Talk:Robert Hanssen/Archive 1

Page needs expansion

This page needs to be expanded. It doesn't say anything about how he was found out. It just jumps to the fact that he was spared the death penalty. --Vitamin D 01:54, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

What is up with the relationship with Freeh - was Freeh his Boss at the time?

Somewhere I have a copy of the original affidaivit prepared by the arresting officer. One aspect missing from the current state of the article is the lack of detail of how Hanssen hid information -- such as rewriting the floppy disk driver to hide information on an apparently empty diskette.

Errors/Ambiguities

This paragraph is factual, except for the sentence in the parenthesis, which states a fact and then follows with pure speculation:

"According to important federal court documents, Hanssen told his Moscow handlers that he read My Silent War, the autobiography of British intelligence mole Kim Philby, when he was 14, and came to think of Philby as a hero. (The book, however, was published in 1968, when Hanssen was 24. Not too much need be read into that inaccuracy; Hanssen did not want to give the Russians clues as to his identity, and might not have wanted them to realize that he was close to retirement age when he made that assertion.)"

"Hanssen did not want to give the Russians clues as to his identity" How do we know that? How do we know what he was thinking when he was engaged in his spying?

"...and might not have wanted them to realize that he was close to retirement age when he made that assertion.)" Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. Let's stick to facts and let the readers draw their own inferences.

Any thoughts? Mcattell 17:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Mcattell

I don't think the following sentence is accurate: "He switched to business after three years,[4] receiving an MBA in accounting." I am not sure that it is possible to earn an MBA degree in Accounting, as a Master's degree in Accounting is usually called an MAC.

There are a fair amount of grammatical and other errors in here. I don't think it quite merits a cleanup tag, but it should be dealt with. I've cleaned up whatever I found. Also, what is up with this quote, midway through the page?

...associated with SANE-and the left-leaning Catholic adversaries of Opus Dei who opposed the American-backed repression in Central America.

Robert Novak. The conservative columnist admitted on July 12 that Mr. Hanssen had served as his main source for a 1997 column attacking Janet Reno, then the U.S. Attorney General, for supposedly covering up 1996 campaign-finance scandals.

The part starting with "Robert Novak" seems disjoint from the rest of the quote and ought to have some sort of further explanation, even if it's just "[With regards to] Robert Novak...". Ario 23:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Reading through the referenced Novak article, there is no mention of Attorney General Janet Reno attempting to cover-up the 1996 campaign reform scandal. Novak mentions Hanssen as the source of criticizing Reno for demanding Ray Wickman's Chinese sources in the COURSE of her DOJ investigation INTO the scandal. The implication of Hanssen's criticism is not that Reno was trying to cover up anything, but that Reno's demands for Wickman's sources was unreasonable since it would not only end Wickman's credibility and likewise career in intelligence but also compromise valuable present and potential future assets of the bureau. Thus, the implication that Hanssen criticized Reno for COVERING UP and thereby provided political COVER for her administration in the 1996 campaign-reform scandal when her role was to investigate the scandal was therefore is a COMPLETE fabrication of Hanssen's criticism of Reno. I rewrote the sentence to provide an accurate account of Novak's insight. Ydef 04:12, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This sentence seems messy to me:

Hanssen hired lawyer Plato Cacheris. On May 10, 2002, in exchange for cooperating with authorities, he was spared the death penalty and sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, and his wife, along with her six children, received the survivor's part Hanssen's husband's pension, $39,000 per year.

Does anyone have any good ideas of how to clean it up?--Kristjan Wager 20:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

-

How's this?

"Following his indictment, Hanssen hired notable trial lawyer Plato Cacheris in his defense. In exchange for divulging the extent of his activities, he recieved a life sentence without parole in lieu of the death penalty. His wife and six children receive $39,000 annually from Hanssen's federal pension."

Not to clutter the Talk page, but I just thought I'd note how unbelievably mind-boggling it is that the Russian government would knowingly hand anything over to Islamic fundamentalists, let alone Al Qaeda, if that was in fact what happened. - Gpotter511@yahoo.com 21:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Opus Dei member category

This article is currently in the "Opus Dei Members" category, but I couldn't find much in the article saying that he is. Is this possibly the source of the categorization?

"Bonnie made him confess to a priest, identified by the New York Times as the Reverend Robert P. Bucciarelli, former head of Opus Dei in the USA."

... But this just says Robert P. Bucciarelli, not Robert Hanssen, was a member.

Then there's this quote:

"Among the many groups under surveillance by the F.B.I. in those days were the Gray Panthers, nuclear-freeze advocates associated with SANE-and the left-leaning Catholic adversaries of Opus Dei who opposed the American-backed repression in Central America."

... But this just tells Opus Dei was among the organizations under surveillance by the FBI.

That is the two sole references to Opus Dei in the current article.

I'm posting this in the talk page instead of just bluntly removing the category inclusion in case I'm missing something. The categorization should obviously be removed if he was incorrectly put there. And if he was a member, the article should clearly tell so. So I'd recommend an edit in either case, depending on what's true. -- Northgrove 00:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Reference to Movie

I restored the reference to the film about Robert Hanssen. It is relevant to the topic at hand, and does not directly represent a commercial interest. -- TriGeek 08:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Surely a review of the movie can be found that isn't on a site where an article (under the Same Sex Union backgrounder) has the heading "Why homosexual relationships disadvantage children"? I changed it from that MercatorNet site to a Boston Globe review. Buggieboy 23:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah?

I would suggest something drastic be done by the assertion "Federal authorities were aided by the opening of the KGB archives." Yes, I can see it is sourced, but is it at all plausible? So the Russians should somehow have forgotten to exempt from the released archives info about an ongoing source in the FBI, the best agent they ever had? Come on! It is far more likely that these informations were secured through a somewhat more covert procedure. Ctande 04:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I was actually wondering that, myself. If that was their source, one has to wonder why they still needed a "smoking gun".

I'm also not sure why an FBI agent would have information on things that seem to be more the foray of the CIA. I mean, as far as I know, the FBI is generally tasked with domestic stuff. Why would any FBI agent know the names of KGB agents who are working for the United States? TerraFrost 16:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

FBI deals with counterterrorism and to counter espionage on U.S. soil.75Janice 03:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)75Janice2 March 2007

Neither here nor there

I removed from the early life segment:

According to important federal court documents, Hanssen told his Moscow handlers that he read My Silent War, the autobiography of British intelligence mole Kim Philby, when he was 14, and came to think of Philby as a hero. (The book, however, was published in 1968, when Hanssen was 24.)

This is neither here nor there. It is out of place to put in something that cannot be correct, even if it was asserted in an important document. As the statement is obviously not accurate, one is only left to speculate what kernel of value there is here, i.e, what is the information value. That he lied about his age when he read the book? That his impulse wasn't that book after all? That he wanted to keep the Russians guessing as to his identity by leaving a wrong clue about his age? Or he just remembered it wrongly? -- and so on.

If somebody would like to put the deleted part back in, please reformulate so that it does not appear so out of place. Maybe somewhere else in the article? Ctande 06:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Is this correct

The article says that Hanssen betrayed Polyakov. Are we sure about this? Elsewhere on wikipedia the blame is placed on Aldrich Ames.

Propertius 13:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

• They both did. Vidor 17:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Family

Does anyone know the current status of his family? Does his wife or children get to visit him or have they completely removed him from their lives? maverick3730@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.196.180.68 (talk • contribs) 13:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• The family has visited him at Supermax, according to David Wise. Vidor 17:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

How did his wife escape responsibilty and get $38K per year when she helped cover up the worst espionage case in US history?? D Ireland —Preceding unsigned comment added by DR Dale Ireland (talk • contribs) 22:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Apparantly the FBI placed much more concern on having 100% cooperation and used that as part of the deal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.188.197 (talk) 00:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Page is a mess

I am going through and rewriting/reorganizing the article, using David Wise's book Spy as the source. Afterwards I'll go back through and use the government dossier available on the internet. Vidor 20:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

• Pretty much finished. Might try and tighten it up a little bit, but have finished going through Spy and rewriting/footnoting. Vidor 05:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The first sentence's phrase "who spied for the Soviet Union and Russia" seems awkward, don't you think? Was there really a distinction between Russia and the Soviet Union during the period covered by Hanssen's spying? Granted, the breakup of the Union during G.H.W.Bush's Administration is significant, but I doubt seriously that Hanssen could then be said to have been spying for the remaining member-States of that Union. I think the phrase would be better served by saying just Russia and let readers try to contemplate the finer distinctions of a Soviet Union after the breakup. I'll let it alone...for awhile. Hag2 (talk) 15:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Eh, change it if you want. No biggie. Vidor (talk) 05:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I took a look around at a few things. Apparently there are many choices e.g. Soviets, Government of the Soviet Union, Government of Russia, Russia, KGB, Soviets and so on. My personal choice is KGB. I changed the first sentence to that as it seems most descriptive of what Hanssen did, and for whom. Hag2 (talk) 11:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The New York Times article ( May 16, 2002) did an article interviewing Bonnie Hannsen. In this it states that "She visits her husband in prison regularly. The family hopes Mr Hanssen will be sent to the federal prison in Allenwood, PA. Which would be close enough for Mrs Hanssen to continue to visit regularly."(Tina) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tina1030 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Anglo American Focus

This page reads very much from an American point of view. Whilst I agree that the subject is an American, phrases such as "The Russians then filed an official protest with the State Department" betray a very one-sided slant to what is an international issue.. How about "the Russian intelligence agencies filed an official protest with the US State Department"? There are many other examples within the article. --Tomhannen 22:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Mug shot

If anyone could find Hanssen's mug shot, put it on the Commons, and add it to the article, that would be fabulous. For some reason it doesn't appear that much on the Internet; the only decent image I found was at mugshots.com and had the "mugshots.com" logo in the side, which won't do. It's in the public domain as the work of a government (FBI) employee in his official duties, so if we could find a good image we could use it in the article. Vidor (talk) 06:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. RedSpruce (talk) 23:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Breach movie

I moved the differences in the Breach (film) section to the film page. The movie thing is out of place, and that page needs more information. And the movie "Breach" is not the highlight of Hanssen's life. Oldag07 (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice work

I think you editors deserve to be patted on the back. This is a good article; very well-written, informative, and well-researched. If I could offer any constructive comment...I would say, juxtapose the image of the Langley woods over to the left just in order to break up the stacking. —Dixie Brown (talk) 22:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

AGREEMENT

I agree that this article is well written and definitely has a place here on wiki. I do believe however that the article could have the improvised layout suggested in the aforementioned posting but that overall it is very nice. I also would like to say that while Wikipedia is an encyclopedia in general, it is still different from the normal encyclopedia in many respects, one of which is the coverage of different subjects, people, places, and events which would not ordinarily be covered by your run of the mill encyclopedia. For this reason, I am very happy to see articles such as this and others which address informative and educational materials which serve to enlighten those that read them. ~John — Preceding unsigned comment added by JNJCMFam (talk • contribs) 17:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Who made small talk with him?

After telling us that Hanssen was careful not to have any contact with his handlers, we get this curious sentence: "...he began to spy for the KGB, which recognized his lack of friends and attempted to compensate. For example, his handlers would often make small talk with him."

Huh? Just who made small talk with him, when, and how?

The paragraph begins "Sources have reasoned ... that he felt his skills were underutilized..." So is this all just speculation? Does anyone have a source for this? If not, we should remove it. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 18:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup brick

An anonymous user slapped a cleanup brick ({{Story|date=October 2011}}) at the top of the article. I don't think this really applies. Surely an espionage career as long as Robert Hanssen's warrants a chronological account of his activities? Can we remove this needless blemish from the article? I'll wait a fortnight or so, and if this message generates no debate, I'll remove it myself. Kelisi (talk) 16:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Polyakov

"For unknown reasons, the Soviets did not act on their intelligence about Polyakov until he was betrayed a second time by CIA mole Aldrich Ames in 1985."

It is obvious that military agency GRU wanted to avoid the Red Army losing face as Polyakov was (almost) retired at the time Hanssen sold him to them, while rival KGB did not and promptly acted upon when Ames sold him to them. Aaaah, Kremlinology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.74.201 (talk) 04:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Opening picture

I would move that we put a less flattering picture of the individual in the info box. This individual endangered the lives of billions of Americans and deserves it to be proven without a pic of him in a Sunday suit with a big smile. He's definitely not smiling now.

→Billions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.7.175.199 (talk) 00:44, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Psychiatrist violated privacy laws and went to the press resulting in major media coverage

"Over the course of seven jailhouse meetings, Salerian got Hanssen, a shy and socially awkward man, to confide his most humiliating personal secrets: his father’s physical abuse, his sexual obsessions, the hidden camera Hanssen had installed in the bedroom he shared with his wife so a friend could watch their lovemaking.

Privacy laws and professional ethics hold both lawyers and doctors to strict client/patient confidentiality. Federal rules for high-risk detainees like Hanssen set an even higher bar: Disclosures to possible witnesses or codefendants, such as a suspect’s wife, are verboten. Yet despite Cacheris’s explicit orders, Salerian went to Hanssen’s wife, Bonnie, with details of her husband’s betrayals, then lobbied her for permission to speak to the press.

When she refused, Salerian did it anyway, telling BBC reporters about his jailhouse conversations with Hanssen."

Source: http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/people/the-spectacular-unraveling-of-washingtons-favorite-shrink-starring-alen-salerian/

12.180.133.18 (talk) 08:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)