18 June 2014

'Operation Breivik' & The D-Notice

Further reading: British State protecting Alan Ayling & Richard the Lionheart

You would think and expect that in what is supposed to be a Democracy the media would play its part in reporting truth to the public but that is not the case here, or not the case when sections of the Government intervene to prevent the reporting of facts to take place.

Facts sometimes conflict with the reality the Government or sections of the Government want the public to hold on a subject which is why they slap D-Notice's on stories which prevents probing questions being asked or the real truth from being told, and third parties complicity protected.

This is commonly referred to as a cover-up.

I know that after The Sunday Times article 'Wealthy backers behind far-right league', the identities of Kinana Nadir and the Richard the Lionheart were sought but it seems the media trail went cold on the question after this for some reason.  Not before the details of Ann Marchini, Alan Ayling and Chris Knowles were published in the media though which opened up its own can of worms and in my mind was the reason why a D-Notice was slapped on the story and case.  Either to prevent evidence emerging for a later trial or to protect the identities of the wider circle which includes the 2 names mentioned and their possibly involvement with Breivik.  I go with the latter considering the implications to 'people' if the truth be known.

I know how I ended up in Ayling's Barbican flat and it turned out that my contact had been working for a Companion of Honour for the past 17 years in his gallery,  Chris Knowles was working for Leeds City Council, and then the case went cold in the mainstream media around Ayling.

They were both subsequently sacked from their positions.

An online publication, not the mainstream media then reported the fact that Ayling had been working for, then suspended, and eventually sacked from the European Bank for Reconstruction & Development.  A fact and information withheld from the public domain for some reason even though he was the financier behind the hijacked English Defence League and had been questioned over his possible role as the English 'mentor' behind Breivik.  He is also know to have political contacts in Norway, Sweden, America and beyond.

You would wonder to yourself, how did a lowly bank clerk working in the back room for the EBRD in the Square Mile end up being the financier and Director behind the EDL (contrary to their denials), meaning how did my contact end up inviting me to his London flat to strategies and how did he gain political contacts throughout Europe and beyond?

Sounds like MI6 to me...What about you?

Then it makes a little more sense as to why there is a D-Notice and complete silence in the media about him and the Breivik case.  He used the alias Alan Lake before The Sunday Times article, his real name emerged in the media and then the case went completely cold around him even though there is evidence linking him directly to someone who uses the alias 'Richard the Lionheart' who the Norwegian police have said they are still trying to ascertain the identity of, and another who actually professes to be a spy.

Could get messy if the truth around these 3 came to light especially for MI6 if Ayling is employed by them, and MI6 have the capacity to slap D-Notices on stories they are personally involved in, and with Breivik being an international terrorist incident with links back into the UK you can safely say they are personally involved in it.  Another can of worms within the World of espionage MI6 are involved in.

The question is; Why are they protecting Alan Ayling and the identities of his associates the aliases Kinana Nadir and Richard the Lionheart?  Especially when 69 young kids were slaughtered on a summer camp in Norway in 2011, with many more injured in the process and there is the possibility these 3 were involved in that atrocity on some level.

Breivik attempted to frame me for some reason.  The Norwegians have my witness statement.  Evidence then emerged later that supports my witness statement but there is complete refusal to act on the facts and evidence, even to the point that not one single section of the police in the UK has spoken to me officially about the case and a there has been a complete refusal from them to take a statement from me, to the point, without going into the full details that I have now been on the end of a clear case of political repression over the Breivik case.

Ayling has already been talking about my murder to another witness in this case which should have been enough for arrest and interrogation but again there has been a refusal to act by the British police and an IPCC complaint I have made about this has been totally ignored.  So if I act in self defence whilst under duress dont blame me as there is a paper trail.

I have no doubt in my mind that MI5 know exactly who the people are who were in Ayling's Barbican flat on the first and second EDL meetings and any of them reading this now and previous information I have shared know that I am speaking the truth but have withheld the information for some reason.  Probably because MI6 have slapped a D-Notice on the case with some excuse as to why which means the evidence is being withehld from the public domain and more importantly the Breivik investigation where the Norwegians have stated they are seeking the identity of  the anonymous 'Richard the Lionheart' from the manifesto.

Does that mean that MI6 are above the law?  Seems to be if my evidence is proven, only nobody knows for a fact yet other than those who do know the facts because the evidence is being withheld from the public domain.

2 independent witnesses can confirm this persons presence in Ayling's Barbican flat other than myself and Ayling himself, and Im pretty certain MI5 know this person exists so why when it is integral to the Breivik case which was the biggest terrorist attack in Europe of the 21st Century has this persons identity not been revealed or any of the witnesses interviewed under police caution to ascertain his identity?

What would the identities of these anonymous people prove?  Or how do they fit into what happened on July 22nd 2011?

The facts and evidence concerning my involvement and my beliefs based upon that are on the pages of this blog.

Next step is to force an official witness statement to be taken within the UK which has been near on impossible so far as those who have dealt with me will know.

What action do I have to take because the normal means have not worked.

No comments: