Mandelson, Epstein, and the Tangled Web of Connections
Personally, I don’t like to do too many articles on the same subject or at least not so close together but we have been inundated with emails to write more about Mandelson and Starmer’s connection to the Trilateral Commission and the direct and indirect connection to the convicted paedophiles Jeffery Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell.
Unfortunately, it’s not light reading and leaves the reader with a disturbing aftertaste of the dark side of politics and the shadowy personalities within its circles.
While many are aware of Jeffery Epstein’s well-documented political connections with former US presidents Clinton and Trump, many will not be aware of his connections to some of Britain’s most prominent Labour politicians.
So once more we plunge into the murky depths, dear reader, to confront disturbing truths about the leaders of His Majesty’s opposition, The Labour Party. Their questionable ties to Epstein leave a bitter aftertaste, hinting at the insidious decay gnawing away at our democracy’s foundations.
Beyond the surface lies a vast web of unseemly affiliations centred around an elitist institution called the Trilateral Commission. This exclusive club boasts a mere 400 active members comprising the world’s most influential politicos and plutocrats. And among their august ranks stand Labour’s leaders and Lords.
In this secretive organisation, Epstein mingled freely with the mighty, far from the public’s prying eye. But what does it reveal about Labour’s hierarchy that they bonded with a man of such odious character? Were they merely unfortunate associates, or active enablers of vice?
To grasp this unholy entanglement, we must delve into the shadows, no matter how discomforting the truths that lurk there. For the Trilateral Commission, that bastion of privilege, illuminates the mysterious Epstein-Labour alliance. Their fraternisation leaves a noxious aftertaste, hinting at the moral decay festering within the dark heart of British politics.
As we embark, steel yourself for revelations that shall shake your faith in the probity of the Labour Party and its leadership. For in the space where power, secrecy and vice converge, no noble principle survives unscathed.
This unsettling journey is where we shall confront uncomfortable truths, shedding light on the convergence of power, secrecy, and questionable affiliations. Brace yourself, dear reader, for the revelations that lie ahead shall forever change your perception of the Labour Party and its ties to an elitist organisation known as the Trilateral Commission.
An Elitist World Order
In 1973, David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski co-founded the Trilateral Commission. Comprising influential figures from the realms of business and politics in the United States, Western Europe, and Japan, the Commission swiftly assumed the mantle of what some perceived as an embryonic, if not shadow, world government.
This apparatus of global governance and international diplomacy should be recognized as an outcome of interconnected elite networks that blur the lines between informal and formal realms, transcending national borders.
Initially conceived to disseminate neoliberal free-market ideals across the globe, the Commission now faces the task of reshaping its identity and mission to grapple with the rising tides of nationalism, populism, and protectionism—forces it vehemently opposes.
Paradoxically, it also staunchly resists socialism or any notion of democratic equality. After all, its members are the affluent and powerful, self-proclaimed as the foremost stakeholders in society. They argue, why should they not wield the greatest influence?
The Trilateral Commission has established its headquarters to reflect its Trilateralism doctrine across three pivotal spheres of influence: Tokyo for the Asia Pacific Group, Paris for the European Group, and Washington, D.C. for the North American Group.
This organisation wields remarkable power, capable of shaping global political and social agendas.
However, the Trilateral Commission is also known for its anti-democratic stance.
It should therefore raise significant concerns that Sir Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour Party, is a member of this organization. This powerful, undemocratic group advocates for a ‘New World Order,’ one that significantly diminishes the role of the people in government and democracy.
Critics accuse the Commission of fostering a global consensus among the international ruling classes to manage international affairs in favour of financial and industrial elites under the Trilateral umbrella.
Members of the Trilateral Commission dismiss these claims as preposterous. They maintain that the Commission is merely a “discussion group” on world affairs, comprised of high-level figures from the corporate and public policy sectors in North America, Western Europe, and Japan. The Commission asserts that its goal is to promote international cooperation for the betterment of all, with no ulterior motives.
Their annual reports and task force papers are accessible to the public. The membership list is not kept secret; it is openly available for anyone to peruse. Moreover, their New York contact information is easily accessible.
Nonetheless, many educated individuals remain unaware of the Trilateral Commission and its activities, despite the fact that it boasts former members of high stature, including U.S. Presidents Jimmy Carter, George Bush, and Bill Clinton, to name just a few.
Labour Party’s Credibility Crisis
Beyond the disconcerting membership of Sir Keir Starmer and Lord Peter Mandelson in the Trilateral Commission lies a far more disturbing truth—the organisation’s association with the abhorrent paedophile predator Jeffrey Epstein.
It is not merely a matter of the Labour Party leaders aligning themselves with an exclusive boys club; it is the fact that this organisation, comprising the most influential power brokers, welcomed Epstein into its ranks.
The Trilateral Commission’s influence is not to be underestimated. It possesses real power and wields a significant voice within the political arena, all while evading accountability. In the words of the late Tony Benn, a towering figure in British politics, it fails on all five crucial questions that determine the legitimacy of power:
- “What power have you got?”
- “Where did you get it from?”
- “In whose interests do you use it?”
- “To whom are you accountable?”
- “How do we get rid of you?”
When it comes to the members of the Trilateral Commission and similar organisations, the concept of accountability becomes an alien notion.
They operate as a self-governing entity, free from democratic oversight. These individuals represent an oligarchy that despises the very essence of democracy and rejects the idea of true power belonging to the people.
The irony deepens when we explore the overlapping connections between British Trilateral Commission members and former EU commissioners and their supporters in Westminster.
This convergence is no mere coincidence; their shared views on democracy and globalisation are undoubtedly aligned.
It is a testament to the pervasive influence of this organisation and its insidious grip on power.
As we peel back the layers of this troubling alliance, we uncover a betrayal of democracy and a consolidation of unaccountable power. The Trilateral Commission’s entanglement with the Labour Party exposes the erosion of democratic principles and the collusion between elites. The very fabric of accountability and the voice of the people are cast aside in favour of an autocratic system that serves the interests of the privileged few.
In the face of such a revelation, we must not remain silent. The time has come to confront the forces that threaten the very foundations of democracy. Brace yourself, for the journey ahead, shall illuminate the unholy alliance between the Trilateral Commission, the Labour Party, and their relentless assault on the democratic ideals we hold dear.
Members Past and Present
Members past and present include Former EU commissioners, Lord Brittan and Lord Mandelson, who took the UK into the EU Edward Heath.
The commission has garnered much controversy over its existence. Detractors cite the levels of influence some commission members wield in politics and their associations with government entities as reasons to question the commission’s activities. Critics say this influence helps the commission prop up the world’s financial and political elite rather than the best interests of the general public.
Holly Sklar in her book on Trilateralism, says the purpose of Trilateralism is to protect the power of the international ruling class “whose locus of power is the global corporation”; to co-opt the Third World and to reintegrate communist countries.
The Commission’s purpose is to engineer an enduring partnership among the ruling classes of North America, Western Europe, and Japan—hence the term “trilateral”—in order to safeguard the interests of Western capitalism in an explosive world.
Noam Chomsky says the Trilateral Commission’s aim is to bring about a ‘moderation in democracy’ to allow only the elite to vote. No matter where your politics sit, this is a backwards step in democracy and the working class movement for emancipation.
This is the elites advocating a shareholder society, where those with the biggest share in society are in their eyes the ones with the most to lose in terms of wealth, land and power and that is why they should be the only ones to have a say in our society. This is a return to a feudal system worldwide controlled by the Trilateral Commission.
Dark Connections: Mandelson, Starmer, and the Trilateral Commission
While Sir Keir Starmer’s membership in the Trilateral Commission raises concerns about the Labour Party’s commitment to democratic values, it is Lord Mandelson’s involvement that plunges us deeper into the labyrinth of questionable connections. Not only does he share the ranks of this exclusive organization, but his ties to Jeffrey Epstein are more extensive and perplexing.
Among the myriad revelations surrounding Lord Mandelson, his presence in the infamous “Little Black Book” raises eyebrows. Listed no less than ten times, his name adorns its pages alongside phone numbers marked “direct line,” “home,” and “country home.” This stark inclusion hints at a familiarity that extends beyond casual acquaintance. Complicating matters further, we find the name of Lord Mandelson’s close friend and former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair recorded once within that little black book.
From Little Black Book to Little Accountability: Lord Mandelson’s Intricate Web of Connections
Yet, the web of connections surrounding Lord Mandelson stretches even further. His association with Epstein’s former lover, Ghislaine Maxwell, adds another layer of intrigue to this already convoluted narrative. And let us not forget his well-documented acquaintance with Prince Andrew, whose own links to Epstein have raised significant questions.
As the puzzle pieces come together, it becomes increasingly apparent that Lord Mandelson occupies a significant role within this complex tapestry. His involvement in the Trilateral Commission, his multiple entries in Epstein’s “Little Black Book,” and his close ties to Tony Blair, Maxwell, and Prince Andrew all contribute to a web of relationships that demands scrutiny.
The Labour Party, founded on the principles of democracy and accountability, must confront the uncomfortable reality that one of its prominent figures is entangled in such dubious connections.
It is a disheartening departure from the values the party was built upon, casting a shadow over its integrity and raising serious questions about Lord Mandelson’s motivations and loyalties.
In the pursuit of truth and the preservation of democratic ideals, we must shed light on these dark recesses.
The intricate web that links Lord Mandelson to Epstein, Maxwell, and even royalty must be unravelled, exposing the depth of this tangled alliance. The Labour Party and its supporters must grapple with the implications of Lord Mandelson’s associations, for they speak volumes about the integrity and direction of the party itself.
In 2011, Virginia Roberts – who claims she was a sex slave to Epstein – said that she was introduced to Mandelson at a dinner party at the financier’s house in New York.
She said: “I never heard of Jeffrey knowing Tony Blair, but he did know Peter Mandelson. I remember him being at the house in New York and I was introduced to him at a dinner party.
One of Britain’s most powerful politicians wasn’t afraid to phone Jeffery Epstein looking for a favour — even while the paedophile was behind bars for sex crimes, according to a new documentary.
A “Dispatches” documentary claims Lord Peter Mandelson who at the time in 2009, was the Labour Business Secretary called Epstein who was residing in a Florida jail after pleading guilty to procuring an underage prostitute. Mandelson it was said was trying to arrange a meeting with the boss of JP Morgan bank, according to The Sun.
This phone conversation was reported on by UK national broadcaster Channel 4 on the ‘Dispatches’ programme aired in October 2019.
During the phone call, Mandelson sought Epstein’s assistance to set up a meeting with Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Bank.
The sex offender referred to Mandelson by a nickname (“Petie”) during the conversation. “I must say I was astonished that a British cabinet minister at that time, probably the most powerful man other than the Prime Minister, was calling Jeffrey in jail to make an appointment, to seek an appointment with a very powerful banker in New York,” the whistle-blower told ‘Dispatches’.
The pedo and the politician were seemingly so close that Epstein even had a pet name for the UK cabinet member — calling him “Petie,” according to the report. LINK
“I must say I was astonished that a British Cabinet minister at that time, probably the most powerful man other than the Prime Minister, was calling Jeffrey in jail,” a friend of Epstein’s who revealed the call told the documentary.
On December 27 2005, Peter Mandelson took part in a shopping trip with Jeffrey Epstein in Saint Barthélemys (photos published by the Daily Mail on August 30 2019). Peter Mandelson by this time had “known Jeffrey Epstein for several years, having previously once visited his Caribbean island for a holiday – when neither Epstein nor any of the girls were there,” at that time the Daily Mail reported. Mandelson’s partner was also present for the earlier visit, according to eyewitness Cathy Alexander.
The timeline of events is disturbing. In June 2009, while Mandelson had returned to government to prop up the ailing administration of Gordon Brown, Epstein, serving an 18-month sentence for soliciting a young girl, was still pulling strings from behind bars. In an email to his personal banker, Jes Staley, Epstein referred to Mandelson as the de facto deputy prime minister. The audacity of Epstein’s claim, even from his confined prison cell, underscores the extent of the relationship between the two.
Epstein’s correspondence paints a picture of familiarity and shared experiences. He mentions Mandelson staying at his opulent townhouse in Manhattan while the financier was incarcerated. The fact that Mandelson has chosen to neither confirm nor deny these claims raises eyebrows and invites speculation. What transpired within the walls of that luxurious abode? What secrets were exchanged in the presence of power and privilege?
Further email exchanges reveal a continued connection between Mandelson and Epstein, even after the former had left government. Mandelson reached out to Epstein on matters concerning US banking regulations, hinting at a relationship that extended beyond casual acquaintance. Epstein, in turn, boasted to Staley about Mandelson’s presence during their rendezvous in Paris. The ties that bind them seem to stretch far beyond the surface.
Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s associate and daughter of the late Robert Maxwell, played a pivotal role in introducing Mandelson to the financier’s sordid world. It was through Maxwell’s connections that Mandelson found himself ensnared in this disconcerting association. Maxwell herself is now serving a lengthy prison sentence for her role in facilitating Epstein’s heinous crimes. One can only speculate on the extent of her influence and the nature of her dealings with Mandelson.
Mandelson’s defenders argue that his involvement with Epstein was primarily through Maxwell, and that he himself never engaged in any improper conduct. Yet, the question remains: How could Mandelson, a seasoned political operator, be oblivious to the reprehensible acts perpetrated by Epstein? Did he willingly turn a blind eye to the exploitation of vulnerable young women? These are uncomfortable inquiries that demand answers.
The spokesperson for Lord Mandelson asserts that he deeply regrets ever being introduced to Epstein and that there was never any professional or business relationship between them. However, Mandelson’s track record with the super-rich has long been a source of controversy. His resignations in 1998 and 2001 due to financial improprieties and allegations of favouritism towards wealthy benefactors cast a shadow over his integrity. This connection with Epstein adds another layer to an already tarnished reputation.
In March 2011 Virginia Roberts (now Virginia Giuffre) told the Mail on Sunday that Lord Mandelson had visited Jeffrey Epstein at his New York townhouse near Central Park, attending a dinner party with the sex trafficker. “I assumed they were in business together,” she recalled. How can it be justified that Lord Mandelson socialised and/or discussed business with Jeffrey Epstein in the same building from which Mr Epstein was operating his sex trafficking, paedophilia and blackmail operation with Ghislaine Maxwell, with minors routinely sexually assaulted on the premises by Mr Epstein?
In January 2001 Lord Mandelson joined his friend Kevin Spacey at the Old Vic Theatre in London, becoming an Associate Director on or before this date (Daily Telegraph, January 5 2001). Spacey had joined the board of the Old Vic Theatre Trust 2000 just a few weeks earlier, in November 2000.
In 2002, Ghislaine Maxwell, another of Mr Spacey’s close friends, accompanied the Hollywood star on a private tour of Buckingham Palace led by Prince Andrew. Mr Spacey was using his tenure at the Old Vic to serially sexually assault young actors – at least 20 – with most of the allegations relating to the period up to 2009. How can it be explained that Lord Mandelson was so closely involved with Kevin Spacey and the Old Vic during the period of widespread sexual abuse concerns, yet encountered no reports of these recurring serious sexual abuse episodes involving his friend and colleague?
On May 27 2010 he wrote to Epstein: “This is thing I am speaking to in Shanghai. If you can open the attachments you will see the entire Chinese banking fraternity is attending. Isn’t it something that JPM should be represented at if they want to spread their wings in China?” Epstein forwarded the message to Staley.
Then in October, Staley forwarded Epstein an email from Mandelson talking about his recent trip to Congo Brazzaville. “I talked at length with President Sassou N’Guesso, including about the above new mine. Exploration, he told me, has been undertaken by a consortium of investors backed by JPMorgan.
The government is reaching a final decision on whether to issue a full mining licence. I spoke to the minister of mines about this.” Two weeks later Epstein told Staley that “petie is just back from russia”.
On October 27, Staley forwarded Epstein an email he sent to Mandelson that appeared to include internal JPMorgan Chase information on a deal regarding the privatisation of businesses in Russia. Staley told colleagues: “When Lord Mandelson can help, please let me know.”
In 2012, Mandelson declared in a statement posted on the website of the TerraMar Project, a charity set up by Ghislaine Maxwell with financial support from Jeffrey Epstein, that he was “supporting” Ms Maxwell’s organisation. U.S. law enforcement contends that the TerraMar Project was a fake charity slush fund for victims of Maxwell-and-Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. How can Lord Mandelson justify publicly supporting Ghislaine Maxwell’s alleged ‘fake charity slush fund’ for victims of sex trafficking?
In or before 2013, Lord Mandelson was brought on to the board of the Alfred Herrhausen Society of Deutsche Bank, according to a July 14, 2013, report in ‘Der Spiegel.
The report identified Anshu Jain as the executive responsible for Mandelson’s appointment. Deutsche Bank executives approved Jeffrey Epstein as a client in 2013 and then kept working with him. “[In 2013] Deutsche Bank was aggressively expanding its U.S. wealth management business under its new co-chief executive, Anshu Jain … Deutsche Bank executives ignored repeated red flags, including suspiciously large cash withdrawals and 120 wire transfers totalling $2.65 million to women with Eastern European surnames,” the New York Times reported.
Subsequently, Mr Jain “was forced to step down from the top job at Deutsche Bank after a series of regulatory mishaps”. In 2017 Mr Jain was hired by Jeffrey Epstein’s next-door neighbour, Howard Lutnick of Cantor Fitzgerald, whose sister, Edie Lutnick, was (in common with Mandelson) a prominent self-declared supporter of Ghislaine Maxwell’s ‘TerraMar Project’ charity.
Here’s Mandy – or should I say, the chairman of Lazard International or his other title Board of Trustees of Deutsche Bank’s – Mandelson perfectly embodies the ghastly, muddy fudge of public and private that so typifies the atmosphere at Bilderberg. Throw a rock and hit a public servant turned investment banker. Alongside Mandelson in the 2014 Bilderberg meeting was his old buddy and sailing partner George Osborne another beneficiary of the “revolving door”.
The staggering trajectory of Sir Keir Starmer, from a newly elected Labour MP in 2015 to the leader of the party within the span of a single parliamentary term, demands meticulous examination. To comprehend this seemingly meteoric rise, we must delve into the realm of influential friendships and exclusive affiliations to which he belongs.
It may be tempting for some to dismiss Epstein’s connections as mere superficial encounters with prominent political figures and interest groups. However, this perspective crumbles under the weight of closer scrutiny. These elite circles are not open to all; they operate through a rigorous invitation-only system, subjecting candidates to meticulous scrutiny before extending membership. Epstein’s presence within these closed ranks hints at a deeper and more calculated involvement, raising questions that warrant exploration.
Furthermore, the proximity of Epstein to the heart of American politics is far from coincidental. His associations extend beyond mere interactions with the likes of Clinton and Trump. Epstein’s affiliation with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a prominent organization intricately intertwined with the Trilateral Commission, illuminates the depth of his connections. The CFR boasts a membership of 5,000 individuals, comprising distinguished figures from the realms of business, government, and media. Remarkably, Epstein maintained his membership in the CFR until at least 2009, despite being under investigation for heinous crimes involving the abuse of minors.
In this context, the enigma surrounding Sir Keir Starmer’s swift ascent to power begins to unveil its underlying dynamics.
The role of power dynamics and networks of influence assumes paramount significance in understanding his political journey. As we piece together the intricate web of connections, we are compelled to scrutinise the nature of elitism, the influence wielded by influential friends, and the extent to which these factors propelled Sir Keir Starmer’s remarkable political odyssey, every day our politics becomes more and more like the American way of doing things…
Democracy’s Precarious State
While it is crucial to separate Sir Keir Starmer from Epstein’s crimes, his affiliation with the anti-democratic and elitist Trilateral Commission raises concerns about the nature of his associations. No accusations of wrongdoing have been levelled against Starmer himself. Nevertheless, a petition has emerged, urging the suspension of Lord Mandelson to allow for a thorough investigation into his close relationship with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The mere connection by membership has tainted the reputation of the British Labour Party.
It is disconcerting to witness such associations at the highest echelons of power. We are confronted with the fact that both the leader of the party and a Lord, who holds a position on Starmer’s advisory team, are linked directly or indirectly to some of the world’s most notorious paedophiles and child exploiters. This casts a dark shadow upon the Labour Party and challenges the notion of accountability and responsibility.
This association by membership alone has put the British Labour Party name into disrepute.
This is not an ordinary member of the Labour Party, nor a solitary MP gone astray. This is the leader of the Labour Party himself, accompanied by his advisor in the shadow cabinet, a Lord and peer of the realm.
Their direct or indirect connections to two of the most notorious paedophiles and child exploiters in the world should cause grave concern.
Democracy encompasses more than the act of casting a vote. A thriving democracy requires an informed society that actively engages in shaping its future. Without an enlightened public, democracy withers, leaving room for decay and erosion. Unjust legislation can be passed, laws can be selectively enforced, and elected officials may succumb to corruption.
The association of Sir Keir Starmer and Lord Mandelson with individuals of such despicable character raises serious doubts about the moral compass and integrity of the Labour Party. It strikes at the very essence of democratic principles, accountability, and the trust between leaders and the electorate.
We must recognise that an informed society is the foundation of a healthy and open democracy.
It is incumbent upon us to ensure transparency, expose connections that threaten the fabric of our democratic institutions, and demand rigorous accountability from our leaders. Failure to do so risks the perpetuation of an unequal, unjust, and corrupted system.
Today Mandelson remains chair and partner at Global Counsel, which does not publish its client list. He is also seen as an influential figure inside the Labour party under its current leadership.