Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Secret Policing dribbles
#1
New investigation into 1987 Debenhams anti-fur' firebomb attack - Evening Standard - http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/new...29881.html
Sebastian Mann Wednesday 20 April 2016 15:37 BST
Detectives have reopened an investigation into the planting of a bomb at a London Debenhams 29 years ago.
Scotland Yard said fresh lines of enquiry had been established over the firebombing of the Harrow store in 1987 which caused £340,000 worth of damage.
The attack is thought to have been linked to an anti-fur campaign, police said.
A spokesman said: "A team is now pursuing a number of lines of enquiry which were identified following a thematic review of the original investigation, by the then Bomb Squad.
"This will include exploiting potential advances in DNA techniques, new information that has been established by Operation Herne and claims made under parliamentary privilege by an MP in 2012."
The new investigation comes four years after Green MP Caroline Lucas [2012] used Parliamentary privilege to accuse an undercover police officer of planting the bomb in an effort to prove his commitment to animal rights extremists.
Read more
Undercover officer proposed to activist despite already having wife
She told MPs in June 2012 that Bob Lambert left an "incendiary device" at the store as part of co-ordinated attacks on three branches in protest at the sale of animal fur by the chain.
Operation Herne is the Met's investigation into possibly criminal misconduct by members of the force's now defunct Special Demonstration Squad, which was set up to use specialist officers to infiltrate British protest groups.
Scotland Yard said detectives had also notified the ongoing Undercover Policing Inquiry about recent developments.
Mr Lambert told The Guardian in 2012: "It was necessary to create the false impression that I was a committed animal rights extremist to gain intelligence so as to disrupt serious criminal conspiracies.
"However, I did not commit serious crime such as 'planting an incendiary device at the [Debenhams] Harrow store'."
Ende.

According to book Undercover: The True Story of Britain's Secret Police By Paul Lewis, Rob Evans, whilst the police would've been informed prior to the event, the sprinklers actually did just happen to be turned-off, so where the intent was apparently to cause £-damage thru' sprinkler-water-damaged stock, instead, it took 80 firemen & 10 engines 5hrs to put it out & ended-up costing c.£7mill., an' all to smear & 'own' the Animal Liberation Front, by the Special Demonstration Squad, the same ppl who infiltrated the Stephen Lawrence family & who slept with-, & had children by-, women, on false pretences, who they knew they were going to leave. There's an interesting bit in the book where he's apparently attempted to be talked-out of it, but he's sooo 'into' his 'alter'/legend, that he's well-up for it. The deduction of that concept thru' the references I get is very familiar to me - psychotically & pathologically deranged & completely deluded fantacist nutters. (Undercover Met officer proposed to activist despite having wife and child already Justin davenport Tuesday 19 January 2016 11:07 BST - http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/und...59936.html )
The 'Occupy' bods at St. Pauls were saying these types were planting hyponerdic deedles all 'round the place, to make 'em look like druggies.

I've had a few "fur" refs over the years.
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#2
Shankill Road bombing: MI5 failed to act on IRA tip-off that may have prevented Belfast atrocity, investigation claims
Highly-sensitive documents suggest terrorist who plotted attack that killed nine civilians in 1993 was British agent - Cahal Milmo, Mick Browne @cahalmilmo Monday 25 January 2016 - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hom...33541.html

The police watchdog in Northern Ireland is probing claims that the senior IRA operative who planned the 1993 Shankill Road bombing was an informant who passed on details that could have allowed the security forces to prevent the atrocity.

Nine civilians, including two children, were murdered in the attack on a fish shop in Belfast's loyalist heartland 23 years ago which became one of the most notorious incidents of the Troubles and led to a wave of sectarian reprisal killings.

Highly-sensitive documents stolen by the IRA during a break-in at the fortified headquarters of the then Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) in 2002 have now been claimed to show that the terrorist who plotted the bombing was a British agent known as "AA".

Leaks from the stolen papers suggest AA had extensively briefed his MI5 or Special Branch handlers on the aim and likely timing of the attack, which was designed to inflame sectarian tensions by killing the leadership of the loyalist Ulster Defence Association (UDA) terror group as they met above Frizzell's fish shop on a busy Saturday in October 1993.

In the event, the UDA leaders escaped unharmed after rescheduling their meeting at short notice. The bomb, made with the powerful Semtex plastic explosive, instead killed Protestant shoppers and one of the bombers, IRA man Thomas Begley, as they carried it into the shop at lunchtime.

The extraordinary allegations concerning AA, first reported by the Belfast-based Irish News newspaper, raise the highly damaging prospect that British intelligence knew of the attack but failed to act quickly enough to prevent it; or even actively allowed a botched bombing of civilians to take place to place pressure on a faction of IRA still intent on pursuing violence and push its leaders towards accepting the peace process.

The Independent understands that AA, who was identified by the IRA from the Castlereagh papers in 2003 but escaped retribution from its notorious punishment squads and still lives in Belfast, may even have had custody of the bomb the night before the attack, allowing time for the device to be rigged to blow up his comrades.

The original plan had been to set a fuse just long enough for shoppers to be evacuated and for the bombers, disguised as delivery men, to escape. Instead, the device exploded as Begley reached the counter while surrounded by customers.

The Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland has confirmed that it was formally assessing a complaint received last week from a relative of one of the victims of the bombing asking for AA and his relationship with either the RUC Special Branch or MI5 to be investigated.

In a statement on behalf of the ombudsman, Dr Michael Maguire, his office said: "We have received a complaint. It centres on two concerns: Did the RUC have information which would have allowed them to prevent the bombing and was the subsequent investigation compromised; [and] did the police fail to deliver justice to the families of those who lost their lives in the bombing'?

"We will seek to establish if this is something we should investigate, and if so, when we could begin this work."

The allegations add to an already heavy caseload for the watchdog concerning claimed collusion between the security forces and terror groups on both sides during the Northern Ireland conflict. They include the killings in the 1980s and 1990s of at least 20 alleged IRA informers whose relatives in some cases believe their loved ones were used as scapegoats to cover the tracks of the security forces' most important IRA agents.

The burglary on St Patrick's Day 2002 at the ultra-secure Castlereagh police headquarters was one of the most embarrassing and flagrant security breaches suffered by the RUC, since re-named the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI).

The raid on the Special Branch offices netted files giving the codenames of British agents in Republican terror groups and records of information provided by them to their handlers. Millions of pounds was spent re-housing many of the informants and their handlers to ensure their security.

In order to reveal the true identities of the British agents, the IRA set up a special unit to pore over the informant messages and match them with the terror group's own intelligence records. It took more than a year before the mole hunters were able to pinpoint "AA", who was then "stood down" by the IRA's ruling Army Council but allowed to remain living in the nationalist Ardoyne area of north Belfast.

Sources have disputed reports that AA, who is now in his mid-50s, had been the commanding officer of the IRA's Ardoyne brigade and suggested he had in fact been its intelligence officer, in charge of plotting dozens of attacks, including the Shankill Road bombing.

The Castlereagh documents are understood to show that in early 1993 AA was passing back to his handlers details of the IRA plot to target senior UDA figures, including leader Johnny Adair, and the chosen location of the room above Frizzell's fish shop as well as likely dates for the bombing.

Investigators will want to establish whether information from AA could have been passed to the UDA leadership to ensure their meeting was rescheduled on the day of the attack; and, crucially, whether there is any evidence that his handlers allowed the bombing to proceed to protect their source and ultimately strengthen the hand of those such as Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams inching towards a cessation of the campaign of violence.

Relatives of the victims called for a full investigation. Charlie Butler, who lost three members of his family, said he and other families would be "devastated" if the allegations were proved to be correct.

He told BBC News: "Collusion is not a nice word for anyone but when it is collusion with innocent people losing their lives to protect someone else there has to be a line drawn to say that is wrong.

"[The security forces] were there to do a job, to protect people. If they knew about [the bombing] then they should pay."

Ende.

Shankill Road bomb: IRA double-agent 'deliberately set device to explode prematurely'
Former IRA comrades claim man 'jarked' bomb to cause more civilian casualties and weaken those opposed to ceasefire
Mick Browne Monday 25 January 2016 - - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hom...33581.html


"We do vile things", synthetic telepathy, c.Feb. 2012, threat/stresser.

>dribbles<
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#3
Hundreds of lawyers 'bugged on prison visits' - By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor12:01AM GMT 09 Feb 2008 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...isits.html
The full scale of a nationwide policy to bug British jails can be disclosed today after a whistleblower revealed that hundreds of lawyers and prison visitors had been secretly recorded.
The covert eavesdropping of the MP Sadiq Khan is alleged to be just the first case in a far wider operation to bug terrorist suspects and other serious criminals introduced after the September 11 attacks.
Lawyers, including the human rights solicitors Gareth Peirce and Mudassar Arani, were allegedly "routinely bugged" by police during visits to see clients at Woodhill prison. Listening devices were said to have been concealed in tables at the jail.


Nationally it is thought that many more people may have been covertly recorded.
Serious criminals, including the Soham murderer Ian Huntley and the letter bomber Miles Cooper, are also thought to have been targeted by the alleged secret bugging.
It is feared that the eavesdropping of legally-privileged discussions could lead to calls from defence solicitors for major criminal cases to be retried.
This weekend, ministers are under intense pressure to reveal what they knew about the secret bugging practice. David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said last night that he would be writing to Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, demanding an inquiry into the surveillance process.
"It is inconceivable that this action has taken place without ministerial approval," he said.
"Whilst there can be reasons for eavesdropping on legal meetings, it is such a serious infringement of people's rights that there has to be a very good reason if this has happened. It can put the trial at risk which means that serious crimes may go unpunished."
Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrats' home affairs spokesman, said that he was "appalled" by the latest revelations.
"The confidentiality between a lawyer and client is a pillar of our legal system. I'm astonished that ministers have apparently given the go-ahead to this without any public discussion," he said.
Andrew Holroyd, the president of the Law Society, said: "It is completely unacceptable that defence solicitors should fear that their conversations with clients are being monitored.
"The law requires that conversations between a solicitor and their client are legally privileged. All monitoring should cease and if a conversation between a solicitor and a client is captured accidentally the tape should be destroyed."
The scandal came to light after Mr Khan, a Muslim Labour MP, was covertly recorded during two visits to a terrorist suspect held at Wood&shy;hill prison in Milton Keynes in 2005 and 2006.
It led to a political outcry as the bugging of MPs has been prohibited since the 1960s. Mr Straw was forced to set up an inquiry. He insisted he had known nothing of the operation before last weekend, although it later emerged that officials in his department had learnt of the allegations two months ago.
Now someone with detailed knowledge of the operation claims that Mr Khan's visits were allegedly among "hundreds of conversations" bugged by Det Sgt Mark Kearney during his time with a four-man intelligence team based at the prison since early 2002.
The recordings are deemed so sensitive that copies are stored at a secret facility protected by armed guards.
Initially, only a handful of prisons implemented the alleged bugging policy - including Woodhill and Belmarsh - but over the past 18 months the secret policy is alleged to have been rolled out across Britain.
At least 10 solicitors had conversations recorded at Woodhill while dozens more are thought to have been monitored across the country, the insider claimed. Hundreds of prison visitors were also targeted.
The whistleblower said: "Mark [Kearney] didn't feel what was going on was right or legal. Every person who came in and saw these terrorist suspects was the subject of an eavesdropping operation. He was put under huge amounts of pressure. Initially, it was just one or two machines but it steadily increased and now covers other category A prisoners such as murderers."
Documents seen by The Daily Telegraph reveal that Mr Kearney's team was also ordered to search and copy the contents of prison visitors' bags including keys and mobile phone sim cards.
These allegedly included confidential documents left by lawyers. It is also alleged that senior Woodhill prison staff were extremely unhappy with the practice.
A written statement drafted by Mr Kearney last year as part of his answer to criminal charges he now faces, claimed the pressure of what he was being asked to do affected his mental state.
After he became concerned about the work he was doing, detectives launched an investigation in February 2007 into whether he was leaking stories to the press via a local newspaper journalist, Sally Murrer.
He was charged with misconduct in a public office and, along with Mrs Murrer, faces prosecution next week. The pair claim their prosecution is a witch-hunt.
Last night, a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "Police monitoring operations are a matter for the police and are undertaken in line with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
"The Prison Service may grant the police permission to operate in prison providing that there are no concerns about order or control. Such co-operation is vital in the fight against serious crime and terrorism.
"It would not usually be appropriate for the Prison Service to question the police's decision to monitor an individual; nor would it expect the police to share details of the intelligence cases underpinning its monitoring operations.
"It would not be appropriate to discuss particular prisoners or other individuals."


Solicitor fears over prisoner bugging - Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 February 2008, 11:55 GMT - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7227918.stm
....
Legal implications
Mr Creighton said there were also implications for trials and, in particular, those which involve the government.
"The real worry is that, very often, the case is being brought against the government, and if the government have the knowledge of exactly what's happening in your case and how it's being prepared, then it gives them an unfair advantage from day one." [Speaking of which, I've just popped-along to the hospital to dish-out a few docs to the docs on the piquet line, but it seems they've all got Brighton headaches and have buggered-off - that'll be the boogeymen - maybe]
Mr Creighton also said that the case involving Mr Khan would only further existing fears that bugging in prisons is already taking place.
"It's certainly the case that many prisoners have long been worried that their supposedly legally privileged, confidential calls have been monitored.
"And obviously, discovery of this has happened on at least one occasion [and this] will give rise to further paranoia on the part of people and further suspicions that it does indeed happen more regularly".
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#4
Michael Barwell Wrote:Hundreds of lawyers 'bugged on prison visits' - By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor12:01AM GMT 09 Feb 2008 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...isits.html
The full scale of a nationwide policy to bug British jails can be disclosed today after a whistleblower revealed that hundreds of lawyers and prison visitors had been secretly recorded.
The covert eavesdropping of the MP Sadiq Khan is alleged to be just the first case in a far wider operation to bug terrorist suspects and other serious criminals introduced after the September 11 attacks.
Lawyers, including the human rights solicitors Gareth Peirce and Mudassar Arani, were allegedly "routinely bugged" by police during visits to see clients at Woodhill prison. Listening devices were said to have been concealed in tables at the jail.


Nationally it is thought that many more people may have been covertly recorded.
Serious criminals, including the Soham murderer Ian Huntley and the letter bomber Miles Cooper, are also thought to have been targeted by the alleged secret bugging.
It is feared that the eavesdropping of legally-privileged discussions could lead to calls from defence solicitors for major criminal cases to be retried.
This weekend, ministers are under intense pressure to reveal what they knew about the secret bugging practice. David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said last night that he would be writing to Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, demanding an inquiry into the surveillance process.
"It is inconceivable that this action has taken place without ministerial approval," he said.
"Whilst there can be reasons for eavesdropping on legal meetings, it is such a serious infringement of people's rights that there has to be a very good reason if this has happened. It can put the trial at risk which means that serious crimes may go unpunished."
Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrats' home affairs spokesman, said that he was "appalled" by the latest revelations.
"The confidentiality between a lawyer and client is a pillar of our legal system. I'm astonished that ministers have apparently given the go-ahead to this without any public discussion," he said.
Andrew Holroyd, the president of the Law Society, said: "It is completely unacceptable that defence solicitors should fear that their conversations with clients are being monitored.
"The law requires that conversations between a solicitor and their client are legally privileged. All monitoring should cease and if a conversation between a solicitor and a client is captured accidentally the tape should be destroyed."
The scandal came to light after Mr Khan, a Muslim Labour MP, was covertly recorded during two visits to a terrorist suspect held at Wood*hill prison in Milton Keynes in 2005 and 2006.
It led to a political outcry as the bugging of MPs has been prohibited since the 1960s. Mr Straw was forced to set up an inquiry. He insisted he had known nothing of the operation before last weekend, although it later emerged that officials in his department had learnt of the allegations two months ago.
Now someone with detailed knowledge of the operation claims that Mr Khan's visits were allegedly among "hundreds of conversations" bugged by Det Sgt Mark Kearney during his time with a four-man intelligence team based at the prison since early 2002.
The recordings are deemed so sensitive that copies are stored at a secret facility protected by armed guards.
Initially, only a handful of prisons implemented the alleged bugging policy - including Woodhill and Belmarsh - but over the past 18 months the secret policy is alleged to have been rolled out across Britain.
At least 10 solicitors had conversations recorded at Woodhill while dozens more are thought to have been monitored across the country, the insider claimed. Hundreds of prison visitors were also targeted.
The whistleblower said: "Mark [Kearney] didn't feel what was going on was right or legal. Every person who came in and saw these terrorist suspects was the subject of an eavesdropping operation. He was put under huge amounts of pressure. Initially, it was just one or two machines but it steadily increased and now covers other category A prisoners such as murderers."
Documents seen by The Daily Telegraph reveal that Mr Kearney's team was also ordered to search and copy the contents of prison visitors' bags including keys and mobile phone sim cards.
These allegedly included confidential documents left by lawyers. It is also alleged that senior Woodhill prison staff were extremely unhappy with the practice.
A written statement drafted by Mr Kearney last year as part of his answer to criminal charges he now faces, claimed the pressure of what he was being asked to do affected his mental state.
After he became concerned about the work he was doing, detectives launched an investigation in February 2007 into whether he was leaking stories to the press via a local newspaper journalist, Sally Murrer.
He was charged with misconduct in a public office and, along with Mrs Murrer, faces prosecution next week. The pair claim their prosecution is a witch-hunt.
Last night, a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "Police monitoring operations are a matter for the police and are undertaken in line with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
"The Prison Service may grant the police permission to operate in prison providing that there are no concerns about order or control. Such co-operation is vital in the fight against serious crime and terrorism.
"It would not usually be appropriate for the Prison Service to question the police's decision to monitor an individual; nor would it expect the police to share details of the intelligence cases underpinning its monitoring operations.
"It would not be appropriate to discuss particular prisoners or other individuals."


Solicitor fears over prisoner bugging - Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 February 2008, 11:55 GMT - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7227918.stm
....
Legal implications
Mr Creighton said there were also implications for trials and, in particular, those which involve the government.
"The real worry is that, very often, the case is being brought against the government, and if the government have the knowledge of exactly what's happening in your case and how it's being prepared, then it gives them an unfair advantage from day one." [Speaking of which, I've just popped-along to the hospital to dish-out a few docs to the docs on the piquet line, but it seems they've all got Brighton headaches and have buggered-off - that'll be the boogeymen - maybe]
Mr Creighton also said that the case involving Mr Khan would only further existing fears that bugging in prisons is already taking place.
"It's certainly the case that many prisoners have long been worried that their supposedly legally privileged, confidential calls have been monitored.
"And obviously, discovery of this has happened on at least one occasion [and this] will give rise to further paranoia on the part of people and further suspicions that it does indeed happen more regularly".

That has been going on in the USA since at least 2001....likely in high profile cases before...after just about everyone.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#5
Police 'destroyed surveillance files' on Green party peer - https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/hom...party-peer
Written by: Emilio Casalicchio Posted On: 8th January 2016

Police records detailing the political activities of a Green party peer were reportedly destroyed in a "highly irregular" cover-up.
Whistleblower Sergeant David Williams has alleged a secretive police intelligence unit improperly destroyed files it held about Jenny Jones.
But the Met argues its records on Baroness Jones were destroyed legitimately as part of a plan to improve record keeping.
Baroness Jones, who has no criminal record, obtained documents two years ago showing how the police had kept track of her activities between 2001 and 2012.
The former London mayoral candidate demanded to know more about the monitoring, but was refused information.
Mr Williams wrote to Baroness Jones claiming he witnessed an officer who "began to electronically delete a number of police records from a police database" relating to her.
He said the records were erased in a "highly irregular manner" without being backed up on the force's database.
"This process would thwart any Freedom of Information request within a 28-day period from the initial deletion," Mr Williams wrote.
He added: "Understandably the behaviour of these five officers caused me great concern as I believed this was a cover-up to ensure you could not get any access to police records relating to you through a freedom of information request."
She said it was concerning the police may have destroyed files to "hide what they were keeping on me".
The Met maintains it can find no evidence there had been "had been any inappropriate destruction of documents" despite two investigations.
"In fact the lead detective in the case, who spoke to all potential witnesses as part of their investigation, found that the unit was responding positively to demands to improve its document retention procedures by destroying information that it had no need to retain and that therefore should not be retained," it added.

Ende.

UK spy agencies have collected bulk personal data since 1990s, files show
Agencies privately concede that intrusive' practices can invade privacy and that data is gathered on people unlikely to be of interest' - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ap...ince-1990s
Owen Bowcott and Richard Norton-Taylor Thursday 21 April 2016 00.01 BST

Britain's intelligence agencies have been secretly collecting bulk personal data since the late 1990s and privately admit they have gathered information on people who are "unlikely to be of intelligence or security interest".
Disclosure of internal MI5, MI6 and GCHQ documents reveals the agencies' growing reliance on amassing data as a prime source of intelligence even as they concede that such "intrusive" practices can invade the privacy of individuals.
A cache of more than 100 memorandums, forms and policy papers, obtained by Privacy International during a legal challenge over the lawfulness of surveillance, demonstrates that collection of bulk data has been going on for longer than previously disclosed while public knowledge of the process was suppressed for more than 15 years.
The files show that GCHQ, the government's electronic eavesdropping centre based in Cheltenham, was collecting and developing bulk data sets as early as 1998 under powers granted by section 94 of the 1984 Telecommunications Act.
The documents offer a unique insight into the way MI5, MI6, and GCHQ go about collecting and storing bulk data on individuals, as well as authorising discovery of journalists' sources.
Bulk personal data includes information extracted from passports, travel records, financial data, telephone calls, emails and many other open or covert sources. Often they are "fused" together to help pinpoint suspects.
The frequency of warnings to intelligence agency staff about the dangers of trespassing on private records is at odds with ministers' repeated public reassurances that only terrorists and serious criminals are having their personal details compromised.
For example, a newsletter circulated in September 2011 by the Secret Intelligence Agency (SIS), better known as MI6, cautioned against staff misuse. "We've seen a few instances recently of individuals crossing the line with their database use … looking up addresses in order to send birthday cards, checking passport details to organise personal travel, checking details of family members for personal convenience," it says.
"Another area of concern is the use of the database as a convenient way' to check the personal details of colleagues when filling out service forms on their behalf. Please remember that every search has the potential to invade the privacy of individuals, including individuals who are not the main subject of your search, so please make sure you always have a business need to conduct that search and that the search is proportionate to the level of intrusion involved." Better where possible to use "less intrusive" means, it adds.
There has been disciplinary action. Between 2014 and 2016, two MI5 and three MI6 officers were disciplined for mishandling bulk personal data. Last year, it was reported that a member of GCHQ's staff had been sacked for making unauthorised searches.
The papers show that data handling errors remain a problem. Government lawyers have admitted in responses to Privacy International that between 1 June 2014 and 9 February this year, "47 instances of non-compliance either with the MI5 closed section 94 handling arrangements or internal guidance or the communications data code of practice were detected." Four errors involved "necessity and proportionality" issues; 43 related to mistransposed digits, material that did not relate to the subject of investigation or duplicated requests.
Another MI5 file notes that datasets "contain personal data about individuals, the majority of whom are unlikely to be of intelligence or security interest".
The documents have been disclosed before a trial due later this summer at the investigatory powers tribunal, which hears complaints about state-authorised surveillance and the intelligence agencies. IPT sessions hear secret evidence behind closed doors.
Release of these internal records follows admissions by David Cameron and by parliament's intelligence and security committee (ISC) last year in the wake of revelations by the US whistleblower Edward Snowden.
The most recent documents refer to a "more onerous authorisation process" after the prime minister's avowal of the "use of bulk personal data". They provide fresh detail of what is happening in the intelligence agencies.
Web and phone companies are required to retain data for official access for 12 months, but the intelligence agency documents make clear that acquired bulk data sets can be held far longer.
An MI5 memorandum says retention of "low intrusion" material needs to be reviewed only every two years. Some key words are missing from the memo, but it adds: "In MI5, a maximum retention period [redaction] is applied to [bulk personal data]. This can be increased in exceptional circumstances via a policy waiver. This waiver must be authorised by a senior MI5 official and agreed by the BPDRP [bulk data retention review panel] but shall be subject to a detailed review."
Bulk personal data is exchanged with "foreign agencies", presumably mainly those from other countries in the UK's traditional "Five Eyes" alliance the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The documents do not specify every type of information exploited but give examples and broad categories: population data and passports, travel records, financial data and communications information. "Some of this data is publicly available, some of it is purchased and some of it is acquired covertly in accordance with SIS statutory functions," according to an MI6 note.
Monetary information is held. "The fact that [MI5] holds bulk financial, albeit anonymised data is assessed to be a high corporate risk since there is no public expectation that the service will hold or have access to this data in bulk. Were it to become widely known that the service held this data, the media response would most likely be unfavourable and probably inaccurate.
"In some cases, it may be necessary for the relevant team to approach the data provider to examine whether any unnecessary/extraneous parts of the dataset can be removed prior to acquisition. Such extraneous data might include large numbers of minors, details of earnings or medical information."
Death provides no escape. "Policy and processes in relation to bulk personal data is the same for both the living and the dead," a combined agencies memo records.
Each intelligence service has its own database, it appears from the documents. For MI5, storage of bulk data is at their London HQ, Thames House. "In order to ensure the security and integrity of the datasets that the service relies upon for its enhanced analytical capabilities and to reassure data providers that their data will be handled securely, it is essential that the necessary physical controls are in place to mitigate unauthorised access to, or loss of, this information during transportation to and subsequent storage in Thames House."
The justification for assembling such sophisticated databases, according to an MI5 document, is that it speeds up the process of detecting suspects. "By integrating bulk data [redaction] with information about individual subjects of interest from other sources of intelligence (liaison relationships, agent reporting, intercept, eavesdropping, surveillance) and from fusing' different data-sets in order to identify common links, we can better understand target networks, locations and behaviours, enabling a greater depth and breadth of target coverage.
"The fragmentary nature of many intelligence leads and the magnitude of the threat all mean that there is currently no effective method of resolving identities in a timely fashion without using bulk data."
The standard MI5 form for acquisition of bulk data requires agency staff to a tick box if it holds sensitive personal data such as "biometric, financial, medical, racial or ethnic origin, religious, journalistic, political, legal, sexual or criminal activity" and membership of a trade union. MI5 officers also need to explain why acquisition is "necessary and proportionate".
The documents show how alert the agencies are to their legal obligations. They refer to the agencies' "ethics team", the need for "proportionality" and "necessity". One note stresses that GCHQ employees' conditions of employment state that "unauthorised entry to computer records may constitute gross misconduct".
But the papers also reveal how much latitude the law notably Ripa, the Telecommunications Act, and the Data Protection Act in practice gives them.
The documents include for the first time certificates under section 28 of the Data Protection Act signed by David Blunkett and Jack Straw in 2001 when they were home and foreign secretary respectively which provided secrecy about authorised bulk data interceptions under section 94 of the Telecommunications Act. The existence of such directions were not disclosed until last year.
The quantity of information the agencies have been forced to release suggests their long-established position of "neither confirming nor denying" any operational details may be crumbling at the edges.
In parliamentary debate over the investigatory powers bill, the government has argued that the security services only conduct targeted searches of data under legal warrants in pursuit of terrorist or criminal activity and that bulk interception is necessary as a first step in that process.
Millie Graham Wood, a legal officer at Privacy International, said: "The information revealed by this disclosure shows the staggering extent to which the intelligence agencies hoover up our data.
"This highly sensitive information about us is vulnerable to attack from hackers, foreign governments and criminals. The agencies have been doing this for 15 years in secret and are now quietly trying to put these powers on the statute book for the first time in the investigatory powers bill, which is currently being debated in parliament. These documents reveal a lack of openness and transparency with the public about these staggering powers and a failure to subject them to effective parliamentary scrutiny."
A Home Office spokesman said: "Bulk powers have been essential to the security and intelligence agencies over the last decade and will be increasingly important in the future.
"The acquisition and use of bulk provides vital and unique intelligence that the security and intelligence agencies cannot obtain by any other means. The security and intelligence agencies use the same techniques that modern businesses increasingly rely on to analyse data in order to overcome the most significant national security challenges."

Ende.

A couple of months ago for a week or two, a womans name started being referenced, just a few times, but it was distinct. I get alot of artificial apophenic references, & it took me a week or so to suss it - I only met her a couple of times - one of my grandmothers names, and then it stopped. There have been other examples of ref'ing from way waayy back, but they like to 'ghost' them - just a hint, then they're 'forgotten'. "Anna from Manchester" was a singular ref from a few years ago; there a tv prog on a couple of days ago about the possibility of a serial killer in Manc; there was an "Anna" in there too: just blarney bullshit.

It minds of the intel ops named after civil war battles, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullrun_(d...on_program) - "Bullrun (stylized BULLRUN) is a clandestine, highly classified decryption program run by the United States National Security Agency (NSA).[1][2] The British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) has a similar program codenamed Edgehill. According to the BULLRUN classification guide published by The Guardian, the program uses multiple sources including computer network exploitation,[3] interdiction, industry relationships, collaboration with other intelligence community entities, and advanced mathematical techniques."
"Etymology[edit] - The name "BULLRUN" was taken from the First Battle of Bull Run, the first major battle of the American Civil War.[1] Its predecessor "Manassas",[2] is both an alternate name for the battle and where the battle took place. "EDGEHILL" is from the Battle of Edgehill, the first battle of the English Civil War.[23]"

Completely batshit.
I used to get alot of "phone records" refs., - knock yerself out yer skulking, seedy, sordid, psychotic blaggards, it's just blarney.
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#6
Loughinisland massacre: Collusion 'significant feature' of 1994 Heights Bar murders, says Police Ombudsman -
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/n...85603.html
Attack could have been prevented if murderous UVF gang had been arrested - ombudsman finds
By Jonny Bell PUBLISHED 09/06/2016
The Police Ombudsman has found that collusion was a "significant feature" of the 1994 Loughinisland murders.
Dr Maguire found that police received information on a "small but ruthless" UVF faction, which if passed to detectives investigating their activities, could have prevented the Loughinisland attack.
However, the police oversight body's investigation found there have been many within the RUC and the PSNI who worked tirelessly to bring those responsible for the Loughinisland attack to justice.
And the report found no evidence the security forces were aware the UVF was planning to mount the 1994 attack.
While the Ombudsman found problems with the police investigation, he said the failure to bring the killers to justice could not be explained solely by those failings.
Six men were gunned down as they watched a World Cup football match and five others were injured in the loyalist terrorist attack.
UVF gunmen burst into the bar and shot indiscriminately at customers who had gathered to watch the Republic of Ireland play Italy in the World Cup in the USA.
More: Loughinisland massacre: How World Cup celebrations turned to murderous horror
Northern Ireland Police Ombudsman Dr Michael Maguire investigated claims of misconduct and collusion against the RUC in relation to the loyalist killings at the Heights Bar in the County Down village of Loughinisland.

It has been alleged that the RUC did not conduct a proper investigation because it was protecting an informer and that there was collusion between some police officers and the killers.
A report by previous Police Ombudsman Al Hutchinson in 2011 found that the RUC failed to properly investigate what happened in Loughinisland but said there was insufficient evidence of collusion.
Those findings were quashed after a legal challenge by relatives of those killed and Dr Maguire subsequently undertook a fresh investigation.
More: Loughinisland massacre: Police collusion in 1994 murders 'totally unacceptable' - Chief Constable George Hamilton
Those murdered were Barney Green, 87; Adrian Rogan, 34; Malcolm Jenkinson, 53; Daniel McCreanor, 59; Patrick O'Hare, 35; and Eamon Byrne, 39.
Relatives of the victims first complained to the Ombudsman's Office in 2006 about a police investigation which had seen 16 people arrested but nobody convicted.
On Thursday, current Police Ombudsman Dr Michael Maguire published his report.
He found that:
· Information received on a 'small but ruthless' UVF unit was not passed to detectives investigating their attacks - which may have prevented Loughinisland attack.
· Fundamental failings in overall Loughinisland investigation.
· Despite having names of those suspected to be responsible within 24 hours, there was a "significant delay" in arresting them.
· One suspect was an RUC informer.
· Informants involved in importing Loyalist guns into Northern Ireland were protected by police. Weapons were found to be used in 70 murders and attempted murders.
· A senior member of the UDA, who was also providing information to RUC Special Branch, played a central role in directing UDA member and former Army agent, Brian Nelson's efforts, along with "security force oversight".
· Police failed to identify a farm used as an arms dump, despite its location being mentioned to officers.
· The Loughinisland weapons were used for other murders and terrorist attacks.
Dr Maguire said: "When viewed collectively, I have no hesitation in saying collusion was a significant feature of the Loughinisland murders," he said.
On protecting those informants involved in importing guns for the UVF, UDA and Ulster Resistance, Dr Maguire said: "Given the gravity of the conspiracy and the impact it had on the lives of numerous citizens, this decision has proven in my view to be indefensible."
<<<Read the full report here>>>
Report
His 160 page report makes public for the first time some of the detailed information informants provided and how this led to the recovery of a substantial amount of the imported weapons. But it also questions how a significant number ended up in the hands of Loyalist terrorists.
It reveals police informants at the most senior levels within Loyalist paramilitary organisations were involved in an importation of guns and ammunition into Northern Ireland in the mid to late 1980s.
The report has identified that two of the weapons from this shipment were connected to the UVF attack on the Heights Bar in Loughinisland on 18 June 1994, to the murders of two men in separate attacks and to a series of other terrorist incidents.
Police figures indicate that the unrecovered weapons from the importation were used in a least 70 murders and attempted murders.
The investigation examined in detail some of the information police were receiving in the mid 80s and early 90s, how they used it and in particular how they investigated the Loughinisland attack.
'Some officers appeared to have place more value on gathering information and protecting sources than on prevention and detection of crime' Dr Maguire
Dr Maguire said the police approach to informants was a concern which appeared time and time again throughout this investigation: "We have seen occasions when informants contributed to both the saving of life and the loss of life."
The report shows instances when police were content not to ask informants for information about serious crime; instances when people volunteered such information and police chose not to act upon it and instances when informants were protected from investigation.
"Some police officers appeared to have placed more value on gathering information and protecting their sources that on the prevention and detection of crime," he said.
Arms importation
The Police Ombudsman's investigation looked at attempts by Loyalists to import weapons into Northern Ireland in 1985 and the role played by the UDA member and former Army agent, Brian Nelson.
It has confirmed for the first time that a senior member of the UDA, who was also providing information to RUC Special Branch, played a central role in directing Nelson's efforts, along with "security force oversight".
It records that although these plans ran aground that year because of a lack of funding, Loyalists continued in their efforts, and police continued to receive information.
The Police Ombudsman has established that some of those involved in the importation had been under surveillance.
This was part of a wider operation directed by police and which also involved the army. It was run from Special Branch Headquarters and had been in place for several months. The operation received information from a "reliable and well placed source within the higher echelons of the UDA".
The report refers to information police received in January 1988 which said the weapons had arrived in Northern Ireland and provides some detail of events on 8 January, the day three members of the UDA travelled in cars from Belfast to collect their share of the shipment.
According to this information, those surveying the vehicles temporarily lost sight of them for 90 minutes in remote countryside. It was during this period that some of the weapons and ammunition was retrieved from where they had been hidden and loaded into the cars for the return journey to Belfast.
The cars were spotted again a short time later and police mounted a checkpoint on Mahon Road near Portadown, arrested the three men and recovered a substantial amount of the shipment.
The matter was immediately handed over to local detectives for investigation. The Police Ombudsman has found that while the majority of these officers acted as professionally as they could, Special Branch did not give them information about the police operation prior to the arrests.
'I can find no logical reason why police failed to identify [weapons dump]' Dr Maguire
Despite this, and through their own efforts, the detectives came to suspect the location from where the men retrieved these weapons may have been a farm. They then set about trying to find it, but without success.
Police later received information that the farm in question was the property of James Mitchell, a former RUC Reserve Constable, who had previously described it to police as one of the main UVF arms dumps in mid Ulster' and who had been convicted of terrorist offences in 1980.
"I can find no logical reason why police failed to identify this property as a possible hide for these weapons. Mitchell was already known to police," Dr Maguire said.
"A police officer present when Mitchell made those comments about his farm was in the car on one of the occasions when detectives drove around looking for a farm where the weapons may have been stored."
The detective who led this investigation and another who assisted him have said they were not told about Mitchell's farm, nor were aware of it.
The lead officer told Police Ombudsman investigators that had he been given this information, he would have "taken the farm apart".
The Police Ombudsman investigation has also seen information later received by police which reported that within two hours of the cars being stopped at Mahon Road, Mitchell was warned police were about to search his property and the weapons were then moved.
The next day, an army unit spent almost two hours carrying out a search at one of his properties, but found nothing. The Ombudsman's investigation was not able to establish conclusively whether this search was connected to the events of the previous day.
Several weeks later, on 4 and 5 February, police recovered a significant number of firearms at Flush Road in north Belfast. These were believed to have been part of the importation.
Convicted
On 19 October 1988 the three men arrested at Portadown were convicted at Belfast Crown Court of terrorist related offences.
Dr Maguire said informants who were involved in gun running were protected from police investigation: "Despite being implicated in the importation of these weapons, senior members of the UVF, UDA and Ulster Resistance were not subject to police investigation.
"This can be attributed to a decision by Special Branch not to disseminate intelligence implicating these individuals, some of whom were informants.
"Given the gravity of the conspiracy and the impact it had on the lives of numerous citizens, this decision has proven in my view to be indefensible," he said.
Gun Running
Police ballistic records indicate that VZ58 assault rifles were used by Loyalist paramilitaries in more than 70 murders and attempted murders in Northern Ireland from March 1988. Many, if not all of them, are believed to have come from the shipment which arrived in January that year.
One in particular has been linked to the murder of Joseph Reynolds in east Belfast on 12 October 1993 and to the attack on McCabe's butcher's shop in Cromac Street in the city on 22 March 1994.
Several months later, it was the rifle used in the Heights Bar in Loughinisland.
A weapon found near the rifle after the Loughinisland attack, a Browning pistol, is also believed to have come from the shipment. It has been linked to several other terrorist attacks before this, including the murder of Martin Lavery on the Crumlin Road in Belfast on 20 December 1992.
South Down terrorism
The Police Ombudsman's report considered aspects of terrorism in South Down in the late 80s and early 90s and how police responded to it.
In particular, it notes what seemed to be a practice by some police officers of placing more value on collecting information and protecting their sources than on preventing and detecting crime.
The investigation established that while the main focus of the local Special Branch had been almost entirely on gathering information about the IRA.
However, following the murder of building contractor Jack Kielty in Dundrum in January 1988 it began to get information about a number of individuals suspected of involvement in Loyalist terrorism in the area.
The report shows that by mid 1993, Special Branch had information which alleged these individuals were involved in a series of terrorist incidents including a gun attack on the Thierafurth Inn near Castlewellan on 19 November 1992, in which Peter McCormack was killed, and the murder of Martin Lavery in north Belfast on 20 December that year.
'Police should have recognised as the escalating activities of a small but ruthless UVF unit operating in the area' Dr Maguire
The Police Ombudsman has established that most of the information police had begun to receive about this group from 1993 onwards was not passed to detectives investigating the attacks.
On one occasion, a document containing a particular piece of information was marked "NDD/Slow Waltz" (NDD = No Downward Dissemination and Slow Waltz' means share in slower time, if at all)
Dr Maguire said: "During these years a series of incidents happened that police should have recognised as the escalating activities of a small but ruthless UVF unit operating in the area.
"I recognise that there was a considerable amount of terrorist activity in Northern Ireland at the time, resources were stretched and it was a busy intelligence environment'.
"However, it is a matter of significant concern that Special Branch failed to pass on intelligence about the alleged activities of Loyalist paramilitaries, thereby protecting them from effective investigation.
"Had this unit been subject to sustained investigation they may have been arrested, brought to justice and not have been involved in the Loughinisland attack, of which they were suspected.
"Whether the attack would then have been carried out by another group will never be known," said Dr Maguire.
Police investigation of Loughinisland
The Police Ombudsman has found that many police officers within the RUC and the PSNI worked tirelessly to bring those responsible for the Loughinisland shootings to justice.
Despite this, Dr Maguire's report lists a number of fundamental failings in the investigation, including the forensic strategy, enquiries to find out more about the getaway car and those connected to it, enquiries to find witnesses and in the strategy for making arrests.
The Police Ombudsman investigation established that within 24 hours of the attack, Special Branch provided detectives with the names and details of people they believed responsible.
There was then a significant delay in arresting the suspects, with the result that evidential opportunities were lost.
The investigation also revealed that one person initially suspected of involvement in the Loughinisland shootings was an RUC informant.
It has also found that investigative opportunities were undermined by the way police conducted inquiries into the getaway car and those connected to it.
the report said: "There is no evidence that the police officer who was tasked to speak to the last registered owner of the car was briefed about the significance of these enquiries and did not get any detailed information about where the vehicle was in the days before the attack.
'This was a hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil' approach to the use of some informants' Dr Maguire
"Although police soon established the name and address given by the man who had bought the car from the last registered keeper the night before the shootings was that of a prominent member of the UDA, this was never properly followed up."
The Police Ombudsman investigation looked in detail at the man who owned the car after the last registered owner and who made a statement to police the day after the attack.
The Ombudsman found that the nature of the relationship between this person and two police officers in particular contributed to the flawed approach to these inquiries.
However, the Ombudsman did not find any information to suggest this man was involved in the Loughinisland attack.
The police later received intelligence that the murder suspects were warned by a police officer they were going to be arrested when they were arrested for a second time later in 1994. This matter was not investigated by the police.
Dr Maguire noted that none of the information police were getting about the attack appeared to come from their senior sources within the UVF: "I have found no evidence that sources were tasked with gathering specific information that could have assisted the murder investigation.
"This was a hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil' approach to the use of some informants, which potentially frustrated the police investigation," he said.
Conclusion
The Police Ombudsman investigation found there have been many within the RUC and the PSNI who worked tirelessly to bring those responsible for the Loughinisland attack to justice.
It has found no evidence the security forces were aware the UVF were planning to mount an attack in Loughinisland.
However, it has also expressed significant concerns about the approach of some police officers to informants and the information such people were providing.
"The use of informants is an integral part of policing. But using them requires the balancing of the potential value of information they may provide with the knowledge that they may be involved in serious crime," Dr Maguire said.
"In this instance, the value of the information they provided led to the recovery of a large number of those weapons and police are to be commended. It is unlikely these items would have been recovered if there had not been informers within the ranks of loyalist paramilitaries.
"But they were also involved in serious crime, namely the importation of weapons, some of which were not recovered and were used in at least 70 murders and attempted murders in Northern Ireland. There is no evidence that most of them were subject to police investigation.
'The failure to bring the killers to justice cannot be explained solely by the problems with the investigation' Dr Maguire
"I have considered the context of policing at the time. The RUC did not have the checks and balances and legislation in relation to the handling of informants that now exists in modern policing. They requested guidance from Government, but none was forthcoming.
"However a lack of guidance does not excuse the actions of the intelligence world if individuals who were informers were protected from investigation," he said.
Dr Maguire said his investigation also raises issues about how police were choosing to use the information such people were providing.
"Prior to the shootings in Loughinisland, there were a series of terrorist attacks which police should have recognised as the escalating activities of a small but ruthless UVF unit operating in south Down," he said.
"On occasions there was a failure to pass on relevant information to the detectives investigating these incidents in order to protect informants."
The report said Special Branch continued to engage in a relationship with sources they identified in intelligence reporting as likely to have been involved at some level in Loughinisland.
It has concluded that the desire by some to protect informants influenced police activity and undermined the investigation into those who carried out the killings that evening.
"The failure to bring the killers to justice cannot be explained solely by the problems with the investigation," he said.
"This report has evidenced many examples of failures to pass on intelligence to detectives engaged in the investigation of serious crime.
"Investigative lines of inquiry were not followed and individuals who might have been subject to detailed and robust investigation were effectively excluded from such consideration.
"These represent more than intelligence failures'. At best they are indicative of an 'intelligence mindset' which placed the collection of information before the prevention and detection of crime," said Dr Maguire.
Some of the bereaved families in Loughinisland have alleged that there was collusion between members of the RUC and those responsible for the murders.
Dr Maguire said he has taken the definition of collusion to be that given by Justice Smithwick, a definition accepted by the PSNI.
"Many of the individual issues I have identified in this report, including the protection of informants through wilful acts and the passive turning a blind eye; fundamental failures in the initial police investigation and the destruction of police records, are in themselves evidence of collusion as defined by Justice Smithwick.
"When viewed collectively, I have no hesitation in saying collusion was a significant feature of the Loughinisland murders," he said.

Related Content
· Loughinisland massacre: Police collusion in 1994 murders 'totally unacceptable' - Chief Constable George Hamilton
· Loughinisland massacre: PSNI vow to catch loyalist killers of World Cup fans
· My awful guilt that I survived Loughinisland: UVF massacre victim Colm breaks silence as anniversary looms
· 'Still a sense of fear when I return'
· PSNI chief defers Stakeknife statement to avoid Loughinisland report clash
· Massacre survivor calls on killers to give families truth
· Theresa Villiers' comments 'offensive to Loughinisland massacre victims'
· Eerily prophetic Troubles ad that shocked us in 1993 gets 500,000 views in one day
· PSNI chief Matt Baggott 'part of massacre cover-up'
· Incompetent policing is not same as conspiracy
· Loughinisland families angry and disgusted' at report findings
· O'Loan definition of collusion radically different' to successor's
· Families of Loughinisland victims vow to fight on as report into bar massacre rules out collusion
· Loughinisland: Tight-knit community brought even closer in face of adversity
· Loughinisland: Seventeen years on and still nobody has been brought to justice
· Families reject pub killings report
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#7
SEPTEMBER 8, 2011
US/UK: Documents Reveal Libya Rendition Details
End Reliance on No-Torture "Assurances" from Abusive Governments

https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/09/08/us/u...on-details
(New York) Documents recently discovered by Human Rights Watch in Tripoli reveal new details of the high level of cooperation among United States, United Kingdom, and Libyan intelligence agencies in the transfer of terrorism suspects, Human Rights Watch said today. The documents underscore the need for the US and UK to account for past abuses, Human Rights Watch said.
The documents, discovered on September 3, 2011, describe US offers to transfer, or render, at least four detainees from US to Libyan custody, one with the active participation of the UK; US requests for detention and interrogation of other suspects; UK requests for information about terrorism suspects; and the sharing of information about Libyans living in the UK. This cooperation took place despite Libya's extensive and widely known record of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees.
……
US, UK Policy and Practice
The Bush administration transferred more than 100 detainees to various countries from 2004 to 2006, including at least seven to Libya, [>click< to right ear as I copy/paste this 5:05pm 9June2016 "Libya", "Syria", "disappeared", "a secret place", "plane waiting on the tarmac [neuralgic left temple there]", "orange", and thousands more, not to forget the change of loyalties' tactics & the dream choreography indoctrinations keep it up Shitlers you need the practice followed by their recent "Not British", whatever that means, me' or them, it's all drivel of the intoxicated]
Obligations and Accountability
Under the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the "Convention against Torture"), which the US ratified in 1994 and the UK in 1988, no one is to be sent to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that they might be tortured or mistreated. This obligation has been interpreted to require governments to provide a mechanism for people to challenge decisions to transfer them to another country.
The Convention against Torture also obligates countries to investigate credible allegations of torture and other ill-treatment, including complicity. However, despite overwhelming evidence of US government involvement at senior levels in the use of torture, and of US and UK complicity in torture in third countries, neither government has conducted sufficient investigations into the alleged conduct. [synthetic trigeminal neuralgia for 180days consecutive, 5-15minutes after going to bed "There was always an MI5 officer present"- c.late2013]
…….
Another document is a letter from a senior MI6 official to Musa Kusa congratulating him on the "safe arrival of Abu Abd Allah Sadiq" and taking credit for Britain's role in the rendition, which "was the least we could do for you and Libya."
……
Some of the reported methods of torture, according to the report, included: chaining prisoners to a wall for hours; clubbing; applying electric shock; applying corkscrews to the back; pouring lemon juice in open wounds; breaking fingers and allowing the joints to heal without medical care; suffocating with plastic bags; deprivation of food and water; hanging by the wrists; suspension from a pole inserted between the knees and elbows; cigarette burns; threats of being attacked by dogs; and beating on the soles of the feet.
[Schiz training via augmented cognition implants, cochlear implants & retinal implant (-all effects precisely as tho'-)]

Ende

[size=12]Which led to-


[/SIZE]

Blair government's rendition policy led to rift between UKspy agencies[/FONT]

MI5chief's complaint over MI6 role in war on terror' abductions caused prolongedbreakdown in relations[/FONT]
Nick Hopkins[/FONT] and Richard Norton-Taylor
Tuesday 31 May 2016[/FONT] [/FONT]17.56 BST[/FONT][/FONT]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016...es-mi6-mi5
British involvement incontroversial and clandestine rendition operations provoked an unprecedentedrow between the UK's domestic and foreign intelligence services, MI5 and MI6,at the height of the "war on terror", the Guardian can reveal.[/FONT]
The headof MI5, Eliza Manningham-Buller, was so incensed when she discovered the roleplayed by MI6 in abductions that led to suspected extremists being tortured,she threw out a number of her sister agency's staff and banned them fromworking at MI5's headquarters, Thames House.[/FONT]
Accordingto Whitehall sources, she also wrote to the then prime minister, Tony Blair, tocomplain about the conduct of MI6 officers, saying their actions had threatenedBritain's intelligence gathering and may have compromised the security andsafety of MI5 officers and their informants.[/FONT]
The lettercaused a serious and prolonged breakdown of trust between Britain's domesticand foreign spy agencies provoked by the Blair government's support forrendition. [/FONT]
The letterwas discovered by investigators examining whether British intelligence officersshould face criminal charges over the rendition of an exiled Libyan oppositionleader, Abdul Hakim Belhaj.[/FONT]
A criticof Muammar Gaddafi, the former Libyan dictator, Belhaj was seized in Bangkok inMarch, 2004 in a joint UK-US operation, and handed over to the CIA. He allegesthe CIA tortured him and injected him with "truth serum" before flying him andhis family to Tripoli to be interrogated.[/FONT]
According to documents found inTripoli, five days before he was secretly flown to the Libyan capital, MI6 gaveGaddafi's intelligence agency the French and Moroccan aliases used by Belhaj.[/FONT]
MI6 alsoprovided the Libyans with the intelligence that allowed the CIA to kidnap himand take him to Tripoli.[/FONT]
Belhajtold the Guardian that British intelligence officers were among the first tointerrogate him in Tripoli. He said he was "very surprised that the British gotinvolved in what was a very painful period in my life".[/FONT]
"I wasn'tallowed a bath for three years and I didn't see the sun for one year," he toldthe Guardian. "They hung me from the wall and kept me in an isolation cell. Iwas regularly tortured."[/FONT]
The secretrole played by MI6 was revealed after the fall of Gaddafi, when documents werefound in ransacked offices of his intelligence chief, Moussa Koussa. [/FONT]
One, dated18 March 2004 was a note from Sir Mark Allen, then head of counter-terrorism atMI6, to Moussa Koussa. It said: "I congratulate you on the safe arrival of AbuAbd Allah Sadiq [Abdul-Hakim Belhaj]. This was the least we could do for youand for Libya to demonstrate the remarkable relationship we have built over theyears. I am so glad. I was grateful to you for helping the officer we sent outlast week."[/FONT]
Allenadded: "[Belhaj's] information on the situation in this country is of urgentimportance to us. Amusingly, we got a request from the Americans to channelrequests for information from [Belhaj] through the Americans. I have nointention of doing any such thing. The intelligence on [Belhaj] was British. Iknow I did not pay for the air cargo [Belhaj]. But I feel I have the right todeal with you direct on this and am very grateful for the help you are givingus."[/FONT]
ScotlandYard has concluded its investigation into the alleged involvement of intelligenceofficers and officials in Libyan rendition operations and an announcement aboutwhether or not to prosecute is imminent.[/FONT]
Whitehall sources have told theGuardian that police and prosecutors have been reviewing the issue for months.They say investigators have been frustrated by the way potentially keywitnesses have said they were unable to recall who had authorised Britishinvolvement in the rendition programme, who else knew about it, and who knewthe precise details of the Belhaj abduction.[/FONT]
"This isan extremely difficult area for police and prosecutors," said one source. "Theproblem is, the CPS cannot bring a charge against a government policy."[/FONT]
The letterto Blair sent by Manningham-Buller, who was director general of MI5 from 2002to 2007, reflected deep divisions within Britain's intelligence agencies overthe methods being used to gather information after the 9/11 attacks on the US.[/FONT]
Though MI5has been criticised about some of the tactics used, the letter suggestsBritain's security service had serious misgivings about rendition operationsand the torture of suspects.[/FONT]
TheGuardian has been told the MI5 chief was "shocked and appalled" by thetreatment of Belhaj and vented her anger at MI6, which was then run by SirRichard Dearlove.[/FONT]
"When EMB[Manningham-Buller] found out what had gone on in Libya, she was evidentlyfurious. I have never seen a letter quite like it. There was a serious riftbetween MI5 and MI6 at the time."[/FONT]
She hassince said the aim of engaging with Gaddafi to persuade him to abandon hischemical and nuclear weapons programme was not "wrong in principle". [/FONT]
However,she added: "There are clearly questions to be answered about the variousrelationships that developed afterwards and whether the UK supped with asufficiently long spoon."[/FONT]
The policefiles with the CPS are understood to describe how Belhaj, his pregnant wife,Fatima Bouchar, and children, and Sami al-Saadi and his family were abductedfrom the far east to Gaddafi's interrogation and torture cells in Tripoli in2004.[/FONT]
The Britishgovernment paid £2.2m to settle a damages claim brought by al-Saadi and hisfamily. Belhaj has refused to settle unless he receives an apology.[/FONT]
JackStraw, who as foreign secretary was responsible for MI6, and Allen have alwaysdenied wrongdoing.[/FONT]
In December 2005, when the firstevidence emerged that Britain was colluding in CIA rendition operations, Strawtold MPs: "There is simply no truth in the claims that the United Kingdom hasbeen involved in rendition full stop."[/FONT]
When theLibyan renditions came to light, Straw said: "No foreign secretary can know allthe details of what its intelligence agencies are doing at any one time." [/FONT]
He hasbeen interviewed by the police but only as a potential witness. Governmentofficials, insisting on anonymity, said MI6 was following "ministeriallyauthorised government policy".[/FONT]
Blair saidhe did not have "any recollection at all" of the Belhaj rendition.[/FONT]
The Blairand Straw denials appeared to be contradicted by Dearlove.[/FONT]
He has said: "It was a politicaldecision, having very significantly disarmed Libya, for the government tocooperate with Libya on Islamist terrorism. The whole relationship was one ofserious calculation about where the overall balance of our national interestsstood."[/FONT]
NeitherMI5 nor MI6, nor Manningham-Buller, wanted to make any public comment.Whitehall sources insist the relationship between MI5 and MI6 has now beenrepaired after a difficult period. [/FONT]
Belhaj isdemanding an apology and an acceptance of British guilt. He has taken his caseto the supreme court, which has yet to hand down a judgment.[/FONT]
Last year,the court was confronted with the prospect of Straw and British intelligenceofficers deploying the "foreign act of state doctrine" that is to say, thecourts here cannot rule on the case since agents from foreign countries,notably the US and Libya, were involved, and they are granted immunity.[/FONT]
Section 7of the 1994 Intelligence Services Act, sometimes described as the "James Bondclause", protects MI6 officers from prosecution for actions anywhere in theworld that would otherwise be illegal. They would be protected as long as theiractions were authorised in writing by the secretary of state.[/FONT]
However,lawyers for Belhaj say many cases involving deportation or asylum seekers, forexample, relate to actions of foreign states and that, in any case, tortureoverrides all legal loopholes.[/FONT]
An inquiryunder Sir Peter Gibson, a retired senior judge, into earlier renditionprogrammes in which British intelligence was involved, was abandoned because ofthe new and dramatic evidence about Belhaj's abduction.[/FONT]
Afterinsisting that the issues were so serious that it needed a judge-led inquiryrather than one carried out by the parliamentary intelligence and securitycommittee, David Cameron reversed his position. After the Gibson inquiry wasdropped, he said the issues should be taken up by the committee after all.[/FONT]
DominicGrieve, the former attorney general and now chair of the committee, saidshortly after he was appointed last October: "Our longer-term priority is thesubstantial inquiry into the role of the UK government and security andintelligence agencies in relation to detainee treatment and rendition, wherethere are still unanswered questions."[/FONT]
The Gibsoninquiry published a damning interim report before it folded. It concluded thatthe British government and its intelligence agencies had been involved inrendition operations, in which detainees were kidnapped and flown around theglobe, and had interrogated detainees who they knew were being mistreated.[/FONT]
It saidMI6 officers were informed they were under no obligation to report breaches ofthe Geneva conventions; intelligence officers appear to have taken advantage ofthe abuse of detainees; and Straw, as foreign secretary, had suggested that thelaw might be amended to allow suspects to be rendered to the UK.[/FONT]
It raised27 questions they said would need to be answered if the full truth about theway in which Britain waged its "war on terror" was to be established.[/FONT]
Thequestions include:[/FONT]
[/FONT] [/FONT]Did UKintelligence officers turn a blind eye to "specific, inappropriate techniquesor threats" used by others and use this to their advantage in interrogations?[/FONT]
[/FONT] [/FONT]If so, wasthere "a deliberate or agreed policy" between UK officers and overseas intelligenceofficers?[/FONT]
[/FONT] [/FONT]Did thegovernment and its agencies become "inappropriately involved in somerenditions"?[/FONT]
[/FONT] [/FONT]Was therea willingness, "at least at some levels within the agencies, to condone,encourage or take advantage of a rendition operation"?[/FONT]
Ende

Which has led to-

'Tortured' rendition couple angry over failure to charge MI6

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36489647
By Gordon CoreraSecurity correspondent, BBC News 1 hour ago
A man who was secretly detained and sent to Libya with his pregnant wife in 2004 has spoken of his disappointment that no-one will be prosecuted.
Ex-Libyan dissident Abdel Hakim Belhaj says the UK's MI6 helped to arrange the couple's rendition - saying they were covertly taken from Thailand to Libya.
Sami al-Saadi and his family were also sent to Libya in 2004, where he was allegedly tortured.
Prosecutors said there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone from MI6.
Mr Belhaj told the BBC he was "very disappointed that individuals responsible" would not be prosecuted, adding: "If there is political interference with the courts, then it undermines British justice."
Rendition involves sending a person from one country to another for imprisonment and interrogation, and in some cases torture.

'Injected'

Mr Belhaj, who commanded an armed opposition group against Libyan dictator Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, and his wife, Fatima Boudchar, had been trying to seek asylum in the UK when they were taken from Bangkok to Tripoli in 2004.
Their lawyers claimed it was a joint operation between the US intelligence service the CIA and its UK counterparts from MI6 to help Col Gaddafi round up his enemies.
Mr Belhaj alleges he was tortured by his jailers and questioned by British intelligence officers during a six-year detention.

Mrs Boudchar, who was pregnant at the time of her detention and transfer to Libya, spent four months in a Libyan prison.
Speaking in her first television interview, she told the BBC: "My hands and legs were tied and my eyes were covered. They injected me with something. I didn't know where I was going.
"I was six months' pregnant. I was so scared that I was going to die."
Separately, Mr al-Saadi and his family were taken from Hong Kong and sent to Libya, where he was allegedly tortured. Memos indicated that MI6 was involved in his transfer.
Warming relations
The Metropolitan Police and the Crown Prosecution Service opened an investigation in January 2012 after documents found following the fall of Col Gaddafi suggested that MI6 had been involved in the rendition.
The documents included letters signed by "Mark". It has been claimed that this is Sir Mark Allen, then MI6 director of counter terrorism.
In a letter to Moussa Koussa, head of Col Gaddafi's intelligence agency, dated March 2004, "Mark" thanked him for helping to arrange a meeting in the desert between then Prime Minister Tony Blair and Col Gaddafi, as part of a warming of relations between the UK and Libya.
"Mark" wrote: "More importantly, I congratulate you on the safe arrival of Abu Abd Allah Sadiq (Mr Belhaj)… This was the least we could do for you and for Libya to demonstrate the remarkable relationship we have built over the years."


Analysis
Even though there will be no prosecution of MI6 officers, the Libyan case still raises many questions.
For the first time, the CPS statement confirms that MI6 was in "communication" with individuals from foreign countries involved in the rendition, and seems to confirm the broad outline of the allegations (even though it finds insufficient evidence to charge).
In one of the most intriguing lines, it also says that the MI6 officer involved sought political authority for "some" of his actions, but not in a formal way. This goes to one of the mysteries surrounding the operation - who authorised it?
Sensitive MI6 operations are supposed to be authorised by politicians - normally the foreign secretary. Jack Straw was foreign secretary at the time and has denied any role in rendition.
And today's statement seems to support the idea that MI6 was operating at the time with only partial political cover.
There was no written record and nor did the officer, we learn, get authority for all his communications and conduct from whomever he talked to. That will raise questions about whether MI6 was operating under sufficiently strong oversight at the time.


The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said an unnamed public official had been investigated for aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring any offence of torture, and misconduct in public office.
It was found the person did not have any connection with the initial physical detention of either man or their families, the CPS said.
Sue Hemming, of the CPS, said: "Following a thorough investigation, the CPS has decided that there is insufficient evidence to charge the suspect with any criminal offence.
"We made our decision based upon all the available admissible evidence and after weighing up all of the information we have been provided with."
'Without fear or favour'
Mr Belhaj's lawyer Cori Crider told the BBC: "This suggests to me the security services are functionally above the law. If you're not going to charge in this case, then when are you going to charge?"
Lib Dem MP Alistair Carmichael has called for the government to make a statement to MPs following the CPS's decision.
The government's Intelligence and Security Committee said later it would examine the families' case as part of its ongoing inquiry into detainee treatment and rendition.
Scotland Yard said a small team of detectives had spent more than two years conducting a "thorough and penetrating investigation without fear or favour", and it was for the CPS to decide whether to prosecute.
Both Mr al-Saadi and Mr Belhaj pursued civil claims against the British government and named individuals. Mr al-Saadi settled out of court but Mr Belhaj's case is continuing.


Ende

Interestingly, Gordon Corera of the BBC, seems to be implying that the Met are saying "We've done our job investigating this, it's the CPS who've decided not to take it further" - the same CPS who ruled during the 'phone hacking thing, that it was legal to access someones voicemail (& texts?) if the recipient has already heard the message - this is "RIPAbollocks", as an investigating journo called it. Article in the news last week saying that no-one was giving names and there was a collective amnesia in progress, regards the rendition investigation. Interesting thing about the 'Crown Prosecution Service' - I get alot of "queen/Queen" refs, always have since this mediaevalist fantasy-land of torture-murder started; in the very very ealy days, I got "There are grown men who weep when they think of their queen/Queen" - take yer pick as to the case there, they're massive gaylords & I kinda wish I'd bitten my tongue when I'd quipped on YT about "What do you think the Queen would like in her latest feast?" - "Polonium210". Wups.
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#8
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...t-11461516
Northumbria Police defends decision to not publicise alleged Leazes Park sex attack by Syrian men
· 16:11, 12 JUN 2016 UPDATED 16:54, 12 JUN 2016 BY AGENCY STAFF

Three men and a boy - one of whom is thought to have come to Newcastle as part of a resettlement programme - have appeared in court
Iain Buist

A police force has explained its decision not to publicise allegations that two teenage girls were sexually assaulted by Syrians in a park, saying such a move could have frustrated the inquiry.
Three young men and a teenager have appeared in court charged with the offences said to have happened last month in Leazes Park, Newcastle.
At least one of them was a refugee allowed into the country in the Government's resettlement programme, according to the BBC's Newsnight programme.
Northumbria Police did not publicise the alleged attacks or release details about the charges to the media.
Since Newsnight aired on Friday, and following an article in the Mail on Sunday which questioned why the force chose to "keep quiet" concerning the alleged attacks, the force has responded.
A spokesman said: "On Tuesday, May 10, police received a report that two teenage girls had been sexually assaulted in Leazes Park in Newcastle .
"An investigation was carried out. Four males were charged with sexual assault.
"Three of the men, aged 18, 18 and 20, appeared at Newcastle Crown Court on Friday June 10, and were bailed to appear at a later date.
"A 17-year-old male will appear at North Tyneside Magistrates' Court on September 29."
The spokesman said the force did not release details of every incident it investigates.
"In relation to this incident, the arrests were made within 48 hours of the report and we had an idea from the beginning of the investigation who these men were and how we could locate and arrest them," he added.
"We needed to carry out enquiries and there was no need for a public witness appeal and there was no danger to the wider public.
"Had we proactively released details of the incident then it could have frustrated our investigation."
The spokesman said the men who appeared before Newcastle Crown Court were:
· Omar Marwan Badreddin, 18 and from Newcastle, charged with sexual assault.
· Mohammed Hamdan Alfrouh, 20 and from Newcastle, charged with two counts of sexual assault.
· Mohammad Allakkoud, 18 and from Newcastle, charged with one count of sexual assault.
A 17-year-old boy, charged with one count of sexual assault, will appear at North Tyneside Magistrates' Court in September.

Ende

[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=8430&stc=1]
i-paper 13June2016

Ende

Well now there's a coincidence - I've had quite a few "badger" refs - tho' I can't say that torture-murder schemes by Northumbria "Total Policing" Cess comes as a surprise - they're completely off their heads; I've long thought there's much much more to this than meets the eye -

John 'The Badge' Roberts murder: Mystery goes on as yet another suspect ruled out of probe
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...er-6839566
[FONT=&amp]
The Chronicle can today reveal that the ninth person to be arrested and questioned over the death of John 'The Badge' Roberts more than a year ago, has now been released without charge





[Image: ec110309roberts2-1735303.jpg]
John 'The Badge' Roberts
The baffling mystery of who killed John The Badge' Roberts took another twist today after yet another suspect was ruled out of the murder probe.
The Chronicle can today reveal that the ninth person to be arrested and questioned over the 32-year-old's death more than a year ago, has now been released without charge.
The 43-year-old, from Newcastle, was taken into police custody on the morning of January 9.
He was quizzed for several hours about John's violent death before being released on bail.
But the suspect has now been told no further action would be taken against him.
And John's loved ones' long wait for answers goes on.
Det Supt Roger Ford, who is leading the investigation into the dad-of-one's murder, in December 2012, has vowed not to give up until he gets justice for the family.
And he has once again asked anyone who knows anything to get in touch.
He said: "We are continuing to investigate the murder of John Roberts and we will always act on any new information that we receive.
"Information from the public may prove to be key with this investigation and one lead, or one piece of information, could be the vital breakthrough we need to locate John's killer.
"I'd urge anyone who knows anything about John's death, or anyone who has any information that they think could help us - no matter how insignificant they think it is to come forward and share it with us."
John was found battered to death in his home in Winlaton, Gateshead on Sunday, December 16, 2012.
His body was discovered by patrolling police who went to investigate after noticing the door of the house, on Park Terrace, had been left open.
A post mortem revealed he died of serious head injuries.
The tragic discovery sparked one of Northumbria Police's biggest manhunts of recent years.
Detectives have since carried out more than 2,500 house-to-house enquiries in and around Winlaton.
John was a devoted Newcastle United fan who was well known among the Toon Army.
He used to help organise away trips for travelling supporters and earned the nickname John The Badge' selling pin-badges outside the Tyneside Irish Centre, near St James' Park, on match days.
In January last year, John's picture was handed out to thousands of Newcastle United fans at St James' Park.
Detectives also took the unusual step of using an actor to film a reconstruction of John's last known movements, on the six-month anniversary of his death.
What looked like a breakthrough came in February when police arrested two men, aged 27 and 21, a 17-year-old boy and a 16-year-old girl on suspicion of murder. A 15-year-old girl was also held for perverting the course of justice.
All were put on police bail but later released without charge.
Then in April three men, two aged 40 and from Gateshead and one 43-year-old from Newcastle, were arrested on suspicion of murder. But again the suspects were released without charge.
Police are still appealing for anyone who knows anything about his death to get in touch.
[Image: JS26363599.jpg]John 'The Badge' Roberts John 'The Badge' Roberts murder: Timeline
SEPTEMBER 2012: John is arrested after taking a 14-year-old girl, who had planned to run away from home, to London to show her what it was like to be homeless. He is later charged with abduction.
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2012: John appeared at Newcastle Crown Court in relation to the allegations. He is later caught on CCTV at the Coral bookmakers in Blaydon.
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2012: John is last seen alive at 6.30pm at the Kandola Bros store in Winlaton.
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2012: John's body is found when police on patrol in Park Terrace noticed his front door was open and went to investigate. A murder investigation is launched and police appeal to the public for help.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 18, 2013: Police attend Newcastle United's home game against Reading and hand out posters and leaflets to supporters appealing for information.
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2013: Police swoop to arrest a 27-year-old man in Gateshead in connection with the murder probe. He is questioned then released on bail.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2013: Police arrest two men, aged 27 and 21, a 17-year-old boy and a 16-year-old girl on suspicion of murder. A 15-year-old girl was also held for perverting the course of justice. All five were released on police bail after questioning.
MONDAY, MARCH 11, 2013: The Chronicle reveals detectives have found both male and female DNA at John's home and police urge anyone who has been in the house to come forward and give a sample.
MONDAY, APRIL 8, 2013: Police arrest three men, two aged 40 and from Gateshead and one 43-year-old from Newcastle, on suspicion of murder. All were bailed.
JUNE 15, 2013: Detectives mark the six-month anniversary of John's death with the release of a video reconstruction of his last movements.
SEPTEMBER 25, 2013: The Chronicle reveals that all suspects arrested over the murder have been told they face no further police action.
DECEMBER 16, 2013: John's mother Jennifer opens up for the first time about her son's killing, and makes an emotional plea for information.
JANUARY 9, 2014: Police arrest a 43-year-old man from Newcastle in a 7am swoop. He is taken into custody to be questioned.
MARCH 10, 2014: The suspect answers bail and is told he will face no further police action.




[/FONT]


Attached Files
.jpg   i-p13June2016NorthumbriaCopsBlack.jpg (Size: 155.54 KB / Downloads: 22)
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#9
[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=8432&stc=1]
Loughinisland: Alot can happen since 2011


Attached Files
.jpg   i-P10June16LoughinislandGunrunning.jpg (Size: 184.78 KB / Downloads: 22)
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply
#10
Undercover policing inquiry considers dead children's IDs disclosure - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36587661
By Dominic CascianiHome affairs correspondent 22 June 2016

The public inquiry into undercover policing is to consider if bereaved parents should be told that officers used their dead children's identities.
Inquiry chairman Sir Christopher Pitchford will hear legal argument at a special session later on Wednesday.
The identities of at least 42 children are also understood to have used.
The inquiry is examining evidence of wrongdoing by disbanded undercover units, including how women were duped into having relationships.
One former police officer has called for the full facts of the "ghoulish practice" of undercover police taking dead children's names to be revealed.
The revelation that dead children's names were taken by officers deployed by the now disbanded Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) was one of the triggers for the public inquiry.

"There is a clear duty to inform parents who wish to receive information about whether their deceased children's identities were used, and to provide a full and unambiguous apology to those affected" -Jules Carey, Solicitor
Officers often browsed cemeteries for details of a child who - had they lived - would have been their age, and then used the name as the foundation stone for their "legend".
Some would then research the family's background to help create a complete identity that would stand up to investigation, including visiting and memorising specific landmarks from their fictitious childhood.
An official internal police investigation has already discovered the identities of 42 dead children were probably used over four decades.
The true number of names used could be far higher.
Some 106 covert identities were created by the SDS alone between 1968 and its disbandment 40 years later.
The National Public Order Intelligence Unit - a former team of officers infiltrating political protest movements outside of London - used the technique and others are suspected of doing so too.cer
How the inquiry handles the possible disclosure of names is set to be an ethical and legal minefield.
Parliament's Home Affairs Committee has already called for the families affected to be given a full explanation about what happened. But many of those families don't know identities were taken.

Scotland Yard has accepted the inquiry must investigate how the tactic developed and why there was "insufficient thought" given to its effect.
But it also says there is no legal obligation to reveal the identities used and has separately argued that former undercover officers must be protected.
Jules Carey, solicitor for some of the families seeking answers, said the police's policy to "neither confirm nor deny" the existence of officers, unless compelled to do so, should not be used to conceal wrongdoing and "shut down accountability"
"The practice of using the identity of a dead child to construct an undercover police officer's legend without parental consent was abhorrent and unlawful," he said.
"There is a clear duty to now inform parents who wish to receive information about whether their deceased children's identities were used, and to provide a full and unambiguous apology to those affected".
'Unambiguous apology'
Peter Francis, one of its former officers whose revelations led to the inquiry, says others who went undercover should explain what happened and offer apologies to families.
"As a former SDS officer, I have already admitted in public that I used the identity of a deceased young boy when I acted undercover," he said.
"I would like to publicly and unreservedly apologise for the untold and immense grief this fully state-authorised ghoulish practice must have caused the family involved and indeed all the other families involved.
"I strongly believe any close family members of my stolen identity should be immediately informed.
"They should receive a full explanation as to why the identity of their child was used, without seeking their permission or approval. They should also be given a full and unambiguous apology by the police and if needed, free counselling."
Mr Francis added that he had offered to meet the family of the child whose identity he had used.
"For the sake of closure, I strongly believe all my former SDS colleagues who used stolen identities should offer to do the same," he said.
Ende



1/2 UNDERCOVER POLICING INQUIRY - https://www.ucpi.org.uk/wp-content/uploa...erence.pdf
Terms of Reference
Purpose
To inquire into and report on undercover police operations conducted by English and Welsh police forces in England and Wales since 1968 and, in particular, to:
· investigate the role and the contribution made by undercover policing towards the prevention and detection of crime;
· examine the motivation for, and the scope of, undercover police operations in practice and their effect upon individuals in particular and the public in general;
· ascertain the state of awareness of undercover police operations of Her Majesty's Government;
· identify and assess the adequacy of the:
1. justification, authorisation, operational governance and oversight of undercover policing; 2. selection, training, management and care of undercover police officers;
· identify and assess the adequacy of the statutory, policy and judicial regulation of undercover policing.
Miscarriages of justice The inquiry's investigations will include a review of the extent of the duty to make, during a criminal prosecution, disclosure of an undercover police operation and the scope for miscarriage of justice in the absence of proper disclosure. The inquiry will refer to a panel, consisting of senior members of the Crown Prosecution Service and the police, the facts of any case in respect of which it concludes that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred as a result of an undercover police operation or its non disclosure. The panel will consider whether further action is required, including but not limited to, referral of the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Scope The inquiry's investigation will include, but not be limited to, whether and to what purpose, extent and effect undercover police operations have targeted political and social justice campaigners.
2/2 UNDERCOVER POLICING INQUIRY
The inquiry's investigation will include, but not be limited to, the undercover operations of the Special Demonstration Squad and the National Public Order Intelligence Unit. For the purpose of the inquiry, the term "undercover police operations" means the use by a police force of a police officer as a covert human intelligence source (CHIS) within the meaning of section 26(8) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, whether before or after the commencement of that Act. The terms "undercover police officer", "undercover policing", "undercover police activity" should be understood accordingly. It includes operations conducted through online media. The inquiry will not examine undercover or covert operations conducted by any body other than an English or Welsh police force.
Method The inquiry will examine and review all documents as the inquiry chairman shall judge appropriate. The inquiry will receive such oral and written evidence as the inquiry chairman shall judge appropriate.
Report The inquiry will report to the Home Secretary as soon as practicable. The report will make recommendations as to the future deployment of undercover police officers. It is anticipated that the inquiry report will be delivered up to three years after the publication of these terms of reference.
Martin Luther King - "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Albert Camus - "The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion".
Douglas MacArthur — "Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons."
Albert Camus - "Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear."
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Did Russian secret services avert military coup in Sverdlovsk? Magda Hassan 6 3,399 10-08-2011, 05:43 PM
Last Post: Jan Klimkowski
  Obama Administration's "Secret Law" to Spy on Americans Peter Lemkin 0 2,602 09-08-2011, 08:37 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  America's Secret Prisons Ed Jewett 1 2,581 18-03-2010, 07:49 PM
Last Post: Jan Klimkowski
  Secret and unusual places of geographical interest for UK residents and visitors. Magda Hassan 0 2,445 07-07-2009, 06:17 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Secret Operations of the Pentagon Tosh Plumlee 3 2,955 20-04-2009, 02:35 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Bush Admin - When Covert Secret Govt Surfaced Overtly Peter Lemkin 0 2,307 24-01-2009, 09:43 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Regan's Drug War.. Secret OPS Tosh Plumlee 0 2,838 03-12-2008, 07:31 PM
Last Post: Tosh Plumlee
  MI5 and MI6 given go ahead for secret hearings into abuse Magda Hassan 0 2,032 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  Lawyer Caught up in Secret CIA Flights Dies... Ed Jewett 0 2,040 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  The US had a secret surveillance group in Oslo Christer Forslund 0 5,197 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)