Alternative view on Defend our Juries, Tim Crosland etc.
Posted by Ian M on September 19, 2025, 11:52 pm
via David Miller again. Can't vouch for this 'different narrative' guy or the 'right to protest' and 'defund genocide' orgs he cites. He seems to go in heavily for conspiracy-type angles of spook infiltration of protest orgs, which may or may not have merit. If it serves to discourage popular mobilisation then you could argue that he himself is doing the bidding of the establishment. On the other hand the point about the failed strategies of DoJ, JSO, XR, Don't Pay etc. is a strong one, and if it prevents ppl from signing up to self-damaging actions that have no meaningful successes that they can point to, then it has value.
I've often thought that Roger Hallam's plan of getting 3% of the population involved in direct action and you automatically win is highly dubious with more than a little of the underpants gnomes type of strategy. It might work for limited issues like women's rights, universal suffrage, anti-racism etc that can be accommodated or co-opted by the establishment, but taking away fossil fuels which are the basis for the entire power structure since the industrial revolution? No, that was never going to be enough.
Anyway, it makes me glad I didn't go along with the DoJ tactic, and will hopefully make me less of a sucker for the next emotive issue that comes along which Tim Crosland et al will try & get me a prison sentence for.
Props to Der for being ahead of the curve on this!
cheers, I
*****
A new warning about Defend Our Juries' "Lift the Ban" campaign from "Right to Protest"
A different Narrative
"Right to Protest" have issued a renewed warning about the Defend Our Juries (DOJ) Lift the Ban campaign. I'm posting it in full because, while it's not my campaign, I share their concerns. My position on this is not a popular one. But if my posts on this topic prevent even one person from having their life ruined by a needless arrest, it will have been worth it. I have to try! Please read in full - it is extremely important!
My own full deep-dive into the organisations behind DOJ is coming soon.
URGENT: WARNING about Defend Our Juries “Lift the Ban” campaign
Today Right to Protest wrote to Tim Crosland.
Did you know Tim Crosland, co-founder of Defend Our Juries, is not just any “activist”? He is a former senior government lawyer who spent over a decade inside the security state. He was:
- Head of Cyber, Prevention & Information Law – National Crime Agency (NCA)
- Head of Legal – National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS)
- Deputy Director – Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA)
- Advising on intelligence operations
Prior to this, he used to work in criminal law so he must know that this campaign can be used to destroy lives.
Tim Crosland was involved in both Extinction Rebellion (XR) and Just Stop Oil (JSO).
Both campaigns used the same formula every time — both resulted in the most repressive protest laws in British history.
1 Urge mass arrests
2 Make people pledge, commit or register for actions & hand over their personal details
3 Promise to “flood the system” with arrests so the state will have to give in to protestors’ demands
4 Result: the state doesn’t give in — instead, the government passes harsher laws against protest — suppressing our protest rights
This was the exact formula promised with Extinction Rebellion (XR).
The result? The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, massively extending police powers over restricting protest. It includes:
- New public order noise trigger – breach = 51 weeks in prison (before: 3 months)
- Parliament obstruction – 51 weeks in prison (before: fine only)
- Highway obstruction – 6 months in prison (before: fine only)
- New statutory Public Nuisance offence – 10 years in prison
- New powers to police static protests and even one-person protests
Amnesty called it “deeply authoritarian” and a “dark day for civil liberties.”
Tim Crosland was XR’s UK coordinator, legal advisor and spokesperson.
Then came Just Stop Oil (JSO). Same founder. Same formula. Same promises. Tim Crosland involved once again.
The result? The Public Order Act 2023 – making new offences criminalising traditional acts of British protest, the removal of legal defences, and the longest prison sentences for peaceful protest in history:
- Locking on – 6 months in prison
- Tunnelling – 3 years in prison
- Obstructing major works – 6 months in prison
- Interfering with infrastructure – 12 months in prison
- Going equipped with protest gear – up to 6 months in prison
- Suspicion-less stop & search at protests – police don’t need a reason; obstructing = 1 month in prison
- SDPOs – new protest banning orders; breach = 6 months in prison
The UN condemned these powers that “target peaceful protests” and asked the UK government to "repeal these laws" .
Now: DoJ “Lift the Ban”. Tim Crosland’s DoJ is using the same formula again:
1 Urge mass participation
2 Make people commit to action, handing over their personal details
3 Promise to “flood the system” with arrests so the state will have to de-proscribe Palestine Action
4 Result: not merely mass arrests but terrorism convictions under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act
Section 13 is a strict liability offence, meaning THERE IS NO DEFENCE. Holding a DoJ sign in public view = terrorism conviction. (Supreme court ruling: Pwr v DPP )
Terrorism convictions have life-destroying consequences, including:
- Permanent criminal record – flagged on DBS checks, blocking jobs or getting you sacked
- Regulatory bodies can suspend or strike professionals off their registers
- Travel bans – refused entry to the US, Australia, Japan, and from 2026 barred from the EU under ETIAS
- Universities can deny entry to courses for students with terrorism convictions
- Risk of losing your citizenship without notice under the Nationality & Borders Act 2022 if you have a parent born abroad
Exactly what the government wanted: pro-Palestinian activists deterred, silenced, controlled, and taken off the streets.
And now DoJ has escalated. They have launched a window poster campaign — urging people to display posters in their homes.
This action has already led to a terrorism arrest in Scotland — which DoJ have NOT mentioned on their website. Under s.13 it doesn’t matter if DoJ told you it was “lawful” — that is no defence in court.
This is not protest. This is a conveyor belt of pro-Palestinian activists into serious terrorism convictions, with draconian consequences — deterring people from ever protesting for Palestine again. Exactly what the government wants.
Tim Crosland and DoJ are not defending your rights. They are pushing vulnerable people into the jaws of the Terrorism Act — and calling it resistance.
Read the full letter. Make your own mind up. See for yourself — before risking your liberties.
Letter here:
Protesting against the genocide in Gaza is imperative. But not in a way that destroys lives, makes protest laws even worse and blocks protestors from attending future protests.
Latest post by the same writer, our friend Paul Mason gets a mention. Not sure what to make of it, having not heard of it before. Posting as grist to the mill...
I
PS: seems there is a website which is still live: https://www.weareplanc.org/about/ apologies if this is old hat and everyone already knows about them
Is CIA cutout Plan C launching a last-ditch attempt to take over "Your Party"?
A different Narrative
"Penned after the 2010 European student unrest and before what is now commonly referred to as the "Arab spring" began to escalate, BBC Newsnight economist Paul Mason's “20 Reasons Why It's Kicking Off Everywhere" sought to establish an understanding of the motivations behind these globally disparate, yet somehow connected struggles.
What roles do the "graduate with no future," the "digital native" or the "remainder of capital" play in the current wave of unrest? What are the ideas, ideologies, motivations or demands driving these movements?
How is struggle organized and coordinated in the age of memetic politics and viral ad campaigns?
This collection of essays seeks to further explore Paul Mason's original 20 Reasons in an attempt tot better understand our turbulent present." -Alessio Lunghi and Seth Wheeler, Occupy Everything: Reflections on why it's Kicking off Everywhere (Minor Compositions, 2010)
Disclaimer: I did not plan to write this and was extremely tired whilst doing so. It is therefore likely that there will be EVEN MORE typos than usual!
This afternoon, Plan C’s media front Novara Media posted an exclusive article titled "Politicians should step aside and let members run the new party”. The proposal is as follows:
“Made up of around two dozen organisers drawn from the trade union movement, tenants’ unions and the Palestine movement, Our Party demands that the MPs involved in Your Party step aside from leading the founding of the party, and allow members to take over. Control over the process of founding the party, along with all money, data, digital systems and companies should be given to a handover committee with a clear and focused brief. This committee would facilitate the election of a founding stewards’ committee that can – with complete transparency – facilitate a member-led, democratic pathway to conference, the conclusions of which will be driven, shaped and decided entirely by the membership.
The founding stewards’ committee would have a “clear, focused mandate” from the membership to execute the existing plan for regional assemblies and a national conference, taking control of the party’s collective resources in the process. This committee would be transparent, accountable and obliged to publish all minutes, decisions, voting and processes.”
As should be clear to everyone, this proposal raises more questions than it answers – such as:
· Who gets to decide who gets to decide who is on the handover committee?
· Which voting system will be used to elect the Founding Stewards Committee and which outside body will moderate the process?
· How will this “taking control of the party’s collective resources” be facilitated in a way that is legal, given that they are split between two separate companies?
· Why was the domain for the campaign already registered on the 21st of August?
Moreover, the framing of this proposal is rather similar to that surrounding Don’t Pay UK, also championed by Novara Media.
In an article promoting the Don’t Pay UK campaign, Novara suggested that it was concocted “by a group of friends at the pub concerned about and impacted by the [energy bill rise] crisis.”
But it turns out that this campaign was in fact a front for Plan C, just like Novara Media itself.
In strikingly similar language, the Our Party campaign also frames itself - and is framed by Novara Media - as a spontaneous response to events, notably of the last couple of days, which saw a serious split form between the Your Party factions aligned to Jeremy Corbyn and his advisers on the one hand, and Zarah Sultana and hers on the other:
“The MPs got us this far, but now it’s time to hand over the reins,” they write. “The people should take things forward from here.” We have been involved in discussions about Our Party, and entirely endorse the group’s demands. The only route out of this awful situation is complete openness and transparency about decisions being made, who is making them, and how they are being made. And crucially – fresh, non-aligned leadership.”
But given that the domain was registered as early as 21st August, this account of the campaign’s origin is implausible. Certainly, the impressive list of known campaigners and academics already on board as signatories at launch suggest considerable organisation beforehand. Things get murkier when a cursory glance at early signatories reveals many to be connected to – you guessed it! – Plan C and its various known front organisations, several of which are resident at Pelican House.
Examples include Plan C co-founder Seth Wheeler, Felix Decampo – who wrote an article on the subject of “Why we need to be erotically free and socially responsible” for Plan C’s website, as well as several other Plan C-linked early signatories such as Ben Beach from Plan C and Pelican House-based architectural group Unit 38. A number of these signatories are associated with the London Renters Union, in which Plan C is involved.
Seth Wheeler, Alessio Lunghi, Paul Mason, Aaron Bastani and James Schneider:
Seth Wheeler’s name is particularly significant. Wheeler cofounded Plan C alongside Alessio Lunghi and, with some help from reported MI6 collaborator Paul Mason, the two activists co-authored the book Occupy Everything. The blurb for Occupy Everything makes clear that it was inspired by Paul Mason’s work, specifically an article he wrote for the BBC in 2011 titled “Twenty Reasons why its all kicking off everywhere.”
The points Mason makes are too convoluted and verbose to be worth quoting here, when they are so easily accessible through this link.
It is worth noting in this article, however, that the concepts outlined in Mason’s 2011 article overlap with the Plan C concept of Fully Automated Luxury Communism, popularised by Aaron Bastani’s book of the same name.
In their acknowledgements, Wheeler and Lunghi credit Mason and others for “their unending help and patience in achieving this project”. (Wheeler and Lunghi, Acknowledgements)
But even more significant is the credit given to Mason in the Book’s opening blurb:
“Penned after the 2010 European student unrest and before what is now commonly referred to as the "Arab spring" began to escalate, BBC Newsnight economist Paul Mason's “20 Reasons Why It's Kicking Off Everywhere" sought to establish an understanding of the motivations behind these globally disparate, yet somehow connected struggles. What roles do the "graduate with no future," the "digital native" or the "remainder of capital" play in the current wave of unrest? What are the ideas, ideologies, motivations or demands driving these movements? How is struggle organized and coordinated in the age of memetic politics and viral ad campaigns? This collection of essays seeks to further explore Paul Mason's original 20 Reasons in an attempt to better understand our turbulent present.”
This text is accompanied by a quote praising “Occupy Everything” from Aaron Peters, who would go on to rename himself Bastani. Peters met Mason while he was studying for his PhD and later hired him as a Novara Media contributor. To belabour the point, Novara, a Plan C front, is now promoting “Our Party”, which is backed by Seth Wheeler and others associated with Plan C. But, as usual, there’s more: yet another individual associated with Plan C, is Your Party media chief James Schneider.
In response to Ben Timberley’s 2022 investigation of Don’t Pay UK for the Crispin Flintoff show, Timberley received a cryptic email from Schneider warding him from continuing his work. Here is an excerpt:
“Hi Ben,
I hope you’re doing well. I’m getting in touch as I just saw your video on the Don’t Pay campaign for Crispin’s show.
I think I can shed some light and hopefully calm some nerves about the campaign. While I’m not directly involved, I know a couple of the people who are. I don’t know everyone involved, but those that I do know are longstanding and committed activists whose sincerity I would be happy to vouch for. My understanding is that they wish to remain anonymous to avoid difficulties at work and retaliation from the media, the companies and the state. As I say, these are longstanding activists with experience of the victimisation that can accompany radical organising.
I recognise the person in the screenshot you took of a zoom meeting. My comradely advice – or even request – would be to take down that screenshot as it could be used to identify him by reactionary forces. Are you able to do that? […]
Anyway, sorry for the longish email but I thought I’d share what I know with you to hopefully allay your concerns. Do let me know if you could remove that photo of that activist to avoid them being put at any risk.
Best wishes,
James”
It has since been confirmed that the “him” in question was Alessio Lunghi and the activists were members of Plan C, who finally took credit for the Don’t Pay campaign in 2024.
That Schneider is an ally of Plan C will not come as a shock to readers of my previous article, “C is for Conspiracy and Corbynism”, where I argued that Corbynism was largely a project of Plan C:
“It is tempting for me to hedge my argument and suggest that it’s possible for the numerous connections between the founding institutions and personnel of Corbynism and Plan C is mere coincidence. But this would be bad faith, especially as Plan C activists have themselves claimed credit for these organisations; my honest opinion is that the only plausible explanation is that Corbynism was the product of a CIA-backed conspiracy, run by a CIA cut-out. This does not mean that all of those involved in the project were knowingly complicit in the scam, whatever its true aims and objectives. I was certainly not. I worked in Corbyn’s LOTO Office and I had never heard of Plan C until 2022. Even members of Plan C may not be aware of its collaboration with the CIA. Nevertheless, Plan C is a CIA Asset and Corbynism was its offspring.”
Given that Plan C was inspired by MI6 collaborator Paul Mason and Corbynism was a product of Plan C, if follows that the intellectual progenitor of Corbynism is … Paul Mason!
Supporters of Your Party may want to reflect on this as they ponder which way to turn at the current crossroads.
Is the Our Party campaign a Plan C front?
Honestly, it seems very likely. According to it’s own account, Plan C has only about 100 members and for them to have numerous people, including their co-founder, within the initial 40 signatories to the Our Party campaign seems too many to be a coincidence. If we add to this that the campaign was promoted as an exclusive by acknowledged (by Plan C) Plan C front Novara Media, and the fact that the font of the Our Party webpage appears identical to that used by Unit 38, for which Plan C’s Ben Beach works, then the balance of evidence suggests that the Our Party campaign is indeed a Plan C front.
Do they think we’re stupid?
Apparently so. Given that Corbynism, including constituent groups such as The World Transformed, Novara Media, and even Momentum, were founded fully or in part by Plan C activists, and that a member of the current steering committee (James Schneider) is associated with the group, the change proposed by the “Our Party” campaign likely represents no change at all.
If successful, the people who founded Corbynism and ran it into the ground will do the same with Your Party. To me, "Our Party" looks like a premeditated plan by at least some around the “Corbyn faction” to secure the leadership of Your Party should they be outmanoeuvred by Zarah Sultana, as appears to have happened yesterday. How else can we explain the domain being registered on the 31st August? I’m open to suggestions. If you have any, please comment!
Update (21:13): in a humorous twist, Zarah Sultana has chosen to back the campaign, even though it explicitly criticises her. Does this mean it was launched by her faction? No (a source has confirmed that this did not come from her faction).
Sultana's just playing politics, taking the sting out of what appears to have been an attempted challenge, turning the tables on her opponents.
"[John le Carré’s] literary world was then also one of men and women who were often never quite as English as they seemed – and not just because they were often spies. They’re everywhere in the books, his establishment outsiders, caught between worlds, and nations: Smiley’s great acolyte Peter Guillam (son of a French businessman), the Circus’s Toby Esterhase (Hungarian), Jim Prideaux (raised abroad by ‘parents in European banking’): Pukka but not really; English but not quite."
- David Patrikarakos, "John le Carré’s London of exiles is alive and well", The Spectator, 20 December 2020
"Halfway through the night, in walked Ben’s friend, James Schneider, up at Oxford from Winchester, who went on to co-found the left-wing organisation Momentum and become communications advisor to Jeremy Corbyn; another product of exile (via a Jewish father whose origins lay in Eastern Europe), formed by his passage through England’s institutions, and like us ‘Pukka but not really; English but not quite.’"
- David Patrikarakos, "John le Carré’s London of exiles is alive and well", The Spectator, 20 December 2020
C is for: Cover-up?
It’s been a weird week. Research I did years ago is suddenly gained more traction than ever before and my work has become embroiled in the controversy surrounding the founding of Your Party or whatever it’s going to be called. This is very curious because I have no particular skin in this game; I am not involved in the party in any way and won’t be joining it; it feels as if a switch has flipped and discussion of my past work and its implications is now suddenly permitted, a least for a short time. The controversy in question surrounds a former colleague of mine (James Schneider) and his close relationship to people named in Integrity Initiative leaks, his wife’s job (not my story) and his in my view questionable record as Jeremy Corbyn’s Director of Strategic Communications, when he was partially responsible for the disastrous “apologise and move on” strategy, which arguably helped to sink Corbyn's political fortunes, and for which there has been no accounting.
Although I care deeply about transparency and accountability, I have no personal grudge against James whatsoever. When I worked with him, I found him personable and approachable. We weren’t friends – I was never part of the Momentum inner circle, did not want to be and am now extremely glad that I wasn’t – but I liked him, even if I never really knew him very well. The only time we ever exchanged cross words was over the decision by Rebecca Long-Bailey to submit to the Board of Deputies’ demands in 2020. The decision horrified me but James defended it.
My initial interest in the story of Schneider’s Integrity Initiative linked friends was personal concern for Jeremy, who I did regard as a friend at the time. I feared, I now think perhaps naively, that he did not know of Schneider’s worrisome connections and was being misled. In the event, my pursuit of this subject led to Jeremy cutting ties with me, as he has done with so many others. It was painful at the time but, to be honest, it was probably for the best.
I can’t claim that my contribution to this story is particularly revelatory, as it originates from Schneider’s own university friend David Patrikarakos, who, in the words of deep politics encyclopaedia “Wikispooks”, “outed” James as a “spook” in his 2020 article for the Spectator. Patrikarakos is, claims Wikispooks, himself a “deep state operative”.
My original contribution was to highlight that both Patrikarakos and the other subject his article, Schneider’s former flatmate Ben Judah, had been named in leaked Integrity Initiative documents, which added additional context to Patrikarikos’s article. I also noted that Schneider’s friendship with Ben in particular extended throughout and beyond Corbyn’s term as Labour leader, until at least 2022; I think it was legitimate to see this as a matter of concern, which others are now registering anyway.
As I explained in a piece for UK Column:
“If it could be considered unfortunate for an avowed radical leftist like James Schneider to have one friend named in connection with influential intelligence officer Chris Donnelly, to have three might be regarded as embarrassing. Perhaps more embarrassing still is for one of these individuals—in this case, Ben Judah, now a senior fellow at the CIA-linked Atlantic Council (effectively NATO’s think tank), itself originally bankrolled by the Ford Foundation, another historic CIA intermediary—to have endorsed Schneider’s blueprint for a federated red-green bloc as “brilliant”.”
As provocative as these facts are, they are facts, and the upset they appear to be causing my former colleagues isn’t my fault. If they have a problem with what David Patrikarakos wrote, perhaps they should take it up with him. Moreover, if they have a problem with the truth, then that is more revealing of their priorities than my own.
Incidentally, Unherd, for which Patrikarakos now works as Foreign Correspondent has published an article by Rob Lownie, addressing some of the controversy surrounding Schneider’s role in Your Party – specifically surrounding his wife, an issue on which I haven’t commented – which, in my honest opinion, contains a noticeably favourable slant towards Schneider. The article gives prominence to the following quote by a “source close to the Corbyn-Sultana Project”:
“James is committed, and always has been. Who he’s married to doesn’t change that and we need to avoid internet gossip that gets in the way of building a strong-based Left-wing alternative.”
Presumably, this source is not James briefing about himself, although the practice of “sources close to” being the actual individual in question or at least someone to whom they’ve told what to say is not “unherd” of in politics. At least this journalist didn’t mention James’ “diverting” good looks, although his “handlebar cheekbones” (???), are fantastic. There are no James Bond references this time, either, which is disappointing.
The positive writeup notwithstanding, given that Unherd is an employer of Patrikarakos, who “outed” James as an alleged spook, it probably wasn’t the best platform from which to launch his defence, as it once again draws attention to the connection.
The issue of media reporting brings me to the question of why this story wasn’t reported in supposedly alternative media two or three years ago when I first highlighted it. It’s a credit to both Unity News and UKColumn that they showed an interest when the likes of Declassified UK rejected my submission. To quote Declassified’s Mark Curtis: “the issue isn’t something we want to investigate.”
I’m still baffled as to why Declassified UK did not wish to report on what has turned out to be a significant story. It may or not be relevant that, as I since learned, Declassified UK is and I think was already, in 2022, a partner publication for Progressive International, for which James Schneider is Head of Communications. Was my pitch refused because of the cosy relationship between Declassified UK and Progressive International? I can only speculate.
What I do know is that Corbynism was itself compromised from the very beginning, not by just any single individual but by what is, thanks to my own research, a proven intelligence asset, or cutout, called Plan C.
C is for: CIA cutout
I’ve dealt with the relationship between Plan C and the intelligence community at length in my previous work, on this site and elsewhere, and so I won’t dwell on it much here. To bring readers up to speed, here’s an excerpt from my previous article on the subject:
“Plan C [Is] an anarchist group influential in UK activism – which has been involved in recruiting UK activists to volunteer for the CIA’s genocidal oil-occupation of Northeastern Syria.
Plan C activists are everywhere in left libertine “movements”, many of which will have been thoroughly compromised and even taken over by members of this agent of the CIA. To those volunteering in the “progressive” protest movement in good faith, it is therefore not a case of “making the best of what you have” or being mindful not to make the good the enemy of the perfect. It is that there nothing to work with; these “movements” are irredeemably, hopelessly tainted by actual, evidenced CIA influence and cannot be changed from within. The truth about Plan C has circulated widely enough amongst people of relative influence to be widely known. Leaders of the movement(s) know, and have evidently chosen to do nothing; this indicates they are either actively or passively complicit in Plan C’s activities and agendas.”
Plan C’s intellectual pedigree, if we can call it that, is of the Anglo-American radical left’s CIA sponsored Cold War cultural turn. Its transhumanist, libertinist, techno-futurist concepts of Fully Automated Luxury Communism and Acid Communism/Corbynism, might as well be products of MK-Ultra-induced fever dreams. It’s therefore hardly surprising that Plan C alumni and associates often have their work published by Verso books or its sister publisher O/R Books [the founder of O/R books was previously Verso’s Managing Director]. Verso Books was launched by Round Table Asset Stuart Hall’s New Left Review, and started life in 1970 publishing works by such Congress for Cultural Freedom luminaries as Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse.
Yes, the ideology underpinning Plan C is rooted in intellectualised CIA-backed anti-communist propaganda and Plan C is itself an asset of the CIA; ladies and gentlemen, the British “radical left”!
C is for: Corbynism
James Schneider’s initial connection to Plan C is likely to be his co-founding of Momentum, which has been claimed as a Plan C project by members of Plan C. But he has worked with others on the left associated with the group, such as its media front, Integrity Initiative cutout Novara Media, also claimed by Plan C as their “own” and The World Transformed, which Momentum funded and was founded by Plan C contributor Andrew Dolan, who was also at one point an employee of Momentum. Plan C was also the farce behind the Don’t Pay UK campaign, which encouraged people to refuse paying their energy bills in 2022. Other significant connections between Plan C and Corbynism include Corbyn speechwriter Alex Nunn’s collaboration with Plan C activist Nadia Idle on the book Tweets from Tahrir (I only discovered this in the past week!), and Corbyn’s own collaboration with the Centre for Turkish Studies (CEFTUS), which supported the CIA occupation of Northeastern Syria, dubbed “Rojava” by its advocates.
CEFTUS was itself endorsed by none other than CIA advisor James Jeffrey, the architect of the US’s Syria campaign in which Plan C has been a direct participant working for the CIA-run SDF According to his CEFTUS profile:
“Ambassador James F. Jeffrey retired from the Foreign Service with the rank of Career Ambassador in June 2012. He was recalled to active duty at the Department of State by Secretary Pompeo in August 2018 to serve as the Secretary’s Special Representative for Syria. In January 2019, Jeffrey was selected by the Secretary to simultaneously serve as the Special Envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. Jeffrey was also named Chief of Mission for Syria in 2020. He retired again from the Foreign Service in November 2020.
During the period 2012-2018, Jeffrey was the Philip Solondz Distinguished Visiting Fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Visiting Instructor at George Washington University, an energy consultant for APCO, member of the SoSi Advisory Council, and member of the Secretary of Defense’s Defense Policy Board 2012-1017 and CIA External Advisory Board 2017-2018.
Before his first retirement in 2012, Ambassador Jeffrey held a series of senior posts in Washington, D.C., and abroad. His last assignment in the Service was Ambassador to Iraq, 2010-2012, where he led a mission by 2012 of 16,000 personnel and an annual budget of $6 billion.”
Ibrahim Dogus, the founder of CEFTUS, described Jeremy Corbyn as “a good friend” of the organisation. Curious.
The above multiple points of interconnection tell us that the real story here is that a shadowy, if neon-pink-branded, cultish CIA cutout is both the founding and driving institution behind what became known as Corbynism. The Corbyn Project was mostly a Plan C Project, defined and driven by the CIA cutout.
C is for: Conspiracy
Is the above claim plausible or just a crazy “conspiracy theory”? It’s very plausible. As I explained in my previous article, “How the Empire works 1: Spookery is a disease: here’s how to spot its symptoms”:
“That individual assets reporting to the same handler probably do not know each-others’ identities, means that opposing political factions can be controlled by a single intelligence agent, who can manipulate their conflict in the service of an objective that the assets under their control do not fully understand – assets would never know for certain that their political opponents are in fact allies in the security services […] [A]t the top of this “pyramid” structure sits the fully paid Intelligence Officer. For the most part, Intelligence Officers are not people working on the front line but government bureaucrats involved in operational planning at a higher level. The day-to-day work on the ground is done by agents and their assets, whose connection to the state is informal.
Agents often work for the state informally under the cover of a “cut out” organisation. Although they may not be paid directly by the state, they may receive funds via the cut out, which may itself receive government funding or financial support from another wealthy asset and therefore acts as an intermediary.
The cut-out organisation also gives cover and sometimes an excuse for assets to interact with agents acting as their “handlers”. Several different assets may be active within a single organisation without knowing of each-others’ identities.
We know that spooks continue to operate in this way thanks to the Integrity Initiative leaks; we now have a real-world example of an intelligence network to study.”
This model is easily mapped onto the organisational infrastructure the activist left, particularly as groups like Plan C have adopted an Integrity Initiative style “cluster” method for organising.
As I explained in my old article, Nato’s Lefty Anarchists:
“Considering the lack of formal accountability, the interconnectedness of these groups seems fertile ground for the development of networks of informal power and influence around particular individuals, whose personal connections extend across the movement. Such people, who could perhaps be described as “fixers”, are best placed to bring organisations together for specific actions and events. Moreover, it is possible to imagine circumstances in which the leaders of one organisation might influence the decisions of another in which they have no formal involvement through their personal supporters involved in both. Nevertheless, it isn’t just climate organisations that are interlinked.
Just as interesting is that the personal networks interweaving climate activist groups extend to the wider UK left – In terms of the people involved, there is considerable overlap between XR, the Canary, JSO, Don’t Pay UK, Momentum, The World Transformed, Alliance for Workers’ Liberty, Ukraine Solidarity campaign, Novara Media, Plan C and Progressive International.”
If you’re someone that the network’s key fixers do not want to have a voice or rise through the ranks, they will ensure that your activity is curtailed and your voice silenced. Anyone who’s been involved in the “hard left” knows that this “cancel culture” is common practice within its network. It’s something I’ve experienced myself. When security state infiltrators become fixers, they control who gets the key positions and who is allowed to speak.
It is tempting for me to hedge my argument and suggest that it’s possible for the numerous connections between the founding institutions and personnel of Corbynism and Plan C is mere coincidence. But this would be bad faith, especially as Plan C activists have themselves claimed credit for these organisations; my honest opinion is that the only plausible explanation is that Corbynism was the product of a CIA-backed conspiracy, run by a CIA cut-out. This does not mean that all of those involved in the project were knowingly complicit in the scam, whatever its true aims and objectives. I was certainly not. I worked in Corbyn’s LOTO Office and I had never heard of Plan C until 2022. Even members of Plan C may not be aware of its collaboration with the CIA. Nevertheless, Plan C is a CIA Asset and Corbynism was its offspring.
Why would the CIA be interested in creating an opposition movement? The obvious answer would be to control it, alienate and isolate independent thinkers and steer it towards a cul-de-sac of extreme, divisive libertinist, hyper-individualistic identity politics, which would be unable to sustain any sort of viable lasting coalition. Not only is this modus operandi not farfetched, it is standard practice for intelligence organisations like the CIA. Perhaps Corbynism was a bit more successful than initially intended but it was easily brought down from within, in the end.
I am not interested in participating in Your Party, or any party political project, these days. Those who are may want to reflect on the reality that the people advising Corbyn are the same as they were during the “Corbyn Project” and past behaviour is the most effective predictor of future action. Tell your story; Ask a question; Interpret generously http://storybythethroat.wordpress.com/tell-ask-listen/
Very interesting thanks. I've only skimmed so I'm coming back to read and try to digest
First impression looks like there's some spooking going on.The corporate media are complicit in the Gaza genocide. Never forget what they did. Never forgive them for it.
Tony Greenstein not happy with this "doing down one of the most succesful protests in recent times"
"So this is Phil Bevin trying to do down one of the most successful protests in recent times. People are fully aware of the risks. Yes we all know Tim Crosland was a government lawyer. More conspiracy thinking."
Re: Tony Greenstein not happy with this "doing down one of the most succesful protests in recent times"
Disappointing from TG. If the definition of 'success' in this instance is overturning the proscription of PA then the DoJ protests have not been successful. In theory the strategy could work, but it remains to be seen. Meanwhile, as Bevin points out, the experience of all the other groups who have tried the 'get loads of people arrested' tactic has been one of complete failure apart from token gestures that don't cost the ruling class anything (declaring a climate emergency, temporarily halting new oil exploration licenses in an economic context when they're questionably profitable). The judicial/prison system has so far been able to absorb the extra arrests and convictions, and the increasingly draconian legislation makes it less likely that groups will continue to get fodder for their causes in this way. The only 'victory' these groups can point to is in the nebulous concept of 'consciousness raising' or supposed moral victories of making the establishment look bad by forcing it to arrest grannies etc. But the establishment doesn't care about looking bad, it just cares about meeting its priorities of resource & population control.
If it's not just about stroking egos and virtue signalling - or actively serving the intel agencies in some cases - maybe it's time for activists to try a different strategy?
on September 19, 2025, 11:52 pm