two pints of blood for anna lindh and david kelly

charlotte gainsbourg
time of the assassins.

two different people in sweden said i reminded them of anna lindh
which it is why its funny i asked FAM's lars wedenborn sarcastically in a letter, whether or not he'd kill me in NK.
not to say he killed al.  or that thomas bodstrom killed al.
he blamed al.
somebody killed al.
and the effect that someone killed her, blamed her for the CIA takeover of swedish gvt.
when thomas bodstrom was sending people to be tortured in egypt, and then he and his dirty firm get hired to rep. anti-assange.
that was where karl rove messed up. too small town. too nasty.  and in rove's wake, there is oft a chain of mysterious suicide.



David Christopher Kelly, CMG (14 May 1944 – 17 July 2003) was a British scientist and expert on biological warfare, employed by the British Ministry of Defence, and formerly a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. He came to public attention in July 2003 when an unauthorised discussion he had off the record with a BBC journalist, Andrew Gilligan—about the British government's dossier on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq—was cited by the journalist and led to a major controversy. Kelly's name became known to the media as Gilligan's source, and he was called to appear on 15 July before the parliamentary foreign affairs select committee, which was investigating the issues Gilligan had reported. Kelly was questioned aggressively about his actions. He was found dead two days later.^[2]

Tony Blair's government set up the Hutton Inquiry, a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death. This determined that Kelly had committed suicide, the pathologist who conducted the postmortem examination giving the cause of death as "haemorrhage due to incised wounds of the left wrist" in combination with "coproxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis". Lord Hutton also decided that evidence related to the death, including the post-mortem report and photographs of the body, should remain classified for 70 years.^[3] In October 2010, Hutton explained that he had done so to protect the wife and daughters of Kelly from the distress of further media reports about the death. "My request was not a concealment of evidence because every matter of relevance had been examined or was available for examination during the public inquiry. There was no secrecy surrounding the postmortem report because it had always been available for examination and questioning by counsel representing the interested parties during the inquiry."^[4]

In 2009 a group of British doctors who had not had access to the evidence—including Michael Powers, a physician, barrister, and former coroner; and Julian Blon, a professor of intensive care medicine at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham—challenged Hutton's verdict, offering their opinion based on published reports that the cause of death was untenable; they argued that the artery is small and difficult to access, and severing it would not have triggered sufficient blood loss to cause death.