₦airaland Forum

Does Nigeria have foreign secret agents like the CIA, FSB and ISI?

rexbuton:
Does Nigeria have foreign secret agents like the CIA, FSB and ISI?

NIA

Obiagelli:
NIA

with covert operations ?

rexbuton:
with covert operations ?

I suppose

Yes

Obiagelli:
NIA

Which spy are you talking about? You mean that yeye agency with "suwegbe" intelligence.

@Obiagelli, there are alot of foreign spies littering all over MDAs and various organs of government in zoogeria even in our institutions as students and researchers; the worst is that most of them are Zoogerians

Decibel:
@Obiagelli, there are alot of foreign spies littering all over MDAs and various organs of government in zoogeria evenin our institutions as students and researchers; the worst is that most of them are Zoogerians

You have been listening to radio biafra?

Obiagelli:
You have been listening to radio biafra?

What is radiobiafra? There are high profile spy handles even here on Nairaland but...

Nigeria only spy on opposition, just like APC and PDP.

Decibel:
What is radiobiafra? There are high profile spy handles even here on Nairaland but...

i hear you

Obiagelli:
i hear you

You may be laughing that's gud...but it's the reality on ground. Sai Buhari!!

staymore:
Nigeria only spy on opposition, just like APC and PDP.

true that.

rexbuton:
Does Nigeria have foreign secret agents like the CIA, FSB and ISI?

No, not in the same sense.

why do you ask, btw.

This is espionage!!

Spies, sleepers and
hitmen: how the
Soviet Union’s KGB
never went away Vladimir Putin’s background as a
Soviet spy means there can be little
surprise at the blatant resurgence of
an aggressive surveillance state in
modern Russia

Vladimir Putin was never an especially distinguished spy. In the
1980s, the KGB dispatched him not
to a glamorous western capital but to
provincial East Germany. It was here,
in Dresden, that he sat out the
collapse of the Soviet Union, an event that filled him with horror and rage. For a brief moment in the 90s, the
KGB – now re-branded as the FSB,
the Federal Security Service – was on
the back foot. Since becoming
president in 2000, however, Putin
has transformed Russia into a giant spy state. He has brought back many
of the cold war espionage
techniques he first learned as a
young recruit in Leningrad’s KGB spy
school. Not that they ever quite went
away. FSB spies are a paranoid,
conspiratorial and deeply
xenophobic bunch. They see
themselves as the direct descendants
of the Cheka, Lenin’s feared, terrifying secret police. They are
obsessed, as in cold war times, with
finding and defeating Russia’s
“enemies”. Some of these so-called
“enemies” are foreign, some are
homegrown. In the 70s, the KGB employed a
wide repertoire of operational tricks.
Typically, they would eavesdrop on
western diplomats, harass British and
American journalists (slashing the
tyres of their cars was a favourite) and carry out break-ins and
buggings. Writing about Soviet
dissidents or Jewish emigration got
you into trouble When I got to Moscow in 2007 as
the Guardian’s correspondent I was surprised to discover that such
ancient KGB practices were back. For reasons that are still mysterious, the
FSB decided that I was one of its
enemies. Unpromising young men in
black leather jackets trailed me
round Moscow’s icy streets. This time,
the reporting taboos were Putin’s money, top-level Kremlin corruption
and the vicious war in the north
Caucasus. As well as demonstrative surveillance
– always more Inspector Clouseau
than John le Carré – Putin’s spies
made it clear that they were listening
to my calls. They pulled the plug, for
example, whenever I made a joke about Russia’s president. Like other
despots, Putin doesn’t have a sense
of humour (though he can do
sardonic repartee). The FSB also revived another old
KGB/East German Stasi tactic: what
the exasperated American
ambassador in Moscow calls “house
intrusions”. Over a period of nearly
four years FSB agents frequently broke into the Moscow flat where I
lived with my wife and two small
children. They left a series of
ridiculous clues to show that they
had been there. These included open windows, central heating wires cut,
family photos deleted from laptops,
and – most amusingly – a sex
manual in Russian, helpfully left
beside my bed. The British embassy politely advised
us that our flat was bugged. There
was little we could do about it, it said.
The same low-level psychological
techniques are used against British
and US diplomats in Moscow, as well as against Russian embassy staffers,
opposition activists, and many
others. In 2011, I was chucked out
of Moscow. This was another tactic
used repeatedly by the Soviet Union
against troublesome western correspondents who annoyed the
state, or tried to dodge censorship,
from the Bolshevik 1920s onwards. The FSB’s special wrath, however,
is directed not at foreigners but at
Russians it regards as fifth columnists
and traitors. In 2006, an alleged KGB
hit squad murdered the Russian
dissident Alexander Litvinenko in London. It poured radioactive
polonium-210 into his tea. He died in
agony three weeks later. The British
government believes that only a
Russian state agency could have got
hold of polonium, a rare and unstable isotope. The row over
Litvinenko’s death plunged London
and Moscow into a very cold war
stand-off, with a tit-for-tat expulsion
of diplomats. US diplomatic cables leaked in
2010 reveal that Whitehall is deeply
concerned about the number of
Russian spies – formal and informal –
now based in London. When the
west was preoccupied with 9/11, al- Qaida and the Middle East, Putin
stealthily ramped up the number of
Russian agents working abroad.
They included the glamorous
Russian US-based sleeper agent
Anna Chapman, exposed and later swapped. Russia’s foreign
intelligence agency, the SVR, keeps
close tabs on Russian exiles in
London. It also seeks to influence
British politicians. Some observers, meanwhile,
have expressed surprise at Moscow’s
takeover of Crimea and its covert
invasion of eastern Ukraine. In fact,
the “little green men” – undercover
Russian soldiers who seized Crimea – come straight from the KGB
playbook. Putin’s actions in Ukraine
follow a classic KGB doctrine known
as “active measures”. The phrase
encompasses disinformation,
propaganda, political repression and subversion. The goal, then as
now, is to weaken the west, create
divisions between Nato member
states, and to undermine the US in
the eyes of the world, especially the
developing world. These days, Russian propaganda
comes in the shape of the English-
language channel Russia Today and
via an army of Kremlin online trolls
who post comments on western
newspaper websites, including the Guardian’s. The production values
are modern, but the thinking entirely
Soviet. Russian television is under
the Kremlin’s thumb; one of the
lessons of the Ukraine crisis is that
propaganda, as in Soviet times, is highly effective. There are a few differences. In the
USSR, the KGB was under the direct
control of the Communist party. It
was subordinate to the Politburo.
Now, however, the FSB is
subordinate to nobody; it operates with impunity according to its own
secret rules. It has become Russia’s
most powerful and unaccountable
institution. On the eve of becoming president in
2000, Putin – then head of the FSB – gave a speech to his colleagues. “A group of FSB operatives,
dispatched undercover to work in
the government of the Russian
Federation, is successfully fulfilling its
task.” Like most of Putin’s “jokes”,
this one was mostly true.

www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/19/spies-spooks-hitmen-kgb-never-went-away-russia-putin

rexbuton:
with covert operations ?

Which kind covert operation NIA operatives sabi apart from patronizing different beer parlors & oloshos in Abuja every night and gossiping about their superior's girlfriends instead of them to infiltrate Boko Haram & neutralize Biafra's Nnamdi Kanu on his London waterbed, making it look like an accident.

Zoogeria operating a kindergarteen espionage

Newest cyber threat
will be data
manipulation, US
intelligence chief says

US intelligence chiefs are warning
Congress that the next phase of
escalating online data theft is likely to
involve the manipulation of digital
information. A “cyber armageddon”, long
imagined in Washington as a
catastrophic event of digitally
triggered damage to physical
infrastructure, is less likely than
“cyber operations that will change or manipulate data”, the US director of
national intelligence, James Clapper,
told the House intelligence committee
on Wednesday. More on this topic CIA to make sweeping structural
changes with focus on cyber
operations Clapper, backed by the director of
the National Security Agency, Admiral
Michael Rogers, said that while such
efforts had yet to manifest
themselves, US business and
governmental agencies had entered an era of persistent “low-to-
moderate level cyber-attacks from a
variety of sources”. Yet both indicated that US digital
networks are currently threatened
by wide-scale data theft, like the
recent intrusion into the networks of
the Office of Personnel Management, not destruction or compromise. Rogers and Clapper warned that a
mutated phase of malicious digital
penetrations would undermine
confidence in data stored and
accessible on US networks, creating
an uncertainty that could jeopardize US military situational awareness. “I believe the next push on the
envelope is going to be the
manipulation or the deletion of data
which would of course compromise
its integrity,” Clapper told the House
panel. Rogers testified that while the NSA
and its military conjoined twin, US
Cyber Command, had clear rules for
protecting US networks, its
authorities to engage in offensive
action online were murkier. In 2013, the Guardian published a secret directive on US digital offensive capabilities and a framework for their
use, thanks to the whistleblower
Edward Snowden. There is “still uncertainty about what
is offensive and what is authorized”,
Rogers said. “That’s a policy
decision.” While noting that offensive cyber
attacks were “an application of
force” akin to conventional military
conflict, Rogers suggested that NSA or Cyber Command require a freer
hand, warning: “A purely defensive
strategy is not going to change the
dynamic we find ourselves in now.” Rogers also urged new international
norms that would prohibit
“extracting mass personally
identifiable data”, although the
Snowden document hoard
demonstrates that to be the NSA’s practice worldwide. Nor should the global community
accept data destruction as a national
practice, Rogers said – a cyber
practice the US and Israel arguably
inaugurated by allegedly creating the
Stuxnet worm that hijacked and damaged industrial controls for
Iranian nuclear centrifuges. The FBI director, James Comey,
joined by Rogers, reprised his plea
for surreptitious access into end-to- end encrypted data. Comey argued that technologists had not truly tried
to find a mathematical solution that
would allow the US government
access without subjecting sensitive
data to increased insecurity. Though leading cryptographers
have likened Comey’s effort to
“magical thinking”, Comey said: “My reaction to that is, really? Have we
really tried?” Clapper testified that there was no
consensus within the intelligence
agencies as to the ultimate culprit in
the mass exfiltration of federal
employees’ data at the Office of
Personnel Management. Rogers said the NSA had provided
the office with “19 specific
recommendations” to forestall a
future hack, but did not indicate why
the US agencies tasked with
protecting government networks did not spot the vulnerabilities before 4
million personnel records were
stolen, reportedly by China. “I don’t think anyone is satisfied with
the environment we find ourselves in
right now,” Rogers said.

www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/10/cyber-threat-data-manipulation-us-intelligence-chief

tpiander:
No, not in the same sense.

why do you ask, btw.

I'm gathering Intel for Mossad
just kidding maybe..

.we have nationals in almost all continents, some of these could be utilized as assets and sleepers, especially these Igbo businessmen with good blending skills
but as a developing world power Nigeria should have foreign agents to assist in protecting her foreign economic interests and give timely advice to our foreign missions. The biggest problem facing our security operatives is Heineken

They have their spies in Owerri aka Okorocha, in Benin aka Oshiomole, in Port Harcourt, Calabar, Warri, and even in Jos.

Nigeria clearly has spies in Cameroon, Niger, Chad, Benin, Mali, UK, S. Africa and US.

Adminisher:
Nigeria clearly has spies in Cameroon, Niger, Chad, Benin, Mali, UK, S. Africa and US.

proof?