Did MI6 plot against UKIP?

30 April 2013

4:34 PM

30 April 2013

4:34 PM

Dirty tricks against UKIP by the establishment are not a new phenomenon. Though in recent days the Conservative party have been found engaging in them, there are far more striking examples from the recent past.

On 25 May 2001 the Spectator published a piece by Norman Tebbit that deserves to be far better known.  Tebbit recounts the tale of two serving or former British intelligence agents who infiltrated first Jimmy Goldsmith’s Referendum Party and then UKIP. Tebbit gives examples of how UKIP’s efforts were derailed during the period in which these agents were inside the party.

It is important to stress before directing you to the Tebbit piece below that it is not conspiracy theory. So long as it was British government policy to seek further integration into the EU, parties like UKIP posed a threat to perceived British interests.

As the arguments and policies of the mainstream parties crumble all about them, it is worth reflecting on the depths some institutions have been willing to stoop to in recent years in order to silence a perfectly respectable and mainstream point of view. I think other members of the public will find the piece interesting reading.

UKIP: Is There A Hidden Agenda? By Norman Tebbit 25 MAY 2001

Norman Tebbit has uncovered an intriguing story about a possible link between Europe and the security services

I have heard more than a few conspiracy theorists telling me of plots against the Queen or how the KGB had infiltrated the Vatican, not to mention absolutely reliable sightings of Little Green Men from Mars. The Little Green Men fraternity are not too much trouble. A promise that their news will be passed to the special unit monitoring LGM is sufficient cover to escape. The conspiracy theorists are more difficult as they are reluctant to accept that the cock-up theory is more often right than the conspiracy one. So when a disgruntled ex-employee of the United Kingdom Independence Party told me that the party had been infiltrated by – of all things – MI6, my first thought was ‘Here’s another one’.

Mr X did not impress at first sight. Though he was not wearing an anorak, he had the air of a man who would. His credentials, however, were good: a long-time Labour supporter, opponent of entry into the Common Market, assistant to the late Eric Heffer when the party’s policy (to which young Tony Blair subscribed) was to negotiate Britain’s exit from the EEC. He told me a story full of circumstantial – but not direct – evidence. One phrase and two names stuck in my mind.

‘However often you take off the overcoat,’ he said, ‘it still fits when you put it back on.’ He claimed (and I agree with him, but the leaders of UKIP do not) that the party had veered away from a policy of standing against sitting Europhile MPs to one of standing in seats where a sitting Tory MP might be ousted or a Tory candidate might be kept out, however good their Eurosceptic credentials might be. Many such seats are in the West Country where the arch-sceptic Patrick Nicholls has a majority of only 281 over the Liberal Democrats, with 13,000 Labour votes available to be squeezed. UKIP polled 1,600 and clearly has no chance of winning, but maintain that their candidate will take votes mainly from the LibDems and Labour, not from Patrick Nicholls. I find that hard to believe.


If I am right, UKIP’s intervention will be immensely damaging to the Tories, and will give their Europhiles the platform to overturn a Eurosceptic leadership; Lord Brittan fired the first shots in that campaign in the Times earlier this week. Nigel Farage – who left the Tories at the time of Maastricht – is confident that I am mistaken. If he is wrong, however, UKIP will have played into the hands of Blair and Brussels. A badly battered Tory party plunged into a leadership crisis would offer Blair the perfect opportunity to bounce Britain into the euro before the sceptics could be rallied to organise a No campaign.

That overcoat fits. It even fits with Blair’s fanatical obsession not just to beat but to destroy the Conservative party.

Then there were the two names. Mr X had no proof, but he believed that they had links to a British intelligence service. Somewhat half-heartedly, I made my own inquiries and unexpectedly struck gold. There is no doubt in my mind about what is known in the trade as their ‘provenance’. I challenged one directly: ‘Are you or have you ever been a member of [that agency]?’ Denial came there none, only an angry retort that I should be ashamed of myself for asking such a question.

The agency does not answer questions of that sort either – and quite right too. Its practice is firmly but non-attributably to deny that it would ever sanction an agent on the active list to intervene in the affairs of a British political party. The agency would say that the recent legislation on political oversight of the intelligence services makes it impossible for such action to be authorised. However, I am perfectly sure that the individuals had been active agents, although both would claim to have retired some years ago, well before joining UKIP.

The conspiracy theory was given a boost when I discovered this week that during the 1997 election both individuals worked for Jimmy Goldsmith’s Referendum party. The first to be employed promptly recruited the other. With its single manifesto commitment to seek a referendum on British membership of the European Union, it was seen, and proved to be, a more credible contender than UKIP, polling more than 800,000 out of about one million Eurosceptic votes. It was a poor return for Goldsmith’s £20 million investment. I have often reflected that I could have made much better use of that money to advance his cause.

After the 1997 election both individuals moved to UKIP. One is still there. I understand the other resigned his post some three months ago, having lost the confidence of some of his colleagues. I do not believe the leaders of UKIP were aware of the background of these people when they were employed. Although there was no shock at UKIP when I told them what I knew about the person who had left, there was some surprise about the other one.

There is nothing illegal or improper in former intelligence officers joining political parties as staff members or to seek election. There are former agents in both Houses of Parliament, but to find two in such small organisations as the Referendum party or UKIP is somewhat against the odds. It is easy enough to postulate innocent explanations for the activities of these two people. One can believe the denials of the agency for which they worked – although in the immortal words of Miss Mandy Rice-Davies, ‘They would say that, wouldn’t they?’ It is possible that they might have been recruited by a non-British agency with a particular interest in the politics of Europe in this country.

Maybe the leaders of UKIP, whose good faith I do not doubt, are right to believe that hordes of former LibDem voters are poised to jump ship from the most extreme Europhile party in Britain to vote for the most anti-European party in Britain. I can only say that I will be as surprised as Charles Kennedy if it works out that way.

Since Attlee’s Labour government helped to create Nato, all three major parties have agreed that membership of that alliance is in the British national interest. Through the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s those opposing membership were regarded as certainly misguided and possibly subversive.

It is possible to draw a parallel with the present agreement of the three major parties that Britain should remain within the European Union – in, of course, our national interest. A party whose sole raison d’etre is British withdrawal might be regarded as subversive. Already New Labour equates patriotism with membership and describes calls for withdrawal as ‘unpatriotic’.

The Cold War is over. The EU is not Nato. UKIP is not a danger to the United Kingdom (though it may be to the European Union). If the Conservative party moved further into Euroscepticism, even contemplating withdrawal, the state would not be endangered, so interference in UKIP could not be justified.

Once away from the heat and dust of an election campaign, it would be wise to set up an independent inquiry to establish whether anything improper has gone on. I hope it would conclude that despite appearances there has been nothing more than a string of coincidences and some bad political judgments. In the meantime, the voters should be informed of the facts and left to make up their minds by 7 June.

They should also listen to what the parties say about Europe. Essentially the Blair position is that anything the EU wants goes. There is quibbling but no lines drawn in the sand. Labour might drag its feet or grumble – but in the end it agrees to what our partners want. Hague is different. His position on the euro was painfully caricatured by John Humphrys: ‘If you are only committed to the pound for one parliament, what about the monarchy?’ Hague’s answer is sound. He cannot commit the British people for more than one parliament. He sees not just an ephemeral economic advantage from keeping the pound but that, if our currency goes, the Bank of England’s economic policy will too, with tax and public expenditure following soon after. He has no need to offer a referendum. The election promise is to keep the pound, but Hague’s refusal – just – to say ‘No euro on principle. No for ever’ has allowed Tory Europhiles to accept his policy.

More broadly, the slogan ‘In Europe but not ruled by Europe’ makes sense to millions of voters nervous of the trauma of disengaging from the European Union. In practice Prime Minister Hague might find our ‘partners’ unwilling to offer that option. What then? Who would favour ‘in and ruled by’ and who would opt for ‘out and rule ourselves’?

Hague’s promise not to ratify the Nice Treaty would shock Europe. His policy to allow other states to integrate, even into a single state if they wished (getting the British dog out of the federal manger), would require a fundamental rewriting of the Treaty of Rome. That could allow the Central European states into the EU, with Britain and several other states ‘in’ a Europe to which they did not have to concede the right to independent self-government. Germany and France could merge – if that is what they wanted – into a federal republic, a more realistic project than the merger of ten or 20 states.

Hague’s proposal for ‘reserved powers’ to prevent the EU from overriding Parliament in areas where we never intend to give powers to them sounds innocent enough, but is bound to lead to clashes with Brussels. This, too, could be resolved only by British surrender or a new treaty. The refusal to ratify Nice would be a clear signal and a powerful bargaining token.

Whatever the outcome of the UKIP affair, even UKIP knows that only a victory for Hague can prevent Britain being bounced into the euro in a rigged referendum and dragged down the federal road to the point of no return. Not even ten seats for UKIP could stop that – and I’m afraid they will not win even one.

UKIP supporters who want their votes to count would be wise to vote for Tory candidates wherever the seat might otherwise fall to Europhile LibDems or Labour.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • Sydonie Hampton

    In less than a week Leon Brittan and John Stingemoor have suddenly died, at relatively early ages.

    Both are connected to the Parliamentary Paedophile investigations being suppressed by the establishment each day.

  • Steve Cheney

    Why would anyone bother to use “dirty tricks” against this party of buffoons and idiots? No one is scared of them. They stand a good chance of losing seats in Europe, and they won’t pick any up in the UK parliament, because their tiny percentage of voters will all wuss out and vote Tory when the time comes – the polls as much as confirm this.

  • martin_lowe

    Did MI6 plot against UKIP?

    Of course not. Don’t be so silly.

  • global city

    Patriotic to merge your country out of existence? Remaining in the EU, as we all clearly now know, will entail the destruction of the entity we are supposed to be patriotic about. How can it be unpatriotic to not want to see your country’s sovereignty passed on to another organisation.

    Ceding power is not pooling power. MI6 should be infiltrating all those fanatical pro EU parties.

    • Steve Cheney

      UKIP are unpatriotic because they want to change the country by attacking our long and established traditions, such as supporting the sciences and welcoming immigration.

      • global city

        do you mean cluemate sceance and MASS immigration?

        Sure, they are against those two cultural Marxist shibboleths.

        • Steve Cheney

          “Cluemate sceance”? Are those words?

          • global city

            Yes. Newly officially sanctioned by the UN. They will help some to get off the hook when the whole CAGW mania is revealed to be nothing more than a chimera. They will claim that they had never ever mention climate or science!

            • Steve Cheney

              Ah right. Well yes, I was talking about climate science, and I don’t really care how funny you think that is. UKIP has chosen to take an anti-science position and they deserve to be ridiculed for it.

              • global city

                But, no, they haven’t… that is just the point.

                They have been advised by real scientists who disagree with those promoting the horrors of CAGW. It is the scientists closest to the heart of the hypothesis that have been caught repeatedly adulterating the evidence, not those who dispute the hypothesis and provide alternative research results.

                Are you that insufferably arrogant that you could not even work that out?

                Don’t just read the Guardian, the IPPC report of the BBC, see what’s out there with regards to the science of AGW.

  • UKSteve
  • Simon Fay

    Which army units might be prepared to enact a Tianamen scenario here in Britain?

  • Valentine Fabris

    Forget MI5 / 6…. this is a Bullingdon Club stitch up… contemporaries at Oxford in the Cameron, Osborne, Johnson era said that the BC was a front for a Neo-Fascist conspiracy to dominate and then destroy the Tory party…. all that self-induced vomiting and debauchery whilst trashing restaurants in Oxford was simply a cover for something far more sinister. Dave, Gideon and Bojo are hell-bent on destroying the traditional Tory party …. and good luck to them !

    What they will reappear as, when their goals are achieved,heaven alone knows….

  • The_Missing_Think

    I’ve always wondered if the acronym ‘BOO’ was a subtle indicator that UKIP, at some level, had been compromised.

    Getting shot of the EU is something to cheer loudly… yet… UKIP’s chosen soundbite, is emotionally the opposite. Voters like positivity, for example,

    Save Homes In Tunbridge has the same, best avoid it, obvious connective problem.

  • Alan McIntyre

    I will type this loudly. THE UK IS ALREADY PART OF A LEGALLY BINDING FEDERATION AND CANNOT LEAVE. As soon as the member states are bankrupt enough and their peoples desperate enough they will be seen to be ready to accept this inevitable announcement. We are being lied to daily. For this reason alone, UKIP will never be allowed to hold power. Do you think Tony Blairs ‘secret courts’, exposed in last months news were set up to make decisions regarding people in care??? These people who have been sent to prison with no trial are a tester for the rest of the UK to gauge public reaction and guess what? There was none!! We have a police state that imprisons people without trial and most were imprisoned because they were threatened by the secret courts and thought a visit to a solicitor would be the right thing to do. Wrong!! By simply MENTIONING to anyone you have been threatened you are automatically jailed. Wake up UK. You are in a Soviet Style federation and only mass protests and a general strike will put an end to this. The government is powerless.

  • zanzamander

    Are you sure your emails, texts etc. are not being hacked by the same lot, Mr Murray? Our secret service is completely compromised and at the beck and call of Arabs.

  • Colonel Mustard

    This has the fingerprints of Common Purpose all over it.

  • Tom Tom

    Well it is possible to look at Lloyd George and his friend Maundy Gregory of MI5 and MI6 fame and the death of Victor Grayson MP. Or perhaps MI6 favouring Appeasement and feeding positive news to Chamberlain whilst MI5 played the opposite role….

    Does anyone seriously believe MI6 does not work for US interests and MI5 for its own ? I mean we had July 2005 bombers under MI5 “observation” and Muslim fanatics on their way to Dewsbury with bombs under MI5 “observation” and only a policeman checking car insurance prevented the Bradford area from exploding.

    MI6 belongs to the Foreign Office which as Tebbit once said is there to “represent foreigners” and MI5 belongs to the Home Office which is there to hold Britons captive and find the right excuse to expunge civil liberties with the Civil Contingencies Act 2004.

  • PaulStott

    We published a major analysis of Norman Tebbit’s analysis in Notes from the Boderland magazine, in a wider look at how our spooks have attempted to bugger about with the anti-EU campaign. It can be read on the link below:

  • Austin Barry

    The Security Service seems remarkably inept.

    How, or perhaps why, for example, did these alleged masters of dissimulation and protectors of the State let the rampant paedophile Savile become a close chum of Thatcher and Prince Charles? (Perhaps the strangely ubiquitous Jimmy was an MI5 agent?)

    If MI5, rather than MI6, did conspire against UKIP it has done a feeble, counterproductive job.

    • Tom Tom

      I always thought MI5 created the BNP it was so inept. Maybe UKIP’s lack of success was a result of MI5 ?

    • Dicky14

      If you nip over to Anna Racoon and her Duncroft files, I wouldn’t be so sure about Saville yet.

  • Daniel Maris

    I’d be v. surprised if they didn’t have agents in every party. 🙂

  • james cooper

    Conspiracy theories are always good reading, they should leave you with an air of incredulity, This tale of uncover operation does exactly that, I want to believe the fact stated point me in the direction of believing, Perhaps I should, nothing is impossible I have found,for when my feet are off the ground I pick myself up dust myself off and start all over again

  • allymax bruce

    Anyway, the sooner we get Nigel Farage, and his UKIP, into power in Westminster, the better.
    Too many spooks, looking for too many shadows.
    Not enough bankers, hanging their heads on the gallows.

    • Daniel Maris

      I think you can see the mountain they have to clmb – between their own incompetence and the determination of their opponents to destroy them.

      • Steve Cheney

        Speaking as an opponent of them, we are pretty much just letting them wear themselves out. They’ve based their whole campaign on promising things that they know they won’t be able to delivery, appealing to people’s ignorance of the democratic process. Ideally, they’ll get a couple of MPs in 2015, so that they can make buffoons of themselves in public for a while, probably get chucked out for yelling at people, and bury the party completely by 2020.

        • global city

          That’s a bit of an outdated notion there Steve. More than a few quite competent people have joined the UK Independence bandwagon that will provide the professionalism and solidity they have, even by their own admission, suffered from.

          How successful they are will largely be determined by how perfidious the other three parties are, with regards to the EU.

          People have finally cottoned on to what the EU actually is now. Deception of the people as to the real design behind the project has always been the fundamental flaw in our strategy.

          The only way forward now, whether you are pro or anti the UK remaining inside the political project, is an honest debate about the project, it’s supranational aspirations, the consequences for democracy and the right to self determination, the pros and cons of it’s economic structures, the superseding of Common Law with Continental norms, etc.

          I think if the establishment try to continue hiding behind lies and misinformation regarding the fundamental impacts of EU membership then we’ll end up having a bloody revolution!

          • Steve Cheney

            I’m not sure that I agree with your assessment. I don’t think that opinion about the EU has changed much over the past few years. It’s funny actually, I’ve always seen people talking about how when they get their referendum, we’ll be out of the EU, but from the stats I’ve seen, if there were a referendum, it would be pretty close.

            I am happy to have an honest debate about the pros and cons of the EU; however, I do not trust the public to have it. The truth is that the tabloids promote and nurture a lot of myths and misconceptions about the EU, with the complicity of the government. I do not share your view of the major parties on this – the Tories in particular have found it very convenient to be in the EU, as whenever they have a policy to launch that they think will be unpopular, they can simply claim that it was forced upon them by the EU (or “dreamed up in Brussels”) and divert public antipathy away from themselves.

            This is what I find strange about the EU issue – everyone seems to think that the establishment is against THEIR side. To me, it’s obvious that the press wants us out, or at least wants us to think that the EU is treating us poorly. I put this largely down to Murdoch’s dislike of the unions and his desire to stoke up xenophobia to sell papers to the dwindling, ageing minority that are still willing to buy. Same goes for Dacre really. You don’t really see much pro-EU rhetoric until you come to those who actually have to deal directly with it – e.g. British business owners, politicians and so forth.

            • Steve Cheney

              We’re not going to have a “bloody revolution” though. I mean, if we didn’t have one over forcing people to work for nothing then I don’t think we’ll have one over that.

              A lot of people actually quite like the EU, by the way. I mean, I hear a lot of talk about sovereignty, but on the flipside, I see a lot of people seeing what we do with that sovereignty, and recognising that the EU is far more likely to protect British people from exploitative employers than anyone that we might elect to government. And UKIP is very much included in that.

              • global city

                So, you’re happier under a benign dictator as long as it is doing thee things that you like?

                What happens when they do things that you don’t?

                Your point completely disregards the importance of democracy. If people want the things that you say only comes from the EU then surely you can vote for a government that would do those sorts of things?

                Did the EU force the Welfare State unto us… or did we do that one ourselves?

                • Steve Cheney

                  That’s not really how democracy works though, is it? This government has introduced lots of laws that weren’t in their manifesto and which nobody has ever had the chance to vote on.

                  I think it would be a good thing to have a body that oversees European countries’ governments, to stop them, for example, veering into the domain of far-right fascism, as so many of them seem to be doing now. I think it’s absolutely right that there should be some things that can’t be voted for, now matter how popular they might be. The death penalty, for example, will always be popular with some people, but it’s morally indefensible, so we’re not allowed to vote for it, and I think that’s a good thing.

                • global city

                  But as we get ever closer union we would control less and less. I am a little uneasy at how easily you seem to be condoning the notion of benign dictatorship.

                  As I have already asked, what happens when THEY begin to steer from YOUR moral compass and you realise you have literally willed away any control you may have once had?

                • Steve Cheney

                  Well how is that different from the ignorant and ill-informed British public steering this country away from my moral compass? You can’t trick me into thinking that I have any control in our democracy as it stands.

                  All I am asking is that there be some rules to limit the power of our government, to prevent them from undermining employment law, to prevent them from disregarding anti-discrimination law, to attack the corruption and tax evasion that our own governments will NEVER tackle. You are not going to persuade me that that’s going to send us down some slippery slope which, i don’t know if you’ve noticed, our own democracy is more than capable of bellyflopping down itself.

                • global city

                  Are you serious? Do you really not understand the difference between democratic will and autocracy?

                • Steve Cheney

                  Yes. Do you understand that freedom without boundaries is just a word?

                  Amused to see that UKIP’s already-minor political influence in the UK is already splintering off into factions – another council got sick of “being dictated to”. This is what happens when you let your leader turn the party into a personality cult.

                • global city

                  Democratic accountability is the foundation of any truly civilised society. You are making a terrible case for rule by a Paternalistic technocracy, which is how the EU Commission is structured.

                  I am not a party joining sort of person, so your UKIP reference is as relevant to me as if you had used the Conservatives or SWP.

  • allymax bruce

    Douglas, Mi6 plotted against me! And I’m nothing to write home about, and, I was in Florida. They moved into the house right across from me. It was quite funny actually. A big guy called Mark, (: ), moved in, and had a party. I went across the road, and introduced myslef, and said I was his neighbour; and gave him a Beatles album, (Double-Hard Days Night). He was friendly enough, (he knew my Scots accent), and as soon as I asked him where he was from, and he said Colchester, I said I lived in Colchester too. His face went blank!
    Funny thing secrecy; there’s not enough of it.

    • Jambo25

      Back in the 70s I knew a few SNP activists whose phones were being tapped. I doubt it was being done by the Boy Scouts. I was a professional association rep and demonstrations, marches; even simple meetings, I attended, were regularly filmed by some of the ‘funny people’. 5,6 or Special Branch. I never knew.

      • Wessex Man

        Snap! Whilst an active member of The Campaign for an English Parliament, filmed several times especially whilst in London.

        • Jambo25

          Doesn’t surprise me.

          • allymax bruce

            Jambo, Wessex; to complete my story, it was turning out to be pretty ridiculous; 6 watching me, and a slew of ‘merican agencies watching them!
            It was like a sketch from the Kenny Everet show!

            • Wessex Man

              were you the straight man for Kenny then?

              • allymax bruce


          • Tom Tom

            Well they recall Sir Walter Wilson and the activities of Cecil King. Perhaps you should review the files. You might also refer to the obsessions of James Jesus Angleton of the CIA

            • Jambo25

              I met some of the security weirdos (Through academic work.) in the early 70s. It has to be noted, however, that the loonies (I think the General was called Walter Walker) had a point. There were several friends and members of Wilson’s government who were pretty certainly spies for East European security services.

              • Tom Tom

                Walter Walker it was, but Treason then still carried the death penalty

              • David Julian Price

                Agreed – and some such as Michael Shrimpton have argued that Heath was working for the West German DVD (MI6 equivalent)…

                • Jambo25

                  Don’t know about that but there certainly were rumours about Heath and his government.

    • UKSteve
      • allymax bruce

        Aye, looks like crash got Gordon, before Crash Gordon got me.

  • Carl Williams

    The late Malcolm Wood once told me that Tebbit had attended a UKIP meeting held during Tory conference fringe, and had taken him aside and quite seriously warned him that one of the organisers present was ‘Six’. According to Malcolm, he seemed quite sure of himself. The timeline talked about in the article (a February 2001 resignation) doesn’t fit anyone genuinely prominent I can think of, though. My first thought was Jeremy Holmes or Ron Dickinson, but Holmes went in March 2000 and to my knowledge Dickinson (who was based in my constituency and who I *really* cannot imagine being a member of any kind of security services) went with him.

    I wonder if Lord Tebbit will respond to this article with any updates…?

  • thanksdellingpole

    When all of this is over, when UKIP is in No. 10 you can bet that there will be a whole slew of investigations into the FCO, the BBC, MI5/6/7, all the rest the institutions and a lot of classified documentation shall be released, a lot of Knighthoods rescinded and reputations tarnished.

    I look forward to that day, but it ain’t gonna come by voting Tory.

    • Rob Broome

      When UKIP is in…keep dreaming.

      • thanksdellingpole

        Yea, atrocious election results the other week…

        • Steve Cheney

          UKIP have never polled much higher than 12%. Even if that 12% were focused in a few constituencies (which it isn’t), they haven’t got a prayer of getting a majority in 2015. Then they’d have to prove themselves to voters who have largely been supporting them on the grounds that they’re unproven. That didn’t go so well for the Lib Dems, I can’t see it going well for UKIP.

          Realistically though, they’re unlikely to get even one MP.

          • Sydonie Hampton

            How much difference a year makes, eh Steve!

  • Adrian Drummond

    If MI5’s purpose to exist is the defense of the realm, it is somewhat paradoxical that they should lend support to the UK becoming a disfranchised state within a larger European federation (with power vested in unelected bureaucrats).

    One can only conclude that they therefore support the ‘establishment’ and not the country and its people. It’s treasonous….

    • Kubrickguy

      They have to follow their masters orders….

    • Dicky14

      It would be wrong if they hadn’t spied on UKIP. As to their involvement in changing the strategic direction of the party..meh…evidence? Patrick Nicholls targeting is a fair assessment that the right wing constituency already existed and their aim was & is to get MPs. Where’s the conspiracy when that makes absolute sense? The biggest hit that UKIP can be attacked with is that they’re a one guy party – how many can name their 2nd in command etc? I would hope MI5 have chaps all over the shop, frankly. All serious political parties are leaky as rusty buckets – I thought it was taken for granted. UKIP are a decent, vaguely legal, democratically elected party – ofcourse MI5 has to monitor them. How did MI5 know 16 years ago that the Referendum Party was run by a tool and UKIP would have a bit of going power? Funny old business, eh?

    • Lily Alldub

      It is. But there is more to it than that.

      The intelligence services themselves have been subverted, with a large amount of patriotic classic pro-Brit spies “retired” early, and a large influx of young politically correct educated fools – young people who have been educated in the “evils” of sovereignty and the British Empire, and the EU’s mythical role in freedom peace and prosperity (vomit!). So there has been no real institutional memory in the service since the 2000s.

      If you look at the MI5 website, it quite clearly says “MI5 NO LONGER INVESTIGATE SUBVERSION”.

      Has the subversion threat vanished?? Of course not. The whole EU process has been done by subversion. These two are inextricably linked.

      If the intelligence services still worked for this country, quite a few of the EUrophiles in Parliament past and present would have been in big trouble. But alas, they are more prominent than ever in positions of power.

      A further interesting question regarding the subversion of UK intelligence services, is whether the employment and (especially) promotion of people hostile to a sovereign UK into positions of major influence, has been done via penetration by hostile foreign influence…

      Sound far fetched?

      It has been done very successfully before. In WW2 MI6’s entire European network was unwound and caught by German intelligence Abwehr. That was done from within, and completely paralysed MI6 who were then out of the war. It was only thanks to one man in MI6 ( ) who had seen this problem arising and had carefully and quietly built his own network of businessman spies, that MI6 could provide anything valuable at all during the war. That is why Churchill formed his own groups. MI6 were so leaky, you just as well have been reporting to Abwehr (because technically, you actually would have been). Not only that, but many of the SOE agents rounded up, tortured, and killed in occupied Europe, were likely to have been betrayed by a certain man at MI6 (Philby) who was later outed as an alleged Soviet spy. There is a chilling passage from the KGB files in which the disposal of successive London controllers of this British officer is noted:

      MAR: real name, Reif. London controller 1934-36. German and Polish spy. Shot.
      MAN: real name, Maly. German spy. Shot in 1938.
      KAP: Gorsky. German spy. Shot.

      His Moscow masters became convinced that he was feeding them lies.
      He had failed to assassinate Franco as ordered.

      The Russians, though they eventually honoured Philby as a master spy and gave him a fat pension, harboured their doubts about him to the end. One veteran spymaster, Yuri (”Peter”) Modin, told Borovik after Philby’s death that he could, after all, have been a triple agent;

      ”I cannot rule out that with his charm, intelligence and ability to influence people, he mocked us and them, the KGB and the SIS — feeling that he was above them all.”
      ”He lived his own third life?”
      ”If you like. And there’s nothing surprising about that. After all, he had a wonderful sense of humour.” The KGB suspected Philby and his accomplices were in fact, triple agents, loyal to Germany, reporting on Russia and Britain to Germany.

      So this level of penetration also raises questions over whether all infiltrators were even caught. What’s to say some major players in post-war MI6 had not been part of the Abwehr network, and just continued to promote their own people?

      From Nicolas Ridley and Thatcher’s overthrow by Germanophiles, to Heath’s Toepfer Prize, to the EU being run for the benefit of Germany – one must admit, if Germany always intended to take Europe via economic power first – followed by political power, then they have played a blinder. And in so doing, subjugating Britain to the same control via the Brussels proxy prevents a strong independent Britain from getting in Germany’s way for a third time. Exactly what the subversive mission was meant to do.

      • Adrian Drummond

        A very insightful comment which deserves a greater readership.

      • Colonel Mustard

        I like the cut of your jib.

      • Dicky14

        I also appreciate your jib.

      • global city

        I have mentioned before that the intention of keeping the UK inside the trap is for the purpose of hostile containment.

    • UKSteve

      Quite brilliantly expressed, Adrian. I’ve been saying the same for years, but not as concisely.

  • dominiccarman

    Not unprecedented: MI5 and MI6 undertook surveillance operations on Harold Wilson when he was PM, but where is the evidence for Murray’s hypothesis of a security services plot in 2013 against UKIP? Is recycling Tebbit’s account of events in 2001 relevant, or just the filling to justify an eye-catching, speculative headline?

  • brossen99

    It rather looks as though the UK ” Establishment ” will stoop to anything to keep their Corporate-Nazi arch plan on track ?

    Even attempting this now !

    Could have shot themselves in the foot with this though ?

    Although UKIP would appear to have clean underpants !