Re: BBC 'Learning the Lessons of the Kelly Affair

"Harold Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> There are many inaccuracies in this thread.
> 
<snip>
> 
> The other inaccuracies are more obvious, for example "The Baha'i Technique"
> which has been drawn up by a small number of people opposed to the
> world-wide admisitrative system followed by most Baha'is is exactly that and
> rather than being "recognised" as the Baha'i technique it is a description
> totally opposite to one that any open minded indvidual who has come into
> contact with the Baha'is will have. "Scapegoating and repudiating" could not
> be further from the truth, if anything Baha'is have continued to use the
> good name of Dr. David Kelly, the press has shown them praying for him
> around the country, attending his funeral and talking about the Baha'i
> beliefs he held and accepting his actions, whatever they may have been. The
> Baha'i community in the UK has probably recieved new followers as a result
> of them hearing how a man with such a strong reputation held to Baha'i
> beliefs and hearing how the Baha'is talked of Dr. David Kelly and his
> beliefs too.
> 
> regards. h

Thank you Harold.

I'm not convinced that I agree with your rationalisation of the
differences between Roger Kingdon's account of the talks Dr
Kelly gave in Abingdon, and the account Barney Leith gave
to Hutton.

There does appear to me to be some kind of a contradiction
going on here, and one which I can see no reason for - to
me, I can't see what the problem is if Dr Kelly gave a
talk about his experiences in Iraq, and about the dossier,
to a group of interested friends at a time when
speculation about going to war with Iraq was the day's
top news story - it's not as if a public dossier was a
state secret after all.

But, as you say, there could be many reasonable explanations
for the discrepancies before we reach to conspiracy
theories to explain what is going on here.

Had Error just left it at pointing out that these
differences existed, that would be nothing but the
clear truth - but no.

Errol has a history of posting wild speculations, and
stopping at nothing in his attempts to damage the memory
of a good man - he has linked to conspiracy theorist
websites that post a list of 18 microbiologists that
have died in "mysterious circumstance" - he has called
Kelly a traitor, and then when asked to justify this
calumny, fallen back on the "argument" that he wasn't
the first person to say this - without being able to
produce a single newspaper article that labels
Kelly a traitor. - then, he posts a link to a website
*full* of conspiracy theories - like the suggestion
that Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed might have
faked their own deaths and be living in some
isolated paradise, or the suggestion that the
latest Harry Potter book has occult connections
because it contains "666 pages excluding the
prologue" (the book actually contains 766 pages,
and does not have a prologue - the suggestion that
there are occult connections stem basically from
the fears of fundamentalist Chrstians, disappointed
that a story about young witches and wizards is
more popular with modern children than the older,
Christian influenced Narnia stories of C.S.Lewis).

His suggestion that anything we have seen on this
thread shows "repudiation and scapegoating" of Dr
Kelly by the Baha'i community, or the Baha'i
Administration is just another in this long-established
line of pathetic attacks upon his former religious
community.

I think that, really, these attacks stem from Errol's
disappointment that the Baha'i Faith did not work
as a cureall for his own personal inadequacies, and
now he sees every Baha'i, and everything Baha'i
as a fair target.

Really, however, there can be no excuse for this
pathetic old man's attempts to smear Dr Kelly's
memory with these conspiracy theories.

Paul