Russian Diver Admits Killing ‘Buster’ Crabb

Wasn’t there some books that came out with photographs of Russian Naval Officers and one of them was identified as Crabb?

Blimey…a post about ‘Buster’ Crabb! Thank you sir! 🙂

I’ve got to say I’m always suspicious of ‘revelations’ that coincide with the publishing of a book or the showing of a TV documentary (and the making of money by somebody from the ‘success’ of either).

Of course it is very tempting to speculate about defection (or abduction) and a ‘new life’ as a Russian naval officer or (another story I’ve read) as a trainer of naval divers in East Germany but there are rather obvious problems with these versions.

Firstly, who is the body if it isn’t Crabb, and more importantly who is a planted body intended to deceive?

Surely if the Soviets wanted to hide the defection of Crabb a missing body is safer than risking a planted body being discovered as fake by the British.

Much has been made of the fact that Crabb’s ex-wife, girlfriend and former diving partner failed to identify the body as Crabb (after it had been in the sea for fourteen months) and that some were pressured by the British government into confirming it as Crabb despite this.

The conspiracy theorist would have us believe that the British government wanted to hide the ‘embarrassing’ defection of war-hero Crabb by saying the body was Crabb when it wasn’t. How would the British government have explained the embarrassment of a lunch meeting between Crabb and Khrushchev, televised for propaganda purposes, a few days, months or years after they confirmed Crabb was definitely the body found in the wetsuit?

Secondly, why no public information (or propaganda) about Crabb in the fifty years since he supposedly defected?

Thirdly, why do the only public accounts about Crabb to come from the former Soviet side both detail the circumstances surrounding his death?

Crabb would be about ninety-eight now, no piece of knowledge that he had in 1956 could be of any possible use to anybody in 2007 so there would be no point in concealing his defection now. Also there would surely have come a point in the last fifty years when all of the (limited) information Crabb could have divulged to the Soviets would be overshadowed by the propaganda value of such a high-profile defector.

To me, it just doesn’t stack up.

Another theory is that whilst the russian probably did kill Crabb, he might have looked at his meagre pension and decided to sell his story and in the process larged it up a bit by the inclusion of the Limpet Mine element. My humble opinion only. 😉

Wasn’t there some books that came out with photographs of Russian Naval Officers and one of them was identified as Crabb?

Mark

Assuming that you are referring to the Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich of 23 March 1933, then nobody voted for Hitler, Garry. Hitler was already Chancellor at the time and had been appointed by Presidential Decree rather than elected, as I have already shown.

I was refering to the vote to largely give Hitler enough power to dissolve the Reichstag and to become Furher. Although dishonestly done in this case there were no laws broken and with 20/20 foresight I am sure a lot of people would never have allowed him into power, but lets face it… till he started invading countries he was actually good for germany minus the little savage interludes like killing off political enemies… which Stalin is quite famous for and is no more an inherent part of Communism any more than it is an inherent part of Democracy.

Did the 441 who voted to give Hitler a dicators hand in Germany not do it at Hitlers command?
Those 441 were democratically elected officials with the mandate from the people to vote on such things… and they voted for Hitler.

Garry, Garry, Garry…… there is a world of difference between a general election and a vote held within a legislative assembly, as you’re no doubt aware. You’re obviously an intelligent and well-read chap, so I can only presume that you’re trying to cloud the issue again. :rolleyes:

Assuming that you are referring to the Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich of 23 March 1933, then nobody voted for Hitler, Garry. Hitler was already Chancellor at the time and had been appointed by Presidential Decree rather than elected, as I have already shown.

The actual situation was far less simple and clear-cut than you appear to imagine. You might be interested in doing some quick research into the circumstances surrounding this law, and in particular the election of 5 March 1933 – which still left the Nazi party well short of an absolute majority in the Reichstag, by the way.

No amount of special pleading can alter the facts, Garry, and the facts do not support you in this particular argument.

hahahahaha a communist state that abandons the principles of communism, seriously Garry you are hilarious.

But they never achieved proper communism, just as no country has ever achieved real democracy.
Of course the democratic state that abandons the principles of democracy… have you heard of the anti social behaviour laws in Britain? How about the anti terrorist laws in the US and UK that allow for unlawful detention without legal council and allowing torture to be applied to suspects? Or how about unlawful detention in Guantanimo, or that little game the CIA plays with its new allies in Poland and Georgia…

When needs must any country can forget its principles…

Hitler at no time commanded a majority of either the popular vote or of seats in the Reichstag.

When the Reichstag voted on the Enabling Act, it passed 441 to 84. All 84 dissenting votes were Social Democrats. Not one member of the Catholic Center party voted against it. (9)

Did the 441 who voted to give Hitler a dicators hand in Germany not do it at Hitlers command?
Those 441 were democratically elected officials with the mandate from the people to vote on such things… and they voted for Hitler.

Yes, a communist state that embraces capitalism and consumerism… you just have to become a communist party member to get a vote at election time…
Perhaps the problem is not calling a pig a cow… the real problem is that the wolf has sheeps clothing on and you are laughing at me calling the cute little sheep a wolf?

…not that I have anything against China…

hahahahaha a communist state that abandons the principles of communism, seriously Garry you are hilarious.:D

….His party had just gotten a significant number of votes in an election. A majority, but not a clear majority that would give him supreme power….

I have already shown that this is not the case, Garry.

Hitler at no time commanded a majority of either the popular vote or of seats in the Reichstag.

Look, mate, these are matters of historical fact, which can easily be verified by anyone.

By insisting on trying to re-write history in this way you risk making yourself appear foolish while, at the same time, diverting attention from your substantive points to the detriment of your otherwise fairly well-argued position on the main subject of the thread.

Best to let this one lie, I feel. 🙂

Garry, you stated that Hitler was democratically elected to power.

He was appointed Chancellor, but how did he become Furher?

He wasn’t appointed Chancellor because he happened to be hanging around, or because of his looks. His party had just gotten a significant number of votes in an election. A majority, but not a clear majority that would give him supreme power. In that sense he was democratically elected… he needed a coalition government to govern… but he was elected.

You have no idea what you are ranting about, China communist hahaha. I could call a pig a cow but it wouldnt make it so.

Yes, a communist state that embraces capitalism and consumerism… you just have to become a communist party member to get a vote at election time…
Perhaps the problem is not calling a pig a cow… the real problem is that the wolf has sheeps clothing on and you are laughing at me calling the cute little sheep a wolf?

…not that I have anything against China…

Yeah, just because the party called the communist party is in power in China and there are no opposition partys or free general elections I just assume it is communism. Sounds like American democracy right there.

You have no idea what you are ranting about, China communist hahaha. I could call a pig a cow but it wouldnt make it so.:D :rolleyes:

With plenty of respect right back at you, my point was that Stalin is often used to represent what communism is. Hitler might not have been democratically elected into power in Germany in 1933 but then who voted for the Queen of England?

Garry, you stated that Hitler was democratically elected to power.

Hitler was democratically elected afterall.

No “ifs”, “buts” or “maybes” – this was what you wrote.

I have shown you that this was not the case and now you’re trying to cloud the issue.

There’s no shame in being mistaken, you know. 🙂

With respect, Garry, that simply isn’t the case.

With plenty of respect right back at you, my point was that Stalin is often used to represent what communism is. Hitler might not have been democratically elected into power in Germany in 1933 but then who voted for the Queen of England? Even democratic governments have positions of power within them that are not distributed democratically. If everyone over the age of 18 voted for every government position from the Prime Minister down to the government worker that sweeps the streets the number of boxes that would need ticking would be ridiculous… and who takes the time to learn about the the top 5 people in each of the main parties let alone local representatives?

Stalin got into power and is used to demonstrate that both Russians and communism is bad…. despite the fact that he was Georgian.

I say if he represents communism and Russians then Hitler should represent Democracy and Germany even though he himself was Austrian.
Fair is fair.

OK, while not directly elected by the people he was put in power legally in a democratic system… therefore democracy must bear the responsibility.

With respect, Garry, that simply isn’t the case.

As I said above, Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor was constitutionally correct and, therefore, legal. No-one is disputing this and, in fairness, it would be foolish to do so.

But since he had no electoral mandate – ie, he at no time commanded a majority of either the popular vote or the seats in the Reichstag and was installed as Chancellor at the whim of an individual his appointment cannot reasonably be called democratic.

Stalin broke a few rules getting to power too you know.

I’m quite sure he did, but no-one has claimed that he was democratically elected. Not even you! 😀

You seem to be suggesting that just becouse China is not democratic it is communist, lol what complete and utter nonsense, you just keep humiliating yourself.

Yeah, just because the party called the communist party is in power in China and there are no opposition partys or free general elections I just assume it is communism. Sounds like American democracy right there.

Funny thing is that elections in Russia are criticised for not being fair and democratic yet Chinese elections receive no criticism…

Perhaps if there were 1.5 billion consumers in Russia then their elections would be ignored too fair or otherwise.

Grey area just pointed out yet another area where you are wrong too.

Why am I wrong? Hitler didn’t break any laws, he was just immoral. Now if you claim the fact that all politicians in democratic countries are above reproach when it comes to morality I will believe that Hitler was an exception and democracy could never be associated with Hitler… but as we all know it is part of the democracy game to say what the people want to hear for 6 months before an election and then do what you like for the next 4-5 years. As long as the economy isn’t too bad you should get reelected by showing the voters that the alternatives are worse than you.

Not quite, Garry.

German Chancellors were not directly elected, they were appointed by the President.

OK, while not directly elected by the people he was put in power legally in a democratic system… therefore democracy must bear the responsibility.

Stalin broke a few rules getting to power too you know.

OMG Garry……..I am astonished at the absurdity of what you say.

You seem to be suggesting that just becouse China is not democratic it is communist, lol what complete and utter nonsense, you just keep humiliating yourself.

Grey area just pointed out yet another area where you are wrong too.:rolleyes:

Hitler was democratically elected afterall.

Not quite, Garry.

German Chancellors were not directly elected, they were appointed by the President.

Having lost over 30 seats in the November 1932 election, the Nazis were a long way short of an overall majority. As the largest single party (with 196 seats out of 583) they became the primary opposition to the ruling coalition.

Hitler was able to convince a part of the ruling coalition – von Papen’s Nationalists – to break off and form a coalition with the Nazis, von Papen apparently being naive enough to believe Hitler’s promise to appoint him as co-Chancellor.

In the light of this, together with persistent rumours that the current Chancellor was about to stage a military coup, President Hindenburg (who was, by this time, suffering from senile dementia) exercised his Presidential prerogative and appointed Hitler as Chancellor in January 1933.

Even at this point, Hitler’s coalition only commanded a minority of seats in the Reichstag. Hitler then set about using his powers as Chancellor to undermine and, eventually, suspend the parliamentary process and the rest, as they say, is History.

While Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor was, without doubt, constitutional it certainly wasn’t democratic.

I think the implication was that Crabb was on the surface when (it is claimed) he was shot…this ‘covert’ dive when Crabb went missing took place in daylight (which I hadn’t realised until recently).

The fact that it was a covert mission suggests he swam underwater towards the target.
If he didn’t how covert was it?
My understanding was that he was used because of the extreme tides in the harbour that made it very difficult to navigate underwater.

During the day you would expect quite a few onlookers from shore and from sea for such a special visit… how could they have possibly gotten away with even just a single shot?

So why do you persist in doubting that ‘the body’ is Crabb…or do you just doubt it is Crabb because the British government say it is Crabb?

After 14 months in the water I doubt even his wife would recognise the body… it would be all bloated etc.
Of course without DNA evidence they only had personal IDs to confirm identification…

…and this former member of Soviet Naval Intelligence claimed that Crabb was shot by a Soviet sniper.

So a least one of them is lying…yes?

Would like to hear this former SNI officers claim before I decide. Does he claim to have seen the resultant floating dead body of the shot Crabb, or did he just see a sniper shoot at someone and assumed it was a kill… etc etc.

1) Only in the most absurd of fantasies is China actually communist.

If it were truely a democracy what problems would Taiwan have returning to the fold? When were their last free elections? Of course in the sense that communism isn’t properly practised there is a fair claim in the same way that voting once every 4-5 years hardly constitutes a democracy either.

The Nazis did a pretty good job of ‘demonising’ themselves, I am assuming that you are aware of the Holocaust?

Yes, both of them. Three if you count what Japan did in China.

The same applies to the Russian Communists, turns out Stalin wasnt such a great guy after all.

Stalin no more represents Communism any more than Hitler represents democracy. Hitler was democratically elected afterall.

Every country will claim it is the best… every enemy is denigrated as evil or bad. The west was excellent at demonising communism and nazism, yet clearly evidence in China shows the western democracies can put aside their problems over communism and both can get along.

You really have lost the plot,

1) Only in the most absurd of fantasies is China actually communist.:rolleyes:

2) The Nazis did a pretty good job of ‘demonising’ themselves, I am assuming that you are aware of the Holocaust?:rolleyes:

2) The same applies to the Russian Communists, turns out Stalin wasnt such a great guy after all.:rolleyes:

Divers underwater would be a poor target for a sniper.

I think the implication was that Crabb was on the surface when (it is claimed) he was shot…this ‘covert’ dive when Crabb went missing took place in daylight (which I hadn’t realised until recently).

I have never described the ideas of defection as anything more than conspirasy theories… not to say they are wrong… just that I don’t believe them.

So why do you persist in doubting that ‘the body’ is Crabb…or do you just doubt it is Crabb because the British government say it is Crabb?

The body recovered in the wetsuit was buried, by the way…in Milton Cemetery, Portsmouth…so could probably provide DNA evidence.

This diver is claiming to have cut his throat while he was planting a mine.

…and this former member of Soviet Naval Intelligence claimed that Crabb was shot by a Soviet sniper.

So a least one of them is lying…yes?

‘Clutches of western propaganda’…are you serious!

In real life the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
It is not because the Rich people are good and deserve their riches and it is not because the poor are evil and deserve poverty.
Every country will claim it is the best… every enemy is denigrated as evil or bad. The west was excellent at demonising communism and nazism, yet clearly evidence in China shows the western democracies can put aside their problems over communism and both can get along. Russia was not bad because it was communist. Russia was considered bad well before the communist revolution. Russia was a threat on the world stage. A rival. That is why it had to be isolated and controlled.

You don’t notice western propaganda because you are immersed in it.

The Germans killed 6 million Jews and communists and homosexuals and physically and mentally handicapped people during WWII. In fact in many western countries it is a crime to deny the so called holocaust took place.
At the same time over 20 million Soviets lost their lives in Hitlers war for living space in the east. The west knows it was a war for living space in the east but somehow the huge numbers of deaths in the eastern front are explained away as poor fighting skills on the part of the Soviets. It was in actual fact a holocaust on a larger scale… yet in the west it was the weather that won it for the Soviets… of course helped by lend lease.

Being right doesn’t win wars or create a global super power. It is the application of force and lots of dirty underhanded things you try to keep secret about yourself and try to expose in your rivals when they do it that gets you a victory in a cold war.

You seem to be arguing that Crabb had his throat cut while planting a mine…

…and yet that he still managed to defect. So what do you believe?

I have never described the ideas of defection as anything more than conspirasy theories… not to say they are wrong… just that I don’t believe them.

This diver is claiming to have cut his throat while he was planting a mine.

In 1990 a former member of Soviet Naval Intelligence by the name of Joseph Zwerkin claimed that Crabb had been seen in the water around the Ordzhonikidze and that a Soviet sniper had shot him.

Now we have two statements made by former Soviet personnel…are they both true?

Divers underwater would be a poor target for a sniper. The problems with refraction making a kill rather difficult, not to mention the problems of bullet performance through water. Also surely a shot fired in the harbour would have been noticed. And of course if the evidence of the body is supposed to be crabbs they would have noticed a bullet wound, though after 14 months with no head a head shattered by a bullet would be a mess.

When there is only one skin of metal between you and billions and billions of litres of water a collision with another object that damages that skin lets in lots of water really quickly.

Thanks for clearing that up for me…I had no idea. :rolleyes:

I am not stupid enough to think a chat with me will change opinions that have developed within the clutches of western propaganda.

‘Clutches of western propaganda’…are you serious!

What I meant was that if DNA could be extracted from ‘the’ body today it would surely be possible to prove that it was Crabb. His relative would not object in all probability and the expense would be relatively small.

And what I meant was that if that DNA could be tested now it could also be possible that the test proves the body found was not crabb.

Of course…(I assumed) that goes without saying…but thanks for pointing it out.

…if it was having their head and hands removed that killed them then you don’t need another reason to remove them…:D

You are really not helping your case by this sort (:D) of comment.

Yeah…a body found at sea in a wetsuit… what a crazy idea… it has to be crabb… who else would wear a wetsuit while at sea?

Actually in 1956 it would have been extremely unusual. The Aqua-Lung had only been commercially available in Britain for about five years and the number of people involved in sport diving were very small (especially in cold British waters). Also you ignore the fact that any missing sport diver would have been reported missing.

So in your view he is not mistaken…he is a liar. He claims to have killed Crabb but also claims he saw crabb fixing a mine to the ship. Interesting you believe only half the story.

You seem to be arguing that Crabb had his throat cut while planting a mine…

…and yet that he still managed to defect. So what do you believe?

In 1990 a former member of Soviet Naval Intelligence by the name of Joseph Zwerkin claimed that Crabb had been seen in the water around the Ordzhonikidze and that a Soviet sniper had shot him.

Now we have two statements made by former Soviet personnel…are they both true?