Now what could have caused this ?
MoD expert goes missing
I was going to make a flippant comment about looking for WMD until I heard a body has been found
Body found in Iraq expert search
I dont generally believe in conspiracy theories, but this is scary !
Dr Kelly might have been the MoD mole who told the BBC that WMD intelligence had been "sexed up" against intelligence service advice, so as to sell the war to a sceptical public.
Its never too soon to start a conspiracy theory.
He may have known too much, and it was known that he knew too much.
Yes he did. But he denies being the "mole"
Quote:Earlier this week, Dr Kelly denied being the BBC's main source for a story claiming Downing Street had "sexed up" a dossier about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Latest : Police say that the body matches Dr. Kelly's description !
There have been a series of odd deaths here and in Britain (as I remember) connected in particular with chem-bio experts. Should we perhaps revive discussion of that, um, series of odd coincidences?
Doubts are already being raised - and not unfounded !
Quote:Committee chairman Donald Anderson told the BBC his "heart went out" to Dr Kelly's family as the search for the official went on.
Another member of the committee, Tory John Maples said he was "speechless" after hearing of the discovery of a body.
"If it is (Dr Kelly), it is just awful. What can you say? Nothing," he said.
"There must be more to this than we had thought. I do not know what that means, I just think there is."
Bush attacked Iraq over the objections of the UN and most of it's members. It deemed the UN more or less irrelevant. Now it must go to the UN "hat in hand" inorder to get help from member nations. I can just visualize the grins on the faces of the leaders of France and Germany.
au
I doubt they are grinning. "Hat in hand" isn't really an appropriate analogy for the US attitude or plan here. There's NO move to share power, nor any suggested change in how the US will operate next time. They are simply treating the UN as cheap and disposable hired help, engaged temporarily to do the **** work.
That is spot-on, Blatham. Au was correct with that analysis, of course.
blatham
Note I said " Now it must go to the UN "hat in hand" inorder to get help from member nations. " I did not say they will. AS for the grinning Chiroc must be laughing so hard he is probably pissing in his pants
Washington - The U.S. effort to stabilize and begin reconstruction of Iraq is headed for failure without significantly more money and dramatic new steps to reach out to Iraqis with security, jobs and basic social services, a Pentagon advisory group of experts reported yesterday.
The group, sent to Iraq by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to assess the situation three months after the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime, said the Pentagon-led reconstruction effort is hobbled by excessive U.S. bureaucracy in Baghdad, where officers have difficulty talking to each other, let alone communicating with Iraqis outside heavily guarded American compounds.
"The next 12 months will be decisive," the experts reported to Rumsfeld.
They added that the U.S. civilian command in Baghdad "will have to dramatically and expeditiously augment its operational capacity" in Iraq to achieve real change while the security situation is manageable.
The experts said the United States must quickly mobilize more international support for the work that must be done.
What an easy argument - asked you to gone us for the massacre and now you only want to join for the cleanup. Kind of a straw man approach to a major debate!
Tartarin
The situation here regarding Dr Kelly WMD Iraq war, the BBC and who said what when is confusing to say the least.
As we all know, the issue of WMD was made central to prosecuting the war. And as we all suspect, it was hyped up to convince a sceptical public that war was really really necessary. The BBC reporter Andrew Gillighan says a senior MoD source told him the Govt put pressure on the intelligence services to "sex up" their material which they subsequently used as propaganda against Iraq and in favour of an immediate attack.
All hell broke out. Blair and in particular his director of communications Alastair Campbell launched a furious attack on the BBC saying that was a lie. BBC refused to back down and refused to name their source.
Then Kelly (a non political scientist) went to his line manager and said he had spoken to Gillighan (which he should not have done without authority) and that he may have been confused with The Mole. Gillighan won't say who the mole is. Campbell says it was Kelly and challenges the BBC to deny it.
Many thought the whole row manufactured out of nothing to divert attention away from the central issue of why we went to war. [Blair never said it was for regime change. For legal reasons he stuck doggedly to the need to disarm Iraq - the only legitimate reason in Britain that could be used to justify an attack]
It was all getting very silly and quite amusing to the outsider, or it was until Kelly ends up dead.
Kelly was summoned to a Parliamentary committee of enquiry and put through the mincer. He was told he was a patsy a fall guy to divert their enquiries and act as a smokescreen.
It could be that the poor guy found the pressure too much and died by his own hand. However the more I learn about what Govt. and its willing little helpers in the secret intelligence services are capable of doing - in extremis - makes me think nothing can be ruled out.
Its important to keep an open mind. Don't believe a word they say until it is oficially denied (!)
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Don't believe a word they say until it is oficially denied (!)
At which point, it behooves the sceptic to believe whatever it is which is being denied.
Sounds like a Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumpsfelt, Cheney kinda thing also!
Maybe Rumps special CIA unit hasn't been disbanded yet!
au1929 wrote:Bush attacked Iraq over the objections of the UN and most of it's members. It deemed the UN more or less irrelevant. Now it must go to the UN "hat in hand" inorder to get help from member nations. I can just visualize the grins on the faces of the leaders of France and Germany.
Must? I think you are jumping the gun a bit. The media is questioning whether they will, and you are claiming they now have no alternative.
