Was Viktor Yushchenko Poisoned?

A disturbing article in today’s New York Times (simple registration required) contains a more detailed story of the terrible illnes that has ravaged Ukrainian opposition leader and presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko. I had mentioned earlier that Ukrainian and Russian friends believe that he was poisoned by the successors to the KGB, which is plausible because it was an old KGB tactic, because the KGB had done a tremendous amount of research into otherwise unknown chemical and biological agents (witness the use of a previously unknown disabling gas by Russian forces during the 2002 theater siege), and because all other explanations, which posit that a completely mysterious and frightening illness would strike an opposition presidential candidate suddenly, devastatingly, and just as he seemed on the verge of victory, are extremely unlikely. I had linked to a much less detailed account from CNN some time ago, which led the crackpots at antiwar.com and lewrockwell.com to jump immediately into action, sending me hate filled emails denouncing Viktor Yushchenko (whom they term the “(losing) candidate, a neocon/CIA stooge“) and me for raising the questions of electoral fraud and of poisoning. Justin Raimondo of antiwar.com immediately posted a number of comments on my site under several different names (as he has done in the past, suggesting that I had had sexual relations with Albanian Kosovar terrorists, and the like) railing against me for raising the issue.

Anyone who gives funds to, writes for, or otherwise associates with Lew Rockwell, Tom DiLorenzo, or Justin Raimondo should read the New York Times article, and then read what our own domestic axis of evil [no doubt a better term could be used to describe the three of them–TGP] have written about Viktor Yushchenko. Here is Raimondo, mocking him for his suffering,

The prince becomes a toad — and, no, I seriously doubt that Yushie’s physical deterioration has anything to do with a nefarious plot by Putin’s KGB against his good looks. Instead, let me suggest an alternative theory, one not contradicted by expert medical testimony — and the account of a parliamentary inquiry, — and it is this: perhaps the Faustian deal that Yushchenko made with the U.S. government has taken its toll, and, as in the dramatic climax of Oscar Wilde’s famous tale, “The Portrait of Dorian Grey,” his sins are being visited on his once-handsome visage, ravaging it — and revealing his inner soul.

We know what Viktor Yushchenko looks like on the outside. You just have to look. To know what Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and Tom DiLorenzo look like on the inside, you just have to read what they write.

P.S. If you read the comments on this posting or others, don’t be surprised to find (before I delete the pornographic ones or the ones falsely posted under my name, Viktor Yushchenko’s name, etc.) additional postings from Justin Raimondo and a variety of puerile Lewrockwellites, under a variety of names (including my own) pointing out or suggesting that A) I must be having sex with Viktor Yushchenko, B) that I am a member of the Communist Party, C) that I am an agent of the CIA, D) that I am friendly to the “Chicago School” of economics, E) a variety of other claims and charges, some so revoltingly colorful that they cannot be imagined until a truly perverted mind suggests them. (In the past I have deleted examples of all of the above, except for D, which I have left up when they are appropriate to the discussion. I have left a few from Raimondo up, under such names as Antaeus, N. Gorovsky, and Akim Tamiroff.)

8 Responses to “Was Viktor Yushchenko Poisoned?”

  1. Tom G. Palmer

    James (click on his name and you are taken to a post I wrote on the savage beheadings in Saudi Arabia and Iraq) has posted a rather cryptic response. Having pondered the phrase (“our own domestic axis of evil”) I used, I see that someone with too much imagination one might take it to mean that Raimondo, Rockwell, and DiLorenzo are harboring ambitions of becoming nuclear powers. That was not my intent. Nonetheless, they are each — individually and taken as an “axis” — authentically hateful and creepy, moved by some strange demons to defend a group of truly evil institutions — the slavery-based Confederate States of America, jihadists and Ba’athists in Iraq, old Soviet apparatchiks in Ukraine — that have only one thing in common: they are enemies of western liberalism and of the United States of America.

    It’s odd that the Rockwellians attacked me for speaking at a conference in Russia and working with a group that met with President Putin (during which meeting he was encouraged to stop intimidating the media, stop the behavior of the Russian military in Chechnya, accelerate privatization of farm land and other assets, support establishment of a truly independent judiciary, etc., etc.), and yet go to such rhetorical extremes to defend Putin’s candidate for president of Ukraine.

  2. I disagree with you on a lot Palmer, but I don’t harbor idiotic and imaginative thoughts that you would believe anything stupid such as your “domestic axis of evil” being nuclear terrorists. I may not think highly of the things you say, but I don’t think lowly of your intelligence.

  3. Actually, I’m neutral on the whole Ukraine affair, neither agreeing with you or Rockwell.

    I just found your phrase “domestic axis of evil” utterly idiotic. I know nothing can quell your hatred Rockwell and Raimondo, so I won’t even bother with that. Their opinions may be radical and disagree with yours, but to label your opponents a “domestic axis of evil” based on out of context references and misconstruments of beliefs is completely irresponsible. I don’t want to hear about the irresponsibility of LRCers, I already know about that so there is no point in repeating that, this is about you.

    Whoever is right, just don’t label your opponents a “domestic axis of evil”, it just sounds stupid and your reasons for it sound even worse, given that LRC is populated by paleocons who want to use the state to enforce different aspects of their morality.

    That’s why I felt that you lost Palmer.

  4. Tom G. Palmer

    I’ll grant that after James brought the phrase to my attention I realized that it is clunky and, well, not clear on its meaning. Let me be make an attempt to be clear, then. The three persons in question (Raimondo, Rockwell, and DiLorenzo) have shown that they are, ultimately, so full of ugliness and hatred that they would mock a man for enduring in his campaign to rid his country of gangsters despite enduring incredible pain and suffering. I will also add the vicious gay baiting (notably on the part of Raimondo, a very seriously disturbed gay man), the mirthsome cavorting with the likes of Gary North (who wishes to stone to death millions of people for “heresy”), and the hatred of the American state so powerful that it overrides all other moral considerations and leads them into sympathy with jihadists, Ba’athists, and Soviet appratchik gangsters, so long as they are opposed to American governmental policy.

    Those three are not merely irresponsible, childish, or ineffective. They are truly vile and disgusting examples of how low men can sink when they really try. There are many people with whom I disagree but whom I respect. I find that, despite often agreeing with the conclusions those three may reach on a wide range of policy questions, I have no respect for them at all, neither intellectual nor moral. The phrase “domestic axis of evil” was a poor attempt to capture the loathesomeness that ties them all together. It clearly doesn’t do the job and is rhetorical and explanatory failure. I hope that this explanation does a better job.

    (On a final note, I wish to point out that the quotations I have brought forth are not taken out of context; indeed, by linking to the full statements, the entire context is there for others to examine. In contrast, I’ve not mentioned the personal conversations of years past in which Rockwell revealed his ugly racism, precisely because they can’t be documented or could be construed as “taken out of context.” They have shown us what their souls are like. It’s up to other people to judge whether they want to be tainted by them.)

  5. Like I said, your loathing of the LRC crowd is incurable, so I’m not even going to deal with it.

    Thank you for understanding the problems of “domestic axis of evil” though.

  6. Tom, I was overtaken with mirth when I read that you thought I was Justin – and had to call my *longtime male companion* over to see. I point this out because you think I “gay-baited” you when I asked if you had mixed motives in going to Albania, whereas you only have eyes for Viktor Yushchenko (not that I blame you – check my link). Did you have half the concern for the mysterious debilitation and equally possible poisoning of Arafat? Perhaps your hysterical compassion is aesthetically (and racially?) selective!

    By the way, you’re out now, so congratulations are in order – but why the rigor in dissociating yourself from certain other gay types? Just wondering…

  7. Tom G. Palmer

    “Antaeus”‘s remarks quite clearly demonstrate gay baiting. Someone who never lifted a finger to advance liberty for people who had been viciously oppressed by communism is quite happy to suggest that the time I spent in Albania right after the walls came down was not to get Paul Heyne’s “The Economic Way of Thinking” translated into Albanian and published for use as an economics textbook (as I also did in Czech, Russian, Romanian, and Hungarian) so that the Albanians could have a text in economics other than Marxism-Leninism, or to get Frederic Bastiat’s essays translated, or to get Albanian scholars and policy makers integrated into the wider world of classical liberalism. No, it wasn’t about meeting people at the Ministry of Industry to discuss privatization strategies and involving outsiders from Britain and elsewhere with experience. No, that’s not why I trekked all over Tirana lugging books on foot (thanks to there being no other transport at the time). It must have been to have sex with Kosovar Albanian terrorists. Hey, I’m a homo; what *else* could motivate me? Frankly, the suggestion shows an extreme variety of self loathing. (As an aside, no doubt the fact that a variety of quasi-pornographic postings under the name “Antaeus” were associated with the same IP as Justin Raimondo’s postings of some time back shows that there is no reason to associate the two. Really, I wasn’t born yesterday.)

    If I disassociate myself from “certain other gay types,” it’s from those who have accepted the stereotype that to be gay is to be frivolous, lacking in seriousness, ineffective, and always showing to the world the curling lip of a cruel sneer. Life involves many things, “Antaeus,” of which you seem woefully ignorant. There are courage,compassion, love of justice, and many other virtues, for example, as our Ukrainian friends (well, mine, at least) are showing every day. Your cartoon campiness crowds out such things, to your own detriment.

    In any case, this has terminated the usefulness of this discussion. “Antaeus/Justin” has simply made my point for me. And rather than “outing me,” as he suggests [that part had gone right past me at first], I’ve been “out” for much longer than I’ve had a web page. Because I’m comfortable with and have no hangups about my sexuality, it doesn’t occur to me to interject it into discussions of matters such as the future of Ukraine. It has no more impact on my views of the justice of such topics as gay marriage or the war in Iraq than does my height or my pigmentation. People who raise their sexuality at every opportunity demonstrate that, “out” or not, they have problems with themselves.

    I’ll leave aside his claim that I must be a racist because I didn’t suggest that the death of Yasser Arafat (a man who, in any case, ruined the lives of “his people” by turning down a clear chance for peace for Israel) was due to poisoning. And “Antaeus”‘s link to a photo (presumably of Yushchenko) is simply bizarre, another sign of a person who has so internalized hatred of gay people that his take on a major political crisis is to make a claim that one of the persons involved is physically attractive. Ugh.

    After thinking about the matter during a train ride back from Philadelphia this evening, I realize that James was right. Had he been looking over my shoulder when I wrote that and said, “Oh, come on…what does that mean?”, I would have said, “You’re right” and cut it. It was inadequate to express the revulsion I feel at people who would mock Viktor Yushchenko for almost dying from a terrible illness — quite possibly deliberately given to him — and yet still soldiering on with a stent between his shoulder blades to deliver medication.