Liam Fox returns! Sacked over Israeli MoD agent Werritty

[TonyGosling]

Armed Forces morale 'badly damaged'

(UKPA) – Thursday 16th November 2010
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hnFMPwFtoEaw4fR -iDcGrhDVJLJg?docId=N0131991290034365230A

The confidence and morale of Britain's Armed Forces has been "badly damaged" by the Government's handling of the defence review, according to a leaked Ministry of Defence document.

Defence Secretary Liam Fox said the document - seen by the Daily Telegraph - was an unauthorised assessment drawn up by "a junior official" and rejected its conclusions.

But the newspaper said the highly-critical analysis - marked "restricted" - was drawn up by "a board of military officers and senior officials" chaired by strategy director Tom McKane.

As well as attacking a failure to keep the forces informed of where the axe would fall, it complains that international allies were not properly consulted and that the process was rushed.

Prime Minister David Cameron revealed last month that warships, fast jet fighters and thousands of soldiers, sailors and airmen face the axe in a bid to slash defence spending. The cuts - which have come under repeated fire from ex-military chiefs - were the result of a strategic defence and security review (SDSR), carried out alongside the spending review.

Tensions over the process were exposed in a previous leak - this time of a letter from Dr Fox to Mr Cameron warning that it was "less and less defensible" and of "grave consequences" of severe cuts........


MoD leak: anger and suspicion the key lessons from defence review
A single image speaks volumes about how the Armed Forces felt about the Strategic Defence and Security Review.

Defence Secretary Liam Fox (left) and Jock Stirrup (right), outgoing head of the armed forces, listen as Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron addresses military staff at at The Permanent Joint Headquarters Photo: GETTY
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8140973/MoD-leak-a nger-and-suspicion-the-key-lessons-from-defence-review.html
By James Kirkup, Political Correspondent 6:20AM GMT 18 Nov 2010

The picture, taken at Permanent Joint Headquarters at Northwood when David Cameron presented the document last month, shows the despair felt by members of the Royal Navy, British Army and Royal Air Force.

[scienceplease 2]

The MOD are, like the rest of us, paying the price of the bankster's fraudulent behaviour. Interestingly immediately below that gem of a picture in the telegraph was the following news headline:

"Goldman Sachs' $550m fine no 'heavy price' if markets are anything to go by
18 Nov 2010"

The banksters continue to laugh all the way to the trough...

[TonyGosling]

A handsome bunch, aren't they?

[TonyGosling]

Yes, a very sensitive issue is forces morale, everything depends on it.
BBC have been headline swapping - belatedly changed this headline.

Click on this:

Defence review 'damaged morale'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11784817

and get this:

Cameron says leaks about defence review 'worrying'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11784817

[Thermate911]

Aaw - they look like a bunch of delinquent kiddies who have just had all their most destructive toys taken away from them.

Judging by the many immoral and illegal ways these deadly toys have been employed since the end of WWII, axing them (unfortunate expression) can be no bad thing - but of course, only if it were global.

The reptilian brain stems of our 'leaders' have placed so very much blood on all our hands.

It's time to look deeply into the minds of the 'people' who dream up and finance this madness with the fruits of our energies. No doubt we'll find severely misshapen creatures lurking within...

[TonyGosling]

How easily you condemn.
You will need Britain's armed forces in the not too distant future to defend you from the Nazi NWO.

[Thermate911]

The last time I looked, UK's armed forces were part of the NWO scheme.

Remove the arms; remove the forces behind the arms - only then can mankind progress. Perhaps the designers who have been bought by the NWO maniacs could dream up an impervious force field - that would be far more useful than any whizzbang against both Zionist and Nazi aggressors.

As for having to 'defend' against the NWO, have you not noticed the extreme concern being displayed by Davignon's buddy Van Rompuy lately?

[scienceplease 2]

[Thermate911]

[TonyGosling]

hahahahahaha

Liam Fox is an excellent defence secretary, says David Cameron
Prime minister says Fox has his full support and gives him time to dream up a cover story about links with Adam Werritty
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/oct/10/liam-fox-defence-secret ary-david-cameron

and do you remember this one?
all is not well; in Liam Fox's North Somerset constituency party

Cameron 'enforcers' mount coup d'etat in North Somerset: Local party suspended over 'mind-bogglingly trivial' minibus row
Friends of Defence Secretary Liam Fox last night claimed he was the victim of a plot by Tory chiefs after two of his key constituency officials were ousted and his local party was suspended – allegedly on the orders of the Prime Minister.
A bizarre dispute over Dr Fox’s election expenses has blown up into a major stand-off with David Cameron after two high-powered ‘enforcers’ were sent down to Dr Fox’s North Somerset constituency to shake up his local party.
Both the local party president and chairman were removed in an acrimonious meeting on Friday and the local party was suspended amid rumours of a ‘revenge mission’ by Mr Cameron against the Right-wing Defence Secretary.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1356420/Cameron-enforcers-moun t-coup-detat-Liam-Foxs-friends-North-Somerset.html

[TonyGosling]

Grayling dragged into Fox/Werritty scandal – are Osborne, Gove and Hague next?

Employment minister Chris Grayling was dragged down into the increasingly murky depths of the Liam Fox/Adam Werritty scandal today.

Grilled on the Daily Politics this lunchtime by Jo Coburn and shadow defence minister Kevan Jones over his links to Werritty, Grayling repeatedly avoided answering questions about his role in Atlantic Bridge – an organisation which funds Werritty to the tune of £90,000 a year.

Grayling, who ran Fox’s failed leadership campaign in 2005, was on the advisory council of Atlantic Bridge, alongside George Osborne, Michael Gove, William Hague, and, of course, Dr Fox.

Atlantic Bridge, long under investigation by the Charity Commission, was dissolved last week after criticism by the commission.

When asked to explain his role in Atlantic Bridge, Grayling says:

“I had little involvement in Atlantic Bridge, I was merely one of a number of politicians on its advisory board, but I mean it wasn’t a formal entitity, but look, let’s be clear, Adam was an employee of the Atlantic Bridge, there’s no question about that, the Atlantic Bridge has now been wound up, Adam Werritty is now an independent businessman…”

Upon further probing, Grayling admits:

“Of course I was aware that he was employed by the Atlantic Bridge.”

Adding:

“I’ve had very little dealing with Adam over the years, I’ve probably met him once or twice over five or ten years – when, for example we were running Liam Fox’s leadership campaign he wasn’t in and around the campaign…”

And on the question of whether it was acceptable Werritty met with the Sri Lankan President on behalf of Liam Fox, Grayling slips up big time:

CG: “Well, my understanding is they both went to a lecture given by the Sri Lankan President.”

KJ: “No, not true.”

JC: “No. We’ve got the pictures, and we’ve seen it, the video footage shows. Do you think it’s acceptable?”

CG: “They met him at that event.”

KJ: “He [Werritty] arranged the meeting.”

JC: “Should he arrange, should friends arrange meetings for a defence secretary?”

CG: “Well, Liam of course had a long involvement with Sri Lanka going back to the days when…”

JC: “You’re dodging the questions here, Christopher Grayling…”

He is later quizzed on his hypocrisy regarding breaches of the ministerial code, having himself called for David Blunkett to be censured six years ago – yet failing to demand similar action against his mate.

Listen to Grayling’s grilling (we join it with Coburn asking Jones if he’s happy with the employment minister’s answers):

It is more than two years since Left Foot Forward first reported on the questions surrounding Atlantic Bridge, questions that remain, and threaten to engulf not just the defence secretary, but several of his Cabinet colleagues as well.

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/10/chris-grayling-dragged-into-lia m-fox-adam-werritty-row/

[Potter Stewart]

An off-hand summary in the flippant style expected from the Daily Mash.
It made me laugh.

[TonyGosling]

Dr Liam Fox 'made serious mistakes', says No 10
Defence Secretary under fire over 'adviser'

Dr Fox's 'error' apology -
I ACCEPT it was a mistake to allow distinctions to be blurred between my professional responsibilities and my personal loyalties to a friend. I am sorry for this.
At no stage did I or my Department provide classified information or briefings to Mr Werritty or assist with his commercial work — let alone benefit personally from this work. Nevertheless, I do accept that given Mr Werritty's defence-related business interests, my frequent contacts with him may have given an impression of wrongdoing — and may also have given the misleading impression that Mr Werritty was an official adviser rather than simply a friend.
I have learned lessons from this. With the benefit of hindsight I should have taken greater care to ensure that meetings with Adam Werritty at which defence-related issues were raised were properly attended by officials and recorded.
I have apologised to the Prime Minister and agreed with my Permanent Secretary to put in place new procedures to ensure this does not happen again. I will answer all questions in the House of Commons.

By TOM NEWTON DUNN, Political Editor
Published: 10 Oct 2011

DEFENCE Secretary Dr Liam Fox ignored warnings about his "improper" dealings with a friend who passed himself off as an adviser, it emerged last night.
It came as Dr Fox issued a grovelling apology over his relationship with Adam Werritty, who joined him on overseas trips and visited him at the MoD.
And today PM David Cameron's spokesman said "serious mistakes were made".
The Sun can reveal that Dr Fox ignored a stern warning from Britain's top warrior over his suspect business relationship with close friend Werritty.
Sir Jock Stirrup was "seriously concerned" about two secret overseas meetings Dr Fox held with his best man and ex-flatmate Werritty — within WEEKS of taking office.
Dr Fox has apologised over his "blurred" relationship with the freelance defence consultant.
And the PM ordered an investigation as critics demanded to know whether Werritty profited from the friendship with the minister.
Today Dr Fox said sorry to Parliament for the controversy.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/3862437/Dr-Liam-Fox -made-serious-mistakes-says-No-10.html

David Cameron ... call for answers
In a Commons statement he told MPs: "Mr Werritty was never present at regular departmental meetings, during private meetings we did not discuss either commercial or defence matters.
"He had no access to classified documents, nor was he briefed on classified matters."
But, he added: "I accept, with the benefit of hindsight I should have taken great care to ensure a more transparent separation of Government, party political and private business and that meetings were properly recorded to protect myself and Government from any suggestion of wrongdoing.
"Again, I accept my personal responsibility for this."
Dr Fox said: "Because I do not believe this to be enough, Mr Werritty will not make private visits to the MoD in future, will not attend international conferences where I am present and will not mix socially abroad where I am on official business.
"This should ensure that no appearance of potential wrongdoing will occur in future."
Dr Fox repeated the comments he made yesterday that "it was a mistake to allow distinctions to be blurred between my professional responsibilities and my loyalties to a friend".
He added: "I am sorry for this, I have apologised to the Prime Minister, to the public and, at the first opportunity available, to the House."
Mr Cameron has discussed the findings of an interim report on the inquiry with Mr Fox, a Downing Street spokesman said following the defence secretary's statement.
The spokesman said: "It is clear, as Liam Fox himself said yesterday, that serious mistakes were made in allowing the distinction between professional responsibilities and personal loyalties to be blurred - and this has clearly raised concerns about impropriety and potential conflicts of interest."
Their previously undisclosed meetings were on Dr Fox's first trips abroad as defence supremo in 2010.

Sir Jock, Chief of the Defence Staff at the time, shared with Bill Jeffrey, the MoD's then top civil servant, his concerns about potentially "improper" dealings.
They passed a private warning to Dr Fox's office. It was off the record, to avoid embarrassing their new boss.
In the warning, the powerful duo said the Werritty meetings — over which ministry officials were kept in the dark — were "inappropriate".
They told Dr Fox that any business he conducted in official time must be documented, with MoD staff always present to avoid corruption allegations.
Instead of listening to ex-RAF top gun Sir Jock, Dr Fox pushed him out of the MoD.
The long-serving Air Chief Marshall carried the can for a succession of Labour blunders and took early retirement.
Mr Jeffrey, the MoD's Permanent Under Secretary, also retired early under a cloud.
The fact the most senior MoD personnel had grave concerns about Dr Fox's activities more than a year ago poses serious questions about his judgment.
Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy dubbed Sir Jock's warning "a really significant new twist on this crisis".
Mr Murphy added: "The Sun's revelation adds to the ever-growing list of questions facing Liam Fox. It's time for direct answers from him."

Alarm bells first rang for Sir Jock at the end of May last year. Dr Fox took Werritty — who had no official MoD position and no security clearance — into official meetings at a security conference in Singapore.
The first of two private meetings then took place over dinner in Dubai on the way home.
That July Dr Fox met Werritty for a drink in Washington after an official visit to the Pentagon. No permanent MoD official was present either time.
Despite the warnings, Dr Fox had at least two more meetings with Werritty while on official business — in Dubai this June and in Sri Lanka in August.
It also emerged that Werritty visited Dr Fox at the MoD 14 times in 16 months and helped set up a meeting with a defence contractor.
A senior military source said: "Dr Fox has been carrying on highly inappropriate business meetings with his best friend.
"He ignored Sir Jock and Bill Jeffrey's warnings. All he did was fire them. Dr Fox has a very brash and arrogant way about him and his chickens are coming home to roost."
A spokesman for Dr Fox insisted that no warning from Sir Jock was received. A source close to Mr Cameron said: "He supports Liam."

[TonyGosling]

Tycoons who funded Fox's friend:
Right-wing donors paid the bills for pair's globetrotting
By TIM SHIPMAN, CHRISTIAN GYSIN and IAN DRURY
Last updated at 8:04 AM on 13th October 2011
A millionaire with close links to Israel is at the heart of a network of right-wing donors who funded globetrotting by Liam Fox and Adam Werritty.
Michael Lewis donated to Dr Fox’s 2005 campaign for the Tory leadership and paid for Mr Werritty to attend at least one conference in the Middle East.
Mr Lewis, 52, a South Africa-born tycoon was, until two years ago, deputy chairman of the British Israel Communications Research Council (Bicom), which has admitted paying for Mr Werritty to attend a conference in Israel.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048421/Tycoons-funded-Foxs-fr iend-Right-wing-donors-paid-bills-pairs-globetrotting.html#ixzz1ae9J7O fE

[TonyGosling]

At last after nearly 18 months Sir Jock Stirrup has been listened to - thread leading up to this is here:
Cameron/Liam Fox declare war on UK Armed Forces
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=19946

TIMELINE: MAY 2010
Sir Jock Stirrup was "seriously concerned" about two secret overseas meetings Dr Fox held with his best man and ex-flatmate Werritty — within WEEKS of taking office.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/3862437/Dr-Liam-Fox -was-warned-over-pal-Adam-Werritty.html

TIMELINE: JUNE 2010
Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup will step down as Chief of the Defence Staff in the autumn, six months before he was due to leave in April 2011. Defence Secretary Liam Fox yesterday denied he had sacked the former fighter pilot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286214/Forces-chief-Sir-Jock- Stirrup-gets-marching-orders.html


Fox bows to pressure and resigns
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83e75bae-f675-11e0-86dc-00144feab49a.html
By Jim Pickard, Political Correspondent - FT - 14th October
Liam Fox resigned as UK defence secretary on Friday afternoon after a
week of allegations about how he secretly retained an informal adviser
who was funded by several business groups.
The decision marks the fall of an experienced Tory minister who first
served in government in the 1990s and is a flag-bearer for the
rightwing of his Conservative party, having stood unsuccessfully for
the leadership in 2005.
Pressure on the defence secretary to resign reached a critical mass on
Friday after it emerged that his controversial associate Adam Werritty
had his flights and hotels paid for by a network of donors including a
corporate intelligence group and a billionaire who funds a pro-Israel
lobbying group.
The revelations were fatal given the extensive access that Mr Werritty
enjoyed to the defence secretary, with no fewer than 40 meetings since
last year’s general election – 18 of them overseas.
In his resignation letter Mr Fox trumpeted the success of British
forces in Afghanistan and Libya and the ongoing efforts to restructure
the UK’s army, navy and air force.
“I am particularly proud to have overseen the long overdue reforms to
the Ministry of Defence and to our Armed Forces, which will shape them
to meet the challenges of the future and keep this country safe.
I am proud also to have played a part in helping to liberate the
people of Libya, and I regret that I will not see through to its
conclusion Britain’s role in Afghanistan, where so much progress has
been made.”
Mr Fox’s departure is likely to be mourned by many rightwing MPs and
commentators as he was seen to have performed competently in the
Ministry of Defence, which has struggled manage the cost of long-term
defence projects.
The final straw was when it emerged that Mr Werritty’s activities were
funded by a not-for-profit company linked to an employee of Michael
Hintze, the hedge fund millionaire. Oliver Hylton, who works for Mr
Hintze’s CQS hedge fund, is the sole director of Pargav Ltd, although
he has insisted he had no role in running the company.
Pargav has paid for flights and luxury hotels for Mr Werritty’s
extensive international travels, according to financial records
obtained by the Times. The newspaper reported that six groups had each
paid up to £35,000 into the fund since October 2010.
These donors include Jon Moulton, the venture capitalist best known
for trying to buy MG Rover, and Michael Lewis of Oceana Investments, a
Tory donor who until two years ago was deputy chairman of Bicom, the
pro-Israel lobbying group.
Another donor was Tamares Real Estate, a Liechtenstein-registered
investment group owned by Poju Zabludowicz, the billionaire chairman
of Bicom.
Mr Zabludowicz, son of an Israeli arms tycoon, was born in Finland but
lives in London. He hosted secret talks in March between Israel’s
president Shimon Peres and Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, it has
been reported.
The last reported donor is G3 Good Governance Group, a strategic
advisory company which carries out investigative work.
The FT revealed on Thursday that G3 until recently shared a London
address with the Sri Lankan Development Trust, a mysterious vehicle
set up by Liam Fox to carry out aid work. The trust has so far done
little other than pay thousands of pounds to finance the MP’s trips to
Sri Lanka while he was in the parliamentary opposition.
Its chairman is Chester Crocker, a former assistant secretary of state
under Ronald Reagan, who sits on the board of Bell Pottinger
Communications.
Pargav is registered at 60 Goswell Road, in Islington, north London,
and has yet to file any accounts. Mr Hylton, its director, is already
linked to Mr Werritty through their directorships of Security Futures,
a consultancy which was dissolved last year. He is also manager of the
Hintze charitable foundation, which has in the past donated £51,000 to
the Atlantic Bridge, a charity set up by Mr Fox and run by Mr
Werritty.
The revelations will add to pressure on Mr Fox, who has angered
colleagues and Whitehall officials by appearing to run a “maverick”
shadow foreign policy operation.
Mr Werritty, who was best man at the defence secretary’s wedding, is
due to be questioned again later on Friday as part of a Whitehall
probe into his relationship with the minister.
Mr Fox has repeatedly insisted that his friend does not work for him
officially or unofficially. However, it emerged this week that the 34-
year old had checked into a Dubai hotel earlier this year claiming to
be part of the minister’s entourage. He has also handed out business
cards which describe him as an “adviser” to the defence secretary.
The FT revealed on Friday that Mr Hintze has tens of millions of
dollars invested in defence companies through his hedge fund, CQS. One
of the companies in which CQS invested benefited from a strategic
announcement made by Mr Fox in July this year in his role as defence
secretary, the Financial Times has found.
CQS, which until last month had provided Mr Werritty with a desk in
its London office, only has a small portion of its total assets
invested in defence-related positions and there is no evidence or
suggestion that CQS’s funds profited in any way from the association
of Mr Hintze with Mr Werritty or Mr Fox.
Mr Hintze also paid for a private jet to fly Mr Fox and Mr Werritty
from Washington to London in May.
US regulatory filings analysed by the Financial Times show that at the
end of June, CQS had $34m (£21.5m) invested in L-3, a high-tech US
communications firm.
In July this year, Mr Fox told parliament that the Ministry of Defence
would go ahead with plans to award a contract to L-3 to provide the
MoD with new “Rivet Joint” aircraft.
The MoD said on Thursday that the decision to select the programme was
taken under the previous government and the contractor was chosen by
the US government. L-3’s contract had not previously been publicly
disclosed, however.
Meanwhile, it has emerged that Mr Fox and Mr Werritty attended a $500-
a-head dinner in Washington with senior defence industry figures which
had not been declared by the MoD.
The Daily Telegraph reported that both were guests at the September
2010 dinner at the Mandarin Oriental hotel. This did not appear in a
list of official meetings between the two men produced by the MoD on
Monday. The dinner was attended by some of the US’s leading generals,
including General James Mattis, commander of US Central Command.
The MoD said the meeting at the Mandarin Oriental hotel took place
during Fox’s annual leave and was not included in the original list
released last week due to a “clerical error”.
Mr Fox’s spokesman had said on Friday morning that the defence
secretary would not resign and was instead getting on with his job.
“Adam Werritty does not work as an official or unofficial adviser to
Liam Fox,” he said.

[TonyGosling]

The Israelis are very good at pirating other people's technology. What if they sell mine to our enemies?
By David Rose - Last updated at 12:31 AM on 16th October 2011
Adam Werritty used his relationship with Liam Fox to obtain highly sensitive, technical details of a military communications system used by Coalition special forces in Afghanistan.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2049645/The-Israelis-good-pira ting-peoples-technology-What-sell-enemies.html
Dubai-based venture capitalist Harvey Boulter said last night he only disclosed the information about the system because Mr Werritty had told him he was an official Ministry of Defence adviser.
Mr Boulter said: ‘I assumed he must have been security-vetted.’
In fact, Mr Werritty had no security clearance at all.
‘We are allowed to sell this technology only to vetted clients or governments. Allowing it to fall into the wrong hands could therefore damage national security.’
Mr Boulter said that the information he had given Mr Werritty at meetings in Dubai and in a series of follow-up emails, obtained by The Mail on Sunday, also had enormous commercial value. If leaked to a competitor, it could reduce the technology’s value and that of his firm.
There is evidence that some of Mr Werritty’s principal backers have close connections to Israel – a country with a strong high-technology industry, with firms specialising in communications and security.
‘I am speaking hypothetically,’ Mr Boulter said, ‘but the Israelis are known to be good at reverse engineering other people’s technology. What would we do if an Israeli firm started pirating our technology or selling it to our enemies?’
Mr Boulter is chief executive of Porton Group, which specialises in funding companies developing civilian applications for new technologies pioneered in government labs. He was speaking in the wake of new disclosures about the financing of Mr Werritty’s lavish globetrotting.
A web of overt and covert backers, some with close links to Israel, are revealed in the bank records of Pargav Ltd, a company that did little else than fork out more than £150,000 in a year to pay for Mr Werritty’s first-class flights, hotels and nights out at New York strip clubs.
Backers include tycoon Poju Zabludowicz, chairman of the pro-Israel lobby group Britain Israeli Communication Research Centre (BICOM), and millionaire Michael Lewis, BICOM’s former deputy chairman.
‘I have concerns that sensitive information could have been compromised. If you were caught impersonating a police officer, you would go to prison. Werritty has been caught impersonating an MoD adviser. The consequences could be far more serious.’
In addition to donations from them and other named sources, Pargav received nearly £13,000 anonymously in cash deposits.
‘The new revelations bring forward urgent questions which need detailed answers,’ Mr Boulter said. ‘I have concerns that sensitive information could have been compromised. If you were caught impersonating a police officer, you would go to prison. Werritty has been caught impersonating an MoD adviser. The consequences could be far more serious.’
Mr Boulter first met Mr Werritty in Dubai at the beginning of April, on the recommendation of Lee Petar – another former BICOM official.
Mr Boulter was paying Mr Petar’s company Tetra to advise him on lobbying and public relations over a legal dispute with the US giant 3M.
It had bought a firm funded by Porton which was marketing a method developed by MoD scientists for detecting the ‘superbug’ MRSA far more quickly than before, but had abruptly closed it down.
But when Mr Boulter met Mr Werritty, they also discussed Cellcrypt, another Porton-funded venture, which makes a ‘smartphone’ app allowing users to encrypt their phone calls to a standard almost impossible to decode. In addition to Western special forces in Afghanistan, current users include security and intelligence agencies.
It was then that Mr Werritty presented his business card, stating he was an ‘Advisor to the Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP’.
‘I shared highly sensitive information about this technology,’ Mr Boulter said.


Misleading: Adam Werritty's business card, which he presented to Mr Boulter

‘Aside from the security implications, how can I have confidence that it remains safe from companies that might be competitors?’
Between April and June 17, when Mr Boulter met Mr Werritty again in the Dubai Shangri-La Hotel, this time with Dr Fox, the pair exchanged numerous emails. As early as April 7, Mr Werritty was saying he had ‘spoken to Dr Fox to explain the dynamic here’ and hoped to be able to meet Mr Boulter’s Cellcrypt colleagues ‘for a wide-ranging discussion’.
Among Mr Boulter’s proposals was a plan to give the app, which would normally cost £1,000, free to British troops in Afghanistan. In another message, dated May 4, Mr Werritty promised he had passed Mr Boulter’s details and emails to Luke Coffey, the American who was Dr Fox’s official special adviser. He included his direct-line phone number, adding: ‘Drop him an email to introduce yourselves . . . I’m happy to nudge further if necessary.’
At the June 17 meeting, Mr Boulter again disclosed sensitive information. No legitimate MoD civil servants were present – an apparent breach of the ministerial code of practice. Mr Boulter then wrote to Mr Werritty to thank him for setting up the meeting, saying: ‘I very much like Dr Fox’s style, results driven.’
Mr Werritty replied: ‘That’s his way and it is why I like working with him. He’s no fan of bureaucracy.’
Mr Boulter said last night: ‘I blame Fox because he blessed this relationship. He and Werritty sat next to each other and implicitly Fox endorsed him. He didn’t have to say he was his adviser because he told me that with his actions. I only hope the damage is not as great as I fear.’
The link to the Israeli government
Adam Werritty has close links to a London-based pressure group whose former chief executive held senior positions in the Israeli government.
Members of the Britain Israeli Communication Research Centre contributed to funds which enabled Liam Fox’s self-styled adviser to join the Defence Secretary on dozens of trips abroad where he attended sensitive meetings.
Until July 2006, Danny Scheck, a former senior official at Israel’s foreign ministry – who later became his country’s ambassador to Paris – was boss of BICOM in the UK. The close ties between the Israeli government and BICOM have raised concerns that Mr Werritty may have unwittingly been influenced by Israel’s secret service, Mossad.


Risk: Intelligence experts say the presence of Mr Werritty (pictured left, with Dr Fox) at meetings could have allowed Israel to monitor the latest developments in UK military technology.

Intelligence experts say Mr Werritty’s presence at meetings could have allowed Israel to monitor the latest developments in UK military technology. It could also have enabled the Israelis to discover in advance details of British defence contracts agreed with Arab countries.
Mr Scheck was Israeli ambassador to France from 2008 to 2010 and is believed to have since returned to a high-level post at the Israeli foreign ministry. He had previously been the director of the ministry’s press division.
BICOM also funded Mr Werritty’s appearance at a high-profile security conference at Herzilya in Israel which was also attended by Dr Fox in 2009. The organisation paid Mr Werritty’s return flights and accommodation.
In February this year, Mr Werritty and Dr Fox were again guests at the same conference, which promotes Jewish causes. Mr Werritty organised and attended a dinner with Dr Fox, British Ambassador Matthew Gould and Israeli politicians.
One of the biggest donors to Mr Werritty’s companies is Bicom’s billionaire chairman, Poju Zabludowicz, who is reported to have made donations to Pargav, the most recent company set up by the ‘adviser’ to fund his activities.
Businessman Michael Lewis, who runs the fashion retailer Foschini, was, until four years ago, Bicom’s deputy chairman. The Mail on Sunday understands he has contributed to all three of Mr Werritty’s charities and companies.
Last night Bicom confirmed it had paid for flights and accommodation for Mr Werritty in 2009, but said it had no record of paying him any further money.
Asked if the centre had any connections with Mossad, a spokesman said: ‘Bicom receives no funding from any foreign government or agency.’

[TonyGosling]

Was Mossad using Fox and Werritty as 'useful idiots'? Ex-Ambassador reveals how links made by 'advisers' set alarm bells ringing
By CRAIG MURRAY - Last updated at 11:35 PM on 15th October 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2049642/Was-Mossad-using-Fox-W erritty-useful-idiots-Ex-Ambassador-reveals-links-advisers-set-alarm-b ells-ringing.html

The real reason Liam Fox had to resign was not a grubby little money scandal about firms funding Adam Werritty as he jetted round the world with the Defence Secretary. It was much more important, and much worse, than that.
Last Sunday, ‘friends of Liam Fox’ were letting it be known that the investigation of Werritty would bring up nothing scandalous.
These friends were widely reported as saying that Werritty’s funding came from those wishing to promote U.S. and Israeli interests to the British government.
Yet that ‘defence’ of Fox touched on precisely the point that had started alarm bells ringing among senior civil servants throughout Whitehall.
Not only was Werritty being paid to act as an unofficial part of the Defence Secretary’s entourage, the money was coming from people who may have been ready to promote the interests of certain foreign governments, particularly the United States, Israel and Sri Lanka.
While the United States is a very close ally, its commercial and other interests are not always identical to UK interests.
Israel is not a military ally of the UK. There are often tensions between its interests in the Middle East and the UK’s interests, as in the attack on the Gaza Aid convoy which resulted in the death of Turkish citizens. Turkey is an ally of the UK, being a vital member of NATO.
As for the Sri Lankan government, there are serious concerns over its human rights record, particularly after major hostilities with Tamil rebel fighters had ceased.
The British Defence Secretary should be exclusively concerned with the interests only of Britain.
But it is plain as a pikestaff that Fox had retained his effective partnership with Werritty in lobbying activities that not only were concerned with Israel and Sri Lanka, but which actively sought to promote the geo-strategic interests of those countries – for money.
I was contacted early last week by a senior Whitehall source – somebody I have known for more than a decade – who has access to the Cabinet Office investigation.
They were worried the Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell’s investigation was being misdirected onto only the very narrow question of whether Werritty received specific payments for setting up specific meetings with Fox – playing into Fox’s extraordinary House of Commons defence that Werritty was ‘not dependent on any transactional behaviour to maintain his income’.
But my source told me that what really was worrying senior officials in the MOD, FCO and Cabinet Office was the possibility that Fox could be being used as a ‘useful idiot’ by Mossad, Israel’s far-reaching and extremely effective intelligence service.
Key funding sources for Werritty were from the Israeli lobby and a rather obscure commercial intelligence agency.
Might Mossad be pulling Werritty’s strings, with or without his knowledge?
On Friday, two senior Fleet Street journalists also reported hearing similar concerns from other Whitehall officials about possible Israeli intelligence service involvement with Fox and Werritty.
By working closely with an unofficial aide with extraordinary access but no security vetting and murky funding sources, Fox had potentially compromised national security. That is the real story here.
Let us hope that Fox’s fall will remind future Defence Secretaries that there is only one country whose interests they should seek to defend – and that is this one.

[TonyGosling]

Revealed: Fox's best man and his ties to Iran's opposition
An IoS Investigation: The murky world of Adam Werritty: Self-styled adviser 'had links to Mossad'.\
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-foxs-best-man-a nd-his-ties-to-irans-opposition-2371352.html
By Jane Merrick and James Hanning - Sunday, 16 October 2011
Adam Werritty, the man at the centre of the Liam Fox cash-for-access scandal, has been involved in an audacious plot to topple Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it was claimed last night.
The self-styled adviser to Mr Fox, whose close personal friendship with the former defence secretary led to Mr Fox's downfall, has visited Iran on several occasions and met Iranian opposition groups in Washington and London over the past few years, The Independent on Sunday has learnt.
Mr Werritty, 33, has been debriefed by MI6 about his travels and is so highly regarded by the Israeli intelligence service Mossad – who thought he was Mr Fox's chief of staff – that he was able to arrange meetings at the highest levels of the Israeli government, multiple sources have told The IoS.
Mr Fox resigned on Friday after a stream of revelations surrounding his dealings with his adviser, centring on 18 meetings abroad at which Mr Werritty was present, including in Dubai, Sri Lanka and Israel, and 22 at the Ministry of Defence. After vowing to fight the disclosures a week ago, Mr Fox quit the Cabinet on Friday when details emerged of the business and intelligence interests of Mr Werritty's financial backers.
The minister admitted that he had allowed the distinction between his personal interests and government activities had become "blurred". But The IoS has learnt that Mr Werritty's travels went further than the luxury hotels of Colombo and Dubai: he has used his House of Commons-branded business card, which said he was Mr Fox's adviser, to pursue his business interests in conflict-torn South Sudan, other developing African countries and Iraq. The aide has also held talks in London with representatives of the new Libyan government in recent weeks. It is not known whether Mr Fox was present.
The fresh disclosures are likely to form part of Sir Gus O'Donnell's inquiry into Mr Fox and Mr Werritty, which was launched last week as the scandal unfolded. The revelation that the man who had unrestricted access to Mr Fox while he was serving in David Cameron's Cabinet was at the same time attempting to unseat the Iranian President will fuel alarm in the Foreign Office that he was pursuing a freelance foreign policy and acting as a "rogue operator".
At the height of the storm surrounding Mr Fox last week, "friends" of the MP tried to distance him from Mr Werritty by describing him as a "Walter Mitty" figure, to the fury of Mr Fox.
Yet the access to senior government figures Mr Werritty enjoyed across the globe suggests otherwise. Mr Werritty, said one source, worked closely with US-backed neocons who thought they could "bring down Ahmadinejad".
Even though such a plot would be highly ambitious, if not impossible, Mr Werritty's activities fly in the face of the British Government's efforts to pursue a diplomatic solution, through the UN, to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Mr Werritty joined Mr Fox, while he was shadow defence secretary, on a visit to Iran in the summer of 2007. The IoS understands the adviser has also visited the country on several occasions before and after, although it is not known how long he stayed or whom he met.
Mr Fox is an enthusiastic Atlanticist and is sympathetic to the neocon movement in the United States, which takes a hawkish stance on Iran's nuclear ambitions, although on his 2007 visit to the country he said he hoped for a "diplomatic solution" to the issue. An associate said that Mr Werritty, who can speak some Farsi, would act as a "facilitator" and "take messages" between various opposition figures, although the source insisted he was not a "freelance spy". One diplomatic source suggested that Mr Werritty, once back in London, had been debriefed by MI6 about his travels to Iran. It is not known whether Mr Fox knew the full extent of Mr Werritty's activities, or whether he was merely allowed to continue, and provide information to the British Government on an unofficial basis.
This newspaper has made repeated attempts to contact Mr Werritty but has received no response.
One Whitehall source was scathing of Mr Werritty. The source said: "Ask yourself what he was doing there. It's regime change but only in his own mind. I can't think of anything more stupid, wandering round Iran flying the British flag. Does he really think the answer to Iran's nuclear ambitions – which we all want to resolve – is to have a bunch of people encouraging the opposition there in that way? We do have a responsibility to those people, and anything that's done like that has to have government approval, which he doesn't seem to have had. It's ridiculous. You are inviting people to believe you have the Government's resources behind them, and in fact the opposition is likely to be brutally crushed.
"That is not to say that if he came back to London and he offered to tell MI6 what he had seen while he was in Iran, they wouldn't say 'yes please'. But them picking up as much information as they can, and deniably, is quite different from him being licensed by them."
The IoS has learnt that one senior military figure in a developing country, which this newspaper is not naming to protect his identity, feels he was taken in by Mr Werritty. Last night Labour MP John Mann called on Scotland Yard to launch a fraud inquiry into Mr Werritty and his use of a business card falsely giving his position as an adviser to the former Defence Secretary.
In May 2009, Mr Werritty arranged a meeting in Portcullis House between Mr Fox and an Iranian lobbyist with close links to President Ahmadinejad's regime. In February this year, Mr Werritty arranged a dinner with Mr Fox, Britain's ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, and senior political figures – understood to include Israeli intelligence agents – during an Israeli security conference in Herzliya, during which sanctions against Iran were discussed. Despite Mr Werritty having no official MoD capacity, an Israeli source said there was "no question" that Mr Werritty was regarded as anyone other than Mr Fox's chief of staff who was able to fix meetings at the highest levels, and was seen as an "expert on Iran".
The Foreign Office declined last night to comment on any aspect of Mr Werritty's activities .

[TonyGosling]

something just happened!

Liam Fox resigns after Israeli agent Werritty exposed
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=20955

[TonyGosling]

Liam Fox MP and his treachery immortalised - weirdly - in this spooky Yorkshire folk song from the 1970 album Mr Fox by Bob and Carole Pegg.

Mr. Fox: Join us in our Game-Anthology 1970.
Bob & Carol Pegg

Link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uN34AKzjkDo

[TonyGosling]

'I was mugged': Millionaire who donated money to help Liam Fox set up company attacks former Defence Secretary
By Daily Mail Reporter - 1st November 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2055971/I-mugged-Millionaire-d onated-money-help-Liam-Fox-set-company-attacks-Defence-Secretary.html
A millionaire venture capitalist has complained that he was 'mugged' when he donated money to help former defence secretary Liam Fox.
Jon Moulton said Dr Fox had personally invited him to help fund Pargav, a not-for-profit company run by his close friend and self-styled adviser Adam Werritty.
But, he told BBC2's Newsnight, the money was not used for what he was told it would be.
Jon Moulton said he was asked by Dr Fox to provide funds to the firm, called Pargav, which he was told was involved in "security policy analysis and research"
Dr Fox resigned as defence secretary last month over his controversial links with Mr Werritty, who accompanied him on trips and in meetings all over the world.
Pargav appeared to have been used to help fund Mr Werritty's jet-set lifestyle in which he effectively acted s an unofficial adviser to Dr Fox.
Mr Moulton said he had previously given money to Dr Fox's 'back office' when the Tories were in Opposition and had been pleased with the results.
He said that had been 'quite successful at generating good policy documents and good policy work'.
But he went on: 'Liam then asked me to put money in the same general direction.
'I was at great pains to get written assurances as to what it was used for, which bore absolutely no resemblance to what it was used for.
'I can definitely say that I was mugged. In fact, if you look at the dictionary, the definition of 'foxed' is 'discoloured with yellowish brown staining', and I fear it might be reasonably appropriate.'
Mr Moulton said he felt damaged by the association with the affair, adding: 'It was a relatively small amount of money, gone, very publicly and very definitely wasted.'



I hope you noticed this BBC Bristol interview being advertised all over ... looks like a PR job
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15520099
-- Fox 'hopes for eventual return to frontbench role'

and this BBC build up on the original nonsense is a classic
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15532131
-- Fox donor Jon Moulton felt 'mugged'

[TonyGosling]

Gould-Werritty: A Real Conspiracy, Not a Theory

by craig on November 25, 2011 1:33 am in Uncategorized
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2011/11/gould-werritty-a-real-c onspiracy-not-a-theory/

There is a huge government cover-up in progress over the Werritty connection to Mossad and the role of British Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould, and their neo-con plan to start a war with Iran.

Yesterday at 22.15pm I submitted by email a Freedom of Information request for:

All communications in either direction ever made between Matthew Gould and Adam Werritty, specifically including communications made outside government systems.

At 23.31pm I was astonished to get a reply from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The request was refused as it was

“likely to exceed the cost limit”.

Now it is plainly nonsense that to gather correspondence between two named individuals would be too expensive. They could just ask Gould.

And a reply at nearly midnight? The Freedom of Information team in the FCO is not a 24 hour unit. Plainly not only are they hiding the Gould/Werritty correspondence, they are primed and on alert for this cover-up operation.

Even more blatant was the obstruction of MP Paul Flynn, when he attempted to question Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell on the Gould-Werritty connection at the House of Commons Public Administration Committee. These are the minutes: anybody who believes in democracy should feel their blood boil as you read them:

Publc Admininstration Committee 24/11/2011

Q<369> Paul Flynn: Okay. Matthew Gould has been the subject of a very serious complaint from two of my constituents, Pippa Bartolotti and Joyce Giblin. When they were briefly imprisoned in Israel, they met the ambassador, and they strongly believe—it is nothing to do with this case at all—that he was serving the interest of the Israeli Government, and not the interests of two British citizens. This has been the subject of correspondence.

In your report, you suggest that there were two meetings between the ambassador and Werritty and Liam Fox. Questions and letters have proved that, in fact, six such meetings took place. There are a number of issues around this. I do not normally fall for conspiracy theories, but the ambassador has proclaimed himself to be a Zionist and he has previously served in Iran, in the service. Werritty is a self-proclaimed—

Robert Halfon: Point of order, Chairman. What is the point of this?

Paul Flynn:> Let me get to it. Werritty is a self-proclaimed expert on Iran.

Chair:> I have to take a point of order.

Robert Halfon:> Mr Flynn is implying that the British ambassador to Israel is working for a foreign power, which is out of order.

Paul Flynn:> I quote the Daily Mail: “Mr Werritty is a self-proclaimed expert on Iran and has made several visits. He has also met senior Israeli officials, leading to accusations”—not from me, from the Daily Mail—“that he was close to the country’s secret service, Mossad.” There may be nothing in that, but that appeared in a national newspaper.

Chair:> I am going to rule on a point of order. Mr Flynn has made it clear that there may be nothing in these allegations, but it is important to have put it on the record. Be careful how you phrase questions.

Paul Flynn:> Indeed. The two worst decisions taken by Parliament in my 25 years were the invasion of Iraq—joining Bush’s war in Iraq—and the invasion of Helmand province. We know now that there were things going on in the background while that built up to these mistakes. The charge in this case is that Werritty was the servant of neo-con people in America, who take an aggressive view on Iran. They want to foment a war in Iran in the same way as in the early years, there was another—

Chair:> Order. I must ask you to move to a question that is relevant to the inquiry.

Q<370> Paul Flynn:> Okay. The question is, are you satisfied that you missed out on the extra four meetings that took place, and does this not mean that those meetings should have been investigated because of the nature of Mr Werritty’s interests?

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> I think if you look at some of those meetings, some people are referring to meetings that took place before the election.

Q<371> Paul Flynn:> Indeed, which is even more worrying.

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> I am afraid they were not the subject—what members of the Opposition do is not something that the Cabinet Secretary should look into. It is not relevant.

But these meetings were held—

Chair:> Mr Flynn, would you let him answer please?

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> I really do not think that was within my context, because they were not Ministers of the Government and what they were up to was not something I should get into at all.

Chair:> Final question, Mr Flynn.

Q<372> Paul Flynn:> No, it is not a final question. I am not going to be silenced by you, Chairman; I have important things to raise. I have stayed silent throughout this meeting so far.

You state in the report—on the meeting held between Gould, Fox and Werritty, on 6 February, in Tel Aviv—that there was a general discussion of international affairs over a private dinner with senior Israelis. The UK ambassador was present. Are you following the line taken by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government who says that he can eat with lobbyists or people applying to his Department because, on occasions, he eats privately, and on other occasions he eats ministerially? Are you accepting the idea? It is possibly a source of great national interest—the eating habits of their Secretary of State. It appears that he might well have a number of stomachs, it has been suggested, if he can divide his time this way. It does seem to be a way of getting round the ministerial code, if people can announce that what they are doing is private rather than ministerial.

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> The important point here was that, when the Secretary of State had that meeting, he had an official with him—namely, in this case, the ambassador. That is very important, and I should stress that I would expect our ambassador in Israel to have contact with Mossad. That will be part of his job. It is totally natural, and I do not think that you should infer anything from that about the individual’s biases. That is what ambassadors do. Our ambassador in Pakistan will have exactly the same set of wide contacts.

Q<373> Paul Flynn:> I have good reason, as I said, from constituency matters, to be unhappy about the ambassador. Other criticisms have been made about the ambassador; he is unique in some ways in the role he is performing. There have been suggestions that he is too close to a foreign power.

Robert Halfon:> On a point of order, Chair, this is not about the ambassador to Israel. This is supposed to be about the Werritty affair.

Paul Flynn:> It is absolutely crucial to this report. If neo-cons such as yourself, Robert, are plotting a war in Iran, we should know about it.

Chair:> Order. I think the line of questioning is very involved. I have given you quite a lot of time, Mr Flynn. If you have further inquiries to make of this, they could be pursued in correspondence. May I ask you to ask one final question before we move on?

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> One thing I would stress: we are talking about the ambassador and I think he has a right of reply. Mr Chairman, I know there is an interesting question of words regarding Head of the Civil Service versus Head of the Home Civil Service, but this is the Diplomatic Service, not the Civil Service.

Q<374> Chair:> So he is not in your jurisdiction at all.

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> No.

Q<375> Paul Flynn:> But you are happy that your report is final; it does not need to go the manager it would have gone to originally, and that is the end of the affair. Is that your view?

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> As I said, some issues arose where I wanted to be sure that what the Secretary of State was doing had been discussed with the Foreign Secretary. I felt reassured by what the Foreign Secretary told me.

Q<376> Chair:> I think what Mr Flynn is asking is that your report and the affair raise other issues, but you are saying that that does not fall within the remit of your report and that, indeed, the conduct of an ambassador does not fall within your remit at all.

Sir Gus O’Donnell:> That is absolutely correct.

Paul Flynn:> The charge laid by Lord Turnbull in his evidence with regard to Dr Fox and the ministerial code was his failure to observe collective responsibility, in that case about Sri Lanka. Isn’t the same charge there about our policies to Iran and Israel?

Chair:> We have dealt with that, Mr Flynn.

Paul Flynn:> We haven’t dealt with it as far as it applies—

Chair:> Mr Flynn, we are moving on.

Paul Flynn:> You may well move on, but I remain very unhappy about the fact that you will not allow me to finish the questioning I wanted to give on a matter of great importance.

It is shocking but true that Robert Halfon MP, who disrupted Flynn with repeated points of order, receives funding from precisely the same Israeli sources as Werritty, and in particular from Mr Poju Zabludowicz. He also formerly had a full time paid job as Political Director of the Conservative Friends of Israel.

But despite the evasiveness of O’Donnell and the obstruction of paid zionist puppet Halfon, O’Donnell confirms vital parts of my investigation. In particular he agrees that the Fox-Werritty-Gould “private dinner” in Tel Aviv was with Mossad, and that Gould met Werritty many times more than the twice that O’Donnell listed in his “investigation” into this affair.

Of the six meetings of Fox-Gould-Werritty together which I discovered, five were while Fox was Secretary of State for Defence. Only one was while Fox was in opposition. But O’Donnell has now let the cat much further out of the bag, with the astonishing admission to Paul Flynn’s above questioning that Gould, Fox and Werritty held “meetings that took place before the election.” He also refers to “some of those meetings” as being before the election. Both are plainly in the plural.

It is now evident that not only did Fox, Gould and Werritty have at least five meetings while Fox was in power – with never another British official present – they had several meetings while Fox was shadow Foreign Secretary. O’Donnell is right that what Fox and Werritty were up to in opposition is not his concern. But what Gould was doing with them – a senior official – most definitely is.

A senior British diplomat cannot just hold a series of meetings with the opposition shadow Defence Secretary and a paid zionist lobbyist. What on earth was happening?

The absolutely astonishing cover-up and lack of honesty from the government about the Fox-Gould-Werritty relationship is being maintained with cast-iron resolve. Not only is Gould a self-declared fervent zionist, he was born in the same year as Chancellor George Osborne and attended the same private school – St Paul’s. At least some of the time he was meeting Fox and Werrity while they were in opposition, Gould was Private Secretary to New Labour Foreign Secretary David Milliband. That opens up the question of whether David Milliband, another fervent zionist, was part of the discussions with Mossad and US neo-cons on how to engineer war with Iran, for which Werritty was the conduit.

That would help explain the completeness of the cover-up. The government appears able with total impunity to refuse to answer MPs’ questions on Gould/Fox/Werritty, and they will not respond to Freedom of Information requests. It is now proven without doubt that O’Donnell lied blatantly about the number of Gould-Fox-Werritty meetings, and that Mossad was involved. And yet every single British mainstream media outlet still refuses to mention it.

I know from a mole that the plot involves a plan to attack Iran. For the cover-up to be so blatant and yet so comprehensively maintained, the secret at the heart of this conspiracy must be great, and those complicit must include a very large swathe of the British political and media establishment.

UPDATE: access to this blog is now blocked from FCO and Cabinet Office terminals. Very wise – truth can be contagious.

[TonyGosling]

Britain’s Gould-Werritty-Mossad cover-up
http://www.redress.cc/stooges/slittlewood20111129

Meanwhile, on the British side of the Atlantic former ambassador Craig Murray has numerous well-placed informants and is busy blowing the lid off one of the slimiest intrigues ever exposed at Westminster.
"There is a huge government cover-up in progress over the Werritty connection to Mossad and the role of British Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould, and their neo-con plan to start a war with Iran.”

Craig Murray, former UK ambassador

On his website Murray has penned a marvellous piece titled “Gould-Werritty: a real conspiracy, not a theory”.

Matthew Gould is the British ambassador to Israel and Adam Werritty is a Zionist stooge, friend and “adviser” to disgraced Defence Secretary Liam Fox.

"There is a huge government cover-up in progress over the Werritty connection to Mossad and the role of British Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould, and their neo-con plan to start a war with Iran,” says Murray. He had made a Freedom of Information request for all communications between Gould and Werritty and was astonished to receive a midnight reply that his request was refused because it was “likely to exceed the cost limit”.

This was like a red rag to a bull. And it coincided with attempts to obstruct MP Paul Flynn while questioning Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell on the Gould-Werritty connection at the House of Commons Public Administration Committee. Flynn was repeatedly interrupted by Robert Halfon MP who, says Murray, receives funding from the same Israeli sources as Werritty and was formerly political director of the Conservative Friends of Israel.

Murray's concerns centre on the numerous meetings between Fox, Werritty and Gould, and especially their “private dinner” in Tel Aviv with Mossad. Murray claims that Gould met Werritty many times more than the twice that O’Donnell listed in his “investigation” into the affair.

Murray observes: "It is now evident that not only did Fox, Gould and Werritty have at least five meetings while Fox was in power – with never another British official present – they had several meetings while Fox was shadow foreign secretary.” He acknowledges that O’Donnell was correct in saying that what Fox and Werritty were up to in opposition wasn’t his concern. But what Gould – a senior official – was doing with them most certainly was. "A senior British diplomat cannot just hold a series of meetings with the opposition shadow defence secretary and a paid Zionist lobbyist. What on earth was happening?"

O’Donnell, replying to Flynn's questions about the dinner date with Mossad, said:

The important point here was that, when the secretary of state had that meeting, he had an official with him—namely, in this case, the ambassador. That is very important, and I should stress that I would expect our ambassador in Israel to have contact with Mossad. That will be part of his job. It is totally natural, and I do not think that you should infer anything from that about the individual’s biases. That is what ambassadors do.

But Murray is adamant. "I know from a mole that the plot involves a plan to attack Iran."

Many will feel it is intolerable for a Christian country like Britain to be represented by a Jew, especially in the Middle East and more especially in Israel where there is bound to be a conflict of interest. There used to be a rule in the Foreign Office, I understand, preventing such person being appointed. Why was that rule disregarded?

Gould has been photographed wearing a Union Jack kippa in a tacky attempt to convince us he’s batting for Britain. Can an ardent Zionist Jew be anything but an Israel-firster? You may well ask, Fox and Werritty are both Zionist sympathizers, as are Foreign Secretary Hague and Prime Minister Cameron.

All of them appear firmly wedded to the principle expressed in Fox’s idiotic declaration that “in the battle for the values that we stand for ... Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together...” Fox was the man the Jewish Chronicle hailed as “a champion of Israel within the government”, though of course there are many others – 80 per cent of Conservative MPs for a start.

[scienceplease 2]

Another couple of key point from Craig Murray's article:

- UK civil servants are compliant with the Zionist conspiracy (Murray is making this point that the conspiracy was proven).

- Implicates George Osborne since they not only attended the same private school – St Paul’s. Also meeting with Fox and Werrity while they were in opposition, Gould was ALSO Private Secretary to former Foreign Secretary David Milliband. This implies the WHOLE of Westminster, in effect, is cahoots!

"The Curious case..." in the independent does mention Murray

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/liam-fox-adam-werritty-a nd-the-curious-case-of-our-man-in-tel-aviv-6268640.html

[Mark Gobell]

Some more very interesting information and posts from Craig Murray's website:

Simple Questions A Real Democracy Would Answer

[TonyGosling]

Could also be pressure from advertisers.
But this looks highly suspicious.

[Mark Gobell]

Atlantic Bridge, Liam Fox, Adam Werritty & Israel and BICOM < my edit

by Jonathon Blakeley

09-Oct-2011

[Image] Liam Fox at Herzliya Israel 2009

Atlantic Bridge was set up as the name suggests to bridge across the Atlantic; as an Atlanticist think tank. To foster and maintain that “special relationship” between the US and UK. Founded by Liam Fox in 1997 Atlantic Bridge was ostensibly a charity but failed to meet the basic guidelines for a charity and was booted off in September 2011 by the Charity commission. It was supposed to have an educational role but failed to do so and spent all its donated money on travel, accommodation and social events for its supporters. BICOM – (The British Israel Communications and Research Centre) was one of its primary sources of donations.

BICOM lists its activities as:

Providing daily, expert news summary and analysis of events in Israel and the region through our online publications.

Taking British journalists, opinion formers and policy makers to Israel and the Palestinian territories to learn about the issues first-hand.

Bringing analysts, journalists and politicians from the region to Britain, to share their insights with their British counterparts.

Promoting a balanced discourse about Israel in the British media by creating opportunities for a wide range of voices to be heard.

Organising events and seminars in the UK aimed at deepening the discussion about Israel in Britain.

Engaging in dialogue with British opinion formers, policy makers and the media on issues of importance to Israel and the Britain-Israel relationship.

Providing resources to individuals and organisations in Britain who share BICOM’s agenda to promote a better understanding of Israel.

Bicom has been keen to foster close relationships with all media people as can be seen here by this interesting leaked email. As well as the media interests Bicom has close links and donates large amounts to all three political parties in the UK; but this is not directly. Bicom donates to CFI (Conservative Friends of Israel) & the LFI (The Labour Friends of Israel) as well and many other Political organisations. It is through these mediator organisations that money is channeled to the politicians themselves.

Gifts are not Payments

The LFI and CFI are -”Unincorporated associations” therfore they are not required to open the books to the public or the UK Tax Man.

An unincorporated association:

not subject to Tax
is not a legal entity
is an organisation of persons or bodies (more than one) with an identifiable membership (possibly changing),
has a membership who are bound together for a common purpose by an identifiable constitution or rules (which may be written or oral),
is an organisation where the form of association is not one which is recognised in law as being something else (for example, an incorporated body or a partnership),
must have an existence distinct from those persons who would be regarded as its members,
the tie between the persons need not be a legally enforceable contract.

Because an unincorporated association is not a legal entity, it

can not be sued, taxed or subject to a criminal enquiry.Well that bit does have an exception, if one of the members breaks rules regarding donations and their ‘distribution’ and is grassed on to the police, then a criminal enquiry may begin. Nice…I am sure all this is perfect legal. I am just not sure whether it is ethically right?

Types of Unincorporated associations from HMR TAX UK http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/ctmanual/ctm41310.htm

Unincorporated associations can include:

Various types of members’ club.
Investment clubs (see CTM40650).
Thrift funds and Christmas or holiday clubs (see CTM40810).
Voluntary organisations, including those set up ‘for good causes’.
Religious communities.
Freemasons {my addition}

Atlantic Bridge had links to various neo-con organizations in Washington most notably:

Centre for Security Policy
The Heritage Foundation
the Lehman Brothers

Atlantic Bridge was effectively an Anglo/American/Jewish think tank, or at least that was the cover story. What becomes clear is that Bicom , Liam Fox and Adam Werritty were are closely linked and often at the same conferences. One wonders whether Adam Werritty was employed by BICOM itself. There is no direct evidence that I can find, however both Adam Werritty (Dr. Adam Werritty, Advisor, Office of Shadow Defense Secretary; UK Executive Director, The Atlantic Bridge listed as an international participant) & Poju Zabludowicz (BICOM) as a sponsor; are both listed in the executive summary at the same conference regarding Israel’s security.

[Mark Gobell]

This is the website of political blogger Stephen Newton who began investigating Atlantic Bridge and complained to the Charity Commission who eventual delisted it.

Stephen Newton's diary of sorts…

[TonyGosling]

Adam Werritty paid £70,000 by Tory donor-funded Pargav Limited

Most of the money collected by Liam Fox's best man and former flatmate was used to support his jetset lifestyle
Rupert Neate - guardian.co.uk, Thursday 29 March 2012 19.46 BST

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/29/adam-werritty-liam-fox-pargav

Adam Werritty was paid more than £70,000 by a company set up to support his jetset lifestyle following Liam Fox around the world, official accounts have shown for the first time.

It comes as the City of London police confirmed they were continuing their investigation into allegations of fraud surrounding the former defence secretary's best man and former flatmate, who handed out business cards falsely describing him as one of Fox's official advisers.

Annual accounts for Pargav Limited, show Werritty collected £73,850 in the year to 31 October last year. Most of the money came from high-profile Tory donors, some of whom had been directly petitioned for donations by Fox.

Fox was forced to resign as secretary of state for defence last year after repeated revelations about his working relationship with Werritty, his close friend of 14 years who had no official role in government and had not been granted security clearance.

The Guardian revealed that Werritty handed out business cards that described him as "advisor to the Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP" and used his quasi-official role to met a string of world leaders, including the president of Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Pargav's accounts, filed at Companies House on Monday, state that "consultancy charges of £73,850 were paid to Mr AM Werritty, a shadow director of the company". The accounts add that Werritty owed the company an additional £11,381. Werritty's debts to the company dragged it £5,125 into the red.

Pargav, which received £147,000 of funds from four high-profile Tory-donating businessmen and an international investigation company staffed by ex-MI6 employees, paid for Werritty to take a string of first-class flights to meet up with Fox at 18 exotic locations while the former cabinet minister was on government business. Fox also hosted Werritty at the Ministry of Defence's headquarters on Whitehall 22 times between the 2010 general election and his resignation in October last year.

Some of the donations also ended up being spent on high-end suits and even a bill of £379.60 at Larry Flint's Hustler Club topless bar in New York, while donors thought they were supporting "security policy analysis and research".

One of the donors, Jon Moulton, a Tory donor and multimillionaire venture capitalist, has provided the police with documents that he claims proves he was duped into handing over £35,000. Moulton, whose private equity company Better Capital owns Reader's Digest UK, said Werritty "wasted" the money and spent it in a way that "bore absolutely no resemblance" to written assurances Werritty provided.

Moulton said Fox had solicited the donation from him after he gave funds to the former defence secretary's "back office" while Fox was in opposition. "Liam [Fox] asked me to put some money in the same general direction. I was at great pains to get written assurances as to what it was used for, which bore absolutely no resemblance to what it was used for," he told BBC Newsnight in November. "I can definitely say that I was mugged. In fact, if you look at the dictionary, the definition of 'foxed' is discoloured with yellowish-brown staining, and I fear it might be reasonably appropriate."

A City of London police's economic crime unit confirmed its investigation into claims that the donations were solicited or used fraudulently. A spokesman said on Monday: "The City of London police has an ongoing investigation into allegations of fraud made by John Mann MP. Detectives have spoken to a number of people as part of this investigation, but it is not force policy to disclose names. The investigation continues."

Until the filing of Pargav's accounts, Werritty had not been named in the company's official records. The identification of Werritty as a "shadow director" raises further questions about the management of the company. "It should be remembered that acting as a shadow director is not an offence in itself," HMRC states on its website. "But the existence of a shadow director is a risk indicator. It raises the suspicion that the shadow director is attempting to conceal something by managing the company but not being listed as one of its directors."

Pargav's only named director was Oliver Hylton, who was working as aide and charity adviser to Michael Hintze, the billionaire chief executive of hedge fund CQS. Hylton, who left CQS's employment in the wake of the scandal, also provided Werritty with free office space in CQS's plush offices over looking Buckingham Palace.

Hintze, who has donated £1.5m to the Tory party and was this week revealed as one of the leading Conservative donors invited to dine privately with David Cameron following the 2010 general election, was also a funder of Fox's now-defunct Atlantic Bridge charity, which was run by Werritty.

Pargav was created days before the charity commission suspended Atlantic Bridge, which had been paying for Werritty's flights around the world.

Also listed among Pargav donors were Mick Davis, the boss of the FTSE 100-registered mining company Xstrata, financier Michael Lewis, a real estate company owned by arms tycoon Poju Zabludowicz, G3, an international investigation company run by former MI6 officers, and defence lobbyist Stephen Crouch's IRG Ltd. Davis, Lewis and Zabludowicz are all big donors to the Tory party.

Werritty's lawyers had not commented by Thursday evening.

[TonyGosling]

3. The issue under consideration is not a trivial one. It is claimed that the former Secretary of State for Defence was operating a private defence policy under the influence of Adam Werritty who was himself under the influence of his paymasters from right wing neo-con groups in the United States. Liam Fox was conducting a policy on Sri Lanka which was not entirely in accord with government policy: it is possible that he may have been conducting a policy with Israel which was also not in accord with government policy. If that allegation proves to be true it could well lead to an acceleration of a process in which Britain could stumble to an avoidable war with Iran. That could lead to similar dire consequences to those of the wars in Iraq and Helmand which lead to the deaths of 179 and 404 British soldiers. The past Secretary of State should not be allowed to escape a full investigation because of his resignation. These matters are of such importance to the nation and the conduct of future ministers that they require, not the botched brief probe conducted by Sir Gus O'Donnell, but a full thorough analysis and judgement of the alleged conduct of the past Secretary of State for Defence and its possible consequences.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmpubadm/17 61/176109.htm