by Tim Shipman

Six doctors who believe government scientist David Kelly was murdered have launched a ground-breaking legal action to demand the inquest into his death is reopened.

They are to publish a hard-hitting report which they claim proves the weapons expert did not commit suicide as the Hutton Report decided.

They have also engaged lawyers to write to Attorney General Baroness Scotland and the coroner Nicholas Gardiner calling for a full re-examination of the circumstances of his death.

The doctors are asking for permission to go to the High Court to reopen the inquest on the grounds that it was improperly suspended. If Baroness Scotland rejects that demand, or the court turns them down, their lawyers say they will have grounds to seek judicial review of the decision.

Dr Kelly was found dead at a beauty spot near his Oxfordshire home in 2003, days after he was exposed as the source of a story that Tony Blair’s government ‘sexed-up’ its dossier on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction to justify invading Iraq.

In one final phone conversation, he told a caller he wouldn’t be surprised ‘if my body was found in the woods’.

The inquest into Dr Kelly’s death was suspended before it could begin by order of the then Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer. He used the Coroners Act to designate the Hutton Inquiry as ‘fulfilling the function of an inquest’.

Lord Falconer, a former flatmate of Tony Blair, was also responsible for picking Lord Hutton to run the inquiry.

Suicide?: A police officer stands next to a cordon near Harrowdown Hill in Oxfordshire where Dr David Kelly’s body was found in July, 2003

But the doctors claim that the original inquest was never formally closed and should now be allowed to hold a proper inquiry.

The six are Michael Powers, a QC and former coroner; trauma surgeon David Halpin; Andrew Rouse, an epidemiologist who established that deaths from cutting the ulnar artery – as claimed in Dr Kelly’s case – are extremely rare; Martin Birnstingl, another surgeon; plus Stephen Frost and Chris Burns-Cox.

Lord Hutton concluded that Dr Kelly killed himself by severing an ulnar artery in his left wrist after taking an overdose of prescription painkillers but he skated over the controversies about the causes of death.

Lord Hutton concluded Dr David Kelly killed himself

The bulk of his report was dedicated to the political row between Downing Street and the BBC, which revealed the sexing-up of the dossier.

Dr Kelly’s death certificate states that he died of a haemorrhage, but the results of a post mortem examination have never been made public.

Crucially, the doctors say that Lord Hutton had no witnesses on oath and did not have to make a finding, as the coroner does, beyond a reasonable doubt.

The doctors tried to persuade the coroner to reopen his inquest in 2004 but were rejected because they were not judged to be ‘properly interested persons’ with the authority to demand an inquiry.

Now they have hired human rights lawyers Leigh Day & Co to challenge the use of the Coroners Act to close the inquest.

A source close to the doctors said: ‘Lord Falconer is on record saying this is a “useful little law” but it was set up to avoid multiple inquests in cases where there were multiple deaths.

It has been used for victims of train crashes and the Harold Shipman case but Dr Kelly’s was not a multiple death.

‘We argue that that’s an abuse of due process. The lawyers have sent the letters this week.

We have concentrated on the finding on the death certificate that the primary cause of death was a haemorrage. We are spelling out why he could not have died from a cut to the small ulnar artery.’

One of the doctors, who preferred not to be named, added: ‘When the Romans committed suicide they would slit all four arteries in a warm bath, which keeps the blood flowing. The arteries would close up in the open air and you would not lose that much blood.’

A book on the unanswered questions surrounding the case by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker concluded that Dr Kelly may have been murdered by Iraqi exiles – but the finger has also been pointed at MI5 and the CIA.

Dr Kelly’s family have never commented publicly on his death.

by David Calderwood

Recent LRC Blog posts surrounding the classical liberal roots of Marxist class analysis reminded me that we have rarely had a clearer portrait of the two dominant heads of the exploiting class hydra. In the past two years, even with central bank stonewalling and opaque government deals it is obvious that the main exploiters are those individuals managing the political system and those individuals who own the financial system’s central conduits.

When the Treasury Department’s managers and the Federal Reserve System’s managers collude behind closed doors, and the lowliest scam that emerges is a lottery-winner level of financial fraud…one that the SEC miraculously can’t fathom…it is pretty obvious who is getting rich at our expense.

Before everyone gets all “conspiracy theory” on me, let’s recognize the obvious, which is that people with similar aims and who benefit from the same set of conditions need not have each other on speed dial in order to coordinate their actions.

Just as the market spontaneously organizes the efforts of individuals laboring in a voluntary system to generate vast productivity, the political system coordinates the efforts of the exploiting class to inexorably change the rules so their exploitive efforts produce more loot. The clown in the White House need not hold a conference call with the heads of the major banking families and the clowns running Congress in order to get all their plans set.

This raises an interesting conjecture.

Has the centuries-long spontaneously-organized labor of the major banking cartel families been the dominant force that gifted us with this hydra political economy that is stealing us blind?

Here’s my line of thought:

We know from Professor Hoppe and other Mises Institute contributors that monarchies tended to be less war-loving than the modern state. Wars generate stunning levels of financing demand, so from this we can infer that the owners of banking cartels would see a transition from monarchy to modern klepto-democratic states as a means of growing themarket for their services.

Shifting education to the public sector where Fabian socialism could be taught as a state religion was also highly constructive to financiers’ profits. Once individual citizens are trained to think about the abstraction we call “government” as something magically distinct from the people who manage it, the state is seen as an extension of society rather than a vehicle for exploitation of producers by parasites.

Unprecedented capital then flows from producers into the hands of the political system’s managers and their financiers (especially once production is so crippled that people begin borrowing to artificially maintain their standard of living).

This process required no more explicit coordination than has the advancement of the computer industry since the invention of the printed circuit. All that was necessary was a relative few people who gravitated to loci of power due to their willingness to exploit others, combined with a great increase in wealth allowing productive individuals to support a vast increase in the burden of individuals exploiting them.

Regardless of the specific desires of individuals in the exploiting class, their paths were largely parallel. Exploiter-class occupations proliferated, with celebrity posts in “news” media, entertainment, and the state apparatus itself. During the latter stage of this two-century development, even some of the banking cartel managers came out of the shadows to gain notoriety and celebrity, to be treated like they have a direct line to Divinity.

State and financial institutions spread like rot in a landfill, attracting exploitation-minded people like roadkill attracts flies.

Across the spectrum of human endeavor, once exploiting-class individuals got a toehold in something, in little time their cancer spread and choked most of the voluntary life from previously healthy market-based activities. The involvement of the state’s coercion in education turned to dominance and with the seeming removal of market discipline from schooling it became a free-for-all for the exploiters.

Is it shocking that grade school kids can identify mass murderers like Lincoln or Sherman but have never heard names like Bastiat, de La Boétie, or Say? Is it a surprise that college coeds wear Che Guevara t-shirts but would respond, if you told them about the man who explained in 1922 unequivocally why the USSR would fail, “Ludwig von-what?”

It’s no wonder that exploitation of the productive became the dominant process at universities. The majority of people teaching in many departments “sell” things that have no market value. Of course they attack the pillars of peace,property ownership, and non-coercion that might impede their desire for more power, prestige, or whatever else their exploitation might yield. The tick, the flea, and the mite have different aims and occasionally compete for host resources, but all wish to stop the horse’s tail from swatting at them.

So here we stand at the edge of the abyss, observing what this perverse anti-market’s coordination has wrought. Over a century of systematic crippling of individual liberty and the free market it generates have strip-mined whole societies of capital. In this final act productive people even mortgaged everything they own to the financiers and are being driven from their homes as politicians sell their tax liabilities to…political entrepreneurs.

What should we expect now?

First we should see the exploiters blame their nemesis, liberty, for the very ills they and their forbearers bequeathed us through war, inflation, regulation, and above all, debt.

Second, it seems that the true exploiter-class captains are ideology-free. They’re not Marxists. They believe in only one form of private property: theirs.

We should expect the great financiers and banking cartels to divest themselves of their highly profitable financial cons that are now ready to collapse. Trillions of dollars worth of debt and paper assets will flow from the banksters into the “hands” of the public through Treasury Department guarantees, bailout schemes, pension and 401(K) plan purchases, and the like just in time to see it all collapse in value.

Then, once the collapse is complete and all defaults have occurred, those same captains of finance (perhaps helming firms sporting new façades) will swoop in and buy it all back up at fire-sale prices when there’s blood running in the streets. For instance, look for all those mortgages in default to be bundled up and sold for a fraction of a penny, so the banking cartels will succeed in owning vast swaths of real estate, ready to sell it back to the dispossessed at a healthy markup.

They, their grandparents, and their great-great-grandparents have done it before. How do you think they accumulated most of the world’s wealth, by inventing useful things? The only entrepreneurship they know is the political kind.

This murderous form of exploitation will end or at least shrink considerably someday. This won’t occur, however, until there’s a widespread appreciation of the malignant alliance between finance and the state, and a new period ofprosperity is begun by eliminating the exploiting class’ revolving door (starting here) between them.

by Dr. Tim Ball and Judi McLeod, Canada Free Press

Lift up a rock and another snake comes slithering out from the ongoing University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) scandal, now riding as   “Climategate”.

Obama Science Czar John Holdren is directly involved in CRU’s unfolding Climategate scandal.  In fact, according to files released by a CEU hacker or whistleblower, Holdren is involved in what Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball terms “a truculent and nasty manner that provides a brief demonstration of his lack of understanding, commitment on faith and willingness to ridicule and bully people”.

“The files contain so much material that it is going to take some time t o put it all in context,” says Ball.  “However, enough is already known to underscore their explosive nature.  It is already clear the entire claims and positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based on falsified manipulated material and is therefore completely compromised.

“The fallout will be extensive as material continues to emerge.  Reputations of the scientists involved are already destroyed, however fringe players will continue to be identified and their reputations destroyed or sullied.”

While the mainstream media is bending into pretzels to keep the scandal under the rug, Climategate is already the biggest scientific scandal in history because of the global policy implications.

A throwback to the intro of the television series Dragnet, “Ladies and Gentlemen:  “The story you are about to hear is true, only the names have been changed to protect the innocent”, the innocent in Climategate have already been thrown to the ravening wolves.

“There is a multitude of small but frightening stories in the massive files,”  Ball writes.  “For example I’ve known solar physicists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon for a long time. I’ve published articles with Willie and enjoyed extensive communication. I was on advisory committees with them when Sallie suddenly and politely withdrew from the fray. I don’t know if the following events were contributing factors but it is likely.

“Baliunas and Soon were authors of excellent work confirming the existence of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) from a multitude of sources. Their work challenged attempts to get rid of the MWP because it contradicted the claim by the proponents of anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Several scientists challenged the claim that the latter part of the 20^th century was the warmest ever. They knew the claim was false, many warmer periods occurred in the past. Michael Mann ‘got rid’ of the MWP with his production of the hockey stick, but Soon and Baliunas were problematic. What better than have a powerful academic destroy their credibility for you? Sadly, there are always people who will do the dirty work.”

Indeed, Holdren’s emails show how sincere scientists would be made into raw “entertainment”.

How the deed was done

“A perfect person and opportunity appeared. On 16^th October 2003 Michael Mann, infamous for his lead in the ‘hockey stick’ that dominated the 2001 IPCC Report, sent an email to people involved in the CRU scandal; “

Dear All,

Thought you would be interested in this exchange, which John Holdren of Harvard has been kind enough to pass along…” At the time Holdren was Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy & Director, Program in Science, Technology, & Public Policy, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government. (Editor’s Note: He is now Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology—informally known as the United States Science Czar. )

““In an email on October16, 2003 from John Holdren to Michael Mann and Tom Wigley we are told:

”“I’m forwarding for your entertainment an exchange that followed from my being quoted in the Harvard Crimson to the effect that you and your colleagues are right and my “Harvard” colleagues Soon and Baliunas are wrong about what the evidence shows concerning surface temperatures over the past millennium. The cover note to faculty and postdocs in a regular Wednesday breakfast discussion group on environmental science and public policy in Harvard’s Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences is more or less self-explanatory.”

The Wednesday Breakfast Group

“This is what Holdren sent to the Wednesday Breakfast group.

“I append here an e-mail correspondence I have engaged in over the past few days trying to educate a Soon/Baliunas supporter who originally wrote to me asking how I could think that Soon and Baliunas are wrong and Mann et al. are right (a view attributed to me, correctly, in the Harvard Crimson). This individual apparently runs a web site on which he had been touting the Soon/Baliunas position.”

“The exchange Holdren refers to is a challenge by Nick Schulz editor of Tech Central Station (TCS). On August 9, 2003 Schulz wrote;

“In a recent Crimson story on the work of Soon and Baliunas, who have written for my website [1 techcentralstation.com, you are quoted as saying: My impression is that the critics are right. It s unfortunate that so much attention is paid to a flawed analysis, but that’s what happens when something happens to support the political climate in Washington. Do you feel the same way about the work of Mann et. al.? If not why not?”

“Holdren provides lengthy responses on October 13, 14, and 16 but comments fail to answer Schulz’s questions. After the first response Schulz replies, “I guess my problem concerns what lawyers call the burden of proof. The burden weighs heavily, much more heavily, given the claims on Mann et.al. than it does on Soon/Baliunas. Would you agree?” Of course, Holdren doesn’t agree. He replies, “But, in practice, burden of proof is an evolving thing-it evolves as the amount of evidence relevant to a particular proposition grows.” No it doesn’t evolve; it is either on one side or the other. This argument is in line with what has happened with AGW. He then demonstrates his lack of understanding of science and climate science by opting for Mann and his hockey stick over Soon and Baliunas. His entire defense and position devolves to a political position. His attempt to belittle Soon and Baliunas in front of colleagues is a measure of the man’s blindness and political opportunism that pervades everything he says or does.

“Schulz provides a solid summary when he writes, “I’ll close by saying I’m willing to admit that, as someone lacking a PhD, I could be punching above my weight. But I will ask you a different but related question. How much hope is there for reaching reasonable public policy decisions that affect the lives of millions if the science upon which those decisions must be made is said to be by definition beyond the reach of those people?”

“We now know it was deliberately placed beyond the reach of the people by the group that he used to ridicule Soon and Baliunas. Holdren was blinded by his political views, which as his record shows are frightening. One web site synthesizes his position on over-population as follows, “Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A “Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death over American citizens.”

“Holdren has a long history of seeking total government control. He was involved in the Club of Rome providing Paul Ehrlich with the scientific data in his bet with Julian Simon. Ehrlich lost the bet. Holdren’s behavior in this sorry episode with Soon and Baliunas is too true to form and shows the leopard never changes his spots,” Ball concludes.

Meanwhile, even with an AWOL mainstream media, the Climategate snakes continue to slither out from under the rocks.

Al Gore to Speak at November Allstream Marquee Event

Event Proceeds Go To the David Suzuki Foundation

Changes in the global economy continue to shape the world and the environment in which we live. Guests of the 2009 Allstream Global Forum will be the first in Canada to hear former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore share his new and compelling vision of how business can play a pivotal role in ensuring these changes are for the better through innovation and investment in new technology. Proceeds from the event, which will take place on November 24, 2009, at the Allstream Centre at Exhibition Place in Toronto, will go to the David Suzuki Foundation and its efforts to help transform the Canadian economy in ways that are consistent with a sustainable future. Co-founded by award-winning scientist, environmentalist and broadcaster Dr. David Suzuki, the David Suzuki Foundation is a world-renowned organization committed to helping Canadians achieve sustainability within a generation.

Read the rest at this link.

Great video explaining the environmental movement’s hijacking by the Bankster Elites and the New World Order: