Dag Hammarskjold

October 10 2019 — In a report released on Monday (October 7 2019) by current secretary-general António Guterres, Tanzanian lawyer Mohamed Chande Othman wrote that he will need more time to finish his review of the case because US, Britain and SA  are not responding to his questions.  Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY

RELATED POST: On This Day — Who Killed Dag Hammarskjöld and Why? (July 29 1905 – September 18 1961) [2019]

RELATED POST: UN: Former Tanzania’s top judge will lead new investigation into Dag Hammarskjold’s suspicious death

RELATED POST: UN to Investigate Dag Hammarskjöld’s Death. NSA Suspected to Hide Information

UPDATE (October 10 2020) — Life, Soren Kierkegaard wrote, must be lived forwards even if it can only be understood backwards. So true, on both counts…

When I wrote this post a year ago, I was boiling with rage. At the time, only the most loyal readers of this blog could have understood — and possibly share — my feelings.

But after this year revelations regarding Crypto AG and Operation Rubicon, no one has an excuse. Everyone one should feel angry. Flashback.

Fact #1 — A decade ago, I argued that Crypto AG had rigged the equipment used by diplomats around the world allowing US Intelligence Agencies to decode their messages in real-time.

The piece (The NSA-Crypto AG Sting — For years US eavesdroppers could read encrypted messages without the least difficulty) is still available online and its relevance to the Lockerbie case could play a major role in the upcoming appeal.

On February 11 2020, I was finally vindicated when Swiss broadcasting company SRF, German public broadcaster ZDF and the Washington Post confirmed most details of the story after gaining access to a classified, comprehensive CIA history document summarizing Operations “Thesaurus” and  “Rubicon”.

RELATED POST: Crypto AG — Belgium Intelligence Committee Launches Investigation

Fact #2 — On November 2 2017, I suggested that Belgian mercenary Jan Van Risseghem may be responsible for the death of Dag Hammarskjold. The story was based on the testimony of a very credible source who had accepted to talk to Intel Today.

On January 12 2019, The Guardian confirmed that Belgian mercenary Jan van Risseghem was indeed the person responsible for the death of Dag Hammarskjold and his crew.

RELATED POST: EXCLUSIVE — Belgian Mercenary Killed Dag Hammarskjold // UPDATE — Story Confirmed!

Amazingly, The Guardian forgot to tell its readers that the story had been published on this blog more than a year before. Even the pictures of Jan van Risseghem published by The Guardian were initially published on this blog.

Intel Today readers were not amused, and a few did not hesitate to tell The Guardian how they felt about this affair.

But not only had the “Guardian story” been stolen from this blog, the authors — Emma Graham-Harrison, Andreas Rocksen and Mads Brügger —  failed to understand a key point.

As I wrote on the day the story was posted by The Guardian,

“Journalists are still missing the importance of one critical aspect of this story: the role of CRYPTO AG.” [Intel Today – Jan 12 2019]

And this brings us to the next issue…

Fact #3 — On January 17 2019, I posted a story titled: Boris Hagelin — The Swiss Businessman Who Sold The World Out.

In that story, I explained that all the Crypto AG machines delivered to the UN — including the one used by Hammarskjöld during his visit to Congo — had been rigged at the request of the NSA.

I concluded the piece with the following statement:

“After his initial visit to Boris Hagelin in Zug, NSA William Friedman wrote in his report:

“The NSA has now complete control over Crypto AG. Spying can start on an industrial scale.”

So much for Swiss neutrality…”

And yet, despite all this information, the UN investigators did not interview the current managers of CRYPTO AG and they did not request any help from Switzerland.

What on earth is going on? Those (UN investigators) who investigate the death of Dag Hammarskjöld do not want to know about Crypto AG and those who report on Crypto AG (The Washington Post) do not mention once the United Nations scandal.

We know that the US hold important undisclosed information regarding the Hammarskjöld case and we know that they refuse to share this information with the UN investigators. Why do you think the US has been withholding this information?

When I wrote this post in October 2019, I concluded:

“This [UN] document is a brick short of a load. The few experts who are still following this case are greatly disappointed.”

I think that we can all agree today that it was a bit of an understatement.

END of UPDATE

In the conclusion of the report, Othman made four recommendations: To continue the investigation, to again urge countries to appoint an independent person to determine whether relevant information about the crash exists, to have the next investigator report at the end whether countries complied, “including an observation as to whether any inference may be drawn as a result of non-compliance,” and to ensure the U.N. continues to work to make key documents publicly available online.

[The full report is available at the following link: https://undocs.org/A/73/973]

Guterres has backed Othman’s request for more time. It is now up to the UN General Assembly to decide whether to extend the investigation, and if Othman or another person should lead it.

Justifying his request for an extension, Othman mentioned the likelihood that UN member states intercepted communications related to the crash, as well as the existence of Katangan air assets that could have attacked the secretary-general’s plane.

Although the report mentions the CX-52 [cryptographic device used by Hammarskjold], it appears that the UN investigators did not interview the current managers of CRYPTO AG and they did not request any help from Switzerland.

“18. Communications sent from the CX-52 cryptographic machine used by Hammarskjöld appear to have been intercepted by British and United States signals and intelligence agencies as a result of a secret interception and decryption setting that those agencies held that enabled them to intercept surreptitiously.”

CX 52 Hagelin Machine recovered from the Ndola crash site

Although the CX-52 cryptographic machine is a central piece of evidence in this case, the report mentions it only once and all indicate that the investigators underestimate its significance.

RELATED POST: Boris Hagelin — The Swiss Businessman Who Sold The World Out

Considering that CRYPTO AG founder Boris Hagelin betrayed the UN allowing the NSA to read in real-time all their communications, you would think that the UN investigators would pay a bit more attention to this device…

The report cites the presence of foreign forces, including pilots and intelligence agents, on the ground at the time of the crash.

Although it mentions specifically the Belgian mercenary Jan van Risseghem, it is very clear that the UN investigators are ignoring the fact that Belgian State Security Services — VSSE — have provided Jan Van Risseghem with a fake alibi.

RELATED POST: Biography — Jan Van Risseghem [Prime Suspect in Hammarskjold Cold case] // UPDATE

Jan Henri van Risseghem de Santieron de Saint Clément (Plötzky – Germany, September 3 1923 — Moorsele – Belgium, January 29, 2007) was a Belgian pilot and mercenary. Many experts suspect that he caused the death of UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold — as well as fifteen other people on the plane — on September 18 1961.

There is no doubt that this UN report makes a few good points. But it is also very clear that this document is a brick short of a load. The few experts who are still following this case are greatly disappointed.

REFERENCES

US, UK and SA withhold info about Dag Hammarskjöld’s plane crash probe — Business Day

UN: More needed from UK, US and others on Hammarskjold crash — Yahoo News

=

Dag Hammarskjöld — US, UK, South Africa still withholding crucial information

One Year Ago — Dag Hammarskjöld Inquiry : US, UK and South Africa still withholding crucial information