#NAMA book banned- yet not a single writ served! 

My book highlighting the nefarious Nama scheme has been banned on Amazon. 

This development comes after a series of complaints by Paul Tweed- a libel lawyer and business partner of Fortress’s Brendan McGinn- on behalf of six individuals who I have named the dirty half-dozen. They are Peter Robinson, Frank Cushnahan, Alan Mains, Paddy Kearney, Brendan McGinn (Fortress) and Kevin Lagan. 

  
Mr Tweed initially informed Amazon that there had been a defamation complaint from his clients- yet not one of them had served any legal papers of any sort against me! 

Amazon refuted his defamation angle so Paul Tweed went back to the drawing board. He has now contrived a “Copyright” complaint. Quite how anyone could hold the “Copyright” for a book written entirely by me, is quite beyond comprehensive. 

  
This is, in fact, merely another attempt by Mr Tweed to have my book banned for a period of time to allow his clients some breathing space. 

The book of course reveals all the grubby schemes that Mr Tweed’s dirty half-dozen have been involved in, along with others. It also reveals how Alan Mains lied to the Smithwick tribunal and failed to disclose he was an MI5 asset at the time. Is it any wonder they are going at every angle to get the book banned? 

I will firmly resist these contrived and pathetic attempts to have my book banned. Should I however fail to overturn the Amazon ban, I will simply publish a PDF of the entire book online where everyone can read it for free. 

The question people should ask is this- if there has been any defamation and I have lied in the book, then why has not one single writ been served? 

If there is any basis to this latest “copyright” complaint dreamt up by Paul Tweed, then why has not one single writ been served? 

These people- represented by Mr Tweed- want my book banned because it is the truth. They haven’t commenced action against me because they know if they do it will be proven to be the truth. 

I emailed Mr Paul within past two weeks following his malicious “defamation” letters to Amazon. I requested that he backed up his complaints by issuing a writ against me or seeking a court order. He has not responded. 

Mr Tweed should come clean on what the basis for his malicious and contrived complaints are and have the courage to issue a writ. If Paul Tweed and his clients/business partners are so certain of their position, then why not apply for a court order to have the book completely banned? Why not seek an injunction? Surely a lawyer of the international standing of Paul Tweed wouldn’t be concerned about taking me on in a courtroom? 

The answer to all of the above is simple. They can’t go to court because they know I am telling the truth, so they are trying to get the book banned via the back-door with a number of malicious, baseless and concocted complaints to Amazon. 

I still have a number of hard copies of the book in my possession if anyone would like a copy, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Advertisements

Who are the Odyssey trust? Over £6.5m in unexplained “expenses” questioned! 

 The Odyssey arena has been in the news over the past few days following the cancellation of the One Direction concert earlier in the week. The late announcement was heavily criticised. Following the earlier cancellation the Odyssey trust, who is the parent company that own the arena, decided to postpone the Belfast Giants- who are also owned by the Odyssey trust- hockey game tonight (Friday October 23) in order that the concert could take place.

 

The decision to cancel the Ice Hockey game has caused much annoyance amongst Ice Hockey fans and especially those from Sheffield who had booked transport for the game. Despite this, the Odyssey trust refused to appear on the Nolan show to explain this decision. This is in stark contrast to the willingness of the group to put forward spokesmen when things are going well.

 

The Odyssey complex was built using a huge amount of public money. From 1997 until 31 March 2009 the group accounts showed that they received a whopping £90 million in public funds. The parent company, Odyssey trust, is a registered charity and therefore receives many benefits from that status and effectively benefits from public money. The trust’s mission statement says they aim to;

 

 “establish, hold, manage, safeguard and develop the investment in the Odyssey Project for the benefit of all the people of Northern Ireland.”

 

In a report into the Odyssey trust, carried out in 2010, it was found that the group had expended £55m since its incorporation in 1998 until 31 March 2009. Startlingly the report also found that £6.4m of this had been spent on “miscellaneous expenses”. At well over 10% of the total expenditure, this is an enormous amount of money to spend on “miscellaneous expenses”. What these expenses were, or who benefited, is not known!

 

Further to the whopping £6.5m wrote off under “miscellaneous expenses”, up until 31 March 2009 the trust had also spent £21m on “estate management” and “establishment expenses”. This enormous expenditure for account headings without any sub-analysis raises serious questions, and for a charity- which had received huge amounts of public money- to be spending so lavishly on unexplained “expenses”, there surely must be further questions asked!

 

The confidential report into Odyssey trust, carried out in 2010, is damming of the publicly funded charity, yet no questions were asked. It would be somewhat concerning if members of the Odyssey trust were availing of public money to travel around in private jets under the auspices of those unexplained “expenses”.

 

Perhaps the CEO of the Odyssey Robert Fitzpatrick, who earns in the region of £120,000 per annum- together with pension contributions, could help us answer some of these questions given that he must be one of the highest paid charity workers anywhere in Northern Ireland!

 

What has DCAL being doing about this and what oversight is there of this unaccountable charity who spend so much public money on undisclosed “expenses”?

Response to Paul Tweed & the Dirty half-dozen’s attempt to have my NAMA book banned 

Responding the the legal action brought against my book: 

Today’s notice from amazon that Mr Paul Tweed, representing six individuals, is claiming defamation in relation to my book, is little more than a transparent attempt to have the book removed from the shelves. 

  
Of course, as yet, they have not taken any legal action against me- to do so would open them up to cross examination in the courtroom. That is one place those six named individuals do not want to find themselves. Hence why they have confined their action to trying to have my book banned. 

Mr Robinson, of course, chose a good day for this action, a busy news day where the focus is all on his epic Stormont U-turn rather than his NAMA shenanigans!  

I again reiterate that I stand over all allegations I have made. I have responded to Mr Tweed and advised him to go ahead and initiate proceedings against me. The discovery in that case will be nothing short of remarkable. 

  

If Paul Tweed and his dirty half-dozen think that a legal letter is going to make me buckle, then they are sadly mistaken. I again repeat my challenge- sue me and I will see you in Court. 

Serious questions for NI21 following exposure of their Stormont worker as a woman beater & LAD admin. 

Today’s exposure of Gary Kirby- who I named as a LAD admin in my book- raises many serious questions. 

Kirby was one of the original players behind the satirical website LAD. The site and their social media accounts set themselves up as the moral guardians of Northern Ireland society. They existed to “call out” and “expose” those who they viewed as the dregs of society. 

LAD took on this crusade behind the cover of a fake account, unable to use their own names and publicly challenge those they disagreed with, instead they hid behind a veil of secrecy and bullied anyone who refused to conform to their viewpoint.

It never bothered me, I put myself out there and am fair game. But there were other ordinary people who didn’t put themselves out there. They perhaps expressed a view on social media and LAD worked to ensure they lost their job, were abused because of their physical appearance or derided over a spelling mistake. 

Gary Kirby thought this was all fantastic stuff. Along with his fellow LAD’s- including a current admin who works for Belfast City Council- he revelled in the destruction their little social media account was causing in the lives of ordinary people. Those they targeted were braver than LAD ever were. The victims of this trolling were vulnerable to harrassment because they had the courage to express their views using their own name. 

In a remarkable portion of karma, Gary Kirby was exposed some time ago as a LAD admin and as a result he had to leave his job in Convergys. Now today he is exposed in the Sunday Life as a convicted wife beater, who urinated in a police car and who now works at Stormont for Basil McCrea. 

  
NI21 had a strong influence over LAD from the very start. Olive Buckley, the NI21 chair, is Gary Kirby’s partner. She used the LAD site to whip up support for her Union & to leak information about the NHS. 

NI21 need to urgently explain just what their involvement  was with LAD and whether any money from their party was funnelled into LAD to assist them in the production of their black propaganda videos and “merchandise”. 

I am sure many victims of domestic violence will also be questioning Basil McCrea’s support for a convicted wife beater, who urinated in the back of a police car. 

Robinson’s abuse of Parliamentary Privilege and confidential letters to British Government ministers.  

 In the letter sent to the DFP committee by Mr Paul Tweed, who acts for Mr Peter Robinson, the well-known legal representative made reference to the fact I used Parliamentary privilege to make allegations against “his clients”. Of course Mr Tweed cannot even tell us who his clients are. This letter conveniently avoids the elephant in the room, namely that I have repeated- continuously- the allegations outside of the DFP committee and therefore without any protection.

  
Peter Robinson went to great lengths to complain about the use of privilege, yet let’s take a look at Mr Robinson’s past use of parliamentary privilege- which was used, naturally, to attempt to influence an open bidding process on behalf of his property developer friends. Unlike me, the DUP leader did not have the courage to repeat his allegations outside the chamber- nor apologise when it was exposed as a tissue of lies!

In June 2005 the Sheridan Group became the preferred developer of the Queen’s Quay sites, beside the Odyssey arena. This development would have brought many jobs into East Belfast and boosted the local economy, but Mr Robinson did not concern himself with that. He was more interested in helping his own circle of developer pals and given individuals such as Kevin Lagan had lost out in an open competition during the preferred developer stage, Peter Robinson decided that he would use Parliamentary privilege to try and poison the due diligence stage of the process. This of course was all done in a contrived attempt to assist the likes of Kevin Lagan and Paddy Kearney.

Peter Robinson stood up in Westminster in 2006 and alleged that the Sheridan group had links to “IRA dirty money”. Of course Mr Robinson cowered under the veil of parliamentary privilege to make these allegations- which were later proven to be baseless- and refused to repeat the allegations outside of Westminster. This is the fundamental difference between Mr Robinson’s use of privilege and mine. I have the courage to repeat my claims and challenge the First Minister to sue me, Peter Robinson hides behind privilege.

After his allegations Robinson continued to write to the then Secretary of State Mr Peter Hain and Minister of State for NI David Hanson, lobbying them to tighten the due diligence procedure. Of course Mr Robinson was so concerned with this because he wanted to get his own charmed circle of property developer pals back into the competition. 

The letters sent by Robinson to former Secretary of State Peter Hain and former Minister of State David Hansen, demonstrate his desire to ensure the Sheridan group did not pass the due diligence stage. These letters are published here for the first time, thanks to a senior member of the DUP who was disgusted at Robinson’s behaviour in 2006.

Rather than bring jobs to East Belfast and boost the local economy, Robinson sought to abuse the use of parliamentary privilege to benefit his charmed circle. Whilst the then East Belfast MP should have been doing all he could to bring jobs to East Belfast, instead he was using his political mandate to try and influence a bidding process so his buddies could benefit.

In the High Court Judgement of Gillen J (Ref GIL7028) in a Judicial Review into matters arising around the bididng process for Queen’s Quay, the judge remarked that the allegations made against the Sheridan Group were “baseless”. It also became clear that neither the PSNI nor the NIO had any information whatsoever to suggest that the Sheridan Group had been involved in any form of criminality of financial mal-practice.

When Peter Robinson- and his lawyer Paul Tweed- bemoan the use of Parliamentary privilege, it is the height of sheer hypocrisy. Robinson did not use privilege to act in the public interest, but rather to assist his charmed circle of business buddies. Further to this he did not have the courage to come out from under the protection of privilege and repeat his claims.

I argue that I have never hid behind privilege. I walked straight out of Stormont and named Peter Robinson as one of those who were earmarked to benefit from a portion of the £7.5 million kick-back stemming from the sale of Project Eagle. I firmly stand over that allegation.

  

    
   

Robinson’s memory loss fooling no-one! 

 At Mr Robinson’s appearance at the DFP committee today he once again rejected my allegations and continued his regular verbal assault on the Irish News.

 It should be pointed out that given Mr Robinson has totally rejected the very serious allegations I have made and described them as scurrilous and without foundation, I do wonder why the side stepping First Minister has not initiated legal proceedings against me? 

It is also a point of note that for all his bluster against the Irish News, he has not issued any legal proceedings against one of Northern Irelands largest Newspapers.

Further to the above I have published a book which not only repeats but makes further allegations against Mr Robinson. Once again, the DUP have not initiated any legal action against my book. Why?

During Mr Robinson’s evidence today he snarled and remarked that some of the charmed circle I had referred to was not even in Nama. Who would that be he is referring to, his old chums Noel Murphy and Adam Armstrong? I have attached documents to show that Mar properties- which stands for Murphy, Armstrong and Rush- were in Nama. There it is in black and white!

  
Mr Jim Wells also took great delight in dismissing my allegation that Mr Robinson celebrated the refinancing of Paddy Kearney’s loans with a dinner in Carrickfergus. Today Mr Robinson himself confirmed that indeed he did attend such a dinner. It was of course organised by Mr Alan Mains, who nobody thought to ask Mr Robinson if he knew. I have named Mr Mains in my book as a MI5 asset who was working for the British Security Services when RUC officers Harry Breen and Bob Buchanan were murdered. A fact he conveniently omitted from his evidence to the Smithwick tribunal.

I also revealed during my evidence the Dankse bank account the money was paid into, and once again this has been confirmed as accurate.

I revealed details of meetings attended by DUP ministers in relation to Nama. This information has been proven accurate and remarkably there have been no minutes kept of these meetings. This is coupled by Mr Robinson’s remarkable memory loss. It would be interesting for someone to collate how many times Mr Robinson relied on his lack of memory to get out of any tight spots today.

He did of course have four loyal allies in the room, including Sammy Wilson’s former SPAD and also his own former SPAD, Emma Pengelly. When Mr Robinson was caught out in relation to contact he had with Mr Frank Cushnahan, Mrs Pengelly demonstrated her usefulness by jumping in, interrupting and going off on a long winded tangent to answer for Mr Robinson. Mr Jim Wells, the George Foreman of the committee’s inquiry, tweeted that Mr Robinson had performed strongly. I leave it for the public to make a judgement on his memory loss.

Judith Cochrane was remarkably silent during today’s hearing. Given her desire to lead the charge in relation to shutting down my evidence and the evidence of Mr Gareth Graham, this is astonishing. It is however made a little clearer when viewed with the knowledge that Mrs Cochrane had last year agreed to join the DUP but during an event in Castlereagh she had been disgusted with the behaviour of Jimmy Spratt and subsequently put off her planned move to the DUP.

Thankfully Mr Robinson was today able to allay any fears in relation to Ian Coulter- the man who secretly transferred £7.5m into an off-shore account- and Frank Cushnahan, the king of conflicts of interest who was to receive £5m from the PIMCO deal for… well no one really knows. Mr Robinson was able to reassure us that there were “good fixers”. That’s the end of that then, move along, nothing to see here!

I also named other individuals due to receive a payment, none of these persons have issued legal action and all issued denials much the same as Mr Robinson. Of course the denial of David Watters has about as much credibility as a DUP graduated response, given that it’s been exposed as a tissue of lies. I again reiterate, without privilege, that the others to receive payment besides Mr Watters were Peter Robinson, Andrew Creighton, Ian Coulter and Frank Cushnahan. I await legal action from the accused!

The well-choreographed evidence of Mr Robinson today is fooling no-one. The remarkable memory loss, the lack of minutes and the fact that PIMCO were led to believe he and Mr Sammy Wilson were “assessing their credibility” leaves us with more questions than answers. 

Then of course we have the activities of Fortress, who Mr Robinson knows nothing about. This is surprising given Brendan McGinn is Gareth Robinson’s best friend and has recently “partied” with him in Belfast City Centre. Mr McGinn is also a business partner of Robinson’s solicitor Paul Tweed.
In relation to Gareth Robinson the DUP leader today adopted an “I know nothing approach”. He stated he did not know his son’s client list, but did feel able to assert his belief that Gareth Robinson did not lobby for the Millmount site. This is strange. For someone who doesn’t know anything at all about his son’s business, how did he feel able to make this assertion?

I also think it’s poignant to highlight the sheer hypocrisy in relation to Mr Robinson’s whining about my use of parliamentary privilege. Firstly, I have made the allegations without privilege so therefore the option of legal action is there for Mr Robinson, but for some unknown reason he chooses not to take it. Secondly, as was revealed in the Irish News last week, Mr Robinson has previously used privilege to make groundless allegations against prominent businessman Peter Curiston. Tomorrow, thanks to a disgusted DUP source, I will publish confidential letters that were exchanged between Mr Robinson and the Secretary of State in 2006 and 2007 in relation to Mr Robinon’s attempts to alter the process in relation to the development of the Odessey arena.
 
The truth behind the Nama scandal can be found within this book, available in paperback or on kindle.
 
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1517720125/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_xacgwb4JV6Q1B

Open letter to NAMA Chairperson Mr Frank Daly 

02/10/2015

Dear Mr Daly
Following your appearance before the Republic of Ireland PAC committee in Dublin, I am writing to offer you the oppourtunity to challenge the evidence I provided before the Northern Ireland DFP committee, and indeed the information I have included on my blog. 

During the hearing before the PAC on 01 October 2015 in the Dail, you remarked that you would like to challenge some of the evidence provided by me and by Mr Gareth Graham. 

You further stated that “evidence is lacking” from my blogs and claimed you were “amazed people swallow it”. 

You did not, however, provide any basis for your amazement nor did you contradict any of the information I have provided, which is relevant to NAMA. 

Whilst you remarked “evidence is lacking”- you did not take the oppourtunity to expose any falsehoods or refute any of my information. Your view that “evidence is lacking” does not detract from the information and I note that you did not question whether the information was correct or not, rather it appeared you took the view that it did not matter whether the information was true or not. 

In light of the above, and given you made it clear yesterday that you would like to challenge some of the information I have provided, I would like to invite you to clarify any elements of my information that you feel is false or misleading. 

I do, of course, firmly stand over all the information I have provided but I do feel that it is prudent to offer you the oppourtunity to challenge any of the information I have placed into the public domain or provided to the Northern Ireland DFP committee.

I should point out that during yesterday’s hearing, under questioning from Mary-Lou McDonald TD, the NAMA delegation informed the committee that the reserve price had been set in January at £1.3 billion and had then been “adjusted”. The NAMA delegation failed to inform the committee that this price was “adjusted” to £1.24 billion in “early April” according to previous statements made by NAMA CEO Mr McDonagh and subsequent to this the Cerberus bid arrived- which was a minuscule £100,000 over the adjusted reserve price- on April 1 and was accepted by NAMA on April 3. 

Within 72 hours in “early April” the reserve price was adjusted, Cerberus’s bid came in almost identical to this reserve and their bid was accepted. This, I am sure you would agree, is simply remarkable. 

In evidence yesterday NAMA also stated that the bidders would have known the reserve price. So when exactly did NAMA inform Cererbus and Fortress that the reserve price had been adjusted from £1.3 billion to £1.24 billion? If this adjustment took place in early April, as stated by Mr McDonagh, then either inside 24 hours NAMA informed Cererbus of the adjustment and they in turn adjusted their bid and submitted it- or else Cerberus were unaware of the adjusted reserve price and- just like Fortress- they bid below the reserve price. This would, of course, have been a pretty pointless excercise because any bid below the reserve price would not have been accepted. Even setting aside the remarkable circumstances arising in “early April”, how could there possibly be a competitive bidding process when Fortress could never have won? 

I am sure you appreciate that given 1 April is just about the earliest in April you can get, that there are some questions to be answered about the adjustment of the reserve price and Cerberus’s identical bid- all on the same day- not to mention the bid from Fortress, who I have described as a “stalking horse”. 

What due diligence did NAMA do on Fortress? Did you know that Brendan McGinn of Fortress is a business partner of Frank Cushnahan and Peter Robinson’s legal representative, Mr Paul Tweed? 

And even if NAMA did know of the link I have illuminated above, would it have made any difference? There was no concern when it became apparent the same legal firms were representing Cerebus that had represented PIMCO- who of course had to withdraw following the revelation they were to pay a fee of £5 million to former NAMA NI advisory committee member Mr Frank Cushnahan- who had an office in Tughans and had Tughans “assistants”. NAMA of course emailed documents (you were unable to tell us what documents) to these Tughans “assistants”. So by your own testimony NAMA was emailing information to “assistants” in the law firm that would go on to represent both of the bidders. 

NAMA sought fit to exclude PIMCO from the process, yet when all the same players moved over to assist the Cerebus bid- NAMA ignored the blatant conflicts of interest and continued with business as usual. It was the same web of solictors, fixers, politicians and businessmen- who had been caught in the act with the PIMCO bid- that ended up with their hands all over the Cerberus deal. Perhaps NAMA felt it was just a big happy coincidence that all these individuals just happened to be entwined with both bids? 

Did it ever cross NAMA’s mind that this web spread not only from the PIMCO bid to the Cerberus bid but that it also had links with the Fortress bid? 

To also suggest it was appropriate for NAMA to hold meetings in the offices of a law firm who would represent not one, but two of the bidders for the NI loan portfolio, is perhaps only slightly more preposterous than the suggestion that it was fine for NAMA to send documents to Mr Cushnahans Tughans “assistants”. 

If you wish to clarify these points then I of course welcome that. Questioning why people “swallow” the information I have provided is no substitute for a full and factual rebuttal. If there is nothing to hide and I have misled everyone, then I am quite sure a forensic and robust interrogation of every word of my information would then naturally lead to a factual rebuttal, which would expose my information as false. 
I do wish to place on record, much in the same vain as Shane Ross TD at the 1 Oct 2015 PAC meeting- that I do not believe NAMA have willingly engaged in any criminal activity or knowingly allowed the bidding process to be corrupted. I do not question the integrity of NAMA, however I can’t help but feel that you have been manipulated by a web of vultures and vipers- which include in their number senior Northern Ireland politicians. 

I look forward to hearing from you. 

Kind regards, 

Jamie Bryson