Commentary and information about public safety and security, intelligence and counterintelligence, open government and secrecy, and other issues in northern Idaho and eastern Washington.

Location: Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, United States

Raised in Palouse, WA. Graduated from Washington State University. US Army (Counterintelligence). US Secret Service (Technical Security Division) in Fantasyland-on-the-Potomac and Los Angeles. Now living in north Idaho.

Friday, November 24, 2006

Another "Message" Poisoning

Once again the wet affairs (scroll down to Executive Action Department - Department V) remnants of the former Soviet Union have sent a message to dissidents and defectors: If you expose us, you will be poisoned. It's not that Russian President Vladimir Putin and his cohorts don't have access to more humane methods of murder. Witness the killing of journalist Anna Politkovskaya. It's that they choose not to use them when a toxic messenger is more useful.

The most recent recipient of the toxic message was former KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko who died Thursday in London. It appears he may have died after ingesting alpha particles of Polonium-210.

Before that, it was Ukraine's opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko. In September 2004 he received a dioxin cocktail administered to disfigure and not kill him. Yushchenko went on to be elected President of Ukraine, his photographic images a testament to the reach of Putin and his former KGB cohorts. Long live the message. (Note: The KGB was the international intelligence service of the former Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union dissolved, the country known as Russia developed its own service known as the Federal Security Service (FSB).)

The most memorable message poisoning may have been the first to get serious public scrutiny. In 1978 Bulgarian dissident Georgi Markov was killed while waiting at a London bus stop. A man carrying an umbrella appeared to accidentally poke Markov with the umbrella tip. The innocent-appearing accident injected toxic ricin into Markov. Markov died three days later.

At a June 2001 joint press conference with both President Bush and Putin in Brdo Pri Kranju, Slovenia, a reporter addressing President Bush asked about Putin, "...is this a man that Americans can trust?" President Bush responded, "... I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. ..."

That is not a reassuring comment from our President.


Blogger Dogwalkmusings said...

That it is not a reassuring comment is an understatement - but it speaks volumns about his intellect.

11:30 AM, November 24, 2006  
Blogger Bill McCrory said...


Thanks again for reading and taking time to comment. President Bush's comment about Putin was either gratuitous or heartfelt. Either way, it was wrong. Vladimir Putin is a killer. To trust him at any level is a mistake.

11:53 AM, November 24, 2006  
Blogger Herb said...

I think, and I certainly could be wrong, that diplomacy, is the art of one government lying to another, while trying to sway the other to your position.

My take on this is that Bush gave Putin an avenue of dialog, by praising his integrity.

For any of us to assume that our entire Executive Branch is asleep? I kind of would question that.

I think that Bush's approach is simply this: If I tab you as a good guy, you might, just might try to live up to that.

Don't for a minute think that the CIA is asleep over this regeme.

Not everything that we do is printed on the front page of the New York Times, although it must seem so.

8:47 PM, November 24, 2006  
Blogger Bill McCrory said...


Thanks for reading the post.

Neville Chamberlain met with Hitler, Daladier, and Mussolini in Munich in 1938 and came away assured and believng that Hitler would not invade other nations. If diplomacy is the art of one government lying to another, then what do we call it when the recipient of the lie believes it and forms policy based on that belief?

The entire Executive Branch, including the CIA, is not asleep. If there's anyone in the Executive Branch who should be aware of Putin's political duplicity, it's Dr. Rice. To believe that Putin is capable of being swayed to the western position by moral diplomacy is absurd. He may be influenced by economic and political diplomacy and by military superiority, but he is an amoral leader. Pragmatic, but amoral.

7:04 AM, November 25, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home