The Team House - Secret Intelligence Service (MI-6) Officer | Charles Beaumont | Ep. 356

Episode Date: June 28, 2025

Charles Beaumont, a former British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) officer, discusses his career. Beaumont, whose identity is concealed due to British laws, shares insights into his recruitment, MI6's evolution from Cold War operations to counter-terrorism after 9/11, and his personal experiences serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The conversation also covers his transition to civilian life as a security consultant and his decision to write spy novels like "A Spy Alone" and "A Spy at War," which explore themes of Russian influence and contemporary espionage.Today's Sponsors:GhostBed⬇️https://www.ghostbed.com/houseFOR 10% off! For ad free video and audio and access to live streams and Eyes On Geopolitics...JOIN OUR PATREON! https://www.patreon.com/c/TheTeamHouseTo help support the show and for all bonus content including:-live shows and asking guest questions -ad free audio and video-early access to shows-Access to ALL bonus segments with our guestsSubscribe to our Patreon! ⬇️https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouseNew merch, patches, and stickers! ⬇️https://theteamhouse-shop.fourthwall.comSupport the show here:⬇️https://www.patreon.com/TheTeamHouse___________________________________________________Subscribe to the new EYES ON podcast here:⬇️https://www.youtube.com/@EyesOnGeopoliticsPod/featured__________________________________Jack Murphy's new book "We Defy: The Lost Chapters of Special Forces History" ⬇️https://www.amazon.com/We-Defy-Chapters-Special-History-ebook/dp/B0DCGC1N1N/——————————————————————Or make a one time donation at: ⬇️https://ko-fi.com/theteamhouseSocial Media: ⬇️The Team House Instagram:https://instagram.com/the.team.house?utm_medium=copy_linkThe Team House Twitter:https://twitter.com/TheTeamHousePodJack’s Instagram:https://instagram.com/jackmcmurph?utm_medium=copy_linkJack’s Twitter: https://twitter.com/jackmurphyrgr?s=21Dave’s Twitter: https://twitter.com/dave_parke?s=21Team House Discord: ⬇️https://discord.gg/wHFHYM6SubReddit: ⬇️https://www.reddit.com/r/TheTeamHouse/Jack Murphy's memoir "Murphy's Law" can be found here:⬇️ https://www.amazon.com/Murphys-Law-Journey-Investigative-Journalist/dp/1501191241The Team Room Reading Room (Amazon Affiliate links):⬇️ https://jackmurphywrites.com/the-team-room-reading-room/Intro music by https://www.youtube.com/user/RemixSample"Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio"00:20 Introduction of Charles Beaumont (Former MI6)01:17 British Intelligence Secrecy Laws03:44 Charles's Path to MI6 & Recruitment23:53 MI6's Shift to War on Terror31:15 Personal Experiences in Conflict Zones44:31 Transition to Civilian Life & Consulting48:04 Writing Spy Novels & Key Themes1:04:09 Q&A: Key MI6 Incidents & OperationsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-team-house--5960890/support.

Special Operations. Covert Ops. Espionage. The Team House. With your hosts, Jack Murphy and David Park. Hey, everyone. This is episode 356 of the Team House. I'm Jack, here with Dave.

And our guest on tonight's show is Charles Beaumont. You will notice that his identity is concealed. Charles is not his real name. That's not just because this gentleman. is trying to be mysterious, it has to do with the laws, the British laws, around former and current intelligence officials. And Charles is a former member of the Secret Intelligence Service, better known to the public as MI6, served as a British intelligence officer,

went through the War on Terror era with time spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. And now he does some consulting and he writes spy novels. And we're really excited to have him on the show. This was the first time we've had a British intelligence official or former official on the show. Thank you for joining us, Charles. Well, thank you for having me. It's my pleasure. Before we really jump into it, maybe, like, could I ask you to expand a little bit on that?

Like the notion of, you know, in the United States, when a CIA officer comes out of the service and retires, their cover gets rolled back oftentimes. And they can appear publicly, as many have on this show. what are the British laws like these restrictions that really kind of prevent you guys from being public? Yeah, well, it's a good question because you're right. We're quite used to seeing former CIA officers, you know, you see their faces, you hear their names, you hear about some details of their careers, maybe not operational details, but certainly a bit of detail. Yeah, in the UK, the rules are very different for people who've served in intelligence agencies. The identities and therefore, you know, checkable things such as your face,

remain things that are not to be disclosed unless you are given specific authorization to do so, and that would be very unusual. So the one exception ordinarily is the chief, which is what we call our director, the head of the Secret Intelligence Service, which is a publicly named and identified person, although not much else is known about them. Another interesting thing that I just learned personally last week was that the term MI6 is really only used in the movies and the spy novels that everyone refers to it either SIS or simply as Thames House. Is that correct? Yeah, well, so MI6, yes, it's definitely, that's a sort of an unofficial nickname for the service.

and yeah, SIS is the formal name which stands for the Secret Intelligence Service, and it's an organisation that was founded, if I'm not mistaken, in 19012, I think, as 1912. So, you know, a good time ago. And it is, it is, this MI6 name is a nickname that appeared, I believe, during World War II, when there were different, the M and the I, military intelligence. There were different sort of bureaus of military intelligence. But it's kind of ironic because MI6 is a civilian organization, just of course as the CIA is. But I would argue it's kind of more civilian.

It has a less obvious connection with the military world. So let's talk a little bit about you. Tell us a little bit about yourself, about how you grew up and how that sort of like took you towards service with the government. Yeah. Well, thank you. I mean, in a way, my childhood sort of wouldn't have. of taking me there at all. I grew up in a in a kind of nice middle class environment in the south of England which for those familiar with England that's kind of my accent. I didn't have any

family connections to people really in well certainly in this line of work but actually I would say in the more general if we were going to talk about kind of military service or or public service, foreign service, that kind of thing. I don't I didn't really have people I knew well from that that world But I was somebody, as a child, I was very curious about the world. You know, I read a lot of books about kind of foreign adventures. I was interested in explorers and people who'd travel to remote places. And I guess, I guess for me that there was this idea that there was a kind of adventure that was there somehow, that, you know, somehow my life might lead in that direction.

But again, the way that the way that the, SIS recruits and the way that you join the organization when I did it's different now but when I did there was no way in you know you you might be invited to apply but but it was really so it was a series of unexpected you know pathways that led me to it really but before you get there um you know what I read about you was you know allegedly you studied history at Oxford yes that is that is true and Yeah, so Oxford is obviously, you know, is one of the kind of ancient universities of the UK. And it has it has a big sort of hold on British culture, I would say. So it's obviously, you know, it's a, it's, I guess it's like an Ivy League or something like that.

But it's got this real hold on books and movies and TV shows and also spy stories. So there's this sort of sense that in the British system, but you kind of expect the British spies to have either have gone to Oxford or Cambridge University and those are the two kind of ancient universities of the country. Now, of course, like all these things, it's a little bit cliched. You know, clearly there are plenty of great people who've gone through other schools and ended up in SIS. But certainly Oxford, I think, I mean, for example,

I think almost every single Prime Minister of Britain, even to this day, attended Oxford University. So it has this kind of weird hold on the country. And that's true also for the intelligence services. And in the era that I was involved, these services would recruit by having a network of what they call talent spotters who would identify young people, you know, undergraduates or whatever, who they thought might have capability, might show some promise and then those people would be invited to apply through indirect means. And so as I say, you would never set out thinking that this is what I want to do and how do I'd get there. You know, it was something that happened to you. Is that how you got recruited? Because it

sounds like you could have been potentially, you know, in academic or something of that nature. Yeah. And in fact, that was what kind of, I think originally I thought I might do that. I was, I was a history major, as you've said. And I was, I was very interesting. in that and I was thinking about staying on doing post-grad work, maybe, you know, doctorate or post-doc, all that stuff. And then I got I got a strange letter one day. And I mean, it really, it's, it sounds like something from a book or a movie, but that's how it would work then.

You'd get a letter from, it didn't even say it was from a government agency or anything. It would just say that there are certain positions which exist, something like outside the normal framework of government recruitment or something. And you were invited to, and of course, it's a pre-internet era, no email or anything like that. You're invited to respond by writing and sending a resume. And at the time, I thought, well, maybe this is just a joke. You know, maybe some mates of mine are just trying to wind me up and, you know, and send a kind of joke letter.

Because there was always this rumor. There was a rumor on campus, you know, oh, there's one or two people and they're recruiting. But to be honest, I thought the rumor was a joke. And until I got that letter, I didn't believe in it. And so the letter implores you to show up at like a recruitment pitch, I take it? Basically, yeah, it effectively, once you've received this letter, you eventually get invited to London to a grand anonymous building in central London, quite near Buckingham Palace.

Again, there's no marking, there's no, you know. And up until that point, I think a lot of people think this whole thing is, kind of elaborate hosts. And then you go through the door and you realize this is real, you know, and there was a guard and it was a, it was not the main building. So the main office of the Secret Intelligence Service, as is well known from the Bond movies, is a kind of quite iconic building on the River Thames in an area called Vauxhall.

This is in another part of London, as I mentioned near Buckingham Palace, a very kind of smart district of town. And until that moment, you, you, don't know what you're doing. And until a moment that you're sort of summoned into the meeting with the recruiter, I mean, obviously at that point, I knew it was some kind of government entity, but I really didn't have an understanding of what it was. And of course, as you said right at the outset, Jack, you know, most people don't know what the Secret Intelligence Service is. People have heard of MI6. So even when the guy said to me, well, this is the Secret Intelligence Service,

I wasn't 100% sure I knew what organization he was talking about. And what was that like when you got into the meeting? I mean, how do they entice you to sign up? Yeah, I mean, it was a very memorable experience because in a way, as you'll be aware, and I'm sure a lot of people watching this would be aware, you know, that we're talking about an agency, which is a human intelligence agency.

So it's about recruiting and running sources. And people who are good at that, of course, are people who have a certain character, a certain persuasiveness, a certain, perhaps a certain charm. And in a way, that's what you, you know, you're being recruited in a way a bit like you're going to be a source for the organisation. Of course, not you're going to be a full employee. But in that sense that you're being drawn in and as a mixture of flattery, you know,

that you're being told that you're there because you've been identified to have special qualities or have certain skills or attributes. But ultimately, I think, as I mentioned, you know, that for a young man in his early 20s who had had a sort of a thirst for adventure, but not really any particular means of pursuing it, you know, I just thought, well, this is incredible. You know, you'd be mad not to do this job. You know, I could be sitting in Oxford studying medieval history for 10 years, or I could be signing up for this. And for me, it wasn't a hard sell at all. And once you accept, was the security checks of pretty long, drawn-out process? I hear people who apply for the CIA sometimes spend years in this sort of like state of limbo. Yeah.

So I don't think it's quite as, I've heard those stories with the CIA that, yeah, literally you might need to get another job while you're trying to do this. It's a little bit quicker. But basically, there's a series of recruitment, you know, that initially. initial meeting is more of a kind of exploratory conversation. There's a series of recruitment. You can imagine there's tests, written tests and other tests. And then eventually a quite intrusive security process. One thing that the UK services really don't do very often and certainly don't do with prospective employees is they don't tend to use polygraphs.

And that's quite surprising, I think, on the American side, because I know that you guys, do quite a lot of that. So they, the security will be about people interviewing members of your family or acquaintances of yours and that kind of thing. And obviously, I mean, I, my own background is very boring, basically. I have, you know, my ancestors all seem to be English and, and there's not much to discover. I guess for people who have a more diverse background, then it might take a bit longer to get through all that. So you decide to take the plunge. Before we get into like, training and what you went through. Let's talk a minute about

the history of the Secret Intelligence Service, which I believe you said goes back to 1902 or? Yeah, it's the beginning of the 20th century. And basically this, it all begins at a time when you have the British Empire, of course,

as a huge global superpower. And it's kind of main global antagonist is Germany, which of course was rapidly catching up, building its navy, expanding its military and so on. And, you know, to give the very crude history, and of course, I'm sure most people are well aware of this, you know, Germany kind of came late to the imperial game and there was that kind of resentment. And there was, I think, there was this idea in Britain that Germany was, the newly united country of Germany was a threat.

of Britain's naval supremacy. And so the Secret Intelligence Service was established as an organization whose job was to spy overseas, to collect intelligence overseas, and as I say, at the beginning, very much focused on the German threat. But because these are not the first spies that have existed in our history

at the time of the first Queen Elizabeth. So we're talking, you know, in the 1500s, there was a guy called Francis Walsingham who ran what was a sufficient. sophisticated intelligence service and they were sending agents overseas into France and so on at that time. So I guess there's a long history of spying in a country, you know, Britain has a lot of history. But the formal organization was founded. I just checked is 1909 is that first foundation.

So just in the run up to World War I. And it's the same organization to this day obviously changed massively over time, but the same structure, I guess. Hey guys, our show is sponsored by GhostBed. Check them out. Please, they make awesome mattresses, awesome pillows, awesome bedding. Ghostbred provides high quality and super comfortable award-winning mattresses crafted in the U.S. and Canada. Did you know that 60% of U.S. adults report being too hot when they're trying to sleep? That's me. I'm a sweaty little baby. That's why we designed all of our products with cooling features so you stay comfortable and asleep all night long. pair any of our mattresses with GhostBeds award-winning adjustable base and get the ultimate sleep experience.

GhostBed rules the family-owned business, $60,000 plus five-star reviews. They have sleep experts on staff with 20 plus years of experience. If you have any questions, you can hit them up and ask them, you know, maybe what kind of mattresses work for you. 20-plus year warranty. That's two times the industry standard. Free shipping and returns on mattresses. Most of the products ship out within 24 hours. they have in-house customer support and sleep experts chilling in plantation Florida.

It rules. It's the best. They give you 101 nights risk-free to make sure that these beds are right for you. If you don't like it after 101 nights, you could send it back full refund. When you purchase a ghost bed mattress, your comfort guaranteed. I'm reading it right now and it's capital letters guaranteed. Okay. They do the right thing and they're a great company.

If you're not sure which ghost bed's right for you, like I said before, you could take their mattress quiz online, or you can give a call to one of their sleep experts and they'll help you with exactly what you possibly could need, what works for you and what doesn't. And the best news about this is Team House listeners and viewers. You get an extra 10% off sitewide for a limited time. You just go to ghostbed.com slash house and use the code house at checkout. One more time, that's ghostbed.com slash. House with the code house, H-O-U-S-E, at checkout for an extra 10% off site-wide. I want to thank GhostBed for their continued support. I want to thank all the fans that listen and watch for their continued support.

Without you guys, we are nothing. So thank you for supporting the show. And thank you for supporting the companies that help support the show. Ghostbed.com slash house for 10% off. Made in the U.S., made in Canada. Shout out to our brothers in Canada. they rock, check them out. I love Ghostbbed.

Thanks, guys. And then let's talk a little bit about after you put in your application get accepted, what is sort of the training process like for a SIS officer? Yeah. So as I mentioned, you know, it's a Humeant organization analogous to the CIA, distinct from, you know, the NSA obviously which the equivalent in the UK would be GCHQ, but on the SIGN side. As a human organization, the focus is on, certainly amongst the sort of intelligence officer case handlers. It's about recruiting and running human intelligence sources.

So there is a training induction which is all about those skills. Now, over time, of course, these training programs change, you know, over history. But I think that the basic ideas about agent motivation, about, you know, what are the factors that cause people to be willing to be recruited to spy for another country, to betray their country for our country? You know, these are things that are, in some sense, is universal, you know, the idea of betrayal, of espionage, of all these things. We can find it in the Bible. You know, we can find it in throughout human history. But, but equally, these are a very sort of complex operations to organize and to run successfully. So there's a lot of

emphasis on on I guess the dynamics of of agent relationships. And when we talk about agents, I'm talking about sources. Obviously, I'm not talking about the officers of the service. There's a lot of work clearly on security. And I guess if you're coming new to that world, the issues of security and protective security, the idea of needs. to know of security of operations. That's all very new if you're coming fresh from, you know, university or whatever. And then there's there is a little bit in in the training, uh, which is about that kind of overlap with the world of special operations of covert operations, technical operations, those kinds of things. I would say in general that the balance of the British

services is much more heavily, uh, towards the human, human intelligence sources. whereas clearly, you know, the CIA is a much bigger organization. It has its covert action. It has its paramilitary. That sort of thing is, doesn't exist really as an equivalent in the UK system. You guys have the SIS to do all that, right? Well, that's right. We've got, we've got, as you know, very well,

a very well-established special forces community. And in a way, they fulfill that function. And it hasn't been seen necessary to sort of try and replicate it within the civilian intelligence agencies. So out of curiosity, are you familiar with our Title X and Title 50 authorities? I'm not, you must enlighten me. I might know when you start telling me they might ring bells. So basically just the idea of the split between intelligence operations and military operations

and how, you know, like for the CIA to sort of have some of those paramilitary capabilities, for things that don't fall under like the military authorities. Yeah. But, you know, for, but may take that kind of action. Do you know if you guys have a similar, I know you don't have like a paramilitary, but do you have authorities set out like that? Or is your military more, like the SAS or whoever,

are they more free to conduct, say, covert or clandestine operations that, you know, that like maybe our military wouldn't be. Yeah, I think actually there might be a bit more flexibility. And I think it's partly because obviously you guys have a constitution. And then the way that is interpreted is the sort of basis of how the country functions, or at least that's my best understanding of it, whereas Britain famously does not have a written constitution. So there's this kind of flexibility that exists for the government.

Typically, for both covert operations and espionage operations, there is effectively a, what we would call a submission process, so that some government minister, and obviously depending on how the level of risk, it might be the prime minister or it might be the foreign secretary who super intends the intelligence services, will have signed off on an operational direction effectively. So I guess, you know, case study might be the war in Ukraine. You know, the prime minister has almost certainly signed off because of the importance of that on the role that might be played by special forces or by intelligence services in that context. And then that obviously provides the legal framework in which these operations are carried out. Very interesting. One of the things this sort of does relate to your training, I think, but also just larger culturally within the SIS.

Do you think the Brits kind of have a leg up on this whole human intelligence thing because of this long history and intelligence gathering and because of this history of colonialism? And I know a lot of bad things happen because of that. But nonetheless, that experience exists, right? Yeah. It's a great question. I think it can be valuable.

So one thing is that the points. of connection for Britain with other countries are so numerous, partly because of the colonial history. So, you know, obviously we can talk about India or sub-Saharan Africa, or there are many, many countries that have a historic link to Britain. And as you rightly identify, Jack, that's not always a positive story. But it often brings with it positivity, whether it's university links, you know, people will come to study at London, Oxford, Cambridge, whatever, things like that. Sporting links, cultural links, you know, the countries that play. cricket, you know, that's a list of countries is very specific and all in some way linked to

Britain. So you have those things that if when we, what is the task of a human intelligence recruitment is to find points of connection with someone and and sort of, you know, build a relationship where you, which crosses a national divide and you convince someone of the validity of what your objective is. So I think it can be helpful. I think it's also, there's a possibility that there's a slightly British, I would say, a British sort of disease of thinking that we're better at everything because we might have done it 500 years ago. And of course, the world keeps moving forwards. And as a kind of British arrogance that goes with that, it doesn't, you know, the fact that we had spies in 1500 doesn't mean that our spies now are necessarily better.

You know, we always have to keep adapting. So I think that those are perhaps the two tensions that exist in our. culture. And about how long did the training process last before you were qualified to do your job? So it's basically about half a year. And I think it's analogous to, I know about the CIA, have the famous farm and, you know, and there are similarities to that. So, you know, lots of sort of role playing and exercises and simulations that feel very real, particularly, again, if you're, if you're a young person with no experience of that world, it can feel very real indeed.

And then at the end of that, typically people would start off working in the UK, you know, in London, in some kind of probably more of a desk-based role. And of course, there's always that tension that you join thinking you're going to travel the world and have these big adventures. And the first bit of your career,

you're running a desk somewhere and you're not earning very much money and you probably have buddies who went to Oxford University and now becoming bankers and lawyers and making big money and you're thinking, what am I doing? But then, you know, things change over time and at a certain point,

people are likely to go overseas, almost always in the context of an embassy, you know, where they have a diplomatic cover role. And then, of course, your career takes a really different pathway. So you can confirm then that Ian Fleming was not being entirely truthful about the life of an intelligence officer. Well, certainly, you know, the James Bond lifestyle, the Aston Martin, you know, the gambling,

all the other stuff, it certainly was not sustainable on the salary that I was earning. You know, I was taking the bus to work and, you know, living in an unglamorous part of town. So there we go. So one of the things you had mentioned to me before we started the interview was being a part of a generation that joins the intelligence service in the 1990s, sort of an unprecedented era of peace in many ways, and then that transition into the global war on terror. Could you tell us a little bit about that from your perspective? Yeah, sure. And I think it was, it was, you know, the transformational event, basically, of my professional life, because as you said there, you know,

you have the 1990s, the Cold Wars ended, the Westers won, and we can argue about that, but, you know, basically that's what happened. Remember that the first Gulf War, again, this kind of, this reminder of the power of America and its allies. Everything is hunky-dory. And in fact, there was even debates. I don't know if this happened in the US, but there were certainly debates in the UK about whether we even needed an intelligence service. You know, what's the point of it? We don't have enemies now. It's the end of history. Do remember that? The history had ended. We had won. And then 9-11 happened. Obviously, terrible, terrible event targeting targeting America, of course, but by definition, any country that's allied with America

that had a vision of liberal democracy, of a, you know, secular freedoms, freedom of religion, all those things just went out of the window overnight. And all of a sudden, the need for intelligence agencies became very clear. But of course, the role being played, and I'm sure this was similar in the CIA, that of course, yes, SIS had a counterterrorism team, yes, It wasn't that it was an unknown capacity, but it was not the main effort. It was not the thing that was seen as the biggest activity for an intelligence agency. So going very quickly from an organisation that post-Cold War, slightly seeking to define its role, maybe dabbling in sort of organized crime, counter-narcotics.

There was obviously there were wars in the Balkans. It's not, you know, the 90s were not without conflict, but these were kind of small, containable wars, and then suddenly overnight transitioning to an extraordinary series of events, the tragedy of 9-11, but then the response, and of course, SIS was very quickly involved with you guys in Afghanistan, in that field of conflict, and then subsequently in the war in Iraq as well. And could you talk a little bit about your personal experience of like where you were in the Secret Intelligence Service.

Like, I imagine, you know, you're in Sub-Basement 5 working on a computer, and then the war happens and your life changes. But, I mean, what was it like really for you? Yeah. I mean, it was, it was, it was, it was dramatic. I was, I was on an overseas posting. I probably can't say where I was, but let's just say I was, I was not near New York or Washington, D.C. And, and it was very disorientating, as you can imagine.

And then very quickly, it was clear that, that, that, you know, that, you know, this world was changing rapidly and there were there was a call for recruits you know people who were able to go directly to Afghanistan I wasn't in that in that particular cohort but you know other people who would who quite quickly transitioned to serve in the Middle East and that's something that I ended up doing so so you you quite quickly move from a situation where you're you're working on on sort of classic political intelligence targeting or maybe running sources in that framework. And then counterterrorism, which again, there was an area I hadn't worked in,

but it was very clearly, you know, this was a priority. And of course, in those early days after 9-11, we really didn't know, people didn't know where bin Laden was, people didn't know whether there would be a series of copycat attacks, whether this was the start of a whole, you know, range of massive attacks on the nature of 9-11. And, you know, there was an amazing amount of people having to make things up as they went along in those early phases. And I remember that sense of disorientation, but I admit also, you know, excitement and feeling, well, actually, I wanted to serve my country.

and up until now I wasn't sure what I was doing was really mattered that much. Not that it was pointless, but it just didn't necessarily feel like it was really so important. Now we're seeing the feeling I had in September 2001 was now I understand why it matters, you know, why I might be doing this stuff. How did the SIS deal with, you know, going from like the CIA, strategic level intelligence, right? embassies, parties, universities, you know, looking for people with access to the things you want. You know, and you might be in, you know, countries where maybe the foreign service

or there's a criminal element or a hostel or whatever. But then you go to this very narrow, very limited environment where you're inside a base. Yeah. You know, even going out is risky. And it's like it's, you're not just going to go. spot assess and recruit some guy at a party now. So, like, how does, how did the SIS, like, manage that kind of growth? Yeah.

Well, it's a very challenging transition. You're absolutely right. And the classic, as you say, the classic sort of Cold War style intel, you know, you're at the embassy cocktail function and you sidle up to the Russian, you know, attache or whatever. All that obviously doesn't work. There's no way you're going to meet the Al-Qaeda facilitator that way. I think, you know, I think a lot probably similar to what the CIA ended up doing was a lot was through existing agents or recruiting agents who were kind of the middlemen. So maybe the sort of Arab businessman or someone who had a foot in more than one world. And some of it was actually just trial and error and finding ways. And as you say, you know, you go from being in an embassy and yes, there are risks and you would, you might do.

anti-surveillance routes and those sorts of things. But the risks are very different from being inside a military base. And the times you leave that base in order to carry out a debrief or a source meeting are kept to a bare minimum. And there's a lot of security arrangements go around with it. And so it's, yeah, this idea that you can sort of cultivate someone, take them to a bar, getting drunk, maybe, you know, take them to a, you know, find some women somewhere or whatever, you know, naughty thing that floats there, but, you know, that kind of stuff was very difficult to do. But interestingly, I think we learn over time. So you would, maybe you, in the theater of conflict, you can't do that, but maybe you can find a way to get someone to another city in the region where security is good,

where there are, there is nightlife, where you can. And your both, your guard is down a little because you're not, you're not fearing that, you know, that immediate threat. So I think, I think there was a lot of trial and error and gradually, you know, successes. successes were made. And you spent quite a bit of time in the Middle East. Can you tell us a little bit about that first trip and what that experience was like for you? Yeah. So obviously, the UK stood alongside the U.S. in those wars and ended up being involved,

both in Afghanistan and Iraq. A lot of people then sort of passed through those places. I think, you know, for someone like myself, going back to sort of what I said earlier on, being in an environment, which is a militarized environment, was a completely new experience for me. So, you know, SIS is a civilian organization. And most of its work, particularly before 9-11, took place either in offices in, you know, in London or in embassies, in capital cities around the world. And so deploying to an environment where you arrive in a military, hell, got to taking evasive maneuvers to avoid, you know, ground fire or whatever. You know, all those things, it's just, it's a completely baffling and, and shocking, you know, sort of change of change of scene. Now, again, in many ways, it was incredibly exciting, very, very rewarding. But another thing which happens is, of course, militaries speak a language, you know, that there's a terminology. And if you've, if you've joined as a recruit and you've served for years,

it's a language like French or German, you know. And again, people would assume that because you come from an intelligence service, that you understand what they're talking about. I remember plenty of times just not literally not understanding what all these different acronyms meant. So there, you know, steep learning curve. And, of course, you're there to be useful. You know, you're not there just to sort of sit around and watch what's going on.

You're there to give, to identify, target, recruit, develop sources, provide intelligence that can stop terrorist attacks or, you know, cause leaders of terror groups to be, to be captured or maybe to help, you know, hostage rescues, you know, in that. And so the other thing is that tempo, the classic diplomatic intelligence type recruitment, you know, you've got a sort of one-year cycle and at the end of it, this guy might, you know, give you the briefing document for the ministerial visit or something along those lines, whereas you're here in a, we've got five days and we've got to get these people, otherwise they're going to blow something up.

And so it's a completely different mind frame. And you basically, it's sink or swim. And I think a lot of people have found that quite challenging. Any particular stories, even if you're able to have to be a little vague about exactly where or when they took place from that time frame that you could share? Yeah, I mean, I think a couple. I think there were times when we were involved with some of the, hostage cases. So, you know, Westerners working in those environments, taken hostage by militant

groups. And then, obviously, you feel viscerally that sense of if we succeed, we know what we've done. If we fail, the outcome is horrific. And, you know, we recall those awful videos of the decapitations and so on. And my experience with those, you know, some ended well, some did not. The seeing actually the personal effects of a British female hostage who sadly did not survive was actually

one of, it's harder than even seeing these videos. There's something about seeing someone's just their private, mundane possessions. You know, and we weren't able to save her. But then, you know, on another occasion that, you know, sometimes there's, as you guys will know, there's a lot of humour in this world. You know, it's kind of dark humour, but it's

there that you, you, people, that maybe there's intel that you, you, you find out that the people you're working against can be quite stupid, you know, there's a sort of comic aspect to it, which I remember there was a case where there was this sort of intercepted communication which seemed to suggest that two people were planning to move a group of hostages from one location to another, so there was a huge ramp up to try and intercept this. And then it turned out that there had been a complete mistake in the translation, whoever was, you know, intercepted the call. And they were moving like a truckload of building materials. And I guess

someone thought that that was a code word, but it was actually, it was actual building materials. And, you know, half the SAS had been sent in to intercept. So, you know, there's a lot of that kind of stuff where you're, you're just constantly trying to stay alert, trying to figure out if you know what you're doing. Another thing that would happen a lot would be that the volunteers, so people would come volunteering information. And of course, you know, it's a bit of a mug's game. They know that if they can persuade you that their information is good, they're going to leave with some US dollars in their pocket. Inevitably, there'll be people who come with ridiculous stories. And, you know, I remember a guy claiming that he'd had one of the Stinger missiles,

famously back in the 80s, of course, that the CIA had rightly provided Stinger missiles to the Afghans to shoot down Russian helicopters. And you'll probably know this, that there are so many people claimed to have Stinger missiles that the CIA must have handed out millions of them. And this guy, you know, he went back from and forwards and he would have the Stinger missile and he'd provide it to us for millions of millions of dollars. you know, we persuaded him. We're going to need to see a photo of this thing.

And it was a photo of like the oldest, most basic Russian RPG that you could pick up for sort of $50 anywhere. And you just sort of think, well, why were you wasting? You know, what was your plan? When did you think that this was going to turn into millions of dollars? Nigerian print scandal in your email box. Basically, it's the same deal. It's the same deal.

And I guess there's always someone gullible enough, you know. How was it for you guys in terms of working environment? Were you tied to like the CIA because they had robust, you know, a robust presence out there? Or would you guys set up your own kind of like small elements and, you know, secure those on your own and stuff like that? Yeah. Generally, we're trying to sort of do our own thing. We'd obviously coordinate a lot with the CIA. and of course with other allies, Australia, Canada,

you know, some other European players, depending on who's in theatre. But yeah, we would generally try to operate a sort of a fairly small kind of low profile. And I guess to the extent that if there's a USP, you know, the CIA, certainly in places like sort of Iraq and Afghanistan, would have a huge presence, understandably. and and we we would probably as the British want to feel that we were we were much less kind of obvious

and maybe it gave us an ability to be more subtle in some ways but of course that means we had fewer resources and sometimes we would beg steal or borrow from the CIA and and you know most of the time it was a productive relationship but of course there's always that competitive thing sure and it's not unusual that you're chasing the same target sure Sure. As far as keeping safe over there, I mean, did you guys usually have military dudes as security? Is that how that works? Yeah, so, and normally that people came from the special forces community. So people who had a prior understanding of the Intel world. And so that there would be that kind of, you know, sort of strong, strong sense of camaraderie and so on.

And as you'll know, you know, these are very unsafe environments, particularly if you're trying to do something unnoticed, you know, it's one thing to drive out of, out of, say, the green zone in Baghdad in armored vehicles, but you might not be able to do that if you're trying to have a source meeting or something like that. Right. So you had to find ways to do that subtly and safely,

and sometimes that was a bit of attention. Well, then I would ask, because, you know, you mentioned the green zone. And, you know, like the agency, by what we've been told, had a difficult time. Like, a lot of their sources were from walk-ins. because when they would go out, they were required to go out in up-armored, you know, two vehicles, things like that.

So is it safe to assume that you guys were kind of out there in like in thin skins, like going low profile, trying not to draw any attention? What did you think, I mean, did you look at the CIA and go like, well, that's amateur hour? Well, I would never do that because genuinely, not just because I'm trying to be polite to, you know,

transatlantic colleagues. But I think a lot of organizations were struggling with the challenge of converting themselves from a civilian-based organization. Yes, of course there would be, you know, military veterans serving in the CIA and that as we both know, the paramilitary wing. But ultimately, you know,

your average CIA case officer is someone who's probably been to university, might have a master's degree. And, and and there's, you know, no more military experience than the old postman, you know. Right. And so in that sense, I think it, I think all these organizations were struggling to find the way round, round those objectives. And yeah, at the beginning, probably that there was some amateurism on all sides. But I think if you look at the results, I mean, if you look at the way that the, obviously not the CIA on its own,

with the CIA working with the, you know, the sort of special operations command and so on. Sure. By the time you had like General McChrystal in place and that kind of manhunt for Zarqawi in Iraq, you know, it was clearly a pretty, pretty well-old machine. Yeah. And I mean, it sounds like you spent about roughly a decade and a half as sort of a wartime intelligence officer. Just curious, like, how did the war and how did your job evolve in time?

How did it change? I mean, a lot happened, the 7-7 attacks, the Bin Laden raid. I mean, there's a lot of things that happened during that time span. Yeah, a lot of things. Yeah, so obviously the 7-7 attacks, you know, and I was overseas in a theater of war at the time. And that was very, you know, a very strange experience where the war was on the streets of London rather than, you know, in this Middle Eastern city where I was working. You know, so that was odd. And, yeah, I think a lot evolved.

I think also, you know, we have to be honest that I think the, the percent. of the utility of the Iraq war, you know, changed rapidly. Clearly, both in the US and in the UK, it became politically very toxic, both for Tony Blair and for George W. Bush. And after 7-7, a lot of people, I think, were not unreasonably asking, well, what would this have happened if we hadn't joined this war whose whole basis, you know, can be questioned? And obviously, there was the whole... whole saga of the WMD, which again was an intelligence-led operation that we were promised that the WMD, Iraq would, this would all be found. And of course, as we all know, it didn't work out

that way. So I think, I mean, for me personally, obviously there's also that process of just becoming older and more experience and you spend less time in in the theatre of conflict and more time maybe in a in a sort of head office role or in some kind of, you know, team leader type thing. So that, so that for me, but towards the end of that period, I mean, I'll admit that I, I had a measure of cynicism about, about the whole war on terror. Clearly, you know, the, the, both the hunt for Zarqawi, which is less well known, but the bin Laden raid, you know, these are spectacularly successful intelligence operations. And there's no, there's no other way to look at those. And, you know, they are, they are ones that anyone involved with could

rightly be proud of. But when we look at that sort of long period of our of our shared history, the US and the UK, I think it's hard, hard to conclude sort of exactly what, you know, what the positive outcomes were. And clearly, you know, the, that they withdraw from Kabul at the end of the Afghan experience. Again, you know, the costs of that war, the numbers are staggering, aren't they? You could have given every Afghan, is it half a million dollars each or something? You know, by the time you've spent the crazy sums of money, and we haven't even talked about the losses of lives and so on. So I think it's an interesting period, but it's a difficult period. And I think a lot of people from the community, certainly in the UK, and I wouldn't be surprised the US, have their questions about that, you know, about what ultimately were we achieving.

Tell us then about your career kind of, or your intelligence career, kind of winding down what that last year or so was like and what made you just. decide to leave. Yeah, well, it was partly sort of some of those things I've alluded to there. And I think particularly also because what happened is that, you know, the war on terror kind of morphed into the Arab Spring and in a way that that was a promise that never delivered, you know, having spent time in the Middle East, the idea that these countries could be democracies from their own volition, not because we had gone in and imposed that, but that they'd find it themselves. And then seeing that that sort of promise be snatched away from them. I think that was that was quite difficult to see. And I think I also, you know, I make it sound like it was all very depressing and torn. But there's

another way which is just that actually you're a young man, you can have the incredible experiences. It's exciting. You have the adrenaline. There's all those things. But actually, you're pretty hard to sustain a relationship. You know, a lot of marriages don't survive that kind of thing. You want to have kids. You want to have a family. You know, all those are just normal stuff. So I felt that I had, I'd had the experiences that I was unlikely ever to sort of have experiences of that kind of intensity again. And I would just, you know, try something else to, you know, leave that world behind, be very happy that I was part of it. Feel proud that I did something, you know, for my country. But, but ultimately, you know, there are other things to do with your life.

And what was that like transitioning from this very secret and secretive world to becoming a civilian, so to speak? Yeah. Because as we mentioned earlier, you can't necessarily take your resume out there and be like, hey, I was in the SIS. No. No, so there is that problem. And I'm trying to sort of explain to people what it was you were up to. You know, it can be difficult. But I think, you know, as I think I mentioned earlier, Jack, you know, I did some work in consulting and as a world which is again, will be familiar to people in the US, a world where there's quite a lot of people who've come from the world of Intel

or maybe special ops or a bit of both. So you're not just kind of walking into the job center and sort of just checking out any old job. So, you know, I started out in roles where there were plenty of people who kind of had an idea of that world, maybe sometimes from a slightly earlier period. and I guess that's a sort of, it's just like a soft landing, isn't it? And so I, yeah, I was sort of security consulting, corporate intel, those kinds of, those kinds of jobs.

This is the city of London consulting that you read about in like a Frederick Forsyth novel? Yeah, absolutely. And it's interesting because, yeah, the city of London has become this kind of global capital for spooks for hire, basically. And I think there's, there's something about, you know, Britain, does have sort of high quality intelligence agencies, but it also has this culture of the kind of financial services and sort of old school banking and, you know, guys with nice tailored suits and all that sort of thing. So I think you sort of meld those two worlds together,

and you're quite right. It's a world that is familiar from the pages of a kind of Frederick Fulsaith novel, but actually, you know, in a way quite realistic. And so you're interesting. consulting, when does the idea kind of come about and how does it come about that you want to try your hand at writing spy novels? Yeah. Well, for me, it was very much the experience of COVID, actually, which I guess a lot of people sort of re-examined their life a bit and, you know, forced idleness from not being in the office every day and maybe having a bit of time off. And I'd always

I'd always thought I might have a novel in me. You know, obviously lots of people thinking that. But I guess that because of that time away from normal work, I thought, right, you know, I've got to give it a go. And then a couple of other things sort of inspired me or just gave me the impetus. One was actually the passing of John LeCarray, who's obviously a great, possibly the greatest English spywriter. and just reading his obituaries and all of that he'd sort of achieved as a writer.

And I thought, well, look, if you're ever going to do this, you've just got to get on with it. You know, you can't always, it's that classic thing. You have an ambition. Well, if you always talk about it to your mates and never do it, then it's just pointless. So that just gave me that kind of inspiration. And the other thing was that having spent a fair bit of time outside the service, but experience this world of the sort of private spying. I realize that there could be a novel to be written

where the protagonist is not a current government intelligence officer, but there's somebody on the outside. And I quite like that idea of an outsider as opposed to setting an office, setting a novel inside the government office, which is a sort of more, I guess, a more classic setting. And your novels are called A Spy Alone and a Spy at War. You want to tell us a little bit about,

what they're about? Yeah, sure. So one is a sequel of the other, so it's a series, and I'm currently working on the third, so it will be a trilogy. So what we have in the first novel, the first thing is they're all set in the present day. So it's that the events in the spy alone, I think it unfolded in 2022. So just in the light of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. And what I have is the protagonist, is he is a consultant, a former intelligence officer, somebody who's working in that kind of private intelligence world in London. And he is given a commission to investigate a Russian oligarch who wants to give a big donation to Oxford University.

Now, these are all things that are happening all the time in real life. And you guys might be very familiar with this London grad phenomenon where a lot of dirty Russian money flowed through institutions in the UK. And, you know, in my view, quite disgracefully, really, both in terms of high-end prime property, central London, or like big manor houses out in the countryside, but also, yeah, this kind of this laundering of money through institutions, whether it was sort of football clubs, university endowments,

you know, it's that way that we sort of let our institutions be one. open to this money. So I have this idea that the protagonist starts investigating what he believes is as a purely commercial project. And then he starts to imagine that there might be something sitting under this. It is more than simply an assessment of the compliance risks of this money. But actually that there's an espionage operation. And effectively, this endowment was a cover for.

a Russian espionage operation targeting the British establishment. So the other thing that I tried to do in this novel is get back to a very classic British idea that the sort of British establishment had Russian double agents in it. And of course, during the Cold War, you know, we had that whole... Kim Filby. Yeah, Kim Filby, the most famous one. But there was others. There was Guy Burgess, a guy called Anthony Blunt.

There was a whole series of these guys. And of course, Britain has this kind of class thing going on, these kind of posh guys, privately educated, Cambridge and Oxford University. And they went into the institutions, MI6, foreign office, other government institutions, and ended up as Russian spies. Or in fact, they'd been recruited as young men. So I had this idea that what if the Russians had managed to recruit people even in the 1990s at a time when we imagine they couldn't recruit anyone because their country was collapsing? But, you know, in a kind of post-ideological, cynical world that we inhabit, it doesn't seem so impossible. And what's kind of interesting is the way that, you know, both sides of the Atlantic, there are lots of questions about some individuals and their relationships with Russia, which perhaps suggests that, you know, maybe the Russians have been able to recruit people, even up to the current time. So that's basically the setting of the first novel.

And the second one? Yeah, so the second one is a sequel, and it actually, most of it takes place in Ukraine, in the war in Ukraine, and effectively the protagonist Simon Sharman is his name. He follows a Chechen assassin to Ukraine where he believes that that person was responsible for the death of one of his colleagues. As it happens, in real life, I've spent some time in Ukraine since 2020. too. So I've got a bit of an understanding of sort of what's been going on there. But also I have many friends who've worked there, whether they've been journalists or, you know, people supporting Ukrainians one way or another, driving trucks, all kinds of things like that. So I did my best to try to

give an impression of what Ukraine is like at the moment. And of course, one of the interesting things about it is that you can go to Kiev and it's a charming European city. You know, most of the time it feels normal and the restaurants are good and the bars are good and it all feels great. And then the sirens go and, of course, the Russian drones and missile attacks come in. So it's this very strange dichotomy that, you know, I think we grew up thinking of places at war being cities like Beirut or Baghdad, everything's destroyed and bombed out. Whereas we're now seeing it happen in a European city that depending which direction you look in can look charming, like a place you take your wife on holiday and then you look the other way and

it's devastation. So it's a very strange dichotomy, I think. And can you tell us anything about the third book? Well, yeah, the third book, I have to have to write some of it. But my hope is to kind of conclude the story and bring it back, really sort of bring it back to the UK, but also to this idea of the kind of the hybrid war that Russia's fighting. In a way, I've written about the kind of the the political interference in terms of the money flowing through our institutions. I've written about the war in Ukraine. And it seems to me that where we're going now is these gray zone operations. You know, when there's a fire at the Heathrow airport, no, no one's really sure anymore,

are they? Is that Russia or is it just, you know, bad wiring? And so I think we're living in this era where there's so much uncertainty which can be weaponized. and it's weaponized through disinformation, cynical politicians, but equally, you know, Russia probably would like to test NATO, would like to interfere in elections, would like to see the kind of cynical opportunists elected. So the idea of this novel, it will be set in 2026, so the readers will read it in the year that it comes out.

And I hope it will give a sense of this kind of very uncertain world that we feel we're now living in. One other kind of like side topic that you had mentioned earlier that I just wanted to come back to is the first female chief of the Secret Intelligence Service was appointed just this week, I think? That's correct, yeah, literally just the last few days, yeah. Yeah, I think, I mean, that's a really historic moment. As we've mentioned, you know, this is an organization is more than 100 years old.

and inevitably part of this is just a function of history at a certain point there were women in the service from early on but there were all kinds of stupid rules about once you got married you had to resign or you know you can imagine these kinds of things and obviously most of those rules disappeared probably in the 1980s at the latest but it still took time for then a cadre of of really talented operational officers to to move through the service. Because the thing about this is that this is, this role is, it's a political appointment. Yes, of course, the prime minister makes the appointment, but it is almost always a person recruited has, has had a career in intelligence. So, so Blaise Metcveli,

who is the appointee, as has been, you know, stated publicly, has had a, had a lengthy operational career, including most recently in, in the Q branch, because of Q from the, the Bond movies, with all the gadgets is actually a real person and a real division. It's a sort of technical, technical division of SIS. That's pretty interesting. Yeah. Anything else, Charles, that, you know, I failed to ask that you'd like to talk about today? Well, I was just going to say, I think we touched on it a bit before,

that there's this kind of a little bit of a trend at the moment for former Intel officers to write novels and I know that you've had Ilana Berry, I.S. Berry on this show. A brilliant, brilliant book, The Peacock on the Sparrow. I don't need to recommend it for all your listeners. I love it. Know it already. Yeah. And then, of course, there's also David McCloskey, who again came through the CIA. And I think in the UK there's been a little bit less of that, partly because of the the funny rules, which is why no one could see my face and all that.

But I think there is something about how in books, spy books, even when they're fictitious books, can be helpful to help us understand the world we're in. And, you know, John Le Carre's books were so popular during the Cold War because readers started to understand the Cold War was a much more complex and kind of cynical story than just this kind of, you know, simplistic, good versus evil, East versus West kind of thing.

And I think in a way, you know, we're living in a very confusing and uncertain era. I mean, we just think the last few days with the conflicts raging, Iran, Israel, the U.S. getting involved, all those kinds of things. It's a very, very difficult sort of time to get your head around. And I feel that spy novels aren't a bad way to sort of help sort of open a window onto that. Yeah, I was going to ask, I mean, that brings up, you know, I have this interesting question. I've now at this point met quite a few. authors. And I noticed that different authors are trying to say different things with their books.

Even in this spy genre. I've met people who write in this genre, but they're not, it's almost like they're using espionage as a vehicle to say something larger about culture, about these sorts of, you know, bigger picture, maybe about international politics. Whereas people who actually served in this position, maybe have an opportunity to, I don't want to use the word reveal like they're revealing a secret, but to reveal something about this inner world. But for you, I mean, what are you trying to say with your books? Yeah, well, that's a great question. I guess, I mean, I suppose there is something about letting people understand, because one of the things that the protagonist of my books is I've tried very hard to make it a normal person. You know, so obviously you watch a James Bond movie

or Jason Bourne or whatever, these people are incredible. Even by the standards of special operations, they can do everything. They've never fired a shot that didn't hit its target. They've never lost a fight. They can jump from buildings and all these things. And, you know, I wanted a protagonist who was a kind of regular guy who might swing a punch and then find that his hand hurts and the person he's punched is still standing, you know, and those sorts of things.

And so that was one thing about the normality, that, you know, normal people have these jobs. And then the second thing was that there is excitement and drama and jeopardy, but not in the sense of Mission Impossible or Jason Bourne, but because the jeopardy is often emotional. You know, it's the drama of not knowing if you trust the people around you, that you don't know if you're being followed, you don't know if someone's doing the double on you.

So I think, again, it's sort of understanding more that a lot of these things take place sort of inside your head rather than, you know, in a kind of action setting. But equally, as you said, Jack, you know, there is something, what are we saying about the world? And certainly for me, I mean, I felt quite strongly that I think Britain made some bad mistakes, particularly with this thing with the sort of allowing Russian money and Russian influence into our country. And of course, you know, once the Ukraine war had started, I feel that we did the right thing as a country that we've, you know, picked up. We've been a very strong supporter to Ukraine and, you know, most British people, it's a very popular thing in Britain. People fly the flag

of Ukraine everywhere. But I think there is that thing about how explaining to people why it matters, why it's important. So certainly particularly in my second book, which is, you know, set in Ukraine, trying to kind of make sure that people understand why it matters that we continue to support them. There is that book, it was written by a British journalist, I believe, Moneyland. Oh, yes. That's a great book. Yeah. Very, very good book. And I recall the author points out that, you know, the city of London banking,

and we have this problem here in the States too, not a lot of corrupt regimes laundered their money through our countries. And we have some responsibility for that. Absolutely. Yeah. So Oliver Bullough is the name of the author. And in fact, I did an event with him. I think it was last year.

And it was interesting because he had obviously written this very factual, brilliant sort of work of reportage. I'd created a very fictitious story. But in a way, we were telling the same story about this thing, of how we took our institutions. And of course, the people, it's this classic thing that they want to launder money and own property in Manhattan or Central London, because then they have the rule of law and no one's going to steal it from.

So, you know, we're kind of, they've stolen the money off the citizen. of Russia or Kazakhstan or wherever. And now that they're coming to the UK, you know, there are so many contradictions and there's so much sort of hypocrisy loaded into these things. And of course, you can see why it drives cynicism. You know, a lot of people in both of our countries feel very cynical about politics. And this is one of the reasons. They see this happening.

They see that the fancy parts of the big cities are owned by kleptocratic foreigners. That doesn't make you feel good about where you're living. Yeah. I think that's, do we have any questions, Steve? We got some questions from our viewership on Patreon. Right. Dee will bring those up for you. Charles, what's your opinion on the whole Richard Thomason affair from the inside? How is his book seen? Yeah. So Richard Tomlinson, just for those who aren't familiar, was a SIS officer whose career began well. He was a successful kind of, officer and then there was a he fell out you know in a catastrophic way with the organization he was he was fired he then released a whole series of names online of um of serving officers so it was a

it was a really toxic situation and then and he published a book which the british government attempted to block ultimately it did it was published which in itself is interesting because it's a reminder that governments often you know think they can stop something coming out and and it normally comes out eventually. Now, my understanding is that Tomlinson is now, he's kind of made peace literally and sort of emotionally with that whole period of his life. And he's living in France and there's no kind of legal cloud over him. I mean, clearly it was badly managed.

I mean, I'm not blaming any one individual and I don't claim to have a direct knowledge. But you can't, what seemed to have been like a disagreement of almost like a human. and resources problem turned into a international espionage problem. Wow. But it's a reminder also that ultimately, you know, trust in these organizations, I mean, I guess we could talk about Edward Snowden. People have a huge amount of trust placed in them. And sometimes you make mistakes.

And then they have that information and they can't, you know, you can't remove it from their brains. And if they want to go road with it, they will. Yeah. All right. We got a couple more from Tomes. Curious how the MI6 views their role between Musada and the president. Palestinian authorities' intelligence.

UK seems to have a more supportive stance with the PA than we do historically. We, I'm assuming, being America. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I think obviously the UK has a historic position there, having been the sort of colonial administrator of what was Palestine, out of which came the state of Israel and then the Palestinian territories. I think there's been an attempt by the, the UK to try to maintain positive relationships with both sides. I think we have to be blunt

that it's been extremely difficult, particularly in recent years. And certainly the sort of post-Gaza, it's been, I mean, I know it's been politically toxic in the US as well, but certainly, you know, things like the way certain communities within our country are now voting, understandably, in my view, in response to what they're seeing happening in Gaza, I think it's made it very difficult. But in terms of operationally, my understanding is that, yeah, that they've managed to keep a fairly strong kind of operational coordination going. And but of course, you know, we work, obviously Israel has been an ally of the UK for a long time.

It's sometimes these relationships can be quite turbulent, I guess, and I can imagine there's been some turbulence in recent years. On a side note, I recently read Agents of Innocence by David Ignatius. Oh, yeah. And it's about the CIA recruiting Palestinians in like the 1970s into the 80s. And I've been told that it's based on very much a true story. It was a good book. Yeah.

Now, I've read that too. And I've also, I'd heard that that it's based on some sort of real case history. Yeah, I think it's a great book. And in fact, I think if people are interested in that, the real craft of human intelligence, you know, completely separated from special operations, covert ops and all that, but just the thing of who is who is playing, who is running, who, the complexities, I think it's a really great book and I can highly recommend it. We got one more from Mark.

Is it true that the SIS has never once lost an officer on the job? And what do you attribute that to? I believe that to be the case. I obviously couldn't confirm it. I attribute it to, I think, taking a very serious attitude to, you know, operational, both security, but also, you know, planning and those sorts of things. And I think I think the point is that coming back to the sort of some of the things we talk about right at the beginning, that obviously you might work in some very challenging. theaters of operation.

But if, you know, if you have a very kind of professional approach to planning, to security, and it's not just about security in terms of, you know, the weapons or the, you know, the vehicles you're using, but actually how many people know the identities, what that kind of protective security and so on. So, you know, I think that's, that's something that the services. taken very seriously and can be proud of. Charles, that's all we got. If you stick with us after the show, please.

But everyone else, we will let you go. And we will see you on the next episode. Jack, why don't we let them know why Charles is sticking with us? Well, because we're going to have bonus segments on the Patreon with many of our guests. So if you are interested, look for links down the description to sign up for Patreon and support the show and get access to all of these episodes ad-free when you do that. What else am I supposed to tell people about? Charles's books. Those links will be in the description as well.

All of Charles's information will be down in the description as well. So thank you guys and we will see you next time. Hey guys, it's Jack. I just want to talk to you for a moment about how you can support the show if you've been watching it, enjoying it. But you'd like to get a little bit more involved and help us continue to do this. You can check out our Patreon. It is patreon.com slash the teamhouse. And for $5 a month, you can get access to all of these episodes of the team house ad free.

The same goes with our affiliated podcast, Eyes On, with Andy Milburn, Jason Lyons, Mick Mulroy. That one, you will also get all of those episodes ad free. And you support the channel and the show, and we really appreciate it. The Patreon members are literally what has helped this company, this small. business survive, especially during our early years, and you are what continues to help this thing going even as we navigate the turbulent world of YouTube advertising. So we really appreciate all of you guys. There's going to be a link down in the description to that Patreon page, and there is also

going to be a link to our new merch shop. So if you guys want to go and get some Team House merchandise, we got stickers, and we also have patches. And I should mention, if you sign up for Patreon at $10 a month, we will mail you this patch as well. So we really appreciate that. But they're also for sale on the merch shop. And additionally, they got T-shirts up there, water bottles, tote bag, coffee mugs, all that good stuff. So please go and check them out and support the show.

We really appreciate it, guys. Thank you.