BAGGULEY P. wrote:
> Some list members may be interested in the followign claims about
> British intelligence services (MI5) funding bin Laden and Al-Qaeda,
> and the government's attempts to censor the story.
>
> ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
> To: leeds_antiwar@???
> From: munkle <munkle@???>
> Date sent: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 00:17:34 -1200
> Subject: [leeds_antiwar] Shaylergate
> Send reply to: leeds_antiwar@???
>
> [ Double-click this line for list subscription options ]
>
> http://www.propagandamatrix.com/shayler_gate.html
>
> On the evening of 7th October, Tony Blair ordered a D-Notice on
> British
> media reporting government officials signing court gag orders. This
> regards the case of former MI5 officer David Shayler, who has
> evidence
> to prove MI6 gave £100,000 to bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, arms to
> Iraq and
> had prior knowledge of several terrorist attacks on London in the
> 1990's. The original articles stated that top Labour MP's had signed
> gag
> orders, whereby upon mention of this evidence in court, media have
> to
> immediately leave the trial. Newspapers all over the country,
> including
> the Guardian, the London Evening Standard and the Scotsman
> either
> completely removed or amended their articles. This evidence is
> damning.
> The British government is trying to bury the story before it buries
> them.
>
> I first noticed that the Guardian article I had earlier posted on my
> website had disappeared. Already aware that Blair may well have
> ordered
> a D-Notice to eliminate these reports, I immediately started
> searching
> on Google for some more. In Britain, a D-Notice is where the
> government
> order a gag on a particular breaking story. I came across a very
> similar
> London Evening Standard report and immediately put it on my web
> site.
> Low and behold, five minutes later the link was dead! Amazingly, I
> still
> had the article up on my screen on a different browser window. I
> tried
> to archive the page to my desktop but to no avail. I did manage to
> print
> out a copy which I have scanned and linked below...
> (see http://www.propagandamatrix.com/shayler_gate.html)
>
> This story is massive because Shayler has them on the wracks on
> a number
> of different issues, from colluding with bin Laden, to arms deals with
> questionable characters.
>
> The original London Guardian report was entitled 'Ministers issue
> gag
> orders for MI5 trial' and was located at
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/shayler/article/0,2763,806009,00.html -
> as you
> will see if you [look at] the link, it's disappeared down the memory
> hole. The text I extracted from the report for my original link to it
> is as follows...
>
> "Ministers issue gag orders for MI5 trial: They appear to be worried
> that he will make further allegations about MI5 and MI6 knowledge
> of a
> plot to assassinate the Libyan leader, Muammar Gadafy, in 1996.
> A book,
> Forbidden Truth, published this summer claims that British
> intelligence
> was in contact with "Osama bin Laden's main allies" who were
> opposed to
> Colonel Gadafy."
>
> The London Evening Standard article was entitled 'Calls for secret
> Shayler trial' and was at
> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/1488303 - again, it has
> now
> been removed. Luckily I saved the text to a Word file and printed the
> article:
>
> Before you read this, it is important to understand the issue at
> hand.
> We're talking about MI6 cooperation with bin Laden, arms to Iraq
> and, as
> reported today in the Scotsman, claims that, 'secret services
> ignored
> warnings that might have prevented bombings in the London in
> 1993 and
> 1994.' Shayler has evidence that MI5 wilfully failed to stop the bomb
> attack on Israel's London embassy in 1994 and the IRA's 1993
> Bishopsgate
> bombing, which killed one person. Here it is in Shayler's own words
> plus
> the actual MI6 Gaddafi plot document - MI6 Plot to assassinate
> Colonel
> Gaddafi: Police enquiry confirms Plot is not "fantasy" -
> http://cryptome.org/shayler-gaddafi.htm
>
> Here is the London Evening Standard report I managed to rescue.
>
> (see http://www.propagandamatrix.com/shayler_gate.html)
>
> Update! Take a look at the scans of the article I printed off -
> why was it removed? Judge for yourself...
> (see http://www.propagandamatrix.com/shayler_gate.html)
>
> Calls for secret Shayler trial
>
> By Patrick McGowan, Evening Standard
>
> The Government has been accused by lawyers of trying to interfere
> in the
> trial of former MI5 officer David Shayler by insisting that part of
> the proceedings are held in private.
>
> Ministers are demanding that trial judge Mr Justice Alan Moses
> agree in
> advance that the case go into private session without saying why
> and
> without hearing arguments to the contrary from the defence.
>
> Shayler's trial, on charges under the Official Secrets Act, was
> beginning at the Old Bailey today. He is being prosecuted following
> newspaper interviews he gave five years ago and the trial is
> expected to
> last for at least four weeks.
>
> On Friday Home Secretary David Blunkett and Foreign Secretary
> Jack Straw
> signed identical public interest immunity certificates under which
> the
> press and the public will have to leave court if sensitive security
> issues are raised.
>
> The certificates do not specify what information they are trying to
> keep
> secret on the grounds that to do so would cause the very damage
> the
> Government is seeking to avoid.
>
> They claim: "Publication of information of the kinds referred to would
> be likely to assist those whose purpose it is to injure the security
> of the United Kingdom and whose actions in the past show that they
> are
> willing to kill innocent civilians, both inside and outside the UK, in
> pursuance of their aims."
>
> Mr Blunkett and Mr Straw also claim present and future intelligence
> operations would be compromised.
>
> PII certificates signed by Conservative ministers were controversially
> used during the arms-to-Iraq trials in the Nineties.
>
> Normally the judge in a trial would read documents in the case and,
> after hearing arguments from both sides, decide whether they
> should be
> disclosed. Now he is being asked to make his decision in advance.
>
> Shayler, 36, faces three charges. They allege he disclosed
> information,
> disclosed information obtained by interception of communications
> and
> disclosed documents. The Crown Prosecution Service has already
> given
> notice that it will apply for some parts of the trial to be held in
> camera. This will apply to evidence on "sensitive operational
> techniques
> of the Security and Intelligence Services".
>
> It is expected that the court will also be asked to keep the
> identities of MI5 agents secret and allow them to give evidence from
> behind screens.
>
> Today Geoffrey Robertson QC, representing civil rights group
> Liberty,
> will oppose the Government's move. Michael Tugendhat QC,
> appearing for
> various national newspapers, is expected to argue that the
> Government
> has provided no evidence that national security will be threatened by
> the trial and will underline the importance of open justice.
>
> During the arms-to-Iraq cases Mr Justice Moses was prosecuting
> counsel
> and Mr Robertson was counsel for the defence when three
> directors of the
> machine tool company Matrix Churchill were accused of selling
> equipment
> to the Iraqi regime.
>
> Shayler will be defending himself during the trial. He is expected to
> claim that British secret service agents paid up to £100,000 to al
> Qaeda
> terrorists for an assassination attempt on Libyan leader Colonel
> Gadaffy
> in 1996. He is seeking permission to plead a defence of
> "necessity" -
> that he acted for the greater good by revealing wrongdoing by the
> security service.
>
> Although much of the trial may end up being held in camera, the
> arguments about which parts should be kept secret will be held in
> public. Only after they are concluded is the jury expected to be
> sworn
> in so the trial proper can begin.
>
> UPDATE: The London Evening Standard have published a shorter,
> watered
> down, version of this story. It does not mention MI5's £100,000
> transfer
> to Al-Qaeda. Yet more evidence of a top down cover-up - read the
> new
> whitewashed piece here and compare it to my scanned original
> that was
> pulled along with all the others!
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> The Scotsman also released a report which remains online but
> both the
> title and the article has been amended!!! The new article talks about
> new MI5 head Eliza Manningham-Buller, only mentioning the
> Shayler case
> in passing. It certainly does not include information concerning the
> Labour MP's involved and government prior knowledge of terrorist
> bombings in London.
>
> http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/index.cfm?id=1113312002 is the
> amended
> version - I archived the original at
> http://www.propagandamatrix.com/renegade_mi5_agent_to_face_jur
> y.htm. The
> report was originally entitled 'Renegade MI5 agent ready to face jury'
> it is now called 'Has MI5 really emerged from shadows?' This is the
> report with the most damning information (the one they erased).
>
> Here is the text of the original - again archived at
> http://www.propagandamatrix.com/renegade_mi5_agent_to_face_jur
> y.htm
>
> Renegade MI5 agent ready to face jury
>
> KAREN MCVEIGH
>
> DAVID Shayler, the former M15 officer branded a traitor by the
> government, is due to take on the legal establishment today, as his
> trial opens at the Old Bailey in London.
>
> The renegade agent, who faces six years imprisonment for
> breaching the
> Official Secrets Act after making a number of sensational
> revelations
> about M15 to a national newspaper in 1997, will represent himself
> for
> part of the landmark case. The trial will centre around a number of
> allegations made by Shayler about M15 holding files on prominent
> politicians, including former cabinet minister Peter Mandelson and
> Jack
> Straw, the Foreign Secretary. He also claimed the secret services
> ignored warnings that might have prevented bombings in the
> London in
> 1993 and 1994.
>
> Shayler, 36, faces two charges under section one of the Official
> Secrets
> Act for disclosing documents and information about the work of
> M15 and
> another under section four, for disclosing information about
> telephone
> taps.
>
> He has failed so far to win his argument that his revelations were in
> the public interest. The High Court, Court of Appeal and the House
> of
> Lords, have all ruled that he cannot claim he disclosed information
> in
> the public interest or out of necessity. They also ruled out the main
> plank of Shayler's defence - that the Officials Secrets Act is
> incompatible with the Human Rights Act.
>
> Shayler, who made other allegations for which he was not charged,
> including a claim that M16 was involved in a plot to assassinate the
> Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, will argue that he is
> only
> guilty of "exposing wrongdoing".
>
> "I aim to persist in my argument that the Official Secrets Act as it
> currently stands is totally incompatible with the Human Rights
> Act," he
> told a newspaper yesterday.
>
> Some of the hearing is expected to be taken up by an application
> by
> newspapers objecting to plans to hold parts of the trial in secret.
>
> The prosecution applied for hearings to be held in camera after its
> concerns that Shayler will make fresh allegations to the jury to
> back up
> his public interest defence.
>
> Shayler's decision to defend himself, against the advice of his legal
> team, for part of the trial was prompted by the belief that he will be
> freer to argue his case than his barrister, Geoffrey Robertson, QC,
> whose hands are tied by earlier court rulings.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> If we make a big stink about this it could really hurt them. We can't
> let it disappear down an Orwellian memory hole. Please E mail all
> three
> publications and asked them why they removed or altered their
> reports.
>
> E mail the London Guardian at userhelp@??? E mail
> the
> London Evening Standard at editor@??? E mail the
> Scotsman at newsdesk_TS@???
>
> Even local papers such as the Leicestershire Mail and the Derby
> Evening
> Telegraph have removed the story from their websites! The original
> stories were here and here respectively. They were entiled
> ''SHAYLER AT
> OLD BAILEY FOR TRIAL' and 'SHAYLER ARRIVES FOR TRIAL.'
> As you can see by
> clicking the links, they are gone. As is a London Independent article
> that was entitled 'MI5 faces accountability test as new chief takes
> reins.' As of 4am UK time, you can still see the original titles of
> the reports as stored on Google's Beta News Search (these will
> probably also
> be deleted in the coming hours).
>
> UPDATE: It is now confirmed that all details relating to the Shayler
> case cannot be reported. The UK government have successfully
> gagged the
> cowardly pathetic mainstream media, but I will continue to track
> this
> story.
>
> The Guardian reports - 'Shayler hearing'
>
> 'An Old Bailey court yesterday heard legal arguments relating to the
> trial of David Shayler, the former MI5 officer charged with breaking
> the
> Official Secrets Act. The judge ruled that they cannot be reported.
> Mr
> Shayler's trial is now expected to be heard before a jury next week.'
> Richard Norton-Taylor
>
> Read this tiny blurb at
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,806640,00.html (until
> they remove that too)
>
> UPDATE: Shayler gag story breaks in foreign media (2 days after I
> first reported it of course)
>
> The Age of Australia reports (original link:
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/09/1034061258269.html)
>
> Media gag on alleged plot to kill Gaddafi
>
> October 10 2002
> By Paul Daley
> London
>
> The British media have been gagged from reporting sensational
> courtroom evidence of former MI5 spy David Shayler, including his
> alleged proof that the British secret service paid $270,000 for al
> Qaeda terrorists to assassinate Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 1986.
>
> In its efforts to contain Mr Shayler's allegations to the privacy of
> the court, the government has even stopped the media from reporting
> its successful attempt to win a gag order.
>
> The decision by an Old Bailey judge to stop the media from reporting
> parts of Mr Shayler's evidence came on Monday after two senior
> ministers, David Blunkett and Jack Straw, signed Public Interest
> Immunity certificates.
>
> The certificates, which were submitted to the court, insisted that the
> media and the public leave the court if the activities of the security
> and intelligence agencies were raised by the defence.
>
> The then Labour opposition strenuously opposed the Tory government's
> use of the certificates during the arms-to-Iraq prosecution in the
> early '90s. Some guilty verdicts were subsequently overturned on
> appeal because the defence successfully argued that it had been
> deprived of relevant information.
>
> When such certificates are issued, it is standard practice for the
> judge to read the applications and publicly hear the arguments for
> and against a gagging order, before ruling. But in the case of Mr
> Shayler - a 36-year-old former MI5 officer who is accused of
> disclosing government secrets to the media and in a book - the
> government wanted the judge, Justice Alan Moses, to consider the
> application in private.
>
> The British media widely reported on Monday that lawyers acting for Mr
> Shayler had accused the government of trying to "intimidate" Justice
> Moses. But on Tuesday the newspapers - many of which had mounted their
> own legal case against the application of the certificates - reported
> simply that the court had heard legal arguments relating to Mr
> Shayler's trial. "The judge ruled that they (the legal arguments)
> cannot be reported," The Guardian reported.
>
> Although Mr Shayler's jury trial is expected to begin next week in the
> Old Bailey, any evidence relating to sensitive security or
> intelligence matters will be kept private. After the judge's ruling
> on Monday, several articles detailing Mr Shayler's anticipated
> evidence - and the government's efforts to keep it secret - were
> withdrawn from newspaper websites across the country.
>
> It is believed the government successfully applied to have parts of
> the trial heard in camera. This applies to evidence on "sensitive
> operational techniques of the security and intelligence services".
>
> It is also believed that the court agreed to keep the identities of
> MI5 agents secret and to allow them to give evidence from behind
> screens.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ---------------------~--> Home Selling? Try Us!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/QrPZMC/iTmEAA/MVfIAA/3hSolB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> leeds_antiwar-unsubscribe@???
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> Dr. Paul Bagguley
> Department of Sociology and Social Policy
> University of Leeds
> Leeds
> LS2 9JT
>
> NEW tel: (0113) 343 4428
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe, email <listserv@???> with the message
> signoff social-movements
______________________________________________________________________
Scarica il nuovo Yahoo! Messenger: con webcam, nuove faccine e tante altre novità.
http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/?http://it.messenger.yahoo.com/
