Shayler in Court (Again)

[Annie]

Former MI5 officer David Shayler returns to the High Court on Thursday,
27th July to fight another government attempt to win a permanent
injunction against him.

The terms of the proposed gagging order will ensure that he can no
longer speak out about the crimes of MI5 and MI6 which he personally
witnessed. It will ban him from speaking about a number of serious
incidents, such as MI6's illegal funding of Al Qaeda to assassinate
Colonel Gaddafi of Libya in 1996 - information which has been in the
public domain world-wide since 1998, and which MI5 itself has already
cleared for publication.

[Graham]

send him my best luck.

Go kick their asses.

[dodgy]

Yep, best of luck too

[Dr Hemp]

Yeah - good luck to David.

Maybe we should ask Woody Harrelson if David could borrow the t-shirt used in the film "The People vs Larry Flynt" to wear for his court room appearance? Well probably not?

Hopefully you will get a fair judge. Do you think the fact this Government has pissed off the Judiciary so much that there's a chance David might find a favourable judge who will relish the opportunity to give the Government a kick in the teeth? Or will it just be an old duffer who is there to protect the PTB?

[Abandoned Ego]

Yes, may the force be with you David.

I trust that Annie will be there, hopefully keeping us all up to speed on this.

[Annie]

[Snowygrouch]

All,
It never ceases to amaze me that authorities never learn the lesson that if you BAN an well publicesed activity/event/occupation you tend to magnify public interest in it 10 fold.

Hopefully the Judge might realise this or at least realise the futility of banning what is in the public domain anyway (thanks to David and Annie).

Best of luck David.

Calum

[kookomula]

Say *, do what you will, I've got bigger fish to fry now MR BUSH staring menacingly down the lense of the camera. Are you going to wear a 9-11 t.shirt? Please, I'll knock you one up.

Donna

[andrewwatson]

We're with you all the way David.

[Steven Collins]

Hi David & Annie

Heard your show on Friday for the 1st time, good to hear you two & also good music. Well played.

Hope David can play as well in court. Good luck m8

Don't let the bstrds grind you down!!

Keep on keeping on being positive.

Love Linda & Steve xx

[Abandoned Ego]

Annie said

[Seb]

Best of luck to the both of you

[Annie]

Hi all

Many thanks for the kind wishes. The time of the hearing has been changed at the last minute to 2pm. So, anyone who is thinking of coming along tomorrow - we shall be gathering at 12.45 at a coffeeshop called Benjy's on Essex Street (just across the road from the Royal Courts)

Regards

Annie


David Shayler Press Release

Date: 27 July 2006
Time: 14:00
Place: The Royal Courts of Justice, The Strand, London

Event:
MI5 whistleblower David Shayler returns to the High Courts of Justice on Thursday, 27th July to fight another government attempt to win a permanent injunction against him.

The terms of the proposed gagging order will ensure that he can no longer speak out about the many crimes of MI5 and MI6 that he personally witnessed. It will ban him from speaking about a number of serious incidents, such as MI6's illegal funding of Al Qaeda to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi of Libya in 1996 - information which has been in the public domain world-wide since 1998, and which MI5 itself has already cleared for publication.

Background:
David Shayler worked for MI5’s political and counter-terrorism departments in the 1990s. He was so disgusted by the crimes and incompetence of MI5 that he left and went on the record about the service’s failings. Ministers have consistently refused to take his sworn evidence. Instead, they have used the Official Secrets Act and a temporary injunction, issued in September 1997, to stop journalists from investigating his disclosures. This has led to a life on the run, exile in Paris, his voluntary return to the UK in 2000, a 2-year court case and two spells in prison.

The initial allegations: Files on Labour ministers, civil liberties activists, pop groups etc; illegal telephone taps; drinking culture in MI5 and MI6; the failed management culture in MI5.

Subsequent allegations made through legal channels:
The mistakes made by MI5 in the run-up to the Israeli Embassy bombing in London in 1994. MI5 then allowed two Palestinians to be wrongfully convicted of the attack.
The case of IRA bombs going off in Tyneside in 1993 because of failures on the part of MI5 and police Special Branch. MI5 then lied to government.
The Gaddafi plot - when two MI6 officers operated outside government control and paid an Islamic extremist group in Libya with links to Al Qaeda to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi; the attack went wrong and killed innocent civilians. A police investigation has established that Robin Cook's assertions that this allegation is "pure fantasy" are at best misleading.
The mistakes that led to the Bishopsgate attack in London in 1993.

A temporary injunction was granted in September 1997 against David and The Mail on Sunday newspaper. The action was dropped against the newspaper, but only stayed against David. The proposed permanent injunction will ban David from discussing ever again any but the initial disclosures, even though the subsequent disclosures were cleared by MI5 for the publication last year of my book, Spies, Lies and Whistleblowers.

In a world where our country is taken into an illegal war on flawed evidence, where people in the UK can be imprisoned without trial on the word of the intelligence services, and where the threat of terrorist attack is a daily fear, we need to know that those responsible for Britain’s security are really doing all they can to protect us.

Whistleblowers should be protected not prosecuted.


Annie Machon
26 July 2006

[DeFecToR]

Hi Annie. Brendan here.
Wish David all our best from over here, and if you could, let him know about this and tell him to keep it fresh in his mind during the proceedings;

http://www.wdsu.com/news/3460133/detail.html

[Annie]

Nice one Brendan. I'm not going to be able to keep a straight face in court!

Annie

[Annie]

Just a quick report back.

Well that was a fun afternoon. Dave was fighting to have the right to a full hearing, including evidence, about the temporary injunction taken out against him 9 years ago. You wouldn't think that would be too much to ask, would you?

The prosecution droned on (barely audibly most of the time) for 1 1/2 hours, regurgitating all the half-baked, unchallenged assertions from Dave's trial. Which brought back all the feelings of seething frustration.

Just as everyone was sliding into a coma, he stopped, and Dave had to go on, even though it was almost the end of the afternoon. But he was magnificent. Cogent, calm but passionate, and eloquent. Whether that will be enough, who can tell? The decision may have been taken ages ago......

And he also included stuff about 911 and 7/7.

Thanks to all who turned up in support. We had a nice little demo, with a "dangerous" placard, and there was a small gaggle of photographers outside the court, so you never know, there might be some good pix out there somewhere in the media tomorrow.

The judgement is at 11am tomorrow.


Annie

[scubadiver]

David will have a lot to say on his slot tomorrow night, assuming he will be on! Could be entertaining.

[Dr Hemp]

Looks like the Labour Nazis are already making moves to stop whistleblowers

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/02/nblows 02.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/07/02/ixuknews.html

[Annie]

Well, that was another resounding success for British justice. Mr Justice Eady granted a permanent injunction against David Shayler in the High Court today.

In a breathtaking ruling Eady stated that David was not entitled to present evidence or cross-examine his accusers (again), but instead issued a summary judgement based on assertions made by MI5. This means that David can now only talk about a restricted range of disclosures – specifically what appeared in the Mail on Sunday on 24 August 1997. This means that he cannot talk about a whole range of topics which are in the public domain and have already been cleared via the injunction and for the publication of my book, Spies, Lies and Whistleblowers.

Specifically, this means that, while I and the rest of the world can talk about state-sponsored false-flag terrorism, including the Gaddafi plot, David is banned. Very convenient when the 911 campaign is taking off.

The temporary injunction was issued in September 1997 on the explicit understanding that a full legal hearing would be needed before it could be made permanent. David has now been denied this. Also, the injunction has been abused repeatedly, for example allowing the government to spin lies against him when he wished to reveal the wrongful conviction of two innocent Palestinians, Samar Alami and Jawad Botmeh, for the bombing of the Israeli embassy in London in 1994.

Also, when he tried to alert the government to murder and a major terrorist attack organised by MI6 officers in the Gaddafi plot, he did so legally via the injunction. For his pains, he was the one thrown in prison in Paris in 1998.

The injunction has also repeatedly been used to intimidate journalists (one of whom was tried and convicted) and to stop the media investigating the criminality of MI5 and MI6.

With this ruling, the judge has also abolished at one stroke the media's right to publish whistleblowers' testimony if they can argue it caused no damage to national security. If any future whistleblower emerges from the intelligence services, and is injuncted, the media has lost this defence, enshrined by parliament in criminal law (Section 1.5 of the OSA).

And why is an injunction necessary anyway? There already exists a criminal sanction under the Official Secret Act. The judge was kind enough to say that the injunction was for David’s own good and would stop him having to break the OSA again!

We are through the looking glass.

Yours in wonderland.

Annie

[dodgy]

That is rough Any chance of an appeal...?

[Annie]

Hi Dodgy

No, not pleasant.

Yes, we shall be asking for an appeal, but we have to ask permission from those upholders of justice, the judges at the court of appeal. So who can tell??

Annie

[Kier]

I am so proud to be British and of our fine justice system! No, really. Who could ask for more than the permanent gagging of a person trying to raise awareness of issues that should concern us all, and for highlighting how very un-protected we are by the security services - which is of course a threat to national security not an intended aid to it.
The messenger is shot, in the tradition of all those who don't care to hear the message.

Annie and David, I guess we will all have to continue to hope that it won't always be like this and keep doing what we can to change it.

Pax et lux

Bev

[kbo234]

[dodgy]

^ I'm with kbo234's idea - if there's anything we can do to make the doddery senile old farts(!) see some sense... best of luck to you both

[Abandoned Ego]

Another obvious triumph for Democracy.

Satire aside best wishes to you both Annie and David.

One of these days people are going to wake up to who still holds the reigns of power in this "Democracy" of ours.

All that said we should use this farsical, nonsensical sham of "justice" to our advantage. Exactly how and Why was this decision arrived at ? Qui bono ?

One things for sure, the average Joe dont.

Keep yer chins up

[Kier]

Ant pointed out to me yesterday that 'justice' and 'law' are not the same thing. As in "'Justice' is what the majority want, 'law' is what a tiny minority impose to prevent 'justice' for the majority from ever occurring."

So, perhaps it was inaccurate of me to be sarcastic about the 'justice system'! What's worrying is that laws are in place that are ostensibly to protect the citizens of this country, yet are apparently employed to prevent individuals protecting the citizens of this country.

The Mirror wrote on Friday:

"Shayler, ordered to pay costs after representing himself, was "likely to continue to make disclosures that could endanger lives" if he were not restrained, the court heard."

I wonder if it was fully explained on what basis the disclosures could 'endanger lives' and whose lives specifically they could have endangered - or had already.

[Justin]

I don't know if any one watches the BBC drama series Judge John Deed and how the establishment, ptb, manipulate the 'right' judge to take the 'right' case to achieve the 'right' outcome, but it certainly looks as though there are rogue elements within the judiciary as much as there are within Parliament. Come the new Peasants Revolt - which I feel is just around the corner (totally non-violent of course) - there are going to be a lot of politicians and judges sharing cells together! They have been warned!!

[Busker]

[Jane]

Excuse me for being thick (as usual!) but does this court ruling, preventing David from speaking out - only refer to him speaking out about what he witnessed whilst working for MI5 or does it also stop him from giving talks around Britain, as he has been doing, at 9/11; 7/7 events and taking part in films such as "Mind The Gap"?

Well, I had to ask....

Love and Best Wishes to you both

Jane P xx

[scubadiver]

Im pleased David hasn't cancelled his slot on Resonance FM