0
kallend

Litvinenko poisoning

Recommended Posts

Litvinenko was a spy. Litvinenko was a defecter. Litvinenko was guilty of treason which is punishable by death. Russia sent a message. It does not matter when, it does not matter where, we will punish you and there is nothing anyone can do about it (because everyone knew Litvinenko was a spy and a defecter).
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also the fact his neighbour in London was - I believe - the Chechen President in exile.

And it seem's Litvinenko had a few issues with certain people, to say the least......

According to his Father he will have had a muslim burial.

Also; (!) Litvinenko contact Kovtun critically ill
07/12/2006 19:15



MOSCOW (Reuters) - Dmitry Kovtun, a contact of dead Russian ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko, is in critical condition in hospital from radiation poisoning, Interfax news agency quoted an unnamed source as saying on Thursday.

"Doctors have classified Kovtun’s condition as critical," Interfax quoted its source as saying. Kovtun met Litvinenko in London on November 1, the day the former spy fell ill.

Interfax also reported that Kovtun fell into a coma after British and Russian investigators working on the Litvinenko case had finished questioning him in a Moscow hospital. However, it gave no source for the information on a coma.

A spokesman for Russia’s Prosecutor-General’s office said he had no information about Kovtun’s health.

Russian prosecutors earlier opened a criminal investigation for the attempted murder of Kovtun, a businessman. They said Kovtun was displaying symptoms of radiation poisoning.

Litvinenko, a Kremlin critic who was buried in London on Thursday, was killed by a lethal dose of polonium 210, a radioactive substance. British and Russian authorities have opened murder investigations.

The plot thickens.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to speak of the man's funeral yesterday - amongst the mourners gathered alongside his widow and son:

Boris Berezovsky, President Putin's arch rival. His presence in London infuriates the Kremlin. He was one of 6 pallbearers.

Akhmed Zakayev - former Chechen resistance leader

Andrei Nekrasov - his 2004 film Disbelief was based on Mr Litvinenko's controversial book claiming that it was Russian security services that were responsible for the 1999 Moscow apartment bombings, to pave the way for Russia's 2nd Chechen offensive
(bit like 9/11 and Iraq/Afghan', eh!? ........sorry, I'll get my coat....")

During the funeral, Lord John Rea, director of the Save Chechnya campaign, held aloft a picture of the Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, a vehement critic of Mr Putin's actions in Chechnya. Mr Litvinenko was investigating the circumstances of her murder at the time of his own poisoning.

Apparantly, it was Mr Litvinenko's wish that the service be non-religious and non-denominational. Also some people appeared and against the explicit wishes of the widow, and performed muslim rights. Some claim Mr Litvinenko switched faiths to Islam on his deathbed (Akhmed Zakayev), others rejected this (Mr Goldfarb; acting as the family spokesman).
This element of whether he became a Muslim or not interests matters - I figure if he felt that strongly about changing his faith, he'd have perhaps been more likely to do so when fit and well.

(Information courtesy of a British broadsheet newspaper)

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Litvinenko was a spy. Litvinenko was a defecter. Litvinenko was guilty of treason which is punishable by death. Russia sent a message.



He is not the only defector and neither was he the most famous/sensitive defector (until someone killed him).

You don't kill someone who's death will cost you more than their being alive. More to the point, if you choose to do so (even if its to make a statement), you do it in a manner than can be easily attributed but just as easily denied. eg bullet, knife, bashing etc Heck even the infamous ice pick was deniable.

You don't use a traceable radioisotope in such a tell-tale amount.

There's a big difference between 'sending a message' and signing your name in blood.

Logically, it makes no sense and even more so when you factor in that Putin's background before politics was intel.
xj

"I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with the earth...but then I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with a car either, and that's having tried both."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Logically it does in the sense that the oligarchs get their message across - simple as that. As far as I understand Polonium 210 doesn't come cheap!

I'm sure the reaction to this would have been anticipated.....

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Logically it does in the sense that the oligarchs get their message across - simple as that


Not really. Oligarchs do not equal Putin nor the regime. Some are on the hit list. Others are in jail.
I'd look more towards the FSB than the oligarchs (whom have, I believe, understood that staying away from pilitics will allow them to stay free and wealthy).

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Litvinenko was a spy. Litvinenko was a defecter. Litvinenko was guilty of treason which is punishable by death. Russia sent a message.



He is not the only defector and neither was he the most famous/sensitive defector (until someone killed him).

You don't kill someone who's death will cost you more than their being alive. More to the point, if you choose to do so (even if its to make a statement), you do it in a manner than can be easily attributed but just as easily denied. eg bullet, knife, bashing etc Heck even the infamous ice pick was deniable.

You don't use a traceable radioisotope in such a tell-tale amount.

There's a big difference between 'sending a message' and signing your name in blood.

Logically, it makes no sense and even more so when you factor in that Putin's background before politics was intel.



And here I thought I was the only one that had an understanding of intelligence services. Maybe I just read too much Tom Clancy. ;)
www.FourWheelerHB.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Logically it does in the sense that the oligarchs get their message across - simple as that


Not really. Oligarchs do not equal Putin nor the regime. Some are on the hit list. Others are in jail.
I'd look more towards the FSB than the oligarchs (whom have, I believe, understood that staying away from pilitics will allow them to stay free and wealthy).




Have you never heard of deniable operations?
Perhap's think of who exactly from the UK trained the mujahadden to operate the Stingers against the Soviets? They were military who'd 'resigned' prior to going to Afghan. They 're-enlisted' again on their return.
Figure it out.
In regards to the Oligarch's, quite often being onside with the politicians allow them to stay free and wealthy. Perhap's your unaware of the dissident ex-oligarchs now languishing in Russian labour camps as enemies of the state?
Besides - both entities had a common problem in Litvinenko.
Hence the simple logic of the situation.:)

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol

Edited to add:Why is it that everyone trusts an anonymous or unidentifiable source? :D
xj

"I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with the earth...but then I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with a car either, and that's having tried both."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In regards to the Oligarch's, quite often being onside with the politicians allow them to stay free and wealthy.


The unwritten rule with Putin is: stay out of politics, and I'll stay out of your business. Which means do not cross Putin. Abramovich is governor of Kamtchatka, has always steered clear of criticizing Putin on his record, has alway minded his own business, and is doing just fine.
Quote

Perhap's your unaware of the dissident ex-oligarchs now languishing in Russian labour camps as enemies of the state?


I am quite aware of such people, as I am married to a Russian woman who knows some of them. As I stated above, "crossing" Putin politically will have repercussions. See Yukos and Khodorkovsky, Berezowsky (close friend of Litvinenko) now exiled in London, etc...
There are little reasons why an oligarch would get involve in such assassination plot. The FSB, and Putin, have more to gain, with very little risk. Even if it is proven the order came from the top, what is going to happen? We'll just buy more energy and brush it aside...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Litvinenko was a spy. Litvinenko was a defecter. Litvinenko was guilty of treason which is punishable by death. Russia sent a message.



He is not the only defector and neither was he the most famous/sensitive defector (until someone killed him).

You don't kill someone who's death will cost you more than their being alive. More to the point, if you choose to do so (even if its to make a statement), you do it in a manner than can be easily attributed but just as easily denied. eg bullet, knife, bashing etc Heck even the infamous ice pick was deniable.

You don't use a traceable radioisotope in such a tell-tale amount.

There's a big difference between 'sending a message' and signing your name in blood.

Logically, it makes no sense and even more so when you factor in that Putin's background before politics was intel.



Whether or not you believe that they acted logically (according to your thoughts) you have to agree that they acted in a way that sent a clear message.
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And your thoughts on the confirmation that Kovtun contaminated his wife and kids with Polonium-210 before he met with Litvinenko?

Perhaps you've missed my point that the perpetrators ("they") might not be Putin and the FSB?

Edited to add:http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Exspy-contact-left-radioactive-trail/2006/12/12/1165685650282.html
xj

"I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with the earth...but then I wouldn't recommend picking a fight with a car either, and that's having tried both."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Boris Berezovsky, President Putin's arch rival. His presence in London infuriates the Kremlin. He was one of 6 pallbearers.



Boris Berezovsky is a lot more than Putin's rival. Paul Klebnikov, the Russian journalist who was assassinated a couple of years ago, wrote an interesting book about him titled Godfather of the Kremlin. It's a must read if you're interested in understanding what happened to Russian politics and the Russian economy after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

On an interesting side note, I once had a Russian teacher who said Berezovsky was a friend of her family and that he even attended one of her birthday parties when she was a child.
I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And your thoughts on the confirmation that Kovtun contaminated his wife and kids with Polonium-210 before he met with Litvinenko?

Perhaps you've missed my point that the perpetrators ("they") might not be Putin and the FSB?

Edited to add:http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Exspy-contact-left-radioactive-trail/2006/12/12/1165685650282.html



No, I was merely stating that what you consider to be illogical may well be very logical. I believe the external message is as I stated before. However, there may also be an internal message but since we are not internal we do not know and are not meant to know what that message is.
"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0