The 'censored' Mark Kennedy article

 http://pressreleases.eon-uk.com/blogs//eonukpressreleases/archive/2011/01/12/1651.aspx

Hmmm - could 'net geek' be E.ON's Jonathan Smith?

“E.ON can confirm that the company has never employed Mr Kennedy, either directly or indirectly via a third party, in any role.”

The question from the Daily Mail was did E.ON use the services of Global Open Ltd not Kennedy. As it reported, E.ON refused to confirm or deny.

Global Open Ltd would not tell E.ON the identity of its informant(s) and after Kennedy’s semi-coherent chat with Simon Lewis was used by Newsnight it is hardly going to endanger its lucrative contract by admitting that he was an employee.

The implication is therefore that E.ON does use Global Open and although there is still no proof that Kennedy was ‘employed’ by Global Open he definitely had a business relationship with one of its directors.

How can Jonathan Smith / net geek "confirm" a negative. A negative like that may be asserted, but cannot be confirmed. Interesting to see Eoff's capacity for reasoning is as defective as their social responsibility.

I have been watching the comments about the infiltrator on indymedia UK for a while now.
A pattern is clearly visible. At first a lot of disrupting posts appeared, quite chaotic, like a gang's response to a security breach.

Then it was relatively quiet.

Now a wave of the same posts of allegations and attacks against the 5 or 6 people who confronted the spy. Followed by a wave of posts displaying support to the attack.

The regrouped, had a meeting and came up with a strategy.

I spot an organized attack against the brave 5 or 6.

I hope they realize that no activist will feel anything else but compassion and support.
I hope that will all see the attacks for what they are: a damage limitation exercise for the failed corporate mission and a attention diverting and disrupting exercise by the corporate 'agents provocateurs'

Unity is strength!

Concerned too, makes an interesting point, that there may well be a pattern to postings on Indymedia about this indicating an attempt at damage limitation. The implication is that the grassy knoll post is part of that...

However, before we jump to that conclusion we need to bear in mind

1) Some assertions about activists relationship with the media contained therein may well be true

2) some other facts contained therein about specific events/media stories/facts (eg the boat) may be, indeed are, checkable.

3) The Guardian newspaper has been going into this story big-time: cowards as they are, I just do not believe the Guardian would be doing this without sanction from powerful forces: indeed re-reading todays Guardian (or rather yesterday's) the front page announces the NPOIU Domestic Extremism unit is now to be based at Scotland Yard: a clear palpable victory for the Met Police.

4) For older readers, compare & contrast the blanket coverage given to Kennedy with the virtually total media blackout (including the Guardian) on the agent provocateur antics of Tim Hepple/Matthews.

and then of course the old Indymedia problem (or if you prefer 'characteristic')--as very few people (myself excepted) actually use real names, who is to know who is disinforming & who isn't. What I would like to see id reasoned discussion of some of the assertions the Grassy Knoll crew make: that has not been seen.

What is this technique called Larry?

Going along with the opponent's argument and then twisting it back to the goals you are trying to achieve: Sowing distrust and punishing the people who exposed their asset.

Do you have any links to the company involved?

All of the points from the grassy knoll crew have been rebuked on a different thread.


We could ask these question:

How much money is this costing the company?
Are they insured for the event that one of your 'agents' is exposed and needs to be re-housed abroad with his entire family and fed and kept quiet for the rest of their lives?
(Surely Mark needs to be kept out of the spot light for the rest of his life?)
How many millions is that? And how are the rest of their team doing? Are they happy? Are they asking questions? Surely the company is in crisis at the moment with parliaments all over Europe asking questions and demanding reassurances that democracy isn't hurt?

Did they disappear his entire family? Surely that is much cheaper and nobody would be surprised if 'for security reasons' they can't answer the question posed by his colleagues: 'Where is Mark and his family?'

To the manager or the company:
For your sake I hope your team isn't loosing trust in you and wondering if Mark has been 'disappeared'. Cause if I was you, that is what I would do. And they know it is the best solution and they might wonder if it would happen to them too.

The time is right to recruit some double agents my friends!

Perhaps the person who can best answer these questions is Barry Millett. Barry is a senior Member of the Security Institute, and in being so will have rubbed shoulders with director of Global Open Rod Leeming who is a Fellow of the institute.


Barry Millett is also Head of Business Resilience, E.ON UK. Thats security and spying to you and me.


Barry Millett


You can contact Barry on:



 Barrie.Millett@eon-uk.com (work) or

 b.millett@ntlworld.com (home)



+ 44 7590 483554 (work mobile)

+ 44 7590 483554 (home mobile)

+ 44 2476 183382 (work)





E.on UK
Westwood Way
Westwood Business Park
Coventry
CV4 8LG (work)







Interestingly Barry is mates with Justin King, Director of C2i International who were employed by BAA to spy on Plane Stupid.. C2i International disappeared after their rather embarrassing Austin Powers spying incident. Justing King Now heads up Lynceus



Lynceus in their own Words..



Justin King is a Chief Executive of Lynceus Ltd, a leading independent provider of training and support to national and international organisations and agencies with legitimate state or commercial interests to protect.

The Lynceus management team comprises highly experienced former UK government agency personnel, each with subsequent careers in commerce or education.

Lynceus delivers its customised services internationally, from an expanding network of training facilities.


Training:

Lynceus courses equip clients’ personnel to excel at their duties and advance their professional skills. Training is designed and delivered by Lynceus under a rigorous quality assurance process, and accredited by UK education authorities.

Lynceus trainers have distinguished and recent armed forces or law enforcement backgrounds and are qualified to teach at further and higher education levels. As an EDI Approved Training Centre, we train many of our own teachers and deploy them worldwide or at our training facilities.

Lynceus is an Enhanced Learning Credits (ELC) Approved Provider.


Business Intelligence:

Lynceus provides Corporate Threat, Intelligence and technical countermeasures to government, commercial and private clients internationally. Please contact Justin King direct if you would like to discuss this service area.


Operational support:

Lynceus also addresses the unique risks faced by clients and can provide equipment and support to help them protect their interests proactively, whether against specific or ongoing threats.


Justin combines many years as an officer in the British Armed Services with expertise in the areas of Intelligence, Security Management and Technology. Trained to government level in the use of intelligence to counter security threats, he has served in many hostile environments worldwide.


He is a member of ASIS International, The Security Institute, The Espionage Research Institute, Business Espionage Controls and Countermeasures Association and The Business Continuity Institute.


 Justin.king@lynceus.co.uk

This site is closely monitored so I suggest you harvest the data from the source below fast before they delete their profiles

Have you considered the fact that Mark Kennedy could have been carrying one of these?
 http://www.trackaphone.com/

Source:  http://www.plaxo.com/profile/show/12885154570?pk=8ef93066494ce8a8ba9ca28b88813ea9797cedd3

It is as well, for those who follow these things, that I enumerated my concerns in point form. Thus, it will be immediately obvious that the joker calling themselves 'corporate o'larry' evades the issues I raised, specifically

1) about the media & activists, specidically the Guardian (points 1/3)

2) the NPOIU being annexed by the Met (point 3)

3) the Hepple case comparison (point 4).

This brave soul (no name given) asks me whether I have any links to "the company involved" & rhetorically asks for "double agents", insinuating perhaps I am one!!. I'll leave it to those who know me/have read my research to decide the answers to these questions.

The one potentially reasonable point they make is that the grassy knoll arguments have been rebuked elsewhere--if they have, good, then point me to it.

There is general question arising from these fly by night companies--C2i, Lynceus etc. Patwently, these groups have a close & at times fractious relationship with the various state fractions--ACPO, Met Police, Special Branch, MI5 (& in Kennedy's case probably MI6 too). It is that nexus we need to concentrate on, looking at both the private corporate outfits and also the 'permanent/semi-permanent ones. Otherwise, we are lost in a wilderness of dummy company mirrors. It is looking at this bigger picture, and how certain outfits out of favour are then targetted selectively in the media, that leads me to the conclusion that the prime mover behind most of the media stories that do surface are related to the score-settling agendas of permanent state fractions.

Thus, while it is undoubtedly the bravery & far-sightedness of those defendants Kennedy helped entrap that put this story on the political & hence media radar initially, the way it has gone & been 'recuperated' subsequently has also owed something to the actions of these other actors.

Larry said: "For older readers, compare & contrast the blanket coverage given to Kennedy with the virtually total media blackout (including the Guardian) on the agent provocateur antics of Tim Hepple/Matthews."

- Hepple/Matthews arguably caused far more damage than Stone/Kennedy has, and his activities were notable for how far he'dd gone to infiltrate, and was instrumental in fabricating a piece of information which was later used to falsely incriminate 3 of the 4 editors of Green Anarchist at the time (1997) - Steven Booth, Saxon Burchnall-Wood and Noel Molland. GANDALF was a trial around charges on incitement to terrorism, directed at the 3 editors of Green Anarchist, as well as ALF UK press officer Robin Webb and ALF SG newsletter editor Simon Russell. Rogers was removed from the trial after refusing to back down from a demand that Hepple/Matthews be questioned in the dock.

Over this Mark Stone case, spokespersons for Climate Camp have been in the media talking about police and corporate-lobbyist spy Stone and the environmental protest movement. All of these media opportunities are ideal opportunities to at-least mention the previous high-profile use of a state-operative in our movement - during the GANDALF trial. GANDALF didn't get the same media coverage as this story now (probably because Stone/Kennedy was successfully outed; this never really happened with Hepple/Matthews, who was a mysetrious figure who disappeared into the twilight well before the 3 from Green Anarchist were framed. However, the story was been fully exposed by Notes From The Borderland, and all activists should be aware of what happened and be able to quote on what happened (a subversion operation which incriminated an editorial collective with a series of writings in publications such as the 'Earth Liberators Handbook' (co-written by Hepple/Matthews) later found to be evidence of conspiracy to Incite Persons Unknown to Commit Criminal Damage

Why Ken McDonald (who later became Director of Public Prosecutions under New Labour) was councel for Paul Rogers' defence at the trial of 4 editors of Green Anarchist plus 2 members of . In Notes From The Borderland publication 'At War with the Universe' co-written by Larry O-Hara and Steve Booth, O-Hara, who was in attendence at meetings of the defence with McDonald before the trial has commented on how McDonald seemed to be under pressure to keep Hepple/Matthews out of the dock even though public exposure of him and his actions (proving he was Comrade X) would have exonerated any blame from the acused. O-Hara quotes McDonald as having said in conversation in view of the 3 defendants in regard to the subject of getting Hepple/Matthews in the dock that: "I can't do that, I'll get struck off". When Rogers insisted on giving particlar evidence in the trial, McDonlad unprecedently sacked his client; it was after this that Rogers was removed from the trial.

O-Hara & Booth again quoted here from "At War With the Universe": "Detective Superintendent Thomas, lead officer in the GANDALF case, admitted at the committal proceedings 1/12/96 that the "secret services ..were involved in one part of it ('it' referring to the investigation LOH, SB), which was not significant until after Mr Webb had been arrested that other people had been arrested ..in the middle of 1995" [source: Official Transcript, P-788].

Reader cites what we wrote in 'At War With the Universe', which is helpful.

However, the awful fact is that the reason why Hepple/Matthews never featured in the media wasn't that he wasn't exposed, but the very fact that he was--in 'A Lie Too Far' (April 1993) & 'At War With the Truth' (November 1993). The former will soon be put on the Notes From the Borderland web-site as it is no longer available, the latter still is.

In other words, while the infiltration operation was going on, we ran a 'counter-intelligence' op of our own, inducing Hepple to helpfully incriminate himself in his own handwriting. This is why the case never got media coverage, when the basic facts are so shocking the whole thing is worthy of a Hollywood epic. It is with wry amusement, therefore, that I watch the Guardianistas slabbering over Kennedy, after his 'story'. We will be covering it in Notes From the Borderland, certainly, but he (and many others) won't like what we have to say...