Boris Nemtsov's Murder May Have Been Provocation: Russian Officials
Source: NBC
Russia's top investigative authority said it was looking at whether the shooting death of prominent opposition leader Boris Nemtsov early on Saturday was aimed at destabilizing the state.
A line of inquiry not mentioned in the statement on the website for Russia's Investigative Committee was the possibility that he was gunned down because he was one of President Vladimir Putin's staunchest critics.
The committee would investigate whether Nemtsov was slain as a "sacrificial victim for those who do not shun any method for achieving their political goals," the committee said in the statement. The committee was also looking at the possibility that Nemtsov, who was shot as he walked across a bridge in Moscow earlier on Saturday, was linked to Islamic extremism, the Ukraine conflict or his personal life.
Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov also called the murder "a provocation" benefiting the opposition and said on Kommersant FM radio that ratings-wise, "Boris Nemtsov was just a little more than an average citizen."
Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/boris-nemtsovs-murder-may-have-been-provocation-russian-officials-n314716
Yes, folks, the Kremlin's investigating agency is going full-on Alex Jones False Flag, saying they will investigate whether the killing of Putin's political opponent was done by the Putin's opponents to make Putin look bad and provoke opposition to the state. Such is the simultaneously Orwellian and Kafkaesque world of Putin's Russia.
I suspect certain Putin Explainers will soon start bringing up this possibility soon. Look for articles from Robert Parry on it any moment now.
Notice the investigative committee mentioned nothing about investigating the possibility that Boris Nemtsov was killed because he was an opponent of Putin's. Naah.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MADem
(135,425 posts)Then ride a horsie shirtless, and kiss dolphins?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Works pretty well, in fact.
Renew Deal
(81,852 posts)Russia is a gangster government state.
As opposed to the U.S being a warmongering money loving state.
Hmm, which state is better, a state that is run by gangsters or a state that is run by war hungry money-loving corporations?
Hmm....
Igel
(35,293 posts)And opposition media sources. For starters.
That is, if you can find any media sources that haven't been raided by the FBI repeatedly for "evidence" just as their broadcasts were set to air--with all their computers confiscated and their files removed--or opposition politicians that haven't been arrested on spurious chargers or gunned down.
politicman
(710 posts)Oh so we the U.S are better than the Russians because we don't hurt our own, instead we prefer to hurt others rather than our own.
Great argument you have there, I mean who could find fault with a strategy of a country satisfying it's bloodlust by quelling dissent in other countries instead it quelling it at home? That's sarcasm by the way.
I mean, sure we may not raid our very compliant media, but do you want me to list all the newspapers and media that the U.S has raided and shut down in countries that has interfered in or invaded?
Take Iraq, I seem to recall U.S military shutting down and arresting many media simply because they were not compliant to the U.S occupation of Iraq.
Desert805
(392 posts)Thanks, Obama!
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)
Cha
(297,069 posts)blameless for everything!" crowd.
politicman
(710 posts)That's your problem, you think we want to absolve Putin of all blame, we don't.
What we want is to be consistent enough that when we criticise Putin for doing things, that we can look back at our own backyard and see that it is also clean of the same things that we are criticising Putin for.
Until then, our criticism's of Putin actions are nothing more than hollow words that seek to portray others as evil for doing many of the things that our own country has done and still does to this day.
Do you understand that?
Cha
(297,069 posts)blameless.
Nothing "hollow" about pointing out what a homophobic, internet censoring, journalist suppressing dictator he is.
I have never had a problem pointing out what the USA has done.
"Buddy".. really?
politicman
(710 posts)Yes Putin in my opinion is a horrible person, but Putin is just doing many of the same things that the U.S has and still does.
And before I focus my anger and criticise Putin and Russia, I think it best that we clean out our own backyard so that our criticisms of Russia don't end up being hypocritical criticism.
See, the fastest way to get anyone to dismiss your criticism of anything is to engage in the very same act that you are criticising.
Imagine if I criticised you for interfering in a country whilst I myself am concurrently interfering in that same country and many others as well?
Cha
(297,069 posts)because Wah Wah Wah.. but it ain't gonna happen.
Putin might very well be to blame, but we cannot be the ones to blame him when we are at the same time doing many of the same things that he is doing.
Wake up and see that in order for our criticisms of Putin to be legitimate, we need to not engage in the same conduct that he engages in.
Its like a person sitting at a poker table criticising another person for gambling while he himself places a bet.
Cha
(297,069 posts)Oh because I see Russia and America as the same in their actions, I am trying to shut down discussion on Putin?
Actually, if you had any moral sense at all, every time you want to call out Putin, you would also include criticism of the U.S in the same post as a way of showing that you are consistent in your criticism of wrongful actions, but then again, according to you, when anyone else does this it is a false equivalence so its no wonder you just choose to ignore U.S wrongful actions in your posts.
Cha
(297,069 posts)Russia.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)just take everything you've just written and hold it in front of a mirror and read it from there. it will become very clear what "buddy" is pointing out to you. also, google "smoke and mirrors".
politicman
(710 posts)What is he pointing out, that Russia is bad and that we should condemn them both officially and personally?
Hmm, as I said, I can put together a long list of even worse leaders, dictators and societies that are classified as our 'friends and allies'.
We do some bad shit around the world ourselves, but even worse we support and prop up dictators around the world that we call our 'close friends'.
Sure we may not abuse own our people, but allying with and supporting dictators that do abuse their own people shows that we don't care about human rights, we don't care about wrong actions as long as they benefit us.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)so deal with that. one thing at a time. it is less confusing for the brain washed.
politicman
(710 posts)To me he is certainly putrid.
But I cant suspend my moral fortitude to focus on him specifically without detailing and comparing the actions of the U.S and all its despicable 'allies' around the world simply to point out how bad I think he is.
Afterall, I am not a hypocrit, who will spend time criticising others for actions without also taking the time to point out our similar bad actions and compare them
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)you do have the right to criticize when you know what your truth is and to not turn away from that which is not truthful.
politicman
(710 posts)I appreciate you accepting my apology 
Unfortunately we have too many people on this forum that are so brainwashed that they will downplay any atrocity committed by the U.S as some sort of good will endeavour, yet atrocities committed by the latest 'public enemy' is viewed as so bad that it must be stopped immediately at all costs.
Bush wanted to invade Iraq, after using propaganda he managed to get a majority of the American people at the time to support his invasion and he also got Congress to pass a resolution authorising his invasion.
After it got exposed that the invasion was based on nothing but lies, what happened?
Oh that's right, we let Bush and his cronies slink away into their nice retirement packages, many Congress members that voted for war got re-elected back to their positions and at least one is now the leading contender for a presidential nomination, and the American people just moved on after convincing themselves that they were fooled into initially supporting the war because they were lied to.
WOW, and now we hear that Putin's actions must be stopped because he is such an evil man.
Lets see, we didn't even have the moral fortitude to clean up our own act after Iraq, we didn't prosecute any leaders for their war crimes and lies, we didn't punish any politicians for their support of the war, in fact we are so close to give one of these supporters the top job in the country, and the American people haven't learnt their lesson about fixing their own backyard before criticising and stopping others from doing the same thing America has and still does.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)to go unchallenged is not acceptable.
people on here pointing out his putridness is not out of arrogance nor ignorance or unawareness of our our country's wrongs. nor, as though, the american corporations are so pure or that corruption does not exist in this country.
thanks to our american internet, we know exactly what is going on here in our own country & around the world in the name of democracy and america - while corporations deceive in order to exploit for personal greed.
the focus of this op is putrid. there are many, many other op's that focus on corporate corruption. we keep all of that in the back of our minds so we do not overlook them - it is reasonable and more powerful (like a laser) to address one lie or wrong at a time - but with all of the others in perspective.
when we demonstrate, boycott, picket, go to the polls to vote or call our legislators or write letters to our local papers, we are keeping all of that on our minds and choosing accordingly. one person cannot do it all - all of the time. you will make yourself crazy and then who will listen to you?
politicman
(710 posts)But the thing is that if people want to protest or call out wrong actions or even stop wrongful actions, it is much easier to do that at home first before doing it else where.
Why focus all your energy or even some of your energy on other peoples wrongful actions, when you should first focus every ounce of energy you have to correct your own backyard and then move on to other peoples actions.
At least we have more power to stop our own bad actions that come from our own country, that come from the people that we elect into office, than we do in stopping a leader of another country, so lets first focus on making sure we don't commit any more bad actions, and then after that we can talk about calling out and stopping others that commit the same actions that we are committing.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)while chopping wood, carrying water, going to work, raising children, paying our bills, making love to our lovers, walking the dog, cooking a meal, celebrating an anniversary, going to a movie, drinking a beer, attending a concert, walking in the mountains, swimming at the ocean, etc., etc., - be aware of your surrounding and never turn your back.
politicman
(710 posts)Yes be aware of your surroundings, but that does not mean distracting yourself from your task.
We can look at Putin and Russia as a way to recognise and fix our own misdeeds.
Sure Putin is a bad man who does bad stuff, but instead of focusing our attention on stopping him right now, we need to focus all our attention on cleaning up our own act by looking at him and his actions as something that we no longer want to do.
Once we use our energy to clean up our own backyard and we regain our moral standing, then we can use our new found collective moral standing to focus on Russia with all our energy and this way we at least will have the moral standing to bring everyone else on board.
Right now we are viewed as no better than Putin when we feel like our interests are at stake, so naturally opinion is divided on who is on the right side in this Ukraine conflict
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)infestations of chiggers? fleas? rats? termites? cockroaches?
how about putrid toxic substances and poisons? how long can you live in filth and with water, earth, neighborhoods contaminated with putrid toxins?
personally, i have no tolerance for it. one must stop it wherever, whenever & whilst one can because when one does not, vermin will multiply and toxins will kill you. they do not just cease to exist all on their own because they want to. it is their nature to be fruitful and multiply.
you know, once one tastes true freedom, one never goes back - not for fear not even for a fascist. this taste for freedom from exploiters of others are what fuel revolutions.
politicman
(710 posts)Infestations of vermin and the other things you listed can only become a reality if you create the right environment for them to fester.
The U.S has created an environment where other countries that also have power can now use the same excuse as the U.S to justify their own warmongering.
Whats the point of eradicating the infestations when the U.S keeps creating an environment for those infestations to keep reconstituting themselves.
Its funny how you talk about a taste of freedom being what fuels revolution. Because unless freedom is in the best national interests of the U.S, many around the world never get that taste of freedom because the U.S supports and helps dictators across the globe to never allow many to get a taste of that freedom.
So in effect what is happening is that the U.S creates the environments that allow infestations of vermin, etc to occur, and then the U.S picks and chooses which infestations it wants to eradicate and which it will allow to keep flourishing.
For instance America wants to eradicate the infestation of Russia interfering and invading their neighbour Ukraine, whilst at the very same time allowing the infestation of Israel interfering and taking over Palestinian land.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)you think americans can battle all infestations at the same time? not going to happen. that would be ridiculous. but, go ahead an continue with your ridiculous defense of putrid. there is no reasoning. in addition, why do you defend him? he cares nothing for you. don't fool yourself.
politicman
(710 posts)I don't defend Putin, I myself think he is putrid just like you.
What I am at a pain to point out is that the U.S has no business criticising and sanctioning another country for engaging in behaviour that the U.S has engaged in, and still continues to engage in to this day.
I care nothing for Putin, I care for right and wrong.
And until we stop the U.S interference in other countries, then we have no moral authority to demand that other countries not engage in actions under the banner of 'national security interests', especially while we continue to reserve the right to do so ourselves.
And the best way to battle infestations is to clean up the environment so that infestations dwindle and die out.
America talks out both sides of its mouth.
In countries that are not American puppet, the U.S calls for freedom and democracy, YET in countries that serve American interests, America supports, arms and even goes so far as to prop up dictators that deny their populations the very freedom that you are talking about.
Imagine if there was a street full of wife-beating husbands. Imagine if I called out some of the residents in that street for bashing their wives, YET at the very same time, I supported and worked actively to allow some of the husbands in the street to continue to bash their wives.
Would you think that my advocacy on behalf of women was sincere?
Don't you think that the next time I stepped in to save one of these wives, that I would be a massive hypocrite if at the same time I supported and helped the next door neighbour to be able to continue beating his wife?
Cha
(297,069 posts)Russia. What a determined chap and it's all for naught.. 'cause like I told him.. Ain't happening.
According to him.. we aren't even allowed to multi-task..
Good summary of highlighting how we do things, hopemountain.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)what makes one so insistent to defend putrid as though putrid's power mongering wars on his own people are to be tolerated? it's not as though putrid is just a simpleton with a penchant for taking over the world and hoarding all it's riches at the expense of all the people.
Cha
(297,069 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)Anything we do gets discussed without having to go over Putin's transgressions, so when he does his, why can't his be discussed?
politicman
(710 posts)Because if we are the ones that are criticising Putin's transgressions then it is incumbent on us on moral grounds to also remember our own transgressions.
And yes, we do do the same things.
We helped destabilise elected Ukraine government because said government wanted to stick with Russia and that ended up leading to this very Ukraine crisis.
We invaded Iraq because our president at the time wanted to.
We use drones to kill people in other countries whenever we feel like it.
We support and arm Israel event though Israel keeps confiscating more Palestinian land each and every day.
We rub shoulders with and support and prop up dictators in the mid-east who do worse things to gays than the Russians do.
We destabilise countries throughout the world just because their dictators wont kneel before us, whereas the dictators that do, we actually strengthen their power.
We meddle in our neighbouring countries under the guise of 'national security interests.
Need I point out even more actions the U.S has engaged in and is even engaged in at this very moment.
Desert805
(392 posts)There must be a website where you could apply...
Can the British criticize Putin or do they have to remember their own transgressions?
Who is perfect enough to be allowed to point out what Putin does wrong?
Oh yeah and when he criticizes the US, shouldn't he consider his own wrongs?
And we have not occupied and annexed parts of another country. In fact, we never forced the countries surrounding our borders to be part of a union with us.
politicman
(710 posts)The U.S invaded and destroyed Iraq illegally under the guise of 'national security'. Then the U.S after doing this, turns around and criticises Russia for interfering in Ukraine under its own guise of 'national security interests.'
The thing that tops the cake is that after doing what it did in Iraq and then criticising Russia for doing what it did in Ukraine, the U.S insists that it reserves the right to take any measures (which presumably include invasion or interference) against any country if it feels its in its 'national security interests'.
So just too simply for all your brainwashed out there:
The U.S is saying that it has and will always reserve the right to invade or interfere in any other country if its in the 'national security interests' of the U.S, but that countries like Russia are evil if they interfere or invade other countries under 'national security interests' of Russia.
At least when Russia interferes or invades a country its nearly always a neighbouring country, whereas the U.S has on many occasions travelled half way across the world to interfere or invade another country.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)also opposed the war in Iraq.
On the other hand, some others opposed the war in Iraq but are jumping through hoops to justify Russia's war.
politicman
(710 posts)To legitimise their crimes.
We can oppose the Iraq war all we like but the fact remains that the U.S illegally invaded and occupied Iraq under the banner of 'national security interests'.
Even worse a majority of people actually supported the initial invasion on grounds of 'national security' which tells me that As long as there is percieved to be a national security interest, then invasion and interference are a legitimate course of action.
Russia is claiming the same 'national security' excuse to interfere and invade Ukraine, so as long as the U.S continues to reserve the right to act in its national security interests, then Russia and other countries are allowed that right as well.
See it's usually America that opens the pandoras box and then complains when others use the same excuse that America does.
Sort of like the war on terror, America opened up a Pandora's box with its actions, a Pandora's box that other bad countries can now use a legitimate excuse to label dissidents as terrorists and point to American war on terror as something they are imitating.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)No? Then there's no hypocrisy involved.
You're working awful hard to justify an illegal war of aggression. I wonder why that is?
politicman
(710 posts)I'm not justifying and war, I am against war period.
What I am doing is pointing out that in a democracy, it is not a warmonger president like Bush that is at fault, the fault lies with the country as a whole for giving him the power to be a warmonger.
There's no sugar coating it anymore, if democratic countries keep electing idiots that love war and invasions, then none of us can complain when less democratic countries have leaders that start wars as well.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)And plenty here condemn warmongering in this country to this day. We can damn well criticize Russia's warmongering if we please.
politicman
(710 posts)Its all very well to say that none of us voted for the warmonger Bush, but what about presidents before Bush and after Bush.
What about Obama? I like Obama but one has to speak the truth, Obama is just like every President before him when it comes to interfering in other countries.
Take Libya as an example.
Obama followed the French into initially taking 'humanitarian intervention' in Libya, but they couldn't stop there, they couldn't control themselves and had to interfere to the point of getting rid of Ghaddafi, eventually leaving behind a place that is in chaos.
So in effect, America under a president that we can say we voted for, did in fact interfere in another country and even went so far as to make sure they interfered enough to change a leader simply because he was not a puppet of the West.
Again you can criticise Russia all you like, but those words ring hollow as Russia is just imitating the pattern that America and every president in my lifetime has set for, to interfere and even invade countries when it is deemed to be in the 'national security interest'
Cha
(297,069 posts)
"Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko himself put forward the theory on Saturday. "He said he would reveal persuasive evidence of the involvement of Russian armed forces in Ukraine. Someone was very afraid of this ... They killed him," Poroshenko said, according to Reuters. He’s not alone. The New York Times talks to the New Times magazine editor who met with Nemtsov two weeks ago. Nemtsov reportedly told his old friend he wanted to publish a pamphlet titled “Putin and the War” about the country’s involvement in the Ukraine conflict. He knew the risks. “He was afraid of being killed,” the editor, Yevgenia Albats, said. “And he was trying to convince himself, and me, they wouldn’t touch him.”
UK in Russia ✔ @ukinrussia
Follow
UK, French and German Ambassadors crossing the bridge to lay flowers where Boris #Nemtsov was killed.
6:34 AM - 28 Feb 2015 446 Retweets 196 favorites
Leonid Ragozin @leonidragozin
Follow
Long line of people and flowers
7:55 AM - 28 Feb 2015 69 Retweets 41 favorites
http://theobamadiary.com/2015/02/28/chat-away-535/
I got more.. :treestar
Love our President/Net Neutrality!
Net Neutrality: President Obama's Plan for a Free and Open Internet
More than any other invention of our time, the Internet has unlocked possibilities we could just barely imagine a generation ago. And here's a big reason we've seen such incredible growth and innovation: Most Internet providers have treated Internet traffic equally. That's a principle known as "net neutrality" — and it says that an entrepreneur's fledgling company should have the same chance to succeed as established corporations, and that access to a high school student's blog shouldn't be unfairly slowed down to make way for advertisers
http://www.whitehouse.gov/net-neutrality
municipal Internet services, overruling state laws that had been put in place to block such efforts."
http://theobamadiary.com/2015/02/26/a-tweet-or-two-and-ggails-birthday/
Vladimir Putin stamps on his citizens again, this time with Internet censorship
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/vladimir-putin-stamps-on-his-citizens-again-this-time-with-internet-censorship/2014/03/14/7058331c-ab93-11e3-adbc-888c8010c799_story.html
Putin..
RIP Boris Nemtsov
treestar
(82,383 posts)
Boris Nemtsov
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Recognizing cause and effect (e.g., blame) does not require moral authority. Recognizing moral lapses by any one government is not predicated on belonging to a country without blame 
"Imagine if I criticised (sic) you for interfering in a country..." Again, what my government may or may not do, though important to another discussion,. is irrelevant to this one.
politicman
(710 posts)Yes what my country does is important to this discussion, because in a democratic society, to elect leader after leader after leader who is prepared to interfere and invade countries for 'national security interests' shows the over the decades the electorate is happy with what is being done by their governments.
pinto
(106,886 posts)"Until then, our criticism's of Putin actions are nothing more than hollow words that seek to portray others as evil for doing many of the things that our own country has done and still does to this day."
The two assumptions are not inexorably linked, save as a hypothetical political argument. Each can stand or fall on its own. If Putin is guilty he's guilty on his own. That exonerates no one else.
Your agenda is warping that simple fact, perhaps.
politicman
(710 posts)No, what I am trying to point out is that no matter how dispicable Putins actions are or are not, the U.S has no moral authority whatsoever to call out Putin for doing the same things the U.S has done and still continues to do.
If the U.S believes that it has the right to invade or interfere in other countries under the notion of 'national security interests', then it has no right criticising or calling out other countries for engaging in the same behaviour under 'national security interests'.
to claim a right for yourself and then demonise someone else for claiming the exact same right that you still maintain you have, is the ultimate in hypocrisy.
Putin and Russia may be a warmonger who need to be called out, but they certainly don't deserve to be called out by a country who has a history of electing a warmonger like Bush and giving him the power to illegally invade a country like Iraq.
You may want to believe that 2 wrongs don't make a right, but I choose to believe that before one wants to criticise another for their wrongs, that one needs to cease doing the same wrongs that it demonises others for.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Don't hold your breath waiting for it. Hold your nose. The flatulent Putin symphony will begin soon. You did a good job naming the players.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Cha
(297,069 posts)Posted without comment 'cause it speaks for itself.
freshfreshwest
(53,661 posts)elias49
(4,259 posts)The US doesn't 'troll'? Come on. This is just what politicman is talking about.
How can we fairly call out foreign heads of state for acting just like us?
That kind of nationalism is unbecoming. Are you one of those "USA, USA, USA" knuckledraggers? I didn't think so,
so take a breath!
blackspade
(10,056 posts)I see that Russia has its own fascist rethugs.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)to putin?
or, from my perspective - coyote? the wiley coyote that is so wiley - he out wiley's himself?
he really believes he is the smartest fart smeller.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026231601
The Koch brothers are now worth $100B, and stood to double that with Keystone, something Obama noted in an interview as a reason to reject it. They want to buy the government Citizens United style.
They have been squalling about not getting it since Obama arrived in office, promising to take revenge if he didn't go along with the first CR after his election in 2009. And they followed through, funding the Tea Party and getting in control in 2010, as a first shutdown fight was on with the 2011 budget.
It's never ended, and their voices from all sides have assisted in their efforts to shutdown government to force that tax free gift to the Koch brothers. Some don't want to know what is going on with these oligarchs, they blame government as if thought up all this stuff by itself. But it's under a heavy siege and in order to protect the many, it makes compromises it wouldn't do otherwise.
In Russia, the oligarchs are much more direct in their demands. It's very sad to see those people being abused as they are now. If we let them consolidate their elected edge, I expect the same will come here, unless Americans get their act together and stop falling for the Reich wing media.
$200B, like $100B, buys a lot of friends...
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)thanks, freshwest. you know what is one of the most disgusting smells to me? money. it has a horrible smell. can't wait to wash my hands and go for a walk in the fresh air after handling bills and coins.
every time i see a picture of putrid with a glare in his eyes - it is right there - no matter how much power he thinks he can achieve - he will never be content. he and his corrupt goons are true threat to common people all of over the world.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)
MBS
(9,688 posts)whole article is quite good, but these concluding paragraphs explicitly address the "provocation" issue:
The answer to all the world’s provocations is a question: Komu vygodno?, or “Who stands to gain?” When Nemtsov published reports on official corruption, he was accused of being an American stooge—instead of prosecutors taking his allegations seriously. After a Malaysian Airlines plane was shot down over eastern Ukraine in July, Russian state television dissected every possible conspiracy theory, including the Ukrainians mistaking MH17 for Putin’s plane, while omitting the most likely version: a stray anti-aircraft missile fired by pro-Russian rebels at a Ukrainian warplane.
Russia’s Investigative Committee has already released a list of possible motives for Nemtsov’s murder. The first version cites Putin: “A provocation to destabilize the political situation in the country as Nemtsov could have become a sacrificial victim for those who don’t shirk from any means to achieve their political goals.” The second lead involves Islamic extremists, as Nemtsov had shown his support for the journalists of Charlie Hebdo. None of the motives under investigation take into account his role as a prominent government critic.
The Kremlin held a rally last weekend in Moscow to denounce the Maidan protest in Kiev that ousted the pro-Russian government of Viktor Yanukovych a year ago and unleashed Putin’s wrath on Ukraine. Some demonstrators held up a sign reading “The enemies of Russia need the Maidan,” others a picture of Nemtsov with the words “Maidan organizer.”
The violence that is sweeping over Russia is not only physical. It is the daily verbal violence that pours out of millions of TV sets about the genocide of Russians in Ukraine and the treacherous fifth column funded by Washington.
Nothing is what it seems anymore. Not war, not peace, not political murder.
Russia's Investigative Committee said it was looking into a number of possible motives, including Mr Nemtsov's opposition to the Ukraine war, his political and personal life, Islamic extremism or an attempt to destabilise the state.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31677506
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)The best-case scenario for Russia would be that it was a lone-wolf political fanatic. Now we will never find out.
One month from now, expect rumors to show up that Nemtsov was an agent of the West. How to find those articles? No worries: The Putin-apologists on DU will dutifully link to them, beating their chest how this must be true because the US is evil.
Cha
(297,069 posts)MOSCOW (AP) — Carrying flowers, portraits and signs that said "I am not afraid," tens of thousands of people somberly marched Sunday in Moscow to mourn opposition politician Boris Nemtsov, whose slaying on the streets of the capital has shaken Russia's beleaguered opposition.
The mourners marched to the bridge near the Kremlin where Nemtsov was gunned down shortly before midnight Friday. Chanting "we'll not forget, we'll not forgive" and waving Russian flags, the crowd filled the road along the Moscow River embankment. Many tied black ribbons to railings along the way.
The mood was somber, with heavy security. Police helicopters flew overhead and police boats patrolled the river.
MOre..
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/world-news/march-moscow-boris-nemstov?utm_content=bufferffb9d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
MBS
(9,688 posts)"Heroes never die" and "These bullets are in each of us"
(I've also seen the banners mentioned in the TPM article, but in other photos. .)
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Nemtsov was NOT a member of Putin's United Russia has 238 seats in the National Duma. Boris Nemtsov was NOT a member of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation which has the second largest number of seats at 92 seats. Boris Nemtsov was NOT a member of #3, A Just Russia with its 64 seats in the DUMA and he was NOT a member of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia which holds 56 seats in the Duma.
Boris Nemtsov was a member of the People's Freedom Party, which has NO members in the National Duma and ONE Member (Nemtsov) in the 3787 Seats in regional Parliaments in Russia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_of_Russia_%E2%80%93_People%27s_Freedom_Party
The party claims it has 46,158 members, compared to the Communist Party of Russia which as a membership of 156,528.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Russian_Federation
Just a Comment that he is another politician more popular in the West then in Russia.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)by the book
happyslug
(14,779 posts)Lenin made that comment and it is known to most people in Russia. You do NOT need 50% of the population, you need 5% of the population that are organized and willing to lead the other 95%. The Communist Party of Russia has that, as to he other parties if they have that 5% is NOT as clear (with most observers saying they do NOT).
Thus he has some support, but no were near the level of support of the other parties for Putin to fear him, thus why was he killed? I do not know, it may have been some sort of attack by Putin, but Putin is NOT that dumb to knock someone off that would bring headlines against Putin during a time of crisis (and the problems with the Ukraine has put Russia in a Crisis). Putin has appear to be a careful person who does NOT do things that bites him back (and this killing will) UNLESS that death is of someone who Putin does fear (And this man does NOT appear to have the political support for Putin to feat him).
Now that does NOT mean people around Putin did not do this, some of them oppose anyone who opposes their position as to the Ukraine. That would have given the people around Putin to knock him off for he OPPOSED that policy. That brings us back to the start, the rest of the parties all support Putin and his position on the Ukraine, as do Yeltsin and Gorbachev.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/gorbachev-warns-ukraine-could-ignite-world-war-iii/5428622
http://rt.com/news/217931-gorbachev-putin-saved-russia/
http://time.com/3630352/mikhail-gorbachev-vladimir-putin-cold-war/
I suspect there is a lot of wishful thinking when it comes to Putin, but I do NOT see anything about him losing control. This murder makes no sense for Putin, he loses more then he gains (and Putins plays the odds in his favor). On the other hand Putin is still popular, and the Russian People understood they are in for a rough time given the sanctions. Thus I see no up-swell in pressure to remove Putin for this murder or anything else he has done. The people of Russia have access to the net and they know who can and can not overthrow Putin and right now it is the Russia People and I have seen NO evidence that the Russian people what Putin Gone. That is the key, even Lenin wanted support of the people, even if he lost the first election after he took over, he still tried to get the support of the people and eventually did when the party that did win that election show they could NOT do anything about the invading Whites (The Whites were even more hated then Lenin, thus when push can to shove and the Russian people had to support someone, they ended up supporting Lenin). I bring up Lenin for the same reason I started with him, he is the ideal revolutionist, he had the group behind him to do a revolution. I do NOT see anyone or any group in Russia capable of such a revolution. The Communist Party is the closest but they do not have the support they need to overthrow Putin.
Now, they may be some high end maneuvering among the ruling elites of Russia, but if that is the case, Putin may be replaced by someone just like Putin. No real change but maybe a change in leadership (i.e. Kruschev being replaced by Brezhnev, no real change between the two).
