A scientist employed by the British MoD (Ministry of Defence) was found dead this weak after having been suspected of leaking information to the BBC which suggested the claims made by the Government that Iraq could launch WMD within 45 mins. were false: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1001129,00.html The Govt. of the UK has promised an "independent judicial inquiry". This looks very bad.53 responses total.
Update: Apparently, preliminary reports indicated that he had committed suicide. The Govt has in fact moved quickly this time (in marked contrast to their attitude over suggestions there should be an independent inquiry into the claims made on Iraq by Tony Blair and his Cabinet) and has already appointed the judge who will be chairing the inquiry, which is expected to report in September, as is the Foreign Office Committee of the House of Commons, which has launched an investigation into the claims over WMD.
According to the BBC, the guy was under a lot of stress, and looked terrible when he testified before a Parliamentary committee. He may well have done himself in.
Like Vince Foster, uh huh.
He was killed to silence him. The American goverment does it all the time.
Re #3: Foster was a long-time clinical depressive, wasn't he?
And the WMD saga continues ........
Ahh!! The latest reports suggest that tha man slit his wrist!! C'mon .... I thought guys in the CIA and MI6 were smarter than that. ;)
They sent Sandbagger 1
That's interesting, if true. Slitting your wrist isn't a particularly quick or effective way to commit suicide, from what I've heard. Most people who try it that way fail.
Apparently he took co-proxamol (i believe that's the right spelling) - a highly effective painkiller. must have sat there for ages, poor bastard.
Though I still like the way BBC has been handling this. Not to say its not biased in its reporting but its still the best around.
If I were the kind of person into conspiracy theories, I'd say that since slitting one's wrists is probably the number one most stereotypical way to commit suicide, it would be a good choice if you wanted to commit a murder that looked like suicide.
I dunno. It'd be pretty tough to do to someone against their will unless you drugged them first, and that would come out in the autopsy.
Yeah, but if you are positing a really nefarious high-level government conspiracy, you'd expect it to be cleverly done - not an easy kill, but a cleverly concocted simulation of a suicide. One shouldn't underestimate the cleverness of those government spys when it comes to evading detection. After all, look at Watergate or Contragate. Hmmm. On second thought, never mind. The average government conspiracy is about as subtle as elephant poop in a wine glass. Ah ... but maybe that's what they *want* us to think....
resp:13 - he'd apparently taken some pretty potent painkillers beforehand.
Yes, he was drugged.
I just don't see that anything he had done or not done would drive a person to suicide. I would suspect some other event in his life to be the root cause. Suppose he did leak information contradicting the government's claims. A significant fraction of the citizenry would applaud that. He might lose his job (giving the government a further black eye), but he would get job offers on the basis of his action. How could any outcome alone be a strong motivation for suicide? Of course, he may have been mentally ill in some fashion, which could tip the scales.
Yep. He was silenced. Its all part of the cover-up. You see, he was actually killed on account of what he actually knew about the Inslaw/Promis affair. What? You don't know about that one? THEY are doing an excellent job of covering that one up.
This response has been erased.
But...what stress? There was no need for him to feel any stress, as far as the information published indicates. Was he being threatened with anything? Nothing published indicates that.
This response has been erased.
You mean, the Foreign Affairs Committee tortured him? I didn't read about that. Otherwise, what is a "rough grilling"? You mean he committed suicide because a committee asked him some questions? All he had to do was answer their questions truthfully. Seems to me he could only *gain* credibility as a whistle-blower. There had to be something else..."chercher la femme".
This response has been erased.
That seems pretty far fetched. Do people get into a funk any more because their family might be embarrassed? I thought that went out with horse carriages.
It does seem pretty common for people to get caught doing something career ending, and commit suicide.
Re #24. It's a major public service thing over here.
This response has been erased.
Re 24/26. I meant general stress and embarrassment, not necessarily suicide.
I think it's far more likely that this was a suicide than some kind of government conspiracy. Especially since his death has only brought more attention.
I think the inquiry has more to do with finding out whether pressure from Dr. Kelly's superiors at the MoD caused him to commit suicide, rather than a conspiracy as such. British people are much more likely to believe in governmental incompetence than in conspiracies.
This response has been erased.
The fucking liberals killed him because they knew he would vindicate our great president BUSH. ALL HAIL THE REPUBLICAN PARTY on your knees liberal scum.
(What a jerk.)
Go jerk off..that's the only way you'll ever get sex.
(Another jerk!)
pot calls kettle black.
We pots are always calling those kettles black, here on Grex.
(when they have nothing intelligent to say)
(Define "intelligent")
Look it up.
Re #34: And a new study shows jerking off lowers your chances of prostate cancer! (Hmm. This may cause people to rethink whether they want to advise their enemies to do it.)
This response has been erased.
Re #41: really? How does that work?
(I might, but it wouldn't do any good around here.)
That's gerat news, as I whack off pretty much every night.
Re #43: Here's the article: http://www.cbc.ca/storyview/AOL/2003/07/17/masturbate030717 It was a statistical study and the mechanism isn't really known.
"The study suggests ejaculation by means of masturbation provides better protection than ejaculation in sexual intercourse because men can pick up infections from intercourse that actually increase the risk of getting prostate cancer." Probably there is a correlation between not have intercourse much and masturbating alot. In which case it may be the lack of intercourse which causes reduced chances of prostrate cancer later in life.
You'd think they would have controlled for that by including non-sexually-active men who didn't masturbate regularly. But without seeing detailed information on the study it's hard to be sure.
Let me guess: prostrate cancer is a disease you take lying down?
Not me. I whack off lying down, and this prevents prostate cancer.
Yeah, me too. Oh. Wait.
re#47: The quote you enter seems to suggest evidence contrary to past studies. Past studies have shown that once the population of various 'floura' are quickly generally evenly distributed between hetero monogamous couples the likelyhood of "picking up" infections is minimal. I would suspect this would similarly be the case in homo monogamous couples although I doubt such studies have been done given the rarity of such. If the study is suggesting that masturbation is far less likely to involve future medical problems than going out and paying for a hooker then I would think that would be obvious as well.
Re #52: The study shows a link between masturbation and lower rates of prostate cancer. Right now any comments about the reasons for that are pretty much just speculation.
You have several choices: