Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Larisa's Questions about the Litvinenko and Politkovskaya Murders

Larisa Alexandrovna's most recent article at Raw Story, concerning the poisoning of Alex Litvinenko and the gunshot murder of Anna Politkovskaya, has caused quite a stir. I think people always expect Larisa to say something different than the mainstream media, and they've been surprised lately to see her appearing to confirm the reports we've been getting from the spin-and-noise merchants on TV and radio.

I've been reading Larisa for quite a while, as regular readers know of this frozen blog already know, and I've been impressed by her courage and passion, as well as her sources. But as far as I can tell, all her sources are "inside". So ... if everyone in the "establishment" is telling the same lie, Larisa will hear it often enough to start believing it, maybe.

But she's not easily taken in, and in this case she's still trying to pull hidden threads together. So if what she's been saying lately turns out to be false, I don't think she'll have a problem admitting it.

It might not turn out to be false, of course ...

Earlier today, Larisa posted on her new blog an enormous thought-provoking piece based on some of the questions in her notebook and the answers she's been getting. I think you should read all of Running amok with Alex and Anna, but I'll tease you with a few excerpts first:
The questions about Politkovskaya’s murder, which I have been trying to get information about since it took place in October, are listed below as I had them in my notes:

1). What was Anna working on? She had always been a vocal critic of the Kremlin. So why now (at the time of her October murder)?

2). When were other assassination attempts on her, if any?

3). Why the use of a gun in what so obviously appears to be a murder rather than something more simple and with some wiggle room with regard to plausible denial, like, a car accident?

4). Who did she confide in/trust to tell what she was working on? (We all tell someone, but someone we trust)

5). Who were Anna’s sources?
Now, let’s examine questions on Litvinenko's murder:

1). Litvinenko had been a long time critic of the Kremlin, so why was he killed now?

2). Why would Putin use such an obvious and incriminating choice of weaponry, if he is indeed behind the attack?

3). How would this material be delivered, in what form, and by whom?

4). What was Litvinenko working on or claiming at the time of his murder?

5). Who were his contacts?

6). Is this related to Anna’s death?

7). Who did they know in common?

8). What similarities did they have with regard to criticism and allegations?
If these questions appeal to you, if you're interested in reading the answers, if you're curious about where all this might lead, please click here to continue.