True Spies

Finally, three documentaries on MI5 and Special Branch called ‘True Spies’ that were shown on BBC2 in 2002 are now available in their entirety on Youtube. Each of them is nearly one hour long. They are very interesting and in the first one the SDS is discussed and the theft of dead children’s identities is brought up, 10 years before the ‘revelations’ about it in the Guardian!

 

This three-part series was broadcast on BBC Two during October – November 2002.

 

True Spies #1 ‘Subversive My Arse!’ 27 October 2002 

True Spies #2 ‘Something Better Change’ 3 November 2002 

True Spies #3 ‘It Could Happen To You’ 10 November 2002 

There is also a page on the BBC website here:

Moscow offers spy swap for sleeper couple

Moscow wants to exchange a married couple of Russian spies jailed this month in Germany for at least one convict jailed in Russia on charges of spying for the West, a report said Monday.
Russian spies use ‘safe’ German typewriters – Science & Technology (12 Jul 2013)
Court jails Russian spy couple – National (2 Jul 2013)
Alleged Russian spy couple in ‘Cold War’ trial – National (15 Jan 2013)

Russia’s Kommersant newspaper said that the Russian secret services wanted to bring the pair — known only by their code names Andreas and Heidrun Anschlag — back to Russia after decades as “sleepers” in Germany.

In a Cold War-style exchange, Moscow would simultaneously hand over to the West at least one spy convicted of passing secrets to Berlin or its allies, the paper said.

“The process of consultations [with Germany] on a possible exchange was started only recently, after their conviction” on July 2nd, a Russian security source told the paper.

“We will get our guys out of there,” the source added.

Another source told the paper that Moscow had waited until after the trial was over to seek the exchange, in case the legal process were toshed further light on how their cover had been blown.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied to the paper that any exchange had been discussed at talks in June between President Vladimir Putin and Chancellor Angela Merkel.

The man known as Andreas Anschlag was jailed for six and a half years and Heidrun Anschlag for five and a half years by the higher regional court in the south western city of Stuttgart.

The pair had been planted there West Germany from 1988 by the Soviet Union’s KGB secret service and later worked for its successor the SVR, the court heard.

Kommersant said that the jailed couple’s lawyer Horst-Dieter Petschke confirmed that the swap was expected and told the paper that the exchange could “happen at any moment”.

It said that possible candidates to be freed in Russia in such an exchange included Andrei Dumenkov, who was jailed in 2006 for 12 years for seeking to hand Germany data on Russian missile designs.

Another name citied was Valery Mikhailov, a former colonel in the Russian security service who was jailed in 2012 for 18 years for spying for the United States.

Such spy exchanges, familiar from the Cold War era and John le Carré novels, already have a precedent in post-Soviet Russian history.

In 2010, Russia and the United States agreed a sensational spy swap of ten Russian “sleeper” agents caught in the United States for four men convicted in Russia of spying for the West.

The ten Russian spies — including the glamorous female agent Anna Chapman — were brought back to Moscow and subsequently personally welcomed by Putin.

Published: 15 Jul 2013 09:38 CET | Print version

Find this story at 15 July 2013

related story at 4 February 2013

related story at 4 February 2013

related story at 4 February 2013

related story at 4 February 2013

© The Local Europe GmbH

Datenleck bei der Nato; Geheimpapiere in der Küche

Viele Jahre lang arbeitet Manfred K. als Informatiker bei der Nato – bieder, unauffällig, pflichtbewusst. Dann kommt heraus: Der 60-Jährige soll brisante Informationen gestohlen haben und auf geheimen Konten Millionen Euro bunkern. Ist er ein Spion?

Koblenz – An dem Dorf bei Kaiserslautern ist die Weltgeschichte bislang ohne Zwischenstopp vorbeigesaust. Es gibt wenig Sehenswürdigkeiten und noch weniger Persönlichkeiten, die irgendwie von Bedeutung gewesen wären. Man könnte sagen, in dem 900-Seelen-Nest ist die Welt noch in Ordnung, doch seit einigen Monaten stimmt auch das nicht mehr.

Damals, es war im Herbst 2012, kamen Bundesanwälte, Staatsschützer des Landeskriminalamts, Agenten des Militärischen Abschirmdiensts. Sie durchsuchten ein schnödes Einfamilienhaus nahe der Hauptstraße und sie taten es gründlich. Lösten die Tapeten von den Wänden, schleppten alle Möbel in den Garten, setzten ein Bodenradargerät ein. Sie sollten fündig werden.

Unter einer Fliese im Keller und hinter einer Fußleiste in der Küche entdeckten die Ermittler zwei USB-Sticks mit brisanten Geheiminformationen der Nato. Es ging um Einsatzplanungen, Luftlagebilder, um IP-Adressen und Passwörter für Programme, wie sie das Bündnis auch in Kampfeinsätzen verwendet. Ein Offizier nennt das Material “brisant”. Eine “Weitergabe hätte uns sicherlich sehr geschadet”.

Prozess wegen Landesverrats

Der Hausherr, Manfred K., der 34 Jahre lang als IT-Fachmann bei der Nato gearbeitet hatte, wurde daraufhin festgenommen. Von Mittwoch an muss sich der Wirtschaftsinformatiker wegen “landesverräterischer Ausspähung” vor dem Oberlandesgericht Koblenz verantworten, ihm drohen bis zu zehn Jahre Haft.

Dabei ist noch vollkommen unklar, wozu K. die Informationen hortete und ob er bereits in der Vergangenheit Daten an ausländische Nachrichtendienste verkauft hat. Immerhin verfügte der 60-Jährige, der zuletzt auf dem US-Militärflughafen Ramstein arbeitete und monatlich mehr als 7000 Euro netto verdiente, über ein Vermögen von 6,5 Millionen Euro. Das Geld hatte er bei Fondsgesellschaften in Luxemburg und Großbritannien angelegt. Teilweise soll er auch hohe Beträge in bar eingezahlt haben.

Die entscheidenden Fragen sind daher: Woher stammen die Millionen? Sparten die Eheleute K., die in sehr bescheidenen Verhältnissen lebten, bloß eisern? Ließ sich K., zuständig für die Beschaffung von Computer und Software, vielleicht von Unternehmen schmieren? Oder verkaufte er doch ausländischen Agenten brisante Nato-Papiere? Weder die Bundesanwaltschaft noch die Verteidigerin von Manfred K. wollten sich dazu auf Anfrage äußern.

Bilder aus Panama

Unstrittig ist hingegen, dass K. und seine Frau Deutschland zumindest vorübergehend den Rücken kehren wollten. So bemühte sich der IT-Experte seit Längerem intensiv darum, Aufenthaltsgenehmigungen für Panama zu bekommen, wozu Einkommensnachweise nötig waren. Auch fanden die Ermittler auf diversen Sticks zahlreiche Bilder aus Mittelamerika. Wollte Manfred K. flüchten?

Gegen eine nachrichtendienstliche Tätigkeit des Angeklagten scheint jedoch die Art seines Vorgehens zu sprechen. Nach SPIEGEL-ONLINE-Informationen gelang es ihm im März 2012, die teilweise als geheim eingestuften Unterlagen an einem internen Sicherheitscheck vorbei auf seinen Dienstcomputer zu laden. Von dort aus sandte K. sie wohl über seinen Nato-Account an seine private GMX-Adresse und speicherte sie anschließend auf verschiedenen Medien. Besonders konspirativ war das nicht.

Die beiden Agenten des russischen Auslandsgeheimdienstes SWR, die kürzlich vom Oberlandesgericht Stuttgart zu mehrjährigen Haftstrafen verurteilt worden waren, gingen anders vor. Sie ließen sich von einem Mitarbeiter des Den Haager Außenministeriums Hunderte vertrauliche Dokumente liefern. Die Übergabe der Papiere erfolgte zumeist in den Niederlanden, danach deponierte der Agent die Akten in “toten Briefkästen” im Raum Bonn, wo sie anschließend von Mitarbeitern der russischen Botschaft abgeholt wurden.

Und noch etwas erscheint seltsam im Fall Manfred K.: 2010 ließ der Nato-Mitarbeiter über längere Zeit eine große Nähe zur NPD erkennen. Er besuchte öffentliche Veranstaltungen der Partei und spendete ihr 3000 Euro. Angeblich wollte er auf diese Weise einen Verlust seiner Zugangsberechtigung zu Geheiminformationen und damit seine Frühpensionierung provozieren. Doch falls das wirklich sein Plan war, ging der nicht auf. Es dauerte noch geraume Zeit, bis K. dem Verfassungsschutz und der Nato-Spionageabwehr auffiel. Die Militärs wandten sich schließlich an die Bundesanwaltschaft.

Als Beamte ihn Anfang August 2012 in seinem Heimatdorf festnahmen, war Manfred K. bereits seit einer Woche Rentner.

16. Juli 2013, 14:28 Uhr
Von Jörg Diehl

Find this story at 16 July 2013

© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2013

Verrat bei der Nato

Eine Notfallübung der US-Streitkräfte in Afghanistan: Die gestohlenen Ramstein-Dossiers offenbar die geheime Taktik der Nato-Einsatzkräfte in Krisenfällen
Fataler Spähangriff auf das Militärbündnis: Ein Deutscher soll die GEHEIMSTEN KRISENPLÄNE gestohlen und verkauft haben
Ein kleiner Ort in der Pfalz, gerade mal 900 Einwohner. Gepflegte Gemüsebeete, an den Obstbäumen blinken die letzten Äpfel des Jahres. Ab und zu rumpeln Bauern mit ihren Traktoren über die Dorfstraße von Börrstadt, 25 Kilometer östlich von Kaiserslautern. Auf einem vergilbten Plakat, mit Reißnägeln an der dicken Linde befestigt, bittet die Landjugend zum Tanz.

In dem schmucklosen Einfamilienhaus in der Hintergasse ist niemand willkommen. „Ich sage nichts“, ruft Rosemarie K. mit viel Zorn in der Stimme und lässt sofort die Rollläden herunter.

Die Nachbarschaft bewegt sich jetzt hinter Gardinen, viele hören wohl zu. Und fragen sich wie schon seit mehreren Wochen: Wo ist bloß der Ehemann von Rosemarie K.? Was mag passiert sein?

Es ist ein realer Krimi, passiert direkt vor der Tür. Und niemand hat es bemerkt: Das spitzgiebelige Haus stand wochenlang unter heimlicher Beobachtung – auch Telefon, E-Mail und Faxgerät wurden überwacht.

Anfang August dann, keiner hat es so früh am Morgen gesehen, holten Staatsschützer des Landeskriminalamts (LKA) Rheinland-Pfalz den Hauseigentümer Manfred K. ab. Seitdem sitzt der 60-Jährige auf Anordnung des Ermittlungsrichters am Bundesgerichtshof in Untersuchungshaft.

Die Karlsruher Bundesanwaltschaft und das LKA in Mainz ermitteln in einem harten Polit- und Spionagethriller:

Manfred K. soll jahrelang auf dem 1400 Hektar großen US-Militärflughafen Ramstein die geheimsten Programme und Codeschlüssel für weltweite Luftlandeoperationen der US-Streitkräfte gestohlen haben.

Die Fahnder haben klare Hinweise darauf, dass Manfred K. die brisante Ware bereits verkauft hat – womöglich sogar an Feinde und potenzielle Kriegsgegner der USA.

Ein Beleg für dieses Geschäft könnten die circa 6,5 Millionen Euro sein, die Fahnder des Mainzer LKA auf Tarnkonten von Manfred K. in Luxemburg und in London entdeckten.

Die Affäre, die nahezu unbemerkt in der Pfalz begann, hat längst das Pentagon in Washington erreicht. Angespannt verfolgt das US-Verteidigungsministerium die Ermittlungen in Deutschland. Das Allied Command Counterintelligence (ACCI), die Spionageabwehr der Nato, muss über seine Büros in Heidelberg und Ramstein permanent Bericht erstatten.

Ramstein Air Base, auf dem 35 000 Soldaten und 6000 Nato-Zivilisten wie Manfred K. arbeiten, ist immerhin der größte Luftwaffenstützpunkt außerhalb der USA. Auch die Nato-Kommandobehörde zur Führung von Luftstreitkräften ist hier untergebracht.

Über zwei Start- und Landebahnen wickeln die USA Truppen-, Fracht- und Evakuierungsflüge ab. Verletzte GIs landen hier und werden anschließend in Landstuhl behandelt. Kampfbrigaden der 101. oder der 82. Luftlandedivision sowie Spezialeinheiten wie Rangers, Delta Force oder Navy Seals fliegen von der Pfalz aus in den Einsatz. Bis 2005 lagerten in Ramsteins Bunkern 130 Atomwaffen.
Der militärische Schaden, verursacht durch den mutmaßlichen Verräter Manfred K., ist offenbar gigantisch. „Die weltweite Eventualplanung für Krisen- und Kriegseinsätze müsste komplett neu gemacht werden, weil der potenzielle Gegner alles weiß. Das bedeutet jahrelange Generalstabsarbeit“, sagt Erich Schmidt-Eenboom, einst Sicherheitsoffizier der Heeresflugabwehr 1 in Hannover und heute Autor von Geheimdienst-Büchern.
FOCUS Magazin | Nr. 44 (2012)
Verrat bei der Nato – Seite 2
dpa
Fallschirmspringer der US-Armee verlassen in Ramstein ein Transportflugzeug
Ob und an wen Manfred K. die Militärdaten aus Ramstein für die bislang entdeckten Millionen verscherbelt hat, ist derzeit noch ungeklärt. Der Spezialist für Informationstechnik und Telekommunikation, den Kollegen und Nachbarn als kontaktscheuen Eigenbrötler beschreiben, macht kaum Angaben zur Sache. Die verdächtigen Millionen will er bei Bankgeschäften verdient haben.

Die LKA-Leute fanden heraus, dass K., seit 1991 in Ramstein beschäftigt, die auf mehrere Sticks überspielten Geheimdaten ausgedruckt haben muss. Papier fand sich indes nicht mehr – hat also jemand dafür in harter Währung bezahlt?

„Russlands Militärgeheimdienst GRU würde für solches Material zehn Millionen Dollar auf den Tisch legen – ohne auch nur mit der Wimper zu zucken“, behauptet ein Spionageabwehr-Experte des Bundeskriminalamts im Gespräch mit FOCUS.

Die Ermittlungen gegen Manfred K., der als Nato-Mitarbeiter im Monat mehr als 6000 Euro netto verdiente und morgens mit seinem koreanischen Kleinwagen nach Ramstein fuhr, orientieren sich derzeit an Paragraf 96 des Strafgesetzbuches. Die „landesverräterische Ausspähung“ von Staatsgeheimnissen wird demnach mit Gefängnis bis zu zehn Jahren bestraft.

Sollte jedoch ein klarer Kontakt zu einem ausländischen Geheimdienst nachgewiesen werden, könnte die Strafe härter ausfallen. So erging es in den 80er-Jahren einem Mitarbeiter der 8. US-Luftlandedivision in Mainz, der geheime Unterlagen an die Russen verkauft hatte. Der Mann wurde zu 15 Jahren Gefängnis verurteilt.

Die Ermittler haben in diesen Tagen ziemlich viel Spaß daran, dass sich der mutmaßliche Datenräuber Manfred K. letztlich selbst ans Messer geliefert hat. Der Delinquent wollte schlauer als alle Sicherheitsbehörden sein – und fiel damit voll auf die Nase.

„60 Jahre“, sagte der stets gepflegte 1,75 Meter große Mann zu einem Nachbarn, „sind doch kein Alter.“ K. und seine Frau, obwohl schwer zuckerkrank, schwärmten davon, nach Mittelamerika auszuwandern. Seinen vorzeitigen Ruhestand wollte K. mit einem Trick erzwingen.

Schritt eins: K. spendete eine größere Geldsumme an die vom Verfassungsschutz beobachtete – aber nicht verbotene – NPD.

Schritt zwei: K. schrieb anonym an das Kölner Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz und teilte als angeblich treuer Staatsbürger mit, dass ein gewisser Herr Manfred K. aus 67725 Börrstadt/Pfalz, Datenspezialist auf dem US-Fliegerhorst Ramstein und befugt zum Umgang mit Geheimpapieren, ein Unterstützer der rechtsradikalen NPD sei. Schritt drei – wie K. hoffte: Das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz wird dem Nato-Mitarbeiter K. keinen weiteren Zugang zu Dossiers gestatten.

Schritt vier – wie K. glaubte: Die Nato wird K. mit guten Bezügen in den vorzeitigen Ruhestand schicken. Und tschüss!
So kam es aber nicht. Die Kölner Behörde ließ K. pro forma den Sicherheitscheck bestehen und verständigte parallel die Kollegen vom Nato-Abwehrdienst ACCI.
FOCUS Magazin | Nr. 44 (2012)
Verrat bei der Nato – Seite 3
dpa
Drehscheibe Ramstein: Die gestohlenen Dossiers liefern Informationen über die Logistik der Nato
Jetzt begann die konzertierte Aktion gegen den vermeintlichen Maulwurf. Spezialisten der US-Streitkräfte stellten mit Entsetzen fest, dass Manfred K. wohl seit Jahren auf sensibelste Daten zugreifen konnte. Das Mainzer LKA, mittlerweile von der Bundesanwaltschaft eingeschaltet, fand bei seinen verdeckten Ermittlungen heraus: K. hatte offenbar einen über Funk gesteuerten und von außen nicht zu knackenden Datentunnel geschaffen. Mit ihm konnte er die illegal abgezweigten Infos direkt von seinem Büro in Ramstein auf den Heimcomputer in Börrstadt überspielen.

Nach Feierabend war´s dann wohl ein Kinderspiel: K. soll die erbeuteten Daten auf USB-Sticks gespeichert haben.

Die zeitgleiche Überwachung des Informatikers brachte keine Erkenntnisse. Das Ehepaar lebt völlig isoliert in Börrstadt. Niemand rief an. Niemand kam ins Haus, keine Freunde, keine Verwandten. Gelegentlich telefonierte K. mit seinem 88-jährigen Schwiegervater, der ganz in der Nähe einen Bauernhof besitzt und gegenüber FOCUS beteuerte: „Der Manfred ist ein lieber, ehrlicher und fleißiger Mensch. Bei Reparaturen auf dem Hof hat er mir stets geholfen. Der spioniert doch nicht, nie und nimmer.“

Kurz nach K.´s Verhaftung setzte eine penible Hausdurchsuchung ein. Beschlagnahmte Unterlagen, zum Teil verschlüsselt, lieferten Hinweise auf die versteckten Millionenkonten.

Die allerbesten Beweise waren raffiniert versteckt. Einen USB-Stick entdeckten die Fahnder in einem Einweckglas mit Kompott, ein anderer lag unter gut duftenden Lavendelblättern. Als die Beamten damit drohten, bei der Suche nach weiteren Beweisen den Fußboden aufzustemmen und die recht neue Küche auseinanderzunehmen, soll die Pfälzer Hausfrau Rosemarie K. schnell nachgegeben haben: Somit fanden die Ermittler schließlich zwei weitere Sticks mit zunächst seltsamen Inhalten.

Bei der ersten Überprüfung der Datenspeicher stießen die LKA-Ermittler auf Bilder aus Panama, auf Fotos von Schiffen und auf lustige Seemannslieder. Manfred K. hatte sofort eine Erklärung dafür: Er wolle womöglich mit seiner Frau nach Panama auswandern, und die Seefahrt mitsamt ihren Liedern, die habe ihn schon immer fasziniert.

Die anderen Daten konnte der Untersuchungshäftling überhaupt nicht erklären: Im Umfeld der gespeicherten Reise- und Seemannsfolklore waren, handwerklich sehr geschickt, geheime Daten von der Ramstein Air Base versteckt. Ein Volltreffer für das LKA.

So viel Raffinesse hatten die meisten Fahnder noch nie erlebt. Deshalb baten sie um eine ungewöhnliche Amtshilfe: Der Militärische Abschirmdienst (MAD), der Geheimdienst der Bundeswehr, wurde um die Bereitstellung eines Bodenradars gebeten. Mit diesem High-Tech-Gerät können die besten Verstecke im Boden aufgespürt werden.

Zunächst wieherte der Amtsschimmel. Der MAD zierte sich, da er das gesetzlich geregelte Trennungsgebot bei der Kooperation von Nachrichtendienst und Polizei verletzt sah. Schließlich kam das grüne Licht – und Rosemarie K. wurde wirklich wütend.

Vor dem Einsatz des Bodenradars räumte ein Trupp der Polizei das gesamte Haus aus – alles landete im Garten, mit einer großen Plane tagelang vor Wind und Wetter geschützt. Doch der Aufwand sollte sich lohnen. Zwei weitere Sticks wurden entdeckt – und ein Gelddepot mit ein paar tausend Euro unter der Badewanne.

Ein Videoteam der Polizei dokumentierte die Zwangsräumung und die anschließende Handwerkerleistung: Alle Tapeten, zumeist noch mit Blümchenmuster aus den 50er-Jahren, mussten runter.
Rosemarie K. kennt da kein Pardon. Für das staatliche Stühlerücken verlangt sie jetzt Schadensersatz.

Montag, 29.10.2012, 00:00 · von FOCUS-Reporter Josef Hufelschulte und FOCUS-Redakteur Marco Wisniewski
AFP

Find this story at 29 October 2012

© FOCUS Online 1996-2013

Jonathan Pollard: Restoring Israel to greatness

“Only a re-awakening can guarantee the future. Political process devoid of fundamental values will never end the agony or the fear for the State of Israel.”

FREED PRISONER Atiya Salem Moussa returns to a hero’s welcome in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday. Photo: REUTERS

When tragedy strikes anywhere in the world, the State of Israel is always among the first to offer help, sending experienced rescue teams, portable hospitals and world-class medical experts to the scene. Israel is a world leader in medical research, farming technology, and military innovation. The country that made the desert bloom is the undisputed champion of hi-tech innovation, all of which it generously shares with the world.

Unfortunately, when it comes to morale, the State of Israel has the distinction of holding a number of world records which no other country would want.
Related:

US Jewish leaders, Kerry discuss Pollard

Peace talks resume against backdrop of prisoner release

Over the last six decades, Israel’s leaders and its judiciary have practiced the art of political expedience to such a degree that Israel is now the first and only country in the world to hold the following dubious “honors”:

• Israel is the only country in the world ever to voluntarily expel its own citizens from chunks of its homeland in order to hand over the land to its enemies.

• It is the only country in the world ever to voluntarily destroy the homes and businesses of its own citizens, leaving them with shattered lives and broken promises.

• Israel is the only country in the world ever to voluntarily dig up and transport the graves of its dead so that the land could be turned over to its enemies.

The State of Israel also holds unenviable world records for betraying those who serve the state, including the following:

• Israel is the only country in the world to restrain its military from rescuing a wounded soldier, for fear of provoking the enemy and risking its approval ratings with the world. The soldier, injured by enemy gunfire at a Jewish holy site, slowly bled to death needlessly while the IDF stood by and watched.

• Israel also remains the only country in the world ever to voluntarily cooperate in the prosecution of its own intelligence agent, refusing him sanctuary, turning over the documents to incriminate him, denying that the state knew him, and then allowing him to rot in a foreign prison for decades on end, cravenly forgoing its right to simple justice for the nation and for the agent.

• Additionally, Israel is still the only country in the world ever to violate its own system of justice by repeatedly releasing dangerous, unrepentant murderers and terrorists back into the civilian population with impunity. No other country in the world has ever done this!

In summary, Israel has the dubious distinction of being the only country in the world so befuddled by moral ambiguity that it is willing to dishonor its dead, betray its bereaved, and disgrace its citizens for the sake of political expediency.

Earlier this week, the State of Israel began the staged release of some of the worst murderers and terrorists the world has ever seen. Twenty-six out of the 104 murderers scheduled for release went free on Tuesday. Many are serving multiple life sentences for their heinous crimes and their many victims.

The blood of their victims cries out from the grave at this affront to human decency. Their cries go unheard.

The bereaved families of the victims beg and plead not to free the savage murderers of their loved ones. Their entreaties are ignored.

All the polls indicate that the overwhelming majority of Israeli citizens are opposed to the release of the murderers. It is a strange kind of democracy that pays no heed whatsoever to the will of the people.

No Israeli official has advanced a single compelling reason in support of the wholesale release of these murderers and terrorists. The claim that it “serves national interests” is spurious. There is no national interest that supersedes morality.

The second-most touted excuse is that the government of Israel was given three existentially threatening choices by its best ally, and the least damaging choice of the three was the release of murderers and terrorists.

Did anyone at the helm ever consider that given three life-threatening choices, the only response is: “No, no and no!”?

Overriding all objections, the government of the State of Israel is bound and determined to release the murderers, whose victims are not all dead. Some have been maimed, crippled and disfigured for life. Others show no external scars but have had parents, children and loved ones amputated from their lives. No one sees the broken hearts that will never stop bleeding for their loss.

Authentic Jewish tradition teaches in great detail how to relate to the dead with honor and reverence. The dead are not only keepers of the past; they are our teachers, our moral guides and our inspiration for the future. A country with no respect for the dead has no respect for the living.

A sovereign state which is capable of dishonoring its dead by freeing their murderers and tormenting their bereaved loved ones has, in essence, discarded all of the moral underpinnings of its own existence.

Nor should it come as any surprise – as any student of history knows – that no country can survive without a clearly defined moral infrastructure.

The Land of Israel is eternal and the State of Israel has temporal stewardship over the land. The corrosive moral ambiguity that has brought us to this dreadful day is relentlessly eating away at the legitimacy of the state’s continued role as legal guardian of the land. The prognosis is dire.

Only a reawakening of national resolve and a rebirth of ethical politics rooted in national self-respect, moral rectitude and courage of conviction can guarantee the future. No political process devoid of these fundamental values will ever end the agony or the fear for the State of Israel.

It is clearly time for an historic restoration.

Jonathan Pollard is completing his 28th year of an unprecedented life sentence in an American prison for his activities on behalf of Israel.

By JONATHAN POLLARD
LAST UPDATED: 08/16/2013 08:03

Find this story at 16 August 2013

© The Jerusalem Post 1995 – 2012

Capturing Jonathan Pollard

De Amerikaanse voormalig spion Jonathan Pollard zit een levenslange gevangenisstraf uit. Als werknemer bij de VS Marine Inlichtingendienst stal hij honderdduizenden geheime documenten en verkocht die aan Israël. De man die hem ontmaskerde, schreef er een boek over.

Bradley Manning wordt verdacht van het lekken van geheime documenten van de Amerikaanse overheid. Deze documenten werden openbaar gemaakt voor Wikileaks. Nog voordat Manning een eerlijk proces heeft gekregen, zit hij al een ruim een jaar in eenzame opsluiting.

De omvang en gevoeligheid van de Wikileaks-documenten vallen echter in het niet in vergelijking met het aantal geheime stukken dat Jonathan Pollard begin jaren ’80 aan de Israëliërs heeft overhandigd. Pollard werkte voor de Naval Intelligence Service. Van juni 1984 tot zijn aanhouding in november 1985 wandelde hij bijna dagelijks het gebouw van de Naval Intelligence Command uit met een tas vol top secret documenten.

De Amerikaanse overheid schat dat hij ruim een miljoen stukken aan de Israëliërs heeft overhandigd. Een van de stukken was het tiendelige boekwerk Radio-Signal Notations (RASIN), een gedetailleerde beschrijving van het netwerk van de wereldwijde elektronische observatie door de Amerikanen.

Pollard onderzocht

Capturing Jonathan Pollard werd in 2006 door de Naval Institue Press gepubliceerd. Het boek is van de hand van Ronald Olive, destijds werkzaam voor de Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS). Als medewerker van de NCIS kreeg Olive in 1985 de taak om te onderzoeken of Pollard geheime stukken lekte.

Het onderzoek volgde op een tip van een medewerker van de Anti-Terrorism Alert Center (ATAC) van de NIS, de afdeling waar Pollard werkte. Deze man zag Pollard het gebouw uitlopen met een stapel papier. De stapel was verpakt in bruin inpakpapier en tape met de code TS/SCI, Top Secret/Sentive Compartmented Information. TS/SCI is een nog zwaardere kwalificatie als top secret.

Pollard stapte met de stukken bij zijn vrouw Ann in de auto. Nog even dacht zijn collega dat Pollard naar een andere inlichtingendienst, zoals de DIA (Defense Intelligence Service) zou rijden om daar de documenten af te geven. Dit leek onwaarschijnlijk omdat Pollard eerder tegen hem had gezegd dat hij verkeerde documenten had besteld bij het ‘archief’ en dat hij deze nu moest terugbrengen en vernietigen. Pollard en Ann reden echter een geheel andere kant op.

Olive beschrijft vervolgens de ontmaskering van Jonathan en Ann. In Pollards werkruimte wordt een camera opgehangen die registreert hoe de spion een aktetas vol TS/SCI documenten propt en het gebouw verlaat. Pollard en zijn vrouw ruiken onraad en proberen de sporen van spionage te wissen. Ann moet een koffer vol super geheime documenten, die in hun huis liggen, vernietigen. Zij raakt in paniek en de koffer belandt bij de buren.

Gevoelige snaar

Het boek van Ronald Olive is nog even actueel als het eerste boek dat over deze spionagezaak is verschenen in 1989, Territory of Lies: The American Who Spied on His Country for Israel and How He Was Betrayed.

Begin dit jaar wordt een petitie, ondertekend door meer dan 10.000 Israëliërs, aan de Israëlische president Shimon Peres gezonden. Hierin roepen politici, kunstenaars en andere bekende en onbekende Israëliërs de president op om Pollard vrij te krijgen. Op 1 september 2010 berichtte de LA Times zelfs dat de vrijlating van Pollard de bevriezing van de bouw van Israëlische nederzettingen in de bezette gebieden zou verlengen.

Pollard raakt kennelijk een gevoelige snaar, zowel in Israël als in de Verenigde Staten. Schrijver Olive op zijn beurt bevindt zich in een gezelschap van allerlei mensen die er voor ijveren om de spion zijn gehele leven achter slot en grendel te houden, hoewel levenslang in de Verenigde Staten niet echt levenslang hoeft te zijn. Bij goed gedrag kunnen gevangenen na dertig jaar vrijkomen.

In 1987 werd Pollard veroordeeld tot levenslang na een schuldbekentenis en toezegging dat hij de Amerikaanse overheid zou helpen bij het in kaart brengen van de schade die hij door zijn spionage-activiteiten had veroorzaakt. Die schade werd door de toenmalige minister van Defensie Casper Weinberger vastgelegd in een memorandum van 46 pagina’s, welke nog steeds niet openbaar is gemaakt. Pollard’s vrouw kreeg vijf jaar gevangenisstraf voor het in bezit hebben van staatsgeheime documenten.

Capturing Jonathan Pollard is geen spannend fictie / non-fictie boek met een twist, zoals Spywars van Bagley. Olive beschrijft droog het leven van de spion vanaf het moment dat hij bij de CIA solliciteert, tot aan de dag van zijn veroordeling. Natuurlijk is de schrijver begaan met de geheimhouding van Amerikaanse strategische informatie en verbaast het niet dat hij bij het verschijnen van het boek in 2006 een pleidooi hield om Pollard niet vrij te laten.

Niet kieskeurig

Hoewel de volle omvang van het lekken van Pollard niet duidelijk wordt beschreven, blijkt dat Pollard niet bepaald kieskeurig was. De Israëliërs hadden hem lijsten meegegeven van wat zij graag wilden hebben, vooral informatie over het Midden-Oosten, maar ook over de Russen en operaties van de Amerikanen in het Middellandse Zee gebied.

Zodra Pollard echter stukken langs ziet komen die ook voor andere landen interessant zouden kunnen zijn, probeert hij ook daar te winkelen. Zo poogt hij geheime documenten aan de Chinezen, Australiërs, Pakistani en de Zuid-Afrikanen, maar ook aan buitenlandse correspondenten te slijten.

Het gegeven dat landen elkaars strategische informatie en geheimen proberen te stelen, is niet nieuw. Het bestaan van contra-spionage afdelingen toont aan dat geheime diensten daar zelf ook rekening mee houden. De Australiërs dachten dan ook dat Pollard onderdeel uitmaakte van een CIA-operatie. Hoewel ze dat eigenlijk niet konden geloven, vermeed hun medewerker Pollard en werd de zaak niet gemeld bij Amerikaanse instanties.

Als onderdeel van thrillers en spannende lectuur zijn de spionage praktijken van Pollard, zoals Olive die beschrijft, niet bijster interessant, want het leidt af van waar het werkelijk om draait. Daarentegen is het boek van grote waarde waar het gaat om de beschrijving van de persoon Pollard, de wijze waarop hij kon spioneren, zijn werkomgeving, de blunders die worden gemaakt – niet alleen het aannemen en overplaatsen van Pollard, maar ook de wijze waarop geheimen zo eenvoudig kunnen worden gelekt – eigenlijk de totale bureaucratie die de wereld van inlichtingendiensten in zijn greep heeft.

Hoewel deze persoonlijke en bureaucratische gegevens niet breed worden uitgemeten – Olive is zelf een voormalig inlichtingenman – verschaft het boek een veelheid aan informatie daarover. De schrijver lijkt die persoonlijke details specifiek aan Pollard te koppelen, alsof het niet voor andere medewerkers zou gelden.

Opschepper

Dit gaat ook op ook voor de gemaakte fouten van de bureaucratie rond de carrière van de spion. Zo lijkt Pollard van jongs af aan een voorliefde te hebben gehad om spion te worden, of in ieder geval iets geheims te willen doen in zijn leven. Tijdens zijn studie schept hij erover op dat hij voor de Mossad zou werken en had gediend in het Israëlische leger. Zijn vader zou ook voor de CIA werkzaam zijn.

Aan deze opschepperij verbindt Olive een psychologisch element. Het zou een soort compensatie zijn voor de slechte jeugd van Pollard die vaak zou zijn gepest. Ook zijn vrouw zou niet bij hem passen omdat die te aantrekkelijk is. Pollard moet dat compenseren door stoer te doen. Later, toen hij voor een inlichtingendienst werkte, voelde hij zich opnieuw het buitenbeentje. Zijn carrière verliep alles behalve vlekkeloos, regelmatig werd hij op een zijspoor gezet.

Olive schetst een beeld van een verwend kind, dat niet op juiste waarde werd ingeschat en stoer wilde doen. Was Pollard echter zoveel anders dan zijn voormalige collega analisten of medewerkers van de inlichtingendienst? Werken voor een inlichtingendienst vereist een zekere mate van voyeurisme, een gespleten persoonlijkheid. Buiten je werk om kun je niet vrijelijk praten over datgene waar je mee bezig bent.

Dat doet wat met je psyche, maar trekt ook een bepaald soort mensen aan. Het werk betreft namelijk niet het oplossen van misdrijven, maar het kijken in het hoofd van mogelijke verdachten. Het BVD-dossier van oud-provo Roel van Duin laat zien dat een dienst totaal kan ontsporen door zijn eigen manier van denken. Dat komt echter niet voort uit de dienst als abstracte bureaucratie, maar door toedoen van de mensen die er werken.

Roekeloos

Pollard gedroeg zich arrogant en opschepperig, misschien wel om zijn eigen onzekerheid te maskeren. Dergelijk gedrag wordt door de schrijver verbonden aan zijn spionage-activiteiten voor de Israëliërs. Pollard was echter niet getraind in het lekken van documenten en ging verre van zorgvuldig te werk. Hij deed het zo openlijk dat het verbazingwekkend is dat het zo lang duurde voordat hij tegen de lamp liep. Hij zei bijvoorbeeld tegen de Israëliërs dat zij alleen de TS/SCI documenten moesten kopiëren en dat ze de rest mochten houden.

In de loop van de anderhalf jaar dat hij documenten naar buiten smokkelde, werd hij steeds roekelozer. Dat hij gespot werd met een pak papier onder zijn arm terwijl hij bij zijn vrouw in de auto stapte, was eerder toeval dan dat het het resultaat was van grondig speurwerk van de NCIS.

Eenmaal binnenin het inlichtingenbedrijf zijn de mogelijkheden om te lekken onuitputtelijk. Als Pollard wel getraind was geweest en zorgvuldiger te werk was gegaan, dan had hij zijn praktijk eindeloos kunnen voorzetten. Welke andere ‘agenten’ doen dat wellicht nog steeds? Of welke andere medewerkers waren minder roekeloos en tevreden geweest met het lekken van enkele documenten?

Die medewerkers vormen gezamenlijk het systeem van de dienst. Pollard schepte graag op, maar de schrijver van Spy Wars, Bagley, klopte zich ook graag op de borst en, hoewel in mindere mate, Ronald Olive ook. Iets dat eigenlijk vreemd is, als het aantal blunders in ogenschouw wordt genomen nadat Pollard ontdekt was. Alleen omdat de Israëliërs Pollard de toegang tot de diplomatieke vestiging ontzegden, zorgde ervoor dat hij alsnog gearresteerd en levenslang kreeg in de VS. Hij was echter bijna ontsnapt.

Blunders

Het is daarom niet gek dat inlichtingendiensten een gebrek aan bescheidenheid vertonen. Vele aanslagen zijn voorkomen, wordt vaak beweerd, maar helaas kunnen de diensten geen details geven. Het klinkt als Pollard, op bezoek bij Olive, die breed uitmeet dat hij die en die kent op de Zuid-Afrikaanse ambassade en of hij die moet werven als spion. Olive was werkzaam voor de NCIS. Pollard bezocht hem voordat hij werd ontmaskerd. Zijn eigen gebrek aan actie in relatie tot de twijfels over Pollard toont aan dat geen enkel bureaucratisch systeem perfect is, ook niet dat van inlichtingendiensten.

Het is niet verbazingwekkend dat de carrière van Pollard bezaaid is met blunders. Hij werd dan wel afgewezen door de CIA, maar waagde vervolgens een gokje bij een andere dienst en had geluk. Hij werd bij de NIS aangenomen en kroop zo langzaamaan in de organisatie. De fouten die bij het aannamebeleid en bij de evaluaties van Pollard zijn gemaakt, worden door Olive gepresenteerd als op zichzelf staand, maar de hoeveelheid blunders en gebrekkige administratie lijken zo talrijk dat het geen toevalstreffers zijn.

Bij elke promotie of overplaatsing lijkt slechts een deel van zijn persoonsdossier hem te volgen. De NIS wist vanaf het begin niet dat Pollard eerder door de CIA werd afgewezen. Als zijn toegang tot geheime documenten wordt ingetrokken, wacht Pollard net zo lang tot bepaalde medewerkers zijn overgeplaatst of vertrokken. Hij wordt dan wel afgeschilderd als een verwend kind dat met geheimen speelt, regelmatig moet Olive echter toegeven dat Pollard een briljant analist is. Pas in de laatste maanden van zijn spionage-activiteiten, lijdt zijn werk onder de operatie om zoveel mogelijk documenten naar buiten te smokkelen.

Waarom Pollard de Amerikaanse overheid schade toebracht, wijdt Olive vooral aan zijn joodse afkomst. Niet dat de schrijver alle joodse Amerikanen verdenkt, maar een belangrijke reden voor het fanatiek lekken wordt verklaard aan de hand van Pollard’s wens om naar Israël te emigreren. Olive gaat echter voorbij aan het geld dat de spion aan zijn activiteiten verdiende. Aanvankelijk 1.500 dollar per maand, na een paar maanden 2.500 en twee volledig verzorgde reizen met zijn vrouw naar Europa en Israël en tot slot een Zwitserse bankrekening met jaarlijks een bonus van 30.000 dollar.

Los van de Zwitserse rekening schat de Amerikaanse overheid dat Pollard rond de 50.000 dollar aan zijn spionagewerk heeft overgehouden. Eigenlijk niet eens veel in vergelijking met de één miljoen documenten die hij leverde. De onderhandelingen over het geld maken echter duidelijk dat Pollard wel degelijk geïnteresseerd was om zoveel mogelijk te verdienen. De prijs werd gedrukt omdat de Israëliërs niet erg toeschietelijk waren en Pollard ze sowieso wilde helpen.

Afkomst

Zijn joodse afkomst zat hem in de weg, want waarschijnlijk had hij alleen al voor het tiendelige boekwerk Radio-Signal Notations (RASIN) 50.000 dollar kunnen krijgen. Uiteindelijk blijkt Pollard een gewoon mens die de verlokking van het geld niet kon weerstaan. Andere agenten zijn hem voorgegaan en hebben zijn voorbeeld gevolgd.

Het nadeel van zijn afkomst blijkt ook uit het feit dat hij zijn Israëlische runner een ‘cadeautje’ gaf. Aviem Sella had mee gevochten in de zesdaagse Yom Kippur oorlog en was een van de piloten die de Iraakse kernreactor in Osirak bombardeerde. Pollard gaf hem destijds satellietbeelden van die aanval. Sella wordt nog steeds gezocht voor Verenigde Staten voor spionage.

De operatie werd door een andere veteraan, Rafi of Rafael Eitan, geleid. Onder diens leiding spoorde de Mossad Adolf Eichmann op. Eitan en Sella werden rijkelijk beloond voor hun werk met Pollard, maar moesten hun promoties inleveren omdat de Amerikanen eind jaren ’80 furieus reageerden. Na de arrestatie van Pollard beweerden de Israëliërs dat ze helemaal niet zoveel documenten hadden gekregen van de spion en de onderhandelingen over teruggave uiterst stroef waren verlopen.

Uiteindelijk werd maar een fractie van de documenten teruggegeven aan de Amerikanen. De Israëliërs waren vooral bezig om na zijn veroordeling Pollard vrij te krijgen. Premier Nethanyahu sprak vorig jaar de Knesset toe over het lot van Pollard, terwijl de Israëlische ambassadeur in de VS hem juli 2011 bezocht in de gevangenis.

Tot nu toe lijken de Amerikanen niet van zins om hem vrij te laten. Na de veroordeling van Pollard kwam de campagne Free Pollard op gang. Zijn vrouw verdween uit beeld. Niet alleen Israëliërs nemen deel aan de campagne, maar ook Alan Dershowitz, professor aan de Harvard Law School en andere academici. In het laatste hoofdstuk More sinned against than sinning beschrijft Olive enkele andere spionnen die documenten verkochten aan buitenlandse mogendheden.

Capturing Jonathan Pollard was nog niet gepubliceerd toen de stroom Wikileaks-documenten op gang kwam. Die documenten laten echter zien dat een waterdicht systeem niet bestaat en dat mensen voor geld of om andere redenen geheime stukken lekken. De Wikileaks-documenten onderstrepen dat er sinds de jaren ’80 weinig is veranderd. Met als enige verschil de hardvochtige wijze waarop verdachte Manning in deze zaak wordt behandeld en de gebrekkige aandacht die hij krijgt van professoren en andere betrokkenen bij de Wikileaks-documenten.

Capturing Jonathan Pollard: How One of the Most Notorious Spies in American History Was Brought to Justice. Auteur Ronald J. Olive. Uitgeverij US Naval Institute Press (2006).

Find this story at 19 June 2012

Revealed: another secret incarceration of Israeli secret services agent

After revelations about Ben Zygier, ‘Prisoner X No. 2’ blamed for ‘horrible security breach’

For the second time in less than six months, the secret incarceration of a member of the Israeli secret services has been revealed.

The new case, which follows that of former Mossad agent Ben Zygier, who hanged himself in the high security Ayalon Prison in 2010, is also understood to involve someone who worked for of the Jewish state’s spy agencies. Both Zygier, and the other individual, were known only as ‘Prisoner X’ during their imprisonment. The second prisoner has not been identified.

There are still few details about the new case, which was revealed earlier today by the liberal Haaretz newspaper. However, Zygier’s lawyer, Avigdor Feldman, told Israeli radio that the allegations facing the second prisoner were much more severe.

“This affair points to far more severe failures than the ones committed by the defense [sic] establishment in Zygier’s case,” he said. “Regarding Zygier’s case, the authorities that recruited him didn’t understand who they were dealing with and weren’t aware of his conduct. Okay – that’s a failure. Prisoner X number two is an entirely different story – a horrible security breach. When I heard the story, as an Israeli citizen I was shocked, and the subject was completely silenced by lawyers who enjoy close ties with the establishment. Whoever opens this affair will be doing the country a great service.”

It is believed that Zygier – disappointed by his superior’s lack of willingness to hand him more interesting work – decided to try and impress his bosses and turn a leading member of the Lebanese group Hezbollah. He was then skilfully played to the extent that he ended blowing the cover of two double agents that had provided information to Israel.

Israeli officials have not commented on the case and like in Zygier’s case, are unlikely to offer any insight, although it is believed that unlike in Zygier’s case, the second Prisoner X had been convicted of whatever crimes he was accused of. It is not clear what has become of the second Prisoner X, but it is thought that he may still be being held at Ayalon prison.

Mr Feldman said that assumptions could be drawn from a detainee being classified as ‘prisoner X’.

“They are Israeli, they work in institutions linked to security whose activities are shrouded in secrecy,” he said. “And their detention demonstrates the failure of these organisations which are not capable of preventing offences such as those for which these agents have been arrested,” he said.

The disclosure that at least two of its spies are alleged to have committed grave crimes against their own state is a huge embarrassment to Israel and the fact that a second Prisoner X is guaranteed to raise questions about whether there yet more people being held in similar circumstances.

Alistair Dawber
Tuesday, 9 July 2013

Find this story at 9 July 2013

© independent.co.uk

Israel’s ‘Prisoner X2’ case raises concerns

In Israel, the news that a second prisoner is serving a jail sentence in top-secret conditions has triggered human rights concerns and raised questions about the transparency of the justice system.

A prominent Israeli criminal lawyer says the detainee, referred to as Prisoner X2, is a member of the nation’s covert security forces and has been held behind bars for years.

In February this year, an Australian TV report about another anonymous prisoner shook the Israeli security establishment and threatened to destabilize Israel’s relations with Australia. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation revealed that a man referred to as Prisoner X, who died in jail in December 2010, was a Jewish immigrant to Israel from Melbourne.

Ben Zygier had joined, then betrayed, the Mossad Israeli spy agency. He was arrested in February 2010 and held in a top-security cell in Israel’s Ayalon Prison. Even his guards did not know his name, and Israel’s courts imposed a media blackout on even mentioning the case. According to media reports, Zygier’s crime was revealing the identities of Mossad operatives in Lebanon. Zygier later hanged himself with a sheet in the shower of his cell. Guards who were supposed to be monitoring his cell said the camera malfunctioned and they were short staffed on the night Zygier died.

Israel’s Justice Ministry released a statement July 9 about Zygier. It included a mention of a second prisoner held in similar conditions, who has become known as Prisoner X2. Israeli criminal attorney Avigdor Feldman, who met with both detainees, told Israeli radio that, like Zygier, Prisoner X2 was also an Israeli citizen and a part of Israel’s covert security operations. However, he noted that the charges against Prisoner X2 were “more grave, more astounding and more fascinating” than those leveled against Zygier. Feldman did not detail the charges and declined to answer DW’s questions.
The Zygier case shook the Israeli establishment

Secret cells

The secret wings and blocks of Israel’s prisons are reserved for those considered to be its most dangerous criminals. Zygier’s cell was previously assigned to Yigal Amir, who assassinated late Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin.

Following the report of a second Prisoner X, legislator Miri Regev called a meeting to discuss the circumstances of his or her incarceration. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel appealed to Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein to end the prisoner’s isolation and lift a media blackout on the case.

“We cannot accept a situation in which a man is arrested, tried, and imprisoned in complete secrecy, and prevented from any possibility of contact with other persons on a daily basis,” ACRI attorney Lila Margalit said in a statement. “The ‘Prisoner X’ affairs prove again that without public scrutiny, it is impossible to safeguard the rights of suspected, accused or convicted persons.”

A senior Israeli government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the veiled arrests were necessary to safeguard important matters of national security. He noted that both secret prisoners were given access to defense lawyers and their families.

“The security services in Israel have a crucial job in protecting the citizens of Israel against the threats that are out there, but those security services work within the framework of the law,” he said.

Murky past
Israel has a history of secretive episodes

The recent Prisoner X cases recall other episodes in Israel. In 1995, an Israeli court order lifted a gag order on seven convicted spies held secretly. The most famous was Professor Avraham Marcus Klingberg, who was a senior researcher at the Israel Institute for Biological Research. He disappeared in 1983 and resurfaced a decade later in the Ashkelon prison, where he was held after being secretly sentenced to 20 years for spying for the Soviet Union. Klingberg was jailed under the false name of Avraham Greenberg. He was released in 1998 and placed under house arrest until he left the country after finishing his sentence in 2003.

Another prisoner on the list of seven was Col. Shimon Levinson, a security officer in the Prime Minister’s office. In 1991 he was found to have been spying for the Soviet Union and sentenced to 12 years in jail.

Yossi Melman, a journalist and commentator on security affairs, told DW that Israel holds far fewer secret prisoners today than in the past. Still, he doubted the method of using utter secrecy to cloak the latest cases.

“These are Israeli citizens. You don’t think Israelis have to know who is in their jails?” he said. “You don’t have to publish everything on him, but the minimum has to come out. [The government should] say someone was arrested, that he is suspected of something, that he is in prison, and has a certain sentence, and that his family is aware.”

Date 18.07.2013
Author Daniella Cheslow, Jerusalem
Editor Rob Mudge

Find this story at 18 July 2013

© 2013 Deutsche Welle

McLibel leaflet was co-written by undercover police officer Bob Lambert

Exclusive: McDonald’s sued green activists in long-running David v Goliath legal battle, but police role only now exposed

Bob Lambert posed as a radical activist named Bob Robinson.

An undercover police officer posing for years as an environmental activist co-wrote a libellous leaflet that was highly critical of McDonald’s, and which led to the longest civil trial in English history, costing the fast-food chain millions of pounds in fees.

The true identity of one of the authors of the “McLibel leaflet” is Bob Lambert, a police officer who used the alias Bob Robinson in his five years infiltrating the London Greenpeace group, is revealed in a new book about undercover policing of protest, published next week.

McDonald’s famously sued green campaigners over the roughly typed leaflet, in a landmark three-year high court case, that was widely believed to have been a public relations disaster for the corporation. Ultimately the company won a libel battle in which it spent millions on lawyers.

Lambert was deployed by the special demonstration squad (SDS) – a top-secret Metropolitan police unit that targeted political activists between 1968 until 2008, when it was disbanded. He co-wrote the defamatory six-page leaflet in 1986 – and his role in its production has been the subject of an internal Scotland Yard investigation for several months.

At no stage during the civil legal proceedings brought by McDonald’s in the 1990s was it disclosed that a police infiltrator helped author the leaflet.
The McLibel two: Helen Steel and David Morris, outside a branch of McDonald’s in London in 2005 after winning their case in the European court of human rights. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian

A spokesman for the Met said the force “recognises the seriousness of the allegations of inappropriate behaviour and practices involving past undercover deployments”. He added that a number of allegations surrounding the undercover officers were currently being investigated by a team overseen by the chief constable of Derbyshire police, Mick Creedon.

And in remarks that come closest to acknowledging the scale of the scandal surrounding police spies, the spokesman said: “At some point it will fall upon this generation of police leaders to account for the activities of our predecessors, but for the moment we must focus on getting to the truth.”

Lambert declined to comment about his role in the production of the McLibel leaflet. However, he previously offered a general apology for deceiving “law abiding members of London Greenpeace”, which he said was a peaceful campaign group.

Lambert, who rose through the ranks to become a spymaster in the SDS, is also under investigation for sexual relationships he had with four women while undercover, one of whom he fathered a child with before vanishing from their lives. The woman and her son only discovered that Lambert was a police spy last year.

The internal police inquiry is also investigating claims raised in parliament that Lambert ignited an incendiary device at a branch of Debenhams when infiltrating animal rights campaigners. The incident occurred in 1987 and the explosion inflicted £300,000 worth of damage to the branch in Harrow, north London. Lambert has previously strongly denied he planted the incendiary device in the Debenhams store.
While McDonald’s won the initial legal battle, at great expense, it was seen as a PR disaster. Photograph: Image Broker/Rex Features

Lambert’s role in helping compose the McLibel leaflet is revealed in ‘Undercover: The True Story of Britain’s Secret Police’, which is published next week. An extract from the book will be published in the Guardian Weekend magazine. A joint Guardian/Channel 4 investigation into undercover policing will be broadcast on Dispatches on Monday evening.

Lambert was one of two SDS officers who infiltrated London Greenpeace; the second, John Dines, had a two-year relationship with Helen Steel, who later became the co-defendant in the McLibel case. The book reveals how Steel became the focus of police surveillance operations. She had a sexual relationship with Dines, before he also disappeared without a trace.

Dines gained access to the confidential legal advice given to Steel and her co-defendant that was written by Keir Starmer, then a barrister known for championing radical causes. The lawyer was advising the activists on how to defend themselves against McDonald’s. He is now the director of public prosecutions in England and Wales.

Lambert was lauded by colleagues in the covert unit for his skilful infiltration of animal rights campaigners and environmentalists in the 1980s. He succeeded in transforming himself from a special branch detective into a long-haired radical activist who worked as a cash-in-hand gardener. He became a prominent member of London Greenpeace, around the time it began campaigning against McDonald’s in 1985. The leaflet he helped write made wide-ranging criticisms of the company, accusing it of destroying the environment, exploiting workers and selling junk food.

Four sources who were either close to Lambert at the time, or involved in the production of the leaflet, have confirmed his role in composing the libellous text. Lambert confided in one of his girlfriends from the era, although he appeared keen to keep his participation hidden. “He did not want people to know he had co-written it,” Belinda Harvey said.

Paul Gravett, a London Greenpeace campaigner, said the spy was one of a small group of around five activists who drew up the leaflet over several months. Another close friend from the time recalls Lambert was really proud of the leaflet. “It was like his baby, he carried it around with him,” the friend said.

When Lambert’s undercover deployment ended in 1989, he vanished, claiming that he had to flee abroad because he was being pursued by special branch. None of his friends or girlfriends suspected that special branch was his employer.

It was only later that the leaflet Lambert helped to produce became the centre of the huge trial. Even though the activists could only afford to distribute a few hundred copies of the leaflet, McDonald’s decided to throw all of its legal might at the case, suing two London Greenpeace activists for libel.

Two campaigners – Steel, who was then a part-time bartender, and an unemployed postal worker, Dave Morris – unexpectedly stood their ground and refused to apologise.
Steel and Morris outside the high court at the start of the first proceedings in the McLibel trial in 1990. Photograph: Photofusion/UIG/ Getty Images

Over 313 days in the high court, the pair defended themselves, with pro bono assistance from Starmer, as they could not afford to hire any solicitors or barristers. In contrast, McDonald’s hired some of the best legal minds at an estimated cost of £10m. During the trial, legal argument largely ignored the question of who wrote the McLibel leaflet, focusing instead on its distribution to members of the public.

In 1997, a high court judge ruled that much of the leaflet was libellous and ordered the two activists to pay McDonald’s £60,000 in damages. This sum was reduced on appeal to £40,000 – but McDonald’s never enforced payment.

It was a hollow victory for the company; the long-running trial had exposed damaging stories about its business and the quality of the food it was selling to millions of customers around the world. The legal action, taking advantage of Britain’s much-criticised libel laws, was seen as a heavy handed and intimidating way of crushing criticism. However, the role of undercover police in the story remained, until now, largely unknown.

On Friday, Morris said the campaign against the burger chain was successful “despite the odds overwhelmingly stacked against us in the legal system and up against McDonald’s massive and relentless advertising and propaganda machine.

“We now know that other shadowy forces were also trying to undermine our efforts in the most disgusting, but ultimately futile ways. All over the world police and secret agents infiltrate opposition movements in order to protect the rich and powerful but as we have seen in so many countries recently people power and the pursuit of truth and justice is unstoppable, even faced with the most repressive and unacceptable Stasi-like tactics.”

Sign up for the Guardian Today

Our editors’ picks for the day’s top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.
Sign up for the daily email

What’s this?
More from the Guardian
The six types of atheist 15 Jul 2013
Judy Murray doesn’t deserve this sniping 14 Jul 2013
Tyson Gay ban: what is oxilofrine? 15 Jul 2013
California wildfire burns seven homes and leads to evacuations 17 Jul 2013
As police arrest British fugitives in Spain, are the days of the Costa del Crime numbered? 14 Jul 2013
Related information
Business
Food & drink industry · McDonald’s ·
UK news
Police ·
Environment
Activism ·
Law

Why my little community is saying no to McDonald’s

18 Jul 2013

Garry Muratore: Tecoma residents have made it clear: we do not want McDonald’s in our small community. Our ongoing fight has brought the best out of all of us

17 Jul 2013

McDonald’s 34,492 restaurants: where are they?

17 Jul 2013

McDonald’s opens first branch in Vietnam

17 Jul 2013

McDonald’s seeks injunction against Victorian protesters

Burgers and nuggets still dominate UK restaurant children’s menus – report

17 Jul 2013

Little fresh fruit or veg on offer in major high street eateries, research by Soil Association and Organix finds

Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
The Guardian, Friday 21 June 2013 14.54 BST

Find this story at 21 June 2013

© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

Second police spy says Home Office knew of theft of children’s identities

Former undercover officer Peter Francis says department helped spies by providing false passports in dead children’s names

Peter Francis, the former undercover police officer turned whistleblower. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian

A second police spy has said the Home Office was aware that undercover police officers stole the identities of dead children to infiltrate political groups.

Peter Francis, a former undercover officer turned whistleblower, said the Home Office helped the spies by providing false passports in the names of the dead children.

His claim comes as Britain’s most senior police officer, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, is due to publish a report on Tuesday about the secret use of dead children’s identities.

It will be released on the same day that MPs on the home affairs select committee are due to question Mick Creedon, the chief constable who is leading the police investigation into the deployment of undercover officers in protest groups over a 40-year period.

Creedon has already conceded that the theft of the children’s identities was “common practice” within a covert special branch unit which operated between 1968 and 2008.

Earlier this month, Bob Lambert, one of the leading spies of the unit, claimed that the technique was “well known at the highest levels of the Home Office”.

In a practice criticised by MPs as “ghoulish” and “heartless”, undercover spies in the unit, the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), searched through birth and death certificates to find children who had died at an early age. They then assumed the identity of the child and developed a persona based on that identity when they went undercover for five years or longer.

The spies were issued with fake documents such as passports, driving licences and national insurance numbers in the child’s name to further bolster their credibility.

Francis, who infiltrated anti-racist groups from 1993 to 1997, discussed the technique with the head of the SDS because he had reservations about stealing the identity of a four-year-old boy who had died. He did not disclose the name of the SDS head.

“We bounced it around – what were his thoughts, what were my thoughts. It was evident that it was standard practice,” Francis said.

The head of the SDS told him the Home Office knew the undercover spies “were using the children”, he said, as it gave fake passports to the spies knowing that they were in the names of the dead children.

The SDS was directly funded by the government, which received an annual report on its work for much of its existence.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We expect the highest standards of professionalism in all aspects of policing. That is why Chief Constable Mick Creedon is leading an IPCC-supervised investigation which will ensure any criminality or misconduct is properly dealt with.”

Francis was an important source for the Guardian when the newspaper detailed the technique, dubbed the “jackal run” after Frederick Forsyth’s novel The Day of the Jackal, in February.

Speaking then as Pete Black, one of his undercover identities, Francis said he felt he was “stomping on the grave” of the boy whose identity he stole. “A part of me was thinking about how I would feel if someone was taking the names and details of my dead son for something like this,” he said at the time.

Last month, he said his superiors had asked him to find “dirt” that could be used to smear the family of Stephen Lawrence, the black teenager who was stabbed to death in a racist attack in 1993.

Lambert went undercover for four years in the 1980s to infiltrate environmental and animal rights groups. He adopted the persona of Bob Robinson, a seven-year-old boy who had died of a congenital heart defect.

Interviewed by Channel Four News this month, Lambert said that at the time he did not “really give pause for thought on the ethical considerations. It was, that’s what was done. Let’s be under no illusions about the extent to which that was an accepted practice that was well known at the highest levels of the Home Office.” Lambert fathered a child with a campaigner while he was undercover.

On Tuesday, Creedon is expected to be questioned by the select committee about whether the police will apologise to the parents whose children’s identities were taken. Creedon has said he has taken legal advice on whether the spies who stole the children’s identities could be put on trial.

Rob Evans
The Guardian, Monday 15 July 2013 18.35 BST

Find this story at 15 July 2013

© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

Operation Herne Report 1 Use of covert identities

Executive Summary

History
The Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) was an undercover unit formed by the
Metropolitan Police’s Special Branch. It operated between 1968 and 2008, during
which time it infiltrated and reported on groups concerned in violent protest.

Operation Herne
Operation Herne (formerly Soisson) was formed in October 2011 in response to
allegations made by the Guardian newspaper about alleged misconduct and criminality
engaged in by members of the SDS. Similar matters had been previously aired as early
as 2002 in a BBC documentary.

Operation Riverwood
On 4th February 2013 the Metropolitan Police received a public complaint from the
family of Rod Richardson, a young boy who had died in the 1970s. It is alleged that an
undercover officer working for the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU) had
used this child’s details as his covert identity. This matter was referred to the IPCC. The
matter was returned to the force and is currently subject of a ‘local investigation’.

National Public Order Intelligence Unit
The NPOIU was formed within the MPS in 1999 to gather and coordinate intelligence.
In 2006 the governance responsibility for NPOIU was moved to the Association of
Chief Police Officers, after a decision was taken that the forces where the majority of
activity was taking place should be responsible for authorising future deployments. In
January 2011 the NPOIU was subsumed within other units under the National Domestic
Extremism Units within the MPS.
In January 1995 large numbers of police from London, Kent and Hampshire were
drafted to the West Sussex harbour of Shoreham in response to protests surrounding
the export of live animals to Europe. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and another
animal extremist group named ‘Justice Department’ had a strong base in the
community there. This led to a number of protests and in October 1995 there was a
further demonstration in Brightlingsea, Essex. This resulted in a record number of police
being deployed to prevent widespread public disorder. Ad-hoc protest groups emerged
and the need for first hand high quality intelligence was evident. This led to undercover
operatives being required to infiltrate these animal extremist organisations.

The purpose of the NPOIU was:
1 To provide the police service with the ability to develop a national threat assessment
and profile for domestic extremism.
2 Support the police service to reduce crime and disorder from domestic extremism.
3 Support a proportionate police response to protest activity.
4 Help the police service manage concerns of communities and businesses to
minimise conflict and disorder.

Control of the NPOIU moved to ACPO in 2006 under the direction of the ACPO National
Co-ordinator for Domestic Extremism, Assistant Chief Constable Anton Setchell. He
was replaced by Detective Chief Superintendent Adrian Tudway in 2010. The NPOIU
worked with the National Extremism Tactical Co-ordination Unit (NETCU) and the
National Domestic Extremism Team (NDET).
The NPOIU now exists as part of the National Domestic Extremism Unit (NDEU) under
the Metropolitan Police Service Specialist Operations and is run by Detective Chief
Superintendent Chris Greaney.

Deceased identities
On 5th February 2013 the Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) questioned Deputy
Assistant Commissioner Gallan about the alleged practice that SDS officers had used
the details of dead children, as part of a cover identity for undercover police officers. At
the time DAC Gallan was based in the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards and
was in overall command of Operation Herne. Her appearance before the HASC led to
considerable media coverage and some negative commentary. As a result of the media
coverage, Operation Herne has now received enquiries from fourteen (14) families
regarding seventeen (17) children.

Operation Herne review
One hundred and forty-seven (147) named individuals are believed to have served as
police officers within the SDS at all ranks from Chief Superintendent down. This covers
the forty (40) years that the unit was in existence and not all the police officers were
deployed in undercover roles.
At this stage one hundred and six (106) covert identities have been identified as having
been used by the SDS between 1968 and 2008.
Forty-two (42) of these identities are either confirmed or highly likely to have used the
details of a deceased child.
Forty-five (45) of these identities have been established as fictitious. Work continues to
identify the provenance of the remaining identities.

Neither Confirm Nor Deny (NCND)
The policy of ‘neither confirming nor denying’ the use of or identity of an undercover
police officer is a long established one used by UK policing. It is essential so as to
provide for the necessary operational security and to ensure undercover officers are
clear that their identity will never be disclosed by the organisation that asked them to
carry out the covert activity. The duty of care owed to such officers is an absolute one
and applies during their deployments, throughout their service and continues when they
are retired.
Please note that this is an interim report specifically about the use of the identities of
deceased children and infants. It does not seek to cover either all of the activities of
the SDS nor has it been able to completely provide all the answers regarding the use
of covert identities. The report clearly explains the use of the tactic and is submitted
early given the need to deal with the public concerns and is provided in agreement with
the Home Office who sought to have this matter concluded before the parliamentary
summer recess.

Find this report at July 2013

Dead children’s IDs used by undercover police to be kept from families

The identities of 42 dead children whose names were assumed by undercover police officers will not be revealed to their relatives, according to a report.

The Metropolitan Police offered a general apology for the “shock and offence” the practice had caused.

But Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said revealing the identities used would endanger the officers concerned.

The senior officer who wrote the report on the 1980s practice told MPs it would not be used as a tactic today.

The report’s author, Derbyshire Chief Constable Mick Creedon, was asked to investigate in 2011 after the Guardian newspaper published allegations about the conduct of undercover officers.

He told the Home Affairs Select Committee ministers did not authorise the practice but refused to condemn the officers’ actions.

“It’s irrelevant what I think,” he said. “It is not a tactic we would use these days.

“It would feel very strange for me to criticise the actions of people 20, 30, 40-years-ago without knowing what they faced at the time.”

Earlier this year, the Guardian reported that officers had stolen the identities of about 80 children who died at an early age.
Anonymity ‘vital’

Mr Creedon’s report concluded that at least 42 children’s identities had, either definitely or very probably, been used by the Metropolitan Police’s Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) and its National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU).

The earliest known use of the tactic occurred between 1976 and 1981 and it was phased out from 1994 in the SDS, the report added.

But it also found that the practice might have been used by the NPOIU as recently as 2003, and that it was “highly possible” that its use was more widespread than currently understood.

The report said: “A range of officers at different ranks and roles have been interviewed by the investigation team. The information provided corroborates totally the belief that, for the majority of the existence of the SDS, the use of deceased children’s identities was accepted as standard practice.”

Sir Bernard said 14 families had contacted the Met to ask whether the identities of their relatives had been used by undercover officers.

The Met had apologised to them, and to another family that had heard separately that it might be affected by the revelations, he said.

“Undercover officers are brave men and women” and maintaining their anonymity is “vital”, Sir Bernard said.

He explained: “There are criminals behind bars and at large today who would have no qualms in doing serious harm if they discovered a former close confidant had been working for the police.

“That’s why undercover officers spent so much time building up their ‘legend’ or false identity, and why that identity must be protected forever.”
‘Rot’

Sir Bernard added: “I believe the public do understand the necessity for police and others to do things like this to protect against a much greater harm. It was never intended or foreseen that any of the identities used would become public, or that any family would suffer hurt as a result.

“At the time this method of creating identities was in use, officers felt this was the safest option.”

But Jules Carey, a solicitor acting for Barbara Shaw, who is concerned that her son Rod Richardson’s identity was used, said: “What we heard this morning was not an apology but a PR exercise.

“The families of the dead children whose identities have been stolen by the undercover officers deserve better than this.

“They deserve an explanation, a personal apology and, if appropriate, a warning of the potential risk they face, in the exceptional circumstances, that their dead child’s identity was used to infiltrate serious criminal organisations.

“The harvesting of dead children’s identities was only one manifestation of the rot at the heart of these undercover units which had officers lie on oath, conduct smear campaigns and use sexual relationships as an evidence-gathering tool.”

He added: “Ms Shaw has told me that she feels her complaint has been ‘swept under the carpet” and she has instructed me to appeal this outcome.”

UK
16 July 2013 Last updated at 16:29 GMT

Find this story at 16 July 2013

BBC © 2013 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

Met chief sorry for police spies using dead children’s identities

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe releases report on surveillance used since 1970s but refuses to inform any affected families

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said families of dead children whose identities were used would not be approached, as that could put undercover officers in danger. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA

Britain’s most senior police officer has offered a general apology for the “morally repugnant” theft of dead children’s identities by undercover spies who infiltrated political groups.

But Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan police commissioner, has refused to tell any families if the identities of their children were stolen by the undercover officers. He said he wanted to protect the spies from being exposed.

In a report published on Tuesday, he admitted that at least 42 police spies stole the identity of children who had died before they were 14 years old.

But the total number of such spies could be far higher as he conceded that the technique could have been more widespread than initially believed.

Hogan-Howe said he “should apologise for the shock and offence the use of this tactic has caused” among the public, after the Guardian revealed details of the policing method in February.

The commissioner argued that the families could not be informed as it could lead to the exposure of the undercover officers sent to infiltrate the political groups.

“It was never intended or foreseen that any of the identities used would become public, or that any family would suffer hurt as a result. At the time this method of creating identities was in use, officers felt this was the safest option” he added.

His decision drew immediate criticism. Jenny Jones, a Green party member of the London Assembly, said: “This falls short of coming clean to all the families whose children’s identities were harvested. In giving a blanket apology they have avoided the difficult task of apologising to real people.”

The Met has sent letters of apology to 15 families whose children died young, but has neither confirmed nor denied whether identities were stolen.

One case concerned a suspected spy, deployed between 1999 and 2003, who allegedly stole the identity of Rod Richardson, who died two days after being born in 1973.

The family’s lawyer, Jules Carey, said that Barbara Shaw, the mother of the dead boy, was taking legal action as she felt her complaint had been “swept under the carpet”.

Carey said Hogan-Howe’s apology was a PR exercise. He added: “The families of the dead children whose identities have been stolen by the undercover officers deserve better than this. They deserve an explanation, a personal apology. The harvesting of dead children’s identities was only one manifestation of the rot at the heart of these undercover units.”

Peter Francis, one of the spies who originally blew the whistle on the tactic, said the police should offer a personal apology to the families in the cases of spies whose identity had already been exposed. He agreed that the spies whose work remained secret should be protected.

The report, on Tuesday, was produced by Mick Creedon, the Derbyshire chief constable who is conducting an investigation into the activities of the undercover spies over 40 years.

Creedon revealed that the technique was used extensively as far back as 1976 and was authorised by senior police. He reported that the tactic became “an established practice that new officers were taught” within a covert special branch unit known as the special demonstration squad (SDS), which spied on political groups.

“This was not done by the officers in any underhand or salacious manner – it was what they were told to do,” Creedon added.

One senior spy is quoted as saying the undercover officers “spent hours and hours … leafing through death registers in search of a name [they] could call his own”.

“The genuine identities of the deceased children were blended with the officer’s own biographical details,” Creedon said.

The spies were issued with fake documents, such as passports and driving licences, to make their alter egos appear genuine in case suspicious activists started to investigate them.

The last time the tactic was used, according to Creedon, was 2003, by a spy working for a second covert unit – the national public order intelligence unit (NPOIU) – which infiltrated political campaigns.

Creedon said it was highly possible that the tactic was used by undercover officers in other units which infiltrated serious criminal gangs. “It would be a mistake to assume that the use of identities of dead children was solely within the SDS and the NPOIU.”

He said that the use of the technique “however morally repugnant, should not detract from the [spies’] bravery”.

Rob Evans and Paul Lewis
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 July 2013 12.22 BST

Find this story at 16 July 2013

© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

Home Office ‘knew police stole children’s identities’

Bob Lambert admits to adopting the identity of a seven-year-old boy and has conceded to having four affairs while undercover

Bob Lambert was deployed as an animal rights activist named Bob Robinson in the 1980s.

A former police spymaster has claimed the practice of resurrecting the identities of dead children so they could be used by undercover officers was “well known at the highest levels of the Home Office”.

Bob Lambert, who is facing a potential criminal investigation over his work for a secret unit of undercover officers, admitted that when he was deployed as a spy himself, he adopted the identity of a seven-year-old boy who died of a congenital heart defect.

He also admitted to using his false identity in court and co-writing the “McLibel” leaflet that defamed the burger chain McDonald’s, resulting in the longest civil trial in English legal history.

Conceding publicly for the first time that he had four relationships with women while undercover, one of which resulted in him secretly fathering a child, he said: “With hindsight I can only say that I genuinely regret my actions, and I apologise to the women affected in my case.”

Lambert was deployed as an animal rights activist named “Bob Robinson” in the 1980s for a covert Metropolitan Police unit called the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) which deployed undercover officers in political campaign groups. In the 1990s, he was promoted to manage other undercover operatives.

Over the last two years the Guardian has detailed the covert work of Lambert, one of the most controversial spies to have worked for the SDS and its sister squad, the National Public Order Intelligence Unit.

Until now, Lambert has either declined to comment in detail or said the Guardian’s reports amounted to “a misleading combination of truth, distortions, exaggerations and outright lies”.

However, in a Channel 4 News interview broadcast on Friday, Lambert admitted that many of the allegations made against him were true. “My reputation is never going to be redeemed for many people, and I don’t think it should be,” he told the programme. “I think I made serious mistakes that I should regret, and I always will do.”

Lambert said he was arrested “four or five” times while undercover and in 1986 he appeared in a magistrates court charged with a “minor public order offence”. He said he had to appear in court using his alter ego – rather than his real name – in order to “maintain cover”.

He also admitted to co-writing the McLibel leaflet. “I was certainly a contributing author to the McLibel leaflet,” he told the programme. “Well, I think, the one that I remember, the one that I remember making a contribution to, was called What’s Wrong With McDonald’s?”

Asked if that was ever disclosed to the court during the long-running civil trial, he replied: “I don’t know the answer to that question.”

Although he admitted having relationships with women, Lambert denied it was a deliberate tactic in the SDS to use relationships to gain access, saying “probably I became too immersed” in his alter ego. “I’d always been a faithful husband,” he said. “I only ever became an unfaithful husband when I became an undercover police officer.”

Harriet Wistrich, a lawyer representing eight women involved in relationships with Lambert and other undercover police said that there was a systematic pattern in which operatives repeatedly used long-term relationships to build their cover.

Almost all of the undercover officers identified so far – including those known to have worked under Lambert – had sexual relationships while operating covertly.

An SDS spy who has become a whistleblower, Peter Francis, has said that when he was deployed as an anti-racist campaigner, his superiors asked him to find “dirt” that could be used to smear the family of Stephen Lawrence, the black teenager who was stabbed to death in a racist attack in 1993.

His revelation has since triggered further investigations into alleged covert tactics used against the Lawrence family, their supporters and Duwayne Brooks, a friend of Stephen and the main witness to the murder.

On Friday, police chiefs admitted bugging a meeting with Brooks and his lawyer, Jane Deighton. Deighton said that Brooks, who is now a Lib Dem councillor, conveyed his concern in a meeting with the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg.

In a previous Channel 4 News broadcast, Lambert denied the unit was involved in seeking to smear the Lawrence family during his tenure as deputy head of the unit.

He had a supervisory role when other spies, such as Jim Boyling and Mark Jenner, formed long-term relationships with people they were spying on. All are now under investigation.

The deployments of Francis, Lambert, Boyling and Jenner are detailed in a new book: Undercover: The True Story of Britain’s Secret Police.

Lambert has also been accused in parliament of igniting an incendiary device in a branch of Debenhams as part of a fire-bombing campaign by the Animal Liberation Front. Repeating earlier denials, he told Channel 4 News that the claim was “false”.

The home secretary, Theresa May, is coming under mounting pressure to announce an independent public inquiry into the affair. So far she has indicated that two pre-existing inquiries – one run by a barrister, the other an internal Met police review – are capable of investigating the allegations surrounding the Lawrences and Brooks.

Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
The Guardian, Saturday 6 July 2013

Find this story 6 July 2013

© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

Undercover policeman who impregnated one of his targets and impersonated a dead child apologises for ‘serious mistakes’

Bob Lambert had a five-year covert career using the alias Bob Robinson
The married office slept with four women and fathered a child with one
Lambert claims that being undercover led to his bad behaviour

Back in the day: During a covert career in which he infiltrated various groups, Bob Lambert has spoke of his disgust at some of his actions

A former Scotland Yard police officer who fathered a child with one of several targets he had relationships with while working undercover has apologised to the women.

Bob Lambert said he would always regret the ‘serious mistakes’ he made during a covert career which saw him use the identities of dead children, give evidence in court under his false name and co-author a libellous leaflet.

Mr Lambert used the alias Bob Robinson during his five years infiltrating environmentalist groups, when he was with the special demonstration squad (SDS), the Metropolitan Police unit that targeted political activists.

The revelation that the married officer slept with four women – fathering a child with one – sparked outrage.

In an interview with Channel 4 News, he said he accepts his behaviour was morally reprehensible and a gross invasion of privacy.

‘With hindsight, I can only say that I genuinely regret my actions, and I apologise to the women affected,’ he said.

‘I’d always been a faithful husband. I only ever became an unfaithful husband when I became an undercover police officer.’

The ex-officer declined to reveal whether his superiors were aware of the child – insisting he would only discuss that with an investigation into the activities of undercover police activities being led by the chief constable of Derbyshire.

Mr Lambert said he ‘didn’t really give pause for thought on the ethical considerations’ of adopting the identity of a dead child in 1984 as it was standard practice at the time.

‘That’s what was done. Let’s be under no illusions about the extent to which that was an accepted practice that was well known at the highest levels of the Home Office,’ he told the programme.

More…
Baby snatched from its pram and thrown to the floor outside a hospital by teenager who was on a legal high called Salvia

He confirmed that he had appeared in court as Bob Robinson but could not say whether the judiciary was made aware by the police that he was doing so.

‘On occasions I was arrested as Bob Robinson and to maintain cover I went through the process of arrest, detention, and on occasions, appearing in court,’ he said.
Lambert insists he was unaware of any campaign to smear family and friends of Stephen Lawrence

He denied it amounted to perjury as ’the position was that I was maintaining cover as Bob Robinson’.
But asked if the court was ‘made aware’, he added: ‘Well, that’s what needs to be established.’

Mr Lambert also confirmed that he helped write a libellous leaflet that attacked fast food giant McDonald’s and triggered the longest civil trial in English history.

McDonald’s famously sued two green campaigners over the leaflet in a landmark three-year high court case.

It was not disclosed during the costly civil legal proceedings brought by McDonalds in the 1990s that an undercover police officer helped write the leaflet.

‘I was certainly a contributing author to the McLibel leaflet. Well, I think, the one that I remember, the one that I remember making a contribution to, was called What’s Wrong With McDonalds?’, he told Channel 4.

Over the line: Bob Lambert in a more recent picture, fathered a child with one of his targets

Asked if that fact was disclosed during the proceedings, he said: ‘I don’t know.’

He repeated his rejection though of claims that he planted an incendiary device in a Debenhams store in Harrow in 1987, calling that a ‘false allegation’.

Mr Lambert, who was an SDS manager for five years, earlier this week insisted he had not been aware of any campaign against the family of murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence.

Those claims were made by another veteran of the unit, Peter Francis, who alleges he was told to find information to use to smear the Lawrence family – who are calling for a public inquiry to examine the issue.

Home Secretary Theresa May has said they would be looked at by the Derbyshire probe and a separate inquiry led by barrister Mark Ellison QC into alleged corruption in the original Lawrence murder investigation, but has left open the possibility of other action.

‘My reputation is never going to be redeemed for many people, and I don’t think it should be,’ Mr Lambert said.

‘I think I made serious mistakes that I should regret, and I always will do. I think the only real comfort I can take from my police career is that the Muslim Contact Unit was about learning from mistakes.’

Belinda Harvey, one of eight women who are suing the Metropolitan Police over relationships with men who turned out to be undercover officers, rejected his apology.

‘Almost everything he said to me was a lie; why would I possibly believe what he says to me know.’ she told Channel 4.

‘If it hadn’t been for the case we’re bringing against the police, he would never have apologised and I would have lived the rest of my days not finding out the truth.’

Former director of public prosecutions Lord Macdonald of River Glaven said the latest evidence strengthened the case for a judge-led public inquiry.

‘It is as bad as I think we thought it was,’ he said.

‘He seems to have admitted a great deal of the conduct that people feared had been taking place.

‘It now sounds as though not only senior police officers but senior civil servants may have known what was going on.

‘It’s no good having this multitude of inquiries that are going on at the moment, one of them conducted by the police themselves which is pretty hopeless in my view.

‘We need a single public inquiry under a senior judicial figure to examine what happened, what went wrong, who authorised it and most of all to reassure us that its not going on still.’

By Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 00:37 GMT, 6 July 2013 | UPDATED: 01:06 GMT, 6 July 2013

Find this story at 6 July 2013

© Associated Newspapers Ltd

Police to apologise for using dead children’s identities

Investigation into covert policing has found widespread use of the practice.

Senior police leaders are set to make an unprecedented national apology after hundreds of names of dead children were used to create false identities for undercover officers.

An investigation into covert policing has found widespread use of the practice.

Undercover officers told The Times that they were trained to use names of the dead and it had become “standard practice”.

Special branch units used the names while infiltrating criminal gangs, animal rights activists and football hooligan firms, it is claimed.

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, will be questioned about the method after it was revealed that officers were told to gather “dirt” on the family of Stephen Lawrence.

Sources say that the practice may have been used in MI5 and MI6 and that several thousand identities of dead infants, children and teenagers may have been assumed by undercover officers.

An apology will be made senior police in the coming days.

Tom Foot
Friday, 5 July 2013

Find this story at 5 July 2013

© independent.co.uk

Scotland Yard to apologise for stealing dead children’s identities and giving them to undercover officers

Police chiefs are expected to formally apologise for using the names of dead children to create fake identities for undercover officers.

It had been thought that only officers in secret police units such as the Met Police’s Special Demonstration Squad, which was closed in 2008, had adopted dead children’s names as a new identity.

But Operation Herne, an ongoing investigation into the conduct of undercover police, has revealed that the practice was more widespread than originally thought and used by forces across the country.

Standard practice: It had been thought that the practice of using dead children’s names as identities for undercover officers was restricted to Scotland Yard’s Special Demonstrations Squad, but the practice is now said to have been more widespread

According to sources, undercover police officers infiltrating criminal networks and violent gangs were given dead people’s identities as ‘standard practice’, reported The Times.

The technique, which was regularly used in the 1960s and 1990s, is thought to have been last used in 2002.

More…
Why SHOULD we help find Maddie, ask Portugal’s police chiefs, as they ridicule Scotland Yard claims of new leads on missing girl
Revealed: BBC boss who landed £866k payoff and walked straight into another public-sector job

But it is thought that the technique was not restricted to police forces with other agencies such as HM Revenue & Customs said to have adopted the practice.

The apology could come as early as this month but police are not expected to contact families of the dead people whose names were used through fear that it could put officers who have taken part in undercover operations in the past in danger.

A way in: Dead children’s identities were used by undercover offices to infiltrate violent gangs and demonstration groups

A source told The Times: ‘This wasn’t an anomaly, it wasn’t something that was used in isolation by just one unit.

‘If you are infiltrating a sophisticated crime group they are going to check who you are, so you need a backstop, a cover story that has real depth and won’t fall over at the first hurdle.

Disapproving: Policing minister Damien Green has expressed his disappointment at the use of dead children’s names by police units

‘The way to do that was to build an identity that was based on a real person.’

It was reported earlier this year that around 80 names were used by officers over a 30 year period.

Set up in 2011, Operation Herne, which is expected to cost around £1.66million a year, will examine the conduct of all ranks of officers and even look at the actions of former Home Secretaries.

Both The Home Affairs Committee and Police minister Damian Green have spoken of their ‘disappointment’ that dead children’s names were used in investigations.

Back in may, Derbyshire Chief Constable Mick Creedon admitted that the practice had been widespread

A raft of allegations have been made since former PC Mark Kennedy was unmasked in 2011 as an undercover officer who spied on environmental protesters as Mark ‘Flash’ Stone – and had at least one sexual relationship with a female activist.

The revelation comes before Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan Howe appears before MPs to answer questions over a number of controversies including claims last month that the family of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence were targeted by undercover officers who were assigned to ‘get dirt’ on them.

Quiz: Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe will face questions from MPs over a number of controversies

It also emerged that police admitted bugging meetings involving Duwayne Brooks, the friend who was with Stephen the night he was attacked.

The claims affecting Mr Brooks came after former undercover officer Peter Francis alleged that he had been told to find information to use to smear the Lawrence family.

Mr Francis, who worked with Scotland Yard’s former Special Demonstration Squad, spoke out about tactics that he said were used by the secretive unit in the 1980s and 1990s.

Investigation: A raft of allegations have been made since former PC Mark Kennedy was unmasked in 2011 as an undercover officer who spied on environmental protesters as Mark ¿Flash¿ Stone ¿ and had at least one sexual relationship with a female activist

By Steve Nolan

PUBLISHED: 11:07 GMT, 6 July 2013 | UPDATED: 11:13 GMT, 6 July 2013

Find this story at 6 July 2013

© Associated Newspapers Ltd

Former Black Panther Assata Shakur Added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist List

Update: Watch our interview on Assata Shakur with her attorney Lennox Hines & scholar Angela Davis.

The FBI added Assata Shakur to its Most Wanted Terrorist List today. In addition, the state of New Jersey announced it was adding $1 million to the FBI’s $1 million reward for her capture. Shakur becomes the first woman ever to make the list and only the second domestic terrorist to be added to the list.

Assata Shakur, the former Joanne Chesimard, was a member of the Black Panther Party and Black Liberation Army. She was convicted in the May 2, 1973 killing of a New Jersey police officer during a shoot-out that left one of her fellow activists dead. She was shot twice by police during the incident. In 1979, she managed to escape from jail. Shakur fled to Cuba where she received political asylum. She once wrote, “I am a 20th century escaped slave. Because of government persecution, I was left with no other choice than to flee from the political repression, racism and violence that dominate the U.S. government’s policy towards people of color.”

In 1998, Democracy Now! aired Shakur reading an open letter to Pope John Paul II during his trip to Cuba. She wrote the message after New Jersey state troopers sent the Pope a letter asking him to call for her extradition.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT
I hope this letter finds you in good health, in good disposition, and enveloped with the spirit of goodness. I must confess that it had never occurred to me before to write you, and I find myself overwhelmed and moved to have this opportunity.

Although circumstances have compelled me to reach out to you, I am glad to have this occasion to try and cross the boundaries that would otherwise tend to separate us.

I understand that the New Jersey State Police have written to you and asked you to intervene and to help facilitate my extradition back to the United States. I believe that their request is unprecedented in history. Since they have refused to make their letter to you public, although they have not hesitated to publicize their request, I am completely uninformed as to the accusations they are making against me. Why, I wonder, do I warrant such attention? What do I represent that is such a threat?

Please let me take a moment to tell you about myself. My name is Assata Shakur and I was born and raised in the United States. I am a descendant of Africans who were kidnapped and brought to the Americas as slaves. I spent my early childhood in the racist segregated South. I later moved to the northern part of the country, where I realized that Black people were equally victimized by racism and oppression.

I grew up and became a political activist, participating in student struggles, the anti-war movement, and, most of all, in the movement for the liberation of African Americans in the United States. I later joined the Black Panther Party, an organization that was targeted by the COINTELPRO program, a program that was set up by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to eliminate all political opposition to the U.S. government’s policies, to destroy the Black Liberation Movement in the United States, to discredit activists and to eliminate potential leaders.

Under the COINTELPRO program, many political activists were harassed, imprisoned, murdered or otherwise neutralized. As a result of being targeted by COINTELPRO, I, like many other young people, was faced with the threat of prison, underground, exile or death. The FBI, with the help of local police agencies, systematically fed false accusations and fake news articles to the press accusing me and other activists of crimes we did not commit. Although in my case the charges were eventually dropped or I was eventually acquitted, the national and local police agencies created a situation where, based on their false accusations against me, any police officer could shoot me on sight. It was not until the Freedom of Information Act was passed in the mid-’70s that we began to see the scope of the United States government’s persecution of political activists.

At this point, I think that it is important to make one thing very clear. I have advocated and I still advocate revolutionary changes in the structure and in the principles that govern the United States. I advocate self-determination for my people and for all oppressed inside the United States. I advocate an end to capitalist exploitation, the abolition of racist policies, the eradication of sexism, and the elimination of political repression. If that is a crime, then I am totally guilty.

To make a long story short, I was captured in New Jersey in 1973, after being shot with both arms held in the air, and then shot again from the back. I was left on the ground to die and when I did not, I was taken to a local hospital where I was threatened, beaten and tortured. In 1977 I was convicted in a trial that can only be described as a legal lynching.

In 1979 I was able to escape with the aid of some of my fellow comrades. I saw this as a necessary step, not only because I was innocent of the charges against me, but because I knew that in the racist legal system in the United States I would receive no justice. I was also afraid that I would be murdered in prison. I later arrived in Cuba where I am currently living in exile as a political refugee.

The New Jersey State Police and other law enforcement officials say they want to see me brought to “justice.” But I would like to know what they mean by “justice.” Is torture justice? I was kept in solitary confinement for more than two years, mostly in men’s prisons. Is that justice? My lawyers were threatened with imprisonment and imprisoned. Is that justice? I was tried by an all-white jury, without even the pretext of impartiality, and then sentenced to life in prison plus 33 years. Is that justice?

Let me emphasize that justice for me is not the issue I am addressing here; it is justice for my people that is at stake. When my people receive justice, I am sure that I will receive it, too. I know that Your Holiness will reach your own conclusions, but I feel compelled to present the circumstances surrounding the application of so-called “justice” in New Jersey. I am not the first or the last person to be victimized by the New Jersey system of “justice.” The New Jersey State Police are infamous for their racism and brutality. Many legal actions have been filed against them and just recently, in a class action legal proceeding, the New Jersey State Police were found guilty of having an, quote, “officially sanctioned, de facto policy of targeting minorities for investigation and arrest,” unquote.

Although New Jersey’s population is more than 78 percent white, more than 75 percent of the prison population is made up of Blacks and Latinos. Eighty percent of women in New Jersey prisons are women of color. There are 15 people on death row in the state and seven of them are Black. A 1987 study found that New Jersey prosecutors sought the death penalty in 50 percent of cases involving a Black defendant and a white victim, but only 28 percent of cases involving a Black defendant and a Black victim.

Unfortunately, the situation in New Jersey is not unique, but reflects the racism that permeates the entire country. The United States has the highest rate of incarceration in the world. There are more than 1.7 million people in U.S. prisons. This number does not include the more than 500,000 people in city and county jails, nor does it include the alarming number of children in juvenile institutions. The vast majority of those behind bars are people of color and virtually all of those behind bars are poor. The result of this reality is devastating. One third of Black men between the ages of 20 and 29 are either in prison or under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system.

Prisons are big business in the United States, and the building, running, and supplying of prisons has become the fastest growing industry in the country. Factories are being moved into the prisons and prisoners are being forced to work for slave wages. This super-exploitation of human beings has meant the institutionalization of a new form of slavery. Those who cannot find work on the streets are forced to work in prison.

Not only are the prisons used as instruments of economic exploitation, they also serve as instruments of political repression. There are more than 100 political prisoners in the United States. They are African Americans, Puerto Ricans, Chicanos, Native Americans, Asians, and progressive white people who oppose the policies of the United States government. Many of those targeted by the COINTELPRO program have been in prison since the early 1970s.
Although the situation in the prisons is an indication of human rights violations inside the United States, there are other, more deadly indicators.

There are currently 3,365 people now on death row, and more than 50 percent of those awaiting death are people of color. Black people make up only 13 percent of the population, but we make up 41.01 percent of persons who have received the death penalty. The number of state assassinations has increased drastically. In 1997 alone, 71 people were executed.

A special rapporteur appointed by the United Nations organization found serious human rights violations in the United States, especially those related to the death penalty. According to his findings, people who were mentally ill were sentenced to death, people with severe mental and learning disabilities, as well as minors under 18. Serious racial bias was found on the part of judges and prosecutors. Specifically mentioned in the report was the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, the only political prisoner on death row, who was sentenced to death because of his political beliefs and because of his work as a journalist, exposing police brutality in the city of Philadelphia.

I believe that some people spell God with one “O” while others spell it with two. What we call God is unimportant, as long as we do God’s work. There are those who want to see God’s wrath fall on the oppressed and not on the oppressors. I believe that the time has ended when slavery, colonialism, and oppression can be carried out in the name of religion. It was in the dungeons of prison that I felt the presence of God up close, and it has been my belief in God, and in the goodness of human beings that has helped me to survive. I am not ashamed of having been in prison, and I am certainly not ashamed of having been a political prisoner. I believe that Jesus was a political prisoner who was executed because he fought against the evils of the Roman Empire, because he fought against the greed of the money changers in the temple, because he fought against the sins and injustices of his time. As a true child of God, Jesus spoke up for the poor, for the meek, for the sick, and the oppressed. The early Christians were thrown into lions’ dens. I will try and follow the example of so many who have stood up in the face of overwhelming oppression.

I am not writing to ask you to intercede on my behalf. I ask nothing for myself. I only ask you to examine the social reality of the United States and to speak out against the human rights violations that are taking place.

On this day, the birthday of Martin Luther King, I am reminded of all those who gave their lives for freedom. Most of the people who live on this planet are still not free. I ask only that you continue to work and pray to end oppression and political repression. It is my heartfelt belief that all the people on this earth deserve justice: social justice, political justice, and economic justice. I believe it is the only way we will ever achieve peace and prosperity on this earth. I hope that you enjoy your visit to Cuba. This is not a country that is rich in material wealth, but it is a country that is rich in human wealth, spiritual wealth and moral wealth.

Respectfully yours,
Assata Shakur
Havana, Cuba

Find this story at 2 May 2013

Former Black Panther Assata Shakur Becomes First Woman On FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist List

Assata Shakur, an ex member of the Black Panthers who escaped from prison and fled to Cuba in 1979, has officially been added to the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist list, making her the first woman ever. Shakur — born JoAnne Byron (married name Chesimard) — was a member of the Black Panthers and the Black Liberation Army when she was convicted of killing a New Jersey police officer in 1973. In 1979, she managed to escape from prison and fled to Cuba, where she was granted political asylum and has been ever since. Since 2005, the FBI has classified her as a domestic terrorist and has offered a $1 million reward for her capture. Yesterday, the 40-year anniversary of the New Jersey Turnpike shootout, they upgraded her to the 10 Most Wanted List.

There’s a lot to read and sift through in regards to Shakur’s involvement in that incident and the various other crimes of which she was accused and convicted. Shakur has long maintained her innocence in regards to the death of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster on May 2, 1973, and during her trial, her defense team presented testimony from medical experts that asserted the wounds Shakur obtained during the shootout — she was shot in both arms and the shoulder — would have made it impossible for her to fire upon Foerster. Additionally, during the trial, one of the prosecution’s primary witnesses, the other officer present (and wounded) at the shootout, Trooper James Harper, admitted he’d lied in all three of his initial statements when he said Shakur shot and killed Foerster and also shot at him. He admitted on the stand that he had in fact never seen Shakur with a gun and that she did not shoot at him. There was also no gunpowder found on Shakur’s fingers. (Shakur testified that after she was shot by Foerster, she took cover for the duration of the gunfight.) In the end, the all-white, 15-person jury, five of whom had personal ties to state troopers, convicted Shakur of all eight counts (two murder charges and six assault charges). She was sentenced to 26 to 33 years in prison.

Of her conviction and eventual escape to Cuba, Shakur once wrote, ”I am a 20th century escaped slave. Because of government persecution, I was left with no other choice than to flee from the political repression, racism and violence that dominate the U.S. government’s policy towards people of color.” There have been numerous attempts to have her extradited, including an appeal to Pope John Paul II in 1998. In response, Shakur wrote a letter to the Pope which you can read here.

Amelia McDonell-ParryMay 3, 2013

Find this story at 3 May 2013

© The Frisky is a member of Spin Entertainment, a division of SpinMedia

Tony Blair hired ex Israeli army intelligence officer despite envoy role

Tony Blair has hired a former Israeli army intelligence officer to work in his private office, despite his role as Middle East peace envoy. Pollak was recruited as a private consultant between October 2012 and April this year

Lianne Pollak, who has led intelligence teams in the Israel Defence Forces, was recruited as a private consultant between October 2012 and April this year.

The 30-year-old was previously a policy adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, working with security agencies and senior officials.

Mr Blair has been involved in sensitive negotiations between the Israeli government and Palestinian Authority. The former prime minister is the unpaid envoy to the Middle East for the Quartet – the group that represents the US, Russia, the United Nations and Europe.

His role includes encouraging development in Gaza and the West Bank and helping to forge a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, having been appointed when he left Downing Street in June 2007.

The disclosure of Miss Pollak’s appointment follows calls for the former prime minister to be more transparent about his complex business network.
Peter Kilfoyle, a former Labour minister who was Mr Blair’s leadership campaign manager, but is now a critic, said: “If you have got someone close to the so-called negotiator who is so partial in these matters [the Palestinians] are going to look even more sceptically at Mr Blair than they do currently.”

Miss Pollak’s public profile on the Linkedin website states: “She recently finished a project as a consultant at the Office of Tony Blair, where she managed processes on Economic Development, improving the business environment, and security related topics.”

Under “experience” she writes that she was a consultant in Mr Blair’s office, listing as her duties: “Strategy and Management Consulting for a major client overseas.

“Managing work processes on Economic Development, improving the business environment and security-related topics.”

Describing her professional experience before her work for Mr Blair, the profile states: “Before joining the team, she worked for the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office in the negotiation team with the Palestinians during the Annapolis process and with the Foreign Affairs Department at the National Security Council.

“She specialized in Economic Development and capacity building for the Palestinian population.

“Lianne was also an officer in the Israeli army in the area of intelligence analysis, and led intelligence teams and intelligence processes in volatile periods, working with senior generals on a daily basis.”

According to Linkedin she served as an officer in the IDF between November 2001 and May 2004, before going on to work for the Israeli prime minister’s office in September 2008, for just under three years.

During her time in the Israeli government she provided strategic planning for the prime minister and worked “hand in hand” with “diverse stakeholders” including high ranking officials and security agencies, her profile states.

A spokesman for Mr Blair said Miss Pollak, who has an MA in public management from the London School of Economics, worked on “public service reform” on a project not related to the Middle East, adding: “There are Palestinians who work for Tony Blair. So the idea of a conflict of interest on this basis is absolutely absurd.”

By Edward Malnick, and Robert Mendick
7:10AM BST 07 Jul 2013

Find this story at 7 July 2013

© Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2013

Anti-War Activists Targeted as ‘Domestic Terrorists’; Shocking new revelations come as activists prepare to sue the U.S. military for unlawful spying

Anti-war activists who were infiltrated and spied on by the military for years have now been placed on the domestic terrorist list, they announced Monday. The shocking revelation comes as the activists prepare to sue the U.S. military for unlawful spying.

“The fact that a peaceful activist such as myself is on this domestic terrorist list should be cause for concern for other people in the US,” declared Brendan Maslauskas Dunn, plaintiff in the lawsuit. “We’ve seen an increase in the buildup of a mass surveillance state under the Obama and Bush Administrations.”

The discovery is the latest development in a stunning saga that exposes vast post-9/11 spying networks in which military, police, and federal agencies appear to be in cahoots.

Documents declassified in 2009 reveal that military informant John Towery, going by the name ‘John Jacob,’ spent over two years infiltrating and spying on Olympia, Washington anti-war and social justice groups, including Port Militarization Resistance, Students for a Democratic Society, the Industrial Workers of the World, and Iraq Veterans Against the War.

Towery admitted to the spying and revealed that he shared information with not only the military, but also the police and federal agencies. He claimed that he was not the only spy.

The activists, who blast the snooping as a violation of their First and Fourth Amendment rights, levied a lawsuit against the military in 2009.

“The spying resulted in plaintiffs and others being targeted for repeated harassment, preemptive and false arrest, excessive use of force, and malicious prosecution,” reads a statement by the plaintiffs.

The Obama Administration attempted to throw out the litigation, but in December 2012 the 9th Circuit Court ruled that the case could continue.

When the plaintiffs were preparing their deposition for the courts two weeks ago, they were shocked to discover that several Olympia anti-war activists were listed on the domestic terrorist list, including at least two plaintiffs in the case.

The revelations prompted them to amend their lawsuit to include charges that the nonviolent activists were unlawfully targeted as domestic terrorists.

“The breadth and intensity of the spying by U.S. Army officials and other law enforcement agents is staggering,” said Larry Hildes, National Lawyers Guild attorney who filed the lawsuit in 2009. “If nonviolent protest is now labeled and treated as terrorism, then democracy and the First Amendment are in critical danger.”

Plaintiffs say this case takes on a new revelevance as vast NSA dragnet spying sparks widespread outrage.

“I think that there is a huge potential for the case to set precedent,” declared plaintiff Julianne Panagacos. “This could have a big impact on how the U.S. military and police are able to work together.”

She added, “I am hopeful we will win.”

Published on Monday, June 24, 2013 by Common Dreams
– Sarah Lazare, staff writer

Find this story at 24 June 2013

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Revealed: The Story Behind the “NATO 3” Domestic Terrorism Arrests

(Image: Jared Rodriguez / Truthout)Accused of domestic terrorism in the course of the Chicago NATO summit,
Brian Church, Brent Betterly and Jared Chase were arguably victims of police entrapment and the use of “Red Squad” tactics the Chicago police were formerly enjoined from employing.

When local and federal police conducted a no-knock, midnight search warrant raid in May 2012 at an apartment in Chicago’s Bridgeport neighborhood, it looked at first like a failed mission.

Yes, police seized a group of 11 political activists in Chicago to protest an international summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). But most of the arrestees were released without charge, and rumors soon began to swirl.

Police chained protesters to benches for 18 hours, one television station reported. Chicago Police Department (CPD) sources told Truthout the raid would unearth Molotov cocktails – homemade firebombs made of breakable glass bottles and gasoline. But they found beer brewing equipment instead.

“If anybody would like some,” one Bridgeport tenant told Truthout, “I would like to offer them a sip of my beer.”

Then things turned.

Of the 11 Bridgeport arrestees, it turned out, two were undercover cops. And beer-brewing equipment wasn’t the only thing the authorities found.

Mo and Nadia at Woodlawn (Photo Courtesy of Occupy Chicago)

They found four dark beer bottles “containing a clear liquid” implied to be gasoline. They found a pint can containing four presumably gas-soaked cloths. They found another pint can containing four glass vials each containing saturated cotton, along with four gas-soaked pieces of cloth, an empty gas can, a black tactical vest and a black gas mask. They found a compound bow and nine arrows.

They found two knives in sheaths, two swords in sheaths, and a set of handcuffs. They found a metal throwing star (a sharp, hand-held blade). They found a PVC pipe with a black flag attached. Authorities also found a printed photo of the female undercover officer who led SWAT teams to Bridgeport in the first place.

This litany of materials, police told Truthout, belonged to three men visiting Chicago from Florida to protest the NATO Summit – and, allegedly, to set parts of the Windy City aflame.

Dubbed the “NATO 3” in media reports, they face maximum sentences of 85 years in prison apiece if convicted, under a decade-old Illinois law that had never been used before. And that was without ever carrying out an attack.

Mug shots taken of the “NATO 3” after their arrests (From Left to Right: Brian Church, Brent Betterly, Jared Chase)

Their arrests may paint a picture of what federal authorities wish they had done to stop the bombings in Boston, or the Fort Hood shootings, or any actual terrorist attack carried out by suspects who had aroused suspicion from authorities.

Unlike the Boston bombers, the NATO 3 hadn’t set off any bombs prior to their arrests. Unlike the Fort Hood shooter, they hadn’t shot anyone. They hadn’t thrown molotov cocktails. They hadn’t even pressed dummy detonators, as was the case with five Cleveland activists in a similar domestic terrorism investigation last year.

They just ran their mouths. They just talked about revolution. And they went far enough into a conspiracy to elicit major charges.

To this day, more than a year after their arrest in Bridgeport, the NATO 3 are still sitting in Chicago’s Cook County Jail, awaiting their trial, which is set to begin on September 16, one day before the two-year anniversary of the Sept. 17, 2011, launch of Occupy Wall Street.

Their case is a big one. It’s the new face of US counterterrorism investigations – a template for pre-crime arrests, performed through entrapment by police – to stop supposedly dangerous political acts before they happen.

And if the “3” are convicted in September, it could set a troubling precedent far beyond the borders of Illinois.

Who are the NATO 3?

While Occupy Wall Street helped to ramp up the possibility for major protest action in cities such as Chicago, it also brought together young activists who would’ve never met otherwise. Case in point: Chase and Betterly.

The duo met in Washington DC at an Occupy protest. They were arrested, arm in arm, in front of the White House, while protesting the National Defense Authorization Act.

It wasn’t the first arrest for either man.

Years ago, when Chase was 18 and living with his folks in Keene, N.H., he was charged with “attempt to commit an assault and reckless endangerment after allegedly pulling a knife on another man,” according to the New Hampshire Union-Leader.

A month later, Chase received more charges, this time for first-degree assault and conduct after an accident, which earned him nine months in jail.

“In that incident, Chase was found guilty of hitting a man with a car after the two had a fist fight,” said the Union-Leader article. “The victim’s impact with the car damaged the windshield, but the man was not seriously injured. . . .The conduct after an accident charge was added because Chase drove off after striking the man.”

He spent six months in jail. He had trouble with drugs when he got out. He violated his probation three times and then eventually moved to Boston, where he stayed for years and worked as a cook at a P.F. Chang’s.

A photo from Jared Chase’s Facebook

Late last year, Chase left his life in Boston. A drifter, he headed to Rhode Island briefly and then to Washington, D.C.

After Chase and Betterly were arrested outside the White House, they headed toward Oakland Park, Florida, just north of Fort Lauderdale, where Betterly’s from, before heading to Miami.

Chase was arrested again as part of a group during Occupy Miami before heading off to Chicago. That group was found with bolt cutters, a baseball bat and a sledgehammer, but they were not charged.

The Miami New Times described Betterly, “with his good looks and dreadlocks,” as “a hippie who attended rainbow gatherings.” He had a criminal record in Florida, but nothing violent: Last September, he and a friend were drunk when they broke into a high school, did some after-hours swimming and broke a cafeteria window. Police picked them up. Betterly was released, but he still faces a pending burglary charge.

A photo from Brent Bettery’s Facebook

New Times reported that Betterly was known among those at Occupy Miami “for his creativity and commitment to fighting foreclosures,” while Chase was seen as more “enigmatic”: “The chain-smoker was a computer whiz who . . . spent days wandering around downtown and talking to homeless people.”

On March 14, 2012, Occupy Miami was raided by police, and Chase was there when it happened. It was depicted on Chase’s Facebook page, in fact, underneath a picture of a SWAT team outside an apartment complex housing members of Occupy Miami.

Church (aka “Sum Wun”) joked – ominously with the benefit of hindsight – that the raid was the result of a “terrorist meeting.”

Occupy’s Open Door for Infiltration: Enter “Mo” and “Nadia”

When it comes to protecting itself from prosecution, one of the Occupy movement’s truest merits – the inclusion of “the 99 percent” and acceptance of anyone willing to lend a hand – is also its fatal flaw.

CPD undercover officers began their investigation in February 2012 as part of a temporary 90-day assignment to monitor NATO protests. Undercover officers soon entered Occupy Chicago posing as activists and did so with ease.

Occupy Chicago organizer Matthew McLoughlin explained the hectic nature of preparations in the months leading up to the NATO Summit protests.

“Every day of the week . . . we had an action going on. So we were making sure that went off without a hitch,” he told us. “And then we had out-of-towners pouring in, so we had to take care of that

“We weren’t really prepared” to deal with undercover police officers, he continued.

That’s how two undercover officers, going by the names “Mo” and “Nadia,” would soon become the NATO 3’s downfall.

In early March, an undercover officer – a big man, a little over 6 feet tall, bearded and dark-featured, in his mid-30s with broad shoulders, wearing jeans, a black hoodie and a black winter cap – was first spotted by central organizers of the NATO Summit protests at a planning meeting.

He went by “Mo.”

A photo of “Mo,” the pseudonym for the undercover informant agent responsible for the entrapment-created arrests of the “NATO 3” and now two others taken by an activist and submitted to the National Lawyer’s Guild Chicago. (Photo Courtesy: National Lawyers Guild)

During small group introductions, Mo said he became an activist because he had been laid off from a job. “Shit blew up,” he said, and Occupy Chicago started. No further explanation was needed.

Mo would show up at a public Occupy event later in March with a woman who would always be by his side: a young woman who went by “Nadia Youkhana.”

Nadia was tall, with tanned skin. Some Occupy sources told Truthout she claimed to be Syrian. Many activists said she was charming and bubbly. They were attracted to her seeming genuine excitement to get involved with activism. If “Mo” was the brawn of the two-person team, “Nadia” was the brains.

Photo of “Nadia” released by Occupy Chicago

Nadia showed up alongside Mo at an Occupy General Assembly – a completely open meeting for anyone new to the movement – to introduce themselves, saying they were cousins. She talked with an Occupy Chicago organizer who oversaw a number of list-serves and who generally passed information about meetings to anyone who needed it.

Nadia seemingly saw this organizer as un-dangerous and useful; she kept in touch with him to monitor when various meetings were taking place and rallies were being planned, as well as to get email addresses of everyone involved in Occupy Chicago.

Mo and Nadia were on a 90-day temporary duty undercover assignment as part of CPD Field Intelligence Team 7150 (FIT 7150). The team was tasked with “attend[ing] Occupy Chicago and anarchist movement events for the purpose of observing and listening to reports of any planned criminal activity” in the run-up to the NATO Summit, according to pre-trial court documents.

Truthout visited the apartments of both Mo and Gloves, but both denied comment.

Woodlawn

The Woodlawn Mental Health Clinic on Chicago’s south side was one of six city-operated facilities scheduled for closure in April 2012. Occupy Chicago activists planned to protest on a daily basis.

Occupy Chicago activists link arms to form a human chain outside the occupied Woodlawn Clinic on the night of Thursday, April 12 2012. (Photo: Marcus Demery / Flickr)

At one of these protests in early April, 23 were arrested. Mo and Nadia thought a second protest – and an inevitable series of arrests – might cause some protesters to plan something violent, according to sources.

So when 10 protesters were arrested on April 23, Mo and Nadia were there.

“At the time, I couldn’t figure out why we were under such close surveillance this particular night,” recalled Rachel Unterman, press liaison for Occupy Chicago. “I thought they were overreacting to a few tents and a handful of expected arrests. Now I know that they had undercover officers in the field, which raised the stakes.”

The 10 spent the night in a Cook County Jail facility together. Some of them found “Mo” and “Nadia” to be a bit odd.

“When she walked into the police van was the first time I had ever seen her,” Christina Pillsbury told Truthout, a University of Chicago student who was arrested with Nadia that day. “It didn’t really make sense because I had seen everyone else arrested with me that day before, but I didn’t really have time to think about it at the time, either.”

Pillsbury recalls her being “really funny” and “really liking her at first.” Nadia also told Pillsbury and her fellow arrested activists “really intense stories about her sister’s mental illness.”

But she also recalls Nadia trying to rile up her and the other women arrested that day in jail. Pillsbury says Nadia started to “freak out” when the police were giving her stuff back to her and they only gave her one of her two cell phones – in hindsight, the two phones being another telltale sign that something was off, she noted.

“It seemed as if she was trying to get us in the whole ‘fuck the police’ mentality, but she was barking up the wrong tree,” noted Pillsbury. “We didn’t even do anything violent to be in jail in the first place; we just stood our ground across the street from Woodlawn in an act of nonviolent civil disobedience.”

Mo had told a story paralleling Nadia’s at Woodlawn Clinic prayer vigil earlier that day, shared by Mental Health Clinic activist Matt Ginsberg-Jaeckle. Mo said he had a “cousin struggling with mental health issues” and that was why he felt strongly about the events unfolding at Woodlawn, compelling him to take part in them.

Mo also played the violence game. While in lockup, he approached one of the arrested activists. “What’s our next step?” he asked Ginsberg-Jaeckle. “We need to step this up a notch.”

Another Woodlawn activist, James Arentz, locked up with Mo, recalled him saying he was once arrested for “violence,” as if to gauge if his compatriots in jail were also interested in participating in illegal violent acts.

Arentz said he showed little interest in taking this route, and it was a route he had never gone down before as a veteran, middle-aged activist and father. Mo soon lost interest in him after a round of intrusive questioning.

Roger Shuy, an emeritus professor of linguistics at Georgetown University, refers to tactics utilized in jail by Mo and Nadia as the “hit-and-run” strategy for undercover cops.

“If the target does not say anything that seems to point to his guilt, many undercover operators begin to ‘drop in’ hints about illegality, sometimes clear and sometimes not,” he writes in his book Creating Language Crimes: How Law Enforcement Uses (and Misuses) Language. “It is commonplace that when they drop these hints into the conversation and are unsure how their targets might react, they often quickly change the subject to something benign before they give up their turn.”

May Day, May Day

If anyone at the Chicago NATO Summit was going to “step this up a notch,” it was Jared Chase, Brent Betterly and Brian Church – the NATO 3.

In south Florida, Betterly and Church – court records reveal – made plans over Facebook, in private messages, to visit Chicago for NATO. That was April 19, the date the “conspiracy to commit an act of domestic terrorism” began, according to Illinois state prosecutors.

In those messages, Church said he wanted to “get on the front lines” of the protests. Betterly agreed, writing that the Chicago NATO “protests are gonna get ugly.” During that same interaction, Betterly asked if Chase would also make the trip to Chicago.

On April 24, Betterly discussed molotov cocktails with a female acquaintance on Facebook after asking that acquaintance to come to Chicago and then typing, “riot!!” Betterly responded: “u cant apologize after throwing a molotov cocktail.” Betterly wrote that he might “catch some charges” in Chicago.

Official accounts suggest the “NATO 3” domestic terrorism plot began on May 1, known by leftist activists as “May Day.” Chase, Betterly and Church were part of the “black bloc” for a large march planned for that day.

Betterly in blue jeans and blonde hair with bandana over his face, Chase on far right in all black and black bandana over face (Photo Courtesy of Occupy Chicago)

Black bloc is a protest tactic in which activists dress in all black, often wearing bandanas, ski masks and other clothing to conceal their faces and identities and to appear as one group in solidarity. On May Day, Nadia and Mo were there, posing as members of the bloc.

Photo obtained from video of May Day rally shot by member of Occupy Chicago. “Nadia” in white shoes, Church in red bandana, Chase to his right and Betterly to far right.

Occupy sources said Nadia was pushing for militant violence within the black bloc, which can be seen on a YouTube video, as well.

Church in red bandana, Nadia in white shoes and Mo to the right with anarchist black flag (Photo Courtesy of Occupy Chicago)

Later that night, Church told “Mo” and “Nadia” that he wanted to find “targets” for the NATO Summit. Occupy sources said Nadia actively attempted to provoke violence that night, asking people if they wanted to go out into the streets and light dumpsters on fire. That never panned out.

On May 2, Church met up with Mo and Nadia in Chicago’s financial district. According to court records, “Church immediately told the undercover officers to remove the batteries from their [cellphones] so that the conversations could not be subject to government eavesdropping.”

Church had come there with an assault vest he told Mo and Nadia he would like to fill with foam for more cushioning. On that day, he also allegedly asked Mo and Nadia where he could purchase a filter from an Army Plus store (aka a gas mask) and where he could buy three assault rifles, plus a long rifle.

Mo and Nadia said Church told them, “If a cop is going to be pointing an AR at me, I’ll be pointing one back at them.” He also said he wanted to make smoke bombs to throw during the NATO Summit and that he owned a bow and arrow that could shatter a window.

Church allegedly formulated a grand plan that day with Mo and Nadia to attack four police districts and destroy as many police vehicles as possible. He’d do the latter by bringing together groups to destroy police vehicles days before the NATO Summit. Church also said he wanted to “hit” a Chase Bank and shoot an arrow through Mayor Emanuel’s window.

“If everything goes according to plans, I am leaving right after NATO,” he allegedly told Mo and Nadia during this meeting. “The city doesn’t know what it’s in for, and after NATO, the city will never be the same,” he reportedly told Mo and Nadia.

On May 4, Brian Church and Jared Chase met with Mo and Nadia at a park in Chicago’s Bridgeport neighborhood. At this meeting, according CPD search warrant documents, they discussed destroying police vehicles parked in police parking lots during the NATO Summit to damage and disrupt their response to protesters.

Two days later, Mo and Nadia met with Chase and Church again to discuss using sling shots to destroy the windows of President Obama’s campaign headquarters. Church allegedly asked the two undercover officers where he could go to buy metal pipes to break windows.

On May 8, Mo and Nadia were invited into the Bridgeport apartment for the very first time.

While there, CPD search warrant documents allege, Brian Church invited them into a bedroom and showed them a bow and arrow with 10 arrows, two metal swords, one silver Chinese throwing star, two knives with brass knuckle handles, a black gas mask, knee/shin pads and arm pads. He also told Mo and Nadia he had a homemade mortar.

Chase allegedly asked the two undercover officers where he could buy cocaine or heroin.

On May 14, the use of molotov cocktails during the NATO Summit was first mentioned by Church to Mo and Nadia. According to CPD search warrant documents, Church also said at the May 14 meeting that he had built a mortar gun with PVC pipe and a piece of wood and that he had filled the mortar gun with bottle rockets, further noting that it was operational.

Church also told Mo and Nadia that they seemed like two “anarchists in a pod,” and he would like for them to travel with him to other states during his activist journey. Church allegedly offered them the opportunity to travel with him if they were willing to shoot a rifle, point it, and shoot someone with it.

On May 16, the day of the raid, Mo and Nadia met the “NATO 3” for a protest and convened at the Bridgeport apartment later that night, according to CPD search warrant documents.

Once inside, they discussed how to make and then constructed four molotov cocktails for use at the NATO Summit. Mo and Jared left for BP to buy the gasoline for the molotovs, the last necessary ingredient for the cocktails.

Truthout has obtained the video of Jared Chase purchasing the gasoline from the BP Station, published here from multiple angles for the first time.

“Church handed one of the officers a knife and advised him to cut a bandana in strips for use as fuses for the molotov cocktails,” a Feb. 15, 2013, court document states. “Betterly cautioned that gasoline should not be poured directly on the cloth; the cloth should be soaked in the bottles. Chase poured the gasoline into the bottles and then turned the bottles over so the strips could be soaked.”

While making the cocktails, Church allegedly asked Nadia if she were “ready to see a police officer on fire.” That’s when the police decided to act. That night, officers from the CPD and the FBI raided the Bridgeport apartment.

Nowhere in the search warrant – or in any of the hundreds of pages of discovery documents later made public – does the prosecution mention one pivotal point: Two aggressive undercover cops helped along – and possibly even incited – the plot.

Mapping the Chicago Activist Community’s “Human Terrain”

It should go without saying that the NATO 3 are not being represented by high-priced attorneys. They are, however, being represented at no charge by attorneys at the People’s Law Office of Chicago (PLO), which specializes in high-profile civil rights cases involving law enforcement.

On April 30, the office filed court papers arguing that under a recent consent decree – an agreement dissolved in 2009 that limited undercover police activities by the City’s notorious Red Squad, a unit that spied on the political and social activities of Chicagoans during the 1950s and 1960s – CPD’s undercover operation in the NATO 3 case would have been illegal.

“At its heart, the consent decree prohibited precisely the type of undercover activities that CPD engaged in here,” PLO argued. “[It] appears to be the broadest foray into undercover activities implicating the First Amendment.”

PLO also argued that the spying and entrapment attempts were motivated by the ideology of the activists, not an imminent threat to public safety.

“The state has acknowledged a . . . broader investigation of Occupy Chicago . . . and political organizing surrounding the NATO Summit,” the PLO stated in a court motion. “This large, overarching operation began by March 2012 and was . . . based in part by political affiliations and beliefs.”

The Booz Allen Hamilton Connection

Court records also show that members of the FBI’s Chicago Regional Computer Forensic Laboratory (RCFL) may be called to testify if the case goes to trial.

A domain name search for Chicago RCFL’s web site shows that it was registered by military and intelligence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH).

BAH is a major US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and US National Security Agency (NSA) contractor abroad. Former CIA Director R. James Woosley once served as BAH Vice President, while Director of National Intelligence James Clapper once served as a BAH executive and current BAH Vice Chairman John “Mike” McConnell held Clapper’s position under former President George W. Bush.

Edward Snowden – the NSA whistleblower who revealed classified NSA spy program to The Guardian and The Washington Post – was a contractor for BAH at the time of the leak.

Michael Hayden, the former head of the NSA and CIA, as well as the deputy director of National Intelligence has referred to BAH as a “Digital Blackwater,” a reference to Blackwater USA – now known as Academi – the “world’s most powerful mercenary army.”

“[BAH] is one of the NSA’s most important and trusted contractors. It’s involved in virtually every aspect of intelligence and surveillance,” writes investigative journalist Tim Shorrock in a recent article. “Among other secret projects, Booz was deeply involved in ‘Total Information Awareness,’ the controversial data-mining project run for the Bush administration.”

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Missed in Shorrock’s analysis: BAH also provides IT and logistical support for the Pentagon’s Human Terrain System and its Human Terrain Teams, which “map the human terrain” of communities abroad for the military and CIA.

A career New York cop, Chicago Police Department (CPD) superintendent Garry McCarthy is no stranger to the Human Terrain System.

It wasn’t long he after formally assumed the mantle of CPD superintendent in 2011 that McCarthy drew fire for having allowed a spy ring tasked to “map the human terrain” of Newark, N.J.,’s Islamic community to operate there, where he served as police chief before taking the position as CPD’s top dog.

McCarthy also served as an NYPD commander when the police set up spy rings before the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City and during “CIA on the Hudson,” the joint NYPD/CIA project that was set up and run by former CIA Deputy Director for Operations David Cohen to “map the human terrain” of New York City’s Islamic community.

Shortcomings of “Mapping Human Terrain”

The problem with “mapping the human terrain”: It relies on overly-simplistic stereotypes. Case in point: FBI Special Agent Maureen Mazzola.

Mazzola is designated in court records as one of the people the state of Illinois may call to testify if the “NATO 3” case goes to trial. She’s also infamous for an incident based on stereotypes that unfolded before the 2008 Republican National Convention (RNC).

In a nutshell, Mazzola attempted to recruit a University of Minnesota (U of M) student in spring 2008 to join the FBI’s ranks as an informant. Conned into the meeting by U of M’s police sergeant, the student was displeased and came to the press to tell his story.

“She told me that I had the perfect ‘look,'” recalled the student after the incident. “And that I had the perfect personality – they kept saying I was friendly and personable – for what they were looking for.”

Stereotypes were the name of the game for the FBI and Mazzola, as an account in the Minneapolis/St. Paul’s City Pages said.

“What they were looking for [was] someone to show up at ‘vegan potlucks’ throughout the Twin Cities and rub shoulders with RNC protesters, schmoozing his way into their inner circles, then reporting back to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, a partnership between multiple federal agencies and state and local law enforcement,” reads City Pages’ rare inside look into the recruitment of an informant.

The days leading up to the 2008 RNC saw the arrest of Scott DeMuth, an animal rights activist and member of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). His charges: an “animal enterprise terrorism” plot that took place in a University of Iowa lab dating back to 2004.

This fishing expedition was lead by Mazzola and ended with DeMuth pleading guilty and serving six months in jail.

“As Special Agent Maureen Mazzola testified to on the stand in Scott’s pre-trial hearing, the FBI used the pretext of this raid as a fishing expedition, searching Scott’s room for anything linking him to ‘criminal activities’ that fell well outside of the scope of the search warrant being executed,” his support committee explained. “In this process, Mazzola came across a journal that she mistakenly believed linked him to the 2004 ALF raid at the University of Iowa.”

Court documents for that case show that Mazzola – unsurprisingly, given the backdrop – was working with an informant leading up to DeMuth’s eventual arrest. Mazzola was one of the people the US government called to testify as a witness during the DeMuth trial.

One Man’s Terrorist, Another Man’s Language Criminal

Digging deeper, there’s also the question of “Why ’terrorism’?” Why not just leave the NATO 3’s charges at the several felony counts?

PLO tackled the issue of terrorism head-on.

PLO made the legal argument in Jan. 2013 that the language in Illinois’ terrorism statute may be overly broad and unconstitutional. Judge Wilson, though, denied this constitutional challenge two months later, saying the law under which the three were charged is constitutional on its face and as applied.

It all boils down to politics, and a May 2012 Chicago Tribune story demonstrates the political nature of the charges, which were decided on at the proverbial 11th hour the night before the May 19, 2012, bail bond proffer hearing.

“[Cook County Attorney General Anita] Alvarez and seven of her prosecutors spent Friday evening analyzing the statute and weighing whether their case rose to the level of domestic terrorism,” reported the Tribune. “It was a marathon meeting with lawyers reading the statute out loud at times. Others ran in and out of the room to look up case law on other potential charges, such as conspiracy to commit arson. After four hours of debate, Alvarez polled those in the room and had a clear consensus that the terrorism statutes offered the toughest penalties and sent the strongest message.”

As an important parallel, a 2009 Neo-Nazi and right-wing terrorism threat report done by the US Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) went unpublished and censored, showing the truly political nature of “terrorism” charges. The author of the report, a former DHS analyst, has asserted that he warned of the right-wing “terrorist” elements that fueled the 2012 attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin – and that his warnings were ignored.

Another example: In Boston, local police in conjunction with federal law enforcement, focused attention on the political activism of local Occupy activists at the same time they missed the actual threat posed by the Boston Marathon bombers.

Contentious political events are, in many ways, a trap set to capture those who even insinuate the wrong kind of political language – “creating language crimes” – as Shuy put it in his eponymous book.

“The persons wearing the undercover mike . . . begin their work with a distinct power advantage over those they talk with,” Shuy writes in his book. “In undercover conversations, when the targets think they are simply engaged in everyday conversations, they are less on alert and are frequently less careful about how they say things. The persons doing the taping, in contrast, have the power to decide when to tape, who to tape, when to start the taping, when to stop, and even how to slant the conversation to serve their own ends.”

Shuy refers to this as “manipulative seduction.”

“When being seduced,” Shuy adds, “the listener does not understand the hidden intent of the seducer.”

The overall message is clear: Whatever your political stripe in the United States, the authorities are watching. That’s no longer a conspiracy theory. It’s policy and now just a question of what the authorities do with that intelligence.

And that decision is by-and-large a political one.

If any case in the last decade has shown that reality, it’s the case of the NATO 3.

Their case revealed authorities watching anarchists and the Occupy movement – specifically designated as the reason for the creation of Field Intelligence Team 7150 – with an all-seeing eye.

These young men fit the stereotypical profile of what a homegrown terrorist is “supposed” to look like. They’re politically active and angry with their country’s direction, burdened with nothing to lose but their freedom, and maybe, their lives.

The CPD and state of Illinois would like you to believe that makes them dangerous – unhinged and ready to strike out and hurt people with impunity, at any moment.

But perhaps they weren’t. The burden of proof falls on the prosecutors to make the case that they were.

Steve Horn

Steve Horn is a freelance investigative journalist, and a researcher and writer at DeSmogBlog.
Matt Stroud

Matt Stroud is a contributing writer at tech website TheVerge.com, where he writes about policy and law. Follow him on Twitter@ssttrroouudd.

Friday, 21 June 2013 00:00
By Matt Stroud and Steve Horn, Truthout | Report

Find this story at 21 June 2013

© 2013 Truthout

‘NATO 3’ Near Trial: South Florida Men To Face Terrorism Charges In Chicago

After Brian Church completed a course in emergency medicine at Broward College, he told his mother he was headed to Chicago for hands-on experience he hoped would boost his chances of becoming a paramedic.

“He was very proud of the fact that he was helping set up the first-aid tents,” said Elizabeth Ennis of her son’s participation in the NATO summit protest movement.

It has been a year since Church and two others from South Florida arrived in the Windy City and were arrested in a raid of an apartment just before the May 2012 summit.

Prosecutors allege the trio — now known by a cadre of supporters as the “Nato 3” — planned to use Molotov cocktails to blow up political targets, including Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s home and President Barack Obama’s downtown re-election campaign headquarters last year.

Yet, with the terrorism trial set to begin Sept. 16, defense attorneys for the men, along with Church’s mother, are calling the charges absurd.

“The whole terrorism thing just blows my mind,” said Ennis, a physician’s assistant and former Pembroke Pines resident who now lives in Central Florida. “This is a kid who made sandwiches to hand out to the homeless.”

Church, 21, Brent Betterly, 25, of Oakland Park, and Jared Chase, 29, a New Hampshire man who had been living in Miami, each are charged in an 11-count indictment with conspiracy to commit terrorism, possession of explosives and attempted arson.

In Illinois, they remain in custody on $1.5 million bond.

Church’s lawyer, Michael Deutsch, tried to get the charges thrown out, arguing that the law passed by the Illinois Legislature in the wake of 911 and used only once before is unconstitutional and being used politically.

“This is an attempt to take the acts of young people who are talking about criminal vandalism and convert it into terrorism in order to chill all militant activity in protest,” Deutsch said.

In a March 27 ruling, County Judge Thaddeus Wilson upheld the statute, saying, “The concept of domestic terrorism is not any more remote in contemporary society than the ‘international terrorism’ U.S. citizens were exposed to in September 2001.”

Church, Betterly and Chase were active in South Florida’s Occupy movement. Betterly was a familiar face around Fort Lauderdale City Hall during a brief encampment that took place there in late 2011 and early 2012.

But when the local Occupy movement began to sputter, all three looked for action elsewhere, friends said.

“He had specifically gone up there [to Chicago] to be a participant,” Ennis said of her son. “He wanted to be part of a bigger cause. At 20 years old, we all want to be part of a bigger cause.”

In the months before he left for Chicago, Church dated Danielle Hiller, then a West Park High School senior. “He always told me he wanted to peacefully protest,” said Hiller, 19. “He never seemed violent. He was really into helping people.”

The government case relies on two informants, undercover police officers nicknamed Mo and Nadia, who infiltrated the group and recorded the men talking about the plots and making four Molotov cocktails that were recovered inside the apartment during the raid. According to prosecutors, police also found swords, a bow and arrows, a slingshot and knives.

In a filing in March, prosecutors said the three allegedly obtained or planned to obtain “other improvised explosive devices, napalm, instructions for producing a pipe bomb, instructions for making potassium nitrate, a mortar … assault rifles and a long rifle.”

The three also constructed a wooden shield with sharp metal screws protruding from its front and hid it in an alley, “where they intended to violently confront police officers” during the summit protests, the filing alleged.

Deutsch acknowledges that Molotov cocktails were found in the apartment. But, he said, they were made at the urging of the police agents.

“When [police] didn’t get them to do anything, they got them to make these Molotov cocktails, with their money and expertise, and created a crime that never would have occurred,” he said.

Ellis said she has visited her son in jail, and talks to him regularly.

“It is starting to sink in, the magnitude of this,” she said. “He wants to be a flight medic, but the FAA has revoked his student’s pilot’s license. Even if these charges get thrown out, he has fears of never getting a job as an EMT.”

Ennis said her son, who is housed apart from the general jail population in semi-isolation, spends his time reading.

“He has his good days and bad,” she said. “He tries not to let the gloom set in.”

Sun Sentinel | By Mike Clary Posted: 06/16/2013 10:11 am EDT | Updated: 06/17/2013 9:11 am EDT

Find this story at 17 June 2013

© 2013 the Sun Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, Fla.)

NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss: “Wir haben die Arbeit der Polizei gemacht”

Bis zuletzt hatte der baden-württembergische Verfassungsschutz versucht, seinen Auftritt zu verhindern – allerdings vergeblich: Vor dem Berliner NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss sagte nun ein ehemaliger V-Mann-Führer aus, dessen Quelle ihm Vertuschung vorwirft.

Wäre der Anlass nicht so furchtbar, man hätte laut auflachen können, als Rainer Oettinger am Montag im Saal 400 des Deutschen Bundestages hinter einem improvisierten Paravent sitzt, während der Öffentlichkeit Eintritt gewährt wird. Bis zuletzt hatte das baden-württembergische Landesamt für Verfassungsschutz versucht zu verhindern, dass Oettinger öffentlich vor dem Berliner NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss befragt wird. Doch die Abgeordneten blieben hartnäckig, bestanden auf Transparenz, zu viel ist in der Causa NSU noch immer im Verborgenen.

Oettinger heißt in Wirklichkeit anders, ist 60 Jahre und seit Januar im Ruhestand. Er war Mitarbeiter des Stuttgarter Verfassungsschutzes und schöpfte laut Behörde zwischen 2007 und 2011 eine Quelle namens “Krokus” ab: Petra S., die inzwischen im irischen Nirgendwo in einem garagengroßen Häuschen lebt – nach eigener Aussage voller Angst vor gewaltbereiten Neonazis, die auf Rache sinnen. Denn Petra S. behauptet, Oettinger im Mai 2007 – kurz nach Ermordung der Polizistin Michèle Kiesewetter – Hinweise auf eine Verstrickung mehrerer Rechtsextremisten in dem Fall gegeben zu haben.

V-Frau “Krokus” selbst war weder eine Rechtsextremistin noch Mitglied in einer politischen Partei oder Organisation, sie hatte zwei Informationsquellen, die sie anzapfte: ihre Freundin, die mit einem NPD-Funktionär liiert war, und eine rechtsextremistische Friseurin, die bei der Landtagswahl 2011 für die NPD kandidierte und bei der sie alle zwei Wochen auf dem Frisierstuhl saß. Die Friseurin Nelly R. habe auch Kontakt zu Freien Kräften gehabt und Skin-Konzerte besucht. Er habe sich von “Krokus” Informationen über Veranstaltungsorte, Treffpunkte und Termine sowie die Beschaffung von Publikationen, beispielsweise vom Grabert-Verlag, erhofft, sagt Oettinger vor dem Ausschuss.

“Die geborene Quelle”

Alles in allem sei “Krokus” eine “aufgeschlossene, intelligente, verschwiegene und zuverlässige” Quelle gewesen, um nicht zu sagen: “die geborene Quelle”. Das belegen auch die Akten, die dem NSU-Untersuchungsausschuss Ende Mai geschickt wurden und die dem SPIEGEL vorliegen. Die V-Frau wurde intern stetig besser beurteilt, von Glaubwürdigkeitsstufe F bis hinauf zur zweitbesten Bewertung B.

Er habe die Informationen meist prompt “materiell umgesetzt”, wie es bei den Verfassungsschützern heiße, sagt Oettinger. Selbst solche wie den Besuch in der Wohnung der rechtextremistischen Friseurin nach dem Haareschneiden, in der sie stolz eine Hitler-Büste und andere Devotionalien präsentierte. Aber alles in allem sei “extrem wenig rübergekommen”.

Krokus selbst muss es anders gesehen haben. “Ich tue ja nicht so viel für Sie, ich würde meine Arbeit gern intensivieren”, soll sie Oettinger vorgeschlagen und ihre Dienste auch für Recherchen im Linksextremismus angeboten haben. “Sie erweiterte also ihr Repertoire?”, hakt Ausschussvorsitzender Sebastian Edathy süffisant nach. Heraus kamen Informationen wie diese im August 2008: “Linkspartei will wie die CDU für Wahlkampf T-Shirts drucken.”

V-Frau soll sich krass gewandelt haben

Als sich “Krokus” in einen vorbestraften Kriminellen verliebt habe, der als Waffennarr gilt, für die IRA gekämpft und sich früher Zypern und der Türkei als Spion angeboten haben will, habe sie allerdings einen “krassen Persönlichkeitswandel” vollzogen, sagt der ehemalige Verfassungsschützer. So sehr, dass er die Zusammenarbeit im Februar 2011 schleunigst beendet habe. “Sie war wie eine Marionette von ihm. Wir merkten, diese Frau ist nicht mehr bei Sinnen”, konstatiert Oettinger. Eine Erfahrung, die auch einige Ausschussmitglieder in den vergangenen Wochen und Monaten gemacht und “wirre Mails” bekommen haben, wie einige sagen.

Ob er ihre Meinung teile, dass es sich bei V-Frau “Krokus” um die Kategorie “Spinner” handele, fragt SPD-Ausschussmitglied Eva Högl den pensionierten V-Mann-Führer. Das könne er “voll und ganz unterschreiben”, sagt Oettinger, müsse aber sagen: Bis sie “die Inkarnation des Bösen” – nämlich den Lebensgefährten – kennengelernt und dem Verfassungsschutz gedient habe, sei sie eine “gute Quelle” gewesen.

Petra S. bleibt jedoch bei ihrer Version: Die Friseurin habe ihr im Frühjahr 2007 bei einem Salonbesuch berichtet, Rechtsextremisten würden über eine Krankenschwester den zum damaligen Zeitpunkt schwer verletzten Kollegen der getöteten Polizistin Kiesewetter ausspähen. Sie wollten demnach herausbekommen, wann er aufwache und ob er sich an etwas erinnere. Wenn dem so sei, werde unter den Rechtsextremisten überlegt, “ob etwas zu tun sei”.

“Krokus” wirft dem Geheimdienst Vertuschung vor

Die Information, sagte “Krokus” dem SPIEGEL, habe sie unmittelbar an den Verfassungsschützer Oettinger weitergegeben. Mehrere Namen bekannter Neonazis will sie dabei genannt haben. Oettinger jedoch habe sie aufgefordert, sich aus der Sache herauszuhalten, und sie eindringlich daran erinnert, dass sie eine Geheimhaltungsverpflichtung unterschrieben habe.

In den umfangreichen “Krokus”-Akten findet sich allerdings zum fraglichen Zeitpunkt kein Hinweis auf eine entsprechende Quellen-Information. Folgt man dem Dossier, wäre das auch unmöglich. Nach Aktenlage nämlich wurde “Krokus” erst von Juni oder Juli 2007 an als Quelle des Landesamts geführt – mithin zwei oder drei Monate nach dem Mordanschlag auf die beiden Polizisten. “Krokus” dagegen schwört, seit Herbst 2006 regelmäßig an Oettinger berichtet zu haben, und wirft dem Geheimdienst Vertuschung vor.

Wenn eine “Information dieser Art” an ihn herangetragen worden wäre, hätte es ihn schon damals – nicht erst mit dem Wissen heute – “elektrisiert”, sagt Oettinger. Er sei selbst Polizist gewesen, und solch ein Hinweis hätte bedeutet, dass ein Kollege gefährdet sei. “So eine Information gab es nicht einmal ansatzweise.”

“Untersuchungsausschuss hat Arbeit der Polizei gemacht”

Der Unmut der Ausschussmitglieder über das Landeskriminalamt Baden-Württemberg (LKA) war groß am Montag. “Es steht nicht Aussage gegen Aussage”, wetterte Grünen-Obmann Wolfgang Wieland nach der Zeugenvernehmung. “Frau ‘Krokus’ sagt heute hü und morgen hott, je nachdem wie eng sie mit ihrem Lebensgefährten liiert ist.”

Die Vernehmung habe leider nicht weitergeholfen, sagte SPD-Obfrau Högl. Oettinger sei ein glaubwürdiger Zeuge, man hätte sich die Zeit sparen können, wenn das LKA ihn vernommen hätte. “Der Untersuchungsausschuss hat heute die Arbeit der Polizei gemacht”, fasste es CDU-Obmann Clemens Binninger zusammen. “Nicht, weil sie nicht wollte, sondern weil sie nicht durfte!”

Ermittler des LKA hatten nicht nur versucht, das Gremium von einer Befragung abzubringen, sondern auch verlautbaren lassen, dass es aus rechtlichen Gründen nicht möglich gewesen sei, den V-Mann-Führer selbst zu vernehmen.

24. Juni 2013, 19:38 Uhr
Von Julia Jüttner und Jörg Schindler, Berlin

Find this story at 24 June 2013

© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2013

Nato-Geheimarmeen: Bundesregierung überprüft Einleitung eines Ermittlungsverfahrens

Staatsminister Eckhard von Klaeden bestätigt Auflösung deutscher Gladio-Einheiten im September 1991

Nun ist auch die Bundesregierung auf den Plan gerufen: Die Vorwürfe des Duisburger Historikers Andreas Kramer, wonach der Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) an Anschlägen auf Strommasten in Luxemburg beteiligt war (Stay Behind – Agenten sterben einsam ), werden derzeit auf Veranlassung der Bundesregierung überprüft.

Das geht aus einer Antwort von Staatsminister Eckhard von Klaeden (CDU) hervor, die der Bundestagsabgeordnete der Linkspartei, Andrej Hunko, auf seiner Internetseite veröffentlicht hat. Hunko wollte im April wissen, ob die Bundesregierung über Details zur Beteiligung des BND an den Anschlägen in Luxemburg vor beinahe 30 Jahren verfügt und welche Anstrengungen vonseiten der Bundesregierung unternommen wurden, um die Verwicklung deutscher Gladio-Einheiten in mögliche weitere Anschläge aufzuklären.

Klaeden ließ verlauten, dass “eine Prüfung der einschlägigen Unterlagen … bislang keine Hinweise ergeben (hat), die die … angesprochenen Sachverhalte bestätigen könnten”. Gleichzeitig erklärte Klaeden, dass dessen ungeachtet, “die Bundesregierung eine weitere Prüfung veranlasst” habe, “unter anderen die Prüfung, ob ein Ermittlungsverfahren einzuleiten ist”. Klaeden sagte außerdem zur Existenz der deutschen Gladio-Einheiten: “Infolge der weltpolitischen Veränderungen hat der Bundesnachrichtendienst in Abstimmung mit seinen alliierten Partnern zum Ende des 3. Quartals 1991 die Stay-behind-Organisation vollständig aufgelöst.” Anzeige

Der Schweizer Historiker und Friedensforscher Daniele Ganser, der intensiv zu den Geheimarmeen der Nato geforscht hat, sagte gegenüber Telepolis, dass sich Deutschland sehr schwer tue, einer Aufarbeitung des Kapitels Gladio im eigenen Land zu stellen.

In Deutschland hat man versucht, die Gladio-Forschung zu verhindern, aber das wird nicht gelingen, das Thema ist zu wichtig, gerade auch wegen den vermuteten Verbindungen zum Anschlag in München von 1980.
Daniele Ganser

Ganser erklärte, dass es es in Deutschland zunächst nur hinter verschlossenen Türen, im November 1990, eine Bestätigung der Stay-behind-Strukturen gab:

“Aber in der Öffentlichkeit log man die Bevölkerung an”, so Ganser weiter. Am 30. November 1990 habe Staatsminister Lutz Stavenhagen im Namen der Regierung Kohl gesagt, dass es Gladio-Einheiten in Deutschland nie gab. “Das war eine glatte Lüge. Kohl wollte vor den ersten gesamtdeutschen Wahlen keinen Geheimdienstskandal.”

Bislang ist es nicht einfach, die Glaubwürdigkeit Kramers einzuschätzen. Seine Äußerungen zum Anschlag auf das Münchner Oktoberfest 1980 könnten, wenn sie sich als richtig herausstellen, zu einem Staatsskandal führen (BND und Gladio in Oktoberfestattentat verwickelt?).

Marcus Klöckner 09.05.2013

Find this story at 9 May 2013

Dossier Von Nato-Geheimarmeen, Geheimdiensten und Terroranschlägen Gladio, Stay behind und andere Machenschaften

Copyright © 2013 Heise Zeitschriften Verlag

«Es war Nato gegen Nato»

Im Luxemburger Jahrhundert-Prozess zu den Bombenattentaten in den 80er-Jahren sagte Andreas Kramer am Dienstag aus, der in einer eidesstaatlichen Erklärung behauptete, sein Vater habe als Geheimdienst-Mitarbeiter die Anschläge in Luxemburg (und auch der Schweiz) koordiniert. Claude Karger, Chefredaktor des Luxemburger «Journal», begleitet den Prozess.

Der Historiker Andreas Kramer (rechts) unterhält sich mit Verteidiger Gaston Vogel in einer Prozesspause. (Bild: Pierre Matgé/Editpress)

Der «Stay Behind»-Leiter des Bundesnachrichtendiensts, Johannes Kramer alias «Cello» stecke hinter den Bombenattentaten im Grossherzogtum, die mithilfe von BND- und MI6-Agenten und zehn Luxemburger Unterstützern, die wiederum eigene Helfer angeheuert hätten, verübt wurden. Das sagte gestern sein Sohn, Andreas Kramer, unter Eid vor Gericht (siehe dazu den Artikel der TagesWoche «Der Sohn des Agenten»). Kramer Junior hatte bereits am 13. März eine eidesstattliche Erklärung abgegeben. Am 18. Prozesstag im «Bommeleeër»-Prozess gab er gestern ausführlich und detailliert Auskunft über die Informationen, die ihm sein im vergangenen November verstorbener Vater über Jahre mitgeteilt hat.

Dieser habe ihm mit dem Tod gedroht, falls er mit seinem Wissen an die Öffentlichkeit gehen sollte. Kramer Junior soll bei den Gesprächen auch erfahren haben, dass sein Vater, der ihn als «Stay Behind»-Agent habe aufbauen wollen, unter anderem auch verantwortlich für das blutige Attentat 1980 auf dem Münchner Oktoberfest (13 Tote und 211 zum Teil schwer Verletzte) war. Auf die Frage der vorsitzenden Richterin Sylvie Conter, weshalb er nicht mit den Informationen an deutsche Behörden gegangen sei, drückte der Zeuge sein Misstrauen gegenüber der deutschen Justiz aus, die im Fall München gar nicht weiter ermitteln wolle.
Auch in Anschläge in Italien, München und Belgien verwickelt

Die Attentate in Italien, in München und in Belgien seien Teil eines Beschlusses auf höchstem Nato-Niveau gewesen, genauer gesagt im «Allied Clandestine Committee», in das auch Luxemburg mit eingebunden war.

Das ACC wurde damals von Kramer Seniors direktem Vorgesetzten, dem deutschen General Leopold Chalupa, dem damaligen Oberbefehlshaber der Alliierten Streitkräfte Euro Mitte (CENTAG) geführt. Der Luxemburger «Service de Renseignement» sei direkt in die Befehlskette eingebunden gewesen. Als Koordinator verschiedener Operationen mit Geheimdiensten aus Deutschland, Grossbritannien und dem Benelux-Raum habe Kramer Senior sehr wohl Kontakt mit dem damaligen Geheimdienstchef Charles-Hoffmann gehabt, auch wenn dieser das abstreite, so sein Sohn vor Gericht.

Der auch dabei bleibt, dass Hoffmanns «Stay Behind»-Truppe für sämtliche Sprengstoffdiebstähle in den Jahren 1984 bis 1985 verantwortlich war. Der Luxemburger SB soll übrigens nicht nur – wie offiziell immer behauptet wird – aus Funkern und Helfern bestanden haben, sondern auch eine «Angriffsgruppe», für die es einen speziellen Operationsleiter gab. Hoffmann habe die Gruppen strikt voneinander abgeschottet. Die Eskalation der Aktion in Luxemburg habe allerdings sein Vater betrieben, am Luxemburger Geheimdienstchef vorbei und auch ohne seinen Vorgesetzten Chalupa ins Bild zu setzen. Kramer Junior sagte, dass von deutscher, respektive Alliierter Seite etwa 40 Männer an den Anschlägen beteiligt waren – ausser an jenem in den Kasematten, das von «Mitläufern» verübt worden sei.
«Nützliche Idioten»

In wechselnden Gruppen. Jedesmal drei bis vier Agenten hätten sich nach Luxemburg begeben und seien dort von den von Kramer angeworbenen «Kontakten», die über die notwendigen Ortskenntnisse verfügten, begleitet worden. Namen habe sein Vater ihm nicht genannt, so der Zeuge, lediglich der Name Geiben sei gefallen. Ausserdem habe Kramer Senior gesagt, dass Leute aus der Gendarmerie rekrutiert wurden, insbesondere gute Motorradfahrer. Als «nützliche Idioten» habe Kramer Senior diese Helfer bezeichnet.

Von einem Motorrad soll übrigens auch der Sprengsatz beim EG-Gipfel auf Kirchberg im Dezember 1985 abgeworfen worden sein. Die Sprengung des Wochenendhauses in Bourscheid im April 1985 soll übrigens ein Testlauf für die Kramer-Agenten gewesen sein, die danach Cegedel-Anlagen massiv ins Visier nahmen. Übrigens: Johannes Kramer selbst habe die Sprengfalle in Asselscheuer konzipiert und mit installiert. Eigenhändig habe er sogar drei der Erpresserbriefe an die Cegedel selbst geschrieben. Andreas Kramer hinterliess gestern eine DNA-Probe bei den Ermittlern, um sie mit Spuren zu vergleichen, die auf den Schreiben gefunden wurden.

Zurück zu Charles Hoffmann: Der habe als Geheimdienstchef die Anschläge natürlich nicht akzeptieren können. Schliesslich trug er zum Teil die Verantwortung für die Sicherheit des Landes. Also habe er sich an CIA und FBI gewandt, in der Hoffnung, dass die Amerikaner dem Spuk eine Ende machen indem sie auf höchster Nato-Ebene intervenieren. «Es war Nato gegen Nato», fasste Andreas Kramer die Lage zusammen. «Die CIA war Hoffmanns einzige Chance, sich selbst zu schützen», sagt Kramer. Zwei Ermittler des FBI seien seinem Vater und dessen Einsatztruppe damals eng auf den Fersen gewesen.
«Mit Hand und Fuss»

1986 wurde Luxemburg aus dem Nato-Spannungsprogramm rausgenommen, deshalb hätten die Anschlagsserie plötzlich aufgehört. «Mein Vater wusste, dass mit Ermittlungen in der «Bommeleeër»-Affäre zu rechnen sei», sagt Andreas Kramer. Der BND-Agent sei übrigens bestens über den Stand der Ermittlungen in Luxemburg informiert gewesen. Auch lange nachdem er aus dem offiziellen Dienst ausgeschieden war. Anfang 2007 habe er seinem Sohn bereits anvertraut, dass die beiden angeklagten Ex-Gendarmen Marc Scheer und Jos Wilmes nichts mit den Bombenanschlägen zu tun hatten.

Zu dem Zeitpunkt wusste die Öffentlichkeit hierzulande noch nicht, dass die beiden zusehends ins Visier der Fahnder gerieten. Wo sein Vater die Informationen her hat, wusste Andreas Kramer gestern nicht zu sagen. Kramer Senior hatte beim Verschwinden zahlreicher Beweisstücke offenbar seine Finger im Spiel. Diese, die, wie beim Prozess zu hören war, nur sehr ungenügend gesichert waren, habe er mit Unterstützung von SREL-Chef Hoffmann verschwinden lassen. Der keine Wahl gehabt habe, als mit anzupacken, die ganze Angelegenheit unter den Teppich zu kehren. Hoffmann hat in einem Interview bereits bestritten, dass er irgendetwas mit Johannes Kramer zu tun hatte und dass der Geheimdienst in die Bombenanschläge verwickelt war.

Das Gericht überlegte gestern, ob Charles Hoffmann nicht sehr zeitnah zu den Aussagen von Andreas Kramer gehört werden sollte. Der Zeuge wird darum auch heute Mittwoch noch vor Gericht stehen. Der beigeordnete Staatsanwalt Georges Oswald hätte gerne noch präzisere Informationen zu einzelnen Punkten, die von Kramer angesprochen wurden. Seine Aussage dass er in drei Stunden zuviel «generelles Blabla» gehört habe, sorgte sowohl beim Zeugen selbst, als auch bei der Verteidigung für energische Reaktionen. «Die drei letzten Stunden waren die ersten drei, in der mit Kopf und Fuss über «Stay Behind» gesprochen wurde», hielt Me Gaston Vogel entgegen. Die Ermittlungen seien trotz vieler Indizien nie in diese Richtung weiter getrieben worden.

Verteidigung zitiert aus Top-Secret-Dokumenten

Die «Top Secret»-Dokumente vom Mai, respektive September 1985, die die Verteidigung gestern vorbrachte, tragen die Unterschrift des damaligen Premiers Jacques Santer. Der genehmigte in den 1980ern eine Reihe von Übungen von Geheimdienstagenten mit «services clandestins» aus Belgien, Frankreich und Deutschland. Die Rede geht klar und deutlich von «Exercices Stay Behind» «dans le cadre de l‘instruction pratique des agents SB». Die Missionen: «diverses opérations d‘infiltration et d‘exfiltration de matériel et de personnel par la voie aérienne aussi bien que par la voie terrestre». Nicht nur ein Indiz dafür, dass hinter dem offiziell als «schlafendes» Funker- und Schleuser-Netzwerk dargestellten geheimen Netzwerk viel mehr steckt. Sondern vor allem dass Parlament und Öffentlichkeit in diesem Zusammenhang offenbar die volle Wahrheit vorenthalten wurde. Am 14. November 1990 trat Jacques Santer vor das Parlament mit folgender Aussage nachdem in ganz Europa «Stay Behind»-Netzwerke : «Je dois vous dire que j‘ai été aussi surpris que le Ministre belge d‘apprendre les activités de ce réseau qui ont défrayé le public et je ne crois pas qu‘un autre membre du Gouvernement en ait eu connaissance». Dabei unterschrieb der Premier regelmässig Genehmigungen für SB-Missionen!

10.4.2013, 11:31 Uhr

Find this story at 10 April 2013

Copyright © 2013 tageswoche.ch

BND und Gladio in Oktoberfestattentat verwickelt?

Duisburger Historiker Andrea Kramer behauptet, sein Vater sei für den Anschlag mit verantwortlich gewesen

Sagt Andreas Kramer die Wahrheit? War sein Vater für das Attentat auf dem Münchner Oktoberfest aus dem Jahr 1980 verantwortlich? Wenn es stimmt, was der Duisburger Historiker derzeit erzählt, dann steht der Bundesrepublik ein gewaltiger Skandal bevor. Telepolis berichtete bereits ausführlich über Kramer und seine Rolle in dem derzeit in Luxemburg stattfindenden Bommeleeër-Prozess (Bombenleger), bei dem zwei ehemalige Polizisten, die Mitglieder einer Spezialeinheit der Luxemburger Polizei waren, angeklagt sind (Stay Behind – Agenten sterben einsam, BND-Schattenmann Kramer in tödlicher Mission?). Ihnen wird zur Last gelegt für diverse Anschläge auf Infrastruktureinrichtungen, die vor beinahe 30 Jahren in Luxemburg verübt worden sind, verantwortlich zu sein.

Was zunächst lediglich nach einem inner-luxemburgischen Fall aussieht, hat sich schnell zu einem Prozess entwickelt, in dem das dunkle Kapitel der NATO-Geheimarmeen, die unter dem Namen Gladio oder Stay Behind bekannt wurden (Der lange Arm von Gladio und das Eingeständnis eines Bild-Reporters), neu in das Licht der Öffentlichkeit rückt.

Kramer, der immerhin unter Eid in Luxemburg ausgesagt hat, dass sein Vater, der Offizier der Bundeswehr, Mitarbeiter des Bundesnachrichtendienstes (BND) und dazu noch in in das Netzwerk der NATO-Geheimarmeen eingebunden war, für das Attentat auf das Münchner Oktoberfest verantwortlich sei, rückt nun auch in das Interesse größerer deutscher Medien.

In einem ausführlichen Interview vom vergangenen Sonntag in der Münchner Abendzeitung und in einem weiteren Interview in der taz von heute schildert Kramer detailliert den Hergang des Oktoberfestattentats aus seiner Sicht.

Die offizielle Darstellung, an der es ohnehin genügend Zweifel gibt, ist ein Märchen. Der Terrorakt war eine gezielte und lange vorbereitete Aktion des Bundesnachrichtendienstes, für den mein Vater gearbeitet hat und in dessen Auftrag er auch gehandelt hat.

Kramer beschreibt weiter, wie sein Vater zusammen mit dem angeblich für das Attentat allein verantwortlichen Gundolf Köhler, der bei dem Anschlag selbst ums Leben kam, die Bombe bei sich zuhause in der Garage gebaut habe.

Und Kramer weiter: “Das geschah nicht nur mit Billigung, sondern im Auftrag höchster Militär- und Geheimdienstkreise.” Anzeige

Mit Kramers Vorstoß in die Medienöffentlichkeit gewinnen die Vermutungen, wonach Köhler eben nicht Einzeltäter war, wie es in den offiziellen Berichten immer wieder dargestellt wurde, neuen Auftrieb. Seit vielen Jahren wird vermutet, dass Köhler den Anschlag nur mit Unterstützung von Hintermännern ausführen konnte. (Eine Vielzahl von Links zu den Zweifel rund um das Oktoberfestattentat findet sich hier).

Mit Kramers Aussagen steht nun erstmalig, neben der offiziellen Version, eine in sich kohärente Schilderung der Hintergründe des Oktoberfestattentats im Raum, in der Planung, Motiv und Täter genau genannt werden. Berliner Filmemacher haben in den vergangenen Wochen einen Beitrag für 3Sat Kulturzeit zum Prozess in Luxemburg ausgearbeitet , der heute Abend im Fernsehen gesendet wird und in dem auch Kramer zu Wort kommt . .

Kramer: Das passt sehr gut zusammen. Die Gladio-Truppen bestanden zu einem erheblichen Teil aus Neonazis und Rechtsextremisten. Gundolf Köhler, der Bombenleger von München und in der rechtsradikalen Szene eng vernetzt, war von meinem Vater angeworben worden. Er hat sich mehrmals mit ihm an seinem Wohnort in Donaueschingen getroffen, er hat die Komponenten für die Bombe besorgt, er hat sie zusammen mit Gundolf Köhler und einigen anderen Geheimdienstmitarbeitern gebaut.

Ihr Vater hat die Bombe gebaut? Und er hat auch gewusst, wofür sie eingesetzt werden sollte?

Kramer: Ja. Die Vorbereitungen für den Anschlag haben eineinhalb Jahre gedauert. Genau genommen wurden in einer Garage in Donaueschingen sogar drei Bomben gebaut. Eine wurde bei einem Test gezündet, eine andere in München verwendet. Was mit der dritten Bombe geschah, weiß ich nicht.

Und das geschah mit Billigung des Bundesnachrichtendienstes? Oder handelte Ihr Vater nach eigener Überzeugung abseits der Befehlskette?

Kramer: Das geschah nicht nur mit Billigung, sondern im Auftrag höchster Militär- und Geheimdienstkreise. Gladio war ja eine Organisation, die von der Nato eingefädelt worden war.

Marcus Klöckner 07.05.2013

Find this story at 7 May 2013

Copyright © 2013 Heise Zeitschriften Verlag

PsyOps in Luxemburg – welche Rolle spielte der BND? Die vorgetäuschten Terroranschläge bringen die Geheimdienste in Verlegenheit

Die eidesstattliche, vor einem Luxemburger Notar abgegebene Versicherung des deutschen Historikers Andreas Kramer, der über die geheimdienstliche Tätigkeit seines verstorbenen Vaters berichtet, ist inzwischen online veröffentlicht worden. Johannes Karl Kramer, vormaliger Soldat zuletzt im Range eines Hauptmanns im Verteidigungsministerium, war auch hochrangiger Agent des BND gewesen. Seinem Sohn zufolge war Kramer Operationsleiter von GLADIO/Stay Behind und koordinierte Einsätze in Deutschland, den Benelux-Staaten und der „neutralen“ Schweiz. Über Kramers Schreibtisch sollen die Bombenleger-Aktionen koordiniert worden sein. Zweck der Operationen waren vordergründig Übungen für den Fall einer sowjetischen Invasion, konkret aber dienten sie zur psychologischen Kriegsführung in Friedenszeiten. So sollte die eigene Bevölkerung terrorisiert werden, um sie hierdurch auf einen Rechtsruck gegen die vermeintlichen Gegner im linken Spektrum einzuschwören.

Kramer soll alle derartigen Aktionen mit dem späteren Chef des Luxemburger Geheimdienstes SREL, Charles Hoffmann, abgestimmt haben, der das Personal ausgesucht habe. Dieser soll in den 1970er Jahren an einem noch heute existenten NATO-Objekt in Sardinien für klandestine Spezialeinsätze ausgebildet worden sein. Hoffmann, der die Vorwürfe zurückweist, soll Gründungsmitglied des Gesprächskreis Nachrichtendienste in Deutschland e.V. sein, in dem u.a. Geheimdienst-Veteranen der Öffentlichkeit bei der Interpretation der Realität behilflich sein wollen. Vor der 2003 erfolgten Gründung dieses Clubs der Spionage-Opas besorgte derartige Propaganda das damalige „Institut für Terrorismusforschung und Sicherheitspolitik“, das der umstrittene Verfassungsschützer Hans Josef Horchem aufgezogen hatte. Von Anfang an dabei war der als Journalist posierende BND-Agent Wilhelm Dietl. Auch dieses Institut, das zu RAF-Zeiten die Presse mit hauseigenen „Terrorismus-Experten“ versorgte, wurde ebenfalls 2003 neugegründet, um nunmehr der Welt vom islamischen Terror zu künden.

Die Sekretärin des BND-Strategen Kramer hatte in den 1970er Jahren tragische Berühmtheit erlangt. Es handelte sich um die rechtsgerichtete Heidrun Hofer, die von einem vermeintlich deutschen „Hans Puschke“ verführt wurde, der sie scheinbar für eine in Südamerika angesiedelte Alt-Nazi-Organisation anwarb. Tatsächlich allerdings war „Puschke“ der KGB-General Jurij Ivanowitsch Drosdow. Nach ihrer Enttarnung 1976 überlebte Hofer einen Suizidversuch. Doch auch Kramer soll nach Aussage seines Sohnes seit 1973 Doppelagent gewesen sein und an Moskau berichtet haben. Dies bedeutet nichts weniger, als dass das bis heute streng geheime GLADIO-Netzwerk auf hoher Ebene verraten worden war. Die Saboteure wären im Ernstfall daher sabotiert gewesen.

Nachdem die geheimnisvollen Bombenanschläge, die seinerzeit Kommunisten und „Ökoterroristen“ in Misskredit brachten, nunmehr NATO-Geheimagenten zugeschrieben werden, bietet sich nun ein praktischer Sündenbock an. Im gestrigen Prozesstag, den das Luxemburger Wort protokollierte, wurde der einstige Waffenmeister der Luxemburger Polizei, Henri Flammang, für die übliche Rolle eines „Verwirrten“ gehandelt. Flammang soll krankhafter Waffennarr gewesen sein, der sogar sichergestellte Tatwaffen aus emotionalen Gründen nicht zerstören wollte. Bei Hausdurchsuchungen seien bei Flammang 434 Schusswaffen und über 70 kg Sprengstoff gefunden worden. Flammang soll unter wahnhaften Angstvorstellungen vor einer sowjetischen Invasion gelitten haben und sei vom Luxemburger Geheimdienst SREL als Agent angeworben worden. Flammang starb nicht durch die Hand eines Rotarmisten, sondern 1995 durch die eigene. Im Prozess wurde am Montag von einem angeblichen Abschiedsbrief gesprochen, in welchem sich Flammang als der Bombenleger zu erkennen gegeben habe. Das angebliche Dokument liegt jedoch bislang nicht vor.

Zeugenaussagen berichten von vier Tätern. In Verdacht stehen neben den beiden angeklagten Polizisten und dem verstorbenen Waffenmeister Flammang der Gründer der Spezialeinheit BMG Ben Geiben, dessen verstorbener Stellvertreter Jos Steil – sowie ein Herr namens Jean Nassau, den Zeugen am Tatort gesehen haben wollen. Herr Nassau war vom britischen Militär ausgebildet worden und brachte es in der Luxemburger Armee zum Rang eines Capitaine. Geboren wurde Herr Nassau als Jean Félix Marie Guillaume Prinz von Luxemburg, verzichtete jedoch 1986 auf sein Anrecht auf die Thronfolge.

Markus Kompa

19 – 03 – 2013

Find this story at 19 March 2013

Copyright © 2013 Heise Zeitschriften Verlag

Luxemburg: Deutscher BND-Mann bei Stay Behind Terroranschlägen involviert

Hinter Bombenattentaten in Luxemburg, welche mithilfe von BND- und MI6-Agenten und zehn luxemburgischen Unterstützern vollzogen wurden, steckt Medienberichten zufolge der Stay-Behind-Leiter des Bundesnachrichtendienstes, Johannes Kramer (Alias Cello). Die zehn luxemburgischen Unterstützer sollen demnach eigens weitere Helfer rekrutiert haben. Der Sohn von Johannes Kramer, Andreas, hatte dies unter Eid vor Gericht ausgesagt. Eine eidesstattliche Erklärung wurde bereits am 13. März dieses Jahres abgegeben. Der Sohn von Kramer gab zu verstehen, dass er sein Wissen nicht hätte an die Öffentlichkeit bringen dürfen, da der Vater ihm mit dem Tode gedroht hätte. Der Stay-Behind-Leiter des Bundesnachrichtendiensts, Johannes Kramer, war im November vergangenen Jahres verstorben. Auch hätte sein unter Eid vor Gericht aussagender Sohn in Gesprächen erfahren, dass sein Vater für das blutige Attentat 1980 auf dem Münchner Oktoberfest verantwortlich gewesen war. Kramer Senior wollte seinen Sohn demnach auch als Agenten für das Stay-Behind-Netzwerk anwerben. Auf die Frage vom Gericht hin, warum der Sohn denn nicht an deutsche Behörden herangetreten sei, sagte dieser, dass er Misstrauen gegen diese hegte, im Fall München hätte man gar nicht ermitteln wollen. Attentate in Italien, Belgien oder München waren Teil eines Beschlusses auf höchstem NATO-Niveau. Hier benannte man das Allied Clandestine Committee, in welchem auch Luxemburg mit eingebunden war. Jenes Allied Clandestine Committee soll damals von dem direkten Vorgesetzten von Kramer Senior geführt worden sein. Bei dieser Person handelt es sich um den deutschen General Leopold Chalupa, der ehemalige Oberbefehlshaber der Alliierten Streitkräfte Euro Mitte (CENTAG). Auch sei der luxemburgische Nachrichtendienst Service de Renseignement de l’Etat (SRE) in die Befehlskette mit eingebunden gewesen. Der «Stay Behind»-Leiter des Bundesnachrichtendiensts, Johannes Kramer, soll nach Angaben seines Sohnes als Koordinator bei Operationen mit Geheimdiensten aus Deutschland, Großbritannien und dem Benelux-Raum mitgewirkt haben, auch stand er im Kontakt mit dem ehemaligen Geheimdienstchef Charles-Hoffmann, obwohl dieser den Kontakt abstritt. Kramer Senior hätte verschiedene rekrutierte Figuren als “nützliche Idioten” bezeichnet. Im Jahr 1986 wurde Luxemburg aus dem Stay-Behind-Netzwerk (Spannungsprogramm) herausgenommen, womit die Anschlagsserie aufgehört hatte. Mehr dazu hier bei der TagesWoche: Bommeleeër-Affäre – “Es war Nato gegen Nato”

15.04.2013

Find this story at 15 April 2013

Copyright © Glaronia.com

Geheimdienst SREL: EX-Chef Hoffmann über Stay Behind-Zelle in Luxemburg

Beim luxemburgischen Untersuchungsausschuss stand am Dienstag Charles Hoffman als dritter Geheimdienstdirektor Rede und Antwort. Dieser leitete den SREL in den Jahren von 1985 bis 2003. Beigetreten war er dem Dienst 1976. Es ging bei der Befragung unter anderem auch um das sogenannte “Stay Behind” Netzwerk. Vor Beginn der Erklärung sagte Hoffmann, dass der Geheimdienst niemals für eine “politische Partei” gearbeitet hätte. Mit Blick auf die Bommeleeër-Affäre könne er keine Angaben machen, da die Staatsanwaltschaft in der Sache noch ermitteln würde, so der Ausschusspräsident Alex Bodry. Hoffmanns Aufgabenbereich war die Gegenspionage und die Terrorbekämpfung. Als EX-Chef des SREL gab er auch wenige Details über die Stay-Behind-Zelle in Luxemburg bekannt, die er leitete. “Bis zu” zwölf Personen gehörten dieser an, welche einander nicht kannten, hieß es. Selbst er hätte nicht gewusst, wer der Zelle angehöre. Im Fall einer angenommenen Besetzung (Sowjet) in den Zeiten des Kalten Krieges wäre es die Aufgabe der Untergrundzelle gewesen, Informationen über den Feind zu liefern, so Hoffmann. Bei logischer Betrachtung hört sich dies ein “wenig” ominös an, dass Hausfrauen, Lehrer, Handwerker und Eisenbahner im “Fall einer Besetzung” einen auf “Spitzel” machen sollten, um so Informationen zu gewinnen. Für derartige Aufgaben standen sicherlich auch offizielle Strukturen in Militär etc. bereit, in einem angenommen Fall, dass mit einer “Besetzung” derartige Informationsbeschaffungsaufgaben umgesetzt werden sollten. Innerhalb der Befragung von Hoffmann hieß es unter anderem, dass während den Zeiten des Kalten Krieges, wenn Bürger aus einem Land kamen, das damals zum potenziellen Feind gehörte, man diese beobachtet hätte. Sie „wurden auch gefragt“, ob sie „für uns arbeiten wollen“. Das sei die Arbeit der Spionageabwehr gewesen. Zudem hätte es damals zu seinem Aufgabenbereich gehört, Terrorbekämpfung durchzuführen. Hier erinnerte Hoffmann daran, dass es damals in den Nachbarländern, in den 1970er und 1980er Jahren, aktive Terrorgruppen gegeben hatte. In Luxemburg kontrollierte man auch, ob sich Individuen dieser Gruppen im Land aufhielten. Zu Stay-Behind. Das war eine internationale Struktur der Alliierten, „nicht eine der Nato“. So hätte auch die Schweiz mitgemacht. Die Agenten hätten einander nicht gekannt, er habe sie als Chef auch nicht gekannt. Nur die Person, die das Stay-Behind-Mitglied rekrutiert kannte er. (weiterer Verlauf hier) Eine Woche zuvor wurde der vormalige SREL-Chef Marco Mille vernommen. Dieser wurde 2003 Chef des SREL (Service de Renseignement de l’Etat). Er hätte damals eine “Black Box” vorgefunden, da die [wie üblicherweise praktiziert] Abteilungen voneinander abgeschottet gearbeitet hätten. Die gesammelten Informationen waren “nicht allgemein” verfügbar, was auch für Informationen in den Dossiers der Bombenanschläge und “Stay Behind” gegolten habe, so Mille. Nach seinen Angaben wollte er das etablierte Abschottungssystem [Anm. z.B. Matrjoschka-Prinzip, Zwiebelring oder Pyramidal] “reformieren”, was jedoch “nicht gut” angekommen sei. Es habe große Widerstände gegenüber Neuerungen gegeben, sagte der Ex-SREL-Chef. (weiterführend hier) 21.11.12: Eine Splittergruppe im Geheimdienst? 25.03.12: Luxemburgs Schattenkämpfer Dr. Daniele Ganser zu den Berichten des parlamentarischen Geheimdienstkontrollausschuss über „Stay behind“ und die Rolle des SREL bei den „Bommeleeër“-Ermittlungen – Das letzte Wort ist noch nicht gesprochen [PDF] (18. Juli 2008) Italien: Das im Jahr 1990 wegen Mordes an drei Carabinieri verurteilte Gladio- und Ordine Nuovo-Mitglied Vincenzo Vinciguerra erklärte zu den Hintergründen der Verbrechen (Strategie der Spannung): „Man musste Zivilisten angreifen, Männer, Frauen, Kinder, unschuldige Menschen, unbekannte Menschen, die weit weg vom politischen Spiel waren. Der Grund dafür war einfach. Die Anschläge sollten das italienische Volk dazu bringen, den Staat um größere Sicherheit zu bitten. […] Diese politische Logik liegt all den Massakern und Terroranschlägen zu Grunde, welche ohne richterliches Urteil bleiben, weil der Staat sich ja nicht selber verurteilen kann.“ Buch zur Thematik “Gladio”: Verdeckter Terror – Nato Geheimarmeen in Europa – Autor Daniele Ganser (ISBN 978-3280061060) – Daniele Ganser, geb. 1972 in Lugano, ist Historiker, spezialisiert auf Zeitgeschichte nach 1945 und internationale Politik. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind Friedensforschung, Geostrategie, verdeckte Kriegsführung, Ressourcenkämpfe und Wirtschaftspolitik. Er unterrichtet am Historischen Seminar der Universität Basel und forscht zum “Peak Oil”, dem globalen Kampf ums Erdöl, und dem so genannten “Krieg gegen den Terrorismus”.

27.01.2013

Find this story at 27 January 2013

Copyright © Glaronia.com

Eine Splittergruppe im Geheimdienst? Ausschuss befasste sich mit dem Lauschangriff auf Colonel Harpes

(ham) – Die jüngsten Entwicklungen in der Affäre Bommeleeër sowie ein Relikt des kalten Krieges standen am Mittwoch auf der Tagesordnung des parlamentarischen Geheimdienstausschusses, zu der auch Srel-Chef Patrick Heck geladen war. Konkret ging es in der Sitzung um das Netzwerk „Stay Behind“ sowie um den vermeintlichen Lauschangriff auf den ehemaligen Chef der Gendarmerie, Colonel Aloyse Harpes in den Jahren 1985 und 1986.

Unterliegen die Beratungen des parlamentarischen Ausschusses der Geheimhaltung, so lieferte der Vorsitzende François Bausch dennoch Einblicke in die Erkenntnisse der morgendlichen Sitzung. Im Sinne der Allgemeinheit und da die meisten Elemente bereits in der Öffentlichkeit diskutiert würden, begründete der Abgeordnete gegenüber dem „Luxemburger Wort“ diese Entscheidung.

Bezüglich des „Stay behind“-Netzwerkes gebe es keine Spuren, dass Verbindungen zu anderen paramilitärischen Gruppierungen bestanden habe, die auch im Ausland operierten. „Stay behind“ war ein Teil des geheimen Gladio-Netzwerkes der Nato, das für den Fall der Besetzung durch feindliche Truppen nachrichtendienstliche Aufklärung leisten und Sabotageakte verüben sollten.

Kein offizieller Abhörbefehl

Was nun den Lauschangriff auf Colonel Aloyse Harpes angeht, so habe der „Service de renseignement“ (Srel) keinen Anhaltspunkt gefunden, dass eine solche Aktion auf dem Höhepunkt der Bombenanschläge in den Jahren 1985 und 1986 offiziell verordnet und durchgeführt worden sei.

Ein Zeuge, der selbst an der Abhöraktion beteiligt gewesen sein will, hatte sich 2009 zu Wort gemeldet und behauptet, der Chef der Gendarmerie sei von der Kaserne auf dem Herrenberg aus ein Jahr lang abgehört worden.

François Bausch betonte am Mittwoch, dass sich diese Erkenntnisse auf den offiziellen Dokumenten und Aussagen von Mitarbeitern aus jener Zeit stützten.

Nun könne aber nicht ausgeschlossen werden, dass eine Gruppierung unabhängig gehandelt habe. „Der Geheimdienst konnte uns aber nicht garantieren, dass es zum damaligen Zeitpunkt keine Unstimmigkeiten innerhalb des Srel gegeben hatte“, betonte Bausch.

Da die jüngsten Enthüllungen in der Bommeleeër-Affäre immer wieder Ex-Mitarbeiter der damaligen Gendarmerie ins Rampenlicht rückten, und solche auch beim Srel tätig waren, gewinne die Hypothese einer Gruppe, die auf eigene Faust gehandelt haben soll, an Bedeutung.

Vertrauen in aktuelle Srel-Mitarbeiter

Im gleichen Atemzug versicherte François Bausch aber, dass der Ausschuss absolutes Vertrauen in die aktuellen Mitarbeiter des Luxemburger Nachrichtendienstes habe. Man dürfe diese Leute nicht in einen Topf mit Ex-Mitarbeitern werfen, die von diesen Enthüllungen betroffen seien. Schließlich sei die Arbeitsweise des Srel vor der Reform des Nachrichtendienstes ein Relikt des kalten Krieges gewesen.

Der Lauschangriff selbst sei laut Srel-Chef Patrick Heck technisch möglich gewesen, wenn auch mit einer mobilen Abhörvorrichtung. Nun soll der „Service de renseignement“ aber kein solches Gerät besessen haben. Im Gegensatz zur damaligen Gendarmerie, die Aufzeichnungen zufolge in den achtziger Jahren eine mobile Abhörstation bestellt hatte.

Veröffentlicht am 21.11.12 19:59 Vorlesen

Find this story at 21 November 2012

© WORT.LU 2013

Stay Behind – Agenten sterben einsam: Zeuge Andreas Kramer sagt im Geheimdienstprozess über seinen geheimnisvollen Vater aus

Im Luxemburger Bombenleger-Prozess wurde am Dienstag der bislang wohl spektakulärste Zeuge Andreas Kramer vernommen. Der Duisburger Historiker hatte vor einigen Wochen u.a. den deutschen Bundesnachrichtendienst in einer eidesstattlichen Versicherung belastet, in den 1980er Jahren in inszenierte Terroranschläge verwickelt gewesen zu sein. Kramers Vater, Johannes Karl Kramer, sei beim BND ein Strippenzieher gewesen, der mit dem damaligen Leiter des Luxemburger Geheimdienstes SREL Bombenanschläge geplant habe, um die Bevölkerung auf einen Rechtsruck einzuschwören.

Die Aussagen, die Kramer im Luxemburger Gerichtssaal machte, sind sensationell – vielleicht sogar zu sensationell. An einigen Punkten widersprach sich der Historiker, der immerhin unter Eid aussagte. Während von Zeugen die möglichst interpretationsfreie Schilderungen von Tatsachenwahrnehmung erwartet wird, kommentierte Kramer eifrig und verkündete laut Protokoll des LUXEMBURGER WORT, in Deutschland habe es keine Möglichkeit gegeben, Informationen an die Presse und Justiz weiterzugeben, da die Aufarbeitung des Stay-Behind in Deutschland systematisch unterdrückt werde. Der Zeuge Kramer gibt an, in den 1990er Jahren Chefarchivar im Bundestag gewesen und als solcher auch mit Geheimdienstangelegenheiten befasst gewesen zu sein. Für einen Akademiker in ehemaliger Führungsposition, der gerade den Medienauftritt seines Lebens absolviert, war Kramer erstaunlich leger gekleidet. Auch das offenbar fahrige Auftreten und der Mitteilungsdrang des Zeugen fördern nicht gerade seine Glaubwürdigkeit, sondern wecken Assoziationen zu verschrobenen Verschwörungstheoretikern, wie sie etwa im Spielfilm Fletchers Visionen dargestellt werden.

Was von Kramers Aussagen zu halten ist, was wirklich aus seiner Beobachtung stammt, oder was er aus Büchern übernommen hat oder selbst schlussfolgert, ist schwierig zu beurteilen. Anderseits gibt es viele Sachverhalte, die lange als Verschwörungstheorien galten und lächerlich gemacht wurden, sich dann jedoch als zutreffend herausstellten. Bei Whistleblowern, die etwa eingeschüchtert wurden, kommt es häufiger vor, dass diese “ein bisschen durch den Wind” sind, zumal es vorliegend um eine tragische Vater-Sohn-Beziehung geht. Sollten nur einige der von Kramer gelieferten Puzzle-Stücke echt sein, dann hätte es sich schon gelohnt, sich mit Kramers spektakulärer, aber mit Vorsicht zu genießender Aussage zu befassen.

Kramer sagte laut Protokoll des LUXEMBURGER WORT aus, sein letztes Jahr verstorbener Vater Johannes Karl Kramer sei Verantwortlicher des Stay-Behind-Netzwerkes in Deutschland gewesen. Dieser habe keine Freunde gehabt, so dass er sich praktisch nur seinem Sohn habe anvertrauen können, den er für Stay Behind (“GLADIO”) habe rekrutieren wollen. Unter dem Deckname “Cello” habe der Schattenmann bis zu seinem 70. Lebensjahr in der “Abteilung 4” des BND gearbeitet und sei mit der Koordination von NATO-Geheimdiensten befasst gewesen. U.a. an der Bombenserie in Luxemburg sei er unmittelbar beteiligt gewesen und hätte diese mit dem damaligen Chef des Luxemburger Geheimdienstes, Charles Hoffmann, gemeinsam geplant. Kramer senior habe mit Hoffmann einem „Allied Clandestine Committee“ angehört, das Bundeswehr-General Leopold Chalupa unterstanden habe. Kramer hätte jedoch hinter dem Rücken von General Chalupa eigenmächtig gehandelt.

Kramer will mit seinen Enthüllungen den Tod seines Vaters abgewartet haben, weil dieser ihm selbst mit dem Tod gedroht habe, falls er auspacken werde. Diese Drohung habe er ernst genommen, da Johannes Karl Kramer nicht nur zu Morden fähig gewesen sei, sondern solche geradezu manisch begangen hätte und daher Strafverfolgung hätte befürchten müssen. So sei der BND-Mann in das Münchner Oktoberfest-Attentat verwickelt gewesen, bei dem vieles auf GLADIO deutet. Die konkret Beteiligten habe Johannes Karl Kramer als “nützliche Idioten” bezeichnet.

Luxemburg sei als Operationsort gewählt worden, weil das Großherzogtum damals noch nicht das Haager Abkommen zur Landkriegsordnung unterzeichnet hätte, die Sprengfallen verbiete. Hoffmann sei mit Kramer senior keineswegs befreundet gewesen, habe sich sogar eigens an die CIA gewandt, weil er keine weiteren Anschläge in Luxemburg dulden wollte. Das FBI (das für die Ermittlungen gegen Doppelagenten usw. zuständig ist) sei Kramer senior auf den Fersen gewesen, habe von ihm jedoch wegen Unkenntnis der Benelux-Länder an der Nase herumgeführt werden können. Kramer gab an, sein Vater habe einige der Erpresserbriefe selbst geschrieben. Dieser habe vermutet, das FBI hätte ihn überführen können, hätten sie damals die DNA-Analyse zur Verfügung gehabt. Kramer selbst gab im Gerichtssaal eine Probe seiner eigenen DNA.

Johannes Karl Kramer, der selbst Sprengmeister gewesen sei, habe seinem Sohn zufolge auch seine Finger beim Anschlag auf das EG-Gipfeltreffen auf dem Luxemburger Kirchberg gehabt. Er habe damit geprahlt, die Sicherheitsvorkehrungen überwunden zu haben. Die Bombe sei von einem Motorrad geworfen worden. Der Schattenmann soll von einer Brigade aus Luxemburg berichtet haben, die Motorräder eingesetzt habe. Der einzige Namen, den Kramer insoweit nannte, war der von Ben Geiben, jenem Super-Flic, der die Einheit gegründet hatte und danach Sicherheitschef von Euro-Disney wurde.

Dass Hoffmann mit Stay Behind befasst war, lässt sich nunmehr kaum abstreiten. So veröffentliche Strafverteidiger Gaston Vogel einen Brief Hoffmans, in dem dieser von einer “Stay Behind-Übung” spricht. Dieser trägt den handschriftlichen Vermerk “d’accord” (“Einverstanden”) von keinem Geringeren als Ehrenstaatsminister Jacques Santer vor. Der allerdings hatte Vogel zufolge immer wieder behauptet, von Übungen mit belgischen, französischen und britischen Geheimdiensten nichts gewusst zu haben. Au contraire …

UPDATE: Anders, als in der ursprünglichen Fassung angegeben, scheint der Zeuge Kramer nicht promoviert zu haben.

Markus Kompa
09.04.2013

Find this story at 9 April 2013

Copyright © 2013 Heise Zeitschriften Verlag

In Luxemburg kocht Stay Behind hoch; Ein Geheimdienstprozess erschüttert das Großherzogtum

Der Luxemburger Geheimdienstskandal bietet ganz großes Kino: Eine James-Bond-Uhr, Spezialagenten, Bombenanschläge, Verwicklung ausländischer Mächte, Cover Up, Hochverrat durch einen Geheimdienstchef und eine ruchbare Intrige im Hochadel. Ein Untersuchungsausschuss sowie ein Strafprozess gegen zwei vormalige Angehörige einer Polizeispezialeinheit sollen das trübe Kapitel aus dem Kalten Krieg beleuchten – mit Staatschef Jean-Claude Juncker nebst Hochadel und Geheimdienstelite im Zeugenstand.

In den 1980er Jahren wurde das Großherzogtum Luxemburg von einer bis heute ungeklärten Serie an Bombenanschlägen terrorisiert, die Strommasten, Polizeistationen, den Justizpalast, den Flughafen, ein Schwimmbad, ein Gaswerk und auch eine Zeitung beschädigten. Ein Mensch wurde durch eine raffinierte Sprengfalle verletzt, eine weitere hätte beinahe Todesopfer gefordert. Ein erstes angebliches Bekennerschreiben eines “Mouvement Ecologiste Combattant” schien die grüne Bewegung in Misskredit zu bringen. Zwar reagierte man auf lancierte Forderungen nach Schutzgeld, das etwa während des Papstbesuchs hätte übergeben werden sollte, in dem die Behörden Geldkoffer an den gewünschten Stellen bereitstellten. Statt diese abzuholen, schilderten die erstaunlich gut informierten Bombenleger jedoch präzise, wer genau ihnen alles vor Ort eine Falle stellte. Etwa zur selben Zeit gab es in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Anschläge, die ohne harte Beweise einer mysteriösen “Dritten Generation der RAF” zugeschrieben wurden, die deutlich professioneller als ihre Vorgänger agierte, deren politische Motive dafür jedoch diffus blieben.

Ein Luxemburger Ehepaar, das einen der Bombenleger beobachtet hatte, fühlte sich von der Polizei nicht ernst genommen. Statt sie als Zeugen anzuhören, habe man auf sie eingeredet und Verwirrung gestiftet. Beim Anfertigen eines Phantombilds hätten sich die Beamten bemüht, das Ergebnis von den Beschreibungen abweichend zu zeichnen. Das behördliche Desinteresse erinnert an die unzähligen “Ermittlungspannen”, die den Behörden anderer NATO-Länder in den 1980er Jahren bei der Aufklärung von Terroranschlägen unterliefen. Vor allem der geringe Sachschaden sah dem damals nur wenige Jahre zurückliegenden Celler Loch ähnlich, selbst eine Neuauflage der geheimdienstlichen Operation Nordpol.

Mr ?

Vor einigen Jahren tauchte bei RTL ein Zeuge auf, der anonym bleiben wollte, und darauf bestand, ausschließlich und persönlich mit Luxemburgs Premierminister Jean-Claude Juncker zu sprechen. Das Treffen wurde schließlich gewährt und der Mann informierte Juncker über eine Person, die er beobachtet habe. Er gab an, die Luxemburger Sûreté habe ihn davor gewarnt, diesen Namen zu nennen, er habe sonst mit persönlichen Konsequenzen zu rechnen. Der Informant schrieb Juncker den Namen auf einen Zettel, worauf hin der Regierungschef den Großherzog persönlich aufsuchte. Beim Namen soll sich um keinen Geringeren als “Jean Nassau” handeln – den zweitgeborenen Bruder des Großherzogs Henri. “Mäi Gott”!

Auch das genannte Ehepaar wollte den Prinzen erkannt haben. Doch Hoheit erinnerte sich nach 20 Jahren, an diesem Tag in den Wäldern des Loir-et-Cherwaren der Jagd gefrönt zu haben und stellte sein Alibi mit Zeugen und einem Brief seiner Verlobten unter Beweis. Der Informant soll inzwischen verstorben sein.

Mr M

Ein Schattenmann namens “M” schien ein Freund und Kollege von André Kemmer zu sein, einem Offizier des Luxemburger Geheimdienstes SREL. M fiel offenbar der Mitschnitt eines abgehörten Gesprächs zwischen Juncker und dem Großherzog in die Hände. M sandte dem Geheimdienst SREL eine verschlüsselte CD, auf der die Aufzeichnung angeblich zu hören ist. Der SREL will den Code aber bis heute nicht geknackt haben.

Mr Mille

Juncker bat 2008 den damaligen Luxemburger Geheimdienstchef Marco Mille zur Unterredung. Mille berichtete, dass der Großherzogliche Hof in Luxemburg sich um Abhörtechnik für Telefongespräche bemüht hätte, wobei man mit dem Geheimdienst ihrer Majestät konspiriert hätte. Die Verbindungen ins Vereinigte Königreich sind exzellent, da der Luxemburger Hochadel seine Sprösslinge auf britische Schulen zu senden pflegte.

Geheimdienstchef Mille war sich nicht zu schade dafür, das Gespräch mit seinem politischen Vorgesetzten ebenfalls heimlich aufzuzeichnen, wobei sich der Schattenmann stilecht einer verwanzten Armbanduhr bediente. Wie inzwischen bekannt ist, kam es damals zu weiteren illegalen Abhöraktivitäten. Die Peinlichkeit wurde perfekt, als der Mitschnitt aus der Spezialuhr seinen Weg in die Öffentlichkeit fand. Der SREL soll seinerzeit auch ergebnislos versucht haben, M abzuhören, indem man ihm ein präpariertes Mobilfunktelefon unterjubelte. Der damalige Geheimdienstchef Mille ist heute Sicherheitschef beim deutschen Siemens-Konzern (wo man sich von der Mobilfunksparte längst verabschiedet hat und Armbanduhren zu retouchieren pflegt). Strafrechtlich betrachtet ist die Abhöraktion inzwischen verjährt.

Tote E-Mail-Briefkästen

Das Aufrollen des Bombenleger-Falls ist nicht unwesentlich das Resultat zweier Journalisten des Luxemburger Senders RTL, Nico Graf und Marc Thoma, die sich über 15 Jahre nicht beirren ließen. Sie richteten 2005 für Whistleblower eigens die E-Mail-Adresse “bomm@rtl.lu” ein. Die Staatsanwaltschaft kopierte diese Idee, wobei sich die Behörde der Dienste von Hotmail bediente: “enquete85@hotmail.com”. 10 Tage nach Einrichtung dieser Hotmail-Adresse entrüstete sich ein unbekannter Hacker über die laxen Sicherheitsstandards der Staatsanwaltschaft und mailte Logindaten nebst Passwort an die RTL-Adresse. Dies führte zu einer Hausdurchsuchung bei RTL, über die sich der Sender bitter beklagte.

“Super-Flic”

Zwischenzeitlich wurde als Hauptfigur der Polizist Ben Geiben gehandelt, der Ende der 1970er Jahre die “Brigade mobile de la Gendarmerie” aufgebaut hatte, der die beiden Angeklagten angehörten. Geiben hatte die Polizei überraschend Jahre vor den Anschlägen verlassen. Bereits 1985 geriet er wegen seines damals kaum erklärbaren Berufswechsels und aufgrund seiner Fähigkeiten und Kenntnisse in einen vagen Anfangsverdacht. Sein Nachfolger ließ ihn deshalb erfolglos beschatten. Geiben begründete sein Ausscheiden aus dem Polizeidienst mit seiner Homosexualität, mit der er die Behörde im katholischen Luxemburg nicht in Verruf habe bringen wollen.

“Ermittlungspannen”

Am Montag begann nun der Prozess gegen die zwei Polizisten Jos Wilmes und Marco Scheer, denen man vorwirft, sie hätten als Angehörige der “Brigade mobile de la Gendarmerie (BMG)” gemeinsam mit zwei weiteren (inzwischen verstorbenen) Kollegen die Anschläge inszeniert, um mehr Mittel für die Ordnungskräfte durchzusetzen. Im Verlauf der Ermittlungen verschwanden 88 von 125 Beweisstücken. Mal versickerten Beweise, die man zur Sicherung eines Fingerabdrucks an das deutsche BKA geschickt hatte, auf dem Rückweg, mal auf dem Weg zum amerikanischen FBI, mal brach in einem Archiv Feuer aus. Anzeige

Der ermittelnde Staatsanwalt Biever schrieb schließlich seinem Justizminister einen offenen Brief, in dem er sich insbesondere darüber beschwerte, dass bei der Polizei offenbar “Amnesie” grassiere. Der “Gedächtnisverlust” nehme mit dem Rang der Vernommenen bis rauf zur Polizeiführung zu. Geibens Nachfolger konnte sich an erstaunlich viele Details aus dieser Zeit erinnern, nicht aber, dass er eine Beschattung seines eigenen Vorgängers angeordnet hätte, und musste seine Dienstmütze nehmen. Die Luxemburger nahmen den Fall zum Anlass, ihr Strafgesetzbuch um den Tatbestand “entrave à la justice” nachzubessern, was in etwa der deutschen “Strafvereitelung” entspricht.

Whistleblower?

Doch seit letzter Woche gibt es in der Luxemburger Geheimdienst-Saga einen weiteren Akteur. So diente sich den beiden Journalisten nunmehr ein geheimnisvoller Whistleblower an, der berichtete, er habe als Unteroffizier dem sagenumwobenen Stay Behind-Netzwerk der NATO angehört, landläufig auch als GLADIO bekannt. Man habe seinerzeit das trainiert, was die Bombenleger auch gemacht hätten: So habe man im Schatten des NATO-Manövers “Oesling 84” auch die Stay-Behind-Saboteure getestet. Die Übung sah vor, die regulären Ordnungskräfte, Soldaten etc. als sowjetische Besatzer zu betrachten und sich an diesen vorbeischleichen, um unentdeckt etwa an Hochspannungsmasten symbolisch rote Klebepunkte anbringen. Die Markierungen hätten “Bombe erfolgreich gelegt/Mast gesprengt”bedeutet. Die Saboteure seien von England aus im Tiefflug eingeflogen und mit dem Fallschirm abgesetzt worden – OSS/CIA-Style.

Wie das Luxemburger Tageblatt meldet, wurden von Premierminister Jean-Claude Juncker und Verteidigungsminister Jean-Marie Halsdorf mittlerweile in einer parlamentarischen Dringlichkeitsanfrage zusätzliche Informationen zu Stay Behind gefordert.

Stay Behind gehört allerdings nach wie vor zu den sensibelsten Geheimnissen, die es in der NATO-Welt gibt. Manche Regierungschefs wurden von ihren Militärs nicht einmal über die Existenz der hochgeheimen Netzwerke informiert. Offenbar ist das unheimliche Netzwerk sogar älter als die NATO und wurde von den Diensten parallel aufgebaut und unterhalten.

Platzt der Bombenleger-Prozess?

Das Verfahren wird in Luxemburg als “Jahrhundertprozess” bezeichnet. Als Zeugen geladen sind Jean-Claude Juncker, die Prinzen Jean und Guillaume sowie Ex-Statsminister Jacques Santer sowie der Justizminister und diverse Schattenmänner. Die Verfahrensdauer wird auf drei Monate veranschlagt, 90 Zeugen sollen vernommen werden. Als sei der Fall noch nicht skurril genug, so heißt der im Prozess agierende Staatsanwalt ausgerechnet Oswald – ein Omen dafür, dass die Monarchie nach Bauernopfern wie die beiden Polizisten verlangt?

Die Strafverteidiger forderten die Vertagung des Verfahrens. Der für sein Temperament bekannte Rechtsanwalt Gaston Vogel und seine Kollegin Lydie Lorang sparten nicht mit Kritik an den Behörden und beklagten die massiven Beweisverluste. Vogel veröffentlichte bereits letzte Woche einen offenen Brief an Premierminister Juncker.

Verteidiger Vogel ist vom Alibi des jagenden Prinzen keineswegs überzeugt. So gab der Zeuge an, den Prinzen um 3.30 Uhr in der Nähe des Tatorts gesehen zu haben, während das Alibi erst ab etwa 12 Uhr greift. Auch in den 1980er Jahren vermochte man die Distanz von 500 Kilometern innerhalb von etwa acht Stunden zu überwinden. Warum allerdings der Blaublütige persönlich vor Ort gewesen sein soll, ist unklar.

Geheimdienst-Wiki

Um die komplexe Angelegenheit zu illustrieren, haben Aktivisten inzwischen ein Wiki aufgesetzt und als Domain hierfür frech den Namen des Geheimdienstes SREL.lu gekapert. Auch eine Mindmap soll bei der Orientierung helfen.

Wer immer Mitte der 1980er im Großherzogtum Bomben gelegt haben mag, “d’Kommunisten” scheinen es nicht gewesen zu sein.

Markus Kompa 27.02.2013

Find this story at 27 February 2013

Copyright © 2013 Heise Zeitschriften Verlag

Luxemburgs Schattenkämpfer; Der Santer-Bericht zu “Stay behind”

Der Bericht aus Jahr 1990 zu dem Luxemburger “Stay behind”-Netzwerk.

(str) -Hausfrauen, Lehrer, Handwerker und Eisenbahner als mit Funkgeräten ausgerüstete Geheimagenten. Drei Kisten mit Waffen in einer Wiese begraben. Das könnten die Zutaten eines spannenden Spionageromans sein. Es sind aber die Details des Berichts von Ex-Premier Santer aus Jahr 1990 zu dem Luxemburger “Stay behind”-Netzwerk. Ein Bericht der wort.lu vorliegt.

Die Erwartungen waren sehr hoch gesteckt, als am 17. Dezember 1990 Premierminister Jacques Santer den parlamentarischen Verfassungsausschuss über das geheime “Stay Behind”-Netzwerk informierte. Wirklich viel verriet Santer damals nicht. Dennoch war es das erste Mal, dass überhaupt von offizieller Seite über diese geheime Struktur aufgeklärt wurde – und bislang auch zum letzen Mal.

Am Rande der “Affär Bommeleeër” sind die Diskussionen um “Stay Behind ” nun wieder aufgeflammt. Da verschiedene Abgeordnete die Aufklärungsarbeit Santers über “diese wichtige Seite der Luxemburger Geschichte” als unzureichend empfinden, könnte dieses Relikt des Kalten Krieges nun zum Politikum werden. Am Dienstag beauftragte der parlamentarische Justizausschuss den Verteidigungsausschuss, sich noch einmal mit dem Thema zu befassen.

In der Sitzung des Verfassungsausschusses Mitte Dezember 1990 beginnt Santer seine Erläuterungen indem er aus aus den Archiven des Geheimdienstes zitiert, dass 1952 ein “Comité Clandestin de Planning” (CCP) gegründet wird. Zur CCP gehören Luxemburg, Belgien, Frankreich, das Vereinigte Königreich und die Niederlande. Als 1958 die USA dazu kommen, wird die Organisation in Allied Coordination Comitee (ACC) umgetauft.

Der CCP untersteht dem militärischen strategischen NATO-Hauptquartier SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe). Die Aufgabe des CCP besteht darin, zu Friedenszeiten die Verbindung zwischen dem Hauptquartier der alliierten Streitkräfte und den nationalen Geheimdiensten herzustellen. In Luxemburg handelte es sich in der Nachkriegszeit um das “Deuxième Bureau de l’Etat Major de l’Armée” – dem auch “Stay Behind” untersteht. 1960 wird der “Service de Renseignement” (SREL) gegründet und übernimmt die alleinige Verantwortung für das “Stay Behind”-Netz.

Es ist ein geheimes Widerstandsnetzwerk, wie Santer erklärt. Obwohl es bereits 1952, zur Zeit des Korea-Krieges entsteht, wird es erst 1956 nach der Invasion Ungarns durch die Rote Armee aktiviert. Die von der NATO vorgegebenen Missionen bestehen aus drei Elementen: nachrichtendienstliche Aktivitäten, Einschleusen und Exfiltration sowie Aktionen.

Die Aktivitäten des Luxemburger “Stay Behind” haben sich jedoch auf die ersten beiden Aspekte beschränkt, betont Santer und fügt hinzu , dass es sich um ein Netzwerk aus Fluchthelfern handelt. Bei der “Infiltration” geht es auch um die Wiedereroberung des Landes im Falle einer Invasion. Santer präzisiert , dass es sich bei “Stay behind” um sogenannte Schläfer handelt, die nur zu Kriegszeiten und im Falle einer Invasion durch die Armeen des Warschauer Paktes aktiviert werden sollen. Obwohl das Netz von der Nato koordiniert wird, hätte es im Kriegsfall ausschließlich unter Luxemburger Befehlsgewalt gestanden.

Lehrer, Eisenbahner, Hausfrauen…

In Luxemburg hat es nie mehr als 12 “Stay Behind”-Agenten gegeben, erklärt Santer weiter. Vor der Auflösung der Struktur 1990 sind es nur neun Agenten . Bei diesen “Agenten” handelt es sich um Lehrer, Landwirte, Handwerker, Beamte, Ingenieure , Eisenbahner und Hausfrauen. Santer betont, dass diese Leute sich untereinander nicht kennen und dass daher nicht von einer Truppe oder einer Gruppe die Rede sein kann.

Im Norden des Landes sind es vor der Auflösung der Struktur im Jahr 1990 zwei Agenten aktiv, im Zentrum ebenfalls zwei, einer an der belgischen Grenze, an der deutschen Grenze zwei und an der französischen Grenze einer.

Rekrutiert wurden sie unter dem Versprechen, dass ihre Identität niemals aufgedeckt wird. Santer betont, dass er persönlich die Identität jedes Agenten überprüft habe und keiner von ihnen vorbestraft gewesen sei. Einige seien ehemalige Resistenzler . Santer besteht darauf, dass keiner der Agenten zur Armee oder zu den Sicherheitskräfte gehört.

Als Santer Altersangaben über die Agenten macht, spricht er wieder von zwölf Agenten. Drei von ihnen, sind älter als sechzig Jahre, vier Agenten im Alter zwischen 50 und 60 Jahren, drei Agenten zwischen 40 und 50 Jahren und zwei Agenten zwischen 30 und 40 Jahren.
Drei Kisten mit Waffen in einer Wiese begraben

Ihre Ausrüstung hat nur aus Funkgeräten bestanden, erklärt Santer . Diese seien dafür gedacht mit “Stay behind”-Strukturen im Ausland in Kontakt zu bleiben. 1973 wird in Luxemburg ein Waffenversteck für “Stay behind” angelegt: Drei Zinkbehälter werden in einer Wiese eingegraben. In jeder befinden sich zwei Maschinenpistolen, vier Pistolen, vier Granaten und 600 Schuss Neun-Millimeter -Munition. Allerdings, bekräftigt Santer, hat nur der Geheimdienst-Chef und nicht die Agenten Zugang zu den Kisten im Versteck.

Die einzige Aktivität des “Stay-Behind”-Netzwerkes ist die regelmäßige Überprüfung des Funkmaterials, die in Zusammenarbeit mit dem britischen Intelligence Sercive erledigt wird. Das seien nur Nachrichtendienstliche Übungen , betont Santer. Niemals haben “Stay Behind” Mitglieder an Sabotageübungen teilgenommen.

“Stay behind” werde zudem oft mit dem italienischen “Gladio-Netzwerk” verwechselt, das nicht nur in einer anderen Struktur organisiert gewesen sei, sondern auch andere Aufgaben gehabt hätte.

Im Gegensatz zum Luxemburger “Stay behind” hätte “Gladio” als paramilitärische Truppe funktioniert und zu deren Mission auch Sabotage gehörte. Zwischen “Gladio ” und dem Luxemburger “Stay behind” hätte es keinerlei Verbindungen gegeben.
Santer und Thorn nicht informiert

Santer erklärt ebenfalls, dass er seine Informationen nicht nur aus Gesprächen mit dem Geheimdienstchef bezieht, sondern auch seine Amtsvorgänger auf das Thema angesprochen habe. Er selbst sei nicht von seinem Vorgänger Pierre Werner in Kenntnis gesetzt worden. Auch Gaston Thorn wurde 1974 nicht über die Existenz eines “Stay Behind”-Netzwerkes in Kenntnis gesetzt. Thorn habe sich das damit erklärt , dass die Aktivitäten des Netzwerkes stets normal verlaufen sind.

Pierre Werner habe Santer gesagt, dass er 1962 über die Existenz des “Stay behind”-Netzwerkes informiert wurde, als dieses in den Zuständigkeitsbereich des SREL übergegangen sei. Das Netz habe niemals Probleme bereitet. Da die einzigen Aktivitäten des Netzwerkes darin bestanden hätten, Funksender zu überprüfen, und dabei stets alles ordnungsgemäß verlaufen sei, habe er es nicht für nötig befunden, sich weiter mit der Geheimorganisation zu beschäftigen.
Mission abgeschlossen

Die Diskussion um “Gladio und “Stay Behind” wird 1990 durch die Debatte um eine Reform des Geheimdienstes ausgelöst. Jacques Santer löst das “Stay behind “-Netzwerk wenige Wochen vor der Sitzung des Ausschusses auf, da das Netzwerk nach dem Zusammenbruch des Kommunismus keine Daseinsberechtigung mehr hat. Am 14. Oktober 1990 werden die Agenten über das Ende ihrer Mission informiert und müssen ihr Funkmaterial zurückgeben. Die Kisten mit den Waffen werden ausgegraben. Die Granaten und Munition werden im Militärdepot am Waldhof untergebracht. Die Schusswaffen sollen dem Militärmuseum in Diekirch zur Verfügung gestellt werden.

Der kommunistische Abgeordnete Änder Hoffmann, der als einziger für die Einsetzung einer Untersuchungskommission zu “Stay behind” stimmt, stellt zudem die Neutralität des Santer-Berichts in Frage. Dieser berufe sich ausschließlich auf Informationen des Geheimdienstes.

Diese Neutralitätsfrage liegt nun 18 Jahre später wieder auf dem Tisch. Denn am Rande der Bombenleger-Affäre sehen insbesondere die DP-Abgeordneten Flesch und Bettel Grund genug, noch einmal Nachforschungen über “Stay Behind ” anzustellen – zumindest um auch letzte Zweifel über eine eventuelle Verbindung zwischen den Attentaten und dem Netzwerk auszuräumen.

Veröffentlicht am 25.03.12 16:09 Vorlesen

Steve Remesch

Find this story at 25 March 2012

Das Bommeleeër-Dossier

© WORT.LU 2013

Chronologie der Anschläge Die Bommeleeër-Taten hielten in den 80er Jahren ganz Luxemburg in Atem. Die Serie umfasst 24 Sprengstoffanschläge von 1984 bis 1986.

wort.lu listet die wichtigsten Daten auf:

30. Mai und 2. Juni 1984

Die beiden ersten Explosionen ereignen sich am 30. Mai und am 2. Juni 1984 in Beidweiler, wo ein Mast der Cegedel gesprengt wird. Das benutzte Material stammt zweifelsfrei aus Helmsingen und Wasserbillig.

12. April 1985

Explosion in Bourscheid: Ein Weekend-Haus, das kurz zuvor an den Staat verkauft wurde, fällt ihr zum Opfer. Bis heute ist nicht eindeutig geklärt, ob das Attentat in die Serie passt, denn es wurde keine kriminalistische Analyse der Spuren und des Sprengstoffs vorgenommen.

27. April 1985

Um 2 Uhr nachts wird auf dem Postamt am hauptstädtischen Hauptbahnhof der erste Erpresserbrief aufgegeben. Darin heißt es: „We have space and time“. Übersetzt: Wir wählen Ort und Zeit aus. Und: Wir sind Herr und Meister.

28. April 1985

Um 23.50 Uhr wird die Serie, wie angekündigt, fortgesetzt und ein Cegedel-Mast auf Stafelter gerät ins Visier der Attentäter. Bemerkenswert: Alle Anschlagsorte liegen in der Nähe der Hauptstadt.

7. Mai 1985

23.50 Uhr: Der Cegedel-Mast auf Schlewenhof fällt einer Explosion zum Opfer – nur fünf Stunden nachdem beschlossen worden war, dass Cegedel, Regierung und Gendarmerie nicht auf die Forderung der Erpresser von 250 000 Dollar eingehen würden. Das Erpresserultimatum hätte eigentlich aber noch bis 10. oder 11. Mai gehen sollen.

8. Mai 1985

Zweiter Erpresserbrief: Geldübergabe wird für die Zeit des Papstbesuchs vom 14. bis 16. Mai angekündigt. Zustimmung soll per Anzeige im „Wort“ erfolgen.

14. Mai 1985

Dritter Erpresserbrief: „Fahren Sie nach Clerf, in einer Telefonzelle erhalten Sie dort weitere Instruktionen“. Ausgerechnet in der Zeit des Papstbesuchs, wo die „Force de l’ordre“ alle Hände voll zu tun hat. Der Polizeifunk des Nordens war für diese Zeit in das Zentrum verlegt, im Norden stand also keiner zur Verfügung …

25. Mai 1985

Attentat bei der Gendarmerie. Aber nicht auf das Kommando oder auf die „Brigade mobile“, sondern am Standort der Brigade Luxemburg, im Keller unter den Büros der beiden ermittelnden Beamten in diesem Dossier.

28. Mai 1985

Um 23.45 Uhr wird in Itzig ein Strommast gesprengt, der das Unternehmen Dupont de Nemours versorgt. Die Masten sind nummeriert, die von 31 bis 39 werden von der Securicor bewacht, der Pfosten 30 nicht und ausgerechnet der wird gesprengt. Und: 70 Meter neben dem Anschlagsort geht in einem Feld eine weitere Ladung hoch.

29. Mai 1985

Vierter Erpresserbrief an Cegedel. Er wirft die Frage auf, an wen sich die Attentäter eigentlich wenden – an die Cegedel oder an die Gendarmerie? Sie hätten sich schlechter benommen als eine Scoutstruppe, heißt es darin, das wäre Verrat. Ein versteckter Hinweis darauf, dass es Pfadfinder waren, die auf das erste Attentat aufmerksam wurden?

11. Juni 1985

Fünfter Erpresserbrief: Darin werden 750 000 Dollar gefordert. Die Geldübergabe sollte am selben Tag im Parkhaus am Theaterplatz stattfinden. Im fünften Untergeschoss. Kurios: Kameras überwachen Einfahrt, Ausfahrt und eben jenes fünftes Untergeschoss, um zu sehen, ob alles belegt ist. Ein Spiel?

12. Juni 1985

In einem Brief werfen die Erpresser den Behörden vor, sie hätten falsch gespielt, und sie listen minutiös auf, welche Polizeibeamten vor Ort waren – bei der anberaumten Geldübergabe. Sie sagen sogar, es wären ausländische Polizisten anwesend gewesen. Und die Informationen der Erpresser treffen zu!

23. Juni 1985

Attentat in Hollerich, am Nationalfeiertag, kurz nach dem Feuerwerk – mit hohem Täterrisiko.

5. Juli 1985

Einziges Attentat mit Dynamit, vielleicht aus Wasserbilliger Stollen, in Asselscheuer. Zone lag übrigens knapp außerhalb der Überwachungszone!

26. Juli 1985

Anschlag auf das Verwaltungsgebäude des „Luxemburger Wort“.

28. August 1985

Zwei Explosionen auf dem Glacis bei der Schobermesse. Polizei und Straßenbauverwaltung sind betroffen.

30. September 1985

Attentat auf Schwimmbad an dem Tag der Pensionierung von Colonel Wagner.

19. Oktober 1985

Attentat im „Palais de justice“. Im Visier: das Büro des zuständigen Untersuchungsrichters.

9. November 1985

Attentat am Findel, drei Minuten nach dem letzten Flug. Findel ist unbewacht, weil die Beamten für den Ministerrat auf Kirchberg abgezogen wurden.

10. November 1985

Taschenlampe-Explosion – mit Quecksilberschalter, der schon Tausende Male gebraucht wurde. So einen, wie man ihn in Spielautomaten findet.

30. November 1985

Attentat in Heisdorf.

2. Dezember 1985

„Sommet“ in Luxemburg. Schwachpunkt: Autobahn. Das ist gewusst, aber sie wird nicht gesperrt. Über 200 Polizisten sind im Einsatz, aber eine „Bombe“ kann trotzdem aus einem Auto gezündet werden. Resultat: Die Ordnungskräfte sehen nicht sehr glücklich aus …

17. Februar 1986

Nach langer Pause kommt es zu einem Anschlag auf das Haus des Notars Hellinckx. Es passt nicht ganz in die Serie, gehört aber dazu. Das Luxite beweist es.

25. März 1986

Attentat bei Colonel Wagner: An dem Abend läuft die Revue „Knuppefreed“ mit besonderem Sicherheitsdispositiv, doch dann geht die Ladung außerhalb dieses Bereichs hoch. So endet der Bombenzyklus.

Veröffentlicht am 25.01.12 17:11 Vorlesen

Find this story at 25 January 2012

© WORT.LU 2013

 

 

 

Luxemburger zweifeln an ihrem Geheimdienst

Der Luxemburger Geheimdienst Service de renseignement de l’État (SREL) ist im Zuge diverser Affären in die Kritik geraten, u.a. wegen des Abhörens eines Gespräches zwischen Premierminister Jean-Claude Juncker und Großherzog Henri. Letzterer geriet in Verlegenheit, nachdem der vormalige SREL-Chef Marco Mille behauptet hatte, der großherzogliche Hof unterhalte wohl gute Kontakte zum britischen Geheimdienst.

Laut einer Umfrage des Luxemburger “Journals” glauben nur 22% der Befragten dem Dementi des Hofmarschallamts. Die Befragten sind zudem wenig erbaut über die Tatsache, dass die Lëtzeburger Schlapphüte in den letzten Jahrzehnten 300.000 Karteikarten über Bürger, Ausländer und politische Parteien angelegt haben. Eine Mehrheit verlangt ein Einsichtsrecht in die Datenbanken und bezweifelt die Notwendigkeit eines Geheimdienstes, berichtet das Luxemburger Tagblatt. Mille war 2009 zu Siemens als Sicherheitschef gewechselt.

Misstrauen gegen Luxemburger Geheime produzierte vor allem die Bommeleeër-Affäre (“Bombenlegeraffäre”), bei der zwischen 1986 und 1987 mysteriöse Anschläge auf Strommasten verübt wurden. In den letzten Jahren wurden Hinweise bekannt, die auf eine Inszenierung durch Sicherheitskreise hindeuten. In diesem Zeitraum gab es auch in anderen NATO-Staaten bis heute ungeklärte Anschläge, die politisch links stehende Gruppen sowie die Umweltbewegung in Misskredit brachten. Inzwischen tritt ein parlamentarischer Untersuchungsausschuss an, um die “Funktions- und Arbeitsweise des Geheimdienstes seit seinem Bestehen” zu ergründen, berichtet das Luxemburger Wort.

Auch das deutsche parlamentarische Kontrollgremium (PKGr) für Geheimdienste will unter dem Eindruck der NSU-Morde und der Serie an Ermittlungsdesastern seine Arbeit intensivieren, die nach parteiübergreifender Auffassung völlig unzureichend ausgestaltet ist. Nach einer zweitägigen Klausur beklagte die erstmals entsandte FDP-Politikerin Gisela Piltz, effektive Kontrolle bedürfe mehr als einer Reihe von Abgeordneten, die in einem fensterlosen und abhörsicheren Raum zusammensäßen. Zudem ist geplant, die operative Arbeit des PKGr mit drei weiteren, besonders befugten Mitarbeitern stärken. Der frühere BGH-Richter Wolfgang Nešković, der bislang als eifrigstes Mitglied des parlamentarischen Kontrollgremiums galt, gehört diesem nicht mehr an. Nešković hatte nach Querelen die Linksfraktion verlassen.

Markus Kompa
23.12.2012

Find this story at 23 December 2012

Copyright © 2013 Heise Zeitschriften Verlag

»Gladio« auch in Luxemburg? Das geheime NATO-Netzwerk und ein Strafprozeß

Seit dem 25. Februar findet vor der 9. Kriminalkammer in Luxemburg ein spektakulärer Strafprozeß statt, der trotz seiner politischen Dimension in deutschen Medien fast keine Resonanz findet. Angeklagt sind in der »Affaire Bommeleeër« (Bombenleger) die beiden früheren Mitglieder der »Brigade mobile de la Gendarmerie« Marc Scheer und Jos Wilmes. Den Exbeamten werden unter anderem versuchter Mord und Brandstiftung in 20 Fällen in den Jahren 1984 und 1985 vorgeworfen. Die Verteidigung hat u. a. Premierminister Jean-Claude Juncker und Angehörige des großherzoglichen Hauses laden lassen. So ging es am gestrigen Donnerstag um ein Alibi des Prinzen Jean, der von einem Zeugen nach einem Attentat 1985 in der Nähe des Tatorts gesehen worden war.

Die heute 56 und 58 Jahre alten Angeklagten sollen unter anderem Masten des Stromversorgers Cegedel zerstört und das Instrumentenlandesystem des Luxemburger Flughafens außer Betrieb gesetzt haben. Sie sollen auch einen Anschlag auf das Gebäude der Zeitung Luxemburger Wort verübt und während eines EG-Gipfels eine Sprengladung vor dem Konferenzgebäude gezündet haben. Laut Staatsanwaltschaft verfügten die Täter über umfangreiche Detailkenntnisse der Arbeit von Polizei und Gendarmerie, wußten offenbar, wann welche Objekte bewacht wurden, und führten die Fahnder regelmäßig an der Nase herum. Alle Ermittlungen verliefen im Sande, bis RTL Letzebuerg 2004 die Sache wieder aufgriff. Inzwischen deutet vieles darauf hin, daß es sich um Taten der NATO-Geheimtruppe »Gladio« handelt. Sie steht im Verdacht, u.a. 1980 in die Attentate von Bologna und auf das Münchner Oktoberfest verwickelt gewesen zu sein. Am Mittwoch vergangener Woche führte die Verteidigung eine eidesstattliche Erklärung in das Verfahren ein. In ihr bezeugt der deutsche Historiker Andreas Kramer, daß sein Vater als Hauptmann der Bundeswehr und Agent des Bundesnachrichtendienstes »Gladio«-Operationsleiter für mehrere Länder gewesen sei. Als solcher habe er engen Kontakt zum damaligen Chef des luxemburgischen Geheimdienstes SREL, Charles Hoffmann, gepflegt. Dieser hat bisher jeden Zusammenhang der Attentatsserie mit »Gladio« oder dem SREL abgestritten.

22.03.2013 / Ausland / Seite 2Inhalt

Von Arnold Schölzel

Find this story at 22 March 2013

© junge Welt

Undercover: Police Officer Connected to “NATO 5” Case Still Spying on Protest in Chicago

The first time “Danny” (far right) officially ran as a CAM medic: March 18, 2012 at a protest to mark the anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq war.
On March 27, Chicago teachers and their supporters – including parents, students and community residents – rallied against the largest mass public school closure in US history. News of the mobilization sparked huge public interest before the demonstration – including from an undercover police officer calling himself “Danny Edwards.”

The day before the big rally, “Danny” reached out in individual emails to fellow volunteer street medics he had met a year earlier after he took a 20-hour training with Chicago’s local street medic collective, Chicago Action Medical (CAM). CAM’s volunteer emergency medical technicians (EMTs), nurses, doctors and trained street medics provide emergency medical treatment at local protests.

His aim in reaching out: to learn more about the next day’s plans.

“Danny” – who admitted to us on May 6 that he is, in fact, a Chicago police officer – could have saved himself the trouble and his department the expense. After all, organizers had already coordinated directly with top CPD brass about their plans for the next day and widely promoted their intent to stage nonviolent civil disobedience.

After the CTU rally, “Danny” also tried to recruit at least one CAM volunteer street medic via email on April 30, the day before a May 1, 2013, immigrants’ rights march, to pair up with him as a partner. There were no takers, so he showed up alone at the rally sporting marked medic regalia.

His latest undercover sortie as a fake volunteer street medic bookends a hectic year for him.

The Paper Trail

“Danny” was a fixture at CAM events beginning in early March 2012, when he participated in a 20-hour introductory training for new street medics – a training he described in an email to CAM volunteer street medic Scott Mechanic as “great.”

May 1, 2012: “Danny Edwards” – posing with fellow Chicago Action Medical volunteers at their health care booth in Union Park, where street medics were volunteering to provide first aid and emergency health care for participants at the annual May Day rally and march. “Danny” – the only medic not smiling – is standing in front of the CAM banner.

The email address “Danny” used in that correspondence, which he did not sign by name, was pegged to the name of a Chicago police officer cited months later in court documents involved in undercover work around the NATO protests.

Less than half an hour after sending that initial email, “Danny” sent the first in a flurry of emails to Mechanic from a different email address, writing “let me know what going on so i can get involved (sic).”

“Danny’s” March 2012 foray into spying on CAM aligns with the date prosecutors say the Chicago Police Department (CPD) posted two other undercover agents who went by the street names “Mo” and “Nadia” on a 90-day temporary duty undercover assignment to Field Intelligence Team 7150. That team was tasked with infiltrating Occupy and anarchist groups in the run-up to the NATO Summit, according to court documents filed by Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez in April 2013.

Those two officers, “Mo” and “Nadia,” are also purported linchpins in the criminal cases against five activists known as the “NATO 5,” three of whom are scheduled to go to trial on NATO-related domestic terrorism charges this September.

The NATO prosecutors’ October 2012 Answer to Discovery lists this same police officer among the CPD officers, detectives and other police officials who may be called to testify in this fall’s upcoming trial. He is also mentioned in the NATO defendants’ February 25, 2013, Motion to Compel Discovery as “a CPD undercover officer related to this investigation.”

Busy Year for “Danny” – and Early Red Flags

Five days after he inadvertently emailed Scott Mechanic under his given name and scrambled to cover his tracks, “Danny” acted for the first time as a CAM street medic at a small permitted peace march on Chicago’s north side. The March 18, 2012 event was organized to mark the anniversary of the launch of the Iraq War in March 2003.

May 1, 2013: “Danny Edwards,” undercover Chicago police officer, at a May Day rally for immigrant rights in Chicago’s Union Park.
“Danny” ran again as a marked CAM street medic on April 7, 2012 at Occupy Chicago’s “Occupy Spring” event, also emailing Mechanic on April 26, 2012 about bringing a “friend” to an upcoming health workshop. On May 1, 2012, he volunteered as a marked CAM street medic at a May Day rally and march, where his refusal to follow CAM operational guidelines – reportedly abandoning his street medic partner to make a b-line for a group of young protesters wearing black clothes – began to raise real alarms with fellow street medics.

After “Danny’s” behavior on May Day, a number of veteran CAM volunteers – including Mechanic – moved immediately to isolate him from new and less experienced street medics, to monitor his behavior closely and to broadly urge the practice of good security culture.

But without a smoking gun, they were unwilling to expose him publicly. The chill from veteran street medics didn’t discourage “Danny” from continuing to reach out and show up to actions.

On May 11, a week and a half later and as local organizers were scrambling to find housing for out-of-town protesters traveling in for the demonstrations, he emailed Mechanic directly for information about housing that other groups or collectives might be offering. “I have a group of friends in need and I wanted some direction,” he wrote.

On May 20, 2012, at a large protest against the NATO Summit, CAM street medics demanded that he remove his medic markings after he again ignored CAM street operations protocols by deserting his partner to sprint after a group of protesters clad in black clothes.

“Danny” sent emails to individual members of CAM’s listserv – but almost never to the larger listserv – strategically for the next year, seeking information about upcoming demonstrations and meetings. The off-list queries continued to raise red flags with CAM members he contacted, some of whom had never met him and did not know who he was.

When we asked “Danny” at the 2013 May Day rally to confirm his name and identity as a CPD officer, he insisted he was “Danny Edwards” and claimed to be a friend of a local activist.

That’s not how the activist described “Danny” to CAM volunteers at a street medic training before the NATO protests last spring. At that training, he told CAM members that “Danny” had recently befriended him, and he raised concerns there about “Danny’s” interest in topics ranging from Molotov cocktails to property damage.

“NATO 5” Connection

According to court documents released in the months after the NATO Summit protests, “Danny”is one of the undercover officers at the heart of the “NATO 5” criminal cases. He’s mentioned in the pre-NATO Summit pre-emptive raid search warrant documents as “Undercover Officer C,” and is also cited by his given name in court documents for one of the NATO defendants, Sebastian “Sabi” Senakiewicz, as a potential trial witness.

We tried to question “Danny” about his undercover activities on May 6 at a house that had a sheet of paper with his given name and phone number taped to the front door. While he admitted he was, in fact, the named police officer he’d denied being just five days earlier, he declined to answer our questions.

“Danny’s” post-NATO activities raise a key question: Why keep an undercover officer in play as a volunteer street medic in a nonviolent health-care project almost a year after the NATO protests that ostensibly put him into motion as a police spy in the first place?

It’s virtually impossible to say from the official record. That’s because the CPD and Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez have fought tooth and nail in court for almost a year to prevent defense attorneys in the remaining NATO cases from learning more about the scope and character of police spying on political activity leading up to last year’s NATO Summit.

At a “NATO 3” status hearing on May 14, 2013, prosecutors again opposed disclosing information about the wider scope of police spying on Chicago’s activist groups (as they have before in official court filings) in the months leading up to the NATO Summit. Defense attorneys rebutted in open court – as they did in writing earlier in their April 30, 2013, “Reply to the State’s Response to Defendants’ Motion to Compel” – that this information remains directly relevant to the NATO cases because it would broaden the context of the arrests of the NATO 3 and the CPD’s pre-NATO spying efforts targeting the activist community.

Broader Context

Police spying in recent years has targeted peace groups, environmentalists and the Occupy movement, a focus on protest as a potential flashpoint of “terrorism” that sometimes has disastrous consequences. By way of example, in Boston, local police focused their attention on the political activism of local residents at the same time they missed the threat posed by the Boston Marathon bombers.

And law enforcement has also demonstrated a disturbing pattern of working undercover to create crime to prosecute crime. Notable cases like the “Cleveland 4” fit into a pattern that journalist Arun Gupta has described as law enforcement’s “war of entrapment against the Occupy movement.”

Law enforcement infiltration in Chicago in the run-up to the 2012 NATO Summit unfolded most publicly with the use of at least two undercover cops who went by the names “Mo” and “Nadia.”

Both were regular fixtures at a spring 2012 encampment to try to prevent the closure of the Woodlawn Mental Health Clinic on Chicago’s south side, one of six public mental health clinics slated for closure by city officials and hardly a flashpoint of “potential terrorist activity.” They also showed up at one point at an independent media center organized to cover the NATO protests and at numerous other documented locales in the two and a half months before the NATO Summit.

“Red Squad” 2.0 Rolling Back into Town?

Ongoing police spying a year after the NATO meeting by “Danny” – and potentially others – raises a real alarm among activists, including CAM street medics, whose national community traces its origins to the Medical Presence Project of the Medical Committee for Human Rights (MCHR).

MCHR was first formed in 1964 to provide medical assistance to the civil rights movement. Its Chicago-based volunteers, who also provided medical aid at protests organized by peace projects and student groups opposed to the Vietnam War, were among thousands of civilians spied on by the CPD’s notorious Red Squad.

“The CPD’s decision to plant an undercover police spy in Chicago Action Medical is outrageous, but sadly, comes as no surprise,” said CAM street medic Dick Reilly in an interview. “The CPD has a long and sordid history of surveillance and infiltration of labor, peace and social justice groups dating back to the 1886 railroading of the Haymarket defendants – efforts that led to the creation of Chicago’s infamous Red Squad. Over a hundred years later, the cops are clearly still at it.”

For Reilly, CAM’s ongoing infiltration threatens core freedoms that range from the privacy rights of the people they treat to police officials’ ongoing assault on dissent in the city.

“When the CPD targets a volunteer medical project like CAM – which seeks to provide basic first aid to people exercising their democratic rights and whose primary principle is to ‘do no harm’ – it underscores the lengths to which they’ll go to criminalize dissent, suppress resistance and pander to the agenda of the political and economic elites they actually serve and protect,” Reilly said.

The Chicago Red Squad’s abuses of basic constitutional rights were so egregious – targets included the Parent-Teachers’ Association and the League of Women Voters – that a federal court slapped the city with a consent decree in 1982 that expressly barred politically motivated police spying unless police could show at least some evidence of criminal intent on the part of the targets of their spying.

The city was finally able to win relief from the consent decree in January 2001, after arguing for years constitutional protections thwarted its ability to investigate gangs and “terrorism.”

The consent decree’s demise hasn’t kept the CPD out of hot water for spying on political projects, either, beginning as early as 2002. Were the old consent decree still in place, CAM members believe “Danny’s” undercover spying on their work over the past year would have been illegal.

McCarthy’s Spy-Ops Background at NYPD, Newark PD

Just before he was sworn in as Chicago’s new mayor in May of 2011, Rahm Emanuel – a former US Congressman and chief of staff for President Obama – announced the appointment of new police superintendent Garry McCarthy. Three months later, McCarthy created an intelligence-gathering unit tasked to perform “counter-terrorism” work in preparation for the May 2012 NATO meetings.

A career New York cop, McCarthy is no stranger to the use of systematic police spying.

The New York Police Department (NYPD) has a contentious track record in this arena, prompting the implementation of New York’s own version of Chicago’s Red Squad consent decree – the Handschu Decree – while McCarthy was climbing up the NYPD’s ranks to a senior command position.

It wasn’t long after he formally assumed the mantle of CPD superintendent in 2011 that McCarthy drew fire for allowing the latest iteration of New York’s police spy ring to operate in Newark, NJ, where he had served as police chief before taking the position as CPD’s top dog.

McCarthy also served as an NYPD commander when the police set up spy rings before the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City and during “CIA on the Hudson,” the joint NYPD/CIA project that was set up and run by former CIA Deputy Director for Operations David Cohen to “map the human terrain” of New York City’s Islamic community.

Targeting Street Medics

Volunteer street medics have historically been an attractive target for undercovers.

CAM street medic Scott Mechanic met “Anna,” before she was outed as a police infiltrator, an FBI informant who used her position as a street medic to befriend and entrap environmental activists. One of those activists, Eric McDavid, is serving a 20-year sentence in a case built around Anna’s testimony and her reported entrapment activities.

In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Mechanic was also a street medic volunteer at New Orleans’ Common Ground Collective, where he and dozens of other volunteer health-care providers ran into Brandon Darby, an agent provocateur and FBI informant at the heart of another entrapment case, this one against David McKay and Bradley Crowder.

“These kinds of informants and undercover police represent a real threat to activists, in no small part because they’re committed to manufacturing crime where none exists to terrorize the public and justify their abuses of our right to dissent,” said Mechanic. “This Chicago cop’s infiltration of our group raises real questions about police intrusion into protesters’ medical histories – and it’s a truly despicable example of exploiting people’s caregivers as part of the national campaign to criminalize dissent.”

Convergence of the War on Drugs, War on Terrorism

As a Chicago cop, the CPD officer who infiltrated CAM has worked on narcotics and gang cases, including as an undercover officer.

Given the growing conflation of the “War on Drugs” with the “War on Terrorism,” which is increasingly married to a War on Dissent, it’s not surprising that the Chicago police officer who infiltrated CAM would segue into COINTELPRO-style undercover work. By the 1990’s, the CPD was listing dissidents by alleged political affiliation in their gang database, in tandem with then-Mayor Richard M. Daley’s claim that the Red Squad Consent Decree shackled cops’ ability to investigate both gangs and “terrorism.”

Shahid Buttar, executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, points to the delayed notice search warrants enabled by Section 213 of the USA PATRIOT Act – presented to the public as a counter-terrorism tool – as a key example of the War on Drugs’ convergence with the War on Terrorism.

“Both the War on Drugs and the War on Terrorism have long represented cash cows for law enforcement and intelligence agencies, from the FBI all the way down to local police departments,” Buttar said in an interview. “Beyond the serial corruption of agencies pimping public fears to inflate their budgets, many particular powers claimed as necessary for one ‘war’ are actually used more in the other.”

The Chicago Police Department did not respond to our phone calls or emails about this story.

Tuesday, 21 May 2013 09:55
By Steve Horn and Chris Geovanis, Truthout | Report

Find this story at 21 May 2013

© 2012 Truthout

The NATO 5: Manufactured Crimes Used to Paint Political Dissidents as Terrorists

A high-stakes game is being played in the United States today called, “To Catch a Terrorist.” The public need not worry, though, as the risks are surprisingly low. In this game, the police claim to prevent nefarious terrorist plots, while in reality they’re taking credit for foiling the same victimless crimes they themselves manufacture. This deceitful strategy is used primarily on Muslims and Arab-Americans, but a string of recent cases shows how political dissidents are also being entrapped, both figuratively and literally.

Last year, Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez dusted off a rarely used 11-year-old Illinois State terrorism statute and, with great fanfare, charged several dissidents with crimes of terrorism on the eve of a national political protest. The NATO 5, as they became known, have since garnered widespread support in Chicago, across the country, and around the world.

This week marks a dramatic shift in their lengthy prosecution. Attorneys for three of the defendants, most of whom are members of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG), will be filing briefs today, January 25th in order to challenge the constitutionality of the state terrorism statute under which four of the activists were originally charged. If the court finds the law to be unconstitutional, the three highest profile cases could go to trial in September with no terrorism charges, fewer felonies to defend against, and facing a far less ominous sentence than the current 40 years in prison.

* * *

Wednesday, May 16th wasn’t particularly memorable, except that it fell three days prior to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit, a National Special Security Event (NSSE) held in Chicago from May 19th-21st. It was the first time in 13 years that NATO member states had met on U.S. soil, well before the 9/11 attacks, and the Obama administration funneled millions of federal taxpayer dollars into a massive “security” apparatus to ensure a seamless summit.

Ever since the NSSE designation was established by President Clinton in 1998, it has been synonymous with heavy surveillance and infiltration of political groups, police brutality, preemptive raids and mass arrests. The NATO summit in Chicago last spring would be no exception.

In the dark of night with guns drawn, the police used “no-knock” search warrants to break down the doors of an apartment building in the Bridgeport district of Chicago at approximately 11:30 pm that Wednesday. Unbeknownst to the thousands of anti-NATO activists in the city at the time, and members of the local NLG chapter which was providing legal support for the demonstrations, the police arrested nine activists, seizing computers, cell phones, political literature and other personal belongings from the building. Police also searched neighboring apartments and questioned residents, allegedly repeatedly calling one of the tenants a “Commie faggot.”

The Chicago Police Department (CPD) refused to acknowledge they had arrested anyone in Bridgeport that night, let alone divulge where they were being held. It wasn’t until the following afternoon that NLG attorneys determined nine activists had been taken to the Organized Crime Division of the CPD. Within 72 hours, six of the nine were released without charges.

On Saturday, the first day of the NATO summit, the three remaining activists were brought before Cook County Judge Edward Harmening on charges of possessing an incendiary device, material support for terrorism, and conspiracy to commit terrorism. The prosecutor wasted no time in labeling the defendants as “self-proclaimed anarchists,” as if to inherently equate thought crime and political ideology with criminal activity or terrorism, though Assistant State’s Attorney Matthew Thrun provided no evidence to substantiate his hyperbole. Thrun accused the three defendants — Brian Jacob Church, who was 20 at the time, and Jared Chase and Brent Betterly, who were both 24 — with preparing to commit “terrorist acts of violence and destruction directed against different targets in protest to the NATO summit”:

Specifically, plans were made to destroy police cars and attack four CPD stations with destructive devices, in an effort to undermine the police response to the conspirators’ other planned action for the NATO summit. Some of the proposed targets included the Campaign Headquarters of U.S. President Barack Obama, the personal residence of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel (sic), and certain downtown financial institutions.

Although no evidence of the allegations was provided, Assistant State’s Attorney Thrun asked the court to impose a bond of $5 million for each defendant. Judge Harmening rejected his request, but was apparently convinced enough by the State’s proffer to impose an equally unreasonable amount of $1.5 million bond each. The prosecutor and judge likely reasoned that such a prohibitively high bond would keep the three defendants imprisoned until trial. They were right. Church, Chase, and Betterly have been held in Cook County Jail for more than eight months now, with their trial currently scheduled to begin on September 16, 2013, more than a year after they were arrested.

Shortly after tracking down Church, Chase, and Betterly, the Guild’s legal team discovered two more activists — Sebastian Senakiewicz and Mark Neiweem — who were also surreptitiously arrested on terrorism-related charges. Senakiewicz, 24, was arrested at his Chicago home the day after the Bridgeport raid and charged with falsely making a terrorist threat, another felony under the State’s 2001 terrorism statute. Neiweem, a 28-year-old local activist, was arrested the same day, but in a far more sensationalized way. In broad daylight, he was snatched by numerous undercover police officers from Michigan Avenue, one of the busiest streets in the city, undoubtedly aimed at inducing fear in those witnessing the aggressive apprehension. Neiweem was slapped with felony solicitation and attempted possession of an incendiary device, but was not charged under the State’s terrorism statute as the others were.

NLG attorneys representing Senakiewicz and Neiweem argued at their bond hearing that they were denied their Constitutional due process rights by being refused a hearing within 48 hours. Senakiewicz was allegedly held for 68 hours without seeing a judge or being able to access a phone or his attorney, who finally got to visit Senakiewicz only minutes before his bond hearing. Neiweem was allegedly held for 66 hours before getting a hearing, and was denied medical treatment in detention. According to the NLG, on several occasions Neiweem was forced to choose between seeing his attorney and going to the hospital.

Once before a judge, the State’s Attorney painted Senakiewicz and Neiweem as violent criminals and convinced the court to impose similarly high bonds of $750,000 and $500,000 respectively. Unable to raise sufficient funds, Senakiewicz and Neiweem also remain incarcerated at Cook County Jail.

But the terrorism-related charges weren’t the only threads connecting the NATO 5 cases together. At least two undercover Chicago police officers are also believed to have been integral to each defendant’s arrest and prosecution. Shortly after the Bridgeport raid, Occupy Chicago activists began piecing together a CPD spying operation that had lasted for months before the NATO summit. As early as March, two assumed activists who went by the names “Mo” and “Gloves” began working with the Occupy Chicago movement. On April 13th, at least one of them was arrested with a small group of Occupy Chicago activists, who had held a demonstration with STOP (Southside Together Organizing for Power) in order to keep open the Woodlawn Mental Health Clinic, which had been scheduled for closure by Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

By the time Church, Chase and Betterly arrived in Chicago around May Day, Mo and Gloves had fully ingratiated themselves in the ranks of the Occupy movement and were supposedly involved in helping plan the NATO demonstrations. By contrast, the three activists from Florida were unfamiliar with the political terrain in Chicago and, more than most, were vulnerable to manipulation by two unsuspected undercover cops.

While little is publicly known about the interactions between Church, Chase, and Betterly and the infiltrators, we do know that Mo and Gloves were arrested with the nine activists the night of the Bridgeport raid. For the past six months, defense attorneys have been poring over trillions of bytes of recorded and written information, an overwhelming amount of data that was dumped on them by the prosecution, thereby significantly complicating and hampering the discovery process.

Of course, that’s part of the game… hiding the ball in plain sight, especially if the ingredients of entrapment are present. The defense wants to know how instructive Mo and Gloves might have been in getting the three to engage in the alleged criminal behavior. Did the undercover cops or their federal counterparts instigate the idea to use Molotov cocktails? How dependent were the three activists on Mo and Gloves to execute the plan? Answers to these questions would better enable the attorneys for Church, Chase, and Betterly to mount an entrapment defense, but by contrast the lack of answers will make that effort much more difficult.

To successfully assert an entrapment defense, the accused must show by a preponderance of the evidence that they were induced or coerced to commit the crime. By no means is this easy to do in a court of law. In fact, no terrorism charges since 9/11 have been beaten based on an entrapment defense, though there have been numerous cases involving undercover police and paid informants.

Three activists were charged with federal terrorism-related crimes during the 2008 Republican convention protests in St. Paul for possession of unused Molotov cocktails. And, in advance of May Day protests last year, five Occupy Cleveland activists were arrested and charged with attempting to blow up a bridge with fake explosives, supplied by the FBI. In each of these cases, paid FBI informants cultivated relationships with activists in order to carry out plans that would never have been hatched or developed without law enforcement participation.

The entrapment defense, however, opens the door for prosecutors to argue that Church, Chase, and Betterly had the propensity to commit the crime. And, while the State’s Attorney must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the three were predisposed, that open door is still a serious concern for the defense.

With the discovery process scheduled to wrap up by February 25th, the defense is continuing to push for more information, especially related to the federal government. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is mentioned in the State’s Attorney’s proffer and the defense wants to know the extent of the agency’s involvement. The FBI is commonly integral to these types of criminal investigations, as the lead counter-intelligence agency for NSSEs. However, the FBI chose not to bring federal charges and has tried to downplay its involvement in the case.

Right now, though, the focus for the defense is challenging the IL State terrorism statute, 720 ILCS 5/29D. Indicating early on that it intended to question the basis of the charges being brought by the State’s Attorney, the defense is now preparing to file its initial brief today, January 25th. Attorneys will argue that the terrorism statute is so vague as to be unconstitutional on its face and as applied against their clients. The goal of the legal challenge is not only to dismiss terrorism charges against the NATO defendants, but also to prevent the State’s Attorney from using a flawed criminal statute against others in the future.

“The State’s Attorney is using sensational terrorism charges to justify the extensive investigation against Occupy Chicago, including months of infiltration as well as this expensive and ongoing prosecution,” said Sarah Gelsomino, who is representing Church as an attorney with the People’s Law Office. “We intend to show that the State’s terrorism statute is bad law that should be stricken.”

The State’s Attorney will have until February 15th to reply to the defendants’ challenge. Cook County Judge Thaddeus L. Wilson, who is presiding over the case, is expected to rule some time after February 25th, when the defense files its final brief in the pre-trial challenge. If the IL State terrorism statute is found to be unconstitutional, either facially or as applied, the defendants’ highest-level felonies could be thrown out. However, that would not necessarily mean their cases would be dismissed entirely. When Church, Chase, and Betterly were finally indicted by grand jury on June 12th, the State’s Attorney had tacked on eight more felonies, including additional counts of possession of an incendiary device, attempted arson, solicitation to commit arson, conspiracy to commit arson and two counts of unlawful use of a weapon, for a total of eleven charges each. Prosecutors have been known to overcharge in criminal cases as a means of getting at least some of the charges to stick. It’s difficult to deny that such a strategy is being used in this case.

Though their cases and situations are different than the three most seriously charged, Senakiewicz and Neiweem are getting the same level of support from activists in Chicago and elsewhere around the country. Neiweem is a local activist who has been targeted before by police for his lawful political activity. On at least one occasion since his incarceration, Neiweem allegedly has been badly beaten and hospitalized by Cook County Sheriff jail guards, and allegedly has been repeatedly held in isolation. Senakiewicz, an activist and Polish immigrant living in Chicago who was facing up to 15 years in prison, accepted a plea bargain in November, in which he agreed to a single terrorism-related felony, and a 4-year prison sentence. Although the prosecution led Senakiewicz to believe he would only have to serve a 120-day sentence in an out-of-county “boot camp” for non-violent offenders, he was ultimately ineligible for the program and will be forced to serve the entire sentence. Supporters also fear his immediate deportation upon release.

“Honestly, how serious was this case?” asked Guild attorney Jeff Frank, who represented Senakiewicz (also known as “Sabi”) with fellow NLG attorney Melinda Power. “Sabi is guilty of imprudent language,” said Frank. “That’s hardly grounds to extract a guilty plea for a serious felony, but that’s how Ms. Alvarez has chosen to spend the taxpayers’ resources.”

So, why were the NATO 5 arrested in such a spectacular way, just days before a controversial summit in Chicago? And, why are they being used as pawns in a high-stakes game of “To Catch a Terrorist?” Maybe the answers partly lie in the questions.

The motivations are actually just beneath the surface. The State’s Attorney’s aforementioned need to justify the investigation, infiltration and prosecution of the NATO 5 is likely a primary impulse. The tactic of preemptive police raids, a common trademark of NSSE law enforcement operations used to chill imminent protest activity, cannot be discounted. But, there is also a coordinated effort by local and federal officials to perpetuate a billion-dollar “protection racket,” in which law enforcement uses an aggressive counter-terrorism approach to both instill fear in the public and then, after solving the “crime,” induce the perception of safety. It’s also reasonable to assume that the NATO terrorism cases are an extension of the ongoing efforts to monitor and undermine the Occupy Wall Street movement. Perhaps there are elements of each in the effort to prosecute the NATO 5.

Regardless of the motivations, the NATO 5 case is indicative of a growing trend in law enforcement strategies used during political demonstrations: entrapping dissidents in manufactured terrorism crimes. As Glenn Greenwald recently wrote in the Guardian:

The most significant civil liberties trend of the last decade, in my view, is the importation of War on Terror tactics onto U.S. soil, applied to U.S. citizens… It should be anything but surprising that the FBI — drowning in counter-terrorism money, power and other resources — will apply the term ’terrorism’ to any group it dislikes and wants to control and suppress.

Disclosure: Kris Hermes is a member of the National Lawyers Guild.

May 24, 2013
Posted: 01/25/2013 4:01 pm

Find this story at 25 May 2013

Copyright © 2013 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.

‘Common practice’ for cops to use dead kids IDs; Shocking … cops used dead children’s identities

POLICE have admitted it was “common practice” for undercover officers to adopt the identities of dead children for aliases in the 1980s – but said they had no idea exactly how many times the sick tactic was used.

Despite a number of requests from relatives of dead children, Chief Constable Mick Creedon said none of the people affected had been told yet.

He also admitted no arrests had been made and no officers faced disciplinary proceedings.

The Derbyshire police boss said: “No families of children whose identities have been used have been contacted and informed.

“No answer either positive or negative has yet been given in relation to these inquiries from families.”

Commenting on the continuing Operation Herne investigation, he said the issue is “very complicated and mistakes could put lives in jeopardy”.

Keith Vaz MP, Home Affairs Select Committee chairman, has demanded all affected families be contacted immediately.

Operation Herne – a probe into undercover policing by the Metropolitan Police’s Special Demonstrations Squad – was set up after PC Mark Kennedy posed as an environmental protestor and had a sexual relationship with an activist.

A number of men and women are suing the Met over alleged intimate relationships with undercover cops.

The investigation, which has 23 officers and ten police staff working on it, has so far cost £1.25million and is expected to cost a further £1.66million over the next year.

By KAREN MORRISON
Published: 17th May 2013

Find this story at 17 May 201

© News Group Newspapers Limited