The Portland Circle was a Soviet success that the British still remember.

7 826 86
The Portland Circle was a Soviet success that the British still remember.
Harry Houghton and Ethel Gee, photographed in 1970 after their release from prison.


Most readers know about the Cambridge Five, but few know about the Portland Five.



Haroon Siddique

The Portland Spy Ring "could have been stopped"
four years earlier"

Declassified documents show that the infamous Soviet spy ring that leaked Admiralty documents (the British Navy Ministry until 1964 – P.G.), including information about Britain's first nuclear submarine, could have been stopped four years earlier.

In 1961, the authorities uncovered the Portland Spy Ring, named after the naval base in Dorset (on the Isle of Portland in the English Channel – P.G.) from which secrets were stolen, arresting and ultimately convicting five Soviet agents (two of whom were the British subjects we are considering (see below), two were US citizens (L.V. Cohen and M.G. Cohen) and an illegal Soviet intelligence officer, K.T. Molody, who operated under the pseudonym Gordon Lonsdale – P.G.).


The Coens


K.T. Molody

The two spies, Harry Houghton and his secret mistress, Ethel Gee, were British. Both worked at the base. MI5 documents recently handed over to the National Archives reveal that Houghton's then-wife contacted the Admiralty three times in 1955 with suspicions about her husband.

An Admiralty letter to the security services in 1956 stated that she "alleged that her husband was divulging classified information to people who should not have it." However, it added: "It is possible that all these accusations are nothing more than the outpourings of a jealous and disgruntled wife."

In March 1961, Martin Furnivell Jones, who became Director General of MI5 four years later, wrote:

Clearly, we should have carried out our investigation back in 1956. Had we done so, we would have had a good chance of uncovering Houghton's espionage activities, and it is quite likely that we would have discovered that he, as a spy, was under the control of a Soviet embassy employee. (In reality, Houghton was controlled by the illegal K. T. Molody. - P.G.) We might also have been on the trail of Miss G. If we had done this, we would have managed to stop the leak of information from the Admiralty approximately four years earlier.


M.-F. Jones

Documents document that Houghton beat his wife (they separated in 1955 and later divorced) and even attempted to kill her by pushing her off a cliff, but was stopped by passersby. When they returned home after the incident, she said he splashed gin in her face and said, "I need to get rid of you; you know too much."

Among the other allegations made in the documents were that her husband had documents marked "top secret" relating to "underwater detection equipment and torpedoes," that he returned from trips to London with wads of banknotes, that he showed her a piece of chalk which he said he used to make marks where money had been left, that he brought Poles to their apartment while refusing to reveal their names, and that he told her how he used a folded newspaper as an "identification mark."

Documents released [previously] show that after the [spy] ring was exposed, Houghton's ex-wife's communications with the press caused concern to the Admiralty and MI5.

In 1961, 56-year-old Houghton and 47-year-old Gee were each sentenced to 15 years in prison, but were released in 1970 and married the following year.

Gee always maintained that she acted solely out of love. Letters she sent to Houghton, contained in newly released documents, reveal her affection for him.

"Bunty," as she signed her letters, began each one with the words "My dear Harry," and in November 1962 she wrote that "the short time I spent with you was the happiest time of my life."

In a 1962 letter, she scolded Houghton for his "lack of courage" and two years later rejected his offer to cooperate with the authorities, saying, "Under no circumstances will I make any deal with them."

When authorities arranged for Houghton to visit her while they were both in prison, the transcript revealed that Gee, who maintained her innocence, nonetheless warned him, "Don't talk to them under any circumstances. I'd go back and do another stint."

The Guardian, September 24, 2019
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    15 October 2025 05: 09
    Soviet illegal intelligence officer K.T. Molody,
    I read his memoirs, the English never found out who he was working for, then they changed him to an English spy.
    1. +3
      15 October 2025 12: 46
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      I read his memoirs, the English never found out who he was working for, then they changed him to an English spy.

      The film "Dead Season" is based on the story of K. Molodykh, who also served as a consultant for the film. Someone told me he heard Molodykh speak at the Higher Party School of the CPSU Central Committee and said he was a strong critic of the Soviet economy. He was not only an intelligence officer but also a very successful millionaire entrepreneur...he died of a heart attack, although he never complained.
      1. 0
        15 October 2025 12: 56
        Quote: Konnick
        but also a very successful millionaire entrepreneur.

        And he made two tax returns: one for England, one for the KGB wink
  2. +1
    15 October 2025 05: 37
    Declassified documents indicate that infamous Soviet spy network,

    Why did the author suddenly decide that the outstanding achievements of Soviet intelligence were suddenly "sad" and "espionage-like"? Is this a reprint from the "Peacemaker" website or a machine translation of an English article by a "democratic" neoliberal who finds everything Soviet appalling?
    When will the "-" for articles be returned?
    1. 0
      15 October 2025 12: 14
      This is a machine translation of an article from The Guardian, September 24, 2019.
      That's why they are spies
      1. -1
        15 October 2025 12: 44
        I have a native English speaker on staff...
        1. -1
          15 October 2025 16: 28
          Perhaps, but it doesn't have much of an impact on the quality of your articles. There are always some blunders like
          and the Soviet illegal intelligence officer K.T. Molody, operating under a pseudonym Gordon Lonsdale. – P.G.
          1. +2
            15 October 2025 17: 02
            "It was he, acting under the workers pseudonym Erdberg established contacts with the anti-fascist underground in Germany on the eve of the Great Patriotic War." SVR website: http://www.svr.gov.ru/smi/2004/12/parlgaz20041210.htm

            Marrr (Mar)You can't be taken seriously.
            1. 0
              15 October 2025 17: 24
              Pavel, you can’t take seriously authors who don’t know the subject they write about.
              What is called in the link "working pseudonym"This is the full name of an intelligence officer working as part of a legal residency.

              The young man was an illegal immigrant and worked under the pseudonym "Ben".
              And Gordon Lonsdale is his first and last name according to legend and documents that support the legend.

              You can perceive me and what I wrote however you want - I don't care.
              1. +1
                15 October 2025 17: 48
                Marrr (Mar)You're confusing an operational pseudonym (nickname, call sign) with a fictitious name used for operations in enemy territory. A fictitious name is, by definition, a pseudonym.
                1. 0
                  15 October 2025 18: 03
                  An excellent demagogic move: to shift the blame for one's own blunder onto the shoulders of the person who pointed it out. laughing

                  It's not my place to confuse things. I've already written about your mistake. But for those who don't know, I'll repeat it:

                  Gordon Lonsdale is NOT a pseudonym, but the real name of Konon Trofimovich Molody, according to the legend and documents he used during his illegal work in England.

                  I've personally never encountered the phrase "working name" in technical terminology. Even Alice wouldn't recognize such a phrase when applied to intelligence. laughing
                  I believe that this literary expression was invented by the writer V.F. Lashkul, whose publication you gave me as a reference.
                  Typically, employees of the legal residency of the USSR were in the host country not under a "working pseudonym," but under fictitious names indicated in their cover documents, and a corresponding legend.
                  1. -1
                    15 October 2025 18: 21
                    Quote: Marrr
                    An excellent demagogic move


                    Those who lack arguments begin to talk about demagoguery.
                    1. 0
                      15 October 2025 18: 40
                      And you are stubborn laughing
                      OK, here's a tricky question for you.
                      In substantiating the correctness of your assertion that K. T. Molody "operated" in England under the pseudonym Gordon Lonsdale, you cited an article by V. Lashkul with the stupid title THE MOST ILLEGAL ILLEGAL, which states:
                      “…And in 1937, he went on a new foreign assignment to Berlin under the cover of an intern at the Soviet embassy. It was he, acting under a working pseudonym Erdberg..»

                      Question for you: even if we assume that Lashkul is right, and the surname Erdberg can be called the “working pseudonym” of A.M. Korotkov, how does this prove that FI Gordon Lonsdale according to terminology, used in Soviet intelligence, is it correct to call the "working pseudonym" of the illegal Molody?

                      If you used the word "pseudonym" in your publication not as a special term, and as a general literary expression, you don't have to answer - then there are no questions
                      1. 0
                        15 October 2025 18: 51
                        Marrr (Mar)There's nothing to talk about with the person consulting with Alice—you, that is. Ask Alice your questions.
                      2. 0
                        15 October 2025 18: 56
                        OK, I get it, you're clearly not one of those authors who isn't shy about admitting mistakes.
                        However, it is your right.
  3. +2
    15 October 2025 07: 24
    Quote from Uncle Lee
    then they changed it to an English spy

    Yes, Greville Wynne, Penkovsky's contact.
  4. +5
    15 October 2025 09: 56
    that he returned from trips to London with bundles of banknotes, that he showed her a piece of chalk which he said he had to use to make marks where money had been left, that he brought Poles to their apartment, refusing to give their names, and that he told her how he used a folded newspaper as an "identification mark."

    How could it be ignored? such signals from a wife, even if she is deceived and offended?

    MI5 clearly wasn't catching mice...
    1. +3
      15 October 2025 20: 59
      He's also good: why the hell show everything off to your wife? To show off your importance?
  5. +1
    15 October 2025 10: 52
    Neither the author nor the translator clearly understands anything about intelligence. Molony was an illegal, not an embassy employee. Lyubimov wrote a rather interesting, albeit oversimplified, book, "And Hell Followed Him," about the work of an intelligence officer in England. However, Lyubimov worked from the embassy and had only heard about illegals.
    1. +1
      15 October 2025 12: 25
      The young man was an illegal immigrant, not an embassy employee.
      The article does not say that he was an embassy employee.
      Although Lyubimov worked from the embassy and only heard about illegal immigrants.
      It is unlikely that the PGU employees who worked in legal residencies often maintained contact with illegals, sometimes through direct contact.

      By the way, based on Lyubimov’s script, a magnificent film was made (probably the best of the domestic ones) about the work of an illegal spy - Soul of a Spy.
      I recommend to view.
      And there are several times shown contact meetings between the illegal, apparently with one of the embassy undercover agents.
      1. 0
        15 October 2025 12: 34
        "Houghton's espionage activities, and it is highly probable that we would have discovered that he, as a spy, was under the control of an employee of the Soviet embassy" - quote from the article, the British believed that he was in contact with someone from the embassy.
        Instant messaging isn't the work of an illegal; it only lasts a few seconds. Lyubimov himself worked at the embassy. I haven't seen the film, the book is popular science, just interesting. Recruitment isn't a science, it's an art. Some people are good at it, others aren't. Giving someone a basic course is possible; there's nothing complicated about it. But whether they become a recruiter depends on their personal abilities, which can't be taught.
        1. 0
          15 October 2025 12: 48
          The British believed that he was in contact with someone from the embassy.
          Once again: the article does not claim that Molody was an embassy employee – read it more carefully.
          Instant is not the work of an illegal, it is only a few seconds.
          Even if Lyubimov only conducted such contacts during his work, this was no longer “just heard.”
          Recruitment is not a science, it is an art.
          Well, you said laughing
          Of course, it's not a science. It's a craft that intelligence officers are trained to do. Some succeed, while others struggle. Again, I agree—a good recruiter is a gift.
          1. -2
            15 October 2025 13: 49
            The article says the British thought he had ties to the embassy. Seeing an illegal immigrant doesn't mean you're illegal. It's something entirely different. A craft can be taught, but an art cannot; it's a matter of luck.
            1. 0
              15 October 2025 15: 42
              I already realized that you are not the kind of person who admits that they are wrong.
              You wrote:
              Neither the author of the article nor the translator, obviously - They don't know a damn thing about operational work. The young man was an illegal immigrant, not an embassy employee.
              Neither the author nor the translator claimed that Molody was an embassy employee. The article merely states that the British believed that Houghton, probably, worked under the supervision of an employee of the Soviet embassy.
              There is no assertion in the article that Molody was an embassy employee.
              On the contrary, it says, "In reality, Houghton was led by Illegal immigrant K.T. Young".
              So in this case, your complaints should not be directed at the author of the article and the translator, but at your own inattention.
              Seeing an illegal immigrant does not mean being an illegal immigrant.
              And who claimed what it means? belay
              1. -2
                15 October 2025 16: 41
                That's what I wrote: "The British believed he was in contact with the embassy." I didn't say anything about Molody at all.
                1. +1
                  15 October 2025 16: 43
                  OK, let's assume that this is it
                  Neither the author of the article nor the translator obviously have any idea about operational work.The young man was an illegal immigrant, not an embassy employee.
                  I imagined it laughing
                  I already realized that you are not the kind of person who admits that they are wrong.
                  1. -1
                    15 October 2025 16: 47
                    You're plucking things from various quotes. I'll admit I'm wrong immediately if I see it. The author has translated a completely clumsy English article, which, aside from the conjectures of one senile old British nutcase, contains nothing more. There are some very competent British authors who have written decent memoirs. There are some good popularizers, like Nigel West. Although he didn't serve in the army, he selects and verifies his material meticulously. So, quite a lot has been written about Molody in England, and intelligently. Unlike this opus.
                    1. +1
                      15 October 2025 16: 55
                      The author translated the English article very clumsily, it was absolutely rubbish.
                      I agree here, the article is not brilliant.
                      It's difficult to judge the quality of a translation; in publications like these, the author always has the opportunity to blame the translation's flaws on the inarticulateness and absurdities of the original author.
                      1. -1
                        15 October 2025 18: 44
                        There's a link to the source, you can read the original if you're so inclined. But I don't see the point; the British media, even the once quite decent ones, have turned into a dump.
                      2. -2
                        15 October 2025 18: 47
                        I don't see the point in reading it, they won't write the truth anyway, and you can read fairy tales on VO and then laugh in the comments at the stubborn authors who wrote (or rewrote) them laughing
      2. 0
        15 October 2025 12: 50
        Quote: Marrr
        By the way, based on Lyubimov’s script, a magnificent film (probably the best of the domestic ones) was made about the work of an illegal intelligence officer - The Soul of a Spy.
        I recommend to view.

        It would be nice if Lyubimov's son produced it; we all know him from Vzglyad.
      3. 0
        15 October 2025 20: 52
        I'll look. Actually, something by Lyubimov flashed on TV. It's been a while, though.
        1. -1
          15 October 2025 21: 57
          Perhaps, but I liked the movie Soul of a Spy the most.
          And it's beautifully filmed, and the actors perform superbly, and the dirty underbelly of intelligence work is shown quite frankly.
  6. +1
    15 October 2025 10: 58
    There is also a book by Molodoy’s son, who was a border guard officer.
  7. -2
    15 October 2025 11: 43
    Quote: TermNachTER
    Neither the author of the article nor the translator clearly understands anything about operational work. The young man was an illegal immigrant, not an embassy employee.


    Well, look at this smart kid...

    "He, as a spy, was under the control of a Soviet embassy employee (In reality, Houghton was under the control of the illegal K.T. Molody. – P.G.)." Jones distorted reality, and I corrected this distortion.

    Operational work has nothing to do with it.
    1. +1
      15 October 2025 12: 39
      I've been doing undercover work for 17 years, including recruitment. If you think it's easier to recruit a serious criminal than some foreign drug dealer, try it. But first, practice on cats. To put it mildly, this site is already turning into a complete mess. People who don't have the slightest idea are writing analytical articles.
      1. 0
        15 October 2025 16: 24
        If you think it's easier to recruit a serious bandit than some overseas drug dealer, try it.
        Your approach to the question is rather amateurish.
        Each recruitment is individual: in some cases, it was easier for an MVD (KGB) officer to recruit a Soviet bandit than an illegal foreigner, in others, the opposite was true.
        One thing is clear: it was much more difficult for an illegal immigrant to conduct recruitment work than for domestic law enforcement officers.
        1. -2
          15 October 2025 18: 53
          Have you ever tried recruiting a seasoned veteran who's not afraid of prison at all—he feels right at home there? I recruited a foreigner in 30 minutes, even though the Ministry of Internal Affairs prohibits it.
          1. 0
            15 October 2025 19: 00
            I don't understand at all why you wrote this.
            Some kind of OF TOP that smacks of bragging
            1. -1
              15 October 2025 19: 04
              You said it's hard to recruit a foreigner, but easy to recruit a Soviet gangster. So I explained it to you. And even then, out of the 30 minutes, I spent 15 of them getting a video camera—that wonderful thing was around back in the 90s.
              1. 0
                15 October 2025 19: 07
                You said that it is difficult to recruit a foreigner, but easy to recruit a Soviet bandit.
                You imagined it.
                You read the texts inattentively and then start commenting on your own interpretations of what was written.
                1. -2
                  15 October 2025 19: 26
                  "In some cases, it was easier for an MVD (KGB) officer to recruit a Soviet bandit than an illegal foreigner, in other cases, it was the other way around.
                  One thing is clear: it was much more difficult for an illegal immigrant to conduct recruitment work than for domestic law enforcement officers."
                  Did you write this? Or do you think a real gangster is that intimidated by epaulettes? Even if they're from a committee.
                  1. -1
                    15 October 2025 19: 30
                    Well, here again.
                    Where did you see in the quoted
                    You said that it is difficult to recruit a foreigner, but easy to recruit a Soviet bandit.
                    ?

                    Read 10 more times in a row:
                    Each recruitment is individual: in some cases, it was easier for an MVD (KGB) officer to recruit a Soviet bandit than an illegal foreigner, in some way the opposite.
                    For those who are in the tank, on the contrary, it means MORE DIFFICULT

                    The phrase "a real bandit" touched me laughing
                    Are there any fake bandits? feel
                    1. -2
                      15 October 2025 20: 05
                      1. What's the unit of measurement for "more complicated" or "easier"? Kilograms per square centimeter? Or pounds per square foot? Yes, there are a ton of methods. But the most important and universal, at all times, is money. An illegal immigrant can offer an interesting local a very good amount of money, even by the standards of a wealthy country like England. And I was charged under Article 9—a couple of trips to a bar, and not even the most expensive ones.
                      2. In order to understand what a real bandit is, you need to work a little in the police, excuse me - the police))) just not at headquarters or in personnel.
                      1. +1
                        15 October 2025 20: 14
                        More difficult - easier - how is this measured?
                        Factors that facilitate (complicate) recruitment.

                        The MVD operative 1) studies the KV and conducts a recruitment interview in his own country, acting legally2) he conducts the conversation in his native language, not a foreign one; 3) the KV is his compatriot, not a foreigner, i.e., his psychology is more or less clear to the operative; 4) in the event of refusal to cooperate, the MIA operative does not need to fear that the KV will report it to the police and the operative will be investigated by counterintelligence (or immediately closed down).

                        An illegal immigrant has all these complicating factors.
                        In order to understand what a real bandit is,
                        Yeah, he who has never stolen doesn't know what honesty is. laughing
                        Good
                      2. -1
                        15 October 2025 21: 25
                        1. An illegal immigrant doesn't speak the language of the host country? What are they even doing there? Doesn't the illegal immigrant research their target beforehand? Does he just approach them on the street and say, "Let me recruit you?"
                        2. Psychology is a very relative factor when I have a wad of dollars in my hands.
                        3. Have you heard of "false flag recruitment"? Or do you think people go to recruitment with a red flag and a banner that says "All power to the Soviets"?
                        4. It is not necessary to steal or kill, for someone who understands, it is enough to talk for 10-20 minutes and it becomes clear whether you are dealing with a bandit or a local cormorant.
                      3. -2
                        15 October 2025 21: 48
                        P.S. An illegal immigrant doesn't risk getting a knife in the liver if the other person doesn't like the topic of conversation.
                      4. -1
                        15 October 2025 21: 54
                        My dear, arguing by asking a bunch of questions is the sign of a demagogue.
                        Let's end here.

                        The story about bandits and sharpened objects made me laugh.
                        To make things even more terrifying, you'll also write that you were infiltrated into a gang and, while there, recruited one of the authorities. laughing

                        You don't need to tell me how the Chinese celebrate Easter. laughing
                      5. -1
                        15 October 2025 22: 02
                        These questions arose from your statements. Regarding infiltrating a gang, watch fewer TV series. They're made by people who've only seen gangsters on TV. Do you think it's impossible to recruit an authority figure? I assure you, there are plenty of scientific methods.
                      6. -1
                        16 October 2025 01: 11
                        I rarely watch TV series about cops and only to laugh.
                        In the turbulent 90s, I had to observe from the inside the everyday life of the territorial criminal investigation department operatives for about 5 years.
                        Their main problems in those years were not at all recruiting "real bandits", but how to keep their marriage from falling apart, not going crazy and not becoming an alcoholic.

                        Maybe things were different later, but at that time that was exactly how it was.
                        And their recruitment work was incomparable in terms of complexity to the work of an illegal recruiter.
                      7. -1
                        16 October 2025 16: 36
                        So did I, joining the police in '93. I just happened to end up in a police station where some real monsters worked. They knew about the upcoming robbery even when the bandits were just planning it.
                    2. +1
                      18 October 2025 22: 19
                      There's also crime: 1. organized, 2. poorly organized, 3. completely unorganized. I don't mean to offend anyone, just a joke. Have a nice evening everyone.
                      1. 0
                        20 October 2025 00: 55
                        Yeah, and there's also street and domestic crime. laughing
  8. -1
    15 October 2025 12: 48
    Quote: TermNachTER
    I was involved in operational work for 17 years, including recruitment.


    The one who did this will never talk about it.
    1. -1
      15 October 2025 13: 50
      I've been retired for 15 years, and what details have I told you?)))
      1. +1
        15 October 2025 13: 54
        Quote: TermNachTER
        I've been retired for 15 years, and what details have I told you?)))


        It's not about the details. You don't even understand what I'm talking about. To paraphrase a famous song, what kind of spy are you...
  9. 0
    15 October 2025 12: 51
    Quote: TermNachTER
    People who have no idea write analytical articles.


    You don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about? Do you even understand what you just said?

    This is a translation not of an analytical article, but of a historiographic one.
    1. +1
      15 October 2025 13: 51
      I understand what I'm saying and writing. But you don't have the slightest idea what you're trying to write about.
  10. +1
    15 October 2025 12: 58
    Quote: Marrr
    The Guardian, September 24, 2019


    This is indicated in the translation.
  11. -1
    15 October 2025 13: 55
    Quote: TermNachTER
    I understand what I say and write.


    Noticeable ...
  12. +1
    15 October 2025 17: 21
    Quote: TermNachTER
    an absolutely crap English article.


    The Guardian is a reputable daily publication with 200 years of experience. If it published "bullshit articles," it wouldn't have been published for so many years. The Englishwoman is crap, but she's not an idiot.

    TermNachTerYou can't be taken seriously.
    1. -2
      15 October 2025 18: 47
      A reputable publication? The British media have become a dump; they only print what they're paid to publish.
      1. +1
        15 October 2025 18: 54
        TermNachTerWhere in this particular article did The Guardian get it wrong?

        The British intelligence services, represented by Jones, openly admit they screwed up for four years. Is that what ours are admitting?
        1. -2
          15 October 2025 18: 59
          I said the author's translation was clumsy, a completely flawed article. Where was it mentioned that it was distorted? However, it's been happening more and more often on this site lately.
  13. +1
    15 October 2025 18: 22
    Quote: Marrr
    It doesn't really suit me to get confused.


    And no one knows your face, unlike mine.
  14. +1
    15 October 2025 18: 30
    Quote: Marrr
    I've personally never encountered the phrase "working name" in technical terminology. Even Alice wouldn't recognize such a phrase when applied to intelligence.


    Firstly, what you encountered there and what you didn't encounter there is irrelevant, since you are not an authoritative source. You are not a source at all, since no one knows you.

    Secondly, the fact that you're asking Alice for information further demonstrates your incompetence. You might as well check Wikipedia.

    For me, the SVR website is an authoritative source, but for you, any garbage dump on the Internet.
    1. 0
      15 October 2025 19: 27
      For me, the authoritative source is - SVR website, and for you - any garbage dump on the Internet.
      Well, I already understood from your literary language that the SVR website is your everything. laughing

      In matters of terminology used in Soviet intelligence, my authority is on books written by veterans of Soviet intelligence.
      Well, there were living teachers too.
      In my youth, I foolishly decided to compile an “operational dictionary” for my subordinates so that I wouldn’t have to waste time correcting the “civilian” phrases they used in official documents.
      1. -2
        15 October 2025 20: 17
        Marrr (Mar)You've learned to puff out your cheeks...
  15. -1
    15 October 2025 18: 36
    Quote: Marrr
    I believe that this literary expression was invented by the writer V.F. Lashkul, whose publication you gave me as a reference.


    This once again confirms that for me the SVR website is an authoritative source, but for you it is not.
    1. +2
      15 October 2025 20: 06
      Gusterin, you are incredibly stubborn.
      If the SVR website is an authoritative source, why don't you use it?

      This is what is written on this site about Molody
      http://www.svr.gov.ru/history/person/mol.htm

      So where does it say that Gordon Lonsdale is a "working pseudonym" that Molody used???
      Moreover, it is written there verbatim:
      In 1954, on instructions from his superiors, he traveled to Great Britain using the passport of Canadian businessman Gordon Lonsdale.

      During six years of residency Ben (operational pseudonym of Young K.T.)
      If you don't know the terminology, at least copy phrases verbatim from authoritative sources.
      1. 0
        15 October 2025 20: 24
        Marrr (Mar), and I didn’t deny that “Ben” was Molodoy’s operational pseudonym.

        Gordon Lonsdale is a borrowed, appropriated, and not a real name for a legend, and therefore, by definition, a pseudonym.

        You, TerminakhTera, rightly called for attention. Is there a log in your own eye?
        1. -1
          15 October 2025 20: 29
          I already wrote above:
          If you used the word "pseudonym" in your publication not as a special term, and as a general literary expression, you don't have to answer - then there are no questions
          I was simply struck by this inaccuracy, which someone far removed from the work of the intelligence services wouldn't even notice.
          There you, TerminakhTera, called for attentiveness.
          I didn’t understand anything, where was it that I called?
          1. 0
            15 October 2025 20: 36
            Look at your correspondence with him and you'll understand everything. I hope...
            1. -1
              15 October 2025 20: 38
              Gusterin, good.
              I understand your train of thought: Konon Molody worked in England under two pseudonyms at the same time: Gordon Lonsdale and Ben.

              Confused nothing? laughing
  16. 0
    15 October 2025 19: 00
    Quote: TermNachTER
    an absolutely bullshit article.


    What is wrong with this article?
  17. +1
    15 October 2025 20: 43
    If you have a strained relationship with your wife, why bother letting her in on such details?
    Ideally: the wife cooperates as well as Rosenberg, or say nothing at all
  18. -1
    15 October 2025 20: 47
    Quote: Marrr
    Confused nothing?


    Are you afraid of getting them mixed up? This once again speaks volumes about your incompetence!
    1. -1
      16 October 2025 09: 18
      I have nothing to fear, you need to be afraid.

      It was not me, but you who published a fairy tale article, where delirium rides on delirium, and is driven by delirium, and logic wanders somewhere in the darkness in search of common sense.
      And they even embellished it with their amateurish commentary about the pseudonym.
      And it is you, not me, who will be laughed at by every reader who has at least a general understanding of intelligence work and has not lost the ability to think clearly.
  19. 0
    16 October 2025 10: 29
    Quote: Marrr
    I have nothing to fear, you need to be afraid.


    MarrrYou have to know how to lose. But you don't know how. This once again proves that you can't be taken seriously.
    1. -1
      16 October 2025 16: 58
      You touch me. I'm not playing with you, I'm laughing at you.
      Try reading this carefully:
      Among the other allegations made in the documents were that her husband had documents marked "top secret" relating to "underwater detection equipment and torpedoes," that he returned from trips to London with wads of banknotes, that he showed her a piece of chalk which he said he used to make marks where money had been left, that he brought Poles to their apartment while refusing to reveal their names, and that he told her how he used a folded newspaper as an "identification mark."
      This is complete nonsense, designed for ordinary people.
      Only a person who doesn't have even the slightest idea about the basics of illegal intelligence activities could translate and then post such nonsense on VO.
  20. 0
    16 October 2025 17: 13
    Quote: Marrr
    You touch me. I'm not playing with you, I'm laughing at you.
    Try reading this carefully:


    MarrrWhy are you so upset? You could have given up and forgotten about me a long time ago. But you can't calm down and are always trying to prove something to me. I'm telling you, you don't know how to lose.
    1. 0
      16 October 2025 17: 41
      Why are you shitting yourself so much?
      So you're also a boor.
      A walking bouquet of anti-virtues laughing

      Okay, as readers like you sometimes advise on forums: akhtur, write ischo hi
  21. 0
    16 October 2025 18: 09
    Quote: Marrr
    So you're also a boor. A walking bouquet of anti-virtues.


    Well, if it makes you feel better...
  22. 0
    24 December 2025 06: 53
    If it weren't for that asshole Polack, they'd still be working! It's infuriating that he was a representative of the socialist camp!
  23. 0
    24 December 2025 06: 54
    All this is true! And how many more have not been identified? And Petrov and Boshirov too!
  24. 0
    29 December 2025 03: 34
    Quote: Konnick
    Quote from Uncle Lee
    I read his memoirs, the English never found out who he was working for, then they changed him to an English spy.

    The film "Dead Season" is based on the story of K. Molodykh, who also served as a consultant for the film. Someone told me he heard Molodykh speak at the Higher Party School of the CPSU Central Committee and said he was a strong critic of the Soviet economy. He was not only an intelligence officer but also a very successful millionaire entrepreneur...he died of a heart attack, although he never complained.

    They probably got rid of him on the orders of the famous Karelian partisan who spent the entire war warming his ass on the mainland.