“If Syria falls into the hands of the Americans and Israel and extremists, and want to impose its own project on Lebanon, Jerusalem will be lost. The resistance will be lost. The people of our region will witness a very difficult and dark period. You can take any side you want, however Hezbollah cannot be on the side of America or Israel or people who dig the graves and open the chests and behead other people.”
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Hezbollah's choice
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Interesting video from the Abkhazian Network News Agency
Check out this video - its mostly combat footage with some commentary in Russian (which I will summarize below):
There really is no point giving you a word for word translation, but a few comments are worth making:
First, the Syrians are advancing, rather easily in fact. During the two days of combat it took them to take the fortified position shown in the footage the Syrians only suffered one casualty - a wounded. The Russian reporters are explaining that the insurgents began to retreat almost as soon as they realized that the Syrian assault teams would be attacking them from the sides. In other words, the morale of the Syrian Army is excellent, the one of the insurgents very bad.
Second, the type of fortifications shown are a far cry from a truly well defended position. Clearly, this is not Grozny or Bint Jbeil. From an engineering point of view, these positions are mediocre at best, poorly camouflaged, and unable to protect against a determined assault.
Third, the type of tactics used by the Syrian military also indicate that the insurgents are not very skilled combatants. Judging by this footage, they are not taking any serious measures to protect their flanks nor are they providing their tanks with direct infantry support. Furthermore, the Syrian infantry seems to be very lightly armed - just some assault rifles, a very far cry from the heavily armed assault groups the Russians used in Grozny (which had machine guns, anti-tank missiles, bunker busting fuel-air explosives missile launchers, grenade launchers, sniper rifles, directional anti-personnel mines, etc.). Frankly, what we see is something like a platoon or so of foot soldiers and three tanks. Hardly the kind of force which would have to be thrown at a skilled and determined defense.
In fact, the Russian reporters are saying that the only type of "resistance" they met is some mortar and some sniper fire. If that is all the insurgents can throw at the Syrian military, things look pretty bad for the "FSA".
Of course, this video shows only a few (selected) minutes of footage made in one specific location, but I have to say that I like what I see very much. If that is what is happening elsewhere, then the tide has really changed in Syria's favor.
The Saker
PS: and if you wonder why the faces of the Syrian soldiers are hidden in this report, it is because the "freedom loving and democracy promoting" insurgency kidnaps, tortures and kills the family and relatives of soldiers whom they can identify. Robert Fisk also reported that in his articles.
There really is no point giving you a word for word translation, but a few comments are worth making:
First, the Syrians are advancing, rather easily in fact. During the two days of combat it took them to take the fortified position shown in the footage the Syrians only suffered one casualty - a wounded. The Russian reporters are explaining that the insurgents began to retreat almost as soon as they realized that the Syrian assault teams would be attacking them from the sides. In other words, the morale of the Syrian Army is excellent, the one of the insurgents very bad.
Second, the type of fortifications shown are a far cry from a truly well defended position. Clearly, this is not Grozny or Bint Jbeil. From an engineering point of view, these positions are mediocre at best, poorly camouflaged, and unable to protect against a determined assault.
Third, the type of tactics used by the Syrian military also indicate that the insurgents are not very skilled combatants. Judging by this footage, they are not taking any serious measures to protect their flanks nor are they providing their tanks with direct infantry support. Furthermore, the Syrian infantry seems to be very lightly armed - just some assault rifles, a very far cry from the heavily armed assault groups the Russians used in Grozny (which had machine guns, anti-tank missiles, bunker busting fuel-air explosives missile launchers, grenade launchers, sniper rifles, directional anti-personnel mines, etc.). Frankly, what we see is something like a platoon or so of foot soldiers and three tanks. Hardly the kind of force which would have to be thrown at a skilled and determined defense.
In fact, the Russian reporters are saying that the only type of "resistance" they met is some mortar and some sniper fire. If that is all the insurgents can throw at the Syrian military, things look pretty bad for the "FSA".
Of course, this video shows only a few (selected) minutes of footage made in one specific location, but I have to say that I like what I see very much. If that is what is happening elsewhere, then the tide has really changed in Syria's favor.
The Saker
PS: and if you wonder why the faces of the Syrian soldiers are hidden in this report, it is because the "freedom loving and democracy promoting" insurgency kidnaps, tortures and kills the family and relatives of soldiers whom they can identify. Robert Fisk also reported that in his articles.
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Mind blowing hypocrisy - this time by John Kerry
I just read this:
Kerry also had bad things to say about Russia and its fulfillment of military contracts with Syria. But why did Mr. Kerry have nothing to say when US allies like France and Qatar flooded the country with weapons?
Could it be because Washington's puppets are losing this war?
Indeed, all the information seems to confirm that the strategic town of al Qusayr has almost been liberated from the Wahabi crazies. The Syrian military is said to be in control of the center of the city, while Hezbollah controls all the roads in and out of the city. The insurgents are still in control of several heavily fortified neighborhoods, equipped with tunnels and bunkers. Unless the insurgency manages to break through the Hezbollah blockade the outcome is basically a matter of time.
Hence Mr. Kerry's hypocritical histrionics.
The Saker
Oh jeez, Mr. Kerry is deploring that foreign elements are involved in the war on Syria. But how is it that Mr. Kerry had nothing to say when many tens of thousands of foreign fighters invaded Syria from Lebanon and Turkey? Where was Mr. Kerry when the Israelis bombed Syrian targets, not once, but twice?US Secretary of State John Kerry has said the militant Lebanese Shia Islamist group Hezbollah and Iran are helping perpetuate President Bashar al-Assad's "campaign of terror" in Syria. Mr Kerry said thousands of Hezbollah fighters were contributing significantly to the violence. He added that Iran was actively supporting Hezbollah's involvement.
Could it be because Washington's puppets are losing this war?
Indeed, all the information seems to confirm that the strategic town of al Qusayr has almost been liberated from the Wahabi crazies. The Syrian military is said to be in control of the center of the city, while Hezbollah controls all the roads in and out of the city. The insurgents are still in control of several heavily fortified neighborhoods, equipped with tunnels and bunkers. Unless the insurgency manages to break through the Hezbollah blockade the outcome is basically a matter of time.
Hence Mr. Kerry's hypocritical histrionics.
The Saker
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Shias, mass media, and Hezbollah: What lies behind the battle for Qusair
by Nadezhda Kevorkova, Russia Today
As the Syrian army and rebels fight for control of Qusair, it is necessary to realize why the town is strategically important and vital for Shias on both sides of the border, making it a military and media battleground. There are far more elements surrounding the situation in Qusair than first meet the eye, RT's Nadezhda Kevorkova reveals.
The army’s advance to Qusair is a key strategic operation. Qusair is near Homs, which is located on the road connecting Damascus with the Mediterranean seaport. And Qusair itself is the closest town to the Lebanese border. So taking control of it allows the forces to control the Lebanese border with the Shias living on both sides.
There is an important high point between Qusair and the Lebanese village Al-Qasr. The Syrian army was forced to leave this area in the fall of 2012, so locals lost their protection. Opposition fighters took over the region and tried to chase out the Shias and take control of the high point – there were severe battles here in April 2013. (I was in Lebanon’s Al-Qasr at the time – the village came under heavy fire). But the rebels lost to the fighters from the Syrian People’s Committees. They were able to hold the high point.
Had the opposition forces won over this rather small and seemingly insignificant area, there would’ve been major consequences. The war would’ve spread to Lebanon, and Hezbollah would’ve been obligated to get involved. Jihadists would’ve been able to get into Syria from Lebanon and attack Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in the Beqaa Valley.
But fighters from the Syrian People’s Committees didn’t let them do it and held the high point.
Thanks to their effort, the government forces were able to deploy troops here and start the Qusair counter-offensive on May 19.
Thirty-thousand Syrian Shias live on the Syrian side of the border (not the Alawites - the Shias). As we know, the border between Syria and Lebanon is relative - the Shias have lived here for ages. When colonial powers drew border lines between countries, they didn’t take the traditional settlement patterns of ethnic groups and communities into account. Many of the local residents have Lebanese passports.
In the fall of 2012, rebels and foreign mercenaries began to sweep Shia villages with fire. They also intimidated people and conducted ethnic cleansing operations. In mixed communities they would go into Shias’ houses telling people to get out, drew “outlaw” signs on the buildings, snipers shot at those who tried to exit these houses. If a family left a home, it was burned down. Rebels planned to drive all Shias out of the area near the border.
Opposition propaganda resources in major mass media and social networks have deployed a campaign in the Islamic world aimed at bolstering the idea that all the Shias are apostates – they are not Muslims, not native to these regions and are simply a tool that is used for proliferating Iranian policy across the Middle East. That is why jihad regards killing a Shia as noble. A number of propaganda resources that different sheikhs were using to broadcast anti-Shia sermons, were involved with the campaign.
Moreover, the mass media are thus instilling the minds of Muslims with the idea that all the Shias, including ordinary peasants, are Hezbollah militants, and Hezbollah, in its turn, is a supplement to the 'dreadful thugs' of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.
Such an approach, which is used by the opposition and backed by the world’s major mass media, has a precise analogy.
The scorched-earth policy was first used in the region by the Irgun Jewish settlers in April 1948, when several Palestinian villages were wiped off the map (Deir Yassin is the most well-known). The goal was simple: the news about the massacre of 254 Palestinians – kids, women and old people would terrify all the rest so much, that they would run away voluntarily. The news about such unprecedented atrocities as, for instance, disembowelling pregnant women did strike terror into people: unarmed and unskilled in terms of war 740 thousand Palestinians fled from their home villages becoming refugees. Zionist ideologists still claim that the Palestinians are not native to Palestine and they were invited there as migrant workers, so they are either Bedouins, or nomads, or Gypsies from the Middle East who didn’t have any skills in agriculture and didn’t know how to farm.
This is also the reason that has been driving the mass-media campaign to discredit Hezbollah that has been accused of allegedly fighting against the Syrian people. Video footage and photographs of fallen Hezbollah fighters dating back to the 2006 Lebanon War have been circulated as “proof” that Hezbollah is involved in Syria and suffering losses. Back in 2006, 800 Hezbollah fighters put up resistance to the ground invasion of Lebanon by Israel, and these numbers were officially announced by the party leader Hasan Nasrallah.
I met with families that were forced to flee Syrian villages by the border. These were mostly large families who feared that their women, wives and daughters, would be raped by the opposition fighters and criminals that accompany them. Many also said that it was their strategy to intimidate the local population on purpose to have the houses vacated. Nonetheless many stayed and organized community defense volunteer squads to protect themselves from the rebel forces and mercenaries with arms in their hands.
The battle of Qusair has been of strategic importance, but not only that - Qusair is the only town, however small (with 50,000 people of population ) that had been given up by the government forces in the past – while the rest of the towns in Syria are under the government’s control. Mass-media that are telling their audience that the purpose of the battle of Qusair was “to regain control over the Mediterranean coast” and “re-deploy the government forces to Aleppo” are lying. The army is already in full control of the coast. Last Sunday, the army launched a massive offensive on all transit routes for weapons and supplies coming into the country.
As of today, Qusair is surrounded by the Syrian army, which is also in control of the downtown area. An escape corridor is being kept open for the fleeing population. The militants who fail to use it are contained in town’s quarters.
As for the losses, all the numbers cited are pure speculation and part of the propaganda attack on Syria. For example, the opposition initially reported online that they had killed “90 Hezbollah militants,” yet after a while changed the number to 30, and that’s in addition to the Syrian army’s losses of 20 soldiers reported by the army itself.
As the Syrian army and rebels fight for control of Qusair, it is necessary to realize why the town is strategically important and vital for Shias on both sides of the border, making it a military and media battleground. There are far more elements surrounding the situation in Qusair than first meet the eye, RT's Nadezhda Kevorkova reveals.
The army’s advance to Qusair is a key strategic operation. Qusair is near Homs, which is located on the road connecting Damascus with the Mediterranean seaport. And Qusair itself is the closest town to the Lebanese border. So taking control of it allows the forces to control the Lebanese border with the Shias living on both sides.
There is an important high point between Qusair and the Lebanese village Al-Qasr. The Syrian army was forced to leave this area in the fall of 2012, so locals lost their protection. Opposition fighters took over the region and tried to chase out the Shias and take control of the high point – there were severe battles here in April 2013. (I was in Lebanon’s Al-Qasr at the time – the village came under heavy fire). But the rebels lost to the fighters from the Syrian People’s Committees. They were able to hold the high point.
Had the opposition forces won over this rather small and seemingly insignificant area, there would’ve been major consequences. The war would’ve spread to Lebanon, and Hezbollah would’ve been obligated to get involved. Jihadists would’ve been able to get into Syria from Lebanon and attack Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in the Beqaa Valley.
But fighters from the Syrian People’s Committees didn’t let them do it and held the high point.
Thanks to their effort, the government forces were able to deploy troops here and start the Qusair counter-offensive on May 19.
 |
| (click on map for full resolution) |
In the fall of 2012, rebels and foreign mercenaries began to sweep Shia villages with fire. They also intimidated people and conducted ethnic cleansing operations. In mixed communities they would go into Shias’ houses telling people to get out, drew “outlaw” signs on the buildings, snipers shot at those who tried to exit these houses. If a family left a home, it was burned down. Rebels planned to drive all Shias out of the area near the border.
Opposition propaganda resources in major mass media and social networks have deployed a campaign in the Islamic world aimed at bolstering the idea that all the Shias are apostates – they are not Muslims, not native to these regions and are simply a tool that is used for proliferating Iranian policy across the Middle East. That is why jihad regards killing a Shia as noble. A number of propaganda resources that different sheikhs were using to broadcast anti-Shia sermons, were involved with the campaign.
Moreover, the mass media are thus instilling the minds of Muslims with the idea that all the Shias, including ordinary peasants, are Hezbollah militants, and Hezbollah, in its turn, is a supplement to the 'dreadful thugs' of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.
Such an approach, which is used by the opposition and backed by the world’s major mass media, has a precise analogy.
The scorched-earth policy was first used in the region by the Irgun Jewish settlers in April 1948, when several Palestinian villages were wiped off the map (Deir Yassin is the most well-known). The goal was simple: the news about the massacre of 254 Palestinians – kids, women and old people would terrify all the rest so much, that they would run away voluntarily. The news about such unprecedented atrocities as, for instance, disembowelling pregnant women did strike terror into people: unarmed and unskilled in terms of war 740 thousand Palestinians fled from their home villages becoming refugees. Zionist ideologists still claim that the Palestinians are not native to Palestine and they were invited there as migrant workers, so they are either Bedouins, or nomads, or Gypsies from the Middle East who didn’t have any skills in agriculture and didn’t know how to farm.
This is also the reason that has been driving the mass-media campaign to discredit Hezbollah that has been accused of allegedly fighting against the Syrian people. Video footage and photographs of fallen Hezbollah fighters dating back to the 2006 Lebanon War have been circulated as “proof” that Hezbollah is involved in Syria and suffering losses. Back in 2006, 800 Hezbollah fighters put up resistance to the ground invasion of Lebanon by Israel, and these numbers were officially announced by the party leader Hasan Nasrallah.
I met with families that were forced to flee Syrian villages by the border. These were mostly large families who feared that their women, wives and daughters, would be raped by the opposition fighters and criminals that accompany them. Many also said that it was their strategy to intimidate the local population on purpose to have the houses vacated. Nonetheless many stayed and organized community defense volunteer squads to protect themselves from the rebel forces and mercenaries with arms in their hands.
The battle of Qusair has been of strategic importance, but not only that - Qusair is the only town, however small (with 50,000 people of population ) that had been given up by the government forces in the past – while the rest of the towns in Syria are under the government’s control. Mass-media that are telling their audience that the purpose of the battle of Qusair was “to regain control over the Mediterranean coast” and “re-deploy the government forces to Aleppo” are lying. The army is already in full control of the coast. Last Sunday, the army launched a massive offensive on all transit routes for weapons and supplies coming into the country.
As of today, Qusair is surrounded by the Syrian army, which is also in control of the downtown area. An escape corridor is being kept open for the fleeing population. The militants who fail to use it are contained in town’s quarters.
As for the losses, all the numbers cited are pure speculation and part of the propaganda attack on Syria. For example, the opposition initially reported online that they had killed “90 Hezbollah militants,” yet after a while changed the number to 30, and that’s in addition to the Syrian army’s losses of 20 soldiers reported by the army itself.
Monday, May 20, 2013
Bosnian deja vu
A strategic town is about to be taken by "the bad guys". The town is full of civilians. An "impending massacre" needs to be stopped. Does that ring a bell? Is that Bosnia in 1995? Nope. This is Syria in 2013.
Please read this article by the BBC.
Here are the key quotes from it with my comments in blue:
Here is how this works:
All towns have civilians. If a strategic town is about to fall, warn of an impending massacre. Once the town falls, speak of an actual massacre. And since all civil wars include summary executions, you can very easily turn a government military victory into a PR disaster. All you need to do is take some true facts and then re-package them with enough hearsay and exaggerations to completely change the nature of the narrative. (Example: I am quite certain that when the Iraqis entered Kuwait they did commit a large number of atrocious human rights violations, but they never tossed Kuwaiti babies out from incubators.)
Last week we had 'Chechen deja vu'. This week begins with 'Bosnian deja vu'.
We are clearly reaching some kind of turning point in this war.
The Saker
PS: I wonder if there ever will be a major Muslim political figure or spiritual leader who will not only understand the nature of how the US/NATO fight their wars, but who will have the courage to admit that in the case of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo the Muslim community worldwide was suckered into supporting the very same Empire that is now attacking it. Would such a person ever find the courage and honesty in himself and express if not outright excuses to the Serbian people, at least some degree of contrition for getting the Balkan wars so wrong? How long will this topic still remain "crimethink" amongst Muslims? Forever?
Please read this article by the BBC.
Here are the key quotes from it with my comments in blue:
Following a day of heavy bombardment by aircraft and artillery, the army launched an offensive to recapture the town on Sunday. (The BBC has no idea what a 'heavy' artillery/air bombardment looks like, but in order to suggest, on one hand, disproportionality and, on the other, to explain away why to putative "bad guys" are winning, they always exaggerate the issue of firepower). By the evening, they had taken the municipality building in the town centre and were advancing, according to state media. The claim was denied by opposition activists (who never admit any defeat on principle), although they admitted the rebels had suffered very heavy casualties. They posted video on the internet showing chaotic scenes at what they said was a field hospital filled with wounded fighters and civilians trapped in the town (that suggests that some action must be taken to assist those civilians and stop the massacre) Our correspondent says it is not clear how many civilians remain trapped in Qusair. Opposition sources estimate that at least 40,000 are still there, though it is thought many may have fled long ago, he adds (as we know from Bosnia and, even more so, Kosovo, those figures of civilians at risk usually turn out to be complete fabrications). State television said that the army had set up a protected corridor for civilians to escape the fighting, but activists said many people feared persecution and torture once they entered government-controlled areas (typical damned if you do, damned if you don't; either way you are a monster). The main opposition alliance, the National Coalition, warned of an impending "massacre" (yeah, right! and the way to prevent that impending massacre? To prevent the government forces from capturing the town, of course), and called for an emergency meeting of the Arab League. What appears to be a concerted government attempt to recapture Qusair from the rebels had been in the making for some time. In a sense, Qusair had already fallen militarily, since the rebels appear to have lost control of most of the surrounding villages and countryside adjacent to the Lebanese border. It adds to a string of setbacks rebels have suffered in recent weeks, especially along the Lebanese and Jordanian borders and around Damascus itself. Rebel commanders blame their recent losses on the drying-up of arms supplies from outside (And who do we right this wrong? By sending weapons to the insurgency, of course!)If this was not so disgusting it actually would be comical. Almost 20 years after the Srebrenica strategic psyop the Anglo media does exactly the same in Syria.
Here is how this works:
All towns have civilians. If a strategic town is about to fall, warn of an impending massacre. Once the town falls, speak of an actual massacre. And since all civil wars include summary executions, you can very easily turn a government military victory into a PR disaster. All you need to do is take some true facts and then re-package them with enough hearsay and exaggerations to completely change the nature of the narrative. (Example: I am quite certain that when the Iraqis entered Kuwait they did commit a large number of atrocious human rights violations, but they never tossed Kuwaiti babies out from incubators.)
Last week we had 'Chechen deja vu'. This week begins with 'Bosnian deja vu'.
We are clearly reaching some kind of turning point in this war.
The Saker
PS: I wonder if there ever will be a major Muslim political figure or spiritual leader who will not only understand the nature of how the US/NATO fight their wars, but who will have the courage to admit that in the case of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo the Muslim community worldwide was suckered into supporting the very same Empire that is now attacking it. Would such a person ever find the courage and honesty in himself and express if not outright excuses to the Serbian people, at least some degree of contrition for getting the Balkan wars so wrong? How long will this topic still remain "crimethink" amongst Muslims? Forever?
Saturday, May 18, 2013
The Anglo media is really too funny :-)
It turns out that that Russians - clearly fed up with the CIA's arrogance in spite of repeated warning - has, indeed, made public the name of the CIA station chief in Moscow: Steven Hall.
But now things get really hilarious: while lots of Anglo media outlets reported this fact, none of them - as far as I can tell - dared to actually mention the spook's name. Ok, well, maybe I could understand why the putatively "independent" and "free" but still American and, therefore, rigidly "patriotic" American press would decide to keep quiet. But I also checked the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent. etc. and they all, as if in lockstep, loyally refuse to name the spook.
Besides being pathetic, this is also very dumb. In God's name, from whom do these boneheaded journalists think they are hiding the spook's name? The FSB? Don't they even realize that once the name is all over the Russian media, its going to be picked up worldwide?
The Anglo media reminds me of puppies who, when they see their master, immediately pee as a sign of submission. It makes no sense, the master might not even like this kind of show, but they do that simply because they are puppies and this is what puppies do, without thinking, without ever considering options.
Finally, what a disgrace that anybody outside the CIA would think that anybody would somehow "owe" the CIA station chief in Moscow anything! Whether I - or anybody else - publishes his name at this point makes no difference to anybody, not to the CIA and not to Mr. Hall. At the age of the Internet, once something is "out", its "out" forever. But even if we - all the non-CIA folks on the planet - could make a difference and hide Mr. Hall's name - why would we have to?! Does anybody sincerely believe that the CIA is on anybody's side besides the 1% who run the USA?
Pathetic. Pathetic beyond words.
Anyway, as a sign of "how its done", let me show them:
See, that was not too hard.
The Saker
But now things get really hilarious: while lots of Anglo media outlets reported this fact, none of them - as far as I can tell - dared to actually mention the spook's name. Ok, well, maybe I could understand why the putatively "independent" and "free" but still American and, therefore, rigidly "patriotic" American press would decide to keep quiet. But I also checked the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent. etc. and they all, as if in lockstep, loyally refuse to name the spook.
Besides being pathetic, this is also very dumb. In God's name, from whom do these boneheaded journalists think they are hiding the spook's name? The FSB? Don't they even realize that once the name is all over the Russian media, its going to be picked up worldwide?
The Anglo media reminds me of puppies who, when they see their master, immediately pee as a sign of submission. It makes no sense, the master might not even like this kind of show, but they do that simply because they are puppies and this is what puppies do, without thinking, without ever considering options.
Finally, what a disgrace that anybody outside the CIA would think that anybody would somehow "owe" the CIA station chief in Moscow anything! Whether I - or anybody else - publishes his name at this point makes no difference to anybody, not to the CIA and not to Mr. Hall. At the age of the Internet, once something is "out", its "out" forever. But even if we - all the non-CIA folks on the planet - could make a difference and hide Mr. Hall's name - why would we have to?! Does anybody sincerely believe that the CIA is on anybody's side besides the 1% who run the USA?
Pathetic. Pathetic beyond words.
Anyway, as a sign of "how its done", let me show them:
===>>>STEVEN HALL<<<===
See, that was not too hard.
The Saker
Friday, May 17, 2013
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Chechen deja vu...
Oh God, it appears that everyday some appalling video comes out of Syria. Though these are mostly from the anti-government side, supporters of government have also produced their own share of horrors. I know about a video of prisoners stabbed to death, and of another of prisoners being cut into pieces by a chainsaw while forced to scream "Assad is my god!".
But there is an important difference between the two sides.
While both sides have committed atrocities, at least the pro-government forces did not proclaim that they were acting lawfully or in the name of God. They committed their atrocities away from the gaze of the crowds. Not so the Wahabi crazies. Just like in Chechnia, these guys actually organize public events with the sole purpose of showing such atrocities. Just like in Chechina, they real aloud some kind of pseudo-religious sentence and then they proceeds to execute the "guilty" parties.
I think that this is an obvious and very important difference: while there are bloodthirsty maniacs on both sides (as I wrote previously), such maniacs are always present in any group of people), on the government side they act in their own, self appointed, capacity, they are not the official norm, and they don't pretend to be upholding any law. Not so with the Wahabis: they very openly claim to be acting legally and morally, they are actually very proud of their actions, and the clearly present their atrocities no as a shameful deed, but as the norm, as the law of the land should they ever get to power. See for yourself:
When I see these SOBs I feel a deep sense of rage and I always have fantasies about Russian Airborne Forces simply wiping them all off the surface of the planet. I know it is not going to happen, and I know it should not even happen. Only the Syrians can save Syria. And yet, if Russia is the only great power who really understand the nature of these Wahabis crazies and has the means to crush them, I have to say that part of me regrets that Russian Airborne Forces are not be send in to finally eliminate these murderous psychopaths (and I know that they would gladly oblige, given the chance, as Russian paratroopers will never forget what they saw Chechnia).
At the very least, I hope that these images will be shown on Russian TV and on the RuNet (Russian speaking Internet). The type of "deja vu" such scenes will have in most Russians will put a great deal of pressure on the Kremlin to hold strong to its current support for Assad and, possible, even strengthen Russia's help to Damascus.
The Saker
But there is an important difference between the two sides.
While both sides have committed atrocities, at least the pro-government forces did not proclaim that they were acting lawfully or in the name of God. They committed their atrocities away from the gaze of the crowds. Not so the Wahabi crazies. Just like in Chechnia, these guys actually organize public events with the sole purpose of showing such atrocities. Just like in Chechina, they real aloud some kind of pseudo-religious sentence and then they proceeds to execute the "guilty" parties.
I think that this is an obvious and very important difference: while there are bloodthirsty maniacs on both sides (as I wrote previously), such maniacs are always present in any group of people), on the government side they act in their own, self appointed, capacity, they are not the official norm, and they don't pretend to be upholding any law. Not so with the Wahabis: they very openly claim to be acting legally and morally, they are actually very proud of their actions, and the clearly present their atrocities no as a shameful deed, but as the norm, as the law of the land should they ever get to power. See for yourself:
When I see these SOBs I feel a deep sense of rage and I always have fantasies about Russian Airborne Forces simply wiping them all off the surface of the planet. I know it is not going to happen, and I know it should not even happen. Only the Syrians can save Syria. And yet, if Russia is the only great power who really understand the nature of these Wahabis crazies and has the means to crush them, I have to say that part of me regrets that Russian Airborne Forces are not be send in to finally eliminate these murderous psychopaths (and I know that they would gladly oblige, given the chance, as Russian paratroopers will never forget what they saw Chechnia).
 |
| The best cure for Wahabism |
At the very least, I hope that these images will be shown on Russian TV and on the RuNet (Russian speaking Internet). The type of "deja vu" such scenes will have in most Russians will put a great deal of pressure on the Kremlin to hold strong to its current support for Assad and, possible, even strengthen Russia's help to Damascus.
The Saker
The Truth about School
As a father of three kids who never spent a single day of their lives in any school (my wife and I home schooled them from kindergarten to college) and with two kids already in college, I fully endorse the message in this video (but not the organization which produced it about which I know exactly *nothing*).
It is my strong belief that the three main steps to liberate your children from the brainwashing of our society are:
1) Give them a very traditional religious education.
2) Never send them to school.
3) Get rid of your TV and all the corporate media (radio, newspapers).
If you do not teach your kids to worship the True God, they will worship false gods. If you hand over their education to schools, the schools will brainwash and alienate them. If you do not get rid of all the corporate media in your house, your children will sooner or later begin to believe what the media tells them.
Think about it and check out this great video:
It is my strong belief that the three main steps to liberate your children from the brainwashing of our society are:
1) Give them a very traditional religious education.
2) Never send them to school.
3) Get rid of your TV and all the corporate media (radio, newspapers).
If you do not teach your kids to worship the True God, they will worship false gods. If you hand over their education to schools, the schools will brainwash and alienate them. If you do not get rid of all the corporate media in your house, your children will sooner or later begin to believe what the media tells them.
Think about it and check out this great video:
More details about the CIA SNAFU in Moscow and some general context information
Interesting information is being leaked to reporters in Moscow about the recent CIA spy incident in Moscow:
a) The Russians knew that Fogle was CIA even before he arrived in Russia.
b) The Russians had already expelled another US diplomat in January of this year for attempting to recruit a Russian citizen and told the Americans to stop these kinds of attempts. The Americans ignored these warning so the Russians got fed up and decided to highly publicize this arrest.
In this context, I would like to add the following reminder:
During the 1990s the Russian security services practically collapsed: their funding almost stopped, corrupt or even outright traitorous individuals were named at the top positions, secrets were given to the American "friends" is mass quantities, key institutes and academies were shut down, many officers resigned and went into "private practice" (for the oligarchs, the mob, private companies, banks, etc.), the media engaged in a hate-campaign against them, their legal powers were curtailed, etc. Last, but not least, the security services were "reformed", "reformed" and then "reformed" some more, and then "reformed" again. As you know, in the 1990s being "reformed" meant being destroyed.
Under Putin this state of affairs dramatically changed, in particular for the FSB (internal security service). The FSB was for many reasons the easiest service to rebuild and Putin's determined efforts to re-establish law and order in Russia made such a process a top priority. Things were far more difficult for the SVR, the external intelligence service which is a far more complex structure. Things did begin to improve there, but at a slow(er) pace not because of any bad will (Putin himself was ex- PGU KGB which is now called the SVR), but because of inherently difficult nature of such a task. The one service which originally appeared to have least suffered from the "reforms" of the democrats, the GRU or military intelligence, then rapidly collapsed. Though I don't know that for a fact, I can imagine several plausible reasons for this collapse:
1) The GRU was a military intelligence service and the fact that the armed forces were "reformed" over and over again obviously affected it.
2) The GRU was a very expensive intelligence service to run due to its huge technological capabilities (space assets), its high-tech institutes and large size thus when the Russian economy collapsed, there was simply no money to run it.
3) The GRU is very secretive and secrecy breeds corruption. Furthermore, the GRU had a lot of very valuable assets (in terms of monetary value) and judging by the level of corruption in the regular armed forces, one can only imagine the level of corruption in the GRU.
4) The GRU has always been a competitor to the other Soviet and, later, Russian security services. So when Putin came to power, his KGB/SVR past and corporate closeness to the FSB put the GRU into an "2nd rate" position compared to the other services.
5) Some still secret crisis did happen inside the GRU with an important number of top officials killed in very mysterious circumstances. While (almost) nobody knows what really happened (all we have is rumors) it appears likely that some kind of ugly "war" involving part of the GRU did result in a weakening of this organization.
6) The performance of the GRU has been, shall we say, less than stellar in a number of occasions including some major intelligence failures in Chechnia, poor intelligence work during the 08.08.08 war against Georgia, and a couple of clumsy intelligence failures abroad.
There are even more smaller reasons which I will not mention here for the sake of space. Bottom line is this: the GRU is now the weakest of the Russian security services even though it is now headed by a real career GRU officer - Igor Sergun - about whom very little is known, but who has made an excellent impression so far. Personally, I expect the GRU to slowly but surely recover under with combined efforts of Defense Minister Shoigu, Chief of Staff Valerii Gerasimov and GRU Commander in Chief Igor Sergun and I expect the new GRU to be very different from the old one with the biggest changes probably coming in the Russian special forces structure.
I wanted to mention these facts to illustrate an important feature of the context of the latest CIA SNAFU in Moscow: the after two decades of absolute collapse, the Russian security services are back, some of them probably better shape than their Soviet predecessors (I think of the FSB here). This means that after two decades of careless arrogance western intelligence services need to adapt to this new reality and not assume that the 1990s are not really over. They are.
Whether Fogle himself was a drooling idiot or somebody with mental issues really doesn't matter. What matter is that the Russian security services are clearly punishing the USA for not taking their previous warning seriously.
This is what we see across the board: the Americans just can't accept the fact that Russia under Putin has truly slipped away from its imperial control and that from now on the USA will have to treat Russia as an equal and respected partner if it wants to do business with it. If not - they can expect even more painful or embarrassing "push back" from the Kremlin.
When not in denial, the other typical western reaction is a mix paranoia and phobia: the Evil Empire is back, the Russia is becoming a totalitarian KGB-run state, complete with dissidents (-: Khodorkovsky :-) and blue-eyed spies under every bed. Check out the cover of one of those paranoid reports: it shows a rabid bear, surrounded by the emblems of various Russian security services. This bear is clearly up to no good and about to attack all sorts of noble and freedom loving innocent people.
Another example of this kind of paranoia is the report of the notorious CIA front "Freedom House" which is modestly entitled "Contending with Putin's Russia: a call for American leadership".
By showing a row of Russian riot police (obviously standing there with the clear intention to mercilessly beat up any putative democrat left in Putin's Russia) Freedom House suggest an even wider agenda and this is why this cover is even better: not only does it reduce all of "Putin's Russia" to a row of mean looking riot cops, it also clearly states that the world is
calling for "American leadership" to deal with those nasty coppers. The cover with the bear really did not suggest a 'solution' whereas Freedom House is far more ambitious and even suggest a moral obligation for the USA to stand up to these Russian bullies. Yes, sure, this is all kindergarten level propaganda, but with a general public lobotomized by hours of staring at the TV, this is good enough to trigger the correct horrified response.
The core issue is this: due to decades, if not centuries, of highly misleading propaganda, most folks in the West simply are unable to imagine a state which is simultaneously 1) supported by a majority of people and democratic 2) with strong enough institutions to defend itself and its people and 3) not subordinated to the USA. In this mindset, world leaders can all be split into 2 basic categories: servile and obedient servants or vicious and bloodthirsty dictators. As Dubya said, you are either with us or with the terrorists. And nevermind that this kind of simplistic dichotomy alienates almost the entire planet as long as it keeps things simple and justifies grotesquely bloated military and 'security' budgets.
Regardless of what made him act the way he did Fogel is an iconic image of this confused, infantile, embarrassed and clueless USA which confidently treads into a world it does not understand and ends up being stunned when it stumbles. It is really rather comical to observe.
The Saker
a) The Russians knew that Fogle was CIA even before he arrived in Russia.
b) The Russians had already expelled another US diplomat in January of this year for attempting to recruit a Russian citizen and told the Americans to stop these kinds of attempts. The Americans ignored these warning so the Russians got fed up and decided to highly publicize this arrest.
In this context, I would like to add the following reminder:
During the 1990s the Russian security services practically collapsed: their funding almost stopped, corrupt or even outright traitorous individuals were named at the top positions, secrets were given to the American "friends" is mass quantities, key institutes and academies were shut down, many officers resigned and went into "private practice" (for the oligarchs, the mob, private companies, banks, etc.), the media engaged in a hate-campaign against them, their legal powers were curtailed, etc. Last, but not least, the security services were "reformed", "reformed" and then "reformed" some more, and then "reformed" again. As you know, in the 1990s being "reformed" meant being destroyed.
Under Putin this state of affairs dramatically changed, in particular for the FSB (internal security service). The FSB was for many reasons the easiest service to rebuild and Putin's determined efforts to re-establish law and order in Russia made such a process a top priority. Things were far more difficult for the SVR, the external intelligence service which is a far more complex structure. Things did begin to improve there, but at a slow(er) pace not because of any bad will (Putin himself was ex- PGU KGB which is now called the SVR), but because of inherently difficult nature of such a task. The one service which originally appeared to have least suffered from the "reforms" of the democrats, the GRU or military intelligence, then rapidly collapsed. Though I don't know that for a fact, I can imagine several plausible reasons for this collapse:
1) The GRU was a military intelligence service and the fact that the armed forces were "reformed" over and over again obviously affected it.
2) The GRU was a very expensive intelligence service to run due to its huge technological capabilities (space assets), its high-tech institutes and large size thus when the Russian economy collapsed, there was simply no money to run it.
3) The GRU is very secretive and secrecy breeds corruption. Furthermore, the GRU had a lot of very valuable assets (in terms of monetary value) and judging by the level of corruption in the regular armed forces, one can only imagine the level of corruption in the GRU.
4) The GRU has always been a competitor to the other Soviet and, later, Russian security services. So when Putin came to power, his KGB/SVR past and corporate closeness to the FSB put the GRU into an "2nd rate" position compared to the other services.
5) Some still secret crisis did happen inside the GRU with an important number of top officials killed in very mysterious circumstances. While (almost) nobody knows what really happened (all we have is rumors) it appears likely that some kind of ugly "war" involving part of the GRU did result in a weakening of this organization.
6) The performance of the GRU has been, shall we say, less than stellar in a number of occasions including some major intelligence failures in Chechnia, poor intelligence work during the 08.08.08 war against Georgia, and a couple of clumsy intelligence failures abroad.
 |
| Igor Sergun |
I wanted to mention these facts to illustrate an important feature of the context of the latest CIA SNAFU in Moscow: the after two decades of absolute collapse, the Russian security services are back, some of them probably better shape than their Soviet predecessors (I think of the FSB here). This means that after two decades of careless arrogance western intelligence services need to adapt to this new reality and not assume that the 1990s are not really over. They are.
Whether Fogle himself was a drooling idiot or somebody with mental issues really doesn't matter. What matter is that the Russian security services are clearly punishing the USA for not taking their previous warning seriously.
This is what we see across the board: the Americans just can't accept the fact that Russia under Putin has truly slipped away from its imperial control and that from now on the USA will have to treat Russia as an equal and respected partner if it wants to do business with it. If not - they can expect even more painful or embarrassing "push back" from the Kremlin.
Another example of this kind of paranoia is the report of the notorious CIA front "Freedom House" which is modestly entitled "Contending with Putin's Russia: a call for American leadership".
By showing a row of Russian riot police (obviously standing there with the clear intention to mercilessly beat up any putative democrat left in Putin's Russia) Freedom House suggest an even wider agenda and this is why this cover is even better: not only does it reduce all of "Putin's Russia" to a row of mean looking riot cops, it also clearly states that the world is
The core issue is this: due to decades, if not centuries, of highly misleading propaganda, most folks in the West simply are unable to imagine a state which is simultaneously 1) supported by a majority of people and democratic 2) with strong enough institutions to defend itself and its people and 3) not subordinated to the USA. In this mindset, world leaders can all be split into 2 basic categories: servile and obedient servants or vicious and bloodthirsty dictators. As Dubya said, you are either with us or with the terrorists. And nevermind that this kind of simplistic dichotomy alienates almost the entire planet as long as it keeps things simple and justifies grotesquely bloated military and 'security' budgets.
Regardless of what made him act the way he did Fogel is an iconic image of this confused, infantile, embarrassed and clueless USA which confidently treads into a world it does not understand and ends up being stunned when it stumbles. It is really rather comical to observe.
The Saker
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
CIA spook in Moscow - just incompetent or mental? (UPDATED)
I have been listening to the Russian reports about yesterday's CIA SNAFU and unless the Russians are lying through their teeth, the details which are emerging just make no sense to me.
According to the Russian media, Ryan Christopher Fogle, the third secretary of the Political Section of the American embassy in Moscow and CIA spook, gave a telephone call to a Russian security services officer who specializes in anti-terror operations in the North Caucasus and offered to recruit him (yup, over the phone!). The Russian officer refused. Then Fogle called him again and insisted that they meet, offering him 100'000 Euros. If that is true, this is already mind-bogglingly dumb. Worse, according to some Russian sources Fogle also made the same offer by email (leaving a paper trail of his clumsy recruitment efforts).
Then it get outright hilarious: Fogle showed up to the meeting wearing a wig and with, I kind you not, sunglasses even though the meeting took place at 23:30 (11:30PM). In his bag, he had a total of 3 pairs of sunglasses, a compass, a knife, a flashlight, an plan of Moscow, an old cellphone, 2 wigs and lots of money. Take a look for yourself:
Now, I have never been a great fan of the CIA whom I always viewed as a nasty but only semi-competent outfit who instead of serving the interests of the US people is really serving the interests of the US plutocracy, the "1%" which owns the USA.
But, honestly, that kind of kindergarten-level of gross incompetence and wannabe Hollywood spy gear really looks weird to me. Either they are all gone totally apeshit at Langley, or there is more to this story than anybody is willing to report.
First, maybe the Russians are lying just to make fun of the CIA while the CIA can hardly refute it all. Possible, but extremely unlikely. That would be plain silly and, besides, that could invite a retaliation in kind.
Or, and that is my hypothesis, maybe there is something really wrong with Fogle. What if Fogle (whether he ever was CIA or not) simply had mental issues? What if he just "lost it" and *wanted* to be caught?
Look at this guy's face and expression:
Doesn't he remind you of somebody? Yes, exactly! He looks like the type of squeaky-clean guy who shows up unannounced and uninvited at your door and asks you with a blissful grin on his face "have you met Jesus?".
I admit - looking like a blissful idiot is hardly a proof of anything, but when you consider that in the context of all the crazy circumstances of this arrest, it makes me wonder.
Finally, there is the demeanor of everybody on the videos shown on Russian TV: US diplomats are summoned to the FSB where they are introduced to a rather peaceful looking Fogle who shows no sign of fear or even embarrassment. As for the US diplomats, they seem puzzled. Normally, being arrested by the FSB at the moment you are carrying a bag full of compromising material should at the very least startle and upset you. Ok, Fogle knew he had diplomatic immunity, but at the very least being caught means expulsion, a huge embarrassment, and a rather unpleasant series of debriefings in Langley. And yet, Fogle looks like he does not give a damn.
Again, I have to admit that all of the above is 100% pure speculation and maybe one day we will get the real picture of what happened. But so far my personal feeling is "this is just too much, too much....".
So what do you think: incompetent or mental?
The Saker
UPDATE: New info just came in: turns out that Fogle is CIA, and that since he had arrived in Moscow in 2011 he had already participated in several CIA operations in Moscow. Also, the Russian media has confirmed that the officer Fogle was trying to recruit was with the FSB (previously, that info was not officially confirmed).
According to the Russian media, Ryan Christopher Fogle, the third secretary of the Political Section of the American embassy in Moscow and CIA spook, gave a telephone call to a Russian security services officer who specializes in anti-terror operations in the North Caucasus and offered to recruit him (yup, over the phone!). The Russian officer refused. Then Fogle called him again and insisted that they meet, offering him 100'000 Euros. If that is true, this is already mind-bogglingly dumb. Worse, according to some Russian sources Fogle also made the same offer by email (leaving a paper trail of his clumsy recruitment efforts).
Then it get outright hilarious: Fogle showed up to the meeting wearing a wig and with, I kind you not, sunglasses even though the meeting took place at 23:30 (11:30PM). In his bag, he had a total of 3 pairs of sunglasses, a compass, a knife, a flashlight, an plan of Moscow, an old cellphone, 2 wigs and lots of money. Take a look for yourself:
Now, I have never been a great fan of the CIA whom I always viewed as a nasty but only semi-competent outfit who instead of serving the interests of the US people is really serving the interests of the US plutocracy, the "1%" which owns the USA.
But, honestly, that kind of kindergarten-level of gross incompetence and wannabe Hollywood spy gear really looks weird to me. Either they are all gone totally apeshit at Langley, or there is more to this story than anybody is willing to report.
First, maybe the Russians are lying just to make fun of the CIA while the CIA can hardly refute it all. Possible, but extremely unlikely. That would be plain silly and, besides, that could invite a retaliation in kind.
Or, and that is my hypothesis, maybe there is something really wrong with Fogle. What if Fogle (whether he ever was CIA or not) simply had mental issues? What if he just "lost it" and *wanted* to be caught?
Look at this guy's face and expression:
Doesn't he remind you of somebody? Yes, exactly! He looks like the type of squeaky-clean guy who shows up unannounced and uninvited at your door and asks you with a blissful grin on his face "have you met Jesus?".
I admit - looking like a blissful idiot is hardly a proof of anything, but when you consider that in the context of all the crazy circumstances of this arrest, it makes me wonder.
Finally, there is the demeanor of everybody on the videos shown on Russian TV: US diplomats are summoned to the FSB where they are introduced to a rather peaceful looking Fogle who shows no sign of fear or even embarrassment. As for the US diplomats, they seem puzzled. Normally, being arrested by the FSB at the moment you are carrying a bag full of compromising material should at the very least startle and upset you. Ok, Fogle knew he had diplomatic immunity, but at the very least being caught means expulsion, a huge embarrassment, and a rather unpleasant series of debriefings in Langley. And yet, Fogle looks like he does not give a damn.
Again, I have to admit that all of the above is 100% pure speculation and maybe one day we will get the real picture of what happened. But so far my personal feeling is "this is just too much, too much....".
So what do you think: incompetent or mental?
The Saker
UPDATE: New info just came in: turns out that Fogle is CIA, and that since he had arrived in Moscow in 2011 he had already participated in several CIA operations in Moscow. Also, the Russian media has confirmed that the officer Fogle was trying to recruit was with the FSB (previously, that info was not officially confirmed).
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
CIA agent trying to recruit Russian intelligence officer detained in Moscow
RT reports:
CIA agent trying to recruit Russian intelligence officer detained in Moscow
CIA agent trying to recruit Russian intelligence officer detained in Moscow
Russia’s counterintelligence agency has detained a CIA agent in Moscow trying to recruit an officer of the Russian secret service, the Federal Security Service (FSB) announced. The agent was operating under guise of career diplomat.
The FSB Public Relations Center has announced that the person detained is Ryan Christopher Fogle, the third secretary of the Political Section of the American embassy in Moscow.
The agency stressed that Christopher had special technical equipment, printed instructions for the Russian citizen being recruited, a large sum of money and means to change the person’s appearance.
The detainee was delivered to the FSB receiving office where he has been questioned and after all the necessary procedures he has been handed over to representatives of the US embassy in Moscow.
The website of the American embassy in Russia informs that its Political Section is engaged in “bringing to the attention of the Russian government the US position on the issues of foreign policy and security.” The section’s other task is to “inform Washington about the main provisions of the foreign and defense policy of Russia,” as well as Russian domestic political life.
Ryan C Fogle, 3d secretary of US embassy, was detained in Moscow by the Russian counterintelligence agency (FSB)
Disguise allegedly used by Ryan Fogle (FSB)
Ryan Fogle inside FSB office (FSB)
The one-page letter to a would-be recruit proposes a payment of US$100,000 for an interview to discuss possible cooperation and promises up to $1 million a year payment if the contact agrees to supply the American side with the information it demands.
The letter also contains a step-by-step instruction how to create a new Gmail account that would be used for future contacts. The instruction repeatedly stresses not to present any real contact information, like phone numbers, email or home addresses.
Instruction allegedly used to recruit Russian intelligence officer with offers of money and means of conducting the conspiracy (FSB)
It is advised not to use personal handheld mobile devices and notebooks for registration, proposing to use an internet café to go through the procedure. Another option, the instruction says, is to buy a new device especially for contacts and pay for it in cash, with the expenses to be reimbursed.
Once a new Gmail account is created, the recruit should write a letter to ‘unbacggdA@gmail.com and wait one week for a reply.
“Thank you for reading this. We look forward to working with you in the nearest future. Your friends,” the instruction ends.
US Ambassador to the Russian Federation Michael McFaul refused to comment on the detention of his subordinate for espionage activities.
On his Twitter account he simply wrote ‘no’ answering a question about Ryan Fogle.
But tomorrow he will definitely have to have an answer to the Russian Foreign Ministry, where he has been summoned to give an explanation concerning the incident.
Ryan Fogle’s pass to the US embassy (FSB)
Money allegedly used by Fogle for recruiting (FSB)
Ryan Fogle’s diplomatic pass (FSB)
CIA agent trying to recruit Russian intelligence officer detained in Moscow
CIA agent trying to recruit Russian intelligence officer detained in Moscow
Russia’s counterintelligence agency has detained a CIA agent in Moscow trying to recruit an officer of the Russian secret service, the Federal Security Service (FSB) announced. The agent was operating under guise of career diplomat.
The FSB Public Relations Center has announced that the person detained is Ryan Christopher Fogle, the third secretary of the Political Section of the American embassy in Moscow.
The agency stressed that Christopher had special technical equipment, printed instructions for the Russian citizen being recruited, a large sum of money and means to change the person’s appearance.
The detainee was delivered to the FSB receiving office where he has been questioned and after all the necessary procedures he has been handed over to representatives of the US embassy in Moscow.
The website of the American embassy in Russia informs that its Political Section is engaged in “bringing to the attention of the Russian government the US position on the issues of foreign policy and security.” The section’s other task is to “inform Washington about the main provisions of the foreign and defense policy of Russia,” as well as Russian domestic political life.
Ryan C Fogle, 3d secretary of US embassy, was detained in Moscow by the Russian counterintelligence agency (FSB)
Disguise allegedly used by Ryan Fogle (FSB)
Ryan Fogle inside FSB office (FSB)
The one-page letter to a would-be recruit proposes a payment of US$100,000 for an interview to discuss possible cooperation and promises up to $1 million a year payment if the contact agrees to supply the American side with the information it demands.
The letter also contains a step-by-step instruction how to create a new Gmail account that would be used for future contacts. The instruction repeatedly stresses not to present any real contact information, like phone numbers, email or home addresses.
Instruction allegedly used to recruit Russian intelligence officer with offers of money and means of conducting the conspiracy (FSB)
It is advised not to use personal handheld mobile devices and notebooks for registration, proposing to use an internet café to go through the procedure. Another option, the instruction says, is to buy a new device especially for contacts and pay for it in cash, with the expenses to be reimbursed.
Once a new Gmail account is created, the recruit should write a letter to ‘unbacggdA@gmail.com and wait one week for a reply.
“Thank you for reading this. We look forward to working with you in the nearest future. Your friends,” the instruction ends.
US Ambassador to the Russian Federation Michael McFaul refused to comment on the detention of his subordinate for espionage activities.
On his Twitter account he simply wrote ‘no’ answering a question about Ryan Fogle.
But tomorrow he will definitely have to have an answer to the Russian Foreign Ministry, where he has been summoned to give an explanation concerning the incident.
Ryan Fogle’s pass to the US embassy (FSB)
Money allegedly used by Fogle for recruiting (FSB)
Ryan Fogle’s diplomatic pass (FSB)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
