Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: Lev Semyonovich, there was also an episode where the lawyer Trepashkin noticed a substitution of a composite sketch. At first, the sketch looked like an FSB colonel, and then, when it came to the case and he had to be picked up, they substituted it with a sketch of another person. The real sketch, made by his clients, matched the appearance of one of the special service agents.

Lev Levinson: Mikhail Ivanovich Trepashkin gave us such information as well. Well, as they say, he knows best. It's quite possible that this is so. But I would like to continue what Valentin Gefter said, that the authorities were not interested in the investigation and behaved very evasively with our commission. In my opinion, the point is also that the results of the investigation did not interest society, by and large. Even if it were proven (and this has not been proven legally) that the FSB blew up these houses, it would not have made a big impression on the voters. Today we see and hear that a fairly large part of the population considers Stalin's role in Russian history to be positive, perfectly understanding that mass political repressions occurred. But the cult of strong power, in general, gives them confidence that the authorities should behave this way. They can behave this way in order to be strong, to win victories, to scare everyone, to gnash their teeth, to move their jaw muscles, and so on.

If a reliable version had sounded, suppose, that they blew up the houses... After all, many have now erased this from their memory. But then it didn't strongly affect the popularity of the new president, who became the current president. Although then there was still Nikolai Nikolaev's program on NTV, residents of the Ryazan house came, demanded the truth, and all this was on the air. And hundreds of thousands of people saw it. But this did not play to lower Putin's rating; rather, on the contrary, it raised it.

Sergei Kovalev: I want to draw attention in the Ryazan case to the following, in my opinion, very important episode. At first, official reports were that thanks to the vigilance of the residents of the building, another explosion, a terrorist attack, was prevented. And they held to this version for some time. Then it was reported that these were planned joint exercises of two ministries—the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB. And here a gap in time occurred. At that time, the Minister of Internal Affairs was Rushailo, and the FSB was Patrushev. So, Patrushev was already officially reporting, speaking on the radio, that these were planned joint exercises. We were later shown the official protocol for conducting such exercises. But Rushailo, on the same day, but two or three hours later, continued to defend the version of a prevented explosion. If these are joint exercises organized by two ministries, how can these two ministers differ in their opinions?! This is completely incomprehensible. And where did the first version of a prevented explosion come from then? Well, exercises are exercises. Apologize to the residents of the building, thank them for their vigilance, and return them to sleep in their apartments. No. The talk about a prevented explosion continued for several days. And when one of the ministers, according to the plan... we read this plan, they presented this plan to us, it's a plan for joint exercises, and one of the ministers continues to talk about a prevented explosion, and the other (note that it was specifically the FSB man) says that these were joint exercises. How could these two ministers differ in their opinions?..

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: And as for the tragic fate of many members of your commission. Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Litvinenko, and Anya Politkovskaya, experts of this commission, died. I would say that both Boris Abramovich and Boris Nemtsov also knew something about the apartment bombings. Doesn't this lead you to reflect on the fact that in a mysterious way, almost your entire commission has been destroyed?

Sergei Kovalev: I cannot say with full certainty that these explosions were organized by the authorities. Although it is clear that they were to their advantage, to the advantage of the future president Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, because he had just promised to 'waste them in the outhouse,' as he put it, everyone who has anything to do with terrorism. And scaring people with terrorism was politically expedient for him. This has not been proven. But what can be stated with full certainty: the investigation of the explosions, both the Moscow ones and the so-called 'exercises' in Ryazan—all of this is sewn with white thread. There could be different options. It seems to me that Ryazan was supposed to be another explosion, but I cannot prove it.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: And it's strange that after the failure of the Ryazan explosion, there were no more explosions.

Sergei Kovalev: But the fact that this version was not investigated, and the fact that we were fed fake protocols about joint exercises... It couldn't be that two ministers of these departments, which are conducting joint exercises, differed in their opinions. Which of them was lying? The one who said that an explosion was prevented? Or the one who said that these were planned exercises? And why at first did both say in one voice that another explosion was prevented, and then suddenly—the exercise version.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: And it's also suspicious that the distribution of the book and the videotape with the film 'FSB Blows Up Russia' was banned in Russia. If it's not the FSB, why then was Podrabinek accused of disclosing state secrets? That is, it turned out that this is a state secret, that it's the truth. Why do you think the FSB prevented the distribution of the book and the film?

Sergei Kovalev: Because it was difficult to make ends meet. Because the more public information there was on this topic, the more clearly the inconsistencies would come out. I already told you about our conversation with Major General Sergeyev. What prevented the detention of this 'trio' if the place where they were located had been calculated? And why was it necessary to release them from Ryazan by order from Moscow? If these are exercises, these valiant FSB officers organized this false alarm, checked it. And Kartofelnikov's vigilance played its role. Why was it necessary at first to talk about a prevented explosion?

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: We recently remembered the Beslan events, remembered 'Nord-Ost.' There are just as many (if not more) blunders, inconsistencies, and outright lies there.

Sergei Kovalev: Both 'Nord-Ost' and Beslan are very characteristic things. The operation with sleeping gas in 'Nord-Ost.' After all, this gas brought 130 innocent victims.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: The terrorists didn't kill anyone; the gas killed everyone.

Sergei Kovalev: And the terrorists were all shot; not a single one was left who could be interrogated. But they had fallen asleep. Why shoot them? And this is very similar to covering tracks. We don't need to find out how this terrorist attack was organized—just shoot them, and that's it. The same story in Beslan. It is quite obvious that the attack on the school was started... It was not profitable for the terrorists to start the explosions and the terror; they were after something else; they had a different goal.

Vladimir Kara-Murza Sr.: Of course. And the lie began with saying that they were not putting forward any demands. The lie began with the number of hostages. We all remembered this on the anniversary of the Beslan tragedy. Of course, it was an outright lie.