Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ultron · 07-22-2003, 03:31 AM

ok I read through the transcript and what he's saying is that he's not the source. I think he succumbed to the pressure of the media that's made his life unbearable. I originally thought this was guilt that forced him to commit suicide, but if I am to believe his own testimony, he just compelled by his own honesty to mention that he had talked to others who might be sources, but he isn't a major source for any of those claims of falsified intelligence.

I'm going to take him at face value and presume he's not a major source of the BBC's information.

So if that's the case, who is the major source?

contracycle · 07-22-2003, 04:43 AM

The BBC has now stated that Dr Kelly WAS the source, with the consent of his family.

This means that either Gilligan "sexed up" what Kelly ACTUALLY told him, or

That Kelly lied to the select committee.

It looks like suicide. I can't say that nay. But then again, BritGov assasinated human rights lawyers in Ireland and has a long history of extrajudicial activities.

seanie · 07-22-2003, 07:24 AM

The original BBC claimwas not that intelligence had been falsified (let's leave aside the whole Niger thing for now).

It was that intelligence had been exaggerated, over emphasised, "sexed up". Spun.

Specifically in regards to the 45 minute claim.

As far as that claim is concerned it seems entirely credible that Kelly was the main source. He was dismissive of the 45 minute claim before the select committee and said it had probably been included "for impact".

Exactly. They were using uncorroborated intelligence, that ran counter to other intelligence, precisely because it packed a punch. It made a good headline and helped their case, regardless of how reliable it was. Even the supine select committe concluded that "the 45 minutes claim did not warrant the prominence given to it in the dossier".

Which correponds to the general pattern of the Governments behaviour. Take the intelligence, leave out the awkward stuff that contradicts your position, and strip what's left of all caveats and qualifications in order to sex it up so you can sell your war to the public.

However, what this tragically stupid bloody row has focused on is not the wider questions but on the relatively pointless question of Alistair Campbell's role. It was later claims by Gilligan about his role that Kelly adamantly denied being the source for.

It might be rather tricky to get to the bottom of that.

RED DAVE · 07-22-2003, 08:35 AM

Quote:

It was that intelligence had been exaggerated, over emphasised, "sexed up". Spun.

These are all euphemisms for "lied about."

RED DAVE

seanie · 07-22-2003, 09:17 AM

Now now. I hope your not casting aspersions upon the unimpeachable moral virtue of the sainted Tony.

Besides, for us it's constitutionally improper to accuse politicians of lying. We have to use euphemisms.

"Economical with the actualite" is a particular favourite.

Godless Dave · 07-22-2003, 10:26 AM

I suppose "lying sack of shit" is not a proper British thing to say, even in the Guardian.

Ron Garrett · 07-22-2003, 10:50 AM

Give Tony his due. At least he can lie a blue streak without having to read the teleprompter.

Godless Dave · 07-22-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ron Garrett
Give Tony his due. At least he can lie a blue streak without having to read the teleprompter.

He and Bill Clinton really were two peas in a pod! Bush can't even make up his own lies, he has to read other people's lies off the teleprompter.

Bill · 07-22-2003, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by contracycle
But then again, BritGov assasinated human rights lawyers in Ireland ...

Excuse me? Can you provide any credible documention on this claim? Like, perhaps, a BBC news story?

== Bill

Suaup · 07-22-2003, 01:12 PM

This is just part of a long string of microbiologist deaths. It's funny that people are still not connecting the dots. Basically the world's top microbiologists have been selectively dying since November, 2001. They all just happened to have killed themselves, or died in mysterious ways (One just fell off a bridge while changing his tire.) We're talking 15+ of the top experts, the ones who would respond in a world crises. Kelly is just another on the long list of deaths here.

No one is asking what's going on, but in the event of a epidemic we've lost many of our top minds. Who is killing these microbiologists? and why?

http://globeandmail.workopolis.com/s...ection=Science

This focuses on a couple of the deaths (11 of them.) To say this is just a coincidence, they're killing themselves, or are just randomally dying, is to shrug off what's really happening.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-22-2003, 03:31 AM	#41
Ultron Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: here Posts: 738	ok I read through the transcript and what he's saying is that he's not the source. I think he succumbed to the pressure of the media that's made his life unbearable. I originally thought this was guilt that forced him to commit suicide, but if I am to believe his own testimony, he just compelled by his own honesty to mention that he had talked to others who might be sources, but he isn't a major source for any of those claims of falsified intelligence. I'm going to take him at face value and presume he's not a major source of the BBC's information. So if that's the case, who is the major source?

07-22-2003, 04:43 AM	#42
contracycle Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: London Posts: 1,425	The BBC has now stated that Dr Kelly WAS the source, with the consent of his family. This means that either Gilligan "sexed up" what Kelly ACTUALLY told him, or That Kelly lied to the select committee. It looks like suicide. I can't say that nay. But then again, BritGov assasinated human rights lawyers in Ireland and has a long history of extrajudicial activities.

07-22-2003, 07:24 AM	#43
seanie Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Edinburgh. Scotland Posts: 2,532	The original BBC claimwas not that intelligence had been falsified (let's leave aside the whole Niger thing for now). It was that intelligence had been exaggerated, over emphasised, "sexed up". Spun. Specifically in regards to the 45 minute claim. As far as that claim is concerned it seems entirely credible that Kelly was the main source. He was dismissive of the 45 minute claim before the select committee and said it had probably been included "for impact". Exactly. They were using uncorroborated intelligence, that ran counter to other intelligence, precisely because it packed a punch. It made a good headline and helped their case, regardless of how reliable it was. Even the supine select committe concluded that "the 45 minutes claim did not warrant the prominence given to it in the dossier". Which correponds to the general pattern of the Governments behaviour. Take the intelligence, leave out the awkward stuff that contradicts your position, and strip what's left of all caveats and qualifications in order to sex it up so you can sell your war to the public. However, what this tragically stupid bloody row has focused on is not the wider questions but on the relatively pointless question of Alistair Campbell's role. It was later claims by Gilligan about his role that Kelly adamantly denied being the source for. It might be rather tricky to get to the bottom of that.

07-22-2003, 09:17 AM	#45
seanie Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Edinburgh. Scotland Posts: 2,532	Now now. I hope your not casting aspersions upon the unimpeachable moral virtue of the sainted Tony. Besides, for us it's constitutionally improper to accuse politicians of lying. We have to use euphemisms. "Economical with the actualite" is a particular favourite.

07-22-2003, 10:26 AM	#46
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	I suppose "lying sack of shit" is not a proper British thing to say, even in the Guardian.

07-22-2003, 10:50 AM	#47
Ron Garrett Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: United States Posts: 1,657	Give Tony his due. At least he can lie a blue streak without having to read the teleprompter.

07-22-2003, 01:12 PM	#50
Suaup Junior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Phoenix Posts: 90	This is just part of a long string of microbiologist deaths. It's funny that people are still not connecting the dots. Basically the world's top microbiologists have been selectively dying since November, 2001. They all just happened to have killed themselves, or died in mysterious ways (One just fell off a bridge while changing his tire.) We're talking 15+ of the top experts, the ones who would respond in a world crises. Kelly is just another on the long list of deaths here. No one is asking what's going on, but in the event of a epidemic we've lost many of our top minds. Who is killing these microbiologists? and why? http://globeandmail.workopolis.com/s...ection=Science This focuses on a couple of the deaths (11 of them.) To say this is just a coincidence, they're killing themselves, or are just randomally dying, is to shrug off what's really happening.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.