On the subject of Dr David Kelly, there is one thing that would not satisfy the utter diehards (since nothing would), but which would satisfy everyone else. So, where is it? Where is the Coroner’s Inquest? And why hasn’t it already happened?
14
comments:
Alf
said...
What - in simple language - would a Coroner's Inquiry show that all the previous analysis - including the now fully released post morterm today - has not?
Quite so, Alf's Dad. Who needs the due process of law, eh? Certainly not Tony and his Blair Broadcasting Corporation.
It is utterly astonishing that there has never been an inquest, into certainly the oddest and most suspicious death in this country in living memory, and possibly ever.
I'm really confused. Are you seriously trying to claim we have had no scrutiny of this? Including Hutton, the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Butler, now Chilcot, the post mortem, all the additional details now released today?
As to why we haven't had a coroner's inquiry - because we don't need one! Because we've already examined, in minute detail everything that can possibly be said about this poor man's unfortunate death. And your conspicuous failure to say what more another inquiry would add proves this
Frankly, all the rubbish quoted by "other people" below makes me think that you are one of these "diehards" you're supposedly distancing yourself from.
None of that is the due process of law in these cases. That is a Coroner's Inquest.
Hutton just wrote what he was told, of course; no one has ever taken him remotely seriously, nor should they have done.
Butler did not clear Blair at all, but Blair's media lackeys amazed Butler by failing to ask the question at the press conference, for such are our famously vibrant and independent media.
Chilcot is not into this.
But none of that, in itself, is the point. The point here is the rule of law. Why are you so frightened of it?
I'm not remotely frighteend of the rule of law. The rule of law says have a post mortem. And we did. And it said he killed himself. End of.
Buit it's when you write things like "Hutton just wrote what he was told, of course" that you truly depart the land of the living with your tinfoil hat squarely attached.
Remind me again what the difference between you and the "diehards" are?
Ah, the Blair cultists, such as they are. No one, absolutely no one, has ever taken the Hutton "Report" seriously. Well, apart from the Blair cultists, and they don't count. Come on.
The pro-life, pro-family, pro-worker and anti-war voice of an economically social democratic, morally and socially conservative patriotism towards the North of England, the United Kingdom, the Commonwealth and Christendom. One Nation politics, with an equal emphasis on the One and on the Nation. Conservationist, not environmentalist. Far too conservative to be capitalist, far too left-wing to be liberal.
14 comments:
What - in simple language - would a Coroner's Inquiry show that all the previous analysis - including the now fully released post morterm today - has not?
He killed himself. That's it. Get over it.
So why not have one? What are you so very, very obviously so afraid of?
We all know that, Alf. The BBC announced the death as suicide on the day that it happened. So that's it. Get over it.
Quite so, Alf's Dad. Who needs the due process of law, eh? Certainly not Tony and his Blair Broadcasting Corporation.
It is utterly astonishing that there has never been an inquest, into certainly the oddest and most suspicious death in this country in living memory, and possibly ever.
Alf wouldn't bother with trials, either.
That's New Labour for you, Tim.
New Labour, I might add, of all supposedly distinct parties.
I was quite pleasantly surprised that the BBC bothered to cover today's story. Will the Murdoch papers? Will the securocrat one?
We shall see tomorrow.
I'm really confused. Are you seriously trying to claim we have had no scrutiny of this? Including Hutton, the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Butler, now Chilcot, the post mortem, all the additional details now released today?
As to why we haven't had a coroner's inquiry - because we don't need one! Because we've already examined, in minute detail everything that can possibly be said about this poor man's unfortunate death. And your conspicuous failure to say what more another inquiry would add proves this
Frankly, all the rubbish quoted by "other people" below makes me think that you are one of these "diehards" you're supposedly distancing yourself from.
None of that is the due process of law in these cases. That is a Coroner's Inquest.
Hutton just wrote what he was told, of course; no one has ever taken him remotely seriously, nor should they have done.
Butler did not clear Blair at all, but Blair's media lackeys amazed Butler by failing to ask the question at the press conference, for such are our famously vibrant and independent media.
Chilcot is not into this.
But none of that, in itself, is the point. The point here is the rule of law. Why are you so frightened of it?
I'm not remotely frighteend of the rule of law. The rule of law says have a post mortem. And we did. And it said he killed himself. End of.
Buit it's when you write things like "Hutton just wrote what he was told, of course" that you truly depart the land of the living with your tinfoil hat squarely attached.
Remind me again what the difference between you and the "diehards" are?
Ah, the Blair cultists, such as they are. No one, absolutely no one, has ever taken the Hutton "Report" seriously. Well, apart from the Blair cultists, and they don't count. Come on.
They can feel the net tightening around Blair. He has to go down for something so it might as well be this. Looks like it will be.
Business intelligence healthcare
business intelligence healthcare
Post a Comment