竟然要分四次貼才貼得完.

=======
《附件六》車臣本身對此事的報導

Anna Politkovskaya:

"Nobody is interested in the matter of what is going on in the country"

Tuesday, 27 May 2003

Chechenpress
http://www.chechenpress.info/english/news/05_2003/11_27_05.shtml

On 28 April 2003, in issue30 of "The Novaya Gazeta" the article "Who Remains Alive" by Anna Politkovskaya was published. It says that the Theater Center hijacking committed by terrorists must have been at least controlled by the secret service of Russia. Anna Politkovskaya managed to meet Khanpash Terkibaev who claimed to have been a member of the terrorist group. He also claimed to have followed orders of some special service.

In April 2003 Terkibaev was a member of the Russian delegation at the European Council as a "representative of the Chechen public". At present Terkibaev is a special correspondent of "The Russian newspaper". Terkibaev's name was in the list of the members of Baraev's group that had been published by "The Izvestia" not long before the Theater Center assault held by the special police forces. According to Anna Politkovskaya, "The Novaya Gazeta" has got some other evidence that Terkibaev was among terrorists. Terkibaev also claims to be working in the Information Office of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation.

In our opinion, the facts tackled in this publication are of the enormous public significance. Has there been any reaction to the investigation carried by "The Novaya Gazeta" from the authorities, society and their colleagues? The author of this sensational article Anna Politkovskaya, an observer of "The Novaya Gazeta" answers the questions of the editor-in-chief of the Informational Center of the Society for the Russian-Chechen Friendship Stanislav Dmitrievsky.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Quite a lot of time has come since your first publication about Terkibaev. Do you know anything about any reaction of the authorities to your article? Is there any reaction from the Procurator Office, the administration of the President or the State Duma?

Anna Politkovskaya: Nothing at all. I have not even been asked any questions.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: You mean to say that you have not been asked to come anywhere, that there have not been any official interrogations or at least contacts with law-enforcement structures.

Anna Politkovskaya: Absolutely no official respond. It made us publish our second article in which we reminded that there is the General Procurator Office in the country and we not only asked the same questions but also put some more.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: I regard your article sensational. I personally think that in any country with the stable democracy such an article and its impact are sure to cause the governmental crisis, at least. Nevertheless, there is no reaction not only from official structures but also from other sources of mass media. There are too few responds and the majority of them are absolutely passive and spiritless. You are either contradicted at a very low level of "you are a fool yourself", "it was made up by Berezovsky" or just mentioned as if your article had tackled upon a trifle matter. There is neither any serious discussion, nor, moreover, any social resonance. What do you think about the reasons for such an attitude both by the mass media and by the society?

Anna Politkovskaya: You know, to be frank, we expected a different reaction. And we supposed - we didn't want it but we supposed that the reaction would be serious. So it is very difficult for me to comment on the fact that there is no reaction at all. It means that it's of no interest to anybody. I mean to say that nobody is interested in the matter of what is going on in the country. What is interesting is the PR: some people are for the president, some others are against him⋯But the facts and the matter of what is going on in the country are of no concern to anybody. I personally can't comprehend all that.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Apparently, it's a problem not only of the mass media but of the whole Russian society.

Anna Politkovskaya: Certainly. Mass media just reflect social interests, opinions and needs. You know, what shocked me most of all was the human rights activists' position. I am honest here. None of the human rights activists have made any attempt to put any questions in front of the official power. There was the only example - the appeal of the social movement "For Human Rights" headed by Lev Ponomaryov.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Yes, as far as I know, it was also signed by the manager of the museum and The Social Center named after A.D.Sakhsrov Yury Samodurov and the writer Alexander Tkachenko.

Anna Politkovskaya: I haven't seen the final wording of this document but the variant they showed to me the next day after the publication made me feel indignation. As I expressed these feelings to the authors of the appeal openly I am telling you about it now. The matter was that social appeal was called "The authorities should refute⋯" From my point of view, it is awful of them. The authorities must investigate such cases. To investigate means to interrogate Terkibaev and me, at least, by members of that big investigating group that is working now to investigate "The Nord-Ost" events under the control of the General Prosecutor Office. I understand the "The authorities should refute-"-position of human rights leaders as a desire to be acceptable by the official power. I can only wish them much success on their way. I was promised, though, that my comments would be certainly taken into account. [Indeed, Anna Politkovskaya's comments must have been taken into account. In the! final wording of the Public Appeal that was published the people who signed it demand investigating into the facts reported in the article and in case they are true - starting a criminal suite. There is no demand to refute in this document. - the editor.]

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Yesterday there appeared an article on Viktor Popkov site by Andrew Smirnov who doesn't agree to you and your supposition about "the controlled terrorist act".

Anna Politkovskaya: Sorry to say, I haven't read this article yet.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Then it wouldn't be right to discuss this topic. It might be possible to comment on the main idea of this publication - the author accuses you of being subject to explain everything by making up schemes of conspiracy. As an example of one of such-like schemes common of the modern Russian mythology Andrew Smirnov tells about the theory of global plot between the two fighting sides. He also considers the supposition of the involvement of the Russian intelligence service into the terrorist act at Dubrovka to be one of these myths. How can you comment on it?

Anna Politkovskaya: Nothing of the kind, I am not for any plot-theories. I can tell honestly - after "The Nord-Ost" a lot of western journalists and employees of foreign embassies used to come to our editorial office with the same question, "What do you think about the involvement of the Russian intelligence service into this terrorist act? Haven't you noticed anything suspicious?" Whenever I was asked this question, I answered that I refused to admit such possibility. I couldn't believe it just because it would have become very difficult to go on living if I had let myself assume it. But later, from January, we began to get some bits of information. It evidenced that there had been some involvement all the same. I started checking it mainly to prove myself that the information wasn't true. This article came from attempts to persuade myself that it wasn't true. I personally think that the reality we are living in now is horrible. It is horrible that the intelligence!

e service controls both the president and the whole system of power, that the intelligence service makes all the people jump as they wish. I started my article from the opposite thought: I wanted to make myself sure that the society was much stronger, that we were living in the democracy. And then- It took a long time to get all the information to write the article. And at last I told the editor that I could write the article. And at the same time my Chechen friends who are living in Moscow told me that they had seen that person - Terkibaev - in Moscow and if I wanted they would be able to get in touch with him. I told that I would certainly meet him. I thought such meeting would be very important. Besides, it was just interesting for me what kind of person was he and what was his life like. At first he refused but then accepted my offer to meet. It was his right.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: So if I've caught you right, you mean to say that you had the information concerning the fact that Terkibaev had really been among the terrorists in the Theater Center long before the interview with him, don't you?

Anna Politkovskaya: Exactly. I could have written the article without meeting him. The next bit of the information will be revealed later as the authorities take some measures.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: I have some more questions connected with, so to say, technical points. First, don't you know where Khanpash Terkibaev is now?

Anna Politkovskaya: No information at all. He has disappeared somewhere but I was sure that it would be so.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Have any other representatives of mass media tried to find him?

Anna Politkovskaya: Yes, they have. Many of them have tried but it was possible to get through to him only once.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: In your interview to the TVS channel that took place on April 28 you told that the members of special military unit who were assaulting the building couldn't have been aware of the "controlled terrorist act". But there appears one more question: the fact that Terkibaev could leave the building of the Theater Center means that he had accomplices among those representatives of the enforcement structures who were in the cordon. The plan of the Theater Center building that Terkibaev had couldn't guarantee that he would manage to leave the blocked building.

Anna Politkovskaya: It was not so. The building wasn't blocked that hard. There was a possibility to escape. If we want to go deeper into that point, I can tell you that too many absolutely inexplicable stories happened there. I can give you some examples. Yes, there was a cordon. And it was rather difficult for me to get into the Theater Center as one special structure said "yes" whereas the other said "no", the Home Affairs Ministry allowed but representatives of the FSB didn't as they didn't have Patrushev's allowance. On having at last received the permission to go, I approach the last circle of the cordon and -see a woman. I ask her, "Who are you? What are you doing here?" And she tells me, "I am this and that". An absolutely incidental person. Then a strange man turned up from somewhere and joined me. I ask him, "And what are you?" The matter is that I was afraid to enter the area that wasn't observable together with him where it was easy to shoot me dead. He answers, !

"I am from the Red Cross". I inquire him, "Well, but do you have any documents to prove it?" The white armband with the red cross that he was wearing couldn't be regarded as a proof. And one more strange occasion happened inside the cordon where the terrorists were nearby, where it was supposed to be dangerous as the Alfa-men were lying there under the cars and when in spite of all that a woman threw herself at me. She tells me, "I am the wife of -tell Baraev this and that." I was completely astonished. I don't know whether she really was the person she gave herself out to be but the fact remains. She managed to get there. There were a lot of similar situations there: some people went inside the cordon, some other went out of it - none of them was known to the public. And if I witnessed what was going on at that time it means that somebody else could leave the building through some other exit, from the back one, for example.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: You mean to say that it was possible to pass the cordon, don't you?

Anna Politkovskaya: Yes! I can say when it became impossible to go through it. It happened an hour and a half or two hours before the assault. But it hadn't been so before that time. That is why I am not suspicious of this very detail that Terkibaev had managed to leave the building before the assault.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: How can you explain that Terkibaev was let to survive? He could have been put away, at least, couldn't he?

Anna Politkovskaya: I don't have the unequivocal answer to this question. I just think that he is a very convenient person for our authorities. He can contact both this and that sides, he can represent the Chechen public in the Russian delegation in Strasbourg, he can wriggle out of any situation. The world has known such people in all times. They just needed him.

Actually he made a big mistake when he made an appointment with me.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Sure.

Anna Politkovskaya: And I think that he has already been explained that.

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: And the motif of the meeting? Vanity?

Anna Politkovskaya: He is absolutely vain. But there is one more explanation that, I think, has some grounds. He might have had some problems. He might have dared to accept my offer to meet not to be killed. And now who would dare to commit it!

Stanislav Dmitrievsky: Exactly, as there would be a scandal then for sure.

Anna Politkovskaya: That's it. It would be absolutely clear why it was done.

Editor in chief Stanislav Dmitriyevsky.

Editor of this edition Oksana Chelysheva.

This edition has been put out with the support of The National Endowment for Democracy, as part of their "Russian-Chechen Information Partnership".

==========
《附件七》是車臣外交部公文，抗議俄羅斯之自導自演，嫁禍於車臣。

Chechen Republic of Ichkeria
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Official Statement

09/12/2003

http://www.chechnya-mfa.info/print_news.php?func=detail&par=101


PRESS-RELEASE: TERRORISM IN RUSSIA IS ORGANIZED AND MANAGED BY THE RUSSIAN SECURITY AND MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SERVICES FOR PROPAGANDA AND SCAPEGOATING PURPOSES

Terrorism in Russia is organized and managed by the Russian security and military intelligence services for propaganda and scapegoating purposes. We do not think that the latest bombing in Moscow is an exception to this rule.

The fact that Russian security services in committing terrorist acts in Russia and elsewhere occasionally use their agents of Chechen origin does not make the Chechen people and the Chechen government responsible for the Kremlin's dreadful crimes. The Chechen government will not, under any circumstances, accept violence against civilians and civilian objects. We repeat that we condemn terrorism in all its forms.

We regret that the western governments fail to see that it is Russian governmental structures that organize these terrorist acts and that it is Russian agents that carry out these terrorist acts. There is a plenty of evidence to this.

For instance, Mr. Khanpasha Terkibaev, an ethnic Chechen serving for the Russian Secret Service and who is one of the main organizers and direct participant of the hostage taking in the Moscow Theater Center at Dubrovka in October 2002, is a clear proof that terror in Russia comes from the Russian government.

Mr. Khanpasha Terkibaev even after the hostage taking has continued to work for the Russian state structures, including the deputy head of President Putin's administration Mr. Vladislav Yuryevich Surkov and Putin's aide Mr. Sergei Vladimirovich Yastrzhembsky. As the hostage taking ended in killing not only Russian but also western nationals, we believe that western governments should no longer close eyes to Kremlin’s role in terrorism. [1]"

Press Office

See, for instance, Anna Politkovskaya’s article in Novaya Gazeta, issue # 30, 28 April 2003.