Ministry of Defence
Main Building
Whitehall
London SW1A 2HB
United Kingdom
E-mail:
People-DPTHub-Sec-
Ref: FOI2019/05407
xxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx
Ref: FOI2023/07181
Ref: FOI2023/07316
Mr Gavin Roberts
request-989240-
xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
request-989816-
xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
30 June 2023
Dear Mr Roberts,
Thank you for your emails of 9 June and 12 June 2023 respectively requesting the
following information:
“When is the Corruption & Cover up due to end surrounding Gulf War Veterans? It is
common knowledge amongst veterans that the vaccines were responsible for
epidemic levels of sickness in troops.
Nothing can travel through the desert hundreds of miles and Only attack 5 Nations
troops and not the other 31 Nations amongst them, then travel across the Persian
Gulf and once again ONLY pick out the crews of ships from these same few Nations.
Then ONLY the non deployed troops from these Nations and not the others. It was
the experimental shots. So called vaccine study was a corrupt smokescreen, it was
nothing like the shots troops received in numbers, like comparing apples with house
bricks. There is taking the piss and there is taking the piss. MOD must hold the world
record for a continued Cover Up.
The home Office informed us a few years ago, with corruption and cover ups. The
correct procedure is to remove the matter from the hands of the alleged responsible
Dept. This good practise also protects innocent personnel within that Dept. Why has
this not been done? Why does the biggest organisation not carry out good practise?
Are they excused? If so please provide data to support. We suggest to look in the
locker in an attempt to find some decency, integrity and honour. There must be a
single employee in there that has some? This 👇🏽
In the last 6 months we have been tracking a person called Jack Melling. He came
under our spotlight as he had advised Congress to stop wasting time on looking for
the cause of the epidemic levels of illness in Gulf War Veterans. We traced Mr
Melling in more recent years, he has been responsible for getting the ONLY squalene
based flu vaccine to market today. He has been responsible for the testing of it. He
was also responsible for the testing of hiv squalene based vaccines. The testing for
the flu vaccines was tested on thousands in the fall of 2002. It does not state on
which humans. Not sure where he was able to find thousands of young fit adults at
the time they were preparing the troops once again for a War in Iraq. We traced
Melling back further. He was only the head of developing the vaccines that were
subjected to the troops on Gulf War 91. Wtaf? What was he doing as an advisor to
Congress advising them to stop looking for cause? Is this the biggest Conflict of
Interest known to man on MOD's Watch?
Does this administration want blood on its hands too?
We have asked MOD before what their procedures are when corruption is pointed
out to them. The answer in short, was they deal with it. We believe dealing with it
was digging it out of the system and NOT sweeping under carpet. Lets not forget we
do not even have access to the docs that you have had.
Are you going to follow best practise or are you going to attempt to cover up once
more against those prepared to sacrifice their lives for your freedoms?
Please do not reply with any further nonsense disrespecting the intelligence of every
pair of veterans/families of fallen eyes that will see it.
Even think about trying to do so, skip the bs and just instruct internal review and save
wasting each others time.
If this is treatment of our troops/veterans we might have got better treatment from our
enemies if we had let them run through the halls of Whitehall.
Treating Veterans with such distain especially over the last 4 years in full knowledge
of evidence, nothing short of a National disgrace.
Please show MOD data/policy in reference to MOD policy surrounding corruptions
and Cover Up's protocols
Please provide MOD data showing MOD FOI Dept protocols that should be followed
when information of corruption has been handed to them on a plate”.
I am treating your correspondence as a request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA). A search for the information requested has now been
completed within the Ministry of Defence (MOD), and I can confirm that some information
in scope of your request is held.
Under the Section 21 (Information accessible to applicants by other means) exemption of
the FOIA, the MOD is not obliged to provide information if it is already in the public
domain. The Department’s policies for responding to and reporting corruption
(whistleblowing and about the MOD confidential hotline) are published on the www.gov.uk
website and can be found at the following links:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_
data/file/408161/Whistleblowing_and_Raising_a_concern.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mod-confidential-hotline
Under Section 16 (Advice and Assistance) of the FOIA please note that a Freedom of
Information Act request is not the correct process for raising concerns about corruption
within the MOD. Please use the guidance in the links that we have provided. Alternatively,
if you believe a crime has been committed, you can contact the Police.
In addition, when making FOIA requests it would be helpful if you would refrain from using
offensive terms such as ‘taking the piss’ and ‘skip the bs’ in your correspondence with the
Department. While I appreciate that this is a subject about which you are passionate, MOD
personnel receiving letters should not be subject to this type of language. Failure to do so
may result in you being declared vexatious, and the MOD refusing to respond to any future
FOIA requests from you on this topic. Furthermore, it is best practice to avoid making
extraneous comments when submitting an FOIA request. Excessive commentary around
the subject which is not directly asking for, or assisting in the request for, recorded
information makes it difficult to identify what, if any, information is actually being requested
from the MOD.
If you are not satisfied with this response or you wish to complain about any aspect of the
handling of your request, then you should contact us in the first instance at the address
above. If informal resolution is not possible and you are still dissatisfied then you may
apply for an independent internal review by contacting the Information Rights Compliance
team, Ground Floor, MOD Main Building, Whitehall, SW1A 2HB (e-mail
CIO-FOI-
xx@xxx.xxx.xx). Please note that any request for an internal review must be made within
40 working days of the date on which the attempt to reach informal resolution has come to
an end.
If you remain dissatisfied following an internal review, you may take your complaint to the
Information Commissioner under the provisions of Section 50 of the Freedom of
Information Act. Please note that the Information Commissioner will not normally
investigate your case until the MOD internal review process has been completed. Further
details of the role and powers of the Information Commissioner can be found on the
Commissioner's website
, http://www.ico.org.uk
Yours sincerely,
Defence People Secretariat