Chapter III: The sorry history of St Catharines College Cambridge Part 2

1 Its record in relation to infiltration (continued)

1 Little Sai Wan – South China Morning Post 1980

On May 23, a Friday, this newspaper reported that the Foreign Office had been duped into denying allegations of ‘serious security breaches in Hong Kong’, which had been going on for some years at Little Sai Wan, now known as Siu Sai Wan.

Quoting the Daily Mirror, the Post reported that David Ennals, formerly a Labour minister in the Foreign Office, had asked prime minister Margaret Thatcher for a full inquiry into allegations first made in 1975 by Jock Kane, a radio officer who had worked for the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) in Little Sai Wan. It was then an operations centre for some of the satellite dishes that straddle Hong Kong Island’s western peaks to this day.

Kane had written a book, GCHQ: The Negative Asset, detailing sleaze, incompetence, corruption, espionage and security breaches at the facility. The book was never published after MI5 confiscated Kane’s manuscript from the publishers, but his allegations did reach the media five years later.

GCHQ had told the Foreign Office that Kane’s allegations had been followed up ‘and action taken where necessary’, but British press reports summarised in the Post claimed that nothing had been done and that in Hong Kong, the GCHQ had become ‘an unaccountable state within a state’.

Not only had highly classified documents gone missing and kickbacks been paid for signals-intelligence equipment, the GCHQ also ran a brothel at the Ascot House Hotel, which served as ‘temporary accommodation for all its top security employees in Hong Kong and [was] the site of the most blatant call-girl racket among the colony’s luxury hotels’ and where GCHQ ‘permanently leases 20 to 30 suites for visiting intelligence staff’. However, in reports with a photograph of a receipt from an ‘executive fitness club’, a Daily Mirror reporter and one from ITV’s World in Action established that GCHQ’s ‘prostitute services were available from HK$250 upwards’.

These call girls, London newspapers quoted Hong Kong vice squad police as saying, were run by members of the 14K triad gang, which ‘apart from involvement in opium smuggling and organised crime, is closely connected to the Taiwan-based Kuomintang, one of the numerous hostile intelligence agencies operating in Hong Kong’.

Agents from the People’s Republic were also afoot. After Kane made his allegations it was discovered that office cleaners at Little Sai Wan had handed over the contents of its rubbish bins to communist agents.

However, in earlier times of ‘firmer management’ the GCHQ had made it clear to staff that ‘the possibility of sexual compromise is a circumstance that enormously threatens security’, the New Statesman reported, as quoted in the Post. ‘In 1964 [it sent] six Little Sai Wan staff home and cancelled their security clearances for having married Chinese women with relatives in the People’s Republic.’

Veteran pilot, Flight Lieutenant Mike Butt saved the life of then former British prime minister James Callaghan and his wife, Audrey. The Callaghans were supposed to visit the Shun Lee housing estate off Clear Water Bay Road in east Kowloon, when a No3 signal storm overtook their helicopter, trapping it ‘in a fierce downdraft’. Lieutenant Butt avoided disaster by flying the Royal Hong Kong Auxilliary Air Force Alouette Mark III underneath a flyover. ‘I warned him [Butt] that in Britain he would be fined for flying under a bridge,’ Mr Callaghan later quipped.

‘Canton radio’ reported that an ideological conference in Beijing had urged the Communist Party ‘to educate people not to watch popular Hong Kong television programmes’. This was part of efforts by ‘the authorities in Guangdong to counteract the influence and attraction of Hong Kong’, and educate people from China about the problems they would face here. The programme stressed ‘the difficulties of finding a job, the cost of transport and accommodation and ‘the tension of daily life’.’ Nevertheless, mainland authorities ‘seem to be facing an uphill battle in dimming the [colony’s] bright lights and attractions’, the Post reported, citing continuing instances of illegal emigration.

 

2 The conviction of Geoffrey Prime (The economist 13-19 November 1982)

This is of course pertinent given that Mr Prime had been employed at GCHQ in a senior position during the period when Sir Arthur Bonsall was head of that organisation.

Britain’ latest and possibly most disgraceful spy scandal, which broke into the open with the conviction this week of Geoffrey Prime at the Old Bailey, was not even unearthed by the professional spy catchers of whose work Prime made a mockery for 14 years. The chronology of this disgrace is below. On Wednesday, the Lord Chief Justice sentenced Prime to 35 years for spying and three years for molesting young girls. It was only after ordinary policemen of the West Mercia force had detected his sexual crimes that his spying came to light.

Prime pleaded guilty. There was no contest in court, so the available facts of his treachery are only those which the the security services have allowed to be shown. But 35 years is a very long sentence indeed, and is a pointer to the by of his crime. In recent years, it has been exceeded for a spy only by the sentence given to George Blake, a Russian agent inside Britain’s secret intelligence service, M16. Blake got 42 years in 1961 and managed to escape in 1966.

Lord Chief Justice Lane said Prime had done “incalculable harm”. That seems to put him in the league of the British diplomats, Guy Burgess and Donald Ma-clean, who defected to-Moscow in 1951; Kim. Philby, a top man in M16 who headed for Russia in 1963 and is now a KGB general; or Anthony Blunt, unmasked in 1979 after a long career in public life (culminating in his appointment as master of the Queen’s pictures), who now lives, disgraced, in London, Prime joins a long list of deplorable security breaches in Britain since Hitler’s war—many at the heart of the country’s security services.

The policemen who had traced three cases of sexual assault to Prime found in his house a card index of 2,287 young girls whom he had identified as potential victims, They also found the whole paraphernalia of the cheap novel spy—one-time pads (the basis of unbreakable coded messages), microdot equipment, a short-wave radio, a briefcase with secret bit and pieces and even some highly-sensitive documents from General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), the government listening post at Cheltenham in Gloucestershire, for which Prime had formerly worked.

The Cheltenham headquarters, where Prime was employed as a senior Russian linguist, has for several decades collaborated closely with America’s National Security Agency in the interception and analysis of communications and with the Canadians and Australians too. Between them, they vacuum the world’s airwaves for anything, particularly from Russia, which would help the security of the west. Those allies now have good reason for any future lack of confidence in the value of collaboration with the British. Everything was wrong with Cheltenham’s security.

First, the system of “positive vetting” of people in highly sensitive jobs failed. At present, 6800 British government servants are subject to “pv” clearance. The process sounds exhaustive and looks for three faults: membership of, or sympathy with subversive organizations; character defects laying the subject open to blackmail, and circumstances, such as family links, with potentially hostile countries. On two of these counts, Prime should have failed. But he was able to keep his sexual tastes hidden even from his wife.

Even security at the gate had clearly broken down at Cheltenham. Prime went in and out with his camera. He took 15 rolls of film of top secret documents when he resigned in September, 1977.

Political responsibility for all security matters lies with the prime minister. Prime’s treachery spans three prime ministers: Wilson, Heath and.Callaghan. The civil service advisers on these matters are the secretary of the cabinet and the directors general of MI5, which runs counter-espionage, and MI6 (which spies for Britain). The security commission gives general advice on all such matters, The commission’s new chairman is Lord Bridge of Harwich, a law lord, and Mrs Thatcher has asked him to investigate the Prime affair.

Mrs Thatcher has been told that no-body else was working with Prime. That may be. There is dispute about the quality of the information he passed to the Russians. During the trial, American newspapers and television, unencumbered by Britain’s sub judice rules, re-ported that his spying had been very damaging indeed. Mr Caspar Weinberger, the American defense secretary, said it was a “serious breach” but not a “catastrophe”. Others below Mr Weinberger are less polite.

Prime was in a position to tell the Russians which of their messages were being specially monitored by Britain and America. The Russians would then have been able to feed false information on these airwaves. They would also know which codes had been broken. Prime might even have been able to pass on any listening that GCHQ does on American communications..

Some optimists say that “need to know” rules would have limited what Prime actually knew. In practice, “need to know” does not limit information, because professionals love to talk to each other and to share information. It could also he that, as Prime continued. to spy for more than three years after he left GCHQ, he was the link for the Russians with another agent who was still inside the Cheltenham post.

In March, 1981, following allegation that the late Sir Richard Hollis, director general of MIT from 1956 to 1965, ha. been a Russian agent, Mrs Thatcher asked the then members of the security commission (chairman, Lord Diplock) to review all security procedures and practices. On May 20th this year, the government published a reassuring summary of its findings and the government’s acceptance of them. This was intended to chest’ the shutters on Britain’s security service for at least a decade. Now the search lights will be switched on, from both side of the Atlantic.

Prime’s progress 14 years a spy
  • May 1964: Geoffrey Prime qualifies as a Russian linguist while serving with Royal Air Force; posted to secret work at RAF Gatow in West Berlin.
  • January, 1968: offers his services to the Russians in Berlin out of ”sympathy for the Soviet regime”.
  • January-July, 1968: provides Russians with RAF secrets in Berlin.
  • July 1968, 1968: leaves RAF, employed as Russian linguist in British intelligence.
  • August, 1968: returns to East Berlin for “extensive training In the arts of the spy”
  • September,1968: joins the foreign office in London fully equipped as a Russian agent (code-name: “Rowlands”) receiving instructions by radio.
  • 1974: second positive vetting by British intelligence. Re-equipped and paid by Russians.
  • Spring, 1975: promoted by British and red for access to more sensitive material.
  • September, 1975: travels to Vienna with top secret material for the Russians, who give him further briefing and more pay.
  • March, 1976: transferred to government communications headquarters (GCHQ) at Cheltenham.
  • May, 1976: returns to Vienna for further Russian briefing; receives £1,000, offer of a pension and rank of colonel in the KGB if he ever decides to defect.
  • November, 1976: promoted to section head at Cheltenham with access to “matters of the utmost secrecy”,
  • June, 1977: marries for the second time.
  • September, 1977: decides to defect but changes mind:instead resigns post at GCHQ, taking 500 photographs of top-secret documents.
  • April 10, 1980: makes sexual attack on 11-year-old girl in her parents’ home in Gloucester.
  • April, 1980: Russians invite him to Vienna.
  • May, 1980: travels to Vienna with his 500 photographs and spends three days being debriefed on a Russian cruise ship on the Danube; given £600.
  • May 28, 1981: makes violent sexual attack on 13-year-old girl in her parent home in Worcestershire.
  • November, 1981: flies to Berlin for further debriefing at Potsdam; returns to England with £4,000 and further sup-plies of espionage equipment.
  • April 21, 1982: makes sexual attack on 14-year-old Hertfordshire girl.
  • April 27, 1982: is interviewed by police, who have traced his.car as being that of suspected child molester. Denies every-thing, later confesses to his wife.
  • April 28, 1982: telephones Hereford police to admit the sexual attack; is arrested and admits all three attacks on girls.
  • May, 1982: shopped by his wife. Home searched: a top-secret document, code pads, radio and other- espionage equipment found.
  • June 8, 1982: first interview on suspicion of espionage by West Mercia police; continues denials at further interviews on June 11th and June 25th.
  • June 26, 1982: confesses to espionage, thereafter co-operates fully with the authorities.

 

3 How GCHQ were obstructive during the investigation into Mr Prime

GCHQ, as one can see from page 157 of “Geoffrey Prime: The imperfect spy” by David Cole”, refused to help with the investigation.

…assistance was essential in order to validate the proposition that various items seized from Laburnham Cottage had been unlawfully removed by Prime during the course of his employment. Cole had not predicted any problems; as he saw it, both he and many others were working extremely hard in the best interests of GCHQ and thus far he had received magnificent co-operation from their security staff. It was a different matter when he met senior executives to request formal evidential statements to prove the significance of exhibits. He met with point-blank refusal. The material, they said, was far too sensitive to be discussed.

In twenty-five years of investigative experience the detective had come across many reluctant, obstructive or obtuse witnesses, but he had rarely encountered such a distasteful reaction as that which greeted what he believed to be a reasonable request. He was given the impression that he was a thorough bloody nuisance for having locked up a member of their organization, and he was left in no doubt that the matters under discussion were way above his head. He did not prolong the conference.

As they drove out of the main gate a security guard relieved them of their entry passes, but there was no search to see if they were taking anything away with them. Heading towards the M5 and home Cole turned to his friend, ‘You know, Al, if those blokes had ever found out for themselves that Prime was a spy, they’d have done a Blunt. If we hadn’t locked him up for the assaults, it would never have seen the light of day.’

Perhaps he was being excessively cynical. Maybe their reaction had been caused by acute embarrassment that vital secrets had lain scattered throughout Prime’s house for four years and had not been missed. There may also have been some guilty con-sciences about the fact that for those same four years everyone in authority had sat on their hands and done nothing to question the linguist’s resignation or his capacity for perfidy.

Nevertheless, a few years earlier Sir Anthony Blunt, surveyor of the Queen’s pictures, had been publicly exposed as a Russian spy by the then prime minister, Margaret Thatcher. For fifteen years he had been allowed to continue in royal service when, all that while, it was known that he had traded a confession to treachery to the security services against the promise of immunity from prosecution…

It is rather ironic given what he did that Mr Prime’s residence at the time of his arrest, a “Laburnham cottage” was named after a poisonous plant.

 

4 How GCHQ continued to show the same attitude after the conviction of Geoffrey Prime

The British Intelligence episode of the Channel 4 series After Dark which was broadcast in 1989, contains an interesting by individuals who have worked for or on behalf of various British intelligence agencies. The revelations by Jock Kane are of course of particular relevance

As this is three hours long, I have elected to include an edited version of this episode with only Jock Kane’s account.

As you can see,

  1. He states that American intelligence were of the opinion that there at least five other people working on behalf of Russian intelligence who were still employed by GCHQ. Two of these were in senior positions and three others were at lower positions.
  2. In the intervening seven years since the conviction of Geoffrey Prime, it does not appear that attitudes towards raising complaints have improved.

Attitudes from my experience of attempting to highlight the matter have worsened and indeed it would not be possible for a publication like the New Statesman to publish similar articles. This is inevitable given the increasing powers available to the agency, the lack of oversight and the increasing level of secrecy since the passing of legislation such as

  1. The Official Secrets Act (1989), which removed the Public interest defence.
  2. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000)
  3. Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (2014)
  4. Counter-Terrorism and Security Act (2015)

Moreover one must consider the fact that since 2010 as a result of the decision to pursue austerity, the government of David Cameron became increasingly reliant upon the intelligence agencies. This is outlined in Page 684 of Black door: Spies, Secret Intelligence and British Prime Ministers.

“Economic austerity defined David Cameron’s coalition government, with the result that his initial priorities were overwhelmingly domestic, focusing on vigorous retrenchment and halting spiraling debt. The agenda did not preclude him from turning almost immediately to issues of national security. In some ways, Cameron’s austerity actually shaped approaches to intelligence. The economic crisis forced Britain to require “smaller, cheaper and less ambitious armed forces”. At the same time Cameron was adamant that Britain would not see any shrinkage in its global role. Like his predecessors, he desperately wanted to retain a place at the top table. once more, the fancy footwork of intelligence was required to bridge the gap between Britain’s global ambitions and the sober realities of economic decline. Intelligence is a force multiplier. It is a special kind of information that not only provides warning, but also allows more effective action. It enables states to punch above their weight and make the most of whatever material assets they have at their disposal.

Obviously this reliance upon intelligence will have applied not just with respect to foreign policy but with respect to domestic politics as well, given the need for cutbacks in domestic services such as the police etc.

As such, the British state is not only much more vulnerable given their greater reliance upon the intelligence agencies but much more averse to listening to accounts of security lapses, given that the intelligence agencies hold a greater degree of power than was formerly the case.

With respect to the press, one must also consider the fact that

  1. They are not as profitable and thus strong as they used to be and as will become evident from the Salisbury case, they are fairly tame and utterly compliant when it comes to any criticism of the intelligence services.
  2. The more establishment papers will back the establishment and as regards the supposed anti-establishment newspaper, the guardian, this has links with the intelligence services.
  3. This includes satirical publications of which private eye is the only example in the UK which are also declining in popularity. This publication rarely if ever cover anything in relation to the malfeasance of the intelligence services which is to be expected given that the editor of that magazine has stated that he has no interest in modern technology which means that he cannot have any understanding of intelligence related matters. The fact that he sides with the establishment is proven by
    1. The lack of any significant investigations into the intelligence services (by which I mean that which hasn’t already been outlined elsewhere)
    2. The case of Julian Assange where he made false claims that Julian Assange had been antisemitic
    3. The fact that he unquestioningly sided with the establishment in the Salisbury case as indicated in the following video and as proven in chapter 13 and chapter 14. One can hardly be called a satirist if one is content to ignore the criminality of the intelligence services and to laugh alongside individuals who come from the same college as someone who was responsible. To be frank, at least Piers Morgan risked his career as a newspaper editor to reveal current information in relation to the armed forces, information which the government claimed was false but which in any case revealed a broader truth about the regiment concerned.

5 How this is present and past policy

The British establishment have had an historic policy of concealing infiltration which is due to their fear that any revelation in that respect would affect what they consider to be the all important special relationship with the United States. This relationship is of course primarily based upon intelligence cooperation between both countries.

Some examples of such a policy of “hushing things” up include

  1. What is related above
  2. The case of Anthony Blunt who was employed as the Queens surveyor of pictures.
  3. The case of David Floyd, who went on the work at the Daily Telegraph,
  4. The murder of the former labour leader Hugh Gaitskell.

I stated that Jock Kane’s allegations concerned infiltration and negligent security had only been partially dealt with, due in part to a wish not to upset the Americans. This is confirmed by

  1. Confirmed by
    1. Jock Kane’s own statements. To give just one example, he stated that the Americans were of the opinion that there were five other people within GCHQ, two at a senior level and three at a more junior level who were working for the Soviet Union who remained in place after the conviction
    2. The fact that the state instituted a policy to murder individuals who either uncovered, were intent upon tackling the matter of infiltration or indeed to detract from the revelation of infiltration. For the most part it pertains to the college. Such instances include:
      1. Airey Naeve who had made plain his intention tackle the issue of infiltration shortly before he was murdered by the state. This pertained to infiltration which has been concealed by a member of St Catharines, Sir Arthur Bonsall.
      2. Gareth Williams who was a member of St Catharines and who was aware of infiltration involving a member of St Catharines.
      3. The fact that the Salisbury affair was, as related in Chapter 13 and 14, carried out to conceal the revelation by myself of Russian infiltration and the passing on of information by a member of St catharines when a member of St Catharines, a Mr Simon Shercliff, was director for national security at the foreign office. I had moreover attempted to alert the authorities to the fact whilst a Mr Johnathan Allen, who was also a member of St Catharines, was director for national security.
      4. The famous defence industry “suicide” clusterwhich were a series of deaths which included state sanctioned murders which occurred for various reasons some of which will inevitably pertain to concealing infiltration, given their similarity to the death of Gareth Williams and the general culture at the time which was reported by Jock Kane and others. The fact that the state had at the very least sanctioned those murders by the government is evident through the fact that they claimed that there was nothing to investigate when it was plain to see that there was.
    3. The fact that on a note which is unrelated to intelligence but which pertains to the college, St Catharines has a historic reputation for dishonesty, as related here in a nondescript history of the college on the college’s own website in a section which takes up one seventh of the page. It is nowhere as serious as the above but it does provide some sort of a context of the college’s ethos and reputation.
  2. Indicated by the fact that
    1. Duncan Campbell who originally investigated Jock Kane’s allegations suddenly stopped publishing material after he founded the organisation in conjunction with a member of St Catharines, Sir Ian Mackellen. There may have been an attempt to suborn him in some way and the timing of his cessation of activities and the setting up of that organisation with a member of St catharines does tend to indicate this.
    2. A film, called the Whistleblower starring Michael Caine was made about the failure on the part of GCHQ (or rather a member of St Catharine’s College) to uncover Geoffrey Prime and the decision to murder people lower down the ranks in order to conceal infiltration and to satisfy the Americans. It should be stated however that,
      1. As myself and Jock Kane and indeed the American government will note such people are usually kept in place, not as double agents but due to negligent security.
      2. The film, it might be of interest to note, starred James Fox whose daughter Lydia is married to Richard Ayoade who is a graduate of St Catharines College.


The fact that there is still infiltration which the establishment does not wish to deal with is proven by

  1. The recent revelation in the Intelligence and security committee report that the United Kingdom as a whole (including political parties and academia, etc) is subject to a rather broad degree of Russian influence (paragraph 50, 54 and 73). If Russia is donating money to the conservative party and they are aware of Russian infiltration, then it follows that they will be unlikely to be willing to reveal the fact, particularly given the fact that this will have a negative impact upon the relations of the intelligence agencies with the United States and Europe.
  2. The fact that the report by the ISC mentions every domain except the intelligence agencies who would not be unaffected by such influence and which the report refuses to investigate.
  3. The press which is subject to the DSMA committee and works in conjunction with the intelligence services even with respect to anti-establishment papers refuses to investigate the matter of infiltration.
  4. The fact that there was an attempt to suppress the publication of this report
  5. Historic attitudes towards security which put Snowden into the shade as one can see from the Dispatches documentary “The Hill”, where, in addition to evidence of corporate spying by GCHQ, one saw evidence of the fact that the biggest interception of communications base in the world, RAF Menwith Hill, which is in reality run by the National Security Agency of America, was heavily insecure and was able to be penetrated 500 times by a local resident who in addition to leaving a bottle of milk and some biscuits on one occasion (!), managed, alongside other people who invaded to the base, to gather evidence of the workings of the National Security Agency as well as GCHQ potentially to the same degree as Edward Snowden.

It is not that difficult to understand that where you have, as the British intelligence agencies do,

  1. A culture of intense secrecy and an organization which, although one should expect this to be the case in such an environment, has a history of being excessively secretive,
  2. A lack of oversight as indicated by the European Court of Human Rights (Malik v United Kingdom (Application no.32968/11) [2013] ECHR 794 (28 May 2013)
  3. immense powers as indicated by amongst others Edward Snowden
  4. It is inevitably the case that such an organization will attract a certain type of person, one who is attracted to power and one who would be far more likely to be of a criminal inclination and to look to their own self-advancement than to be interested in the public good. It is also inevitably the case that as a result of this, others who are public minded will be more likely to be driven out of such an environment or will much of the time stay silent. The end result is that you have a culture where there is corruption and where people are thus people are subject to blackmail and/or are amenable to working for hostile parties.

 

6 The murder of Gareth Williams

A fuller explanation of the case involving the murder of Gareth Williams can be found in an article from the Guardian newspaper.

Gareth Williams was an employee of GCHQ who had begun an advanced course in mathematics at St Catharine’s College, Cambridge in 2000 as part of his employment at that organisation. The people whom GCHQ assigned to mind him at the college were one of the former directors of admissions and my former personal tutor, Dr Philip Oliver, along with one of the porters Mike Reynolds who has subsequently died.

This fact was made known to me by Dr Oliver in a conversation which I had with him at the college on the 25th August 2015. Dr Oliver revealed this information as part of a conversation whereby he attempted to recruit me to MI6. He also did not always keep thing confidential which might be to do with the fact that he became tired and emotional. As such, during that meeting he also said that he did not like America and preferred Russia something which indicated employment by Russia, as would be confirmed through the Salisbury affair

I did not recount the fact of his employment nor indeed why the murder occurred in the original copy of this article article given that it was written whilst I was in Russia. I also did not update the article properly after I left Russia to reflect what I knew given the fact that I had to deal with events which pertained to Salisbury, harassment and the family distress which that caused. My journalism at the time was to be frank not as good as might have been beneficial

I had however touched upon his employment in a letter which I wrote to the RCMP in 2016.

To be precise, I did know that he had worked for Russia but due to the fact that I was subject to a level of gaslighting and due to the importance of what Dr Oliver had revealed, I doubted my own recollection of the fact.

 

1 Why he was murdered and why he was murdered by or on behalf of the British government

Shortly before Gareth Williams was due to leave his secondment to MI6 to work at GCHQ in 2009, he was found dead in a locked holdall in an MI6 safe house in Pimlico. There is apparently some uncertainty as to what caused his death.

When one examines the facts surrounding this case and other similar cases and when one takes into account conversations which were help with myself and Dr Oliver and additionally with Chris Kerr, a former student of the college, one can only conclude that he was murdered by individuals who work for or on behalf of the British government. The reasons for this conclusion are as follows.

  1. He was found dead in a holdall which was padlocked from the outside, something which is apparently not been achieved by someone of his height. Furthermore, the holdall was found in a bath which would have further lessened the room which he would have needed in order to manoeuvre himself into the bag and also to lock himself in from the outside. One must also consider that the handles were fastened with Velcro which would have added to the difficulty. Even if it were the case that he had somehow managed to lock himself in the bag, there were apparently no fingerprints or DNA on the handle of the holdall or around the zip which would mean that he would have had to have worn gloves. There were however no gloves found. It would be reasonable to conclude on the basis of this that someone else put him in the bag and that he was murdered.
  2. There were no fingerprints or DNA evidence in the flat and the USB sticks within his flat had been wiped. Additionally, the temperature had been turned up in his flat in the midst of summer, something which would appear to be indicative of an attempt to eliminate the presence of toxins within his body. Both of these factors would indicate that a third party had had access to the flat and had taken steps to hide the evidence in relation to a murder.
  3. It been noticed that he had not turned up to work for a week. Given his access to sensitive information and the fact they they considered him important enough to allocate him a safe house in Pimlico with an armed guard outside, it is difficult to believe that MI6 did not seek to discover his whereabouts at an earlier stage.
  4. The suggestion that due to the presence of two armed guards, someone chose to enter his premises through a skylight would appear to be somewhat suspicious in that had it been a possibility, given how obvious it is, it would have been mentioned as part of the inquest and was only mentioned later as part of an attempt to throw off the scent.
  5. There were suggestions that Gareth Williams was a cross dresser despite the lack of evidence for this found by the police who expressed frustration at the fact that “He didn’t even drink”.
    1. If he had bought women’s clothing, the police would easily have found either credit card records if the garments were purchased on-line (or indeed offline) or witnesses in the form of employees at the shops where the clothes would have been bought, particularly given the fact that £20000 worth was found. Given his employment and the fact that he would have been under close surveillance as part of this, it would have been very easy to discover which shops he frequented. The fact is there was no record of any such purchases.
    2. Such sexual smears (or indeed just the usage of bondage) after the murder of an employee of the intelligence services or indeed former government owned or associated defence companies are markers of the fact that the British establishment is responsible. Futhermore, it is notable that historically where journals, even those which can be said to be virulently anti-Russian like the dailymail, have made claims about Russian involvement in some murder, they have never made involve allegations that the Russians dressed them up in women’s clothes or bondage gear.
    3. The fact that this is the case is indicated by Nicholas Anderson, a former SIS officer who worked as a deep undercover spy. He states not only states that “I don’t think it is foreign at all. It’s closer than that. The clue was in the spotless clean-up of his flat, no fingerprints, no footprints, no CCTV clues, nothing at all, so that makes me think there is British involvement in some form.” but also “SIS (MI6) and other UK security agencies have a habit of coming in and cleaning up in the spotless manner the police found the place to be in. Over the decades we have tended to leave the impression that the victim was a crossdresser and/or a secret homosexual. It’s an SIS calling card, our signature as it were. All terrorist organisations and government agencies have one, and that’s ours…the British like to present the image suggesting the recently deceased was a sexual deviant. We do so to discredit them for political reasons.””
    4. Of particular note in this respect are the following cases:
      1. March 1990: Jonathan  Moyle, (28)
        Former RAF pilot-turned-journalist, whose death while investigating a huge arms deal for the intelligence service was blamed on a sex game that went wrong. He had been investigating claims that US civilian helicopters were to be converted into gunships for sale to Iraq and was found hanging naked inside a wardrobe with a pillow case over his head by cleaners in room 1406 of the Hotel Carrera in Santiago, Chile. British Foreign Office officials briefed reporters at the time that Moyle appeared to have died while involved in auto-erotic sex, which involves asphyxiation to the point of black out. Initial reports also claimed Moyle had no links to the intelligence community. Yet his family refused to accept their son would kill himself accidentally in this sordid way. After a lengthy legal battle, the British authorities accepted in 1998 that Moyle had ‘probably been killed unlawfully’ and were forced to apologise for the sexual smears.
      2. February 1994 Stephen Milligan (45)
        Conservative MP was found tied to a chair wearing women’s underwear, a plastic bag over his head, an electric cord round his neck and a satsuma stuffed into his mouth by Vera Taggart, his loyal secretary at his  flat in Black Lion Lane near the  Thames.. He was the parliamentary private secretary to the then defence minister Jonathan Aitken who has since denied media reports that he also worked for MI6.
        Even though it has never been proven, there are strong suspicions that Milligan, an Oxford graduate who was once a Sunday Times foreign correspondent, had close links to the intelligence community.
        Evidence suggested that his death was due to a sex game gone wrong, though Andrew Neil, his former editor at the Sunday Times, was convinced he’d been murdered. Even now, 18 years later, Mr Neil remains unconvinced that his death was an accident.
        ‘I asked the Insight team on the  newspaper at the time to investigate Stephen’s death,’ he told me yesterday.
        ‘I also spoke privately to his past girlfriends to find out if there was anything about him that we didn’t know. All of them said there was nothing about his private life that would make you think the way he died was possible.’
        What indicates that this is a murder is the following

        1. The fact that there does not appear to have been much if any urgency or investigation by the police into discovering who tied him to the chair.
        2. The fact that noone from his past life which indicates such an interest on his part.
        3. Just three weeks before Milligan’s death, in a case that was even more outlandish, an M16 agent was found hanging from  a beam inside his house on Cornwall’s Bodmin Moor, wearing a chemical weapons suit, black plastic mackintosh and rubber gloves.
      3. 1994, James Rusbridger, (65)
        Ex-MI6 agent turned journalist, was found hanged at his house on Bodmin Moor in Cornwall. He was dressed in a green protective suit, green overalls, a black plastic mackintosh and thick rubber gloves. His face was covered by a gas mask and his body was surrounded by bondage pictures. Consultant pathologist Dr Yasai Sivathondan said he died from asphyxia due to hanging “in keeping with a form of sexual strangulation”. What indicates that this is a murder is the following

        1. The timing and the manner of his death just three weeks after Milligan’s death,
        2. His body was suspended from two ropes, attached with shackles fastened to a piece of wood across the open loft hatch, and was surrounded by pictures of men and mainly black women in bondage. This would indicate the presence of a third party, something which is overlooked by the pathologist.
        3. He was indeed in debt and about to be evicted but if he were intending to commit suicide, it would seem unlikely that he would chose a sex game to do so even if he was writing a book about the subject.
        4. The lack of a suicide note
        5. His status as an alleged ex-MI6 operative who was acerbic and critical of the Official Secrets Act and the Security and Intelligence services (over 1,000 letter to national newspaper editors) as well as someone who would be seen as a troublemaker. Amongst other revelations during the year previous to his death;
          1. He was an expert defence witness in the recent trial of the KGB operative Michael Smith who was convicted and was expected to do so again at his appeal. The fact that a person defending someone who was charged with being a KGB operative was found in such a manner, given the other evidence, proves that such smears and the policy to give the appearance of a sexual-related death is not a Russian one but is in fact a British one.
          2. In the week before his death, Mr Rusbridger sent bundles of research material on the pornography industry to a television station and a newspaper. The documents were said to have named certain members of the Royal circle with ‘exotic sexual appetites’. This material form a tiny section of voluminous Rusbridger files painstakingly assembled over the years.
          3. Claimed that ‘corruption, fraud and errors’ in the DSS was more than matched by the pounds 1.2bn ‘squandered’ by the Ministry of Defence (Sunday Telegraph);
          4. Lashed the intelligence agencies ‘who, like drunken sailors, have propped up each other’s extravagant lifestyles’ (Telegraph);
          5. Revealed that the Home Secretary never asks to see the complete files on persons he allows to be bugged (Independent on Sunday) and Rubbished the Home Secretary’s claim that MI5 is accountable, through him, to parliament (Times),
          6. Delivered acerbic comments on a wide range of other matters, from expenditure on the Royals to Foreign Office sanitising of intelligence reports for politicians.
        6. His investigations into the death of the CND campaigner, Hilda Murrell which he deemed to be a murder.
  6. It is difficult to see how Gareth Williams could have afforded £20,000 worth of such clothing which was apparently found in his flat given the comparatively low salaries paid by GCHQ and the need for secure housing which is not provided as part of any remuneration package. The secondment to MI6 and the allocated safe house was only for a short-term period and it is difficult to see how he could have saved that amount of money in such a short duration.
  7. The lack of willingness of the press to apportion blame to the Russians as overtly as they do in other cases signifies a wish to conceal involvement on the part of the British. It was after all only two years after the inquest that the possibility was mentioned in a newspaper. Furthermore the lack of willingness on the part of several newspapers to respond or to publish this information, to get in contact as well as the publishing of disinformation are indicative of the fact that this case is subject to a DSMA notice and that the press are aware of what happened. Further to this, one might also like into consideration the following in that there is an attempt to conceal what occurred by the powers that be.
    1. The rather aggressive reaction and personal attacks in relation to my perfectly reasonable questions about the case in December 2015 on the British Army Rumour Service forum seem to suggest that there may be something to hide. It would appear likely that members of JTRIG were present on the forum which would not be unexpected given that it is an official British military forum and had used personal misinformation in the form of very idiosyncratic personalized slurs which had been gathered from people whom I had known 20 years ago.
    2. The fact that someone has commented before the comments were disabled with advice that one should secure ones laptop. Given that this is written on a laptop and given the fact one the basis of the evidence one can conclude that MI6 or another intelligence agency murdered their own employee, this can not only be interpreted as a threat by JTRIG but also as confirmation of the fact that the intelligence services do in fact steal as I have stated in my asylum case.

 

2 Incorrect explanations for the murder
  1. There was a suggestion that he was assassinated by the British because someone “had some compromising material on him” which might present a security risk. The trouble is there was no such opportunity to gather any compromising material.
    1. He had no great wealth nor indeed desire for possessions.
    2. He had no sexual interests according to the evidence from the guardian article and the suggestion that he was does not make sense according to the evidence.
  2. The possibility that the United States ordered the murder is not plausible in that it occurred just before he was due to move back from SIS to GCHQ which would indicate that his murder had something to do with his employment at SIS. Both SIS and GCHQ have a close relationships with their American counterparts (the CIA and the NSA) and it would not seem plausible to suggest that there were concerns about him leaking information which was gained from the CIA as a result of his employment at SIS to GCHQ.
  3. It does not seem plausible that it was because he was supplying information to some foreign government as Chris Kerr, a former student at Saint Catharine’s College, claimed in a meeting in January 2015. There was no leverage on him in terms of sex or money and even disregarding such adverse pressure, he did not have the time, inclination (being obsessed with maths) or skillset (being somewhat naive), to be able to deceive people as would be a requirement for anyone acting as a double-agent. Mr Kerr mentioned the fact that because he was aware of my recording of an attempt to recruit me to MI6 and hinted that for my own safety I should not return to the UK. From my observation and from the fact that he was a former member of the college’s MCR (Middle Combination Room) committee, Chris was quite close to to Dr Oliver. As Dr. Oliver has leaked a certain amount of sensitive information to myself and to others, it would not have been unreasonable to suggest that Mr Kerr had had access to information in relation to what happened from Dr Philip Oliver.
  4. He could have been murdered because he was aware of something which was inconvenient to those within a section of British intelligence. As mentioned by Jock Kane this would have pertained to corruption which of course, more often than not, has entailed working on behalf of a hostile party but even so he could, as with Mr Kane have simply been moved on. He was leaving SIS anyway. It is of course possible perhaps that he was intending on reporting the matter to GCHQ but from my experience and that of others, they do not tend to take much notice of such complaints.
  5. Gareth Williams was someone who by all accounts was somewhat introverted. He spoke about friction in the office and his distaste for the hard drinking, macho culture in the office. It is possible that due to a personality clash, certain members of MI6 or other intelligence agencies may have used him as a scapegoat for actions which were their own or that, given the lack of oversight in the intelligence services, someone may have chosen, purely based on a personal dislike or some perceived social faux pas to murder him but that seems a little excessive even for the intelligence services.
  6. Norman Baker bases his claim that Russia murdered Gareth Williams upon an account given by a Russian defector Boris Karpichov. It is obvious that the account of Mr Karpichov is shash and nonsense as are the conclusions reached by Norman Baker. That is to be fair with the exception of the revelation of the mole.
    1. Boris Karpichov
      1. Apparently was imprisoned by the FSB, got political asylum in Latvia then went to the UK on his FSB issued passports.
      2. Was threatened along with Sergei Skripal by unnamed sources which he claimed were Russian yet the evidence proves that it was not Russia who was responsible for Salisbury.
      3. Claims that Russian intelligence went straight to his house to recruit him, which was a heavily monitored MI6 safe house in Pimlico and attempted to recruit him there. This is a laughably inept claim.
      4. Would not have sources in Russian intelligence and would not mention them so openly even if he did. This would draw attention to himself and to those sources.
      5. Claims that Gareth Williams was similarly targeted in the United States. Had this been the case, given his access to sensitive information, it would have been of concern to American intelligence who would have taken action.
      6. Attempts to claim that methods which have been employed by British intelligence were employed in this case on the pretext that Gareth Williams was a homosexual when
        1. There is no evidence to suggest that was the case
        2. MI6 had to go to some considerable lengths to indicate as much
        3. MI6 were responsible in other cases, as the article shows and as has been attempted in my case
      7. is a liar and is employed as a disinformation agent by British intelligence in cooperation with Russian intelligence to smudge or to discredit true stories. In this instance because infiltration is so obvious they have to provide a partial confession whilst attempting to claim that Russia (as opposed to British intelligence) was responsible for murdering individuals who found out.
    2. Mr Baker claims that foreign intelligence agencies monitoring individuals from rival intelligence agencies is a sign that they are about to kill them. Nonsense, it is standard practice to monitor as one can read (in rather tedious detail) in Spycatcher.
    3. Mr Baker fails to understand that the intelligence agencies have a policy to murder individuals in their employ when it is deemed convenient.
3 Why he was murdered
  1. It seems more likely that concern was expressed by others about leakages/infiltrators and they chose to kill an “oddball” like Gareth Williams in order to reassure them even given his level of skill. This is not altogether unlikely, given the fact that my experiences of British Intelligence at Cambridge concur with those reported by Gareth Williams and more importantly sections of British Intelligence including MI6 have attempted to kill me. For reference, I should perhaps add that there are of course leakages on a general level within British intelligence as indicated by this website but given that these sort of leakages would have been known about by the Americans, it is not logical to suggest that someone who would have access to greater information as part of his direct employment would have been blamed for this sort of leakage.
  2. There was no concern at my repeated reports of Russian infiltration within British Intelligence and also an attempt to conceal my report when I pointed it out on various occasions. As in the case of Jock Kane, and as recently admitted this sort of allegations is an inconvenience and challenge to the powers that be because of the effect amongst other things upon the special relationship. And when push comes to shove they chose someone disposable in terms of the hierarchy even if he had a high level of skill.
  3. In my meeting with him in August 2015, Dr Oliver did not express concern at the death of Gareth Williams and in fact joked about it. It is my interpretation but I read from his tone that he knew that he had been murdered and furthermore. He said that after it occurred, he hid from the press who presumably knew about his function as minder and wished to talk to him.
  4. As the director of admissions for the college and as someone who has made visits to several schools in order to encourage people to apply to the college, it is implausible to claim that Dr Oliver’s reticence is down to shyness and not wishing to talk to the press. One can see that this is not the case from the following tweet.
  5. I did not recount this at the time given that this was written in Russia and not updated properly due to having to deal with events which pertained to Salisbury, harassment and the family distressed which that caused but it should be stated that in that meeting he said that he did not like America and preferred Russia in response to which I said “Yes, Enoch Powell was of that view”. I had however touched upon the fact that I was concerned about the fact that he worked for Russia in a letter which I wrote to the RCMP in 2016 which was brushed off.
  6. Additionally, it could not be stated for certain that he was murdered in order to conceal Russian infiltration which included the fact that Doctor Oliver worked for Russia until the British government carried out the Salisbury chemical weapons attack to conceal my reports of the fact that amongst other things Doctor Oliver worked for Russia as I relate in chapter 10 and chapter 12
  7. The reason why Gareth Williams was murdered was to conceal his knowledge of infiltration which would have included his discovery that Dr Oliver worked for Russia.
  8. The British government broadcaster, the BBC broadcast a shameful program called “London Spy” which was supposedly based upon the murder of Gareth Williams and which attempted to fudge what happened by giving incorrect reasons for the murder. It was rather unsurprisingly written by someone from Cambridge a university which has a record of attempting to conceal infiltration. It was supposedly fictional but by the same token I could write a fictional program about a presenter of Crimewatch who was murdered because she owed money to a member of the Albanian mafia because she owed money for purchases of crack cocaine.

 

7 The defence industry suicide cluster

The following is partly adapted from the book Outbreak!: The Encyclopedia of Extraordinary Social Behavior which provides strange cases of “suicide” or “accidents” from the 1970s and 1980s of individuals who worked within the British Military Industrial complex. It provides a summary of deaths which had been reported in the press. I have adapted the article to indicate cases where, upon examination of the evidence, there is evidence that these individuals were murdered at the behest of that complex with the approval or instruction of the British government. This article shall be updated to include new cases as I examine 30 or so cases.

I will also be

  • Indicating those which involve suicide, accidents or murder at the behest of a foreign country.
  • Including a list of individuals who were not part of the suicide cluster but who were murdered by the British government.

With respect to the “suicide cluster” during the 1970s and 1980s, a number of people working on high-security military research in Britain, or in companies or institutions associated with such research, suffered accidents, frequently fatal, or killed themselves in circumstances that were often puzzling. Although individually each case received a mundane explanation, these often failed to satisfy colleagues and relatives of the victims; inquests tended to result in open verdicts (where no cause of death could be definitely identified). The police often seemed to be less than diligent in their investigation, and the authorities often seemed to be trying to conceal details.

For this reason, in these cases where the details do indicate a murder and the fact that there appears to have been a coverup, it is reasonable to assume that the government may not have approved but gave tacit consent.

The fact that so many incidents occurred in a narrow segment of the population, within a relatively brief time span, caught the media’s attention and resulted in conspiracy theories, which may or may not be justified. Though officially each incident was regarded as an individual occurrence, and though there seemed nothing to directly link any victim with any other, it seemed to many to be more than coincidence that so many people, working in the same or related organizations on projects within the same general area, should fall victim at all, let alone in circumstances that were, in some cases, bizarrely improbable.

Some explanations

  • At the time of these happenings, the Cold War was still simmering, and Britain and the Soviet Union regarded each other as potential enemies. A great deal of research and development, largely concerned with electronic warfare, was being conducted in conditions of extreme secrecy. Those involved in this research were, by definition, security risks, and the possibility that they might pass their information to the other side, either voluntarily, or for cash, or consequent upon blackmail, was ever-present. Consequently, any unusual incident involving such people inevitably aroused suspicion. None of those listed here was seen to have been dishonest in any way, but the possibility may account for the evasive behavior of the authorities.
  • It is also true to state that the government as one can see from several cases, most notably that of Gareth Williams and Johnathan Moyle do murder employees for reasons which may either pertain to concealing infiltration, corruption or some other embarrassment

Note: Many of these scientists worked for companies in the General Electric group (GEC), including Marconi, Easams, and Plessey. The following abbreviations are used:

  • BT: British Telecom
  • GCHQ: Government Communications Headquarters at Cheltenham
  • MOD: the Ministry of Defence
  • ICL: International Computers Ltd
  • RARDE: Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment
  • RMCS: Royal Military College of Science at Shrivcnham, Wiltshire.

 

1 Individuals who worked for the British Government

1 Murdered by the British government

  1. April 6, 1984: George Franks (58): Radio specialist at GCHQ engaged in highly classified defense work. Originally said to have been found hanged in his Sussex home, leaving a suicide note. However, it was subsequently stated that he had died of a heart attack
    • Verdict: natural causes.
    • Unusual circumstances: The original Statement seems to have been totally false, but how this error originated only adds to the mystery. The name of the victim was not at first disclosed, and a news blackout followed his death. The authorities explained this was out of concern for his family, yet no family member appeared except a sister who had not seen him for four months. A neighbor stated that Franks received only about two phone calls a week, mostly from a man who identified himself in code. Apparently anticipating his heart attack, Franks had bundled together a number of papers with directions that they were to be given to his sister only. However, they were given to the police and only some of them were passed on to his sister. A partially concealed half-empty malt whisky bottle and a bottle of tablets were found near the body, but they were said to have no relevance to his death. A friend revealed that he had been in serious dispute with his employers, GCHQ, but could not elaborate. Possibly this related to his taste for pornography, which had caused him difficulties at work, though ‘ how the magazines were discovered and exactly why the matter was taken so seriously is not clea
  2. March 1990: Jonathan  Moyle, (28): See above
  3. February 1994 Stephen Milligan (45): See above
  4. 1994, James Rusbridger, (65): See above
  5. January 1987: Richard Pugh (26): See above
  6. July 1997 Nicholas Husband (46): See above
  7. March 1999, Kevin Allen, (31): See above
  8. 1985: Stephen Oke (35): Worked at GCHQ’s listening post at Morwensrow, Cornwall. His work apparently had no security aspect, though he had access to sensitive material. Found hanging from a beam in the loft of his home while his wife and children were away for a few days. No apparent reason for suicide.
    • Verdict: open
    • Unusual circumstances: A piece of string was tied round his hands, though the police said he could have tied it himself. Cigarettes were found nearby, though Oke did not smoke. An empty brandy bottle was found in the dustbin, though he disliked spirits.
  9. February 21/22, 1987: Peter Peapell (46): Scientist at RCMS where he had been employed for 25 years, currently working for a MOD research department. Found dead in the garage of his home in Shrivenham, of carbon monoxide poisoning, after returning from a party with his wife about 3 a.m. She had gone straight to bed, but when she woke at about 9:30, she realized he was not there and went to look for him. She found him lying on the ground beneath the car in the garage, dead, with his head close to the exhaust and the engine running. She thought that he might have been checking for a knocking noise they had noticed on the drive home, but the garage light was broken and he had no flashlight. Suicide was improbable. He enjoyed his work and had just had a big pay raise, and their marriage was happy.
    • Verdict: open.
    • Unusual circumstances: It would have been virtually impossible to get his body into this position without opening the garage doors, yet they were closed. Deposits showed that the engine had been running for only a short time, certainly not the 6 hours between their return and the discover)’ of his body.

 

2 To Determine

  1. July 1982: Jack Wolfenden (56): Radio operator at GCHQ at Cheltenham. Though an experienced glider pilot, he had a fatal crash when his powered glider crashed into a Cotswold hillside in perfect flying weather. His girlfriend said he had been acting oddly, lethargic, and indecisive after returning from abroad. No indication of suicide.
    • Verdict: accidental death.
    • Unusual circumstances: The accident occurred within a few days of the appearance in court of Geoffrey Prime, a fellow worker at GCHQ, who was subsequently jailed as a spy, his files named several colleagues who might be blackmailed or bribed to pass information to the Soviets. However, the authorities specifically denied any connection between Wolfcnden’s death and Prime’s conviction. Eye witnesses claimed however that the crash appeared to be deliberate
  2. 1982: Emest Brockway (43): Employed at Irton Moor, one of GCHQ’s largest ground stations. He was found hanged in his home. Though he left no suicide note, suicide was presumed. His widow told reporters that her husband had been a sick man, and that she had been told by the authorities to say nothing. As with Wolfenden. the authorities denied any link with spying.
  3. 1983: Stephen Drinkwater (25): Employed at GCHQ, Cheltenham, in the only department where it is permitted to make copies of classified documents. Found by his parents in his room asphyxiated with a plastic bag over his head. It was supposed he had been involved in a sexual experiment.
    • Verdict: death by misadventure.
  4. April 1983: Anthony Godley (49): A Lieutenant Colonel and defense expert at RMCS. Disappeared one Saturday morning, seemingly with no word to anyone, He spent the night at a hotel in Dover, leaving without paying his bill. His car was found at Folkestone, where his yacht was missing and has never been found. He was presumed dead, particularly as he did nor claim a substantial bequest left him by his father.
    • Unusual circumstances: His widow left their married quarters at RMCS within 24 hours, without making any comment on her husband’s disappearance.
  5. January 12, 1987: John Brittan (52):Senior scientist, formerly working at the RCMS, later for the RARDE at Chcrtscy. In December 1986 he had a car accident in which he lost control and drove into a ditch; he told colleagues he could not understand how it happened. In January he paid a working visit to the U.S., returning with a throat infection that kept him off work. January 12 was to have been his first day back at work, but he was found dead sitting in his car in the garage of his Camberley home, due to carbon monoxide poisoning. It was supposed that he had been warming up his car and had thoughtlessly failed to open the garage door. He had no reason to kill himself.
    • Verdict: accidental death.
    • Unusual circumstances: Most who choose this form of suicide connect a hose from the exhaust to the interior of the car. The fact that Brittan did not do this supports the accident explanation.
  6. 8 January 1987: Aviar Singh-Gida (27):Signal-processing scientist from Pakistan, previously at RCMS, currently at Loughborough University on a grant from the MOD where he was employed in the Admiralty Research Establishment and involved in a signal processing project for them. He disappeared while working at a reservoir near Loughborough, Leicestershire, while his colleagues had gone oil to buy lunch. The police carried out an intensive search on a scale that made it clear the authorities were very concerned to find him. Pour months later, acting on a tip from the police, a Derby journalist traced him to a boutique in the porn district of Paris. Back in England, he had no explanation for his fugue beyond that he had been “in a state of confusion,” which he attributed to work pressure.
    • Unusual circumstances: his wife reported that he had been very disturbed by the death the previous August of Dajibhai, a former acquaintance. He was just a few weeks away from completing his four-year PhD.
  7. April 10, 1987: Stuart Gooding (23): Variously described as research student, undergraduate, or scientific officer at RMCS. While on a diving expedition in Cyprus, he was killed in a car crash when a truck on a mountain road hit his hired car.
    • Verdict: accident.
    • Unusual circumstances: By coincidence, personnel from RMCS were involved in military exercises on the island at the time.
  8. April 10, 1987: David Greenhalgh (46): Though at first described as a “salesman,” he was a NATO Defense Contracts Manager working for International Computers, which is not quite the same thing. Though the authorities insisted he was not currently engaged in sensitive work, he had recently been working on high-security matters. He was critically injured after a 13-meter fall from a railway bridge onto an embankment at Maidenhead, a few miles from his home, which he had left nearly four hours earlier on route for work. After several weeks in hospital, he recovered, but was unable to remember what happened before his fall.
  9. April 14, 1987: Mark Wisner (24): Software engineer at the Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment at Boscombe Down. Found dead in his home at Durrington, wearing women’s hoots and suspenders, with a plastic sack over his head and cling film over his face. He was said to be a transvestite in his leisure hours, and his death was perceived as an unsuccessful sexual experiment.
    • Verdict: accident.
  10. January 1988: Russell Smith (23): Laboratory technician at Atomic Energy Research Establishment, Harwell. Found dead halfway down a cliff at Boscastle, Cornwall.
    • Verdict: suicide.

 

2 Individuals who did not work for the British government

1 Murdered with the consent of the British government

  1. August 4, 1986: Vimal Bhagvani Dajibhai (24): Pakistan-born computer programmer working for Marconi at Croxley Green on underwater defense. He was happily married and enjoyed life. He was in his last week of employment at Marconi and looking forward to a new job starting the following week. Apparently killed himself by jumping off the Clifton Suspension Bridge at Bristol, a location much favored by suicides.
    • Verdict: open.
    • Evidence which indicates murder
      1. All who knew him insisted that suicide was highly improbable and out of character.
      2. He had driven some 150 km from his home at Ruislip to Bristol, a city he had never previously visited.
      3. Bottles of wine were found in his car, though he reportedly rarely drank, never when driving, and did not like wine.
      4. His trousers were found drawn down below his buttocks, and a needle-sized puncture mark was on his left buttock. His wife presumably would have known about such markings and the Bristol coroner stated that he was concerned by this — “it was a mystery then and remains a mystery now.”
      5. The authorities unexpectedly interrupted his cremation and called for a second postmortem but did not reveal the findings.
      6. If it had been a murder at the behest of a foreign power the British would have stated as much given the case of Dennis Skinner
      7. The MOD has apparently “lost” the files in relation to the case
      8. It is perhaps significant that, as in the case of Gareth Williams, he was found dead shortly before he was due to change employer.
  2. November 19, 1985: Jonathan Wash (29): Digital communications expert who had worked for GEC and at BT. Fell from a hotel room in Abidjan while working in the Ivory Coast for BT.
    • Verdict: open.
    • Unusual circumstances: He had previously expressed fear that his life was in danger. Conflicting evidence left the exact circumstances of his death unclear and raised the possibility of a Struggle before his fall. He had secretly booked a flight to Britain for the following day.
  3. October 27-28, 1986: Art had Sharif(26): Pakistan-born computer expert with Marconi, Stanmore. He had previously worked for British Aerospace. He was due to get married that same month and was also expecting promotion at work. Killed himself at Siston Common, near Bristol, by tying one end of a rope to a tree, the other round his neck, then driving off in his car with the accelerator jammed down with a spanner. A tape recording left in the car was described by the authorities as tantamount to a suicide note, but its contents were never made public.
    • Verdict: suicide.
    • Unusual circumstances: He had driven some 200 km from his Walthamstow home to Bristol to do what he could have done anywhere. He spent the previous night at a guesthouse in Bristol used largely by employees of British Aerospace, where he had himself lived while working for them. There he displayed a wad of high-denomination banknotes, l our lengths of rope were used for the suicide, but a receipt for only one length was found in the car. On the day of his death he had an appointment with his Member of Parliament, presumably to discuss delays in the entry permit for his Pakistani bride.
  4. August 22 or 23, 1988: Peter Ferry (60): Retired army officer (Brigadier), working for Marconi on business development and involved with NATO. He was planning soon to retire from full-time work and work for Marconi part-time. He had been severely shaken by a car accident on August 2; though noone was seriously injured, he had been trapped in his car after being struck by a truck on the wrong side of a lane near his house. He was found in a cottage in the grounds of the Marconi factory at Frimlev, Surrey. He had been electrocuted, having stuck two electric leads onto his teeth. No sign of foul play.
    • Verdict: open.
  5. Unknown Date of Death: John Whiteman (31): Computer software manager for British Aerospace at Warton, Lancashire. Found dead in his bath with an empty bottle of sleeping tablets and two empty whisky bottles. But no motive or sign of intention to kill himself. Stress at work was a possible factor.
    • Verdict: open.
    • Unusual circumstances: It is said that an autopsy revealed no trace of drugs and very little alcohol in his body.
  6. April 17/18, 1987: Shani Warren (26): Personal assistant at MicroScope, which became a GEC subsidiary less than a month later; the company was already collaborating with GEC on communications technology. Found drowned in half a meter of water on the edge of a lake. Police and medical experts thought suicide at least half-likely, despite the circumstances and the lack of motive, and the fact that she had made plans for the next few days.
    1. Verdict: open.
    2. Evidence which indicates murder:
      1. She was gagged, with a noose round her neck, her hands tied behind her back, and her feet tied together. A reconstruction showed that it was almost impossible she could have reached the water on her own.
      2. Suicide seemed supported by the fact that the only footprints were her stiletto heels, but the same reconstruction showed that someone wearing fiat shoes would have left no marks.
      3. Her car, parked nearby, had a defective gearbox, and the contents were strewn around the grass nearby as though it had been searched.
      4. The police investigation was puzzlingly unenthusiastic.
      5. She had made plans for the next days.
      6. If it had been a murder at the behest of a foreign power the British would have stated as much given the case of Dennis Skinner

 

2 To Determine

  1. 1972-3 Robert Wilson (43): A former technical author for Marconi at Chelmsford, Essex. Wilson was clearing out his attic when he came across some confidential Marconi documents. When he took them to Marconi, he was interviewed at length. The next day he was cleaning his .45 revolver when he accidentally shot himself in the chest, though as a member of the local gun club he knew better than to clean a loaded gun with the muzzle pointed at himself. He himself described the accident as “grotesque.” Around May the following year he had another accident. While servicing his car in his garage, he was overcome by fumes. This time the accident was fatal.
  2. March 1982: Keith Bowden (46): Computer programmer and mathematics professor at Essex University engaged in computer work for Marconi. Killed in car accident after dinner with friends, when his well-maintained car went out of control on a divided highway, crossed the central median and plunged onto a disused railway line.
    • Verdict: accident.
    • Unusual circumstances: Police said he had been drinking, but family and friends denied this. Accident investigation revealed that the new tires on his car had been replaced with worn out retreads, a likely cause of the accident.
  3. March 1985: Roger Hill (49): Radar designer with Marconi. Killed himself with shotgun at his family home.
    • Verdict: suicide.
  4. February 1987: Victor Moore (46): Design engineer with Marconi Space Systems. It was alleged that he did not agree with some of the things he had to do. Said to have died in Portsmouth from an overdose of drugs.
    • Verdict: suicide.
  5. February 1987: Edwin Skeels (43): Engineer with Marconi, Leicester. Found dead in his car with hose leading from the exhaust.
    • Verdict: open.
  6. March 30, 1987: David Sands (37): Senior communications scientist working on defense projects for Easams, Camberley. Driving to work, he performed a sudden U-turn on the divided highway, A33, and drove at high speed down a slip road and crashed into an abandoned cafe. His car burst into flame and he was burnt beyond recognition. There was no sign of intent to kill himself and the
    • Verdict: Open
    • Unusual circumstances: His car was carrying extra petrol cans, though this was said to be normal. Two days earlier, he had left the house telling his wife he wanted to buy some petrol. When lie failed to return after six hours, she called the police. When he returned, he told her he had been driving and thinking;” he was confused.
  7. April 17. 1987: George Kountis: Experienced systems analyst at Bristol Polytechnic. His drowned body was found in his upturned car in the river Mersey at Liverpool.
    • Verdict: misadventure.
  8. May 3, 1987: Michael Baker (23): Digital communications expert engaged on a defense project for Plessev at Poole, Dorset. On a fishing trip with two friends, his Car crossed the highway and crashed through a barrier. His two companions were uninjured, but he was killed.
    • Verdict: accidental death.
    • Unusual circumstances: His mother reported that he had not wanted to go, but someone came to the door for him and he went. He was a part-time member of an SAS (Special Air Services) squadron with MOD connections.
  9. June 1987: Frank Jennings (60): Electronic weapons engineer at Plessev. Found dead of heart attack. No inquest.
  10. March 25, 1988: Trevor Knight (52): Computer services manager at Marconi, Stanmore. He had previously worked for Marconi at Croxley Green, where Dajibhai worked, and at Stanmore, where Sharif worked, though it is nor known whether he knew either of them. Found dead at the wheel of his car, with a hose connected to the exhaust, in his garage at Harpenden, Hertfordshire. He was known to have disliked his work and to be depressed by a number of traffic accidents, but his estranged wife and his current partner both found his suicide unexpected and surprising. Notes were found whose content was not disclosed; those who had seen them refused to comment.
    • Verdict: suicide.
    • Unusual circumstances: The previous day he had phoned his mother, sounding quite happy and discussing plans for the weekend.
  11. August 1988: Alistair Beckham (50): Computer engineer with Plessey Defense Systems at Addlestone, Surrey. Found dead in his garden shed at his home in Woking, with electric wire to mains.
    • Verdict: open.
    • Unusual circumstances: Earlier in the day he had discussed a forthcoming family holiday with his wife, and had arranged to pick her up that afternoon. He returned home, took the dog for a walk, bought the Sunday papers, and was preparing to do some D1Y work.
  12. September 1988: Andrew Hall (33): Engineering manager with British Aerospace. Found dead in car with hose connected to exhaust.
    • Verdict: suicide.

 

2 Something worse than infiltration (Update: 25th of December 2020)

The details of the following are rather complicated to explain and are therefore outlined in the rest of the website. It is no exaggeration to state that as a result of the actions of members of the college and the university, the United Kingdom is going to disintegrate.

In short, years after gaining significant information from my father with respect to the middle east something which resulted in regime change in Egypt with consequent geopolitical and economic benefits to the United Kingdom and the west as a whole, they decided to invite me to St Catharine’s college. They took the bizarre decision given my ancestry and given who my father was to harass me.

To reiterate, this is explained in the rest of this website but the result of their harassment, my reaction and their reaction which amongst other things consisted of an unwillingness to talk and to say what ailed them has been that they were unable, as they had intended, to ensure that the United Kingdom did not leave the European Union. Given the resultant deal, the effects will be as follows.

  1. The United Kingdom is going to disintegrate as a result of discontent in Scotland and Northern Ireland with respect to the decision to leave the European Union, the government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, something which a) they were unable to deal with given the fact that important elements of the civil service and indeed the government were rather more preoccupied with me and b) will lead to either cutbacks or tax rises in the short to medium term. As a result of this,
    1. Colonies such as Gibraltar, the Malvinas will go.
    2. They are going to lose the UN security council seat.
    3. Any prospect of the United Kingdom rejoining the European Union is gone. In the short term, given the divisive past four years, it would be rather delusional to expect any such outcome. In the medium term, there will be no United Kingdom to rejoin the European Union.
  2. They have lost influence both with the European Union and the United States given that the main aim of British foreign policy since the end of the empire has been to act as a link between those two geopolitical entities. The result is that the importance of the “special relationship” particularly with the election of Joe Biden is rather diminished.
  3. The deal in itself, the economic effects of the pandemic something which will entail cutbacks (in particular to low hanging fruit such as governmental defense and intelligence organizations) as well as my highlighting of their incompetence will inevitably mean that in the short term, the stature and capabilities of British intelligence, as well as defense” and “police” work in Europe will be rather diminished. From January the first, the government loses access to the European Arrest Warrant, the the SIS II database, to Europol and Eurojust as well as real time access to information. As of the 1st January 2021, there will therefore be no framework in place between the UK and the EU to develop and coordinate joint responses to foreign policy challenges, for instance the imposition of sanctions on third country nationals or economies, external security and defense cooperation. In the medium term, the rest will all end given the end of the United Kingdom.
  4. Universities and Cambridge in particular are also badly affected.
    1. Erasmus is going so one will not see students from different parts of Europe coming to the United Kingdom to the same extent or indeed vice versa
    2. Because European students have to pay full fees and because of visa requirements and so on, European students will not be coming to the United Kingdom to the same extent. Moreover Chinese and other foreign students will not be coming to the United Kingdom because of the pandemic in the first instance and because of the disfavorable attitude towards China on the part of the United Kingdom. This is obviously important given that much of the funding for universities comes from foreign students who pay full fees.
    3. The participation in Horizon Europe funding will be adversely affected
      1. It is no longer a defined (financial) benefit for the United Kingdom which they gain as a result of their membership of the European Union.
      2. Due to restrictions on European immigration and indeed a lack of participation in Erasmus which render cooperation more problematic.
    4. Because of the economic effects of the pandemic something which the government were unable to deal with because they had their minds on other things, there are going to be cutbacks to higher education funding.
    5. Startups are going to be affected given the fact that
      1. They will not have as big a pool of talent as was previously the case
      2. The European Union will obviously be a bigger draw.
  5. The reputation of the UK is in tatters and they are facing another Suez moment what with
    1. Their handling of COVID and Brexit and in particular disputes and division in this respect in the United Kingdom as a whole
    2. The recent blockade at Dover showing the very real limitations of their power,
    3. The decision to focus on and harass myself as opposed to other more pertinent issues which has resulted in this sorry outcome.
    4. What I have revealed with respect to their incompetence and corruption.
    5. The way they will inevitably be perceived by their international partners even if sometimes those partners might wish to
      1. Maintain the appearance of unity.
      2. Flatter GCHQ amongst others by going on about a “special relationship” which they do in order to secure benefits .
  6. The United Kingdom was ill prepared for and did not handle the current pandemic well. Indeed the economic havoc this has caused will leave the United Kingdom less well prepared for the next pandemic, something which would seem to be inevitable given globalization and the fact that outbreaks of new diseases occur every four to five years.

What sums up a the college is the fact that it has decided, even in light of the coming economic effects of the pandemic and Brexit and even in light of the above outcome, that it would be a good idea to spend millions of pounds on new or refurbished buildings and to publicize the fact.

A sane and rational person would understand that any cuts to funding should fall upon that university which in any case has huge reserves. It would be unconscionable to argue in light of the above that others should pay for the economics effects of the coronavirus and Brexit through either tax rises or cuts in government funding  whilst they spend money on unnecessary buildings.

The reaction from the UK to the deal is priceless. It’s like watching a prisoner for the first time in four years expressing happiness at getting his first not very good English breakfast which happens to be from a very run down cafe in Middlesborough which is known for failing its hygiene inspections and which is liable to give him botulism and salmonella.

I don’t wish to sound like a guardian columnist but I would imagine that as ever, elements in the government and beyond will numb themselves to the reality of the situation by quoting select economists (whose job it is to make astrologers look good) saying how everything is going to be wonderful or and how there will be sunlit uplands (remember them?) or going so far as to state how there is now some “special relationship” with the EU.

This is another instance of the sort of complacent attitude we heard just after the election and just before the government’s mishandling of the pandemic. We all know what the result of a government (and specifically Boris Johnson) getting drunk on the outcome of an election (and thinking, as a consequence, that one can will certain things into being or out of the way) was because the effects of this are already apparent.

As regards any talk of a special relationship, if the EU has such a relationship, which is based upon a defense and intelligence, it is with the United States. In the first place, the UK has chosen not to coordinate its defense policy with that of the EU and vice versa. In the second place, it is the United States and not the United Kingdom which provides for the military requirements of the member states of the European Union and in any case the armed forces of the United Kingdom are two third of the size of those of France (and this is before any cutbacks). In the third place, with respect to intelligence, a) the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom are an appendage of those in the United States and b) the UK has a less close relationship in this respect, come January the 1st given the fact that it has opted out of several databases. In the fourth place, look at the above, this is before the effects of brexit have become clear.

One thing I should perhaps advise the FCDO of is that it would be ridiculous and be seen as ridiculous to make any moves either on a personal or cooperate basis on the effect that I had done something wrong. The fact is had you had any issue, you would not have allowed brexit to occur. It’s as simple as that.

Anyway, merry Christmas. I’m going to watch Jeremy Clarkson (who should make similar films) talk about the raid on St Nazaire.

Another update (26th of December 2020). A report has been published saying how Britain will remain the fifth largest economy and will beat France.

It is however published by an outfit known as the center of economics and Business Research. One can tell that the body (and thus the report) is rather dodgy and that the FCDO are rather desperately trying to bolster public confidence by spreading this story through the press by the following.

  1. The CEBR is based in Brtain and is not an exactly reliable source of information
  2. They employ a Vicky Pryce who went to jail for perverting the course of justice. She is part Greek so the spreading of this story is in response to what a Turk (ie myself) has stated
  3. They have had some not very good reviews
  4. It looks like a dodgy outfit for what it is publicized as. It’s above an eye hospital in an unmarked building. Even trotters independent trading had logos and stuff.
  5. It is published in the guardian, the times and promoted in the mail,
  6. There is no report form a reputable outfit which confirms these claims. Thus one can tell that the FCDO are desperately scrabbling around for any positive spin on what is going to happen to the economy and are found wanting.

 

3 The reputation of the college in other respects

1 Introduction

Apart from its strong relationship with the intelligence services and the foreign office and history of concealing infiltration, it is true to state that the college has not have a particularly distinguished academic or scientific record over the past 500 years. One could cite the inventor of Concorde Sir Morien Bedford Morgan who was an alumni of that college but the fact remains that

  1. The Soviet government were first to manufacture a supersonic aircraft.
  2. There are indications that there was an attempt by western intelligence to sabotage its development

I do not say this out of spite but on the basis of my initial impression before I visited the college, something which was confirmed by my later experiences when I was awarded a place and by statements on the part of members of staff.

It does have a reputation for the culture of the misuse of alcohol as one can see from

  1. Reports in the media.
    1. Dean reads riot act over ‘drunken, naked girls’ – Telegraph
    2. Catz Rugby Team Suspended
    3. Alley Cats drinking
    4. Drunk people smashing everything
    5. College bar closed indefinitely
  2. The fact that it is best known as a sporty college, so a culture of alcohol would not be unexpected.
  3. Some of the staff including members of the welfare team, Dr Oliver who is now deceased and the reverend Anthony Moore who has since departed. And indeed the present head of admissions, member of the tutorial staff, Disabilities Tutor, and senior Member of the JCR Committee David Bainbridge, who has a tolerant attitude to such things.

So he wrote the book, in which he is truly ecstatic about teenagers, and which will no doubt get him many teenage fans. “We’ve become blind to the fact that our teenage years are, in fact, the most dramatic, intense and exciting of our lives,” he says. “We shouldn’t be criticising teenagers, we should be celebrating them.” He even refuses to condemn teenage drug-taking, saying we should try to understand the reasons behind it instead: “We have to be realistic – people take drugs because they enjoy them.” That was a big problem for his American publishers – Bainbridge is best known in the US, having won critical acclaim for A Visitor Within: The Science of Pregnancy, but they refused to publish Teenagers so it is being published in Canada instead.

The attitude to drink is mentioned in an episode of Have I got News for you from 2001

It also and this pertains to myself has a culture of harassment something which is confirmed by

I shall of course relate the harassment which I experienced in the college and beyond but I feel that the attitude to drugs in particular is worth talking about within the context of the strong links between the college and the intelligence services.

 

2 How the attitude to drugs is relevant

It has been noted by some journalists that there may be a correlation between the usage of drugs, whether illegal or legal and terrorism.

I elected to list all the terrorist attacks which have occurred in Europe between the years 2014 and 2019, to research each case to find out whether there was indeed such a correlation.

There were 61 incidents in total during this period but for reasons of accuracy, I had elected to exclude 10 of them. This is because most or all of the details of those cases were kept out of the public domain due to privacy laws in the countries where those attacks occurred.

Out of the 51 cases where there is information available, one can state on the basis of publicly available information 46 of the cases involved individuals who either used drugs (or sold drugs which would ordinarily involve some usage of drugs), had been subject to psychiatric treatment with drugs or had some other neurological issue who then subsequently committed attacks.

As such one can see that there is a strong correlation between terrorism and drug related issues (both illegal and legal) given that the correlation is present in 90.2% of cases. This is not unexpected given the fact that

  1. ISIS fighters in Syria and Iraq commonly used an amphetamine drug called Captagon.
  2. Alcohol and drugs are implicated in an estimated 80% of offenses leading to incarceration in the United States such as domestic violence, driving while intoxicated, property offenses, drug offenses, and public-order offenses.

It should also be taken into consideration that most of these are people from a quick glance would appear to be rather low in intelligence.

So the common factors which can be said to precipitate terrorism are

  1. Low intelligence
  2. The usage of drugs (legal and illegal). I should also like to add that the drugs do not include hallucinogenic substances such as LSD given their rarity.

The list of incidents is highlighted in bold, the perpetrator(s) is listed underneath and where there are any medical issues these are listed in brackets with a link to the article which provides such information.

 

1 Attacks where the data is publicly available.
  1. 24/04/14 Jewish Museum of Belgium shooting (Belgium)
    1. Assailant: Mehdi Nemmouche (Brain Tumour)
  2. 20/10/14 Tours police station stabbing (France)
    1. Assailant: Bertrand Nzohabonayo (Drug dealer)
  3. 07/01/15 Ile-de-France attacks (France)
    1. Assailant: Saïd and Chérif Kouachi (Drug taking)
    2. Assailant: Amedy Coulibaly (Drug conviction)
  4. 03/02/15 Attack on a Jewish Community centre in Nice (France)
    1. Assailant: Moussa Coulibaly (Drug taking)
  5. 14/02/15 Copenhagen shootings (Denmark)
    1. Assailant: 6 Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein (Drug taking)
  6. 19/04/15 Shooting in Villejuif (France)
    1. Assailant: Sid Ahmed Ghlam (No information which indicates a problem)
  7. 26/06/15 Saint-Quentin-Fallavier attack. (France)
    1. Assailant: Yassin Salhi France (Drug trafficking)
  8. 21/08/15 Thalys train attack. (France)
    1. Assailant: Ayoub El Khazzani (Drug trafficking)
  9. 17/09/15 Police officer attack (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Rafik Yousef (Drug and mental health problems
  10. 13/11/15 Paris attacks (France)
    1. Assailant: Salah Abdeslam (Drug taking)
    2. Assailant: Mohammed Abrini (Drug dealer)
    3. Assailant: Bilal Hadfi
    4. Assailant: Ahmad al-Mohammad
    5. Assailant: M al-Mahmod
    6. Assailant: Chakib Akrouh
    7. Assailant: Abdelhamid Abaaoud, (Drug taking)
    8. Assailant: Brahim Abdeslam (Drug taking)
    9. Assailant: Omar Ismail Mostefai (Drug taking)
    10. Assailant: Samy Amimour (Drug taking?)
    11. Assailant: Foued Mohamed-Aggad (Drug taking)
  11. 07/01/16 Paris police station attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Tarek Belgacem (Drug trafficking)
  12. 22/03/16 2016 Brussels bombings (Belgium)
    1. Assailant: Ibrahim El Bakraoui
    2. Assailant: Najim Laachraoui
    3. Assailant: Mohamed Abrini (Drug dealing)
    4. Assailant: Khalid El Bakraoui
    5. Assailant: Osama Krayem (Drug taking)
  13. 10/05/16 Munich knife attack (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Paul H Germany (Drug taking)
  14. 13/06/16 Magnanville stabbing, (France)
    1. Assailant: Larossi Abballa (Hospitalised and medicated)
  15. 14/07/16 Nice attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Mohammed Louaiej Bouhlel (Drug taking)
  16. 18/07/16 Würzburg train attack (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Muhammad Riyad (no information which indicates a problem)
  17. 22/08/16 Munich Shooting 34 (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Ali Sonboly Germany (Hospitalised and medicated)
  18. 24/07/16 Ansbach bombing (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Mohammad Daleel (Drug offences)
  19. 08/06/16 Charleroi attack (Belgium)
    1. Assailant: Khaled Babbouri (Drug taking)
  20. 19/08/16 Stabbing at Garde-Colombe (France)
    1. Assailant: Mohamed Boufarkouch (Hospitalised and medicated)
  21. 26/08/16 Normandy church attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Adel Kermiche France (Hospitalised and medicated)
    2. Assailant: Abdel Malik Petitjean
  22. 06/08/16 Stabbing of Brussels police officers (Belgium)
    1. Assailant: Khaled Babouri (Drug taking)
  23. 19/07/16 Attack on rabbi (France)
    1. Assailant: No name given (Hospitalised and medicated)
  24. 30/08/16 Toulouse Stabbing (France)
    1. Assailant: Abderrahmane Amara (Hospitalised and medicated)
  25. 02/10/16 Vincennes stabbing (France)
    1. Assailant: No name given France (Drug taking
  26. 05/10/16 Stabbing of Brussels police officers (Belgium)
    1. Assailant: Hicham Diop (Drug taker)
  27. 19/12/16 Berlin Attack (Hermany)
    1. Assailant: Anis Amri (Drug taker)
  28. 03/02/17 Paris machete attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Abdullah Reda Refaie al-Hamahmy (Drug taker)
  29. 18/03/17 Île-de-France attacks (France)
    1. Assailant: Ziyed Ben Belgacem (Drug taker)
  30. 22/03/17 Westminster attack (United Kingdom)
    1. Assailant: Khalid Masood (Drug taker)
  31. 07/04/17 Stockholm attack (Sweden)
    1. Assailant: Rakhmat Akilov Sweden (Drug taker)
  32. 20/04/17 Champs-Élysées attack. (France)
    1. Assailant: Karim Cheurfi France (Drug taker)
  33. 22/05/17 Manchester Arena bombing (United Kingdom)
    1. Assailant: Salman Ramadan Abedi (Drug taker)
  34. 03/06/17 London Bridge attack (United Kingdom)
    1. Assailant: Khuram Shazad Butt (Drug taker)
    2. Assailant: Rachid Redouane (Drug taker)
    3. Assailant: Youssef Zaghba (Drug taker)
  35. 06/06/17 Notre Dame attack. (France)
    1. Assailant: Farid Ikken (No indication)
  36. 19/06/17 Champs-Élysées car ramming attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Djaziri Adam Lotfi (No indication)
  37. 20/06/17 Brussels attack (Belgium)
    1. Assailant: Oussama Zariouh (Drug offences)
  38. 28/07/17 Hamburg attack (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Ahmad Alhaw (Drug taking)
  39. 09/08/17 Levallois-Perret attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Hamou Benlatrèche (Hospitalised and medicated)
  40. 17/08/17 Barcelona attacks (Spain)
    1. Assailant: Younes Abouyaaqoub (Drug usage)
    2. Assailant: Moussa Oukabir (Drug dealing)
    3. Assailant: Said Aallaa
    4. Assailant: Mohamed Hychami
    5. Assailant: Omar Hychami
    6. Assailant: Houssaine Abouyaaqoub
    7. Assailant: Abdelbaki Es Satty Youssef Aalla (Drug dealing)
  41. 18/08/17 Turku stabbing (Finland)
    1. Assailant: Abderrahman Bouanane (Drug taking)
  42. 15/09/17 Parsons Green Bombing (United Kingdom)
    1. Assailant: Ahmed Hassan (Medicated)
  43. 01/10/17 Marseille stabbing (France)
    1. Assailant: Ahmed Hanachi (Drug taking)
  44. 31/10/17 Schwerin terror plot (Germany)
    1. Assailant: Yamen A Germany (Drug dealing)
  45. 23/03/18 Carcassonne and Trèbes attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Redouane Lakdim (Drug possession)
  46. 12/05/18 Paris Knife attack (France)
    1. Assailant: Khamzat Azimov (No information which indicates a problem)
  47. 29/05/18 2018 Liege attack (Belgium
    1. Assailant: Benjamin Herman (Drug dealing)
  48. 23/08/18 2018 Attack in Paris
    1. Assailant: No name given (Medicated)
  49. 20/11/2018 Brussels stabbing attack
    1. Assailant: Issam T (Medicated)
  50. 11/12/2018 Strasbourg attack
    1. Assailant: Chérif Chekatt (Drug taking)
  51. 18/03/ 2019 Utrecht shooting
    1. Assailant: Gökmen Tanis (Drug taking)

 

2 Terrorist incidents where the data is not publicly available
  1. 01/01/16 Mosque raming (France) No name given.
  2. 11/01/16 Attempted beheading (France) No name given.
  3. 05/02/16 Arson attack hanover (Germany) Saleh S. Surname withheld
  4. 26/02/16 Hanover stabbing (Germany) Safia S Surname withheld
  5. 16/04/16 Bombing of Sikh Temple (France) No name given.
  6. 04/09/16 Stabbing in a detention centre (France) No name given.
  7. 04/09/16 Mellee attack (France) No name given.
  8. 31/08/18 Amsterdam stabbling attack (Netherlands) Jawad S. Surname withheld
  9. 20/01/01 Oslo Stabbing No name given
  10. 17/03/19 Stanwell Stabbing No name given

 

3 A general comment

Given

  1. The fact that it is a fact that drugs are a main cause of terrorism. This can also be noted by the fact that Sweden which does penalize drug usage has not had any terrorism related problems.
  2. The alleged “concern” about terrorism on the part of the authorities.
  3. The consequent assault on civil liberties (it is very noticeable by the way that there is far less CCTV in Turkey and indeed less crime than the United Kingdom in particular) supposedly under the pretext of preventing terrorism.

The above correlation must at some point have been known about by the authorities. It’s really not that difficult to note and one must ask why the authorities do not do the obvious in order to prevent terrorism and properly enforce drug laws.

Is it because it is felt to be a price worth paying in that, as the person who attempted to recruit me to SIS stated, governments and the intelligence agencies do not wish to tackle the drug problem because it acts as a means of pacifying people. As for those who claim this is a “conspiracy theory”, the above is not so bold a claim given that has been the British policy since the era of Hogarth.

It does seem like a stupid policy to stupefy your populace given the fact others choose to enlighten theirs instead. But then I suppose the people making these decisions are perhaps themselves stupefied.

The point is that even with respect to dealing with terrorism the college does set a bad example through

  1. Its ardent and deranged defence (as I shall relate) of those who deal drugs.
  2. The fact that the directors of national security do not take note of the fact that they could largely eliminate the problem of terrorism by eliminating the drug issue rather than stating they need more and more legislation and powers..