W. Husain: UK Arms Expert Death Ruled A “Suicide”

David Kelly was an arms expert for the United Kingdom, who was found mysteriously dead near his Oxfordshire home during the Invasion of Iraq. Kelly was exposed as the source for a BBC story that alleged that the UK government had fabricated intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction ahead of the invasion. This challenged the very premise for the War in Iraq and thus Kelly served as a major credibility threat to the UK government and intelligence.

The government has not released a report that found Kelly had in fact commited suicide and that no foul play was involved, whether through British Intelligence or other covert operations. The claims by the government are refuted by many who saw Kelly’s death as a signal for dissidents to remain quiet as the country entered one of the most costliest wars since World War 2.

Thom Yorke, a UK artist and front-man for Radiohead, produced a song describing the death of David Kelly. The video is posted below- Enjoy


2 comments on “W. Husain: UK Arms Expert Death Ruled A “Suicide”

  1. Wymus Chowdy says:

    Nothing about the courts witholding of david kelly’s autopsy report is as controversial or nefarious as you have implied in your article. first, the power to withold autopsy reports from the public rest squarely with the purview of the court. Here, the court simply exercised this power when it sealed Kelly’s autopsy report from the public sphere. Furthermore, publicizing Kelly’s autopsy report would have been highly unusual. Typically, autopsy reports are only given to the decedent’s family members and insurers to protect their privacy interests from public scrutiny. Here, the court reasoned that protecting the Kelly family from “further and unnecessary distress” far outweighed what could be gained from the publication of the report in “newspapers, books and magazines.” Evidence supporting the testimony provided by the pathologist who performed Kelly’s autopsy that Kelly’s death was a “textbook case of suicide” is on the public record because it was presented at trial. finally, the court has decided that other doctors – and their legal advisers – are permitted to access the report if necessary for the sole purpose of contesting the reports findings. fyl.

  2. abcdezzz says:

    Well, that’s all right then, Wymus. All very correctly done. Case closed.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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