Some Public Relations on behalf of MI5 by an employee of MI5.

Give my reports of the fact that MI5 have amongst other things

  1. Harassed two individuals into working for them which resulted in them becoming terrorists and harassed one of their employees, Annie Machon for revealing matters which should have been investigated.
  2. As part of a general campaign of anti-Russian propaganda have made a false claim that a Russian ship sailing through the english channel is a threat when it is an international waterway.
  3. Used their employee Martin Clarke, who is editor of MailOnline, to send messages on behalf of MI6 to one of their prospective employees (as they saw it) whom they then harassed into applying.
  4. Appeared to have used the royal family as a human shield
  5. Appeared to have used their resource to spy on the royal family
  6. Are unable or unwilling to prevent one of their employees publishing intimiate details in relation to members of the Royal family


It is not surprising that Martin Clarke editor of the mail and employee of the MI5 has been doing doing a public relations on behalf of MI5 .

It might just be me but given this and the absence of oversight, I don’t find this all that convincing particularly given the fact that an employee of MI5 is still having a go at Prince Harry’s Girlfriend.

The appearance of the two stories which came within an hour of each other after a lull in attacks against the royal family might be interpreted as an attempt to state that MI5 is a wonderful and competent organisation whilst at the same time hoping that one of their employees can continue to disparage a member of the royal family for no reason in particular. It’s of no public interest whatsoever.

EDIT 29 April: The Mail and the Telegraph (which doesn’t cover the story as a general rule) are running the McCann story most likely in an attempt to pretend, through giving it unnecessary prominence and focus, that it wasn’t being used to conceal another story as I had suggested. It is not as if it is a significant story except insofar as it has been given significance and as far as I can tell it is very rare for such a story to be covered before the tenth anniversary.

In addition to this, the editor of the mail and employee of MI5, Martin Clarke, is as usual intruding into the private affairs of the royal family. If he is hoping this is going to go away it very much isn’t.

It is rather strange how the people who look after the interests of the royal family, namely MI5, are on the one hand letting Martin Clarke intrude into the affairs of the Royal family and are on the other hand protecting paedophiles like Sir Cyril Smith.

Paedophiles in high places are given more protection than the Royal Family and the future king which shows you how utterly deficient it is as an organisation.

I think Alan Sugar puts it correctly with regard to the mail

Furthermore, I understand that Leveson part 2 was going to investigate the matter of criminality on the part of the newspapers but given that at least some of the alleged criminality will have involved the mail and therefore employees of MI5, I’m not all that confident that it will go ahead which is probably why it has been delayed.

UPDATE: Apparently the mail have reported that are 10,000 jihadists in Britain, although one might ask what independent verification of this apart from MI5’s word. It would appear that this terrorist incident is being exploited in order to soften up the public for more powers to be given to that organisation.


Clearly the existing legislation has been necessary and successful in preventing all the islamic terrorist outrages which occurred in the 1990s and the UK is in desperate need of more powers and not oversight.

Obviously no-one can agree with terrorism and some might disagree with statements made by Alexander Lukashenko because as a non-democrat, unlike Theresa May and MI5, he obviously doesn’t represent the views of his people nor indeed those of the people in the UK.

One should look at the roots of this however. It all comes back however to the attempt to create a unipolar approach to world politics.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s