One question that I am hoping that the Museum or some kind soul here could shed some light - how did Kim Philby communicate with his handlers in wartime London?
With anything like this, it's a little difficult given how much (or how little) we actually know - Ben Macintyre's book A Spy Among Friends puts it like this: "One morning in 1941, Kim Philby caught the train to London, taking with him, as usual, a 'bulging briefcase and a long visiting list'...He let the first train leave without boarding. Then he waited until every other passenger had boarded the next train before slipping on just as the doors closed. Two stops later, he alighted and caught a train in the opposite direction. Then he hopped on a moving bus. Finally certain that he was not being followed ("dry-cleaned," in spy jargon), Philby made his way to a park, where a stocky, fair-haired man was waiting for him on a bench. They shook hands; Philby handed over the contents of his briefcase and then headed to King's Cross to catch the train home to St Albans." Basically, Philby would copy documents (sometimes in code, in Spain Philby wrote coded reports to a handler in Paris, which of course had to be sent) and deliver them by hand to a handler after complicated maneuvers to lose a tail. Honestly, I find this all a little hard to believe but supremely interesting- I'm not sure how else such a thing could be done, logistically speaking. Hope it answers your question! :)
As a committed socialist I struggle hugely with all of the Cambridge 5. With the possible exception of Cairncross there were upper middle class toffs who enjoyed the trappings of a priviledged upbringing and yet they supposedly alligned themselves with communism. They surely must have been aware of the tyranny of Stalin, particularly during and after the war. Were they naive, or self dellusional?
Disappointed, this is a serious subject with great relevance to America today... The conference was poorly done and it appears as if some of the participants are not well prepared... With Yale, Brookings and people out there like Strobe Talbot, it is important we know more about the Cambridge Five and their similarities to some of today's political dynamics...
Who are these people? Are these guys the five of MI 5, obviously not since some were never in MI5. You would have to be very gullible to even assume there were only 5 traitors.
The lady discussing Anthony Blunt is an annoying "up-talker". Most every statement is spoken as a question. A distinct indication of her youth given that most of her age speaks in this manner. While she may full well know her topic very well, she will lose audiences who prefer proper syntax.
Thank you for the time and energy you guys put into this.. thoroughly enjoyed myself.
Bottoms up , Cheers Mates
They knew about Philby and didn't want the bad PR
One question that I am hoping that the Museum or some kind soul here could shed some light - how did Kim Philby communicate with his handlers in wartime London?
With anything like this, it's a little difficult given how much (or how little) we actually know -
Ben Macintyre's book A Spy Among Friends puts it like this:
"One morning in 1941, Kim Philby caught the train to London, taking with him, as usual, a 'bulging briefcase and a long visiting list'...He let the first train leave without boarding. Then he waited until every other passenger had boarded the next train before slipping on just as the doors closed. Two stops later, he alighted and caught a train in the opposite direction. Then he hopped on a moving bus. Finally certain that he was not being followed ("dry-cleaned," in spy jargon), Philby made his way to a park, where a stocky, fair-haired man was waiting for him on a bench. They shook hands; Philby handed over the contents of his briefcase and then headed to King's Cross to catch the train home to St Albans."
Basically, Philby would copy documents (sometimes in code, in Spain Philby wrote coded reports to a handler in Paris, which of course had to be sent) and deliver them by hand to a handler after complicated maneuvers to lose a tail. Honestly, I find this all a little hard to believe but supremely interesting- I'm not sure how else such a thing could be done, logistically speaking. Hope it answers your question! :)
What a Cluster-F of MI5
As a committed socialist I struggle hugely with all of the Cambridge 5. With the possible exception of Cairncross there were upper middle class toffs who enjoyed the trappings of a priviledged upbringing and yet they supposedly alligned themselves with communism. They surely must have been aware of the tyranny of Stalin, particularly during and after the war. Were they naive, or self dellusional?
Disappointed, this is a serious subject with great relevance to America today... The conference was poorly done and it appears as if some of the participants are not well prepared... With Yale, Brookings and people out there like Strobe Talbot, it is important we know more about the Cambridge Five and their similarities to some of today's political dynamics...
with so many books about them and you sitll believe, like a bible, in Philby's or Modim's book, is a shame
Who are these people? Are these guys the five of MI 5, obviously not since some were never in MI5. You would have to be very gullible to even assume there were only 5 traitors.
👍
The lady discussing Anthony Blunt is an annoying "up-talker". Most every statement is spoken as a question. A distinct indication of her youth given that most of her age speaks in this manner. While she may full well know her topic very well, she will lose audiences who prefer proper syntax.
Good lord what a waste of time. Children spy historians!!