:It's amazing how eager the Western media is to blame Kremlin for every evil thing that happens in the world. If this "hypothesis" is mentioned, then the other one - the more plausibel one - has to be as well. Why would the Kremlin had wanted to kill Litvinenko? His death hurt the Russian goverment's imago much more than the conspiracy theories he told - the lies that Berezovsky paid him to tell - ever did. Litvinenko was just a crazy, exiled, unemployed man who had lost his job, a poor man who made his living by writing stories, smuggling and blackmailing. The Western media frankly didn't even pay too much attention to him before his death. No, the Kremlin would have had no real motive. Killing him would have been nothing but pure stupidity because of the catastrophical PR consequences it brought. Yes, the killer must indeed have been someone with lots of money, someone obsessed with an agenda, someone whose behaviour is "always marked with audacity and cunning." There is one man who is all of that, one who has the money, one whose agenda - to discredit the Russian government, to have his revenge, to get power himself - would be optimally supported by Litvinenko's murder: that man is no one else but Berezovsky himself. For years, after getting "betrayed" by Putin and going into opposition, Berezovsky has spent his millions in an extraordinary campaign to disdain the Russian government. He has even sworn to "bring it down." He has financed Litvinenko's books and published all kinds of conspiracy theory material, and made sure the claims are picked up and spread further by anglophone journalists for maximum coverage.