Poisoned Spy?

[j2k4]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2460129,00.html

Is this even worth our time?

After all, the United States is not to blame...well, not yet, anyway.

Honestly, I'd have though someone else would get to this first.

[GepperRankins]

he was a spy. who cares?

[j2k4]

he was a spy. who cares?

And if he were an American, accusing Bush? :whistling

[GepperRankins]

he was a spy. who cares?

And if he were an American, accusing Bush? :whistling
he'd still be a spy and he'd still be fair game for pwnage :dabs:

[j2k4]

And if he were an American, accusing Bush? :whistling
he'd still be a spy and he'd still be fair game for pwnage :dabs:

Disingenuous; oh, well.

Expectations weren't high.

[GepperRankins]

he'd still be a spy and he'd still be fair game for pwnage :dabs:

Disingenuous; oh, well.

Expectations weren't high.

dis‧in‧gen‧u‧ous  /ˌdɪsɪnˈdʒɛnyuəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dis-in-jen-yoo-uhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective,
lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere: Her excuse was rather disingenuous.


sorry. i really shouldn't have used so many long, outdated words

[j2k4]

Disingenuous; oh, well.

Expectations weren't high.

dis‧in‧gen‧u‧ous  /ˌdɪsɪnˈdʒɛnyuəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dis-in-jen-yoo-uhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective,
lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere: Her excuse was rather disingenuous.


sorry. i really shouldn't have used so many long, outdated words

You didn't, you merely sidestepped the question in a manner you no doubt thought mildly cunning.

Your postage is unresponsive and of no moment.

[GepperRankins]

dis‧in‧gen‧u‧ous  /ˌdɪsɪnˈdʒɛnyuəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dis-in-jen-yoo-uhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective,
lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere: Her excuse was rather disingenuous.


sorry. i really shouldn't have used so many long, outdated words

You didn't, you merely sidestepped the question in a manner you no doubt thought mildly cunning.

Your postage is unresponsive and of no moment.
no i didn't. i said no-one cares because he's a spy. you said what if it involved bush. i explained that my point was that he'd still be a spy so i still wouldn't care.

[vidcc]

I thought the conservative view was people that work in the intelligence field were fair game.

[j2k4]

sorry. i really shouldn't have used so many long, outdated words

You didn't, you merely sidestepped the question in a manner you no doubt thought mildly cunning.

Your postage is unresponsive and of no moment.
no i didn't. i said no-one cares because he's a spy. you said what if it involved bush. i explained that my point was that he'd still be a spy so i still wouldn't care.

Then I will admit to a modicum of surprise at your response, and ask you why you responded at all (at all).

[j2k4]

I thought the conservative view was people that work in the intelligence field were fair game.

In the course of executing their professional directive?

Absolutely.

This fellow believed he was singled out (as part of a larger and on-going movement) by Vladimir Putin for criticizing Putin and his government for any number of misdeeds.

This not being the ordinary province of spy-craft, your post is of the "apples-and-oranges" variety.

[GepperRankins]

You didn't, you merely sidestepped the question in a manner you no doubt thought mildly cunning.

Your postage is unresponsive and of no moment.
no i didn't. i said no-one cares because he's a spy. you said what if it involved bush. i explained that my point was that he'd still be a spy so i still wouldn't care.

Then I will admit to a modicum of surprise at your response, and ask you why you responded at all (at all).
you were obviously curious as to what other people thought. otherwise you wouldn't have posted :dabs:

[vidcc]

I thought the conservative view was people that work in the intelligence field were fair game.

In the course of executing their professional directive?

Absolutely.

This fellow believed he was singled out (as part of a larger and on-going movement) by Vladimir Putin for criticizing Putin and his government for any number of misdeeds.

This not being the ordinary province of spy-craft, your post is of the "apples-and-oranges" variety.

Do you think that the Russians were wrong for targeting a defecting spy?

[j2k4]

no i didn't. i said no-one cares because he's a spy. you said what if it involved bush. i explained that my point was that he'd still be a spy so i still wouldn't care.

Then I will admit to a modicum of surprise at your response, and ask you why you responded at all (at all).
you were obviously curious as to what other people thought. otherwise you wouldn't have posted :dabs:

I see.

Will you be visiting every other thread which holds no interest for you so you can post to that effect?

Better get busy.

[j2k4]

In the course of executing their professional directive?

Absolutely.

This fellow believed he was singled out (as part of a larger and on-going movement) by Vladimir Putin for criticizing Putin and his government for any number of misdeeds.

This not being the ordinary province of spy-craft, your post is of the "apples-and-oranges" variety.

Do you think that the Russians were wrong for targeting a defecting spy?

I don't know that they did.

I do know this is the latest in a string of suspicious deaths involving people critical of Putin and his government

I am very curious at that, and also why others are not curious as well.

[GepperRankins]

Then I will admit to a modicum of surprise at your response, and ask you why you responded at all (at all).
you were obviously curious as to what other people thought. otherwise you wouldn't have posted :dabs:

I see.

Will you be visiting every other thread which holds no interest for you so you can post to that effect?

Better get busy.
sorry for soiling your thread :(


you asked if anyone should care. i answered. deal with it

[vidcc]

Do you think that the Russians were wrong for targeting a defecting spy?

I don't know that they did.

I do know this is the latest in a string of suspicious deaths involving people critical of Putin and his government

I am very curious at that, and also why others are not curious as well.

You seem to be implying they did by asking "what if it were bush?"

But let's say we know for sure.

Do you think that the Russians were wrong for targeting a defecting spy?

Or if you don't want to answer without knowing for sure

Do you think that the Russians would be wrong if they targeted a defecting spy?

[bigboab]

The only differenece between this 'assassination' and others is the fact that he lived for a few days after the incident and was able to point a finger.
The fact that this is happening on a regular basis by almost every country tends to make most people a little blas'e about the spying game.

If they caught one of the 'spies' and put them on trial, that would make it more interesting.

[j2k4]

you were obviously curious as to what other people thought. otherwise you wouldn't have posted :dabs:

I see.

Will you be visiting every other thread which holds no interest for you so you can post to that effect?

Better get busy.
sorry for soiling your thread :(


you asked if anyone should care. i answered. deal with it

I have.

Then I asked why you posted to note for us your apathy on the subject and I wondered why you bothered.

Deal with it.

[j2k4]

Do you think that the Russians would be wrong if they targeted a defecting spy?

This is germane precisely how?

The "What if it was Bush?" qualification was aimed at The, only.

I've already noted Litvinenko's contention that he was poisoned over his stance on Putin and Putin's politics, and in context with the murders of a string of journalists and other players who weren't Putin fans.

Are you so obsessed with what I think (or rather, what you think I think) that you can't muster a viewpoint, or haven't the wherewithal to construct the underpinnings for one?

Oh, and as to your question - which I've quoted, accurately - I will answer in the affirmative...if it is determined somehow that he was targetted over his previous clandestine activities, rather than his dissident status, which you haven't seen fit to note.

BTW-

After six years in Britain, I think he qualifies as "defected", rather than defecting.

The heat had long left the moment, I'd say.

[j2k4]

The only differenece between this 'assassination' and others is the fact that he lived for a few days after the incident and was able to point a finger.
The fact that this is happening on a regular basis by almost every country tends to make most people a little blas'e about the spying game.

If they caught one of the 'spies' and put them on trial, that would make it more interesting.

Such is the life of a spy, eh? :whistling

I can imagine, however, he might have had actual knowledge of some of the others who've been done in so "mysteriously" in the past several years.

We'll probably never know.

[vidcc]

Do you think that the Russians would be wrong if they targeted a defecting spy?


This is germane precisely how?

The "What if it was Bush?" qualification was aimed at The, only.

I would go for that if your thread starting post hadn't been worded in the way it was because "non americans" hadn't started a thread yet.
However if you are going to ask a "what if" question then it seems reasonable that you answer the reverse question.




I've already noted Litvinenko's contention that he was poisoned over his stance on Putin and Putin's politics, and in context with the murders of a string of journalists and other players who weren't Putin fans.

But he was a spy also, this is important. The fact that he says he is being targeted purely because of his stance on putin doesn't make it so.
I will concede that it may be a part of it in that if he is critical of his former country what else is he talking about? .................remember he was a spy.


Are you so obsessed with what I think (or rather, what you think I think) that you can't muster a viewpoint, or haven't the wherewithal to construct the underpinnings for one?
"what you think I think" :rolleyes: then why did I ask you what you think If I already knew? I asked a question to find out what you think.
I asked a simple question which you danced around and didn't answer, so I re-worded it and asked again.

It was a simple question, why are you getting so upset about it?.

Do you really hate being asked questions that much, or do you just hate answering?

Back to the importance of him being a spy and your thread starting post. It's a simple question. If Russia would be justified in targeting a spy then why would anyone start a thread about his death?
the question was would russia be wrong, you said affimative which to my mind says that russia has no justification
so my next question would be, would the US be justified in targeting one of our spies should they "defect" to say Iran or North Korea and start bad mouthing us, or even if they just defect.
Personally I would prefer that the spy way captured, brought home and tried, as I would like all countries to do..........I don't think that happens.



Oh, and as to your question - which I've quoted, accurately - I will answer in the affirmative...if it is determined somehow that he was targetted over his previous clandestine activities, rather than his dissident status, which you haven't seen fit to note.
see above
You noted that you don't know that they did target him in connection with his past clandestine activities, will you say the same about his being targeted for his stance on putin?
Had he not been a spy then the dissident status would be all there was. On the other hand you seem to wish to ignore that he was a spy. This is odd because the thread title is "poisoned spy?". They will always be treated by a different standard, there is a reason for this and they know it.


BTW-

After six years in Britain, I think he qualifies as "defected", rather than defecting.

The heat had long left the moment, I'd say.
My question was simple and general. It was about if a nation had justification to target spies that cross over. Timespan is of little importance. They may feel that the defector is a low risk to begin with but his/her behavior over time may change that assessment.


Now on the theory that putin's critics are being dropped I will say that it's entirely possibly and even probable that things like that happen. Of course Putin will deny it. The validity of the word of a leader is up to the people who own the ears that hear the words..........

We don't torture. ;)

[j2k4]

This is germane precisely how?

The "What if it was Bush?" qualification was aimed at The, only.

I would go for that if your thread starting post hadn't been worded in the way it was because "non americans" hadn't started a thread yet.
However if you are going to ask a "what if" question then it seems reasonable that you answer the reverse question.




I've already noted Litvinenko's contention that he was poisoned over his stance on Putin and Putin's politics, and in context with the murders of a string of journalists and other players who weren't Putin fans.

But he was a spy also, this is important. The fact that he says he is being targeted purely because of his stance on putin doesn't make it so.
I will concede that it may be a part of it in that if he is critical of his former country what else is he talking about? .................remember he was a spy.


Are you so obsessed with what I think (or rather, what you think I think) that you can't muster a viewpoint, or haven't the wherewithal to construct the underpinnings for one?
"what you think I think" :rolleyes: then why did I ask you what you think If I already knew? I asked a question to find out what you think.
I asked a simple question which you danced around and didn't answer, so I re-worded it and asked again.

It was a simple question, why are you getting so upset about it?.

Do you really hate being asked questions that much, or do you just hate answering?

Back to the importance of him being a spy and your thread starting post. It's a simple question. If Russia would be justified in targeting a spy then why would anyone start a thread about his death?
the question was would russia be wrong, you said affimative which to my mind says that russia has no justification
so my next question would be, would the US be justified in targeting one of our spies should they "defect" to say Iran or North Korea and start bad mouthing us, or even if they just defect.
Personally I would prefer that the spy way captured, brought home and tried, as I would like all countries to do..........I don't think that happens.



Oh, and as to your question - which I've quoted, accurately - I will answer in the affirmative...if it is determined somehow that he was targetted over his previous clandestine activities, rather than his dissident status, which you haven't seen fit to note.
see above
You noted that you don't know that they did target him in connection with his past clandestine activities, will you say the same about his being targeted for his stance on putin?
Had he not been a spy then the dissident status would be all there was. On the other hand you seem to wish to ignore that he was a spy. This is odd because the thread title is "poisoned spy?". They will always be treated by a different standard, there is a reason for this and they know it.


BTW-

After six years in Britain, I think he qualifies as "defected", rather than defecting.

The heat had long left the moment, I'd say.
My question was simple and general. It was about if a nation had justification to target spies that cross over. Timespan is of little importance. They may feel that the defector is a low risk to begin with but his/her behavior over time may change that assessment.


Now on the theory that putin's critics are being dropped I will say that it's entirely possibly and even probable that things like that happen. Of course Putin will deny it. The validity of the word of a leader is up to the people who own the ears that hear the words..........

We don't torture. ;)

Oh, ffs...

[Ava Estelle]

[QUOTE=j2k4;1569692] Personally I would prefer that the spy way captured, brought home and tried ..
Tried with what, bad mouthing the US? Is that a crime now?


My question was simple and general. It was about if a nation had justification to target spies that cross over.
What do you mean by 'cross over'? Don't spies have the right to leave a country that is plotting to kill him? Crossing over, in the spy game, is usually associated with working for the other side, there is no evidence that this is the case here, his opposition was as part of a dissident group opposed to the government of Putin, that is not a crime.

[MagicNakor]

Haven't read the whole thread yet, but on the news recently they said both that he had died and that he had information regarding the Putin government attempting to strike up another war with Chechnya.

:shuriken:

[GepperRankins]

I see.

Will you be visiting every other thread which holds no interest for you so you can post to that effect?

Better get busy.
sorry for soiling your thread :(


you asked if anyone should care. i answered. deal with it

I have.

Then I asked why you posted to note for us your apathy on the subject and I wondered why you bothered.

Deal with it.
:lol:

well, if the question wasn't along the lines of should we be apathetic, i would never have registered my apathy :dabs:

[lynx]

What I find really amazing is the different response by the West to two political murders.

First we have the murder of Pierre Gemayel in Lebanon, which provokes outrage and Syria targetted finger pointing from the West, yet there is no evidence that Syria is even involved and there are several reasons why Western leaning organisations would have committed this murder simply to elicit an anti-Syria response.

Then we have the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, clearly the work of some Russian based organisation, with the possibility that innocent bystanders present at the site of his poisoning may have been affected, but there's no outrage, no finger pointing, merely a calm response to the Russian authorities for any information they may have.

I don't attribute more importance to one murder or the other, but the response goes a long way to explain why the West gets less cooperation from places like Syria.

[bigboab]

Mr Litvinenko named his killer. He said his name was Igor. WOW! what a lead for Scotland Yard and MI5.:lol:

[lynx]

Mr Litvinenko named his killer. He said his name was Igor. WOW! what a lead for Scotland Yard and MI5.:lol:
Now they just need to ask the KGB Russian security agencies for information on anyone called Igor. There can't be many.

[j2k4]

What I find really amazing is the different response by the West to two political murders.

First we have the murder of Pierre Gemayel in Lebanon, which provokes outrage and Syria targetted finger pointing from the West, yet there is no evidence that Syria is even involved and there are several reasons why Western leaning organisations would have committed this murder simply to elicit an anti-Syria response.

Then we have the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, clearly the work of some Russian based organisation, with the possibility that innocent bystanders present at the site of his poisoning may have been affected, but there's no outrage, no finger pointing, merely a calm response to the Russian authorities for any information they may have.

I don't attribute more importance to one murder or the other, but the response goes a long way to explain why the West gets less cooperation from places like Syria.

Why, everybody knows Gemayal was assassinated not for any sort of political reason, but for rubbing another man's rhubarb.

Honestly lynx, your default position always seems to be the one with the most salacious and conspiratory potential.

Actually, I meant to start a thread about Gemayal's demise yesterday, but my plate was a bit full.

I would have begun by casting about for opinions as to the nature of the intent of those responsible, but I'd have thought we'd get at least a couple of pages into it before anyone made that assertion.

[vidcc]

Tried with what, bad mouthing the US? Is that a crime now?

will concede that it may be a part of it in that if he is critical of his former country what else is he talking about? .................remember he was a spy.


If he is innocent the trial would clear him would it not. He is not afforded this if he is assassinated.
We are not talking about persecuted scholars or religious persecution. It's about national security.


What do you mean by 'cross over'? Don't spies have the right to leave a country that is plotting to kill him? Crossing over, in the spy game, is usually associated with working for the other side, there is no evidence that this is the case here, his opposition was as part of a dissident group opposed to the government of Putin, that is not a crime.How do you know there were plotting to kill him?

I shall repeat the risk assessment
if he is critical of his former country what else is he talking about? .................remember he was a spy.I make no judgment here about the fairness of the situation, just pointing out the way things are.
As A spy he would have information that would compromise other spies and their operations. I make no judgment here about which side they are on.


It was about if a nation had justification to target spies that cross over. Timespan is of little importance. They may feel that the defector is a low risk to begin with but his/her behavior over time may change that assessment.


They will always be treated by a different standard, there is a reason for this and they know it.

There will always be certain people that get held to a different standard. Spies are one group. Another could be scientist that specialise in nuclear weapons. It also depends on where they go as to the level of risk when making the assessment.

[Ava Estelle]

If he is innocent the trial would clear him would it not.

Innocent of what? What would the charge be? How would you have him extradited back to the US?


He is not afforded this if he is assassinated.

They are assassinated because there can be no trial, what can you prove?

[lynx]

What I find really amazing is the different response by the West to two political murders.

First we have the murder of Pierre Gemayel in Lebanon, which provokes outrage and Syria targetted finger pointing from the West, yet there is no evidence that Syria is even involved and there are several reasons why Western leaning organisations would have committed this murder simply to elicit an anti-Syria response.

Then we have the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, clearly the work of some Russian based organisation, with the possibility that innocent bystanders present at the site of his poisoning may have been affected, but there's no outrage, no finger pointing, merely a calm response to the Russian authorities for any information they may have.

I don't attribute more importance to one murder or the other, but the response goes a long way to explain why the West gets less cooperation from places like Syria.

Why, everybody knows Gemayal was assassinated not for any sort of political reason, but for rubbing another man's rhubarb.

Honestly lynx, your default position always seems to be the one with the most salacious and conspiratory potential.

Actually, I meant to start a thread about Gemayal's demise yesterday, but my plate was a bit full.

I would have begun by casting about for opinions as to the nature of the intent of those responsible, but I'd have thought we'd get at least a couple of pages into it before anyone made that assertion.
I wasn't making a point about who was responsible for the murders.

In the case of Litvinenko the UK Foreign Office specifically said they had no evidence to start any finger pointing (their words).
In the case of Gemeyal the also had no evidence, but that didn't prevent immediate finger pointing and accusations towards Syria.

Regardless of who might actually be responsible the difference in reaction is reprehensible and is a major cause of the distrust the Middle East has for Western governments.

[Ava Estelle]

[QUOTE=j2k4;1570825]Regardless of who might actually be responsible the difference in reaction is reprehensible and is a major cause of the distrust the Middle East has for Western governments.

Did you notice how Bush stood up and said Lebanon has a right to defend it's democracy? He didn't say that when Israel was bombing the fuck out of the place, and just last year he was calling the Lebanese democracy a sham.

[Barbarossa]

What I don't understand is that he was killed in such a way that it gave him ample opportunity to talk before the actual death, and in such a way that the finger clearly points to the Russian secret service, due to the nature of the toxin (pollonium).

Surely if they wanted to silence him, it would have been more prudent to shoot him unexpectedly in a dark alley, and then have someone find him floating upside down in the Thames a few days later.

It doesn't really make sense to do it in the way they did, which leads me to think that someone is actually trying to frame Putin and the Russian secret service, for some reason.


Probably the CIA :whistling

[bigboab]

It is a plot to stop Japan from over fishing. Fish now contains Pollonium and Omega-3. The Omega-3 lets you know that you are dying and The {Pollonium lets you know there is nothing you can do about it.:(

If it had been the CIA they would never have found the Pollonium.:)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/bigboab/igor.jpg
I have found Igor.

[j2k4]

It is a plot to stop Japan from over fishing. Fish now contains Pollonium and Omega-3. The Omega-3 lets you know that you are dying and The {Pollonium lets you know there is nothing you can do about it.:(

If it had been the CIA they would never have found the Pollonium.:)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/bigboab/igor.jpg
I have found Igor.

It would seem then that incompetence serves our international reputation, and reinforces the purity of our stated purpose.

In this instance, at least.

Hurrah. :mellow:

[4play]

This fella accusing putin of pedofilia probably didn't help his life expectency as a spy any.

source (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:vA38XOLDXnYJ:www.chechenpress.co.uk/english/news/2006/07/05/01.shtml+putin+pedophile&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2/)

then again he has been called a crackpot on more than one occasion here (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10049)

[j2k4]

This fella accusing putin of pedofilia probably didn't help his life expectency as a spy any.

source (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:vA38XOLDXnYJ:www.chechenpress.co.uk/english/news/2006/07/05/01.shtml+putin+pedophile&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2/)

then again he has been called a crackpot on more than one occasion here (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10049)

The "crackpot" accusation works very well.

For example, Noam Chomsky is a well-known crackpot, and has been one for decades.

He makes quite a nice living at it, though you couldn't tell from his wardrobe.

[skllbob]

I found this story interesting to say the least. I've haven't bought into the "Communism collapse Issue" totally. It also seems obvious that corruption is quite rampant in Russia. Since he was investigating corruption it doesn't seem far fetched that he was assassinated. I'm not paranoid nor do I spend to much time reading into issues re:espionage. So to sum up my .02 , yes I believe it's quite possible that he pissed of the wrong people.

[j2k4]

This just keeps getting bigger and stranger...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,233578,00.html

[bigboab]

I only feel sorry for the innocent people caught up in this. The spies know the risks when taking on the job. The whole thing, at the moment, revolves around Litvinenko. How many killings has he carried out in his time as a spy?

[skllbob]

Interesting link j2k4, thanks for posting that.:cool:

[j2k4]

I only feel sorry for the innocent people caught up in this. The spies know the risks when taking on the job. The whole thing, at the moment, revolves around Litvinenko. How many killings has he carried out in his time as a spy?

Maybe none, Bob. :huh:

It does indeed seem that whomever is responsible used techniques that could best be described as scattershot.

I'm hearing other reports that say "several family members" (of Litvinenko's? Others?) also show traces of the Polonium 210, with no mention of what this bodes for them.


Interesting link j2k4, thanks for posting that.:cool:

'Twas nothing, nothing at all.

[bigboab]

The more this 'goes on' I am starting to have the feeling maybe he was carrying the Pollonium to harm someone else. It is just my training. Looking at all possibilities.:)

[j2k4]

The more this 'goes on' I am starting to have the feeling maybe he was carrying the Pollonium to harm someone else. It is just my training. Looking at all possibilities.:)

A possibility, true.

Makes me wonder, if he was carrying it, whether or not he was aware of the fact?

He may have been compromised without his knowledge...could account for the "scattershot" aspect, and be a very telling (and unique!) tell-tale about his movements once the story broke.

Yet another possibility, eh?

[bigboab]

I just hope that we dont invade Pollonium. After all they may have more Large Intercontinental Explosive Stocks.

Note the avoidance of using another acronym.:)

[j2k4]

Well done.

Good to see your government carrying the ball, BTW, and I hope, apart from the anticipated involvement of our Eff Bee Eye, that we can avoid the imminent international brouhaha. Ha. :P