BBC 'Learning the Lessons of the Kelly Affair

in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Harold Jones at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 3/12/03 11:33 am:

> I do not wish to discuss Dr. David Kelly's actions, they were his own affair
> and if Baha'is wish to have opinions on them that is their own matter.
> Anybody who spoke of his character obviously spoke from their knowledge and
> experience of him and your Andrew Gilligan quote confirms that he was known
> as a man of integrity.

No one denies that Dr kelly was a man of integrity. But when telling
the truth and nothing but the truth happens to be the very pinnacle
and most important moment of one's very life (IE when he was
questioned at the Government select committee) Dr Kelly failed to tell
the truth.  Had he done so, he may have been hauled over the coals and
lost his job working for the Government, but he might be alive today
with his dignity and integrity intact.

> However, both the 27th July (misquoted by me as
> August) and 1st August articles below show that the Telegraph were told by  Roger 
> Kingdon that the comments took place outside of the public (ie with guests) forum. 
> Mentioning the question and answer session is not relevantbecause if Roger Kingdon 
> has confirmed that the comments were not in front
> of everybody else then that part of the event becomes as irrelevant as the
> refreshments that were no doubt served and the one or more prayers that no
> doubt started the meeting, neither of which were referred to in the
> newspaper articles.

The saying of prayers proves one point that the meeting had a
religious connection, and therefore was no doubt a Baha'i AO organised
meeting.

> By mentioning the question and answer session and
> continuing by quoting Roger Kingdon on comments made 'at that meeting',
> while keeping the fact that the comment was private and not in front of the
> guests, the Guardian was able to make the story sound much more sensational
> than it was and presumably make more sales. Only below can you see a quote
> where Roger Kingdon states whether the comment was part of the meeting or
> not and he says it was not, therefore there are no contradictions. There
> were other similar instances to this, one popular paper had an exclusive
> that Dr. David Kelly might have committed suicide because the Baha'i Faith
> promoted it, again the truth of the Baha'i view on suicide appeared in other
> papers over the following days.

If Baha'is use ambiguous double speak about their religion's writings
then what do you expect journalists to write?............Errol

According to Bahai scriptures, a man who takes his own life "will be
immersed in the ocean of pardon and forgiveness and will become the
recipient of bounty and favour." The phrase has been widely quoted in
the past week as evidence that the religion supports suicide, but
Bahai followers are keen to point to other passages that, they say,
make it clear "the soul is a precious gift for us from God".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,1006858,00.html
> 
> Regards, h.
> 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Harold Jones at
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 3/12/03 1:47 am:
>> 
>>> The Daily Telegraph on the 1st August:
>>> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/08/01/nkell01.xml
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Roger Kingdon, a fellow member of the Baha'i group in Abingdon,
>>> Oxfordshire, attended by Dr Kelly, said: "I will remember him as a
>>> person of tremendous integrity and self containment."
>> 
>> Well Dr Kelly did *not* show this side of his "tremendous integrity
>> and self containment" at the government select committe? Why did Dr
>> Kelly  not tell them what he told Rodger Kington that he was  not
so
>> happy with how the material ( september intelligence dossier) had
been
>> interpreted." Instead Dr Kelly used equivocal language with intent
to
>> deceive the select committe that he not discussed the dossier with
BBC
>> journalist Andrew Gilligan. "Lying was not easy for Dr Kelly, who
was
>> regarded by all who knew him as a man of integrity with a
scientist's
>> regard for accuracy and the truth".
>> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/08/01/nkell01.xml
>> But the tape of a telephone conversation by him and Susan Watts
>> (another BBC journalist) was the smoking gun to prove Dr Kelly had
>> told lies. Two days later he committed suicide. This proves the
>> nonsense some Baha'is seem to think that a good Bahai like Dr Kelly
>> cant tell a lie is a load of tosh.
>>> 
>>> Dr Kelly, he said, had given a talk to the group about his
experiences
>>> as a weapons inspector in Iraq in October last year, after the
dossier
>>> had been published.
>>> 
>>> Mr Kingdon said: "He had no doubt that they [the Iraqis] had
biological
>>> and chemical weapons. He didn't comment on that while everyone
else
>>> was there, but separately I asked him - because the dossier had
just
> come
>>> out.
>>> 
>>> "He said he had been sitting with Jack Straw when the dossier was
> released
>>> to
>>> the public. It was clear that David Kelly was largely happy with
the
>>> material in
>>> the dossier, but he was not so happy with how the material had
been
>>> interpreted."
>> 
>> So the question-and-answer session on the *intelligence dossier*
has
>> been excluded in this later " Telegraph" article?  You would agree
>> usually a question-and-answer session is centered around  what is
>> discussed in a talk?
>> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1006711,00.html
>> If the Observer were not told by Rodger Kington that (a
>> question-and-answer session on the *intelligence dossier*)
happened,
>> why would a journalist include such an inportant piece of
information
>> if it was an untruth?
>> 
>> " Kelly gave a 40-minute talk, which was accompanied with a slide
>> show, about his work as a weapons inspector in Iraq. He ended with
a
>> question-and-answer session on the intelligence dossier, which had
>> been made public 10 days earlier as part of what opponents claim
was a
>> government attempt to swing public opinion behind war on Iraq.
>> 
>> Roger Kingdon told The Observer last night that Kelly expressed his
>> unhappiness with how the document was being interpreted, saying the
>> intelligence information supplied was accurate, but indicating that
he
>> was uncomfortable about how it was being represented".
>> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,6903,1006711,00.html
>> 
>> Surely if this had have happened to me I would be on to the
newspaper
>> like a shot and request they print a disclaimer that I never told
the
>> journalist this. Why did Rodger Kington not do so?  I am sure you
>> would agree telling another newspaper the same story (but deleting
the
>> Q & A bit on the dossier) story is not the same as a
>> disclaimer?..............Errol
>> 
>>> 
>>> see also the same paper on the 27th August:
>>> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/07/27/uhain.xml
>>> 
>>> 
>>> "...he had discussed the issue with Roger Kingdon, a fellow member
of
> the
>>> Baha'i
>>> faith, following a meeting of believers in Mr Kingdon's home..."
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards, harold.
>>> 
>>> 
> 
>