KGB Agent Fingers MI6

KGB Agent Fingers MI6

www.myfoxal.com

The main suspect in the murder of former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko in London has accused the British secret services of being involved in his death.....


He said MI6 agents had been implicated in the murder and were now using him as a scapegoat.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Does this mean MI6 could be considered worse than the CIA?

Most conspiracies surrounding the CIA put them in a shadowy light, I always had thought of the UK's MI6 as more... above reproach.

Could his accusations be just that, unfounded accusations or could there be some truth behind his story of recruitment?

His story certainly seems plausible.

www.myfoxal.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

its bull.

the guy contradicts what he said today and a while back, when he said he was surprised by the actions of the British police.

why is he only saying it now after the British called for his arrest? why didn't he come out at the start.

And why would the British kill someone who wanted democratic change in Russia? (which is what the British quietly wants?)

His story certainly seems plausible.

He has no evidence to back up his claim. And the KGB have assassinated someone in London before.

Could his accusations be just that, unfounded accusations or could there be some truth behind his story of recruitment?

So, you are number one suspect in a assassination plot, your government is refusing to send you and this is after the Russian military were spying on a UK military exercise. It's more finger pointing by the Russian state.

Plus UK and Russian relations are poor.

And...in Russian Law, its legal to assassinate people in other Countries, please remember that.

[edit on 31-5-2007 by infinite]

The MI6 get a bad rep in some things, they are an easy target for CT's and also being used for deflection reasons in this case.
You have to ask yourself what would the MI6 and the British Government get out of the murder of Mr Litvenyenko?
Nothing, if we wanted him dead, we would of done it many easier ways without trace.
Im afraid the trail very much leads back to the Kremlin, with huge evidence pointing towards the former KGB man.
He is using oldskool deflection, trying to pass the buck...
Some people will get confused and wonder if he speaks any truth, but the reality of the matter is that after a full investigation, there is more than enough evidence to prosecute the Russian Spy.
If it was in doubt we would not even think of trying for extradition which could deteriorate our fragile relationship with our Russian counterparts.
Why do you think these people seek sanctuary in our country?

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Why do you think these people seek sanctuary in our country?

Spot on the money dude

Many people are in exile here, including the Chechen government

Not that a 'spy' or 'assassin' wouldn't sound convincing to save his own skin, but what he claims seems to make sence.

Mr Lugovoi said he did not know who killed Litvinenko but insisted it was not him. He said: "To commit such a crime you would have to have a motive. Sasha was not my enemy. I didn't feel cold or hot about the books he was writing. I had been in business for a long time and I wasn't really interested."

Could this guy be a scapegoat being used by MI6.

The logic of killing one spy that was possibly a loose end, and using another who could not be 'turned' as the fall guy would certainly fit nicely.

Of course, it could also make a good movie as well

Originally posted by Grailkeeper
Could this guy be a scapegoat being used by MI6.

but you are ignoring the facts here,

why would the British government kill someone living in exile in the United Kingdom? Litvinenko was against Putin, so why would we kill him?. We have nothing to gain.

but what he claims seems to make sence.

no it doesn't. Hundreds of exile Russian's come to live in the UK because its safe, which the Russian government has taken a strong dislike to.

Think and look at the facts.

[edit on 31-5-2007 by infinite]

Spot on Infinite... There is no motive for us to Whack Litvenyenko, even if there was, we wouldnt of used the technique used.
You are totally right in saying we are a safe haven for Russian agents who are against the Putin regime.
You are right it would make a good film, but it would only be fictional and far from the truth, just like the former KGB spys accusations.
Just looking for CT's based on extremely unreliable ex KGB wild accusations is absurd, this guy has his back to the wall and his life is certainly in danger. he will say anything to try and save his neck. I wouldnt be suprised if this guy suffered a fatal heart attack or car crash. The Kremlin will not allow his extradition, he may choose to go the same route as Litvenyenk and try and thrash a deal with our CPS. This is unthinkable for the Kremlin. The guy is a dead man walking... and he knows it. Desperation can make a man say many things.

Originally posted by infinite

Originally posted by Grailkeeper
Could this guy be a scapegoat being used by MI6.

but you are ignoring the facts here,

why would the British government kill someone living in exile in the United Kingdom? Litvinenko was against Putin, so why would we kill him?. We have nothing to gain.

but what he claims seems to make sence.

no it doesn't. Hundreds of exile Russian's come to live in the UK because its safe, which the Russian government has taken a strong dislike to.

Think and look at the facts.

[edit on 31-5-2007 by infinite]

You should do some thinking too. Have you never heard of a false-flag operation? Look. It's well-known that Boris Bezerovsky is plotting with right-wing politicians in Moscow to overthrow Putin. A couple of weeks back, he came on BBC Newsnight and admitted it. If he were not protected by British intelligence, he would have been arrested for such a crime. He has set aside several hundred million pounds to finance this project. He and fellow exiles currently protected by MI5 from assassination want to return to Moscow to resume their mafia activities and get back their oil fields and other assets. But they can't whilst Putin is in power because they are wanted for fraud and other financial crimes. At the same time, BP would like to drill in Russia, which it can do only if someone takes over in Russia who is more sympathetic to foreign oil companies stealing Russian oil. MI6 does the bidding of the City of London bankers who could make a lot of money if British companies could start drilling for oil in Russia. Litvinenko could have been killed so that Putin would be blamed. Indeed, the Polonium 210 trail was laid down to lead to Moscow to set up Lugovoi as the patsy. This was done, I suggest, to turn Putin into an international pariah, thus helping the political opposition in Moscow and accelerating his downfall so that these billionaire crooks can return to mother Russia and resume their asset stripping of the country.

Do you REALLY think the FSB would waste £100 million in Polonium 210 just to kill someone very slowly? This was done in order to maximise the publicity surrounding Litvinenko's death - to make the whole world think that Putin was behind it by dragging out the drama and making sure that suspicion fell on Moscow. Sure, Putin had reason to do this. But he certainly is not so stupid as to order the murder of an enemy in such a way that points so obviously towards him! No, this was done by Putin's political enemies in Britain. And Lugovoi could well be right that MI6 had a hand in it.

why would the British government kill someone living in exile in the United Kingdom? Litvinenko was against Putin, so why would we kill him?. We have nothing to gain.

The above is reference to the my quote....

Could this guy be a scapegoat being used by MI6.

But you left out the rest of my post which offered a possible answer to the question YOU asked....

The logic of killing one spy that was possibly a loose end, and using another who could not be 'turned' as the fall guy would certainly fit nicely.

I'm not saying this is what happened, but what makes so impossible?




Deny Ignorance

I hate to be the voice of reason here but you forget one thing infact the very first thing in this services actual standing orders:

1.—(1) There shall continue to be a Secret Intelligence Service (in this Act referred to as "the Intelligence Service" ) under the authority of the Secretary of State; and, subject to subsection (2) below, its functions shall be—
(a) to obtain and provide information relating to the actions or intentions of persons outside the British Islands; and

From: Intelligence Services Act 1994
www.opsi.gov.uk...
And now heres MI5's role..

1.—(1) There shall continue to be a Security Service (in this Act referred to as "the Service" ) under the authority of the Secretary of State.

(2) The function of the Service shall be the protection of national security and, in particular, its protection against threats from espionage, terrorism and sabotage, from the activities of agents of foreign powers and from actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means.

(3) It shall also be the function of the Service to safeguard the economic well-being of the United Kingdom against threats posed by the actions or intentions of persons outside the British Islands.

From the Security Services Act, 1989
www.opsi.gov.uk...

Now which of these two would most likely operate abroad and which one would operate in thier own backgarden....

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

Originally posted by devilwasp
I hate to be the voice of reason here but you forget one thing infact the very first thing in this services actual standing orders:

You are correct. MI5 are national, it's MI6 who operate internationally. The two agencies could be compared in function somewhat to the American CIA and FBI. In all fairness though, it wouldn't surprise me if the international branch also help to coordinate MI5 operations within the United Kingdom from time to time -- I would expect it, in fact. None of this is to say I'm accusing Five or Six. I honestly don't know who is responsible.

Hang on... how does Lugovoi know? If he had nothing to do with the murder then where has he got this story about MI6 (which, as devilwasp says, is a foreign intelligence agency) from? And why not prevent this evidence that he claims he has got (again, how did he get this evidence? I wonder if the Kremlin helped him there...) now that an official extradition request has been put forward?

There are so many holes in this guy's story, it's like a piece of Swiss cheese.

Not to mention the point brought up by others... what motive would the British security services have to murder Litvinenko?

What has always puzzled me about this case is the method used. If someone wanted Litvineko dead then why not just shoot him, run him down, toss him in a lake with a rock around his ankles. Do something cheap and simple and hide the body somewhere remote?
The method used, causing a long drawn out demise just doesn't seem plausible, especially considering the cost of the material used. Then there was the neat trail of polonium traces running all the way back to Moscow, like a trail of breadcrumbs. How clumsy is that?

Intel and power plays. So many players from many sides probably involved.
To be honest I cannot see Putin authorising a hit like this, it's just so overly complex.

First of all, the threads title is very misleading.

Secondly, yeah, I'm sure the MI6 had plenty reason to kill a guy that sided with theyre views. Just sounds like the KGB is trying hard to cover theyre tracks.

Originally posted by micpsi
Sure, Putin had reason to do this. But he certainly is not so stupid as to order the murder of an enemy in such a way that points so obviously towards him! No, this was done by Putin's political enemies in Britain. And Lugovoi could well be right that MI6 had a hand in it.

So, the act he signed allowing Russian secret service to kill people abroad is nothing then?

Think before you post

Originally posted by Britguy

Intel and power plays. So many players from many sides probably involved.
To be honest I cannot see Putin authorising a hit like this, it's just so overly complex.

I could'nt either until it came to us that Jacob Rothschild may have had a hand in this, and when we toss that name into it, then now you have a true elitest banker with World wide influence who will not let his interests take a tumble.

here's how he's involved.

Back in 2003, He took shares worth 13.5$ Billion dollars in a deal he colluded with Mikhail Khodorkovsky, in a company named Yukos, who is in turn Russia's oil giant.

www.washtimes.com...

Unfortunately for him ( Alexander Litvinenko) it all ended when he probably made a bad decision to turn to Israel and hand over "classified documents on Yukos, Of course he wasn't gonna get away with it.

external quote:

"Leonid Nevzlin, former CEO of the oil giant and current chairman of the Diaspora Museum in Tel Aviv, says the former Russian spy came to Israel with classified documents on Yukos which may be damaging to Russian leaders. Nevzliln estimates that Litvinenko’s death was connected with this information, which he has handed to London police investigators of the murder..."

www.debka.com...

You are right about one thing Alot of players in on this one, i'm guessing a collusion involving some Israeli's, a few British, and a handful of Russian,s.

the Polonium episode was absolutely ridiculous, whoever pulled that stunt ought to have their egos examined. who knows, these people might as well be Russians, but other than Western® Media™ the PR campaigns, there's next to nothing linking Moscow to this assasination, it's all nonsential assumptions and mostly slander. i mean there's a pattern of deceit whenever they're reporting on Russia, remember the gas dispute between Ukraine, Russia and by extension, several EU countries?

who cut of what and who could do that and why did it happen in the first place?

see

www.abovetopsecret.com...

but of course, Russia is evil for not giving away their stuff for close to free, because Free Market© means that Western® interests prevail at minimal cost and maxmum profit. competition is terrorism. just take a look at the regular hissy fit thrown by EU firms when Gazprom is trying to access the allededly liberalized gas market...

PS: there are things to critizize Moscow for, but the west can't do that because they're stuck knee-deep in iraq and afghanistan and afaik, they aren't operating remote...'camps'.. anymore, which can't be said of other countries, see www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by devilwasp
I hate to be the voice of reason here but you forget one thing infact the very first thing in this services actual standing orders:

1.—(1) There shall continue to be a Secret Intelligence Service (in this Act referred to as "the Intelligence Service" ) under the authority of the Secretary of State; and, subject to subsection (2) below, its functions shall be—
(a) to obtain and provide information relating to the actions or intentions of persons outside the British Islands; and

From: Intelligence Services Act 1994

And now heres MI5's role..

1.—(1) There shall continue to be a Security Service (in this Act referred to as "the Service" ) under the authority of the Secretary of State.

(2) The function of the Service shall be the protection of national security and, in particular, its protection against threats from espionage, terrorism and sabotage, from the activities of agents of foreign powers and from actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means.

(3) It shall also be the function of the Service to safeguard the economic well-being of the United Kingdom against threats posed by the actions or intentions of persons outside the British Islands.

From the Security Services Act, 1989

Now which of these two would most likely operate abroad and which one would operate in thier own backgarden....

The above standing orders could apply to both agencies.

The argument could go either way. The threat could be conceived as being both, home and abroad depending on the origin as well as direction.

Originally posted by Grailkeeper
The above standing orders could apply to both agencies.

Uhh no they couldnt....Each one is a seperate act of parliment concering EACH service.....ie one act for the Security service and another for SIS.

The argument could go either way. The threat could be conceived as being both, home and abroad depending on the origin as well as direction.

Then they would have to cooperate together but its more likely if you wanted to kill someone in britain then MI5 will have more assests to do so than a foriegn intelligence arm.