A Loophole for the New Kelly Inquest?
Kevin Boyle – No One to Vote For August 15, 2010
Yesterday a story was published in the Daily Mail reporting that one Dr Richard Spertzel, "a leading UN weapons inspector", is calling for a full inquest into the death of Dr David Kelly.
Dr. Spertzel asserts that Dr. Kelly had been "on an Iraqi hit-list". (along with himself and 'a couple of others')
As the pressure for a proper inquest grows (an inquest that is likely to conclude that the Hutton narrative regarding Kelly's death is almost certainly false) is a loophole being created to direct probable blame for Dr. Kelly's death towards Iraqi agents?
We must ask this question holding the certain knowledge that any government-initiated official inquest most certainly will not find that Dr. Kelly's assassins were agents of that same government (or agents of an allied government, which would amount to the same thing).
This simply cannot happen.
Let's get real here.
It might be an idea to look at the character of Dr Richard Spertzel. Even Wikipedia (not exactly an anti-establishment source) says that his evidence to Congress about the pre-war WMD capabilities of Iraq was "strongly misleading".
Below* is the summary to his 2002 testimonial to the Congressional Committee.
The point is.....it does not look as if this is an individual who can be trusted. He was prepared to misrepresent Iraq's WMD capacity. Being an intelligent man he surely understood the appalling consequences of invasion and occupation of a country that provided no serious threat to the USA or even Israel, with its massive nuclear capability.
So, this is an individual sharing the personality characteristics of the majority of our degenerate ruling class, high intelligence coupled with low character.
Is he, by speaking to 'The Daily Mail', acting on the advice of 'Intelligence Services' as he obviously did in 2002 during the Congressional Iraqi WMD hearings?
Almost certainly yes.
Even if such hit lists did exist (and how can such a thing be proved or disproved), the purpose of this story can only be to furnish an escape route for any new Kelly Inquest that is forced into existence by the weight of public opinion.
The alternative death narratives are being put in place now. Here is another story from today's Independent, 'Kelly had heart attack, says pathologist'.
Retired Pathologist, Dr. Jennifer Dyson, about whom there is no information on the web that I can find, asserts confidently that "Dr. Kelly was not murdered". Making such a statement immediately indicates that hers is a political rather than a seriously considered scientifically informed intervention.
How on earth could she know that? What qualifies her to utter such a definitive sentence. Based on this bluster, any serious analysis would surely conclude that, in this case, a fool had opened her stupid mouth.
From the same Independent article:
Evidence: Ten reasons to query the suicide verdict
1. An elbow injury had left David Kelly's right arm too weak to cut his wrist.
2. He had "difficulty swallowing pills" so he couldn't have swallowed 29 tablets.
3. Medical records about the case have been classified for 70 years, implying there's something to hide.
4. There were no fingerprints on the pruning knife used to cut his wrist.
5. He anticipated his own death, predicting he would "probably be found dead in the woods" if Iraq was invaded.
6. Doctors doubt the severed artery would have caused enough blood loss for him to have died of a haemorrhage.
7. The detective who found his body, Constable Graham Coe, said there wasn't much blood, so how could he have died of blood loss after slitting his wrist?
8. Two paramedics at the scene were sceptical the "wrist wound we saw" could have caused his death.
9. There was no evidence he was depressed; he was looking forward to his daughter's wedding.
10. His death certificate was not signed by a doctor or coroner and does not state a place of death.
Iraq's BW program in 2002:
I intentionally left this discussion to the end because much of the above discussions affect this response. In 1990, as stated above, Iraq's BW program was still in expansion and development. It probably had three bacterial agents, one bacterial toxin, one mycotoxin and one anticrop agent in its arsenal. Although Iraq denies it, Iraq had the equipment and know-how to dry BW agents in a small particle that would be highly dispersable into an aerosol. (Iraq acknowledges testing aflatoxin and Smut spores mixed with silica gel.) It still retains the necessary personnel, equipment (including spray dryer), and supplies to have an equal or expanded capability in this regard. It has had 12 years to advance its viral capability and, as I have cited elsewhere, this almost certainly includes smallpox as an agent. Even more ominous is Iraq's successful efforts to acquire the necessary equipment and reagents for adding genetic engineering to its BW repertoire. This was particularly alarming because, at the same time, key personnel in Iraq's virus and bioengineering BW program were no longer functional at their stated work locations. There is no doubt in my mind that Iraq has a much stronger BW program today than it had in 1990. Perhaps of most concern would be anthrax and tularemia bacteria and smallpox virus as well as antianimal and anticrop agents.
Last updated 17/08/2010