How the Establishment Functions

Just as Jimmy Savile was to be protected over actual sex crime, Keir Starmer knew that Julian Assange was to be persecuted over fake sex crime, writes Craig Murray.

Oxford University students, 2006. (James, Flickr, CC BY 2.0,, Wikimedia Commons)

By Craig Murray

I suggested in my last post that the British Establishment may be looking for a way out of the terrible Assange debacle without raising difficult truths about the United States justice and penal system. The functioning of the Establishment, the way it forms a collective view and how that view is transmitted, is a mystery to many. Some imagine instructions must be transmitted by formal cabals meeting as Freemasons or Bilderbergers or some such grouping. It is not really like that, although different fora of course do provide venues for the powerful to gather and discuss.

I have a bit of a feel for it all, having been a diplomat for 20 years and member of the Senior Civil Service for six. And if I was advising someone who wanted to think of it seriously, I would say human nature doesn’t change; read Thackeray and Trollope, Harold Nicolson and watch the amazing Brian Cox in Succession. All these sources give genuine glimpses of insight.

Former Foreign Office Minister Alan Duncan appears to fancy himself as something of a Harold Nicolson, though sadly lacking the wit or writing ability. Duncan has published his diaries. Duncan is the former Foreign and Commonwealth Office minister “for the Americas” who cooperated with attempts to have Julian Assange removed from the Ecuadorian embassy, and was the point man for the CIA’s various illegal schemes around Assange. Duncan referred to Assange in Parliament as a “miserable little worm.”

And who was Alan Duncan’s best friend at Oxford? Why, none other than Ian Duncan Burnett, now lord chief justice of England and Wales, the judge who heard Assange’s High Court appeals. As Alan Duncan’s diary entry for 14 July 2017 tells us:

“At Oxford we always called him ‘the judge’ and they always called me ‘Prime Minister’ but Ian’s the one who got there.”

On Alan Duncan’s birthday on June 7, 2017, Ian Burnett and his wife were part of the dinner celebration, alongside former Tory leader William Hague, and the arms dealer Wafic Said and wife.

Wafic Said was central to the largest bribery scandal in British history, the Al-Yamamah BAE contract for arms to Saudi Arabia, where an 80 billion pound contract involved hundreds of millions in corrupt bribery payments swirling around Wafic Said and his friend Mark Thatcher.

A central part of the Al Yamamah deal was the sale of Tornado fighters to the Royal Saudi Air Force. (Wikimedia Commons)

The only reason several very rich people did not go to prison is that Tony Blair — another Oxford University man — and Jack Straw, the recipient himself of BAE largesse, made a historic decision that the Serious Fraud Office investigation must be stopped “in the public interest.”

The Serious Fraud Office subsequently “lost” all the thousands of documents proving the corruption. Thus enabling the central fixer, arms dealer Said, to enjoy a jolly dinner and banter with the new lord chief justice of England and Wales, rather than eat his dinner in Ford open prison.

That, my friends, is how the British Establishment functions. It also of course enabled the continuing relationship that means British planes, missiles, bombs, mechanics, trainers and special forces are every single day involved in eviscerating women and children in Yemen. I do hope they are proud.

Everyday Milieu

On May 27, 2018, Lord Chief Justice Burnett and Alan Duncan were at Chequers having lunch with Prime Minister Theresa May, Michael Gove and “journalist” Sarah Vine and — to quote Duncan — “two financier couples.”

Thus do politics, the law, the media and big money mix, dear reader. These are not special events. It is the everyday milieu. Nobody needs to phone a judge and tell him what to think; they know what their circle thinks from constant experience and interaction, and they can extrapolate from the general to the particular.

The judges know what they are expected to think about Assange. The Scottish judges certainly know what they are expected to think about me.

The politicians freeload — Duncan’s birthday bash had been paid for by Tory party donor, Carphone Warehouse’s David Ross, whose unethical business practices I outlined two years ago. Some of us may feel distaste at the idea of having, or attending, birthday parties gifted by a businessman; but we are not politicians. Or judges.

There is no doubt that Jimmy Savile’s ability to mingle freely at precisely these kind of social gatherings, hosted by royalty and prime ministers down, provided him with the cloak of Establishment protection which enabled his decades of crime.

June 30, 2008: Prime Minister Gordon Brown, right, presenting Sir Jimmy Savile with a Bevin Boys medal to acknowledge the work carried out by the Bevin Boys during World War II. (10 Downing Street, Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

To deny it is ridiculous. It is also very interesting how unanimously the Establishment has decided to protect Keir Starmer. They faced a real danger for a few years with one of England’s two main parties under the control of genuinely radical figures. Having managed to get the big-money friendly Sir Keir Starmer into place and neutralize any possible threat to their wealth, the ferocity of the Establishment’s defense of Starmer is fascinating.

There is no doubt that Starmer was indeed director of public prosecution and head of the Crown Prosecution Service in 2009 when it was decided that credible allegations against Jimmy Savile should not be prosecuted (after they had reached that stage already decades too late). Of course, the director of public prosecutions does not handle the individual cases, which are assigned to lawyers under them. But the director most certainly is then consulted on the decisions in the high profile and important cases.

That is why they are there. It is unthinkable that Starmer was not consulted on the decision to shelve the Savile case – what do they expect us to believe his role was, as head of the office, ordering the paperclips?

Keir Starmer in 2013, while director of public prosecutions for the Crown Prosecution Service, U.K. (Chatham House, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)

When the public outcry reached a peak in 2012, Starmer played the go-to trick in the Establishment book. He commissioned an “independent” lawyer he knew to write a report exonerating him. Mistakes have been made at lower levels, lessons will be learnt… you know what it says. Mishcon de Reya, money launderers to the oligarchs, provided the lawyer to do the whitewash. Once he retired from the post of DPP, Starmer went to work at, umm,

It is remarkable that the media has never got as excited about any of the lies told by Johnson, as they have done about what is in fact a rare example of Johnson saying an interesting truth. Starmer was indeed, as director of public prosecutions, responsible for the non-prosecution of Savile.

But just as Savile was to be protected over actual sex crime, Starmer knew that Assange was to be persecuted over fake sex crime. Starmer’s conduct of the Assange case was entirely corrupt.

Assange Never Charged in Sweden

Swedish embassy in London. (Allen Watkin, CC BY-SA 2.0, (Wikimedia Commons)

It is important for you to understand that Assange was never charged with any sex crime in Sweden. He was wanted for questioning, after Stockholm’s chief prosecutor had decided there was no case to answer, but a prosecutor from another district had taken up the case. Assange always believed the entire thing was a ruse to get him sent from Sweden to the United States. His legal team had offered the Swedish prosecutors the chance to interview him in the Swedish embassy back in 2011, which should have enabled the case to be closed.

Under Starmer, the Crown Prosecution Service told the Swedish prosecutors not to come to London. The emails in which they did this were destroyed, and only recovered by an FOI request at the Swedish end. You will recall that, when after a further seven long years Swedish prosecutors finally did interview Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy, it resulted in the Swedish investigation being dropped.

Had Starmer not prevented it, the Swedish investigation could have been closed in January 2011 following interview.

Then in October 2013, while Starmer was still DPP, his staff emailed Swedish prosecutors in response to reports that they wished to drop the case, saying “Don’t you dare get cold feet.” The Swedes responded explaining they did indeed wish to drop it. The Crown Prosecution Service again dissuaded them.

Why was Starmer intervening to insist a foreign state continue an investigation that state itself wished to stop, and which involved no British nationals?

I am very confident there is no other example of the British director of public prosecution interfering in an overseas investigation in this way. It certainly was nothing to do with the ostensible subject matter of the Swedish investigation, which doesn’t rate a mention in the email correspondence. There can be no doubt that Starmer’s motive was entirely ulterior to the Swedish investigation, and almost certainly is related to the illegal CIA activity against Assange and the current U.S. extradition effort. Starmer is revealed as a highly unscrupulous and mendacious character.

That has of course been confirmed by the downright lies Starmer told in seeking election by the Labour Party membership, when he stated he would maintain former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s popular left-wing economic policies, particularly on rail and utility nationalization. Once in power Starmer simply ditched these pledges in favor of billionaire-enabling policies, and started a purge of the left of the party on an epic scale.

The British Establishment likes Starmer. They can’t allow Boris Johnson — who is fast becoming a liability to them — saying true things about Starmer which they wish to be buried. Watching their propaganda apparatus act in unison to defend Starmer, and reconfirm in the popular mind the binary choice between their blue puppet and their red puppet, has been fascinating viewing.

As I frequently state, I don’t mind if you agree or do not agree, and I certainly want everybody to think for themselves. My aim is to point out facts that are insufficiently considered and project a different perspective to that commonly promoted in the mainstream media. I am not always right about everything. But I hope that you found reading this gave you some ideas to think through.

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. His coverage is entirely dependent on reader support. Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

This article is from

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

10 comments for “How the Establishment Functions

  1. Daniel
    February 13, 2022 at 10:41

    Another great one by Mr. Murray. Thanks for publishing, CN. And what a window into the world of our — can we just say it — criminal ruling class. Where we go from here, with the Five-Eyes West cornered, exposed, and hated is a frightening thing to contemplate. How do we untangle ourselves from the decades of lies, corruption, and criminality they are all guilty of, when we are bombarded constantly with propaganda and threats of war? I hope we are on the verge of finding out, but it won’t be pretty, if allowed. I pray for us all.

  2. Lois Gagnon
    February 11, 2022 at 18:56

    The Western establishment is on its last legs. You simply can’t keep up this level of corruption indefinitely. The US government, if you can call it that is in miserable shape which is why they’re trying to trick Russia into starting a war. Russia and China of course see that the imperialist West is tottering on the brink of collapse. The multilateral world is already here.

    The deep seated corruption of the UK and the US is just a sign that the internal decay is terminal.

  3. phree
    February 11, 2022 at 17:26

    As an occassional listener to James O’Brien on LBC, I was curious why he found Boris’ attack so outrageous, and wondered why it was not fair game to point out that a decision not to prosecute was made under his watch.

    So you have indeed provided food for thought.

  4. forceOfHabit
    February 11, 2022 at 11:56

    “But I hope that you found reading this gave you some ideas to think through.”

    You have succeeded. Thank you.

  5. John Doran
    February 11, 2022 at 11:48

    A most valuable post. Thank you muchly Mr. Craig Murray.
    John Doran,.

  6. CNfan
    February 10, 2022 at 20:01

    Sadly, the Queen has clearly failed at her job of maintaining the “dignity” of the government.

    • Piotr Berman
      February 11, 2022 at 08:31

      The role of Her Majesty is to behave according to an intricate etiquette. The role of her government is to refrain from screwing up to such a degree that the profits of the backers would dive.

      Sometimes you may wonder about that. One example is that UK was the only major country in Europe with only one larger storage facility for the natural gas, making it overly vulnerable to the vagaries of winds: when they do not blow, energy shortage has to be covered in the natural gas. As a cost saving measure, this facility was closed in 2017, and during the latest pan-European energy shortage (not over as yet), UK was hit the hardest, so few million saved pounds translated into few billions of losses. Which is OK, as long as the customers and other patsies were the only ones who lost.

      Thus the government can be in the hands of amoral backstabbing morons, but the Establishment prevents it from hurting those who matter. And if the government fails politically, it will be the time form amoral backstabbers with more intelligence to take over.

  7. Sam F
    February 10, 2022 at 19:41

    Thank you Craig Murray for this glimpse of the economic corruption of UK government.

    The same is true throughout the US government: the DOJ lacks the moral integrity to do anything that doesn’t pay.
    They completely ignored my pleas that they investigate political racketeering by Repub politicians in Florida, who stole $120 million in conservation funds, even after I mailed full packages of evidence and legal argument to their local, DC, and OIG offices several times over three years, under both Repub and Dem administrations. I am now suing them directly as a branch of the racketeering operation, and the judiciary are faking up excuses not to request that they investigate. The top levels of executive agencies are political party crooks installed by politicians, and the rest are afraid to lose their careers under the present or future administrations, if they investigate political racketeering. And the judiciary are in full agreement and conspiracy to steal public funds: for money is their definition of honor. This is simply very poor design of government structure, of, by, and for a very amoral population.

  8. evelync
    February 10, 2022 at 19:21

    Thanks you, Craig Murray, for affirming what we all suspect given the lies, the for profit war machinery, the theft and the ruthless disrespect for the vast majority of the people who don’t have their power.
    Surely the Queen and the royal family are onto this corruption.
    I’m aware the Crown is not permitted to set government policy. But by shilling for the arms industry they are a part and parcel of this corruption.
    It’s so smarmy.
    I learned something about British elite from watching debates between elitist schools. They are trained to argue convincingly on points that in a sane world have no merit because they’re lies. They are prepared to argue in the House of Commons as smoothly and convincingly without batting an eyelash of concern over twisting the argument to benefit their class.

    It may work the same way in most of the most powerful countries……

    The game is fixed.

    Sorry for what you’ve been through for doing your job well.

    Here’s a great movie to watch based on a true story roar took place in the U.S. in 1935:
    The Great Debaters (2007)
    Where substance/values/truth are put to the test.

    • Dr. Hujjathullah M.H.B. Sahib
      February 11, 2022 at 02:17

      Simply couldn’t agree with you more in your crisp comment on Craig’s bold and highly responsible write-up here exposing the true nature of the British establishment that the poor Queen is left to be a pleasant fig leaf for. The gem here is ” elites (not just British) … are trained to argue convincingly on points that in a SANE world have no merit because they’re lies”. This is also the case in many other countries as well, why should the elites bat even an eyelid when they all have their highly reliable special branches and “intelligence” services to enforce all their privileged SHITS, oh so brainlessly, dutifully !

Comments are closed.