Dec 06 2006
Did Goldfarb Send Lugovoi A Signal?
All through the Litvinenko iincident Goldfarb (speaking for Berezovsky and Litvinenko) have claimed Litvinenko was rubbed out by Putin controlled assassins. Now all of a sudden news is leaked from UK authorities that Lugovoi is the main suspect in incident strengthening the assassination theory since Lugovoi is an ex-FSB agent. And does Goldfarb (and therefore Berezovsky) cheer this turn of events that supports their claims? No, they do just the opposite:
ABC News reported that British detectives had identified Mr. Lugovoi as a prime suspect in the poisoning. The report cited an unnamed senior British official.
Alexander Goldfarb, a friend of Mr. Litvinenko’s, said he doubted that Mr. Lugovoi played a role in the killing.
“I frankly doubt that he was the hit man because hit men are usually people hiding in the dark,†Mr. Goldfarb told the AP. “I think it’s one of his associates, I think he was used unawares … Now his life is in danger because he knows a lot.â€
Emphasis mine. Now why would Goldfarb go out in public and defend Lugovoi? We know Lugovoi is an associate of Berezovsky’s and his relationship with Litvinenko was all business (Berezvosky business?). What struck me with this comment by Goldfarb was the clear indication of a possible threat message. Was Goldfarb signalling Lugovoi to implicate others and keep quiet about certain aspects of this case? If there is a Berezovsky angle to all this the fact the Russian police will be handling the questioning is probably more of a threat to any smuggling ring than the UK authorities who seem bent on an assassination theory. Or so they appear.
Goldfarb is like Pavlov’s dog – he responds to news without thinking. And he is probably only the face and voice of Berezovsky (as he has been since Litvinenko fell ill). So when I say Goldfarb is constantly trying to guide the news I suspect it is Berezovsky. A couple of times I have felt Goldfarb/Berezovsky tipped their hands by jumping out with strange and bizarre comments. This may be another one of those incidents. Who says the UK leak was not disinformation used to get a response and see what it was?
Bringing this here from the thread below:
Mr Lugovoi attacked Mr Litvinenko’s friend Alex Goldfarb for implicating him in the affair. He said that he had met Mr Goldfarb only a couple of times briefly. “I think he is just trying to attract attention to himself and maybe this is his way of doing it,†he said
This is from the Times article of Nov. 24
Times UK online:
It was also confirmed today that none of the staff of the Itsu sushi restaurant in Piccadilly – where Mr Scaramella met Mr Litvinenko – have tested positive for polonium 210.
It is understood that Mr Litvinenko’s funeral will be held in London on Friday.
The WaPO reports today that Trepashkin (apparently the source of the info to Scaramella which he passed on to Litveinenko) has asked to speak to the British investigators, the Russians have refused that request and are seeking to place him in a maximum security prison. Trepashkin, like Litvinenko claimed the Moscow apt bombings were an FSB job.
Why in the world would Trepashkin stick his neck out for Bereszovsky? That letter has put him in danger and he must have know it would if published and why write it if not to publish it? I thought it was a forgery written by Bereszovsky and Goldfarb to enhance their PR. I didn’t really think Trepashkin wrote it unless he had a lot more freedom than the usual Russian prisoner.