Werritty/Miliband: They Were All In It 106


David Miliband and William Hague are implicated in three entirely new Adam Werritty/Matthew Gould meetings admitted by the FCO in response to one of my FOI requests. Gould’s meetings with Werritty, in his capacity as Principal Private Secretary to first Miliband and then Hague, were entirely left out of Gus O’Donnell’s “investigation” into Werritty’s activities.

I have now received the following FCO response to my Freedom of Information request on Gould/Werritty:

Thank you for your email of 24 November 2011 asking for “all communications in either direction ever made between Matthew Gould and Adam Werritty, specifically including communications made outside government systems”. I am writing to confirm that we have now completed the search for the information which you requested.

I can confirm that the FCO does hold some information relevant to your request.

There are entries in diaries indicating that there were two meetings at which Mathew Gould and Mr Werritty were both present while he was serving as Principal Private Secretary to the Foreign Secretary on 8 September 2009 and 16 June 2010.

Since Mr Gould was appointed as HM Ambassador to Israel on 11 September 2010 there were three further instances on 1 and 27 September 2010 in London and a dinner on 6 February 2011 in Tel Aviv. The meeting on 1 September and the dinner on 6 September are already matters of public record as they are included in the report by the Cabinet Secretary “Allegations against Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP” published on 18 October 2011. Mr Gould attended the Herzliya Conference in his official capacity. Mr Werritty was also a participant. This is already a matter of public record.

The FCO holds no information relating to written communication (either electronic or mail) between Matthew Gould and Adam Werritty at any point.

So Gould attended one meeting with Werritty as David Miliband’s Principal Private Secretary, and one as William Hague’s Principal Private Secretary. Private Secretaries in the civil service do not hold meetings on their own account. It would be very peculiar indeed for a Private Secretary to meet an outside lobbyist on his own, or to formally meet on business anyone outside the civil service without his minister’s permission. Even then, I cannot stress too much how rare this would be; the FCO has batteries of civil servants covering all subjects and geographical areas; private secretaries do not normally meet outsiders except when accompanying their minister.

What was Miliband’s business with Werritty? Does it relate to the later meeting between Werritty, Gould, Fox and Mossad at the Tel Aviv meeting? Does David Miliband’s involvement with Werritty explain the ludicrous charges of anti-semitism levelled at Paul Flynn from within his own party when he tried to dig deeper into what Gould and Werritty were up to?

Those who can count will realise that the FCO letter refers to two instances where Gould met Werritty before he became Ambassador to Israel, and three after being appointed Ambassador, but actually lists four not three – 1 and 27 September 2010 and 6 February 2011, plus the Herzilya Conference from 4-6 February 2011 (this is not the same event as the Tel Aviv dinner as it took place in a quite different town).

Either the meeting on 1 September or 27 September is a new admission. The O’Donnell report refers to only one September meeting, the infamous “briefing meeting” for Gould in the MOD between Gould, Fox and Werritty. Just before Christmas, Caroline Lucas obtained a parliamentary answer that stated there was no MOD official present at that meeting and no record was taken. The FCO letter above is the first admission of a second September meeting.

The FCO list omits the “social occasion” in summer 2010 to which Fox invited both Gould and Werritty, despite the fact that this had already been revealed in a parliamentary answer to Jeremy Corbyn. Presumably it is omitted from this Freedom of Information request because there is no written record of it within the Foreign Office. That might also explain the extraordinary omission of the “We Believe in Israel” conference in London which Fox, Gould and Werritty all attended shortly after the Herzilya Conference in Israel. In this context, am I the only one to find the formula: “The FCO holds no information relating to written communication (either electronic or mail) between Matthew Gould and Adam Werritty at any point” somewhat unconvincing. Have they even asked Gould about communications outside the FCO system?

We now have these Gould/Werritty meetings:

1) 8 September 2009 as Miliband’s Principal Private Secretary (omitted from O’Donnell report)
2) 16 June 2010 as Hague’s Principal Private Secretary (omitted from O’Donnell report)
3) A “social occasion” in summer 2010 with Gould, Fox and Werritty (omitted from above and omitted from O’Donnell report)
4) 1 September 2010 in London (only one September meeting in O’Donnell report)
5) 27 September 2010 in London (only one September meeting in O’Donnell report)
6) 4-6 February 2011 Herzilya Conference Israel (omitted from O’Donnell report)
7) 6 February 2011 Tel Aviv dinner with Mossad and Israeli military
8 15 May 2011 “We believe in Israel” conference London (omitted from above and omitted from O’Donnell report)

Only two of these eight were recorded by Gus O’Donnell in his pathetic “investigation” into the Fox Werritty affair.

It is simply impossible that Matthew Gould, a senior British diplomat, attended all of these meetings and events, yet no formal minute or note of any of them exists. Yet that is what the FCO appears to be claiming. In particular the meetings as Principal Private Secretary on 8 September 2009 and 16 June 2010 simply must have been minuted. The FCO admit they hold diary entries detailing participation, but so far have not responded to my request to release them.

I have no doubt that the near total blackout on serious media investigation into what Werritty was really up to, relates directly to the fact that he was meeting with Gould as Private Secretary to both Miliband and Hague, in this sense. There is a silent cross-party agreement among the political establishment to ally the UK strongly with the interests of Israel (and thus against the interests of the Palestinians). Werritty’s activities were therefore countenanced by both New Labour and Conservative leaderships, and the nebulous “Establishment”, including the mainstream media, have closed ranks around this.

My sources within the civil service remain adamant that the purpose of all this activity was diplomatic preparation for an attack on Iran. When those sources first contacted me, and told me to look at Gould Werritty, I genuinely had no idea that Gould and Werritty had any connection. Getting the information has been extremely difficult, but I have proven that the Gould/Werritty connection was indeed far more extensive than the Establishment were prepared to admit, and directly implicated Miliband and Hague with Werritty. It was deliberately underplayed by Gus O’Donnell’s report, in a blatant act of political lying by the then Cabinet Secretary.

I still do not have positive evidence that the purpose of this activity is an attack on Iran, but I trust my source and his or her tip-off that the place to dig was the Gould-Werritty relationship has proven to be entirely accurate. It ties in with information I have received from another source, this time a senior journalist whom again I trust, that Werritty met with Robert Gates on two occasions. I would be grateful if any of my US-based readers could try to track that down using FOI.


106 thoughts on “Werritty/Miliband: They Were All In It

1 2 3 4
  • Passerby

    Thank Craig,
    Craig you marvellous sleuth, you have been digging for Gould there, and it appears the whole stinking lot of the bastards are implicated to a lesser or greater degree, in this sordid and squalid affair.
    ,
    Fact that David Milliband was/is involved too, can help clarify/shape the questions to be asked.
    ,
    “the big mistake of the century” “If this rhetoric spins out of control, if there are incidents in the Persian Gulf or the Strait of Hormuz that lead to wider hostilities, as night follows the day, this could spin not only into a regional war but even farther; and… of Israel, I fear, may cease to exist,” Ray McGovern told Press TV US Desk.
    ,
    The above interview clarifies some of the potential scenarios.
    ,
    So far as troop movements to Isreal goes, this could be in preparation for operation Libyaing Syria, which itself is coming apart in the seams.
    ,
    we need to get busy digging more now.

  • John Goss

    Excellent Craig! Your persistence is starting to bear fruit. I’m not surprised about the Milliband involvement after the way a decent MP, Paul Flynn, was pulled over the coals and more or less made to apologise to that right-wing neo-shit, Robert Halfon. It strikes me that we get the same whatever we ask for. Who pulls the strings and what money is behind a party that gives a choice of one or the other of two Millibands? It has to be Zionist money.

    Rocki, I got that message last night about the US sending a fleet and soldiers to Israel. It’s very worrying. At the same time the Israli’s were talking about shutting down a nuclear power station to prevent an attack. Could this US threat have anything to do with South Korea buying oil from Iran despite sanctions.

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219297.html

  • Tom Welsh

    Well done Craig! You point out that “There is a silent cross-party agreement among the political establishment to ally the UK strongly with the interests of Israel (and thus against the interests of the Palestinians). Werritty’s activities were therefore countenanced by both New Labour and Conservative leaderships, and the nebulous “Establishment”, including the mainstream media, have closed ranks around this”.

    In other words, here is a specific – and very important – example of a situation in which citizens of the UK have no say whatsoever in their government’s policies. For regardless of whether one votes for Labour or Conservatives (and I have little doubt Liberal Democrats either) one will get exactly the same outcome: alliance with Israel, right or wrong, and aggression against Iran.

    Democracy? What “democracy”???

  • Mary

    David Miliband denies visiting family in West Bank settlement

    By Bernard Josephs and Simon Griver Tel Aviv

    The Jewish Chronicle, 22/11/2007

    .
    A report that Foreign Secretary David Miliband took time out to dine with relatives at a Jewish settlement in the West Bank threatened to overshadow his visit to the region this week.
    .
    The report, strenuously denied, was broadcast on Israeli Army Radio and comes in the run-up to the Annapolis peace summit next Tuesday. The British government has made clear its opposition to the building of settlements in the occupied territories, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has pledged a settlement freeze.
    .

    A spokesman for the British embassy said that, although Mr Miliband had relatives in Israel, he dined with them in Tel Aviv. “The Foreign Minister was in Jericho on Saturday to meet Palestinian Authority leaders. He certainly was not at any West Bank settlements.”
    .
    One of the relatives, David Landau, an insurance agent, said he was at the Tel Aviv dinner. “We are very proud of the Milibands, even if we do not always agree with their political positions on Israel,” he said.
    .
    Mr Landau added that most of Mr Miliband’s relatives in Israel are Orthodox, including some West Bank settlers. “But he has no direct connection with them,” he insisted. Both British and Israeli officials declared that Mr Miliband’s visit — the first since he became Foreign Secretary — had been productive.
    .
    After meeting him, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni described talks about the summit and on the threat posed by Iran as “very fruitful”.
    .
    Mr Miliband said that the opportunities presented by the summit “don’t come along very often”, and that it was very important that the international community provide “practical and political support for the two parties”.
    […]

    .
    EX http://radioislam.org/islam/english/jewishp/britain/miliband_jewish.htm

  • arsalan

    Why the surprise?
    80% of Tories are openly members of Friends of Israel.
    That means 80% of the ruling party and a substantial slice of the opposition take their orders from Israel.
    This is known, so what is the new information.
    It just tells us what we already know using other words.

  • Jon

    Yes, the media blackout has been alarming, but I managed to get Private Eye and the Morning Star to do a piece. I seem to remember someone on another thread saying that Red Pepper (a left/socialist magazine) had covered it. And of course the Indie, probably the only MSM outlet to cover it. Any others that come to mind?

  • ingo

    An indightment of democratic values as they exist, a sad day for main party politcs. My thanks to Paul Flynn and caroline Lucas for baring the wrath of the purporters of israely foreign policy, for defending the real interest of the realm, whatever that entails.

    I shall now take a five second break, stand up and salute your principled actions in support of Britains interest, for visualising the smeary relationship Labour and Conservatives keep behind their playfull sharade of playing opposition and fooling voters.

    This is the most powerfull case one could ever make for the rise of Independent MP’s, the nail in the coffin for these self serving puppets who front dogma at us but are really leaving foreign policy and decisions as to what amounts to British interests, to Israel.

    The FCO would have forseen this article and informed the MSM about it, the Guardian will still lick backsides, not so sure about the Independent, so do not expect them to fall over themselves.

    Where is Adam Werritty? If he has anything to say and if there is nothing behind this story, why does he not speak out? Why be frit, why hide if you have nothing to hide? Not that any newspaper seem to care what happened to one of the most important political interlopers and neocon adjudants. He has disappeared for month and nobody raises questions?

    what if Jeremy Paxman disappears for three month, or that other Jeremy, him with the big piston type head and nothing in it? would they equally not care?

    How about an old fashioned Hyde Park Corner event Craig, I think you have earned a good hourly spot with this exposee?
    I would compare this scandal to the profumo affair, indeed the revellations will make for far more damage, imho.

    look after yourself.

  • woody

    “There is a silent cross-party agreement among the political establishment to ally the UK strongly with the interests of Israel (and thus against the interests of the Palestinians).”

    And thus, of course, against the interests of the UK. Let us not forget that. Israel’s enemies are NOT our enemies despite what the cretin Fox would have us believe.

  • Wikispooks

    This looks like the nuts and bolts of the UK end of a political/diplomatic fix on war with Iran, for when it is finally precipitated. Iran’s refusal to be provoked thus far demonstrates monumental restraint, but there must come a point where they feel compelled to defend their interests. I wonder what casus belli we will be presented with?

  • ingo

    yes he does, Larry, whats your point? Robert Maxwell spoke seven languages and some say he was a engaged with secret services, the MSM and intelligence services have a symbiotic relationship, always had.

  • arsalan

    The reason why we don’t see this stuff in the media, is they own the media. And what they don’t own, they control. The little they don’t control they censure. The few that aren’t censured are sidelined.

    The solution is to make our own media, and to promote it.

  • ingo

    Wikispooks, we now have to expect an escalation, not just in words but in actions. The gulf of Hormutz, the Gholan heights, in Gaza, and in Syria, the latter by an ‘accident’of sort.

    I’m also impressed by the massive restraint shown by Iran in the face of all this readying for manouvres. Russia’s Black sea fleet is taking part in a manouvre in the Ionian sea this Thursday.

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20111201/169194741.html

  • craig Post author

    I just wanted to acknowledge how very helpful it is when readers post a link to articles here into RELEVANT and current comment streams in mainstream media sites. The link from the comments section of this Indie article http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/adrian-hamilton/adrian-hamilton-the-more-we-talk-of-war-with-iran-the-more-likely-it-becomes-6284980.html has brought several hundred readers already. It is a great way to attract new readers.

  • Komodo

    Congratulations, Craig. I suspect the Miliband meeting may be key to extracting more details: I can understand Hague wanting contact with Fox’s man, but Miliband?

  • Mary

    ‘Werritty/Miliband: They Were All In It’
    .
    I suppose it could be said that ‘they were all in it together’.

  • David Halpin

    Re.Woody above. Craig has defined with great care the covens of traitors. Their venomous words are yet to be seen in print – if ever. We have become inured to treason, but treason it is.

    On the way to the 1936 Olympics with its legacy of concrete and regiments of security guards, visitors should pass the Tower wherein will be ensconced the trio plus a Miliband. No Beefeaters outside, but SO19 instead with sub-machine guns slung.

    And these creatures gather at war memorials to honour the selfless dead. There are no words.

  • Jon

    Craig, is it possible that a D-Notice has been issued to the media? I guess since the Indie has published, that would be a no – but if that is the case, one would hope the Guardian would have followed with its own report. Perhaps they’re still mad at you 😉

  • deepgreenpuddock

    Somehow it is a somewhat underwhelming thesis that the Fox and Werrity. (Seriously- does anyone imagines that someone of the calibre of Werrity is anything but a compliant nark, pimp and gopher), and that the policy is ‘contiinuous’ regardless of the party that provides the faces that occupy the nominal positions of state.
    The great merit of Nulabour was that they could not do the ‘pretence’ thing as well as the Tories, and succumbed to the kind of contorted mental processes that led to Blair’s tortured adoption of supernatural explanations of the world by an organisation so irredeemabley discredited as Church of Rome, and who cannot be aware of the unspoken cynicism, etched on their faces, that others like Straw and Reid unwittingly reveal. A matter of style is all that defines our political choices.
    We are all no doubt, watching, if in some desultory way, the ‘ongwangs’ of the Republican party in Iowa and who could imagine for a a moment that any of these comedic craturs holds the kind of personal qualities that would allow them to change policy direction in the face of the kind of entrenched pre-existing interests that exist in Washington. I was thinking of Ron Paul-but it applies to all of the candidates. It is a side-show-it may even be a game that is taken seriously-in the same way that football is a game taken seriously by so many. (Fun is serious after all ad we can all admire and enjoy the slick or deft moves tha mark a good game.
    When we look at the charade that the US democracy has slid into, with religious crackpots, glorified office administrators, and shrill, harping mediocrities vying for the pole position, what can it mean? Can it mean that there is any substance to the idea of an independent parliament in the UK, except perhaps on the outer edges. Can it mean that our politicians are just simple people who, at the highest level, makes decisions, having already been screened and moulded and bought into the system of rewards and status that ensures compliance to an established value system. independence of thought is actively and progressively eliminated as the jokers pass their tests.
    How can anyone imagine for a moment that an individual such as the President /PM is anything but a symbol who represents and articulates the power of the state or gets destroyed. Why are we so surprised by the absurd volte-faces of Obama and the bare faced invention that preceded the Iraq war. I am pretty sure that there is a moment in the lives of all those who pass to positions of nominal power, where they realise, or are informed in no uncertain terms , that the guillotine, bullet or a premature terminal disease awaits anyone with the idea of acting independently.
    Is it a surprise that Cameron had a training in PR. is it a surprise that Brown’s ‘failure’ was defined in terms of his personal relations deficiencies- and Blair’s ‘success’ was defined in terms of his oleaginous ability to summon up and ‘persuade’ the kinds of people who would comply with his ‘understanding’ of his role.
    is it a great surprise that his closest confidante was a PR man. i.e. Campbell.

    For anyone prepared to follow the story it has been clear for some time (years) that Iran is a strategic target of the west.
    The discovery of the furtive machinations of the alley runners and creeps who do the gophering, is really probably irrelevant at this point interesting though it may be. The arrival of US troops in Israel is rather obviously to neutralise Hezbollah. With retrospect, the last engagement with Hezbollah has revealed that such a strengthening was necessary and it may even be the case tat it was decided to postpone the Iran action from Bush’s time because Hezbollah turned out to be too hot to handle and might inflict serious damage on Israel.
    What about Egypt? Well it seems likely that urgent action is necessary , while Mubarak’s military are still in control and before some MB dominated entity comes to power, the actions of which are not predictable.

    Unfortunately there is a strong whiff of the same kind of fevered perspective that perceives Jews at the epicentre of some sinister and evil grand plan for destruction and domination of innocent and righteous people. (The Protocols of the elders of zion etc) I think it is important to understand that Jews are no better (or only slightly so) at plotting and manipulating, than anyone else, and that Christians and Moslems are no more righteous than Jews, or any other group for that matter. Secret societies, elitism and manipulation are prevalent in all of human activity.

    The essential nature of career progress with the parliamentary system ( by being a Friend of Israel) is a way of signalling that the person has understood the pragmatic nature of plotting, alignment, lobbying, manipulation, and the dirty process of policy development, connections to the past and to cultural definitions and its incremental possibilities and limits, and has rejected the kind of quasi-religious affiliations and sensitivities and prejudices that was so prevalent in the late nineteenth century and early 20th century that led to the nightmare of the holocaust. In many ways that is certainly right, as it is an indicator of immaturity. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t a plot or conspiracy.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.