- .... Suicidal people generally do not politely walk out
into the woods and bring double methods to ensure the suicide is successful
the first time (i.e. painkillers to ensure that panic after the wrist slashing
did not lead to calling off the suicide.)
-
- And it is still absurd that everyone so openly accepts
that a short stint of media pressure drove this previously fine man to
suicide. That is not realistic. Where is all the questioning? The British
press is questioning whether the BBC or Blair is to blame for his suicide,
but who is questioning the suicide?
-
- Just a few days before his death Kelly had written in
an e-mail to a friend regarding the scandal, "Hopefully it will soon
pass and I can get to Baghdad and get on with the real job," according
to the <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17184-2003Jul19.html>Washington
Post. These words reflect exactly what one would expect in the situation
- a discomfort rather than suicidal despondency. Even with this quote,
who is questioning that it was suicide?
-
- There is more to this. Period.
-
- We are not asserting that we know it was a murder. Maybe
he did kill himself, calmly, methodically, walked out to the woods, brought
pain killers to ensure his slash would be successful, succeeded in killing
himself with a wrist slash on the first try - when the reality is that
wrist slashing is an incredibly unsuccessful method of suicide, and usually
ends up in the 'attempted suicide' category.
-
- But this man, from this short bit of media pressure,
was so clear in his mind that he needed to end his life on that day and
at that time, that he got all the implements, the back-up pills behind
the more than adequate knife. This man of peace, without drawing alert
from his family members, walked out of his house in the middle of the day,
took a nice long walk in the rain, remained steadfast and unwavering in
his plan, and carried out his death mission perfectly.
-
- And now it is confirmed, he is the one who spilled the
beans on Blair.
-
- The response?
-
- 1) Blair's people assert that, now that they know for
certain the dead Kelly was the source of the damming BBC story, they can
discredit this dead man and his accusation.
-
- Excuse me? Now that he is conveniently dead they won't
even let the body cool before trying to discredit the words of a man who
only days ago could have defended himself but now can't?
-
- 2) People are attacking the BBC for printing what he
had said.
-
- 3) Blair's people are asserting that maybe the BBC reporter
who wrote the story incorrectly or dishonestly related information Kelly
had given him.
-
- If this was the case, Kelly would have clearly forced
Gilligan (the BBC reporter) to write a retraction, would have simply told
another reporter that the information reported was inaccurate and had a
story written about that, or publicly would have had the information corrected.
-
- He did not do any of these things.
-
- Previously, we had said regarding this case some things
that were certain, and none has turned out to be other so far.
-
- Now, we can clearly say one thing is certain: if Kelly
had made an untruthful assertion to the BBC reporter, he would have recanted,
not killed himself. If he was the type of person who sought to bring the
mischief that such a false statement would bring, he would have been the
type of person who would be able to deal with the fallout of such a situation.
Liars and anyone who would play a game on that level are prepared to continue
to lie and lie and live and live as liars.
-
- Kelly had clearly unleashed a truth larger than the man
could survive. That is the inescapable reality, whether it turns out to
be suicide or murder.
-
- Blair and folks will kick his corpse, discredit the man
who had earned a long life worth of credit. Anything but admit a lie.
-
- http://www.moderateindependent.com/v1i7top.htm
|
