> One of the things it mentions is the bike crash, there was an investigation but they couldn't find proof for it being anything other than an accident.
This is one of those things that are unknowable by the general public. It may have genuinely been an accident, but it may also have been an assassination. In both cases it is possible, even likely and expected, that the official account be the same.
A little potential snag in the story, though: "Nothing points to foul play, the Volkskrant said after speaking with people at the crash scene. Though, an anonymous MIVD employee told the newspaper that Van Sabben “paid a high price”" [1]. Perhaps that's there in the original piece you linked to: "‘Hij heeft een hoge prijs betaald’, klonk het bij de MIVD."
Nice to see that European intelligence services are still capable of something. The article mentioned the government didn't know - should they have known? Not sure what the law on that in Netherlands is. From what I read, Netherland's special services did know, it wasn't him working privately with US and Israel.
Yes, it could have been considered an act of war, and have caused major issues. There's a parliamentary commission that's responsible for controlling the Dutch intelligence services, consisting out of the leaders of the 5 biggest parties in parliament. The fact that they weren't informed is a scandal.
> Nice to see that European intelligence services are still capable of something
I don't think the AIVD has been criticized for being ineffective, if anything the other way around.
> I don't think the AIVD has been criticized for being ineffective, if anything the other way around.
reputation, carefully curated, is that they're small but can punch above their weight.
they watched the Russians hack the US Democrats in real time, for example. that's how we know Guccifer was the Russians -- Dutch intel was already on those systems. Woulda been nice if they stopped them, but you don't become an APT by intervening constantly or blowing 0-days willy-nilly, and the attribution was useful enough.
Yes, multiple levels of governance were unaware of these actions, including the prime minister (a covert action that could count as a casus belli might be something to mention to the PM) and the committee where the leading representatives are briefed on all matters intelligence ('commissie stiekem'). How it went down, both the executive and legislative branch of government were in the dark. That's way more trust than the system is supposed to give the spooks.
A former head of the intelligence department is quoted that not briefing the PM is more or less default ("sweeping his sidewalk"), which is an insult to democracy. Not that I cannot see the rationale for this action, but it all falls under the broad perversions of democracy and justice that our former-PM (Rutte) has willfully accepted.
European intelligence services are definitely capable, and the Dutch AIVD is highly regarded for its cyber capabilities.
In a proper functioning democracy at least the prime minister should know what intelligence services are up to. As those politicians are ultimately responsible. It’s not that intelligence services are independent lawless sub-states.
The AIVD nor the spy did know the specifics of the operation, e.g. that the waterpumps were carrying Stuxnet. Sources in the AIVD said that they felt used by the CIA.
We should form a rainbow-color coalition, invade on your premise, wage an unwinnable war for 20 years, and then ditch everything when it's apparent Western values are not welcomed by the local guerrilla.
> Why is it okay to attack Iran? Unless in a state of war, it seems just as “not-evil” to do this to the US or UK, no?
Iran funds, plans and executes terrorist attacks around the world, including Europe and the United States (via proxy organizations, and it also mostly fails, which is nice).
Iran supplies Russia with drones for its war with Ukraine (obviously this is after Stuxnet, but just pointing out they are aligned with Russia/China against the West).
Iran openly calls for the destruction of the United States and Israel (can you guess where its future nuclear weapons will be pointed at?).
How is it not okay for the United States and Israel to sabotage their nuclear program? How is it equivalent to sabotaging the UK?
That's semantics. The US does much much worse things, but because the US or the EU brand something "terrorist" then those that support it in one way or another are evil?
How many have Iran killed? The war on terror alone have caused more than 500.000 deaths. Sure you can say Iran is evil, but nothing you said makes them an okay target more than the US, UK, EU, etc.
I would love to read a rundown that is not so hyperbolic/dumbed down ("most sophisticated software in history" for some multiple-0-day worm, also supplying digital signatures of large manufacturers must be common practice for agencies, etc).
> Twee weken na zijn raadselachtige vertrek uit Iran overlijdt Van Sabben bij een ongeluk in Sharjah, nabij Dubai. Hij raakt op 16 januari 2009 met zijn motor van de weg, slaat over de kop en breekt zijn nek.
Two _weeks_ later, not two years later. That is incredibly efficient of the Iranian secret service. This is most likely even before Stuxnet was starting to do damage. Almost as if it really were an accident. Or as if there was another secret service involved. One that already knew what was going on. No loose ends.
Dubai's drivers are some of the most dangerous in the world. It's quite normal to see a Ferrari and Maserati pull up at an intersection, then take off on a drag race like they are in a Fast & Furious movie.
While the driving in general is pretty bad, the super car example is partially because there are a lot of companies that rent out super cars by the day/hour.
The guys you see red-lining a blue Lamborghini on Sheikh Zayed/JBR, with a selfie stick and two friends squashed into the back (sunglasses on at night of course), are almost always renters.
> His naked, decomposing remains were found in the bath of the main bedroom's en-suite bathroom, inside a red bag that was padlocked from the outside, with the keys inside the bag.
> A subsequent Metropolitan Police re-investigation concluded that Williams's death was "probably an accident".
I think the SVR probably did it, but you'd be remiss to ignore the facts that he had a documented interest in bondage and self bondage, had previously had to get help from his landlord after tying himself to a bed, and that a key to the padlock was found inside the bag with him. It was a weird case.
I am not sure if you trolling or serious. This kind of western moral superiority feeling that created the current regime at the first place. Iran is older than most civilisations on Earth. Chances are that they around while our culture is only in history books not zero.
The breadth and depth of Persian history and the beauty of poetry in Farsi are somewhat orthogonal to wishing the current rulers a long walk on a short pier.
With some small effort you can find a number of well educated culturally aware Iranian exiles who'll express similar thoughts wrt the end of the current regime.
You canot say that Iran is older than most civilizations on Earth. Is like saying Italy is older than most of other civilizations.
Yes, there have been people around for millenia, but they are far distant from Iran.
Mesopotamia is the start of the civilization, and part of it was on the modern Iran. Do mesopotamians belong to Iran people?
It's weird to assume my position comes from one of ignorance. In fact, it's in no small part born out of a deep respect for Persian people, history, and culture - things for which the current Islamist regime has obvious scorn and dislike.
but when the biggest western superpower, the only one to USE nukes, and on civilians at that talks, it has the moral high ground. It also does not topple regimes, asassinates its own citizens and others with drones, and just recently bombed an innocent families car while surprise pulling out of a country it had laid seige to. Yeah, moral high ground.
I'm tired of this nukes argument. The morality arises from having a great power and not using it to destroy everything. US could have used nukes against Russia or against any other country. They did not. But perhaps they should have considering how much evil it enabled to prosper in Russia and China, resulting in torturous deaths of tens of millions of people.
I fail to understand how you are (trying to?) justify the US nuking Russia or China. I’m not from any of these countries but I don’t follow your logic. Should some other country be permitted to nuke the US if the IS “became evil”?
I am not justifying as it didn't happen. But for example general Patton realized that Russian communists were equal or maybe even greater evil than the Nazis were. Now we know for sure that he had the right understanding - tens of millions people were murdered by Russian communists. More over they exported their murderous ideology into other countries causing even wider human suffering. My comment argues that if US had waged war against Russia after WW2 to liberate Russia from communist dictatorship then most likely nukes would have been used, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths (mind you - the nukes of the day were small in comparison), but avoiding tens of millions. But perhaps the nukes would not have been used as despite their fame, their real utility is small (if you are trying to minimize civilian causalities). We'll never know.
My main argument is that the usage of nukes by itself doesn't include any moral values - it is necessary to understand the context in what these weapons are used.
and what do we think about bombing civilians? what do we think about the entire government eagerly covering up the epstein shit? why did the trial not ask who the customers of the crimes were? face it, the US (and all governemnts im guessing) has no moral high ground, with the US being one of the worst (maybe not the wort, but certainly top 10 material). You may think you sit on a high horse, but you do not, and you'll never convince anyone else you do
I once was lost but now am found. With arguments like these, so persuasive, so insightful and relevant. I bow down to your most powerful debating style. Sir(or Xir or whatever you prefer), I bow down to you.
I also don't approve of Western warmongers interfering in other nations for the sake of immense profit, while couching the justification for their crimes in terms of human rights, when those Western nations involved in arms trafficking are easily among the absolute worst violators of human rights in the modern zeitgeist...
For as long as there are 1,000 secret CIA torture sites across the globe in the worlds most repressive nations, and for as long as Pine Gap still operates, the moral imperative to 'do something' about Iran doesn't exist. They're not the bigger fire. WE are.
I thought the headline was saying the report was from VK, as in VKontakte, the Russian social media site, implying an additional level of intrigue.