I put a post on The Army Rumour Service forum concerning the Daniel James espionage case. The post was up on the forum for barely 10 minutes before it was taken down by the moderator (and was viewed 32 times!).
The post was based on public domain material, and it seems that ARRSE is scared of repeating what the rest of the public are allowed to see. This is censorship - or is this site under the control of the British intelligence services?
Take a look at my post (below) and see if you think I have done anything wrong. After all, there are plenty of other near-the-knuckle posts with bad language and extreme comments on the ARRSE forums.
Could it be that we are getting too near the truth with references to CIA involvement, and the obvious use of ECHELON to snoop on a British army general?
Joined: Jun 02, 2007 Posts: 1
Fair deal for Daniel James?
Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 1:08 am
I don't understand why Corporal James is apparently being deprived of his right to an honest, fair and just Court Martial.
I don't understand how he came to be arrested by civilian police, and why he has been confined in a civilian prison whilst awaiting a civilian trial. I can only guess why.
James is being accused of having an intent to commit an offence against Section 1 of the Armed Forces Act 2006, but he is being prosecuted under Section 1 of the much maligned Official Secrets Act of 1911. This has brought Cpl James into the hands of the civilian police and their much maligned criminal justice system.
Why should this be? Could it be that the last 3 or 4 alleged identical offences - Carole Maychell, Milos Stankovic, Nigel Wylde, etc - that have followed the correct path of Court Martial, all resulted in the exoneration of the above named. Whereas, those civilians who have faced the same charge, but under the Official Secrets Act, have all been convicted after trials riddled with alleged instances of corruption, perjury, trial and jury rigging, tame judges prosecutors and witnesses; in other words the traditional bent old bill fit-up, followed by a rigged trial and years of Appeals.
Is it that the powers that be are particularly anxious to run this trial in camera to hide from the public what is freely being discussed in the various rumour mills, for example as on the Postman Patel blog.
The situation is that Corporal James is a Territorial soldier, of good character, who was serving his country as a volunteer in a war zone, in a responsible position as an aide to the GOC, when he was accused of formulating an intent to commit an offence against Section 1 of the Armed Forces Act 2006.
If anybody has the right to face a Court Martial, it must surely be this man? And the question must be - why is he being deprived of this right? Could there be any connection to the allegations about the CIA involvement, the illegal tapping of the GOC's phone by the CIA, who were allegedly the informants against James in the first instance. This was apparently an attempt by our US allies to discredit our Brit GOC. Also, it now seems (as Lord Patel says) James was just the unfortunate 'Piggy in the middle'.
I would like to hear from anybody who could make a contribution.