Tuesday, August 05, 2003

It seems less and less likely that David Kelly killed himself:

  1. Kelly's watch was apparently removed after the first wound in his wrist was made. If you were to slit your wrist, wouldn't you remove your watch first?

  2. Kelly's glasses were apparently removed before his wrist was cut. How could the pathologist know this (the only thing that comes to mind is that Kelly's right hand was bloodied and his glasses had no trace of blood on them)? I would have thought that you would leave your glasses on in order to ensure that you found the proper place to cut. In any event, taking your glasses off does not suggest suicide, as the pathologist has stated.

  3. Kelly had electrocardiograph pads on his chest. Why would he go to check on his health in the morning if he was going to kill himself in the afternoon? Did he want to leave a healthy corpse? Is it not possible to discover what he was being treated for? It is extremely unusual to receive an electrocardiogram and then leave the hospital with the pads still on. It is not impossible that he had been wearing a portable monitor, the kind you wear all day to get a more accurate reading away from the stresses of a hospital visit, but no trace of this monitor was found. Electrocardiograph readings aren't used in traditional polygraph tests as they aren't supposed to add any relevant data to the lie detection process. Is it possible that he was hooked up to some more sophisticated device, the kind that might be used in interrogations by some agency that used state-of-the-art testing devices? Maybe the results of the interrogations weren't to the liking of the interrogators.

  4. Kelly apparently left behind no suicide note, which is very odd given that he had a wife and children and might also have wanted to place his death in the context of what he was trying to fight against. If he really was committed to disclosing the truth, a suicide note would have been the perfect place to summarize how the Blair government had lied to the British people.

  5. One theory was that Kelly was distraught at losing his security clearance, which would have precluded his return to Iraq to continue his work as a weapons inspector. This really doesn't make any sense. He was on the verge of retirement anyway, and would have probably only had one more shot at going to Iraq. On top of that, he now knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction to look for, so why would he be so keen to go to Iraq on a wild goose chase?


Kelly successfully portrayed himself as a sort of shy, absent-minded professor who found himself way over his head when confronted with the realities of politics and intelligence. This view of Kelly seems to be completely false, as Kelly was in reality rather tough and in no way naive about the realities of the world. He was also extremely well informed on the issue of weapons of mass destruction, although almost certainly wrong in his belief that Saddam had such weapons The irony is that the latest Labour approach to the problem is to argue that he may have indeed told the BBC what they reported - probably a necessary approach for them to take if the BBC tape contains what the BBC says it contains - but he was not in a position to have that information (the denial that they called him a 'Walter Mitty' style fantasist is at least the second outright lie proving knowledge of guilt they have been caught in, the first being that Hoon had never spoken to Kelly). We can see how he manipulated everyone he dealt with:

  1. He manipulated the BBC into thinking that he was just a concerned scientist who wanted to be a whistle blower, when in fact he seems to have been fronting for a darker group with a highly political agenda.

  2. He manipulated the Ministry of Defence by misleading them about what he told the BBC, and then writing them a letter assuring them that it was the BBC that had 'considerably embellished' information in the story about how the dossier was sexed up.

  3. He manipulated the Labour Party by allowing them to believe they could destroy the credibility of himself and the BBC by grilling him before the foreign affairs select committee.

  4. He manipulated the members of the foreign affairs select committee by having them believe he was a shy unsophisticated scientist who had been used by others, and by allowing them to believe that he thought he was not the sole source for the BBC story and had not talked to journalists who he had in fact talked to.


My original theory was that he was working for British intelligence interests who asked them to be a front in their ongoing war against the Labour Party and the Ministry of Defence, both of whom had manipulated intelligence in order to have their attack on Iraq. I have seen nothing to alter this theory. The real question is who killed him when he became infamous, and why did he allow himself to get in this dangerous position. There are at least two possibilities:

  1. He underestimated the viciousness of the counterattack by Labour Party operators, particularly Campbell and Hoon, who decided to ensure that the whole issue be deflected from Blair by focussing it on Kelly and the BBC. To this end, they ensured that his name be revealed to the press, and then put him through the wringer at the committee in their attempt to embarrass the BBC. I think it unlikely that someone used to dealing with the politics of the weapons inspection process would have been unaware of the likelihood that he would become an issue in the political fallout. In fact, the larger plan appears to be to put Kelly's allegations at the forefront of the story in the hopes that this would reveal the misuse of intelligence by the warmongers.

  2. He agreed to be the front only on condition that some very heavy hitter agreed to shelter him from personal and professional attack, including physical attack, in the melee that he knew was sure to ensue. Whoever this was led him to believe that he was protected, and then failed to do so when the going with the Ministry of Defence got rough. This could be what he was referring to by 'many dark actors playing games'. You have to wonder whether this has anything to do with the resignation of the head of MI6.


It seems that Kelly managed to fool almost everyone he came into contact with, and was completely successful in his operation. Unfortunately, unknown to him, the complete operation required that he be killed so that the importance of his statements be impressed on the British people.

0 comments: