Questions over Robin Cook's death

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Questions over Robin Cook's death

Another David Kelly? Some people online are asking questions.

While googling around the other day, one link led to another until a blog in particular caught my attention. Though I'm a firm believer that shit happens and that, if one wants, practically everything can be dressed up and interpreted as conspiracy (sometimes to mental extremes), I'm also aware that there are several grey areas in the way our governments act. This blog paid some attention to the strange death of Dr David Kelly and the murky world behind the Iraq war and I couldn't help but think that aspects of Robin Cook's death don't appear to fully add up.

I know it's hardly topical but you may want to have a look.

According to this entry ("Lingering questions about Robin Cook's death") available on a blog called 'Shaphan', there was some ambiguity regarding Cook's official cause of death (head injuries or heart disease?). Also, it may mean nothing, but as the Scottish mountain of Ben Stack (where Cook died while on a walking holiday) is extremely isolated, for a walker (or walkers - again, there seem to be contrasting versions) to be at hand and phone for help was quite a singular coincidence. More, in spite of earlier reports suggesting the opposite, it is was later established that both Cook and his wife were indeed carrying a mobile phone themselves (it was 2005, after all).

Finally, "Robin Cook chose an extremely remote place to die, far away from London, and the story was over before the press could send anyone to cover it". I didn't know, for instance, that Ben Stack is property of the Duke of Westminster, someone who devoted most of his life to the British Army and has always been regarded as a top MoD insider.

Similarly to the David Kelly affair, in spite of the high profile nature of the deceased, the police declared the case closed straightaway "as this would appear to be a medical matter".

In case you're scratching your head about all this, Robin Cook, as many know, was possibly the fiercest critic of the Iraq invasion amongst Labour's senior politicians. As he'd been Foreign Minister throughout Tony Blair's first term in office (1997-2001), he obviously had first-hand knowledge of intelligence related to Iraq, WMDs and threats (real or imaginary) from abroad. This is why he was particularly aware that Blair was hitting a bum note with the botched intelligence that lead to the infamous 45-minute claim. In protest against the invasion of Iraq, Robin Cook resigned from the cabinet in 2003. Four weeks before his death, he'd caused a minor stir when he relied on his previous knowledge as Foreign Minister to write in The Guardian:

"Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians".
written by Stan Moss at 1:09 PM



9 comments:

Le Mans said...

Pleased to see someone's writing about it. I remember not being fully convinced when it happened back in 2005. When intelligence matters and high-level secrecy are at stake nothing should be ruled out.
5:07 PM

Prestonshire said...

The Blair government? I wouldn't put anything past them. If they could lie shamelessly about carpet bombing and invading a country and signing ludicrously expensive contracts for reconstruction, then they can do anything.
7:40 PM

Anonymous said...

oh no! Another paranoid lot. People just die, and that includes politicians and celebrities alike, such as Marilyn Monroe, JFK and Elvis. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy. Accidents do happen and the intelligence services dont employ half of the population. Let Cook and Kelly rest in peace.

PS Lotsof folk go on trekking up Ben Stick -its not as unusual as you make it sound.
7:51 PM

Stan Moss said...

anonymous,

I started the article by carefully stating that accidents do happen and that I'm aware conspiracy theories often turn into mental stuff. I said exactly that.

I think people don't bother to read articles properly and just have knee-jerk fits of rage when they post comments!
7:58 PM

Anonymous said...

It was fishy. Dr Kelly docet.
9:44 PM

Andrew Simon said...

Whilst completely accepting that Robin Cook's death can easily be explained as being quite natural by simple medical reasoning, it's nevertheless true that he was the most senior critic of Mr Blair's claims about Saddam's WMD.

There's an interesting conjunction between Dr Kelly and Robin Cook contained in the evidence given by the BBC's Susan Watts to Lord Hutton at his inquiry:

Q. You were interviewing with him or talking to him because you were going to help preparation for an interview with Robin Cook. Did you discuss that at all?

A. Only briefly towards the end of the conversation. This was for an item I was putting together, a 4 minute item. I asked him what he would like to ask Robin Cook.

Q. What would he have liked to ask Robin Cook?

A. He just suggested that he should be asked why he was adamant in his position, Robin Cook's position.

Q. So adamant about his political position?

A. Yes, that there were no weapons to be found.

This kind of begs the question as to who it was who was actually briefing Robin Cook (and the FCO when he was there) about the so-called 'missing' WMD. You don't suppose that that could have been Dr Kelly himself by any chance do you? Or even that it was Robin Cook (whilst he was still in the Cabinet) who actually told Dr Kelly about Alastair Campbell and the 45 minute claim in the first place?
11:26 PM

Counting Crow said...

You may be interested in the following:

Norman Baker, Brighton Argus: "Nagging Doubts" over the death of Robin Cook. http://www.theargus.co.uk/display.var.1327811.0.0.php
12:11 AM



Anonymous said...

Interesting article. It does make you think that the case was closed before even opening it. You'd have thought they'd have used more caution...?
12:44 AM

thepatriot said...

What is it abt all those critics of the WMD claim that make them walk all the way to remote forests or mountains ?
8:35 AM



Robert Finlayson Cook (28 February 1946 – 6 August 2005), better known as Robin Cook, was a politician in the British Labour Party. He was Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom from 1997 to 2001. He resigned from his post as Leader of the House of Commons and Lord President of the Council on 17 March 2003 in protest against the 2003 invasion of Iraq. At the time of his death he was president of the Foreign Policy Centre and a vice-president of the America All Party Parliamentary Group and the Global Security and Non-Proliferation All Party Parliamentary Group.

Norman Baker says lies have been told

Murder theory that just won't go away

11:39am Friday 13th April 2007

The greatest British conspiracy theory of the modern age was unveiled this week. Lewes MP Norman Baker set out in detail for the first time why he believes the secret service murdered the Government scientist Dr David Kelly.

MILES GODFREY and KATYA MIRA report on a one-man crusade for the truth which has catapulted an unassuming Parliamentarian into the international spotlight.

• It was the start of 2006 and the time was right to bring down the British Government.
• In March last year Norman Baker, serial thorn in the side of the establishment and by his own admission "not the Prime Minister's favourite person", resigned his role as a frontbench MP for the Liberal Democrats.

It was a typically low-key announcement, timed to coincide with the anointment of the party's new leader Sir Menzies Campbell.

The time had come, the MP said, for a new man to take over.

But to those who knew Norman Baker, the decision to resign was made for another reason.

It would allow him more time to do what he does best: investigate, challenge, push, probe - specifically into the death of weapons expert Dr David Kelly. He was about to embark on an amazing investigation into the murky world of secret service agents, national security and the death of the man who very nearly halted the start of the war in Iraq.

If he could prove conclusively that members of the Government had conspired to get rid of Dr Kelly, it would have been - and still could be - the biggest single scandal this country has ever known.

The official report into the death of Dr David Kelly concluded he committed suicide after a row between the BBC and the Government over the "sexed up" dossier on Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction thrust the normally private scientist into the glare of the limelight.

But Mr Baker didn't believe a word of it. He said at the time: "The public out there can smell a rat and they don't think it's finished business either."

The scientist's death was, the MP said, just too convenient, too riddled with inconsistencies and so unlike a man like Dr Kelly.

His year-long investigation culminated on Wednesday night at a meeting at which he proclaimed Dr Kelly had been murdered and set out his evidence.

Mr Baker told a packed community hall in Lewes: "I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that this could not be suicide.

"The medical evidence does not support it and David Kelly's state of mind and personality suggests otherwise.

It was not an accident so I am left with the conclusion that it is murder."

He told of how the world's leading WMD expert had spent the morning before his death sending "upbeat emails" and even booking himself a flight to Iraq from his rural home in Southmoor, near Oxford.

Mr Baker questioned the cause of death - a haemorrhage caused by cuts to the ulnar artery in the wrist.

He said such wounds were "matchstick thick" and hidden, difficult to get to, as well as rarely leading to death.

The knife said to have been used was a gardening pruner Dr Kelly had kept since childhood - an unlikely and blunt choice.

Paramedics have said he had lost little blood and was "incredibly unlikely" to have died from the wound they saw.

Police said 29 tablets of the painkiller Coproxamol were missing from his home but all that was found in Dr Kelly's stomach was the equivalent of one fifth of a tablet.

The MP told The Argus: "It has taken more than a year to investigate and it has been an incredible and fascinating journey which has taken a large number of twists and turns.

"I have met experts on weapons of mass destruction in Brussels and uncovered more evidence about the lies the Government told about weapons of mass destruction before the war."

Along the way Mr Baker has had personal run-ins with high-profile Government figures, not least Tony Blair.

He said: "I wouldn't say it has been easy, certainly the Foreign Office has done a lot to put obstacles in my way and other people have too. It has been hard work but at the same time it has been extremely worthwhile."

He has also been hugely encouraged by the public, who he claims can see Dr Kelly's death for what he says it was. Mr Baker said: "There is a world in Westminster and the rest of the world and I think most people in the public world can see that Dr Kelly was murdered.

"He was the world's foremost expert on weapons of mass destruction who could single-handedly destroy the Government's case for war so it was no wonder he was killed.

"It may have also been intended as a message to other people out there who speak to the press when the Government doesn't want you to.

"I was appalled at his death and at the Hutton Inquiry into it. It was a procedural disaster from start to finish and I felt compelled to look into it."

Mr Baker has signed a book deal to explain in greater detail his findings on Dr Kelly's death and he expects to publish it later this year.

But the MP insists he will continue to investigate.

He has nagging doubts about the official line taken over the recent Navy hostages taken in Iran and over the death of Robin Cook, the MP who resigned in protest at the Iraq war.

He said: "Robin Cook was on Ministry of Defence land, I believe, when he died and certainly I have doubts over what happened."

There are those, of course, who doubt Norman Baker's theories.

But for every person out there who does there are an equal number for whom the MP has become a beacon of truth in an increasingly murky world.

martin brighton, says...
11:44am Sat 14 Apr 07

Dr. David Kelly was not the first to have been targeted by nulabor, and will not be the last.
This nulabor government, as corrupt as it is, has a policy of inducing mental illness and suicide among those it has deemed to be a potential threat.
In effect, Dr. David Kelly, among others, was effectively killed because of what he knew about nulabor.
This sad saga, yet another in years of similar abuses by nulabor, demonstrates yet again that:
This nulabor government is corrupt. The corruption is absolute, lead from the top down, includes the government institutions, and is out of control. Being rotten to the core and from the core, everything it touches it taints. Having neither the ability nor inclination to sort itself, outside intervention is indicated.

Dr. David Kelly was not the first to have been targeted by nulabor, and will not be the last. This nulabor government, as corrupt as it is, has a policy of inducing mental illness and suicide among those it has deemed to be a potential threat. In effect, Dr. David Kelly, among others, was effectively killed because of what he knew about nulabor. This sad saga, yet another in years of similar abuses by nulabor, demonstrates yet again that: This nulabor government is corrupt. The corruption is absolute, lead from the top down, includes the government institutions, and is out of control. Being rotten to the core and from the core, everything it touches it taints. Having neither the ability nor inclination to sort itself, outside intervention is indicated.

Ron Lambert, Geordieland says...
3:51pm Sat 14 Apr 07

The B.B.C.'s whitewash of Dr. Kelly's death was almost as transparent as their 911 farce and you've got no right to infer that public opinion is in favour of the so-called official line.
Conspiracies are only theories if there are no facts and in Dr. Kelly's case there are plenty. There are hundreds of suppressed facts and real witnesses relating to 911 that were blatantly, no criminally ignored. So please stop trying to tell us that what we see is reality, haven't you heard of smoke and mirrors? It's what governments do when they don't want to be found out, such as in taking the country to war for reasons no sane person would agree to,
i.e. oil and power. I am only a humble, disabled bricklayer with lots of time on my hands, to read freepress on the internet, to look beyond the matrix of the controlled mainstream media, and guess what. I can see through the phoney spin of your masters, whom you prefer to lie down with. But the scales are rapidly falling from the eyes of the masses, like with the cold war and the 911 pretext for this phoney war on terror.
And people like Norman Baker, George Galloway and the late courageous Robin Cook
are the only one's with balls enough to rebuff ridicule by their bosses and peers to say
ENOUGH!.
Truth is like a little crack in a roof tile which lets in a trickle of rain-water, until it builds up in the felt and bursts through the ceiling, and it is building up in the populous my freind.
Go to New York and ask Joe Schmoe in the street if he thinks that the 911 commission was fairly conducted, and well over 50% will tell you that they know someone who heard, felt or saw dozens of explosions from the basements of the towers to the top, well before the collapses. If you think it's beyond a 'civilized' government to perpetrate terror against it's citizens, please google up 'The Northwoods document' where some inside Kennedy's admin. drew up a plan to sink ships, shoot down aircraft with make-believe passenger lists, and even kill patsies in Florida so that they could win public opinion in order to go to war with Cuba. Heck, it's like a script for 911 and this current bloodbath in Iraq, who like Afghanistan,
had nothing to do with 911. And you don't call the deaths of approx.1,000,000 civillians murder, not to mention the 500,000 Iraqi kids who died of starvation and no medicine through embargos after Gulf war 1? Boy you really need to swallow the red pill, or was it blue? Where's the evidence? you say, well there's an old latin saying, Cui Bono?...or who benefits? Iraq didn't benefit, nor Afghanistan, nor did the old C.I.A. agent
called Bin Laden who denied the gig, even though it would have rocketed his kudos.
Palestine, Syria and Iran didn't benefit too. Hmm, who did?
Bush, Blair, Cheney, especially Dick with his multi billion dollar, no tender Halliburton contracts.
Er..Larry Silverstein who took over the twin towers a year earlier and insured them for seven and a half billion and counting did o.k. The
unknown stock traders who made who knows what on put options on the decline of American Airlines, on the 9th. of Sept.and before. Everybody but the invaded got rich, and stayed alive. You want evidence pal? Try opening your eyes to the discrepancies, they far outweigh the official line. As to Norman Baker's book, I suspect it's more for reaching a brain-washed public than fiscal profit, but so what, plenty M.P.'s do books about their sordid lives and still get fat pay-offs, and pretendy jobs in the city for keeping their mouths shut. Wake up fool, unless you are..... already wide awake.

In answer to secret Blair supporter, or is it Tonyboy himself? The B.B.C.'s whitewash of Dr. Kelly's death was almost as transparent as their 911 farce and you've got no right to infer that public opinion is in favour of the so-called official line. Conspiracies are only theories if there are no facts and in Dr. Kelly's case there are plenty. There are hundreds of suppressed facts and real witnesses relating to 911 that were blatantly, no criminally ignored. So please stop trying to tell us that what we see is reality, haven't you heard of smoke and mirrors? It's what governments do when they don't want to be found out, such as in taking the country to war for reasons no sane person would agree to, i.e. oil and power. I am only a humble, disabled bricklayer with lots of time on my hands, to read freepress on the internet, to look beyond the matrix of the controlled mainstream media, and guess what. I can see through the phoney spin of your masters, whom you prefer to lie down with. But the scales are rapidly falling from the eyes of the masses, like with the cold war and the 911 pretext for this phoney war on terror. And people like Norman Baker, George Galloway and the late courageous Robin Cook are the only one's with balls enough to rebuff ridicule by their bosses and peers to say ENOUGH!. Truth is like a little crack in a roof tile which lets in a trickle of rain-water, until it builds up in the felt and bursts through the ceiling, and it is building up in the populous my freind. Go to New York and ask Joe Schmoe in the street if he thinks that the 911 commission was fairly conducted, and well over 50% will tell you that they know someone who heard, felt or saw dozens of explosions from the basements of the towers to the top, well before the collapses. If you think it's beyond a 'civilized' government to perpetrate terror against it's citizens, please google up 'The Northwoods document' where some inside Kennedy's admin. drew up a plan to sink ships, shoot down aircraft with make-believe passenger lists, and even kill patsies in Florida so that they could win public opinion in order to go to war with Cuba. Heck, it's like a script for 911 and this current bloodbath in Iraq, who like Afghanistan, had nothing to do with 911. And you don't call the deaths of approx.1,000,000 civillians murder, not to mention the 500,000 Iraqi kids who died of starvation and no medicine through embargos after Gulf war 1? Boy you really need to swallow the red pill, or was it blue? Where's the evidence? you say, well there's an old latin saying, Cui Bono?...or who benefits? Iraq didn't benefit, nor Afghanistan, nor did the old C.I.A. agent called Bin Laden who denied the gig, even though it would have rocketed his kudos. Palestine, Syria and Iran didn't benefit too. Hmm, who did? Bush, Blair, Cheney, especially Dick with his multi billion dollar, no tender Halliburton contracts. Er..Larry Silverstein who took over the twin towers a year earlier and insured them for seven and a half billion and counting did o.k. The unknown stock traders who made who knows what on put options on the decline of American Airlines, on the 9th. of Sept.and before. Everybody but the invaded got rich, and stayed alive. You want evidence pal? Try opening your eyes to the discrepancies, they far outweigh the official line. As to Norman Baker's book, I suspect it's more for reaching a brain-washed public than fiscal profit, but so what, plenty M.P.'s do books about their sordid lives and still get fat pay-offs, and pretendy jobs in the city for keeping their mouths shut. Wake up fool, unless you are..... already wide awake.

Stephen B Coulson, Canada says...
1:48am Sun 15 Apr 07

A government willing to lie its way into a war killing 650,000 people or thereabout so far certainly wouldn't balk at killing a few people who stood in their way either.
If people are suspicious about this government, it's really the governments own fault. Neither Tony Blair, nor president Dick Cheney and his glove puppet for that matter, have given much indication that they should be trusted on matters of fact.

A government willing to lie its way into a war killing 650,000 people or thereabout so far certainly wouldn't balk at killing a few people who stood in their way either. If people are suspicious about this government, it's really the governments own fault. Neither Tony Blair, nor president Dick Cheney and his glove puppet for that matter, have given much indication that they should be trusted on matters of fact.

Dianne C. Foster, USA says...
2:13am Sun 15 Apr 07

It may have been an allied foreign power, equally keen to be in Iraq, who killed him. I happened to have been in Ireland at the time of his disappearance. It seemed there was a note of skepticism when he first went missing, a tone of something like suspicion, and then his body was discovered. The absurd motives for suicide combined with the weak evidence for blood loss or drugs as having been the cause point to the sinister conclusion. But please think outside the box. There are others who wanted to be in Iraq, not just the British government, however corrupt. It's about huge amounts of control of the world's oil, at the most profitable well-head, with the complicity of the citizens of those invading states due to ill-founded fears of WMD. Don't forget, we had an incident with anthrax, which was traceable to an Army lab in the US, not to Saddam as it was hoped we would believe. To remove a few men who stand in the way is nothing for the professional killers who invaded a sovereign and unoffending (lately) Iraq with Shock and Awe. As an American, I have a blood spot in my eye which will not go away. Kelly's death must be understood for the murder it undoubtedly was. It is one of thousands, don't forget, and only the beginning. Keep a broad understanding of where the other allied nations are in this. To think that we, who once stood together against Hitler, in our finest hours, must live under tyranny is something we must scorn and fight against. Inevitably, an expensive instant and increasingly imaginary empire will cost us in blood, treasure and in our hard fought human rights. Those who brought us to it will steal from us until we stop them.

It may have been an allied foreign power, equally keen to be in Iraq, who killed him. I happened to have been in Ireland at the time of his disappearance. It seemed there was a note of skepticism when he first went missing, a tone of something like suspicion, and then his body was discovered. The absurd motives for suicide combined with the weak evidence for blood loss or drugs as having been the cause point to the sinister conclusion. But please think outside the box. There are others who wanted to be in Iraq, not just the British government, however corrupt. It's about huge amounts of control of the world's oil, at the most profitable well-head, with the complicity of the citizens of those invading states due to ill-founded fears of WMD. Don't forget, we had an incident with anthrax, which was traceable to an Army lab in the US, not to Saddam as it was hoped we would believe. To remove a few men who stand in the way is nothing for the professional killers who invaded a sovereign and unoffending (lately) Iraq with Shock and Awe. As an American, I have a blood spot in my eye which will not go away. Kelly's death must be understood for the murder it undoubtedly was. It is one of thousands, don't forget, and only the beginning. Keep a broad understanding of where the other allied nations are in this. To think that we, who once stood together against Hitler, in our finest hours, must live under tyranny is something we must scorn and fight against. Inevitably, an expensive instant and increasingly imaginary empire will cost us in blood, treasure and in our hard fought human rights. Those who brought us to it will steal from us until we stop them.

Veloceraptor, U.K. says...
9:35am Sun 15 Apr 07

Upon his resignation as BBC chairman Gavyn Davies commented on the irreconcilable contradictions between Hutton’s "bald conclusions" and the balance of evidence presented to the actual Inquiry.

Even BBC political editor Andrew Marr comments on Hutton's underlying assumptions and background, making him more likely to believe and trust certain social groups: "again and again, he comes down on the side of politicians and officials."

So who is Hutton, and what is in his background to come to these extraordinary conclusions? What has lead to the reports extraordinary absolution of Blair’s war lies and attack on journalistic freedom?

The 72 year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh, County of Down, North Ireland, is a classic representative of the British ruling establishment. A member of the Anglo-Irish elite, he was educated at Shewsbury all boys boarding school, and then Balliol, Oxford, before entering the exclusive club of the British Judiciary. Whilst British Judges are overwhelmingly conservative, upper class, white, male and biased, Hutton’s background is even more compromised.



His name will be familiar to residents of the Six counties of Ulster. During the bloody thirty years war Hutton was an instrument of British state repression, starting in the late 1960’s as junior counsel to the Northern Ireland attorney general, and by 1988 rising to the top job of Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland.

Hutton spent his career as Judge and Jury in the notorious northern Ireland kangaroo ‘Diplock Courts’. These were special non-Jury courts, condemned by human rights advocates for their miscarriages of justice. He was hated for this role by the families of the many innocent Catholics wrongly convicted here.

Hutton distinguished himself after the Bloody Sunday massacre of civil rights protesters in 1972. He played a key role in the ensuing judicial cover-up called the Widgery Inquiry which absolved British troops of Murder. This miscarriage of justice is only now being investigated by the current Saville inquiry.

Then in 1978 he represented the British Government before the European Court of Human Rights, defending it against a ruling that it abused and maltreated detainees from the conflict.

However, he will be remembered in the rest of the UK for his role in the 1999 Pinochet affair. Another senior Judge, Lord Hoffman had contributed to the decision to arrest and extradite the notorious former dicator of Chile and mass murderer General Pinochet during his visit to Britain.

As a law lord, Hutton led the rightwing attack on Lord Hoffman, on the excuse that Hoffman’s links to the human rights group amnesty international invalidated Pinochet's arrest! Lord Hutton said "public confidence in the integrity of the administration of justice would be shaken" if Lord Hoffman’s ruling was not overturned.

More recently, Hutton was also involved in the ruling that David Shayler, the former MI5 agent, could not argue he was acting in the public interest by revealing secrets.

This history of intimate links with, and knowledge of Britains secret military intelligence operations meant he could be a trusted pair of hands when it came to the Kelly affair.

Upon his resignation as BBC chairman Gavyn Davies commented on the irreconcilable contradictions between Hutton’s "bald conclusions" and the balance of evidence presented to the actual Inquiry. Even BBC political editor Andrew Marr comments on Hutton's underlying assumptions and background, making him more likely to believe and trust certain social groups: "again and again, he comes down on the side of politicians and officials." So who is Hutton, and what is in his background to come to these extraordinary conclusions? What has lead to the reports extraordinary absolution of Blair’s war lies and attack on journalistic freedom? The 72 year old Baron Hutton of Bresagh, County of Down, North Ireland, is a classic representative of the British ruling establishment. A member of the Anglo-Irish elite, he was educated at Shewsbury all boys boarding school, and then Balliol, Oxford, before entering the exclusive club of the British Judiciary. Whilst British Judges are overwhelmingly conservative, upper class, white, male and biased, Hutton’s background is even more compromised. His name will be familiar to residents of the Six counties of Ulster. During the bloody thirty years war Hutton was an instrument of British state repression, starting in the late 1960’s as junior counsel to the Northern Ireland attorney general, and by 1988 rising to the top job of Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland. Hutton spent his career as Judge and Jury in the notorious northern Ireland kangaroo ‘Diplock Courts’. These were special non-Jury courts, condemned by human rights advocates for their miscarriages of justice. He was hated for this role by the families of the many innocent Catholics wrongly convicted here. Hutton distinguished himself after the Bloody Sunday massacre of civil rights protesters in 1972. He played a key role in the ensuing judicial cover-up called the Widgery Inquiry which absolved British troops of Murder. This miscarriage of justice is only now being investigated by the current Saville inquiry. Then in 1978 he represented the British Government before the European Court of Human Rights, defending it against a ruling that it abused and maltreated detainees from the conflict. However, he will be remembered in the rest of the UK for his role in the 1999 Pinochet affair. Another senior Judge, Lord Hoffman had contributed to the decision to arrest and extradite the notorious former dicator of Chile and mass murderer General Pinochet during his visit to Britain. As a law lord, Hutton led the rightwing attack on Lord Hoffman, on the excuse that Hoffman’s links to the human rights group amnesty international invalidated Pinochet's arrest! Lord Hutton said "public confidence in the integrity of the administration of justice would be shaken" if Lord Hoffman’s ruling was not overturned. More recently, Hutton was also involved in the ruling that David Shayler, the former MI5 agent, could not argue he was acting in the public interest by revealing secrets. This history of intimate links with, and knowledge of Britains secret military intelligence operations meant he could be a trusted pair of hands when it came to the Kelly affair.

FedUpWithLies, Brighton says...
11:43am Sun 15 Apr 07

Thank goodness someone is going to expose this mendacious and corrupt government for what it is, and going to ensure they don't get away with such an appalling and self-preserving act as the murder of David Kelly.

Thank goodness someone is going to expose this mendacious and corrupt government for what it is, and going to ensure they don't get away with such an appalling and self-preserving act as the murder of David Kelly.

bigmouth, manchester says...
4:58pm Sun 15 Apr 07

now that we know there were never any WMD's in iraq, kelly was right - the dossier was sexed up. why would he kill himself when he knew he was right all along and that he would eventually be vindicated? motive and blame lies with government and government only

now that we know there were never any WMD's in iraq, kelly was right - the dossier was sexed up. why would he kill himself when he knew he was right all along and that he would eventually be vindicated? motive and blame lies with government and government only

Michael Smith, Germany says...
1:10pm Mon 16 Apr 07

The problem is today that ordinary persons have an almost impossible task in getting exposure for stories that prove what we have for a Government. I have been trying to get coverage for a story I have researched,involving the MoD(UK), which is all backed by documentary evidence, so it can't be denied. The media does nothing but run from the story.

The problem is today that ordinary persons have an almost impossible task in getting exposure for stories that prove what we have for a Government. I have been trying to get coverage for a story I have researched,involving the MoD(UK), which is all backed by documentary evidence, so it can't be denied. The media does nothing but run from the story.

Strategist, London says...
1:32am Tue 17 Apr 07

Argus readers should check out what the dissident former British Ambassador Craig Murray is saying about this on his site www.craigmurray.org.uk: "I think it most likely this was private by one of the US companies that were pushing the war on Iraq. I know some senior MI6 people privately think this, too."

This is an important contribution. It feels implausible that Blair would have ordered the murder (even in a "who will rid me of this turbulent weapons inspector" moment) - Blair & Campbell's No.10, constantly obsessed by how it was being reported, would have thought killing him in the midst of a total media furore way too risky to contemplate.

With the information I have seen to date I have for some time thought that the most plausible explanation of what the British security services were doing at the crime scene (standing down the local constabulary for however many hours and so on) was hurriedly finding out what had happened and removing evidence.

Can you imagine the scene in No 10 as the report came in that yes he was dead and that MI5 suspected an American agency had done it? They would be bricking it. A cover up would be of paramount importance. The idea of an inquiry announced quickly was a clever one – the govt that always resists inquiries into itself suddenly looked good at the time by announcing an inquiry quickly and appearing to come clean by releasing emails, for example – but all the time they knew that the inquiry would find nothing incriminating in No 10’s email accounts. Appointing Hutton – a man who could be relied on to give the right verdict at the end of the process without needing to be leaned on by the government – was clever, but the masterstroke was to say that the Inquiry superseded any need for a local coroner’s inquest – a local level process that would correspondingly be far more difficult to control. So, one way of understanding the Hutton Inquiry is to think of it as a means of distracting attention from the really damaging evidence (from the local medics etc) that this was no suicide.

I await “Stormin’ Norman” Baker’s book with great interest. I hope he has considered the possibility that it was neither suicide nor a British Govt-sponsored murder, but a third party sponsored murder obligingly covered up by the British secret services. The BBC's Conspiracy Files programme on 26 Feb, whilst airing ridiculous ideas, eg the Iraqi secret services did it (!), noticeably failed to give any time whatsoever to the possibility that the Americans had done it.

Finally, on a theme we must often return to, isn’t it funny that Norman Baker’s pronouncements last week, which one might have thought just slightly newsworthy, have been utterly blanked by the London media and are going totally unreported outside Sussex? Clearly the carrier pigeon hasn’t quite made it across the North Downs to Fleet Street yet!

Argus readers should check out what the dissident former British Ambassador Craig Murray is saying about this on his site www.craigmurray.org.uk: "I think it most likely this was [a] private [contract killing] by one of the US companies that were pushing the war on Iraq. I know some senior MI6 people privately think this, too." This is an important contribution. It feels implausible that Blair would have ordered the murder (even in a "who will rid me of this turbulent weapons inspector" moment) - Blair & Campbell's No.10, constantly obsessed by how it was being reported, would have thought killing him in the midst of a total media furore way too risky to contemplate. With the information I have seen to date I have for some time thought that the most plausible explanation of what the British security services were doing at the crime scene (standing down the local constabulary for however many hours and so on) was hurriedly finding out what had happened and removing evidence. Can you imagine the scene in No 10 as the report came in that yes he was dead and that MI5 suspected an American agency had done it? They would be bricking it. A cover up would be of paramount importance. The idea of an inquiry announced quickly was a clever one – the govt that always resists inquiries into itself suddenly looked good at the time by announcing an inquiry quickly and appearing to come clean by releasing emails, for example – but all the time they knew that the inquiry would find nothing incriminating in No 10’s email accounts. Appointing Hutton – a man who could be relied on to give the right verdict at the end of the process without needing to be leaned on by the government – was clever, but the masterstroke was to say that the Inquiry superseded any need for a local coroner’s inquest – a local level process that would correspondingly be far more difficult to control. So, one way of understanding the Hutton Inquiry is to think of it as a means of distracting attention from the really damaging evidence (from the local medics etc) that this was no suicide. I await “Stormin’ Norman” Baker’s book with great interest. I hope he has considered the possibility that it was neither suicide nor a British Govt-sponsored murder, but a third party sponsored murder obligingly covered up by the British secret services. The BBC's Conspiracy Files programme on 26 Feb, whilst airing ridiculous ideas, eg the Iraqi secret services did it (!), noticeably failed to give any time whatsoever to the possibility that the Americans had done it. Finally, on a theme we must often return to, isn’t it funny that Norman Baker’s pronouncements last week, which one might have thought just slightly newsworthy, have been utterly blanked by the London media and are going totally unreported outside Sussex? Clearly the carrier pigeon hasn’t quite made it across the North Downs to Fleet Street yet!

Psynonymous, Sunderland says...
5:29pm Tue 17 Apr 07

Strategist above is on the right track, indeed a third party, try Mossad. Someone said ' cui bono ', who benefits? well oil is pretty much too obvious but not enough reason to go to all that bother, however security and middle east supremacy are crucial to Israel's existence and they have more leverage in the White House than all of the opposition put together. Just look at the level of threat the invaded countries were regarded to have been to and by Israel. Then look at the countries now in line for attack i.e. Syria, Iran and Lebanon. With those out of the way, who is left as a threat? no-one. As the twin towers came down, five men dressed as Arabs were seen on an apartment roof in Manhattan with a mounted video camera, high-fiving each other and cheering. When neighbours called the cops, who arrested them fleeing the city in a van containing detonaters and explosives, it was discovered that they were of Israeli origin and all ex - army. Some demolition experts, and others surveillance technicians. You can Google the interview of them on Israeli t.v., where they claimed that they weren't the one's the U.S. should be going after, but that they were only there to ' document the events.'

SAY WHAT ? How did they know there would be any events, and at the time and place where their camera was pointing? I am no Sherlock Holmes but is this not a bit odd? Especially as they and another hundred were arrested, failed polygraphs and were spirited away to whence they came. Now who could have that kind of power in Washington on America's darkest day? Soon after, we heard on the news that Israel is the worst offender in spying on uncle Sam. Like I said, I am no Sherlock Holmes.

Bella, London says...
11:49pm Tue 23 Oct 07

honest, upright and with true leadership qualities.I really don't believe that I have ever read such pith about TB. Dr Kelly murdered? Yes more than likely, in my humble opinion. But then there are those that would say |Another conspiracy theory" We're British it just wouldn't happen here! Ok & Churchill didn't let Coventry burn.

honest, upright and with true leadership qualities.I really don't believe that I have ever read such pith about TB. Dr Kelly murdered? Yes more than likely, in my humble opinion. But then there are those that would say |Another conspiracy theory" We're British it just wouldn't happen here! Ok & Churchill didn't let Coventry burn.

joe, Bristol says...
11:15pm Sat 5 Apr 08

Sad people who say things like ' the government would never do something that' live in a complete la la land of naivety and innocence. Get real. Things that have to be done get done.
I'm sure most of the public realise some very unsavoury things happen from time to time. For the good or less good of the country. To go around thinking that because the government wants to reduce road deaths or heart disease levels that they wouldn't bump off dangerous or leaky people then that is total niavety and stupidity.
It's well known that Robin Cook had started to get a bit 'mouthy/leaky' where the official secrets act was concerned, just before he died. Thats fact.

Sad people who say things like ' the government would never do something that' live in a complete la la land of naivety and innocence. Get real. Things that have to be done get done. I'm sure most of the public realise some very unsavoury things happen from time to time. For the good or less good of the country. To go around thinking that because the government wants to reduce road deaths or heart disease levels that they wouldn't bump off dangerous or leaky people then that is total niavety and stupidity. It's well known that Robin Cook had started to get a bit 'mouthy/leaky' where the official secrets act was concerned, just before he died. Thats fact.

South Ossetia, manipulation: Images of war, war of images

Thursday August 28 2008 - 14:25

A few days after these pictures had been analyzed by the Russian blog Russia Inside Out and the Serbian blog Byzantine blog as fake ones, staged by the photographer David Mdzinarishvili, some of them have been simply removed from the website of Reuters. Here the deconstruction made by Byzantine blog



This photo was first published by the Reuters as an image of a "dead woman being carried from the town of Gori". But this "dead woman", incredibly, is clutching the nurse’s arm.

http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article17284