Royal Dutch Shell Nazi Secrets: Authors extraordinary relationship with Shell
Since the information revealed in Royal Dutch Shell Nazi Secrets is extremely damaging to the reputation of Royal Dutch Shell, it is proper to openly declare the relationship between Shell and the author of the revelations, John Donovan. He does not claim to be impartial, but contends that the overwhelming volume of independent verifiable evidence from reputable sources, as quoted and listed, speaks for itself.
John (65) was involved in the gasoline retailing industry for over 40 years. His company, Don Marketing, co-founded by him and his father Alfred, created and supplied marketing campaigns for major oil companies.
John is best known for his long association with the Royal Dutch Shell Group, firstly as a result of devising Shell national promotional campaigns in the 1980’s and early 1990’s and since then, for many bouts of litigation with Shell (mostly relating to alleged theft of intellectual property by Shell), which attracted a great deal of unwelcome publicity for the multinational oil giant.
Most litigation is by its nature acrimonious, but the Shell/Donovan litigation turned particularly ugly and involved sinister events, including industrial espionage carried out against the Donovan’s at Shell’s behest.
The last proceedings were in 2005, when Shell International Limited unsuccessfully attempted to seize the Internet domain name – royaldutchshellplc.com. This is the main website through which the Donovan’s campaign for Shell to abide by its self-proclaimed core business principles of openness, integrity, honesty and respect for people in all of its dealings. John Donovan is a long term Shell shareholder.
The long lasting hostility between Shell and the Donovan’s has not escaped the attention of the news media.
On 22 September 2007, The Times newspaper reported:
Since the 1990s, Royal Dutch Shell has been at war with a family who registered a website, royaldutchshellplc.com. (1a)
That family is Alfred and John Donovan.
The Financial Times has described royaldutchshellplc.com as an anti-Shell website run by a father and son partnership that has been a long-running thorn in the companys side.(1b)
The One World Trust, an independent research organisation associated with the UK Houses of Parliament and the United Nations, said in a newsletter: The site has not only cost Shell billions of dollars in Russia… even Shell insiders unhappy with the company use it.(1c)
The Daily Mail says Shell had been rattled and put on the back foot by a campaign involving the website.(1d)
A Reuters article described royaldutchshellplc.com as an unofficial company Web site and said it acts as a conduit for whistleblowers at the company (1e)
Prospect magazine: essential reading for anyone who covers Shell and the energy sector more broadly.(1f)
Leading Japanese business magazine, Nikkei BP: The fate of Sakhalin 2 was changed by two British men(1g) Sakhalin 2 was a major project in Russia in which Shell was the majority stakeholder.
Wall Street Journal article about a leaked Shell internal email: A copy was given to royaldutchshellplc.com, a Web site regularly used by Shell whistleblowers.”(1h)
Sunday Telegraph article: Their site became a hub for activists and disgruntled former employees. It has been used to mobilise support for environmental campaigns by the likes of WWF, the environmental lobbying group, against drilling in the Arctic and Russia, for groups worried about Shells social impact in Ireland and Nigeria, and by the companys former group auditor Bill Campbell to raise issues about employee safety.(1i)
Reuters has described John Donovan as a prominent critic of Shell.(1j) John shares this distinction with a great man, Winston Churchill, the legendary WW2 leader of Great Britain. Churchill accused Shell of oil price rigging.(2a) His assessment was correct. Royal Dutch Shell was built on creating and maintaining price fixing cartels.(2b) Shell still takes a leadership role in setting up illegal cartels.(2c)
Shell has allegedly stolen confidential intellectual property from the Donovan’s on several occasions. Shell tried to keep the initial associated court settlements secret after the Donovan’s issued further High Court proceedings against the company. (See pdf of magazine feature High Court papers unveil secret Shell writ losses(3) the special feature was spread over several pages of the magazine, so it takes a little time to load).
After the Donovan’s issued SEVEN separate related court cases against Shell in all, the oil giant decided to use undercover agents to investigate the father and son team. One agent was caught at their UK offices examining private mail. When challenged, the agent presented fake credentials.
The Donovan’s with the aid of their lawyers, cornered the Legal Director of Shell, Mr Richard Wiseman, into admitting in writing that the agent in question (Christopher Phillips) was working for Shell.(4)
Because of sinister threats made to the Donovan’s and their witnesses in the run up to a High Court trial held in 1999, Wiseman felt it appropriate to provide the following assurance to John Donovan on behalf of Shell:
Neither you, your family, nor any potential witness, has any cause for physical fear as a result of your prosecuting this case with all the vigour we have come to expect.(5)
John Donovan asked Wiseman if “Christopher Phillips” had engaged in surveillance or phone tapping activities directed against the Donovan’s,(6) but Wiseman ducked the question by stating:
So far as the visit of Mr Phillips is concerned, and his instructions, we will, as D J Freeman have said, co-operate with the police to the utmost extent.(7)
Mr Colin Joseph of DJ Freeman (aka Kendall Freeman), the retained lawyers acting for Shell, revealed in a related letter dated 3 July 1998, that Phillips was not the only person involved in making enquiries on Shells behalf.
If, nevertheless, the police wish to obtain any further information from my clients or from anyone involved in enquiries on their behalf, including Mr Phillips, then, as has been said on several previous occasions, the fullest of co-operation will be given.(8)
The revelation that Phillips was but one, of an undisclosed number of agents making enquiries, was intimidating and no doubt meant to be so. Shell lawyers were unwilling to disclose how many agents were involved, or what they were doing on Shells behalf.
Colin Joseph asked John Donovan to substantiate his claim, in a letter published by Marketing Week magazine, that his family had been bombarded by threats.(9) John supplied a letter listing the threats(10) up to that point. A Shell lawyer even threatened to make the litigation “drawn out and difficult”, exploiting the fact that Shell is a multinational Goliath with unlimited financial resources.
Even worse than the threats, the Donovan’s were besieged by undercover operatives.(11) Their own house was burgled and Shell discovery papers, including a document that Shell had been unable to obtain through court proceedings, were tampered with (and possibly photographed). A key witnesss residence was also burgled. Again, Shell discovery documents were tampered with. The residence of the solicitor representing John was also burgled. All of the burglaries across Southern England took place within a matter of weeks leading up to the 1999 trial in which Shell had brought counter-claims against John and his father (claims later abandoned by Shell). Wiseman denied that Shell had any connection with the sinister activity, other than in relation to Christopher Phillips.
Some of these events were set out at the time in a letter Alfred Donovan sent to Colin Joseph.(12) It included reference to threats made against my son, his family and against his witnesses. It also mentions a related meeting at Shell-Mex House. Journalist Simon Rines represented The Guardian newspaper. Colin Joseph, Richard Wiseman and a person from Shell media department represented Shell. Both sides tape recorded the interview.
As is evident from a letter John Donovan received from Wiseman,(13) Mark-Moody-Stuart, the then Chairman of Shell Transport & Trading Company plc and Dr Chris Fay, the then Chairman and Chief Executive of Shell UK Limited., were both in the loop regarding the discussions about undercover activity.
It is relevant to note that two years later, The Sunday Times ran a front page lead story about Shell espionage operations(14) conducted on an international basis against its perceived enemies, including Greenpeace, The Body Shop and Nigerian activists. For this purpose, Shell used a private intelligence firm Hakluyt & Co Ltd(15) in which titled Shell directors were major shareholders, directors and the ultimate spymasters.(16) (Link to pdf of original Sunday Times article – 17) As far as we know, at the time of the police investigation of the crimes of a similar nature committed against the Donovan’s and associated parties, no one at Shell revealed this highly material fact to the police. All of the Shell espionage took place in the same period.
Colin Joseph confirmed in a letter dated 26 October 1998(18), that an internal investigation had also taken place within Shell.
RIGGED CONTRACT TENDER PROCESS
During the discovery process of the Smart litigation John Donovan found Shell internal documents providing irrefutable evidence of a scheme by Shell executives to deliberately obtain confidential information from several companies under false pretenses.(19) The companies were lured into a rigged contract tender process. They were then enticed into confidentiality agreements, again under false pretenses.
The whole exercise was designed to steal information from participants in the tender, when in reality they had no prospect of winning the contract, which was miraculously awarded to a company that did not even participate in the tender. This was analogous to a horse winning a race in which it did not run. It was a company with whom the Shell executive masterminding the rigged process, Mr Andrew Lazenby, had a very close connection.
Senior Shell executives, including Malcolm Brinded,(20a) gave Lazenby their full backing.
The Donovan’s found out from Shell discovery documents that Lazenby was prepared to engage in an illegal act on behalf of Shell.(20b) It was evident from his diary that he was a disgruntled employee(20c) who recorded his intent to set up a personal business while at Shell and exit the company at the age of 35,(20d) presumably on the basis of building up sufficient funds in the meantime. He had an offshore bank account(20e) into which funds were paid.
Mr Wiseman, always loyal to Shell senior management, also gave his full backing to Lazenby’s corrupt predatory conspiracy designed to cheat and defraud smaller businesses. Wiseman’s legal team had provided the confidentiality agreements that were an integral part of the plan, which was ruthlessly executed.
Bearing in mind the above information and the fact that Mr Wiseman had admitted bending professional rules(21) on an earlier matter, it struck the Donovan’s as ironic in the extreme when Wiseman was appointed as Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer of Royal Dutch Shell Plc. He traveled the world making anti-corruption speeches until his retirement from Shell in March 2011. (22a) (22b)
Donovan’s Website Replaces “Tell Shell”
For some years Shell operated a “Tell Shell” Internet forum for open and lively discussion involving Shell employees, Shell shareholders and other parties interested in Shell. When the postings became too lively and too critical of Shell, they were initially openly censored, then secretly censored, with postings vanishing without trace or explanation. When this action was publicly exposed, Shell first suspended, then closed down “Tell Shell”.(23a)(23b)
Shell was unsuccessful in legal proceedings against Alfred Donovan, which related to Donovan’s version of the “Tell Shell” forum.
To Shell’s consternation,”Tell Shell” has been replaced by Donovan’s unofficial Shell website, which has become the worlds leading online source of information and uncensored online discussion about the oil giant.
As we will see, royaldutchshellplc.com has received a glowing endorsement by a hapless Shell official.
Prominent retired Royal Dutch Shell Group senior staff, including former executive Paddy Briggs, retired HSE Group Auditor, Bill Campbell, and retired Global Chief Petroleum Engineer, Iain Percival, contribute highly informative articles, which are published on the website from time to time on an entirely unedited basis.
Shell employees have supplied insider information and Shell internal documents and emails to the Donovans. The leaks have been very damaging to Shell, generating many news articles around the world, including a front story in the Financial Times.
Shells hostile activities targeting the Donovan’s and their website have continued in subsequent years.
Shell has supplied Shell internal documents and emails directly to the Donovans in compliance with a series of applications made by the Donovans to Shell under the UK Data Protection Act.
The internal documents revealed that Shell secretly set up a counter-measures team and mounted a global spying operation against Shell employees in a determined, but unsuccessful bid to stop the flow of Shell insider information to the Donovans and their website, which because of its domain name, is a huge constant embarrassment to Shell in a variety of ways.
In a spectacular blunder, Shell had neglected to register what was the top level domain name for the company Royal Dutch Shell Plc. Shell lawyers discovered, no doubt to their horror, that their most enduring critics had beaten them to the registration.
Consequently, the Donovan’s receive business proposals, job applications and even terrorist threats meant for Shell.(24) This has led to the bizarre situation whereby the Donovan’s have written permission from Michiel Brandjes, the Company Secretary & General Counsel Corporate of Royal Dutch Shell Plc to process the incoming mail on Shell’s behalf. An intolerable situation that Shell has been forced into after the humiliation of losing the case it brought via the World Intellectual Property Organisation(25) against Alfred Donovan to seize the domain name. Because of Alfred’s age, this event attracted more embarrassing publicity for Shell, with extensive international news coverage e.g. The Wall Street Journal, The Times, The New York Times, Reuters and Bloomberg.(26)(27)(28)(29)
Information about setting up the counter-measures team was contained in a confidential Shell internal email dated 9 March 2007.(30) As can be seen, the language used was decidedly aggressive.
In a Shell internal a few days later, dated 20 March 2007,(31) Shell staff discussed whether to set up “an information security tasking to discover where exactly in Shell their (good) sources are located.” Amusingly, the same email contained a spectacular endorsement of the website, which its author obviously never intended for public consumption:
John and Alfred Donovan well known in UK / Hague. They perceive Shell played them and so have made it their mission to embarrass, belittle and criticize Shell, which they do quite well. Their website, royaldutchsellplc.com is an excellent source of group news and comment and I recommend it far above what our own group internal comms puts out.
The following day, in a Shell internal email dated 21 March 2007(32) marked “Donavan CONFIDENTIAL”, there was confirmation that Shell had undertaken a global spying operation against its own employees in an attempt to discover the identity of employees supplying the Donovan’s with Shell insider information. The spying plan included monitoring “Shell servers globally to Donovan” and “monitoring web traffic to determine internal traffic to their website.”The objective was to stop what was described in the same email, as “internal laundry”, from being published on the royaldutchshellplc.com website.
In June 2007, Shell secretly threatened legal proceedings against the website server hosting companies in Canada and the USA being used by the Donovan’s. The threats resulted in the royaldutchshellplc.com website being deactivated on 25 June 2007.(33) Although initially unwilling to disclose who had made the threats, each hosting company reluctantly confirmed that it was Shell. Keith Ruddock, a Royal Dutch Shell General Counsel, later confirmed in an email to John Donovan dated 26 June 2007, that Shell was responsible for the machinations which briefly shut down the website.
In 2008, the website came under sustained attack, the precise details of which for security reasons, will not be revealed . By March of that year, the attacks had become so disruptive that John Donovan sent an email to Michiel Brandjes, officially notifying Shell of what was going on and providing detailed information. John thought it possible that if cyber attack specialists/hackers had been retained by Shell, they would be concerned at Shell senior management being made officially aware of what was going on. Mr Brandjes knew nothing about the attacks, but by coincidence of otherwise, the attacks immediately ceased, as if by magic.
A confidential Shell internal email dated June 2009(34) involving (CAS) Shell Corporate Affairs Security and NCFTA, a U.S. cyber-crime agency, partly funded and staffed by the FBI, discussed investigations relating to John Donovan and the royaldutchshellplc.com website and said: There will be no attempt to do anything visible to Donovan. The implication being that the investigations would be invisible.
Shells spying against the Donovan’s and Shell’s own employees was reported in a Reuters article published in December 2009.(35)
Some of the leaks have been devastating to Shell. Leaked emails that John Donovan supplied to the Russian government(38) concerning the Sakhalin2 gas project cost Shell billions of dollars, as reported in Prospect Magazine,(39) The Sunday Times(40a)(40b) and The Guardian(41). Shell lost its majority shareholding in the project as a direct consequence. The last message John Donovan received from his main Sakhalin2 insider source reported that they had received a credible serious threat. The source disappeared without trace. The Guardian article also revealed that John Donovan helped “US investigators looking into the award of oilfield drilling licenses, providing them with information leaked to his website“.
Two former spooks are currently employed by Shell. A retired senior FBI official, Richard T. Garcia, is Global Security Manager for Shell Americas. A former senior MI6 officer of the British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), Ian Forbes McCredie OBE., is head of Shell Corporate Affairs Security (CAS).
There is a volume of evidence confirming Shells track record of IP theft, industrial espionage, threats, corruption and fraud. Only a few years ago, Royal Dutch Shell was responsible for one of the biggest securities frauds in corporate history.(42)
Other parties have been the victims of such activity by Shell.
The following is an extract from a statement published on the Internet by John Alfred Dyer:(43)
In 1993, following five years of research, my findings resulted in the commissioning of a television program for Carlton Television. Shell quickly responded. Investigators kept me under surveillance. My telephone was tapped. My mail was intercepted, and destroyed and/or kept. At the same time, Shell filed a seemingly endless line of complaints about my own alleged conduct, to the Independent Television Commission (UK regulatory authority), Carlton, and others.
The accuracy of serious allegations made by Mr Dyer against Shell have been confirmed by a former producer of the TV investigative programme in question. Pressure was applied by Shell to prevent the programme being aired.
In more recent years, Shell has been accused of being responsible for surveillance operations and violence directed at members of the local population in Ireland protesting against the Shell led Corrib Gas Project.
Some news headlines…
Shell Corrib Gas Controversy: Call for Investigation into boat sinking(44)
Security firm for Shell at Corrib site rejects conclusion on alleged assault(45)
Focus on sinister events surrounding Shell Corrib Gas project(46)
Corrib link to Irish mans death(47)
On 12 September 2001, under the headline: No Secret’s Safe From These Sharp Eyes, The New York Times published an article(48)focused on corporate cloak-and-dagger escapades. Mr Stephen J. Wade, an executive of Shell International Exploration and Production, a Royal Dutch/Shell Group business, was revealed as being a “competitive intelligence analyst — management-speak for corporate America’s equivalent of a spy. The report said that Mr. Wade uses every trick in the book and may even dish out erroneous information… Mr Wade was quoted as commenting: It isn’t James Bond. The article went on to say: Still, like any good spy, Mr. Wade declined to give detailed examples of information gleaned this way. It also pointed out that corporate spying sometimes skirts ethical bounds.
The Donovan’s warn third parties to take all appropriate precautions when approaching Royal Dutch Shell with confidential commercially value information. They claim that the oil giant is predatory in nature and well versed in the dark arts(49) despite its claimed business principles,(50) has no scruples and a track record of using industrial espionage i.e. “More Royal Dutch Shell IP Chicanery”.(51) In October 2010, the Donovan’s broke the story: “U.S. Dept. of Defense Confirms NCIS Espionage Investigation of Shell.”(52)
Shell hasa staggering number of in-house legal staff – 1800 people, including an army of 800 lawyers(53) backed up by unlimited financial resources. The Donovan’s claim that Shell lawyers are ready to destroy without mercy, any smaller companies or individual who might object to being trampled on by Shell or its agents.
Shells spying against Alfred and John Donovan, their website royaldutchshellplc.com and Shells own employees, on a global basis, was reported in a Reuters article published in December 2009. The industrial espionage involved Shell Corporate Affairs Security and a specialist USA unit in Pittsburgh National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance (NCFTA) partly funded and staffed by the FBI.
The Donovan’s publish their own articles on their website and articles authored by unnamed Shell insiders and former Shell employees. A brief selection:
DATA SECURITY BREACH AT SHELL PUTS ITS EMPLOYEES AT RISK: 4 February 2010
RELATED: News headlines file for Royal Dutch Shell Sex and Drugs Scandal: 27 May 2009
Former Shell PR veteran, Paddy Briggs, traces the firm’s reputational demise: the reputation of Shell has been destroyed by hypocrisy, mendacity and deceit.”: 09.25: Wednesday 27 July 2005
An email to Bill OReilly at Fox News: Shells treachery in Iran : 19 March 2007
1a. Published in The City Diary column of The Times on Saturday 22 September 2007.
1b. Article published by The Financial Times on 11 June 2007 under the headline: “Energy Filter: Stirring words on Sakhalin“.
1c. Newsletter published by One World Trust in July 2007 by the One World Trust under the headline: “Between expose? and libel: online activity and the lack of institutional accountability“.
1d. Article published by The Daily Mail on 1 September 2007 under the headline: “Shell on back foot as gripe site alleges safety concerns“.
1e. Article published by Reuters on 4 September 2007 under the headline: “Shell loses exec on troubled Kazakh project-source“.
1f. Article published by Prospect Magazine website on 12 September 2007 under the headline: “Shell’s Colchester Headache“.
1g. Article published by Nikkei BP (the top circulation Japanese business magazine) on 13 November 2007: “Gripe sites are becoming more powerful“.
1h. Article published by The Wall Street Journal on 18 March 2008 under the headline: “Shell Addresses Output Issue“.
1i. Article published by The Daily Telegraph on 9 September 2007 under the headline: “Online revolutionaries“.
1j. Reuters article “Shell critic says oil major targeting his website” published 2 December 2009.
2a. Royaldutchshellplc.com article “When Winston Churchill accused Shell of secret oil price rigging” published 21 May 2010.
2b. ShellNews.net article: ROYAL DUTCH SHELL – EVIDENCE OF MARKET MANIPULATION.
2c. ShellNews.net article: Royal Dutch Shell Price Fixing.
3. Marketing Week article “High Court papers unveil ‘secret’ Shell writ losses” published 23 April 1998.
4. Letter dated 24 June 1998 from Shell Legal Director Richard Wiseman to John Donovan.
5. Letter dated 9 July 1998 from Shell Legal Director Richard Wiseman to John Donovan.
10. Letter dated 25 May 1998 from John Donovan to Colin Joseph of DJ Freeman. (listing threats received from Shell)
11. Web page entitled “UNDERCOVER ACTIVITY AGAINST THE DONOVAN’S IN THE PERIOD SHELL LEGAL DIRECTOR RICHARD WISEMAN IN CHARGE OF DEFENCE CASE” containing links to correspondence involving John Donovan, Richard Wiseman and Colin Joseph of DJ Freeman, the solicitors representing Shell.
14. Sunday Times front page lead article published on 17 June 2001 under the headline: “MI6 ‘Firm’ Spied on Green Groups“.
15. Wikipedia article Hakluyt
16. ShellNews.net web page entitled “SHELL CONNECTION WITH HAKLUYT & COMPANY LIMITED” containing links to correspondence and information about Hakluyt & Co Limited.
17. PDF of Sunday Times front page lead article published on 17 June 2001 under the headline: “MI6 ‘Firm’ Spied on Green Groups“.
18. Letter dated 26 October 1998 from Colin Joseph of DJ Freeman to Alfred Donovan. Confirms there was an internal investigation at Shell.
19.Web page containing article “ALARM BELLS RING OVER TENDERING FOR ROYAL DUTCH SHELL CONTRACTS” first published on 29 August 2005.
20a. Article by John Donovan published on Blogger News Network on 28 May 2009 under the headline: : Royal Dutch Shell Fat Cat Malcolm Brinded: Big Brain but no scruples.
20b. Shell internal email dated 4 November 1993 from A J Lazenby to other Shell executives as listed in the email.
NB: To answer your last point: My note of 25/10 is the official position, my note of 9/9 expressed a personal and pragmatic view of how to handle the problem’ it is in fact illegal and is certainly unofficial, and if we were discovered then we will enforce the official legal position – which is that all volume must currently be rewarded with promotional points.
20c. Handwritten entries from the diary of Andrew Lazenby dated Wednesday 12 October 1994 in which he complains on page 2 that he had not received the credit he deserved for the main project – Hercules, and for other matters he listed.
20d. Handwritten entries from the diary of Andrew Lazenby dated 25 July 1994 in which he listed his intention under “Personal”, Set up personal business while @ Shell 35yrs = exit date.”
20e. Handwritten entries from the diary of Andrew Lazenby dated May/June 1994 contain information about transfer of payments to “NWB” (National Westminster Bank?) account in Jersey.
Extract: “The difficulty I have In corresponding with you is not my position in the company but the fact that I am a solicitor bound by therules of professional conduct which preclude my corresponding with a layman represented by a solicitor. I have for the sake of a speedy response ignored the professional rulesbut I am making sure that copies of our correspondence are sent to Royds Treadwell through Mackrell Turner Garrett.”
22a. Article published 20 November 2008 entitled: “Anti-corruption speech by Richard Wiseman, Royal Dutch Shell Plc Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer“.
22b. Article published 17 March 2010 entitled: “Shells poacher turned gamekeeper ethics chief giving anti-corruption speech“.
23a. ShellNews.net article published 14 August 2005 under the headline: “Secret Censorship on Royal Dutch Shell Tell Shell Internet Forum“.
23b. ShellNews.net article published 6 November 2005 under the headline: “Royal Dutch Shell suspends its Tell Shell discussion forum indefinitely in response to censorship attack“.
24. Article published on Prospect Magazine website on 12 September 2007 under the headline: “Shells Colchester headache“
25. Decision on royaldutchshellplc.com domain name published by The World Intellectual Property Organisation on 8 August 2005.
26. Article published by The Wall Street Journal on 2 June 2005 under the headline: “Shell Wages Legal Fight Over Web Domain Name“.
27. Article published by Bloomberg on 2 June 2005 under the headline: “Shell in Legal Battle Over Name of Web Site, Journal Reports“.
28. Article published by The Times on 21 June 2005 under the headline: “Hostile domain“.
29. Article published by The New York Times on 25 June 2005 under the headline: “Shell Shareholders to Back Unification“.
Another dampener on Shell’s biggest corporate overhaul since the two holding firms tied up in 1907, is a spat over the rights to the web domain “royaldutchshellplc.com.” Disgruntled shareholder Alfred Donovan beat Shell to register the domain name. Shell has sued Donovan for the rights to the domain but while the matter plays out, Donovan uses the site to lambaste Shell management.”
30. Shell internal email dated 9 March 2007 “Subject: Legally Privileged and Confidential XXXXXXX nd Donovan follow up” (xxxx denote words redacted by Shell. Counter-measures document/plan discussing how Shell should react to the Donovans.
“…demonstration that we won’t tolerate the Donovans’ approach unchallenged any longer?”
31. Shell internal email dated Tuesday 20 March 2007 Subject: FW: FYI: Media monitoring – An e-mail t0 xxxxxxxxxx at Fox News: Shell’s treachery in Iran. (xxxxx’s denote information redacted by Shell).
32. Shell internal email dated 21 March 2007 Subject: Donavan CONFIDENTIAL
34. Shell internal email dated 17 June 2009 7.57 AM Subject: RE: Donovan Blogs. Privileged and confidential.
35. Reuters article dated 2 December 2009 headlined: “Shell critic says oil major targeting his website“.
36. Article dated 26 October 2010 headlined: “Reported death threats against Shell Corrib employees“.
37. Article dated 26 October 2010 headlined: “Shells dilemma in denying death threats against its Corrib employees“.
38. Article/Interview published by Petroleum Argus FSU Energy 27 October 2006 under the headline: “Shell weights its options“.
39. Article published by Prospect Magazine in February 2007 under the headline: “Rise of the gripe site“.
40a. Half page article published by The Sunday Times on 19 July 2009 under the headline: “Two men and a website mount vendetta against an oil giant“. (Online version)
40b. Pdf of same article as printed in the newspaper, displaying graphics.
41. Half page article published by The Guardian on 26 October 2009 under the headline: “92-year-old’s website leaves oil giant Shell-shocked“.
43. Home page of the website “Shell’s Nuclear Crimes“.
44. Article published by an Irish newspaper Western People on 12 May 2010 under the headline: “Kilcommon group calling for investigation into boat sinking“.
45. Article published by The Irish Times on Wednesday 28 April 2010 under the headline: Security firm for Shell at Corrib site rejects ‘conclusion on alleged assault’
46. Royaldutchshellplc.com compilation of articles published by the Irish Times in April 2010 about the Corrib gas project.
47. Article published by The Sunday Times on 26 April 2009 under the headline: “Corrib link to Irish man’s death“
48. Article published by The New York Times on 12 September 2001, under the headline: “No secret’s Safe From These Sharp Eyes“.
49. Article published by The New York Times on 1 September 2010 under the headline: ” Tabloid Hack Attack on Royals, and beyond”.
“THE DARK ARTS Goodman and Mulcaire pleaded guilty to hacking.”
“The illicit methods became known as the dark arts.
“Despite the earlier arrest of the private investigator Steve Whittamore, the dark arts were still widely in use.”
50. PDF copy of Shell General Business Principles
51. Article published by royaldutchshellplc.com on 4 November 2009 under the headline: “ENERTAG PATENTS: MORE ROYAL DUTCH SHELL IP CHICANERY?“
52. Article published by royaldutchshellplc.com on 7 October 2010 under the headline: “U.S. Dept. of Defense Confirms NCIS Espionage Investigation of Shell“.
53. Article published 17 September 2010 by THE AM LAW DAILY under the headline: “LETTER FROM LONDON: Europe’s GCs Warn of More Pressure on Fees“.
LINKS TO OTHER PARTS OF ROYAL DUTCH SHELL NAZI SECRETS
Copyright Notice: All rights, including copyright, in the content of these royaldutchshellplc.com web pages are owned or controlled for these purposes by John Alfred Donovan. In accessing the royaldutchshellplc.com web pages, you agree that you may only download the content for your own personal non-commercial use. Except where expressly stated otherwise, you are not permitted to copy, broadcast, download, store (in any medium), transmit, show or play in public, adapt or change in any way the content of these royaldutchshellplc.com web pages for any other purpose whatsoever without the prior written permission of John Alfred Donovan via his email address: [email protected]