Tuesday, 19 August 2014

Cliff






This picture is incredibly rare - that's "The Duchess", or "The Dutch".

That's Savile's MOTHER...

Dead since 1973.


"Cliff Richard, whose home is near to where Madeleine McCann disappeared, with Winston Churchill's close friend Lord Boothby, who reportedly was involved with child sex rings for the elite..."


The Krays were not psychotic (or even violent) prior to their National Service - then they spontaneously developed Multiple Personalities.

They are a product of the Tavistock Institute.

They main criminal racket was not Fruit Machines, it was little boys for the Cliveden Set.



Anonymous commented on the 1967 Tattingstone suitcase murder.

"The Scotland Yard Savile inquiry should extend to Suffolk...

"The Krays had property at Bildeston where they were involved with local youth clubs and giving children donkey rides etc.

"Just across the Essex border lived Ronnie's gay lover Tom Driberg MP."


"Apparently Kray had access to many London care homes and would have boys delivered to parties at DJ Alan ” fluff” Freeman’s large flat over a music shop in East London. 

"There they would meet with show biz types and DJs including Jimmy Saville, Joe Meeks and on occasion Beatles manager Brian Epstein."





"Apparently Kray had access to many London care homes and would have boys delivered to parties at DJ Alan ” fluff” Freeman’s large flat over a music shop in East London. 

"There they would meet with show biz types and DJs including Jimmy Saville, Joe Meeks and on occasion Beatles manager Brian Epstein."


According to this source - Archives - the Krays ran a paedophile ring.

"What was involved was the systematic abuse of ten-to-twelve-year-old boys, one of whom subsequently became fairly well known as a singer. 

"Another, rather less fortunate,wound up in six pieces in two suitcases... 

"The police uncovered a large-scale juvenile pimping operation centred on a house in a Suffolk village (Tattington) owned by Ronnie Kray. 

(The Kray twins had huge property interests in East Anglia). 

"Some of the boys were obtained via a close friend of (Benjamin) Britten's in London, who named him as one of the beneficiaries of the 'service': other'customers' included Lord Boothby (who frequently shared boys with Ronnie Kray himself) and the record producer Joe Meek. 

"At least two other people died in the aftermath of Bernard's murder as the twins sealed up the leaks."


"Joe Meek: addicted to amphetamines and obsessed with séances and the occult.

"He had been questioned by police about the 'Suitcase Murder'...

"The dismembered remains of 17-year-old Bernie Oliver were found in two suitcases in a field in Tattingstone in Suffolk...

"Bernie had lived close to Joe's Holloway Road studio...

"And Joe ... had been arrested for cottaging in 1963...

"Joe committed suicide less than a month after the discovery of the body..."




The Kray twins ran a bodyguard and 'protection' business for Hollywood stars, such as Frank Sinatra, and for Arab princes.


"At a big London railway station in the spring of 1970, a plastic carrier bag was found in the regular search for bombs before the station closed for the night.

"The contents were an odd assortment of letters and photos, which seemed to have been taken at a kinky party attended by some well-known figures in entertainment.

"One in particular showed a pop singer who masquerades under a Christian persona; dressed in women’s underwear he was pictured with young boys.

"The bag was duly taken to the station office and, as a senior rail worker wrote out a report for the lost property office, two MI5 men and a special branch officer arrived and demanded the photos."

T Stokes





THE ABDUCTION OF MADELEINE McCANN - A Modern Fairy Tale



After a gruelling professional year slogging away with nothing but exploitation and degenerating services for a reward, what better way could there be to wind down than a nightmare holiday in Portugal? This was the experience of the British family the Maccans in 2007, when their three year-old daughter Madeleine was abducted while on holiday. The abduction of Madeleine Mccann is like a fairy story, a cautionary tale that encapsulates the depths to which Thatcherism and free capitalism has taken western democracy.

Madeleine Mccann was abducted on the night of May 3rd 2007, while she was asleep in the family's holiday apartment on the Algarve coast of Portugal, in the village of Praia Da Luz. The abduction happened while the parents were dining out with friends a few yards away, and it was discovered when the mother, Kate McCann, slipped away to check on her children at 10 p.m.

There are several important witnesses to the abduction. The first was the father, Gerry McCann, who returned to the apartment at around 9.05 p.m. to check on the children, and when he entered their room he found that the door was open wider than usual, but because it was an unfamiliar door and he had no reason to suppose it, he did not check to see if there was someone hiding in the room. When he left the apartment, he met a friend outside and stopped to talk to him.

While they were talking outside, a second witness, Jane Tanner, who was one of the seven British friends who were dining with the McCanns at the Ocean Club nearby, returned to the apartment building at about 9.15, and as she passed by them, she saw a man with dark, collar-length hair walking across the end of the alley with a small child asleep in his arms. The child had no shoes on and was wrapped in a blanket. The man carrying her looked Mediterranean. He was wearing long trousers and a heavy coat, so he didn’t look like a holiday tourist.
The third witness was George Burke, who saw a small girl with a remarkable resemblance to Madeleine being hauled along by a vicious-looking man and a woman in the area very early the next morning. It was dark, at 6.00 a.m., and no one else was about. The group was hurrying towards the Lagos marina and railway station and they looked very suspicious. Mr Burke informed the police, but they didn't take the incident seriously.

Given the timing of this incident (6.00 a.m.) and the age of the child (a toddler aged under 4), and given the vicious impression created by the man, George Burke's sighting is highly significant, and it cannot reasonably be ignored by any investigation into the abduction.
Four months prior to the abduction of Madeleine McCann, another attempt at an abduction is known to have occurred in this area, involving a girl of the same age and of very similar appearance. She had blonde hair and is said to resemble Madeleine McCann quite closely. Her name was Carolina Santos, and her parents were working in their cafe when their child was taken on Christmas Day. The parents happened by chance to go out and they spotted her with a man of Moroccan appearance 300 yards away. The man ran off. The Santos parents offered to help the Portuguese police after the abduction of Madeleine, but they were never questioned by them.

On May 9th, just five days after the abduction of Madeleine Mccann, a Norwegian tourist, Marie Olli, reported that she believed she had seen Madeleine at a Moroccan petrol station asking a man, "Can I see Mummy soon?" This incident is again significant because it corresponds with the experience of the Santos family and their Moroccan-looking abductor. Being locals in the area, the Santos family are likely to be reliable in their identification of Mediterranean castes.
All these witness accounts have corresponding features that authenticate them, and certainly no investigation into the abduction of Madeleine McCann could discount them.

Yet another abduction had occurred in the area in 2004, some 15 miles from Praia Da Luz, when 8 year-old Joana Cipriano disappeared from her home in Figueira near Portimao. The mother believes that her daughter was taken for a German couple. She claims that the Portuguese police had beaten a confession of murder out of her and she is in jail, retracting the confession.

The McCanns' experience with the Portuguese police supports the claim made by this mother, while her experience clarifies the situation for the McCanns with the Portuguese police.
Given these eyewitnesses, why did the investigation turn out the way it did?

It has been reported that after the abduction, the police investigated the church where Mr and Mrs McCann prayed for their daughter after the abduction. Then they turned their suspicions on to an ex-patriot Briton who lived in the village, Robert Murat, who was harassed with intensive questioning and house-searching, and who, despite there being no evidence to connect him with the incident, was subsequently declared an official suspect by the police. It is reported that Robert Murat had sat in on the police interviews with the friends who had dined with the McCanns when the abduction occurred. The police were using him as an interpreter in these interviews. This shows that he was also being used by the police for their own convenience when they named him as a suspect, and that they didn't have any other grounds to suspect him.
The same applies to the McCanns. They joined him on the list of suspects after they mounted a sustained media campaign to help get their daughter back and revitalize the investigation. The police theory to justify their campaign was that the parents had murdered their daughter in the apartment and had faked the abduction to cover this up. This is clearly not consistent with the McCann's efforts to keep the case awake when the public and the police wished to forget it, and it corresponds with the experience of the mother of Joana Cipriano in jail. If the McCanns had murdered their daughter as proposed, why did they repeatedly return to Portugal to revive the investigation? The police case is illogical and groundless.

In November, the police were willing to absolve the McCanns of responsibility and of murder by using another fantasy, and a very peculiar one it was, which was published in the Portuguese newspaper Publico. This theory was that an intruder had broken into the apartment after all, "to look at her [Madeleine], touch her or smell the fragile little blonde girl with big eyes", that she had screamed, and in his panic, the intruder had suffocated her. Aside from the elaborate perversity of the story and its motive, there has been no attempt by the newspaper or the police to explain why the intruder had carried his accident away with him afterwards.

The behaviour of the McCanns over the loss of their little daughter has been entirely inconsistent with a cover-up of any kind, or with any guilt. Their persistence can only be explained by the parents' desire to keep in touch with the situation and their daughter‘s plight and their need to have their daughter returned to them. Their campaign, and the media circus that went with it, seems to be the reason that they have been listed as suspects in the abduction.

Instead of the compassion and public support that their situation merited, their campaign has unleashed a maelstrom of abuse and accusation and lawyers against them, all of which has exploited the situation. The British press has taken the side of anyone who wished to attack the McCanns, whether it was someone expressing a personal dislike for them, or a lawyer threatening them with a private prosecution, or the attempts of the Portuguese police to implicate them. And, as is typical of Thatcherist public services, the McCanns have had to abandon the official police service and hire their own detectives to find their daughter.
From the beginning, the Portuguese police have acted as though the whole incident was British, and that the jurisdiction for it is properly covered by their own competence, but this was an international incident, and national police services appear to have difficulty in pursuing international cases like this. The McCanns case shows that there is a need for an international police force in Europe, like the American FBI, which is able to investigate freely across national borders while being responsible to the respective national police forces.

In November, when the Portuguese case against the McCanns looked to be floundering, a British lawyer mounted an alternative case against the McCanns of abandonment of their child, which held them responsible for the abduction in a different way. This lawyer's idea of a family holiday seems to consist of the parents standing guard outside their chalet or apartment, armed perhaps with guns and machetes, to protect their children (and themselves) from their species and its society. The lawyer's case accepts child abduction as a way of life, and it gives the parents the responsibility for it, which is another abuse against the family. Why should parents be responsible for the abduction of their children? It should be the responsibility of the State and the public.

In December, when Christmas was approaching, the Portuguese investigators complained that the McCanns were receiving scandalously privileged treatment, and that if they had been Portuguese, they would be in jail. This is confirmed by the claims of the Cipriano mother in jail, and it shows that the only reason the McCanns are not in a Portuguese prison is because of the international trouble that this would cause to their police.

The story of the McCanns is one of innocence (Madeleine) being abducted while on holiday, and innocence (the McCanns) being vilified and abused by their society while trying to get their daughter back. In both cases, innocence is under attack from its society, which is supposed to be innocent itself, and which clearly is not.

Like any fairy story, there must be an Evil Witch in this one, and there is. Surely it is time for the West to reckon the appalling damage that Mrs Thatcher and her free economy has unleashed on western democracy. Our nations are meant to be evolving in talent and experience of self-government, while civilizing itself along the way, but the free capitalism of Thatcherism has liberated the lowest denominator of human values everywhere. These attacks against childhood and children belong to this trend and arise from the same source. It is one of the effects of the anti-talented economy of free capitalism.

Christmas 2007

August 2008: A definite sighting revealed - top secret and ignored since June 2007

In August 2008, when the files of the Portuguese police were released, they were found to contain the report of a clear sighting of Madeleine McCann in Holland just three days after her abduction. A shop employee named Ana Stam had reported to the police an encounter that she'd had with a three or four year-old girl who strongly resembled Madeleine McCann. The child had told her "My name is Maddy." When Stam spoke to her about the woman that she was with, the child said, "She is not my mummy. They took me from my holiday." The child-like clarity and simplicity of these statements clearly look authentic.

The child had entered the Ballonnerie de Ballondrukkerij party shop in Amsterdam accompanied by a couple with two other children, possibly not theirs. The little girl said to the witness, "Do you know where my mummy is?" When Stam told her that her mummy was elsewhere in the shop, the girl replied, "She is not my mummy. She took me from my mummy." When asked where she had last seen her mummy, the child replied, "They took me from my holiday." The child couldn't answer questions about what sort of holiday it was or where. When the girl told Ana Stam that her name was Maddy, Stam assumed she meant Maggie because the name Maddy was unfamiliar to her, and the child repeated that it was Maddy. The child spoke with a clean English accent, while the woman with her spoke English with a French accent and the man apparently Portuguese. The couple acted oddly when Stam asked if she could help.

Stam went to the police in June 2007 when she saw news about the kidnapping.
This report had been in the police files for two months when they named the Mccanns as suspects or 'aguidos' in the assumed murder of their daughter.

The Portuguese police files have also revealed a trail of good sightings across Holland and Belgium in the days following the abduction. In one case the witness was bewildered by the fact that the child and the couple with her did not resemble each other and spoke different languages. None of these sightings was investigated.

Perhaps the difference of languages prevented the Portuguese police from recognizing the authenticity of the Amsterdam sighting.

A sighting in the Caribbean in May 2008

In May 2008 the British captain of a chartered yacht, Trevor Francis, made a sighting of a girl he is convinced was Madeleine McCann on the island of Margarita in the Caribbean. He saw her with three women in a restaurant on a marina which was on a direct shipping route to Portugal. He told British police: "I noticed that the little girl was white with fair hair. There are sometimes white children in Venezuela but not as fair as this child. She really stood out. She was the absolute image of the missing Madeleine McCann. She was very sullen-looking and refused to eat. She looked unhappy and out of place. I shuffled in my seat so I could see 'Madeleine' clearly. I was about four or five feet away from the little girl. Her eyes met mine as I walked past and that's when I saw the little blemish in her right eye - it was like a little fleck."
There have also been several sightings of Madeleine in Brazil which is connected to Portugal by language.







People believe that where there’s smoke there’s fire, but sometimes there is just a smoke machine.

By treating Cliff Richard as though he were a bank robber or a mass murderer, the police from Thames Valley and South Yorkshire, aided and abetted by the BBC and a Sheffield lay justice, have blasted his reputation around the world without giving him the first and most basic right to refute the allegation.

Last year, apparently, a complaint was made to police that the singer had indecently assaulted a youth in Sheffield a quarter of a century ago. The police had a duty to investigate, seek any corroborating evidence, and then – and only if they had reasonable grounds to suspect him of committing an offence – to give him the opportunity to refute those suspicions before a decision to charge is made.

But here, police subverted due process by waiting until Richard had left for vacation, and then orchestrating massive publicity for the raid on his house, before making any request for interview and before any question could arise of arresting or charging him.

Police initially denied “leaking” the raid, but South Yorkshire Police finally confirmed yesterday afternoon that they had been “working with a media outlet” – presumably the BBC – about the investigation. They also claimed “a number of people” had come forward with more information after seeing coverage of the operation – which leads one to suspect that this was the improper purpose behind leaking the operation in the first place.  This alone calls for an independent inquiry.

The BBC and others were present when the five police cars arrived at Richard’s home, and helicopters were already clattering overhead. Police codes require that “searches must be conducted with due consideration for the property and privacy of the occupier and with no more disturbance than necessary” – here, the media were tipped off well ahead of time, and a smug officer read to the cameras a prepared press statement while the search was going on.




Lockerbie - Tam Dalyell


Q7. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on representations from Arab countries about sanctions against Libya.

The Prime Minister : We have had various approaches from Arab countries about sanctions against Libya. We and the Arab League share the same objective--to see a satisfactory outcome to the Lockerbie problem. This, as the Arab League well knows, will require Libya's full compliance with United Nations Security Council resolution 731.

Mr. Dalyell : In the light of my two letters to the Prime Minister on this subject, will he consider putting in the Library a response to the cover story of Time magazine--not exactly a publication of the left--which challenges the whole basis of the Anglo-American position? Will the right hon. Gentleman also consider approaching Spain on the legal proceedings relating to Monzer al Kassar, a Syrian drugs and arms dealer?

The Prime Minister : I saw the article in Time magazine ; I examined it and sought advice on it. The theories about involvement and links with drugs are not new. They were thoroughly examined by the police during the investigation and were discounted at that stage, at the conclusion of the investigation. No evidence has yet been found to link the Syrian, al Kassar, to Lockerbie--but I shall, of course, examine the matter again in view of the hon. Gentleman's representations.

Mr. Wilkinson : Can my right hon. Friend enlighten the House about any dealings between Government officials and the Government of Libya over links between the Libyan regime and the Irish Republican Army? Has the IRA received any supplies from Libya recently? Have the Libyan authorities given assurances to the Government that they will not continue to supply the IRA?

The Prime Minister : The Libyans have provided some information to the Government about their relationships with the IRA ; they did so in Geneva on 9 June. The preliminary assessment of that information suggests that although in places it was incomplete and unsatisfactory, it contains some positive elements which may well prove useful. One positive development is the fact that the Libyans have indicated to us that they wish to cease providing assistance to the IRA. We are not convinced that that is yet the case.





19 Jan 2005
 

Lockerbie

11 am
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow) (Lab): This is my 17th and probably last Adjournment debate on Lockerbie. On the sixth occasion, 10 long years ago on 1 February 1995, Douglas Hurd, who I am told was the first Foreign Secretary to answer a Back-Bench Adjournment debate since 1945, said:
    "All significant information relevant to Lockerbie obtained by the intelligence agencies—or anyone else, to my knowledge—is invariably and as a matter of course provided to those who are responsible for the investigation."—[Official Report, 1 February 1995; Vol. 253, c. 1058–9.]
I am sure that Douglas Hurd spoke in good faith, but I just ask to wonder.
In 1998, Lady Symons told a group of Lockerbie relatives that Her Majesty's Government had a duty to find out why British nationals were killed at Lockerbie. Who was responsible, and how could it have happened? I wonder, as do Pamela Dix and Dr. Jim Swire of the Lockerbie families group, who are here today, whether Her Majesty's Government are fulfilling that duty.
In the Prime Minister's letter of 19 July 2004 to Lockerbie relatives, he writes:
    "I entirely share your concern that we learn from Lockerbie and do all we can to prevent such a tragedy happening again."
How can we do that if we do not know the whole truth?
The aim of my next question is to try to establish some part of this very complex truth. Did British intelligence know, or was it informed, that a fifth improvised explosive device, allegedly not recovered but once in the possession of a terrorist cell of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine general command in Germany in late October 1988, was larger than the Toshiba Bombeat single-speaker radio cassette recorder adapted to become an improvised explosive device and found in the possession of the same PFLP-GC terrorist cell, and that the twin-speaker device, which was used in the Lockerbie murders, was larger than the Toshiba Bombeat single-speaker version?
If the UK intelligence services did know or were informed that the so-called fifth device was larger than the Toshiba Bombeat single-speaker radio cassette recorder, adapted to become an improvised explosive device, and that the twin-speaker Toshiba radio cassette recorder was larger than the single-speaker version, was that information given to any police force in the UK? If so, to whom was it given and when?
What were the total costs, incurred directly or indirectly, in connection with the visits made by the prosecution witness, Anthony Gauci, and members of his family, to the UK and Holland between 1 September 1989—a decade before the Scottish Parliament was set up—and 1 September 2002, including travel, accommodation, allowances, subsistence, police time and transport? Who authorised such costs? Do Her Majesty's Government know of any direct or indirect payments or payments in kind offered or made to Anthony Gauci, or to any members of his family, by any organ of the UK Government? Do HMG know of a payment of about $4 million to Gauci from American sources? What was the approximate value of any such payments or payments in kind to Gauci? When were

19 Jan 2005 : Column 267WH

they made or provided, by whom and out of what vote? Does the United Kingdom know, through any British agency, of any offer or arrangement to meet the costs or provide funds, directly or indirectly, for the actual or prospective resettlement of Anthony Gauci—a Maltese citizen and prosecution witness in the Lockerbie trial—or any member of his family, in Australia or any country south of Malta? If so, what were the details of any such offers or arrangements and when, and by whom, were they offered or made?
The Crown Office issued a press release on 10 May 1995 about the late Alan Francovitch's film "The Maltese Double Cross", acknowledging that the US Drug Enforcement Administration was running controlled drug deliveries through Frankfurt and London to the USA in 1988 and 1989, in collusion with the German Government. Do HMG still believe that that was so? I have given 48 hours' notice of these questions, and I hope that I have left time for a serious Foreign Office reply.
Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk) (Con): I am sorry for asking the Father of the House to give way just as he is ending his speech. However, is he aware of my constituents, Martin and Rita Cadman, who are the parents of one of the victims on the aircraft? Above all else, they want closure. They want the truth; for them that is very important. They want to get on with their lives. Is the hon. Gentleman also aware that most of the relatives feel that the Libyan leader was forced into making his offer to them, for purely political reasons? They are not impressed by it; they want the truth more than anything else.
Mr. Dalyell : I simply respond that Martin Cadman is an extremely serious and well informed member of the Lockerbie group of relatives. He and his wife had a most terrible loss, as did the other relatives.
I say to hard-working Ministers and Foreign Office officials that, at one level, I am sorry to bother them about events that began 16 long years ago and that perhaps could only have been fully explained by the late Abu Nidal—who was murdered in Baghdad, probably by associates of Saddam Hussein—or by people, either dead or long since retired, in Washington. However, on another level, I do not apologise. Those relatives passionately believe that they are entitled to the truth. In Barlinnie prison there is a man—Abdelbaset al-Megrahi—who I believe was a sanctions buster for Libyan Arab Airlines and the Libyan oil industry, and not a mass murderer.
11.19 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Bill Rammell) : I take the opportunity to congratulate the Father of the House, my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), on securing this debate to discuss matters relating to Lockerbie and talk about the recent developments in the UK-Libyan relationship, which are also relevant. I pay tribute to his persistence and sustained interest in his inquiries as to what happened with regard to Lockerbie. He referred to the fact that that horrific and tragic event took place 16 years ago and said that this was his 17th Adjournment debate on the subject. He has persistently pursued the matter in a way that is remarkable and to his credit.

19 Jan 2005 : Column 268WH
 
I also pay tribute to the Lockerbie families. Their courage and determination throughout the years and in the face of such a tragedy are impressive and humbling. Nothing can ever bring back their family members, but Libya's formal acceptance of responsibility for Lockerbie, and the payment of compensation to the victims' families, are important and have been recognised as such by the families.
Before I turn to the foreign policy aspects of Lockerbie, I wish to underscore this Government's satisfaction with Libya's reintegration with the international community in the past 12 months. As the Prime Minister rightly said when he visited Libya in March 2004, we are aware of Libya's past record but we should acknowledge and support change where we judge that it is real; otherwise, we never make progress in international relations. It is right that we should seek to consolidate and build on that improvement in relations.
Libya's dismantling of its weapons of mass destruction programmes and the formal acceptance by its Government of responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing are particularly welcome and important developments. It is worth noting that there have been other signs of progress, including rapprochement between Libya and the EU, payment of compensation to the families of the Lockerbie victims and settlements in the French and German claims for compensation.
Mr. Bellingham : I am grateful to the Minister for giving way and for what he has said so far. Would he not agree that the families have said that the compensation is a step forward, but is pretty meaningless in the absence of getting the truth out? The total amount of compensation that Gaddafi is offering is minute compared with Libya's oil revenues. The families really want some progress on the truth.
Mr. Rammell : On one level I accept the thrust of what the hon. Gentleman is saying. We left the negotiation on the compensation to the lawyers, because that was the correct course to take to get the best deal and justice for the families of the Lockerbie victims. I will deal later with the issue of wanting truth and closure.
It is clear that a policy of engagement with Libya has the potential to bring this country and its people further benefits—political, strategic and commercial—in the future. A Libya that has renounced terrorism and abandoned its weapons of mass destruction programmes is a safer neighbour for the EU and the UK. I should like to say a final word on this subject: the case of Libya demonstrates that international relationships can be transformed. Difficult problems, such as the proliferation of WMD, can be resolved through discussion and engagement if political will and commitment is present on both sides. What has happened with Libya is a model that I hope North Korea will follow, recognising that it is possible to make progress on such issues by genuinely engaging with the international community.
I have set out the Government's approach to UK-Libya relations. Let me turn now to the points that my hon. Friend raised in his speech. I am grateful for the fact that he gave advance notice to my office of his line of questioning, but he has asked many detailed

19 Jan 2005 : Column 269WH

questions and if there are gaps between what I am able to say and the fullness of my answers, I shall write to him. Some of my hon. Friend's points are the responsibility of the devolved Administration in Scotland, and I will ensure that those issues are passed on to the authorities there, but I shall certainly try to deal with his main points.
Mr. Dalyell : As to the responsibilities of the Scottish Parliament, that is a very grey area, because many of my questions referred to the knowledge of the Government in London before the Scottish Parliament was set up in 1999.
Mr. Rammell : Certainly, I will do my best on the points that relate to the responsibilities of the UK Government, either today or subsequently in writing. However, there are elements that relate to devolved responsibilities and functions that have been transferred to the Scottish Parliament and Executive. It is appropriate for me to ensure that they are aware of the issues that my hon. Friend has raised, and I will do my level best to ensure that they respond to him.
Let me now deal with what, in many senses, is the central thrust of the argument of my hon. Friend and the hon. Member for North-West Norfolk (Mr. Bellingham): the case for an independent inquiry into Lockerbie. I know that my hon. Friend has long taken the view that there should be an independent inquiry into Lockerbie. Some 270 people died, and in such circumstances, as Ministers have said before, there is both a moral and a practical imperative for Government to seek answers to the key and fundamental questions.
The search for answers about Lockerbie involved unprecedented police, diplomatic and legal efforts. The unique format of a Scottish court sitting at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands led to the trial and conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. His conviction, as my hon. Friend will know, has since been upheld on appeal. The trial and Mr. al-Megrahi's conviction answer many of the key questions about what happened at Lockerbie. The court heard evidence about how the bomb was loaded on to Pan Am 103. It established that the attack was carried out
    "in furtherance of the purposes of the Libyan intelligence services"
and that Mr. al-Megrahi, an agent of the Libyan intelligence services, had been involved in the conspiracy to bomb the plane.
I appreciate that there are other questions that some feel were not addressed in full by the trial. I fully understand that this is undoubtedly a particularly sensitive issue for the victims' families, many of whom have pressed for an independent inquiry into the tragic events at Lockerbie. Let me assure hon. Members that we take the families' concerns extremely seriously. Ministers and officials have had regular contact with the families over the years and have listened very carefully to them. The Prime Minister met representatives of the families in spring 2004 when he returned from Tripoli. The Foreign Secretary has also met the families, rightly, on a number of occasions.
The Government have given proposals for a further inquiry into Lockerbie careful consideration on a number of occasions; I know that to be the case. In

19 Jan 2005 : Column 270WH

regard to the case that my hon. Friend made for an independent inquiry, I have to say that such an inquiry would be a further inquiry because, of course, a number of inquiries have already taken place. Those include the Camp Zeist trial and the fatal accident inquiry, a published report following the expert investigation by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch, and Mr. al-Megrahi's appeal against his conviction. Much information came to light, perhaps inevitably, in the course of those inquiries and trials.
I do respect the view that the issue should be reconsidered in light of improvements in the bilateral relationship established between the UK and Libya. The improvement is welcome and we remain determined to continue the process of bringing Libya back into the international community, but that does not alter the fundamentals that led us, after long and careful consideration, to reject the idea of a further inquiry.
As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has told the families and Parliament, given the absence of any significant new information, the fact that the key issues have already been extensively explored, and action taken, including substantial changes to airport procedures, it is most unlikely that any further form of inquiry would unearth further lessons to be learned—some16 years after the event, as my hon. Friend said—that had not been identified during earlier investigations.
There undoubtedly remain a host of theories and issues on this subject that have developed over time. It is not the place of the Government to assess those theories. That was, and must remain, a matter for the prosecuting authorities. It is clear that such theories can be based only on an incomplete knowledge and understanding of the mass of evidence that was available to the prosecuting authorities, through which these matters were investigated in extraordinary detail.
It also remains a matter for the Scottish prosecution authorities to decide whether further inquiries into the criminal case are appropriate. As the independent head of the prosecution authorities, the Lord Advocate addressed the Scottish Parliament following Mr al-Megrahi's conviction for murder in 2001. On that occasion, he made it clear that the criminal investigation remains open as regards the involvement of others with al-Megrahi in the bombing, but that there was insufficient evidence to justify bringing criminal proceedings against any individual. That remains the case, as I understand it.
As anyone who has followed the case knows—certainly my hon. Friend the Father of House does—the possibility that an extremist group might have been responsible was thoroughly investigated on a number of occasions. No credible evidence has been found to substantiate any theory other than that which led to charges being brought against the two Libyan individuals—that was certainly the assessment of the prosecuting authorities.
The case was put together after the largest investigations to take place in respect of any crime that has been committed in the UK. The crime committed was unique in the history of crime in this country, and our concern, as always, was rightly that justice should be done. The dedication of the Dumfries and Galloway constabulary, and the efforts of the families in their

19 Jan 2005 : Column 271WH

pursuit of justice, was rightly admired by all. [Interruption.] As we certainly know, the Scottish judges in the Netherlands returned their verdict on 31 January 2001, and one of the two accused, al-Megrahi, was found guilty of the murder of 270 people on Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie. The second, Mr. al-Fhimah, was acquitted. Mr al-Megrahi's appeal was not upheld.
In view of the time that has elapsed during the investigation, and the fact that some of the detailed matters raised by my hon. Friend are properly for the devolved Scottish Administration, the information relating to some of his questions lies outside the grasp of the Foreign Office. I will nevertheless deal with the specific points raised, with the knowledge that has been made available to me.
Mr. Dalyell : What is not outside the UK's purview is whether moneys were paid to Mr. Gauci, and if so from what sources. If the Minister cannot answer that today, I do not make any complaints—but he has had 48 hours' notice and I really would like a detailed letter on this.
Mr. Rammell : I will happily address that point, but let me refer in turn to the points that my hon. Friend has raised.
My hon. Friend has raised the possible use, by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine general command, of a Toshiba radio cassette as an improvised explosive device. On the face of it, it is indeed striking that the radio cassette player was of the same make as that used in the attack on Pan Am 103. As my hon. Friend points out, it was, however, a different model. More importantly, the timers were found to be of a different kind. The court looked in detail at the apparent connections between this case and Pan Am 103—they had the full information before them—and concluded that there was no connection.
My hon. Friend has also raised a number of detailed questions about the prosecution witness Mr. Gauci—with notice but, with the time it takes to pull information together, at short notice. On his request for the detail of the costs of Mr. Gauci's visits to Scotland, I have not been able to pull together the costs within the time available, but I will write to my hon. Friend. However, for the record, let me make it absolutely clear that any visits to the United Kingdom were appropriate and necessary, and were related to the proper investigation and prosecution of the case. There is no question of any inducements having been offered by the UK authorities to any individuals during the Scottish authorities' inquiries.
My hon. Friend asked about Mr. Gauci's possible relocation to Australia. I am not aware of any such arrangement. However, I will write to my hon. Friend once I have had the opportunity to look at that claim in detail. He should not assume anything from that. I am not aware of any information about that, but I will check it out further. I will do the same as regards the $4 million payment.
My hon. Friend also raised the issue of the press notice issued by the Crown Office in 1995. I am not sure he quite does justice to what was said in that statement, which quoted from a statement made in the House on

19 Jan 2005 : Column 272WH

1 February 1995 by the then Foreign Secretary, who was himself quoting a United States official. The press statement said:
    "As the Foreign Secretary told the House of Commons on 1 February, the acting Administrator of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration stated publicly to United States Congressional investigators in 1990 that while they did conduct controlled drug deliveries through Frankfurt in 1989 with the co-operation and supervision of the German authorities no controlled deliveries were conducted anywhere in Europe during or immediately before December 1988."
I think that that addresses my hon. Friend's concern.
There may be parts of the detail that I have not picked up from my hon. Friend but I hope that I have managed to deal with the fundamentals of the Government's approach to the case. I shall certainly look carefully at the record of my hon. Friend's remarks to see whether I can usefully write to him on any other matters. If this does prove to be my hon. Friend's last Adjournment debate on the subject, I want to take the opportunity to recognise the diligence with which he has pursued these issues and the spirit in which he has raised them. He has done an enormous service to the families of Lockerbie, and it is right that that is recognised.
In conclusion, my thoughts and concerns remain with the families whose lives were fundamentally devastated by the Lockerbie bombing. It is one of the most appalling terrorist attacks ever to beset this country. The investigations and compensation are progress, but nothing will ultimately ever reverse the appalling events that took place back in 1988. Nevertheless, I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate and giving it a further air.
Mr. Dalyell : I should like to take the opportunity to thank the Minister and his officials. There are terrible problems for things that happened, not in the time of his father, grandfather, great-grandfather or great-great grandfather in Foreign Office terms, but long ago. I can imagine that it is difficult to go through archives. However, there is also a general problem with the responsibilities of the House of Commons and of the Scottish Parliament. You would have ruled out of order some of the questions that one would have liked to ask, Mr. Taylor, because they concern the Crown Office. The Crown Office has a moral obligation to be forthcoming in all that it knows—
Mr. David Taylor (in the Chair): Order. Mr. Rammell.
Mr. Rammell : Briefly, in response to that point, there is a proper division of responsibilities between the UK central Government and the Scottish Parliament. Nevertheless, I will ensure that the points that my hon. Friend has raised will go to the Scottish Parliament, Executive and relevant authorities, and I will ensure that he gets an answer.
Mr. Dalyell : Thank you.
11.30 am

Sitting suspended until Two o'clock.
 

Blatant EDL-Recruiting Propaganda, Courtesy of the License Fee Payer


BBC EDL Girls - Dont Call Me Racist

A chronicle of the EDL "Angels" from BBC 3 in the wake of the Lee Rigby Incident in Woolwich.

"The English Defence League has gained notoriety as the far-right street movement with racist and extremist members whose protests often end in violence. Many of its members feel misunderstood and misrepresented by the media. This film explores the lives of some of the females living within the EDL's ranks.

After the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby in May 2013, the EDL's ranks multiplied five times and a growing number joining the largely male group were women - they are known as EDL Angels.

This film follows a committed Angel, a new member and a teenager trying to decide whether to join, over six tumultuous months, charting the impact of EDL leader Tommy Robinson's departure as well as unearthing their views and fears, and shining a light on what members of the EDL believe and why.

Gail, 41, is the regional EDL leader for Yorkshire and one of the founding EDL Angels. The film follows her through the court case of the men accused of attacking her, leaving her jaw broken in seven places, and explores how her EDL beliefs have impacted on her life and family.

Amanda is an 18-year-old new recruit from Yorkshire. From her first introduction to the EDL to her nervous debut at a demonstration, she speaks of the fear of Muslim extremists that has made her turn to the EDL. The programme follows her journey to understand the EDL's principles as well as the mixed reception she gets from friends about her new political interests.

Katie, 16, from Reading is from a large extended family of staunch EDL supporters, including her mum and two sisters. Katie, however, struggles to make up her mind up about whether she wants to be part of their campaigning or if she's even prepared to tell her new college mates about her family's passion."