It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did MI6 'dry clean' this flat to cover up the spy in a bag murder? Not one fingerprint and five...

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neocrusader
reply to post by Bedlam
 


lol talking like that scares folk on here lol trust me I know
But your correct about the safe house surveillance
But the problem with using furniture is that when the Feds turn up ( sorry fed generic for authorities )
There's then a large pice of missing furniture leaving outline marks on the wall/flooring
And all this attracts attention especially the ambulance method so as such are only used in certain scenarios where you have control of information and most parties involved


If you're playing for the other side, so to speak, the missing furniture and such just adds to the mystique for the locals. You can play that up for a bit of misdirection by leaving them a "shrine" - something like a navel orange with toothpicks in, a bottle of wine poured into a couple of glasses and a cod, with candles all around. Whatever's around the Tesco when you're setting up. The more random the better.

The ambulance bag job is time honored. All you've got to do is get to the first rally point and swap out vehicles, cover your 'ambulance' with a bit of tarp and away you go.

I agree that this sort of disturbance isn't what you'd want if you were doing it to your own. It's hard to say, though, if it's a safe house then they'll be sanitizing it between uses anyway - you don't want anyone using your safe house for data by letting themselves in and dusting for prints and such to see who's been there, maybe leaving a few surveillance devices, so it's SOP to clean them up every time, and after a few uses to abandon them entirely. Therefore, it's not so clear that the lack of prints is meaningful, it might just be bureaucracy - the guy's found dead, do the normal sanitizing run.

Why was he in a safe house at all? Lots of high level guys "work for the USDA" or whatever equivalent porkie they use over there, live at home with three kids, the wife and a dog in suburban bliss and no one the wiser. There's more to the story than you're seeing. If he was being rotated between safe houses, then someone was after him to start with. It might have been a bit wiser to have popped him into some nice NCO housing at MH or whatnot, but then I'd guess he couldn't go biking or boinking quite as easily.

edit to add: safe houses are expensive to run. You wouldn't normally use them for housing trainees. If you're going to put someone in to make it look occupied, you'd generally use the honorably retired Major Fitzpatrick or someone who's both safe, vetted, and has an otherwise boring life. A steady stream of MI6 trainees as lodgers sort of draws the wrong attention to the place. You want it to be mundane, if it's in a neighborhood. Thus my statement that something's odd about him having been safe housed to begin with. Very odd.
edit on 8-4-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
From what I've read on this thread it sounds like there are a few ATS members far more experienced/knowledgeable with this sort of 'wet work' than I am so I'll just say this - Interesting to note that MI6 delayed reporting him missing, therefore assuring his body would probably be seriously decomposed by the time it was found (as mentioned by the coroner in the first half of the inquest last month). Hindering analysis of his body for clues to his death. Despite MI6's denial of it being related to his work I really do think he either stumbled onto something he shouldn't have or was deemed a security risk because of his personal life. The Telegraph reported that he had more than £15,000 of women's clothes and an 'interest' in bondage. How accurate is that? Who knows... His family deny it. All smoke and mirrors. I believe the 2nd part of the inquest into his death is this month so maybe we'll find out? Highly unlikely I suspect...



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Double post
edit on 8/4/12 by Anon77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anon77
Interesting to note that MI6 delayed reporting him missing, therefore assuring his body would probably be seriously decomposed by the time it was found (as mentioned by the coroner in the first half of the inquest last month). Hindering analysis of his body for clues to his death. Despite MI6's denial of it being related to his work I really do think he either stumbled onto something he shouldn't have or was deemed a security risk because of his personal life. The Telegraph reported that he had more than £15,000 of women's clothes and an 'interest' in bondage. How accurate is that?


Yeaaaaah, about that.

Here's this guy. He's on TDY from GCHQ as a crypto guy, which is somewhat equivalent to the NSA here. He qualified for MI6 field work, which is something like our DIA and CIA combined. And he's into women's clothing and questionable paraphilias. (?) And he's living in safe houses suddenly. Then he's dead, and left to rot.

Lots to work with here. Things are not as stringent as they once were in getting your clearances. Now gay is ok, there's even gay analyst clubs (!) at the NSA. Weird strangulation/crossdressing/animals/etc paraphiliae are still a bit of a putoff. And this guy - he's not just your everyday joe. He's a crypto guy at GCHQ for God's sake, and now going online at MI6. So he's a certified golden citizen. But yet not. (?) And he WAS living in a garage-over apartment, by himself, not too bad, lots are that way, it's tough to keep the family life and be in the community. But then he's suddenly in a safe house. What's that about? You don't just get the key to a safe house because they're spraying your flat for roaches. They put him there to hide him from someone. It apparently didn't work. (!) And then they stall for five hours and voila! no one knows anything at MI6.

What's the point of putting him in a safe house if they're just going to off him in the safe house, thereby losing a ton of money in his training, vetting, and future work output, not to mention losing any future use of the safe house? It would have been easier to have run him down on his bike, or have an unfortunate asphyxiation accident. Someone was after this guy. And either the guy GOT him, packaged him up and left him there, or the guy got him and MI6 chose to cover for him. Not seeing a lot of alternatives. Not seeing any incentive for MI6 to just kill him directly, it seems obvious they were trying to prevent this and failed. The fact they were hiding him tells you that they likely knew who was trying to get to him.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   
There is in the states 18 different intelegence agencies ( what is refered to as int agencies anyway )
For this I'm just going to use one
The CIA
Ok it's numbers are classified but the best staff number I've heard is about 140,000
Let's for a minute take that that number has remained relatively stable since 1970 ( cold war, eastern Europe influence, war on terror ect ect )yes it will have changed over the years but this is just for some simple maths )
Ok lets for a while assume that an average service is 15 years ( yes many are shorter many longer but again for the maths let's just go with an average of 15 years)
So every 15 years staff turnaround means 140,000 former employes leave the service
So starting at 1970
By 1985 - 140,000 former CIA members retired
By 2000 another 140,000 retired that's 280,000 total
2015 another 140,000 so now 420,000 total
That's nearly half a million retired CIA in your populous
( Admitadly many are admins, strats, analysts - not all work in gathering )


Now add on the numbers from the other 17 agencies
Admitadly the CIA has one of the highes staff levels but you should be getting the idea how many former intelegence staff you have living among you ( through experience I know some go to well paid executive style jobs, some to 'private' work but many go for the quiet life with little responsibility to leave the life totally behind )
So beware the slightly scary store clerk, the quiet ageing trash collector, the school bus driver and teachers
You never know !



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Neocrusader
 


Probably about 10% of that were field agents at some point, maybe less. Of those, about 10% were in top tier jobs. There is a very small section of CIA, no more than 100-150 field agents at a time, that is a lot like "mission impossible", or at least as close as real life gets. Being support personnel for that group is some hot # in the community - pretty tough to play "Q" for those guys.

I think I'd actually work for the agency if I could get that job. Work directly for them, that is.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


True that
As I said many are admins strats analysts ect ect
That number would even include security pers ( uniformed door guards ) the health and safety pers medics IT geeks ect ect
The number I've had bantered about is 20-25,000 field agents ( gathering and support )
But even so that's still a big number with training knowledge and skills in your populous
Emphasis on the knowlege
Even langleys 'school nurse' is trained in things the average first response medic would never need due to the possible scenarios they could encounter



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Hmm, all good points.
A few questions for you though. Just out of interest what does qualified for MI6 field work really mean? (Genuine question, no sarcasm or anything else intended). Does it mean trained to spy out in the field? Do you believe MI6's explanation of what he was supposedly working on? They have published in a few places that he kept his private life 'very private'. Do you think he was living in the safe-house under an assumed name? I sure I remember reading somewhere (maybe 'The Telegraph' again) that the building was owned by a Russian company. How true is that do you think? This is great talking to some of you 'possibly' ex spooks.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Neocrusader
 


Also all very good points.
That's pretty amazing there's so many ex spooks in the world. Are they ever really in full retirement? I mean does assorted governments still rely on them for useful info? Are they still able to ask for favors from still in the field agents like background checks and stuff? (like who is my new neighbour/daughters new boyfriend type thing) Like I said in the last post really interesting talking to you 'possibly' ex spooks.
If anyone out there feels like doing an 'ask an ex spook anything' thread Please PLEASE do one!



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anon77
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Hmm, all good points.
A few questions for you though. Just out of interest what does qualified for MI6 field work really mean? (Genuine question, no sarcasm or anything else intended). Does it mean trained to spy out in the field?


Yes. Not only that, but he qualified for it - that is, he passed their security vetting which is wretched, and qualified physically and intellectually for whatever class of job they had in mind for him at that level.



Do you believe MI6's explanation of what he was supposedly working on? They have published in a few places that he kept his private life 'very private'.


Before then he was a crypto at GCHQ. I'd expect he would be 'very private' or at least "work for" GB's equivalent of the USDA. Most social people make up some reasonable alternate employer. Some don't care if you know.

edit to add: some "jobs" here, especially contract jobs, are arranged to pay from someone else so you don't even have to make up an excuse. After the Army when I was in college I did three summers of contract work under a fictitious university foundation that was funded by a US DOD group.



Do you think he was living in the safe-house under an assumed name? I sure I remember reading somewhere (maybe 'The Telegraph' again) that the building was owned by a Russian company. How true is that do you think? This is great talking to some of you 'possibly' ex spooks.


Don't know anything about the building. I'd heard something else. You'd generally use an assumed name, as they don't put you in safe houses unless you've some good reason to be there. It's not like off-base NCO housing, it's like witness protection on steroids.
edit on 9-4-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Do you think he would have been armed? Or possibly had armed 'protection' assigned to him? How would the security services have viewed his supposed bondage/transvestite interests? When you left the military were you approached before you left to go and work at that fictional university organisation? How do they select for things like that? Yeah I have heard that some of the security checks can be very intrusive, I read on Wikipedia (not the best source I realise) about the security checks they do for working with the POTUS and his staff. Pretty extreme stuff. Yankee White..? I think an SSBI is part of it? I'm guessing that's the highest security check they do on you? Does that then give you top secret or above clearances or are there further things that need to be satisfied before that? Do they really do things on a 'need to know' basis or is that all Hollywood BS? How long do checks like that last? I mean once they've checked you is it a permanent 'this person is OK' or is it an ongoing check? Thanks for answering these questions btw.
very rare you get to actually ask someone who has been there.

Edit - Just wanted to say as well, I admire your military service my friend and salute you. I wanted to join the British military (as 2 of my brothers had) but I was rejected at medical because of a back injury I got working as a bouncer (some rsole hit me in the back with a steel bar - cue 2 broken vertebrae, 3 slipped disks and permanent pain to this day). Was very disappointed.
edit on 9/4/12 by Anon77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
not to worry ats member, i knew for a fact that this thread would not be touched, infact i could have posted it in another area of the site but i chose to place within here for a particular reason. Those who know why, are well aware of it the rest...well they can simply read through and jump on anyone of the thousand doom and gloom or anything but real life cases.

I have totally enjoyed reading every single reply.As for the "wet work" , well i guess its like leaving a business card, but in this circle your more or less placing a billboard ad on the interstate. The message was loud enough and clear enough to all who were, are and are thinking of associating themselves with this issue or future issues that have the same weight if not more.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Yes they did indeed, how can you have an apartment/flat that was occupied with no finger prints?

Interesting to say the least.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iwinder
Yes they did indeed, how can you have an apartment/flat that was occupied with no finger prints?

Interesting to say the least.
Regards, Iwinder


well seeing that this is a conspiracy site and since the apartment was crystal clear i assume that the individual was a hypochondriac, but then again perhaps its exactly what the article is painting for us and to those who still dont get it, perhaps they should re-read the title of the article.


"Not one fingerprint" , thats how obvious it is and thats how one says to the rest...look fellas, your in the big leagues now...your move.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by cerebralassassins
 

Correct you are sir/madam
"well seeing that this is a conspiracy site and since the apartment was crystal clear i assume that the individual was a hypochondriac, but then again perhaps its exactly what the article is painting for us and to those who still dont get it, perhaps they should re-read the title of the article.


"Not one fingerprint" , thats how obvious it is and thats how one says to the rest...look fellas, your in the big leagues now...your move."

How simple can it get? I mean it is really obvious the place was sanitized really carefully too.

Nice and neat and no blood no DNA and no prints.
someone went to a certain school before doing this trick.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


I assume it was a tag two team and a well oiled machine to know what to wipe as time was also a factor so one can safely say it was a surgical crew that as we all know, do exist. Then again, if it wasn't i would also like to hire the cleaning maid as my home could do with a quick wipe here and there.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Just thought I'd point out...

MI6 is the External Intelligence Agency (technically called SIS - Strategic Intelligence Service these days), and do not carry out operations on the UK mainland.

Thats the job of MI5.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by BMorris
Just thought I'd point out...

MI6 is the External Intelligence Agency (technically called SIS - Strategic Intelligence Service these days), and do not carry out operations on the UK mainland.

Thats the job of MI5.


That's why I likened them to the CIA. Not so much local work. Although like the DIA, they can operate domestically if it's military involved. I think...I could tell you for the US. Not so sure of the finer points of MI.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anon77
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Do you think he would have been armed? Or possibly had armed 'protection' assigned to him? How would the security services have viewed his supposed bondage/transvestite interests?


You guys are weirder with the firearms thing than we are. It wouldn't be unusual to have some level of extra watch at a safe house, at least. But either they got them too or there wasn't any.



When you left the military were you approached before you left to go and work at that fictional university organisation? How do they select for things like that?


No, I was about a year out. I got quarterly calls reviewing my NDAs for a number of years, so they knew my phone number, and one day the foundation guy called up out of the blue and said I'd been recommended for it, they didn't say by who, but I'd guess my former Captain. They needed some months of technical diving done the first two times and it couldn't be done by active military. Very entertaining. In three months I made as much as a year in the service. Helped a lot with school, didn't get shot at, only had to make a handful of really spooky dives.

As far as how they select, not sure but they had a list of prerequisites I happened to fit by chance.



Yeah I have heard that some of the security checks can be very intrusive, I read on Wikipedia (not the best source I realise) about the security checks they do for working with the POTUS and his staff. Pretty extreme stuff. Yankee White..? I think an SSBI is part of it? I'm guessing that's the highest security check they do on you?


There's worse, but not for normal people. You have to be Jack Bauer for full scope, or have a really odd job. Your sponsor can add on caveats too. There's also poly levels. Work with SCI projects or on SAPs and you'll likely have SSBI with lifestyle poly. Maybe with restrictions on drinking in public.



Does that then give you top secret or above clearances or are there further things that need to be satisfied before that? Do they really do things on a 'need to know' basis or is that all Hollywood BS? How long do checks like that last? I mean once they've checked you is it a permanent 'this person is OK' or is it an ongoing check?


Really there's only TS, the rest is just compartmentalization or descriptors of what sort of data it is, although I tend to think of SCI or SAP as being its own thing. Technically it's not.

Generally, you also go through a sort of paperwork hell/ death by slides/ black spot/ death before dishonor thing with lectures when you're read onto a project. The more sane project leaders will waive the formalities which leaves a wad of forms to sign. The less sane will either try to skip it altogether, bad idea, or go through the entire kabuki. I've had the preliminaries reduced to "Hold up your right hand - I swear that I understand the LTC will send FR to your house to kill you if you talk about this project - say I do. Ok, you can sign all that crap down the hall on your way out the door this afternoon, let's get to work"

It's five years for SSBIs, generally the same but sometimes every year with poly, they can drop in and do supplemental security investigations whenever they feel like it, which since I married a FORN is in practice every year.

Yes, it's all need to know, you do not, in fact, want to know. This is for your own good if something leaks, or you make an amazingly intuitive guess based on experience and foggy data and discuss it online, because then you can establish plausible deniability. You don't get your clearance and then have access to all the UFO and Kennedy assassination data over on JWICS, sad to say.

However, you do in general get an idea of what's going on anyway, over time. Also, it's really good if you can wangle a spot on the integration team, because they have to tell you about the whole thing, it's not really possible to confine you to the wheelwells if you're testing systems integration.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Thankyou once again for your reply.
A few more questions and comments for you my friend. Yeah your right about that, I wish the UK government would ease up on the firearm laws. When you say 'spooky dives' if your able to can you give a description of one? (Understand entirely if not possible). God Damn! They poly test you as well!? That's mad!, I'm guessing the public drinking restriction is just to stop you getting drunk in public and saying something you shouldn't? I often wondered that, there is so much stuff on internet and books that say all different things about security levels etc. So TS is it and the rest is just compartments within TS. Makes sense. Do you think they really would kill you for mentioning stuff you shouldn't? Ever known or heard of anyone 'removed' for talking? You'll need to excuse my ignorance here but what does 'FORN' mean? 5 years for SSBI's is longer than I was thinking. I thought it would be a more continuous monitoring thing. Ha! Need to know stuff makes sense. In your opinion are there many people who have access to the UFO/Kennedy assassination stuff? For instance is that the kind of thing they would tell POTUS about? Do you think your previous employers are monitoring what your writing to me on ATS? Are people like yourself ever really 'off the books' so to speak or could they come back to you even now and ask for 'a job'? Might they be checking up on my ID? Once again my friend thankyou very much for answering my inane questions.




top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join