Corbyn the communist spy!

Bradley:

“On 19 February 2018 I made a seriously defamatory statement on my Twitter account, ‘Ben Bradley MP (bbradleymp)’, about Jeremy Corbyn, alleging he sold British secrets to communist spies. I have since deleted the defamatory tweet. I have agreed to pay an undisclosed substantial sum of money to a charity of his choice, and I will also pay his legal costs.

I fully accept that my statement was wholly untrue and false. I accept that I caused distress and upset to Jeremy Corbyn by my untrue and false allegations, suggesting he had betrayed his country by collaborating with foreign spies.

I am very sorry for publishing this untrue and false statement and I have no hesitation in offering my unreserved and unconditional apology to Jeremy Corbyn for the distress I have caused him.”
 
Sorry to make you read the Sun - but documentary evidence in the article that there was a file of some sort. I can accept that it couild be a fake, but looks genuine.

Jeremy Corbyn met Communist spies during the Cold War and 'briefed' evil regime
You'll never make me read the Sun but I appreciate the kindness of the warning for the link.

A less breathless account.

What do we know for sure?
Very little. Records appear to confirm three meetings between Mr Corbyn and Mr Sarkocy in 1986 and 1987: two in Parliament and one in Mr Corbyn’s constituency office.

Czech authorities have also confirmed the meetings, but say Mr Corbyn was not an informant. There are signs that Czechoslovakian intelligence officials made attempts to hide Mr Sarkocy’s true identity from the Labour MP, they said.

Svetlana Ptacnikova, director of the Czech Security Forces Archive that includes StB documents, said: “Mr Corbyn was neither registered [by the StB] as a collaborator, nor does this [allegation] stem from archive documents.”

Mr Sarkocy’s other claims have so far not been substantiated.
So. The director of the security forces archive is clear Corbyn wasn't an asset. There was at least one meeting. Sarkocy was a Spy.

That's about as much as there is.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
If only he'd just called JC a Communist collaborator and not used the S-word!
 
Still waithig for you to answer mine 'would you give Corbyn SY clearance knowing his Pro-IRA terrorist stance*, his admiration for the DDR and Marxist-Leninist beliefs? YES/NO (ignore for a moment your political bias)


Yes, and they rejected him

*As claimed by, amongst others, the IRA
I asked first I think you'll find. Any time you're ready. You haven't got a fecking clue about my political bias BTW, perhaps it's your own deciding that I have one.

You've all ducked the questions, you chose to believe a discredited fantasist who claims responsibility forLive Aid because you want to believe him.

It's a sad day when people parrot the lies of the Sun, DM and Express as undeniable truth. WTF has my country come to. McCarthyism is alive and well in the UK.
 

DaManBugs

LE
Book Reviewer
I asked first I think you'll find. Any time you're ready. You haven't got a fecking clue about my political bias BTW, perhaps it's your own deciding that I have one.

You've all ducked the questions, you chose to believe a discredited fantasist who claims responsibility forLive Aid because you want to believe him.

It's a sad day when people parrot the lies of the Sun, DM and Express as undeniable truth. WTF has my country come to. McCarthyism is alive and well in the UK.
I really wouldn't bother, if I were you. It's a complete waste of time. Maypole's MO is to firmly make up his mind on a subject, then steadfastly ignore your (or any other) counter-arguments that totally destroy his case. He'll then insist that your responses are the exact opposite of what they really state. Oh, and he'll also probably accuse you of hypocrisy and having double standards.:smile::smile::smile:

MsG
 
Text Taken from todays Telegraph: written by Richard Dearlove

Jeremy Corbyn seems to think it sufficient to laugh off the criticism he has faced for meeting with a Czechoslovak intelligence officer in the 1980s. It is not. I worked against the Czechoslovak Services during my early career in MI6, I served in Prague and I spoke Czech. Everything I learned about the way those services, known as the StB, operated tells me that these accusations should be taken seriously.
Firstly, there is the codename given to Corbyn by the StB, "COB". If the StB had allocated him a pseudonym, it meant that they had opened an operational file. They would only do that if they had reason to be interested in him as a target and they had assessed him as someone with whom to develop a relationship.
As has been repeatedly made clear, the Cold War Czechoslovak spy Jan Sarkocy is a fantasist whose claims are entirely false and becoming more absurd by the day.Corbyn spokesperson
The Czechoslovak Services had a history of attempting to recruit Members of Parliament and they started out by trying to find who among them got drunk, who was in debt, who had personal problems and whose career was on a downward trend.
It was not necessary to know state secrets to be of interest; simply to know a lot of what was going on inside Parliament. The StB’s ultimate aim, therefore, was to identify who might be recruitable and as step towards that goal to cultivate those willing to talk to them in order to get them to divulge, often unwittingly, who those vulnerable individuals might be.
It is mundane work undertaken by a member of a foreign intelligence service, but still a significant threat to our national security. Anybody with sense would have taken care to avoid someone like Jan Sarkocy, the intelligence officer in question.

Secondly, there is the absurd suggestion that Corbyn could not have know that Sarkocy was a Czechoslovak intelligence officer. It was well known at the time that the StB was active on behalf of the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War, and there was a well established pattern that the StB had followed in trying to recruit British politicians, including three MPs that they had recruited successfully in 1960s.
By the standards of Central Europe, the Czechs were extremely westernised. The Russians regarded them as more sophisticated than other parts of their Communist empire and particularly adept at challenging intelligence work. Soviet bloc diplomats were also being regularly expelled from the UK for espionage activities during this period. Corbyn surely would have been well aware of this.
Even had he been so naive that he had not seen through Sarkocy’s diplomatic cover, the regime Sarkocy represented was known to be one of the nastiest in Central Europe, continuing to persecute its dissidents right up until the Velvet Revolution. They were not people with whom to consort without sharing their extreme views. Corbyn seems to have enjoyed rubbing shoulders with regimes that were undemocratic, conducted mass surveillance of their populations and ruled by a combination of force and fear.

Thirdly, Labour has said that Sarkocy should not be taken seriously and that his claims are absurd. Discussion I have had with friends close to the current Czech intelligence community suggest otherwise.

Sarkocy is behind the claim that Andrej Babis, the current Czech prime minister, collaborated with the Communist regime, which is being taken seriously in his country. Babis's lawsuit against those claims, which he says are false, was last week dismissed by a Slovak court. There is therefore some grounds for thinking that Sarkocy could be telling the truth about Corbyn.
Corbyn has questions to answer. How many meetings did he, in fact, have with Sarkocy? If only a couple, or the single one that Corbyn recalls, his behaviour can be put down to stupidity. If Sarkocy is telling the truth and not exaggerating when he says there were many more and that money changed hands (which again Corbyn denies), then this affair takes on a completely different aspect.
Finally, there is the issue of how the StB documents on Corbyn entered the public domain. I suspect that someone with access to the StB archives found them, noticed they were about Corbyn, realised they were of value and sold them on. We do not know if further documents exist but, if they do, and contain more incriminating information, it leaves Corbyn – who could yet become Prime Minister – in a very awkward position.

Sir Richard Dearlove was head of the Secret Intelligence Service from 1999 to 2004
Disingenuous to say the least. Everybody and their brother in parliament had a fecking file because they were all of interests.

Dearlove should be well aware that a much greater threat to UK security was from within his own and sister service, none of the Cambridge 5 or their associates were politicians were they?
 
I asked first I think you'll find. Any time you're ready. You haven't got a fecking clue about my political bias BTW, perhaps it's your own deciding that I have one.

You've all ducked the questions, you chose to believe a discredited fantasist who claims responsibility forLive Aid because you want to believe him.

It's a sad day when people parrot the lies of the Sun, DM and Express as undeniable truth. WTF has my country come to. McCarthyism is alive and well in the UK.
er.......someone who gets so upset about 'assumptions' makes an assumption, if you look back you'll see I said 'putting aside your own etc.....' By saying that I'm asking you to suspend your own prejudice whichever way it flows, take a neutral view, setting aside anything else, based on his behaviour, the organisations he's supported down the years...... would you pass him for a vetting check? Hope you understand the question now. As you say, I have no idea about you, MSB is obviously a valiant defender of 'socialism' who will deny any evidence of Corbyn's activities regardless, Bugsy will defend to the death the DDR and the Stasi so it would be a bit pointless to ask him.

I've been pointing out that JC and DA will have had Stasi files raised against them - you don't have to like it, you just have to accept it. If he had multiple meetings with a StB agent he will have had a file raised - again you don't have to like it. The Stasi and the StB were subordinate to the KGB - therefore whatever they collected will be sitting in his active FSB file. So, just a working knowledge of how these things are..... not getting anything from the tabloids - what sources are you drawing your knowledge from?
 
And yet you keep turning up to remind me of my not botheredness.

Still no quote I see?
"Shield and Sword" Mr "not bothered?" Look, you've told us your not bothered and anyway Corbyn is totally innocent of everything because it's all a conspiracy.......of course, sure...... move on, we know, it's not as if you keep coming back to protest his innocence as if you're not really convinced yourself.....
 
er.......someone who gets so upset about 'assumptions' makes an assumption, if you look back you'll see I said 'putting aside your own etc.....' By saying that I'm asking you to suspend your own prejudice whichever way it flows, take a neutral view, setting aside anything else, based on his behaviour, the organisations he's supported down the years...... would you pass him for a vetting check? Hope you understand the question now. As you say, I have no idea about you, MSB is obviously a valiant defender of 'socialism' who will deny any evidence of Corbyn's activities regardless, Bugsy will defend to the death the DDR and the Stasi so it would be a bit pointless to ask him.

I've been pointing out that JC and DA will have had Stasi files raised against them - you don't have to like it, you just have to accept it. If he had multiple meetings with a StB agent he will have had a file raised - again you don't have to like it. The Stasi and the StB were subordinate to the KGB - therefore whatever they collected will be sitting in his active FSB file. So, just a working knowledge of how these things are..... not getting anything from the tabloids - what sources are you drawing your knowledge from?
My sources are the Stasi and StB archivists. Who both say there are no files saying anything like what Sarkocy and the Tabloids allege. Who are yours?
 
er.......someone who gets so upset about 'assumptions' makes an assumption, if you look back you'll see I said 'putting aside your own etc.....' By saying that I'm asking you to suspend your own prejudice whichever way it flows, take a neutral view, setting aside anything else, based on his behaviour, the organisations he's supported down the years...... would you pass him for a vetting check? Hope you understand the question now. As you say, I have no idea about you, MSB is obviously a valiant defender of 'socialism' who will deny any evidence of Corbyn's activities regardless, Bugsy will defend to the death the DDR and the Stasi so it would be a bit pointless to ask him.

I've been pointing out that JC and DA will have had Stasi files raised against them - you don't have to like it, you just have to accept it. If he had multiple meetings with a StB agent he will have had a file raised - again you don't have to like it. The Stasi and the StB were subordinate to the KGB - therefore whatever they collected will be sitting in his active FSB file. So, just a working knowledge of how these things are..... not getting anything from the tabloids - what sources are you drawing your knowledge from?
Pish. The assumption of bias towards Corbyn was implicit in your statement.

Still haven't answered the questions I note.

Well aware how it works and why Corbyn would have a file.
 
The Independent?

A left-wing rag owned by a Russian named Evgeny Lebedev, the son of a billionaire ex-KGB agent.

Breathless indeed.
Mr. Lebedev has also lived in London for two-thirds of his life and now holds British citizenship. His father, the oligarch and former K.G.B. agent Alexander Lebedev, co-owns Novaya Gazeta, a rare Russian liberal paper with the bravery to speak its mind.

This is only because he's considerably richer than yow,,,
 
Foot took KGB money too......a fact hotly denied by the far left - right up until the time his KGB file proved it....then they switched to the 'so what?' track without a pause or hint of embarrassment, same with CND, for years denied being funded by the KGB, then when the files were released Bruce Kent said 'so what?' Men of honour? Nope
Already happening with Corbyn.

Go to any of the broadsheets / tabloids running reports on him and his handlers and you'll find, lined up in the comments underneath, loads of momentum useful idiots talking 'whataboutery'. Then the tactic is 'veiled legal threats' until we get to the not so veiled, naming names of Tory politicians. There must be a plan that they all adhere to.
 
Already happening with Corbyn.

Go to any of the broadsheets / tabloids running reports on him and his handlers and you'll find, lined up in the comments underneath, loads of momentum useful idiots talking 'whataboutery'. Then the tactic is 'veiled legal threats' until we get to the not so veiled, naming names of Tory politicians. There must be a plan that they all adhere to.
Nothing veiled about the legal threats which brought this about.

I get that Corbyn's a twat of epic proportions, I've given him as the reason I couldn't vote Labour as a protest in a previous post ages ago. I get that Momentum are a bunch of unreformed trots. All of which doesn't count in respect of proving that he was an asset of a foreign power.

This is a classic political smear campaign, which shows how much the Tories fear him. They've made him electable and are now shitting themselves.
 
Nothing veiled about the legal threats which brought this about.

I get that Corbyn's a twat of epic proportions, I've given him as the reason I couldn't vote Labour as a protest in a previous post ages ago. I get that Momentum are a bunch of unreformed trots. All of which doesn't count in respect of proving that he was an asset of a foreign power.

This is a classic political smear campaign, which shows how much the Tories fear him. They've made him electable and are now shitting themselves.
Interesting.

Which one are you, by the way???
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top