Published On: Sun, Jan 31st, 2021

The Coronahoax is bread and butter for the British Krypteia

In ancient times, the Spartans were a ruling class in the Greek city state of Lacedaemon. When reading Plutarch’s account of the reorganisation of the society of that country by Lycurgus, one can certainly form the impression that in fact they had been military adventurers from elsewhere, and hadn’t been native to the land, but had conquered it, and thus the creation, in fact, of a new social order was all together a necessity as a means for a stable ongoing occupation. It would explain the treatment of the Helots, who had been indigenous – a clue is that they were a populous people with an attachment to the land through farming – and were a class of harshly used slaves under the Spartans.

The Spartans obviously felt threatened by the Helots, as well they might be if the latter were resentful and desirous of rebellion, or else they would not have instituted the Krypteia, which was a secret service attached to the military that roamed the countryside committing murder upon the Helots. The targets were people travelling the roads at night, or people working in the fields; the strategy must have been to disrupt and restrict Helot activity; and that the organisation was secret points to the Helots not fully understanding that the banditry that afflicted them was in fact an act of state oppression. Another objective was evidently to stymie Helot ability to organise against the Spartans: the Krypteia would murder likely leadership.

Because, from a purely analytical point of view, the Krypteia does make, for those unscrupulous to deploy it, an eminently plausible option in terms of what is possible in the realm of surreptitious statecraft,  it doesn’t take a giant leap of imagination to appreciate that the ruling class of a modern state could have taken the Spartan example for dealing with domestic threats to power, and instituted a secret organisation that commits murders on the governed people. The Crown of Victorian Britain, in all its laconophilia (which is a real word denoting admiration of the societal model, and the martial achievements it lends itself to), evidenced by its Spartan public school playing fields to Imperial leadership mentality (see the FBEL articleThe Spartan Tradition & UK Government; Pederasty & Homosexuality As Control Grid), is a prime candidate for knowing about, and implementing its own version of the Krypteia. Its enemy would not have been any class of radical that would attempt with arms to overthrow the order of things, but instead it would have been the huge and prosperous – and gentrifying – middle class inherited from the 18th century, that was powerful and independent by its purse, and had created decentralised religion so it was free of the Crown’s Church of England. Arguably, the Victorian Crown; i.e. aristocracy and financiers, had the same problem as the Spartans in that, i) if the “enemy” was not totally culturally separate from them, it was at least divergent, ii) the “enemy” was by no means a minority, and iii) it was the class that produced.

The Victorians did indeed create the apparatus that would eventually become MI5, but before that, when an intelligence service was formalised into a body known as the Secret Service Bureau at the turn of the 20th century, this operation was concerned with infiltration from Germany and that country’s imperial ambitions – or at least, that it what is now said of it. This is a subject for further investigation, and for demonstration with real examples, but it suffices to say that, just as we see in real time in current affairs how a Russian threat is used to stigmatise legitimate domestic opposition, we can perhaps understand the actuality of things in the opening years of the nineteen hundreds (1900s), where the same playbook would no doubt have been utilised, with the Germans being used as cover.

Ultimately, if MI5 is the counter-intelligence service of UK Government (i.e. the Crown) – which it is – then this means that it is the intelligence service that is dedicated to preserving the order of power; i.e. it guards from domestic threats to the continuance of what is a tyranny, and it confronts “enemy” intelligence activity acting against this interest. Realistically, as we are now learning in our modern experience, and as we expect to be able to show from the history of Anglo-German relations, that which is styled as efforts in counter-intelligence against a foreign power, is for a large part action against legitimate domestic opposition.  All in all, then, the enemy is the people as per “government of and for”.

Rather than being unwarrantedly sensational, it would actually be naïve to think that the British intelligence service(s) responsible for counter-intelligence isn’t, in its functions for preserving the order of power, a Krypteia for the purposes of causing disruption, trauma and pretext for a political agenda of increasingly impoverishing and disempowering the enemy. Indeed, in late 2019, something called the Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled that MI5 had the right to allow its informants (agents) to commit the very sort of crime that MI5 is being blamed for in these pages, and in recent articles in a State Crime and Police Cover up series.

The opening paragraph from Bloomberg reportage summarises the information quite adequately:

Britain’s domestic intelligence service MI5 can authorize its agents to engage in criminal activities, potentially including murder, kidnap and torture, a London court ruled, as Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new government prepares to overhaul espionage laws.

The background to this ruling is best conveyed through the republishing of a section, in its near entirety, of the Wikipedia entry on MI5, titled Participation of MI5 agents in criminal activity.

In March 2018, the government acknowledged that MI5 agents are allowed to carry out criminal activity in the UK. Mao Foa, the director of Reprieve, said: “After a seven-month legal battle, the prime minister has finally been forced to publish her secret order, but we are a long way from having transparency. The public and parliament are still being denied the guidance that says when British spies can commit criminal offences, and how far they can go. Authorised criminality is the most intrusive power a state can wield. Theresa May must publish this guidance without delay”.

In November 2019, four human rights organisations claimed that the UK government has a policy dating from the 1990s to allow MI5 agents to participate in crime, and to immunise them against prosecution for criminal actions. The organisations said the policy authorised MI5 agents to participate in criminal activities that protected national security or the economic well-being of the UK. The organisations took the UK government to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, seeking to have it declare the policy illegal, and to issue an injunction against further ‘unlawful conduct’. In December 2019, the tribunal dismissed the request of the human rights organisations in a 3-to-2 decision.”

The abovementioned Bloomberg piece quoted a statement by a Home Office spokesman, which defends the use of covert agents “as an essential tool for MI5 as it carries out its job of keeping the country safe”, and the reader will have noticed that the objecting human rights groups, at least in the way it is stated in the Wikipedia entry, somewhat damage their own case by allowing that the problem doesn’t actually reside in there being something extremely sinister in the definition of “national security” or “the economic well-being of the UK” – which is this:  for the UK Government, security and economic well-being is something that needs protecting only for itself, and by this definition MI5 can prey on the people.

What was an enormously interesting feature of the Bloomberg reportage, of course, was the appearance of the old trick of framing domestic threat as foreign  activity. Incongruously, but more truthfully, the very next sentence suggests that it was committing crime, rather, that was at the crux of what MI5 does:

The [Investigatory Powers Tribunal’s] decision comes as Johnson seeks to update laws to bring them in line with the U.S. in a crackdown on spies, saboteurs and hackers working for foreign states such as Russia, North Korea and Iran. Preventing MI5 from running agents in criminal organizations “would strike at the core activities of the Security Service,” the judges said.

So, to be absolutely clear, MI5 agents can commit murder and kidnap in the course of their operations. This wasn’t denied. In fact, a court ruled against an injunction to have it stopped.

Moreover, it would appear that the ramification of the attempted injunction, such was the danger it and an appeal of the decision presented, was the emergence of that new legislation, as mentioned in the extract, which the UK Government is putting through Parliament at this time. The Covert Human Intelligence Sources Bill is framed as empowering agents to prevent and safeguard victims of crime, and yet the government’s own fact sheet reports the following:

Participation in criminal conduct is an essential and inescapable feature of CHIS [Covert Human Intelligence Sources]  use, otherwise they will not be credible or gain the trust of those under investigation. This enables them to work their way into the heart of groups that would cause us harm, finding information and intelligence which other investigative measures may never detect.

The [Covert Human Intelligence Sources] Bill provides an express power to authorise CHIS to participate in conduct which would otherwise constitute a criminal offence.

This is not a new capability; the Bill provides a clear legal basis for a longstanding tactic which is vital for national security and the prevention and detection of crime.

With this information being understood, the ongoing FBEL articles in the State Crime And Police Cover Up series, and the articles suggesting the Twickenham attacks of 2003 and 2004 were incidents in a broader psychological operation carried out by the Krypteia (MI5), should be taken completely seriously.

Of course, people will defend UK Government by arguing that agents need to commit crime so as not to blow cover for the good of an operation, and the good of some greater goals. They would regurgitate the UK Government line that the crime that an MI5 agent might commit is somehow moral, and this would exclude involvement in the Twickenham attacks.

In answer, as argued before, the goals in question would be the security and the well-being of UK Government, and the not having cover blown for the good of an operation, when committing what is consequently state crime against “the people”, would be all about not being discovered as being the leading player and the organising power. Because we would probably discover, if we could get to the bottom of it, that UK Government is responsible for a lot of crime in the name of its own security and well-being.

Of course, a variety of this crime is the false flag attacks that have been blamed on Islamists: people who are inevitably always known to MI5. On the other side, there is white extremism and far-rightism, with the Birstall false flag attack as its emblem, which appears very much as being intelligence agency work, and with the abortive National Action project said to have been a development into organised terrorism actually appearing to emanate from the British Army. An extension of this crime is the execution of a crisis with broader perceived threat to every day living, such as the Salisbury poisoning of 2018, and a population made to be concerned about persistent nerve agent in their midst. It was a psychological operation by military intelligence, presenting no chemical danger to anyone, to try and undermine Russian dedication in Syria against UK efforts to overthrow the Assad government.  In this operation, of course, the connivance in the scheme by the NHS Salisbury District Hospital was crucial, and if the reader would look at the FBEL article, Charlie Rowley sweats it out in “Novichok and Old Rope”, sponsored by Lucozade, the reader will get a gist of this. More pointed were the remarks by a commenter who noticed that the staff of the hospital, in their public pronouncements, should not have said things so supporting of the official narrative.

Of course, a couple of years down the line, and the NHS is in its entirety facilitating a psychological operation, and in fact being complicit in that unlawful death that the UK Government is such a dab hand at producing. Indeed, the point of producing the State Crime and Police Cover up series is to introduce, to anyone who stumbles across this site, the notion that if the UK Government will abduct and attack little girls and unaccompanied women in the street, then it will have no scruple in laying economic siege upon the British people, and staging a public medical emergency hoax as a pretext to do it.

The State Crime and Police Cover up series will continue.


Further reading:

The 77th Brigade Must Go To Jail: Part One – (link).

The 77th Brigade Must Go To Jail: Part Two – (link).

Is The Skripal Incident Linked To The Recent Liberation Of A Town Called Nashabiya? – (link).

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
Displaying 1 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. theguvnor says:

    Another great piece.’…and the NHS is in its entirety facilitating a psychological operation’ with the aid of scientists, NGOs and of course the legacy media to do the Governments dirty work.