British Government murdered Dr. David Kelly

[Greg]

https://twitter.com/Jones787Sj/status/1757140894048792974

Murdered to shut him up about Iraq's lack of WMDs.

[awkward customer]

Is this a conspiracy theory?

Anyone with any sense knew that Blair was lying about Iraqi WMD. I know I did, which is why I went on the march against the Iraq war with 1 million other people.  But the war went ahead nevertheless.

If 1 million people and more were onto Blair, why would the government bother killing Dr David Kelly?

[Greg]

Because he probably had concrete evidence that Iraq did not have them.

You were just acting on an educated guess.  You did not KNOW for sure that Saddam did not have weapons.  You just suspected he did not.  David Kelly had much strong objective evidence.

Same is true for the vaccine.  None of us KNEW it would cause excess deaths.  We just thought it might since it was untested and the people pushing it and making it in large batches are incompetent morons and some of them criminally so.

That they closed the file on Kelly for 70 years is prima facie evidence that they murdered him.  If he suicided they would let the file be open.  It's the same as Pfizer wanting the vaccine data secret for 70 years.

[awkward customer]

Is it possible to have "concrete evidence" that Iraq didn't have WMD?  Wouldn't it be a bit like trying to prove a negative?  All anyone could say was that WMD couldn't be found anywhere but there could be no certainty that they didn't exist somewhere else.

Besides, Iraq is a sovereign nation and has every right to have weapons of its choosing.  What annoyed NATO was that Saddam Hussein was selling Iraq's oil in Euros, thereby undermining the petrodollar system.  So he had to go as the same decades old story of NATO wars against any nation that won't toe the line continues.

As for the vaccine, since the people pushing the vaccine have also been calling for population control for decades, it might have occurred to some people that they weren't primarily intended to make sure the world's population continued to grow.

[Greg]

I would think it was possible yes.

Let's say you had concrete evidence of how far their weapons program was along, 10, 5, 3 and 1 year before.  Then you could be sure beyond reasonable doubt that they could not possibly have WMDs capable of being launched in 45 mins and reaching southern Europe.

Just as I could be sure than my 8 year old child could not jump 1.85m in high jump, because only the very best 13 year olds can jump that high.

[awkward customer]

Let's say you had concrete evidence of how far their weapons program was along, 10, 5, 3 and 1 year before.  Then you could be sure beyond reasonable doubt that they could not possibly have WMDs capable of being launched in 45 mins and reaching southern Europe.

You've pushed the issue back in time.  How would such concrete evidence exist ten years ago?

All I'm saying is that it's impossible to have "concrete evidence" that Iraq did not have WMD.  How do you prove that someone doesn't have something?  All you can say is that you couldn't find that something anywhere you looked.

I don't believe that the British government murdered Dr David Kelly because there's nothing he could have said that others weren't saying at the time.  Any concrete evidence he might have had doesn't exist because it can't exist.

[Greg]

Then why close the file for 70 years?

[awkward customer]

I don't know.

[Greg]

I do.  Because they murdered him.