Politics Archives - Page 23 of 134

Posted in:

Judge Horner’s ruling creates the framework for a new Omagh inquiry.

by admin 5 November, 2021

By Deirdre Younge. On 8 October 2021, Judge Mark Horner in the High Court in Belfast gave the reasoned judgment behind his decision of 21 July that there should be a new Human Rights compliant investigation into the catastrophic bombing of Omagh on 15 August 1998. He suggested that preferably there should also be one conducted simultaneously in the Republic of Ireland. The judgment was on foot of a Judicial Review brought by Michael Gallagher in 2013. Gallagher was appealing the decision of the then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Theresa Villiers not to set up a public inquiry into the bombing of Omagh by dissident republicans (referred to as DRs by Judge Horner). Michael Gallagher’s son Aiden was one of the 29 people who died. Judge Horner found that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the Omagh bomb could have been prevented. The case, conducted largely in closed session, heard closed (secret) intelligence from MI5 and other agencies as well as evidence in open court. The Judicial Review was of course a civil case but one which engaged issues of (UK) National Security because of the intelligence material from M15 and other agencies which was revealed to the court. Mr Justice Horner put heavy emphasis on the intelligence given to his RUC CID handlers in 1998 of a British agent/informant ‘Kevin Fulton’ who had also been the central witness at the Smithwick Tribunal in Dublin, giving evidence in 2011. Fulton was a former FRU, Special Branch, MI5 and latterly RUC CID agent and informer ‘embedded’ with the IRA in Dundalk and Newry in the 1980s and 1990s. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is setting up a statutary inquiry into the Omagh bomb using the grounds on which Mr Justice Horner made his ruling, as the terms of reference. In an endorsement of Fulton’s highly contested intelligence leading up to the bombing the Judge said: “I am satisfied that it is arguable that the intelligence supplied by Kevin Fulton, either on its own or more importantly in conjunction with other intelligence about the activities of those who planned the Omagh bomb and other bombs had a real prospect of preventing this tragedy”. Neither Fulton nor his handlers claimed to have foreknowledge of the Omagh bomb itself but said he had warned handlers that a huge bomb was being prepared that was about to be moved north of the border days before the bomb. The former Police Ombudsman Nuala O’Loan in her 2001 report and now Judge Horner believe that the intelligence Fulton gave his RUC handlers in the months, days and weeks running up to the bombing was crucial information that should have been acted on to prevent the bombing. Fulton and his handler gave evidence about this intelligence concerning dissident republicans to O’Loan and Smithwick. The October /November print issue of Village magazine contains an extensive analysis of the evidence of Fulton and his handler leading up to the Omagh bombing and its aftermath, and explains the significance of this intelligence in detail. Reliable sources maintain that Keeley was not in fact a detached observer of events leading up to Omagh, as he maintains, but was deeply involved himself. In his evidence to Smithwick in December 2011 Fulton describes the operation of the timer unit of a bomb. In Queen v Hoey (2006) Mr Justice Weir describes how such a safety mechanism was added to timer units in the run up to the Omagh Bomb. Of the ten arguments put forward by the applicants Mr Justice Horner accepted the following – Ground 2: Information passed to police between June and August 1998 by a former British security agent known by the name of Kevin Fulton relating to DR* activity. Ground 6: Surveillance operations relating to events surrounding the Omagh bomb that were reported on in a BBC Panorama; in particular telephone and vehicle monitoring carried out by GCHQ. Ground 7/9: the tracking and pattern of telephone usage by DRs and the connection arising between different bomb attacks, including the same mobile telephone being used in the Omagh bomb and the bomb in Banbridge on 1 August 1998. Detective Chief Superintendent Norman Baxters evidence to the NIAC, [Northern Ireland Affairs Committee HOC] to the effect that investigators into previous attacks in 1998 did not have access to intelligence which may have enabled them to disrupt the DR gang by way of arrest or house searches prior to the Omagh bomb. There were a number of arguments put forward by the applicants which the Judge did not accept as grounds for a new inquiry: Ground 3: Information provided by David Rupert Ground 4: Information sent to the RUC by AGS on 13 August 1998 relating to the particulars of the red Vauxhall Cavalier that was used in the Omagh bomb. Ground 5: Information shared by AGS with the RUC relating to intelligence obtained by Detective Sergeant John White from the agent known by the name of “Paddy Dixon” [in] relation to DR activity. Judge Horner concluded: “I am satisfied that grounds 2, 6, 7 and 9 when considered together give rise to plausible arguments that there was a real prospect of preventing the Omagh bombing. Judge Horner’s judgment is a vindication for Kevin Fulton over Omagh but like all informants and agents operating in the stygian underworld there is a dark side to Fulton which Village Magazine has also explored at length. (Like many British agents Fulton has a dark side: see Investigation: Killusion and How Drew Harris diverted the Smithwick Tribunal. The High Court judgment was in the context of Mr Gallagher’s civil proceedings. Many victims or their families are taking civil actions against the State, not just to achieve some form of redress, but to gain an understanding of events through the discovery process. Since 2013 such proceedings are often conducted partly or wholly as ‘Closed Material Proceedings’ ( CMPs) for reasons of ‘National Security’ and to comply with human rights legislation to protect

Posted in:

Learning to Kill, an exclusive extract from the new book on General Sir Frank Kitson, mastermind of the Dirty War in Ireland.

by admin 30 October, 2021

Kitson’s first overseas assignment was to Germany in 1946 with the rank of second lieutenant. He remained there for seven years. He found plenty of sport to occupy his spare time such as racing horses in Rhine Army competitions, trout fishing and ‘many wonderful opportunities for shooting … and by shooting I don’t mean plugging holes in targets’, he wrote.’ Playing bridge and attending the opera also helped to pass the time. By 13 September 1949, he had found his vocation and was appointed as an intelligence officer at the HQ of the Armoured Brigade in Germany. Half a world away, in October 1952, the Kenya Land and Freedom Army (KLFA) launched a rebellion against the white European colonist-settlers in their homeland. The British army and the local Kenya Regiment resisted them. The latter included British colonists, local auxiliary militia and some pro-British Kenyans. Later, MI5 was deployed to help suppress the rebellion. The KLFA, also known as the Mau-Mau, consisted of rebel tribesmen from the Kikuyu, Meru, Embu and other Kenyan communities. In July 1953, Kitson was transferred to Kenya ‘to do a job connected with Intelligence’. After seven years, he was glad to be leaving Germany. He was twenty-six. The Mau-Mau rebellion was inspired by a desire on the part of the Kikuyu and other Kenyans to reclaim by armed insurrection land taken from them by the British. Kitson, however, seemed to think that opposition to Britain was inspired in large part through the intercession of witchcraft. He had a rose-tinted view of Britain’s presence in the country: During the half century in which the British had ruled Kenya they had dispelled the fears which had formerly come from raiders, slavers and disease, but the fear of magic was still a powerful force. As I sat at home reading about the witch-doctors and their ways, I too felt that fear, flickering faintly across the four thousand miles which separated me from the Kikuyu. He did not see the Kikuyu as civilised people. Instead, he described how they: relied mainly on magic and therein lay the greatest of all the horrors which beset them. Most witch-doctors were not malign in the sense of wishing harm to their clients. On the contrary, they doubtless did their best. On the other hand they sat in the middle of a web of superstition which bound the whole tribe in thrall to an unseen world of spirits, omens, curses and blood. At this time in his life, Kitson kept a Bible by his bedside. A clue as to the type of Christian he was can be gauged by the fact that on his first Sunday in Nairobi he attended a service in the local Anglican cathedral and wrote later: ‘I sat next to an African woman who had bad halitosis and I was surprised to find that there was no segregation of races into separate parts of the building’. The British campaign against the Mau-Mau was merciless. In 1953, Gen. George Erskine, commander-in-chief of British armed forces in Kenya reported to the secretary of state for war, Anthony Head, that in the early days there had been a ‘great deal of indiscriminate shooting by the Army and Police’ and he was ‘quite certain’ that prisoners had been: beaten to extract information. It is a short step from beating to torture, and I am now sure, although it has taken me some time to realise it, that torture was a feature of many police posts. The method of deployment of the Army in the early days in small detachments working closely with the police … had evil results. … I very much hope it will not be necessary for [Her Majesty’s government] to send out any independent enquiry. If they did so they would have to investigate everything from the beginning of the Emergency and I think the revelation would be shattering. What were these ‘evil results’, the revelation of which would have been ‘shattering’? In Cruel Britannia, A Secret History of Torture, Ian Cobain summarises some of the atrocities in Kenya: Men were whipped, clubbed, subjected to electric shocks, mauled by dogs and chained to vehicles before being dragged around. Some were castrated. The same instruments used to crush testicles were used to remove fingers. It was far from uncommon for men to be beaten to death. Women were sexually violated with bottles, rodents and hot eggs. This all took place against a background of curfews, internment and capital punishment. Over 1,200 Kenyans died dangling at the end of a noose. One of the torture victims was Hussein Onyango Obama who had served with the British army during the Second World War in Burma. When released after six months in detention, he was emaciated, suffering from a lice infestation of his hair and had difficulty walking. He died in 1979. His wife informed journalists that he had told her that the British had ‘sometimes squeezed [his] testicles with parallel metallic rods’. They had also ‘pierced his nails and buttocks with a sharp pin, with his hands and legs tied together with his face facing down’. Hussein Onyango Obama was the grandfather of Barak Obama. One British officer quoted by David Anderson in ‘Histories of the Hanged’ revealed just how brutal the campaign became. He described how a police officer was interviewing three suspects: … one of them, a tall coal-black bastard, kept grinning at me, real insolent. I slapped him hard, but he kept on grinning at me, so I kicked him in the balls as hard as I could … when he finally got up on his feet he grinned at me again and I snapped. I really did. I stuck my revolver right in his grinning mouth … and I pulled the trigger. His brains went all over the side of the police station. The other two [suspects] were standing there looking blank … so I shot them both … when the sub-inspector drove up, I told him the [suspects]

Posted in:

The D-G of MI5 who ordered the murder of Patrick Finucane has died.

by admin 21 October, 2021

By Joseph de Burca 1. Getting away with murder. Sir Patrick Walker was in charge of MI5 when the Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane was assassinated by MI5 agents. Those agents were handled by the RUC Special Branch on behalf of MI5. They included Tommy Lyttle, Brian Nelson, William Stobie and Ken Barret. The assassination, which was bloody and brutal, was carried out in front of Finucane’s wife and young family. The assassination, which was bloody and brutal, was carried out in front of Finucane’s wife and young family. The Canadian judge who investigated the matter, Peter Cory, told the widow of Patrick Finucane that he had seen documents which emanated from ‘Cabinet’ level about the killing. The most reasonable interpretation of this is that Walker was ordered, or had the sanction of Margaret Thatcher and some of those around her in Whitehall, to murder Finucane. The British State has resisted an inquiry into the Finucane assassination for decades. It has flouted agreements and court orders in so doing. When David Cameron was in 10 Downing Street, he told the Finucane family that he could not order a public inquiry into the scandal. When Finucane’s brother Martin asked him why, he turned to Mrs. Finucane and said: “Look, the last administration couldn’t deliver an inquiry in your husband’s case and neither can we”. According to Cameron this was because “there are people all around this place, [10 Downing Street], who won’t let it happen”. As he was saying this, he raised a finger and made a circular motion in the air. Theresa May, who was Cameron’s Home Secretary between 2010 and 2016, did not order a proper inquiry either whem she became prime minister. Walker’s death will please those in Whitehall who are pulling the strings in the background in resistance to the establishment of a full judicial inquiry into the murder. They are engaged in a tactic of ‘running down the clock’. There are very few people alive now who were directly involved in the plot against Finucane. Village magazine accused Walker of the murder years ago. He was named in one story which has been read more than 22,000 times. He did not sue. He did even seek a right of reply. His silence now condemns him. A full account of the Finucane assassination can be found here, especially at Part 4: Thatcher’s Murder Machine, the British State assassination of Patrick Finucane. By Joseph de Burca. 2. Northern Ireland, counter-terrorism and ‘Death on the Rock’. Walker garnered considerable experience in NI on his way up MI5’s blood soaked greasy pole. He served as assistant to David Ransen, the head of MI5 in NI during the late 1970s. He rose to become the head of MI5’s counter-terrorism division (F Branch), 1984-86. He became Deputy D-G in 1986. He was a bully given to flashes of temper when things went wrong. He was the D-G who oversaw the killing of three members of an IRA active service unit (ASU) in Gibraltar in 1988. That unit was planning the slaughter of a harmless ceremonial band and guard. Suffice it to say, many non-military bystanders and tourists would have been wiped out too. How the IRA planned to equate such a massacre with a ‘just war’ is anyone’s guess. The elimination of the ASU became notorious because the IRA volunteers were on a scouting mission and were unarmed. The SAS men who shot them were acting in tandem with MI5. Carmen Proetta, who witnessed the SAS soldiers in action spoke to the media. Her account contra dicted that of the British government. She was then portrayed in the UK press as a prostitute. No money for guessing who briefed the hacks with that lie. She was later awarded libel damages. One female witness who saw the SAS soldiers in action spoke to the media. Her account contradicted that of the British government. She was then portrayed in the UK press as a prostitute. No money for guessing who briefed the hacks with that lie. She was later awarded libel damages. 3. Protecting paedophile rings. Walker was also in charge of MI5 during the last real heave by British MPs and journalists (such as Paul Foot) to uncover the truth about the vile Kincora Boys’ Home sex abuse scandal. MI5 and MI6 used the home as a ‘honey trap’ to collect ‘compromat’ about Loyalist terrorists and politicians. As a result of the cover-up, the wider paedophile ring of which Kincora was a part survived intact. Kincora was part of the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring which overlapped with a multitude of other similar rings. An incalculable number of children were raped as a result of Walker’s contribution to the cover-up. An incalculable number of children were raped as a result of Walker’s contribution to the cover-up. Walker undoubtedly knew all about Kincora from his earlier days working in NI as assistant to David Ransen. Furthermore, the FX section of MI5 was responsible for surveillance operations which included telephone tapping, photographing and video taping of MI5 ‘compromat’ targets. At least one Kincora boy was raped by a senior DUP figure on the first floor of the Park Avenue Hotel in Belfast in 1976. He was one of many recorded by MI5 at the venue. While this event took place before Walker took over FX, he would have read all the files and may even have reviewed photographs and videos in the possession of FX as the Kincora scandal became a massive headache for MI5 during the 1980s. By then the DUP figure was in a senior political position from where he was able to assist the cover-up. This man was an associate of the terrorist, serial killer and paedophile John McKeague. 4. Sailing by the same dark compass as his mentor. Walker was placed in charge of MI5 at the behest of his predecessor, Sir Anton Duff. Duff was another of those who covered up for paedophiles and state assassins. Unfortunately, Walker sailed by the same

Posted in:

Prince Andrew has no need to sweat after publication of the Janner paedophile report.

by admin 20 October, 2021

By Joseph de Burca. Prince Andrew is hardly in a sweat after the publication of the report on Lord Greville Janner by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA). Janner was a paedophile who abused boys and girls. IICSA has confirmed what has been known for decades, namely that witness statements taken by the British police went missing instead of being sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Aside from confirming known facts, the report has added little to our knowledge of VIP sex abuse. Interested readers are invited to look at Village’s free online book which addresses VIP child sex abuse. It starts here: The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Chapters 1 – 3. Janner was one of a special group of VIP paedophiles which was protected by Whitehall’s darkest forces including MI5. Other beneficiaries included Margaret Thatcher’s private Secretary Sir Peter Morrison MP, Sir Cyril Smith MP and Sir Peter Hayman, the Deputy Chief of MI6. Significantly, during its investigation into Janner, IICSA received the evidence of a former ‘rent boy’ from Belfast called Alan Kerr. Kerr’s life story was published by Village over two parts in 2018. (This was before he engaged with IICSA.) As a child, Kerr was let down badly by the NI welfare system and became an underage prostitute. He ended up in London where he still lives. By the age of 18, Kerr had fallen into Janner’s clutches. Janner once brought him to a performance of ‘The Prince and the Pauper’ where the pair met Prince Andrew. Prior to the event, Kerr was vetted by Scotland Yard/ MI5. The reason for the vetting was because Kerr was being put on the Royal’s guest list. The reason for the vetting was because Kerr was being put on the Royal’s guest list. The security officials approved his attendance. This happened despite the fact Kerr had convictions for sex related offences and was the brother of Richard Kerr, the boy who had blown the whistle on the Kincora Boys’ Home scandal in Belfast a few years earlier. MI5 was deeply involved in the Kincora scandal. Whatever about Kincora, Janner knew that Alan Kerr was a male prostitute who was known to the police. In other words, Janner was prepared to let Scotland Yard and MI5 know that he wanted to bring a practicing rent boy to the event. Clearly, Janner knew he had nothing to hide from MI5. During the performance, Janner let Kerr and Prince Andrew talk to each other without interruption. The pair were seated directly behind Prince Andrew during the performance. Why did Prince Andrew seat Janner directly behind him? Prince Andrew is currently facing a civil legal action brought by Virginia Roberts (Giufree). She accuses him of having raped her. She was procured for the Royal by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. It is beginning to look increasingly like Lord Janner was acting in a similar capacity for the Prince. Why did Janner think the Royal might be interested in meeting and talking to a teenage rent boy? While the Prince was friendly and told Alan Kerr that he would be visiting Belfast later that year, he never made any arrangement to meet him again. Did MI5 warn the Royal subsequently that Alan Kerr was the younger brother of the boy who had blown the whistle on the Kincora scandal a few years earlier? None of this – nor anything remotely connected to it – is addressed by the IICSA report. It is doubtful that the IICSA sought or was given MI5’s file on Alan Kerr or Prince Andrew. Alan Kerr is not named in the IICSA Report. IICSA failed to investigate child sex abuse perpetrated by VIPs such as Enoch Powell MP, Jim Molyneaux MP and Knox Cunningham (all of whom were members of the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring) despite the fact IICSA was set up to probe sex abuse by VIPs. There is nothing in the IICSA report on Janner which even hints that it sought Prince Andrew’s guest list for the performance of ‘The Prince and the Pauper’ which Kerr attended as one of the listed guests. There is nothing in the IICSA report on Janner which even hints that it sought Prince Andrew’s guest list for the performance of ‘The Prince and the Pauper’ which Kerr attended as one of the listed guests Prince Andrew was not asked to provide evidence by the IICSA. Prince Andrew was not asked to provide evidence by the IICSA. Fr. Dougal McGuire would probably have done a better job at finding the truth about VIP abuse than the IICSA. Last week the Metropolitan police confirmed that it will not be investigating Prince Andrew for the abuse of Virginia Roberts. The sad and depressing reality is that MI5 has monitored the sexual excesses of members of the Royal Family, politicians and other persons of influence for decades. Lord Mountbatten was another member of the Royal Family who abused children, including boys from Kincora. Kincora was run by both MI5 and MI6. The boys Mountbatten abused were driven to him at his holiday castle in the Republic of Ireland by Joseph Mains, an MI5/6 agent who worked as the ‘warden’ at the home. MI6 has admitted a connection to the Kincora scandal. During the Hart Inquiry, MI6 revealed that its former Chief, Sir Maurice Oldfield, had a ‘relationship’ with Mains. Hart included this admission in his 2017 HIA report. The British media has ignored this fact. Put simply, MI5 and MI6 are untouchable as they are the repositories of a mountain of vile ‘compromat’ about British and Northern Irish VIPs. A glimpse of the power they exert was exposed by former British PM David Cameron. He told the family of Patrick Finucane, the solicitor who was murdered by MI5 agents in the UDA in 1989, that he could not order an inquiry into the assassination because people around him in Whitehall would not let it happen. Meanwhile, the British government continues to deny access

Posted in:

THE LEGACY OF THE CONFLICT: UPDATE ON THE MODEST PROPOSALS

by admin 18 October, 2021

Christopher Stanley, Litigation Consultant, KRW LAW LLP, Belfast.[i] THE LEGACY OF THE CONFLICT: UPDATE ON THE MODEST PROPOSALS Christopher Stanley, Litigation Consultant, KRW LAW LLP, Belfast.[i] Earlier this year Village published my comment THE LEGACY OF THE CONFLICT: MR LEWIS’S MODEST PROPOSAL – Village Magazine. This comment concerned the following: “On 14 July 2021 Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Right Honourable Brandon Lewis MP (a lawyer by trade), made a statement in the House of Commons and his office published a Modest Proposal: ‘Addressing the Legacy of Northern Ireland’s Past’ (CP498). It is fair to say that Mr Lewis’s Modest Proposal created a backlash within the community after its publication.” As the UK’s Parliament is now in session it is appropriate to update readers of Village on the progress of Mr Lewis’s Modest Proposals. Those Modest Proposals: The Draftsman Cometh As of today (26 October 2021) the British government has yet to publish its proposed legislation to “Address the Legacy of Northern Ireland’s Past”. There is still no prospect that there will be a public consultation before the introduction of legislation as it was introduced as a White Paper which means the government is not obliged to consult on the contents as opposed to a Green Paper. Mr Lewis made this point clear in his most recent oral evidence session to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (NIAC) on 27 October 2021: “Let us be clear: this was not a formal consultation in that sense. This was a Command Paper.” https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/2917/pdf/ (last accessed 2 November 2021) In the UK there has been cross-party condemnation of the approach of the British government on this issue. There has also been condemnation from politicians in Ireland and USA and from international organisations including the European Human Rights Commissioner and the United Nations Special Rapporteurs. For example: The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights has warned that the proposals are “indistinguishable from a blanket unconditional amnesty for those not yet convicted” and “would undermine human rights protections and cut off avenues to justice for victims and their families”. The relevant UN special rapporteurs have also expressed their concern regarding the proposals, which in their view would place the United Kingdom “in flagrant violation” of its international obligations. The Ad Hoc Committee to Protect the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) of the United States Senate wrote to the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on 8 September 2021: “We find this proposal to be at odds with both the spirit and architecture of the Good Friday Agreement. It would abrogate the hard-won compromise regarding legacy issues in the NDNA and appears to us to represent a significant breach of several international human rights agreements to which the UK is a party. Equally important, the cross-community opposition to the current proposal in Northern Ireland should be enough to signal that this points not to reconciliation, but instead to continuing division there. Painful as it is, enduring reconciliation is dependent on accountability and transparency with respect to all participants in Troubles-related violence. There is no shortcut, and the GFA does not countenance one. It is tragic that so many years have been wasted with obfuscation and legal wrangling, but that does not justify abandoning the commitments made by the UK government to see the process through. While the GFA does not impose specific obligations with respect to legacy, it does mandate that both state parties observe and implement the European Convention on Human Rights. Toward this end, both governments are required to incorporate the European Convention into domestic law. The UK in particular must provide for “direct access to the courts, and remedies for breach of the Convention.” The UK addressed these duties domestically with the Human Rights Act of 1998. As a matter of international law, the UK has a double obligation to adhere to the European Convention, first as a party to that treaty, and second, through the GFA. Central to those protections under the European Convention is the right to life, set out in Article 2.” Ad-Hoc-Comm-letter-to-PM-on-Amnesty-Proposal-090821.pdf (caj.org.uk) (last accessed 20 October 2021) Dear Strasbourg: Keep off our Grass On 18 October 2021 the Secretary of State wrote to Clare Ovey of Department for the Execution of Judgments of the ECHR regarding the forthcoming review of the McKerr group of judgments by the Secretariat of Ministers of the Council of Europe. In his initial response he states: “The UK Government is committed to dealing with legacy issues in a way that supports information recovery and reconciliation, complies with international human rights obligations, and responds to the needs of individual victims and survivors, as well as society as a whole.” These Modest Proposals are clear evidence that this is not the commitment of the British government. The Modest Proposals offend and breach international human rights obligations and do not respond to the needs of relatives of victims and survivors. “The UKG proposals follow on from the principles set out in the Stormont House Agreement, while attempting to address the implementation problems within that agreement.” They do not follow the principles in the Stormont House Agreement 2014 (SHA 2014) “We think the best way to help Northern Ireland move towards reconciliation is through information recovery rather than an adversarial court process. It is therefore proposed that a statute of limitations would apply equally to all Troubles-related incidents.” “A meeting of the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference (BIIGC) took place at Dublin Castle on 24 June 2021 . At this meeting the UK and Irish Governments agreed there was a need for a ‘process of intensive engagement’ with the Northern Ireland parties and others on legacy issues. This would build on previous discussions, take account of the views of all participants and include consideration of new proposals which the UK Government intended to bring forward.” MPs have confirmed to relatives of victims and survivors of the Conflict that NO ‘process of intensive engagement’ has occurred since 24 June 2021. As previously noted there

Posted in:

Colin Wallace, the former British Army Psychological Operations officer, writes about Bloody Sunday in light of David Burke’s new book, Kitson’s Irish War, Mastermind of the Dirty War in Ireland.

by admin 16 October, 2021

By Colin Wallace. 1. Memories of Brigadier Frank Kitson. David Burke’s fascinating new book on Frank Kitson includes a comprehensive analysis of what has become known around the world as ‘Bloody Sunday’. Reading it has stirred a lot of memories of the time I spent at Army HQ in Northern Ireland during the 1970s. As the new book reveals, Brigadier Kitson sometimes used me as a sounding board while we were both based at Thiepval Barracks, Lisburn. I remember him well coming to my office where he sat in a red armchair. Unlike other senior officers, he never once called me to his office, which was on the other side of the complex. Intriguingly, he never spelt out to me precisely what had triggered the questions he put to me. The book also describes how the brigadier – as he was then – was encouraged by the Ministry of Defence to sue a British newspaper, The Daily Mirror. It had erroneously claimed Brigadier Kitson had developed the five techniques which had been deployed against internees while he had served in Kenya. The ploy, as Burke describes, was designed to dampen the confidence of the media who were attacking the Army over those interrogation methods. Inevitably, with the passage of time, many of those distant memories have now morphed into a collage of blurred images, but some remain painfully in focus because of their emotional impact upon me at the time. ‘Bloody Sunday’ is one of those. Burke’s book covers a lot of ground including a lengthy section on the Bogside tragedy. He demonstrates that despite two major inquiries into the event, new information is still surfacing some 50 years after it. I believe his book makes an important contribution to the overall debate about what has become one of the most controversial and divisive episodes of that traumatic period. He demonstrates that despite two major inquiries into the event, new information is still surfacing some 50 years after it. I believe his book makes an important contribution to the overall debate about what has become one of the most controversial and divisive episodes of that traumatic period. 2. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) attempted to mislead the media about my role in Widgery. The complexity of the events surrounding ‘Bloody Sunday’ is well illustrated by the fact the initial Widgery Inquiry lasted 24 days and heard evidence from 114 witnesses. The subsequent Saville Inquiry lasted five years and heard evidence from 922 witnesses. It became the longest inquiry in British legal history! Why did the additional 800 witnesses not appear at the Widgery Inquiry when their memories of the event were more likely to be fresh and, therefore, potentially more accurate? At the time of ‘Bloody Sunday’, I was part of the Army’s Psychological Operations (Psy Ops) unit. My role was gathering and disseminating intelligence information in ways to assist the work of the Security Forces. The work was sensitive and totally deniable. In 1990, the MoD approached a number of journalists in an attempt to mislead the public about my role in Widgery Inquiry. That was a pointless attempted cover-up because my role at Widgery had little, if anything, to do with Psy Ops. However, MoD documents disclosed by the Government make it clear that, on 11 February 1972, I took over responsibility from Colonel Tugwell, the officer then in charge of Psy Ops in Northern Ireland, for what was known as ‘The Opposition Case’. Another document compiled at the end of the Widgery Inquiry by the Deputy Director of the Army Legal Services, Lt Colonel Colin Overbury, stated that I: “provided detailed background information (to the Army counsel) throughout the hearing“. The Army legal Team also included two very experienced members of the Royal Military Police Special Investigation Branch who undertook ongoing research. It is now clear that some Government witnesses lied to the Saville Inquiry by falsely claiming that the Army had stopped using Psy Ops before ‘Bloody Sunday’ took place. Why was that deception necessary and why was no action taken against those who committed perjury? That failure tends to indicate that those witnesses were doing what was required of them by those in authority. Why was that deception necessary and why was no action taken against those who committed perjury? That failure tends to indicate that those witnesses were doing what was required of them by those in authority. 3. An IRA ambush of a ‘distant cousin to the Queen’ during the Widgery tribunal was ‘quietly covered up’ One of my colleagues on the Army legal team was Major Henry Hugh-Smith of the Blues and Royals. He was the team’s secretary and brought great energy and humour to his role. He was described in Peerage News as “a distant cousin to the Queen”. All the members of Army team including the barristers stayed with the 2nd Battalion Royal Green Jackets, at Ballykelly, which is about half way between Derry and Coleraine where the Widgery Tribunal was being held. On the night before the final hearing, the Green Jackets invited Hugh and me to join one of their mobile patrols into the Bogside to see at first hand some of the locations featured in the Inquiry. The lead Land Rover in which Henry was travelling was ambushed by the IRA. An official account in Guards Magazine of what happened records that in the attack: “lasted eight minutes with some 600 rounds exchanged“. It was believed that the IRA were using a variety of weapons in the ambush, including an American M60 machine-gun. It is amazing that Army casualties were not higher. Two members of the IRA were killed in the ambush and Henry was shot in the right arm. His hand was subsequently amputated above the wrist. I went to visit him early the following morning – the final day of the Inquiry – at Altnagelvin Hospital on the outskirts of Derry. He was still very ill and heavily sedated. Two members of the IRA

Posted in:

The boot is on the other foot. Former British 'PSYOPS' officer Colin Wallace sues the MoD. His case demonstrates that lying to Parliament did not start with Boris Johnson.

by admin 2 October, 2021

By Joseph de Burca. Introduction to Village’s online pamphlet on the Colin Wallace Affair. The Tory Government of Boris Johnson is routinely accused of deceiving the House of Commons. Many British commentators behave as if this is a new low in their democratic history. Yet, there is nothing unusual about the situation. The UK’s Parliament has been misled by ministers at the behest of Britain’s intelligence services, especially MI5 for decades. MI5 is attached to the Home Office and is responsible for internal security. The deception of Parliament has been nowhere more evident than in the case of Colin Wallace, the man who tried to expose the notorious Kincora Boys’ Home child sex abuse scandal. Village readers will be familiar with the case of Wallace. In the 1970s he worked at the British Army HQNI at Thiepval Barracks, Lisburn. He had a public job but also a clandestine one. On the surface, he performed public relations duties for the army. Towards this end, he briefed journalists about an array of routine military activities. His ‘open’ superior was Peter Broderick, a very senior official of the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Broderick served as the head of the Army Press Desk. Secretly, Wallace was also reporting to Col Maurice Tugwell and later Col Geoffrey Hutton who were in charge of the Information Policy Unit (IPU) which conducted psychological operations known as ‘PsyOps’. Hutton took over from Col Tugwell in March 1973 and was in post for two years. He was in charge when Wallace left NI in February 1975. Wallace has just issued proceedings in the High Court in Belfast with the intention of prising out further documents which are in the possession of the British government which will confirm his PsyOps role in detail. In 1974-75 Ian Cameron of MI5 plotted against Wallace who wanted to expose the Kincora Boys’ Home scandal and was refusing to engage in smear campaigns directed against British politicians. During the course of his work, Wallace was ordered to leak certain documents to the journalist Robert Fisk. He was then disciplined for what he had done. At his disciplinary hearing, MI5 and others conspired to deceive the tribunal hearing his case. They alleged that he had only one role – his ordinary PR duties – and therefore should not have leaked anything sensitive to Fisk. Secretly, Cameron contacted the chair of the tribunal and told him that Wallace was in the UVF. Wallace, of course, had nothing to do with the UVF. Wallace lost his job. Worse still, in the 1980s he was framed for manslaughter on the basis of fabricated evidence by a corrupt Home Office pathologist who lied to the Court. The conviction was later overturned but not before Wallace spent six years in prison. The MoD has alleged that all of the files belonging to the IPU were destroyed in 1980. The Ministry has admitted that those responsible for the destruction of the files have never been interviewed. It is highly unlikely that the documents were actually destroyed. In the main, this article – which is intended as an online version of the old fashioned pamphlet – has been drawn together from reports which have already appeared in Village. This account has been prepared in response to the launch of Wallace’s legal action in Belfast. The materials included in the ‘pamphlet’ merely represent a portion of the evidence which shows that Wallace has been telling the truth for decades and the MoD, NIO, Home Office, Conservative Party and Whitehall have been lying. Readers should also watch the documentary ‘The Man Who Knew Too Much’ which is available on Youtube. More information about Colin Wallace can be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Wallace WALLACE AND THE PERILOUS PANTIES Wearing his IPU hat, Wallace and the members of his team were responsible for waging psychological warfare against Loyalist and Republican paramilitaries. It is important to bear in mind that psychological warfare is not solely about spreading false information, it is about the use of intelligence and factual information in such a way as to influence the behaviour of others. For example, one of Colin Wallace’s more amusing and notable successes was to deter female members and collaborators of the IRA from transporting explosives for the organisation. Wallace put a story into circulation that the static from the typical female pair of nylon knickers generated sufficient electricity to explode the bomb materials being carried. As a result, there was a great reluctance to transport explosives. There was a scientific basis at the root of the story, as can be seen from a document entitled: ‘Ammunition and Explosives Safety Standards’. At pages 85-99 it stated: Explosives. The explosives or explosive mixtures that are sensitive to static discharge (electro-static sensitivity of 0.1 joule or less) when exposed are generally primer, initiator, detonator, igniter, tracer, incendiary, and pyrotechnic mixtures. In reality, the chances of explosions being caused by static electricity were very small. Similarly, the PsyOps unit pointed out that the use of nitro benzene in home-made explosives was potentially carcinogenic. This claim is supported by the United States Environmental Protection Agency who considered nitro benzene a likely human carcinogen. See “Nitrobenzene CASRN 98-95-3 – IRIS – US EPA, ORD”. An excellent account of Wallace’s exploitation of fears about devil worship stories can be watched on the Man Who Knew Too Much documentary. THE INFORMATION RESEARCH DEPARTMENT (IRD) The Army’s IPU was not the only organisation engaged in PsyOps. The notorious Information Research Department (IRD) was too. The IRD was part of the Foreign Office and worked closely with the British Secret Service, MI6, which is also attached to the Foreign Office. The IRD operated from a building in London called Riverbank House. The IRD was a Cold War Intelligence organisation designed to counter Soviet expansion globally. Inevitably, its staff became involved in the propaganda war in Ireland. The department’s representative in NI was Hugh Mooney, a graduate from Trinity College with Irish roots who had once worked for The Irish