The Troodos Conundrum 433


troodos2

 

The GCHQ listening post on Mount Troodos in Cyprus is arguably the most valued asset which the UK contributes to UK/US intelligence cooperation.  The communications intercept agencies, GCHQ in the UK and NSA in the US, share all their intelligence reports (as do the CIA and MI6).  Troodos is valued enormously by the NSA.  It monitors all radio, satellite and microwave traffic across the Middle East, ranging from Egypt and Eastern Libya right through to the Caucasus.  Even almost all landline telephone communication in this region is routed through microwave links at some stage, picked up on Troodos.

Troodos is highly effective – the jewel in the crown of British intelligence.  Its capacity and efficiency, as well as its reach, is staggering.  The US do not have their own comparable facility for the Middle East.  I should state that I have actually been inside all of this facility and been fully briefed on its operations and capabilities, while I was head of the FCO Cyprus Section in the early 1990s.  This is fact, not speculation.

It is therefore very strange, to say the least, that John Kerry claims to have access to communications intercepts of Syrian military and officials organising chemical weapons attacks, which intercepts were not available to the British Joint Intelligence Committee.

On one level the explanation is simple.  The intercept evidence was provided to the USA by Mossad, according to my own well  placed source in the Washington intelligence community.  Intelligence provided by a third party is not automatically shared with the UK, and indeed Israel specifies it should not be.

But the inescapable question is this.  Mossad have nothing comparable to the Troodos operation.  The reported content of the conversations fits exactly with key tasking for Troodos, and would have tripped all the triggers.  How can Troodos have missed this if Mossad got it?  The only remote possibility is that all the conversations went on a purely landline route, on which Mossad have a physical wire tap, but that is very unlikely in a number of ways – not least nowadays the purely landline route.

Israel has repeatedly been involved in the Syrian civil war, carrying out a number of illegal bombings and missile strikes over many months.  This absolutely illegal activity by Israel- which has killed a great many civilians, including children – has brought no condemnation at all from the West.  Israel has now provided “intelligence” to the United States designed to allow the United States to join in with Israel’s bombing and missile campaign.

The answer to the Troodos Conundrum is simple.  Troodos did not pick up the intercepts because they do not exist.  Mossad fabricated them.  John Kerry’s “evidence” is the shabbiest of tricks.  More children may now be blown to pieces by massive American missile blasts.  It is nothing to do with humanitarian intervention.  It is, yet again, the USA acting at the behest of Israel.

 

 


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

433 thoughts on “The Troodos Conundrum

1 2 3 4 15
  • craig Post author

    Phil,

    Presumably you would accept that Alex Jones can be right if asked, for example, what the time is? The material on the reuse of an old photo by Kerry as new evidence appears convincing. It is rather a spurious trick of internet trolling to claim a link implies endorsement of everything the site linked to has ever said.

  • Phil

    @Craig

    Blimey. My question was sincere. I don’t think I deserve to be called a troll by you mate.

    I did not say you endorsed everything jones says. I was saying he cannot be believed because he makes mad shit up. So to link to him because he has a story you want to believe discredits your judgement.

  • Villager

    Someone, still, we can understand now more clearly why fate selected Ed Miliband, rather than his brother, to lead Labour.

    Of course we are all conditioned beings. To be aware of it and live in that constant awareness is our task.

    I disagree with Craig that we should not celebrate. The vote is a victory for the *people* of Britain in *their* overall sense of fairness and lack of support for violence, regardless of the narrow margins within the vote. This is proof that people can make the difference at a political level through simple consciousness. Our task now is for each of us to drill deeper and negate violence at every level. It is an extraordinary opportunity, coming as it is 12 years deep into the era of the GWOT, to build a saner society.

  • Villager

    Craig, in addition to your substance, your eloquence, at all times, is to be applauded.

  • BrianFujisan

    Exellent Post Craig, and an Enlightening new angle on all of this. thank you.

    Heartbreaking what the lying evil bastards are getting away with.

  • Mary - for Truth and Justice

    Off topic but ‘fate’ had nothing to do with Mi(l)lipede Junior’s election. It was the unions’ backing primarily.

    ‘Other senior Labour figures who backed the younger Miliband included former Deputy Leaders Roy Hattersley and Margaret Beckett. By 9 June, the deadline for entry into the Labour leadership contest, Miliband had been nominated by just over 24% of the Parliamentary Labour Party, double the amount required. By September, Miliband had received the support of six trade unions, including both Unite and UNISON, 151 of the Constituency Labour Parties, three affiliated socialist societies, and half of the Labour MEPs.’

  • N_

    Craig – apologies for getting a little bit off topic, insofar as possibly distracting from your main thesis here, namely that the ‘information’ indicating that Syrian government forces recently used chemical weapons was concocted and supplied by the Israelis – which seems surely to be the truth.

    That said,…

    …I’m very surprised to hear what you say about the CIA station chief not attending JIC meetings. When did that practice stop? Can you comment on this article by Stephen Grey in the New Statesman from 2003? He describes a tradition whereby the CIA guy leaves the room before the second ‘domestic only’ part of the meeting.

    On the matter of what happened in the House of Commons, of course it is good to see as many MPs as possible vote against attacking Syria, whichever party they are in. Everyone is very welcome indeed to do the right thing when it is a matter of opposing the slaughter of innocents. But I think the ‘incompetence of the whips’ line sounds as if it was made up

    a) to give members of the chattering classes something to talk about, and

    b) to distract from the real issues, thereby preparing for House of Commons support at a later stage.

    Did the Israelis push too far, having wrongly gauged the level of obedience they could count on?

    Was it a dry run?

    I don’t know. Either might be the case, or a mixture of both. But I don’t believe Labour pulled a fast one. They’re too supine for that.

    Here’s the list of ‘Tory rebels’. How many known relationships to the Conservative Friends of Israel? And to the British or US military or intelligence and security communities? Just wondering…

    David Amess
    Steve Baker
    Richard Bacon
    John Baron
    Andrew Bingham
    Crispin Blunt
    Fiona Bruce
    Tracey Crouch
    David TC Davies
    Philip Davies
    David Davis
    Nick de Bois
    Richard Drax
    Gordon Henderson
    Philip Hollobone
    Adam Holloway
    Dr Phillip Lee
    Dr Julian Lewis
    Jason McCartney
    Stephen McPartland
    Nigel Mills
    Anne Marie Morris
    Andrew Percy
    Sir Richard Shepherd
    Sir Peter Tapsell
    Andrew Turner
    Martin Vickers
    Charles Walker
    Chris White
    Dr Sarah Wollaston

    I doubt the Syrian government did use chemical weapons, because first-order analysis suggests it’s the side that’s losing the war with conventional weapons that would be first to reach into the chemistry cabinet, not the side that’s winning.

  • Villager

    @ Someone
    31 Aug, 2013 – 11:49 am

    Further to my comment above, i might add that its a fact that consciousness, unlike nations, knows no boundaries. I would not underestimate the impact of the Commons vote on the desire for common-folk global villagers around the World to end this blasted War on Terror and start a fresh chapter. This may be wishful thinking but it might just prove to be a mutation point.

    It is unfortunate that Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner (me still laughing/crying after all these years) is unable to turn statesman and take advantage of this opportunity.

  • Phil

    Craig 31 Aug, 2013 – 12:02 pm

    “The material on the reuse of an old photo by Kerry as new evidence appears convincing.”

    That is plain old bs. Jones is an internet innovator. He has been selling exaggeration and extrapolation for far longer than I suspect you have been familiar with him. He is very good at it. But he is a liar. I would have thought you would want more than the word of a liar even if the liar presented evidence that “appears convincing”.

    “It is rather a spurious trick of internet trolling to claim a link implies endorsement of everything the site linked to has ever said.”

    This comment of yours fails your own standard that commentaters tackle the substance of an argument rather than attribute motivation to others.

    I am surprised at your belligerence. You have been disingenuous calling me a troll and have displayed an embarrassing lack of judgement by linking to infowars. So we all make mistakes. However, given your pretensions to open debate I am disappointed that you neither present a case for your actions nor accept your mistake with grace.

  • technicolour

    Fascinating piece – and important. Was talking to a friend yesterday who had swallowed the ‘we know it was definitely Assad because of the intercepted messages’ line. It still didn’t make her conclude that we, or anyone, should bomb people in response, but it worried her. She, and most people I know, now just desperately want to help the current victims. Otherwise, no-one can believe the way that Labour’s opposition is being spun and derided as more ‘politicking’: it should be seen as a landmark, I think.

  • Donald

    “On the 2oth of August, the day before the chemical attack, Press TV’s Youtube account was cancelled by Youtube. According to Press TV this was due to pressure from the Israeli-American Anti-Defamation League (ADL).”

    A large number of the videos claiming to show the victims were also uploaded the day before. The stench of this being a black-op is overwhelming.

  • technicolour

    Phil: It is a fact that the BBC used an old photo from Iraq in 2003 and attributed it to the Syrian massacre has been widely covered. The photographer, whose picture it was has spoken out:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9293620/BBC-News-uses-Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html

    and elsewhere. The BBC admitted the mistake and withdrew the photograph.

    John Kerry certainly sounds as though he is referring to that picture. “We saw rows of dead in burial shrounds, in white linen…unstained by a single drop of blood”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/world/middleeast/john-kerry-syria.html?_r=0

    about four minutes into the speech.

    So perhaps you could check the facts yourself before complaining about them.

  • technicolour

    And perhaps the fact that Kerry uses that picture in the middle of his other ‘compelling’ and ‘clear’ evidence is rather important, don’t you think?

  • Phil

    Technicolour 31 Aug, 2013 – 1:33 pm
    “Phil: It is a fact that the BBC used an old photo from Iraq in 2003 and attributed it to the Syrian massacre has been widely covered.”

    The veracity of the story has absolutely nothing to do with my point. I am merely saying that relying on a professional liar as a source is not what I expected from craig.

  • Fred

    As regards Alex Jones, he’s a cult leader, not a reliable source of information, he twists the facts to suit his agenda then uses brain washing techniques to make the gullible believe them. I looked into him a while back after someone I knew was convinced the Arctic ice extent was increasing despite the obvious evidence it was decreasing.

    As for Kerry, he didn’t use any photos, I’ve seen video of the speech in question, no pictures were used to illustrate it. He did make reference to photos which may sound similar to the one the BBC was taken in by.

    I wouldn’t believe a word either Alex Jones or Kerry says myself.

  • technicolour

    Phil: except that when you check you see the Infowars piece (not written by Jones, apparently) links to the Telegraph piece (I already knew from other sources but found that link by looking myself). It did not bother to transcribe Kerry’s actual description which is a mistake, journalistically, but not, it seems, factually.

  • Phil

    Technicolour 31 Aug, 2013 – 1:33 pm
    “Phil: It is a fact that the BBC used an old photo from Iraq in 2003 and attributed it to the Syrian massacre has been widely covered.”

    Come off it technicolour you conflated two different stories. You seem to be saying that the media lies so this story by a media liar about the media lying must be true. Do you believe the liar this time just because craig links to it?

    This is important to me because I have often disagreed with craigs conclusions but never previously doubted his integrity.

  • technicolour

    And it’s true that Kerry may not have been referring to the BBC photo: there are other photos of rows of dead in burial shrouds from Syria.

  • technicolour

    Phil, no, I never believe anything. I do think that referring to something in a passing comment is not the same as writing an in-depth and researched piece about it, so it wouldn’t make me question someone’s integrity as a result.

  • Villager

    Phil
    31 Aug, 2013 – 11:49 am
    “@Craig

    Infowars? You are linking to infowars? I am taken aback.
    ……
    Either my assessment of infowars as a fucking joke or you as a wise man is fucked.”

    A. Craig is not @Craig (at Craig) — he is simply the Craig who he says he is, which we all know. So wrong addressing. And i hand it to him for his courage and persistence.

    B. Good that Craig can see how people here are willing to be disgraceful, loose with their language and dish it out, then suddenly turn thin-skinned when it comes back to them, even with style.

    I mean, come on ” or you as a wise man is fucked” — doesn’t reveal much in the way of preparation for social bearings. So let’s not get into this childish nonsense stuff, which you don’t believe in yourself, of ” This comment of yours fails your own standard that commentaters tackle the substance of an argument rather than attribute motivation to others.”

    My motivation to write here is that *total observation* requires utter and complete clarity. Grace helps too, even in the political world.

  • Phil

    Technicolour 31 Aug, 2013 – 2:03 pm
    “I do think that referring to something in a passing comment is not the same as writing an in-depth and researched piece about it, so it wouldn’t make me question someone’s integrity as a result.”

    Fair point with which I agree. I am possibly over egging this because craig responded by calling me a troll and claimed that because jones might not lie about the time he might be true with this.

    However, linking to infowars as a source is ridiculous.

  • mark stephen golding

    A post based on solid information – Thank-you Craig.

    Phil – stop whining – “..a spurious trick of internet trolling..” is not calling you a troll in any double take.

  • Phil

    Mark Stephen Golding 31 Aug, 2013 – 2:20 pm
    “Phil – stop whining – “..a spurious trick of internet trolling..” is not calling you a troll in any double take.”

    Don’t be daft. Of course he called me a troll. What other possible meaning could he have meant. But, it is besides the point and I will not whine about it again.

    However, I notice you do not tackle the clear point of my comments which is that craig discredits himself by relying on a well known professional liar as a source. Which is no great surprise from someone who regularly confidently asserts the impossible to know as fact.

    Talking of which perhaps you could explain how you know the sas are in syria as you stated yesterday . Don’t get me wrong I suspect they probably are. But you seem to know.

  • Villager

    “Phil
    31 Aug, 2013 – 2:13 pm
    @Villager

    Go fuck yourself you hollow ingratiate.”
    _________

    No thanks Phil. Far be it from me to grab your stage. You’re doing a fine job yourself! Carry on….

  • Mary - for Truth and Justice

    The real John Kerry.

    The Blood-Soaked Resumé of a Peace Broker
    What John Kerry Really Did in Vietnam

    by JEFFREY ST. CLAIR

    With John Kerry currently in full Henry Kissinger regalia, parading around the Middle East, brow-beating the Palestinians and their allies in the region and Europe into signing onto a deeply flawed peace accord that primarily serves Israeli and American interests, it may prove a useful exercise to inspect the curriculum vitae of this putative peace-maker, especially during those formative years when the Secretary of State first carved out his name in the jungles of Southeast Asia. Though Kerry has a reputation as an anti-war activist, his brief tenure in Vietnam and Cambodia was notable both for acts of casual savagery and his striking lack of contrition for his own participation in atrocities that in a rational society might easily be classified as war crimes.–JSC

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/07/26/what-john-kerry-really-did-in-vietnam/
    July 26 2013

  • mark stephen golding

    Phil – ..and compromise a valuable, even cherished source; – Phil you know me better – do you not?

    I am not a ‘Juliet’ of Mr Jones, neither I suspect is Craig. Infowars is a compilation – period.

1 2 3 4 15

Comments are closed.