Is Fiona Hill a Sleeper Agent?
Ed. note: Does anyone actually think we will at some point know what is really going on with the “deep state” between Russia and America? Our guess is Fiona Hill works for the Neocons and that President Trump is being fed bad intelligence all around. If there is any doubt about the Neocons running the White House, this linked article below may open a few eyes. Discussing anything at all about the “deep state” without analysis of the Neocons isn’t a good formula when trying to figure out what exactly is going on between Russia and America with the Neocons running interference. The real problem is the Neocons are conning everyone into hating the Russians. These Neocons have nothing but contempt for the American people because we have lost “command and control” of our government institutions handing power over to these Neocon networks and deeply entrenched think tanks by default. As Americans, we are at serious risk and here is why:
“What is sure is that you will never see a Neocon in frontline combat. Neither they nor their kids will die no matter what they do. Or so they think. This is one of the main reasons why these Neocons are the single biggest danger for the United States and the American people: they despise the real American people and they won’t hesitate to sacrifice them, in large numbers if needed (9/11 anybody?).”https://thesaker.is/the-trump-administration-goes-neocon-crazy/
The question to be asking concerning Fiona Hill is, do her activities and policy decisions favor the Neocons? Fiona Hill is presently on a leave of absence from the Brookings Institute and this think tank is a major bastion of Neocon policies and networking with other Neocon-related think tanks like the Heritage Foundation. Contrary to the Heritage Foundation writing the Neocons are an “endangered species“, don’t believe it, the Heritage Foundation remains whoring for Neocons. One of the more notorious Neocons is Robert Kagan who is married to Victoria Nuland who was at the US State Department. Russia’s Foreign Minster Sergey Lavrov, was well aware of what the Neocons were doing in Ukraine under Nuland, that when Sergey Lavrov entered a conference room where John Kerry and Victoria Nuland were, Lavrov curtly dismissed Nuland completely ignoring her. Fiona Hill and Robert Kagan along with other well known Neocons, work closely together at the Brookings Institute.
The Neocons clearly do not like being referred to as Neocons, otherwise The Chicago Tribune wouldn’t have ran the article with the title: “It’s time to retire the ‘neocon’ label.” Adam Schiff is their front man in the senate who is “An Evil Bug-Eyed Fascist” leading this constant Trump-destroying Russia-hating as an “unbalanced hack.”
Fiona Hill obtained her PhD under Richard Pipes who mentored her. Richard Pipes was the father of American historian and expert on American foreign policy and the Middle East, Daniel Pipes. If there ever was a hardcore ultra Neocon and Zionist it is Daniel Pipes despite being a trained scholar. It is Daniel Pipes, Jared Kushner, David Friedman (US Ambassador to Israel), Ron Dermer (Israeli Ambassador to US) and Jason Dov Greenblatt, Trump special aide who are behind the “peace deal” for Palestine. According to Daniel Pipes, there can only be one victor in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the loser isn’t going to be Israel.
The Neocons are already fully aware of just how dysfunctional America’s government is and have clearly stepped in to take control under Trump. Look who was brought in to go after Venezuela, the most treacherous Neocon provocateur in Washington, Elliott Abrams. Donald Trump has been completely captured by the Neocons. And as far as Steve Bannon getting kicked out of the White House, the Neocons were behind his dismissal.
We can see the ultra Neocon Daniel Pipes is not going to allow the US military to withdraw from Syria despite what President Trump announces. When the record is considered it is pretty much easily observed Trump is being undermined when necessary and provided false intelligence when Neocon goals are revealed or compromised.
In addition to being a geo-political disaster, the withdrawal of US troops from Syria has a moral dimension: It leaves the Kurds, America’s steadfast ally, exposed to attack by #Turkey‘s forces. When US soldiers helped the Kurds, #Erdoğan dared not attack them. Now he is free to. pic.twitter.com/jxeoaM9Tvc— Daniel Pipes دانيال بايبس (@DanielPipes) December 22, 2018
Fiona Hill is British-American so what if any connections are there back to UK Neocon think tanks and possible intelligence links? Judging how much the British despise Russia, just look at the Skripal case as an example of what kinds of operations are deployed against Moscow.
Source: Fort Russ
COLLUSION OR DIPLOMACY? A Trump ‘Hawk’ makes Surprise visit to Moscow
MOSCOW – The Russian media reported on the surprise trip of the adviser to President Donald Trump and Senior Director for European and Russian Affairs of the National Security Council of the USA, Fiona Hill, to Moscow.
According to the Kommersant newspaper, a delegation from the White House led by Hill arrived in Moscow.
Neither the US nor the Russian authorities publicly reported on this visit.
During her trip, Hill met with representatives of the Security Council of Russia and the Russian Foreign Minister.
According to Kommersant, this is not Fiona Hill’s first visit to Moscow as an adviser to the US president, but her previous visits were not known either.
Prior to joining the Trump Administration, Hill was part of the board of the Brookings Institution in Washington. As author of the biographical book ‘Putin: an agent of the Kremlin’ and former specialist of the National Intelligence Council, she has spoken publicly about the Russian authorities.
During a meeting held in 2018 Hill with the Russian ambassador to the US, Anatoli Antonov, the senior official commented that in the relations between Moscow and Washington “it is likely that everything will get worse before it improves.”
Please go to Fort Russ to read the entire article.
Source: Russia Insider
Vladimir Putin Is Safe If Donald Trump’s Expert on Russia Is Fiona Hill, But Is Trump?
Trump is getting bad advice on Russia from his National Security Council
by John Helmer | Tuesday, May 16, 2017
When it first appeared in Washington in December 2013, the semi-thousand page biography of Vladimir Putin by two minor American think-tank researchers, Fiona Hill and Clifford Gaddy, was judged to be a valuable compilation of everything the US news media and other government-funded think-tanks had already reported, suspected or believed about the Russian president for the previous decade. No more, no less. In Russia, since no knowledgeable or politically significant Russian contributed evidence to the book, much less.
The subsequent publication of chapters on the putsch in Ukraine in February 2014, the accession of Crimea, Russian military intervention in Syria in 2015, and the US war to overthrow Putin and fight Russia everywhere in cyberspace, added nothing more remarkable in Washington, and nothing novel (non-fictional sense) in Moscow.
But had Hill not been appointed a few weeks ago as President Donald Trump’s (lead image, right) director of Russia at the National Security Council (lead left), the principal foreign policy advisor serving the President, Hill’s book, with its one thousand and one footnotes, and fifteen single-spaced pages of references, led by Hill and Gaddy themselves, The Economist, and extracts from the Voice of America, would have been as inconsequential as they have already proved to be for years. However, Trump’s confidence in, and dependence on Hill’s advice on Putin, and the campaign to impeach Trump himself for high crimes and misdemeanours in association with Putin, change the way the book must now be interpreted.
Does the evidence that Hill spent two formative years as a student at an institute in Moscow where she rubbed shoulders with Russians bound for, and already bound to, the two state intelligence services, GRU (military intelligence) and SVR (foreign intelligence), require a counter-intelligence assessment because of the risk which was unforeseen until now?
Hill’s Moscow time is a detail of her resume which has yet to be identified in US media reporting and Congressional committee vetting. But as a Russian source from the institute points out, “this is especially curious if we take into account the fact that the Moscow State Linguistic University is a source of supply of employees for GRU and SVR. It was during the Soviet period, and it remains the same nowadays.” As another Russian source familiar with the secret services points out, by the standard of investigation the CIA, FBI and the US media now apply to Trump, his appointees, business associates, advisers, family, and friends, does this detail require special scrutiny for Hill? “Her book,” claims the source, “is so full of false leads and dead-ends, don’t the Americans wonder if Hill is a sleeper agent, recruited long ago with the mission to keep the Americans as ignorant of Russia as her book on Putin demonstrates?”
If Hill is a continuing Russian penetration risk at the White House, then is there also the risk that the potentially culpable General Michael Flynn, National Security Adviser between January 20 and February 13, 2017, and his successor General H.R. McMaster, have failed to protect Trump himself?
In her book, Hill makes much of her Russian language and translation skills, including her own translation of Putin’s campaign biography of 2000. She doesn’t reveal that she got her skills from two years of study at the Maurice Thorez Moscow State Pedagogical Institute of Foreign Languages.
The Thorez Institute was the Soviet-period name, commencing in 1935 to honour the French Communist Party leader from 1930, who spent the war years in the USSR before a brief term as Vice Premier of France. The institute operates at a converted 19th century mansion on Ostozhenka Street, in Moscow’s old city. Thorez’s name was removed in 1990, but it sticks to the school as durably as the new acronym, MSLU. The institute itself says it cannot confirm the years Hill was a student there until it searches its old paper archives, and that may take weeks.
Please go to Russia Insider to read the entire article.
Trump Was Worried HR McMaster or Fiona Hill Would Spy on His Conversation with Putin
July 7, 2017 |42 Comments |in Foreign Policy | by emptywheel
There were two infuriating stories earlier this week in preparation of today’s meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin.
The Daily Beast reported that Trump’s aides wanted top NSC Russia expert Fiona Hill in the meeting between the presidents.
According to two White House aides, senior Trump administration officials have pressed for Hill—the National Security Council’s senior director for Europe and Russia and the author of critical psychological biography of Putin—to be in the room during the president’s highly anticipated meeting with Putin.
If Hill is there, these officials believe, it will help the White House avoid the perception that the president is too eager to cozy up to the Kremlin. The hope is to avoid a repeat of Trump’s last meeting with top Russian officials, during which he disclosed classified intelligence to two of the country’s top diplomats—and was pictured by Russian state media looking particularly friendly with them.
But it used linguistic gymnastics to avoid stating who might decide to keep Hill out of the meeting.
Then Axios reported that just Trump, Rex Tillerson, and a translator would represent the US.
There will likely only be six people in the room when President Trump meets President Putin on Friday at the sidelines of the G-20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany.
According to an official familiar with the meeting’s planning, it will be Trump, Putin, the Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, and translators.
But it, too, remained silent about who decided to keep the attendee list so small (though admittedly, that detail was a less crucial part of their story).
Thankfully, the NYT has finally revealed that it was Trump, not Putin, who chose to limit attendees.
Only six people attended the meeting itself: Mr. Trump and his secretary of state, Rex W. Tillerson; Mr. Putin and his foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov; and two interpreters.
The Russians had agitated to include several more staff members in the meeting, but Mr. Trump’s team had insisted that the meeting be kept small to avoid leaks and competing accounts later, according to an administration official with direct knowledge of the carefully choreographed meeting, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity around the matter.
And he did so specifically to avoid leaks about what would transpire.
This means that Trump (personally, given the NYT portrayal) decided to exclude his National Security Advisor and top Russian advisor. And he did so, again, based on the NYT reporting, because he didn’t want a competing account from coming out. He basically excluded the key staffers who should have been in the meeting, in spite of the wishes of aides, to avoid having Russian critics describing what really happened in his meeting with Putin.
Remember, this is not the first time Trump has excluded McMaster from a key meeting: he also left McMaster sitting outside his meeting with Bibi Netanyahu, after belatedly inviting Tillerson in.