Great reporting on Integrity Initiative(II) by Moon of Alabama(MoA)
First, hat tip to Bob In Portland for starting this disucssion.
Someone claiming to be part of Anonymous has been dumping documents about II since Novermber. MoA first reported about II running anti-Russian smear campaigns.
As usual at MoA, the comments are as informed as the stories, and well worth the read. Here's the first one I noticed:
I doubt very seriously that the British launched this operation without the CIA's implicit and explicit support. This has all the markings of a John Brennan operation that has been launched stealthily to prevent anyone from knowing its real origins.
The Brits don't act alone, and a project of this magnitude did not begin without Langley's explicit approval.
This is classic Five Eyes bullshit, where the CIA is forbidden by law to spy on Americans, so they simply call up MI6 and have them do it and report back.
After a couple of weeks hiatus, the II leaks have been headlining MoA daily.
British Spies Infiltrated Bernie Sanders' Campaign?
Here is a quick summary of the Craig Murray article referenced by both Bob In Portland and by this MoA article:
In early 2016 Simon Bracey-Lane claimed to support Corbyn and worked as a 'volunteer' for the Bernie Sanders campaign where he became a "full fledged field organizer":
Bracey-Lane has worked his way up the Sanders campaign but immigration rules mean he can't get paid. Instead, he's pledged to follow the campaign to the end, while using his savings to meet basic costs.
It is, to say the least, very interesting indeed that just a year later the left wing, “Corbyn and Sanders supporting” Bracey-Lane is hosting a very right wing event, “Cold War Then and Now”, for the shadowy neo-con Institute for Statecraft, at which an entirely unbalanced panel of British military, NATO and Ukrainian nationalists extolled the virtues of re-arming against Russia.
Nor would it seem likely that Bracey-Lane would be involved with the Integrity Initiative.
So, MI6 has operatives in leftwing political campaigns.
The third MoA story lays out a large number of II documents. (BTW - II has acknowledged these documents are genuine. But - wait for it - they blame their prominence in the media on Russian intelligence!)
...as we saw in the information revealed yesterday there is more to it. The Initiative, which has lots of 'former' military and intelligence people among its staff, is targeting the political left in Britain as well as in other countries. It is there where it becomes a danger to the democratic societies of Europe.
The MoA comments contain this useful link:
Here's a list of about 60 organizations & projects devoted to spreading anti-Russia content in Western media. The Integrity Initiative is just the tip of the iceberg.
Today's installment focuses on the batshit crazy statements of a longtime intelligence operative, Christopher Nigel Donnelly (CND), who is co-director of II. His words are simultaneously riduculous and frightenting. Ridiculous because they have little to do with reality, and frightening because these people are heavily funded by iFUKUS intel and by the usual collection of anti-Russian oligarchs (e.g., Atlantic Council, Bill Browder).
Our problem is that, for the last 70 years or so,we in the UK and Europe have been living in a safe, secure rules-based system which has allowed us to enjoy a holiday from history.
Unfortunately, this state of affairs is now being challenged. A new paradigm of conflict is replacing the 19th & 20th Century paradigm.
In this new paradigm, the clear distinction which most people have been able to draw between war and peace, their expectation of stability and a degree of predictability in life, are being replaced by a volatile unpredictability, a permanent state of instability in which war and peace become ever more difficult to disentangle. The “classic” understanding of conflict being between two distinct players or groups of players is giving way to a world of Darwinian competition where all the players – nation states, sub-state actors, big corporations, ethnic or religious groups, and so on – are constantly striving with each other in a “war of all against all”. The Western rules-based system, which most westerners take for granted and have come to believe is “normal”, is under attack from countries and organisations which wish to replace our system with theirs. This is not a crisis which faces us; it is a strategic challenge, and from several directions simultaneously.
MoA comment on CND:
In reality the "Western rules-based system", fully implemented after the demise of the Soviet Union, is a concept under which 'the west' arbitrarily makes up rules and threatens to kill anyone who does not follow them. Witness the wars against Serbia, the war on Iraq, the destruction of Libya, the western led coup in Ukraine and the war by Jihadi proxies against the people of Syria and Iraq. None of these actions were legal under international law. Demanding a return to strict adherence to the rule of international law, as Russia, China and others now do, it is not an attempt to replace "our system with theirs". It is a return to the normal state of global diplomacy. It is certainly not a "Darwinian competition".
The circular reasoning that the undercover nature of II is capable of defending bodes poorly for democracy:
The 'experts' of the 'charity' Institute for Statecraft and Integrity Initiative testified in the British parliament. While they were effectively paid by the government they lobbied parliament under the cover of their NGO. This circularity also allows to use international intermediates. Members of the Spanish cluster (pdf) of the Initiative testified in the British Parliament about the Catalan referendum and related allegations against Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange. (It is likely that this testimony led to the change in the position of the Ecuadorian government towards Assange.)
Here is a perceptive comment on that article:
What remains mysterious (not really) is why --if these initiatives are truly meant to save and strengthen democracy-- they aren't proudly proclaimed and advertised, in the open, transparent, for everyone one to see and judge, like an adult democracy that they claim to stand for might want to debate and form an opinion on.
The fact that it isn't, is testimony to the nefarious anti-democratic, authoritarian and totalitarian streak that runs in between every two lines that they put on paper.
This story is being suppressed as hard as possible in the US. The UK can't suppress it because there is a parliamentary inquiry into using government funds to trash UK political parties.
Its important to spread the word as much as possible about the II and its connections to US politics. I haven't had time to dig deep, but there is the list of "US cluster" operatives - all of whom are unknowns to me. I'm almost certain there are strong ties to the Ukronazi Atlantic Council (official censors for Facebook) and to the whole Steele Dossier/Skripal mess. One of these articles has II memos that refer to the Skripal narrative as propaganda.
As usual with intel/counter-intel, the game is so complicated that Joe Average is not going to be bothered with it, what with 24/7 Trump and Russia-gate. How do you describe this for people who have little time for news? Mr A. worked for organization B who was clandestinely funded by intel shop C to produce false charges D, E, and F? It instantly scans as CT - even though it is lifted directly from documents acknowledged to be genuine.
I am grateful to whomever got this stuff out onto the internet. I don't even care if they have their own hidden agenda. These are acknowledged facts in a world of shadows and rumors. They have the potential to be as powerful as the Edward Snowden revelations.