British Intelligence: Her Majesty’s Terrorist Network
"Shaylergate"
MI5, Military Intelligence 5, looks for spies and subversives within the UK. MI6,
Military Intelligence 6, operates under Foreign Office control and is involved in
spying on ‘enemies’ of the British state abroad.
David Shayler worked for MI5 for over six years before quitting in 1997. Amongst
other departments he primarily worked for G branch, the international terrorism
desk. Shayler headed the agency’s Libyan section for around two years. During
this period he developed a good working relationship with his opposite number in
MI6. In 1995 Shayler gained access to secret MI6 documents concerning a plot
to assassinate Colonel Mu'ammar Gaddafi, the Libyan Head of State.
Mu'ammar Gaddafi was born in the desert near Sirte in 1942. He overthrew the
Libyan monarchy in 1969 and launched a cultural revolution to remove traces of
imported ideology. He has supported a broad range of militant groups including
the IRA and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Alleged Libyan involvement in
attacks in Europe in 1986 led to US military strikes against Tripoli. For several
decades Gaddafi tried to portray himself as leader of the Arab world, and has
now taken up the mission of uniting Africa.
A document released on the Internet by Shayler confirms MI6 had foreknowledge
of the Gadaffi assassination plot. Shayler insists he has further information to
prove MI6 paid a Libyan member of the Al-Qaeda terrorist network at least
£100,000 ($156,000) to lead a 20 man team in carrying out the operation. This
agent was code named TUNWORTH, his MI6 handler was code named PT16. In
a press release Shayler stated,matter. In particular, we need to know how around £100,000 of taxpayers' money was used to
fund the sort of Islamic Extremists who have connections to Osama Bin Laden's Al Qaeda
network. Did ministers give MI6 permission for this? By the time MI6 paid the group in late 1995
or early 1996, US investigators had already established that Bin Laden was implicated in the
1993 attack on the World Trade Center. Given the timing and the close connections between
Libyan and Egyptian Islamic Extremists, it may even have been used to fund the murder of British
citizens in Luxor, Egypt in 1996.1
The assassination attempt was carried out in early 1996 but failed with tragic
consequences. ‘TUNWORTH’ was to place a bomb under Gaddafi’s convoy.
However, he foolishly placed the bomb under the wrong car, killing six innocent
bystanders.
Despite former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook describing the allegation as
‘fantasy,’ a 2001 Metropolitan Police investigation sought no charges against
David Shayler for perjury or wasting police time, confirming that his detailed
sworn statement was honest, reliable and true.
How can it be that the foreign intelligence agency of the British government was
colluding with Al-Qaeda terrorists who had already been charged with the 1993
World Trade Center bombing? Several of these individuals are still at large,
appearing on the FBI’s most wanted terrorists list.
The 1994 bombing of the Israeli Embassy was one of the worst terrorist
bombings London has seen. A 50-pound (22 kg) car bomb injured 13 and almost
destroyed the embassy. Later that night a second bomb injured six people at the
London offices of Britain's main Jewish charities and pro-Israel institutions.
A previously unknown group, the Palestinian Resistance Jaffa Group, claimed
credit for the attacks. Two Palestinians were later convicted for the attacks. The
presiding judge said it was only "providence" that more people were not seriously
injured or killed.
Shayler alleges that the British intelligence service MI5 was warned in advance
of the bombing, yet it took no action, failing even to tip off the police or the Israeli
government.
The warning, a written report from a highly trusted source, was sent for
assessment to a desk officer in MI5's international terrorism section. After she
failed to act on the report, it was later found buried in the filing cupboard of
another officer, leading to speculation of a bungled cover up. Neither officer was
disciplined and MI5 management failed to institute procedures to prevent the
recurrence of such an incident.
Shayler would have obviously been in a position to learn of the cover up. He also
worked at G branch, the international terrorism desk.
Responding to the revelations, Israel's ambassador to Britain Moshe Raviv said,
"This story is completely new to me. The Embassy had passed on to the Foreign Office general
warnings based on information from Jerusalem. These warnings had been sent to a number of
our embassies and as a consequence we had asked the Foreign Office to step up security and
vigilance at the Embassy in London. If this information is correct, it is amazing that greater efforts
were not made to prevent the attacks."2
Shayler also made the allegation that MI5 had prior knowledge of numerous IRA
bombings in London, most notably the 1993 Bishopsgate bombing, in which an
IRA truck bomb devastated the Bishopsgate area of London's financial district,
killing one and injuring 44.
Shayler’s July 2000 Punch Magazine article entitled ‘MI5 could have stopped the
bomb going off’ detailed how MI5, the police anti-terrorist branch and GCHQ - the
government's electronic eavesdropping center, had tracked the bombers for six
months before the operation and were fully aware of the specifics of the plot
before it was carried out.
Punch was fined £5,000 for contempt of court but the charge was later reversed
on appeal. However, the back issue containing the article cannot be sold in
Britain. I personally ordered a copy but ended up with a refund after being told
that particular issue was unavailable. The article in full is available on the
Internet.3
As I will later document, the Bishopsgate case is just one example of MI5’s link to
Irish Republican terrorism.
The Gag
Shayler’s revelations were first published in a series of reports for the Mail on
Sunday in August 1997. From this point onwards, all articles by or about David
Shayler had to be passed through a special branch of the Ministry of Defence,
whereupon the attorney general, Lord Williams, scanned them for any details that
would breach the 1989 Official Secrets Act. The publishers were then told
whether or not they were allowed to print the report. The British government had
appointed itself as state censor. Their argument that publishing Shayler’s
information would breach national security can be debunked by the very fact that
their own intelligence agencies are a threat to national security by way of their
treasonous behavior.
Following the Mail on Sunday expose, Shayler fled to France in an attempt to
avoid arrest. The British government were so desperate to extradite him, Shayler
even half joked that MI5 fixed the 1998 Coca Cola Cup soccer tournament in England so that Shayler’s team, Middlesborough, would reach the final, tempting
him to return to attend the game. Shayler resisted the urge but was subsequently
arrested by the French authorities.
Shayler was released from prison in November of 1998 and from that point on
fought a war of brinkmanship with Tony Blair’s government, threatening to
release more damaging information while they tried to either lure him back to the
country or have the French extradite him. This exchange continued up until
Shayler’s return to the UK when his trial for violating the Official Secrets Act
commenced in October 2002.
On Monday October 7th 2002, numerous articles appeared in British newspapers
specifying how top Labour cabinet members were intimidating the judge of the
Shayler case, Justice Alan Moses. MP’s such as Foreign Secretary Jack Straw
and Home Secretary David Blunkett were trying to force Moses to accept Public
Interest Immunity Certificates that would make part of the case, i.e. the £100,000
bin Laden transfer, secret. Upon mention of this material, media and public would
have to leave the courtroom.
By the evening of October 7th, the British newspaper reports had either been
removed from their respective web sites or completely amended. The original
London Guardian report that was later erased stated, Ministers have demanded that part of the trial of David Shayler, the former MI5 officer, which
starts at the Old Bailey today, be held in secret in what lawyers say is an unprecedented attempt
to influence the course of criminal proceedings. The home secretary, David Blunkett, and the
foreign secretary, Jack Straw, have signed public interest immunity certificates - a device
designed to gag a court - insisting that the media and the public leave if activities of the security
and intelligence agencies are raised by the defence
Government officials and lawyers persuaded the two cabinet ministers to sign the PII certificates
after they learned that Mr Shayler intended to defend himself at the trial. They appear to be
worried that he will make further allegations about MI5 and MI6 knowledge of a plot to
assassinate the Libyan leader, Muammar Gadafy, in 1996. A book, Forbidden Truth, published
this summer claims that British intelligence was in contact with "Osama bin Laden's main allies"
who were opposed to Colonel Gadafy.4
By the late evening of October 7th, the London Evening Standard and the
Scotsman had also removed their original reports concerning the trial. The
London Evening Standard were forced to censor the following,
Shayler will be defending himself during the trial. He is expected to claim that British secret
service agents paid up to £100,000 to al Qaeda terrorists for an assassination attempt on Libyan
leader Colonel Gadaffy in 1996. He is seeking permission to plead a defence of "necessity" - that
he acted for the greater good by revealing wrongdoing by the security service.
Whereas the Scotsman, before completely changing the nature of the article,
stated,
The renegade agent, who faces six years imprisonment for breaching the Official Secrets Act
after making a number of sensational revelations about MI5 to a national newspaper in 1997, will
represent himself for part of the landmark case. The trial will centre around a number of
allegations made by Shayler about MI5 holding files on prominent politicians, including former
cabinet minister Peter Mandelson and Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary. He also claimed the
secret services ignored warnings that might have prevented bombings in the London in 1993 and
1994.6
It became apparent that a D-Notice had been issued to gag the story. A D-Notice
is a mandate emanating from an office of the Ministry of Defence called the
Defence Advisory Committee, effectively silencing any media report that is
considered harmful to national security implications. Luckily, I had already saved
and printed these deleted stories, which enabled me to use them as a basis for
an article I would subsequently write for my web site, entitled ‘ShaylerGate.’
After I advised my readers to mass E mail the British media, asking them why
they had deleted these stories, the London Guardian was forced to print a small
blurb in its October 8 edition which read,
An Old Bailey court yesterday heard legal arguments relating to the trial of David Shayler, the
former MI5 officer charged with breaking the Official Secrets Act. The judge ruled that they cannot
be reported.
So in effect, using the analogy of Russian dolls, the British government had
gagged the gag. They had ensured parts of the Shayler trial remain secret and at
the same time, prevented the mainstream British press from reporting on the very
debate of whether that was in the public interest. An Australian newspaper later
confirmed this,
The British media have been gagged from reporting sensational courtroom evidence of former
MI5 spy David Shayler, including his alleged proof that the British secret service paid $270,000
for al Qaeda terrorists to assassinate Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 1996. In its efforts to
contain Mr Shayler's allegations to the privacy of the court, the government has even stopped the
media from reporting its successful attempt to win a gag order.
The British media widely reported on Monday that lawyers acting for Mr Shayler had accused the
government of trying to "intimidate" Justice Moses. But on Tuesday the newspapers - many of
which had mounted their own legal case against the application of the certificates - reported
simply that the court had heard legal arguments relating to Mr Shayler's trial. "The judge ruled
that they (the legal arguments) cannot be reported," The Guardian reported.
Although Mr Shayler's jury trial is expected to begin next week in the Old Bailey, any evidence relating to sensitive security or intelligence matters will be kept private. After the judge's ruling on
Monday, several articles detailing Mr Shayler's anticipated evidence - and the government's
efforts to keep it secret - were withdrawn from newspaper websites across the country.
Note that according to The Age, the Al-Qaeda payoff was even greater, standing
at £170,000.
Why bury the story?
It is common knowledge amongst journalists that MI5 has a very close
relationship with London’s Fleet Street hacks. The Security Service has at least
two agents working in every major newspaper office. MI5 frequently issue their
officers with false National Union Of Journalist cards denoting them as reporters,
standard cover for clandestine stage management of the media.
The argument that the story was gagged because it contravened the Official
Secrets Act and was a threat to national security does not hold sway. Recall, this
was the same Labour government that before it came to power argued vigorously
to amend the Official Secrets Act to protect whistleblowers.
The story was gagged because at that time its implications would severely
undermine both the validity of the war on terrorism and the rhetoric behind the
impending invasion of Iraq.
Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary who issued one of the PII gag
certificates, was involved in soliciting illegal weapons transfers to numerous
countries, deals that directly contravene international protocol. As I document
elsewhere in this book, Britain has been caught shipping arms to India, Pakistan,
Israel and Iran – directly fomenting instability in those regions.
In addition, Shayler insists he has more revelations concerning the British tool
company Matrix Churchill and the arms to Iraq scandal, which originally broke
under the former Tory government. Again, this is covered in detail elsewhere in
this book.
I have no doubt, and the man himself has publicly stated so, that Shayler has
even more damaging information concerning British intelligence collusion with
the very organizations we are told are our supposed enemies. A £100,000+ Al-
Qaeda payoff, after they had bombed the World Trade Center in 1993, may only
be scratching the surface.
The paranoid and authoritarian reaction of the British government in censoring
both the Gadaffi plot and David Shayler’s trial begs the question - what else do
they have to hide?
Protecting bin Laden’s Lieutenants
In September of 2002, one year after the attacks on New York and Washington,
French intelligence officials angrily accused MI5 of failing to cooperate in stifling
Islamic terrorist groups. The level of assistance received from British intelligence
was described as being “worse than before� September 11th.
The French specifically referred to the case of Abu Qatada, a 43-year-old militant
Muslim cleric born in Jordan. Qatada is described by many as the leader and
mastermind of Al-Qaeda's European network. Videos of Mr Qatada's speeches
were found in the Hamburg flat of Mohamed Atta, who is believed to have been
the leader of the September 11 hijackers.9 Qatada has links with terror suspects
in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Britain and Spain. Baltasar Garzon, a
Spanish National High Court judge charged with leading Spain's Al-Qaeda
crackdown, named Qatada as the "spiritual head of the mujahideen in Britain.�
In 1993 Qatada was sentenced to life imprisonment, in his absence, by a court in
Jordan for his involvement in a terrorist bombing campaign. He escaped jail by
fleeing to West London and bought a house in Acton. Claiming political refugee
status, he avoided extradition.
After September 11th, Qatada was identified as a ‘specially designated global
terrorist’ by a US executive order.11 He was also categorized by the British
Treasury as ‘believed to have committed, or pose, a significant risk of committing
or providing material support for acts of terrorism.’12 Qatada disappeared from his
London home in December 2001, just before the implementation of new antiterrorism
legislation would have finally paved the way for him to be deported.
In the summer of 2002 a sensational Time Magazine report revealed where
exactly Qatada had gone,
Senior European intelligence officials tell TIME that Abu Qatada is tucked away in a safe house in
the north of England, where he and his family are being lodged, fed and clothed by British
intelligence services. "The deal is that Abu Qatada is deprived of contact with extremists in
London and Europe but can't be arrested or expelled because no one officially knows where he
is," says the source, whose claims were corroborated by French authorities. "The British win
because the last thing they want is a hot potato they can't extradite for fear of al-Qaeda reprisals
but whose presence contradicts London's support of the war on terror.13
Despite official denial French anti-terrorist officers stated on the record that they
were certain MI5 were protecting Qatada, and in addition believed they had
actually colluded in his disappearance. A senior French intelligence agent stated,
“British intelligence is saying they have no idea where he is but we know where
he is and, if we know, I'm quite sure they do."14
Why on earth were MI5 protecting Osama bin Laden’s European ambassador
while at the same time claiming ignorance of his whereabouts? If they wanted to
interrogate him in secret then why did they wait three months after 9/11 before
coming into contact with him? The leaders of the ‘war on terrorism’ seem to treat
high-level Al-Qaeda members with reverence, even recruiting them as agents.
Why wasn’t Qatada sent to be held in U.S. military custody at Guantanamo Bay?
He is a known Al-Qaeda terrorist, expresses support to Osama bin Laden’s
ideals and is named, in British government documents, as highly likely to be
involved in future acts of terrorism.
Qatada wasn’t transferred to Guantanamo because he actually was a terrorist,
unlike the other ‘residents’ of the naval brig. A Guantanamo official, quoted in the
Los Angeles Times, stated, “some of these guys literally don’t know the world is
round.�15 The same report detailed how U.S. authorities had yet to identify any
senior Al Qaeda leaders among the nearly 600 terror suspects from 43 countries
being held at Guantanamo Bay. The torture camp consisted of nothing more than
a group of goat herders that had been given a gun and thrown onto the front line
by the Taliban.
As the Qatada case highlights, the real Al-Qaeda and Taliban leadership were
whisked away to safety by orders of U.S. and British intelligence. This contradicts
the entire scope of the ‘war on terrorism’ and leads us to question who precisely
is giving comfort to terrorists – rogue states or our own governments?
The Real IRA: MI5
For more than 30 years, Catholics and Protestants have fought bitterly over
whether Northern Ireland should belong to Ireland or to Britain. The conflict has
left 3,600 people dead on both sides and more than 30,000 injured. There was
hope in 1998, when the landmark Good Friday peace agreement was reached.
The agreement created a government in which both Protestant and Catholic representatives could share power in Northern Ireland. But tensions continued to
grow between Catholics and Protestants, especially after the IRA refused to
destroy or surrender its weapons.
The Real IRA is a hard line group of between 70 and 170 members dedicated to
an armed campaign aimed at driving the British out of Ireland. Its members see
themselves as Irish republican purists, accusing the Provisional IRA of selling
short republican ideals.
Since its founding in 1997, the Real IRA has been fully infiltrated by British
intelligence - MI5. The first double agent to infiltrate the Real IRA on behalf of the
British government was David Gary Rupert, an elusive loner born in Madrid, New
York State. Rupert first surfaced at an Irish Freedom Committee meeting in
Chicago in 1997. Eye Spy Magazine reported,
He was a well-known figure at meetings and became the talk of the IFC. Many believed he had
contacts that wended their way to the very top of organisations like Sinn Fein and the IRA.
MI5 had successfully tracked US fund-raising efforts to certain US citizens and groups through
bank accounts. But they needed more information. Together with the FBI and Irish security police,
they spoke to Mr Rupert who agreed to work for them as a double agent. It was a major coup.
Throughout the last four years he has supplied intelligence on fundraising, bank accounts, and
recruiting campaigns. He "networked" between various rival factions and was so trusted he
eventually befriended members of the Real IRA and several political organisations, such as the
32 County Sovereignty Committee. Similarly, he was befriended by Martin Galvin, a New York
lawyer and the head of Noraid, the American fundraising arm of the Provisional IRA. Rupert was
given codes and access to various associated groups and learned of leading personnel on both
sides of the Atlantic. As Rupert forwarded donations to Ireland and elsewhere, MI5, the FBI and
the Garda were carefully following the transactions, collecting details of every bank account the
money was channelled through. In 1999 Rupert met with Michael McKevitt, who MI5 believe is
the head of the Real IRA. Mr McKevitt is said to have introduced Rupert to other leading players
in the group. And, according to sources, he handed over a £10,000 donation to ‘cement relations’.
Rupert told the Garda that the organisation was planning a series of top-level meetings at a
certain location. The Irish security services planted listening devices and surveillance equipment
in the room. Much evidence was apparently acquired and then the Garda asked MI5 and the FBI
if it was time to act. The agencies mind was made up for them when Rupert said McKevitt had
allegedly asked him to participate in a terrorist act. The Garda said that if they arrested McKevitt,
Rupert would have to testify and this meant blowing his cover. MI5 knew they were about to lose
one of their most important agents, but the prize they believed was worth it. Rupert agreed to
testify for a massive sum of money and a new identity. He was also relocated.16
Twenty-nine people were killed and 200 badly injured, when a 500 lb bomb
exploded in a busy shopping street in Omagh, Northern Ireland, on 15 August
1998. The bomb was planted by the dissident republican group, the Real IRA,
although at the time of writing only one individual, Colm Murphy, has been
formally charged. The tragedy claimed nine children as victims.
MI5, along with the Royal Ulster Constabulary, knew at least two days before the attack not only that an attack would take place, but also the name of the bomb
maker and his car registration. If they had placed this terrorist under surveillance,
the horror of Omagh would have been prevented. British intelligence had a
reason for allowing the bombing to go forward. One of the terrorists in the
bombing team was a double agent. He was working for MI5.
This damning information was released by Kevin Fulton (a pseudonym), another
British double agent in the IRA. Fulton was an ex-British army soldier and onetime
member of the army's covert Force Research Unit. Fulton says he was
recruited by the secret service to inform on the activities of the IRA in the 1980s.
He claims to have been an informer up until the IRA cease-fire in 1996. Included
in a whole raft of separate allegations is Fulton’s contention that MI5 and the FBI
helped him travel to the United States and buy state of the art infra-red
equipment for the IRA so that they could trigger bombs from over a mile away.17
Fulton was also involved in the process of actually mixing explosives to make
new types of bombs. He also coordinated political assassinations and robberies
to help finance the IRA. This policy came directly from the very top; then-Prime
Minister Margaret Thatcher received a weekly briefing on Fulton’s activities.
Fulton states,
“I was told 'there'll be no medals for this, and no recognition, but this goes the whole way to the
Prime Minister. The Prime Minister knows what you are doing.�18
Fulton had to slip into the role of a terrorist to prevent his cover from being blown.
He helped plan murders and torture innocent people with the backing and
encouragement of the Prime Minister and MI5. When Fulton had outlived his
usefulness he realized that MI5 and military intelligence were fully prepared to
leave him to be killed. It was at that point that he distanced himself from both the
IRA and British intelligence and began a whistle-blowing campaign.
Fulton alleges that 48 hours before the Omagh bombing he met with a senior
member of the Real IRA in a pub in Dundalk. The man was covered in dust and
gave off a strong odor of fertilizer sediment. He had obviously been making a
bomb. The man told Fulton “there’s something big on.�
Within hours, Fulton informed his handler, telling him the name of the man and his car registration number, along with a description of the vehicle. The sensitivity
of the information would have meant that Fulton’s RUC handler immediately pass
it on to higher authorities. Any information portending to an immediate threat to
British national security is subject to a ‘FLASH’ classification of urgency, meaning
it instantaneously receives the attention of MI5 and MI6 counter terrorism agents.
Another ex-informer, Willy Carlin, said of the Fulton allegations,
“I would believe that the officer put it in the system, and it would have immediately been shared
by the security services, by MI5 and MI6. It would definitely been shared with the Chief
Constable, no doubt about it. And it would have been shared with the Garda [the police in the
Irish Republic]. And the question is, if it was shared, what happened? And why didn’t someone
turn up in Dundalk and watch this man for 48 hours?�19
British intelligence sat back and did nothing as the bomb traveled from Dundalk
to Omagh in a vehicle they could easily have identified and apprehended. It has
now been confirmed by the Sunday Herald that MI5 allowed the bombing to take
place because one of its own double agents had successfully infiltrated the Real
IRA and his cover would have been blown if the bomb plot had been exposed. Of
course, this in itself is a whitewash. The agent, code named ‘Stakeknife’ had
managed to tap the upper echelons of the terrorist group and MI5 valued the
continued position of him as a key informer over and above the 29 lives that were
suddenly ended on that hot August afternoon. The Sunday Herald source stated,
“The only reason the RUC would not act on a tip-off which stated a bomb was in the offing is if a
member of the bombing team was a highly-placed agent and they needed to keep him in place. If
the operation was allowed to go ahead then the agent would be seen as a good guy by the Real
IRA; but if it failed, he could have come under suspicion of being an informer and been killed.�20
How can the MI5 and the RUC justify allowing a terrorist bombing to proceed to
simply keep an agent in place? An informant is supposed to have the rationale of
warning his superiors so that they can take action to avert such a catastrophe, as
mentioned earlier in the circumstances surrounding the infiltration of the Real IRA
by David Rupert. This wasn’t the case in Omagh. So why did the British
government authorize the bombing?
Just weeks after the bombing, the Irish and British parliaments were recalled
early to pass anti-terrorism legislation openly described as “draconian.�21 Despite
Prime Minister Tony Blair’s assertion that the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Bill was not a ‘knee jerk reaction’ – MP’s were not even given time to
thoroughly read it. The bill was passed within 24 hours of its proposal. Former
Prime Minister John Major gleefully admitted that the new laws were a response
to “the public mood for action following the atrocity at Omagh� without
consideration of how the wider legal implications could effect that very same
emotionally manipulated public who had just been bombarded for two weeks with
horror stories about blood soaked babies and missing limbs.22
The new legislation enabled the government to prosecute any group they defined
as an ‘active paramilitary’ as a terrorist organization and deny them the right to
legal counsel. The mandate of the bill, ‘intended to catch the Omagh bombers’
can only be considered to have been a complete failure, as to this day the
individuals responsible for the Omagh bombing are still at large.
Again we see the Hegelian dialectic at work. Create the problem (allow the
bombing to take place), apportion blame (the Real IRA), get the desired reaction
(shock, revulsion and a desire for vengeance) and then hurriedly offer the
solution (draconian police state laws) that do nothing to stop real terrorists and
only strip innocent people of fundamental human rights.
The final word on Omagh will be left to Lawrence Rush, the husband of one of
the victims,
"Tell me, are you a completely incompetent force, that in Great Britain they can pick up lone
murderers out of a population of 59m? Do you recognise that we have a population of 4m and
you cannot pick up over 100-odd people? My dear sir, this is a conspiracy. This will come out like
the Derry Thirteen (a reference to the Bloody Sunday massacre by the British army in 1972). Why
did Sinn Fein close their office the day before the bomb? Why was the army confined to
barracks? Why sir, did the RUC have only three men on the streets of Omagh and 24 men in
surrounding areas? Tell me that. This is a conspiracy by the British government and by everyone
involved in the administration. This is an example of administrative terrorism.�23
Mr. Rush’s wife died in the blast. Victims of both the bombing and the suffocating
legislation introduced shortly afterwards were the only victims of Omagh. The
perpetrators in both cases were the British government, MI5 and MI6, Her
Majesty’s terrorist network.
[align=center]Divison Bell
[/align][align=center]<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BVUTQ7stBng"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BVUTQ7stBng" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>[/align]