Skip to comments.
Gilligan damned by evidence of colleagues (Lying BBC Bastard NAILED! MUST READ!)
Financial Times ^
| August 12, 2003
| Bob Sherwood
Posted on 08/13/2003 8:40:23 AM PDT by Timesink
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
To: gcruse; Congressman Billybob
Hey, I remember that one! It's a good 'un.
21
posted on
08/13/2003 10:46:33 AM PDT
by
Cyber Liberty
(© 2003, Ravin' Lunatic since 4/98)
To: Dirk McQuickly
Given that there are serious inconsistencies between what Kelly told the Parliamentary Committee and what's on Watts' tape, and given also that he was taped by Watts just after Gilligan's story had gone public, Kelly may just have been backtracking a little bit with her and then a lot more with the committee. That way his suicide might make more sense.
(On the inconsistencies point e.g. Kelly is talking on the tape about speaking with the BBCs Gavin Hewitt, which he explicitly denied doing in front of the select committee)
A bigger problem is that all this stuff confirms that Kelly and at least some other UK intelligence and technical professionals, believed and said to journalists, that Blair's people had at least to some extent distorted the contents of the dossier for PR purposes.
That hasn't been refuted at all. It's just been confirmed, not least by the Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence on day one.
Sure, Gilligan has been badly damaged and even the BBC management have been fingered as putting pressure on Watts to help Gilligan. Blair's hatchet man Campbell is probably breathing a sigh of relief that Kelly avoided naming him on Watts' tape. The long-term PR damage is pretty severe though and Blair's crew have no real answer but more spin.
Have a look at this poll data, you can see what the UK people think of Blair right now
http://www.yougov.com/yougov_website/asp_besPollArchives/pdf/DBD020101010.pdf.
22
posted on
08/13/2003 11:19:10 AM PDT
by
bernie_g
To: bernie_g
Hmm URL didn't work. Try this one, which works in preview:
http://www.yougov.com/yougov_website/asp_besPollArchives/bes_arcMain.asp?sID=3&rID=2&wID=0&uID= It's the pdf with David Kelly in the title four down from the top. Some highlights,
Conservative ahead of Labour
68% think Blair's Government is dishonest and untrustworthy
70% think there is a culture of deceit and spin in govt
41% blame the government for Kelly's death and 9% the BBC
Of course, this was done a few days before the Inquiry started. It'll be interesting to see how it changes.
23
posted on
08/13/2003 11:32:14 AM PDT
by
bernie_g
To: Timesink
Kelly also strongly denounced Susan Watts at the hearings. Both Watts and Gillian sandbagged Kelly. They also made their reports sound like they had multiple sources, not just Kelly. Typical jounalistic trix.
24
posted on
08/13/2003 11:40:32 AM PDT
by
Deb
(My Tag Skies to Gotham & Con-Fabs With Net Prexies)
To: bernie_g; Timesink; Congressman Billybob
Why couldn't Saddam mix precursor chems and fill the reservoir of a missile in 45 minutes? Clinton's SOD William Cohen - report released 10 days before leaving office - gave Saddam a few weeks to a month to start up the chem production:
Source: New York Times
Published: 1/22/01
By STEVEN LEE MYERS and ERIC SCHMITT
ASHINGTON, Jan. 21 Iraq has rebuilt a series of factories that the United States has long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons, according to senior government officials. The new intelligence estimate could confront President Bush with an early test of his pledge to take a tougher stance against President Saddam Hussein than the Clinton administration did.
The factories in an industrial complex in Falluja, west of Baghdad include two that were bombed and badly damaged by American and British air raids in December 1998 to punish Mr. Hussein for his refusal to cooperate with United Nations weapons inspectors, the government officials said.
The new intelligence estimates were mentioned, but without any such specific details, in a report on weapons threats released on Jan. 10 by the outgoing secretary of defense, William S. Cohen. It warned that Iraq had rebuilt at least its weapons infrastructure and may have begun covertly producing some chemical or biological agents.
Last week, the officials provided details on what they said was the reconstruction of the two factories, and the resumption of the production of chlorine at a third in the same complex.
The factories have ostensibly commercial purposes, but all three were previously involved in producing chemical or biological agents and were among those closely monitored by the United Nations inspectors, the officials said. One of the rebuilt factories, for example, is making castor oil used in brake fluid, the Iraqis say, but the mash from castor beans contains a deadly biological toxin called ricin, the officials said.
~~~~
While officials have previously disclosed that Iraq had rebuilt missile plants destroyed in the 1998 strikes, the Jan. 10 report released by Mr. Cohen was the first public acknowledgment of the resumption of work at suspected chemical and biological plants.
"Some of Iraq's facilities could be converted fairly quickly to production of chemical weapons," the report said at one point. It went on to warn, "Iraq retains the expertise, once a decision is made, to resume chemical agent production within a few weeks or months, depending on the type of agent."
25
posted on
08/13/2003 2:35:14 PM PDT
by
Ragtime Cowgirl
(149,998 US troops won hearts and kicked butt w/ their 2 lost brothers yesterday: www.centcom.mil)
To: Cyber Liberty
Good evening, Cyber,
I thought I put "Death by Typewriter" up on FreeRepublic. But it certainly appeared on ChronWatch, the conservative (believe it or not) website that's attached to the San Francisco Chronicle. Here's the address of that article, published there. I gather you know how to make this an operating link:
http://www.chronwatch.com/featured/contentDisplay.asp?aid=3649
Cheers,
Billybob
26
posted on
08/13/2003 2:47:48 PM PDT
by
Congressman Billybob
("Don't just stand there. Run for Congress." www.ArmorforCongress.com)
To: Congressman Billybob
Thanks, BB..
gcruse fixed us up on the link.
27
posted on
08/13/2003 5:59:14 PM PDT
by
Cyber Liberty
(© 2003, Ravin' Lunatic since 4/98)
To: Timesink
bump
28
posted on
08/13/2003 6:02:38 PM PDT
by
VOA
To: Congressman Billybob
Dr. Kelly should have kept his mouth shut. He sowed the seeds of this outrageous story and then this slime Gilligan was off and away.
Gilligan: The big lie
Excerpt:
But if Gilligan is in trouble, Dr David Kellys reputation is also being hurt by the inquiry.
There is no doubt that this distinguished scientist lied to his bosses, lied to the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee and lied to the Intelligence and Security Committee.
~snip~
I have also posted extensive excerpts on two other threads from Kelly's testimony to the committee showing how deceptive he was regarding his meeting and communication with Susan Watts.
The BBC is disgusting, but Dr. Kelly was not a victim.
To: belmont_mark
See my post #29.
Kelly was talking to these reporters and told them things that undermined his own government. He then lied to the committee. His conscience must have hurt after the hearing, or he feared all of the facts were about to come out and he might be charged with a crime.
What has your "investigation" uncovered? Mine shows Kelly started the ball rolling with his statements to reporters. Gilligan in particular then embellished his reports in an effort to bring down Blair. We know that was the goal from the tone of reports and the fact that the talking point didn't vary even after Kelly's death uncovered the depth of treachery that had gone on.
To: bernie_g
A bigger problem is that all this stuff confirms that Kelly and at least some other UK intelligence and technical professionals, believed and said to journalistsNo, Kelly said there were questions from other professionals. That's what he told these reporters. He denied that to the committee, perhaps knowing there were no names to name.
To: bernie_g
I tried your link but didn't get the poll.
Blair's been stabbed in the back by Kelly, from my pov, and the BBC eagerly latched on to this line and "sexed it up" as they like to say.
The fact that poll numbers may be down because the media has relentlessly, even now, still insisted that Blair has much to answer for when it looks like he and others have been lied about, does not move me to think he's in the wrong. I have seen nothing to support that, but plenty to show his enemies were willing to lie to try to bring him down.
To: Deb
Kelly also strongly denounced Susan Watts at the hearings.Actually, he did not, but he was very deceptive in his representation of his communications with her. I posted about it on another thread and provide a link to his entire testimony.
Kelly's testimony pertaining to Watts
To: cyncooper
Sure, but the Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence had also confirmed that at least some other members of his staff had (internally) documented their unease about the way Downing Street had spun their work.
Ref: Martin Howard's evidence, day one:
http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/ This is not IMHO just a straight black/white liberals vs conservatives issue. From the point of view of UK-based Conservatives it's fantastic that Blair is in trouble, especially that the electorate is losing trust in him.
From the point of view of Rupert Murdoch (owns Times, Sun, Fox and Sky TV among many other media) and Conrad Black (owns Telegraph), it's great that the BBC is in trouble.
Just because Murdoch supports Blair and because, for perfectly understandable commercial reasons, he wants to see the BBC's reputation tarnished and it's special status ended, doesn't mean that Blair is automatically the innocent party in this situation.
34
posted on
08/13/2003 11:55:16 PM PDT
by
bernie_g
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson