The Deep State Breaks Surface 277


I confess I found it difficult to get worked up about the Cambridge Analytica affair. My reactions was “What awful people. But surely everybody realises that is what Facebook does?”. It seemed to me hardly news, on top of which the most likely outcome is that it will be used as yet another excuse to introduce government controls on the internet and clamp down on dissenting views like those on this website, where 85% of all traffic comes through Facebook or Twitter.

But two nights ago my interest was piqued when, at the height of Cambridge Analytica’s domination of the news cycle, the BBC gave it considerably less airtime than the alcohol abuse problems of someone named Ant. The evening before, the BBC had on Newsnight given the CEO of Cambridge Analytica the most softball interview imaginable. If the BBC is obviously downplaying something, it is usually defending a deep British Establishment interest.

It took me a minute to find out that Cambridge Analytica is owned by a British company, SCL Ltd, which in effect does exactly the same activities in the UK that Cambridge Analytica was undertaking in the US. I then looked up SCL on Bloomberg.

The name which jumped out at me of course was Lord Ivar Mountbatten, direct descendant of Queen Victoria and scion of the family closest friends with that of the UK’s unelected monarch. The only person listed by Companies House as having “significant control” – ie over 25% of the shares – is Roger Gabb, the wine merchant known for large donations to the Tory Party. I have now spoken to people who know him fairly well who, I must note in fairness, universally say he is a kind and very bright man, but with no technical input in the kind of work performed by SCL/Cambridge Analytica.

SCL is as Establishment as a company can get. The most worrying aspect of this is that SCL is paid by the British government to manipulate public opinion particularly in the fields of “Security” and “Defence”, and still more worryingly SCL – this group of ultra Tory money men seeking to refine government propaganda at the expense of you, the taxpayer – is cleared by the MOD to access classified government information.

I then did a news search on google for “Mountbatten” and “SCL” and it brought up zero results from corporate and state media. I then did a wider search not just of news sites, and found this excellent article from Liam O’Hare on Bella Caledonia. It said everything I had been planning to write, and probably says it better. Please do read it. Liam has actually done this to me before, getting there first. I suspect we may be the same person. Come to think of it, I have never seen a photo of us together.

PS Everyone of my generation will remember this joke. “What’s white and flies across the sea at 300mph?” We had a more robust attitude to free speech in the 70’s, and the maudlin deference to the “Royal family” had much less hold on the population.


277 thoughts on “The Deep State Breaks Surface

1 2 3 4 5
  • SA

    So it seems ‘highly likely’ that a UK company with close ties to the Tories and the Government have attempted to manipulate the US elections, rather than the Russians.
    Moreover the concerted Russophobia appears to have been orchestrated over a long term, I wonder whether this was also done by CA?

    • Mochyn69

      Perfidious Albion strikes yet again.

      de Pfeffel is just a retard. No other explanation is possible.

      >

    • Sagittarius Rising

      That is exactly the point.

      Do not forget this, from 17/18 December 2016:

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4044728/Theresa-wants-use-army-computerised-Trump-mind-readers-help-win-Election.html

      Theresa May wants to deploy an army of computerised ‘mind-readers’ to help her win the next Election, sources claim.

      Tory chiefs have been in talks with Cambridge Analytica, the polling data experts credited with playing a key role in Donald Trump’s presidential victory.

      So, the people who made Mr Trump look good were also being considered to make Mrs May look good???? That is what this article looks like, does it not?

      If on the surface, that is what the article is suggesting – that what is good for one is good for the other – this is the tricky bit. Mr Trump was not supposed to win the US Election – Hillary Clinton was ‘supposed’ to – with more than a little help from (altogether now….) Christopher Steele.

      Although the DNC / Fusion links and payments to Mr Steele are not in dispute – which also establishes that one of HM gov’s own former spies tried to interfere in a close ally’s Election, what has been asked in the past couple of days in the US but not reported in the UK is this: – was Christopher Steele ALSO paid by the ‘Russians’ in that same botched attempt to swing things in favour of Hillary, when Mrs May and Mrs Clinton have considerably more in common with each other, that either do with Mr Trump?

      Not ‘Mr Putin’ per se, although it could mean that – but ‘Russians’, or ‘Russian oligarchs’ – i.e. the sort of questionable chaps known to be residing in London.

      http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/20/top-senators-press-doj-on-whether-russian-government-paid-christopher-steele/#.WrFRJwprkPQ.twitter

      If monies can be traced back to ‘Russians’ and Mr Steele – then this would incontrovertibly establish that Mr Steele was not only trying to swing things in Crooked Hillary’s favour (now not so) covertly on behalf of HM gov but that he was doing it with the help of some of his old Russian pals, which if that link became known, would also be understood would point the finger of blame squarely in Mr Putin’s direction.

      Given that Mrs May and Boris J are both inclined to risk causing nuclear war before thinking about things more rationally, they would have believed that people in the UK were just as daft – that if the Russians were blamed for something, that they/we would simply lap it up, like the sheep we are/are not.

      This means that instead of rogue elements of Russian mafia or oligarchs being linked to Christopher Steele, the DNC campaign etc, most people would likely assume that if Russia was linked in any way – that this would ensure Mr Putin and the Russian government was cited as being the source of that interference.

      As some suggestions have been made that could link the events of Salisbury to the Russian mafia or Russian oligarchs, if the same is now being asked in the US i.e. were rogue Russian elements paying Mr Steele (as well) when he wrote his dodgy Trump dossier, the common denominator in both scenarios would be Russian oligarchs, or Russian mafia – not ‘Russia’ or Mr Putin.

      Who would most gain from accusing Mr Putin and Russia? Not the US – not when they are already indicting Mr Steele for his actions and are seeking dialogue with the Russians.

      It is the UK who would most gain from accusing ‘Russia’, or having the world view ‘Russia’ as guilty of something it is not guilty of.

      Mr Skripal’s daughter Yulia is engaged to someone high up in the Kremlin heirarchy, whose family is not pleased that he is due to marry a traitor’s daughter. Mr Steele, Mr Skripal’s old handler would know and understand this better than most.

      Perhaps what happened is that as a means to placate the Kremlin, Yulia made known that actually, it was HM gov behind the Trump dossier, not only the aspect which is not in dispute (i.e. the payments via Fusion etc) but if Mr Steele was also paid by the Russian mafia, or Russian oligarchs, as is now being suggested in the US – then this would be known would likely point the finger straight at Mr Putin – even if it was later realised that it was not Mr Putin who was to blame but rogue Russian elements working on behalf of HM gov who wished to implicate Mr Putin.

      Perhaps Yulia, or more likely her father, who is known to have had contacts with his former colleagues (Russian intelligence) of late, made it known to Mr Putin that rogue elements of the Russian mafia had agreed to pay Mr Steele (also) – as a means to implicate Mr Putin?

      This would then suggest that the Russian government would know that our own gov was directly behind interfering in the US election of 2016, as well as (the unknown aspect) UK gov being responsible for the allegations which have also emerged, that would suggest that Russia meddled in those elections also – when in actual fact, it is much more likely that HM gov acted in ways so as to make it look like it was the Russians wot dunnit, rather than them who did.

      The common denominator in all instances is Christopher Steele.

      As Mr Skripal and his daughter were then attacked in some way – this *could* imply that it was indeed our own gov who covertly targetted them, if they realised that Mr Skripal had informed Moscow as to who was actually behind the smears of both Mr Trump and supposed Russia collusion in the US Election of 2016.

      After all, why else would HM gov be going out of its way to protect Mr Steele now? It would also explain why Mr Trump is seemingly not unduly concerned that a nerve agent attack was carried out on British soil, if he telephoned Mr Putin to congratulate him on his recent landslide election victory, just a few weeks after that supposed attack took place. Odd behaviour if an attack on an ally really did take place.

      Then there is the policeman – who almost certainly got caught up in that which he should not have, hence a story being fabricated so as to explain his botched involvement.

      Last but not least, there is this news article from Friday 2 March 2014 – just two days before the events of Salisbury began to unfold:-

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5452695/British-MI5-agents-allowed-commit-crimes.html

      • saluspopuli.org

        SR, interesting. Putin divided the oligarchs. Those who would support him and the Russian state were let off the hook. Those who would not support the Russian state but rather subvert it he put in jail or otherwise disciplined or tried to but they still operate against the Russian state. Logically, Western governments opposed to Putin and the Russian state support the latter set of oligarchs. Some of the oligarchs also have citizenship in Israel.

        CA first supported Cruz owing to Robert Mercer’s interest in Cruz. Cruz is a fully neoconized Republican. He was born in Canada and held Canadian citizenship until forced to drop it owing to critcism in US. His father is a Fundamentalist preacher. Cruz, being fully neoconized, is an ardent supporter of Israel, anti Russia, anti Iran. Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson bankrolled Cruz. But when things began to shift toward Trump, Mercer then later Adelson shifted to Trump. Although Trump is pro-Israel has has not been fully neoconized despite a strong effort. Trump come from the pragmatic business world. So he is willing to try to make a deal, ie engage in constructive diplomacy, with Russia. This runs contrary to what powerful international interests want.

        If the GRU wanted Skripal and his daughter dead, arguably they would be dead. Public spectacle of them in supposed death throws on a park bench would not seem to be the most prudent method.

        Assuming that the Skripals were poisoned, it would seem they could well have been silenced in order to tidy up the Steele dossier case. We dont yet know their location or condition. Perhaps, if it is all an elaborate hoax, they will be given new identities and relocated somewhere. On the other hand, if they were fatally poisoned some might think it advisable to let them pass from the scene. They are expendable.

        • Sagittarius Rising

          Salus,

          My own sense is that what may have started as a small lie morphed into a much bigger one once it was revealed (DNC / Fusion etc), which then meant that an ever greater lie had to be perpetuated as a means to continue that bluff.

          After all, who amongst us would be willing to literally accuse a serving Prime Minister of faking all the events in Salisbury? Indeed, even if someone was willing to do just that – exactly how does one accuse a serving Prime Minister? Is it even possible? Not least, as it would be perfectly well understood that the burden is on the accuser to prove that guilt. How then could that be achieved – even if many sensible people already understand we are being taken for a ride, none more so than the Russians.

          So, even if someone did do just that – they would likely die of shock first, or be arrested for making such ‘wild accusations’.

          This has just appeared on twitter:-

          https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/976812095118479361

          The link referred to in the above tweet is much more in depth about Christopher Steele’s links to Russian oligarchs than I was able to allude to earlier – there are quite a number of replies to the thread as well.

          http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/21/russian-oligarchs-lawyer-refuses-to-divulge-what-he-knows-about-russian-payments-to-steele/

      • SA

        SR
        Very complicated. But what seems to be clear is that MI6 appears to train agents who are then on discharge go on to do other ‘commercial activities, for example James Le Mesurier and the white helmets and Steele and probably people in CA. This all seems to be privatised or outsourced clandestine activity to be at arms length from official channels for the purpose of ‘plausible deniability” and to act as the fall guys when things go wrong.

        • Sagittarius Rising

          SA,

          Exactly. Did you see the Alexander Yakovenko press conference at lunch-time today? He mentioned the White Helmets by name and their links to Al Nusra, very calmly stating that they are a UK State sponsored NGO.

      • lysias

        The head of GCHQ resigned one week after Trump’s inauguration last year. For “personal reasons” after two years in office.

        • Sagittarius Rising

          lysias,

          Thank you for making that known. I believe it was you who posted that comment a couple of days ago also – I apologise for not thanking you at the time. It was one snippet that evaded my vast appetite for seemingly unrelated detail.

          • SA

            Looking at seemingly unrelated happenings is wise. Sometimes the relationships surface after a long time.

  • Sagittarius Rising

    re: SCL Forgive me if I am repeating what has already been posted. If a search is conducted on ‘Strategic Communications Laboratories’ instead of ‘SCL’, different results come up – so despite ‘Strategic Communications Laboratories’ being one and the same as SCL, different results do seem to emerge depending on the explicit search criteria used (on google chrome):-

    http://powerbase.info/index.php/Strategic_Communication_Laboratories

    This link suggests that SCL goes back to at least 1993.

    What is also interesting is that a whole host of names are listed on the above link, like so:-

    Board of Directors
    circa 2012
    The Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Pattie was listed as president of SCL Group [24] in September 2012. Companies House records show that he was a director of SCL Group between November 2005 and 1 December 2008. [25]
    Nigel Oakes Chief Executive Officer
    Alex Oakes Director
    Alexander Nix Director
    Roger Gabb Director
    Julian Wheatland Director and Chairman [24]
    Rear Admiral John G Tolhurst CB FRAeS Advisory Board
    The Rt. Hon. Sir James Mitchell Advisory Board
    John Bottomley FCIS Company Secretary
    Ian Tunnicliffe Director of Information Operations: ‘SCL’s information director is colonel Ian Tunnicliffe, a former strategic communications expert at Britain’s Defense ministry, who also served with the Office of Strategic Communications run by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Baghdad.'[26]
    Dr Andrew Stewart Advisory Board
    Lord Birdwood Advisory Board
    Lord Ivar Mountbatten Advisory Board
    Professor Phil Taylor BA PhD – Behavioural Dynamics Institute Advisory Board
    Gavin McNicoll Advisory Board [27] [28]
    David Michaels, Senior Adviser, Advisory Board [29]
    Former Directors
    Peter Varnish was listed as a member of the Advisory board in December 2005.[30]
    Known staff
    Mark Broughton, public affairs director (in 2005) [31]
    Alexis Everington, Marketing Manager.[32]
    Scherzando Karasu, Director of Political Affairs (as of January 2010)
    Shareholders
    Circa 2006
    Several of the company directors hold shares in the company and there are a number of non-executive shareholders. In early 2006 it was reported that the Iranian born London property tycoon Vincent Tchenguiz had acquired 23 per cent of Strategic Communications Laboratories,[33] and in May that year the investment company Viatrade PLC bought a small stake. Conservative Party treasurer and venture capitalist Jonathan Marland also holds shares, as does his company Herriot Ltd.

    The company’s latest Annual Returns[34] (made up to 20 July 2006) list the following shareholders. They are arranged in descending order according to their share allocation.

    Name: Consensus Business Group, 18 Upper Grosvenor Street, London W1K 7PW :Shares held: 22,533
    Name: Nigel Oakes :Shares held: 14,849
    Name: Roger Gabb :Shares held: 11,266
    Name: R M Gabb, M A Gabb and M J Thompson as Trustees of the Glendower Settlement :Shares held: 11,266
    Name: Share Nominees Ltd on behalf of the Fund :Shares held: 9,013
    Name: Alexander Waddinton Oakes :Shares held: 7,429
    Name: CMTC Nominees BV (registered to an address in Curacao, Netherlands Antilles) :Shares held: 6,253
    Name: Paul David Ashburner Nix:Shares held: 5,633
    Name: Alexander James Ashburner Nix :Shares held: 5,249
    Name: Jonathan Peter Marland :Shares held: 563
    Name: Viatrade PLC :Shares held: 507
    Name: Herriot Ltd :Shares held: 338
    Name: S Marland & P Addington as Trustees of J P Marland’s child. :Shares held: 225
    Name: Harry Rollo Gabb Shares held: 10

    As a perhaps peculiar postscript, I copied and pasted the text of the powerbase data listing for Strategic Communications Laboratories into an email and sent it to myself for posterity a couple of days ago. My copied version was last updated on 20 March 2018 which is clearly shown within the body of the text of the email, whereas the last update on the powerbase listing now says 21 March 2018 i.e. it is 24 hours newer. The only discernible difference to this being that on my version, there is no number 41 at the end.

    My version only goes upto number 40. I looked at my version and the newer version to compare, to see if I had missed the end off mine – which I had not. Mine goes upto 40 and the newer version includes 41. In the newer version, publicly available via the link above, number 41 states that the ‘Partners’ communication being referred to was accessed on April 19 2010.

    Either I am going completely potty, or the suggestion that no:41 was last accessed on April 19 2010 cannot be possible when number 41 only appeared after 20 March 2018 and before today, 22 March 2018 given that it is dated 21 March 2018 still.

    • Sagittarius Rising

      P.S.

      My number 40 is what is now showing as number 41.

      If or when I can fathom out what has been altered in-between, I will add another note.

      • Sagittarius Rising

        Got it!

        This text is what is not in my earlier email version:-

        “Companies House SCL Group, last accessed 21 March 2018”

        The above line is showing as number 25 (the number itself for reasons that are unclear is not also able to be copied). How and why this line of text has been inserted where it has, rather than at the end as number 41, I do not know.

        It confused me mightily even if the explanation is a simple one as it seems odd to add something in the middle and not at the end, if putting it where it is implies it has been there longer than it has.

  • Barden Gridge

    Good to see that, at a time of grave crisis in Salisbury, the leader of Wiltshire Council’s first thought was to clock into the House of Lords:

    http://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/16106168.Council_leader_was_at_House_of_Lords_while_too_ill_to_visit_Salisbury_after_nerve_agent_attack/

    A major incident was declared in Salisbury on the Monday (counter-terrorism unit involved as of the evening before).
    The leader of Wiltshire Council has told the Salisbury Journal:

    ‘“I probably went to London that Monday,” she said. “I didn’t know anything at the time, nothing was known.”’

    The SJ continues:
    ‘She was in London again on the Tuesday, but said she “probably came home very ill”, and on the Wednesday she said she went straight to the office of a minister, whom she would not name, to discuss the Salisbury incident.’

  • SA

    A coverup is underway. The Information commissioner announced publicly that she would like to raid the offices of Cambridge Analytica. A high court Judge (can anyone find out who it is?) then adjourned the hearing until Friday. Meanwhile removal vans were seen removing crates of stuff from the offices of CA. When the IC arrives tomorrow they will find an empty office and of course no evidence of wrongdoing.

  • meric

    One British journalist who has investigated the two companies and their leaders also suggested that the real trail of questions leads to Oakes.
    “Alexander Nix has been suspended from a shell company that has no employees and no assets,” said Carole Cadwalladr of the Observer, who authored last weekend’s expose, and others. “If you think this ends here, think again.”
    https://www.politico.eu/article/cambridge-analytica-facebook-data-boss-nigel-oakes-alexander-nix-went-from-aromatics-to-psyops-to-donald-trumps-campaign/

    • Mark Russell

      What a squalid business. Makes you wonder if HMG knew the SCL/CA operations and personnel were about to be exposed. Interesting thing with the Salisbury incident..

    • SA

      Interesting though that this politico article still tries to implicate Russia in election meddling when in fact it may be Ukraine.
      “Nix appears to tell a journalist posing as a potential client that the company could, for instance, send Ukrainian sex workers to an opponent’s house to sabotage him.”

  • Ilya G Poimandres

    Have to follow the Swiss and make the system of government semi-democratic. At least people should be able to strike laws they don’t want to be governed by. Would get rid of this stuff pretty quickly.

  • Dave Edwards

    Well, we can’t say we weren’t warned. It’s easy to get bogged down in isolated scandals but this has been going on for 127 years………………

    Carroll Quigley documented all of the Networks workings in 1966 and being well respected at the time he was given access to information that you would have thought they would want to keep secret. Perhaps they were so proud of what they were achieving they wanted someone to write a book about it???
    The problem was, that being a professor, the 1300 page book ended up so dry that hardly anyone would have the dedication to read it, let alone understand all the interconnections of the parties involved.
    The issues that are being exposed today have a long history going back to 1891 when Cecil Rhodes organised a secret society which evolved into The Round Table Movement.
    In an earlier post I mentioned Tragedy and Hope 101 which I am about to start again in the light of recent events.
    The author, Joseph Plummer, explains why he felt the need to write his version here. Only 7 minutes.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIpAyA318yg

    Coming in at 200 pages, it is a great piece of work. Well done Joe.
    It should be compulsory reading for anyone coming up to voting age.
    And to the rest of us that are of voting age……..I wouldn’t bother. Democracy is an illusion.

    Read the UK Amazon reviews to learn more about Tragedy and Hope 101 and better order a copy fast.
    It’s 44,532 in Amazon’s best seller list. Today’s number one is probably Ant and Dec, the true story.

    • N_

      That sounds good, if he can précis Quigley!

      For those who are in a hurry, I’ll mention the importance Quigley ascribes to the central bankers’ central bank, the Bank of International Settlements, based in Geneva. They are also a major ratings agency, even though they rarely get mentioned alongside Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch.

  • N_

    That plonker of a British Foreign Secretary has been comparing the 2018 World Cup to the 1936 Olympics. He’d better be careful, because if he jeopardises or ruins a contract of that size, some rather powerful types are going to get annoyed with him. I suspect that after servicing his nose, he is just shooting his mouth off from the hip. Then again, the British elite seems to be egging on the elites of other European countries to kick Russian diplomats out, so they may also be encouraging Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and whoever else is good at football in western and central Europe to leave the World Cup. That would I am certain require lots of large payments to be made. As they say, “good luck with that”. Of course the whole issue becomes moot if WW3 has already started by then.

    The 1936 Olympics are interesting. That event is one of those things that everyone thinks they know about, when actually what they do know is patchy and vague, apart from two facts that nobody disputes: 1) the new Nazi German regime used the event to showcase itself, and 2) a black athlete from the still largely segregationist US, Jesse Owens, won a lot of medals.

    As I understand it, there was in existence a Palestine National Olympics Committee, which was a front for the (J**ish, Z**nist) Maccabi World Union. Since 1932 the MWU has run the Maccabiah Games, in which J**ish athletes from many countries compete, an event sometimes non-pejoratively called the “J**ish Olympics”. This organisation was asked to participate in the 1936 Berlin Olympics but, for reasons I don’t know, they refused. I’d be interested to find out, because it was around 1935 or 1936 that the Nazis stopped supporting Z**nism, i.e. the movement for the creation of a J**ish state in Palestine. Could it be that Germany asked the PNOC to compete but only under a J**ish label and not a Palestinian one? I don’t know the answer to that question, which is why I ask it. It is known that they were asked to compete.

    • jazza

      Johnson is also claiming that applications for visas to Russia are down by two thirds from the same applications for the Brazil world cup – except no visas were necessary for Brazil

  • N_

    Just what kind of trouble are the royal family in? The Daily Mail is reporting about Prince Charles’s boyfriend Michael Fawcett, the man who the late George Smith accused of raping him, including in a taped interview he gave to Princess Diana.

    In the past, stories have included tell of how Prince Charles has said that he “cannot live without” Fawcett, and that he relies on Fawcett to “squeeze his toothpaste” for him. Almost any article about Fawcett is full of innuendo. Private Eye once wrote that he pronounces his name “Force it”.

    The Daily Mail reports today that “in the Prince’s eyes, (Fawcett) could do no wrong”, and that “Fawcett would stand behind Charles waiting for orders”. I’m surprised they don’t write that “the Prince” and Fawcett enjoy mash for their dinner and spending afternoons gardening uphill.

    Needless to say, in the bitchy environment of a British “royal” household, Fawcett has found someone to fall out with, namely Robert Higdon, a regional figure in Prince Charles’s business machine the head of Prince Charles’s “charity foundation” in the US.

    Fawcett was once in line to be the main “event organiser” at the Athens Olympics, and remember that Prince Charles’s sister Anne was involved in the London Olympics and she sits on the International Olympic Committee. Olympics…mmmmm…lots of “charity”… We are supposed to assume that these British types are ever so squeaky clean, when nobody would think so if they were Paraguayan, Spanish, Chinese, or Russian – which is a measure of just how thin the ice is that they walk on. One day it’s going to collapse. That day could be soon.

    Anyway, according to the lovely Daily Mail, Prince Charles “gave Fawcett (a) free hand in organising entertainment for super-rich donors”.

    The “free hand” thing appeals to British journalists’ sense of humour, but it’s also meant to distance Prince Charles from whatever dirt – and we are talking about “entertainment” for the super-rich – may soon attach to Fawcett.

    The following paragraphs give a taste of royal household life:

    He knew precisely how to please him. When the Prince arranged to have a dinner for donors in Hong Kong, for instance, Fawcett shipped over a full set of eighteenth-century china and glasses from England. He also brought a set of special bells used by Charles to summon his staff.

    Minutes before the American guests arrived, there would often be farcical scenes. Each man would grab at name cards on the Prince’s table to move them either nearer to his seat or further away. In the case of Eva Rausing, the American wife of the Swedish billionaire Hans Rausing, their argument became particularly unseemly.

    (We all know where you’ve been!”

    “Ooh, I’ll claw your eyes out!“)

    Higdon had originally persuaded Rausing to support Charles’s charities. At one American dinner, however, he’d discovered that Fawcett had placed her next to Charles, apparently in exchange for a donation of £500,000, thus outdoing the American woman whom Higdon had promised could sit next to the Prince for $250,000.

    Who are these “super-rich donors”? Are any of them Russian mafia?

    The Rausing connecting is well-known.

    Another who is named is the US banker John Studzinski. He combats human trafficking apparently. Sounds like an ideal contact for Ivar Mountbatten and co. and Helen Windsor’s ex-boyfriend at SCL in making sure that the “Ukrainian girls” they supplied around the world were all properly kite-marked, wouldn’t you say? Everything above board and shipshape. Nothing untoward going on. All “compliance” boxes duly ticked.

    • Republicofscotland

      Lets not forget the last British viceroy of India, he wasn’t known as Dickie for nothing – Richard wasn’t one of his given names.

    • Sagittarius Rising

      N

      How do you alter the fonts and italics etc for the text in your posts? I have not fathomed out how to do that in this forum. Please do not come back with a – just hit this button, or I shall feel really idiotic. What secret ruse are you using that is invisible to me/the rest of us?

  • Billy Bostickson

    Come on, get off bloody Internet, you keyboard warriors, I want you lot down there NOW on a 24 hour picket outside 55 New Oxford St

    4 hours ago “The London headquarters of the embattled political consultancy Cambridge Analytica was evacuated because of a suspicious package. Police were … The road has just Been cornered off due to a bomb threat or suspicious package or something like that”

    Cover-up!

    “The Information commissioner announced publicly that she would like to raid the offices of Cambridge Analytica. Meanwhile removal vans were seen removing crates of stuff from the offices of CA. When the IC arrives tomorrow they will find an empty office and of course no evidence of wrongdoing”

    If the left had balls, there would be mass pickets outside CA Offices, with Removal van Drivers being identified and questioned.
    “What’s inside those crates, Comrade?” “Right, Lads, let’s offload this lot and put a guard on it”. The Tories are only as strong as we make them, and that goes for their poodles in the Met too. People Power has worked in many countries and on many diverse occasions. What we need is more balaclavas and steel capped DMs and less Tweets and Liberal PC bullshit.

    • N_

      @Billy – What was the name of the High Court judge who adjourned the hearing of the ICO’s application for a search warrant? And what was the reason given?

      The government is on the run. When shadow digital minister Liam Byrne said it was “ludicrous” that a search warrant had still not been obtained by the ICO, culture secretary Matt Hancock replied that there’s currently a bill before Parliament. So what?

      What’s the bewigged f***er’s name, and what reasons did he give for himself? Somebody very influential is calling the shots here. They are humiliating the British executive branch in the centre of London.

  • N_

    Link to the Daily Mail article about the trouble in “the Prince’s” household.

    (The bits “We all know where you’ve been” and “I’ll claw your eyes out” were added by me and weren’t in the Daily Mail. Just to be clear 🙂 )

  • N_

    Go for it, Billy! And while you’re there, could you have a look at No.5 New Oxford Street too? It’s a den of Steinerites. Any traffic between no.5 and no.55, please expose!

  • crispin hythe

    FWIW Sky News is marginally better than BBC#lies. After these two, get the reality on RT, the only one [eg] to remind us that dozens of Grenfell families are still stacked in squalid BnB lodgings, when the money spent on that could have built THREE NEW GRENFELL TOWERS.
    Incredible in a murder case, the propaganda media pay NO attention to the Salisbury victims. Who is Yulia, what does she do, what was her dad doing for the last 8 yrs in UK,…? We see just one photo of the pair, in the pub before lunch. WHO is the man taking the photo, visible in the mirror? The key player in this murder case is not the victims but the weapon itself….as if all you need to know in a gangland slaying is what a Glock 9 looks like. In fact the victims’ fate is irrelevant, once the sheeple have learned to bleat ‘Russia…nerve gas…’.

    • Steve Goodwin

      A somewhat specious argument from RT. Where are “Grenfell families” supposed to stay while the THREE NEW GRENFELL TOWERS are being built?

  • Sal Newton

    I note that the establishment all seem to be keen to jump into the Facebook bad bandwagon. Possibly to deflect the story away from the people who bought and used the data to manipulate public opinion in favour of the same establishment. Yes, Facebook had a serious data breach, but the subsequent shady stuff is far more worrying and anti-democratic.

  • Robert Smith

    Well Craig may be new to details of Cambridge Analytica’s modus operandi, and makeup, but not I. Or anyone who had been able to break surface from their Cambridge Analytican abled incubated right or left “subgroup” – as Prof Jonathan Albright helpfully explains – in detail in his 523 page Medium article, that exposed all the Facebook shenanigans in the first place – and over a year ago – why the CA “propaganda machine” is so succesful “The Great British Brexit Robbery” by Carole Cadwalladr, first alerted me to Albright’s work. And that of Prof David Carroll who is leading on the legal challenges against CA. Open Democracy’s Adam Ramsay’s “Who are Veterans For Britain”.again is light years ahead of this blog’s findings.Then @textifire’s “A Special Relationship & The Birth of Cambridge Analytica” would add even more detail if needed. That he penned 18 moths ago. And yes it’s an old etonian,old boys network. BUT …..and here’s the important bit that some left wingers HATE to acknowledge. It’s all coordinated alongside the oligarchy and monies of Russia. Final credit’s have to go to indy journalist’s Wendy Siegelman and her group. And Scot M Stedman and his work. They are breaking stories so important DAILY, while Craig does the occasional fart. Catch up old boy.

  • N_

    IMPORTANT<
    Amber Rudd, Home Secretary, got an order from the Court of Protection today, 22 March, to permit the OPCW to take new blood samples from Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal.

    There were hearings on Monday, Tuesday, and today. They were held in private.

    Evidence was given by Porton Down scientists and by officials from the Home Office and FCO.

    The Official Solicitor was accepted as the "litigation friend" of both of the Skripals. The judge ruled that "given nature of the issues raised in the case and the gravity of the situation I conclude that both Mr and Ms Skripal should be joined as parties and that the Official Solicitor should be appointed as Litigation Friend to each of them." (Surely this is a breach of the Vienna Convention? They must have family, surely?)

    Final point of the judgment:

    *******************
    i) Mr Skripal lacks capacity to make a decision as to the provision of blood samples, the testing of blood samples and disclosure of medical notes

    ii) Ms Skripal lacks capacity to make a decision as to the provision of blood samples, the testing of blood samples and disclosure of medical notes

    iii) That it is lawful for Salisbury NHS Trust to take blood samples for provision to OPCW and to provide copies of medical notes to OPCW

    iv) That it is in the best interests of Mr Skripal and Ms Skripal for the samples to be taken, tested and the notes provided
    *******************

    Name of judge: David Basil Williams. He's also a director of Children and Families Across Borders.

  • J

    Liam says:

    Great to see my article/thread on deep Tory links to Cambridge Analytica/SCL being so widely shared. Should say that I wouldn’t have been able to collate it so quickly without the groundwork already done by @Spinwatch.

    https://twitter.com/Liam_O_Hare/status/976462752922456065

    Credit where it’s due. The redoubtable Spinwatch director David Miller also wrote A Century of Spin with William Dinan, the best overview of corporate propaganda, or of how we got where we are that I’ve read.

  • Node

    If you were to hire a firm like Cambridge Analytica to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency, they would construct a campaign very similar to this slow drip exposé of Cambridge Analytical which is undermining Donald Trump’s presidency.

    Just sayin’

    • Mark Russell

      Aye…what a wicked web, huh? This has some way to run yet, but the implications for HMG and the British Establishment are staggering. Don’t want to get too excited, but these events over the last two weeks could well seal the end of Empire once and for all.

      • Ben

        End of Empire leads to what?

        Marx’s dialectic of perpetual paradise?

        What would Putin say..?

  • N_

    Good news: police officer Nick Bailey has left hospital.

    Will he be giving a sample to the OPCW?

    The judge says with gobsmacking disingenuity that “(t)he hospital has not been approached by anyone known to the patients to enquire of their welfare.” Well if the FCO had kept the Consulate informed, the Consulate could no doubt have found some of the Skripals’ family members! It is disgrace that the Official Solicitor has acted as their “litigation friend” without the Consulate being informed or family members being sought.

  • TomGard

    BBC, less than an hour ago:

    quote:
    The court, which hears issues affecting the welfare of sick or vulnerable people, has given doctors permission to take blood samples from the Skripals to send to chemical weapons experts.
    Delivering the ruling, Judge Williams said: “Medical tests indicate that their mental capacity might be compromised to an unknown and so far unascertained degree.”
    unquote

    It was not in the headlines, that’s why I bring it up. This might or might not mean, that giving earlier samples to the OPCW is legalized, but it should definitly mean, that the “findings” of Porton Down, which OPCW is up to “independently verify”, didn’t include blood samples of the Skripals (though perhaps of Det Sgt Nick Bailey). And how is OPCW to verify the origin of samples presented to them?
    The sentence to the possible mental state of the victims is beyond sensible comment. The inquisition courts 500+ years ago didn’t worse – or better, if you prefer to put it like this.

    • fred

      “And how is OPCW to verify the origin of samples presented to them?”

      Presumably the OPCW doctors will be present when new samples are taken then DNA analysis will verify the original samples.

      • TomGard

        “Possibly”, not “presumably”, because the russian ambassador was denied any access to Yulia or her medical records, against british obligations of Vienna Convention.

        And even if, blood samples 18 days after the fact, whatever the fact was, are presumably useless.

        • fred

          Britain is under no obligation to supply Russia with anything.

          OPCW have been given access to the original samples.

          One has to wonder about people who refuse to trust British analysts but are eager to trust Russian analysts.

          Two tweets on the Foreign Office twitter feed today.

          “Analysis by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down made clear that this was a military-grade Novichok nerve agent produced in Russia. Porton Down is OPCW-accredited and designated laboratory”

          “We have no information to suggest that this agent could have been produced anywhere else except Russia. Novichok is a group of agents developed only by Russia and not declared under the CWC.”

          They aren’t beating about the bush they seem pretty certain about it.

          • Ben

            “One has to wonder about people who refuse to trust British analysts but are eager to trust Russian analysts.”

            It is a quandary Fred.

            Has anyone other than you compiled the positive stats?

          • TomGard

            “One has to wonder about people who refuse to trust British analysts but are eager to trust Russian analysts.”

            You may wonder, but as an answer to me it is libel. I would block you for that..

          • Ben

            “You may wonder, but as an answer to me it is libel. I would block you for that..”

            Your case would be extremely weak.

          • Republicofscotland

            “One has to wonder about people who refuse to trust British analysts but are eager to trust Russian analysts.”

            What about British doctors, or doctor in this case, who categorically stated that, no nerve agent was found.

        • TomGard

          Just for the record: you find metabolites mostly in the blood liquid, thats where they are meant to be. So you can extract the blood cells of a sample and dote another sample with the liquid. That’s why documentation is the core of every step of an investigation.

    • Republicofscotland

      When Litvenenko was attacked, we saw many images of him hooked up to medical machines via tubes etc.

      However we haven’t see one piccy of Skripal or his daughter or the police officer for that matter.

      It not like the British establishment to miss a propaganda trick unless, things aren’t what they seem.

      In which case Skripal and his daughter will be under lock and key in some reinforced oubliette. Showing no signs of nerve agent poisoning, reaffirmed by Dr Davis, of Sailbury District hospital.

      • fred

        It wouldn’t be legal to publish pictures of Skripal or his daughter without their permission. Litvenko must have given his consent for photographs to be taken.

        • Republicofscotland

          No his wife gave permission, however if there’s only Skirpal and his daughter and no one else “family wise” then, I’m surprised that the British propaganda state media machine the BBC hasn’t posted any pictures.

          Unless as I said earlier, any pictures of them would quickly be debunked as not having suffered a nerve agent attack.

      • john Brown

        Might just have been because he was conscious and gave consent which the unfortunate Skripals cannot do.Oh but that spoils your conspiracy theory. I think all Brits wish Scotland was a Republic and we were well rid of you.

        • Neil Anderson

          Might have been, might not have been.

          Is that what you think? Were it were true, I’d take that thanks very much. Goodbye, dear oh dear old Blighty.

  • knuckles

    So to recap;

    Cambridge Analytica worked with and won the election for Trump*. And on the other side, Steele (Orbis) worked with and lost the election for Clinton**.

    The British regime and their spooks cover all the angles. And yes it is a dirty, despicable REGIME.

    By the way, the faux outrage in the MSM regarding CA’s connection to the Trump and Brexit win is one big, giant dead cat. The real scandal is what CA did across eastern Europe, Africa, Latin America, ME and Asia. Blood on their hands (not that they care). Channel 4 gave a snapshot of their activities during the Kenyan elections. Transfer that MO to every other country the operate in. If its burning down, they are not far away. They create carnage for money.

    *Initial worked/aligned with Ted Cruz who was favourite for the Rep. nominee.
    **Orbis didn’t ”lose” it for her, but their dirty dose didn;t work obviously.

    • Bob Apposite

      WikiLeaks worked with Cambridge Analytica, clearly.
      As did the IRA.

      The Steele Dossier was never deployed during the Election.
      And it started as a “Cruz” thing.

      • Bob Apposite

        I don’t care what weak protestations Craig offers.

        It’s very clear that WikiLeaks knowingly provided cover for the “fake news” from Cambridge Analytica, that appears to have been signal boosted by the IRA.

    • saluspopuli.org

      K. Good points. The Steele Pee Dossier although HC lost has been used to destabilize the Trump administration by the Deep State elements at FBI and Justice etc. The dossier was used as part of the information the FBI used to obtain FISA surveillance warrants on Trump campaign people. The dossier has been used by Establishment newsmedia to propel anti Russia meme. The dossier was used as part of the basis for Mueller Special.Counsel destabilization op.

      The fundamental point is the destabilization of the Trump admin so as to prevent US Russia cooperation…in the Middle East and so on.

      • Bob Apposite

        Nonsense.

        If Russia wanted US-Russia cooperation, they wouldn’t have to destabilize the American government to get it.

        They had our cooperation with Gorbachev. All they have to do was be friendly, positive, honest, cooperative.

        Attacking us is not cooperation.
        The Russia is at war with the U.S.
        It’s as simple as that.

  • knuckles

    Next weeks PMQ’s –

    —————————-
    Corbyn – Joe Public would like to ask the following; Can the Prime Minister confirm what part Cambridge Analytica played in the previous 2 year smear campaign against a one Jeremy Corbyn? Thank you.

    May – I can confirm funding for the NHS and Schools has increased by 10 Trillion bitcoins…………
    —————————–

    MSM shills – May destroys Corbyn at PMQ’s again……….

  • Dave Edwards

    Hmmm. In the business section of the BBC. Note the number of comments. Don’t read them for the sake of your own sanity!

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43489462

    So, we can now draw the conclusion that if the story relates to suspicious government policy then the BBC does not open a comments section where people could criticise it.
    They do however open a comments section if it can get the masses bickering amongst themselves, so as you can see the above BBC article has over 4300 comments already.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.