We Now Know More About the Apparent Poisoning of the Pussy Riot Member Pyotr Verzilov | The New Yorker

We Now Know More About the Apparent Poisoning of the Pussy Riot Member Pyotr Verzilov

…Verzilov, who is thirty, fell ill on September 11th. In the course of several hours, he lost his eyesight and his ability to speak, became delirious, and lost consciousness. He was hospitalized in Moscow in critical condition. Four days later, after he had stabilized, Verzilov was flown to Berlin, where he is now being treated at Charité hospital. On Tuesday, members of his German medical team held a press conference, during which they confirmed that Verzilov had probably been poisoned. He is recovering, but still hallucinating….

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/we-now-know-more-about-the-apparent-poisoning-of-the-pussy-riot-member-pyotr-verzilov

We Now Know More About the Apparent Poisoning of the Pussy Riot Member Pyotr Verzilov

New details have emerged in the apparent poisoning of Russian activist Pyotr Verzilov, a member of the protest-art group Pussy Riot, and they may shed light on the deaths of three Russian journalists who were shot in the Central African Republic in July.

0
This entry was posted in The Global Picture. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to We Now Know More About the Apparent Poisoning of the Pussy Riot Member Pyotr Verzilov | The New Yorker

  1. It’s the modern variant of spiking heads.

    It doesn’t make the dead any deader. But it tells the living what you can and will do and to how many levels of precision of zero fucks you give about it.

    Or: Coercive power of fear.

    0
  2. Aaron Hamid says:

    It seems plausible to me that they 1) want these deaths to be publicized and for people to be fearful (death by poison, especially these exotic ones, is sensational and prolongated)
    2) they want people they know they have the power to do this, while be able to disclaim responsibility

    A guy gets an anonymous and unseen bullet in the head and the world shrugs and moves to the next news story.

    Yeah, what Edward Morbius said.

    0
  3. Or, pour encourager les autres.

    Quietly execute one person, you’ve removed one problem. Publicly execute one person (and make it clear that you don’t care if their family is collateral damage or not) especially if they die slowly and in agony, and you remove as a problem everyone who sees what you did and doesn’t want it to happen to them.

    0
  4. Yep. I mean, the KGB did this sort of thing on the regular back in the day, when Putin was in it.

    Remember the Umbrella Murder? There sure as hell were easier methods of killing people anonymously even in the 60s. But it signals state level actor to everyone, and the intelligence services will be sure which one, the public will be pretty sure, and yet it is entirely deniable to the point they can’t even expel your diplomats.

    0
  5. I think we’ve all found slightly different ways to say exactly the same thing.

    0
  6. I’m putting all your heads on spikes.

    0
  7. Cindy Brown says:

    FUD sowed, I suppose. It just seems /weird/.

    0
  8. Nila Jones says:

    I’m with Cindy, that it seems like there’s something more.

    0