TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Of course the Russians did it. They're the experts
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Of course the Russians did it. They're the experts

quote:

There are lots of reasons to doubt the sensational claims by Andrei Lugovoy, the Russian accused of murdering Alexander Litvinenko, that it was in fact the British Government wot did it. He�s a KGB officer, for starters. That�s the kind of job that doesn�t tend to encourage or reward guileless declarations of unimpeachable fact before the television cameras. Then there�s the problem that Mr Lugovoy�s case isn�t helped by the lack of any supporting evidence of British government involvement, nor by the awkward fact of the long trail of polonium-210 that seemed to follow his own movements across Europe in the days surrounding Litvinenko�s murder. But the biggest reason for suspicion is that, if what he said is true it would mark a wholly implausible reversal of fortunes in the decades�long struggle for supremacy between Russian and Western intelligence agencies. The truth is that we in the West may have won the Cold War but when it came to the intelligence battle, we came in a distant second. The Litvinenko affair � a hit job carried out with evident impunity by Russian agents on foreign soil � is a sorry reminder of how overmatched we were in the Cold War in the spy business. Other than Olympic shot-putters chemically propelled to athletic excellence by a dehumanising regime desperate for some ersatz legitimacy, intelligence was about the only thing the Russians did really well. They may not have been able to make the trains run on time or increase wheat production in Moldova, but by golly they knew how to eavesdrop, wiretap, blackmail and bribe their way into the most sensitive of the West�s inner sanctums. Consider a Cold War balance sheet. They bumped off Soviet defectors at will and almost killed the Pope. We had a cunning plan to explode cigars in Fidel Castro�s beard. They had Philby, Burgess, MacLean, Blunt and just about every clever undergraduate at Cambridge who ever responded warmly to any man who sidled up to them over a late-night sherry. We had a few brave but terrorised dissidents who invariably ended up in the Lubyanka or Siberia. We gave them our atomic secrets so they could build the weapon that saved their regime � at least for 40 years. They gave us lectures at the UN about human freedom. Not that they always got it right. There�s a nice story about a French diplomat, caught in flagrante delicto with a couple of Soviet beauties, who received the customary incriminating photographs readied for copying to his wife back in Paris along with a letter inviting him to cooperate. Go ahead, he told them. I haven�t lived with my wife for 20 years and I can�t wait to see her face when she gets a look at the new me. But cock-ups, as it were, like that were rare in Soviet Russia. And since the Cold War ended the story hasn�t changed much. Our intelligence agencies have developed an unhappy knack of uncovering threats where there are none and failing to find them where they are. They didn�t really spot the terror of al-Qaeda until it was way too late. They told us in 1991 that Iraq was nowhere close to developing nuclear weapons when, it turned out, they were on the very brink. Then they told us in 2003 that Iraq might be on the very brink of developing nuclear weapons when it turned out they were nowhere close. None of this is to speak too harshly of the efforts of MI5, MI6 or the CIA. It is merely a reflection of the asymmetric struggle between intelligence agencies in democratic and totalitarian societies. Penetrating regimes that are run on a premise of domestic terror requires really painstaking and risk-laden effort. Finding out what goes on in open democracies? Not so much. The Lugovoy-Litvinenko saga underscores the fact that this basic imbalance has not changed in the 16 years since we won the Cold War. We remain, paradoxically, the victim of our own freedoms, which they exploit ruthlessly � including, as yesterday, leading along a fabulously credulous media. They remain, paradoxically, secure in their own paranoia and insecurity. It�s partly why I think Vladimir Putin is so nostalgic for another Cold War. He worked for the KGB, remember, and in hard intelligence terms those were heady days for their side. That we have entered another troubling phase in our relations with Russia is not in doubt. ... As for those claims by Mr Lugovoy that British intelligence is actively trying to destabilise the Russian President, I sincerely hope they are true. But if I were him, I wouldn�t be losing any sleep.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/co...icle1867905.ece

Also this interesting piece, for those who doubt the evidence of Lugovoi's involvement:

quote:

Clues point to the Kremlin The murder of the former KGB man Alexander Litvinenko was �undeniably state-sponsored terrorism on Moscow�s part. That is the view at the highest levels of the British government�. This official had access to the latest police and intelligence findings, and he was reflecting the views of senior Home Office counter-terrorism officials, Scotland Yard detectives and others with close knowledge of the murder investigation. All confirmed last week that they believe the plot to poison Litvinenko in London last year was ordered by the Russian secret service, the FSB. ... Until now - while there has been press speculation about the FSB�s and even Putin�s responsibility for Litvinenko�s death - informed sources have confined themselves to the theory that former secret service associates killed him because of a personal vendetta. After a police investigation, the Crown Prosecution Service wanted to charge Andrei Lugovoi, a former FSB officer, with the murder; and it was Moscow�s refusal to allow his extradition for trial, once the scandal had become an affair of state, that led to the expulsions. Now, however, British officials are saying that the police investigation implicates the FSB itself. They point to the estimated �4.5m cost of the radio-active polonium210 used to kill Litvinenko. They confirm it has been traced back to Russia - probably to the nuclear centre at the closed city of Sarov. They also point out that last summer the Russian parliament gave Putin the right to order the FSB to carry out assassinations of �enemies of the Russian state�. They are careful to refrain from claiming he actually ordered the killing. �Yes, the road leads to the FSB, but where the road goes once it�s inside the FSB is not something the police are really aware of,� said one of the officials.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...icle2116262.ece

the game goes on.

Yeah, FSB has spent 25 MILLION DOLLARS to kill some low-threat low-level dissident??? Thats bullshit. I already covered this. The polonium trail has gone out of Lugovoi's way as well, and was found in Germany in apartments of other businessmen and in Berevosky's offices, and on TWO DIFFERENT British airliners (I assume Lugovoi was on both AT THE SAME TIME). And Lugovoi's associates were poisoned as well. Litvinenko had no secrets that would compromise Russia, he only had speculations, just like all other Russian dissidents do, so nothing new here. They are all anti-Russian, and Berezovsky was the one Russia was actually pursuing for (but somehow they didnt poison him). FSB DOES NOT carry out assassinations abroad, thats CLEARLY stated in their rules. Its only GRU that ever does this, and they is no talk about them and its not their jurisdiction anyway (they target terrorists). The story lacks logic and lacks proof from British side to convict and extradite Lugovoi. They only claim, suspect, view Lugovoi as the murderer, while presenting no evidence to back that up, something that's common in China where you're guilty until proven innocent.

As for polonium-210 traced to Russia, thats quite odd, since the polonium-210 doesnt just put out "Made In Russia" symbol, and polonium-210 is the same in UK as it is in Russia. Its not a different substance. Plus, there's no evidence Russian government or the Russian police did this, I already pointed this out many times, ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence, this case has become politicized. The only person that should have been blamed or accused is Lugovoi, but thats not the case here, isnt it? But since I know well the British media and its sensationalism, well, they've been caught lying and exagerrating things on many occasions. But they are successful at lying and brainwahsing the British public into creating a new enemy to fight. Because they're too bored or trying to sway attention from the war in Iraq to build a war against Russia.

You guys should just give up with this nonsense, until you present proof and undeniable evidence that Lugovoi and/or Russian government did this, because until then its obvious that you guys are bent on starting a new Cold War with Russia. It wasnt Russia who started this in the first place, it wasnt in Russian interests to do this, it didnt involve any risky elements to Russian state, and for the last time, many businessmen and politicians in Russia were at some point involved in KGB or some other agency, because thats how it was back then in Soviet Union. Even Hungarian and Latvian government leaders were frigging involved at one point. In Poland even they are making political scandals against current politicians who were once members of KGB. SO WHAT? Its ancient history. You guys need to get over it. If Putin wanted Cold War or Soviet Union, he would have never pushed for greater autonomy of Russian regions, market reform, privatization, democracy and equal trade and political relations with its neighbours. He would have been like Chavez instead. Its not the case, so please drop your aspirations for Cold War, because Russians dont want and are not aiming for it.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium You guys should just give up with this nonsense, until you present proof and undeniable evidence that Lugovoi and/or Russian government did this,

man that's funny coming from you!!

I think the Russians were behind 9/11. The evidence is obvious

Can someone explain why those dumbasses would use polonium to kill him? Isn't it obvious that super expensive shizzle like that would be traced back to a government?

Why not use a .05 bullet and make it look like a robbery?

Putin is a silly goose.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Can someone explain why those dumbasses would use polonium to kill him? Isn't it obvious that super expensive shizzle like that would be traced back to a government? Why not use a .05 bullet and make it look like a robbery? Putin is a silly goose.

to send a message?

the more pertinent question would be: who ELSE would go to this kind of trouble when, as you say, its far easier just to shoot someone?

undoubtedly the russian govt.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Can someone explain why those dumbasses would use polonium to kill him? Isn't it obvious that super expensive shizzle like that would be traced back to a government? Why not use a .05 bullet and make it look like a robbery? Putin is a silly goose.

Arrogance.

It is a much bigger deterrent to people who would go against someone who is willing to murder someone in a fashion that makes it patently obvious that it was not a coincidence as an example of their power.


MrS

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Can someone explain why those dumbasses would use polonium to kill him?

They used it because they didn't think it would discovered so quickly and efficienty by Britain. And by the time it COULD be discovered, all traces would have evaporated.

The British found that it was polonium almost by accident. It's a very difficult substance to identify (while still present).

Why does this have to be repeated over and over again? Didn't you read any articles in the press about how hard polonium is to ID?

Now my question: Did you read the two articles that I posted in this thread? They really mention some facts that you don't hear everyday in the media.

quote:

Originally posted by MrSquirrel Arrogance. It is a much bigger deterrent to people who would go against someone who is willing to murder someone in a fashion that makes it patently obvious that it was not a coincidence as an example of their power. MrS

Yeahhh ... Russia using polonium ... VERY POWERFUL ... nuke those bastards!!! Hahaha ...

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN to send a message? the more pertinent question would be: who ELSE would go to this kind of trouble when, as you say, its far easier just to shoot someone? undoubtedly the russian govt.

Kinda funny reading this coming from you ... I thought you didnt believe in conspiracies. Would be nice if you provided some proof ... Somehow you believe that Russians are behind everything, the Russian secret plan to take over the world ...

Whomever poisoined Litvinenko chose polonium-210 intentionally because only specific government and military agencies have it, its not public, just like uranium. So it would be obvious who is to blame here ... qui bono ...

25 Million os a lot of money for someone who posed no threat to the Russian government. Yes, a bullet to the head, an accident or something similar would have totally not been linked to Russian government.

If polonium-210 was so hard to trace, then how come weeks after Litvinenko's death its traces were still found long after Lugovoi allegedly visited the places that were heavily sprayed with polonium-210? Seriously, where's the common sense here? Are you guys really naive to suggest that Lugovoi sprayed all places he visited? Thats a HUGE amount of polonium-210 to sneak across the airplane. And through SEVERAL countries across Europe (including Germany). And the untracebility of polonium-210 has been clearly smashed, so there goes that argument. It was confirmed that poloninum-210 killed Litvinenko at his death, over 3 WEEKS after he was poisoned. Pretty dam hidden poison it seems, so hidden its traces were STILL present in so many places. And Lugovoi was very happy to spray (mark his territory) to some of the public places he visited. How come then if he was 'heavily leaking' polonium-210, how come the poison wasnt discovered at his hotel, and some other places he visited, but only found in key remote places? How come polonium-210 was discovered in Berezovsky's offices, in offices in Germany of other businessmen, in British Embassy in Moscow, etc? Hmmmmmmmmm .... the trail is quite a broken one. Lugovoi it seems was choosing where he wanted to spray polonium, in remote places only, and not in all places he visited. But I thought he only gave some poison for Litvinenko to drink? Hmmmmm ....

EDIT: POISON DISCOVERED 'ALMOST' BY ACCIDENT? Are you insane? Have you read health books? Do you know what the signs of RADIATION poisoning are? Well, do some homework. It was CLEAR that Litvinenko was POISONED WITH A RADIOACTIVE SUBSTANCE from the beginning. However, polonium-210 is not a common substance, so it wasnt easy to determine what it was until after his death, when coronary report was concluded, and all observations were done. Throwing up, losing all body hair, vomiting, immune system failing, organs failing, etc. are just some of the signs of radiation. And the doctors EASILY figured that out, so it wasnt that hard to figurte out he WAS MURDERED, not just a flu illness.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Kinda funny reading this coming from you ... I thought you didnt believe in conspiracies. Would be nice if you provided some proof ... Somehow you believe that Russians are behind everything, the Russian secret plan to take over the world ...

no, i just dont believe in the conspiracies that you bang on about. i know all government's are known for their often violent espionage. that's just common knowledge.

interesting for you to suddenly do the proof argument. funny funny funny!!

quote:

Whomever poisoined Litvinenko chose polonium-210 intentionally because only specific government and military agencies have it, its not public, just like uranium. So it would be obvious who is to blame here ... qui bono ...

why on earth would they need to "blame" anyone for it? you give us a more likely candidate than the russian government and maybe we'll start listening.

russians had motive, means, capability. i find it weird that you would dismiss the arguments against russia based on nothing at all.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN no, i just dont believe in the conspiracies that you bang on about. i know all government's are known for their often violent espionage. that's just common knowledge.

Yet you dont want to even consider the idea that the U.S Government could have been behind the 911 attacks.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Yet you dont want to even consider the idea that the U.S Government could have been behind the 911 attacks.

i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting...

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting...

How about the simulations reconstructed from the flight data recorder of flight 77 by the pilotsfor911truth ? Surely that was thought provoking.

quote:

Originally posted by Omega_M How about the simulations developed from the flight data recorder by the pilotsfor911truth association ? Surely that was thought provoking. Have you seen it ?

yes i have. and yes, it is interesting. but something like this cannot stand up to the counter evidence. you know, bodies, wreckage, the destroyed lightposts on the approach vector, the hundreds of witnesses that saw the plane crash etc. or the very same blackbox they got from the pentagon

has the accuracy of the blackbox been verified? i dont know enough about blackboxes and how accurate they are to make a judgement. i am however pretty good at plain old reading, and hundreds of witnesses cannot be wrong to such a degree. especially those that witnessed the flight passing within metres of their car

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting...

Just wondering what sort of proof do you have in mind?I mean would you believe it if lets say one day the U.S Government comes out clean and admits it? we both know that will never happen.

I think no matter how much proof is presented people like you will always doubt the evidence.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Just wondering what sort of proof do you have in mind?I mean would you believe it if lets say one day the U.S Government comes out clean and admits it? we both know that will never happen. I think no matter how much proof is presented people like you will always doubt the evidence.

hardcore, i really do appreciate your (often left-field!) opinions on stuff. but this sort of argument goes a little too far for my liking!

its like this: despite their ridiculous opinions to the contrary, there remains NO evidence to support controlled demolition/no pentagon plane, and irrefutable evidence that there was no controlled demolition and a pentagon plane. this is what i care about. until this situation is reversed, then i remain entirely unconvinced.

so yes, my mind is still open to change, but bereft of anything even remotely approaching hard evidence, my opinion shall remain. there's also the small fact that SO many of the theories (asides from making little to no sense) are founded on poor logic, known fallacies and often dishonest research. that's a big thing for me. i dont mind people expressing an opinion, but when its blatantly obvious that they have deliberately manipulated their data, it makes me pretty angry.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN hardcore, i really do appreciate your (often left-field!) opinions on stuff. but this sort of argument goes a little too far for my liking!

It is all good I mean you cant like everything in this world right?

quote:

its like this: despite their ridiculous opinions to the contrary, there remains NO evidence to support controlled demolition/no pentagon plane, and irrefutable evidence that there was no controlled demolition and a pentagon plane. this is what i care about. until this situation is reversed, then i remain entirely unconvinced.

With something this big, we probably wont know the truth for many years,maybe even not in our life time.

quote:

so yes, my mind is still open to change, but bereft of anything even remotely approaching hard evidence, my opinion shall remain. there's also the small fact that SO many of the theories (asides from making little to no sense) are founded on poor logic, known fallacies and often dishonest research. that's a big thing for me. i dont mind people expressing an opinion, but when its blatantly obvious that they have deliberately manipulated their data, it makes me pretty angry.

Fair enough,at least I know where you are standing on this issue.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting...

I am glad that since you've mentioned this, maybe then you could put this into action and apply it to this Litvinenko case ;-) Plus add cui bono principle. And you'll see who is more likely to have carried out the murder of Litvinenko. Because the proof ... well, if there's such thing in this case, is not pointing towards Russian involvement. Litvinenko was harmless, and the whole chase by Russia is ACTUALLY after Berezovsky, and Litvinenko means nothing to Russia. Litvinenko was just another defector who was disappointed in Putin and who didnt like that his mafia and corrupt bastards were beginning to get their nuts cut off. There were plenty of defectors of higher rank who exposed dangerous materials about Russia during and after Cold War and they are all alive. At least they died of natural causes. So there you go.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6188658.stm

I have a Russian article on the law. Yes, it is to fight terrorists abroad, and NOT dissidents. Those are separate things. Russia has not assassinated a dissident since 1959. Yes, the 2004 car bombing of Zelimkhan Yandarbiev was done by Russian special forces, who were CAUGHT in Qatar, imprisoned. And there was proof of Russian involvement. I supported that one (it was much cheaper than this 25 million dollar murder of Litvinenko). Zelimkhan Yandarbiev has orchestrated attacks against civilians (BOTH Russian and Chechen) and he rightfully deserved what was coming at him.

The article quotes:

"Much more controversially, the law also defines "those slandering the individual occupying the post of president of the Russian Federation" as extremists. "


Thats bullshit. Not true, this is taken out of context. Basically the article says that anti-war protesters can be executed? Are you guys that insane? This law applied to TARGET ASSASSINATIONS of terrorists and criminals abroad ... and Litvinenko had nothing on Russians. Nothing. No proof, only speculations that the British media adores. If he had some proof, then it would have surely been exploited by the British media, as Litvinenko has written a book ...

Also, how come Mr Kovtun, a close friend and associate of Lugovoi who was also present in that bar on that day is in critical condition in Moscow hospital with the same symptoms as Litvinenko?? I thought that Lugovoi only put the poison into the drink of ONLY the Litvinenko's tea .... even Lugovoi spent some time in hospital after coming to Russia, serious illness developed as a result of his trip to UK, hmmmm *cough, *cough ...

Interesting timeline that comes in question against the mainline story according to the British media itself, and it becomes obvious that according to the British, Russian "agents" deliberately poisoned themselves and EXPOSED THEMSELVES to radiation in order to poison and kill Litvinenko, and Lugovoi even brought his family over for greater risk ... now that's retarted, I am not buying that. But the timeline has some controversial and questional points that many people have overlooked:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6179074.stm

quote:

27 November Police confirm traces of radioactive polonium-210 have been discovered at two more central London addresses - Grosvenor Street, Mayfair and Down Street in West London.

quote:

30 November Home Secretary John Reid tells MPs traces of radioactivity had been discovered in 12 locations, as well as the two British Airways planes. Mr Reid tells MPs that two Russian aircraft, one of which is currently at Heathrow airport, are also of interest (but no radiation was found).

quote:

1 December In the wake of the alleged poisoning of former Russian Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar radiation tests are carried out in the Republic of Ireland.

quote:

6 December Radiation is found at the British embassy in Moscow following precautionary tests on the building.

quote:

7 December Russia says it is investigating the attempted murder of Dmitry Kovtun, a contact of Mr Litvinenko who met him at the Pine Bar in London's Millennium Hotel on 1 November. Reports that Mr Kovtun is in a critical condition spark speculation he too may have been poisoned.

quote:

9 December Police in Germany say they have found indications of radiation in two properties apparently used by Dmitry Kovtun - the Hamburg flat of his ex-wife, and her mother's home outside the city.

quote:

10 December A British detective arrives in Hamburg to be briefed by German police on their investigation into traces of polonium-210 found at various residences. Four people close to Dmitry Kovtun also test positive for the radioactive substance. They are his ex-wife, her partner and two children. And in Moscow, British detectives and officials from the Russian Prosecutor General's office reportedly interview ex-KGB bodyguard Andrei Lugovoi, who is currently in hospital. - Lugovoi himself became sick!

quote:

Mr Scaramella is arrested in Naples, Italy, as part of an investigation into arms trafficking and violating state secrets. (He was also present at the meeting with Lugovoi, Kovtun and Litvinenko). Scotland Yard say the arrest is not connected to the investigation into Mr Litvinenko's death. (HAHAHAHAHA!)

quote:

5 January Polonium-210 is detected at another restaurant - the Pescatori in Mayfair, central London - health officials say. (WTF???????????????????????????)

quote:

30 January Mr Lugovoi and Mr Kovtun, both businessmen and former members of the Russian security services, were taken to hospital with suspected radiation poisoning in December.

quote:

31 January The BBC's security correspondent Frank Gardner says police sources have told him that the "finger of suspicion" pointed "clearly" at former KGB officer Andrei Lugovoi. Police say they cannot reveal the contents of the file.

Here's what we Russians think:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6909056.stm

Russia wants normal ties with UK

quote:

Russia wants to restore normal ties with the UK following tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said. He said he assumed ties with London were "based on respect for each other's interests and common sense".

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium "Much more controversially, the law also defines "those slandering the individual occupying the post of president of the Russian Federation" as extremists. " Thats bullshit. Not true, this is taken out of context. Basically the article says that anti-war protesters can be executed? Are you guys that insane? This law applied to TARGET ASSASSINATIONS of terrorists and criminals abroad ...

I don't speak Russian, or know where to look for a copy of the law. Can you find it and translates the bits that proves the BBC article wrong please?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley I don't speak Russian, or know where to look for a copy of the law. Can you find it and translates the bits that proves the BBC article wrong please?

I am going to sleep now, because I came from work couple hours ago, but ... basically, this Russian assassination law is the carbon-copy as the law that the British and Americans have for target assassinations abroad for terrorists and criminals. I hope you can understand that. I couldn't find anything in English on this right now, and in Russian it will be just as hard (I dont have Russian keyboard). But its utterly impossible for that law to state that criticizing Russian president is considered terrorism and the person can be executed abroad, that is plain wrong. If its true, then I would like to know. I hope proof can be presented, because I would have heard about it by now (but only a few "hints" are given in Western media about how how liberty ALLEGEDLY the FSB/GRU can have in assassinating ... its just plain wrong to assume). If the law was such straightforward at saying that anti-Putin protesters must be killed, then I would have known this, I read a lot of Russian media of different sources and different political angles.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.