|
SPOOKS ILLUMINATED?
THE DAVID SHAYLER versus LARRY O'HARA DEBATE
by Steve Booth of Green Anarchist
|
Introduction
David Shayler is the former MI5 officer, who left the Secret Service in August 1997, and, amidst sensational publicity claimed that his revelations could 'bring down the government'. He was then jailed for 3 1/2 months in France, and later prosecuted under the UK Official Secrets Act, and jailed for seven weeks, in Ford Open Prison. Subsequently, he has campaigned on civil liberties, together with his girlfriend and former MI5 supervisor, Annie Machon. He has written in the short-lived revived Punch magazine and other places. Annie Machon has recently published a book, 'Spies Lies and Whistleblowers' [1].
What sort of revelations has Shayler made about the Security Services? What do these reveal about his motives? At the beginning, Shayler / Machon gained a lot of publicity and had an easy ride, being welcomed into the fold by the civil liberties industry. Why? In the 1980s, Patricia Hewitt and Harriet Harmon, of the then NNCL were targets by MI5. That was then, but in the late 1990s, Shayler / Machon were permitted to run their campaigns from the Liberty office. That they were granted, and did not earn acceptance by naively uncritical civil libertarians is more of a problem for the civil liberties machine than for Shayler / Machon. [2]
|
Notes From The Borderland
Dr Larry O' Hara is the editor of 'Notes From the Borderland', the parapolitical magazine, which looks at the secret state and the hidden agenda behind such things as the Far Left, the Far Right, the EC and many other issues. A veteran anti-Fascist, Larry is perhaps best known for his pamphlet 'Searchlight For Beginners'. [3] As long ago as 1998, he analysed Shayler's claims at length and in detail, and through a series of follow up articles has subjected them to rigourous and close scrutiny. [4] On top of this, on the 3rd February 2001, Larry put some of his questions directly to Shayler at a meeting held in Newcastle, hosted by the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom. Similar information was also given out at an investigative journalism conference held in Sheffield, on the 16th - 17th June 2001, which Shayler and Machon attended.
More recently, Larry O' Hara put out a challenge to Shayler / Machon to enter into public debate with him. To some considerable surprise, this was accepted, and it took place in the Conway Hall, London, on the 21st June 2005. I am not aware of a similar recent case, where such a figure has faced up to some of his most severe and radical critics in this direct way. On this level, David Shayler ought to be praised for turning up. On the other hand, the criticisms made by O' Hara and by others, stand. This debate was probably the most important parapolitical event of 2005 and its implications and consequences will continue to reverberate for some considerable time.
The Debate Commences
Larry opened up by discussing the Shayler / Machon allegation that long ago Tony Benn gave Polaris nuclear missile secrets to Jack Jones, the Trade Union leader, who was said to be a Soviet agent. [5] He then went on to talk about the persistent smears against the anarchist group, 'Class War'. The first part of this started when Shayler initially came to public attention, and was recorded in the Mail on Sunday article, where he outed an infiltrator within CW, [6] subsequently named as Andy Bryant, and displayed patronising contempt for his target calling CW "a tiny and ludicrous anarchist group". In the second version of this, made in December 2001, Shayler went on to claim to Bristol based journalist and Bilderberg conspiracy theorist, Tony Gosling, that another, a Special Branch agent inside CW was an "unstable drunk" who propped up the administration of the organisation, while drinking multiple cans of Special Brew, and beating up policemen. [7]
Taking Liberties
Larry also went over Shayler's claims to be a civil libertarian. For example, he called for the prosecution of Melita Norwood [8] Some of this was also seen in Shayler's attitude towards Richard Tomlinson, the MI6 runaway, whom in some ways occupies a similar position to Shayler. At the beginning, Tomlinson was affectionately referred to as 'Tommo', but later said he "could bullshit for England". [9] Shayler's line then changed, when he used information provided by Tomlinson about the similarities between the death of Princess Diana and an earlier, but aborted, MI6 plan to eliminate Milosevic.
On the suppression of photographs
David Shayler condemned secret state inefficiency, when it took 12 days to courier photographs of Sean McNulty, the 1993 IRA gas terminal bomber, from Newcastle to London. Shayler was silent on another case at around the same time, where spooks suppressed a photograph of one of the Harrods bombers for 33 days, between January and March 1993, and when the picture was released, one of the bombers, Patrick Hayes, was instantly recognised. [10]
Dogs That Didn't Bark
Larry then went on to outline a few more dogs that didn't bark, including Roger Windsor, the NUM, and the 1984 Miners' Strike. Shayler's denial of the well documented Wilson Plot as "fantasy" was also criticised. The Wilson plot was disclosed in the respected book 'Smear!' by Stephen Dorrill and Robin Ramsay. Larry also mentioned the claims about MI5 infiltration in the top echelons of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP).
Shayler's Riposte
David Shayler replied with an emotive call to unite and repel the 'forces of darkness'. He claimed that the Official Secrets Act and libel laws restricted what he could say. He countered the comments about Jack Jones by offering the claim that Jones was an MI5 double agent.
As to Class War, he reiterated his two agents claim. One, codenamed 25/79, was an alcoholic, and gave little useful information. M25/80 on the other hand was thought to have 'gone native', beating up police. This was the one who ran off with CW's money. Shayler then claimed to want to expose agent provocateurs, but few in the audience bought any of this. As to Melita Norwood, he also fudged, saying that the law should apply to all people equally. After all, she gave away 'our' secrets.
Shayler and Tomlinson
Shayler claimed that Richard Tomlinson was unreliable. He failed his 2 year probationary period with MI6. Tomlinson might be "still working for them" (=MI6) and tried to entice Shayler into going to Libya, saying he could get $1M from the Arab TV station, Al Jazeera, to make a programme, Shayler alleged. When Shayler checked up, Al Jazeera denied all knowledge of it.
Bureaucratic Inertia
On the Princess Diana crash, at first he was sceptical about Tomlinson's claims, but when he looked further into it changed his mind. On the Sean McNulty case, and related issues, he criticised MI5's internal procedures as an abuse of civil liberties, but got very angry because on four occasions during his career, prior information about IRA bombings was received, but not acted upon because of "bureaucratic inertia." In the Harrods Bombing 33 days delay example, Shayler blamed the SO13 police squad. It wasn't MI5's fault.
SWP
As to the Socialist Workers Party, Shayler claimed he does not know who the infiltrators were / are. However, (strangely) he also said that if somebody ran a list of names by him in private, he would nod his head. He claimed that Shayler / Machon closed down the MI5 anti-SWP operation as a waste of time, a claim which fell on sceptical ears with the audience. On other matters, like the Israeli embassy bombing, the Victoria Brittan journalist harassment case, Roger Windsor, and the Harold Wilson Plot, Shayler tried to switch attention away on to the civil liberties angle, or transfer the blame across to MI6. Indeed, his rather emotional anti-MI6 position was one of the clearest aspects of Shayler's position at this meeting.
Audience Questions
Class War members present challenged Shayler's stereotyped and prejudicial comments against the group as "being more of a threat to public health than public security ... a rag tag group of crusties, alcoholics and dogs on string." [11] On the question of assets, they put the fact to Shayler that Andy Bryant, the first asset, was known, but that the second agent described, did not fit any real member. Shayler backtracked on his claim, stating the man may not have been a member, but a casual anarchist who drifted in and out of various groups. If so, this could not support his previous claim that the group collapsed when this agent pulled out. The more he was pushed to disclose the details behind his claim, the more Shayler's story cracked apart.
Assassination attempt
Mark Glendenning of the Democracy Movement asked for elaboration on his claims that the Security Services tried to assassinate Shayler. This came down to a claim the tyres on his car were interfered with, around the time that he was making claims about the IRA 'Stakeknife' infiltrator. There was a suggestion that the Loyalists may have been behind it. I did not find this convincing.
When asked about current groups under MI5 investigation, Shayler said little. Larry O' Hara suggested that the Far Left, Far Right, Animal Rights, anti Globalisation, anti EU groups, and football gangs were in the frame.
Sheila Trymoska from Freedom Press, the anarchist publishers, asked whether Freedom had ever been under surveillance? Shayler said yes, but provided no details.
Financial Accounts
Robert Henderson asked how Shayler funded his lifestyle? Shayler said he was paid for his newspaper articles, but had to borrow £25,000 from relatives. He did a James Bond film promotion, and of course there was the book. Shayler was then asked if he was prepared to make his finances open to public scrutiny, but he would not. MI5 and MI6 might want to also scrutinise his accounts.
Why did he not disclose what he earlier implied he was going to reveal about Peter Mandelson's relationship with MI5? Shayler smokescreened this question with the bizarre counter claim that Tony Blair might be an agent of MI5.
Passionate
Russell Miller, a human rights lawyer, formerly working for Birnbergs, drew attention to Shayler's tendency to blame MI6 for all the ills of the world, while disclosing little or nothing of value about MI5. Charity should begin at home. Both George W Bush and President Putin had spook connections. The spooks ran everything and therefore clear, unequivocal disclosure of what he knew was required. The naming of names. Russell got quite passionate in his denunciation of Shayler, calling him a phoney. This rattled Shayler and he got angry and loud, smokescreening very heavily about human rights for Palestinians and Libyans.
Somebody asked if John Wadham of 'Liberty' is an MI5 agent. This collapsed into a general denunciation of the abject uselessness of Liberty from the floor.
Lockerbie
Fran Scott of 'Cultureshock' asked about the 11th September 2001 attack on the World Trade Centre in New York. It was suspicious that scrap metal from the site was sold off to China. The Neo-Cons were blamed. There was nothing particularly new or startling in this. Larry spoke about MI5 attempts to suppress the showing of the 'Maltese Double Cross' film about the Lockerbie crash, in Birmingham, where the film's exhibitor underwent a burglary, and an arson attack, while other people associated with the project suffered a CIA inspired smear campaign. This happened during the time that Shayler was on the MI5 Libya desk, so was he involved? Shayler blustered about the passengers, still conscious, falling 40,000 feet from the Lockerbie jet. He claimed he did not know about or agree with the harassment of people showing this film, and then tried to switch attention away to MI6, who were currently blaming Iran for Lockerbie to 'justify' George W Bush's next planned invasion.
Searchlight and Hepple
An activist from Anti-Fa asked about Searchlight and Tim Hepple. Again, Shayler claimed complete ignorance. Larry drew attention to the well known 'Gable Memorandum' [12] and the Leeds Northern Star address book theft incident. Shayler's ignorance was not credible, given that he had photocopied 187 MI5 files and worked in the relevant section at the time.
ECHELON
A question was asked on the War on Terror, and the US anthrax incident, where the spores were shown to be US military anthrax. Shayler drew attention to the TV series, 'The Power of Nightmares'. Questions were also asked about bugging and tapping, and the way under the Echelon system, US personnel spy on the UK, and vice versa, to get round legal restrictions. Shayler expressed his support for bugging, and established his civil libertarian credentials when he called for tapping evidence to be admissible in court.
SWP infiltration questions
Many questions about MI5 infiltration of the SWP were asked at the end of the meeting. Again, Shayler ducked and weaved, claiming Annie Machon was the expert here. Fourteen agents were claimed, and Shayler / Machon supposedly challenged this degree of MI5 attention being given to the party. The number of infiltrators were said to be reduced to three.
In the contemporary light of the SWP's apparent liquidation of itself, and the turn towards the Muslim community, when put alongside the undoubted desire of the intelligence services to turn their attention towards the Muslim community; who the remaining SWP infiltrators are, and the agenda they promote in there is certainly of interest. It is an important political question. Again, when pressed as to details, Shayler knew nothing.
The two different versions of the story, (was it 25 agents or 14?) were put to him. Were they passive or actively intervening? - Again, Shayler knew nothing. Larry suggested the SWP / Respect might be used as a trojan horse operation to spy on the Muslim community. MI5 has a poor recruitment record towards the ethnic communities and crass operations against them can only alienate and antagonise people.
Impressions and Summary
David Shayler's stand as a civil libertarian was unconvincing. For example, he does not call for the abolition of the security state's powers for telephone tapping, but rather demands these be admissible as evidence in court. He asks for Parliamentary oversight of the security services; however, we already have this, and it does not work. It is worthless. Shayler expects the security services to be more efficient and less bureaucratic, less tied up with red tape. This is hardly a recipe for restraining them.
When challenged on particulars, Shayler tends to blame MI6. Where clear evidence of MI5's wrongdoing was put forwards, he claimed ignorance of the case, or that MI5 operated on the 'need to know' principle and that he was out of the loop. This tendency to deny all knowledge was the poorest and least convincing part of his presentation. Russell Miller's objections were sound. Were Shayler a genuine penitent, openly, he would be prepared to spill the beans. Questioned on the SWP infiltration, he passed the buck to Machon. Failing this, when challenged he reverted to his civil liberty fall back position: 'Trust me, I'm a former spook! ...' and in this regard it was interesting and perhaps significant that the civil liberty cases he championed were Palestinians. Failing this, he tried to resort to emotive arguments and bluster, eg the spooks 'protecting' the public from the IRA, or the passengers, still conscious, falling from the wreckage of the Lockerbie jet. This served to highlight the weakness of his position.
In some respects, Shayler invites comparison with the 1980s 'Spycatcher' man, Peter Wright. Wright seems to have been motivated by bitterness over his pension. Shayler's motivation is less clear. Whistleblower? Reformer? Egotist? Rebel? Nemesis? David Shayler is more to be understood as a Postmodern figure, standing outside Thames House, casting his lethargic thunderbolts across the river towards Vauxhall Cross. Seemingly, he would like to appear to be MI5's harshest critic, demanding that it clean up its act. Yet, in contrast to this impression, in this age of spin doctors, glossy PR campaigns, posturings, and a continual stream of 'good days to bury bad news', he is its staunchest advocate.
- – S.B. 26th June 2005
REFERENCES
[1] Annie Machon, Spies, Lies and Whistleblowers: MI5, MI6 and the Shayler Affair, Book Guild, Lewes, 420 pps ISBN: 185776-952 X, £17:95p.
[2] That not everyone has been taken in by this process of ready acceptance can be seen in the fact that when Privacy International gave him a whistleblower's award, angered activists pied him. (4th March 2002).
[3] Notes From The Borderland, BM 4769, London WC1N 3XX. Searchlight For Beginners, Phoenix Press, October 1996, ISBN 0 948984 33 3.
http://www.borderland.co.uk
[4] NFB issue 2 1998, pp 3 - 17. NFB3, Autumn 2000, 'David Shayler - The Questions Multiply, p 9. NFB4, Winter 2001-02, p 31. NFB5, Winter 2003-04, pp 51 - 52, 'David Shayler - It won't be over till the fat boy sings'. NFB6, 2005, 'David Shayler and Annie Machon: MI5 Cuckoos in the Nest?' pp 62 - 66.
[5] Mail on Sunday, 30th January, 2005.
[6] Mail on Sunday, 31st August 1997.
[7] http://www.uk.indymedia.org posting 20332, 14th January 2002.
[8] Punch 104, 6th September 2000.
[9] New Statesman, 22nd January 2001.
[10] See Larry O' Hara, chapter 3, pp 28-40, Turning Up The Heat, Phoenix Press, London 1994, ISBN 0 948984-29-5
[11] Punch, 22nd February 2000.
[12] May 1977, reproduced in Lobster 24, December `1992. also Duncan Campbell 'Destabilising the Decent People' New Statesman, 15th February 1980.
|
|
