"Foundation X" wants to buy the UK

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      If a recent speech in the House of Lords is accurate, a secretive international organization has offered to financially bail out the UK.

      During a November 1 parliamentary session discussing economic difficulties, Conservative life peer Lord James of Blackheath shared his concerns, outlining an urgent need for investment in industry. He then announced, "I am about to raise a subject that I should not raise" and began an unusual pitch for a massive stimulus offer proposed by a non-government organization that he referred to as "Foundation X" (witholding the organization's real name due to security concerns).

      Introducing the situation, Lord James claimed he'd been asked by a London financial institution to look into an organization that had approached it with the idea of loaning the UK government £5 billion, interest-free, to help it fund economic stimulus and £17 billion, also interest -ree, to fund government services.

      The institution was predictably cautious about moving forward, concerned that "Foundation X" could be linked to organized crime or terrorism. James claimed to have spent 20 weeks investigating the "strange" organization, concluding it to be legitimate and wishing to "disseminate its extraordinarily great wealth into the world ... as part of an attempt to seek the recovery of the global economy".

      Asked by another peer what his credentials were for dismissing the possibility of the organization's criminality, Lord James outlined his past involvement with "funny" money, saying, "I have handled billions of pounds of terrorist money. My biggest terrorist client was the IRA and I am pleased to say that I managed to write off more than £1 billion of its money. I have also had extensive connections with north African terrorists, but that was of a far nastier nature, and I do not want to talk about that because it is still a security issue."

      Lord James stated that his client in these past dealings was the Bank of England and hinted that he has access to UK intelligence resources that enabled him to vet the organization proposing the loan.

      Lord James continued his pitch by discussing the requirements needed to secure the proposed aid. The organization, he claimed, is very security conscious and would only deal with heads of state or "someone with an international security rating equal to the top six people in the world". He claimed that to move forward, "a senior member of the government has to accept the invitation to a phone call to the chairman" of the organization proposing the loan.

      After Lord James finished outlining the plan, the next speaker took his place at the podium and the parliamentary session continued as if nothing unusual had just happened.

      During a television interview today with Sky News, Lord James shed more light on the nature of the organization. He referred to their resources as as a "massive supernational accumulation of funds which are ... the proceeds of ... commercial activity ... over ... a hundred years".

      When asked about their possible motivation, Lord James claimed "they will protect the world ... so they will continue to survive with their wealth in it". He claimed the organization is concerned about energy and the environment and interested in funding technologies such as "underground gasification of coal".

      Asked whether he is concerned the organization is a hoax, he claimed, "I am progressively comfortable with the genineness of their approach" and that the organization has provided a list of high profile global individuals that will validate their existence if contacted by representatives of the British government.

      Lord James also elaborated on the loan conditions, claiming the loan would require no repayment schedule. Leaders in the UK government had not yet agreed to take the steps necessary to pursue the loans.

      Lord James also spoke with ZDNet UK, who asked him about his claimed involvement in money laundering. He elaborated on his covert work for the Bank of England, claiming that he'd been brought into five companies that had been originally built up using IRA pension funds and through which money was being laundered. His instructions were to "run the companies down and liquidise the assets".

      Video of Lord James' speech is available in its entirety online via the BBC (his speech starts during the second hour, at 02:34:00).




      Nov 5, 2010 at 10:28am

      Two things - way to bury the stark revelation that the UK govt. routinely does business with terrorist groups. Which we all know but aren't supposed to talk about.

      And also, with respect, the UK's upper chamber is full of weird and flatulent old millionaires who might not be totally stable, and Lord James has said some pretty goofy stuff in the past. Equally, you could argue that as senility increases, so does honesty.

      Anyway, this bears repeating. Lord James of Blackheath said he laundered one billion pounds of IRA money for the Bank of England. And he's "pleased" with that.

      0 0Rating: 0

      Mike Cantelon

      Nov 5, 2010 at 10:52am

      Hi Adrian,

      To me it's a two-pronged story... It's fairly well known in progressive circles that states embed themselves in terrorist organizations and the like for the purposes of sabotage and intelligence gathering, but less recognized that non-state actors exist with state-like resources, but no accountability.

      What are some controversial things Lord James has said in the past? I'd be interested in knowing as there isn't much in his Wikipedia article.

      0 0Rating: 0


      Nov 5, 2010 at 10:57am

      Mack, I think what you say about the dealings between the UK govt and terrorist groups is way out of context. What he actually meant to say, which seems to be less obvious than it appeared to me, is that he was tasked with identifying money which the IRA were themselves laundering, and making sure that said money DID NOT circulate back into their hands. He said he wrote off money belonging to the IRA, meaning the exact opposite of what you purport to.

      He is one of the most highly regarded Lords in parliament and holds a business acumen and experience which would be difficult to surpass, so claiming that he is just senile is utterly disingenuous. Meetings were held between himself, Lord Sassoon and a representative of the group being referred to as Foundation X, whatever the nature of those meetings entailed is unknown, and should not be swept aside on the basis that the person drawing attention to it is a doddering old cook

      0 0Rating: 0


      Nov 5, 2010 at 11:57am

      Mike, here's Lord James spinning an admittedly entertaining shaggy dog tale about his experiences as a child being shunted from a school "for mental defectives" to an academy for foreign refugees - even though he wasn't foreign - based on his name starting with the letter "J". Which might be true. I dunno. And I wouldn't say it's controversial - but I insist that it's goofy. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2010-10-21a.903.2&s=speaker:1388...

      And I absolutely agree that we have non-state actors with state-like resources. I'm even prepared to accept that Lord James' story about Foundation X might be true, with the caveat that it came from Lord James. Perhaps I'm prejudiced by my own experiences as a student in England, watching Lords sleep through sessions or otherwise deliver eccentric speeches about cheese. But this is anecdotal - I admit!

      Martin, that's an interesting take on what he said. In Lord James' words: "My biggest terrorist client was the IRA and I am pleased to say that I managed to write off more than £1 billion of its money. I have also had extensive connections with north African terrorists, but that was of a far nastier nature, and I do not want to talk about that because it is still a security issue."

      You may be right, but why would Lord James' "client" stick around while he cut them off from over one billion pounds? I'm honestly not sure how to unpack that statement. Again, my own biases are filling in the blanks for me. But I'm afraid I'm not so impressed by Lord James' credentials, given my low tolerance for upper class twits.

      And Lord Sassoon and Lord Strathclyde, it should be noted, "both came up with what should have been an absolute killer argument as to why this could not be true and that we should forget it."

      In any event, say Foundation X is real. Do you think it's intentions are benevolent?

      0 0Rating: 0

      Mike Cantelon

      Nov 5, 2010 at 1:48pm


      Thanks for the link to Lord James' yarn.

      I would agree that it's much more likely that "Foundation X", if it exists, is acting out of self-interest rather than benevolence. The organization's insistence on secrecy is likely for strategic advantage and avoidance of accountability/taxes as much as for security.

      The organization may feel its investments are imperilled in the short-term and wish to buy time to adjust. Or it may see the crisis as an opportunity to buy influence to the UK elite in exchange for the enaction of policy it favours. Should the organization prove real, the UK electorate should certainly be concerned. One doesn't make that much money by being inclined to altruism.

      0 0Rating: 0


      Nov 5, 2010 at 6:44pm

      If some shadowy cabal of billionaires really had the power and money to pull off this sort of thing, I find it highly unlikely that they'd approach some relatively powerless, obscure parliamentarian in the lower house to do it. Why not just cut out the non-middle-man and go straight to Downing St.?

      0 0Rating: 0


      Nov 6, 2010 at 9:29am

      Um....could it be China? Didn't they just try to buy out the Greek debt? Just sayin'.....

      0 0Rating: 0

      Timothy Helgeson

      Nov 6, 2010 at 12:08pm

      St Germain World Trust Fund...

      0 0Rating: 0


      Nov 8, 2010 at 8:58am

      Lord James had a role in exposing Supergun! He's a regular 007 of banking! And I'd say he's spooked up to the tits. I hereby retract my statement that he might be "weird and flatulent" (unlike many of his Peers).

      Curioser and curioser. I'm still hung up on his description of the IRA as a client, I'm afraid. If there wasn't so much murk and scandal concerning the penetration of the IRA, then I'd feel more comfortable thinking it had actually served the purposes of security. And a billion pounds knows no allegiance.

      What a bizarre story.

      0 0Rating: 0