being uncovered. Having "might" in there doesn't change the meaning in the way you think it does.

I don't want the thread to get tied down over possible misreading that might have been brought about on my wrong phrasing or clearer choice of words which I admit might have been phrased clearer - I guess I will have to have some of my posts reviewed by someone from now on.

In respect of that, I know we all have our own thoughts and sticking with the main topic, as a parent and father I know I would just like to know if my dad had killed himself or if he was killed.
I might not like the answer either way but at least i would have gotten one and released any possible sense of shame that might exist about the actions one's dad is accused (and stated to have done in the media) of doing to himself.

I don't think its fair that his wife and children will never, ever know a basic answer to a medical evidence question.

humanji

Biggins wrote: »

I don't want the thread to get tied down over possible misreading that might have been brought about on my wrong phrasing or clearer choice of words which I admit might have been phrased clearer - I guess I will have to have some of my posts reviewed by someone from now on.

You're right, it's just getting pedantic now. Sorry.


The thing about the case is that a lot of people are just taking a few things they heard about it and assuming that Kelly had all this secret information that was going to send hundreds of high up people to prison.

The guy thought there were WMD's in Iraq. His main problem was with a claim that Iraq could launch them in something like half an hour. He, and a few others said this was nonsense, but it was published in the infamous "Dossier". I think he was also involved in investigating some of the sites in the aftermath, looking for evidence of WMD's and of the site he visited, he said it couldn't of been used for biological weapons making. But many people assume he said that there had never been any WMD's.

The problems arose when he did an interview on the BBC and it got found out that it was him. He denied it, but there was a lot of evidence to suggest he was just backtracking to cover himself. He seemed to keep digging himself into a hole, and if he felt trapped enough, it seems fairly plausible that he killed himself.

If he did indeed kill himself, then it's also quite plausible that things are being sealed to protect anyone who acted inappropriately with regards teh WMD's in Iraq, and it may have nothing to do with his death at all. It's just the fact that they may feel it has to be an all or nothing deal.

edit: I was talking with a guy in my office who pointed out that Kelly had assured several contacts he had in Iraq that there wouldn't be a war and when asked by a friend what would happen if there was one he said something alone the lines of "They'll probably find me dead in the woods", which is ominous to say the least.

So that's another possible theory, that Iraqi elements killed him in revenge for lying to them. Might seem extreme, but everything's a possibility at the moment.

humanji

Biggins wrote: »

I don't think its fair that his wife and children will never, ever know a basic answer to a medical evidence question.

Actually, there's a question. Does anyone know what the family want? Most articles seem to gloss over them.

Elliemental

Like many on here have already said, we'll probably never get to the truth of this matter, but I have a very strong feeling, going on what I have read about the case, that it is a cover-up. But, it is just feeling. There is something deeply fishy about the whole sorry episode.

Biggins

Humanji - All possibly true and lord knows - we will probably never know, nor will our great grandchildren...

I've no doubt that he did know "something". Again "what" is an open question.

The veins on his arteries were re-examined again and as some later said, the way the were cut (I'm paraphrasing) was highly unlikely to be possible in a suicidal way by ones self.
Despite all the other additional mysteries, the main one will go unanswered if Hutton gets his way, is the simple question "was it indeed suicide or not?"

Even if the public never gets to know, the British government could get the family to sign state non-disclosure agreements and tell them one way or another.
At least a terrible question will not be forever hanging over their heads till their own passing.