All news on this page courtesy of the
The Telegraph Newspaper, London, UK
The Sunday Telegraph 24 August 1997
Gulf veterans at war over MI6 claim
By Tim Reid
VETERANS of the Desert Storm campaign are locked in a bitter dispute over allegations that a leading supporter for action on Gulf War Syndrome was offered money by MI6 to sabotage the veterans' cause.
Major Ian Hill, chairman of the National Gulf Veterans' and Families' Association, has been accused by a fellow former soldier of failing to inform the association that a secret offer of "gratuities" was made to him by intelligence officers.
The allegation, contained in correspondence seen by The Sunday Telegraph, was last night denied by Major Hill. But he said that his wife, Carole, was indeed approached in 1995 by a woman who suggested "money could be made" by keeping the Government informed of developments in the veterans' campaign.
He and his wife said last night that they immediately informed their association, their lawyers, the Royal British Legion and the press about the approach.
A letter, sent last week by Andrew Honer of the Gulf Veterans' Association - a rival campaign group engaged in a long-running feud with the NGV&FA - accuses Major Hill of being offered "gratuities" from a "Government Intelligence Agency" to "supress [information] relevant to the Association in its claims against the Government", and of failing to report the alleged approach by intelligence officers.
Mr Honer claims to have been told by a fellow GVA member that Major Hill, during a meeting in September 1996, suggested that it was possible to receive "monthly gratuities" by passing information about the veterans' campaign back to the Government.
He claims the veteran who contacted him has "video and audio tapes" that prove the claims. But Mr Honer, who served in the Gulf as a reservist, admits he has not yet seen or heard these.
He also alleges in the letter that Major Hill suggested to the veteran that he could be "paid off" not to organise events designed to promote their campaign. Major Hill denies both allegations.
Mr Honer, who has also sent the letter to the Royal British Legion - which oversees the activities of both groups - has demanded the immediate resignation of Major Hill.
Major Hill told The Telegraph last night that Mr Honer's allegations were "absolute nonsense". He said when his wife, also a member of the NGV&FA executive committee, was approached in mid-1995 "we were completely open about it. In any event, I was never approached. This whole thing is a figment of his imagination. I just feel sorry for Andrew Honer. It's just an attempt by him to get some publicity, because he's trying to get a book published.
"He is also not in a position to call for anything. The NGV&FA has its own democratic constitution. With regard to his allegations against me, I have taken immediate legal advice and the matter is now in the hands of my solicitor."
The letter is the latest, and by far the most bizarre, development in a long-running feud between the two Gulf War veterans' associations, which have accused each other of incompetence and poaching members.
Discontent between the NGV&FA and the Newcastle-based GVA, which was set up a year earlier in 1993, intensified after a mailshot last September. Nearly 400 GVA members received letters at home from Eddie Blench, a former GVA chairman who is now a member of the NGV&FA, asking them to swap allegiance.
Major Hill, a regular soldier for 20 years, served in the Gulf for a few months as a reservist in the Royal Army Medical Corps, but says he was exposed to a mixture of drugs designed to protect him from Iraqi chemical attack. He became so ill that he had to be flown home.
The Government has so far refused to recognise the illnesses reported by veterans as a syndrome, or to accept that their Gulf service, and the drugs they were given before the conflict, were in any way to blame.
Such an admission could cost the Ministry of Defence many millions of pounds in compensation. More than 3,000 veterans are considering making claims against the MoD.
A spokesman for the Royal British Legion said last night: "We have received a copy of the letter. We feel it would be inappropriate to make any comment at this stage." A Home Office spokesman said last night: "We don't discuss operational matters of the intelligence services."
I was with sad regret that I returned home today to read the article that appeared in today's Telegraph.
Why do people feel the need to publicly attack a comrade in arms, for what purpose, for what gain and at what cost? If indeed allegations of pay off's and such are with substance, then surely they should be dealt with by the relevant Association. Certainly not splashed all over a Sunday Newspaper for the entire world to see.
Veterans have had a hard enough time in this country fighting for recognition, at one time it was concerted effort, all reaching for the same goal. Sadly, now that seems to have withered as certain people strive to make a name for themselves, using whatever dirt they can find.
To those who fit this category, I say, get off this train now, you are on the wrong line. In the Gulf we fought together and we must fight together now. I for one do not want to see the last 5 years work go down the pan just because you want to get yourselves noticed.
| Top of Page | Current Section Index |
|---|