Cea mai puternică lovitură primită de serviciile de informaţii româneşti în întreaga lor istorie s-a petrecut la jumătatea anului 1978, când însuşi şeful adjunct al spionajului românesc1, generalul Ion Mihai Pacepa a trecut în tabăra adversă. N. Ceausescu a solicitat ulterior autorităţilor americane printr-un emisar din CPEx, trimis în SUA, ca diplomaţii români să nu fie prigoniţi şi denigraţi de către serviciile speciale americane. S-a pus astfel, în plan extern, surdină cazului Ion Mihai Pacepa.
Migranţii tigani erau călăuziţi pentru a ajunge în mod fraudulos în localităţile Cancún şi Mexico City, din Mexic, şi, ulterior, după efectuarea plăţii, erau preluaţi de alţi membri ai grupării tiganesti şi transferaţi pe teritoriul statului american, cu destinaţia Los Angeles şi New York.
Poliţia şi DIICOT au colaborat cu agenţii FBI şi CIA pentru anihilarea grupării tiganesti de traficanţi de tigani.
Prestigioasa publicatie TIME arata in articolul “Hounded in Europe, Roma in the U.S. Keep a Low Profile” (“Vanati in Europa, Romii din SUA tin capul la cutie”) ca romii, cunoscuti mai bine ca tigani (in original “the Roma, more commonly known as Gypsies”), ajung in SUA pentru ca sunt haituiti de rasism in Europa. Speram ca autoritatile americane si cele romanesti nu au actionat in baza acelorasi sentimente cand au dat iama in clanurile din Craiova, tinand cont ca toti infractorii vizati erau tigani.
Ziaristi Online solicita CNCD-ul sa investigheze de urgenta acest caz si sa sanctioneze atat autoritatile SUA si ale Romaniei, de la CIA la DIICOT, cat si pe cele din Italia, Franta, Germania si Spania, care nu par sa suporte tiganii – cunoscuti mai putin ca romi – din motive necunoscute.
Pe de alta parte, se pare ca clanul tiganesc a actionat in baza imboldului oferit chiar de acest articol din TIME, in care Jakab Orsos, fost director al Centrului Cultural Maghiar din New York sustine ca tiganii pot solicita asil politic in SUA in baza atacurilor rasiste la care sunt supusi in tarile lor de origine, desi acesta este un proces complicat. “E foarte rau ca acest lucru este atat de dificil”, se plange ungurul citat in revista TIME, concluzionand: “Marile orase ale Americii pot oferi o liniste minunata, perfecta, pentru Tigani (Gypsies).” Subsemnam!
UPDATE: La plangerea noastra catre CNCD se adauga si autoritatile din Mexic. Iata de ce:
“Un prieten bun (unul dintre cei alaturi de care am fost in Jamaica) a plecat in Mexic. La plaja! zeci de ore de zbor si de escale prin aeroporturi. Ajunge acolo, este tratat din prima ca un infractor si acuzat fara probe ca vrea, de fapt, sa emigreze in SUA. Chestia e legata de scandalul sutelor de rromi, trecuti peste gardul mexican (o cautare pe net e suficienta pt asta). Capii afacerii erau din… Craiova! Una peste alta, omul n-are treaba cu scandalul. Dar nu i se iau in considerare argumentele, dovezile certe de la agentia de turism, nu conteaza ca are cazare, bilet de intoarcere etc., asigurare, nici ca poate proba lejer ca are suficienti bani pe card cat sa-si permita o excursie la Cancun. E tratat ca un infractor si atat. E trimis inapoi in Europa, la Paris, cu bilet emis de politia mexicana. Situatie extrem de jenanta in avion, unde insotitorii de zbor stiu ce inseamna un astfel de bilet. La Paris e preluat la aeroport ca Escobar, de masini cu girofare si de oameni in uniforma. Umilinta totala. E dus la politie si pus sa dea declaratii. Din fericire, francezii nu se lasa dusi de prejudecati. Ii verifica actele, ii asculta argumentele, se conving de realitate, il saluta si il trimite sa se plimbe prin Paris. Ca sa-si recupereze bagajele il costa 300 de euro! Omul e avocat. Ne spune: “urmeaza procesul!” L-am sunat imediat (e inca la Paris), am vb cu el a fost de acord. Asa ca eu zic: “Urmeaza o poveste!” Cu multe detalii!”
Tismaneanu si Patapievici: sub zodia noilor cominformisti
“Cazul Volodea” sau Ce vor sa stie americanii despre emigrarea lui Vladimir Tismaneanu
În urmă cu un an şi mai bine am fost solicitat de “un membru al staffului tehnic” al unuia dintre cele două partide dominante ale scenei politice americane să sprijin efortul de lămurire a împrejurărilor în care Vladimir Tismăneanu, fiul militanţilor comunişti Leonte Tismăneanu și Hermina Marcushon, a “emigrat” în SUA în 1981, când doar agenţii din Securitate, Direcţia Informaţii Externe, aveau parte de asemenea privilegii. Aceştia sunt termenii în care mi-a fost adresată cererea.
Prima mea reacţie a fost aceea de a observa, nu fără maliţiozitate, că, în primul rând, respectivii agenţi trebuiau “pierduţi” într-un număr rezonabil de emigranţi adevăraţi şi, în al doilea rând, că serviciile de spionaj nu prea îşi trimiteau agenţii direct la ţintă, ci pe rute ocolite, care puteau include una sau mai multe ţări de tranzit, ideal fiind să ajungă la destinaţie ca cetăţeni ai uneia dintre aceste ţări. Remarca mi-a fost aprobata “profesionist” şi considerată ca fiind bine-venită.
Interlocutorul meu avea o listă de probleme neclare asupra împrejurarilor plecării lui Vladimir Tismăneanu din România şi m-a rugat să-i facilitez legătura cu foştii ofiţeri a căror nume au fost extrase din documentele întocmite de unităţi ale Departamentului Securităţii Statului în legătură cu eliberarea, în 1981, a paşaportului care i-a deschis Cortina de Fier.
Am reţinut lista şi i-am promis că la o viitoare revenire în România s-ar putea să am o parte din răspunsuri, dar că nu-i voi intermedia nici o legătură cu ofiţerii respectivi, dacă ei există.
Agitaţia tsunamică a personajului controversat, urmare la comentariile provocate de publicarea în cotidianul.ro a articolului Cristinei Horvat “Cartea neagră a băsismului. Tismăneanu: «Atacarea lui Băsescu duce la izolarea ţării»”, mă determină să anticipez, în parte, unele dintre clarificările posibile asupra împrejurarilor plecării sale din ţară.
Astfel, deşi în documentele identificate la Consiliul Naţional pentru Studierea Arhivelor Securităţii (unde se află doar ceea ce nu mai are legătură cu securitatea naţionala a României în contextul noii sale alianţe politico-militare) sunt o serie de piese care pun în evidenţă preocupările Centrului de Informaţii Externe faţă de persoana sa, avizul favorabil eliberării paşaportului, fundamentat pe câteva argumente false, l-a dat o unitate a Serviciului Intern al Securităţii, cea de contrainformaţii în sectoarele economice (vezi documentul la Ziaristi Online)
(…)
7. Refuzul lui V.T. de a reveni în ţară nu a produs nici un deranjament major până în primăvara anului 1987, când s-a simulat o anchetă internă a circumstanţelor plecării. Scandalizarea a fost la nivelul şefului Centrului de Informaţii Externe, dar “oalele sparte” s-au decontat la unitatea serviciului intern care a avizat plecarea.
8. Unul dintre ofiţerii care au avut în studiu, verificare şi pregătire obiectivul a trebuit să-şi întrerupă fortuit activitatea. Circumstanţele ar merita un studiu de caz.
9. Elementele reţelei KGB de control asupra acţiunilor Securităţii trebuie obligatoriu prezumate ca fiind mai puternice şi mult mai dificil, dacă nu imposibil, de controlat pe zonele externe ale activităţii, unde exista, la un moment dat, o adevărată inflaţie de agenţi ai Moscovei originari din Basarabia şi care treceau drept români.
10. S-a arătat că obiectivul a avut puncte de sprijin în Venezuela, aceasta fiind ultima ţară de tranzit spre SUA.
Nota bene: Spionajul României nu a folosit Venezuela sau Mexic şi, în general, ţările din America Latină pentru “acomodarea” agenţilor cu destinaţie SUA sau Canada, deoarece spaţiile respective erau fieful KGB.
Aurel I Rogojan / Fereastra Serviciilor Secrete, Editura Compania, 2011
Mosteniri imperiale in Comintern si organele de securitate sovietice
Nota: Tentative de a nega faptul ca Valter Roman si Leon Tismaneanu au fost agenti sovietici au fost facute individual de membri ai familiilor lor. In cazul lui Tismaneanu, statele de plata ale Cominternului din februarie-iunie 1944 indica faptul ca era platit cel mai bine, dintre cei 26 de agenti de pe lista, surclasand agenti semnificativi ca Vasile Luca, Iosif Chisinevschi sau Valter Roman. Numai Boris Stefanov (nume de acoperire: I. Draganov) primea la fel de mult ca el, iar acesta era titularul Partidului Comunist Roman din acea vreme. Vezi Rosiiskii Gosudarstvennyi Arkhiv Sotsial’noi i Politicheskoi Istorii [Arhiva Rusa de Stat pentru Istorie Politica si Sociala: RGASPI], fond 495, opis 286, dosar 55, f. 13
Larry L Watts / With Friends Like These, Editura Militara / Fereste-ma, Doamne, de prieteni, Editura RAO, Bucuresti, 2011
Cele doua documente si capitolul dedicat lui Tismaneanu, integral, la Ziaristi Online
Urmeaza: De la N.K.V.D. şi Gestapo la Banca Naţională a României şi Institutul Cultural Român
Incepand de azi, Ziaristi Online publica din cartea recent aparuta la Editura RAO, “Intre linii“, scrisa de Eugen Mihaescu, membru de onoare al Academiei Romane si fost ambasador al Romaniei la UNESCO, tusele portretelor unor personaje surprinse de ochiul acerb al graficianului de la Time Magazine, New York Times si New Yorker.
“Memorialişti ai istoriei recente se întâlnesc mai rar, şi, de cele mai multe ori, sunt politicieni care vor să-şi justifice eşecurile cu speranţa unei reveniri spectaculoase, după ce mulţimea, le-a citit cartea şi le-a dat dreptate”, scrie istoricul Alex Mihai Stonescu in prefata cartii, continuand: “Este şi cazul ultimelor cărţi memorialistice ale lui Ion Iliescu, o tentativă de a răspunde problemelor grave pe care le ridică acţiunile sale în istoria recentă”. Istoricul mai arata ca “in volumul Între linii, al lui Eugen Mihăescu, artist recunoscut deja în rândul valorilor internaţionale şi totodată rafinat intelectual român, am găsit exact opusul oricărui interes propagandistic. Amintirile sale din perioada regimului Iliescu au creditul preţios al obiectivităţii, pentru că nu sunt interpretări ale faptelor şi evenimentelor, ci relatări, uneori minuţioase, ale unor intâmplări la care a participat direct”. “Două sunt valorile cărţii lui Eugen Mihăescu: informaţia istorică şi stilul literar cuceritor, care face din cele mai dezolante momente de istorie recentă o lectură asimilabilă şi un episod al reflecţiei”, afirma Alex Mihai Stoenescu.
Prezentam astazi prima parte a schitei despre un fost propagandist comunist si aventurile lui uluitoare: Volodea Tismaneanu. Titlul, fotografiile si intertitlurile apartin redactiei.
Un articol aparut in TIME, in 18 octombrie 2007, dar care contine date foarte interesante.
Foto: Tiny radio frequency identification (RFID) computer chips with the needles used to implant them under the skin.
You may not know what RFID stands for, but you’re probably using the technology on a daily basis. RFID (that is, radio frequency identification) is in passports, in electronic toll-collection tags, in credit cards, metrocards, library books and car keys. Like conventional bar codes, RFID chips store and relay information, and allow for the identification of commercial products — and, now, of house pets and people too. Human “tagging” was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2004 to facilitate retrieval of private medical records, but the procedure has had few takers. It’s still purely voluntary and last week, California Gov. Schwarzenegger sought to keep it that way, signing a bill that makes it illegal for employers to force workers to have RFID devices implanted as a means for receiving paychecks or government benefits. But this summer, a large pilot program involving hundreds of human patients got under way at the Alzheimer’s Community Care agency in West Palm Beach, Florida. The maker of the RFID chips used in the program, VeriChip Corporation, a subsidiary of the Delray Beach–based Applied Digital Solutions, is funding the initiative and wants to market its tags to the roughly 45 million high-risk patients in the U.S. with diseases such as Alzheimer’s, diabetes, cancer and heart disease. The company says these patients can benefit from having instant and accurate access to medical records, which the chip would provide. “The medical community understands the need for a comprehensive electronic medical record that has portability,” says VeriChip Chairman and CEO Scott Silverman. “What goes on in emergency rooms and even in practices today is archaic. Pen-and-paper record keeping is 97% of medical records today; 98,000 deaths occurred last year in emergency rooms because of no information or inaccurate information.” To date 2,000 people worldwide have voluntarily had the VeriChip tag implanted into their upper right arms, among them patients with chronic or debilitating disease — as well as VIP patrons of a Barcelona nightclub and investigators requiring special access to confidential drug-trafficking case files at the Ministry of Justice in Mexico. Over the next two years, VeriChip and Alzheimer’s Community Care plans to inject 110 patients with dementia or Alzheimer’s with the chip as well. But VeriChip came under fire in September — shortly after the first 90 or so Alzheimer’s patients received its chips in Florida — after an AP report unearthed studies suggesting the chips may cause cancer in laboratory animals. Within two weeks of the AP report, VeriChip’s stock plummeted from just under $6 a share to a low of $3.50, a company spokesman says. The AP cited three studies published between 1996 and 2006 that “found that lab mice and rats injected with microchips sometimes developed subcutaneous sarcomas — malignant tumors, most of them encasing the implants.” In an exclusive interview with TIME, Silverman provided a list of 34 studies the company included in its FDA application, including one of the three mentioned in the AP article, which showed that less than 1% of 4,279 chipped mice developed tumors “clearly due to the implanted microchips” but were otherwise healthy, and that “no clinical symptoms except the nodule on their backs were shown.” The second study, conducted in France in 2006, two years after VeriChip’s FDA application was approved, found that while 4% of the 1,260 mice in the study developed tumors, none of them were malignant. As for the third study, Silverman says it was conducted in mice specifically bred to produce tumors, and was therefore omitted from the sheaf of studies included in the FDA application. Other studies that were sent to the regulatory agency also showed tumor growth, but associated only with vaccination sites. Dr. Lawrence D. McGill, a veterinarian and leading expert in animal pathology says the tumor development in rodents is unsurprising. “Even if you put in a bland piece of plastic, it will produce tumors in rats and mice,” says McGill, who assessed the studies on behalf of VeriChip. He says it would be a leap to apply the findings of studies in mice to cats or dogs — or to humans, for that matter — which are much more complex animals. Few official scientific studies have been conducted on the effects of microchip implants on house pets, but none have found a link between the chips and cancer, says McGill. If there were a problem, he says, we would have already seen lots of cancer among the approximately 10 million pets that have been chipped over the past 15 years. Says Silverman, “There are no reported incidents to the FDA of any cancer formation around that.” In fact, there has been one case of cancer — in a French bulldog named Leon — according to a 2006 study in Veterinary Pathology. But it remains unclear whether the cancer was caused by a microchip or as the result of an injection, or who the maker of the chip was. The dog’s tumor was removed in 2004, and a later examination found no recurrence. It seems that no one notified the FDA about Leon, but his case doesn’t appear to worry the agency, as evident from a statement it issued when the AP brought Leon’s story to light in September. “At this time, we continue to believe that the VeriChip is safe for humans,” the FDA said. “In all the safety data the FDA has reviewed for this device, including extensive animal data, we have seen no evidence suggesting toxic or carcinogenic effects.” News of the tumor studies haven’t yet dissuaded other groups, including Alzheimer’s Community Care and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), from encouraging the use of RFID microchips. Given the large number of Alzheimer’s patients in South Florida and the potential for natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods, the VeriChip comes in handy, says Mary Barnes, president and CEO of Alzheimer’s Community Care, because, unlike a medical medallion, it cannot be taken off or lost. “In Palm Beach County and South Florida, we have projected over 200,000 Alzheimer’s patients,” Barnes says. “When you’ve got that kind of risk out there for our family members … this type of technology is a godsend.” Over the next two years, Barnes will monitor how often medical records change for each of the patients in her agency’s RFID program, and will track how the caregivers work with the new technology. “You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure out this has great possibilities,” she says. Meanwhile, a handful of concerned pet owners have expressed interest in removing RFID chips from their furry companions, but VeriChip hasn’t heard of anyone doing so yet. The AVMA officially counsels against removing the chip, while assuring pet owners it will continue to monitor the situation. “At this point we do not recommend that people should stop microchipping,” says Dr. Rosemary LoGiudice, a veterinarian and assistant director with the AVMA. “We are actively watching. For the number of animals that are said to actually have microchips, when you consider the number of animals that have been microchipped and returned to their owners, the benefits are huge compared to the few and suspect cases that have been reported to have tumor formation.” At VeriChip, the outlook remains hopeful. Silverman says his company is bracing for the negative press by gathering up studies that prove the safety of its product. Even though the public hasn’t yet warmed to RFID tagging, Silverman says that sales are brisk and expects this year to double the 1.7 million chips sold in 2006.
Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica speaks at a press conference after he dissolved the government, March 8. 2008, in Belgrade, and called for new elections after clashing with his pro-Western coalition partners over Kosovo and EU membership. Kostunica said that he will convene a government session Monday that will propose to parliament that new elections be held May 11, zice EPA
By splitting the West and the wider international community, the U.S.-backed declaration of independence by Kosovo has given Russia an opening. Countries concerned with separatist problems of their own, from Spain or Cyprus to China, have been unable to follow the U.S. lead in recognizing Kosovo’s breakaway from Serbia. And Russia has sought to exploit the gaps that have emerged as a result.
In Serbia, itself, Russia capitalized literally, on the standoff over Kosovo. In Belgrade, just a week before he became Russia’s President-elect, Dmitri Medvedev supervised Serbia’s signing up to a prospective Russian Southern Stream natural gas pipe-line. Serbia also sold to Russia a 51% stake of Naftna Industrija Srbija (NIS), a much prized national oil company for $614 million and the promise of a further investment of $770 million. Russia plans build a major gas storage facility in Serbia, making the country a key base for Russian energy supplies to Europe. This consolidation of ties with Serbia achieves two Russian strategic goals: taking over national energy assets of European countries; and keeping erstwhile allies of the Soviet Union from being drawn into the Western fold. To emphasize warming ties, travel between Russia and Serbia will no longer require visas. The Balkans is not the only theater in which Moscow is strongly reasserting its presence. This week, just as Georgia’s breakaway provinces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia formally appealed to Russia, the U.N., the E.U. and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) a loose association of post-Soviet countries to recognize their independence. Russia has pointedly abandoned the economic sanctions, clamped on Abkhazia in 1996 to punish its separatism. The Parliament of the Russian Republic of Alania-North Ossetia already voted to incorporate South Ossetia. Next week, the Russian Duma will consider Abkhazian and South Ossetian appeals to join Russia. South Ossetia and Abkhazia broke away from Georgia in the 1990s in the wake of bloody ethnic wars. Much as those wars were ignited by the then Nationalist Georgian authorities, Russia fanned the flames by giving a brazen support to the separatists. It was the Russian army that won their wars against Georgia. Although Russia pays lip service to Georgia’s territorial integrity, it has tacitly supported breakaway provinces, just as it has done in Trans-Dniestria — a province that broke away from Moldova back in the 1990s. Russia deploys its peace-keepers in all the three separatist provinces, and these serve to counter any thoughts of forcible re-integration by Georgia or Moldova. Moscow has also granted Russian citizenship to some 90% of the Abkhazian and South Ossetian populations, giving it grounds to intervene whenever Russia deems it expedient, on the basis of ensuring the security of its citizens. “Russia is smartly playing a more subtle game then just formally recognizing breakaway provinces,” comments Tedo Japaridze, former Georgian Foreign Minister. Indeed, Russia could never openly annex South Ossetia or Abkhazia. That would have been very much in conflict with Russia’s harsh suppression of Chechnya’s independence, or fears of separatism in non-Russian ethnic regions. Annexing Abkhazia and South Ossetia was also “a red line” drawn by the U.S. But Russia has become the de facto power in both territories without formally annexing them. Chairman of the Chechen Parliament Dukvakha Abdurakhmanov blurted out last week that “Abkhazia has long been a part of Russia’s Southern Federal District.” Recently, Russia tacitly deployed units of its Chechen Vostok battalion in Abkhazia to beef up its force there as a deterrent against any Georgian move to regain the territory. Leonid Slutsky, First Deputy Chair of the Russian Duma’s Foreign Relations Committee, told Itar-Tass on Friday that “So far, Russia doesn’t have plans of recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia.” However, he said, “Should Georgia try using force there, the situation will cardinally change. The same concerns Georgia’s plans of joining NATO.” For its part, NATO, long eager to grant Georgia membership, has backpedaled, saying that Georgia isn’t yet ready to join. The Kosovo opening may indeed encourage a resurgent Russia to go beyond simply exercising de facto control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Another after-effect of Kosovo’s independence is Moscow’s rallying of its hitherto reluctant CIS partners against the West. Oil-rich Azerbaijan, for example, had long begun inclining towards the West, but may be pushed back into Moscow’s orbit because of Nagorno-Karabakh, a province that broke away in the 1990s and has de facto integrated with Armenia. Last week, for the first time in years, Azeri and Armenian forces clashed in a full scale fighting in Karabakh. Even a staunchly pro-Western Georgia, furious as it is with Russia, might finally be forced back into Russia’s orbit because of Kosovo. “It’s indeed surrealistic,” quips Japaridze darkly: “How it happens that in terms of the ‘Kosovo Precedent’ we, Georgians, Azerbaijani, Moldovans, have to support Russia’s position and go against the West?!”