Northern Bank murk
Update. Here is an impressive account by Jonathan McCambridge in the Bel Tel of the reasons for failure in the case and others, minus the conspiracy theory. “In the end, the problem was the same as in the Omagh bombing and Robert McCartney murder trials – how do you solve a crime without evidence?”
Our old friends the dogs in the streets will have a complete theory about the Northern Bank robbery and I doubt if Chris Ward is central to it. I have to say I’m totally ignorant of the gossip but let’s see if I’ve got it right what the Times and the Guardian are trying to tell me.
In the weeks after the Northern Bank robbery, security sources in Northern Ireland and the republic hinted that at least one branch of the security services had prior knowledge the IRA was preparing just such a heist….. At the time, this was dismissed as a conspiracy theory. But in light of the Omagh revelations, would it be a complete surprise if it emerged the authorities knew in advance about the biggest bank robbery in UK history but failed to act?
Henry said earlier in the piece: “Following the heist on December 20 2004, the PSNI chief constable, Sir Hugh Orde, claimed it was “the biggest theft of waste paper in history”. Orde was referring to the bank’s decision to immediately recall all its notes and reprint an entire set of new ones that were radically different in colour and design.
But he goes on to give weight to this contradiction:
“The IRA southern commander turned police spy Sean O’Callaghan was adamant the Provisionals had the ability to absorb and “wash” the cash through their various assets relatively quickly. Most of the stolen money, O’Callaghan said, was digested through the IRA’s financial system even before the Northern Bank’s reprinted notes hit the streets.”
If this is true, Orde is bound to have known it so why did he play down the scale of the financial loss?
David Sharrock in the Times points out that Sir Hugh Orde has scored three of the UK’s most controversial cases – the 1998 Omagh bombing, the Northern Bank robbery and the murder of Robert McCartney – at the end of which he has scored a legal 0-3 with not a single conviction achieved.
“A harder question to answer is how much blame should be shouldered by Sir Hugh and how much is the result of the peculiarities created by the peace process and the blurred point at which justice and politics meet in Northern Ireland.”
David concludes: “Almost three weeks after the raid he told a news conference in Belfast: “In my opinion the Provisional IRA were responsible for this crime.” His delay in publicly attributing blame – in a province where the police were usually more swift to do so – may have been because of the febrile political atmosphere of the time.” (What’s the precise suggestion here?)
These reports seem to imply first, that Orde had to have the IRA attribution dragged out of him at the time and second, that he played down the significance of the real money loss of £20 million – contrary to O’Callaghan’s view that the loss was real and substantial – a view which Orde is bound to have shared from his knowledge of the IRA racketeering. Did Orde take this line ( if he did), in order to minimise the threat to the peace process, or did he do the opposite – defy pressure to get him not to give the IRA attribution at all? There’s a suspicion of cover-up of prior knowledge held by either by MI5 or the CID. There’s no conclusive knowledge of this that’s fit to print – it’s hard to imagine anybody fessing up – but I think I’ve got the message. The further impression I’m left with is that Ward was put up for a show trial that was bound to fail, so that yet again the book can be closed on a politically inconvenient case. What I’m confused about is whether the suggestion is that it’s the prior knowledge is being covered up as such or a cover up for political reasons or both. I somehow doubt if that’s all we’ll hear of the Northern Bank saga…
Whatever the truth behind the murk, this is not the best of times for Hugh Orde to get such coverage
I think he just answered that himself. The rest of you should leave him alone.
Is that fellow UMH, a bit of a nut?
He’s a persistent troll. Like all trolls, it’s better not to feed him.
I’m still here guys, no matter what libels the moderators allow UMH to say about me.
I had hoped that someone would have something relevant to say about what others might have committed the Northern Bank heist, especially since those who did went out of their way to make it look as if the PSNI did.
Until someone adds something relevant, I am going off to write an article about the unexpected death of Austrian troublemaker Jörg Haider – apparently an assassination by his former hardline rightists, led by the Freedom Party’s Heinz-Christian Strache, for betraying the cause to the Israelis, or by the Mossad because of how Haider’s continued existence would help Josef Fritlz explain his continued abuse of his daughter at his trial. Apparently, the Mossad’s continued blackmail of him in its anti-Nazi purposes kept him at it in his cellar.
Hey, folks, I’m back, having written the article I proposed, and it can be found on this link:
http://www.mixx.com/stories/2438608/why_austria_s_j_rg_haider_was_assassinated
And if link doesn’t work, it can always be found on codshit.com and cryptome.org
The only thing to add is about Haider’s successor, young Stefan Petzner, who has belatedly claimed that Haider was drunk when the crash happened – what the media has blown up to incredible degrees.
The facts are that Petzner was one of the last persons to see Haider alive; made no protest when he apparently drove home, while letting his driver off on the way; made no mention of Haider being apparently quite drunk when he got the chance the day after, especially not chastising
himself for letting it happen; only to come back on line when it looks like he is part of the problem by stating that Haider was thoroughly drunk.
Still won’t account for the missing woman caller who announced the killing after she had apparently
helped drive Haider off the road to his death, the fact that the massive car was reduced to a collapsed tin can in the process, the fact that the Austrian police ruled out any foul play or electronic glitchers in the process – what prevented a real inquest into his murder, etc.
Just shows that British covert operators have no monoply on the deadly process, as I shall show in more revelations about the Northern Bank heist.
Time to wake up, students!
POLITICAL WARNING: Driving without due care and attention on the Right in Europe can be seriously damaging to your health.
While Rory is quite right with his snide comment about driving on the right in Europe when it comes to avoiding Mossad hit squads, perhaps it is time to bring the thread back to various kinds of hit squads the Brits ran in N. I., apparently including those involved in the Northern Bank heist.
In order to do so, posters should understand the differences in organization, agenda, modus operandi, etc., of the SAS, FRU, 14 Intelligence Company, etc., – what has been largely incorporated in the Special Reconnaissance Regiment since 9/11.
In thinking about the 14 Intelligence Company, especially its role – what could easily have been used, either officially or unofficially, in the bank heist, read what Mark Urban has written in Big Boys’ Rules about the assassination of Francis Bradley (pp. 214-6), and Rev. Raymond Murray has added to in The SAS in Ireland, especially Captain Simon Hayward’s leadership role in it. (p. 343ff.)
In doing so, note that the place where Bradley was assassinated was staked out until he conveniently arrived there, and then he was cut down in a barrage of bullets before he could do anything. The stake-out was clearly not an SAS one, but neither Urban nor Murray apparently knew about the existence of the 14th then, just assuming that it had to be an SAS one.
And the Bradley assassination was basically carried out to give Hayward apparently an alibi when he, it seems, assassinated Sweden’s statsminister 10 days later.
With the 14th able to do such a coordinated, undercover operation as the setting up of Bradley in order to give its personnel cover for just about anything, the bank job would have been a piece of cake by any of its employees, whether still on the Crown’s payroll or not.