Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Today's News > Politics / Elections

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-05-2015, 10:48 PM   #1461
grannie27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 15,058
Likes: 2,639 (1,294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by furling View Post
No offence, but at least grannie won't be going on about UKIP and how great they are anymore.

UKIP are finished without Nigel Farage as leader. Can't see them being as popular in future with a new leader.

Last time farage resigned, what's his name took over and was not very good.
Quote:
UKIP are finished without Nigel Farage as leader.
I beg to differ .... sadly the Farage brand is toxic ,we need someone like Steven Woolfe ,or Suzanne Evans in the future , Farage can still be part of the movement .

No offence taken dear
grannie27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 10:48 PM   #1462
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by furling View Post

UKIP are finished without Nigel Farage as leader. Can't see them being as popular in future with a new leader.
Absolute bollocks.

Suzzanne evans - who wrote the UKIP manifesto which was the clearest, most well defined and only ever independently costed manifesto in the history of the UK, will be the leader until September elections.

She is a tower of strength, as Farage described her, and a credit to herself and the party.

Evans is more than just a replacement - she is a fucking star!

camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 11:27 PM   #1463
mightiswrong
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,160
Likes: 229 (177 Posts)
Default

A woman.
mightiswrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2015, 08:26 PM   #1464
furling
Senior Member
 
furling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orwellian UK-EU
Posts: 2,345
Likes: 289 (142 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grannie27 View Post
I beg to differ .... sadly the Farage brand is toxic ,we need someone like Steven Woolfe ,or Suzanne Evans in the future , Farage can still be part of the movement .

No offence taken dear

Maybe farage may not be good after the performance this year but brand farage, is what really made UKIP and what most associate with UKIP.

That’s why I said what I said, about UKIP being finished without Nigel farage




Wouldn't it be better for UKIP to have, Paul Nuttall as leader,as he is deputy?




BTW that whats his name I was referring to, was Lord Pearson. He was useless compared to Nigel farage.
__________________
The Arrival - Aliens https://youtu.be/e6ST9dsDGRg
http://www.youtube.com/user/MrFurling
News, documentaries ect >> http://www.dailymotion.com/Truth-Be-Told
Technology will eventually, be used to enslave the human race. Time to wake up.
The UK voted to leave the corrupt, undemocratic EU. Get on with starting article 50!

Last edited by furling; 09-05-2015 at 08:27 PM.
furling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2015, 08:48 PM   #1465
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by furling View Post
Maybe farage may not be good after the performance this year but brand farage, is what really made UKIP and what most associate with UKIP.

That’s why I said what I said, about UKIP being finished without Nigel farage




Wouldn't it be better for UKIP to have, Paul Nuttall as leader,as he is deputy?




BTW that whats his name I was referring to, was Lord Pearson. He was useless compared to Nigel farage.
Pearson is OK - he will be good in future elections as a a standard run of the mill representative of UKIP - the real stars have been the likes of Farage, Evans, Nuttall and also lord Dartmouth, although he has a bit of a stutter which doesn't help in these appearance-weighted times.

I reckon that Farage shouldn't stand in the upcoming leader election, but still be heavily involved in the running of UKIP. Evans or Woolfe for me, with Nuttall remaining deputy.

Last edited by camaban; 09-05-2015 at 11:42 PM.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 12:18 AM   #1466
nadams
Senior Member
 
nadams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,231
Likes: 13 (9 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grannie27 View Post
I beg to differ .... sadly the Farage brand is toxic ,we need someone like Steven Woolfe ,or Suzanne Evans in the future , Farage can still be part of the movement .

No offence taken dear
I don't think Farage put a foot wrong.

He is responsible for the huge endorsement they recievied.

Get him back as soon as possible.
nadams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 12:52 AM   #1467
besides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: under a tree
Posts: 289
Likes: 22 (10 Posts)
Default bankers funding both sides, UKIP & CONSERVATIEF

bankers funding both sides, UKIP & CONSERVATIVE

https://medium.com/@NafeezAhmed/how-big-money-and-big-brother-won-the-british-elections-2e8da57faac4

How Big Money and Big Brother won the British Elections


by Nafeez Ahmed
Courtesy of the New Statesman, an illustration of David Cameron (left) alongside Nigel Farage (right) positioned outside No. 10 Downing Street

This story is published by INSURGE INTELLIGENCE, a new crowd-funded investigative journalism project.

Support us to break the stories that no one else will — become a patron of independent, investigative journalism for the global commons.

The Conservatives have won the 2015 elections with a slim majority. Labour and the Liberal Democrats suffered unexpected crushing defeats, prompting their leaders, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, to resign. And despite winning a significant percentage of votes, UKIP only managed to win one seat, with its leader Nigel Farage also resigning after losing to a Tory MP.

But the Tory victory reveals precisely why British democracy is broken.

The ultimate determinant of which party won the elections was the money behind their political campaigns — the winning and losing parties correlate directly with the quantity of funding received. Yet there is also compelling evidence of another factor — interference from Britain’s security services.


The best democracy money can buy


As of the end of last year, the Electoral Commission found that the Tories received the largest amount of donations, at £8,345,687, the bulk of which came from financiers associated with banks, the hedge fund industry, and big business. Two million pounds worth of donations were associated with hedge funds, and a further £4 million with people attending private dinners hosted by senior Tories.

Next up in donations was Labour at £7,163,988, much of which came from trade unions, as well as corporate donors like PricewaterhouseCoopers, a major proponent of corporate tax avoidance; then the Liberal Democrats with £3,038,500, UKIP with £1,505,055, and the Green Party with £248,520.

That was last year. This year, donations continued to come in. In the final week of the campaign, the Tories managed to raise 10 times more donations than Labour — a total of a further £1.36 million — once again largely from hedge fund managers, property tycoons, and a telecoms firm that has avoided paying corporation tax in the UK since 2007.

Political parties appear to have achieved electoral success in direct proportion to the amount of money received to fund their political campaigns, indicating that the most important precondition for victory in Britain’s broken democracy is the party’s subservience to corporate power.


Oligarchy


The role of party donors in determining election outcomes — by determining the effectiveness and reach of national public relations campaigns — has consistently been overlooked by the main parties, despite some obligatory lipservice that has gone nowhere tangible.

Over the last five years, 41% of all individual and corporate donations to British party political-related causes have come from just 76 extremely wealthy people, including City financiers, corporate moguls, and owners of multi-million pound businesses.

Public relations spin has increasingly played a critical function in permitting corporate power to translate its wealth into political power.

In their study of the subject, A Century of Spin (2007), Prof. David Miller and Dr. William Dinan, sociologists and directors of the public interest investigations body, Spinwatch, show how the corporate co-optation of PR has been used to subordinate liberal democracies to corporate rule, and to limit the scope of populist grassroots movements to influence the political party system.

Under a climate of economic uncertainty and lack of independent sources of news and information, public opinion has become evermore vulnerable to slick partisan campaigns that mobilise wealth to create highly effective media spin by which to manipulate voters.


The Tory-UKIP money machine


While UKIP has positioned itself as an independent counterweight to the ‘establishment’ parties, standing up for swathes of under-represented working people, the truth is the opposite.

A large bulk of UKIP’s funding boost came from former Tory donors, millionaire bankers, and corporate executives, pushing the fringe party to receive the third largest percentage of the vote.

But not all these former Tory donors are former Tory donors.

‘Former’ Tory donor Robin Birley, for instance, who owns a Mayfair nightclub and who is one of UKIP’s biggest donors, had also bankrolled the campaign of Tory MP Michael Gove, government chief whip.

Another major former Tory donor, Growth Financial Services, switched to UKIP in 2014, giving the party £90,000 before switching back to fund the re-election campaigns of two prominent Tory MPs, Amber Rudd and Mark Field, who sits on the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee.

Similarly, hedge fund millionaire Crispin Odey donated to UKIP in 2014, but in late March 2015 provided funds to support the re-election of Tory MP and climate denier Jacob Rees-Mogg.

In other words, a number of major Tory donors plugged into the heart of the Conservative Party establishment were funding both UKIP and Tory political opponents.

Days before the elections, Tory-UKIP funder Robin Birley told pro-Tory newspaper The Telegraph that UKIP supporters should strategically vote Conservative in seats that UKIP could not win — which was most of them. In seats that Tories were unlikely to win, he urged Tory supporters to vote UKIP.

This Tory-UKIP switch strategy, he said, would “stop Britain being left with a government being formed by a hard left rabble of parties.”

Ironically, Birley’s recommendations for UKIP supporters to vote tactically for the Tories were vehemently opposed by Nigel Farage, the very leader of the party he had funded.

But the idea of a Tory-UKIP strategic voting bloc had also been endorsed just days before Birley’s announcement by the Bow Group, the oldest conservative think-tank in Britain.

Chaired by Ben Harris-Quinney, who has worked on foreign policy issues for the Conservative Party in the UK and EU parliaments, the Bow Group includes on its board of patrons several senior Tory figures, such as Lord Norman Lamont, Lord Michael Heseltine, Lord Michael Howard, and Lord Earl Howe — who as of 2010 was appointed by David Cameron as Department of Health minister.


MI5 and The Bow Group


The Bow Group’s Conservative Party patrons had all served in senior Cabinet positions, under either Margaret Thatcher or John Major. All four of them made a point of publicly distancing themselves from their chairman’s exhortations to vote UKIP, which were published by The Telegraph.

But also on the board of patrons is renowned philosopher, Prof. Roger Scruton, who has been connected to dubious anti-left intelligence information operations. Unlike his colleagues in the Tory party, Scruton was silent throughout this affair.

In the 1980s, Scruton was a member of the neoconservative Hillgate Group, a network of British academics who coordinated various policy publications to influence government. Their focus was hyping up the threat of Marxist, leftwing or “radical” infiltration of British universities and schools. Scruton admitted to historian David Callaghan, however, that the Group’s policy reports were “quietly encouraged by 10 Downing Street to concoct an outside pressure group to influence policy.”

Scruton’s Hillgate Group was run by Baroness Caroline Cox, another senior Conservative Party figure with a history of political agitation on behalf of British intelligence. In 1977, Cox was part of a study group behind a report on how leftwing “radical minorities” were subverting “capitalist, free market civilisation.” The report was published by the Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC), a “think tank” created jointly by the British and American intelligence services, specifically the CIA, an MI5-MI6 linked intelligence unit in the Cabinet Office, and the Foreign Office.

The Bow Group’s role in promoting the Tory-UKIP voting strategy was therefore not a curious aberration. Rather, it reflected a strategy being explored by senior elements in the Tory establishment and its elite support-base in the corporate oligarchy.

Scruton’s role in the Bow Group further raises questions about the role of Downing Street and Britain’s intelligence services in the use of UKIP to ramp up pro-Tory votes.

Roger Scruton could not be reached for comment.


MI5 and UKIP


Unbeknown to many, UKIP too had early roots in Britain’s intelligence services.

In 2001, former Conservative Party chairman Norman Tebbit called for an independent inquiry into revelations that UKIP had been infiltrated by MI5. In a televised interview on BBC News, Tebbit said:

“A chap came to me and said UKIP had been infiltrated by the British intelligence services and then he gave me two names of people and from various ways I came to the conclusion that I was absolutely and completely certain that these people — although they had left the service and the Foreign Office some years earlier — in fact had been intelligence agents.”

As Tebbit explained in a Spectator article that even Douglas Murray recently endorsed, he “half-heartedly” made his “own inquiries” after a source inside UKIP raised the concerns with him, “and unexpectedly struck gold… I am perfectly sure that the individuals had been active agents, although both would claim to have retired some years ago.”

Tebbit had not suggested that UKIP’s leadership was aware of the intelligence operation. At the time, Nigel Farage admitted that he could not discount Tebbit’s allegations.

It eventually turned out that the two people identified by Tebbit — Heather Conyngham and Christopher Skeate — had indeed been former MI6 officers, who had worked together at one time in Latin America. They were also both senior figures in the now defunct Referendum Party, Skeate as a candidate in 1997.

Robin Birley, the major Tory-UKIP donor who had urged a Tory-UKIP mutual tactical voting strategy, was at that time operations director of the Referendum Party, a Eurosceptic party similar to UKIP. Both Conyngham and Skeate had transferred their allegiance to UKIP after the death of Referendum Party founder, Sir James Goldsmith (Birley’s stepfather).

Birley and his Referendum Party also had a wider relationship to Latin America, specifically Chile. In 1998, Birley had recruited Referendum’s communications director, Patrick Robertson, to work with his campaign group, ‘Chilean Supporters Abroad,’ in support of notorious dictator Chilean General Pinochet, who had been supported by Margaret Thatcher herself.

The late Pinochet had been installed in a brutal military coup in 1973, which had been planned and backed by the CIA and MI6 since the democratic elections that brought leftwing nationalist President Salvador Allende to power in 1970. Birley’s ‘Chilean Supporters Abroad’ published a pro-Pinochet pamphlet that promulgated a range of MI6 and CIA disinformation about Allende.

Senior Tory pro-Pinochet apologists Norman Lamont and Michael Howard are today senior patrons of the Bow Group.

It later transpired that Tebbit’s original informant was then UKIP press officer Chris Jones, who months earlier had written a formal letter to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Tribunal about his “allegation, based on detailed circumstantional [sic] evidence gathered over 5 months that UKIP has been penetrated and is largely controlled by British Intelligence agents.”

The letter requested that the Tribunal:

“… call upon files on UKIP: myself: Dr R AE North: G Franklyn-Ryan: Nigel Farage MEP: Heather Coyningham a former FCO official; Christopher Skeate also FCO: Tony Stone: Mark Daniel (alias): Janet Girsman and G Lance Watkins.”

The curious overlap of MI5-MI6 officers with the Referendum, UKIP and Tory parties, and the movement of donors between all three parties, raises questions about the manipulation of the popular vote by a nexus of powerful British interests encompassing a network of corporate elites and Whitehall officials.


MI5 and SNP


The Tory-UKIP nexus is not the only instance offering disturbing evidence of the interference of British intelligence in our national elections.

Last month, The Telegraph — which had also promoted the Tory-UKIP strategy put out by the Bow Group and Robin Birley — published an ‘exclusive’ about a leaked FCO memo, which purportedly recorded Scottish National Party (SNP) leader Nicola Sturgeon telling the French Ambassador she would prefer a Tory government.

But as former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan and longtime Foreign Office (FCO) official, Craig Murray, remarked about the alleged memo, “both sides of the alleged conversation categorically deny it was said. Nicola Sturgeon denies she said it and the French Embassy deny she said it.”

Supposedly, the confidential contents of Sturgeon’s meeting with the French Ambassador had been passed to the Foreign Office and transcribed by a Whitehall official as a matter of FCO protocol.

“The extraordinary thing is, this is just a lie,” said Murray.

“As someone who worked in the FCO for over twenty years and was an Ambassador myself, I can assure you there is absolutely no protocol requirement on the French Ambassador to give the FCO the content of the meetings she, her Consul-General or anybody else from the French Embassy held in Edinburgh. That claim is absolute nonsense.”

Even more bizarrely, it turned out that the Foreign Office itself denied being the source of the alleged ‘leaked memo.’

Drawing on the example of the MI6-forged Zinoviev letter ‘leaked’ to the Daily Mail in 1924, which triggered the fall of the Labour government, Murray concluded: “The fake FCO memo has MI5 written all over it. This is the worst example of British security services influencing an election campaign since the Zinoviev letter.”

“I have been warning the SNP that we are going to be the target of active subversion by the UK and US security services. We are seen as a danger to the British state and thus a legitimate target,” the former Ambassador added.

“That the attempt to destabilise Nicola Sturgeon originates with the UK government and the Telegraph should give everyone pause. It is very obviously a security service effort. How otherwise is an account which the French Embassy says is completely false, contained in an official memo to be leaked? This episode raises very serious questions. But they are not questions about Nicola Sturgeon. They are questions about the subversion of democracy by the security services, and the willing complicity of the corporate media.”

There is thus alarming evidence that not just Big Money, but Big Brother, made a concerted effort to disrupt the SNP and co-opt UKIP, as a mechanism to sideline what Birnley characterised as a “hard left rabble of parties,” cementing a Tory parliamentary majority.

The next five years promises more of what we have already seen over the last five years: austerity, corporate empowerment, privatisation of public services widening inequality, continued obfuscation on climate change, subservience to Big Oil and nuclear lobbies, and a return of the snoopers’ charter — previously blocked by the Lib Dems — that would enshrine excessively intrusive surveillance powers into law.

So we should make no mistake. This is not a victory for British democracy. It is a victory for Britain’s increasingly draconian corporate-security complex.

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project Censored Award, known as the ‘Alternative Pulitzer Prize’, for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his Guardian work, and was selected in the Evening Standard’s ‘Power 1,000’ most globally influential Londoners.

Nafeez has also written for The Independent, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, New Internationalist, Counterpunch, Truthout, among others. He is the author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilization: And How to Save It (2010), and the scifi thriller novel ZERO POINT, among other books. His work on the root causes and covert operations linked to international terrorism officially contributed to the 9/11 Commission and the 7/7 Coroner’s Inquest.

This exclusive is being released for free in the public interest, and was enabled by crowdfunding. I’d like to thank my amazing community of patrons for their support, which gave me the opportunity to work on this in-depth investigation. If you appreciated this story, please support independent, investigative journalism for the global commons via Patreon.com, where you can donate as much or as little as you like.
__________________
"a knowledge economy presupposes mass stupidity" - besides(2004)

“Pillagers of the world, they have exhausted the land by their indiscriminate plunder, and now they ransack the sea. A rich enemy excites their cupidity; a poor one, their lust for power. East and West alike have failed to satisfy them. ...

CALGACUS (attrib.)

Last edited by besides; 10-05-2015 at 01:01 AM.
besides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 12:59 AM   #1468
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by besides View Post
bankers funding both sides, UKIP & CONSERVATIVE How Big Money and Big Brother won the British Elections https://medium.com/@NafeezAhmed/how-big-money-and-big-brother-won-the-british-elections-2e8da57faac4 by Nafeez Ahmed Courtesy of the New Statesman, an illustration of David Cameron (left) alongside Nigel Farage (right) positioned outside No. 10 Downing Street The Conservatives have won the 2015 elections with a slim majority. Labour and the Liberal Democrats suffered unexpected crushing defeats, prompting their leaders, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, to resign. And despite winning a significant percentage of votes, UKIP only managed to win one seat, with its leader Nigel Farage also resigning after losing to a Tory MP. But the Tory victory reveals precisely why British democracy is broken. The ultimate determinant of which party won the elections was the money behind their political campaigns — the winning and losing parties correlate directly with the quantity of funding received. Yet there is also compelling evidence of another factor — interference from Britain’s security services. The best democracy money can buy As of the end of last year, the Electoral Commission found that the Tories received the largest amount of donations, at £8,345,687, the bulk of which came from financiers associated with banks, the hedge fund industry, and big business. Two million pounds worth of donations were associated with hedge funds, and a further £4 million with people attending private dinners hosted by senior Tories. Next up in donations was Labour at £7,163,988, much of which came from trade unions, as well as corporate donors like PricewaterhouseCoopers, a major proponent of corporate tax avoidance; then the Liberal Democrats with £3,038,500, UKIP with £1,505,055, and the Green Party with £248,520. That was last year. This year, donations continued to come in. In the final week of the campaign, the Tories managed to raise 10 times more donations than Labour — a total of a further £1.36 million — once again largely from hedge fund managers, property tycoons, and a telecoms firm that has avoided paying corporation tax in the UK since 2007. Political parties appear to have achieved electoral success in direct proportion to the amount of money received to fund their political campaigns, indicating that the most important precondition for victory in Britain’s broken democracy is the party’s subservience to corporate power. Oligarchy The role of party donors in determining election outcomes — by determining the effectiveness and reach of national public relations campaigns — has consistently been overlooked by the main parties, despite some obligatory lipservice that has gone nowhere tangible. Over the last five years, 41% of all individual and corporate donations to British party political-related causes have come from just 76 extremely wealthy people, including City financiers, corporate moguls, and owners of multi-million pound businesses. Public relations spin has increasingly played a critical function in permitting corporate power to translate its wealth into political power. In their study of the subject, A Century of Spin (2007), Prof. David Miller and Dr. William Dinan, sociologists and directors of the public interest investigations body, Spinwatch, show how the corporate co-optation of PR has been used to subordinate liberal democracies to corporate rule, and to limit the scope of populist grassroots movements to influence the political party system. Under a climate of economic uncertainty and lack of independent sources of news and information, public opinion has become evermore vulnerable to slick partisan campaigns that mobilise wealth to create highly effective media spin by which to manipulate voters. The Tory-UKIP money machine While UKIP has positioned itself as an independent counterweight to the ‘establishment’ parties, standing up for swathes of under-represented working people, the truth is the opposite. A large bulk of UKIP’s funding boost came from former Tory donors, millionaire bankers, and corporate executives, pushing the fringe party to receive the third largest percentage of the vote. But not all these former Tory donors are former Tory donors. ‘Former’ Tory donor Robin Birley, for instance, who owns a Mayfair nightclub and who is one of UKIP’s biggest donors, had also bankrolled the campaign of Tory MP Michael Gove, government chief whip. Another major former Tory donor, Growth Financial Services, switched to UKIP in 2014, giving the party £90,000 before switching back to fund the re-election campaigns of two prominent Tory MPs, Amber Rudd and Mark Field, who sits on the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. Similarly, hedge fund millionaire Crispin Odey donated to UKIP in 2014, but in late March 2015 provided funds to support the re-election of Tory MP and climate denier Jacob Rees-Mogg. In other words, a number of major Tory donors plugged into the heart of the Conservative Party establishment were funding both UKIP and Tory political opponents. Days before the elections, Tory-UKIP funder Robin Birley told pro-Tory newspaper The Telegraph that UKIP supporters should strategically vote Conservative in seats that UKIP could not win — which was most of them. In seats that Tories were unlikely to win, he urged Tory supporters to vote UKIP. This Tory-UKIP switch strategy, he said, would “stop Britain being left with a government being formed by a hard left rabble of parties.” Ironically, Birley’s recommendations for UKIP supporters to vote tactically for the Tories were vehemently opposed by Nigel Farage, the very leader of the party he had funded. But the idea of a Tory-UKIP strategic voting bloc had also been endorsed just days before Birley’s announcement by the Bow Group, the oldest conservative think-tank in Britain. Chaired by Ben Harris-Quinney, who has worked on foreign policy issues for the Conservative Party in the UK and EU parliaments, the Bow Group includes on its board of patrons several senior Tory figures, such as Lord Norman Lamont, Lord Michael Heseltine, Lord Michael Howard, and Lord Earl Howe — who as of 2010 was appointed by David Cameron as Department of Health minister. MI5 and The Bow Group The Bow Group’s Conservative Party patrons had all served in senior Cabinet positions, under either Margaret Thatcher or John Major. All four of them made a point of publicly distancing themselves from their chairman’s exhortations to vote UKIP, which were published by The Telegraph. But also on the board of patrons is renowned philosopher, Prof. Roger Scruton, who has been connected to dubious anti-left intelligence information operations. Unlike his colleagues in the Tory party, Scruton was silent throughout this affair. In the 1980s, Scruton was a member of the neoconservative Hillgate Group, a network of British academics who coordinated various policy publications to influence government. Their focus was hyping up the threat of Marxist, leftwing or “radical” infiltration of British universities and schools. Scruton admitted to historian David Callaghan, however, that the Group’s policy reports were “quietly encouraged by 10 Downing Street to concoct an outside pressure group to influence policy.” Scruton’s Hillgate Group was run by Baroness Caroline Cox, another senior Conservative Party figure with a history of political agitation on behalf of British intelligence. In 1977, Cox was part of a study group behind a report on how leftwing “radical minorities” were subverting “capitalist, free market civilisation.” The report was published by the Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC), a “think tank” created jointly by the British and American intelligence services, specifically the CIA, an MI5-MI6 linked intelligence unit in the Cabinet Office, and the Foreign Office. The Bow Group’s role in promoting the Tory-UKIP voting strategy was therefore not a curious aberration. Rather, it reflected a strategy being explored by senior elements in the Tory establishment and its elite support-base in the corporate oligarchy. Scruton’s role in the Bow Group further raises questions about the role of Downing Street and Britain’s intelligence services in the use of UKIP to ramp up pro-Tory votes. Roger Scruton could not be reached for comment. MI5 and UKIP Unbeknown to many, UKIP too had early roots in Britain’s intelligence services. In 2001, former Conservative Party chairman Norman Tebbit called for an independent inquiry into revelations that UKIP had been infiltrated by MI5. In a televised interview on BBC News, Tebbit said: “A chap came to me and said UKIP had been infiltrated by the British intelligence services and then he gave me two names of people and from various ways I came to the conclusion that I was absolutely and completely certain that these people — although they had left the service and the Foreign Office some years earlier — in fact had been intelligence agents.” As Tebbit explained in a Spectator article that even Douglas Murray recently endorsed, he “half-heartedly” made his “own inquiries” after a source inside UKIP raised the concerns with him, “and unexpectedly struck gold… I am perfectly sure that the individuals had been active agents, although both would claim to have retired some years ago.” Tebbit had not suggested that UKIP’s leadership was aware of the intelligence operation. At the time, Nigel Farage admitted that he could not discount Tebbit’s allegations. It eventually turned out that the two people identified by Tebbit — Heather Conyngham and Christopher Skeate — had indeed been former MI6 officers, who had worked together at one time in Latin America. They were also both senior figures in the now defunct Referendum Party, Skeate as a candidate in 1997. Robin Birley, the major Tory-UKIP donor who had urged a Tory-UKIP mutual tactical voting strategy, was at that time operations director of the Referendum Party, a Eurosceptic party similar to UKIP. Both Conyngham and Skeate had transferred their allegiance to UKIP after the death of Referendum Party founder, Sir James Goldsmith (Birley’s stepfather). Birley and his Referendum Party also had a wider relationship to Latin America, specifically Chile. In 1998, Birley had recruited Referendum’s communications director, Patrick Robertson, to work with his campaign group, ‘Chilean Supporters Abroad,’ in support of notorious dictator Chilean General Pinochet, who had been supported by Margaret Thatcher herself. The late Pinochet had been installed in a brutal military coup in 1973, which had been planned and backed by the CIA and MI6 since the democratic elections that brought leftwing nationalist President Salvador Allende to power in 1970. Birley’s ‘Chilean Supporters Abroad’ published a pro-Pinochet pamphlet that promulgated a range of MI6 and CIA disinformation about Allende. Senior Tory pro-Pinochet apologists Norman Lamont and Michael Howard are today senior patrons of the Bow Group. It later transpired that Tebbit’s original informant was then UKIP press officer Chris Jones, who months earlier had written a formal letter to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Tribunal about his “allegation, based on detailed circumstantional [sic] evidence gathered over 5 months that UKIP has been penetrated and is largely controlled by British Intelligence agents.” The letter requested that the Tribunal: “… call upon files on UKIP: myself: Dr R AE North: G Franklyn-Ryan: Nigel Farage MEP: Heather Coyningham a former FCO official; Christopher Skeate also FCO: Tony Stone: Mark Daniel (alias): Janet Girsman and G Lance Watkins.” The curious overlap of MI5-MI6 officers with the Referendum, UKIP and Tory parties, and the movement of donors between all three parties, raises questions about the manipulation of the popular vote by a nexus of powerful British interests encompassing a network of corporate elites and Whitehall officials. MI5 and SNP The Tory-UKIP nexus is not the only instance offering disturbing evidence of the interference of British intelligence in our national elections. Last month, The Telegraph — which had also promoted the Tory-UKIP strategy put out by the Bow Group and Robin Birley — published an ‘exclusive’ about a leaked FCO memo, which purportedly recorded Scottish National Party (SNP) leader Nicola Sturgeon telling the French Ambassador she would prefer a Tory government. But as former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan and longtime Foreign Office (FCO) official, Craig Murray, remarked about the alleged memo, “both sides of the alleged conversation categorically deny it was said. Nicola Sturgeon denies she said it and the French Embassy deny she said it.” Supposedly, the confidential contents of Sturgeon’s meeting with the French Ambassador had been passed to the Foreign Office and transcribed by a Whitehall official as a matter of FCO protocol. “The extraordinary thing is, this is just a lie,” said Murray. “As someone who worked in the FCO for over twenty years and was an Ambassador myself, I can assure you there is absolutely no protocol requirement on the French Ambassador to give the FCO the content of the meetings she, her Consul-General or anybody else from the French Embassy held in Edinburgh. That claim is absolute nonsense.” Even more bizarrely, it turned out that the Foreign Office itself denied being the source of the alleged ‘leaked memo.’ Drawing on the example of the MI6-forged Zinoviev letter ‘leaked’ to the Daily Mail in 1924, which triggered the fall of the Labour government, Murray concluded: “The fake FCO memo has MI5 written all over it. This is the worst example of British security services influencing an election campaign since the Zinoviev letter.” “I have been warning the SNP that we are going to be the target of active subversion by the UK and US security services. We are seen as a danger to the British state and thus a legitimate target,” the former Ambassador added. “That the attempt to destabilise Nicola Sturgeon originates with the UK government and the Telegraph should give everyone pause. It is very obviously a security service effort. How otherwise is an account which the French Embassy says is completely false, contained in an official memo to be leaked? This episode raises very serious questions. But they are not questions about Nicola Sturgeon. They are questions about the subversion of democracy by the security services, and the willing complicity of the corporate media.” There is thus alarming evidence that not just Big Money, but Big Brother, made a concerted effort to disrupt the SNP and co-opt UKIP, as a mechanism to sideline what Birnley characterised as a “hard left rabble of parties,” cementing a Tory parliamentary majority. The next five years promises more of what we have already seen over the last five years: austerity, corporate empowerment, privatisation of public services widening inequality, continued obfuscation on climate change, subservience to Big Oil and nuclear lobbies, and a return of the snoopers’ charter — previously blocked by the Lib Dems — that would enshrine excessively intrusive surveillance powers into law. So we should make no mistake. This is not a victory for British democracy. It is a victory for Britain’s increasingly draconian corporate-security complex. This story is published by INSURGE INTELLIGENCE, a new crowd-funded investigative journalism project. Support us to break the stories that no one else will — become a patron of independent, investigative journalism for the global commons. Dr Nafeez Ahmed is an investigative journalist, bestselling author and international security scholar. A former Guardian writer, he writes the ‘System Shift’ column for VICE’s Motherboard, and is also a columnist for Middle East Eye. He is the winner of a 2015 Project
I'm not going to accuse you of copy-pasting here, but perhaps breaking that large block of text into manageable paragraphs would help potential readers.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:02 AM   #1469
besides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: under a tree
Posts: 289
Likes: 22 (10 Posts)
Default

ooopsy dooopsy just noticed - fixed
__________________
"a knowledge economy presupposes mass stupidity" - besides(2004)

“Pillagers of the world, they have exhausted the land by their indiscriminate plunder, and now they ransack the sea. A rich enemy excites their cupidity; a poor one, their lust for power. East and West alike have failed to satisfy them. ...

CALGACUS (attrib.)
besides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:05 AM   #1470
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by besides View Post
ooopsy dooopsy just noticed - fixed

OK, thanks for that, will read.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:25 AM   #1471
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Have read the article, and trying to absorb the main points. He is suggesting that UKIP were broadly an organisation there to help divert leftist votes? It is then automatically reasoned that because a high-ranking group of tories tells us that UKIP were such, that it is believed that UKIP were infiltrated by mi6 agents?

Then the SNP are accused of MI6 infiltration, but are then forgiven for some strange reason by this reporter, who then forgives Sturgeon of any wrong doing?

The whole thing does not add up, and stinks.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:27 AM   #1472
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Nafeez, shall remember that name.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:28 AM   #1473
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,954
Likes: 1,346 (693 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camaban View Post

The whole thing does not add up, and stinks.
Could this have someting to do with it.

__________________
The Beast from the sea with 7 heads, 10 horns and 10 crowns has been wounded to one of the heads, the 2 horned beast from the earth commanded us to worship the 7 headed beast but on 23rd June 2016 we said no.


Don't forget, everything is foretold you just need to have the eyes to see and the ears to hear.
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:31 AM   #1474
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bendoon View Post
Could this have someting to do with it.

Maybe.. my head is still spinning from that article.. my logic fuses have been blown and I need to have a kip and a brain reset after that one...

Will read it again tomorrow and try to make better sense of it with a clearer mind.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:37 AM   #1475
besides
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: under a tree
Posts: 289
Likes: 22 (10 Posts)
Default

no worries. not a perfect article by any means - the author clearly doesnt like ukip and terms like "denier" mark it down. however, there's certainly some food for thought in there. if the writer kept to the facts, which are the interesting bits and kept the tribal soundbytes a bit lower in the mix ...
__________________
"a knowledge economy presupposes mass stupidity" - besides(2004)

“Pillagers of the world, they have exhausted the land by their indiscriminate plunder, and now they ransack the sea. A rich enemy excites their cupidity; a poor one, their lust for power. East and West alike have failed to satisfy them. ...

CALGACUS (attrib.)
besides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 01:54 AM   #1476
camaban
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Awaiting the Tsunami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by besides View Post
no worries. not a perfect article by any means - the author clearly doesnt like ukip and terms like "denier" mark it down. however, there's certainly some food for thought in there. if the writer kept to the facts, which are the interesting bits and kept the tribal soundbytes a bit lower in the mix ...
Yep - and alternative views are always welcome to me, shall read again.
camaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2015, 10:18 AM   #1477
cont
Senior Member
 
cont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,970
Likes: 1,137 (616 Posts)
Default

__________________
One who questions, and people should question everything, including what I say, is questioning in pursuit of the truth. A skeptic, their foundation from the start is that anything outside their pea-sized norm is not true. So their skepticism is not questioning if something is true it's setting out from the start to try to convince people it's not. - David Icke Videocast 11 March 2016
cont is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2015, 04:45 PM   #1478
johnny b
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 242
Likes: 33 (23 Posts)
Default Left-wing Euroscepticism

Just pointing out that you don't have to be right-wing to be against the EU. There was once a tradition of left-wing Euroskepticism which has now been eclipsed by UKIP and the Tory right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0wFii8klNg

Last edited by johnny b; 11-05-2015 at 04:47 PM.
johnny b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2015, 07:42 PM   #1479
the_ohmbudsman
Senior Member
 
the_ohmbudsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: London - UK
Posts: 2,898
Likes: 298 (226 Posts)
Default

UKIP are probably the reason the Tories got back in again because they took away votes from Labour - now we have to have another 5 years of them.
the_ohmbudsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:37 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.