5 ms·

Are they coming to pick up expelled diplomats?

vbezhenar 5y ago
Yes.
sandstrom 5y ago
Yes, though they were spies under diplomat cover. The US has the same setup in Moscow too though. Among "non-friendly countries" it's common that close to half of embassy staff are actually spies or at least 'intelligence analysts'.
- lawlorino 5y ago
  Do you have a source for that? Edit: seems people misread my intention, I am challenging the parent response because it reads like something out of a spy novel with nothing to back it up.
  - vagrantJin 5y ago
    Where do you get a complete list of spies and their activities if you do not work for covert operations government agency ala Edward Snowden?
    - toomanyrichies 5y ago
      Your comment is valid- it’s likely unreasonable to expect evidence for this claim in particular to be furnishable. That said, if OP can’t provide evidence for the percentages they mention, perhaps the bigger problem is that they shouldn’t have made the claim in the first place.
  - epgui 5y ago
    It’s true even of friendly countries.
    - robin_reala 5y ago
      Yep. See Harry Dunn’s manslaughter for an example of a US spy in the UK under the pretense of diplomatic cover. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn
      - mike-the-mikado 5y ago
        A CIA employee working at listening station based at an RAF base in the UK (presumably listening into transmissions from e.g. Russia) is rather different from spies based at the Russian embassy in Washington.
        rjsw 5y ago
        Anne Sacoolas, who killed Harry Dunn, was not working at the RAF base. She had also not been declared as a CIA employee to the UK government.
  - nradov 5y ago
    You've got to be kidding? There are no reliable sources on numbers of spies, by definition.
  - aceazzameen 5y ago
    Not OP, but I read about this in a book by an ex-CIA guy a long time ago. I think even friendly nations do it to each other too. It's like an unwritten rule to have spies in embassies. Of course, I don't know how much was sensationalized, but it somewhat makes sense to keep tabs on everyone else if everyone is doing it. Also, this is why counter-intelligence exists in every nation. Watching embassies is part of what they do.
    - progre 5y ago
      ‘... spies?' I thought we were chums with the Low King!’ 'Of course we are,’ said Vetinari. ‘And the more we know about each other, the friendlier we shall remain. We’d hardly bother to spy on our enemies. What would be the point?’
    - AniseAbyss 5y ago
      Nothing wrong with spying, it keeps the world safe in a way if your intelligence agency can tell you the enemy isn't planning a sneak attack.
      - rurban 5y ago
        Not really. If they would not act criminally they would not need diplomatic cover. Most of the "spies" there are actually agent handlers, i.e. handling native agents, infiltrating unions, press, police, army, government. Spying is mostly not passively writing reports of intelligence matters, it's mostly actively pursuing criminal acts. Writing wrong press articles, social media posts, paying natives to do something illegal, killing union folks, torturing students. The passive agents writing the innocent intelligence reports are usually not under diplomatic cover. They are under some commercial cover mostly. As with Israel also arts and students. There are tons of CIA books.
  - NelsonMinar 5y ago
    This discussion has gone poorly but I think it's a totally fair question to ask for a source. I can't find anything to corroborate the "close to half" number but here's a couple of articles about diplomatic staff being spies. https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-43556816 https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-43556816 https://apnews.com/article/north-america-ap-top-news-wa-state-wire-politics-united-states-985f444da7dd42c5b3b8abc422a977b8 https://apnews.com/article/north-america-ap-top-news-wa-stat...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - engineer_22 5y ago
    Why have an embassy staffed full of people in a foreign country if not gather information? "Spy" is used sort of loosely here, I think.
- kingcharles 5y ago
  Yes, the words they always use are embassy personnel conducting "non-diplomatic activities" https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1498392471851741202 https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1498392471851741202 The spy world isn't opaque. Each country knows who most of the spies are. They generally operate out of special sections of the primary embassy in each country. Almost all spies act under diplomatic cover so that they have immunity when they get caught. Operating without that cover is a risky mission which normally means your host country can't save you and will deny you. Each country just allows the spies to pretty much go about their business, follows them from the embassy when they can, and then uses them as pawns when necessary, like this.
  - cutemonster 5y ago
    When the other country knows already that they are spies, doesn't that make their job harder? What can they actually get done, I wonder
    - amaranth 5y ago
      You either feed them junk so they waste time filtering out the good intel from the bad, use them as a communications backchannel, or both.
- toyg 5y ago
  > though they were spies under diplomat cover Pretty much all diplomats are spies, whether officially or unofficially. Their work involves learning and understanding things about the counterpart, openly or otherwise, and reporting their findings. The main difference is that the official spooks take more risks and carry out more direct action. > Among "non-friendly countries" Among all countries. Any embassy of note (say, US in Germany, or French in Algeria, etc) hosts at least a few actual spooks at any given time.
tus666 5y ago
Why would the US pick return its diplomats in a Russian il96? That website is amazing too, I am surprised so much data is publicly available.
- ncallaway 5y ago
  The US doesn't pick a flight. The US says: "You're not welcome, you have XX hours to leave the country". The diplomatic personnel have to figure out their own ride home. Normally that's fine (private charter flight, commercial, whatever), but in this case there are few (no?) flights to Russia, and the Russian's can't fly there due to airspace restrictions. So in this case, Russia asked for a special exemption to the US airspace restriction so it could get its personnel out. The US said "fine", and the Russians are flying the IL-96 in to pick up its personnel
  - Symbiote 5y ago
    The FAA ban has an exception for diplomatic flights: "EXCEPT ... STATE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS GRANTED A DIPLOMATIC CLEARANCE BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE" There are commercial options, e.g. flying to Turkey, the Middle East, China, India etc and taking a connecting flight to Moscow. But Russia probably doesn't want a large group of their spies and families travelling together on a commercial flight.
- mike_d 5y ago
  FlightRadar24, FlightAware, etc. are actually heavily censored. As a recipient of FAA radar data they have to agree to remove planes owned by rich people and corporations that don't want to be publicly visible. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/privacy/ https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/privacy/ ADSBExchange.com does not accept FAA data or process any removal requests.
  - nickphx 5y ago
    That's not how ADSB works.. FlightRadar/FlightAware do not have an "FAA Radar feed", they have a network of rtlSDRs listening for ADSB traffic. They offer the removal of the public display of flights, you can still purchase a commercial account to view them.. https://flightaware.com/adsb/flightfeeder/ https://flightaware.com/adsb/flightfeeder/

Yes.

Yes, though they were spies under diplomat cover. The US has the same setup in Moscow too though. Among "non-friendly countries" it's common that close to half of embassy staff are actually spies or at least 'intelligence analysts'.

lawlorino 5y ago
Do you have a source for that? Edit: seems people misread my intention, I am challenging the parent response because it reads like something out of a spy novel with nothing to back it up.
- vagrantJin 5y ago
  Where do you get a complete list of spies and their activities if you do not work for covert operations government agency ala Edward Snowden?
  - toomanyrichies 5y ago
    Your comment is valid- it’s likely unreasonable to expect evidence for this claim in particular to be furnishable. That said, if OP can’t provide evidence for the percentages they mention, perhaps the bigger problem is that they shouldn’t have made the claim in the first place.
- epgui 5y ago
  It’s true even of friendly countries.
  - robin_reala 5y ago
    Yep. See Harry Dunn’s manslaughter for an example of a US spy in the UK under the pretense of diplomatic cover. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn
    - mike-the-mikado 5y ago
      A CIA employee working at listening station based at an RAF base in the UK (presumably listening into transmissions from e.g. Russia) is rather different from spies based at the Russian embassy in Washington.
      - rjsw 5y ago
        Anne Sacoolas, who killed Harry Dunn, was not working at the RAF base. She had also not been declared as a CIA employee to the UK government.
- nradov 5y ago
  You've got to be kidding? There are no reliable sources on numbers of spies, by definition.
- aceazzameen 5y ago
  Not OP, but I read about this in a book by an ex-CIA guy a long time ago. I think even friendly nations do it to each other too. It's like an unwritten rule to have spies in embassies. Of course, I don't know how much was sensationalized, but it somewhat makes sense to keep tabs on everyone else if everyone is doing it. Also, this is why counter-intelligence exists in every nation. Watching embassies is part of what they do.
  - progre 5y ago
    ‘... spies?' I thought we were chums with the Low King!’ 'Of course we are,’ said Vetinari. ‘And the more we know about each other, the friendlier we shall remain. We’d hardly bother to spy on our enemies. What would be the point?’
  - AniseAbyss 5y ago
    Nothing wrong with spying, it keeps the world safe in a way if your intelligence agency can tell you the enemy isn't planning a sneak attack.
    - rurban 5y ago
      Not really. If they would not act criminally they would not need diplomatic cover. Most of the "spies" there are actually agent handlers, i.e. handling native agents, infiltrating unions, press, police, army, government. Spying is mostly not passively writing reports of intelligence matters, it's mostly actively pursuing criminal acts. Writing wrong press articles, social media posts, paying natives to do something illegal, killing union folks, torturing students. The passive agents writing the innocent intelligence reports are usually not under diplomatic cover. They are under some commercial cover mostly. As with Israel also arts and students. There are tons of CIA books.
- NelsonMinar 5y ago
  This discussion has gone poorly but I think it's a totally fair question to ask for a source. I can't find anything to corroborate the "close to half" number but here's a couple of articles about diplomatic staff being spies. https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-43556816 https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-43556816 https://apnews.com/article/north-america-ap-top-news-wa-state-wire-politics-united-states-985f444da7dd42c5b3b8abc422a977b8 https://apnews.com/article/north-america-ap-top-news-wa-stat...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- engineer_22 5y ago
  Why have an embassy staffed full of people in a foreign country if not gather information? "Spy" is used sort of loosely here, I think.
kingcharles 5y ago
Yes, the words they always use are embassy personnel conducting "non-diplomatic activities" https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1498392471851741202 https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1498392471851741202 The spy world isn't opaque. Each country knows who most of the spies are. They generally operate out of special sections of the primary embassy in each country. Almost all spies act under diplomatic cover so that they have immunity when they get caught. Operating without that cover is a risky mission which normally means your host country can't save you and will deny you. Each country just allows the spies to pretty much go about their business, follows them from the embassy when they can, and then uses them as pawns when necessary, like this.
- cutemonster 5y ago
  When the other country knows already that they are spies, doesn't that make their job harder? What can they actually get done, I wonder
  - amaranth 5y ago
    You either feed them junk so they waste time filtering out the good intel from the bad, use them as a communications backchannel, or both.
toyg 5y ago
> though they were spies under diplomat cover Pretty much all diplomats are spies, whether officially or unofficially. Their work involves learning and understanding things about the counterpart, openly or otherwise, and reporting their findings. The main difference is that the official spooks take more risks and carry out more direct action. > Among "non-friendly countries" Among all countries. Any embassy of note (say, US in Germany, or French in Algeria, etc) hosts at least a few actual spooks at any given time.

tus666 5y ago

Why would the US pick return its diplomats in a Russian il96? That website is amazing too, I am surprised so much data is publicly available.

ncallaway 5y ago
The US doesn't pick a flight. The US says: "You're not welcome, you have XX hours to leave the country". The diplomatic personnel have to figure out their own ride home. Normally that's fine (private charter flight, commercial, whatever), but in this case there are few (no?) flights to Russia, and the Russian's can't fly there due to airspace restrictions. So in this case, Russia asked for a special exemption to the US airspace restriction so it could get its personnel out. The US said "fine", and the Russians are flying the IL-96 in to pick up its personnel
- Symbiote 5y ago
  The FAA ban has an exception for diplomatic flights: "EXCEPT ... STATE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS GRANTED A DIPLOMATIC CLEARANCE BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE" There are commercial options, e.g. flying to Turkey, the Middle East, China, India etc and taking a connecting flight to Moscow. But Russia probably doesn't want a large group of their spies and families travelling together on a commercial flight.
mike_d 5y ago
FlightRadar24, FlightAware, etc. are actually heavily censored. As a recipient of FAA radar data they have to agree to remove planes owned by rich people and corporations that don't want to be publicly visible. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/privacy/ https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/privacy/ ADSBExchange.com does not accept FAA data or process any removal requests.
- nickphx 5y ago
  That's not how ADSB works.. FlightRadar/FlightAware do not have an "FAA Radar feed", they have a network of rtlSDRs listening for ADSB traffic. They offer the removal of the public display of flights, you can still purchase a commercial account to view them.. https://flightaware.com/adsb/flightfeeder/ https://flightaware.com/adsb/flightfeeder/