A Briefing for the Serious Followers of Scottish Politics – Final Part – Overt British Secret Services in Scotland – Gathered under the Auspices of Baroness Smith – Add in the Coverts from the previous articles – Could Someone Good at Graphics Draw a Picture Showing Baroness Smith as the Spider at the Centre of Her Web?

See the source image

The John Smith Trust (JST) – The sales pitch

The Trust runs intensive, four-week Fellowship Programmes twice a year in the UK for emerging leaders from 12 countries of the former Soviet Union. The Programmes are built around three pillars – unique insight into UK institutions, personalized meetings and leadership skills development – which together offer both a broad picture and an individual focus.

What is really happening

The political psychology programmes delivered by the Trust are designed to influence the thought processes of individuals confronted with a wide range of political situations so that they select options that most reflect the political system chosen by the Trust. Achieving success means that it has imprinted on the minds of course participants that the ideal is the western-style democracy, with its human rights legislation protecting individual and minority rights and good governance. Shades of “The Manchurian Candidate”.

Social, Group, and Political Psychology Research Group | UWTSD


The Board

Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill: Board member of a number of organisations with interests in Russia and FSU countries. Very influential politically has had a very long career near the top of the British secret services. Widow of the late John Smith, Labour Party Leader.

Catherine Smith: An Advocate. Daughter of Baroness Smith. Vice Chair of JUSTICE Scotland, the Scottish arm of the London NGO. Involved in work promoting the rule of law and human rights in developing democracies and sustainable development in societies in transition.

Girodivite: Mind Manipulation and Brain Washing-The Price of a Predictable  Society

Stephen Gethins: Former SNP Member of Parliament for North East Fife. Worked with Craig Oliphant in Eastern Europe before entering politics for the SNP.

David Charters: Former diplomat. Particular personal interests include cyber security and evolving forms of conflict.

Alex Just: Transitioned from law to high-level strategic communications.

Prof. The Lord Alderdice: Liberal Democrat member of the Lords since 1996. Currently Director of the Centre for the Resolution of Intractable Conflict at Harris Manchester College, Oxford.


How A Murky Row Over Russia, Jeremy Corbyn And A 'Psyops Campaign' Went  Mainstream | HuffPost UK


(1) Craig Oliphant, is a senior member of the Integrity Initiative/Cluster/UK/Inner Core.[1] 

And the Integrity Initiative is:

In 2006, NATO Special Advisor Chris Donnelly co-founded a charity, the “Institute for Statecraft and Governance” (IfS) together with Daniel Lafayeedney, a man previously condemned as untrustworthy in business matters by a judge.

The IFS which authored and published articles on threats to NATO imperialism, the biggest being Russia, was registered to a semi-derelict mill in the Fife constituency of Board member and ex-SNP MP Stephen Gethins.

In 2015, the IfS established the Integrity Initiative, an organization that also received Tory Government funding from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, initially to the tune of many millions.

The Integrity Initiative is described by the British government as a counter-Russia-disinformation campaign, which, in typically Orwellian language, means that it is a U.S.-British disinformation campaign.

Integrity Initiative is the biggest story of 2018 – but not because of  anything it did — RT World News

This is what the Scottish Charity Regulator thought of the organisation:

The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator opened an inquiry into the Institute for Statecraft the 13 December 2018, which after 10 months found that “one of its most significant activities, a project known as the Integrity Initiative did not provide public benefit in furtherance of the charity’s purposes”. It also found that trustees had “breached their trustee duties to act with care and diligence in the interest of the charity, some of them to a serious extent”.[28]

Scottish Labour candidate facing questions over links to 'secretive  military propaganda unit' | HeraldScotland

The 77th Brigade and Scotland’s Independence

Black Watch soldier, Brigadier Alastair Aitken, formed the 77th (CYOPS Brigade, referred to in the media as ‘Twitter troops‘ or ‘Facebook warriors‘, which he described as  the largest integrated government communications organisation [in] Europe.

Scottish Labour has links

A Scottish Labour Party candidate and former “Better Together” boss has been called on to explain her links to a “military propaganda unit” within the British Army. Kate Watson is believed to be part of the Berkshire-based 77th Brigade, which was described by one newspaper as a “special force of Facebook warriors”.

She declined to comment, but David Miller, a professor of political sociology at Bristol University said: “The 77th Brigade is involved in manipulation of the media including using fake online profiles.

Why Political Psychology is Increasing in Popularity in 2016 |

Respected elder statesman of the SNP give warning and advice

In an article published in the “National” (Dec 2018) George Kerevan wrote:

“In any future Scottish independence referendum will the 77th Brigade be neutral or see the yes campaign as a threat to national security and  conduct a campaign to protect the constitutional status quo?  SNP MSP’s and MP’s at Westminster should ask these questions now before it’s too late.”

The Glasgow University hosted John Smith Centre 

The recent purge of left wing politicians and their leadership brought about the return of power and influence to the “Fabian Society” and its right wing socialists, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Ian Murray and many other Unionist Labourites. One of the most insidious objectives of the Fabians is to create a One World (‘Third Way’) government linking with the “New World Order” (NWO) project financed and controlled by the USA. In furtherance of their aims the Fabian’s developed and implemented the highly secretive “educational charity”, “Common Purpose”, which now effectively controls many facets of local and mainstream politics and the media (BBC). More on “Common Purpose” here: and here: .

With Blair then Brown in charge of government the NWO/Bilderberg movement enjoyed guarantees that the UK government would manipulate the electorate and parliament to support their efforts without question. War and War and yet more War. All unjustified. Scots need to be alert to the dangers of unwarranted and misleading statements designed to cause political instability, from persons who actively support the “new” venture which was sprung of Scots without warning. It should be remembered that the late John Smith was a leading Unionist politician and a Bilderberger to boot!!‌‌

Image result for John smith and blair

The Centre’ public sales pitch

A Board comprising members of the Smith family, University of Glasgow alumni, public service practitioners and academic staff oversees the conduct, leadership and management of the Centre. It sets the priorities; benchmarks best practice; and reviews performance to enable the Centre to achieve its aim to promote trust in politics and public service and to empower and attract more people to contribute to public life.

Image result for John smith and blair

membership of  the fluctuating Board 

Catherine Smith (Chair): Catherine is John Smith’s youngest daughter.

Professor Anne Anderson OBE: multi disciplinary educational activist.

Rt Hon Ed Balls: Hard right rich boy and “new Labour” politician

Dr Matt Carter: Blair’s man. Right wing “New Labour” political strategist.

Rt Hon Ruth Davidson MSP: Baroness Ruth. Her rise from nowhere is being guided by ??

David Muir: Ultra right wing “New Labour” strategist. Gordon Brown’s man.

The Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill: Very influential politically has had a very long career near the top of the British secret services. Widow of the late John Smith, Labour Party Leader.

Andrew Wilson: Held a number of posts, including Deputy Chief Economist and Head of Group Communications. at the financially incompetent and ultimately disgraced RBS Group. Founder of the increasingly influential political media company, Charlotte Street Partners.

Kezia Dugdale: Former leader of the Labour Party in Scotland is the Director of the Centre.

Image result for John smith and blair

Tony Blair’s cynical epitaph to the career of John Smith

Blair told his wife that John Smith would die prematurely and he, not Gordon Brown would win the race to become the next Labour leader. The statement was made in April 2004, only a month before Smith suffered a fatal heart attack. Blair woke his wife, Cherie, one morning and told her: “If John dies, I will be leader, not Gordon. And somehow, I think this will happen. I just think it will.” Smith had suffered a serious heart attack in 1988 and Blair argued this was thanks to his lifestyle and, in particular, his heavy drinking. Branding Smith a “stupendous toper”, Blair wrote: “He could drink in a way I have never seen before or since. If there was an Olympic medal for drinking, John would have contended with such superiority that after a few rounds the rest of the field would have simply shaken their heads and banished themselves from the track.” (The Telegraph)

Image result for blair and brown


George Robertson – the Labour Party visionary walks on water – those who mocked now come to worship him

See the source image

George Robertson, (Baron of Port Ellen)

In 1995, when Scottish nationalism began to find increasing favour with Scots as their preferred choice of government Robertson, then Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland said:

“let them have their way. Devolution now entrenches the Scottish parliament in the UK’s unwritten constitution, power devolved from Westminster is power retained by Westminster. It will kill Nationalism stone dead.”

In the years that followed the SNP gloated that the party had destroyed that fallacy by winning the Scottish Parliamentary Elections in 2007, 2011, 2016 and 2020. But “wise seer” George was right.

But his vision of Scots being “fitted up” with a poorly equipped and reversable devolved governance structure proved to be entirely accurate.

As at 2020 Scottish Nationalism is “stone dead” under the auspices of Labour Party apparatchiks, led by Daniel Defoe’s successor, Nicola Sturgeon who joined the nationalist cause falsely proferring to be committed to fighting tooth and nail for independence.

Scots will need to find a way of starting again only this time led by bone-fide Party members who declare “fealty” to a Scotland free and independent of any political interference from Westminster or any other country.

See the source image


New Labour corruptly embraced State Capture and screwed the Nation

Prime Minister Tony Blair and his cabinet after the 1997 election. Front Row from left to right: Secretary of State for Scotland, Donald Dewar; President of the Board of Trade, Margaret Beckett; Home Secretary, Jack Straw; Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, Robin Cook; Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott; Prime Minister, Tony Blair; Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown; Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine; Secretary of State for Education and Employment, David Blunkett; Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Jack Cunningham; Secretary of State for Defence, George Robertson.
Back row from left to right: Chief Whip, Nick Brown; Chief Secretary, Alastair Darling; Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, David Clark; Secretary of State for International Development, Clare Short; Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mo Mowlam; Secretary of State for National Heritage, Chris Smith; Secretary of State for Health, Frank Dobson; President of the Council, Ann Taylor; Secretary of State for Social Security, Harriet Harman; Secretary of State for Wales, Ron Davies; Lord Privy Seal, Lord Richard; Minister of Transport, Gavin Strang; Secretary of the Cabinet, Sir Robin Butler.

What is State Capture?

Transparency International, the anti-corruption watchdog, defines it as:

“a situation where powerful individuals, institutions, companies or groups within or outside a country use corruption to shape a nation’s policies, legal environment and economy to benefit their own private interests”.

An online search of ex-New Labour ministers career choices after moving on from government reveals a disturbing pattern. Many have taken up positions with major weaponry manufacturers.

Related image

Former Foreign Secretary, the late Robin Cook said of his time in office that he:

“came to learn that the chairman of BAE appeared to have the key to the garden door to number 10.  Certainly I never knew No 10 to come up with any decision which would be incommoding to BAE.”

As well as employing in-house lobbyists, BAE Systems also employs a lobbying agency called Portland PR.

Many of Portland PR’s staff have worked at the upper echelons of both Labour and Conservative governments.

Portland Communications Ltd is a political consultancy and public relations agency set up in 2001 by Tim Allan, a former adviser to Tony Blair and Director of Communications at BSkyB. Portland provides communications and public affairs advice to brands and high-profile individuals. Portland’s website states:

“Our team is recruited from the highest levels of the media, politics and government.”

In 2016, political blog The Canary alleged that Portland staff were behind the orchestration of a “coup” against, Jeremy Corbyn, after a wave of mass resignations from his front bench. Len McCluskey of British and Irish trade union Unite told Andrew Marr on his Sunday morning programme:

“I’m amazed that some of the MPs have fallen into a trap.”

Referring to Portland Communications as:

“a sinister force”

McCluskey said:

“This is a PR company with strong links to Tony Blair and right-wing Labour MPs who’ve been involved in this orchestrated coup, and the coup has failed”.

Image result for mod purchasing under new labour

Gordon Brown and new Labour Embraced the Practice

During his 10 years as Chancellor of the Exchequer and then as Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury, Gordon Brown cultivated a carefully crafted reputation as a prudent politician and trustworthy custodian of the public purse. Indeed, such was his penchant for using the word ‘prudence’ that political journalists took to playing a fun game of counting the number of times it was mentioned in his budget speeches, and then comparing it with appearances in previous deliveries at the despatch box – to gauge his commitment to balancing the books. Some even jokingly suggested that Prudence was the name of his girlfriend, who had been kept out of the public eye. Either way, managing the nation’s finances is no joke and Brown’s record in office, as a fiscally prudent politician, does not tally with the evidence. In his autobiography My Life, Our Times, Brown discusses among other things the financial crises, his economic record and that fateful promise made by Tony Blair. Not surprisingly, there is no mention of one of most disgraceful actions of his government. It concerns state-sponsored protectionism, blatant favouritism and failure to install genuinely independent regulators. This shameful episode, which marred Brown’s time in office, relates to the procurement of military equipment.

Image result for mod purchasing under new labour

New Labour Government Procurement Policy in Practice

What has been clear for many years is that, public subsidies handed out to defence equipment manufacturers over several decades, is the reason why they have failed so miserably, to deliver equipment to the Armed Forces which is fit for purpose, adequately sustained in-service and constitutes value for money through-life. In the UK, as in many western countries, the means of defence production, distribution and exchange is exclusively in the hands of private interests, that is to say, the State is entirely dependent on for-profit organisations for the design, development, manufacture and delivery of new military equipment to the Armed Forces. Consequently, the government has no choice but to rely on the Private Sector for all its military equipment needs, including its subsequent upkeep when in-service with the user. The harsh reality is that, no department of state in Whitehall is as dependent on the Private Sector, as is the Ministry of Defence – putting it at serious risk of capture by private interests (if it hasn’t already been) which allows them to bend policy to their will, as it relates to the expenditure of public funds. Equally, these private interests are entirely dependent upon a steady flow of taxpayer funds for their very survival – no least, because they have not bothered to diversify at all. It may be that senior executives seconded from the defence industry and embedded within the Ministry of Defence, who remain in the pay of their employers, may have something to do with this skewing of spending decisions, to favour their narrow commercial interests – at the expense of taxpayers and the national interest.

Related image

Secret Deals

Consider the case of the Terms of Business Agreement on naval shipbuilding, signed by the Brown government with BAE Systems during the dying days of the 2005-10 Parliament, which left the incoming administration no room for manoeuvre at all, as it set about undertaking a comprehensive Strategic Defence & Security Review – for the first time in 12 years. In fact, this agreement was signed in secret, in 2009, precisely because it locked the government into an appallingly poor 15-year contract laced with a punitive get-out clause which, if made public at the time, would have attracted criticism and negative publicity in the press and media during the run-up to the 2010 general election, potentially swinging the result in favour of the other party. The existence of the TOBA was only revealed to Parliament in 2011 by the Cameron-led coalition government, when it was confronted with the undeniable truth that MoD finances were in pretty bad shape and needed to be declared publicly, to garner public support for deep cuts in the defence budget that ensued.

Lack of Fiscal Prudence

It is an open secret that the even the most fiscally prudent people in government are prone to softening their hard-line stance just before a general election, when they are up for re-election, which makes them more likely to open-up the public purse. Equally, defence contractors are aware of this weakness in top politicians and will take full advantage, by surreptitiously intensifying their lobbying efforts in cahoots with labour trade unions, to apply political pressure spliced with threats of massive lay-offs, timed to coincide with the electoral cycle, to relieve politicians of taxpayers’ money and maximise their take – which is exactly what happened with this TOBA. So, instead of exposing defence equipment manufacturers to the full rigours of the free market, that is, not shielding them from “feeling the heat” of competitive market forces, the Brown government chose to engage in protectionism and favouritism by handing out uncontested, long-term shipbuilding contracts worth billions of pounds – with virtually no checks and controls, or even guarantees.

Image result for mod purchasing under new labour

Summary and the Way Ahead

People at the Ministry of Defence are, without exception, favourably disposed towards the defence industry because they are completely dependent upon it for their subsequent career choices (via the revolving door), when their time in public service comes to an end, or their employment contract is terminated abruptly by political edict. Indeed, it is very hard to find anyone at MoD who will aggressively defend taxpayers’ interests once they have enjoyed a cosy relationship with contractors. It is fair to say that they certainly know which side their ‘bread is buttered’! It is precisely to overcome this disastrous state of affairs that the government should set the objective of pulling back from the defence equipment market and allow the Private Sector to take-over, so that it can make the necessary capital allocation decisions for itself, as it relates to the development of its own products – instead of continually looking to intervene in the market with public funds which, as history has shown, will always be squandered. An innovative proposal on how to go about eliciting Private Sector investment capital in defence procurement programmes was set out in a written submission to the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee, which reported on its inquiry into Industrial Strategy in the last Parliament. It introduces a modern Defence Industrial Strategy that puts financial security and the national interest first, not military equipment manufacturers’ commercial interests.

Composed by Jag Patel

The pdf copy of the paper can be downloaded from here:

Related image

And the Arms dealers have wormed their way into UK Schools and Colleges

In allowing the arms trade into schools and colleges we are teaching children that innovation for the sake of destruction is acceptable. Private arms companies and government-owned military organisations have wormed their way into the British education system. Global arms companies have links with many UK Universities; investing in research programmes, poaching recent graduates and funding new buildings.

Image result for weapons manufacturers in schools and colleges

But these links stretch further than this into our education system, as weapons manufacturers also invest their time and money into schools across the country. Raytheon, an American weapons and cyber security company with multiple UK sites, holds an annual “Quadcopter Challenge” in which children are encouraged to design the best drone they can. Billed as a means for the company to ‘invest in its future workforce’ by promoting STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects, this programme reached over 1,000 teenagers nationwide in 2018 with the full backing of the Westminster government. Pushing STEM subjects is most common amongst private arms manufacturers and government-funded military organisations; QinetiQ and BAE Systems each boast various outreach programmes. In 2017, BAE partnered up with the Royal Navy and the RAF to visit 420 schools with a workshop designed to encourage the uptake of science and maths amongst 10-13 year olds. That year, BAE Systems also joined forces with the Royal Navy, QinetiQ and the University of Portsmouth to open a college. Portsmouth’s University Technical College (UTC) allows students to complete GCSEs and further educational qualifications in STEM subjects, whilst giving them ‘regular engagement’ with ‘employers and partners’. These partners include the likes of Airbus, who build the fighter jets used by Saudi Arabia in the war on Yemen; and BAE Systems, who produced the missiles used by the UK in its bombing of Syria. In addition to encouraging young children and teenagers to take up sciences, dozens of universities from Southampton to Sheffield are making millions of pounds from arms industry investment. The University of Cambridge, for example, received £13.7m from private arms companies between 2008 and 2011. The University of Sheffield was also funded £13.7m during this period, along with Imperial College London, which was granted over £16m between 2008 and 2017. BAE Systems in particular has a vested interest in British higher education. Southampton, Strathclyde, Manchester, Cranfield and Birmingham are five “strategic partner universities”, which have all signed long-term partnership deals with BAE to be ‘mutually productive’.  Recently, the company handed out awards to PhD students from each of these institutions for various research projects. The overall winner was a project from the University of Strathclyde that developed new technology for detecting far away targets. The company responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Yemenis through the selling of arms to the Saudi-led Coalition, is being facilitated by universities and students across the country. BAE took on 700 apprentices in 2019 and boasts that it is ‘one of the biggest UK supporters of education’ that has links to ‘approximately 100 universities’ worldwide. It remains unclear if this commitment to education extends to the two million Yemeni children who can’t go to school because of the war BAE Systems is helping wage. These companies gloat that by promoting STEM subjects they are pioneering a better, safer future. The arms industry puts on a front of humanity and tells us that the good work it does in this country outweighs the destruction it unleashes overseas.  This is simply not the case. By allowing the arms trade into schools, colleges and universities, we are teaching children that innovation for the sake of destruction is acceptable and desirable. There is only a small leap between teaching schoolchildren to make toy drones and getting graduates to build real ones. (Stop the War coalition)

Related image