A factual drama about the Iraq dossier row and the subsequent death of Dr David Kelly, one of the top government experts on Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Subject: Cinematic coverup? of an official narrative lie - if not state murder? A review of The Government Inspector film (2005) about British Iraq weapons instructor Dr. David Kelly’s death in July 2003. Film writer/director Peter Kosminsky’s docudrama begins with scenes to confirm the Blair (and subsequent) governments’ claim Kelly’s death was suicide, despite there being no historically required coroner’s inquest and despite basic, compelling questions remaining which indicate that it wasn’t suicide. That is, it seems to have been a film made to back the highly questionable and questioned official narrative, deflecting attention from questions about his actual death to Kelly’s personal life as well as conflicting accounts of Kelly, BBC reporter Gilligan, and Prime Minister Tony Blair’s spinmeister Alastair Campbell about the “dodgy dossier” which Blair used to try to persuade both the American and British peoples to support us attacking Iraq ... claiming most sensationally and falsely that Saddam Hussein could launch weapons of mass destruction "in 45-minutes." The government claimed Kelly both used pills and his garden knife to slash his wrists, but there was an insufficient amount of the drug in his system to kill him, according to the autops, and only a small piece of one tablet was in his stomach. Moreover, according to both his U.S. Army inspector colleague Mai Pedersen and his wife, Kelly had an intense aversion to trying to take pills. As well, doctors claim that cutting the ulnar artery - wrists - is not fatal and there was little blood found on/around his body, in any case. Guardian, 27Jan04, Letters: “Our doubts about Dr. Kelly’s suicide,” by David Halpin and Drs. Stephen Frost, Searle Sennett, and Rowena Thursby. Guardian, 28May18, Book Review, “An inconvenient death - by Miles Goslett” Daily Mail, 13Nov10, Miles Goslett, “Drug expert claims Dr. David Kelly was murdered, as he could not have taken overdose.” There was no suicide note, and he had seemed upbeat, planning a get-together with a friend. Guardian, 12Dec04, “Kelly death paramedics query verdict: The Hutton inquiry found that the scientist caught in the storm over the 'sexed up' Iraq dossier committed suicide. Now, for the first time, the experienced ambulance crew who were among the first on the scene tell of their doubts about the decision. Special report by Antony Barnett.” A suspicious omission from the film is Kelly’s last-day e-mail to Judith Miller, a New York Times reporter and principal media proponent of the (never found) Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction lie, used as the official motive for attacking/invading Iraq. In his e-mail to her, of all people, he referred to “dark players,” and the film depicts Kelly as being idealistic, self-righteously blind if not delusional, and (fatally) naive. And the film was incriminated by Peter Kosminsky himself, who being criticized for taking the official line attempted to claim that docudrams are not necessarily based on fact … and neither are documentaries themselves! Guardian, 17Oct05, “Kosminsky defends docudrama, by Jason Deans. “Award-winning director Peter Kosminsky has expressed his frustration with critics who question the authenticity of his fact based dramas such as The Government Inspector, saying conventional documentaries are just as subjective. Mr Kosminsky said people regarded documentaries as objective because they looked real, but his docudramas were just as subjective because they had actors and a script.” There are other questions, but the biggest and most self-incriminating one is why the Blair and subsequent British governments have blocked a geniune, thorough, historically legally required under-oath inquest into his death. Kelly’s death did succeed in diverting public attention away from the consequences and thus crime of the fraudulent runup to the Iraq war, which was then repeated in Iraq and Syria. The film is well-acted and certainly is absorbing and emotionally compelling - the idyllic/bucolic horse pasture scenes first in the company of his daughter and then finally alone by himself, for example - regardless of its dismissal of facts ... if not its dismissal of a high state crime incidentally murdering once great Britain’s justice and democracy. The Wikipedia entry about David Kelly’s death dismisses all the unanswered questions as well. For many years now I’ve tried to get the film to view, and just discovered it is now available on UA-cam at ua-cam.com/video/LLHGxiXDbC0/v-deo.html Another film about the Iraq War fraud is Official Secrets, starring Keira Knightley as pre-war whistle-blower Katharine Gun. Katherine Gun is reminiscent of Sigourney Weaver's Jilly, the British Djakarta Indonesia embassy clerk who sees a telegram indicating impending civil war and confides that to reporter Mel Gibson in The Year of Living Dangerously.
Gerald Bull was my Father; I've been interested in this seriously since Blair blocked the inquest as no one has ever been charged in the assassination of my Father. This is the first time I've been able to see this, thank you.
It isn't the business of the UK to charge anyone in connection with a murder in Belgium. I guess your Dad shouldn't have been helping Saddam Hussein, then he might not have been topped by Mossad lol
@@esmeecampbell7396 He would have had his life taken from him by any number of agencies at least Mossad made it quick and we got to say our goodbyes, he also gave us all the info on where the money was
One of the Best Films you will ever see . Perhaps the Official version isn't telling the whole truth . Rylance understated performance as Doctor Kelly is just perfect , leaving more questions than answers .
I totally agree! 😊 If you’re interested to know more, and you haven’t already, I would highly recommend reading “The Strange Death of David Kelly” by Norman Baker MP. A truly fascinating and terrifying read!
@@martinobrien7110 It is an interesting film, but as is often the case with conspiracies, it just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. If the British Government killed everyone who questioned the evidence of the Iraq War then they'd have to have killed hundreds more people who are still alive today, journalists, other doctors, even some intelligence and Whitehall personnel. They haven't, so why bother with Kelly? What made him so special he "HAD" to be taken out? Nothing... they could have fired him and discredited him, he'd get some lowly job at a university somewhere, the only thing killing him would do was lend credit to idiotic theories. The conspiracy would require not just perfect execution of a bizarre sloppy method to make it look like suicide (which is logistically tricky if you think about how you'd kill someone and make it look like an accident) but also you'd have to hope no witnesses saw, you'd have to swear the various coroners and Police officers to total secrecy when the conducted the post mortem because it would be so hard to make it look like suicide that something would turn up that proved it wasn't. And even if there "was" a good reason to have him killed, why do it in such a stupid place? "They" could simply have him arrested on trumped up charges and then lock him away for good and "kill himself" in Belmarsh, or the basement of Porton Down, somewhere more controlled as an environment that they could rely on the story not leaking and it being easier to cover up. In fact "they" could just arrange to "find" a lot of illegal stuff on his hard drive and had him locked away for life, again much cleaner than any complicated attempt at cover up and it would achieve the exact same thing if for some reason they were desperate to stop him talking about...something...although it's hard to say what he could even have said that hadn't been said by someone else already.
They killed him.
who? and why?
Subject: Cinematic coverup? of an official narrative lie - if not state murder? A review of The Government Inspector film (2005) about British Iraq weapons instructor Dr. David Kelly’s death in July 2003. Film writer/director Peter Kosminsky’s docudrama begins with scenes to confirm the Blair (and subsequent) governments’ claim Kelly’s death was suicide, despite there being no historically required coroner’s inquest and despite basic, compelling questions remaining which indicate that it wasn’t suicide. That is, it seems to have been a film made to back the highly questionable and questioned official narrative, deflecting attention from questions about his actual death to Kelly’s personal life as well as conflicting accounts of Kelly, BBC reporter Gilligan, and Prime Minister Tony Blair’s spinmeister Alastair Campbell about the “dodgy dossier” which Blair used to try to persuade both the American and British peoples to support us attacking Iraq ... claiming most sensationally and falsely that Saddam Hussein could launch weapons of mass destruction "in 45-minutes." The government claimed Kelly both used pills and his garden knife to slash his wrists, but there was an insufficient amount of the drug in his system to kill him, according to the autops, and only a small piece of one tablet was in his stomach. Moreover, according to both his U.S. Army inspector colleague Mai Pedersen and his wife, Kelly had an intense aversion to trying to take pills. As well, doctors claim that cutting the ulnar artery - wrists - is not fatal and there was little blood found on/around his body, in any case. Guardian, 27Jan04, Letters: “Our doubts about Dr. Kelly’s suicide,” by David Halpin and Drs. Stephen Frost, Searle Sennett, and Rowena Thursby. Guardian, 28May18, Book Review, “An inconvenient death - by Miles Goslett” Daily Mail, 13Nov10, Miles Goslett, “Drug expert claims Dr. David Kelly was murdered, as he could not have taken overdose.” There was no suicide note, and he had seemed upbeat, planning a get-together with a friend. Guardian, 12Dec04, “Kelly death paramedics query verdict: The Hutton inquiry found that the scientist caught in the storm over the 'sexed up' Iraq dossier committed suicide. Now, for the first time, the experienced ambulance crew who were among the first on the scene tell of their doubts about the decision. Special report by Antony Barnett.” A suspicious omission from the film is Kelly’s last-day e-mail to Judith Miller, a New York Times reporter and principal media proponent of the (never found) Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction lie, used as the official motive for attacking/invading Iraq. In his e-mail to her, of all people, he referred to “dark players,” and the film depicts Kelly as being idealistic, self-righteously blind if not delusional, and (fatally) naive. And the film was incriminated by Peter Kosminsky himself, who being criticized for taking the official line attempted to claim that docudrams are not necessarily based on fact … and neither are documentaries themselves! Guardian, 17Oct05, “Kosminsky defends docudrama, by Jason Deans. “Award-winning director Peter Kosminsky has expressed his frustration with critics who question the authenticity of his fact based dramas such as The Government Inspector, saying conventional documentaries are just as subjective. Mr Kosminsky said people regarded documentaries as objective because they looked real, but his docudramas were just as subjective because they had actors and a script.” There are other questions, but the biggest and most self-incriminating one is why the Blair and subsequent British governments have blocked a geniune, thorough, historically legally required under-oath inquest into his death. Kelly’s death did succeed in diverting public attention away from the consequences and thus crime of the fraudulent runup to the Iraq war, which was then repeated in Iraq and Syria. The film is well-acted and certainly is absorbing and emotionally compelling - the idyllic/bucolic horse pasture scenes first in the company of his daughter and then finally alone by himself, for example - regardless of its dismissal of facts ... if not its dismissal of a high state crime incidentally murdering once great Britain’s justice and democracy. The Wikipedia entry about David Kelly’s death dismisses all the unanswered questions as well. For many years now I’ve tried to get the film to view, and just discovered it is now available on UA-cam at ua-cam.com/video/LLHGxiXDbC0/v-deo.html Another film about the Iraq War fraud is Official Secrets, starring Keira Knightley as pre-war whistle-blower Katharine Gun. Katherine Gun is reminiscent of Sigourney Weaver's Jilly, the British Djakarta Indonesia embassy clerk who sees a telegram indicating impending civil war and confides that to reporter Mel Gibson in The Year of Living Dangerously.
Gerald Bull was my Father; I've been interested in this seriously since Blair blocked the inquest as no one has ever been charged in the assassination of my Father. This is the first time I've been able to see this, thank you.
Wow, thank you so much for sharing this with me! I googled your father, I am sorry for your loss. I appreciate you watching the video! ☺🥰
It isn't the business of the UK to charge anyone in connection with a murder in Belgium. I guess your Dad shouldn't have been helping Saddam Hussein, then he might not have been topped by Mossad lol
@@esmeecampbell7396 He would have had his life taken from him by any number of agencies at least Mossad made it quick and we got to say our goodbyes, he also gave us all the info on where the money was
@@esmeecampbell7396"lol" really, have some respect, even if, just for yourself
One of the Best Films you will ever see . Perhaps the Official version isn't telling the whole truth . Rylance understated performance as Doctor Kelly is just perfect , leaving more questions than answers .
I totally agree! 😊 If you’re interested to know more, and you haven’t already, I would highly recommend reading “The Strange Death of David Kelly” by Norman Baker MP. A truly fascinating and terrifying read!
@@danbillington Tom Mangold al so has his " Doubts " about the " Truth " . The Facts do not add up. Change the Story. That is Experts for you .
@@martinobrien7110 It is an interesting film, but as is often the case with conspiracies, it just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. If the British Government killed everyone who questioned the evidence of the Iraq War then they'd have to have killed hundreds more people who are still alive today, journalists, other doctors, even some intelligence and Whitehall personnel. They haven't, so why bother with Kelly? What made him so special he "HAD" to be taken out? Nothing... they could have fired him and discredited him, he'd get some lowly job at a university somewhere, the only thing killing him would do was lend credit to idiotic theories. The conspiracy would require not just perfect execution of a bizarre sloppy method to make it look like suicide (which is logistically tricky if you think about how you'd kill someone and make it look like an accident) but also you'd have to hope no witnesses saw, you'd have to swear the various coroners and Police officers to total secrecy when the conducted the post mortem because it would be so hard to make it look like suicide that something would turn up that proved it wasn't. And even if there "was" a good reason to have him killed, why do it in such a stupid place? "They" could simply have him arrested on trumped up charges and then lock him away for good and "kill himself" in Belmarsh, or the basement of Porton Down, somewhere more controlled as an environment that they could rely on the story not leaking and it being easier to cover up. In fact "they" could just arrange to "find" a lot of illegal stuff on his hard drive and had him locked away for life, again much cleaner than any complicated attempt at cover up and it would achieve the exact same thing if for some reason they were desperate to stop him talking about...something...although it's hard to say what he could even have said that hadn't been said by someone else already.