As Netanyahu and May Chat, a Large Nest of israel’s Spies in London Exposed

As Netanyahu and May Chat, a Large Nest of Israeli Spies in London Exposed


The Israeli Embassy has seventeen Israeli “technical and administrative staff” granted visas by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The normal number for an Embassy that size would be about two. I spoke to two similar size non-EU Embassies this morning, one has two and one zero. I recall I dealt with an angry Foreign Minister during my own FCO career incensed his much larger High Commission had been refused by the FCO an increase from three to four technical and administrative staff.

Shai Masot, the Israeli “diplomat” who had been subverting Britain’s internal democracy with large sums of cash and plans to concoct scandal against a pro-Palestinian British minister, did not appear in the official diplomatic list.

I queried this with the FCO, and was asked to put my request in writing. A full three weeks later and after dozens of phone calls, they reluctantly revealed that Masot was on the “technical and administrative staff” of the Israeli Embassy.

This is plainly a nonsense. Masot, as an ex-Major in the Israeli Navy and senior officer in the Ministry of Strategic Affairs, is plainly senior to many who are on the Diplomatic List, which includes typists and personal assistants. There are six attaches – support staff – already on the List.

Masot was plainly not carrying out technical and administrative duties. The term is a formal one from the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and it is plain from the convention that technical and administrative staff are in official status lower than the diplomatic staff. The majority of support activities are carried out in all Embassies by locally engaged staff already resident in the host country, but a very small number of technical and administrative staff may be allowed visas for work in particularly secure areas. They may be an IT and communications technician, possibly a cleaner in the most sensitive physical areas, and perhaps property management.

These staff do not interact with politicians of the host state or attend high level meetings beside the Ambassador. The level at which Shai Masot was operating was appropriate to a Counsellor or First Secretary in an Embassy. Masot’s formal rank as an officer in his cover job in the Ministry of Strategic Affairs would entitle him to that rank in the Embassy if this were a normal appointment.

The Al Jazeera documentaries plainly revealed that Masot was working as an intelligence officer, acquiring and financing “agents of influence”. It is simply impossible that the FCO would normally grant seventeen technical and administrative visas to support sixteen diplomats, when six of the sixteen are already support staff. The only possible explanation, confirmed absolutely by Masot’s behaviour, is that the FCO has knowingly connived at settling a large nest of Israeli spies in London. I fairly put this to the FCO and they refused to comment.

I asked my questions on 10 January. On 12 January the FCO asked me to put them in writing. On 2 February they finally replied to the first three questions, but refused to comment on questions 4 or 5 about involvement of the intelligence services in Masot’s appointment.

On 2 February I sent these follow-up questions to the FCO by email:

FCO Media Department have replied that they refuse to give me any further information on the subject, and that I should proceed through a Freedom of Information request so the FCO can assess properly whether the release of any further information is in the national interest.

What is it they are always saying to us: if you have got nothing to fear, you have got nothing to hide?

I am confident I know what they are hiding, and that is FCO complicity in a large nest of Israeli spies seeking to influence policy and opinion in the UK in a pro-Israeli direction. That is why the government reaction to one of those spies being caught on camera plotting a scandal against an FCO minister, and giving £1 million to anti-Corbyn MPs, was so astonishingly muted. It is also worth noting that while the media could not completely ignore the fantastic al Jazeera documentaries that exposed the scandal, it was a matter of a brief article and no follow up digging.

This was not just a curiosity, it reveals a deep-seated problem for our democracy. I intend to continue picking at it.


The more Juif becomes Theresa, the more antisemitic becomes Britain.

February 02, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Today, the Jewish Chronicle (JC) reported that the number of antisemitic incidents in Britain in 2016 were the highest on record. The CST’s statistics show that there were 1,309 incidents of ‘Jew hatred’ last year — a 36 per cent increase on the previous 12 months.

Of course, the CST is not a reliable source and its‘antisemitism figures’ have been debunked numerous times before. However, if these statistics are accurate, they suggest only that the more the British government invests in fighting anti-Semitism…. the more antisemitic Britain becomes.

This is easy enough to explain. The fight against antisemitism is now a profitable industry.  Every day, we learn of some new Jewish organisation dedicated to fighting antisemitism and to hunt down the Jew haters, and all at the expense of the British tax payer*.

And, as always in the case of Israel and Zionism, these organisation are financially sustained by the very Jewish hatred they seek to oppose. And, when there is no Jew hatred to be found, they will either induce, or even invent some.

For instance, we learned in the last few weeks that Stephen Silverman of the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) launched a war against popular cult figure David Icke. The same Stephen Silverman who launched this war also launched a war against musician Alison Chabloz for expressing her thoughts on Holocaust religion by means of a cabaret performance.

These ugly campaigns against British truth-seekers are unlikely to make UK Jewry popular. Quite the opposite. Both these campaigns immediately backfired – Alison’s work went viral and the campaign against Icke proved only that Icke’s investigation into Rothschild Zionism is not only legitimate, it is actually essential.  These campaigns clearly are not going to silence Icke or Chabloz but they will confirm  that Jewish institutions here in Britain do not subscribe to the notion of freedom of thought and elementary human rights.

Dave Rich, Deputy Director of Communications at the CST told the JC: “I think there is an overall climate rather than one specific thing that is responsible for the rise in (antisemitic) incidents.”

Rich is wrong. There is one crucial factor in the rise in opposition to Jews and their politics: Jewish power has lost all its subtlety. It is now crude and vulgar and manifested right out in the open: whether it is the campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour party or theIsraeli embassy crudely interfering with British party politics or the constant hunting of critics of Israel or even the impunity of suspected child molester Lord Janner – more and more Brits are now reading between the lines. They have had enough.

If the British government is really concerned about antisemitism, it could eliminate it in no time at all. It must immediately strip Jewish organisations of any special treatment and funds and  must stop spending millions on the CST and all the other Jews-only paramilitary organisations operating in the kingdom.

We all agree that racism is a bad thing, so let’s fight it in a universal manner rather than following the whims of one particular tribe.

* Theresa May vowed recently to allocate more than 13.4 million pounds annually to Jewish security matters.

UN idiot: Al-Aqsa Mosque is Jewish

Posted on


Antonio Guterres, the newly installed United Nations secretary general and a Friend of Israel told Israel Radio on Friday that “it was completely clear that the Temple that the Romans destroyed in Jerusalem was a Jewish temple.”

This is no news to people who have studied the history of Temple Mount and Jewishness from some objective sources. The Zionist narrative of Temple Mount, just like Holy Holocaust is all based on fakes, frauds, and forgeries (watch video below).

The so-called Temple Mount (Solomon Palace or Haikale Sulemani) and part of Old City of Jerusalem were destroyed by Romans in 70 AD to crush the anti-Rome armed rebellion by the people of Judea, who were not Jewish. Majority of them belonged to Hebrew tribes also known as Bani Israel who were descendants of 12 sons of prophet Israel (Jacob). These people who lived in Arabian peninsula converted to Christianity and Islam with the passage of time. Over 90% of current world Jewry is not Israelites but Khazarian Turks.

Israeli historian Dr. Shlomo Sand, author of books The Invention of Jewish People’, ‘The Invention of the Land of Israel’, and ‘How I ceased to be a Jew’ has claimed that the word JEW was invented in late 18th century – most probably by Christian Zionists.

The photo above clearly shows that the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of Rock are not built on top of the Temple Mount. And the so-called Wailing Wall under the Al-Aqsa Mosque is not the foundation wall of the Temple Mount – but of a Roman fortress.

In October 2016, UNESCO declared that Old City of Jerusalem (occupied East Jerusalem) had nothing to do with Judaism.

But don’t expect Netanyahu stop speaking through Antonio Guterres’ mouth in the future.

Related Videos

Hasbara is Desperate to stop David Icke (video)

January 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

But with Goldman Sachs and Soros destroying one country after another, they do not stand a chance. By now we are all Palestinians.  David Icke knows it and he is not alone!!!

The following pathetic video was produced by the Campaign Against Antisemitism, an Israeli Hasbara unit operating in Britain. This video won’t hurt David Icke. Instead, it proves once again that Jewish power is the ability to silence discussion on Jewish power.  This power is proving less effective by the day.


US Public Discourse Slipping Further from Reality

Posted on January 23, 2017

 photo mrogers_zps591pngpj.jpg

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Alabama) is the latest example of a member of Congress who seems to be slipping further and further from reality. Rogers has introduced a bill entitled “The American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017”–which sounds good until you get to the fine print.

The bill is aimed at eliminating US membership in the United Nations, which Rogers sees as a threat to US sovereignty. It also would end US support for UN agencies such as UNESCO and the World Health Organization, and would even have the UN headquarters kicked out of New York.

Personally, I am not a big fan of the UN. It has been used often as a political tool to support US foreign policy objectives, for instance in 2011 when it authorized a no-fly zone over Libya–and so for this reason I have some doubts as to whether Rogers’ bill will pass. But this is neither here nor there. Where things get really crazy is when you look at the congressman’s reasoning behind the bill.

According to RT, Rogers’ bill, officially HR 193, was motivated by the UN Security Council resolution adopted last month criticizing Israeli settlements. I have already discussed HR 11, a bill introduced specifically in response to that Security Council resolution and which was approved by a vote 342-80, and HR 193 seems to have been similarly motivated. Or at least partly, at any rate–for the RT report makes note of the fact that the Alabama congressman introduced an earlier version of the bill back in 2015.

“Why should the American taxpayer bankroll an international organization that works against America’s interests around the world?” Rogers is said to have asked at that time. “The time is now to restore and protect American sovereignty and get out of the United Nations.”

A little more from the RT report:

Later, in June 2015, Rogers had introduced his document – then named HR 1205, but essentially the same USExit idea he’s proposing now.

“The UN continues to prove it’s an inefficient bureaucracy and a complete waste of American tax dollars.” Rogers went on to name treaties and actions he believes “attack our rights as US citizens.” These included gun provisions, the imposition of international regulations on American fossil fuels – but more importantly, the UN attack on Israel, by voting to grant Palestine the non-member state ‘permanent observer’ status.

“Anyone who is not a friend to our ally Israel is not a friend to the United States.”

So in Rogers’ delusional thinking, it is the UN, and not Israel or its US Lobby, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States.

American funding to the UN comes to approximately $8 billion per year, that’s in mandatory payments as well as voluntary contributions. This makes up about 22 percent of the UN’s overall budget.

By contrast, US funding of Israel presently comes to about $3.8 billion per year (in direct aid). Presumably, if Rogers’ bill passes, the $4.2 billion difference will then be available to pass along to Israel. I’m not saying that’s what will happen, but worth keeping in mind is that in September of last year, Obama signed a $38 billion aid package to the Jewish state, and Obama wasn’t even on good terms with the Israeli leadership. Imagine what largess may flow under a Trump administration.

As I said before, the US is often able to pressure other nations and thereby use the UN as a political tool to advance its own foreign policy objectives, so from that standpoint one might argue that the $8 billion per year was an investment which brought back a return.

By contrast, if the money goes to Israel, the opposite will be the case: for it is Israel which uses the US as a political tool, not the other way around.

If we continue to be ruled by people like Rogers, our national sovereignty will eventually disappear. We will become a nation governed in total by a foreign power.

Why Did the Al-Jazeera Expose Fail?

January 14, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

“The Lobby”, the Al-Jazeerah expose of the Israeli Embassy and the Jewish Lobby infiltration into British politics is a landmark in journalism. It seems that Qatari TV outsmarted Israeli intelligence in the UK and beyond.

In the program, an undercover journalist named ‘Robin’ managed to infiltrate into the corridors of the Jewish lobby in Britain, secured the trust of a senior Israeli intelligence officer and, most importantly, managed to reveal the depths of Israeli interference in British politics.

We learned how Israel and its lobby plot against Britain and the Brits. In the program, Shai Masot, an Israeli official was caught on camera conspiring to “bring down” a British minister.

We learned how our own treacherous MPs shamelessly serve a foreign power and foreign interests. In Episode 3 we witness British politicians and Israeli lobbyists such as MP Joan Ryan  caught on camera smearing a Labour voter as an ‘anti-Semite’, and practically conspiring against her own party. Ms Ryan does it all for the Jewish state, a state with a horrid record on human rights and war crimes.  I wonder what is it that motivates MP Ryan? Is it  greed, or is it just power seeking?

The Brits should certainly ask themselves how come it is left to a Qatari TV network  to reveal the shocking news about their democracy being taken over by a foreign Lobby. Should this not be the concern  for the BBC or the Guardian? And even after the Al-Jazeera expose, the British media remained silent and the question must be asked: would it have stayed as silent had Shai Masot been a Russian? Would it have stayed as silent if MP Joan Ryan was exposed as an Iranian lobbyist?

But Al-Jazeera fell into an all-too-common trap. Troubled by its own findings, it tried to soften them with the usual politically correct fluff.  Instead of concentrating on the British aspect of this saga and allowing the Brits to speak for themselves, Al-Jazeera allowed an Israeli – academic Ilan Pappe to speak for us. Similarly, Jackie Walker, certainly a victim of the Israeli campaign was also asked, “as a Jew” (as well as a Black person), to spell out for us her own identitarian philosophy. All other commentators on the Israeli espionage operation came from recognised Palestinian solidarity perspectives. Despite the fact that the dirty dealings of the Israeli Embassy and the treason of members of the Israeli lobby groups in Britain is a clear offence against British sovereignty and the British people, only one Brit, journalist Peter Oborne, addressed the offence from a clear British perspective.

This is wrong. “The Lobby” exposed, above all, a gross interference with British sovereignty, a crude intrusion into the British democratic process and government.  Al-Jazeera failed because it turned this British national tragedy into an internal Jewish dispute.

For obvious reasons, Al Jazeera chose not to delve into the deep, cultural meaning of the Israeli operation. Israel is, above all, the Jewish state and, as I have mentioned many times before, plotting against other people’s regimes is deeply embedded in Judaic teaching and Jewish culture. It is in practice the message of The Book of Esther, which teach the Jews how toconspire against their rulers and, by proxy, to win over their enemies.  You can read The Book Of Esther for yourselves (it’s pretty short and very entertaining):

Shai Masot was no junior embassy employee as claimed. He was a senior intelligence officer operating from the safety and immunity of its embassy on behalf of the Jewish state. He was working alongside Israeli Ambassador Mark Regev and the two are seen together in the film, sitting side by side, addressing various Jewish lobby groups. Shai Masot has been recalled and, I understand, is currently seeking other employment. Mark Regev should now be expelled and the matter must be investigated by MI5.

The inside story of Labour Party’s anti-Semitism saga

Footage captured by Al-Jazeera shows process involved in reporting incidents on anti-Semitism in the Labour party

A still from undercover footage shows the Labour Friends of Israel stall at the Labour party conference (Al-Jazeera)

A political activist who was accused of anti-Semitism at the Labour Party conference in September by a pro-Israel MP has been exonerated in undercover footage seen by Middle East Eye.

Video footage secretly filmed at the conference in Liverpool in September 2016 shows a woman engaged in a heated discussion at the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) stall with Joan Ryan, the MP for Enfield North, about the two-state solution.

Later, Ryan discussed the exchange with other members of the group. Details subsequently appeared in media outlets and the woman – who only wishes to be known as “Jean” – was the subject of a Labour Party investigation, which eventually cleared her.

“I am very worried, I’m very hurt, I feel very anxious that she has taken my words, to making it into something entirely different, and that she should be misinterpreting me totally to other people. I find that very, very worrying.”

Jean told Al-Jazeera – which filmed the incident as part of its investigation into the Israeli lobby in the UK  – that she was appalled at being accused of anti-Semitism.

“I am very shocked about the way she described my words to other people,” she said.

“I am very worried, I’m very hurt, I feel very anxious that she has taken my words, to making it into something entirely different, and that she should be misinterpreting me totally to other people. I find that very, very worrying.”

Undercover sting

The footage surfaced as part of a journalistic sting by Al-Jazeera into the activities of Israeli lobbyists in the UK.

The network also filmed Michael Rubin, LFI Parliamentary Officer, discussing working “really closely together” with the Israeli embassy “behind the scenes.” He was previously involved in interviewing Labour student supporters about allegations of anti-Semitism in the Oxford Students Union.

An undercover reporter attended the 2016 Labour Party conference, which saw the re-election of leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is sympathetic to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel and who has been criticized for apparent reference to Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends” in a 2009 meeting.

Corbyn’s team launched an inquiry into the depth of anti-Semitism within the Labour party in 2016 – and came up with new guidelines on the limits of what would be tolerated, including discussion of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Among the incidents presented in the footage is a confrontation between “Jean”  and Joan Ryan MP, the chair of Labour Friends of Israel (LFI). The LFI is a pressure group within Labour: it was originally established in 1957 and has for decades lobbied for stronger bilateral ties between the UK and Israel, as well as building links with the Israeli Labour party.

Heated conversation

In the video, which contains the full conversation, Jean approaches the LFI stall to ask Ryan if her group is “very anti the settlements”, referring to the illegal settlements constructed by Israel in the West Bank.

Jean: “What is Labour Friends of Israel doing about that?”

Joan Ryan: “We make our view clear and we meet with people at all levels in Israeli politics and diplomatic circles etcetera. And we make it absolutely clear we’re not friends of Israel and enemies of Palestine. Hence our new campaign launching next month and that we’re showcasing here.

Jean then repeatedly asks Ryan about “Israeli occupation” and what steps can bring about the “two-state solution”.

Joan Ryan: “I think we have to be very, very careful not to let our feelings about this morph into anti- Zionism.”

Jean: “So no feelings come into account? No, I’m not being anti-Zionist. Don’t we all want a two-state solution based on coexistence and peace?”

The conversation then becomes more heated as Jean repeatedly inquires what LFI is doing to support the move towards a two-state solution.

Jean: “You’ve got a lot of money, you’ve got a lot of prestige in the world.”

Joan Ryan: “I don’t know where you get that from… ‘Labour Friends of Israel have got a lot of power, a lot of money’… that’s just not …

READ: Israeli diplomat worked inside Labour to discredit ‘crazy’ Corbyn

Jean: “Well, I think so, that’s what I hear that, you know, it’s the stepping-stone to good jobs. A friend of mine’s son’s got a really good job at Oxford University on the basis of having worked for Labour Friends of Israel… it’s not a rumour, it’s a fact.”

Joan Ryan: “It’s anti-Semitic. It is. It’s a trope. It’s about conspiracy theorists.”

Jean: “No it’s not anti-Semitic, it’s not.”

Joan Ryan: “Sorry, it is. Anyway, that’s my view and I think we’ll have to agree to differ.”

Jean: “No, I don’t think we do have to agree to differ.”

Joan Ryan: “Well, I’m agreeing to differ and I am ending the conversation because I am not really wanting to engage in a conversation that talks about get involved with this and then you get a good job in Oxford or the City or… and that is anti-Semitic, I’m sorry.”

‘Anti-Semitic harassment’

In the undercover footage seen by Middle East Eye, Ryan attends a meeting of LFI after the earlier incident with Jean, saying there had been “three incidents of anti-Semitic harassment” at the LFI stand that day.

Footage captured the next day sees Ryan discuss the conversation – and other alleged incidents – at the LFI stall with leading Labour MP Angela Eagle and Michael Rubin, LFI Parliamentary Officer.

Speaking at the conference, Rubin refers to the previous day’s incidents, adding that “today’s been better where we did have one person towards the end of the day come and say the anti-Semitism was just being used to crush Jeremy and that the allegations are made-up to certain extent.”

He says that such comments are “obviously awful but compared to the stuff yesterday it’s sort of not as bad” and that he is “less shocked about that than I was about what happened yesterday.”

Ryan says she made a “formal complaint” against Jean, who by this point had circulated a video of the incident.  Ryan points out the video “didn’t show any of the bits where I said ‘you’re being anti-Semitic.’”

She adds: “Well I mean, I wrote down honestly what she was saying about him being rich and powerful, he went to Oxford and the next minute he’s got a big job in banking, you know,” she explains – even though in the conversation Jean did not refer to banking.

Ryan adds: “And I said… classic anti-Semitic tropes aren’t they.”

The group discuss other incidents, including one woman who claims never to have seen anti-Semitism in the party and believes the  claims are being used to “undermine” Corbyn; and another person who remarks that the “coup” launched by Labour rebels to unseat Corbyn in 2016 had been “launched by Jews and Jewish MPs and Jewish millionaires and Angela Eagle’s husband is Jewish.”

Alex Richardson, Ryan’s assistant, says to Ryan that if the incident makes her feel uncomfortable then she should report it. He says that he reported an incident the previous day because he felt uncomfortable.

He adds: “And although nothing anti-Semitic was said, I’m sure there were undertones of it and it was brought up on that context.”

After the conference, Jean was contacted by a Labour party official who, she says, would only say it was about a serious incident.

“At no point did I ever say that Labour Friends of Israel will get people jobs in banking in the City”

Al-Jazeera’s undercover reporter was also contacted by Ryan’s assistant, asking him to be a witness to an alleged act of anti-Semitism.

Eventually Jean was cleared.

“At no point did I ever say that Labour Friends of Israel will get people jobs in banking in the City,” she said. “I did say, which is absolutely true, that I know the son of a friend of mine who, he believed himself that having some connection with Labour I Friends of Israel didn’t harm his career at all.

“I thought Labour Friends of Israel were talking about Palestine because they were promoting a two-state solution. Now I find they don’t want to talk about Palestine, and if you do talk about Palestine it would appear you’re kind of sucked into having, uh, an accusation of anti-Semitism brought against you. “

Ryan was contacted for comment, but at the time of publication MEE has received no response.

Israeli historian and activist Ilan Pappe, who saw the footage, told Al-Jazeera that it “clearly” showed that Jean was “not anti-Semitic. They know it,” he said “She didn’t talk like an anti-Semitic person. She was a typical pro-Palestinian person who was worried about the violations of human, of the Palestinian human and civil rights.”

“The activist who came to ask [Joan Ryan] tough questions about settlement activity, that was her main point. She didn’t ask her about Judaism or the existence of Israel, she just wanted a straight answer for how does anyone who supports Israel explain the settlements, or justify the settlements.”

‘More Palestinian than the Palestinians’

The Labour Party has faced claims of anti-Semitism during the past 12 months.

Video captured at the Labour party conference shows Israeli ambassador Mark Regev speaking to a group of activists at an event about the risks facing pro-Israel sympathisers in the party.

Also present is the Israeli embassy political officer Shai Masot, who was caught on camera discussing ways to “take down” UK deputy foreign minister with a former employee of the Department of Education.

“Some of the people here are more Palestinian than the Palestinians,” says Regev. “The fashion if you are on the left today you are probably very hostile to Israel, if not anti-Semitic.”

In April 2016 a Facebook post by the Bradford West MP Naz Shah appeared to suggest Israel could be relocated to the US.

Although the image had originated as a satire from the Jewish professor and activist Norman Finkelstein – and had originally been posted by Shah in 2014 – the ensuing controversy led some to suggest that Corbyn was tolerant of anti-Semitic attitudes within the party.

Shah apologised and her suspension was lifted – but numerous members were suspended amid fresh reports of anti-Semitic attitudes, including Jewish anti-Zionist activist Tony Greenstein.

“I have no idea what the comments I am alleged to have made which caused the LP McCarthyists such upset,” he wrote on his blog at the time.“Perhaps I mentioned socialism too often. Or in the current atmosphere of attempting to paint the Left as anti-Semitic, perhaps they thought that expelling someone who has fought fascism all his life would be an example to all.”

Former Mayor of London Ken Livingstone was also suspended from the party following comments in which he appeared to suggest that Adolf Hitler had been a supporter of Zionism.



UK is held in Israel’s ‘golden chains’


%d bloggers like this: