Lower Degrees

Copyright © 2016   Democratic Reform              

Democratic Reform

The Lower Degrees

Before we detail the contents of the lower degrees, we will look at a brief history of Freemasonry to place the current organisation in context.


Masons define Freemasonry as, 'A peculiar system of morality, veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbols.'

Webster's New World Dictionary defines 'Freemason' as 'n. a member of an international secret society.'

We define it as a covert mechanism that uses fear based control to pull the strings of the media, the government and the legal profession at will, unseen and in private. A secret mechanism that tries to ensure that nothing fundamentally changes in the ‘system’ ever, while at the same time giving a country’s system a veneer or illusion of democracy and accountability.

Before we continue, most of this site is centred on Britain and America where the Masonic stranglehold is probably the strongest. We acknowledge that Freemasonry has taken strong root in other countries such as: Switzerland, France, Australia, Sweden, New Zealand and Canada. These tend to be either Commonwealth countries whose head of state is the Queen of England or countries where there is a royal, conservative system and culture.

At different times the focus shifts between Britain and America based on the evidence we have to hand. While Freemasonry is not restricted to these countries as already mentioned, we would say that Britain and America are the most Masonic countries and / or are at least at the centre of most of the wars such as the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. As already alluded to in the Introduction, Freemasonry is essentially the banned order of the Knights Templar, a military order.

In 1717, the Grand Lodge of England was formed in London. It was said to have been formed by James Anderson along with George Payne and Theopholips Desaguliers. Before this, Freemasonry was made up of disparate groups scattered throughout the country, many of which met in private rooms in pubs.

We should qualify the above statement and refer to the Freemasonry of 1717, aka modern day Freemasonry as ‘speculative’ Freemasonry. Speculative Freemasonry differs from the earlier form of ‘operative’ Freemasonry in that the operative Freemasonry of the fourteenth to seventeenth centuries (it is not clear when operative Freemasonry actually began) was a craft guild, or a very early version of a trade union you could say. Its members then were actual stone masons who had to complete a lengthy and rigorous apprenticeship. Those masons were the builders of the cathedrals of Europe which you can still see today in England, Germany and France.

The Daily Mirror in its report on the Masonic link to the Hillsborough disaster summarised their history as follows:

Secret society pervades the establishment

The Freemasons are a “fraternal brotherhood” dating back to the 14th century. It started as an organisation to monitor the qualifications of stonemasons. But in modern times the organisation is seen as an elitist group that has been dogged by allegations of corruption.

The all-male group, governed by the United Grand Lodge of England, has 250,000 members. Many figures in authority are Freemasons. The first US president, George Washington, and another leading American revolutionary, Benjamin Franklin, were Masons. Today a significant proportion of the Royal household are members, and the Duke of Kent is grand master of the UGLE.

Despite royal patronage, and their presence in the judiciary and the higher reaches of the City, the Masons deny being an underground arm of the Establishment. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hillsborough-freemason-cops-banned-working-2366200

We will investigate the difference later in the site, but simply put the operative rituals were changed, added to and modified during the eighteenth century to essentially turn Freemasonry into the Knights Templar, a military order (not a craft guild) that had existed from around 1118 to around 1312 before being banned for heresy, greed and satanism amongst other charges. Modern day Freemasonry or speculative Freemasonry is therefore essentially the banned military order of the Knights Templar and has virtually nothing in common with the medieval operative craft guild that originally bore the name ‘Freemasonry’.

The change is also highlighted in the distinction between the ‘Ancient’ and ‘Modern’ masons, with the latter representing the changed rituals introduced by James Anderson. The Moderns disassociated themselves from the Jacobites who wanted to restore the throne to the Stuart's, who were also masons loyal to the ancient rituals. It is clear from this that Freemasonry has been used by opposing groups and factions at times, although modern Freemasonry in Britain at least appears to be a vehicle to ensure that the system remains royal under the Hanoverian royals who were German.

We could conclude from this that a group of British / German aristocrats (the ‘Georgians’ -  ancestors of the current British Royal Family who ‘hijacked’ Freemasonry for their own ends were German aristocrats) changed Freemasonry to fit their own personal agenda of greed and power and to exclude any other claim to the British throne. They especially wanted to ensure that no Catholic could ever claim the British throne (see Act of Settlement 1701). Note that under current British Human Rights legislation  (HR Act 1998), this practice is unlawful and is in direct conflict with:

Article 14

Prohibition of discrimination

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

Another source that provides a lengthy history of Freemasonry, with emphasis on the conflict between the Catholic Church and Freemasonry can be found at: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09771a.htm

You might wonder why on earth a German national was given the throne in 1714 after the death of Queen Anne. Weren't there any British nationals eligible? There were over 50 claims that had closer blood ties to Anne, but the Act of Settlement barred them from taking the throne as Catholics, and Georg Ludwig (real name) was the closest Protestant relative.

The historical German connection of the Royal Family is highlighted in their real surname ‘Saxe-Coburg-Gotha’. They changed their name to ‘Windsor’ in 1917 to try and distance themselves from their aristocratic German roots.

It has been postulated that the French and Russian revolutions were facilitated using Freemasonry, and if Freemasonry is royal in nature and the revolutions were centred on removing royal power, isn’t that a paradox? We would say that Freemasonry can be used by any group for any purpose. It is essentially a very secretive, compartmentalised structure that facilitates covert, clandestine, fear based control. It is clear as already mentioned however that Freemasonry is royal in nature and in Britain appears to be controlled by the Royal Family.

Returning to the operative masons. By requiring membership of a craft guild, a stone mason arriving at a site would be required to supply half a password and have knowledge of the handshake for the degree he claimed to have completed. The person receiving him would supply the other half of the password and would return the handshake or ‘grip’. It was a means of maintaining standards and ensuring that a stone mason could do the work he claimed to be able to do. Back then, stonemasonry required a very high degree of skill and knowledge that took at least several years to master.

Comment. Handshakes. Does the handshake originate with the Freemasons whether operative or speculative? No. The handshake was first seen in ancient Egyptian texts where it was used to hand over power from a god to a ruler. It was later used (e.g. the Romans) to show that there were no hidden weapons in the hand, and then much later used by the Freemasons. It does not originate in the relatively recent order of Freemasonry.

Another purpose of the guild or union was mutual aid. I.e. Charity to members in hard times. This was not unlike the later trade unions that sprang up during the twentieth century to protect the workforce against harsh management and industry owners.

Speculative masons see a human life as a model of the temple of Solomon, and they teach initiates basic moral life lessons that revolve around the idea of building and buildings. After being initiated, the entered apprentice is told he is like a rough ashlar stone, ‘in his infant or primitive state’. Through subsequent degrees, he is hewn into the perfect ashlar stone, a cube of rock, fitting neatly into the pyramid that represents Freemasonry.

We say that a human being is a multi dimensional soul creation, capable of communicating on multiple dimensions and frequencies. A cube of rock is an absurd allegory for a human being. The soul is infinite in its capabilities, and it is ridiculous to limit and restrict it to nothing more than a brick in a building.

Masonic words to look out for: ‘Cowan’, a person excluded from masonry, ‘Lewis’, the son of a mason (a ‘lewis’ can join Freemasonry at eighteen, as opposed to twenty one, which is the usual age), ‘On the square’, or ‘On the level’, controlled by Freemasonry, ‘Had a drink’, took a bribe, ‘Tyler’, the doorman who stops any non mason (the profane) from entering the temple and ‘Hail’, a word often recited in oaths taken by masons. ‘.. That I will always hail, ever conceal and never reveal..’ The letter ‘G’ is also often used by masons and features prominently in their lodges.

Moving on to a detailed discussion of the lower degrees.

The Lower Degrees

The first three degrees are known as the 'Craft' or 'Blue' degrees, and it is alleged that many masons join for selfish reasons. These can be to further their business interests, career prospects and / or social standing.

Before continuing, masons often refer to their organisation as ‘The Craft’ and it is worthy of note that witchcraft is also often referred to as ‘The Craft’. Are the two similar? No, we don’t think they are. Witchcraft and Freemasonry have virtually nothing in common at all, and we have studied both extensively. So why do masons use the term ‘The Craft’? Masons are experts at deception and lying, and by referring to themselves as ‘The Craft’ they aim to make themselves appealing to some people in the world who are attracted to witchcraft. They also want to make Freemasonry appear as innocent ‘dabbling’, and something not to be taken that seriously. The simple fact is that there is virtually no similarity, and as mentioned Freemasonry today is more akin to the banned order of the Knights Templar, and is neither a craft guild nor witchcraft in any form.

The physical lodge is said to represent the earth as an oblong square, where the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. This is an often unquoted embarrassment for masons and refers back to a time when it was thought that the earth was flat with four corners. And the masons are supposed to lay claim to valuable, ancient secrets?!

A first degree initiation (based on video evidence, other pictorial evidence and written evidence) goes something like this. A candidate is prepared in a preparation room by a Tyler, where he is divested of all money and metal objects, ordered to remove his shoes and blindfolded or hoodwinked.

A similar 'ritual' to security checks at modern day airports you could say, after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Or were the attacks orchestrated, allowed or encouraged to happen by masons within government and the security services, as an excuse to take civil liberties from the general populace? Is the world population being literally hoodwinked by high ranking masons?

The candidate is then given a two piece garment made of thin, white material that looks like pyjamas. One sandal is placed on the right foot, and the left remains bare. The candidate is then blindfolded or hoodwinked. I.e. unable to see or understand his surroundings. This has the effect of blocking out all light. The left arm is exposed from the cloth shirt, and the left side of the torso is also bared. The left leg of the garment is also rolled up, and a rope or 'cable tow' is tied around the neck. The effect is to make the person uncomfortable and scared.

A steward leads the candidate to the lodge door, and gives three raps on the door. 'Who comes here?' a voice responds from inside the lodge.

'A poor blind candidate who desires to be brought from darkness into light, and receiving a part of his rights, lights and benefits of this worshipful lodge, dedicated to the holy saints of Saint John, as many a brother and fellow have done before him.'

The candidate is said to approach the east in search of light. There are said to be three great lights: the Holy Bible, the square and the compass. There are also three lesser lights represented by candles, said to be, the sun, the moon and the master of the lodge.

He (women can also be masons) is asked, 'Is this of your own free will and accord?'

To which he replies, 'It is.' He is also asked if he is properly prepared, worthy and qualified, to which the steward replies, 'He is'.

The other voice asks, 'By what further right or benefit does he expect to gain admission?'

The steward replies, 'By being a man, free born, of lawful age and well recommended.'

On the other side of the door, the voice says, 'Let him wait with patience until the worshipful master is informed and his answer returned.'

Eventually the door opens, and the voice says that the candidate is allowed to enter and be received 'in due and ancient form.' He then enters the lodge hall. When inside the lodge, still blindfolded, the voice says, 'You are received into this lodge of entered apprentice upon the point of a sharp instrument piercing your naked left breast, which is to teach you as this is an instrument of torture to the flesh, so the remembrance of it be to your mind and conscience, should you ever presume to reveal any of the secrets of Freemasonry unlawfully.'

Comment. Are the threats of violence, murder and torture really necessary to protect the secrets of Freemasonry? No. As you read on you will see that there are no worthwhile secrets in Freemasonry to protect anyway. The rituals are nonsense. The ‘candidate’ is simply being taught to be a secretive person to perpetuate a corrupt, covert ‘shadow’ system. I.e. a system within a system.

The sharp instrument is usually the sharp ends of a compass, brought together to form a sharp point. When it is poked into the flesh, it is supposed to cause real pain. It can also be a dagger or 'poniard' at the back, and the ritual can vary in this respect.

Comment. The knife or compass on the left breast is referred to as ‘a torture’. Whatever the instrument of pain, the ritual is hardly illuminating, and where are the so called 'basic moral life lessons' that Freemasonry is supposed to be about? At this point, the initiation appears to be designed to scare the would be mason, and intimidate them into total and utter obedience, using fear and intimidation as the main tools. At this point Freemasonry enters the realm of terrorism, namely the use of threats of physical violence to subjugate and control. ‘Morals and Dogma’ the handbook for high ranking masons contains political instruction and claims that Freemasonry is not political appear to be nonsense.

If you are thinking that ‘terrorism’ is not appropriate and going too far when trying to define what Freemasonry really is, let’s consider some definitions:

- Act of terrorism, terrorism, terrorist act - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/terrorist

- Terrorist - someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes. http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/terrorist

An individual dressed in a suit and holding powerful office is still a terrorist according to the above definitions.

- The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.


On the subject of politics and Freemasonry, masons claim that they are not political, while Aleister Crowley the well known 33 degree mason, described the lower degrees as being dominated by ‘political intrigue and piracy’. See sections on this site, ‘Higher degrees’ and ‘Morals and Dogma’ for further evidence of strong political links.

The rope or cable tow around the neck appears to say, if you break your oaths we'll hang you, and the dagger or poniard suggests that if you break your oaths, you will be stabbed to death. Even in a metaphysical sense, it is vile and gruesome.

A general prayer is said, and the candidate is asked, 'In whom do you place your trust?' He must reply, 'In God.'

Comment. In later degrees, the Masonic ‘god’ is revealed as Lucifer or the devil. The lower degree mason isn’t told this however. He is deceived and lied to - a common theme in Freemasonry, and probably assumes that ‘God’ is the Christian God of the Bible.

He is then led to the worshipful master in the East, and asked exactly the same questions, and has to give the same replies. He is told the proper manner of approaching the East as follows.

The senior deacon, the candidate's escort, turns him around, saying, 'You will face the East. Take one step with your left foot, and bring the heel of your right foot to the hollow (instep) of your left foot, feet forming the angle of the oblong square.' The candidate has difficulty in following these commands, since he is blindfolded, disoriented and confused.

Suddenly, a voice shouts, 'STAND ERECT!' This is designed to startle the candidate, to instil yet more fear, and a sense of total obedience to Freemasonry.

Comment. These elements of Masonic initiations do not appear to teach a person humility, and are simply abusive.

The voice of the worshipful master then says, 'Friend, for the first time in your life you have advanced to the altar of Freemasonry. You stand before us a candidate seeking admission to our order.' The candidate is offered the chance to withdraw, and one source describes his feeling at this point as a victim trapped.  

He is then placed in a kneeling position before the altar, ‘in due form’. This is to kneel on the naked left knee, right leg extended to form the tau cross (angle of a square), left hand under the Bible on the altar (on top of which are the square and compass), right hand resting thereon and body erect. The oath is then taken.

He swears to protect the secrets of the lodge, and it should be noted that these do not appear to be secrets of ancient orders, but simply secrets.They could be the fact that the members of the lodge are paedophiles, or in league with local mobsters. It doesn't matter. The candidate is simply being taught, and threatened with violence and torture, to keep secrets no matter what.

He swears to, '...always hail, ever conceal, and never reveal, any of the arts, parts, or points of the hidden mysteries of ancient Freemasonry..., binding myself under no less a penalty than that of having my throat cut from ear to ear, my tongue torn out by its roots, and buried in the sands of the sea, a cable's length from shore, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty four hours, should I ever willingly, knowingly, or unlawfully violate this, my entered apprentice oath, so help me God and keep me steadfast.'

Comment. Unlawfully violate a Masonic oath? Another aim of Freemasonry seems to be establishing its own laws and system of justice outside the official courts, and in doing so it subverts and perverts the course of justice established through the constitutions of world governments. When you consider that many legal people including senior solicitors, barristers, lawyers and judges are masons, it makes a mockery of the legal system.

It is alleged that some decisions in courts are made in advance of the trial, between Masonic judges and fellow masons with a nod and a wink in the corridor. This naturally makes a mockery of the legal right to be presumed innocent, and to receive a fair trial before an independent judge and impartial tribunal. The Masonic oaths also make a true, independent division of powers impossible to practically achieve in any system of government. Another link to the legal system and judiciary is the use of the common gavel or mallet in the lodge which echoes the process of court rooms.

He seals his oath by kissing an open Bible. The worshipful master directs the rope or cable tow to be removed from the candidate's neck, since he is now bound ‘by an oath which cannot be broken’.

Comment. The implication is that if the oath is broken, the candidate is doomed to death by hanging, along with being tortured to death in the manner described during the ritual. It comes across as a mixture of bloodthirsty barbarism and piracy on the high seas, since these were the types of oaths that pirates used to take.

Its probable purpose? To protect the crimes of its members, and to keep their unlawful activities a secret, whether they be illegal land and housing deals, illegal market manipulation (e.g. colluding to fix LIBOR or FX rates), drug running, illegal wars, assassinations of key figures who threaten to expose them, or corruption through arms and oil deals etc, etc.

There are no moral or ancient secrets to learn, and each ritual appears to be an elaborate charade designed to instil fear and absolute obedience into the individual.

Masons often claim that the threats are metaphysical and have no real or actual meaning. If they have no real or actual meaning then why include them? If a person was threatened with murder whether by letter, in a private meeting or on the street, do you honestly think that they would assume the threat was ‘metaphysical’? The matter would be reported and treated as a crime.

'My brother, in your present blind condition, what do you most desire?'

'Light', he has to reply. The hoodwink is then taken off.

The master goes on to explain the Bible, the square and the compass, along with the 'three lesser lights of Freemasonry', which are the sun, the moon and the master of the lodge.

The candidate is also shown the due guard, by holding the left hand palm up and the right over it, palm down. The sign is executed by drawing the open hand from the left ear, across the throat to the right ear, as if cutting the throat.

He is also shown the secret handshake, performed by pressing the knuckle of the right index finger, and told the secret word, 'Boaz'. He is given a lambskin apron, and told it represents innocence.

Comment. In reality, it represents the rejection of the Christian religion, since Jesus was the final sacrifice, the Lamb of God in the Christian religion, and there is no further need to sacrifice any living creature to atone for sins.

A mason is known by ‘signs’ and ‘tokens’. Signs include right angles and tokens are the grips or handshakes.

Finally he has to give some pennies, in remembrance of his ‘poor and penniless condition’.

This is a direct and unequivocal link to the Knights Templar, who had to pledge all they had to their order, which at its outset was called, ‘The Poor Knights of Christ’. As you will discover elsewhere on this site, they secretly rejected the Christian faith and were anything but poor. This link is further proof that Freemasonry is essentially the Knights Templar in a different form.

'Prince Hall' lodge Freemasonry (for black people) is referred to as clandestine or 'irregular' Freemasonry and is not recognised by the 'white' lodges. Evidence that Freemasonry is racist and apartheid.

Also, in a 'well ordered' lodge, the name 'Jesus' is not allowed to be spoken, and this is  further evidence of the origins of Freemasonry being closely connected to the Knights Templar, who secretly rejected the figure of Jesus, preferring to worship John the Baptist (or at least his skull), and later 'Baphomet'.

'So what?' you might say. The problem is that the Knights Templar were supposed to be Christian crusaders defending the Christian faith, and that was the reason for their massive wealth. The behind the scenes reality of their organisation was very different.

On the subject of John the Baptist. In the degree, ‘The Knights of East and West’, it is explained that ‘The skull is the image of a brother who is excluded from a lodge or council.’ It appears therefore that the masons / Knight Templar’s are not revering the figure of John the Baptist. This could have been because John the Baptist who was probably part of the Essene sect, a secretive organisation, wanted to disseminate the ‘mysteries’ of religion to everybody. The Knights Templar on the other hand were the opposite and wanted to keep secret knowledge to themselves underground.

On the subject of ‘Baphomet’: .. Baphomet is officially approved as a symbol of the Church of Satan (The Occult Emporium, Winter, 1993-1994, p. 54) that it is worn by the Priest of Satan (Ibid., 1990-1991, p. 26).

The fellow craft degree (the second degree, also called ‘passing’) is similar to the first degree, although the slipper is put on the left foot, leaving the right foot bare, and the right leg of the trousers is rolled up above the knee. The right arm is left out of the pyjama like garment, leaving the right side of the torso naked.

The whole ritual appears to be an elaborate, meaningless charade - smoke and mirrors.

The rope or cable tow is wrapped twice around the arm, and the candidate is lead again to the inner door, where the steward again raps three times on the door. The senior deacon answers with three raps, and says, 'Who comes here?'

The steward replies, 'A brother who has been regularly initiated an entered apprentice and now desires to receive additional light in Freemasonry by being passed to the degree of fellow craft.'

The senior deacon asks, 'Is this an act of your own free will and accord?' ‘It is’, the candidate must reply. The senior deacon asks the steward if the candidate has made suitable proficiency in the preceding degree, and is told that he has. 'By what further right or benefit,' asks the senior deacon, 'does he expect to gain admission?' 'By benefit of the pass,' replies the steward, on the candidate's behalf.

Note that speaking on someone else's behalf, is a very similar process to the court system of having a barrister speak on behalf of the defendant or prosecution, and this illustrates the disturbing similarities between the legal system and Freemasonry. If you ever happen to be near The Strand in London in the vicinity of the Royal Courts of Justice, you might also notice the Inns of Court and temples that surround the barrister's chambers (E.g. 'Inner Temple'). They are located around a temple ‘church’, built by the Knights Templar. Other temples which barristers can gain admission to are called 'Middle Temple' and 'Outer Temple'.

‘My brother’, the senior deacon says, 'it is the will of the worshipful master that you be received into this lodge upon the angle of a square at your naked left breast, which is to teach you that the square of virtue should be a rule and guide to your conduct in all your future action with mankind and more especially with a brother mason.'

Note the last part. Freemasonry instructs the member to show favouritism to a fellow mason. In the court room? When being considered for a business contract? It stinks of corruption.

The password of the second degree is 'Shibboleth'. A word denoting elevation above the common people, the 'profane', the masses.

In other words more elitist nonsense, causing a two tier structure within society -  those with privilege, and those without.

The candidate swears never to cheat or defraud knowingly a fellow craft lodge, or brother of that degree. This is sworn, binding him, 'under no less a penalty than that of having my left breast torn open, my heart plucked out and given to the beasts of the field and fowls of the air as prey.'

Again, note that he does not have to swear not to cheat or defraud another person. That's OK it seems, as long as that person is not a ‘fellow of the craft’.

The master points out that one point of the compass was hidden beneath the square, and this is to teach that there are still more secrets hidden from view. Another deceptive teaser to extract more money and false loyalty from the mason.

He then demonstrates the due-guard and sign of a fellow craft mason, consisting of the right arm extended just below the chest, palm down and the left arm raised to form a right angle.

The sign is given by raising the right hand to the left breast and drawing it swiftly across the chest, as if tearing it open with claws and then dropping the hand to the side, all in one motion.

Charming. And this is what some senior police officers and police chiefs responsible for shoot to kill policies are members of, along with some senior politicians and judges, who start wars based on lies and deceit, where hundreds of thousands of  people lose their lives.

The pass grip is demonstrated by pressing the thumb between the first and second fingers, where they join the hand, and the word for the pass grip is 'Shibboleth'.

After this, the real grip is demonstrated, and this consists of putting the thumb on the first knuckle of the second finger, so that each can stick the nail of his thumb into the knuckle of the other. 'Jachin' is the name associated with this grip. While giving the grip, the mason says, 'What is this?'

‘A grip’,

'A grip of what?'

'The grip of a fellow craft mason.'

'Has it a name?'

'It has.'

'Give it me.'

'I will letter it or halve it.'

'Halve it and begin.'

'Nay, you begin.'

'You begin.'



'Jachin, right brother, I greet you.'

This name relates to the columns or pillars of the temple. The column on the left is called 'Boaz’, and the one on the right is 'Jachin.' The master explains to the mason that he has been admitted to the middle chamber of King Solomon's temple for the explanation of the letter 'G'.

He says it means 'deity' and 'geometry', to better comprehend the perfection of nature, and the ‘great artificer of the Universe.’

Calling the lodge the 'Blue' lodge, and the first three degrees, the 'blue' degrees, is apparently due to the importance of the sky.

The ancient pagans worshipped ‘under the starry canopy of heaven’. Unfortunately, masons have a painted 'canopy of heaven' on the ceiling's of their lodges, and do not go anywhere near the outdoors, preferring to keep their rituals in darkened rooms with no windows. Hardly natural. Studies on light deprivation incidentally have clearly shown the link between darkness and depression. Freemasonry uses darkness / the absence of light to facilitate control through depression and low frequency wavelengths. 'Light' is drip fed to the mason and society to 'keep them in the dark' and under fear based control.

It is relevant to note the ‘window tax’ England had in place during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Yes, a tax on light. Poor people used to brick their windows up to avoid having to pay it.

Voting for a candidate is done using black and white snooker / pool like balls, with a white ball signifying a yes vote, and a black ball a no vote. It only takes one black ball to veto the candidate, and this is the root of the term being 'blackballed'.

For the master mason degree, both trouser legs are rolled up to the knee and both feet are bare. The chest is bared, with no top, and the rope is tied around the body three times at the waist. The mason is again hoodwinked.

'Brother, you are received into this lodge of master masons upon the points of the compass, which are virtue, morality and brotherly love,' the senior deacon says.

The password for the third degree is 'Tubal-Cain', and the mason has to say, 'In the presence of God and this worshipful lodge, I hereby and hereon solemnly promise and swear, that I will always hail, ever conceal and never reveal any of the secret arts, parts or points of the master mason's degree to any person or persons whosoever except it be to a true and lawful brother of this degree, and not unto him or them until after due trial and strict examination I have found him or them justly entitled to receive the same.'

'I further more promise and swear that I will conform and abide by all the laws, rules and regulations of the master mason's degree.. Furthermore, that I will keep the secrets of a worthy master mason as inviolable as my own, when communicated to and received by me as such. Furthermore, I will aid and assist all worthy distressed brother master masons, .. I knowing them to be such.'

'I furthermore promise and swear that I will not cheat, wrong or defraud a lodge of master masons, or a brother of this degree, knowing them to be such, but I will give them due and timely notice that they may ward off all approaching danger.'

What happens when a mason police officer is asked to question or arrest a fellow mason? Does he warn him in advance, thereby perverting the course of justice? Does he purposely misplace papers and evidence to help his fellow mason, irrespective of his alleged crimes? Does he drag his feet deliberately prolonging the investigation? What if his fellow mason is guilty of rape or child abuse, and goes on to abuse further? It makes a mockery of the legal system and judiciary.

'I further more promise and swear that I will not give the grand Masonic word in any other manner than that in which I shall receive it, which shall be on the five points of fellowship and at low breath.'

'I furthermore promise and swear that I will not give the grand hailing sign of distress, except it be in case of most imminent danger, my life in peril, or within a lawfully constituted lodge of masons.'

'When I hear the words spoken and see the sign given, I will hasten to the aid of the one giving it, if there be a greater possibility of saving his life than that of losing my own.'

Again what if the distress of the fellow mason is the fact that he is guilty of a crime? Is he then exempt from prosecution because he knows other masons who are police officers and legal personnel? What happened to the fundamental concept that everybody is supposed to be equal before the law? It appears that there are two systems at play in reality. A royal Masonic system for the privileged, and the system on public view for everybody else, the general public who masons see as ‘profane’.

'Binding myself under no less a penalty than that of having my body severed in twain, my bowels taken out and burned to ashes, the ashes scattered to the four winds of heaven that there should be no more remembrance among men and masons forever of so vile a wretch as I should be, should I ever knowingly or wittingly violate or transgress this my solemn and binding master mason's obligation.'

Having the hoodwink finally taken off, one former mason's account of the experience perfectly sums up our claim that Freemasonry is simply fear based control. 'It was .. startling and disconcerting. It was as if a susceptibility or fear had been planted in me the first time, and it remained.'

As we claim, that is the real point of Freemasonry. To instil fear based control.

The sign of the master mason is made by dropping the left hand to the side, bringing the right hand to the left of the waist, palm down, and then bringing it quickly across the waist as if severing the body in two with the thumb, then dropping the right hand to the side. The due guard is made by extending the hands palm down, and the pass grip is made by pressing the thumb between the second and third joints of the fingers where they join the other's hand.

Acting out the legend of Hiram Abiff (he gets beaten to death by ‘ruffians’) takes place after the senior deacon says, 'My brother, heretofore you have represented a candidate in search of more light.'

How acting out getting beaten to death by three ruffians gives the mason 'more light' must truly be one of life's greatest mysteries.

At high twelve or midday (the time JFK was assassinated), the grand master Hiram Abiff (a mythical figure) used to enter the Holy of Holies to offer up his adorations, and draw his designs on the trestle board (a black and white squared board, similar to a chess board).

'He then passed out by way of the south gate to talk to the workmen, as you will do now,' the senior deacon says.

He is first accosted by Jubela, who demands the secret word of a master mason. 'Craftsman, this is neither the time nor the place,' says the mason playing Hiram Abiff. 'Wait until the temple is finished, and then you shall have the secrets of the master mason.'

Jubela gets violent, and strikes the mason with a twenty four inch gauge across the throat. The second ruffian, Jubelo also demands the secret word, and when it is refused he strikes the mason across the chest with the square. Jubelum, the third ruffian says, 'for the last time, grand master Hiram, give me the secret word or I will take your life.' He hits the mason in the middle of the forehead with a setting maul.

With the mason dead, the ruffians decide to conceal his body in the rubbish of the temple until low twelve, midnight. They bury the body in a grave, six feet due east and west, and six feet perpendicular.'

King Solomon orders a search to be made, with one party going west, one east, one north and one south. Three loud raps are heard at the door, and twelve fellow crafts confess to the King that they and the three ruffians had conspired to kill the architect, but they had not gone through with the plan. The twelve are sent out to find Hiram Abiff, but report back that they cannot raise him from his grave.

The master playing King Solomon demonstrates the 'strong grip of the lion's paw,' and raises the mason from the grave. This is usually a coffin or a large black cloth representing a coffin, covered in skull and bones symbols.

He places his right foot alongside the raised mason, instep to instep, his knee and chest against the mason's, and puts his mouth next to his right ear. With the mason's hand on the master's back, they are on the 'five points of fellowship: foot to foot, knee to knee, chest to chest, hand to back and mouth to ear.'

He also whispers the grand Masonic word, 'Mah-hah-bone.' Another meaningless word that promises much, but signifies nothing.

He instructs the mason that the word is never to be given to any, but another master mason, and then only on the five points of fellowship and never above a whisper, under penalty of death.

You have to ask the question. Why this unholy emphasis on torture and gruesome death? The probable answer? The whole idea of the initiations is to lower the initiate's consciousness to a low vibration to make that person easier to manipulate and control through fear. To turn the person into a robotic sheep if you like, to hear, see and be silent. To do what they are told, and not ask questions.

Comments on the figure of Hiram Abiff:

The truth of the matter is the Hiram Abib in the Bible has no connection with Freemasonry, although Freemasonry uses him symbolically. Manly P. Hall, a mason of the twentieth century, stated the purpose of Hiram Abiff.

Quoting from his book ‘The Secret Teaching of All Ages’, Manly P. Hall states: “The legend of Chiram Abiff is based upon the ancient Egyptian Mystery ritual of the murder and resurrection of Osiris .. (p. XCV)”

The book states the following about Hiram Abiff: “To the mystic Christian mason, Hiram represents the Christ who in three days (degrees) raised the temple of His body from its earthly sepulcher. His three murderers were Caesar’s agent (the state), the Sanhedrin (the church), and the incited populace (the mob).

Thus considered, Hiram becomes the higher nature of man and the murderers are ignorance, superstition, and fear. The indwelling Christ can give expression to Himself in this world only through man’s thoughts, feelings, and actions.

Right thinking, right feeling and right action; these are three gates through which the Christ power passes into the material world, there to labour in the erection of the Temple of Universal Brotherhood.  Ignorance, superstition and fear are three ruffians through whose agencies the Spirit of Good is murder, false kingdom, controlled by wrong thinking, wrong feeling, wrong action established in its stead. In the material universe, evil appears ever victorious (p. LXXVIII).”

If Freemasonry is a religion that uses the Bible, why is it so afraid of the Christian faith? Why refuse to use the name of Jesus? Because it is a deception, Freemasonry misleads, lies and deceives. It is Templar based and secretly rejects the Christian religion as stated.

The worshipful master also demonstrates the 'grand hailing sign of distress', by raising the hands above the head and looking up, then lowering his hands in supplication, then dropping them to the side. The accompanying words are, 'Oh, Lord my God, is there no help for the widow's son?'

A candidate also promises never to write down the secrets in any form, 'or to cause or suffer it to be done by others..'

This is another means of spotting and identifying a mason. They often avoid writing things down, to eliminate any audit trail of their actions. In the event of any investigation into their behaviour and work, they want as little evidence against them as possible. Criminals, especially drug dealers behave in a very similar way.

Other notable points as already alluded to. Non masons are referred to as 'profane' (a term meaning 'outside the temple', unclean, debased or unworthy). This includes the mason's wife, children and parents, unless they are also masons. When you view scenes on television of starving millions in Africa, and realise that the economies of many of these nations are controlled ultimately by high ranking masons, you start to get the picture of how masons think, and how they view the world. Are these scenes anything but human culling on a mass scale by the so called 'elite' of the 'profane'?

The higher (up to thirty three) degrees of the Scottish rite are mostly only open to those from aristocratic, 'elite' bloodlines incidentally. This includes the thirty second degree, called the 'Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret'. See section on this site for an in depth analysis of these degrees and excerpts from these degrees.

Before anybody alleges that many African nations are run by corrupt leaders, who are just as bad, you should ask yourself this question. If Bush and Blair managed to con the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and that Iraq had to be invaded, then why can't they do anything about the trade and other policies that cripple some of the economies of Africa?

Their 'interventionism' appears to revolve around oil, money and reshaping the world towards a Masonic blueprint of total control and domination, and appears to have nothing whatsoever to do with being humane or helping people. The same charges could be levelled at Barack Obama, the president who said all the right things to get elected, but who has delivered on virtually nothing. We see him as a mason and a slick con man, although we acknowledge that he is a skilful orator. America were quick to help invade Libya under Obama’s leadership, to rid the world of an alleged mad dictator who gave so much free stuff to his ‘oppressed’ people, although did nothing to stop the barbaric murder and torture of men, women and children in Syria, where they have more of an economic interest. America’s foreign policy appears to be, invade a country that refuses to forge strong economic ties with them. I.e. money before the lives of innocent women and children.

To be fair and balanced, we acknowledge the argument that if Obama did try and deliver on his hollow promises of fundamental change, he would simply be assassinated by the Masonic community.

Masonic oaths were put to the ultimate test in America during the early nineteenth century. Captain Morgan of Batavia, New York was the first person to reveal some of the inner secrets of Freemasonry, which resulted in the masons murdering him. He revealed the initiation rites of the lower degrees or the blue degrees, which included rituals, passwords and secret oaths.

William T. Still wrote in his book, 'New World Order'. 'The concern over the influence of secret societies in the United States grew steadily until an anti-Masonic explosion erupted in 1826, after the murder of one Captain William Morgan, of Batavia, New York. Morgan was killed by masons shortly after obtaining a copyright for an exposé on Freemasonry.  Morgan's crime was that he was the first to publish the complete rituals, including the oaths and secret passwords of the first three degrees of Freemasonry, known as the Blue Lodge (p. 98).'

Captain Morgan's book touched off a firestorm. In 1826 there were fifty thousand masons in America. After the publishing of this book, forty five thousand left the masons and this resulted in as many as two thousand lodges closing between 1830 and 1840. As the result of this scandal, a political party called the Anti-Mason party was formed. It got one hundred and thirty votes in the 1832 presidential election and carried the state of Vermont. William T. Still quoted William J. Whalen's writing in 1958, who explained, '.. Rhode Island and Vermont passed laws against blood oaths. Thousands of masons burned their aprons. In a few years time, membership in the New York lodges dropped from thirty thousand to three hundred as a direct result of the Morgan incident (p.108).'

Masons claim that the 'darkened room' initiations are to symbolise the darkness and ignorance of an initiate before he is enlightened. If that is the case, why is it that in subsequent degrees, when presumably the initiate or should we say idiot has received enlightenment, do the meetings and ceremonies remain in darkened rooms with no windows?

The claim that it symbolises the ignorance of the initiate is nonsense. The darkness and lack of light is designed to lower the consciousness of the initiate, and a lower consciousness induces fear and makes it easier for the person to be controlled. Any initiation is designed to work on and affect the sub conscious and the inner workings of the human mind, subtly changing it and altering the person's view of life and the world. Lowering a person's consciousness, while being told that all sorts of inhumane and blood curdling forms of torture will be inflicted on him, if he divulges secrets, is designed to control that individual through fear and terror.

In effect, to make that person easier to control in whatever walk of life they enter. The whole point is to get the mason, and those the mason has control over (e.g. those who take orders from the mason, or work for the mason) on the same low wavelength or frequency, to facilitate fear based control, and inhibit true spiritual progress and enlightenment. I.e. do what you’re told, don’t tell anyone else, don’t ask questions and don’t think for yourself.

Spiritual enlightenment requires higher wavelengths and frequencies, and that is the last thing Freemasonry wants. Any initiation can work for the good, with say a guided meditation that brings unity, peace and well being to fellow human beings using sound, colour and carefully chosen positive words or music; or influence a person in a way that engenders excessive secrecy, excessive control, fear, oppression, a desire to dominate and control, excessive hierarchy and bloodshed.

Who wrote the grotesque oaths, rituals and initiations? Masons claim that its rituals and practices are ancient, and can be traced back to antiquity. Nonsense. In 1721 a Dr James Anderson started to rewrite Freemasonry's constitution just four years after the Grand lodge of England was formed in 1717 and after the Royal Family of Britain (the Hanoverian royals were ‘imported’ from Germany to be precise) had been reinstated as unelected heads of state. Britain had been a republic for a short while after Oliver Cromwell who became ‘Lord Protector’ challenged the didacticism of King Charles I. There was a civil war in which Cromwell’s Roundheads beat the royal Cavaliers.


An example of Anderson’s changes: He stated that masons should avoid, 'all wrangling, quarrelling, slander and backbiting, not permitting others to slander any honest brother, but defending his character..'

On the subject of law the Anderson constitution goes further, undermining the whole basis of law in any country where masons practice. If a mason dares go to a civil court for justice, the lodge master and brethren 'will go to that judge he complains to and make him a perjured man.., in so far as we can hinder.'

Again, this makes a mockery of the court system, which appears to be riddled with Freemasonry.

Anderson also stripped out any reference to Jesus when he rewrote the Masonic 'constitution', and this placed Freemasonry firmly back into the realms of the Knights Templar, namely a b.c blood sacrifice religion.

When the Moderns and the Ancients joined forces in 1816, the rituals were again revised to exclude any reference to Christianity, other than a reference to the morning star, most likely because the accepted interpretation of the morning star, Venus, is that it represents Satan in his pre fall state (Isaiah 14:12: 'How art though fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!').

To reiterate, the legend of Hiram Abiff reinforces the obsession Freemasonry has with the old B.C. pre Jesus Christ religion, with blood sacrifice at its core. The mason playing Abiff the architect, is killed as the clock strikes twelve. This is the hour when he was apparently slain and incidentally the hour that JFK was killed. It is claimed he was assassinated because he was upsetting the Masonic hierarchy of the day, wanting to break the stranglehold the CIA had on the country and wanting to withdraw troops from Vietnam.

He was also a Catholic and there is a long history of antagonism between the Roman Catholic Church and Freemasonry. This was brought into sharp focus when Henry VIII split from the Catholic Church to form the Church of England (allegedly an offshoot of the masons) because the Pope refused to grant him a divorce. Masons appear to use wars, death and blood sacrifice to facilitate total control, so JFK’s plans would have caused private outrage in the Masonic community. Masons in the multi trillion dollar oil and arms industries often make fortunes from wars.

Incidentally, the Abiff character was an addition in the eighteenth century also, and has no root in actual history or the ancient mystery schools of Egypt. The story and ritual also played no part in the ancient stone masons guilds. Their noble traditions were hijacked as stated, by the Georgians (German aristocrats) and rewritten in gruesome form by James Anderson.

We acknowledge that there have been scandals in the Catholic Church that have been rightly exposed and reported involving child abuse, and we are not trying to claim that Catholicism is a panacea for the world’s problems. However, how many times have mason paedophiles been exposed in western newspapers of TV programmes? For that matter how many articles or TV programmes on Freemasonry have you seen in the media? None? And the media and press claim to be free and independent? It’s a farce.

The candidate is greeted on the five points of fellowship: 'Hand to hand I greet you as a brother, foot to foot I will support you in all your undertakings, knee to knee.., breast to breast your lawful secrets when entrusted to me as such, I will keep as my own. I will support your character in your absence as in your presence.'

The legal system is materially undermined by the master mason degree. For example, take the following scenario. A mason is accused of child rape and molestation, and the case is brought through a Masonic police officer, who blocks and drags out the investigation for as long as possible, and then before a Masonic judge, who will hear no wrong against his fellow mason. Based on this and many other actual scenarios, Freemasonry is incompatible with the civil, moral, religious, legal and ethical duties of any person, whether they be members of the police, the CPS, the judiciary or any other profession.

We also believe that Freemasonry played a fundamental part in the death of the late Princess of Wales.

She mysteriously died in a Paris tunnel on an ancient sacrificial site dedicated to the goddess ‘Diana’ on a key date in the satanic calendar (August 31).

The circumstances of the crash were also identical to an MI6 planned assassination of the former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic based on papers witnessed by an ex agent. MI6 later stated that they do not kill or assassinate people. We agree, and we believe they pay other people to do the dirty work for them; in cash of course to avoid a paper or electronic trail.

Paul Burrell’s (ex butler, friend and confidante to Diana) evidence in her inquest illustrates the farcical nature of the court system in cases such as this where the Crown / masons are under suspicion. Paul Burrell was videoed after the inquest into her death by a British newspaper. In that video he admitted to lying in court. So why wasn’t he arrested for perjury? Because he was protecting the British Royal Family? If he had been a Scottish MP with working class roots who had been the subject of a sex sting, he would no doubt have been arrested, tried and jailed for four years. Links:





Allegations that the late Diana, Princess of Wales was assassinated

The Pont D’Alma tunnel, sacrificial site.

To some readers, introducing ‘occult’ themes may appear spurious. They are anything but, and they are very relevant. The royal family are obsessed by the occult and always have been.


(Extract) As you might know, Princess Diana died in a limousine ‘accident’ inside the Pont d’Alma Tunnel in Paris. Her vehicle was supposedly chased by paparazzi that caused the world-class chauffeur to lose control due to his inebriated state after consuming alcohol. We can argue for days about the theories concerning these events, but this is not the purpose of this article. The truth lies in the symbols placed on purpose for the initiates to recognize. One of them is the actual site where Diana lost her life, the Pont D’Alma Tunnel.

The city of Paris was built by the Merovingians, a medieval dynasty which ruled France for numerous generations. Before converting to Christianity, the Merovingian religion was a mysterious brand of paganism.

‘The Merovingian kings, from their founder Merovee to Clovis (who converted to Christianity in 496) were ‘pagan kings of the cult of Diana’.’ Clive Prince, The Templar Revelation.

The Pont D’Alma Tunnel was a sacred site dedicated to the Moon Goddess Diana, where they used to practice ritual sacrifices. During those ceremonies, it was of utmost importance that the sacrificed victim died inside the underground temple (The French medical staff ensured this happened by refusing to move Diana to a hospital after they arrived on the scene). The assassination of Diana was a re-enactment of this ancient pagan tradition. Shortly after Diana was killed, Rayelan Allan (a researcher of esoteric history since the early 1970′s, who was also married to Gunther Russbacher, a deep cover CIA/ONI operative) wrote an article called ‘Diana, Queen of Heaven’.

The article was picked up by numerous newspapers across the United States and Europe. Several authors who have written books about the death of Princess Diana used Rayelan’s article as reference. However, no one fully understood the deeper meaning of the article. Therefore, Rayelan decided to expand it into a book. The book states that in pre-Christian times, the Pont d’Alma area had been the site of a pagan temple of the goddess Diana and a direct gateway to heaven. Mindful of this safety net, the place was chosen by the Merovingian kings (AD 500-751) to fight their duels, with the loser going directly to paradise.  ‘Pont’ means ‘bridge’ and ‘Alma’ means ‘soul’ and for Merovingians, the site was a bridge across the ‘river of souls’. So, Pont D’Alma, the site of the accident which killed Princess Diana, means ‘Bridge of the Soul’.

On the point of failing to get Diana to a hospital quickly, any honest qualified doctor will tell you that in the event of a crash where the victim is probably or possibly suffering from heavy internal blood loss, there is a ‘golden hour’ where the victim needs to be transported as quickly as possible to a hospital for surgery within that one hour of opportunity. So what did the French ‘medics / medical staff’ or should we say ‘assassins’ do? They kept her in the tunnel for well over an hour, before crawling towards the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital where she was pronounced dead on arrival. Not long after, her body was illegally embalmed, making any accurate post mortem autopsy extremely difficult. In addition (yes it gets worse), the crash scene in the tunnel was washed and the tunnel opened for traffic again within a few hours of the crash, making any forensic examination of the scene virtually impossible. To any rational person, these string of ‘errors’ cry staged murder.

On the subject of the ‘drunk’, speeding’ chauffeur who was allegedly the reason for the crash, we see him as a typical intelligence services ‘patsy’. An easily controlled stooge who on the night in question was probably instructed by his MI6 handler to drive a certain route in return for a large cash payment (a large sum of cash was found on his person at the crash scene). Not knowing the reason for the instruction, he simply followed orders with murderous consequences. French authorities have refused to allow his blood to be DNA tested, and many sources believe the blood tested showing high alcohol levels was not his blood. The reader might ask the question, why would the French have an interest in her death? Answer, Freemasonry. Links:




Summary of timings:

Black Mercedes car entered Pont D’Alma Tunnel at 12.23 (midnight = ‘low 12’ = ‘the witching hour’). The ambulance left the crash scene at 1.41, well outside the golden hour, and ensuring that the ritual was fulfilled and that Diana bled to death in the tunnel on the ancient sacrificial site. The ambulance arrived at the hospital at 2.06, almost 2 hours after the crash.




Princess Diana died inside the Pont D'Alma Tunnel after her car hit the thirteenth column. The thirteenth degree in Freemasonry incidentally is the Royal Arch degree. How could the assassination be planned so precisely?  You use a paid MI6 informant (Henri Paul, the driver), you blind the driver with a strobe light, and then remote control the car into the relevant pillar. MI6 were planning a virtually identical assassination of a former Serbian leader, according to Richard Tomlinson an ex agent of MI6 who saw the relevant documents.


Comment on the security services emblem / crest. A pyramid containing an all seeing eye, a royal crown along with pyramids within pyramids (compartmentalisation). An explicit Masonic symbol.

Coincidence, or ritual sacrifice?

There was also the untimely death of Barry Mannakee, Diana’s one time security guard and alleged lover. He was killed instantly in a bizarre motorbike accident. It’s odd how enemies of the Royal Family and MI5 / MI6, perceived or otherwise, die in bizarre, gruesome road accidents. Coincidence?


"Hewitt said that he had received threats to his life. Patrick Jephson, a private secretary, said his safety could not be guaranteed. Members of the (royal) household told him that his safety would be in peril if he did not back off. Anonymous telephone calls warned him that he would meet that same fate as Barry Mannakee. He said that the Princess of Wales took the threats seriously and told him that Mannakee had been murdered" (Hansard, 22nd June 1999).




Statement by Richard Tomlinson, ex MI6 agent

During the 1990's, MI6 is alleged to have been involved in two attempts to kill leaders of foreign government's: President Milosevic of the Yugoslav Republic of Serbia in 1992, and Libya's leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, in 1996. Although it appears that the initial attempt to kill Milosevic was abandoned, during NATO's air campaign against Yugoslavia in 1999, a second attempt was made to kill him and his family, when his house was hit by missiles from US bombers. Like Milosevic, Gaddafi has been lucky - in 1986, US bombers flew from Britain to kill Gaddafi and his family - they failed, but 55 civilians in Tripoli, along with his daughter died in the attack.

In 1998, news broke with claims that Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, had tried to assassinate him in 1996. These revelations came from the former MI6 agent David Shayler, who held a mid-level position in MI5, Britain's domestic security agency. He told the BBC, that he that learned MI6 had channelled US $160,000 to an underground, Islamic fundamentalist group in Libya to assassinate Gaddafi. Shayler was attached to the joint MI5 / MI6 joint Libyan task force. Shayler claims the Libyan extremists planted a large bomb in February, 1996, on a road along which the Libyan leader's motorcade was to travel. The bomb detonated under the wrong vehicle. Six bystanders, government officials and security personnel were killed. Gaddafi escaped unharmed.

The reason we are printing Richard Tomlinson's letter to his lawyer below, is because of the similarities between the way MI6 planned to kill Milosevic and the way Princess Diana died in the car crash in Paris in August 1997. If these accounts are true, then they confirm the widely held belief that MI6 has not only planned and attempted to kill the leaders of Libya and Yugoslavia, it also had the means to kill Princess Diana. Read Tomlinson's account below and see what you think. More information on both these cases has been published in Stephen Dorrill's new book MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations (Fourth Estate, London, UK, 2000).

Tomlinson has now published The Big Breach, his account of his service in MI6 in Russia in January 2001, and it is unclear whether it has any references to the death of Princess Diana or the alleged attempt to kill Milosevic

One final editors note. Because of the British government’s continuing harassment of journalists and newspapers such as The Guardian and The Observer over publishing names of MI6 officers, we have deleted their names from the document and replaced them with either "X" or "A" etc.

Seán Mac Mathúna


‘(The) proposal was to kill Milosevic in a staged car crash, possibly during one of his visits to the ICFY (International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia) in Geneva, Switzerland. X even provided a suggestion about how this could be done, such as by disorientating Milosevic's chauffeur using a blinding strobe light as the cavalcade passed through one of Geneva's motorway tunnels.’

Geneva 1201,Switzerland

John Wadham
21 Tabard Street,
London SE1,


Dear John,

As requested, I enclose a statement detailing MI6's plot to assassinate President Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia in 1992.

When you have read it, let’s discuss the best way to proceed.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Tomlinson

To whom it may concern:

MI6 1992 proposal to assassinate President Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia

Dear Sir,

I would like to bring to your attention a proposal by MI6 to assassinate President Milosevic of Serbia. My motive in doing this is to draw to your attention the casual and cavalier attitude that many MI6 officers have to British and international law. The officer who wrote this proposal clearly could (and in my view, should) be charged with conspiracy to murder. He will no doubt escape unpunished, like many other MI6 officers who routinely break the law. This lack of legal accountability of MI6 officers needs to be addressed urgently.

From March 1992 until September 1993 I worked in the East European controllerate of MI6 under the staff designation of UKA/7. My role was to carry out natural cover operations (undercover as a businessman or journalist etc) in eastern Europe. The Balkan war was in its early stages at this time, and so my responsibilities were increasingly directed to this arena.

My work thus involved frequent contact with the officer responsible for developing and targeting operations in the Balkans. At the time, this was X, who worked under the staff designation of P4/OPS. We would frequently meet in his office on the 11th floor of Century House to discuss proposed and ongoing operations that I was involved in and, indeed, many other operations which I was not myself involved in.

During one such meeting in the summer of 1992 X casually mentioned that he was working on a proposal to assassinate President Milosevic of Serbia. I laughed, and dismissed his claim as an idle boast as I (naively) thought that MI6 would never contemplate such an operation. X insisted that it was true, and appeared somewhat offended that I did not believe him. However, I still presumed that he was just pulling my leg, and thought nothing more of the incident

A few days later, I called in again to X's office. After a few moments of conversation, he triumphantly pulled out a document from a file on his desk, tossed it over to me, and suggested I read it. To my astonishment, it was indeed a proposal to assassinate President Milosevic of Serbia.

The minute was approximately 2 pages long, and had a yellow minute card attached to it which signified that it was an accountable document rather than a draft proposal. It was entitled "The need to assassinate President Milosevic of Serbia". In the distribution list in the margin were P4 (Head of Balkan operations, then A), SBO1/T (Security officer responsible for eastern European operations, then B), C/CEE (Controller of east European operations, then C or possibly D), MODA/SO (The SAS liaison officer attached to MI6, then Major E), and H/SECT (the private secretary to Sir Colin McColl, then F).

The first page of the document was a political "justification" to assassinate President Milosevic. X's justification was basically that there was evidence that Milosevic was providing arms and support to President Radovan Karadzic in the breakaway republic of Bosnian Serbia.

The remainder of the document proposed three methods to assassinate Milosevic. The first method was to train and equip a Serbian paramilitary opposition group to assassinate Milosevic in Serbia. X argued that this method would have the advantage of deniability, but the disadvantage that control of the operation would be low and the chances of success unpredictable.

The second method was to use the Increment (a small cell of the SAS and SBS which is especially selected and trained to carry out operations exclusively for MI5/MI6) to infiltrate Serbia and attack Milosevic either with a bomb or sniper ambush. X argued that this would plan would be the most reliable, but would be undeniable if it went wrong. X's third proposal was to kill Milosevic in a staged car crash, possibly during one of his visits to the ICFY (International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia) in Geneva, Switzerland. X even provided a suggestion about how this could be done, such as by disorientating Milosevic's chauffeur using a blinding strobe light as the cavalcade passed through one of Geneva's motorway tunnels.

There was no doubt in my mind when I read X's proposal that he was entirely serious about pursuing his plan. X was an ambitious and serious officer, who would not frivolise his career by making such a proposal in jest or merely to impress me. However, I heard no more about the progress of this proposal, and did not expect to, as I was not on its distribution list.

I ask you to investigate this matter fully. I believe that legal action should be taken against X, to show other MI6 officers that they should not assume that they can murder and carry out other illegal acts with impunity.

Yours sincerely

Richard Tomlinson

Comments and further information re’ Richard Tomlinson

Phillip Knightley believes that if Tomlinson does sound paranoid, it doesn't mean that MI6 are not out to get him.

"They would feel," says Knightley, "that he let them down, first for whatever it was they sacked him for, then for blowing the whistle. They're a very tight-knit, loyal family, and they'll pursue him to the ends of the earth. If he tries to make another career, they'll do their best to ruin it. The very idea of writing a book.."

Knightley draws a comparison with the story of Warren Reed, a (MI6-trained) former officer of Australia's Security and Intelligence Service, who went on to write books, fictional and not, about working in the intelligence services.

"They (MI6) destroyed his career," says Knightley. "Every time he had a new thing going, they destroyed him. When he found a job, they made contact with his bosses, planted nasty rumours about him. They do this partly to discourage others, but it is also possible that they want to discredit Tomlinson before he reveals something.

Tomlinson was infuriated by their attitude, and emailed the Australian publisher from his work computer, indicating a desire to proceed with the project. A few days later, on 8 September, 1997, Tomlinson's flat was burgled and his laptop, containing what he'd written of the book taken. The following month, the publisher was visited by the Australian Federal Police, to whom, despite her previous assurances, she handed Tomlinson's synopsis. Back in England, Tomlinson was arrested and charged with breaking the Official Secrets Act. He was convicted, sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, and served eight.

Asked if the experience, which included being interred as a Category A prisoner in HMP Belmarsh, scarred him, he replies: "Not really, no. It was a miserable time, but you remember the good things and you forget the 22 hours of utter boredom every day."

After release, Tomlinson's difficulties continued. He absconded, without documentation, to France in 1998 - this seems to have been as much a means of defiantly hoisting two fingers towards Vauxhall (area in London where the MI5 / MI6 central building is located) as anything else - and was arrested.

He carried on to New Zealand, where his hotel room was raided. At New York's JFK airport, he was refused entry to the United States and deported - rather fortuitously, as Tomlinson's original itinerary had seen him due to leave the US on Swissair flight SR111 on 2 September, 1998, which plunged into the Atlantic shortly after take-off. He was harassed in France and Switzerland, and suffered repeated interdiction of his early attempts at an online presence - one of which showed Tomlinson superimposed before Vauxhall Cross in a daft hat, accompanied by the theme from Monty Python's Flying Circus.

All that was before the surfacing of The List, the underlying cause of Tomlinson's present travails.

In May 1998, a website belonging to indefatigable American activist / crank Lyndon LaRouche published a list of 115 alleged current and former MI6 officers. The Foreign Secretary at the time, the late Robin Cook, blamed Tomlinson. Tomlinson was thrown out of Switzerland, where he'd been staying, followed in Germany and arrested in Italy.

The Big Breach sold, by Campbell's recollection, somewhere in the vicinity of 12,000-14,000 copies. It caused controversy for Tomlinson's suggestions of links between the media and the security services (The Spectator, he alleged, once furnished an MI6 agent in Estonia with credentials), and of secret-service involvement in the death of Diana, Princess of Wales (the driver in whose car she died, Henri Paul, was an MI6 informer, according to Tomlinson). He also claimed that MI6 had been working on a plan to assassinate Slobodan Milosevic by contriving a car accident in a tunnel.

Tomlinson believes himself the victim of two factors. One is a desire on MI6's part to discourage any other agents from following his path into print - although Tomlinson notes, bitterly, that Dame Stella Rimington was allowed to write a memoir about her time in MI5. The other is what seems an institutional failure by MI6 to understand either the Internet or public relations. Closing down a website by legal means, or by hassling its hosts, is like stamping on mercury. Making a fuss about not wanting people to see something only inflames curiosity. Tomlinson's blog has wandered from server to server as various website hosts have been leant on - and, to the certain infuriation of his persecutors, Tomlinson has been posting all of the correspondence pertaining to this pressurising online.

"When I was in MI6," he says, "they were scared to death of the Internet. They wouldn't have any Internet connections in the office, even by the time I left in 1995. I'm sure they've moved on now."

Extract from a sworn statement by Richard Tomlinson re’ the late Diana, Princess of Wales’s death

3. In 1992, I was working in the Eastern European Controllerate of MI6 and I was peripherally involved in a large and complicated operation to smuggle advanced Soviet weaponry out of the then disintegrating and disorganised remnants of the Soviet Union.

During 1992, I spent several days reading the substantial files on this operation. These files contain a wide miscellany of contact notes, telegrams, intelligence reports, photographs etc, from which it was possible to build up a detailed understanding of the operation.

The operation involved a large cast of officers and agents of MI6. On more than one occasion, meetings between various figures in the operation took place at the Ritz Hotel, Place de Vendome, Paris.

There were in the file several intelligence reports on these meetings, which had been written by one of the MI6 officers based in Paris at the time (identified in the file only by a coded designation).

The source of the information was an informant in the Ritz Hotel, who again was identified in the files only by a code number. The MI6 officer paid the informant in cash for his information. I became curious to learn more about the identity of this particular informant, because his number cropped up several times and he seemed to have extremely good access to the goings on in the Ritz Hotel.

I therefore ordered this informant’s personal file from MI6’s central file registry. When I read this new file, I was not at all surprised to learn that the informant was a security officer of the Ritz Hotel. Intelligence services always target the security officer’s of important hotels because they have such good access to intelligence.

I remember however being mildly surprised that the nationality of this informant was French, and this stuck in my memory, because it is rare that MI6 succeeds in recruiting a French informer. I cannot claim that I remember from this reading of the file that the name of this person was Henri Paul, but I have no doubt with the benefit of hindsight that this was he.

Although I did not subsequently come across Henri Paul again during my time in MI6, I am confident that the relationship between he and MI6 would have continued until his death, because MI6 would never willingly relinquish control over such a well placed informant. I am sure that the personal file of Henri Paul will therefore contain notes of meetings between him and his MI6 controlling officer right up until the point of his death.

I firmly believe that these files will contain evidence of crucial importance to the circumstances and causes of the incident that killed Paul, together with the Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed.

4. The most senior undeclared officer in the local MI6 station would normally control an informant of Paul’s usefulness and seniority. Officers declared to the local counter-intelligence service (in this case the Directorate de Surveillance Territoire, or DST) would not be used to control such an informant, because it might lead to the identity of the informant becoming known to the local intelligence services.

In Paris at the time of Paul’s death, there were two relatively experienced but undeclared MI6 officers. The first was Mr Nicholas John Andrew Langman, born 1960. The second was Mr Richard David Spearman, again born in 1960.

I firmly believe that either one or both of these officers will be well acquainted with Paul, and most probably also met Paul shortly before his death. I believe that either or both of these officers will have knowledge that will be of crucial importance in establishing the sequence of events leading up to the deaths of Paul, Dodi Al Fayed and the Princess of Wales.

Mr Spearman in particular was an extremely well connected and influential officer, because he had been, prior to his appointment in Paris, the personal secretary to the Chief of MI6 Mr David Spedding. As such, he would have been privy to even the most confidential of MI6 operations. I believe that there may well be significance in the fact that Mr Spearman was posted to Paris in the month immediately before the deaths.

5. Later in 1992, as the civil war in the former Yugoslavia became increasingly topical, I started to work primarily on operations in Serbia. During this time, I became acquainted with Dr Nicholas Bernard Frank Fishwick, born 1958, the MI6 officer who at the time was in charge of planning Balkan operations.

During one meeting with Dr Fishwick, he casually showed to me a three-page document that on closer inspection turned out to be an outline plan to assassinate the Serbian leader President Slobodan Milosevic. The plan was fully typed, and attached to a yellow "minute board", signifying that this was a formal and accountable document.

It will therefore still be in existence. Fishwick had annotated that the document be circulated to the following senior MI6 officers: Maurice Kendwrick-Piercey, then head of Balkan operations, John Riddle, then the security officer for Balkan operations, the SAS liaison officer to MI6 (designation MODA/SO, but I have forgotten his name), the head of the Eastern European Controllerate (then Richard Fletcher) and finally Alan Petty, the personal secretary to the then Chief of MI6, Colin McColl.

This plan contained a political justification for the assassination of Milosevic, followed by three outline proposals on how to achieve this objective. I firmly believe that the third of these scenarios contained information that could be useful in establishing the causes of death of Henri Paul, the Princess of Wales, and Dodi Al Fayed.

This third scenario suggested that Milosevic could be assassinated by causing his personal limousine to crash. Dr Fishwick proposed to arrange the crash in a tunnel, because the proximity of concrete close to the road would ensure that the crash would be sufficiently violent to cause death or serious injury, and would also reduce the possibility that there might be independent, casual witnesses.

Dr Fishwick suggested that one way to cause the crash might be to disorientate the chauffeur using a strobe flash gun, a device which is occasionally deployed by special forces to, for example, disorientate helicopter pilots or terrorists, and about which MI6 officers are briefed about during their training.

In short, this scenario bore remarkable similarities to the circumstances and witness accounts of the crash that killed the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul. I firmly believe that this document should be yielded by MI6 to the Judge investigating these deaths, and would provide further leads that he could follow.

6. During my service in MI6, I also learnt unofficially and second-hand something of the links between MI6 and the Royal Household. MI6 are frequently and routinely asked by the Royal Household (usually via the Foreign Office) to provide intelligence on potential threats to members of the Royal Family whilst on overseas trips.

This service would frequently extend to asking friendly intelligence services (such as the CIA) to place members of the Royal Family under discrete surveillance, ostensibly for their own protection. This was particularly the case for the Princess of Wales, who often insisted on doing without overt personal protection, even on overseas trips.

Although contact between MI6 and the Royal Household was officially only via the Foreign Office, I learnt while in MI6 that there was unofficial direct contact between certain senior and influential MI6 officers and senior members of the Royal Household. I did not see any official papers on this subject, but I am confident that the information is correct.

I firmly believe that MI6 documents would yield substantial leads on the nature of their links with the Royal Household, and would yield vital information about MI6 surveillance on the Princess of Wales in the days leading to her death.

7. I also learnt while in MI6 that one of the "paparazzi" photographers who routinely followed the Princess of Wales was a member of "UKN", a small corps of part-time MI6 agents who provide miscellaneous services to MI6 such as surveillance and photography expertise.

I do not know the identity of this photographer, or whether he was one of the photographers present at the time of the fatal incident. However, I am confident that examination of UKN records would yield the identity of this photographer, and would enable the inquest to eliminate or further investigate that potential line of enquiry.

8. On Friday August 28 1998, I gave much of this information to Judge Hervé Stephan, the French investigative Judge in charge of the inquest into the accident. The lengths which MI6, the CIA and the DST have taken to deter me giving this evidence and subsequently to stop me talking about it, suggests that they have something to hide.

9. On Friday 31 July 1998, shortly before my appointment with Judge Hervé Stephan, the DST arrested me in my Paris hotel room. Although I have no record of violent conduct I was arrested with such ferocity and at gunpoint that I received a broken rib.

I was taken to the headquarters of the DST, and interrogated for 38 hours. Despite my repeated requests, I was never given any justification for the arrest and was not shown the arrest warrant.

Even though I was released without charge, the DST confiscated from me my laptop computer and Psion organiser. They illegally gave these to MI6 who took them back to the UK. They were not returned for six months, which is illegal and caused me great inconvenience and financial cost.

10. On Friday 7th August 1998 I boarded a Qantas flight at Auckland International airport, New Zealand, for a flight to Sydney, Australia where I was due to give a television interview to the Australian Channel Nine television company.

I was in my seat, awaiting take off, when an official boarded the plane and told me to get off. At the airbridge, he told me that the airline had received a fax "from Canberra" saying that there was a problem with my travel papers.

I immediately asked to see the fax, but I was told that "it was not possible". I believe that this is because it didn't exist. This action was a ploy to keep me in New Zealand so that the New Zealand police could take further action against me.

I had been back in my Auckland hotel room for about half an hour when the New Zealand police and NZSIS, the New Zealand Secret Intelligence Service, raided me. After being detained and searched for about three hours, they eventually confiscated from me all my remaining computer equipment that the French DST had not succeeded in taking from me.

Again, I didn't get some of these items back until six months later.

11. Moreover, shortly after I had given this evidence to Judge Stephan, I was invited to talk about this evidence in a live television interview on America’s NBC television channel. I flew from Geneva to JFK airport on Sunday 30 August to give the interview in New York on the following Monday morning.

Shortly after arrival at John F Kennedy airport, the captain of the Swiss Air flight told all passengers to return to their seats. Four US Immigration authority officers entered the plane, came straight to my seat, asked for my passport as identity, and then frogmarched me off the plane.

I was taken to the immigration detention centre, photographed, fingerprinted, manacled by my ankle to a chair for seven hours, served with deportation papers (exhibit 1) and then returned on the next available plane to Geneva. I was not allowed to make any telephone calls to the representatives of NBC awaiting me in the airport.

The US Immigration Officers - who were all openly sympathetic to my situation and apologised for treating me so badly - openly admitted that they were acting under instructions from the CIA.

12. In January of this year, I booked a chalet in the village of Samoens in the French Alps for a ten day snowboarding holiday with my parents. I picked up my parents from Geneva airport in a hire car on the evening of January 8, and set off for the French border.

At the French customs post, our car was stopped and I was detained. Four officers from the DST held me for four hours. At the end of this interview, I was served with the deportation papers below (exhibit 2), and ordered to return to Switzerland.

Note that in the papers, my supposed destination has been changed from "Chamonix" to "Samoens". This is because when first questioned by a junior DST officer, I told him that my destination was "Chamonix". When a senior officer arrived an hour or so later, he crossed out the word and changed it to "Samoens", without ever even asking or confirming this with me.

I believe this is because MI6 had told them of my true destination, having learnt the information through surveillance on my parent's telephone in the UK. My banning from France is entirely illegal under European law.

I have a British passport and am entitled to travel freely within the European Union. MI6 have "done a deal" with the DST to have me banned, and have not used any recognised legal mechanism to deny my rights to freedom of travel.

I believe that the DST and MI6 have banned me from France because they wanted to prevent me from giving further evidence to Judge Stephan’s inquest, which at the time, I was planning to do.

13. Whatever MI6’s role in the events leading to the death of the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed and Henri Paul, I am absolutely certain that there is substantial evidence in their files that would provide crucial evidence in establishing the exact causes of this tragedy.

I believe that they have gone to considerable lengths to obstruct the course of justice by interfering with my freedom of speech and travel, and this in my view confirms my belief that they have something to hide.

I believe that the protection given to MI6 files under the Official Secrets Act should be set aside in the public interest in uncovering once and for all the truth behind these dramatic and historically momentous events.

SWORN at )

this 12th day of May 1998, before me:- )


A Notary Public

And comments from another source re’ David Shayler, an ex MI5 agent and whistle blower who was also jailed

Ex MI5 anti-terrorism officer David Shayler, who spent three days with us in Bristol recently, when his car got brake failure while parked up at the University, said at his Cube cinema presentation that he had access to information contained in Blair's Security File while in 'The Service'.

Blair, according to Shayler, had documents in his file which clearly meant he had been spying on his comrades in CND and The Labour Party before being made Party Leader - which explains his so-called radical left activities as a young man - he was a spy reporting back on Communist 'subversives' in CND and in the Labour Party!

Shayler says his secret state agent past would make Blair utterly unreliable to hold public office - particularly in the Labour party and would make him a puppet of the hawks in MI6. The same hawks I guess who cooked up the dodgy dossier at our expense which has been used to kill nearly 150,000 Iraqis and open the gates of hell in the Middle East. (oh yes and boost the profits and margins of every single western arms business leaving not enough to pay our pensioners and treat people on the NHS properly).

Renegade spy David Shayler claims the 9/11 terrorist atrocities in America were the work of elements of the US government.

Mr Shayler, a former MI5 officer who was jailed for disclosing security secrets, believes there are some elements within the FBI, CIA and the US government who wanted "another Pearl Harbour" so they had public support for invasions in oil-producing countries.

He said there was no evidence that a plane had hit the Pentagon, and claimed it was more likely to have been a missile. He said the incident happened when America's major defence building was being redecorated so staff were at minimal risk.

Mr Shayler believes Dr David Kelly was an MI6 agent who was murdered, and he alleged that Tony Blair worked for MI5 before he became Labour leader. Mr Shayler was jailed for six months at the Old Bailey in November 2002 for disclosing security secrets which breached the Official Secrets Act.

.. During his closing speech last week, Shayler repeated claims that he was gagged from talking about 'a crime so heinous' that he had no choice but to go to the press with his story. The 'crime' was the alleged MI6 involvement in the plot to assassinate Gaddafi, hatched in late 1995.

Shayler claims he was first briefed about the plot during formal meetings with colleagues from the foreign intelligence service MI6 when he was working on MI5's Libya desk in the mid nineties.

The Observer can today reveal that the MI6 officers involved in the alleged plot were Richard Bartlett, who has previously only been known under the codename PT16 and had overall responsibility for the operation, and David Watson, codename PT16B. As Shayler's opposite number in MI6, Watson was responsible for running a Libyan agent, 'Tunworth', who was providing information from within the cell. According to Shayler, MI6 passed £100,000 to the Al-Qaeda plotters.

The assassination attempt on Gaddafi was planned for early 1996 in the Libyan coastal city of Sirte. It is thought that an operation by the Islamic Fighting Group in the city was foiled in March 1996 and in the gun battle that followed several militants were killed. In 1998, the Libyans released TV footage of a 1996 grenade attack on Gaddafi that they claimed had been carried out by a British agent.

Shayler, who conducted his own defence in the trial, intended to call Bartlett and Watson as witnesses, but was prevented from doing so by the narrow focus of the court case.

During the Shayler trial, Home Secretary David Blunkett and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw signed Public Interest Immunity certificates to protect national security. Reporters were not able to report allegations about the Gaddafi plot during the course of the trial.

These restrictions have led to a row between the Attorney General and the so-called D-Notice Committee, which advises the press on national security issues.

Despite the James Bond myth, MI6 does not have a licence to kill and must gain direct authorisation from the Foreign Secretary for highly sensitive operations. Malcolm Rifkind, the Conservative Foreign Secretary at the time, has repeatedly said he gave no such authorisation.

It is believed Watson and Bartlett have been relocated and given new identities as a result of Shayler's revelations. MI6 is now said to be resigned to their names being made public and it is believed to have put further measures in place to ensure their safety.

A top-secret MI6 document leaked on the Internet two years ago confirmed British intelligence knew of a plot in 1995, which involved five colonels, Libyan students and 'Libya veterans who served in Afghanistan'.

According to ex-MI5 officer turned whistle blower David Shayler, MI5's 'infiltration' of Class War looks more like a 'propping up' operation. Shayler revealed while in Bristol recently that a Metropolitan Police officer was recruited specifically to penetrate Class War.

This he did very successfully, getting his hands on the membership database, one imagines, rather easily. So successful was the spy that he began taking on many of the administrative tasks at Class War.

As the routine jobs nobody wanted to do started to be done with what was in effect a subsidy to the organisation, membership figures crept higher and higher and reliability and efficiency of Class War increased dramatically. When the copper was finally pulled out of Class War, largely due to Shayler's efforts within MI5, the organisation became a shadow of its former self.

One wonders if the same would happen to the Socialist Workers Party if MI5 pulled out of there? The 1999 book 'Defending the Realm, MI5 and the Shayler Affair' (by Mark Hollingsworth and Nick Fielding) reveals that MI5 recruited 25 agents specifically to spy on and penetrate the SWP. The tiny party are, after all, Bolsheviks plotting with the Russians to overthrow the British Government.

Since then the SWP have become almost as intransigent as the labour party when it comes to insisting members toe the party line. Could it be MI5 have a bigger part to play than we thought in creating that party line in the first place?

So I courteously request MI5 pull their agents out of the SWP, the sooner the better. My guess is either it would find it difficult to carry on or else fall into the hands of true socialists. I imagine the MI5's main reason for not pulling out of the SWP is to prevent the latter.

David Shayler: But the real criminals in this affair are the British Government and the intelligence services. The Government has a duty to uphold the law. It cannot simply be ignored because crimes are carried out by friends of the Government.

A second MI5 officer, Jestyn Thirkell-White, has decided to speak out to the Guardian in the wake of attempts on behalf of MI5 to harass the press.

He backs many of the allegations of mismanagement made by his former colleague, the renegade MI5 officer David Shayler.

"I think it is totally wrong that there has been no serious investigation into Shayler's allegations," he says. "Instead, the government has harassed his friends. I thought the arrest of his student supporter Julie Anne Davies, and another of his friends for so-called money laundering - he was never charged - was unjust and outrageous.

It was totally disproportionate to the alleged offence. MI5 and special branch were acting like the very police state they are supposed to be protecting us from."

Mr Thirkell-White, who resigned from MI5 in 1996 and now works as a banker, says: "I do not accept Jack Straw's statements that Shayler's revelations have in any way damaged national security." This included Mr Shayler's claim that the sister overseas espionage organisation, MI6, had colluded in an assassination plot by opponents of Col Gaddafi in Libya, and that Libyan intelligence officers had been active in London.

Mr Thirkell-White also agrees that the organisation has been in desperate need of reform and modernisation.

"When David went public, I expected an independent inquiry, because the allegations were serious enough to warrant proper investigation. Instead, MI5 appointed a former deputy director, John Alpass, who was a friend and colleague of MI5 chief Steven Lander, to conduct a broad review of all three intelligence organisations - MI5, MI6 and GCQ. That was quite wrong."