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
  • ingo

    Mike, why Syria first? Russia is leasing a massive naval base there, as well as taking part in NATO manouvres starting this Thursday, according to Novosti, unless they are part of the rout, this somehow does not fit.
    I think Syria is more likely goaded into some sort of action along its borders and involved by countering.

  • Fedup

    Related to this thread is the farce unfolding in Syria.
    Firstly : “Western powers have grown frustrated by divisions within the Syrian opposition. Belgium’s foreign minister, Didier Reynders, held talks with rival opposition groups yesterday to seek to mend a rift that, he warned, was “playing into the hands of the Syrian regime.”
    Found towards the end in the Telegraph article : Syria: Arab League must press for UN-enforced no-fly zone, main opposition leader says.
    “Syria opposition groups fail to reach accord” is the article in FT.
    So the commercial Media are hinting at the wishy washy and tepid opposition in Syria, that is unlikely to pan out to “Benghazi uprising”. However, this does not deter the warmongers and the imperialists. This is because they have their own patsy in the race to yet another war, enter :
    Abdul-Halim Khaddam, former vice-president to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, who is viewed as an opportunist in Syria, formed the National Committee to Support the Syrian unrest in Paris back in November with as little as 65 members and is now urging British PM David Cameron to help him back into the Syrian politics.

    The opposition organization Khaddam leads wrote in a letter to Cameron that Syria is the main “tool” in the hands of an Irano-Russian coalition, which he described as risky. as carried in PressTV; “UK to make Syria another Libya?”
    So much for the new year, the status is same shit as before, but in the new time continuum.
    PS John Goss, surely everyone has noticed the various ziofuckwit agents assigned to the comments sections of the Indy, Guardian, etc. The keyboard warrior in the Independent displays classic maniacal OCD. These specimens are on a mission, and they are not pro-war, they are at war.

  • John Goss

    Fedup, thanks. I thought comments relating to this blog might have been edited out at the Guardian but I’m happy to say the Havantaclu’s is there as well as mine. Excellent! Goodnight all!

  • Jives

    Sorry but i just can’t read The Grauniad anymore,it nauseates me.Something very bad has occurred there in the last year.I used to be a regular CiF commentator but i can’t visit that site now without getting very angry.
    Seems full of pro-war idiots(probably never known real war up close),sockpuppets and imported hasbara.Really bad.It was never as bad as this before,it now reads like Fox News /Torygraph.I used to link there to this site but i guess they must have the PR Search Engine Optimisation Mafia on the payroll,now employed to manipulate the Recommend button.
    Truly disturbing what’s happened there.

  • OldMark

    Very pleased to see that your FOI requests have borne fruit Craig. Pretty soon after the Act became operative in 2005 Blair had ‘doubts’ about one of NuLab’s best pieces of legislation, and by the time he left office he was convinced he’d made a big mistake on this issue. Your successful probe helps explain why Blair reached such a conclusion.

    I think we should all be watching what happens to the aircraft carrier USS John Stennis (presently in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf) very carefully in the coming weeks…

  • Rocki

    For those questioning no DNA found on the victim with regards the Sandringham case, there is a bizarre Goverment cover-up with the McCanns, (as if you did not know) Forensics ALSO found no DNA of Madeleine McCann even though she had spent 5 days in the apartment in Portugal, it was as though she had never been there. Gerry McCann had to return to Rothley to collect her pillowcase for DNA, now how weird is that ?

  • Soporific

    Good points about the Guardian. I’ve noticed they avoid opening the comments system to Israeli stories and altogether shy away from anything to do with Israel now.

    There would be times when the comments section scheduled for 9am opening, for an article posted online at midnight, would be bombarded with neo con claptrap from one or two suspects who would submit elaborate responses that were posted 1 minute apart at exactly 9am, and of course have 300 recommends on them by 9:15am.

    Craig hinted at a likely dot to this new direction the Guardian was following that Zionist money was sprinkled in front of Rusbridger in a meeting about readership figures.

    Its the one rag I had pride in, shame.

  • boniface goncourt

    Amid all the American dick-waving, do not forget the essential – Iran has captured a U.S. predator drone. Not shot down or deflected, actually software-hacked and landed intact. Which means they have Oybama by the cyberbollox. No war.

    John Goss – ignore leo 999, one of the stupider talmudists injecting hate speech into the Goydian’s cif. In fact you might as well ignore cif altogether, as Jives suggests. It has become no more than hasbara central. All the meaningful posters including me have departed in disgust at the pro-zionist censorship.

    For a useful exposure of the Goydian and its gutless zionist hacks as the ‘thought police of the left’, see Jonathan Cook’s essay ‘The Dangerous Cult of the Guardian’, available at
    http://www.counterpunch.org or http://www.jkcook.net

  • John Goss

    Even for a short time last night I saw the neocon-Zionist brigade on the Guardian comments section ticking one another’s ‘Recommend’ boxes for the most innane comments. Numbers don’t mean a thing. It’s content that matters. Half of these people can only just string a sentence together, and their collective knowledge of history is primary level.
    Soporific, try the Independent.

  • Clanger

    Re. The Guardian ; let’s not forget it as bailed out by Apax Partners a few years ago. They are also chasing the US market and this is reflected in their current news coverage. The CIF pages have not only been flooded with Daily Flail readers but also North Americans. Try using a little irony and you are bombarded with replies about how ill informed you are etc. There also seem to be lots of Zionist trolls pressing the Report button every time Israel, Palastine or Libya are mentioned. I think the Guardian is loathsome for purporting to represent an alternative while slavishly peddling neo-liberal, neo-zionist propaganda. Keep bombarding them with posts, preferably ones that undermine their credibility.

  • John Goss

    If Gus O’Donnell had not retired I would be calling for his resignation. Let’s hope this is the last piece of nasty whitewashing he ever gets chance to do.

  • ingo

    Blast, take it all back, my comment did appear with a link to this story and some 143 approved of it. Are the journo’s fed up with being led by the nose by APAx partners?

  • Rocki

    The Guardian and the likes of Nick Davies and David Leigh can no longer be trusted, (if they ever could that is ) they have no interest in publishing the truth,for if they had Craig’s story would and should be headline news . ALL mainstream media is PR , Propaganda and keeping informationn like Craig has well away from the people.

    This Video claiming Russia and China will get involved if the U.S. touch Iran. I still think this build up is in preparation for the Olymics where something horrific is planned…mainstream media will be the propaganda tool to inflame the public, Murdochs rags are good at that and ‘that’ will be the platform to hit Iran


  • Parky

    and certainly don’t ever pay for the “Zuardian or ZBC” and encourage others to do likewise.

  • Mark Golding - Children of Iraq

    Thankyou for the link. I watched John Rees early this morning on RT. John is correct in his thinking that the West is more concerned about Iran’s influence in the Middle East than it’s nuclear ambitions. To the enlightened here it is clear such concerns can be resolved peacefully around a negotiating table.
    Negotiation is however not an option to the ruling elite whose long term plan has always been to succumb Iran by force and install another puppet regime. The formula worked for Libya by aerial bombardment and empowering opposition groups. So successful was this, Obama has been forced to rule out expensive land armies. The prolonged and catastrophic Afghanistan and Iraq wars may cost two trillion and certainly created the downturn.
    Stop the War is aware that peaceful protest on it’s own does not work in persuading governments to refrain from war. Much more is needed. Consider the paradigm: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing” [Anon] and the lateral paradox of owning everything as opposed to having no rights, even the right to live. An extreme thought but one worth considering when evaluating a strategy to prevent the horrific consequences of a war with Iran and the entity that would exist after the slaughter.
    There is no excuse for our prostration. We have been shown the actions that created a holocaust in Iraq and the senseless of Afghanistan and their aftermaths; now our own reaction is in focus.
    What can we do?

  • Rocki

    What can we do Mark ? Nothing we are powerless and my fears are heightened with the 2012 Olympics.

    Off topic but very much involving the British Goverment, this relates to your reader Craig who questioned DNA…I already explained that no one can understand how a person can spend time in an apartment for five days without leaving a single trace of DNA!!! So I leave you with this post and ask what the hell are the Goverment and the McCanns up to?


  • ingo

    Why wait until the Olympics? the nature of the attack would be to gain an advantage , they don’t need to wait for any pretext.

    It was me who raised the question. It is alledged by the EDP that the Body found, I mean they can extract DNA from just about every organic material, incl. bones, is made from alian material :), as it does not come up with a DNA… never heard so much codswallop.

  • Mary

    email to Guardian re Obama’s proposed military spending cuts
    Posted by emersberger on January 6, 2012, 1:15 pm
    RE http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/05/barack-obama-plans-leaner-military
    Dear Ed Pilkington:
    Your article stated
    “the Pentagon is under orders to slash $487bn from the resources it had expected to receive over the next 10 years, and those cuts could rise to close to $1tn if Congress fails to reach agreement on alternative reductions by January next year.”
    Why would you not add that the US military will receive about $7 trillion over the next 10 years (about $670 billion per year)? That means Obama’s proposal amounts to a 7% cut before even accounting for inflation and “off budget” funding for the military.
    I am very glad you added that
    “the defence budget would continue to be larger than it was at the end of George Bush’s term, and larger than the military spending of the next 10 countries put together.”
    However, you still could have made it much easier for readers to put Obama’s proposal in proportion.
    Joe Emersberger
    The above was on Medialens. To put these ‘cuts’ into some perspective, the US annual expenditure on prescription drugs alone is $240 billion.

  • Jack

    One of the major problems when Zionists cut loose with cries of anti-semitism is that they may yet produce a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they can’t see the difference (or pretend not to) why should anyone else bother? The cancerous influence of Israel on our democratic processes is not just moving us towards another unnecessary and immoral war but steadily polarising populations. If Zionists accuse any and all who oppose them as anti-semitic, then so be it – just as long as they don’t cry in their beer when they’ve forced the whole world into choosing sides against a world Jewish community with whom they need have no quarrel (or is that Israel’s actual intent?)
    We hear occasionally from anti-Zionist Jews – of whom I suspect there are quite a lot. It’s perhaps time they were speaking out a lot more vociferously – they may not be Zionists, but not for the first time they may end up having to deal with the consequences.
    As far as Iran goes, I suspect the major problem may end up being that they’re NOT Iraq and may not be quite the military pushover armchchair warmongers expect. The USA and her vassals got it wrong about Afghanistan and about Iraq. What makes them think it might be any different this time? Assuming of course they even care.

  • anno

    A friend of mine who happens to be black was punched severely by a mob of policemen because he was trying to open his own car by forcing a window. And he was reported by a neighbour who probably knew him.
    In Syria the Muslim citizens are the black guys, and Al-Qaida/ CIA/NATO/ US forces are the policemen. The neighbour is Israel.
    All the Muslims want is to run their own country, in peace with their fellow citizens of other beliefs and affiliations.
    Is it necessary to destroy a society in order to achieve regime change or modification? Assad like Gaddaffi is weak, but armed to the teeth by powerful nations.
    The reality is that the threat of the Arab Spring touching Syria and weakening USUKIS asset Assad is being pre-empted by UKUSIS. Better for them to impose the same as Libya, aggressive Islam with the sweet political face of Iqwan, The Muslim Brotherhood, than allow peace , justice and goodwill to all mankind to break out so close to the malicious neighbour.
    What? peace and goodwill break out in the Holy Land??!! It must be stopped immediately by whatever possible means.

  • anno

    You never know, the nasty political face of Al-Qaida may just be for attracting the attention of our detestable leaders. Underneath, when they are in power, maybe they will change and give the Muslim countries freedom from Western hegemony and henchmen. Assets for UKUSIS, and freedom for the Muslims.
    Maybe UKUSIS are the real suckers in this complex political game.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.