MI6 enters the Labour leadership debate with vintage "Red Smear" piece in the Torygraph

[Paul Rigby]

Is the "deep state" trying to undermine Corbyn?

The denial to me of Commons security clearance and a raft of hostile stories suggests the intelligence services may be working to block the election of a Labour government.

BY ANDREW MURRAY

19 SEPTEMBER 2018

That weekend break in Dnipropetrovsk is off. I have been banned from entering Ukraine. I learned of this edict via the Mail on Sunday, naturally. I was unlikely to be appraised any other way, since I have never sought to go to Ukraine in my life. Doubtless frustrated at being unable to turn down a visa application they were never going to receive, the Kiev authorities simply issued a ban anyway just in case, as it were.

Being prohibited from setting foot in Ukraine will not trouble me particularly. Unlike, for example, Donald Trump's disgraced campaign manager Paul Manafort, I do not need the assistance of an unwitting Ukrainian hairdresser to conduct my tax affairs. Nor was I planning a political visit to a country where the parliamentary speaker is a Hitler admirer and pogromists and Nazi collaborators are national heroes a place where as much as a favourable mention of the Red Army's wartime record risks prosecution.

As for Ukrainian state security service the SBU, its only other claim to distinction this year has been to fake the murder of a journalist, to the distress of his wife and friends, before revealing that he was alive and well a day later. So, no, visiting a land where the morality of the brownshirts meets the methods of the Keystone Cops was not on my to-do list. I may as well be barred from eating celery or listening to the Eagles.

What prompted my appearance on what looks like a British blacklist-of-one maintained by the super-corrupt Poroshenko government? Ostensibly, a speech I made more than four years ago protesting the takeover of Ukraine by ultra-nationalists. So the SBU has not moved fast, but what with deaths to stage, ministerial mobsters to protect, not to mention munificent hairdressers to keep an eye on, it has had other things to do.

The SBU claim is that I am part of "Putin's global propaganda network". For the record (again) I am no admirer of the Putin regime. Those charmed by its authoritarian conservative nationalism are found on the alarmingly well-populated authoritarian conservative nationalist wing of contemporary politics. However, I empathise with those millions of ex-Soviet citizens who found themselves in the "wrong" country when internal boundaries became state frontiers after the dissolution of the USSR and who have since had to live under regimes they didn't want and that often don't want them either. Those who don't understand that tragedy will always be at a loss to explain Putin's popularity in Russia.

Doubtless the Mail on Sunday's interest in this arcana was stimulated by the revelation that I have not been issued with a parliamentary security pass nearly a year after applying for one. Not that such a pass has been denied either the application has been met with stony silence from those who process such things. Now, I would like to go to the House of Commons more than I want to go to Ukraine, but the inconvenience is only that. My role in Jeremy Corbyn's team is advisory, and advice can be tendered from almost anywhere. But the story of the pass-that-isn't fits snugly into the endless agenda of attacks on the Labour leadership.

Thus, the news that I have no Commons security clearance was followed immediately by "revelations" that I have presided at anti-war meetings and made speeches criticising Nato. Pity the poor trainee spook trawling through decades of Stop the War rally videos in the service of the next Mail exclusive. The charge sheet rolls on. I am accused (accurately) of having said that Russia's intervention in the Middle East was "miniscule compared with the serial and disastrous interventions of the Western powers". Hello? Has someone missed the last 15 years the last 250 in fact? There are two issues of substance in all of this. The first is that the establishment at home and abroad deplore Labour's approach to foreign policy more than anything else. They fear the popularity of Corbyn's opposition to war, backing for global human rights and support for the Palestinian cause and their loss of control over the international narrative. The powers-that-be can perhaps live with a renationalised water industry but not, it seems, with any challenge to their aggressive capacities, repeatedly deployed in disastrous wars, and their decaying Cold War world view.

The second is the manoeuvrings of what is now called the "deep state". Call me sceptical if you must, but I do not see journalistic enterprise behind the Mail's sudden capacity to tease obscure information out of the SBU. Yes, they got a copy of an SBU letter allegedly banning me back in June, although it is dated 14 September and does not mention me anyway. Don't publish what you can't read guys!

Someone else is doing the hard work possibly someone being paid by the taxpayer. I doubt if their job description is preventing the election of a Corbyn government, but who knows? We are often told that the days of secret state political chicanery are long past and we must hope so. But sometimes you have to wonder this curiously timed episode seems less rooted in a Kiev security scare than in a political stunt closer to home.

My trouble is that I will have to phone in my advice for now. Senior parliamentary sources tell the Mail they're not speaking to me, by the way that I have "vetting problems". Still, I am not despairing they may yet prove speedier than the SBU. And this much I know: the millions of people headed by Corbyn who were right on Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan when the elite, the security services included, were wrong, are near to office in significant part because of those views. Britain could soon have an anti-war government. Vet that, comrades.

Andrew Murray is chief of staff at Unite and an adviser to Jeremy Corbyn.

[James Lateer]

Since the above quote clearly suggests a link between UK intelligence, Nazi collaborators or Nazi sympathizers and Ukrainian Security Services, I would like to ask people the following:

Has anyone read a book which addresses the question as to when the actual Hitler-associated Nazis relinquished power after World War II? And also, when did their hoard of looted money derived from their role as Nazis under Hitler actually run out? Or did it ever run out?

I know that on 11-22-63, ex-Nazi friend Adolf Huesinger was basically the military head of Nato. And Hans Globke, a close friend of Adenauer (Globke wrote the Nurember Laws) was in control of the German intelligence and German "FBI".

But the actual WWII Nazis would have all died off by now. Who took their place? How and to whom was the baton handed off as they aged off of the scene?

The only book I have read that addresses even part of that question is "The Real Odessa" by Argentinian Uki Goni. But his inquiry was whether those ex-Nazis who lived in Argentina were involved in the fascist regime of the Argentinian Generals from 1976 to the 1980's. He concluded there was no involvement there.

But the ominous re-emergence of Nazi admirers in Ukraine suggests that there has been a continuous link between actual WWII Nazis and the current Nazis who are in partial power in Ukraine. And what about their counterparts in Western intelligence, NATO, etc. etc?

James Lateer

[David Guyatt]

James, if you haven't read Martin Bormann: Nazi in Exile by Paul Manning, I highly recommend you consider doing so. You can download a free .dpf copy at Dave Emory's Spitfire List (HERE).

I would also suggest reading what Emory wrote about Manning and the tribulations he suffered (HERE). He had a follow up book ready to publish titled In Search of Martin Bormann, but in the end this didn't proceed to publication. The reasons are stated below:

Much of his postwar career was devoted to researching the Nazi flight-capital program÷through this research he came to write Martin Bormann: Nazi in Exile. Although his research on Bormann was partially funded by CBS News, the network never "went" with the story. Those who would denigrate his work on the Bormann Organization should carefully weigh their own journalistic credentials against Paul Manning's, in addition to taking into account the research resources accessed in the book.
Manning paid dearly for his efforts. He was actively marginalized, his family suffered the resultant economic hardship. (FTR 145 contains a reading of some of Mr. Manning's correspondence with professional colleagues, discussing the documentary sources utilized for his book, as well as some of the professional difficulties he encountered during his endeavor. Side 1 of FTR 152 is the story of the frustration of the publication of Manning's Bormann book. When Manning was finally able to get Lyle Stuart, Inc. to publish the book, Lyle Stuart had both of his legs broken the week the book was published. FTR 125 is a spontaneous interview with Paul's son Peter, conducted after Peter called Mr. Emory's show. FTR 155 consists of the last published work that Paul did. Both FTR 283, and Side 1 of FTR 152 discuss Mr. Manning's riveting professional dialogue with the Bormann group, through professional intermediaries.) Eventually, Paul's son Gerry was murdered in retribution for the Bormann research, and as a warning against publishing a follow-up volume In Search of Martin Bormann. The "target selection" by the Bormann group for its retribution may well have been determined by the dedication of Martin Bormann, Nazi in Exile. "To my wife, Peg, and to our four sons, Peter, Paul, Gerald and John, whose collective encouragement and belief in this book as a work of historic importance gave me the necessary persistence and determination to keep going."

The bottom line was that the Bormann Brotherhood was enormously rich and used that wealth wisely in investments. Even before the end of WWII they had very hefty investments in leading US stocks and banks as well as in other nations. 750 companies had been established to launder their proceeds and eclipse them from post war investigation.

I would venture the view that they are far wealthier today that in 1945/6. And enormously powerful because of that wealth.

[David Guyatt]

Is the "deep state" trying to undermine Corbyn?

The denial to me of Commons security clearance and a raft of hostile stories suggests the intelligence services may be working to block the election of a Labour government.

BY ANDREW MURRAY

19 SEPTEMBER 2018

That weekend break in Dnipropetrovsk is off. I have been banned from entering Ukraine. I learned of this edict via the Mail on Sunday, naturally. I was unlikely to be appraised any other way, since I have never sought to go to Ukraine in my life. Doubtless frustrated at being unable to turn down a visa application they were never going to receive, the Kiev authorities simply issued a ban anyway just in case, as it were.

Being prohibited from setting foot in Ukraine will not trouble me particularly. Unlike, for example, Donald Trump's disgraced campaign manager Paul Manafort, I do not need the assistance of an unwitting Ukrainian hairdresser to conduct my tax affairs. Nor was I planning a political visit to a country where the parliamentary speaker is a Hitler admirer and pogromists and Nazi collaborators are national heroes a place where as much as a favourable mention of the Red Army's wartime record risks prosecution.

As for Ukrainian state security service the SBU, its only other claim to distinction this year has been to fake the murder of a journalist, to the distress of his wife and friends, before revealing that he was alive and well a day later. So, no, visiting a land where the morality of the brownshirts meets the methods of the Keystone Cops was not on my to-do list. I may as well be barred from eating celery or listening to the Eagles.

What prompted my appearance on what looks like a British blacklist-of-one maintained by the super-corrupt Poroshenko government? Ostensibly, a speech I made more than four years ago protesting the takeover of Ukraine by ultra-nationalists. So the SBU has not moved fast, but what with deaths to stage, ministerial mobsters to protect, not to mention munificent hairdressers to keep an eye on, it has had other things to do.

The SBU claim is that I am part of "Putin's global propaganda network". For the record (again) I am no admirer of the Putin regime. Those charmed by its authoritarian conservative nationalism are found on the alarmingly well-populated authoritarian conservative nationalist wing of contemporary politics. However, I empathise with those millions of ex-Soviet citizens who found themselves in the "wrong" country when internal boundaries became state frontiers after the dissolution of the USSR and who have since had to live under regimes they didn't want and that often don't want them either. Those who don't understand that tragedy will always be at a loss to explain Putin's popularity in Russia.

Doubtless the Mail on Sunday's interest in this arcana was stimulated by the revelation that I have not been issued with a parliamentary security pass nearly a year after applying for one. Not that such a pass has been denied either the application has been met with stony silence from those who process such things. Now, I would like to go to the House of Commons more than I want to go to Ukraine, but the inconvenience is only that. My role in Jeremy Corbyn's team is advisory, and advice can be tendered from almost anywhere. But the story of the pass-that-isn't fits snugly into the endless agenda of attacks on the Labour leadership.

Thus, the news that I have no Commons security clearance was followed immediately by "revelations" that I have presided at anti-war meetings and made speeches criticising Nato. Pity the poor trainee spook trawling through decades of Stop the War rally videos in the service of the next Mail exclusive. The charge sheet rolls on. I am accused (accurately) of having said that Russia's intervention in the Middle East was "miniscule compared with the serial and disastrous interventions of the Western powers". Hello? Has someone missed the last 15 years the last 250 in fact? There are two issues of substance in all of this. The first is that the establishment at home and abroad deplore Labour's approach to foreign policy more than anything else. They fear the popularity of Corbyn's opposition to war, backing for global human rights and support for the Palestinian cause and their loss of control over the international narrative. The powers-that-be can perhaps live with a renationalised water industry but not, it seems, with any challenge to their aggressive capacities, repeatedly deployed in disastrous wars, and their decaying Cold War world view.

The second is the manoeuvrings of what is now called the "deep state". Call me sceptical if you must, but I do not see journalistic enterprise behind the Mail's sudden capacity to tease obscure information out of the SBU. Yes, they got a copy of an SBU letter allegedly banning me back in June, although it is dated 14 September and does not mention me anyway. Don't publish what you can't read guys!

Someone else is doing the hard work possibly someone being paid by the taxpayer. I doubt if their job description is preventing the election of a Corbyn government, but who knows? We are often told that the days of secret state political chicanery are long past and we must hope so. But sometimes you have to wonder this curiously timed episode seems less rooted in a Kiev security scare than in a political stunt closer to home.

My trouble is that I will have to phone in my advice for now. Senior parliamentary sources tell the Mail they're not speaking to me, by the way that I have "vetting problems". Still, I am not despairing they may yet prove speedier than the SBU. And this much I know: the millions of people headed by Corbyn who were right on Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan when the elite, the security services included, were wrong, are near to office in significant part because of those views. Britain could soon have an anti-war government. Vet that, comrades.

Andrew Murray is chief of staff at Unite and an adviser to Jeremy Corbyn.

Shades of the security services dark arts used against Harold Wilson, eh Tooth. These guys never change - even though the faces of the players do.

Considering the vileness of the anti-Jewish lies told by the media about Corbyn - complete lies and fabrications - imagine what it will be like if he actually gets elected? With Wilson there were ongoing plans for a military coup d'etat headed by the bloody awful Lord Louis Mountbatten.