What's the point of this? Kelly is a guy that stated that a specific claim in a British white paper on WMD was false. His name was made public by the Prime Minister's staff, and he killed himself. So what is this revelation supposed to prove to us?
Did you not read the article? Or as usual, did you pick out the parts that you liked to draw the conclusion you wanted? I will make it easier for you, even though I've been told I'm lazy.
Hutton's long inquiry last summer found no evidence that the government knew that claim to be wrong. But it did show the government helped make Kelly's name public.
In its conclusions, the Panorama program was highly critical of Gilligan and of BBC chiefs for backing their reporter to the hilt, without checking the facts of his story.
The (BBC) director general and its senior executives bet the firm on a shaky foundation," the program said.
Asked if Iraq was an "immediate threat," Kelly, a former United Nations weapons inspector, said: "Yes."
Judge Lord Hutton will release his potentially explosive report into Kelly's suicide Wednesday, one day after a make-or-break parliamentary vote that Blair could lose.
Gee, sounds like someone might think there is a revelation in here somewhere.
<img src=http://publish.hometown.aol.com/gpigking/myhomepage/xxbis.gif?mtbrand=aol_us>
<marquee>I am not part of any percentage. I am the Bestinshow<marquee>
[center]Kiss a Doberman Today