Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: British Diplomat caught in a brothel in Russia

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Da of the Dasein
    Posts
    1,640

    British Diplomat caught in a brothel in Russia

    James Hudson, a british diplomat, was filmed in a brothel in Russia. After this «dickplomatic» incident he had to resign.

    Here's the whole story and the video of his session with a Russian duo.

    http://www.compromat.ru/page_28003.htm

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...hel-video.html
    ἄνθρωπος μέτρον
    Man is the measure of all things

    Sexo sin pecado es como huevo sin sal (Le sexe sans péché est comme un œuf sans sel/Sex without sin is like an egg without salt) [Carlos Fuentes]

  2. #2

    Wink

    that vid reminds me to lay off the french fries and do some situps.

  3. #3
    I am me, too!
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    If only I knew...
    Posts
    2,214
    Look like the guy was going bareback! On top of doing it in a place he can't control if there's camera, he's dumb enough to expose himself to diseases...

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by metoo4
    Look like the guy was going bareback! On top of doing it in a place he can't control if there's camera, he's dumb enough to expose himself to diseases...
    He had a condom on if you look carefully but what I dont get is he didnt notice the camera when he was doing them it was so close to him how could he have not noticed?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by THEHITMAN
    what I dont get is he didnt notice the camera when he was doing them it was so close to him how could he have not noticed?
    http://www.spygadgets.com/Merchant2/...Category_Code=

  6. #6
    Just goes to show you how much times have changed! Years ago that video would have gone directly to the KGB and they would have had another British diplomat in their pocket.
    And the Lord said unto John, "Come forth and receive eternal life." But John came fifth and won a toaster.

  7. #7
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Techman
    Just goes to show you how much times have changed! Years ago that video would have gone directly to the KGB and they would have had another British diplomat in their pocket.
    The article accompanying the video suggested that FSB (successor to KGB) was in fact responsible for this video, either to blackmail the diplomat or otherwise control him. It was presumably released when he refused to give in to the blackmail/control.

    The article also reports, and it is common knowledge, that video sex stings of this nature were a time honored tactic of the KGB, which usually used female operatives to pose as high class hookers. I would think diplomats are easy prey if they are known hobbyists, and FSB likely knew the guy was a hobbyist and probably paid off the brothel, which took FSB's money as well as the diplomat's.
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 07-12-2009 at 10:04 PM.

  8. #8
    Yes, but in the old days the KGB had their own 'swallows' to handle the entrapment. Now they have to use civilians. And the article also states that it may have been the work of a criminal organization. But I doubt that the threat of exposure, no pun intended, carries the weight today that it did in the 50's or 60's.

    Besides, with Bernie Ecclestone talking about how much he admires totalitarian regimes and Hitler, I don't think the Brits will bat an eye over this.
    And the Lord said unto John, "Come forth and receive eternal life." But John came fifth and won a toaster.

  9. #9
    Not to mention Max Mosley's sex tapes

  10. #10
    I recommend this book:

    Dancing with the Devil

    Remember the Soviet operation in the 80s where hot chicks were used against Marines at the US embassy in Moscow?

    This book describes the operation in full detail.

  11. #11
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Techman
    But I doubt that the threat of exposure, no pun intended, carries the weight today that it did in the 50's or 60's.
    That may be true as a general statement, but in this case the threat of exposure was the loss of Hudson's job and that threat did come home to roost. This guy was a career diplomat who had postings in 7 different Eastern European cities, he was probably making 6 figures and given his relative youth was probably on track for an Ambassadorship down the road. That's all gone now. He will never work for the British government again. He will probably have to find work as a private consultant, either for a local think tank or more likely for British companies looking to do business in one of the countries where he was posted. If you ask Hudson, he is probably not real happy about having to resign his job. In this economy, loss of one's job is ample threat.

    I can only speculate that FSB or organized criminals asked Hudson to do something that would have amounted to high treason, in order to avoid exposure. He had to know that refusal and subsequent exposure would force him to resign his job as a senior diplomat (he was Deputy Counsel General which I believe means he was their chief staff attorney or second in command to the chief).
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 07-13-2009 at 02:53 PM.

  12. #12
    There may be no evidence of a Ponzi scheme, but there may be a few irregularities popping up later in this matter.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Whoville
    Posts
    291
    Quote Originally Posted by EagerBeaver
    The article accompanying the video suggested that FSB (successor to KGB) was in fact responsible for this video, either to blackmail the diplomat or otherwise control him. It was presumably released when he refused to give in to the blackmail/control.
    What I thought, by firing the guy aren't the British scaring the WRONG message to their staff and increasing their risk of having diplomats getting
    "turned" in the future? I don't get it.
    J Edgar Whoever

  14. #14
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,144
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Edgar Who
    What I thought, by firing the guy aren't the British scaring the WRONG message to their staff and increasing their risk of having diplomats getting "turned" in the future? I don't get it.
    Diplomats are expected to not put themselves in situations where they can be blackmailed and their loyalty to the United Kingdom might then be compromised. I don't see how any country could do anything but what the British did with Hudson. Furthermore, if they continued to employ him they risked a very serious security breach at his hands - who knows what else FSB has on the guy. By keeping him on the Brits essentially would have invited the Russians to get more from the guy, by sex and maybe by other means.

    Another possibility beyond the blackmail scenario hypothesized in the Telegraph article is that this was retaliation by FSB against the UK for expelling 4 Russian diplomats in the aftermath of the Alexander Litvinenko poisoning in London in late 2006, after Russia refused to extradite the prime suspect. That whole episode was enormously embarassing to the Russian government because Litvinenko was an extremely outspoken expatriate Putin critic and the British press used the occasion of his murder by poisoning to create a heroic martyr figure and give a platform to Litvinenko's views. The Telegraph article alludes to this history but does not speculate that this may have been a simple retaliation: you make us look bad, we make you look bad.
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 07-13-2009 at 09:31 PM.

  15. #15
    Nothing I've read states if he was married or not so there could also be consequences coming from that direction too. But the guy will probably end up writing a book about the whole affair and likely end up with some sort of movie or TV miniseries deal.
    And the Lord said unto John, "Come forth and receive eternal life." But John came fifth and won a toaster.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •