|
Previous:
Collateral Damage Film (Context) |
|
(www.stakeknife.eu)
Twitter: @seankellyis
(18)
*
Communications to the
Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament
In July 2013 from a blind position I wrote to
the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. As no address was
available I initially wrote to: The Secretary, Intelligence and Security
Committee, House of Commons,
On receiving a reply from a source I did not
direct to, my next communication went to the committee chairman, Sir Malcolm
Rifkind MP. There was no return to this letter.
On getting names of committee members, future
missives went to the chairman and individual members of the Intelligence and
Security Committee.
I sought to educate the Committee as to the
on-the-ground reality of the Security Service, something the agency was
unlikely to volunteer.
The direction concerned the “operations [and]
policy” of the said agency in so far as my personal experience informs.
The aim was to highlight egregious wrongdoing
by the Security Service through the medium of the Stakeknife web site and by
raising specific issues in the letters. But first an insight as to what the
Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament is about.
“The ISC’s statutory remit covers the
operations, policy, administration and finances of the intelligence and
security Agencies. The Committee does not investigate individual complaints about
the Agencies (which is the responsibility of the Investigatory Powers
Tribunal).”
The Stakeknife revelations, per se, only relate to me by my being
the author of the web site, an understanding derived from many years at the
receiving end of MI5 malpractice and added to by extensive research. Ditto
those issues represented in correspondence supplied to the ISC concerning
compromised continental IRA operations allowed to proceed in the protection and
promotion of agents/assets, leading to deaths.
With other matters mentioned these are surely
appropriate subjects for ISC deliberation and, ultimately, exposition and
correction.
The Investigatory Powers Tribunal is
ill-suited, I judge, to dwell on my submission. Besides, notwithstanding the
grand sounding title, it is likely to be no more than a bureaucratic jar of
ointment for an unsuspecting fly. I hope I am by now beyond that naïve
definition.
*
Communications to the
Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament
1) Tuesday 02.07.13 – One page letter
to The Secretary, Intelligence and Security Committee, House of Commons,
London.
2) Monday 22.07.13 – Two page letter to
Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP, Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee.
3) Monday 09.10.13 – One page letter to
Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP, Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee, enclosing
an eight page update from Section 9, Stakeknife compilation.
4) Monday 20.01.14 – One page letter to
Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP, Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee and Members
Intelligence and Security Committee. With enclosures.
5) Monday 31.03.14 – Three page letter
to Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP, Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee and
Members Intelligence and Security Committee. With enclosures.
6) Tuesday 22.04.14 – Five page letter
to Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP, Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee and
Members Intelligence and Security Committee.
Notes:
Letters one, two and three had an attached
slip of paper with Internet addresses.
Letter three enclosures are excluded but are
contained in web site (details below).
Letter four enclosures are excluded but can be
made available on request.
Letter five enclosures are included with
correspondence below.
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
(1)
Letter of Tuesday 02.07.13 to
Secretary Intelligence & Security Committee
(Dear Secretary)
This brief missive comes to you from a UK
pensioner who was forced out of England in order to safeguard his life. I have
spent fully thirty years in the pursuit of justice in this matter, yet you will
not have heard my name or know of my case.
Stapled to this covering note is a slip of
paper containing web addresses. I ask that you would copy and make same
available to the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. I ask that
members, from the chairman down, would read the documents referred.
I bring to your attention that MI5 will have
read this letter before you. I further ask that you would endeavour to access
my web sites through a search engine.
Unless the Security Service has had a word in
the ear of its Irish Special Branch counterpart consequent of this despatch,
you will not find them.
Welcome to the real world!
(Yours sincerely)
THE SECRETARY.
Intelligence & Security Committee,
House of Commons,
London SWIA OAA,
England.
END
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
(2)
Letter of Monday 22.07.13 to
Intelligence & Security Committee
(Dear Sir Malcolm Rifkind)
Please find attached letter dated 2 July 2013
addressed to The Secretary, Intelligence & Security Committee, House of
Commons, London. Today I received a return from the Home Office querying same.
The direction of my missive to the Home Office
by an unknown party, instead of the addressee, seems to me to be anomalous, to
say the least.
The Home Office is ill-suited to reflect on
the issues I offer for consideration, especially given the historic events
which overtook me were primarily due to the Security Service, an agency
subordinate to that office.
It is because of these considerations I again
petition the ISC, doing so through you as chairman. I emphatically wish no
other direction.
Does it concern you that MI5 will be apprised
of the content of this letter before you and fellow members of the ISC? Does it
concern you that MI5 was party to concerted efforts by fraternal intelligence
agencies to kill me?
My wish was to forward a copy of this letter
to individual members of the ISC, but not knowing their names I am unable to do
so. I do, however, have your name as chairman of the committee, hence the
specific direction.
Please do not construe this gesture as a vote
of confidence in your committee to deliberate impartially on my submission. To
expect otherwise would be, I pose, to run counter to the laws of nature. Years
of lies and abuse have conditioned me to believe intelligence agencies are a
law unto themselves.
Disabuse me if you will.
Attached are the Internet addresses previously
forwarded to the Intelligence & Security Committee.
If the Stakeknife compilation, number one on
the list, reflects on egregious wrongdoing by the Security Service in respect
of other parties, the additional web addresses – mirroring one presentation –
derive in large part from personal encounters at the hands of intelligence
agencies, and post event experiences.
My claims are backed up by extensive research
and corroboration. If your committee hold to a genuine desire to “investigate
the actions of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ to uncover the truth” in order to provide an
accurate overview of national intelligence agencies, it is imperative that it
should go beyond the sanitised and partial submissions that will indubitably be
made on behalf of those agencies.
Perhaps a reading of my two web sites will
provide some realism and balance in that regard?
Let’s see if MI5 “only shoot the crocodiles
nearest to the boat”!
You might be kind enough to personally
acknowledge.
(Yours sincerely)
Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP.
Conservative Party,
Chairman ISC,
House of Commons,
London SWIA OAA,
England.
END
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
(3)
Letter of Wednesday 09.10.13
to Intelligence & Security Committee
www.stakeknife.eu
(Dear Sir Malcolm Rifkind)
Since my letter to you of 22 July 2003,
enclosing an earlier communication of 02.07.13, the Stakeknife web site
(address as above and attached) has been further developed.
While the additional information is now on the
Internet, an eight page hard copy of that material is attached; and too copies
of previous letters. It may assist in a quick mental updating should you have
an interest.
The sentiment and requests contained in
previous correspondence continue unaltered.
(Yours sincerely)
Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP.
Conservative Party,
Chairman ISC,
House of Commons,
London SWIA OAA,
England.
[Note: Enclosures are omitted as content is
now contained in “Thursday 19 September 2013 Insertion” in Section 9 of the
Stakeknife web site.]
END
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
(4)
Letter of Monday 20.01.14 to
Intelligence & Security Committee
(Dear Sir Malcolm Rifkind)
Since last writing to you I obtained a hard
copy of the Smithwick Tribunal transcript of Witness 82, a selective reference
from which was made in my Stakeknife enclosure forwarded with covering letter
dated 09.10.13.
You have not acknowledged or returned to any
communication.
For the sake of completeness, please find enclosed
relevant pages of the Smithwick Tribunal transcript: this to confirm accuracy
of inclusions.
Quoted parts are asterisked.
Copies of the above, including this letter,
are to be despatched to the members of the Intelligence and Security Committee,
namely: The Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears MP; The Rt. Hon. The Lord Butler of Brockwell
KG GCB CVO; The Rt. Hon. Sir Menzies Campbell CBE QC MP; Mr Mark Field MP; The
Rt. Hon. Paul Goggins MP; The Rt. Hon. George Howarth MP; Dr Julian Lewis MP;
Lord Lothian QC PC.
I pose two questions to the ISC. Are you aware
of the on-the-ground reality of intelligence matters and their consequences? Do
you care?
Finally, in the typing of this letter my
non-Internet computer suffered from external intrusion.
(Yours sincerely)
The Rt. Hon. Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP.
Chairman Intelligence & Security
Committee,
Members Intelligence & Security Committee,
35 Great Smith Street,
London SWIP 3BQ.
[Note: Enclosure omitted but can be made
available on request.]
END
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
(5)
Letter of Monday 31.03.14 to
Intelligence & Security Committee
www.stakeknife.eu
(Dear Sir Malcolm Rifkind)
On Tuesday 3 December 2013 the Smithwick
Tribunal Report was made public.
The Chairman and Sole Member, His Honour Judge
Peter Smithwick, had the balls to conclude that on the balance of probabilities
there was collusion by An Garda Siochana in the murder of RUC officers Harry
Breen and Bob Buchanan, shot by the IRA on 20 March 1989.
His findings represented a politically
unpalatable truth.
The implications of these findings are
profound. However, given the amount of publicity devoted to the Smithwick
Report, you wouldn’t think so. You see, official Ireland, like Britain, buries its
dirt quickly, at times under piles of ephemera of the bogus “whistleblowing”
kind. Most of which comes from the lousy
left, masters at projecting feigned umbrage and outrage on behalf of state
security interests, in parliamentary chambers and in varying branches of the
media.
The concerned
leftie touch, as known to the cognoscenti.
Spoofs by one name. False representations of
democratic freedoms, another. And yet again, a trip on the magic roundabout.
I hope the Intelligence and Security Committee
in London will emulate the courage of Judge Smithwick and pronounce positively
in respect of your own deliberations.
My direction is to the Security Service.
The Stakeknife web site supplied to you in previous
correspondence brought to your attention IRA operations on the continent, which
though compromised, were allowed to proceed for operational intelligence
reasons, namely in the protection and promotion of informers.
Deaths ensued.
One of those murdered in what I call an RIA operation was 6 month old Nivruti
Islania, shot with her father Maheshkumar “Mick” Islania, a Royal Air Force
corporal based at Wildenrath, Germany on 26 October 1989.
Mick Islania was also killed. Murder tolerated
in order to preserve a modus operandi with close to a universal acceptance in
the intelligence community.
A hidden remove that affords protection to
MI5/Special Branch and facilitates plausible denial. As elsewhere described, a
bespoke hoodie for cowards.
By speaking up for Nivruti you can help break
this extraordinarily privileged and deadly silence.
Over long years our so-called free press has
failed to do so in this and countless other avoidable deaths associated with
the Troubles. Yet, on lesser matters, they can on behalf of the same hidden
interests get into an induced feeding frenzy.
Theatre for the proletariat.
Talking about the media, specifically the
press. Enclosed is “Stakeknife – An Update”, a two page summary of a recent
initiative. Though on my computer since end [February], it has not been put on
the Internet or imparted to other parties.
It relates to the submission of my Stakeknife
web site to the Paul Foot Award competition for investigative journalism. A
reading will explain.
With it is an Irish Times clipping dated
Wednesday 26 March 2014. The headline says it all. “’Guardian’ threatened with
closure over Snowden leaks, conference told.”
[The Irish Times clipping of Wednesday 26
March 2014 is scanned in below.}
The British government threatened to close
down The Guardian newspaper over the Snowden files spoof? Do you believe that?
If so, fair play to you. Long beyond
expectation you have retained a delightful childhood innocence. Which obliges
the question: what are you doing on a national intelligence and security
committee?
The Guardian helped float the Stakeknife
spoof. The Snowden tale comes from the same stable of collective intelligence
ephemera posturing as disclosure on sensitive national security secrets. Yet
they do have ulterior intelligence motives.
A revisiting of my Stakeknife web site will
indicate somewhat the where and how of these false flags. You will read The
Guardian published an article by the MI5 at a remove “whistleblower” Martin
Ingram/Ian Hurst, chief architect of the Stakeknife myth. The newspaper may
have done so in good faith, accepting the bona fides of the author.
And likewise with the Snowden disclosures.
The difference between the Stakeknife and
Snowden stories is primarily scale. You all know how big the Snowden explosion
was (is?).
Please read “Stakeknife – An Update” and ask
your self what does Private Eye magazine know that the Intelligence and
Security Committee do not know?
Indeed, why not have a chat with Private Eye?
Judge Peter Smithwick went down roads where
others had not gone before to arrive at his conclusions, this in spite of
difficulties created by the respective national security agencies, who, I am
confident, consciously witheld swathes of intelligence understanding from his
Tribunal.
Let the moral clarity and example of Judge
Smithwick be your guiding light.
Finally, I ask – please do not forsake
Nivruti.
Thank you.
(Yours sincerely)
The Rt. Hon. Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP.
Chairman Intelligence & Security
Committee,
Members Intelligence & Security Committee,
(The Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears MP; The Rt. Hon.
Lord Butler of Brockwell KG GCB CVO; The Rt. Hon. Sir Menzies Campbell CBE QC
MP; Mr. Mark Field MP; The Rt. Hon. Paul Goggins MP; The Rt. Hon. George
Howarth MP; Dr. Julian Lewis MP; Lord Lothian QC PC.)
35 Great Smith Street,
London SWIP 3BQ,
England.
(Letters to Members of Parliament will be
directed to the House of Commons)
*
(Enclosures
with letter of 31.03.14)
Stakeknife –
An Update
In November 2013 the Stakeknife web
presentation was submitted to the Paul Foot Award competition, online section,
for “investigative or campaigning journalism.” An award annually sponsored by
Private Eye magazine and The Guardian newspaper in memory of Paul Foot, a
journalist who died in 2004.
It was “An investigative and analytical search
for truth behind the ‘agent Stakeknife’ story.”
The initiative was an attempt to push the
story into the open. What consideration it was given - if any - is best known
to the above sponsors.
Even if it had merited inclusion in the “short
list”, I am confident the government offices concerned with these matters would
have imposed a gagging order, thus preventing it from going forward to a wider audience.
For the reasons why, read the below
introductory letter which accompanied the submission.
*
[Paul
Foot Award Submission]
www.stakeknife.eu
Intelligence agencies are a law unto
themselves. It is so because they are above legal, journalistic and political
challenge. Indeed, in some part at least, their ability to be placed above
accountability is down to the pro-active or tacit support of the aforesaid
practitioners.
For ordinary citizens grievously abused by an
agency of national intelligence, there is no avenue of redress.
Not in theory. Not in reality.
For fully 30 years I have been engaged in a
fight for justice, yet you will not know my name or have heard of my case. For
the why, read above [website].
When the Stakeknife story began its public
life, I was confident it was a bogus presentation. For all that, one with an
ulterior intelligence motive.
I set out to prove the non-existence of the
alleged agent and determine the purpose behind the creation.
In this regard, submissions were made to the
following: 1) Mrs. Nuala O’Loan, Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. 2) Lord
Saville of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. 3) His Honour Judge Peter Smithwick of
the Smithwick Tribunal.
From these submissions were developed the
component parts of the Stakeknife – A
Search for Truth story. It grew into a 17 section compilation.
In June 2013 it was placed on the Internet.
Web address as above.
*
In February 2014 a shortlist of six was announced
by the Paul Foot Award judges. “The first prize of £5,000 will be presented at
a ceremony in London on Tuesday 25 February, with each of the [five] runners-up
receiving £1,000.” So went the prelude to the big day.
On Wednesday 26 and Thursday 27 February I
bought The Guardian, expecting to see the results. I saw nothing. Did a report
slip by unseen?
A Guardian online page was
more helpful. In standard print I learned “The Snowden Files: How GCHQ Watches
Your Every Move” (received) “the £2,000 special investigation award”.
Smaller print informed the
first prize went to David Cohen of the Evening Standard for his “Frontline
London” work investigating criminal gangs.
So the David Cohen real life minnow swallowed
a faux whale, the Guardian’s Snowden Files. However, instead of getting the
standard £1,000 runners-up prize, the seven Guardian writers had a “£2,000
special investigation award” to share between them.
Was this a face saving gesture for a hand-out
with more bounce to it than a wallaby on walk-about?
*
|
The
Irish Times Snowden Article as highlighted in 31.03.14 letter to ISC. |
END
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
(6)
Letter of Tuesday 22.04.14 to
Intelligence & Security Committee
(Dear Sir Malcolm Rifkind)
On Tuesday 8 April there was an on-the-ground
activity relevant to my person by the Irish national intelligence agency, which
embodied the usual characteristic of plausible denial. I assume it was
consequent of my letter of 31 March 2014 to the Intelligence and Security
Committee.
Did something else intervene say two days on
with the causal effect of back pedalling on the first initiative? An adjustment
by MI5’s Crime and Security counterparts in Dublin following from a development
in the extended household?
The Tuesday part had to do with a senior
journalist from a flagship media outlet who was put across my path. The person
will have been acting at the behest of national security interests, the same
people, Irish, US or UK, who consider it part of their remit to allow babies to
be murdered and not be held accountable.
The “across my path” juxtaposition is an
intelligence agency staple with many permutations. One spoke in the large wheel
of plausible denial. As previously described – “a bespoke hoodie for cowards”.
This well known journalist – “he’s a very nice
person” – was put across my path in what is ostensibly a chance encounter. An
artificially created position which invites the target to make an opportunistic
approach.
“Hello, can I have a minute with you, please?”
A friendly man, he would listen to your tale, take your details and maybe
offer, “Leave it with me and I will see if anything can be done”.
In one innocent move control of the deck of
cards, little though it ever was to the aggrieved party, is transferred to the
other side.
The helping hand turns out to be a “sink” job
on behalf of state intelligence, having the effect of further isolating the
target and leaving in its wake a morale sapping sense of deflation and anger.
Media facilitation is only given to spurious
intelligence whistleblowers. Genuine state sensitive national security secrets
on grievous wrongdoing have no takers.
Insult to the target is further compounded by
the back-footing effect that he was the architect of the initiative, which,
while superficially correct, is not factually so.
The first initiative was theirs, they created
the coincidental overlap, the “across my path” encounter – but that is hidden
and protected by plausible denial.
A modus operandi that is as stomach churning
in its hypocrisy as it is unending and rigid in application. Adults acting out
childish games with deadly potential.
The journalist would likely have facilitated
the stamping of a lie on the record. That or “dismissal by ridicule”; another
trick from the repertoire of secret state.
If I labour on this point, it is because it
has purpose. Consider the frustration of fighting an unseen enemy, one who
lives out the notion of non-existence, and doing this for over thirty years
against an array of countries.
It is an unequal contest. One side advantaged
at every turn, the other thwarted.
Every direction within the system, national
and fraternal, is designed to preserve this extraordinary privilege and
preclude challenge. It is so because all within the system accord deferentially
to it.
I have no blood on my hands but by silence and
acquiescence those who shape our structures do. As I count out my daily
prayers, so I count out my blessings. At least I am alive. Others are not.
Sacrificed by a complicit silence.
The above related “across my path” encounter
with the journalist is a well walked route with a greater history, in my
experience, of being worked by politicians.
The intent is to direct the complaint through
the politician to the Minister for Justice, who will on behalf of an agency
subordinate to his or her office, and by deduction its fraternal counterparts
outside Ireland, rubber stamp a lie on record.
This becomes a hook to hang all future
representations, beyond which there is no passage.
Though a lie it brooks no challenge. It is
brutal and unjust – a licence for future criminal acts by the same agencies,
operating nationally or fraternally, on which the peoples’ representatives
remain silent. As do journalists and lawyers who effect “liberal” and/or “human
rights” pretensions in the public mind.
By Thursday 10 April the Irish were back
pedalling on their 8 April initiative. Had new insight come to the triumvirate
to mitigate against the first course of action?
What I am saying is something that will be
known to ISC members, intelligence agencies of Ireland-UK-USA cooperate on
common security issues to a degree of near seamlessness.
However, it may come as a surprise for some to
learn that the CIA in Langley and the FSB in Moscow likewise operate and
cooperate in close partnership.
Yes, they will, given the chance, steal
secrets from one another, as do fraternal agencies from counterparts, but in
large part they work in harmonious concert.
Example the recent Sochi Winter Olympics.
Do you remember when Edward Snowden was in
Hong Kong and there was talk of him going to a South American country?
Scriptwriting.
He could have gone to a choice of many
countries before embarking on his trip to Hong Kong, he didn’t because of the
potential for danger as his mentors would have perceived it had he gone in
particular to one of the South American prospects and his ephemera was decoded
for what it is, a cover up by the disclosed of that not disclosed, the real
buried by the false. An old trick of the trade.
He had to go to a country with a disciplined
security system with whom the US had worked in partnership and on whom they could
depend to act out their part.
Talk of Snowden having aspiration to secure
political asylum in Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, or elsewhere, was for effect.
Look at where he could have gone, look at
where he didn’t go, look at where he did go.
A bird quiz question. Name the first cuckoo to
nearly fly into Venezuela?
Snowden’s going to Hong Kong was part of a
pre-mapped journey to Russia. I’m saying it was a mutually agreed position
between the relevant agencies involved.
If indubitably the Chinese were aware of the
course of action, if not its purpose, the real partners in this covert
collaboration were the CIA and the FSB.
Lest you consider my use of the word
“partners” in this context to be over strong, the word is not my own. I
borrowed it from President Vladimir Putin of Russia.
Despite the close security cooperation between
Russia and the United States for the Sochi Winter Olympics, I am confident that
President Putin didn’t do the Snowden job “for our American partners” as a
freebie. Granting temporary political asylum to Snowden was a win-win situation
for Russia. It cranked up Putin’s human rights standing and put President
Obama’s in that regard in a correspondingly poor light.
A perception that was reinforced by Snowden’s
praise for Russia. The old “Punch and Judy” routine played out to a global
audience.
In June 2013 Stakeknife was put on the Internet. In Section 8 there is a short
sub-piece entitled The Dead Dog Sings.
For an overview of the Edward Snowden whistleblower swiz, I ask that you would
read it.
Should you wish to go further, please read the
full Stakeknife web site and State Murder 1 – a separate web site, in
particular that dealing with raising extradition warrants for the arrest of
Evelyn Glenholmes.
In these documents and the unmentioned flight
of Patrick Ryan from Brussels to Dublin in a military aircraft, you will find
many component parts of the Snowden story. Bits are also found in other false
representations of democratic freedoms.
I pose a serious question: what quid pro quo
did Russia demand and get for
hosting Snowden? A prize for the first ISC member with the correct answer!
*
After Private Eye magazine booted the
Guardian’s Snowden Files into touch, the Pulitzer Prize egg-heads picked them
up and dusted them down by lending their imprimatur to the Washington Post and
The Guardian for publishing same.
Was it a star spangled banner dig out?
Media awards for secret state generated
controversies is as old as the practice itself. Stakeknife is one example. You
will know from the eponymous web site that the Stakeknife story is a lie. Do
your maths on other “whistleblowers” and you can add to the list.
So, who do you accept? The cynical worldliness
of Private Eye magazine or the solemnity of the Pulitzer Prize committee?
Those who know or those who don’t care to know
– and who easily elevate leftie
disclosure as gospel because it is written in certain scholarly newspapers?
Never going behind the veil to ask the real questions like who gave it and why.
*
In mine of the 31st ultimo I
brought to your attention IRA actions on the continent which though compromised
were allowed to proceed for operational intelligence reasons, that is – in the
defence and promotion of informers. Deaths ensued.
Cited were the murders of Royal Air Force
corporal Mick Islania and his six month old daughter Nivruti.
I add to the list. When the ISC are next
addressed by a senior member of the Security Service, please put this direct
question to him or her:
Who murdered Heidi Hazell?
Heidi, the German wife of a British army
sergeant was shot dead near Dortmund, Germany on 7 September 1989 in what I
call an RIA operation.
*
I make the point that my letters to members of
the ISC have so far failed to elicit a return and the contents of those letters
is soon enough known to the respective security services.
*
As one long at the receiving end of secret
state attempts at administering “justice”, I enlighten you.
Bereft of formal avenues of redress the task
of correction is left to the
wrongdoers. It demands one to pretend that those who manipulated, lied and
threatened, didn’t manipulate, lie or threaten. Additionally it requires –
albeit unspoken – from the target an acceptance that the security services who
tried to kill, didn’t try to kill. Indeed, one is obliged to pretend that they
do not exist and by corollary all that happened didn’t happen.
Accordingly, whatever beneficence comes one’s
way it is by fortuitous happening [and not a pay-off for, or admission of,
wrongdoing].
Multifarious formulas to realise control and
acquiescence, silence by another word – when all else has failed!
An attempt to dole out “justice” by piecemeal
manipulation, given to those who conform – the innocent bound by the norms of
the guilty, a guilty who in life and death assume the prerogatives of God.
How can a Christian accept this and still do
his duty to God?
I can tell you in words you will not
understand, those who are with God have for over thirty years witheld or
blinded me to the immediacy of every attempt at manipulated closure.
Don’t take my word for it, ask MI5 who will be
aware if not understanding of this on their own behalf and through fraternal exchange.
Prisoners held by the rules of their own dirty game.
How can ISC members remain silent when you
have a voice that can be heard?
Finally, when you sink your next glass of
claret or whatever, think of the maimed and the murdered unknowingly sacrificed.
Cheers!
(Yours sincerely)
The Rt. Hon. Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP.
Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee,
Members Intelligence and Security Committee,
(The Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears MP; The Rt. Hon.
Lord Butler of Brockwell KG GCB CVO; The Rt. Hon. Sir Menzies Campbell CBE QC
MP; Mr. Mark Field MP; The Rt. Hon. Paul Goggins MP; The Rt. Hon. George
Howarth MP; Dr. Julian Lewis MP; Lord Lothian QC PC.)
35 Great Smith Street,
London SWIP 3BQ,
England.
(Letters to Members of Parliament will be directed
to the House of Commons)
[Section 18 placed on the Internet Tuesday 13 May 2014]
END
*
Should you wish to read more investigative
material on security matters, these deriving in large part from personal
encounters with intelligence agencies, the non Stakeknife web addresses below
may be of interest.
www.statemurder.eu
(mirrored
at)
www.seankellydublin.eu
Twitter: @seankellyis
*****
*
2015 Update (Correspondence)
In January 2015 – in a brief search of the Internet
I came across a name hitherto unknown to me, that of Andrew Tyrie, Conservative
member of parliament for Chichester in England.
As his opinion of the Intelligence and
Security Committee of Parliament (ISC) resonated with my own, I decided to write
to him.
Below are letters to Mr. Tyrie in his capacity
as chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition
(APPG on ER). In a couple of instances letters to the APPG on ER and the ISC
enjoy a shared distribution.
This is indicated in the relevant
correspondence.
*
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
Monday 12.01.15
www.stakeknife.eu
(Dear Mr. Tyrie)
Read for the first time this afternoon your
statement on the Internet – “The Intelligence and Security Committee: A
watchdog with no teeth or credibility.”
Your words are well judged and honest, bereft
of political waffle, so much so I was surprised to learn you are a Conservative
member of parliament.
But why should I be surprised? On going further
into the material I intend submitting to you, if fully read, you will learn I
was once a member of the Conservative Party.
A beneficial experience, I add.
In Section 18 of the above Stakeknife web site
are my private submissions to the ISC.
Perhaps you would be so kind as to read them;
and, indeed, go beyond and read the full Stakeknife compilation. None of my
letters to Sir Malcolm Rifkind and ISC members got a return.
A letter to Yvette Cooper MP, shadow home
secretary, has likewise failed to elicit an acknowledgement.
Additional to the above Stakeknife web
address, you will find an attached list with three other web addresses,
mirroring one web site.
[Now replaced by the two web addresses below.]
The latter web site has been on the Internet
since 2003. It relates to a fight for justice that is ongoing for more than 30
years. Yet, you will not have heard of my name or know of my case.
A reading will explain why.
You will also learn that the Security Service
facilitated my premature in-flight to the United States for what was a clear
intention to murder.
Details and corroboration are to be found in
the three mirrored web addresses.
By passing these web documents on to you, I
impose. They are lengthy, extensively researched and offer copious
corroboration in various forms.
Should you ever visit Dublin, perhaps you
would let me know so we can arrange a meeting? If you so oblige, further
sensitive understanding can be transferred.
This missive is sent to you without any desire
for parliamentary representation on my behalf. There are, however, other names
in the ISC correspondence to which you might apportion time and attention.
I am thinking of Nivruti Islania and Heidi
Hazell. A reading will explain.
I would raise no objection to a copy of this
letter going to members of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary
Rendition.
(Yours sincerely)
Mr. Andrew Tyrie MP.
Conservative Party,
Member for Chichester,
House of Commons,
London SWIA OAA,
UK.
*
WEB
ADDRESSES
(non
Stakeknife)
*
www.statemurder.eu
(mirrored
at)
www.seankellydublin.eu
Twitter: @seankellyis
*
(Letter of 21.01.15 from the All Party
Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition)
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
Tuesday 24.02.15
(Dear Ms Lam)
Thank you for your letter of the 21st
ultimo – re mine of Monday 12.01.15 to Andrew Tyrie MP, copy transferred to the
All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition.
I express my gratitude to Andrew Tyrie for
considering and effecting this transfer.
In general terms, on issues of intelligence
sensitivity, acknowledgements from non-government offices tend to be almost as
scarce as hens’ teeth.
As for executive government offices, department
of justice in Ireland and home office in the UK, for example, their assumed
duty is to lie and impose a close-down on behalf of subordinate agencies and
what they consider to be in the “national interest”; all part of the hidden
agenda in what is known as the democratic process.
In mine to Andrew Tyrie MP: “The latter web
site has been on the Internet since 2003. It relates to a fight for justice
that is ongoing for more 30 years. Yet, you will not have heard my name or know
of my case. A reading will explain why.
“You will also learn that the Security Service
facilitated my premature in-flight to the United States of America for what was
a clear intention to murder.”
Details of this claim are contained in the
above stapled three mirrored web sites, and are found in State Murder 1,
Section 2. Hyperlinks connect to corroborating documents.
They confirm my premature in-flight to Los
Angeles airport en-route to New Zealand from Heathrow airport. A flight
scheduled for 17 July 1983 was brought forward to 16 July 1983, for which there
was no ongoing same day connection. Background to this is in State Murder 1,
Section 2.
Hyperlinks connect to corroborating documents.
Lending balance to this point, I add that this
was not the first covert attempt to secure my entry into the United States. A
reading of document State Murder 1, Section 2 takes one by hyperlink to a
corroborative section entitled “West Cork and Travel.”
Item A1 within reflects on the sale of my
property in County Cork, Ireland.
You will note that the American purchaser
sought to have me accept the placing of 75% of the property purchase money in a
bank account in the United States.
For your convenience, please find attached a
copy of Item A1, dated 26 April 1983. Also attached, but not on the web site,
is further evidence of that claim, contained in a one page letter from the
legal representative of the other party, dated 2 May 1983.
A reading of web site (State Murder 1, Section
2) adds context to this intended entrapment.
Property disposal completed, I transferred to
Coventry, England. From there I set out to travel to Australia-New Zealand. The
intention was to spend months in one country before going on to the other.
I was instead persuaded to route myself in the
opposite direction, departing Heathrow for a same day connection from Los
Angeles to Auckland in New Zealand.
On arrival at Los Angeles, it was found my New
Zealand connection was not scheduled for about another 31 hours. I had been
flown in prematurely.
An airline/airport staff member, dealing with
an unseen other or others, liaised with me. Through this intermediary I was
informed I could leave the airport and spend the intervening time in Los
Angeles without a passport.
The alternative was that I remain on the
airport under armed guard.
I went for the latter suggestion. It was not
to be. Soon after, the hidden decision maker(s) decided I should be flown
onward by another carrier, Air New Zealand, arriving Auckland 18 July 1983.
A wider context and hyperlink connection to
corroborating documents is to be found in State Murder 1, Section 2.
Inside three months of arrival in New Zealand,
a United States assassination team was flown in to kill me. A design scheduled
for 16 October 1983 in Abel Tasman National Park, under the command of a senior
CIA officer.
Like the two prior attempts to secure my entry
into the United States, thanks to good souls gone to God, I would also evade
this lethal intention.
Enlargement of detail on this point, with
hyperlinks to corroborative documents, is to be found in State Murder 1,
Section 2.
Reflecting on these events, one sees in them a
presumptive and arrogant abuse of New Zealand sovereign territory by an
intelligence agency of United States of America. This apart from the grievous
wrongdoing intended.
But then, that arrogant intrusion was also
evident in Australia, Britain and Ireland. From my experience, all are links in
an execrable chain of fraternal cooperation.
I exclude New Zealand from the worst of that
judgement.
*
Following events in Abel Tasman National Park,
and making a report to the police in Wellington, I embarked on a precipitate
flight of about 14,000 miles, arriving Heathrow airport Monday 24 October 1983.
That day, I lodged an attempt to murder charge
by telephone from the ground floor to the office of Douglas Hurd MP, Minister
of State, Home Office, Queen Anne’s Gate, London.
Over the next few days, this charge was
repeated in Coventry to my solicitor, A.V.N. Richards, and to John Butcher MP,
the local Conservative member.
State Murder 1, Section 2, enlarges on and
provides by hyperlink connection corroborative support for these claims.
A reading will also inform on an apparent
raising of two sets of files by the Home Office. The first dealing with a
complaint on surveillance, one not made by me, and dealt with by Douglas Hurd
MP.
On lodging the attempt to murder charge with
John Butcher MP, I asked that it not be handled by Douglas Hurd MP, but it
should “go to the top”, to the Home Secretary, Leon Brittan MP.
It seemed it did. A reading of State Murder 1,
Section 2, expands on this theme through text and by hyperlink extension to
corroborative documents.
In presenting my experiences of years ago, I
do hope it provides a precursor format, at least in some respects, to what
would become known post 9/11 as extraordinary rendition.
Had I entered the United States on any of the
two attempts to have me do so, a cage didn’t await me. It was a hole.
Maybe the greater act of depravity was that
which will surely have been intended beforehand.
*
Since writing to Andrew Tyrie MP, my
non-Internet connected computer suffered an egregious act of abuse. One made
possible through deception.
The computer is also believed to have been
abused in a secondary incursion.
Using my ignorance of information technology,
within the pretense of lending a helping hand, the computer was accessed and an
extensive list of files copied.
My ignorance of computer science does not equate
with the human dimension, on which I have more experience. I set about to
enquire further.
The files contained personal and official
correspondence and research papers relating to security matters; the installing
of poems; the logging of many across my
path encounters, including identification of those involved.
These partly to do with state attempts to gain
control, achieve a silence and realise a cessation of bolshie demands for
justice.
Some state manipulations had to do with
sensitive aspects of my past life. This precious and intimate detail,
fraternally employed, was noted and developed, forming part of a long list of
compilations and collations, embodying opinion, analysis and, at times,
humorous observation.
The content of the files would be of value to
the respective security agencies. A knowing what I know.
A reading of specific loggings, would
enlightened as to why many of their across
my path manipulations failed, this without a conscious effort on my part to
negate them.
Computer geeks spoken to have said the device
plugged into my computer had no pertinence to the task in hand, but had a
capacity to copy (“download”) all of my computer data in minutes.
It was not the first such theft.
An Internet enthusiast brought in to give an
overview of what happened had in seconds picked up the process of fault
correction, using the computer’s in-built software, without resort to external
nexus.
That understanding was elementary and could
not but have been known to a very experienced technical operator.
In another regard, the person most concerned
with the said abuse, had in the not too distant past inquired of my wellbeing.
“How is your health?”, I was asked.
The query was unprecedented, without preamble,
and instigated for a purpose in which natural courtesy or concern had no part
to play; like the computer abuse, it will have been done at the behest of and
in the interest of national security agency.
The health enquiry, another security staple,
also comes from the plausible denial box of tricks. But why?
At the time of its posing, our national
intelligence guardians were in the throes of attempting to put a cache of high
priced treasures my way, likely to be “found“ at a flea market, a car boot sale
– or a charity shop. The list of possibilities goes on.
“’Junk’ for Justice”? A way of saying, “Take
it, sell it – and shut up!” This was not the only time such an oblique pay-off
attempt was considered. Natural disposition precluded the initiatives from
developing to fruition. Innate priorities dictate.
The whys and wherefore of this fortuitous beneficence is explained in
the last section of my letter dated 22.04.14 to the Intelligence and Security
Committee, and found in Stakeknife web site, Section 18.
Yes, I want justice, but I want it by the way
of God. A justice that is cognisant of others less fortunate than myself. I
allude to those souls wantonly sacrificed by state intelligence agencies over
the long travail we know as the Troubles.
This cohort is symbolically represented by
Nivruti Islania (6 months at death) and Heidi Hazell (26/27 years at death).
Both are mentioned in my correspondence to the
Intelligence and Security Committee (Stakeknife web site, Section 18).
*
One day after the above remarked egregious
abuse of my computer, an “across my path” encounter took place. It was by a
politician of the lousy left. Someone
who will end up with a bevy of pensions before reaching my age.
An approach to this facilitated opportunity, a
security service staple, would have led to a lie being placed on the record. It
was an unrequited expectation.
(The Irish well of state friendly lousy left names must be nearly dry by
now?)
This tactic is more broadly illustrated in my
letter of 22.04.14 to the Intelligence and Security Committee (Stakeknife web
site, Section 18).
*
Once again, my gratitude to Andrew Tyrie MP
and the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Extradition for making
it possible to place this letter and the points it raises on record.
No such opportunity is available to me in
Ireland.
I ask that a copy of the missive and
enclosures go to all members of the Group.
I also ask of APPG members, if you have spare
time and energy left after your deliberations on extraordinary rendition are
completed, you might wish through individual concern to deal with the position
of Nivruti Islania and Heidi Hazell.
As for myself, I have been an awful long time
on this road alone, I could do with a companion on the journey.
Incidentally, on the mentioned abuse of my computer,
this may have been in part driven by a remark in my letter to Andrew Tyrie MP.
I’m saying, take note, intelligence agencies
hold to a self ordained remit to know everything of potential concern to them
and through that knowing to thwart any challenge to own and fraternal
interests.
“God” is watching over you!
A copy of this letter and enclosures will be
forwarded to members of the ISC.
Thank you.
(Yours sincerely)
Ms Janice Lam.
Coordinator,
APPG on Extraordinary Rendition,
House of Commons,
London SW1A OAA,
UK.
Enc.
*
(Letter of 26.04.83 advising the sale of my
property in County Cork)
(Letter of 02.05.83 advising the sale of my
property in County Cork)
Note: Had I obliged with the suggestion of accepting
75% of the purchase money in dollars from a bank of my choice in the United
States, I was dead meat.
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
Tuesday 24.02.15
(Chairman and Members of Intelligence &
Security Committee)
Please find enclosed a copy letter of today’s
date to Ms Janice Lam, Coordinator, All Party Parliamentary Group on
Extraordinary Rendition. It contains two enclosures.
The missive, apart from referring to
submissions to the Intelligence and Security Committee, has, I believe,
relevance to your committee.
I do hope it will be given due respect and
attention.
A copy is to be despatched to all members of
the ISC.
(Yours sincerely)
The Rt. Hon. Sir Malcolm Rifkind QC MP.
Chairman Intelligence and Security Committee,
Members Intelligence and Security Committee,
(The Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears MP; The Rt. Hon.
The Lord Butler of Brockwell KG GCB CVO; The Rt. Hon. Sir Menzies Campbell CBE
QC MP; Mr. Mark Field MP; Ms Fiona Mactaggart MP; The Rt. Hon. George Howarth
MP; Dr. Julian Lewis MP; Lord Lothian QC PC.)
35 Great Smith Street,
London SWIP 3BQ,
UK.
Enc.
*
(Letter of 11.03.15 from Intelligence and
Security Committee of Parliament)
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
Tuesday 17.03.2015
(Directed to Members of the ISC)
Over say the past twenty months I wrote a
series of letters-submissions to the Intelligence and Security Committee of
Parliament (ISC), in most part to named members, without a return.
On the 24th ultimo, a copy letter
and enclosures to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition
was sent to individual members of the ISC.
Something in it must have particularly frightened
MI5, for a communication was forthcoming from the ISC Secretariat, dated
11.03.15, referring to mine of 24 February, informing, “I am replying on behalf
of the Committee.” (See attached copy.)
The push was that I should take my case to
“The Investigatory Powers Tribunal” as the ISC “does not investigate individual
complaints regarding the intelligence agencies.”
I know that. I did not ask the ISC to
investigate my position..
In mine of 22.07.13 to Sir Malcolm Rifkind,
Chairman, ISC:
“Please do not construe [my writing this
letter] as a vote of confidence in your committee to deliberate impartially on
my submission. To expect otherwise would be, I pose, to run counter to the laws
of nature. Years of lies and abuse have conditioned me to believe intelligence
agencies are a law unto themselves.
“Disabuse me if you will.
“Attached are the Internet addresses
previously forwarded to the ISC. If the Stakeknife compilation, number one on
the list, reflects on acts of egregious wrongdoing by the Security Service in
respect of other parties, the additional web addresses, mirroring one
presentation, derive in large part from my own encounters at the hands of
intelligence agencies and post event experiences.
“My claims are backed up by extensive research
and corroboration. If your committee hold to a genuine desire to ‘investigate
the actions of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ to uncover the truth’ in order to provide an
accurate overview of national intelligence agencies, it is imperative that it
should go beyond the sanitised and partial submissions that indubitably will be
made on behalf of those agencies.
“Perhaps a reading of my web sites will
provide some realism and balance in that regard?
“Let’s see if MI5 ‘only shoot the crocodiles
nearest to the boat.’”
On Tuesday 13.05.14, my submissions to the ISC
were placed on the Internet – Stakeknife web address, Section 18. A short
introduction preceded the inclusion of letters.
In that preamble it was noted:
“’The ISC’s statutory remit covers the
operations, policy, administration and finances of the intelligence and
security Agencies. The Committee does not investigate individual complaints
about the Agencies (which is the responsibility of the Investigatory Powers
Tribunal).’
“My aim is to bring to the attention of the
Committee acts of egregious wrongdoing by the Security Service and to educate
them as to the on-the-ground reality of that agency, which is within their
remit. The direction concerns the ‘operations [and] policy’ of the said agency,
in so far as my own background informs.
“The Stakeknife revelations, per se, only relate to me by my being
the author of the web site, an understanding derived from many years at the
receiving end of MI5 malpractice and added to by extensive research. Ditto
those issues represented in correspondence supplied to the ISC concerning
continental IRA operations allowed to proceed in the protection and promotion
of agents/assets, leading to deaths.
“With other matters mentioned these are surely
appropriate subjects for ISC deliberation and, ultimately, exposition and
correction.
“The Investigatory Powers Tribunal is
ill-suited, I judge, to dwell on my submission. Besides, notwithstanding the
grand sounding title, it is likely to be no more than a bureaucratic jar of
ointment for an unsuspecting fly. I hope I am by now beyond that naïve
definition.”
Going further into the web presentation, my
letter of Monday 31.03.14 goes…
“The Stakeknife web site supplied to you in
previous correspondence brought to your attention IRA operations on the
continent, which though compromised, were allowed to proceed for operational
intelligence reasons, namely in the protection and promotion of informers.
“Deaths ensued.
“One of those murdered in what I call an RIA operation was six month old Nivruti
Islania, shot with her father Maheshkumar ‘Mick’ Islania, a Royal Air Force
corporal based at Wildenrath in Germany, on 26 October 1989. Mick Islania was
also killed. Murder tolerated in order to preserve a modus operandi with close
to a universal acceptance in the intelligence community.
“A hidden remove that affords protection to
MI5/Special Branch and facilitates plausible denial. As elsewhere described, a
bespoke hoodie for cowards.
“By speaking up for Nivruti you can help break
this extraordinarily privileged and deadly silence.”
This theme was further developed in a
follow-up letter dated Tuesday 22.04.14.
“In mine of the 31st ultimo I
brought to your attention IRA actions on the continent which though compromised
were allowed to proceed for operational intelligence reasons, that is in the
protection and promotion of informers.
“Deaths ensued.
“Cited were the murders of Royal Air Force
corporal Mick Islania and his six month old daughter Nivruti.
“I add to the list. When the ISC are next
addressed by a senior member of the Security Service, please put this direct
question to him or her:
“Who
murdered Heidi Hazell?
“Heidi, the German wife of a British army
sergeant was shot dead near Dortmund, Germany on 7 September 1989 in what I
call an RIA operation.”
Who murdered Heidi Hazell? The Security
Service did. No, not directly. They pulled the strings, not the trigger – an
agent did that.
You see, I did not ask the ISC to “investigate
an individual complaint” to do with my person. I simply asked that questions be
put to the Security Service in order to “investigate the actions of MI5…[and]
uncover the truth.”
That is the function of the ISC
A clatter of safe pairs of hands dodged the
issue in order to portray clean hands where in reality there is blood on hands.
British and other blood.
*
Returning to the letter from the ISC
Secretariat. I privately observed that it was a bureaucratic device to redirect
and negate, in particular those charges contained in my letter of 24 February
2015. As elsewhere termed: “A jar of ointment for an unsuspecting fly.”
Had I been unwise enough to oblige with a
direction to The Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the collective of intelligence
agencies would have, on recovering from a convulsion of laughter, attempted to
put a “favour” across my path.
Tid-bits for an accomodating child.
A try-on fielded many times before, which
always fell short of its intended design.
However, since the recent theft, and reading,
of my computer data, they should now know, if not fully understand, the reasons
for that failure.
I allude particularly to manipulations of a
sensitive and intimate nature, across my
path encounters created by state agencies to secure control and effect a silence.
In life and death they assume the prerogatives
of God.
*
Who instructed the despatch of the ISC
Secretariat letter? Was it really the Committee?
It doesn’t indicate a named direction and it
isn’t signed.
Could it be a valedictory gesture by a member
of the Committee for the benefit of the Security Service?
MI5 calling the shots?
*
“The Investigatory Powers Tribunal is an
independent body comprising senior judges and lawyers.” Every bit as
“independent” as the ISC, I suggest.
The controlling forces that corrupt our
“democratic” system made a mistake in appointing Mrs. Nuala O’Loan as Police
Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. Within her remit, she courageously searched for
truth in matters referred to her. I aver it was at times a titanic struggle.
One that did not make her popular among
certain entrenched powers in the Northern Ireland security establishment, long
a self ordained body of shadow governance, and this excluded the obfuscators in
chief, MI5 and other intelligence agencies, who were outside her remit.
Under her stewardship the Ombudsman’s office
was honourable and diligent in its excavations. The “mistake” made in respect
of her appointment is unlikely to have been made in the loading of The
Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
The John Stalker experience without the menace
and just as efficacious at closing down external challenge?
I repose no confidence in The Investigatory
Powers Tribunal and will not make a blind leap of faith.
Intelligence agencies hold in contempt courts
of law, tribunals and investigatory bodies. Well they protect themselves, their
co-fraternals and political friends.
Many years ago, when reporting in New Zealand
an intelligence agency attempt to kill me in Abel Tasman National Park, the
decent policeman, referring to the NZ intelligence agency, said: “That lot
wouldn’t give us the time of day.”
A reading of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry and the
Smithwick Tribunal transcripts suggests an almost fawning deference, even a
siding with the protocols of intelligence agencies, by some of the involved
legal representatives. By use of protective caveats and subterfuge, deception
by another word, MI5 and its counterparts can avoid embarrassing disclosure.
Let me illustrate by use of quoted material
from the Stakeknife web site, Section 6. It concerns an IRA agent code named
Infliction and the giving of evidence on his behalf by the Security Service to
the Bloody Sunday/Saville Inquiry.
“Note 2:
“Though the Saville Inquiry gave qualified
endorsement to the proxy submissions made on behalf of Infliction, his identity
was not made public.
“The Security Service has undoubted good
reasons for keeping the identity of Infliction under wraps.
“Infliction could have attended the Inquiry
and given evidence behind screens. It was not done.
“Was this because, in one respect, the content
of his statement(s) and ensuing evidence, along with his speech, even if
electronically distorted, would have made for identification?
“These considerations aside, I do not believe
it is beyond the wit of a good security analyst in the republican movement to
divine a likely candidate for agent Infliction, especially if Martin McGuinness
was forthcoming to such an inquiry.
“However, the movement may have a vested
interest in not making Infliction’s identity known. In that they share common
ground with MI5.
“Exposing Infliction would undermine a
pantheon of lies and mythology silently advanced in a game of fractious
evolution of the republican movement from revolution to ballot box.
“Was an honest exposition an invitation for
cracks to appear in a time crafted story image, challenging for state on one
hand with potentially destabilising implications for the non-truth process on
the other?
“On Infliction, Martin McGuinness is caught
between a rock and a hard place. If he publicly admits knowing who Infliction
is, as he must if evidence given by MI5 to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry was a true
return from a debrief, which the Inquiry accepts it is, he thereby acknowledges
having fired the first shot on Sunday 30 January 1972 and having confessed this
to Infliction. If loath to concede on the latter, he must know on the former.
Not that he would retract his denial of having said what is credited to him for
fear of the backlash it would have on his personal standing and on his
political base.
“Infliction it was claimed in one formula of
words had ‘resettled outside the United Kingdom’ and ‘who was overseas’ in
another, wasn’t asked to give witness evidence to the Saville Inquiry as doing
so, it was said, could put him in danger and infringe his human rights.
“In their narrowest interpretation, the two
above quoted mentions simply say that Infliction was not living in Britain or
Northern Ireland at the time of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. If true, it does not
exclude the possibility of him living, or having lived, in the Republic of
Ireland.
“The essence of Infliction evidence to the
Bloody Sunday Inquiry ended on Friday 9 May 2003 with testimony from serving
and ex-Security Service officers, including ‘whistleblowers’ David Shayler and
his girlfriend Annie Machon. On Saturday 10 May 2003 the Stakeknife bombshell
was primed for lobbing into the public arena through facilitated press
disclosure the following day, giving impetus to an Anglo-Irish intelligence
deception by transforming it into a hyper news event. The 11 May Stakeknife
explosion was simply lift-off. Like a rolling thunder the story rumbled on,
crowding out speculation on Infliction’s identity and other issues.
“A case of the respective states doing their
duty to self interest, and note the consummate ease with which they carried it
off. What does that say about the supposed independence of our media, north and
south of the Irish border and on the ‘mainland’?
“On Monday 12 May 2003, Martin ‘whistleblower’
Ingram gave evidence to the Saville Inquiry. Ingram was the chief architect of
the Stakeknife story at a remove. His evidence to the Inquiry was, like that of
David Shayler and Annie Machon, found wanting.
“Best it should with MI5 Infliction disclosure
which preceded it, be buried under a triggered Stakeknife mudslide.
“It was.
“Returning to why Infliction did not attend
the Saville Tribunal, it was said to compel a presence would have infringed his
human rights, in that it could disclose his identity and endanger his life.
“If there is potential in that claim, there
were yet more pressing reasons for MI5 not wishing Infliction’s attendance at
the tribunal.
“Hoisting the human rights flag may have been
an expedient to deflect from them.
“Revealing the identity of Infliction directly
or inadvertently through statements and/or evidence to the Inquiry, would put a
cat among the pigeons, the ramifications of which are profound.
“His unmasking would do more than expose the
deep penetration of the republican movement, it would open a window to
countless operations made possible by default.
“I allude to those actions effectively given
the green light by intelligence agencies in acceptance of the possible
consequences, including landing, dispersal and end use of munitions from North
America and Libya.
“As it stands, the deaths, maiming and terror
resulting from the use of that weaponry, rests solely at the door of the IRA
and is not properly shared with those who for years helped in good part the
driving of that belligerence – agents and agencies of state.
“By exclusively dwelling on the human rights
of Infliction, the Bloody Sunday Inquiry negated a corresponding position on the
human rights of victims of IRA actions given a free hand for operational
intelligence reasons, including those compromised as a result of intelligence
supplied by Infliction and other well placed informers.
“Correction in these matters should come, even
if the coming is too late for many.
“One observes, as an aside, if Infliction was
as earlier noted, ‘resettled outside the United Kingdom’, outside Britain and
Northern Ireland, he would have been beyond the legal reach of the Bloody
Sunday Inquiry. That being so, the tribunal could not impose and considerations
of his ‘human rights’ would not have arisen.
“It is also possible he may have non-British
or even dual citizenship.”
A rhetorical question. How many lives wantonly
discarded in compromised IRA operations should be laid at Infliction’s door,
this through source protection and promotion? Thirty, forty, fifty? More?
How many more, I would ask.
*
The above has mention of a former British army
intelligence “whistleblower” who operated under the pseudonym Martin Ingram.
In some of the fundamentals to do with the
Stakeknife myth – made public by Ingram – he claimed involvement in specific
events in Northern Ireland at a time when, research tells us, he was based in
another country.
Corroborative documents and references
underpinning this assertion are to be found variously in the Stakeknife web
site. In short, intelligence officer Ingram messed up his dates.
Giving credit to Ingram’s version of events is
to accept a capacity to bi-locate.
But then he has MI5 on his side, so maybe he
can.
*
I am a UK pensioner aged 75 years. At time of
writing that pension is £64 per week. I receive no benefits from Ireland or
elsewhere. Survival is made possible through dipping into my savings, the
returns from years of industry and sacrifice.
I have very little formal education (failed
the Irish Primary Certificate). I have no formal qualification. What you see
comes largely from life’s experience.
My transport is an old postman’s bicycle with
a banana box at the front. Norm’ Tebbit would be
proud of me.
There are no holidays.
What I am saying is: if I can do my bit for
others who suffered the ultimate price of state wrongdoing, so can you.
You get paid for it. Besides, it is your duty,
if you know the meaning of the word.
I once more ask members of the Intelligence
and Security Committee to give consideration to those capriciously sacrificed
by the modus operandi of MI5, operating independently or fraternally.
The deaths of Nivruti Islania and Heidi Hazell
on the continent symbolically represent that cohort.
If the hour is late, please do not forsake
them. Treat them as if they were your own blood. Defy the obscene protocols
that govern these things.
(A copy of this letter will be forwarded to
the All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition.)
(Yours sincerely)
Members Intelligence and Security Committee of
Parliament.
(The Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears MP; The Rt. Hon.
The Lord Butler of Brockwell KG GCB CVO; The Rt. Hon. Sir Menzies Campbell CBE
QC MP; Mr. Mark Field MP; The Rt. Hon. George Howarth MP; Dr. Julian Lewis MP;
The Lord Lothian QC PC; Ms Fiona Mactaggart MP.)
35 Great Smith Street,
London SWIP 3BQ,
UK.
Enc.
*
(Letter of 07.04.15 from George Howarth MP on
behalf of ISC)
*****
Seán Kelly.
474 Galtymore Road,
Drimnagh,
Dublin 12,
Ireland.
Thursday 23.04.15
(Dear Mr. Howarth and Members of ISC)
Received yesterday (sic) yours of 07.04.15, in
reply to mine of 17th March.
To quote your short missive, written on behalf
of the Intelligence and Security Committee:
“Thank you for your letter of 17th
March 2015, regarding the former British Army Intelligence Officer, Martin
Ingram. * ”I was aware of the previous response to you from the former Chair of
the Committee and do not think there is anything useful I can add to the advice
you have already been given. * “Yours sincerely, George Howarth [facsimile
signature].”
My letter of 17 March was not about Martin
Ingram, even if he was a serious component in introducing the mythical British
Army agent Stakeknife in the IRA into the public arena. An MI5 deception that
had ulterior intelligence goals.
It was in the context of that deception he
entered the presentation.
My direction to the ISC was repeated in the
clearest terms in a number of letters. Allow me to extract a short quote from
mine of 17 March 2015 (final page):
“I once more ask members of the Intelligence
and Security Committee to give consideration to those capriciously sacrificed
by the modus operandi of MI5, operating independently or in fraternal concert.
“The deaths of Nivruti Islania and Heidi
Hazell on the continent symbolically represent that cohort.”
The implications of this direction are
profound and are not confined to IRA operations on the continent but extend to
the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
In mine of the 17th ultimo a query
was posed and answered: “Who
murdered Heidi Hazell?” Your letter by a reluctance to return, fears to speak
its name.
Hence in yours of 7 April, the evasion of
twice kicking the ball to touch. Firstly by reference to Martin Ingram.
Secondly, by allusion, that I should take my case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
In mine of 17 March the latter insult was
unequivocally responded to. You people evidently do not like truth or plain
speaking.
Nor do you like doing your duty to God and the
British people. In the failure to grasp this nettle you have sentenced more
people to death.
History will repeat itself.
In reading The
Times of yesterday, the day I received your letter, a report caught my
attention. It concerned a war crimes trial underway in Germany.
I introduce a paragraph from the report:
“Mr. Groning’s trial
is expected to run for three months, with testimony from Auschwitz survivors
and historical records. Prosecutors hope
to establish the principle that anyone who worked in Auschwitz bears legal
culpability for complicity to murder.” (My emphasis)
Oh that such a principle would extend to those
who, in other matters, have a voice but care not or dare not use it.
(Yours sincerely)
The Rt. Hon George Howarth and Members
Intelligence and Security Committee.
(The Rt. Hon. Hazel Blears; The Rt. Hon. The
Lord Butler of Brockwell KG GCB CVO; The Rt. Hon. Sir Menzies Campbell CBE QC;
Mr. Mark Field; Dr. Julian Lewis; The Lord Lothian QC PC; Ms Fiona Mactaggart.)
35 Great Smith Street,
London SWIP 3BQ,
UK.
Enc.
END
*
WEB
ADDRESSES
www.stakeknife.eu
*
www.statemurder.eu
(mirrored
at)
www.seankellydublin.eu
*
Twitter: @seankellyis
Do you have a Twitter, Facebook
or other social media account? If so, would you consider advertising the above
web addresses?
On Saturday 6 August 2016 I found the second
and third web addresses to be unavailable on the Internet when doing a routine
check.
I will work to have them reinstated next week.
If any of my web addresses are down in the future and you wish to view them,
write to me and a CD will be forwarded.
Please help make known these events. It is
very important for those who have been lied to and denied justice.
Thank you.
*
|
Previous:
Collateral Damage Film (Context) |
|