Obama's origins resurface at intel expert's trial
British figure defends claim on DNA disproving president's mother
When it came his time to speak, defendant Michael Shrimpton, a middle-aged London barrister by profession and self-proclaimed intelligence expert, politely issued to the judge a series of interrogatories that made clear he plans to launch a vigorous defense, representing himself before the court.
The criminal charges brought by the British government against Shrimpton under Section 51(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1977 accuse him of falsely notifying the British government to prepare for a terrorist nuclear attack on the 2012 Olympics in London that the British government claims had no basis in reality.
It’s the same Michael Shrimpton who appears in a 2008 video that began re-circulating earlier this year on the Internet in which he claims to have been privy to shocking intelligence information on Obama’s origins. Shrimpton contends to this day that the CIA collected DNA from then-Sen. Obama and a grandparent, establishing that Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama’s biological mother.
The video naturally has raised questions about Shrimpton’s credibility and his qualifications to make such an extraordinary claim.
Glaring inconsistencies, blackouts and outright fabrications in Barack Obama’s life narrative have generated widespread doubts about his presidential eligibility — Jerome Corsi’s “Where’s the Real Birth Certificate?” sets the record straight.
Meanwhile, Shrimpton has been indicted for having telephoned in 2012 the secretary of state for defense in London and declaring that a nuclear weapon stolen from the Russian submarine Kursk that sank in the Barents Sea on Aug. 12, 2000, had been smuggled into Britain.
Shrimpton said the smugglers were agents of a top-secret German intelligence agency that intended to detonate the weapon to cause massive damage and murder members of the Royal family and top government officials attending the London Olympics.
On March 17, in a courtroom devoid of news media except for WND, a short-tempered Senior Circuit Judge Alistair William McCreath, a resident judge based at Southwark Crown Court, surprised the Crown Prosecution Service and the defense by postponing Shrimpton’s trial until Nov. 10.
It was originally scheduled to begin that day.
The postponement meant any issues Shrimpton wants to pursue in his defense will not be aired in court until after the November mid-term elections in the U.S.
Government intelligence experts on both sides of the Atlantic marginalized Shrimpton as a loud-mouthed nuisance and gadfly who lacks professional credentials as an intelligence expert. But McCreath, nevertheless, dismissed a prosecution motion to order Shrimpton to undergo a psychiatric examination, making it clear a trial on the merits would take place.
Shrimpton was born in RAF Hospital Ely on March 9, 1957, to an RAF officer father and a Welsh mother. He was schooled in Wales one year then in Australia, beginning in 1964. He earned a Bachelor of Laws degree from the University of Queensland in Australia in 1976 and from the University College Cardiff at the University of Wales in 1981. He attended the Inns of Court School of Law in 1982 and 1983, and was called to the Bar in 1983.
His biography, while admirable in its educational achievements, irreparably placed Shrimpton outside the British social classes from which the most distinguished professional intelligence agents and lawyers have traditionally been recruited. Most come from the upper classes of British society with pedigrees and sufficient financial resources to be educated at boarding schools such as Eton, followed by university studies at Oxford or Cambridge.
Although Shrimpton has never held an official government job, he has published in a peer-reviewed intelligence publication, the Journal of International Security Affairs. The editor at the time of Shrimpton’s publication was the late U.S. Ambassador Harvey Feldman, perhaps best known for the role he played in helping plan President Nixon’s 1972 visit to China.
Shrimpton is the author of an upcoming book, “Spyhunter: The Secret of German Intelligence,” which is being finalized now for publication in the U.K. this week.
Confirming military satellite intelligence?
Shrimpton intends to defend himself in a November jury trial by demanding to see specific intelligence information he believes will exonerate him.
In a document shared with WND that Shrimpton submitted to the court in his defense, he put CPS prosecutors on notice that he intends to subpoena radar signature readings taken by U.S. military satellites.
In particular, Shrimpton wants to obtain readings from U.S. intelligence satellites involved in the KH-13 satellite surveillance program operated by the NRO, the highly secretive U.S. National Reconnaissance Office headquartered in unincorporated Fairfax County, Va., two miles south of Dulles International Airport. It operates as one of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies that along with the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency is considered one of the “big five” of U.S. intelligence agencies.
Shrimpton believes readings from U.S. military intelligence satellites operating in low orbit between 2200 hours GMT and 0100 on April 20 through 21, 2011, downloaded to a ground station near Fort Belvoir, Va., will indicate a source of weapons-grade plutonium was adjacent to, and then on, the Blackwater River Estuary in Essex.
“This Satellite Intelligence (SATINT) is consistent with reporting of a viable IND [Improvised Nuclear Device] being removed from the U.K. by a German SSD [State Security Department],” Shrimpton’s brief to the court claims. “The SATINT would have been made available to GCHQ [British General Communications Headquarters] as a matter of course under the UKUSA (originally BRUSA) Intelligence Treaty and on balance is probably being withheld from the CPS, the defense, and the court.”
Nuclear weapon stolen from Kursk?
In London, WND interviewed John Large, head of Large and Associates Consulting Engineers, a group with established nuclear expertise that had been contracted by the Russian government for advice on how best to salvage the Kursk submarine.
“With the salvage of the Kursk, the Russian Federation took the standard government line of refusing to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons on board, but there were six nuclear weapons on board when the submarine went down,” Large told WND.
“My work was to set up the procedure assuming nuclear weapons were on board, and the Russian Federation implemented the procedures we devised based on the malfunction of a weapon with its conventional charge being released.”
Large said the submarine had been at the bottom of the sea for a year, and two of the weapons silos housing the nuclear-tipped weapons were at the front, near the site of the explosion that sank the vessel.
WND asked Large if all the nuclear weapons were on board the submarine when the salvage operations took place.
“We have no idea,” Large responded. “We assumed the nuclear weapons were on board.”
He said the submarine sank in 110 meters of water, or 360 feet, and the Russians had a guard ship above the location from the moment the submarine sank.
“Because of weather, the guard ship may have run for shelter three or four times during the year when the Kursk was sunk,” he said. “It would be difficult at that depth to do a submarine recovery given the shallowness of the sea there, but you certainly could do a surface recovery if you had saturation divers. But again, a surface ship would be immediately spotted by the Russian Federation.”
Still, Large explained to WND that he and his staff were not present during Russian Federation recovery efforts.
“We worked very closely with the Russian Federation during the Kursk salvage operations, so we assumed and we were never challenged that the nuclear weapons were still on board,” he said.
“But if I were to testify in Michael Shrimpton’s case, I couldn’t say if any of the nuclear weapons were missing or not missing when the Kursk was recovered, because I wasn’t there to observe it.”
Large concluded the interview by saying he was surprised the CPS was going forward with the prosecution.
Large also had no explanation for why the judge postponed the case until November. However, he speculated that the judge may have wanted to give the prosecution time to consider whether or not prosecuting Shrimpton in a public jury trial and allowing him to launch a defense was really in the British government’s national security interest.
While he was doubtful a nuclear weapon had been stolen from the Kursk while submerged, Large cautioned that terrorists could have obtained a nuclear weapon in the chaos that occasioned the end of the Soviet Union.
“Iran could also have a nuclear weapon anytime Iran wants one,” Large also said. “With Iran making rapid progress toward a nuclear weapon, the probability of a terrorist nuclear attack is a realistic risk. Iran could get a nuclear weapon today, if Iran wants, from North Korea or rogue elements in Pakistan.”
Secret German intelligence group?
WND traveled to Marlborough Wiltshire west of London to meet with distinguished retired British Intelligence officer Lt. Col. Dr. Harry Beckhough, MBE, who Shrimpton plans to call as a defense witness via video link from Newbury Magistrates Court. Advanced age has limited Beckthough’s mobility.
Among Beckhough’s many career achievements are having worked as a code-breaker at Bletchley Park during World War II and having served with the British 8th Army in the World War II campaign in North Africa. His duties included working on Lt. Gen. Thomas Montgomery’s intelligence staff with the assignment to break Nazi Gen. Erwin Rommel’s military codes.
Beckhough presented WND two books he has authored, one titled “Germany’s Four Reichs” and the other “Germany’s Fourth Reich,” in which he documented the rise a secret German intelligence agency. The Deutsche Verteidigungs Dienst, the DVD, or German Defense Agency, he said, was created as a post-World War II continuance of the Nazi Abwehr military intelligence organization operated by Admiral Wilhelm Franz Canaris.
Beckhough told WND he was willing to testify at Shrimpton’s trial that the DVD continues to operate from its headquarters outside Dachau as a secret German military intelligence operation.
Obama’s birth story
In the U.S., Shrimpton recently has drawn attention with the re-circulation of a video that shows him claiming that the CIA collected DNA from Obama and a grandparent in 2008 as Obama was running for president.
See the Shrimpton video:
Shrimpton alleged that through DNA tests conducted during Obama’s initial presidential campaign, the CIA established Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama’s biological mother.
He said Dunham was not pregnant in July 1961, yet it is claimed that she gave birth to Barack Obama Jr. on Aug. 4, 1961.
Shrimpton said it was his understanding that the DNA samples were collected at a fundraising dinner from water glasses that were bagged after the dinner.
However, Stanley Ann Dunham’s father, Stanley Amour Dunham, died in 1992. Her mother, Madelyn Dunham, died of cancer Nov. 2, 2008, and was not know to have made public appearances in Obama’s campaign, though she did turn up briefly in an April 2008 Obama TV commercial. A TV news report on the commercial by Honolulu’s KITV said Madelyn Dunham had tried to stay out of the campaign and declined formal interviews. When a KITV reporter reached her by phone, she said she hadn’t seen the commercial and was surprised to learn she was in it.
See the KITV report:
Shrimpton made clear he intends to subpoena from the CIA and from British intelligence any records either agency may have on Obama’s DNA.
“I intend to stand by my allegations regarding the Obama birth certificate, knowing that U.S. intelligence agencies will prefer to characterize me as crazy and delusional rather than admit the CIA has the files I believe they have on Obama DNA,” Shrimpton insisted.