In an explosive news story for ConservativeNewsSite.com, a former head of MI5 has been sensationally re-located and relieved of his duties.
This suspect had been appointed by Queen Elizabeth 2nd, but had refused to leave his duties after being asked to do so. He remained at large until today.
You may think of Dickens as one example, or a poet or charismatic politician. It’s certain there aren’t many places to go if you’re not a larger-than-life figure in our past.
This is all true to form for the past but our present is much different.
We’re not so much performer’s now, or illustrious writers, or exciting adventurer’s, but people with skills and ambition.
The reach for the past however is a tendency that still exists. It persists more strongly in academia than anywhere else. There, in the rarified halls of power of the mind, it’s possible to dream up anything.
The trouble is the fluorescent light bulb has to switch off at some point.
It doesn’t always end up as so.
In my experience there are plenty of dreamers and pretender’s about still these days. They hark back to former times when farms were run off vegetables and stalls had fruit to sell.
“MI5”“MI6”
It doesn’t work anymore but maybe Hollywood brings it back into view: it might do, just one more time. It doesn’t but there’s no harm in trying, allegedly.
The troubling truth is there is.
In recent times those of us more inclined to secrecy have believed that espionage – or spying, more pertinently – is a worthy cause to fall back on. It’s not as if we don’t do it already (there’s plenty of reason to suspect so), but some of us are not inclined to read the newspapers.
The news of actions abroad and reactions at home don’t reach all of us and it’s suspected that many of us don’t really regard news of anything to be of much worth at all.
It takes the few among us to make a fool of ourselves on this basis alone. It takes fewer to really cause damage.
The story that relates to intelligence in the military is that in recent times folks believed that they could do better.
The point is not we did it anyway and sometimes intelligence is a thankless task, it’s that human ego takes over when nobody is really watching.
This is to mean that ego had not been factored in as a threat where no other one was present.
The old style spy bases of both MI5 and MI6 – both respectively located in London in times past – became a source and focal point of interest. They’re both small buildings, but then why shouldn’t they be – a spy is supposed to be out in the field, and not closeting himself in, away from the cold.
They became locations of a resurgence of fake interest in spying.
The errors that resulted from this type of exuberance are noted in the public record of events in London, but thankfully they’ve gone down and not up. It wouldn’t work to be known for such foolishness.
In telling the story of Margaret Thatcher it’s necessary to talk about the IRA too. It’s unfortunate as it marks out a Premiership with terrorism that English people felt personally.
It isn’t her fault but her Premiership is marked in some way by the feeling of it.
Yet the facts do not always bear out for all of us.
I once spoke to an Irish dissident who called himself so because he deviated from a narrative he saw as stopping Ireland’s future from materialising, not a policy or program as it were.
This is the state of things in a news era, he’d imply.
He believed an IRA man to be an early type of intelligence spy. He said he knew of a few people who knew a few facts of the matter, of political discussions higher up.
He said it made sense to see it as so.
The ensuing events, as he saw it, confirmed his views but I can’t be so sure. This sort of cloak and dagger talk is normally beyond me and I don’t engage with it.
However he felt sure and I was clear I’d listen to him.
I don’t believe it necessarily but it’s a case sometimes of if the shoe fits.
In his case he was upset about the prospects of his country so it didn’t seem worth challenging him on it.
A spy belonging to an international intelligence agency has been spotted visiting Scotland today. The man was photographed as he was loitering with an accomplice taking photos of their own in a popular and busy intersection in the city of Edinburgh.
It’s believed they are both working together to reconnaissance the city. The other suspect is thought to be a military officer and both are believed to be working for North Korean authorities although it cannot be confirmed as yet.
In a groundbreaking operation a suspect has been spotted in central London following an international sting effort.
He is known as a political strategist of sorts who also holds unofficial positions of influence in key areas usually designated only to important persons in the so-called military industrial complex.
However, in particular places he’s wielded significant manipulative influence in terms of advice given and sought.
He remained at large until today when a positive ID was enabled to be achieved outside the gates of 10 Downing Street in central London.
It was meant as a “fun” name and was given to him because people liked him. However these were the wrong people for him to be around and even worse for everyone else. It also wasn’t an appropriate name.
He concerned himself with what he termed “corporate” media. It was built on a sense that anything based on how we look or how we look at and perceive others is important.
He wouldn’t just stop at a photograph being taken but knew it was meant to mean more than an image implied and was meant to “last forever” as he used to put it.
He also even attempted an infiltration of news media in the UK but this was unsuccessful. If he had proved successful he might have changed the way we see ourselves and manipulated our sense of nationhood entirely.
However his activities took place (or at least came to the fore) during our Brexit period and were exposed. Thankfully it meant his other business activities were neutralised as well.
It’s just an example of how one man can make an impact as an individual in a negative sense.
A further problematic situation any intelligence service finds itself in is more complex in its political ramifications.
This is a truth that intelligence services acknowledge.
In trying to untangle complexities brought about by nefarious actors within the UK, the UK’s own intelligence services also had to map out an appropriate short-term plan for the nation’s security to secure it in the long-term.
It’s inevitably a continuation of its work in fear of facing a total meltdown of operations. Any further assessment would only contribute to a plan that helps the UK to adapt to threats.
It emerged overseas states were taking an adverse interest in the condition of the UK at the time (this is when things were so uncertain that even MI5 itself had been concerned about its own longevity).
It was clear there were particular nations who would be able to use our position to launch an attack of some kind. This is merely a potentiality since war is also not an inevitability following the decline of an enemy’s capabilities or focus.
In times of crisis new management models also begin to emerge as perceived “improvements” to a current way of thinking about things. It happened to MI5 at this time and it had to fight off suggestions of a “root and branch review” in the midst of intense operations and an attempt to regaining control of its position in a very tight and pressing situation.
It’s also not unlikely politicians will call into question capabilities as a way of monitoring the struggles of a covert intelligence branch to gauge for itself what the situation is.
In a time of crisis telling the facts plainly between people is not always a possibility.
Our fortitude in the face of adversity – exhibited in this case by a variety of analysts and agents – is a testament to the courage of such individuals in the face of such a difficult and trying time.
It’s a secret albeit very real and personable role which ordinary people still have to undertake.
Our measure of our technologies also has to take into account that at the highest levels a diplomatic attitude is always the winning force through trying times. It’s helped us before and it helps us now.
In the early investigation into people trafficking launched by the police in the UK it quickly became clear there was disarray at the heart of the UK’s intelligence service.
The thick walls and sealed doors were only a comfort to those who worked there. It was these same people who were tasked with securing the UK’s borders who quickly found they just couldn’t do it.
They had money, the apartments, and even laptops aplenty. It was just the skill and will power that was lacking at the very start. It didn’t phase them to begin with because in that state anyone is the enemy.
It could even be anyone of us.
In the ensuing investigation our police force managed to regain control over its own assets.
This was the bulk of the work which engaged law enforcement agencies in the UK to start with and it was this progress that led to the end of such gross mismanagement of national security.
In today’s terms it’s better.
The industries and professions of the UK are returning to normal and have their strength back. It was an over-reliance on tech and intrusive methods that marred the early progress of MI5.
In contemporary terms much of the idea it has about itself is dead. If anything remains it’s the will to secure the UK for the future.