Rentoul – The Mail – The Times – David Kelly – 9 Doctors

  • Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog
  • Current Latest Page
  • All Contents of Site – Index
  • Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here
  • Comment at end

    13th August 2010

    DAILY MAUL (sort of, not) EXCLUSIVE

    (Read all about it at The Times)

    No “exclusive” of course.  The Mail is regurgitating, in a state of high dudgeon, The Times’s story.

    Its raised pique level at someone else stealing its story deters The Maul about as much as its lying about Tony Blair ever has.

    The picture above, in case you were taken in,  is my edit. Whether it’s nine or ninety-nine with several dozen zeros, is immaterial. The Daily Mail is at its Hunt The Blair game again. Whatever the season, whatever the reason.

    Talking about seasons – after a fortnight off, John Rentoul is back.

    He seems to be rested, fighting fit and having a go at The Maul again with “The lower level of the fourth dimension”

    As if to prove Rentoul right the visitors from a world many light years from ours are out in force. The Vectors,  Euclideans and Quaternions visiting and commenting at JR’s usually find difficulty combining two and two arithmetically far less working on anything four-dimensional.

    Not one of these foreign bodies remarks on the fact that the Mail interviews a man on David Kelly’s death and then headlines with the exact opposite of what he actually says. T’was ever thus with a bad dose of three wise monkeys syndrome, John.

    See earlier stuff –  here and here and Daily Mail, sorry… Daily MaUl’s Underground ‘NEWS’ Map

    So, especially for Rentoul’s commenters, let me give you an easy sum or two, guys and guyettes.

    How two and two make four

    1. If Tony Blair or the government or the secret services decided they wanted to do away with David Kelly, why did they make such a hash of it? Are there NO professional killers in our country?!

    And, wait there’ s more…

    2. If they did it, HOW did they think they would get away with it? Did they think no-one would blame them? No-one would blame the government? After the dossier business, Campbell, the BBC and Gilligan? In this cynical suspicious country? With this cynical, suspicious, lying press?

    While we’re at these rhetoricals…

    3. If Doctor Kelly said “I’ll be found dead in the woods”, might he not have been intimating his own thoughts of suicide?

    And, yes, more again. I know I know…

    4. If others (the real killers, you know… them) also knew he’d said this (and surely they were monitoring him closely so they would have known), wouldn’t they have made sure he wasn’t “found dead in the woods”?

    Now I know it’s tough suddenly working out the irrationality of your position all ye Haters of The Blair, but try to get  used to it.  In the meantime –

    Whether the present government decides to hold a full inquest or not.   Whether his family want one or not. Whether it comes to the same conclusions or not, you’ll still be adding two and two and getting five.

    Michael White at The Guardian puts his finger on it, in the same vein (metaphorically speaking) that some of us have been pressing time and time again:

    “So we may have to hold that inquest – and sack a few more teaching assistants to pay for it? – to clear the air. The sad thought remains that, as with Hutton, Butler and, in due course, Chilcot, some people won’t be satisfied.

    “They won’t be satisfied until they can prove that Blair invaded Iraq to sell more copies of his memoirs and that he also strangled Kelly with his own blood-stained hands.”

    And we ALL KNOW that, don’t we?

    As for who Kelly may have feared – less Tony Blair than Iraqi agents, some suggest. Though, in true conspiratorial fashion some of them then retract that suggestion.


    “I will probably be found dead in the woods”

    During the Hutton inquiry, a British ambassador called David Broucher reported a conversation with Kelly at a Geneva meeting in February 2003. Broucher related that Kelly said he had assured his Iraqi sources that there would be no war if they co-operated, and that a war would put him in an “ambiguous” moral position.[8] Broucher had asked Kelly what would happen if Iraq were invaded, and Kelly had replied, “I will probably be found dead in the woods.” Broucher then quoted from an email he had sent just after Kelly’s death: “I did not think much of this at the time, taking it to be a hint that the Iraqis might try to take revenge against him, something that did not seem at all fanciful then. I now see that he may have been thinking on rather different lines.”

    “According to an entry in one of Kelly’s diaries, discovered afterwards by his daughter Rachel at his home, this meeting did not take place in February 2003, but in February 2002”
    “According to Kelly’s half-sister, Sarah Pape, the day after his daughter Ellen’s wedding on Saturday 22nd February 2003, he flew out to New York. Puzzled by Broucher‘s evidence, Pape remarks to the inquiry, ‘he certainly did not mention he was going to be flying almost straight back to visit Geneva.’”[20]


    Enquiry, please. More strange evidence. Lies and confusion.  Obfuscation. All over the place. Blair did it. OBviously!



    From Rentoul:

    “Anyone who wants to know why the Kelly conspiracy theories are hogwash should read my previous posts on the subject; the article in The Independent on Sunday by Tom Mangold, investigative reporter and friend of Kelly’s; and David Aaronovitch’s superb Voodoo Histories. Aaronovitch’s challenge to any of the fruitcakes who espouse the cult, to whose number I should add Nick Ferrari of LBC, to take part in a public debate is as yet unanswered.”

    Back to top

    Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here

    A recent comment from an Albanian, Mr Leonard Dedej from Tirana – “It takes big leaders to make the hardest turns in peoples life…mr Blair is a big leader and a great man for millions of people in Balkans!!!for stopping a savage war!about Iraq I believe that the press wherever it is has not the right to judge on this issue because it simply is to small to judge!!history will judge mr Blair!as long as it is an ongoing war no one can blame mr Blair,after all he started something for a big reason..the press its often wrong because it fights for audience!!!”

    Free Hit Counter


    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    16 Responses to “Rentoul – The Mail – The Times – David Kelly – 9 Doctors”

    1. PJD Says:

      The doctors in their letter to the Times are only stating that in their expert opinion suicide is unlikely. They are not speculating on any other theories.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        True, PJD. I haven’t read the Times article in full, but I cannot be sure. But I do not believe that some of them are well known conspiracy theorists, a la Norman Baker mode, who happen to be doctors, so he has encouraged them.

        There is so much bad feeling over “dodgy dossiers”, Campbell, Blair, Gilligan and even over the decision, reasons, motivations for going into Iraq, that I think it’s at least valid to conclude that there is score-settling going on here.

        Quite what (to positive effect) it would prove if a new Inquiry DID conclude that Kelly could not possibly have killed himself, I have no idea. Unless there is a smoking gun – to the secret services, the government or foreign killers what good will any of this do? As for the bad effects, it would only make mud stick even more strongly to certain groups and individuals.

        I’m not sure that any of that is useful or helpful to freedom and/or democracy. We should let the security services get on with their own business without us looking over their shoulders every moment.

        We are beginning to look like amateurs now in a very dirty world. This is now a country where a wanted terrorist suspect is paid tens of thousands from the Met for damages and THEN STILL goes on to persuade the CPS to charge four of our policemen for it. Meanwhile the USA wants him for terrorism charges, and we soft Europeans think HIS rights are more important than ours.

        Crazy world.

    2. Peter Reynolds Says:

      !We are beginning to look like amateurs now in a very dirty world. This is now a country where a wanted terrorist suspect is paid tens of thousands from the Met for damages and THEN STILL goes on to persuade the CPS to charge four of our policemen for it. Meanwhile the USA wants him for terrorism charges, and we soft Europeans think HIS rights are more important than ours.”

      Please m’lud, calm yourself! The degree to which we protect the rights of those that we charge even with the most heinous crimes, is a measure of our own integrity. We should be proud of it. We are not the USA or Israel.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:


        The degree to which we protect the rights of those that we charge even with the most heinous crimes, is a measure of our own integrity. We should be proud of it. We are not the USA or Israel.

        Liberal lily-livered claptrap, dear P.

        We have talked ourselves into subordination by those who don’t share our respect for “rights”. Next step – annihilation.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        So at what point does one abandon one’s principles for the sake of expediency?

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          I’m not suggesting anyone abandons their “principles”, for the sake of expediency or anything else. Perhaps we should just re-assess how helpful our “principles” are when they can be used so effortlessly against us by those without the same principles.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        I’m surprised at you about this. Come on, just because someone else doesn’t hold to the same standards/principles as I do, does that entitle me to abandon mine?

        If it’s “unhelpful” to me to adhere to my principles at any given moment, what, I can just overlook it?

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          I said “we”, Peter, because quite frankly I think our country’s determination to hang onto so-called ‘principles’ in the face of various onslaughts from the unprincipled has outserved its usefulness. Usefulness to US, I mean, of course. Our principles are VERY useful to our enemies. We are being used. IMHO.

          If you are determined to hang onto ALL your principles rather than look at how that hanging on might affect or impinge on the wider picture with all its complexities, that’s your choice, of course. I just think, again in my humble opinion, that we are allowing ourselves to be taken advantage of.

          For instance, why does the Human Rights Act protect those who act inhumanely towards others? I do not think it is right to pay damages to suspected terrorists, for instance Binyam Mohamed for one, because our “principled” security services may have tortured him to try to get him to speak.

          More than that, I do not think it right that our CPS should consider putting soldiers on trial for giving him a taste of his own medicine.

          If he had captured a British soldier or politician while training at jihadist camps in Pakistan, and torture hadn’t worked to get them to talk, said soldier/politician wouldn’t be alive today to tell the tale or to go the Human Rights Act with any legal appeal.

          I’m sorry, but I have become very unhappy in recent years as to how the liberalism and compassion of our laws rebound on us. They were not originally put in place with today’s terrorists suicide/murderers in mind. The game has changed, and IMHO, we must change to keep ahead of it.

    3. celia walters Says: coroner would have brought an open verdict as is usual in suicide. that would really open the flood gates. but it is Mrs Kellly I feel sorry for opening this all up after so many yrs must be horrible. I know how I would feel if it happened to me

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        A bit like getting together 3 economists in a room, all these “specialists” have their own favourite interpretation as to how Kelly died.

        When there is a call by his family for an inquest I will pay attention. Until then, a large dose of sceptical salt should be taken when working out the motives of those presently suggesting the cause of death.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        I think that, ultimately, whatever his family might feel, there is sufficient doubt and concern about the death of Dr Kelly for a new inquiry. I don’t know what format that should take but it needs to be public and transparent.

        If there are matters that cannot be revealed for genuine reasons of national security, then they must be kept secret. However, if illegal acts have been perpetrated not in the national interest but in a political or individual interest or in error, then they must be revealed.

        I was beside myself with anger yesterday lunchtime when I heard James Delingpole on Any Questions saying that the Saville Inquiry (about Bloody Sunday) produced “no particularly useful result” and that he couldn’t see any point in another inquiry into Dr Kelly’s death.

        That’s exactly the point. The genuine concern here is that Hutton has done the same job in this case as Widgery did on the truth about Bloody Sunday.

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          First of all I have to tell you that you, Pete ol’ mate, are far more in touch with the average punter than I am.

          Yes I ADMIT IT. It doesn’t make the average punter or you right.

          On Any Questions the only one that I thought spoke any sense at all on this question was James Delingpole. I was beside myself with anger at all the others. Ruth Lee has now come out as a Tory, though she always tried to hide it before. And of course Tony Benn – well, enough said about him.

          What you seem to be saying is that we need to have another inquiry into Kelly’s death, costing millions, and perhaps taking years, even if it doesn’t prove what you and the accusers and doubters want it to prove.

          WHY, FGS?!?!

          You know that you and the rest of the accusers will still talk about it in the same “whitewash” language as you talk about other inquiries which didn’t/don’t give you what you wanted/want.

          If you and people like you are unhappy at how British governments and the Police and security services function, perhaps it’s time you and people like you found somewhere more suited to your ‘high’ standards and principles. I think you’ll search in vain.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        What horrified me was when I looked up Delingpole’s website and he says he’s a “right-wing libertarian” which is exactly what I say about myself!

        I think Ruth Lee is great. I bet she has some wicked secrets behind that spinsterly facade!

        Tony Benn – a giant, a man above compromise, a great hero of mine. I disagree with almost everything he says but I am in awe of his integrity and honour.

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          My Dad used to think of Tony Benn as a hero too. But he was pretty much Left, even communist at times, until he went back to Labour. I never joined Labour. Never liked the class-based positions of both main parties, to be blunt.

          As I have said here before, I would NOW, if ….

    4. Peter Reynolds Says:

      I keep thinking of that famous Churchill quote about.. what is it…I’ll go and find it and come back….

      “We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”

      I have great difficulty with this. I am wrestling with myself about it now…

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Peter, you are an open-minded man, and I admire that about you. Personally I’d much prefer to feel so preciously and assuredly perched on my high-horse to be able to say “my principles” ALWAYS come first. This seem to be today’s “liberal left’s” position. I think it has developed because that particular political grouping hasn’t had to grapple with the complexities of REAL power in recent times. Perhaps now we will see a change.

        Churchill was right, of course, but can you imagine him or any leader saying that today? The ‘intelligentsia’ would be all over him.

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s