Workers Party Logo


Axis of Terror: Nato and its modern Left and Anarchist support

Opinion piece by Phil Bevin

NATO’s lefty anarchists

When analysing the UK left, I keep encountering strange organisations that don’t really exist, at least not in legal form. Sometimes, the leadership structures of these groups are either wholly anonymised or at least very opaque, which raises, in my view, serious concerns over accountability over their actions and their consequences. I think this is especially troubling with regards to movements that collect personal data and encourage people to get themselves in to legal or financial difficulties. Just as concerning, is how one of these groups, Plan C, is directly connected to armed militias fighting US proxy-wars overseas and using their platforms to bolster support for these interventions, which have resulted in a significant loss of life.

These organisations are, by nature, hard to define, so, for now, I have termed them “ghost ships”: political vehicles that we can see but have no tangible (legal) form.

Beginning with an examination of Extinction Rebellion, this essay charts the interconnections between the British anarchist, and radically liberal left and traces their extensions into the tangle of the civil war in Ukraine, where British anarchists have become intertwined with the Banderite (Nazi) far-right. Over the course of this journey we will discover that many of the organisations that we think we know are mere phantoms whose presence is indicative of a darker specter lurking beneath, in the murky depths of the Anglo-American deep state.

Extinction Rebellion

Probably the most famous of these “Ghost Ships” is Extinction Rebellion (XR). It is also a useful case study because it is fairly representative of several anarchists groups operating around and through the UK left. XR is fascinating because it isn’t really an “organisation” at all. According to its finance overview document, XR

“is not a legal entity and is not controlled by anyone or any other legal entity. What is referred to as Extinction Rebellion UK “XRUK” is a movement governed by constitution and a managed self organising system. There are no employees, managers or bosses. Volunteers needing financial support can access allowances”

But of course Extinction Rebellion, is under no obligation to provide financial support to people getting arrested as a result of its campaigning activities, because it doesn’t exist in legal form.

What does exist in legal form is Compassionate Revolution. According to the XR Funding and Expenditure document,

“Compassionate Revolution Ltd (CR) is a company limited by shares and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Climate Emergency Action Ltd, which is established as a non-for-profit company limited by guarantee.

CR supports movements campaigning for action on the climate and ecological emergency, handling all the practical aspects of fundraising, making grants and paying expenditure.

Compassionate Revolution is run by volunteers. It does not make decisions on how the funds raised by, or on behalf of, XR are used but provides an overview of the financial situation to assist with budgeting. It also provides additional checks on how the funds are spent, to ensure that donations are used in line with the expectation of donors and are efficiently utilised.”

To be clear, Compassionate Revolution is not Extinction Rebellion or vice versa. This raises a possible power imbalance whereby those with access to the money collected by Compassionate Revolution have the power to decide how and on what it is spent. The company is under no obligation whatsoever to support the activists that XR has encouraged to get themselves arrested and therefore potentially charged with criminal offenses, which as the Extinction Rebellion website acknowledges, can “become very expensive” as a result of “court costs, legal representation, victim surcharge, damages, civil liability and court fines”. Essentially, people are being encouraged to put themselves at physical and financial risk, without any guarantee of formal or institutional support from the groups that are encouraging them to do so.

Nevertheless, XR does have an internal structure. According to Chris Taylor, Director of Oasis Foundation & member of Extinction Rebellion:

“It is based on a set of nested interlocking circles. There are circles that look at how the movement develops, at the culture, the values, non-violence. There are circles that look at training and how to run meetings, to plan actions, to set the overall strategy. There are also circles to look at the health of the self-organising system itself. (I’m within the circles of influence and governance).

So, people can find their place within those circles. Each local group is autonomous and organised on a circular model. So as long as local groups operate towards the overall vision and within the same set of values, they are free to act in the way they see fit. This structure of circles managing the organism as a whole, supported by local autonomous groups then creates a system that releases energy and potential into the movement.”

While this sounds mutually supportive and collegiate, serious problems over accountability have been reported. For example, activists have claimed that the campaign “wasn’t designed to be democratic or accountable”.

Focussing on the controversial action at Canning Town Tube Station in 2019, a Novara Media article recounts how activists’ concerns over the action were overridden by Extinction Rebellion’s leadership.

“ “The tube action wasn’t well received by the public. Activists were physically assaulted, and eight arrests were made. At the time, only 13% of Brits said they had sympathy for the activists. The protests also caused division within the climate movement. Some felt the target of the action was misguided, largely taking place in historically working class areas of London and disrupting those going to work. Within XR, people feared the incident had alienated potential supporters.

Ben* [a pseudonym], who joined XR in April 2019 and left in 2020, explains that before the Canning Town incident, ‘rebels’, or XR activists, were polled about whether or not it was a good idea. “A huge percentage of them said no, but then they did it anyway,” he recalls. This is because the action met a list of guidelines set out by XR. “Once you accept that framework, you can literally do any action you like,” he says. “The problem is that loads of people in XR might do some actions, but might really hate or disagree with others, and they have absolutely no control over that.” “

An interesting and thoughtful article by former Extinction Rebellion activist Zion Lights, published in the Free Press, highlights more of the consequences following the action. According to Zion,

“October 2019 was, for many of us in XR, a turning point.

That was when XR shut down the London Tube. I was against the action, but others targeted the Canning Town station since it had inadequate security. They didn’t care that the reason it had inadequate security was that it was underfunded because it was in a beat-up neighbourhood. The people who use the Canning Town station every day are the working poor, the people who really need to get to work, the people who don’t have the luxury of working from home. I watched in horror as the news hit, showing videos of a mob pulling one activist down from atop a Tube train by his foot and kicking him […] The Tube disruption lost the group much-needed public support and a lot of money. It also splintered the movement.”

Zion’s article also likened Extinction Rebellion to a “cult”, with certain individuals, like co-founder Roger Hallam, holding disproportionate influence, possibly even after he stopped having any formal role. She claims,

“Though XR officially started to cut ties with Roger in November 2019, he continued to come to the office, and to speak to the press. I came to realize that XR was really his movement and he’d never truly leave.”

Zion’s article asserts that “in July 2020, XR announced that Roger no longer holds any formal role in the UK organization. But he has moved on. His latest project is a rebranding of the most extreme faction of XR, Just Stop Oil, which is supported by the Climate Emergency Fund, funded by Oscar-winning director Adam McKay and Rory Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy’s daughter, among others.”

However, the independence of Just Stop Oil from the rest of the XR movement is questionable, not least because the two campaigns share a common funding source: the Climate Emergency Fund.

Integrated into XR are members of other organisations. Though it is little known, the most notable of these groups for my purposes is Plan C, partially because of its surprisingly ubiquitous presence across the UK “left”.

Plan C: a “leftist” paramilitary wing of the US Empire?

According to its website:

“Plan C exists to organise in, beyond, and against capital. We think this requires the development of ideas and practices that are able to cohere together whilst at the same time being dynamic enough to adapt to changes in our lives and our work. Whilst we try to avoid tying ourselves down to key principles and hallmarks, there are a few things that can be sustainably drawn on to broadly describe its form.”

In terms of its structure, although not identical, Plan C appears to operate according to a model that is analogous to Extinction Rebellions “Circles” paradigm, which enables local groupings to act with a certain level of autonomy:

“We don’t have a leadership, a central committee, or a steering committee. The sovereign decision-making bodies at the national level are congresses (open to all members), and monthly intercongress proposals (discussed by all local groups). Any member or group can make a proposal for a course of action, policy, amendment to a policy, project, or national discussion […]

We don’t require members to toe the line. Minority groups within the Plan C are welcome to pursue courses of action under the Plan C name that the majority isn’t into (where logic allows it). A diversity of approaches makes for a much stronger organisation. However, we attempt to move continually towards shared strategic orientations to enhance the intellectual and logistical coordination within (and outside) the organisation rather than a centrally determined line or course of action.”

Once again, though, it’s easy to see how this level of decentralisation can lead to issues with accountability. It is for instance, unclear who, if anyone, is accountable for the actions of the group as a whole, which like XR’s structure, raises the possibility of individual activists left to shoulder the full consequences of actions they have been encouraged to take by the group as a whole. This is particularly troubling because Plan C does not simply encourage ordinary people to risk being subject to fines or jail – it has endorsed the actions of activists who have travelled to northern Syria to support the US backed SDF occupation of the region by joining the paramilitary militia.

In an article for the Canary Tom Anderson, who is part of the Plan C tendency  wrote how,

“In 2012, a revolution began in the majority-Kurdish region of Rojava in northern Syria. People organised themselves into communes, declared autonomy, and began practicing stateless direct democracy. The revolution, however, was under threat from the very beginning and has faced invasion by Daesh (Isis/Isil) and Turkey. People from all over the world have travelled to Rojava to join the revolution as internationalists.”

One of these was “Josh”, whose obituary on the Plan C website states,

“A longtime member of our Kurdistan Cluster, Josh travelled to Syria in 2017 to volunteer in the Rojava Revolution. He stayed for a year, volunteering with both SYPG, a Marxist civil organisation supporting the growth of the democratic system, and the International Freedom Battalion, an internationalist YPG battalion established as a united front of anarchists and communists defending the revolution. Josh was loved and respected by the people in Rojava as a teacher in Kobane, and by his IFB comrades as a soldier in the liberation of Raqqa.”

While Plan C likes to stress the progressive, leftist nature of the militia’s serving in Rojava, at least some of the individuals who participated travelled to serve in another US proxy war, this time alongside Neo Nazis fighting against the Russians in Ukraine.

An obituary of three anarchist militia volunteers killed in Ukraine – Finbar Cafferkey, Dmytro Petrov, and Cooper Andrews – written by Tom Anderson for the Canary, explains that Irish national Finbar, who was killed fighting in the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut, had previously “volunteered to help defend the Rojava revolution in North and East Syria”.

It seems that the line between “progressive” anarchist militiamen and Neo Nazi collaborators is a permeable one.

How the Network works

The interlinkage of the various climate activist groups, Plan C and other anarchist groups working the UK is outlined in statement by James Dobson, Specialist Security Consultant and Advisor to the First Claimant, High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, Two Snowhill, Snow Hill Queensway, Birmingham to the high court.

The document notes,

” “in their “about us” description on their website (screenshot at page 132), XR describe themselves as an “international movement that uses non-violent civil disobedience in an attempt to halt mass extinction and minimise the risk of social collapse”. In reality, XR is an environmental campaign which is trying to enact political change through direct action. The group uses civil disobedience, disruption and delay to heighten awareness of their cause. HS2 Rebellion, JSO and Insulate Britain may all be considered affiliated groups as they share members and founders and on occasion engage in cooperative actions.

“HS2 Rebellion may be considered an affiliate group to or “wing” of XR. An insight into the key role played by XR in the evolution of HS2 Rebellion can be seen in comments made on a post on the Stop HS2 Facebook group from 02.01.2023 (copy at page 133), where Scarah Snooks comments “how do you think we got so many people into the campaign! Where were u 4 years ago when the first camp was a year old and totally empty. XR gave us loads of people and even more publicity”.

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.

For example, Andrew Dolan, one of the original organisers of TWT, a festival co-founded by Momentum, was Political Coordinator of Momentum and has been reported to be a former activist with Plan C. Dolan has also written for Novara Media which has promoted the World Transformed, as has Michael Chessum, another apparent Plan C fellow traveler. Chessum is also a former Momentum Steering group member, who delivered leaflets for Don’t Pay UK, which was heavily featured by Aaron Bastani’s Novara Media, as Just Stop Oil and XR co-Founder Roger Hallam has been. Chessum was also a primary organiser of the Soros-funded Another Europe is possible campaign and has been linked to the AWL (although has denied being a member), which is affiliated to the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign – a group that supports escalation in the Russia-Ukraine war. A supporter of this organisation is Paul Mason, who has written for Novara Media. Mason narrated a video series for the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation (RLF), the German state backed foundation which funds Novara Media and The World Transformed via Foreign Office grants from the German Government. RLF also finances Ukrainian militia volunteer Sergey Movchan’s website,, which claims to be dedicated to monitoring the far right.

These are just some of the links I have uncovered throughout my research and others are outlined in previous articles, which can be found here, here, and here

As I have also explained previously, these groups don’t just share personnel but also hold common positions on a range of issues, notably on foreign policy matters. For example, the perspectives on the Russia Ukraine war published in Novara Media and the Canary are, at times, nearly identical to each other, almost to the extent that one might wonder if they are receiving briefings from similar sources. This is also true of the coverage of the Turkish elections by the Canary, Plan C and Progressive international.

The interconnectedness is so extensive that, rather than a broad range of diverse organisations, these groups, media organisations and campaigns may be more accurately described as a range of vehicles fronting for the aims and objectives of what is, in truth, a relatively small network, or “clique” of influential people with similar views and political leanings, particularly when it comes foreign policy. Those who are not part of this clique or at least in their good graces, are unlikely to be allowed to play a significant or influential role in the “mainstream” UK left.

The UK liberal left is therefore not an open, democratic, welcoming environment for the many but a closed shop, serving the interests of an established and, in some cases, establishment, few. Because it operates through informal networks of influence, the UK left is also opaque and, like the organising structures within XR, it is very difficult to tell where authority and influence sits .

Nazi collaboration

Following criticism from scholar and investigative Journalist David Miller over their coverage of three anarchists who volunteered in the Ukraine war, the Canary cast doubt on the allegation that the individuals – Finbar Cafferkey, Dmytro Petrov, and Cooper Andrews – who were killed in the battle for Bakhmut, had fought alongside Banderite Nazis in Ukraine. In a thread The Canary’s official Twitter account, explained,

“Finbar Cafferkey, Dmytro Petrov, and Cooper Andrews were not Nazis – they were committed anti-fascists who spent their lives struggling against authoritarianism …

”The Resistance Committee, who the three men organised with, said “Recently, we received information that some political fraudsters are trying to make a PR campaign out of the deaths of our comrades, attributing to them actions or motives that were not theirs.” “

Later in the thread, they added:

“It is morally repugnant to align these anti-fascists with Nazism. As we said before, we understand that Western imperialism and Russian imperialism must be steadfastly resisted – we’re against authoritarian states, always have been and always will be. People over power, always”

However, the Canary’s rebuttal is not fully supported by the text of the Resistance Committee’s statement, which makes clear that the three men did serve alongside people with whom they were not previously politically aligned.

As the full statement says:

“We declare the following:

1. Although in the course of their military activities they did have to cross paths and interact with people and groups of different political views, which is currently in line with the requirements of this war, this cannot in any way cast a shadow on the reputation of the heroes.

2. Until their deaths, they remained convinced anti-fascists and anarchists, which is reflected in the texts they left behind and messages from their social networks, messages to their families and memories of friends and relatives.

We urge you not to believe rumors and to trust the information from the groups to which our fallen comrades were affiliated.”

One of these groups is Solidarity Collectives, which has published obituaries for the fallen volunteers. In interviews, Sergey Movchan, an organiser of Solidarity Collectives, has made clear that he believes it to be permissible to collaborate with the far right when the main enemy is Russia. Movchan even downplayed the Banderite Nazi politics of the Azov battalion. From an article, published by News in Germany:

“ “According to Movchan, one must also distinguish between the Azov regiment and associations that also bear the name Azov in their designation. These are much more politicized than the Azov regiment. In no way, according to Movchan, is the presence of right-wing extremists a reason not to help the people defending Mariupol now. The majority of the defenders are regular military and not Azov people.

“Compared to her early days, Azov is much less politicized today and hardly makes any political statements of her own, Movchan told the taz. At the same time, the proportion of right-wing extremists in Azov has also decreased. “Not so long ago, Azov even declared that they were not Nazis, but patriots. And the only Nazi is Putin.” “

“These are much more politicized than the Azov regiment. In no way, according to Movchan, is the presence of right-wing extremists a reason not to help the people defending Mariupol now. The majority of the defenders are regular military and not Azov people”.

Nevertheless, as the same piece admits, at the point of writing, the regiment was still using the “Wolf Angel” symbol, “considered a sign of identification of the right-wing extremists. It had been used by National Socialist organizations and SS units during the National Socialist era.”

The piece frames Movchan as “The coordinator of the Violence Marker project, which documents right-wing violence in Ukraine,” and “has been observing the Ukrainian right-wing scene for years”. But, in the context of the war, the far right are clearly Movchan’s allies, and he and his Solidarity Collectives are fighting on their side, even though they do not share their ideology.

Movchan has also put forward a similar argument in an interview with the UK’s Novara Media, where he states:

“Originally there were specific leftist units, but people have now mostly moved on to other volunteer battalions or regular units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, mostly because they wanted to go to the frontlines, and that was the easiest way to get there.”

Following the Canary’s instruction and taking their allies at their word, we can confirm that anarchists did fight alongside the far right within the Armed Forces of Ukraine, of which the far-right regiments are components.

Moreover, it has been revealed on social media that Ukraine’s anarchist militia fighters have not only praised but also participated in operations led by Banderite Nazi regiments employed within the armed forces of Ukraine. In any case, serving in a military that has fully incorporated whole Nazi regiments makes anarchist fighters Nazi collaborators by definition, regardless of how they claim to feel about their allies’ politics.


Like ISIS volunteers, foreign militiamen fighting alongside Nazis in the Armed forces of Ukraine are radicalised at home before being trafficked abroad. Environmental activism may sound like an unlikely source of volunteers for these militia units, but it appears that it could serve as a pathway for radicalisation.

In an article for Unherd, former Extinction Rebellion activist Poppy Coburn explains how her environmentalism was linked to her support for the SDF occupation of northern Syria:

“ […] I enjoyed being a “radical”. I would walk around campus brandishing my own Little Green Book. Entitled Make Rojava Great Again, it was a hilariously delusional manifesto influenced by Murray Bookchin, and attempted to explain how a small, anarchist-in-name-only Kurdish commune was the future for global Leftism. The irony that Rojava was only able to exist thanks to the imperialist interventionism of the Global American Empire in Syria was, of course, lost on me and my comrades.

It was amid this revolutionary fervour that I was introduced to Extinction Rebellion (XR).”

If support for Rojava can lead to environmental activism, the reverse is no doubt possible too. And a similar dynamic may be visible in the case of Finbar Cafferky. According to the obituary published in the Canary:

“Finbar Cafferkey was from Ireland. He was involved in the eco-defence campaign against Shell’s natural gas pipeline in County Mayo in the mid-2000s. Later, he volunteered to help defend the Rojava revolution in North and East Syria, and participated in the liberation of Raqqa from Daesh (ISIS) in 2017. Finbar went on to participate in Rojava‘s armed defence against the Turkish invasion of Afrin in 2018 as part of the YPG (People’s Defence Units). He was given the name Çîya, meaning ‘mountain’, by his Kurdish comrades.

When Russia invaded Ukraine, Finbar began to organise support. He worked with ACK Galicja and the XVX Tacticaid to bring humanitarian support from Poland to the front lines in Ukraine comrades said:

When asked why he did that, Çîya always answered: “Because I have time and I can be useful here.”

Later he decided to join a fighting unit with three comrades, supported by SC.”

In this context, encouraging climate activists to break the law and the trumpeting the “green” initiatives of the oil extracting “Rojava Revolution” can be seen as possible gateways into radicalisation and even, potentially, future paramilitary activity.

Tendrils of the Integrity Initiative

Not only is the traffic in people to fight in foreign militias morally repugnant, it is also illegal under UK law. This is presumably because the return of trained militiamen, potentially traumatised by their experiences in war, could result in blowback and increased dangers at home, as has happened before. Nevertheless, it seems that this has been an ongoing trend for some time. Given the illegality of the practice, it is logical to consider whether Western authorities have been involved in encouraging people to go and fight in the US proxy wars taking place in Syria and Ukraine or have at least been turning a blind eye. Certainly, we now know that a Canadian state asset facilitated the trafficking of Shamima Begum to fight alongside ISIS in Syria. We know, too, that the British security services have been very active in stoking and promoting the conflict in Ukraine. This is hardly surprising as British and American intelligence services have a long history of supporting Stepan Bandera and his followers, dating back to the immediate post World War 2 period.

Of particular note in this regard is British Spy Chris Donnelly, the man in charge of the Integrity Initiative. According to a briefing by the Working Group on Syria, propaganda and media, “some activities of the Integrity Initiative in the Baltic states and Ukraine, where people who consider themselves Russian make up large minorities, appear likely to foment sectarian hatred and civil conflict”. The project therefore has a reputation for escalating, rather than reducing tensions in Eastern Europe. According to the Grayzone’s Kit Klarenberg,

“Detailed proposals for providing “audacious” support to Kiev’s “maritime raiding operations” were drafted at the request of Chris Donnelly, a senior British Army intelligence operative and veteran high ranking NATO advisor. The wide-ranging plan’s core component was “destruction of the bridge over the Kerch Strait.””

The Grayzone also revealed Donnelly’s oversight of plans to construct “a secret terror army in Ukraine”. So how is Donnelly and his Integrity Initiative relevant to the UK left?

I have previously drawn attention to Plan C activists and Novara Media authors Sam Moore and Alex Roberts’ interview with Michael Colborne, a representative of named Integrity Initiative partner Bellingcat, for their podcast, “12 rules for WHAT?”.

In the interview, Colborne explained how the left could play a positive role in Ukraine by assisting Ukraine’s fight against Russia. He explained:

“There is an opportunity for some elements within the left to stand up and say to the far right – what are you mad at us for we stood up for the country too, so why do you get all the political capital?”

This line of argument is remarkably similar to that espoused by Sergey Movchan who, as we saw earlier, legitimised the anarchist-fascist alliance.

Bizarrely, the episode, which is centred around Bellingcat’s role in analysing the far-right, including Nazi forces in Ukraine, makes little mention of Western support for neo-Nazi militias in the country and reflects positively on the role played by anarchist groups in the conflict. Notably, Michael Colborne was also interviewed for Sergey Movchan’s Rosa Luxemburg Foundation-financed far-right monitoring site, Violence

Left wing journalist Paul Mason’s role is also interesting. Last year, a Grayzone report revealed email conversations between Mason and Andy Pryce, who, according to Wikispooks, ‘set up and ran the UK’s Counter Disinformation and Media Development Programme for four years’ (2015-19). Pryce has been named as a member of the “Integrity Initiative’s” “Inner Core”.

Mason is a signatory of the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, a platform he has used to argue for escalation of Western involvement in the war, citing briefings by the NATO-funded Atlantic Council think tank to support his case.

Also of note is the connection between, Andrew Chadwick, the former PhD supervisor to Novara Media’s Aaron Bastani and Andy Pryce’s Counter Disinformation Unit. According to his own website, from 2020 to 2022, Chadwick “served as an adviser to the Department of Digital, Media, Culture and Sport (DCMS) Counter-Disinformation Policy Forum”.

Finally, at least for now, is Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Ben Judah. Judah was named by Donnelly himself in a 2016 memorandum to his colleagues in the French integrity Initiative. In this document, Donnelly proposes that Judah be one of the individuals to be included in “a network of like minded people across Europe in NGOs and governments to focus on Russian influence and information.” Donnelly explains that

“NATO PDD Info & Press will take our papers and other product and disseminate them to defence circles and political circles in member states. Note that as an independent NGO we can do things they can’t do and national governments can’t do.”

In 2018, Judah, a long term friend and former housemate of Progressive International’s head of communications, co-authored an article with the organisation’s General Coordinator, which explained why Putin “should fear a President Bernie”.

As I have highlighted elsewhere, Progressive International has taken a supportive stance regarding Turkish parties endorsing the US backed occupation of Northern Syria, where anarchists volunteered before some of them moved on to Ukraine. Judah also claims to have numerous acquaintances on the British left. In an article for the financial times, titled “Momentum: Inside Labour’s Revolutionary Movement” he writes:

“This is my generation. The furious tweeters. The self-taught YouTube Marxists. The failed hipsters and freelancers. The last protesters trying to stop the cuts who stayed up all night cursing corporate tax avoidance and the Cayman Islands. The twenty to thirtysomethings who built Britain’s new left. I was never one of them. But I always knew them. And I kept drifting in and out of pubs and house shares with them.”

What lurks beneath?

It certainly seems likely, indeed a near certainty, that, given the numerous connections between the tentacles of the Integrity Initiative and the UK left, the security services know about the illegal traffic in British Nationals to conflicts overseas. Curious, too, is that no action being taken by the authorities to curb the encouragement of these activities by “left wing” media. Perhaps, it has something to do with the alignment of the foreign militias supported by the British left with Anglo American foreign policy interests.

Give us your thoughts...