Are they too much of a security risk?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-104607 0/MI5-tell-spies-come-drive-begins-recruit-hom osexuals.html

Should Homosexuals or Muslims be recruited into M15, or are they too much of a security risk?

Food for thought are these two extracts from the report.

"People from all minority communities do have experience of getting on with people who are different and of fitting in.

"They are also good at doing these things in a way that is not conspicuous."

Examples would be appreciated.

[Oneeyedvic]

With regards Gays, they used to be a security risk since they were open to blackmail - this is no longer a threat.

With Muslims, it would be pretty difficult for a white person to infiltrate a mosque.

I am pretty sure that the security services had some Irish recruits 30 years ago.

[anotheoldgit]

With regards Gays, they used to be a security risk since they were open to blackmail - this is no longer a threat.

Why not? there must be many who still do not wish to come out of the closet, so therefore they are still wide open to blackmail

With Muslims, it would be pretty difficult for a white person to infiltrate a mosque.

May be, but it seems we are opening our secret service to any who may be under-cover terrorists.

Why take these unnecessary risks, when there is no need ?

[jno]

undercover terrorists... is there another sort? Ones who build their car bombs in Trafalgar Square, perhaps?

[Kromovaracun]

Why not? there must be many who still do not wish to come out of the closet, so therefore they are still wide open to blackmail

True.

But homosexuality is not the only thing you can blackmail somebody on. If I remember right, a recent study has shown adultery to be alive and kicking (though I confess I can't find it online) - which might not be as juicy as homosexuality, but it's still a very possible and very easy route to blackmail.

I'm not convinced that homosexuals are anything more than very slightly more open to blackmail than anyone else.

[Oneeyedvic]

Why not? there must be many who still do not wish to come out of the closet, so therefore they are still wide open to blackmail

If they are advertising to and for Gay people, the presumably they would already be out of the closet?

Why take these unnecessary risks, when there is no need ?

As explained, there is a need to infiltrate Muslim terrorist organisations. How do you propose that will happen?



Every person who is a candidate will undergo extensive background checks.

Every person is also a potential blackmail target or may have an allegiance to another organisation.

[rov1200]

Maybe as their first assignment MI5 could infiltrate them in Iran to learn about their nuclear intentions. If caught spying they could plead they were being blackmailed for being a homosexual.

[sp1814]

Oneeyedvic has hit the nail on the head.

A gay man or lesbian who is still in the closet would be a huge security risk back in (say) 1955, when it was illegal and a huge social stigma.

But now?

It's not even newsworthy. Remember when that lad from Westlife came out (actually, he was forced out because the Daily Mail were about to out him) - what was the general reaction of the nation?

It was a massive yawn. We're living in a country where people couldn't even get properly worked up about the introduction of civil partnerships.

I think we're now looking at a 'transitional generation'. In 30 years time, being gay will be about as shocking as women wearing trousers (in my first job women were banned from wearing trousers - and that was in the early eighties!!!).

Oh, and if you were still in the closet, its doubtful whether you would join a profession where personal 'blackmailable' secrets were an issue.

[LeMarchand]

Surely, as M15 recruits from British public schools, the only difference that this will make is that there are a few more openly gay men in the service?