Russia today

[blindpig]

Tears of terrorists
March 24, 2:33 p.m



Tears of terrorists.

When apprehended, cold-blooded killers hide in trees, cry, and scream. There is genuine horror in their eyes. Looking at them in this state, you wonder how this nonentity could shoot point-blank at children, defenseless people, a few hours ago?

Let us explain, there are two aspects.

1. First, the effect of prohibited drugs, the presence of which is not even discussed, has expired. Under the influence of doping, there is a strong release of hormones into the blood, i.e. all the body's reserves are consumed at a wild speed, including adrenaline. Such stress takes its toll on the body: the video shows one of the detainees shaking during interrogation.

2. The second is a nervous breakdown. For a long time, the terrorist is in a daily state of deep stress, suppresses his emotions and constantly experiences anxiety. At the moment of arrest, banal hysteria occurs. Its effect is enhanced by the “coming off” from the drugs and the mental pressure of the security forces.

It is important that such behavior is typical in a situation where the actions of terrorists do not have a deep ideological basis. As is the case with the action films in Crocus, where the only motivation is money. Already at the moment of escape, the criminals realized what they had done and, because The terrorist attack was not supported by ideology; the militants were overcome by animal fear for their own lives. Therefore, during interrogation, they are ready to tell everything, cry, etc., just to stay alive.

But judging by the video, they knew how to handle weapons, although some of them shot wildly, there was the use of edged weapons, but they did not have radio communication; they kept each other at arm's length, and worked according to plan.

@rusich_army - zinc

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9046174.html

Poll about the death penalty
March 24, 8:57 am



Interesting results of the survey https://t.me/boris_rozhin/117637 about the restoration of the death penalty for terrorism. 84% completely or with reservations in favor with approximately 150,000 voters. Of course, we can say that the sample on my channel is not relevant, but similar results were obtained on many other channels.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9045606.html

Google Translator

******

Update on the ‘Crocus City Hall’ massacre
March 23, 2024
Finally a substantial feed of information on the massacre is being released to the public by Russian official news channels including RT. Moreover at 15.00 Moscow time, President Putin delivered a televised address to the nation on this tragedy. In what follows I will provide relevant facts and my own commentary.

First, as was expected, the death toll has risen sharply from first news last night. It now stands at 140 and may go still higher. Most of the victims apparently died from gunshot wounds. Some died from asphyxiation linked to smoke from the fire on the premises which the attackers lit with incendiary devices. The event under attack was a rock concert that was about to begin and many of those killed were children and adolescents, a fact which, rightly or wrongly, Russians consider particularly heinous.

We know that 11 of those responsible were apprehended, including the four who committed the murders in the auditorium. They were caught in a forest of the Bryansk province, following a car chase and exchange of gunfire with law enforcement officers when they tried to evade a roadside control. They were driving their Renault car in the direction of the Ukrainian border.

We are told that several at least are citizens of the Central Asian republic of Tajikistan, although Tajik authorities deny that their people were involved. Representatives of the Islamic State terrorist organization have claimed responsibility, although that by itself says nothing about ultimate directions from Ukraine.

One of the terrorists revealed under police interrogation that they were paid 500,000 rubles for the attack, amounting to a paltry $5,000. Another 500,000 was to be paid later, following the attack, but it is safe to assume that the paymasters never expected that half to be paid out.

Vladimir Putin’s address to the nation was calm and non-accusatory with respect to the puppet masters behind the atrocity, though he did drop a couple of hints as to who they are, which I will mention in a minute.

For those who want to listen to his 5 minute speech, here is the link:

https://smotrim.ru/article/3867162?utm_ ... ain2-news6
The title of this news item gives you the first hint – “Putin: there is information about the preparation of an escape window for the murderers on the Ukrainian side”

Otherwise, Putin’s opening words were of comfort to the bereaved and relatives of those wounded. We know from other sources that the Moscow and Moscow regional authorities have announced compensation to be paid to all victims and their relatives.

Putin put the attack in the context of global terrorism and did not specifically name anyone. He said that what was planned was a mass murder, a kind of ‘demonstrative execution’ such as were committed by the Nazis under Hitler. We may call this hint number two in the direction of Ukraine.

Tomorrow has been declared a national day of mourning in Russia. The Culture Ministry has cancelled all events involving large gatherings of people and cities across Russia have declared heightened security measures. Indeed the situation at the Crocus City Hall was exceedingly lax: there were no armed guards. The security people had only wooden clubs, not firearms, and they apparently were in their quarters when they were tracked down by the assailants and murdered first before they proceeded to the auditorium.

Let there be no confusion here: the tragedy yesterday is a turning point in the war. I remain persuaded that it was an American sanctioned or directed provocation intended to elicit the violent response that I mentioned in my last essay – a Russian strike on Kiev with intent to decapitate the Zelensky regime.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/03/23/ ... -massacre/

*******
(Note that 'The Bell' quoted below is a Russian liberal opposition publication who lifted it's title from a 19th century Russian socialist paper, as did we, see our front page. This piece nonetheless has some good information.)

THE BELL: MOSCOW CONCERT HALL ATTACK: WHAT WE KNOW BY NOW
MARCH 23, 2024 NATYLIESB LEAVE A COMMENT

Read Putin’s address to the citizens of Russia on the terrorist attack here. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73703

The Bell, 3/23/24

The biggest terrorist attack in Moscow for 20 years

A group of armed people killed at least 115 people Friday in an attack on a shopping and entertainment center in Moscow – the most deadly terrorist incident in the Russian capital in two decades. Amid the war in Ukraine, Russia’s response is very difficult to predict. [Note: Both Euronews and RT a the time of this posting are reporting 133 dead. – Natylie]

The attack began about 8 p.m. in Crocus City Hall, which includes one of Moscow’s biggest concert halls (seating about 6,200 people). Five well-armed people in camouflage entered the hall just before the start of a sold-out performance, shooting the security guards, and then those present in the room. According to officials, at least 150 people were killed and hundreds more injured. A large fire began at about this time, as a result of which part of the roof of the hall collapsed.
Initially, there were reports that the attackers had remained in the building, but, at about midnight, the police announced they had begun a search for the culprits. On Saturday, the Federal Security Service (FSB) said that the four terrorists were detained in th western Bryansk region, which borders Ukraine. Russian state media posted videos of their interrogations; one of the attackers said that he was offered to carry out the shooting by a “preacher’s assistant” on messaging app Telegram, and was promised 1 million rubles ($11,000) as a reward.
All the recent developments (especially the fact that the shooters were offered a money reward) and the tone of the propaganda, suggests that the Russian official version will inevitably focus on blaming Ukraine.
The political backdrop is extremely concerning. President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Thursday for the first time that Russia is waging a “war” in Ukraine – not a “special military operation,” which has been the preferred official term for more than two years, And the day before, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced plans to establish three new armies – sparking speculation about another round of mobilization to raise the soldiers to man them.

Why the world should care
Such a brazen attack in the heart of Moscow could potentially be used by the Kremlin to justify another escalation in Ukraine, or another wave of mobilization. However, Russian officials stopped short of blaming Ukraine on Friday evening. We will look at the attack and its fallout in more detail in our following newsletters.

Wartime economics puts money in pockets of Russia’s poor
Predictably, Western nations were dismissive of the “election” that saw Vladimir Putin voted in for a fifth presidential term. Of course, the election was neither free, nor fair. However, that does not mean it was meaningless. The words once credited to U.S. political strategist James Carville also apply here: “It’s the economy, stupid.”

Even if the votes had been counted accurately, it’s more than possible that the economy would have powered Putin to victory. After all, most Russians have never lived as well as they do now. Nor do people believe that things are about to get worse. This is particularly notable in Russia’s regions, far from the hipsters of Moscow and St. Petersburg.

An economy that is growing because of the needs of the military and rising government spending has ensured wages outstripping inflation.



After the start of the war, inflation rocketed – but wages more than kept pace. Central Bank head Elvira Nabiullina said Friday that the economy’s “production capacity and labor reserves are almost totally committed.” In other words, there is no way of boosting production and the labor shortage is ongoing. That means salaries will continue to rise. Same the inflation.

The fact that Russians are living better is evident from their outgoings. Spending at cafes and restaurants, for example, is increasing.



Demand for non-food goods (i.e. items where purchases can be postponed or even canceled) has recovered from its slump in the months after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Its rate of growth now exceeds both inflation, and wage increases.



This does not look like the sort of panic buying that happens in a crisis, when many rush out to buy whatever consumer durables they can afford. Instead, Russians appear to have sufficient confidence in their finances to take out personal loans. Consumer confidence is approaching record levels, Nabiullina told reporters on Friday.



Of course, increased prosperity is not universal. But those who have lost out are the more wealthy Russians. The average income of the richest 10% in Russian society has increased by 27% since the start of the war. While this may seem a lot, it’s the lowest rise of all 10 income groups, and barely matches the combined inflation rate for the past two years. Incomes for the poorest in society have grown much faster.



“A large-scale redistribution of resources in favor of the less well-off has prompted a widespread shift in perceptions of justice for the first time since 1990,” Denis Volkov, director of independent pollster Levada Center, wrote in an article last month. According to Levada, the proportion of Russians who feel that the distribution of material wealth in Russia is getting more unfair fell from 45% in 2021 to 25% in November 2023.

Why the world should care

The war has caused disproportionate economic suffering for a small minority of privileged Russians living in big cities, working for international companies (or companies integrated into global networks) and regarding themselves as “citizens of the world.” The Kremlin has apparently given up on this group. Now, Russian citizens who once regarded themselves as forgotten and overlooked are ready to take their place. Both the war, and the Kremlin’s economic policies, resonate in the hearts and wallets of these people.

Putin Prepares For China Visit as Russia’s Dependence Grows

Putin’s first foreign visit after his upcoming inauguration could be to China. The Russian president could head eastward as soon as May, Reuters reported Tuesday. The increasing regularity of meetings between Putin and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, is testament to the rapidly deepening ties between the two countries.

Putin and Xi met twice last year. In March, the Chinese leader came to Moscow. Then, in October, Putin made a visit to Beijing for the Belt and Road Forum. The Russian leader’s next trip would likely be a mirror of Xi Jinping’s Moscow visit.

Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia’s relationship with China has begun to look a lot like dependence. Western sanctions are pushing Moscow into Beijing’s embrace, with Sino-Russian trade last year topping $240 billion (China delivered 38% of Russia’s imports, and received 31% of Russian exports). Beijing now holds a monopoly in a range of goods (and, as a result, can charge Russia more than other countries).There was a 594% increase in imports of Chinese cars to Russia in 2023, and an almost 600% increase in imports of Chinese tractors.

China is not just Russia’s leading trade partner. It also plays a key role in helping settle accounts with third countries. In just two years, the yuan has become the most important currency for Russian business. In December, 35.8% of Russian exports and 37% of imports were paid for in yuan. That’s more than the ruble (35.7% and 31.5% respectively). The amount of yuan held in Russian business and personal accounts last year even outstripped the U.S. dollar ($68.7 billion vs $64.7 billion). And lending to companies in yuan was up 3.6 times to $36.1 billion in 2023, primarily due to the conversion of debts once held in U.S. dollars and euros.
Some media outlets speculated that one of Putin’s reasons for visiting China was to solve the problems some Russian financial institutions had with Chinese banks last year. The issues seemed to arise after U.S. President Joe Biden passed a decree tightening the penalties on third parties helping Russia evade Western sanctions. However, this speculation is probably little more than speculation. It’s true that correspondent banks in China began curtailing relationships with their Russian counterparts after the U.S. decree, and businesses complained of problems. But this did not halt financial transactions. “In general, payments were made and continue to be made,” a source from a Russian export company told The Bell. “It’s just that first-tier banks are being replaced by second and third-tier organizations.”
The average time to verify funds received from Russia in China is now 18 days, according to the “Business Practice in China” Telegram channel. In other words, payment chains are adapting to new realities. “Before, the relationship was: client – Russian bank – foreign bank – client. Now, there are three or five more banks in the chain. But everything still works,” added The Bell’s source.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/03/the ... ow-by-now/

(The 'best economy since the 90s perhaps, though for the working class the 60s and 70s were a very good time, what they might have lacked in cash-in-hand was more than compensated by the amenities provided by the social system, As for the wealthy, tough shit.

Russian nationalists may be suspicious of China but not so much the true internationalists...)

*******

Who Would Ever Doubt It.

As was expected: the cover of ISIS, in reality MI6-GUR terrorism is written all over it. All for the money, which excludes any ISIS connection. And, of course, they have contacts in 404 and have been running to their "window" to 404 side.


After carrying out the attack on Friday night, “the perpetrators tried to escape by car, fleeing towards the Russian-Ukrainian border,” the FSB said on Saturday. “The criminals intended to cross the Russia-Ukraine border and had relevant contacts on the Ukrainian side,” it added. According to the agency, “all four terrorists” were arrested in Russia’s Bryansk Region within several hours as a result of well-coordinated actions by the security services and the police. The detainees are now being transferred to Moscow, it added. The attack on Crocus Crocus City Hall was “carefully planned,” with the perpetrators using weapons that had been placed in a stash in advance, the FSB said.

Everything one needs to know. Mourn victims, give kudos to FSB and MVD. Now, finally, State Duma WILL legislate death penalty (in Russian). Even Macron expressed... condolences to Russian people--what do ya know. US did too. London "decisively condemned" the terrorist act? Really!? Surreal. Was the US involved in any way? At this stage it doesn't matter--Kiev Nazi terrorist regime is a creature of the United States and that says it all.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/03 ... bt-it.html

[blindpig]

Bastards in court
March 25, 1:32



The 4 terrorists who killed people in Crocus were brought to court, where they were arrested until May 22, 2024.






https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9047195.html

Kill them all
March 25, 13:39



The liberal hope of Russia 2008-2012 is in touch.

Everyone asks me. What to do?
They were caught. Well done to everyone who caught it.

Should they be killed? Necessary. And it will be.

But it is much more important to kill everyone involved. Everyone. Who paid, who sympathized, who helped.

Kill them all.

(c) Dmitry Medvedev

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9048288.html

Google Translator

I am reminded:

NO LIMIT TO OUR ANGER (C) V. M. MOLOTOV

********

GLENN DIESEN: WESTERN MEDIA ‘COVERAGE’ OF RUSSIA IS INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS, AND IT’S GETTING WORSE
MARCH 24, 2024

By Glenn Diesen, RT, 3/20/24

Western media coverage of every Russian election is bad. But this time it was even worse than usual.

Instead of lashing out at the incompetence on display, it’s more constructive to explore why rational discussions about the country continue to appear impossible.

Not to mention the dire consequences of the ongoing self-delusion.

Reason versus conformity to the group

One of the first things we learn in sociology is that humans are in a constant battle between instincts and reason. Over tens of thousands of years, we have developed the instinct to organise in groups as a source of security. This is the result of evolutionary biology as survival demands that we organise into “us” versus “them”. In-group loyalty is augmented by assigning contrasting identities of the virtuous “us” versus the evil “other”, which helps stop an individual from straying too far from the pack.

Yet, human beings are also equipped with reason and thus the ability to assess objective reality independent of their immediate circle. In international relations, it’s imperative to place yourself in the shoes of the opponent. The rationality required to see the world through the perspective of the “other” is vital for reaching mutual understanding, reducing tensions, and pursuing a workable peace.

Every successful peace process and reconciliation in history – from Northern Ireland to negotiations to end apartheid in South Africa – has been based on this.

We expect journalists to be objective in their reporting of reality, which is especially important during war. But this seems to be almost impossible, especially during conflicts. When human beings experience external threats, their herd instincts are triggered as society demands group loyalty and we punish those who deviate. The political obedience demanded during war time usually results in the weakening of freedom of speech, the role of journalism, and democracy.

Why did Russians vote for Putin?

So, how can we understand the reasons for President Vladimir Putin’s immense popularity in Russia and his landslide victory?

If we use our reason and resist our tribal instincts, it should not be difficult to understand the popularity of Putin. While the 1990s was a golden period for the West, it was a nightmare for Russians. The economy collapsed and society disintegrated with truly horrific consequences.

The country’s security also collapsed, as NATO expansion meant there was no chance to agree an inclusive European security architecture. This had been outlined in the Charter of Paris for a New Europe in 1990 and the OSCE founding documents.

A weakened Russia meant that its interests could be ignored, and NATO was able to invade Moscow’s ally Yugoslavia, in violation of international law.

When Putin took over the presidency on 31 December 1999, it was commonplace in the West to predict that Russia would share the fate of the Soviet Union. That is eventual collapse.

However, Russia has instead become the largest economy in Europe (by PPP), its society has healed from the disastrous 1990s, its military might has been restored, and new international partners have been found in the East and Global South, as evidenced by the growing role of BRICS.

Furthermore, most Russians believe it’s not a good idea to have major disruptions to leadership in the middle of a NATO-Russia proxy war in Ukraine that is deemed an existential threat. Don’t change horses in midstream as the American proverb, often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, advises.

Speaking of the US, the late Mikhail Gorbachev – who was immensely popular there – did not shy away from criticising Putin, when he was still with us. However, he nevertheless argued that Putin “saved Russia from the beginning of a collapse”.

Today, any Western journalist repeating this would be immediately branded as a “Putinist” – implying a betrayal of the “us”. Western journalists cannot acknowledge the immense achievements of Russia since 1999 as it could be interpreted as lending legitimacy and signalling support for the “bad” side.

The price of self-delusion

Arguments are not judged by the extent they reflect an objective reality, rather they are assessed by how they are seen to express support or condemnation of Russia. Conformity to a narrative signals in-group loyalty, and the desire to deprive opponents of legitimacy limits what is allowed to be discussed.

Acknowledging Putin’s achievements over the past 25 years is treated as expressing support for him, which is tantamount to treason.

Meanwhile, journalists hardly ever discuss Moscow’s security concerns and the extent to which our competing interests can be harmonised. Instead, Russian policies are conveyed by referring to derogatory descriptions of Putin’s character.

As in our other wars, conflicts are explained by the presence of a bad man and if we could just make him go away, then the natural order of peace would be restored. Putin, the narrative contends, is our most recent reincarnation of Hitler and we constantly live in the 1940s where an adversary must be defeated and not appeased.

How can journalists then explain to their audience Putin’s popularity and the reasons for his huge personal vote when it is not allowed to say anything positive about the Russian president? Unable to live in reality and unable to place ourselves in the shoes of the opponent – how are we supposed to have sensible analysis and policies? As I always warned my students of international relations: Do not hate your rivals, it produces poor and dangerous analysis!

Making self-delusion virtuous comes at a high price. How can the West pursue diplomacy and work with Putin when he is presented as the embodiment of evil and an illegitimate leader? Even explaining Russian policies is condemned as legitimising Russian policies, which is deemed to be propaganda that must not be given a platform. People conform to the good versus evil mantra as it feels virtuous and patriotic to signal that they support the in-group and loathe the out-group. But how can we pursue our interests when we have committed ourselves to self-delusion and have banned reality from our analysis?

I have attempted to explain for two years why the anti-Russian sanctions were doomed to fail and why Russia will win the war, only to be told that it is Russian propaganda to undermine support for sanctions and to challenge the narrative of a pending Ukrainian victory. Reality be damned! Ignoring reality results in a distorted picture of Russia which predictably leads to miscalculations. How could Russia as a “gas station masquerading as a country” defeat the most draconian Western sanctions and see its economy not only survive, but by some measures even thrive? Why would Russians unite under an existential threat when we cannot acknowledge the role played by NATO in that regard?

Sigmund Freud explored the extent to which instinctive group psychology could diminish the rationality of the individual. Freud’s ideas were further developed by his nephew, Edward Bernays, who became the father of modern political propaganda. Over a century ago, Walter Lippman cautioned group psychology, managed with propaganda, as it came with a heavy price. Yielding to the instinct of viewing conflict as a struggle between the virtuous “us” versus the evil “other” implies that peace requires defeating the adversary, while a workable solution becomes tantamount to appeasement.

What better explains the current failure of rational analysis and the resulting collapse of diplomacy?

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/03/gle ... ing-worse/

ECONOMIST JAMES K. GALBRAITH: SANCTIONS: TO RUSSIA WITH LOVE
MARCH 24, 2024



“James Galbraith challenges common perceptions about western sanctions and their impact on Russia, revealing unexpected outcomes for its economy and development. Contrary to the goals of defunding the war and degrading Russia’s military capacity, sanctions have led to economic adjustments that have fostered Russia’s independent development. Galbraith points out that despite initial disruptions, Russia adapted by focusing on domestic production and diversifying its economic partnerships. This analysis provides a nuanced view of economic sanctions’ real-world impacts, suggesting that their effectiveness and consequences are more complex than commonly understood.“

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/03/eco ... with-love/

******

Here’s Why Ukraine’s GUR, And Not ISIS-K, Is The Prime Suspect In The Crocus Terrorist Attack



ANDREW KORYBKO
MAR 24, 2024

The GUR learned everything about terrorism from the CIA, but since it’s still a knockoff, it made a series of sloppy mistakes that resulted in incriminating Ukraine instead of lending false credence to the ISIS-K narrative.

Speculation has swirled since Friday night’s terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall venue in Moscow over whether ISIS-K was really responsible like the group claimed or if Ukraine’s military-intelligence service GUR orchestrated everything under the cover of its agents posing as members of that group. The Mainstream Media is running with the first scenario while doing their utmost to discredit the second, but recalling the GUR’s terrorist history and ties with radical Islamists shows that it’s not above suspicion.

They were responsible for assassinating Darya Dugina in summer 2022, carrying out the Crimean Bridge truck bomb attack that fall, assassinating Vladlen Tatarsky in spring 2023, and the cross-border terrorist raids by the so-called “Russian Volunteer Corps” over the past year. They’re also tied to Crimean Tatar terrorists and ISIS-linked Chechen ones. The CIA is connected with these terrorist acts and groups too after the Washington Post reported last fall that they rebuilt the GUR from the ground-up after 2014.

The modern-day GUR is a product of the CIA, which certainly shared with its protégés everything that it learned while waging the ongoing Hybrid War on Syria, not to mention their terrorist contacts as well. It was through this meticulous cultivation that GUR chief Kirill Budanov obtained his bloodlust that was on full display last spring when he declared that “we’ve been killing Russians and we will keep killing Russians anywhere on the face of this world until the complete victory of Ukraine.”

For as lethal as the GUR has become over the past decade, it’s still a CIA knockoff, which is why it’s expected to make sloppy mistakes from time to time. This is relevant when it comes to the latest attack after ISIS-K claimed responsibility using an outdated news template, thus suggesting that someone else claimed credit in their name at first but then ISIS-K opportunistically ran with it for clout. Considering its terrorist history and ties with radical Islamists, that mysterious actor was arguably the GUR.

What likely happened is that their agents posed as members of that terrorist group in order to retain plausible deniability in case the planned attack was foiled or the terrorists were caught afterwards. One of the Tajiks who was captured in the car that was racing towards the Ukrainian border claimed that they were recruited by the curators of a radical Telegram channel just a month ago to carry out the attack using already cached arms in exchange for a debit card payment of around $5000 each.

These nationals were probably chosen by the GUR since some of them are predisposed to religious radicalism due to the lingering legacy of Tajikistan’s Islamist-inspired civil war from the 1990s, their country abuts ISIS-K’s Afghan headquarters, and they have visa-free travel privileges to Russia. Accordingly, they were allegedly recruited via a radical Telegram channel, ISIS-K’s involvement doesn’t seem entirely implausible, and they were able to easily enter Russia with minimal scrutiny.

They weren’t radical enough to go out with guns blazing or in a suicide blast like ISIS-K is known for, however, but were still sufficiently sympathetic with that group’s ideology to carry out what they believed was its latest mission in exchange for money. This explains why they fled from the scene of the crime, which is contrary to what any affiliate of that group would ever do, after machine-gunning dozens of people and setting fire to the venue.

Had they reached Ukraine, where the FSB confirmed that they had contacts and President Putin said that “a window was prepared for them…to cross over”, then they’d likely have been killed by the GUR to cover everything up. It shouldn’t be forgotten that this group learned how to conduct terrorism from the CIA, which in turn perfected this practice in Syria over the past 13 years of the Hybrid War that it’s been waging there, but the GUR is still a knockoff and that’s why they made three sloppy mistakes.

In the order that they occurred, their first mistake was recruiting people who weren’t ready to fight to the death at the scene of their forthcoming terrorist attack. This led to the culprits being captured and spilling the beans about how they were recruited in exchange for money, which is one of the signs that ISIS-K wasn’t behind what happened since their members always expect to die as “martyrs”. Accordingly, the fact that this mistake was made suggests that the GUR was desperate to go through with their plans.

The second mistake was that they didn’t tell their proxies to flee to a safe house right after the attack to meet a contact that’ll then help them reach the border later on but who’d actually kill them once they meet in order to cover everything up. This led to them racing towards the Ukrainian border, thus showing everyone that they at the very least felt that they’d find sanctuary there, which made Russia’s claim of Ukrainian involvement much more believable for many skeptical Westerners.

And finally, the last mistake was that the GUR used an outdated news template to claim credit for the attack on behalf of ISIS-K, who they correctly predicted would opportunistically run with it for clout. By doing so, however, they signaled that the group itself didn’t play a role in organizing what happened otherwise their more modern template would have been used instead. Taken together, these three sloppy mistakes discredited the Mainstream Media’s narrative and drew attention to the GUR instead.

Coupled with its terrorist history and ties with radical Islamic groups, which respectively prove that it has the capabilities and intent to carry out the Crocus attack as well as the knowledge required to impersonate extremists online for recruiting purposes, all of this makes the GUR the prime suspect. It learned everything about terrorism from the CIA, but since it’s still a knockoff, it made a series of sloppy mistakes that resulted in incriminating Ukraine instead of lending false credence to the ISIS-K narrative.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/heres-wh ... d-not-isis

******

Why Did Putin Get Re-Elected and Have Been in Power for 25 Years?

Eduardo Vasco

March 24, 2024

Putin knows very well the feelings and psychology of the Russian people. The sense of family and preservation of traditional customs is deeply rooted in the common population, which gives it a conservative character.

Forget what the propaganda manufactured by the CIA and disseminated by all the major international media says. Only someone who is very uninformed can believe that Putin was elected because he arrested and killed opponents who had a chance of defeating him. Putin has no rival and the reasons are as follows.

His politics are highly popular. No one can deny that Putin is largely responsible for pulling Russia out of the mud it was thrown into by the same people who attack it today. Only those who lived through the terrible 90s know what Russia was like before Putin, with total devastation of the economy and unprecedented human degradation. And many of them know that the real culprits are the great imperialist powers, first of all the United States, which tried to enslave Russia and today cannot accept this fantastic recovery.

But Putin only managed to rebuild Russia because he applied a masterful policy. He united around his project different ideological sectors, ranging from ultra-conservative and far-right monarchists who are nostalgic for tsarism to orthodox communists who are fanatics of Josef Stalin.

Hence most people who look at today’s Russia are confused by the nature of Putin’s politics. There are those who call him a fascist and there are also those who call him a communist. The point is that Putin knows very well the feelings and psychology of the Russian people. The sense of family and preservation of traditional customs is deeply rooted in the common population, which gives it a conservative character. At the same time, the 70 years of Soviet rule awakened his political awareness of building a collectivist, fair and egalitarian State.

The neoliberal shock of the 1990s disintegrated both the traditional family and the welfare state. The Russians felt the misfortune more than any other people, although we see that even in the United States, land of liberal capitalism for 150 years, millions of citizens are outraged by the attacks on their quality of life. In fact, capitalism is mainly responsible for the destruction of the family and traditional values, which had been respected in the Soviet period and, to a certain extent, during the welfare state in Western countries.

The main reason, however, for Putin’s extreme popularity, and the unification of such different sectors of society, lies in the identification of the person mainly responsible for this disintegration. Russians realize that it was caused by the imperialist system’s oppression of Russia. And the unifying axis of Russian society is the struggle for independence and definitive national liberation against this imperialist oppression. This is in all of Putin’s speeches and both right-wing and left-wing Russians declare that this is their country’s great struggle. This became very clear from the start of the special military operation in Ukraine.

But popular support is not enough for a ruler to successfully implement his policy. You need determination and pragmatism. Naive prejudices, childish beliefs and passivity in the face of the enemy would lead to the defeat of your project. Putin, like every mortal – and like every nationalist politician, in the sense of having ideas and projects consistent with the interests of a national bourgeois elite – was initially guided by empiricism, only to discover that he was naive and wrong in believing that his enemies would become friends.

Realizing that there were not many alternatives for the progress of his policy, he gradually abandoned his belief in collaboration with the imperial powers. This should not only be done from a foreign policy point of view, but mainly internally. The Yeltsin period showed that the Russian State was infested with foreign agents, who had infiltrated in the Soviet Era. Putin implemented a purge of these agents and equipped the State with trusted men, suppressed the pro-imperialist opposition and entered into an agreement with the Russian national bourgeoisie (the famous “oligarchs”) and the country’s working class, because these are the sectors whose interests contradict those of the imperialist powers and the unified struggle of these classes is the only one that could protect the country from foreign domination. That was – and still is – Putin’s view.

An opinion that, so far, has proven to be partly true. Russia’s recovery and success show this. But many Russians agree that there is still work to be done to purge the state apparatus of the fifth column. It still exists within the state bureaucracy, in decision-making positions such as parliament, the armed forces and regional entities. It exists, above all, in the so-called sectors of civil society, particularly the middle class and bourgeoisie. Although Putin has 87% popular support – as expressed at the polls – there are still many who would like to see Russia submissive to the USA, even if they do not publicly or consciously admit it.

This new mandate could give Putin the chance to crush these sectors that are somewhat residual, but dangerous due to their foreign connections.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... -25-years/

*******

WION, Indian global television, interview on consequences of the Crocus City Hall massacre

This morning I was interviewed by India’s premier global English-language broadcaster WION for a chat about who were the puppet masters behind the savage terrorist attack at a concert hall located in the suburbs of Moscow two days ago.

So far this interview is incorporated in the channel’s Live programming but is not yet available separately. It appears approximately 15 minutes into the video

Russia LIVE: Did ISIS choose a wrong battle this time? Putin vows revenge for the attack | WION LIVE




I set out below the essence for your consideration.

The context for my remarks was a lengthy article published online this morning by The Financial Times under the title “Moscow seeks to blame Kyiv for Isis concert hall attack.” The wording “seeks to blame” tells you clearly that the editorial stance of the newspaper is to ridicule what were so far just hints at Ukrainian responsibility for the atrocity in Vladimir Putin’s address to the nation yesterday. The most important hint was with respect to the ‘window’ opened by the Ukrainian authorities for the fleeing gunmen to escape across the border. This is treated by the FT as Russian propaganda: “…Putin, Russian officials and the FSB security service repeatedly claimed the assailants were intercepted while en route to Ukraine.”

Instead, citing “US and other western countries,” the FT insists that the Ukrainians had nothing to do with the massacre. After all, ISIS itself has publicly claimed responsibility. To be more precise, the culprits were “an Afghan-based affiliate called Isis-Khorasan, or Isis-K.”

The FT reasons that Russia is viewed with the same hatred by ISIS as are Western states. The Afghan affiliate, which was little known till now, had every reason to carry out the spectacular attack to draw attention to itself and thereby to greatly enhance its recruitment prospects.

Per the FT, this same Isis-K has attempted terrorist attacks in Western Europe in the recent past but was thwarted each time. Russia proved to be an easier target, hence the successful operation at the Crocus City Hall auditorium.

All of this argumentation by The Financial Times, or rather by the fast talkers in Washington who fed the FT its lines to disseminate to its respectable audience, all of this argumentation has a fatal flaw, namely the assumption that there is an either/or here: either the Ukrainians did it, or the Isis-K did it.

However, upon inspection it is fairly obvious that both sets of actors, Isis-K and the Ukrainian military intelligence operatives, worked cooperatively. Only in this way could a group of Tajik gunmen with poor knowledge of Russian, as we now know from the tapes of their initial interrogation posted on Russian television, and with still less knowledge of the target site have pulled off the attack and made their way out of Moscow by car, nearly reaching the Ukrainian border in the Russian province of Bryansk to the west.

Clearly it was Ukrainian intelligence operatives who were the enablers. They speak native Russian. The Russian-Ukrainian border is porous and these operatives have established themselves within Russia in considerable numbers. They would have had ample opportunity to prepare the cache of automatic rifles and incendiary devices, to inspect the venue for attack, to learn where the security staff had their office, to find escape routes and to do all of the other preparatory and support work necessary for success.

So much for the benefit to the Isis-K from working hand in hand with the Ukrainians. But what were the benefits to Kiev from this cooperation? The answer is that this arrangement could deflect blame entirely away from Kiev and onto a credible international terrorist organization, as the US tells us, so that gullible readers of the FT and of other major Western media carrying the story will believe that Putin is lying.

I will not mince words: this cynical and duplicitous plot has on it the fingerprints of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who made his name in infamy in the Nord Stream II bombings, per Sy Hersh, or by the CIA, acting in consort with Sullivan. We already know from recent New York Times exposes that the CIA has been deeply embedded in Ukraine’s terrorist activities.

Sullivan has taken the relay baton from Victoria Nuland and is now the leading promoter of WWIII in the Biden Administration. It was he who a week ago had to be squelched by Secretary of State Blinken when he sought to describe Vladimir Putin’s electoral victory as illegitimate. The final language of the U.S. position on the elections placed before Biden to read was that Putin is Russia’s president. But that came only after a big internal debate which Sullivan lost. The Crocus City Hall massacre suggests that Sullivan has not yet gotten the message that the outbreak of WWIII will not help Biden’s electoral chances.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

Postscript: The following relevant comment has been sent in by one reader:

quote

This would be the same Jake Sullivan who wrote “AQ [Al Qaeda] are on our side in Syria” to Hillary Clinton in an email back in 2012 (Wikileaks). That Jake Sullivan?

unquote

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/03/24/ ... -massacre/

[blindpig]

This Is Not ISIS – Rossiya Segodnya Editor-In-Chief on Moscow Concert Hall Attack
MARCH 25, 2024


Margarita Simonyan at the plenary session "The struggle for digital sovereignty. How to maintain a single information space?" within the framework of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum - 2021. Photo: Sputnik/Евгений Биятов/Editor-in-chief of RT and "Russia Today".

Ukraine and the West have resorted to false flag operations to persuade everyone that ISIS* was behind the terror attack in the Crocus City Hall concert venue near Moscow, said Margarita Simonyan, the editor-in-chief of Sputnik’s parent media group Rossiya Segodnya.

The head of the media group stressed that the names and faces of the perpetrators are already known to authorities and that the terrorists gave everything away during interrogation.

“It immediately became obvious why US media were claiming in unison that it was ISIS,” she said.

Simonyan explained that the perpetrators were chosen to carry out the attack in a manner that would allow the West to persuade the international community that ISIS was behind the attack.

“Basic sleight of hand. The level of a railway thimble-rigger,” she added.” It has nothing to do with ISIS. It’s Ukrainians.”

She added that the enthusiasm displayed by Western media when they tried to persuade everyone that ISIS was responsible even before arrests were made gave them away completely.

“This is not ISIS. This is a well-coordinated team of several other, also widely known, abbreviations,” Simonyan concluded.

The shooting occurred on Friday evening in the Crocus City Hall concert venue just outside Moscow and was followed by a massive fire, claiming at least 143 lives.

In the hours following the attack, Western media insisted that radical jihadist organization ISIS was behind it, while Ukrainian officials also said that they had nothing to do with the tragedy.

However, suspects were detained in Russia’s Bryansk region near Ukrainian border. According to the data provided by law enforcing agencies, they had a support base on the other side of the border.

Moreover, while Kiev rushed to deny its involvement into the shooting, Ukrainian secret services have a long track record of terror attacks on Russian territory, from shelling in the Belgorod region to assassinations of political scientist Daria Dugina and journalist Vladlen Tatarsky.

https://orinocotribune.com/this-is-not- ... ll-attack/

*******

About the terrorist attack
No. 3/91.III.2024

Things like high-profile terrorist attacks are almost always a game of escalation . Such terrorist attacks do not pursue any particularly specific goals; they are organized by those capitalists who are tired of waiting for a big war (or who for some reason decide to push decision makers to take certain actions). It is quite possible that, due to the greater interest of the imperialist groups in the United States and Western Europe, the unwinding of the Third World War will proceed at a furiously accelerating pace, even faster than could have been expected even last year .

Consequently, we also need to be prepared - to retreat to reserve positions in order to retain personnel, to work in war conditions, and, most likely, circumstances will force us to speed up organizational events, because there will no longer be a favorable environment in which we can simply publish and distribute materials , a lot will have to change.

I would like to note that people who talk about the goodness of a market economy are their own evil Pinocchios. War, including world war, is one of the forms of implementing BUSINESS . To believe that it is possible to allow business into the life of society and prevent war is very naive. Business itself produces war, having swollen like a bug, it faces a situation where it can no longer function without war - without war its profits fall, investment portfolios burst and a crisis of overproduction arises. A market economy is VITALLY INTERESTED IN WARS , because war is UNLIMITED DEMAND . You produced two hundred helicopters, and the very next day they were shot down. And we need another two hundred, or better yet five hundred. You produced a million blankets, and in a matter of weeks they burned in warehouses, were lost, torn by millions of soldiers. You produce shells, of which more and more are needed every day, and the more successful the war, the more of them are needed (ammunition consumption at the end of any war is significantly greater than at the beginning). And so on. No one was more upset by the end of the First and Second World Wars than businessmen. Lenin did not say for the sake of rhetoric that “ capitalism is war .” This is simply a statement of the fact that war is an integral part of a market economy and without wars it does not function, and if it functions, then as an exception and for a very short time, until the club cuts out more of the competitor.

How many of those who died in Crocus even thought about this? Yes, most likely no one. As one of the characters in the famous film said: “The most expensive thing in the world is stupidity, because you pay the most for stupidity.” And the most offensive thing will be to pay for someone else’s stupidity, massive, faceless.

I. Bortnik
03/25/2024

https://prorivists.org/91_teract/

Google Translator

******

Russia Is Justified In Using Tough Tactics To Learn About Potentially Imminent Terrorist Attacks



ANDREW KORYBKO
MAR 26, 2024

Security services all across the world have an obligation to employ all means at their disposal if they sincerely believe that there are legitimate reasons to suspect that those in their custody might have information that could thwart a potentially imminent terrorist attack against civilians.

The four terrorists that were caught fleeing to Ukraine after carrying out Friday night’s terrorist attack at Moscow’s Crocus City Hall appeared in court battered and bruised. Footage earlier circulated on social media showing one of them face down on the ground with his hair pulled, another with his eye popped out of its socket, the other with his ear being stuffed into his mouth, and the final one having his genitals shocked. This led to condemnation from the Mainstream and Alternative Media Community (AMC) alike.

The first sought to fearmonger that the FSB published this footage in order to intimidate their compatriots while a prominent member of the second who was recently in Moscow for a major event lambasted these tough tactics as “medieval” and “a breakdown in the chain of command”. Other members of the AMC condemned torture in general, with the timing of their posts hinting that they’re connected to that footage but that they feel uncomfortable directly addressing it for whatever reason.

The Mainstream Media obviously has ulterior motives in pushing the narrative that they did while the AMC’s are well-intentioned but arguably misguided for the reasons that’ll now be explained. It’s understandable that those activists, commentators, pundits, etc. who are against what the US did in Iraq’s Abu Ghraib and continues to do in Guantanamo Bay would disavow what they truly believe to be the similar tactics that Russia employed against the four captured terrorists.

This is especially so for those who’ve raised awareness of Israel’s abuses against the Palestinians over the years. These members of the AMC might either truly be against the use of any force against detainees for any reason no matter the context, whether out of principle or because they’re concerned that it could discredit whatever they reveal, or they’re worried that they themselves would be discredited if they support it in the Russian case after condemning it in the aforementioned three cases.

Whatever their reasons may be, those that are concerned about double standards have nothing to worry about because the Russian case is qualitatively different from the Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and Israeli ones. Those three were mostly against random Iraqis, Muslims from the Global South, and Palestinians who in the vast majority of instances wouldn’t realistically have information about potentially imminent terrorist attacks unlike the four terrorists that Russia captured last weekend.

In other words, the suspects against whom these tough tactics were infamously applied in those three cases were mostly victims of sadists, who literally tortured them for personal or political reasons. The Russian case, however, was all about attempting to obtain information as soon as possible about potentially imminent terrorist attacks seeing as how such could have planned as immediate follow-ups to the Crocus City Hall one as part of a nationwide Hybrid War campaign against Russia.

Security services all across the world have an obligation to employ all means at their disposal if they sincerely believe that there are legitimate reasons to suspect that those in their custody might have information that could thwart a potentially imminent terrorist attack against civilians. To be sure, there are those that sometimes abuse this obligation for sadistic personal or political reasons, and others are sometimes so brainwashed by liberal-globalist ideals that they voluntarily refuse to utilize tough tactics.

Both discredit those of their counterparts who employ these means for the greater good of protecting people from potentially imminent terrorist attacks: the first’s abuses make some suspect that this is always done for sadistic reasons, while the second’s reluctance makes them think that it’s never needed. The reality is that this is sometimes required no matter how much some well-intentioned members of the AMC might be opposed to it, and Russia’s utilization of these tough tactics was for the right reasons.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/russia-i ... sing-tough

******

Ukrainian and Western Intelligence Services Certainly Involved in Moscow Concert Hall Attack

Lucas Leiroz

March 25, 2024

Accusing ISIS sounds like a mere way of disguising the real culprits.

The recent terrorist attack on Crocus City Hall, in the suburbs of Moscow, has taken over the news around the world. The tragedy made many internet users pay attention to the Russian scenario, generating curiosity in Western public opinion. However, as expected, anti-Russian media outlets are spreading rumors designed to disguise the truth about what happened in Krasnogorsk.

The attack was carried out by four gunmen who entered the Crocus facilities and murdered more than 140 Russian civilians. After the massacre, the killers escaped and hours later were captured by Russian security forces while trying to cross the border into Ukraine in Bryansk oblast. They claimed they were hired via Telegram and received weapons from the hirers to conduct the attack. The reward for terrorist service would be half a million Russian rubles.

Western media rushed to publish materials claiming that Kiev was not related to the attack. Reports began to emerge linking the shooters to ISIS, but without showing sufficient evidence to prove this hypothesis. Subsequently, the arrested terrorists had their identities discovered and indeed appear to have links to Islamic extremism, but it is still unclear about any real affiliation with ISIS.

There are some points to be clarified in order to understand the case based on the information available so far. Although investigations are still ongoing, it is possible to draw some partial conclusions based on the evidence presented. First of all, it is necessary to emphasize that the terrorist operation was extremely complex, involving multiple agents and a profound ability to circumvent Moscow’s security mechanisms.

Clearly, this was not the action of “lone wolves”, but of a complex network of agents, with intelligence support. A factor that also proves this is the attempted escape through Bryansk. Since the Ukrainian attacks on the region in 2023, Bryansk has been heavily protected by the Russians, with minefields and solid defense positions on the border. The area has become so difficult to cross that it has been avoided by Ukrainian forces even in the current context of terrorist incursions across Russian borders, when there have been so many attacks on Belgorod and Kursk.

For some reason, the terrorists tried to evade precisely through Bryansk , which indicates that they had detailed information on how to cross the border and find support on the other side. This is a sign that Ukrainian intelligence was actively participating in the operation, providing the necessary data for the killers to find the best route to evade Russian troops – which fortunately did not happen, with those responsible for the crime being arrested.

So, these data indicate that the Kiev regime actively participated in the attack. As we know, Ukraine, as a proxy state, never acts alone. If the regime’s intelligence forces were involved in the operation, then there was certainly coordination from the Collective West through strategists based on Ukrainian soil, which means that NATO countries are co-responsible for the crime in Crocus.

Evidence of this is the suspicious act that, a few weeks earlier, the American Embassy issued a warning to its citizens to avoid participating in public events in Moscow. If the US really had data that pointed to the imminence of an attack, then the right thing to do would be to hand over such information to Moscow and cooperate with the Russians to thwart the attack. But, apparently, the Americans never had such an intention, which indicates that they acted with bad intentions – either actively participating in the attack or ignoring the threat.

It is also necessary to remember that the former American Deputy Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, had made controversial statements promising “surprises” to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Considering the personal history of Nuland, who is the mind behind the Maidan and the US’ “Ukrainian project”, it is possible to suspect that she was actually planning terrorist attacks in Russia. Furthermore, her recent exit from office is an indication that she is trying to get out of the public attention – and she appears to have been concerned about doing so precisely a few days before the Crocus event.

Finally, it is possible to say that Washington and Kiev appear to be acting together again to cause deaths of Russian civilians. Claims of ISIS responsibility do not sound true, but as merely distraction strategy. ISIS as a solid political organization was liquidated years ago, in the context of the Russian military intervention in Syria. There are currently remnants of ISIS fighting in several countries, mainly in Ukraine, but it does not appear to be a group strong enough to carry out complex attacks like this one in Moscow.

Indeed, the shooters appear to have links to Islamic extremism, but that does not mean they are actually members of ISIS. It should be noted that they tried to escape the place, not seeking suicide or any other practice common to members of ISIS. Although they are radical Islamists, they appear to have acted as mercenaries, agreeing to kill Russian civilians for Ukrainian money.

In this sense, the data points to the existence of a complex terrorist network, with the Collective West coordinating an incursion against Russia through Ukraine and using Wahhabi mercenaries to carry out the operation. Attributing responsibility to ISIS seems just a way to exempt Ukraine and its Western allies from the role they obviously have in the case.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... ll-attack/

The Role of Turkey and Idlib in the Moscow Attack

Steven Sahiounie

March 25, 2024

The U.S. and Turkey are keeping Idlib safe from attack in order to be able to use those armed assets when and where they chose

The road to the Crocus Center in Moscow began in Turkey, as one of the attackers confessed who killed 143 concert goers and injured more than 150 on Friday night. Russia has said the all the attackers have been captured on their way to Ukraine in an effort to escape. A message on the social media, Telegram, claims responsibility for the attack by the Islamic State Khorasan (IS-K). The U.S. media reports that the U.S. government had warned Russia of a possible attack being planned by the IS-K.

One of the attackers has confessed that he arrived in Russia from Turkey, and was radicalized there by an Islamic cleric. The confessor is a citizen of Tajikistan in Central Asia. Turkey had been a secular government following the political ideology championed by the father of Turkey, Ataturk, who asked his nation in the aftermath of WWI to look to the west and become modern, while turning away from the east and old traditions which Ataturk saw as an obstacle to cultural and economic progress.

But, Erdogan was a follower of a political form of Islam, which is termed Radical Islam. Under the decades of Erdogan rule in Turkey, the society has turned backwards to the east, and embraced a non-secular trend. Erdogan claimed that the Turkish people are the descendants of ancient ethnic groups in central Asia. Places like Tajikistan became recognized as ‘brothers’ to the Erdogan regime.

Members of IS-K and Al Qaeda from the Central Asian republics can legally reside and work in Turkey, successfully infiltrating the local society. They patiently await commands from their clerics to carry out terrorist attacks, adeptly navigating security measures. Istanbul’s Basaksehir, is a favorite haven for Uzbek, Tajik, and Turkmen migrants.

The U.S.-NATO attack on Syria began in 2011 for the purpose of regime change. Erdogan, a longstanding U.S. ally was asked to be a partner in the Obama-led war on secular Syria, to create a Muslim Brotherhood friendly state in Damascus, who could be a perfect partner to Erdogan’s ruling party in Ankara. Obama launched a similar plan in both Libya and Egypt with varying success. The Muslim Brotherhood thrived in the U.S. and UK and was represented in key positions in the government and society in both places. This was a group following Radical Islam, but they wore suits and ties and appeared to be productive members of society, all the while planning openly to deconstruct democratic governments little by little to realize their dream of an Islamic State with Islamic Law as the only constitution.

Russia had suffered many Radical Islamic terror attacks over decades killing dozens. President Putin saw the U.S.-UK and Turkey sponsoring the terrorists in Syria, and by 2015 made a decision to save Syria from becoming an Islamic State by entering the battlefield against the terrorists who were gaining territory. As many experts explained at the time: Russia could stop the march of Radical Islam in Syria, or wait and battle them on the streets of Moscow.

Erdogan and Putin were pitted as enemies in Syria by the U.S.-NATO war. After Turkey shot down a Russian plane over Syria, and a Turkish security officer killed a Russian diplomat in cold-blood, the relationship between the two major nations hit a low point.

But, the U.S. stabbed their loyal ally Turkey in the back in Syria. Washington sponsored the Kurds who are the enemy of Turkey. The PKK is a terrorist group which has killed over 30,000 people over 30 years. The Kurds in Syria formed an armed militia the SDF and the YPJ which are directly tied to the PKK, and share the same Communist political ideology. The Pentagon took the SDF and YPJ under its wing and provided everything a modern army could want, including paychecks in dollars. Erdogan complained to Obama, to Trump and to Biden, but all his complaints about the Kurds fell on deaf ears in Washington.

Dr. Kamal Jafa, the geopolitical expert in Aleppo, reported that there was a meeting at the Al Shadade military base in Syria, under the occupation of the U.S. military, between the SDF and Ukrainian officials seeking armed IS terrorists to fight the Russians in Ukraine. An agreement was made to transfer certain Russian-speaking IS terrorists held in prisons by the SDF in Syria to Ukraine.

Ukraine was developing plans to work with the SDF to attack Russian troops in Syria. However, in late December 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called a halt to that planning, as The Washington Post reported, citing a leaked U.S. document that dates from January 2023. The document also discusses the attitude of the Turkish government, which was aware of Ukraine’s planning to strike Russian targets in Syria.

Just hours after the Moscow attack, John Kirby, a spokesman for President Biden’s National Security Council, stated publically that the Ukrainians had nothing to do with the attack. People asked the question, “How would you know who is, or is not involved, when the attack just occurred, and no arrests have been made?” Others commented, “If you know who is not involved, then you must know who is involved.”

Idlib is the last terrorist-controlled area in Syria. It is under the armed control of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, commanded by Abu Mohamed al-Julani, who is on the U.S. wanted list, with a $10 million bounty on his head. This is despite being in full view of the media, including the U.S. media who came to interview him while wearing a suit and tie, in an effort by his American handlers to cleanup his image, and rebrand him as a U.S. approved alternative to President Assad in Damascus.

All the UN and other humanitarian aid arriving in Idlib passes first through the hands of Julani and his terrorists, who distribute the aid to their families and associates, and refuse to share with those opposed to his Radical Islamic occupation. The leftover aid is sold in Julani’s new shopping mall, Al Hamra, with its escalators taking shoppers over several luxurious floors. Not surprisingly, recent street protests in Idlib have called for his ouster and execution from the 3 million civilians living under a brutal and repressive regime which forbids females to take part in any training programs offered by humanitarian groups.

Idlib is the place the U.S. military attacked, claiming that IS-K was thriving there, and the same place that the U.S. military on the order of Trump killed Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, and again in Idlib the U.S. took out an ISIS officer.

Commentators have asked, if the U.S. knows that Idlib is the headquarters of IS-K, and other armed groups following Radical Islam, why do they denounce the Syrian Arab Army, or their ally, the Russian military, and their plan to eliminate the terrorist presence in Idlib? If the whole world recognizes Idlib as a center for terrorism, then why not get rid of the threat, which poses a threat to civilians in Syria, Russia and Europe? The U.S. and Turkey are keeping Idlib safe from attack in order to be able to use those armed assets when and where they chose.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... ow-attack/

[blindpig]

THE EVIDENCE ON THE CROCUS GANG ATTACK IN MOSCOW

by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

In just thirteen minutes, four Kalashnikov rifles, knives, and plastic bottles of gasoline, discharged by four men, were not enough to kill and injure so many people as have been accounted for to date in the Crocus City Hall attack in Moscow.

More than half those examined so far in post-mortems “died as a result of the fire from exposure to high temperature and combustion products”, according to Alexander Bastrykin, the chief investigator in his public report to President Vladimir Putin on Monday night. Post-mortems have yet to be reported for one-third of the 139 dead counted by Bastrykin; no analysis of the cause of injuries to 182 of the surviving casualties has been reported yet; 93 of them remain in hospital.

Bastrykin also reported “two AK-74 assault rifles, over 500 rounds of ammunition, 28 magazines with ammunition, and bottles with remaining gasoline were found and seized at the scene.” A NATO military expert explains: “They didn’t strike me as well-trained, so they lost time changing magazines and their fire wasn’t all that accurate. These data tell me the majority of victims died from some other cause than gunshot.”

Yevgeny Krutikov, a writer with military intelligence sources, reported in Vzglyad: “It can be assumed that the weapons were stored in the terrorists’ cache for a long time and not too carefully – the machine guns sparkled during the shooting. This indicates damage to the barrel or breech (dirt got inside the barrel).”

Recruitment of the shooters; pre-placement of weapons and ammunition; accommodation and advance payment to the gunmen; purchase of the car they used; communications and coordination; exit undetected in the crowds escaping the building; and the escape route to the Ukraine border through Bryansk region – the evidence of these details prepared over weeks and months indicate a much larger organization than the four shooters formed with seven others already arrested and under interrogation.

What they know and will tell is likely to reveal a sophisticated command-and-control system which knew how vulnerable the target was, how to maximize the killing in the shortest possible duration, and at the same time allow escape for the attackers – which is almost unprecedented in the recent history of mass terrorist attacks in Russia. .

That’s to say, the command knew — the shooters and their accomplices didn’t. There was advance reconnoiter of the Crocus City Hall so that the shooters knew the route they followed inside the building and then out under cover of fire and smoke, which erupted faster than they were able to shoot almost half of their ammunition which they left behind.

Did the command also know that Crocus City Hall and the surrounding mall were operating without adequate fire alarms, smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, sprinklers, and emergency ventilation, none of which has been reported by eyewitnesses? Was the building targeted because the command knew it was constructed without fire-resistant structural supports, allowing ceilings and roof to cave in, choking or crushing those beneath to death?

“Most of the victims in Crocus died not at the hands of terrorists, but from the criminal negligence of the owners and regulatory authorities,” reported Mikhail Delyagin, chairman of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy, on Sunday evening. “It is known that many people suffocated with carbon monoxide inside the building. There are already more victims of this kind than those killed by terrorist shooting. Nothing like this could happen in a certified building built according to modern standards for such objects. Why? Because all such buildings are equipped with an automatic ventilation system. These are windows or hatches that fire off automatically if the detector detects an increased level of carbon monoxide inside. Holes open in the roof – and the life-threatening gas goes into the sky. This system works, by the way, without electricity, on compressed air.”

“The way the Crocus burned down shows that cheap Chinese materials (glass wool, plastics, cable braid, etc.) were used in its decoration, which are prohibited for use in public buildings. The reason for the ban? Combustibility. In Europe, non-burning glass wool, plastics, etc. have been used for a long time. They are, of course, twice or three times more expensive than the Chinese equivalent. But they have one advantage: they do not burn in case of fire. And they don’t kill those who are inside.”

Delyagin has publicly accused Aras Agalarov, the wealthy founder of the Crocus shopping and development group, and his son Emin of failing “to formally commission this particular concert hall. As it became known, it is not listed as a properly designed capital construction object on the cadastral map of the Federal Register. Apparently, the amount of bribes needed to receive such a dangerous object exceeded all reasonable limits, and for Agalarov, taking into account the above-mentioned monstrous violations of standards, it was cheaper to extend the status of a building under construction than to put it into operation.”

Bastrykin has announced “the investigation is checking the possibility of violation of safety requirements and the fire extinguishing system in the Crocus City Hall concert hall. For this purpose, remote controls, electronic components and control devices for the fire protection system of the concert hall were seized. They are aimed at researching and extracting information about the operating mode of fire safety systems at the time of the terrorist attack. The contents of the fire protection system server are being studied with the participation of experts. To establish the operability and timely operation of all fire safety systems, a fire technical examination has been appointed.”

Emin Agalarov has issued a press statement claiming he arrived shortly after the gunmen had left. He said he “entered the building 40 minutes after the first shots were fired. He noted that the fire safety system was working and the doors were unlocked…The sprinkler fire extinguishing system was also operating normally. The building collapsed only six hours after the start of the terrible fire. Some rooms remained intact and did not burn down.”

“If we focus too hard on the minute details which are being patched together, this might clear up some details of assault,” comments a retired senior intelligence source in a position to know, “we might learn something more but not the fundamentals. These [the four shooters] are no ISIS-K. . The harder New York Times, BBC and The Guardian try to prove they are, the less we have to believe it. They are no jihadists. Just murderers. Mercenaries brought in a month ago.

They are not suicide killers. There are no reports of this ISIS outfit operating away from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Certainly not in Tajikistan. However there are mercenaries at a dime a dozen there who have fought all over. Including in ISIS.”

“At Ukraine entry, they would certainly have been killed, removing all the evidence. The investigation will show they were hired, paid for. A Tajikistan blogger news service reported raids in [Tajik] villages, but then removed it. I am sure their families and friends will be picked up and all connections to jihadists or contractors will be established. They are not migrants, do not speak Russian, and thus cannot claim any ethnic discrimination vendetta [against Russians].”

President Putin claimed in his meeting with the security services on Monday: “We know that the crime was perpetrated by radical Islamists. The Islamic world itself has been fighting this ideology for centuries. But we are also seeing how the United States is using different channels to try and convince its satellites and other countries of the world that, according to its intelligence, there is supposedly no sign of Kiev’s involvement in the Moscow terrorist attack, that the deadly terrorist attack was perpetrated by followers of Islam, members of ISIS, an organisation banned in Russia. We know whose hands were used to commit this atrocity against Russia and its people. We want to know who ordered it.”

What Putin meant by “radical Islamists” is unclear; the public evidence of the four individuals who have been charged has yet to confirm a record of their religiosity or any ideological conviction.



The officials at the Kremlin meeting on Monday: Prosecutor-General Igor Krasnov, Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office Anton Vaino, First Deputy Chief of the Presidential Executive Office Sergei Kiriyenko, Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova, Presidential aide Maxim Oreshkin, Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev, Emergencies Minister Alexander Kurenkov, Minister of Labour and Social Protection Anton Kotyakov, Healthcare Minister Mikhail Murashko, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Director of the Federal Security Service Alexander Bortnikov, Commander of the National Guard Troops Viktor Zolotov, Chairman of the Investigative Committee Alexander Bastrykin, Moscow Region Governor Andrei Vorobiev, and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin. Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/

For the time being, the only evidence connecting the four shooters to the Ukraine is the direction they were taking when their vehicle was stopped by the security forces. In a shootout the car overturned, and three of the gunmen fled into the forest beside the road, leaving one man injured in the car.

The head of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, Alexander Khinshtein, is the source for press reporting on the site of the interception. That was on Highway E101 about seven kilometres south of the P-120 intersection east of Bryansk city. From Bastrykin’s report, and from an award ceremony in Bryansk on Monday for the forces who made the capture – Federal Security Service (FSB), Interior Ministry, National Guard, and border forces of the Defense Ministry — the getaway was being tracked for some time before it reached the P-120 intersection. At that point, if the four men planned to head for Belarus, they would have turned right, followed the south circular road around Bryansk, and then turned left on to the A-240 towards the Belarus border, about 100 kms to the southwest.

Instead, the men drove due south and on the highway near Khatsun, they were about 100 kms from the Ukraine border. There have been reports they were expecting to make a rendezvous with accomplices they believed would guide them to safety over the Ukraine border, and to payday. Or, as Moscow sources speculate, to their execution by the Ukrainians.



Above: Google map of the roads and villages, including Khatsun, east of Bryansk city. Below: the view in daylight of the point on Highway E-101 where the gunmen were intercepted about five minutes after they passed the Belarus turnoff, confirming to the security forces tracking the car that they were heading to the Ukraine.

Speculation, however, including analysis of the cui bono, who gains type, the sequence of statements from Washington, and the history of association between the US, British and Ukrainian secret services and Tajik mercenaries, creates a balance of probabilities, but not an explanation beyond reasonable doubt.

“Of course, we must also answer the question of why the terrorists, after committing their crime, attempted to flee specifically to Ukraine,” the president said at his meeting with security officials on Monday. “Who was waiting for them there? It is clear that those supporting the Kiev regime do not wish to be implicated in acts of terrorism and be seen as sponsors of terrorism. But there are indeed numerous questions.”

Public comments to reporters on Tuesday by the FSB chief Alexander Bortnikov and Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev have answered with emphasis on the Ukrainians, backed by the US and UK.


Source: https://t.me/s/boris_rozhin March 26 – 15:34.

Boris Rozhin (Colonel Cassad) has followed their remarks with a detailed statement of the history of the intelligence service operations before the Crocus attack, and a circumstantial detail of Ukrainian border drone operations in the area and on the night the getaway car was headed through Bryansk region. Click to read – March 26, Min 22: 23.

What is evident so far, including from the line of Tajik accomplices now making formal appearances in a Moscow court, is the absence of ideology or religiosity of the radical Islamic type; and ignorance of where their orders and money were coming from, and why. This non-evidence points to the Ukraine as strongly as the road the four shooters were taking when they were caught.

Their subsequent demeanour in brief videoclips after capture, in hospital, and in court confirms what the military blogger Boris Rozhin calls “dumb hysteria…behaviour [that is] typical in a situation where the actions of terrorists do not have a deep ideological basis. This is the case of the Crocus gunmen, where the sole motivation is only money. Already in the moment of flight, the criminals realized what they had committed and, since the terrorist attack was not supported by ideology, the militants were seized with animal fear for their own lives. Therefore, during the interrogation, they are ready to tell everything, cry and so on, just to stay alive.”

The Russian intelligence agency investigations now under way, according to Krutikov, are tracing the “Telegram accounts through which the terrorists received instructions, including during their departure from the crime scene. Most likely, it is this branch which directly links the investigation with the Ukrainian direction due to the indication of a specific square at the border crossing.”

The public recriminations against the Agalarov family are not supported by Alexander Kurenkov, the Emergencies Minister, who told the Kremlin meeting on Monday in a brief, ambiguous report: “The building was equipped with an automatic fire alarm system. This system responded to the fire as expected. There was also a set of four robotized fire-fighting hoses and a software control system, which worked in conjunction with other fire protection systems. They were activated during the terrorist attack, but the arson involved the use of flammable substances. According to experts, the system failed to extinguish the fire due to its wide spread. This is what I wanted to say. We managed to totally extinguish the fire on wall panels, given the materials they were made of, only at 6.40 pm today [March 25]. The search and rescue operations continue. They are expected to be completed by 5 pm tomorrow [March 26]. This concludes my report.”

An Emergencies Ministry (MChS) expert has released data indicating the fire covered 12,900 square metres and more than 900 cubic metres of collapsed structures were removed. In the videoclip the roofless exterior wall can be seen, and the destruction of the inner auditorium.


Source: https://www.kommersant.ru

A local fire brigade source comments: “this was a Category-5 fire — Class 5 is an extreme fire hazard — and the services did an extraordinarily professional job to contain and extinguish a fire of such intensity.” He said the roof “may have collapsed between 2:30 am and 3:30 am.” This corroborates Emin Agalarov’s report of the timing.

The fire expert explained: “If lots of fuel was spilled in the auditorium among the chairs with synthetic fabric and plastic elements, then even low-inflammable things could start burning. They are resistant to high temperatures, but not to extremely high ones. In this case the sprinkler system can be useless.”

The Moscow region governor, Andrei Vorobiev (Vorobyov), was at the site half an hour after the gang had left. “An operational headquarters has been established. All the details will come later.” At 10:39 on Saturday evening [March 23] he reported by video that the roof was still ablaze and that firefighters were pouring water on it from extension ladders.


Governor Vorobiev is at lower left. Source: https://t.me/vorobiev_live/6164

Six hours later, at 04:43, Vorobiev posted a new video clip from inside the building in which he confirmed with firemen that the roof had fallen in. “The collapse of structures continues now,” Vorobiev reported. “There are still some pockets of fire, but most of the fire has been eliminated. Rescuers were able to enter the auditorium, where the temperature had been high for a long time and where, apparently, the epicentre of the fire was. The roof over the auditorium has collapsed, and the debris is still being dismantled.”


Source: https://t.me/vorobiev_live/6170

Delyagin was asked to say if he wished to correct his initial report and modify his allegations against the Agalarovs; he has not answered.

The political repercussions of the attack have been amplified in the Moscow media. But at a meeting of the Prosecutor-General’s Office Board on Tuesday, Putin played down his claim about “radical Islamists” of the day before. “As you know,” he said, “the perpetrators responsible for this mass murder have been arrested, and our law enforcement agencies are diligently investigating the circumstances surrounding this barbaric crime. They are piecing together the details of the attack, determining the roles and culpability of each individual involved, and analyzing the findings provided by criminalists and experts. The Federal Security Service [FSB], alongside other intelligence services, is actively addressing pertinent issues in coordination with the National Anti-Terrorism Committee.”

The president added: “I trust that the prosecutors, within the scope of their authority, will ensure that justice is served when charging the accused and during the legal proceedings.” This appears to be a response to western media reports that the four gunmen were beaten up and tortured after their capture.

Prosecutor-General Igor Krasnov said to Putin: “These atrocities have a common goal – to intimidate people, to destroy the unity of our people. Their performers, customers and curators will inevitably be punished. That is why the most important task for Russia remains to achieve the goals of a special military operation.” Putin had said the same thing the day before: “Their goal, as I mentioned, is to sow panic in our society while demonstrating to their own people that not all hope is lost for the Kiev regime. All they need to do is follow the orders of their Western patrons, fight until the last Ukrainian, obey Washington’s commands, endorse the new mobilization law, and form something resembling a new version of the Hitler Youth. To comply with all of this, they will seek new weapons and additional funds, much of which will likely be embezzled and, as is customary in Ukraine today, put into their own pockets.”

As more time has elapsed and the interrogations of the attack group have produced no new official evidence, the Russian media have been publishing angry calls to restrict migration into Russia, both legal and illegal; attacks on ethnic communities like the Tajiks; and on the corruption of Russian officials providing them with entry, residence, and work permits. The Kremlin has responded with a brief communiqué of a telephone call between Putin and the Tajikistan President Emomali Rahmon: “During the conversation, Vladimir Putin and Emomali Rahmon noted that the security services of Russia and Tajikistan were working closely together to counter terrorism and that they would build up their cooperation.”

Konstantin Malofeev (Malofeyev), owner of the Tsargrad media group in Moscow, has published several policy calls under the slogan, “the internal threat has turned out to be no less serious than the external one”. “There should be no xenophobia towards Ukrainians, Jews, and Muslims,” according to Malofeev. “We are a multinational country. That’s the only reason she became an Empire. Because she is not only strong, but also kind. And xenophobia is the lot of the weak. The strong are not afraid. But a competent migration policy, of course, must be carried out. There should be no migration enclaves. There should be no diasporas which try to replace the government, whom the government consults and fears. Members of these diasporas should not be above the law. If they come to Russia, then the main thing for them should be the law.”

“Imagine what three million ‘hardworking’ migrants would do in Moscow, for example, if they all came out at once… It’s not a bell anymore – it’s a bell ringing, a rumble. It’s time to take up migration legislation. Only in this case will we be able to protect ourselves. Fortunately, I have evidence that the people in power who are responsible for migration have heard this ringing. I hope this will affect our streets and our safety. I hope that we will no longer have to catch Tajiks a hundred kilometres from the Ukrainian border who cannot speak Russian, but at the same time live freely in Russia.”


Home page of Tsargrad illustrated with a collage of armed Tajik fighters appearing to pose in front of the Kremlin; Konstantin Malofeev is pictured at upper right. For more on how Malofeev made his first fortune, click to read this and the archive.

Putin responded swiftly in his speech to prosecutors on Tuesday; the State Duma followed. “[Prosecutors should] consider implementing a system of additional preventive and anti-crime measures,” the president said, “including supervision of compliance with migration legislation. The situation in this area, which is very important and of great concern to millions of people, must be closely monitored.” The same day, Vyacheslav Volodin, the Duma Speaker, told a parliamentary session that he is appointing a multi-party working group “that will analyze the entire range of legislation that is relevant to the challenges of today, and legislation in the field of migration.”

Pro-US reporters in Moscow reverse the direction of the crackdown Malofeev and his supporters advocate. “Russians will likely face the security crackdown that, ironically [sic], they have largely avoided over two years of war in Ukraine. That would mean a further tightening of the screws on speech and make it much harder to use public transportation or gather in large groups. Communities of migrant workers will likely face a real crackdown… the tactics once adopted to deal with terrorists became quickly accepted as a new norm to treat political dissent. Thus the torture the Russian security services used against four suspects might be used against all sort of people in the country. This is the most direct consequence of the attack.”

Malofeev and the Tsargrad group are not alone in saying the Crocus City Hall attack should lead to intensification of the military operations in the Ukraine. “They struck at us, at our civilians, moreover, in the very center of our Homeland. This is an act of war. It needs to be answered as we have said many times. It must finally be answered with the massive real use of weapons that will allow us to win this war. We must give the civilian population [in the Ukraine] 48 hours to leave the cities and then strike with all our might. Then the war will end quickly, which means that the sponsorship of terrorist attacks will stop. No Americans and British, without the Armed Forces of Ukraine, without Kiev, without the current war, will sponsor terrorist attacks on the territory of Russia.”

For the time being, there has been no impact of the Crocus attack and the Moscow media debate on the operational or strategic plans under way in the Ukraine. The intensification of the General Staff’s offensive along the line of contact in the Donbass; in the electric war against Kharkov and other cities east of the Dnieper River; and in the missile attacks on targets from Kiev to Lvov – reported here — commenced before the Moscow events; they are continuing as planned.

“Those in political command who have been favouring an outcome to the war that falls short of regime change in Kiev and extension of demilitarization to the Polish border,” observes a Moscow political source, “have lost their voice since Saturday night.”



When Mr. Patrushev...]/b]

... says something, it means he has huge reasons to do so, unlike it is the case with spokespersons circus in the West who simply lie to your face. Same goes for Mr. Bortnikov--the Director of FSB.

МОСКВА, 26 мар — РИА Новости. Показания задержанных по делу о теракте в "Крокус Сити Холле" подтверждают украинский след, заявил директор ФСБ Александр Бортников журналисту Павлу Зарубину, который выложил видео в Telegram-канале."Первичные данные, которые мы получили от задержанных, подтверждают это. Поэтому будем дальше дорабатывать информацию, которая должна нам показать — реально присутствие и участие украинской стороны или нет. Во всяком случае, пока есть основания говорить, что это именно так", — сказал руководитель спецслужбы.

Translation: MOSCOW, March 26 – RIA Novosti. The testimony of those detained in the case of the terrorist attack in Crocus City Hall confirms the Ukrainian trace, FSB Director Alexander Bortnikov told journalist Pavel Zarubin, who posted the video on the Telegram channel. “The primary data that we received from the detainees confirms this. Therefore, we will further refine it information that should show us whether the presence and participation of the Ukrainian side is real or not. In any case, for now there is reason to say that this is exactly the case,” said the head of the special service.

Bortnikov also pointed out the obvious "interest" of Western special services in Crocus-City atrocity. So, as you can see--404 and Budanov are already being dealt with, now it is the matter of establishing the main "customer". This may take some time but we already know the circle of suspects and they are not in 404. As I pointed out not for once, at this stage neither Russia as a state nor Russians as people give a flying fuck about what West thinks or says, only what it does. Russia reacts appropriately. As Mr. Medvedev said (in Russian)--it would be good for France to send a couple of regiments to Russia to be annihilated. This is your answer in regards to the "direct conflict" with NATO. Russia will kill anyone who enters 404. It is one thing when Petr Tolstoy says it, however important MP he is, totally another when the deputy chair of Russia's Security Council says so. Medvedev is NOT a "bad cop" in tandem with "good cop" Putin--he is a genuine hawk who hates the West viscerally. He has some reasons for that. So, for NATO it is the time to exhale and praise the Lord that Vladimir Putin won these elections. Medvedev may yet run in the future and, believe me, he will win. Meanwhile, for French troops, if they ever make it--Welcome to Hell.

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/03 ... ushev.html

*******

What are the Russians saying now about the organizers and implementers of the Crocus City Hall massacre?
March 26, 2024

Today’s edition of The New York Times tells us triumphantly that “President Vladimir Putin of Russia acknowledged for the first time that ‘radical Islamists’ had carried out the attack on a concert hall near Moscow…,” meaning that the Russians have accepted the American version of who was responsible. And yet, they noted, Putin was still ‘insisting that Ukraine could still have played a role,’ as if it was pure obstinacy on the part of the Russian president to justify a politically more convenient explanation leading to escalation of the war.

Meanwhile, doing its part to convey the narrative provided by Washington, The Financial Times front page tells us “How Ukraine war distracted Moscow from Isis-K threat: Russia’s security services have shifted focus away from Islamist terror.” This same line happens to be among the points made by Ukrainian president Zelensky in his first comments on the attack just hours after it occurred. Once again, I say, ‘hats off’ to the propaganda department in Washington for close coordination of what the general public reads and hears everywhere on planet Earth.

*****

Meanwhile, among Russia’s chattering classes there is a lot of speculation on who was really behind the concert hall attack and whether the terrorists were genuinely members of the Afghanistan-based Isis-K.

The premier talk show Evening with Vladimir Solovyov last night gave voice to these thoughts. Specialists on the Middle East and Islamic issues told us that the attack did not follow the usual pattern of Isis and other Muslim extremist groups. It was staged in the middle of Ramadan, which normally is not violated by the Jihadists, and also on a Friday, for a double measure of exceptionality. The attackers made no attempt to take hostages or to make political demands, which usually has been the case. They were only interested in killing as many innocent people as possible, for which they were being paid onto their bank cards. What could they do with such payments? They could send the money to their relatives in Tajikistan, where even the $5,000 ruble equivalent paid out would be useful. And they appeared not to be seeking martyrdom. The perpetrators sere keen on escaping, and the vector of their escape route was straight to Ukraine from which they were about 100 km distant when apprehended.

The assumption of the panelists speaking on the Solovyov show was that the escape path to Ukraine indicates Ukrainian involvement. What no one has said on television or elsewhere is what fate would have awaited the terrorists had they made it to Ukraine. Would it have enabled them to evade the clutches of the Russians or would they have been murdered upon arrival to silence them and show good faith to the international community on the part of Kiev?

I did not hear among the Solovyov panelists mention of Washington as the overall director of the attack.

Otherwise, discussion of the atrocity moved on to the questions of whether the death penalty should now be reintroduced in Russia and what to do to fix the obviously failed controls on immigration from Central Asia, a failure that is in large part blamed on corruption among the Russian law enforcers.

But let us not dwell on what Mr. Solovyov’s talk show promoted. Yesterday I read an essay by Dmitry Trenin on what the ongoing investigation into the perpetrators and paymasters of the Crocus City Hall atrocity may lead to. Considering who Trenin is and what he says, this article, which was published on RT, is worth our time.

See “The American explanation for the Moscow terror attack doesn’t add up. Russian foreign policy could change significantly, depending on the results of the investigation into the atrocity.”

For those who are not familiar with Trenin, allow me to explain that he is a leading Russian analyst and commentator, a member of all the most authoritative security and foreign affairs institutions in Moscow, with a background of high service in the Russian military going back to the 1990s and with more than a decade at the helm of the Carnegie Center Moscow, a U.S. sponsored think tank. Trenin left the Carnegie shortly after the start of the Special Military Operation and, in short order, the Carnegie Center was closed down. He has since then been making amends for his past coddling of anti-Putin Liberals, but always within the bounds of solid academic reasoning. In this respect, Trenin’s evolution since 24 February 2022 is very similar to that of the former director of The National Interest foundation (formerly The Nixon Center) in Washington, Dmitry Simes, who moved back to Moscow from the United States after the start of the SMO to defend Russian national interests as opposed to U.S. interests.

From the very title, it is clear that Trenin is directing attention to possible United States involvement in the atrocity. The fact that Washington was publicly identifying the terrorist group within minutes of the attack in damning. However, he holds open the possibility that Kiev ‘conceived, planned and organized’ the attack.

Trenin acknowledges that at this point ‘nothing is firmly established,’ but he insists that the conclusions ultimately reached can greatly impact on Russia’s conduct of the war with Ukraine. If it becomes clear, for example, that Kiev did it all, then it is assumed that President Zelensky gave it his approval. In this case, all prior guaranties by President Putin not to touch the Kiev leadership are withdrawn.

Kiev will be identified than as a terrorist state, which constitutes an inadmissible neighbor.

Moreover, establishing Kiev’s responsibility would necessarily implicate the United States as having had at a minimum advance knowledge and hence been complicity. Under these circumstances, says Trenin, we may now expect Russia to carry out strikes against airfields in NATO countries if they are used by the Ukrainian air force. We may expect Russia to annihilate any French expeditionary force. Andwe may expect a ‘head-on collision’ between Russia and NATO.

This is food for thought from a restrained and knowledgeable source. Is anyone in Washington, London or Brussels paying attention?

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/03/26/ ... -massacre/

******

Terror Attack in Moscow Is U.S./NATO’s Revenge for Losing its Proxy War Against Russia in Ukraine

Finian Cunningham

March 27, 2024

Not defeating Russia on the Ukrainian battlefield is forcing the Western imperialists to resort to terrorism and other dirty tricks which they know all too well.

The terrorist attack near Moscow on March 22 in which 140 people were killed by four gunmen was claimed by a radical Islamist group. But the bigger picture indicates the assault was organized by the United States and its NATO allies.

For a start, the suspects were caught while fleeing to Ukraine, which implicates the Ukrainian regime and its NATO sponsors as the masterminds behind the atrocity.

The Western governments and media have been quick (one might add, too quick) to lay the blame entirely on the Islamic State network based in Afghanistan. The shooters may have professed allegiance to this network. But that is a charade to divert attention from the real culprits – the United States, NATO, and the Ukrainian fascist regime.

In this interview, Bruce Gagnon discusses the long and sordid history of Western states deploying terror groups claiming Islamist tendencies as a proxy for their regime-change operations and other dirty wars. This is despite Western declared aims of “fighting terrorism”.

Gagnon says the terror attack near Moscow was motivated by revenge of the United States and its NATO allies against Russia over the loss of the proxy war in Ukraine. It cannot be overstated how disastrous that defeat is for the NATO axis.

He points out that the proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is only one part of a bigger, global confrontation by the U.S. for Western hegemony. Ukraine is the most immediate site of struggle. But it is only a battlefield on a global scale. What is going on is an existential struggle for the survival of the Western neocolonialist empire of U.S.-led capitalism against the emergence of a fairer, multipolar world order.

Defeating Russia in Ukraine is vital for the Western imperialists. Not defeating Russia on this battlefield is forcing the Western imperialists to resort to terrorism and other dirty tricks which they know all too well.

Gagnon notes that the building of a new NATO base in Romania on the Black Sea which will be the biggest base in Europe as well as the increasing U.S. militarization of the Korean Peninsula are important fronts in a global project of aggression and war by the United States and its imperialist partners towards Russia, China and any other perceived rival.

The increasing war footing by the United States and its Western partners is consistent with a fascist control of Western states, says Gagnon.

Bruce Gagnon is the coordinator for the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. He writes frequent updates on international politics on his site, Organizing Notes.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/ ... n-ukraine/

[blindpig]

West Desperately Deflects as Ukraine's ISIS Gambit Backfires

SIMPLICIUS THE THINKER
MAR 27, 2024

Since the Krokus attacks occurred, the West has been in utter overdrive to pin the blame on ISIS while absolving Ukraine from any responsibility. The heavy-handed desperation with which they’ve gone to lengths in doing this reveals the game and tells us everything we need to know about the nature of the attacks.



(Video at link.)

Listen to Grant Shapps at the end of the video above, whose mask slips when he openly reveals: “We must resist Putin’s effort to link ISIS to Ukraine.”

But before we go on, let’s remember how almost every previous terrorist attack that was denied by Ukraine ended up being quietly admitted later.



Same goes for Nord Stream and many others. So why this pearl clutching by the Western commentariat that Ukraine would never resort to killing civilians?

After all, just yesterday Ukraine’s head of the SBU Vasyl Malyuk went on a long confession spree, “unofficially” admitting Ukraine’s responsibility for killing Ilia Kiva, Vladlen Tatarsky, and others.

(Video at link.)

And who can forget Ukraine’s usage of an unwitting civilian ‘suicide bomber’ in their terror attack on the Kerch Bridge? By the way, the same Malyuk above also just admitted that the Kerch Bridge is no longer even used for military purposes:



https://english.nv.ua/nation/russia-not ... 04271.html

Ukraine could “potentially” destroy Russia’s illegally constructed Crimean Bridge in Kerch, although it’s not currently used to bring weapons and ammunition into occupied Crimea, head of Ukraine’s SBU security service Lt. Gen. Vasyl Malyuk said in an interview with Ukrainian broadcaster ICTV on March 25.

That alone exposes so much about Ukraine and its perverted strategy to somehow win the war by ‘cornering’ Russia with the destruction of the bridge. They now admit the bridge plays no military role for Russian forces, so why would destroying it have any effect whatsoever on Russia’s ability to hold Crimea? It’s clear that the bridge as sacred target is only there for the typical PR purposes, not real victory.

But getting back.

The U.S. and friends really, really, really want you to know it wasn’t Ukraine who did the Moscow attacks, it was “ISIS”. Anyone who has even a functionally adult understanding of how the world works will innately comprehend that Ukraine is behind the attack. Of course, it’s possible it was one of its sponsors, the CIA or MI6—but the fact that the CIA claimed to have warned Russia of an impending terror action seems to imply to me that Ukraine had gone rogue, and even the U.S. was not standing with their gravely overreaching gambits.

It was just made known that the U.S. ‘warned’ Ukraine to stop provoking Russia by striking its energy facilities, remember? The U.S. has clearly diverged with its little pitbull on how to proceed further, as Biden’s admin is becoming averse to the increasing risks of poking the nuclear Bear.

Thus, it becomes quite plausible that the CIA attempted to warn Russia as a potentially indirect way of putting Ukraine off from the plan at the final hour. But desperate, bloodthirsty Zelensky will stop at nothing to appease his more occult masters, who operate through the unseen folds of the greater ‘U.S.’ apparatus.

Here’s one indepth theory as to how it likely really happened:

According to the "subjective data" available to me, terrorists from among the citizens of Tajikistan fell under religious lessons conducted on the Internet (watch the video), which were the ideological instructions of the "Islamic State of Valayat Khorosan (IGVC)".

Also, as I know, at least one of them was in a chat room called "Rahnamo ba Khuroson" (Rohnamo ba Khuroson).

A citizen of Tajikistan, Salmon Khurosoni, was (and is) curating religious processing groups. It was Salmon Khurosoni who made the primary recruitment approach to Islamic terrorists.

There is also information in certain circles that Khurosoni is an intermediate link between the Islamic State of Khorosan Wilayat (IGVC) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States.

Despite the fact that the terrorists of the Islamic State do not promise financial rewards for their terrorist attacks, but promise eternal Paradise ... nevertheless, with the assistance of Salmon Khorosani, an amount of 500,000 rubles was approved, which was supposed to cover the costs of the attack.

After that, the tasks and instructions in Turkey were already set by an emissary-mediator, who, presumably, is a staff member of a foreign special service (resident). And they, in turn, sent bayats (the oath of ISIS) to the same Salmon Khurosoni.

Also, Ukraine was not the last link in their withdrawal plan. Another unidentified emissary of foreign intelligence, who is in Ukraine, was supposed to send them directly to Turkey, and then to Afghanistan.

It is in Afghanistan that the alleged ideological (namely ideological, I'm not talking about the customer) leader of the terrorist attack in Moscow, Salmon Khurosoni, is located.

In fact, we see the apotheosis of the development of hybrid terrorism, namely brand franchising – one side aiming to strike at the other, resorts to the help of a third. Including on the basis when the performer is recruited under the third flag, that is, he thinks that he is fulfilling one will, when in reality there is another behind it.

Read the final bolded part again.

This is how modern hybrid warfare works. Each attack is different: there are some where Ukraine wants to have its footprint or responsibility publicly known as a direct message to Russia, as well as morale-boosting effort for its own audience. But there is another class of attack whose purpose is to destabilize Russia from the inside without acknowledging Ukraine’s fingerprints on the action.

In fact, to know Ukraine did it in this case would be to defeat the whole point: the entire purpose of this attack was to engineer the narrative that “Putin’s regime” is generating such global discontent that it’s starting to boomerang on its own people, with the aim being to mobilize discord within society against the Kremlin. Were people to know Ukraine was behind it, it would totally reverse the effect, making Ukraine the lightning rod for the devastating terror attack and galvanizing Russians even more against their enemy.



In this case, it was absolutely paramount that Ukraine had to utilize the services of a third party—so they hired some patsies through an intermediary with a convenient ‘ISIS’ link. But the timing is too ludicrous to believe—it’s akin to the CIA’s ‘best hits’, like the farfetched gas attack Assad carried out just when he had broken the enemy’s back and was winning the war. It’s utterly unbelievable that just as Russia had dealt some unprecedented blows to Ukraine, including a massively crippling air attack, and just as MSM outlets were sputtering out reams of devastating headlines about Ukraine’s impending collapse, ISIS just happens to decide to make a totally uncharacteristic attack in Moscow? You have to be infantilely credulous to believe such improbable coincidences.

There are a few simple facts:

1. First and the most important, these mercenaries did not declare ISIS goals and its ideology in any way during the action. They did not make any demands. They did not voice any statements.

2. They followed a well-planned timing that allowed them to leave the scene of the crime before the Special Forces arrived. Then they tried to run away to Ukraine. Any ideological self-sacrifice was out of the question.

3. They received money for the attack. Half of the amount was given to them before the terrorist attack, the other half is to be received after the evacuation.

4. They did not commit suicide while being detained. They did not even try to do it. They just ran like rats. They did not even try to fight. They were all captured alive.

And another expert opinion.

That’s not even to mention that the attackers were obviously caught heading to Ukraine, a fact now established with precise geolocation from on the ground videos:



You’ll note that at Bryansk there’s a fork where you can go several ways: they specifically chose the southern route into Ukraine’s Sumy region.

And an important clarification: right now there’s Ukrainian propaganda going around that today Lukashenko “disproved the Kremlin narrative” by pointing out that the terrorists first attempted to go into Belarus, but Belarusian forces blocked them, forcing them to choose Ukraine as a second option.

This is a total lie.

I’ve now studied Lukashenko’s exact statement, and he is in fact responding to a reporter who asked: “Is it possible they could have gone into Belarus?”

What he says is basically, no because we put up forces and either way they would be forced to go elsewhere. In short, he’s responding to a hypothetical, that even if they had wanted to come into Belarus, they would not be able to—but he by no means stated they definitively were coming to Belarus. This is a deliberate mischaracterization by Ukrainian propagandists.

In fact, during wartime you can imagine the border is impossible to cross without very special accommodations, which the terrorists clearly had from their Ukrainian friends. That’s not to mention that “ISIS” is incapable of supplying a stash of weapons into Russia for the patsies to have used—only Ukrainian SBU leads would have provided that weaponry from Ukraine deep inside Russia.

<snip>

Some analysts have even speculated that Putin’s choice of ambiguous language is a hidden signal to the West: he knows precisely who did it and can reveal it at any moment, but—he’s giving the West a chance to make favorable concessions and gestures of reconciliation, to some extent.

Pay attention:

Putin’s performance yesterday demonstrates that there is a behind-the-scenes auction. Pay attention to ambiguous language:

- We know that the attack was committed by the hands of radical Islamists, we are interested in the customer;

- We need to get answers to a number of questions, did the radical Islamists really decide to strike at Russia;

- It is absolutely clear that the terrible crime in « Crocus » — is an action of intimidation, the question arises to whom it is beneficial.

Add here today's statement by Peskov that Russia is open for dialogue with the United States, but all problems must be discussed in a comprehensive manner, the Kremlin said.

Peskov is clearly hinting at a return to strategic dialogue.

That is, there is still a chance that the problem of jihadists can become a common denominator for the start of negotiations. This opens up opportunities for a return to discuss Erdogan's proposals for strategic stability.

If this does not happen with a high degree of probability, blows to bridges across the Dnieper (including in Kiev) and new attempts to achieve blackout as now will be added to strikes on energy and gas storage in Kharkov.

In short: “We’re willing to pretend this was ISIS if you sit back at the table and make some amends while working toward common goals. But if you want to play hard ball, we’ll “find” blame for Ukraine and then up the temperature severely on them, by way of massive infrastructure strikes and military escalations.”

Another possibility:

#hearings
Judging by the analysis of the events of the last three weeks, someone specifically provokes an increase in temperature in the Ukrainian crisis.

From this follows:
1. Events will peak for two weeks and return to normal again.
2. The Ukrainian crisis is waiting for maximum intensity, tragedies will be massive, and constant.

Be careful. The denouement is very close…

The source explains that the Ukrainian crisis has reached a dead end, where directors need a new increase for two things.
1. Knock out money to further finance the crisis.
2. Reset the Ukrainian crisis until the Taiwanese case begins.

We are watching…

Some even believe Putin could issue an ultimatum to Ukraine: leave all Donbass territories or hell will be unleashed on all the previously off-limits targets—depending on what the ‘answer’ from the West on the backdoor Krokus parley will be:

One source from the Russian President’s entourage reported information that Vladimir Putin is considering a harsh ultimatum to Ukraine. The people demand victory and the President is ready for tough decisions.

In order to complete the Northern Military District and save as many lives of our soldiers as possible, and also to avoid a new mobilization, Vladimir Putin is considering the option of a harsh ultimatum to Ukraine. Putin will demand the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Russian territory (new regions) and the voluntary surrender of Kharkov, Nikolaev and Odessa. In case of refusal, Moscow will declare real war on Kyiv within 24 hours. After which, within 72 hours, Kyiv, Lviv, Dnieper, Poltava, Ternopil and Vinnitsa will be destroyed. The rest of Ukraine will be subject to massive missile and bomb attacks. Tu-22M3 bombers using FAB-5000 bombs will destroy all bridges across the Dnieper, civilian airports, and all railway infrastructure. The center of Kyiv, all administrative buildings and bunkers will be destroyed by "Daggers". All power station substations will be destroyed by a single missile and bomb attack from Tu-95ms bombers.

The special forces of the Russian Armed Forces in Kyiv will detain the entire top leadership of Ukraine, and if impossible, liquidate them on the spot.

And this is just the beginning! In 48 hours the climax will begin.

Take the above with a Ropucha-class cargo of salt, but such things are at least remotely possible given the scope of the catastrophe that occurred, which I believe now ranks third in post-Soviet tragedies—in terms of number of victims—after the Beslan attack and Moscow apartment bombings of ‘99, even surpassing the Moscow Theater attack of 2002 casualties.

(More at Link.)

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/wes ... s-ukraines

******

Yesterday’s remarkable statements to journalists by Alexander Bortnikov, director of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB)

To the uninitiated, I explain first that the FSB is the successor organization to the Soviet Union’s well-known and much feared KGB. However, the FSB today might be better compared with the FBI in the United States. It deals with domestic criminality of all kinds and with threats to Russian civilians such as terrorism. The agency and its head are rarely in the news.

In this respect, the FSB is less visible both at home and abroad than the Foreign Intelligence Service headed by Sergei Naryshkin, a state figure who spent five years of this millennium as chairman of the State Duma, Russia’s lower house of the legislature, and also three years as head of the Presidential Administration. In both positions Naryshkin was very often seen on television performing his duties.

By contrast, Bortnikov spent the past 15 years in his FSB offices out of sight. However, the spectacular attack on the Crocus City Hall concert venue has propelled him to center stage and yesterday he met with the Russian state television journalist Pavel Zarubin for an interview and then allowed himself to be questioned further by a gaggle of other journalists on his way out along a corridor. This spontaneous Q&A was later broadcast on the television news. What Bortnikov had to say was extraordinary and bears directly on whether you and I should now be looking for bomb shelters. Regrettably you will not find any of it in the lead stories of today’s mainstream media. The Financial Times, for example, features an account of Xi’s meeting with CEOs of American businesses to mend ties: interesting, but not very relevant if we are at the cusp of WWIII.

*****

Bortnikov is by definition a member of Vladimir Putin’s inner circle of advisors. He, Putin and Naryshkin are all roughly the same age. At 72, Bortnikov is just several years older.

I was struck in particular by his poise and prudent, carefully weighed choice of words while setting out where the investigation is heading with transparency and a ‘let the chips fall where they may’ unaffected demeanor.

The journalists were all probing the question of who stood behind the terror attack. Bortnikov told them…and us: standing behind the terror act committed by Islamist extremists are the United States, Great Britain and Ukraine.

Bortnikov said that the preliminary findings indicate that the four perpetrators of the slaughter were headed by car to the border with Ukraine where they were awaited on the other side. He very calmly explained that the involvement of foreign powers is being clarified and that he will say nothing out of pure emotion now but will wait for the facts to be solidly collected before being presented.

Nonetheless, it was entirely newsworthy that he named the United States, Great Britain and Ukraine as the likely puppet masters of the terror act. Let us remember that following the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines, the most significant attack on critical civilian infrastructure globally in the last 50 years, Russian officials did not point the finger directly at any country. There was innuendo but no direct accusations such as we heard from Bortnikov yesterday.

****

Meanwhile, quite apart from Mr. Bortnikov’s chat with journalists, a lot of new elements to the terror attack at Crocus City Hall were posted yesterday on the Russian state television news and analysis program Sixty Minutes. In particular, we learned that in the last days of February and first couple of days of March two of the four attackers were in Istanbul. The departure and arrival of one at a Moscow airport was recorded on video. We were told which hotels they stayed in, and the selfies and other photos taken by one in Istanbul were put up on the screen. It is still not clear with whom they met in Turkey. However, the timing itself is very important, because the point was made that they returned to Moscow to carry out a terror attack on 8 March, International Women’s Day, a sacred date on the Russian calendar. Had they done so on that day, the effect would have been catastrophic for the presidential elections in Russia one week later.

However, per Sixty Minutes, it was determined that Russian state security on 8 March was too tight for the terrorist mission to succeed and the United States decided to pull the plug on that operation. Note that this is approximately the time when Victoria Nuland tendered her resignation at the State Department (5 March). The possible causal link here surely deserves attention by my peers in the U.S. ‘dissident’ community.

In any case, the scenario which was explored later in the day on the Evening with Vladimir Solovyov talk show is that the Ukrainians decided to proceed with the terror attack a week after the Russian presidential elections, when it lost most of its rationale. They did so over the objections of Washington.

*****

From time to time, readers ask why I pay attention to talk shows like Vladimir Solovyov’s. These skeptics tend to ignore that Solovyov invites not just the usual irresponsible academics and journalists who can amuse the public but also some very serious statesmen who are close to the center of power in Russia and exert influence on the conduct of foreign and domestic policy, including in particular committee chairmen and other key personalities from the State Duma.

So it was last night when we heard from a member of the Committee on Relations with the Commonwealth of Independent States (Former Soviet Union). With reference to the never ending terror attacks on civilians in the Russian border region of Belgorod coming from nearby Kharkiv (Ukraine), he said it is time to raze Kharkov to the ground: issue a warning to the population to get in their cars and head West, then blow it all to bits. Kharkiv is, by the way, Ukraine’s second most populous city after Kiev.

In general, the mood of panelists and of the host Solovyov himself is now changing in a cardinal manner: Ukraine is seen as an enemy state and the sooner it is finished off the better. There was talk last night on the need for missile strikes to flatten the presidential palace in Kiev along with all military and other decision making government centers in the capital.

As we have observed repeatedly over the past two years. President Putin has been a voice for moderation and restraint, resisting actions that might precipitate WWIII. That is clearly coming to an end when his own FSB director names the United States and the UK as planners of the biggest terror attack in Russia in 20 years.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/03/27/ ... rvice-fsb/

******
.
Lukashenko’s Poor Wording Undermined His Point But He Never Intended To Contradict Putin



ANDREW KORYBKO
MAR 27, 2024

To be fair, Lukashenko was ad-libbing and not reading from a prepared statement, which explains his poor wording and the reason why the Mainstream Media could spin his words about Belarus’ robust border security the way that they did.

The Mainstream Media is having a ball after what Belarusian President Lukashenko said about the Crocus terrorists’ escape from Moscow. He meant to discredit false claims that they intended to hide out in his country, but his poor wording undermined his point by appearing to contradict what his Russian counterpart claimed about them attempting to flee to Ukraine. What follows are his exact words as reported by publicly financed BelTA, which will then be analyzed to clarify exact what he meant:

“They could not enter Belarus. Their handlers (we have suspicions about some of them, I’ll call Putin and share my suspicions) knew that it would be a very bad idea to try to enter Belarus, because Belarus immediately reinforced security measures, just like a part of the oblast in Russia. In the very first minutes, I received a report from the KGB chief (he is involved in anti-terrorist activities).

We put our units on combat alert, including forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Checkpoints were set up on roads, including on roads connecting Belarus with Russia; the forces of the KGB, the State Border Committee, and some military units were deployed. That’s why there was no chance they could enter Belarus. They realized it. So they took a turn and headed to the Ukraine-Russia border.”

The first thing that he did was reaffirm that it would have been impossible for the terrorists to flee from Russia to Belarus, which he explained on the basis that their unnamed handlers – who FSB chief Alexander Bortnikov believes might be the US, UK, and Ukraine – knew better than to attempt that. What Lukashenko didn’t explain was how they would have known about Belarus’ robust border security efforts in the immediate aftermath of the attack, but that arguably would have been taken for granted.

After all, it’s standard protocol for Belarus to ramp up border security right after a terrorist attack in Russia, which it did following Darya Dugina’s and Vladlen Tatarsky’s assassinations out of an abundance of caution in case the perpetrators sought to exploit those two’s practically borderless Union State ties. The Crocus terrorists’ handlers would have therefore assumed that the same procedures would be implemented after the attack that they were planning and thus wouldn’t have sent their proxies there.

As for those fleeing terrorists, they couldn’t have seen the aforesaid procedures in place since they hadn’t crossed into Belarus, which is why it’s inadvertently misleading to state that “they took a turn and headed to the Ukraine-Russia border” instead. Apropos of the symmetrical procedures implemented on the Russian side of the border, those forces either helped intercept the terrorists or were still beyond the range that they traveled since it’s unrealistic to imagine that they saw them but didn’t react.

Lukashenko’s remark about how “They realized” how Belarus reinforced its border therefore refers to their unnamed handlers, not the fleeing terrorists, with the part about the latter “[taking] a turn” being his way of saying that they were told to go directly to Ukraine instead of trying to cross via Belarus. To be fair, Lukashenko was ad-libbing and not reading from a prepared statement, which explains his poor wording and the reason why the Mainstream Media could spin his words the way that they did.

Upon analyzing the official transcript of his remarks, it’s clear that he only wanted to boast about Belarus’ robust border security in response to false claims that the terrorists wanted to flee there, whether to hide out indefinitely or before crossing into Ukraine. His off-the-cuff comments provided fodder for anti-Russian propagandists to stir trouble between him and President Putin, but this latest divide-and-rule provocation will fail since the Russian leader knows what he meant to convey.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/lukashen ... undermined

******

The prosecutor's office returned 15 strategic enterprises of the military-industrial complex to state ownership
March 27, 12:14



An interesting interview with Prosecutor General Krasnov. It turns out that since last year, the Prosecutor's Office has already returned 15 illegally privatized strategic enterprises in the military-industrial complex to state ownership.
As we see, it is quite possible and even necessary to cancel illegal privatization. And this should apply not only to the military-industrial complex, where the roast rooster has already pecked and the most drastic measures are required.

The prosecutor's office returned 15 strategic enterprises of the military-industrial complex to state ownership

— You regularly instruct your subordinates to maintain law and order in the North Military District zone, to defend the interests of the participants and veterans of the special operation. What has already been done?

— Today in my report I highlighted this topic as one of the most important. He also spoke about the decisions taken regarding the protection of the social rights of military personnel, volunteers and other categories of citizens. For example, on our initiative, the rules have been changed and the procedure for calculating bonuses for participation in the SVO has been simplified. Based on our claims, the courts have made hundreds of decisions to establish legal facts that are extremely important for the payment of benefits and the provision of other forms of support. All prosecutors, as you rightly said, are focused on providing full support to SVO participants and their family members.

— After the start of the SVO, a number of countries, especially in the European Union, actually curtailed international legal cooperation with Russia. It turns out that now if criminals flee abroad, they will not have any problems?

— What problems will citizens of countries whose authorities, guided by political motives, retain murderers, smugglers, rapists, swindlers and other people accused of committing crimes will have? It is obvious that these states have not become safer.
Well, regarding those who hope to escape from punishment abroad, I will say one thing: many countries have remained committed to legal acts in the field of extradition of criminals and are guided not by political motives, but by international conventions and legal grounds. It was they who extradited more than 150 people last year at our requests.

— In 2022, the Prosecutor General’s Office reported that, based on its materials, the FSB opened a criminal case for an act of international terrorism in connection with damage to the Nord Stream branches. Are there any results in the investigation?

- You said it very correctly. This is a terrorist attack, not sabotage, as the West is trying to tell us. The authorities of the country (Sweden - Kommersant), which has not ensured an effective investigation and brought the perpetrators to justice, are grossly violating one of the UN conventions. It is not only international obligations that have been violated. The rights of citizens to a favorable natural environment have suffered, and significant economic damage has been caused to business. It turns out that no one cares about it. This is precisely the question of the quality of international cooperation. Everyone knows perfectly well who did it. However, our so-called partners are turning themselves inside out to hide the circumstances of the Nord Stream explosion. Since October 2022, we have sent 15 requests for legal assistance to the competent authorities of Germany, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland and Sweden: for the provision of materials for interrogating witnesses, for the conduct of procedural actions, and for the creation of joint investigative teams. However, information is provided only on one request - from the Danish side. And that one is absolutely formal. The decision of these countries to refuse to cooperate with us primarily indicates that they did not conduct a real investigation. The fear of publishing the names of the perpetrators, whose traces undoubtedly lead overseas, is higher than national interests for them. But that's on their conscience. They are also afraid of being sued for damages from the destruction of our infrastructure. With all this, I continue to call on my foreign colleagues to jointly fight terrorism, because it is a common evil. But our investigation is moving forward. Currently, in order to establish the causes of damage to gas pipelines, their localization, characteristics and power of explosive devices, explosive forensic examination and other investigative actions are being carried out.

— Recently, the Prosecutor General’s Office has achieved the return of dozens of large enterprises to the state, including those related to the military-industrial complex. The defendants call such processes deprivatization. Can we expect new lawsuits and in what areas of industry?

— Protection of the property interests of the state cannot be called deprivatization. This is an adequate legal response to such illegal facts. Let me emphasize that since 2023, in the military-industrial complex alone, 15 strategic enterprises with a total value of over 333 billion rubles, which were illegally removed from its ownership, and in some cases came under foreign control, have been returned to the ownership of the Russian Federation. Having received enterprises bypassing the established prohibitions and restrictions, residents of unfriendly states pursued a consistent policy to destroy them and damage the country’s defense capability. Modernization and development of production have not been carried out for decades. Income from activities was mainly transferred abroad.
Enterprises ended up in private ownership as a result of abuses by their leaders, as well as government bodies, including former governors and former law enforcement officers who did not have the authority to alienate state property. By the way, those same affiliated persons often practice using the media to expose themselves as the so-called good light, while hiding their true face under a mask.
The privatization procedure prescribed by law was not carried out. If similar violations of the law are identified, we will, of course, continue to protect the interests of Russia and restore justice. Moreover, law enforcement practice has already been formed. Each situation is resolved point-by-point, and an individual, verified, balanced approach is applied to each.

— What about the rights of workers of these enterprises?

— During the period of legal proceedings, supervisory forces ensure the continuity of technological processes and compliance with the labor and social rights of workers. This is not even discussed. Prosecutors go to enterprises and explain everything necessary to the work teams, and are always in touch. This is a priority for us.

— Does the department monitor the fate of seized assets? Suddenly they'll steal it again!

- Undoubtedly. After a decision is made to turn property into state revenue, we control its execution until the objects enter the treasury and the rights to them are registered. We act directly and openly. There are no beneficiaries for us except the state. All assets are transferred to the balance sheet of organizations that use them to develop the Russian economy and increase the country's defense capability.

https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/6595064 - zinc

In general, it is possible to take it away from pests. The main thing is not to call it deprivatization - this word makes the eyes of “effective owners” twitch.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9052509.html

Google Translator

******

Russia says US 'boxed itself into corner' by blaming ISIS for Moscow terror attack

Washington maintains that the militants behind the attack belonged to 'ISIS-K,' an Afghanistan-based armed group whose members have deep ties with the US armed forces and intelligence agencies

News Desk

MAR 27, 2024


(Photo Credit: Russian Investigative Commitee Handout via EPA via Shutterstock)

Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova accused the US government of backing itself "into a corner” for announcing that ISIS was to blame for the Crocus City Hall terror attack even as the situation was still in progress.

"The very fact that within the first 24 hours [after the attack], even before the fire was put out, the Americans started screaming that it wasn't Ukraine, I think, is a piece of incriminating evidence. I can't classify it otherwise; it is evidence in and of itself," the Kremlin official said during a Sputnik radio broadcast.

"The second fact to note concerns the clamor by the US that this assuredly was the work of ISIS," Zakharova highlighted. “Of course, the speed with which they were able to [come to such forthright conclusions] is astonishing. It took them only a few hours to get to a microphone, turn on the lights, summon the press, and draw a conclusion about who is to blame for this horribly bloody terrorist attack.”

She added that Washington's accusations “boxed themselves into a corner” because it allowed experts to “[remind] everyone else what ISIS really is.” "You are behind all those ISIS-type structures; you – the United States, Great Britain – yourselves brought them into being," she concluded.

Zakharova’s comments came on the heels of an announcement by the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), Aleksandr Bortnikov, saying not only Ukraine but also the US and UK may have orchestrated the attack that killed 140 people, adding that investigators already have “concrete results.”

A US official said on the day of the attack that Washington “had no reason to doubt” the claim by ISIS that the group was responsible for the attack. Furthermore, US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters that the White House had “no indication at this time that Ukraine or Ukrainians were involved.”

In a speech on Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin blasted a warning issued earlier in the month by the US embassy about a planned “terror attack” in Moscow as “provocative,” saying “these actions resemble outright blackmail and the intention to intimidate and destabilize our society.”

The US has used ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and other related extremist groups to destabilize their enemies in the past, including during a major insurgency against Russia in Chechnya in the 1990s.

The US and Israel also used these groups in hopes of toppling the governments of Syria and Iraq. In 2015, Russia intervened militarily to prevent the fall of Syria to ISIS and other extremist groups.

https://thecradle.co/articles/russia-sa ... ror-attack

Russia's allies struggle to pay oil bills as US sanctions take toll: Report
Washington expanded its economic war on the Kremlin late last year after most of the world refused to enforce western sanctions

News Desk

MAR 27, 2024


(Photo Credit: Reuters)

Banks in China, Turkiye, and the UAE are facing delays in delivering payments for Russian oil sales due to secondary US sanctions implemented in December 2023 that target foreign financial institutions dealing with Moscow.

Sources in the know who spoke with Reuters said that banks in the three nations closely allied with Russia “have boosted their sanctions compliance requirements in recent weeks, resulting in delays or even the rejection of money transfers to Moscow.”

As part of these new measures, the banks are asking clients to “provide written guarantees that no person or entity from the US SDN [Special Designated Nationals] list is involved in a deal or is a beneficiary of a payment,” purportedly delaying payments for “several months.”

The UK news agency identified the banks implementing these new measures as First Abu Dhabi Bank (FAB), Dubai Islamic Bank (DIB), and Mashreq Bank in the UAE; Ziraat and Vakifbank in Turkey; and Chinese banks ICBC and Bank of China.

"Problems returned from December after banks and companies have realized the threat of US secondary sanctions is real," one trading source told Reuters.

When asked about the reports, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, “Of course, unprecedented pressure from the United States and the European Union on the People's Republic of China continues.”
"This, of course, creates certain problems but cannot become an obstacle to the further development of our trade and economic relations [with China]," the Russian official added.

Earlier this week, Bloomberg reported that Indian oil refiners would no longer accept tankers owned by Russia's state-run Sovcomflot PJSC because of Washington's unilateral economic warfare.

In 2023, New Delhi purchased a record $37 billion of Russian crude oil, some of which India refined and then re-exported to the US as oil products worth more than $1 billion, according to an analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA).

Although the US and its western allies turned Russia into the world's most sanctioned nation in March 2022 following the invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin last year saw its monthly income from the oil and gas trade soar thanks to the cooperation of several allied nations in the Global South.

https://thecradle.co/articles/russias-a ... oll-report

[blindpig]

THE CROCUS CITY HALL ATTACK — GORILLA RADIO SETS THE STAGE



by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Grief, anger, recriminations, media moneymaking, and political ambition make a highly inflammable combination whose smoke and heat — on both sides of the war against Russia — distort what caused the Crocus City Hall attack – and what will happen next.

Methodical analysis of cause of death and of culpability in conspiracy to kill doesn’t persuade as quickly and profitably as incendiary propaganda.

This, said the Orthodox Church’s Patriarch Kirill on Wednesday, is aimed “to use internal problems with the migration situation, to aggravate interethnic relations in our country, including with the help of a radical Islamist factor. In particular, we are talking about the enemy’s intention to clash two traditional religions and divide people according to religious principle. Of course, we cannot allow anything like this in Russia.”

The Church warning, during the celebration of Ramadan until April 9 and ahead of Orthodox Easter on May 3, follows President Vladimir Putin’s remarks to security officials on Monday, and the subsequent clarifications by security chiefs Alexander Bortnikov of the Federal Security Service (FSB) and Nikolai Patrushev of the Security Council. Click for details and context.

If there is an operational military objective for the March 23 attack on the part of the mercenaries, their command and controllers, and the US and other intelligence services engaged, triggering inter-communal violence in Russia is it. “Sow panic in our society while demonstrating to their own people that not all hope is lost for the Kiev regime,” Putin said on Monday. “All they need to do is follow the orders of their Western patrons, fight until the last Ukrainian, obey Washington’s commands, endorse the new mobilization law, and form something resembling a new version of the Hitler Youth. To comply with all of this, they will seek new weapons and additional funds, much of which will likely be embezzled and, as is customary in Ukraine today, put into their own pockets.”

From this warfighting point of view of the Ukrainians and the Biden Administration, however, the Crocus Hall operation has turned out to be a triple failure.

The effectiveness of the Russian security forces in pursuing the getaway car; monitoring in real time the social media and telephone communications of the gunmen in the vehicle, and then capturing them alive minutes after they had proved their destination was the Ukraine is a major operational success – and a deterrent for follow-up enemy operations in planning.

The failure of the Ukrainians to provide the gang with either safe haven or execution to hide the command and control is also a deterrent for the planned sequels. It’s also a negative for the case the Zelensky regime has been making to the US Congress and NATO allies for more money, weapons, and men to take their war deep into Russian territory.

Finally, there has been no intercommunal violence in Moscow, religiously motivated protests, or pogroms of Tajiks. The Russians have proved they are not the Germans towards Jews, the English towards Irish, the Israelis towards Palestinians, or American Trump voters towards Mexicans.

Yet to be acknowledged, though, there has been an operational failure for the Kremlin and the Moscow city and Moscow region governments, but it is neither military nor ideological. This is that the casualty toll is at least twice the number it might have been if not for the maladministration of the Crocus building construction permits and the failure to enforce fire security and evacuation codes. “The building went up much too fast and we still have no video evidence of fire suppression, let alone a functioning alarm system,” comments a US engineer. “I’ve looked at the walls and ceilings. There were no pull stations, sprinkler heads, smoke or heat detectors visible. When people were being led out, there were no strobe lights, bells, klaxons, or any other emergency signage.”

The majority of Russians are well aware that shoddy engineering and corrupt administration can cause mass loss of life; for example from methane explosions in the coalmines of the Kemerovo region, and in the slow poisoning of air and water in the steelmaking cities of the Urals. But in the most recent public opinion polling across the country, optimism for the future has never been higher.

This public sentiment isn’t going to be damaged or distracted by the propaganda following the Crocus City Hall attack. The priority in public opinion remains to take the war to the enemy before he exploits another chance; and for that, Russian confidence in the military has not been higher since 1945.

In the 30-minute interview on Gorilla Radio, recorded on March 28, Moscow time, Chris Cook leads the discussion. Click to listen. https://gradio.substack.com/p/gorilla-r ... medium=web


The interview begins at Minute 30. Don’t miss listening to the song, “This is genocide” from Min 28:40. Click: https://gradio.substack.com/

For the introduction to this broadcast, access to the 20-year Gorilla Radio archive, and Chris Cook’s blog, click here. https://gradio.substack.com/p/gorilla-r ... k-john-eb1

https://johnhelmer.net/the-crocus-city- ... more-89601

******

‘The Moscow Terror Attack Was an Inside Job!’ the Strange and Twisted World of the West’s Political and Media Russia Haters
MARCH 27, 2024


A woman lights a candle at a makeshift memorial near the Crocus City Hall in memory of the victims of a terrorist attack on the concert venue near Moscow on March 22, Russia. Photo: Maksim Blinov/Sputnik.

By Tarik Cyril Amar – Mar 25, 2024

Many of the responses to the tragedy betray both the narrow-mindedness and meanness of some of the world’s most demented Russophobes

Only a few days ago, one of the worst terrorist attacks in recent history occurred in Russia. The perpetrators stormed concert venue Crocus City Hall on the outskirts of Moscow, systematically and in cold blood massacring as many victims as they could, then starting a devastating fire that destroyed much of the adjacent shopping mall.

Numbers cannot convey the depravity of the attackers or the suffering of the victims – and of their families and friends – but they can convey some of the scale of this horror: As of March 25, 137 were reported as killed and over 180 as injured. As always in such cases, many more will have to struggle with severe psychological trauma.

Like numbers, comparison is inadequate yet necessary to try to grasp the significance of this event. The 2015 Paris attacks that centered on a concert at the Bataclan venue, for instance, were similar in scope: They left at least 130 victims dead and more than 350 injured. The French government responded with an immediate countrywide state of emergency, massive security sweeps, and – as Encyclopedia Britannica sums it up – a “dramatic escalation of French military intervention in the Syrian Civil War” as well as an equally “dramatic increase in domestic security spending.”

There was also, of course, a great wave of international solidarity not only with the victims of the attack but, as was proper, with France as a nation. No Western or, for that matter, Russian commenters who care about their reputations would have dared make perverse claims about French authorities somehow being behind this horrific attack and prepared to sacrifice their own people and to, in effect, betray their country.

Yet, things have turned out differently after the Crocus City Hall massacre in Moscow. While the Russian security services and authorities got to work in a manner fundamentally similar to the French response in 2015 (capturing 11 suspects, four of them “immediate” shooters who’d mass-murdered innocents at a concert, on the run towards the Ukrainian border), a disturbingly large number of Western politicians and media figures responded with a combination of glee, generally transparently concealed but at times stunningly open, with hypocritical equivocating, and, last but not least, with insane conspiracy theories. In other words, with anything but genuine compassion and respect.

A German X user (here anonymized) with over 30,000 followers delivered an example of pure sadistic pleasure by posting a picture of the Crocus mall in flames, with the comment “May it burn, may all of Moscow burn.” Perhaps realizing he sounded as if tweeting from the Nazi Reich Chancellery, the over-excited user subsequently deleted this message. But without displaying any signs of remorse.

RT
Some X user, even if with a substantial number of followers indicating a concerning popularity, may not strike you as very representative. But consider the case of Michael Roth, an extremely vocal member of the German parliament (for Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s SPD) and chair of its Foreign Policy Committee. He showed enough smarts to abide by minimum decorum, just enough to admit that Russia had suffered a “cruel act of terror” that cannot be justified.

But his real message was something else, namely that with Russia such a minimal concession to common decency (insincere as it may be) can and must immediately be accompanied by some Russophobic ranting: Roth carefully hedged that his “compassion” was (clearly: only) for “the innocent victims,” which translates into withholding any acknowledgement of the fact that – as with Bataclan in France – the Crocus attack is also an attack on a whole country and nation. He then proceeded to slander Russia as a “terror state,” caricaturing its war in Ukraine as a campaign of terror. (Roth, by the way, is a great fan of Israel, who has loyally stuck with Tel Aviv through its Gaza genocide with true Germanic “Nibelungentreue.” Go figure…).

Meanwhile, Roderich Kiesewetter, a militaristic foreign-policy hardliner from the CDU (Angela Merkel’s party and the conservative rivals of the SPD) has publicly fantasized about the possibility of a “false flag operation.” Bereft of any evidence or plausibility, the idea of Russia bizarrely launching a massive terror attack on itself, Kiesewetter had an urge to say, can nonetheless, “not be excluded.” In Germany, baseless accusations and insane speculation are bipartisan, as long as the target is Moscow.

If Kiesewetter and Roth, influential if not (yet) first-rank German politicians, illustrate the toxic brew of Russophobia, deranged conspiracy fantasies, and sheer lack of decency that is now ‘normal’ in Berlin, Germany has had no monopoly on perverse responses to the Crocus massacre. Let’s look at some by-no-means marginal representatives of Western media, traditional as well as social.



US-based Igor Sushko, a popular purveyor of deep-frosted neo-Cold War hype with over 300,000 X followers, raced into overdrive, rapidly promoting a black legend of “Putin’s false flag terror attack at the Crocus City Hall,” as if he had to hurry to get the fake news out before reality hits. And that, come to think of it, may well have been the idea: As every propagandist knows, dirt flung first can stick around – at least with the badly informed – even once the facts have been established.

Alexey Kovalyov, formerly of ‘Meduza’ (a website based in Latvia, which has spent recent years waging information war against Russia – such as warning of imminent martial law which never happened) and a stalwart representative of that ‘liberal’ Russia that the West loves to promote, joined the monotonous ‘false flag’ chorus with a gratuitous display of a lack of logical acumen by absurdly concluding from a terror attack which did take place that the Russian authorities are not preventing any such attacks. He also sensed an opportunity to warm up old fairy tales, repeating the allegation that Putin was to blame for terrorist bombings in Russia in 1999. Never mind that the best – and very critical – biographer of Putin, Philip Short, has explained in detail why that old canard makes no sense.

Oliver Carroll, another staunch warrior on the (ideological) eastern front rushed to frame the Crocus massacre with aberrant references to the Berlin Reichstag Fire of 1933 and the Kirov murder of 1934. These incidents have in common that it’s either virtually certain (with Reichstag Fire) or at least a widespread belief (with Kirov murder) that they were staged by state authorities. In other words, yet again ‘false flag’ operations. Carroll, too, has zero evidence to offer. But then, he works for The Economist, so none needed. Not when it’s about putting the boot into Russia and its government.

It would be tedious to catalogue the full emerging swampish ecosystem of “Crocus Truthers.” Suffice it to say that it features famous old hands of the propaganda war, such as Garry Kasparov and, from Ukraine, Sergei Sumlenny (a lesser practitioner, conspicuous perhaps above all for combining an almost grotesque Russophobia with a very long stint as a de-facto point man for the German Green Party in Kiev) and, last but not least, Sarah Ashton-Cirillo.

In case you are blessed with not remembering him (or her? I admit, I have lost track), that is the person who volunteered as a clownish yet vicious spokesperson for the Ukrainian military – in a sadly transparent attempt to deploy a little “queer-washing” to please (some) Western audiences. In that capacity, Ashton-Cirillo launched a deranged, violent rant against the blogger Gonzalo Lira. Lira later died in a Ukrainian prison, abandoned by his own government in Washington and killed by a combination of massive medical neglect and – it is virtually certain – torture.

What to make of this odd alliance? Influential mainstream politicians and journalists, oddball (to put it mildly) social-media types, and a gaggle of eternally bitter Russian oppositionists in exile, who have never figured out how to square their intense dislike of Putin’s Russia with an adult sense of the West’s capacity to use them…

Two things seem certain: This degree of hatred of Russia makes the haters blind in a manner that leads to reputational self-damage, if not today, then tomorrow. And it also comes with an unsurprising inability to face the reality of the Zelensky regime in Ukraine.

For, tellingly, the absurd ‘false flag’ accusations are almost always accompanied by an adamant refusal to even consider that the Kiev regime may have been involved, in one way or another, in the Crocus massacre. And yet, as a matter of fact, it could well turn out that there was some form of Ukrainian hand behind the attack.

(RT)

https://orinocotribune.com/the-moscow-t ... ia-haters/

******

Today’s 13 minute interview on WION, Indian television: “Russian FSB says US, UK and Ukraine behind Moscow attack / What’s the truth?”

I am very pleased that WION, India’s premier English language global news broadcaster took the initiative and discussed with me the significance of the statements yesterday to Russian television by FSB boss Alexander Bortnikov.

Bortnikov alleged that the the United States, the United Kingdom and Ukraine were the plotters and planners of the terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall concert hall in a Moscow suburb. What is the scenario of the crime emerging from the investigation being conducted by Russian intelligence services?

See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RMFLQVym7M

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2024/03/27/ ... the-truth/

******

MARCH 28, 2024 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
Ukraine’s survival hangs in the balance


Moscow’s Crocus City Hall on fire, March 22, 2024

A controversy arose needlessly over the advisory issued by the American embassy in Moscow on March 7 to the effect that “extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts” and warning US citizens to “avoid large gatherings.” It took the form of a diplomatic spat and momentarily at least, the American claim that they shared the ‘information’ with the Russians hinted at the ineptness of the security agencies in Moscow while the latter hit back saying there was nothing specific or actionable that the Americans conveyed.

Clearly, Washington was in possession of some information which was at the very least credible enough in terms of its source but was not specific enough for Moscow. Interestingly, the UK embassy in Moscow also issued a similar advisory cautioning British citizens against visiting shopping centres. The US and British intelligence agencies work in tandem.

However, in a strange pre-emptive move, as it were, the State Department also scrambled within two hours of the horrific attack on the mall in Moscow’s Crocus City Hall on March 22 with a statement declaring that Ukraine was not responsible for the attack. The US’s European allies also began parroting the same line. As can be expected, the Americans got a head start in the propaganda war and that in turn enabled them to craft a narrative — also in real time — naming the Islamic State as the culprit in the horrific crime.

Yet, the very next day, President Vladimir Putin went on to reveal in his address to the nation that what happened was “a premeditated and organised mass murder of peaceful, defenceless people,” harking back to the Nazis “to stage a demonstrative execution, a bloody act of intimidation.”

Importantly, Putin disclosed that the perpetrators “attempted to escape and were heading towards Ukraine, where, according to preliminary information, a window was prepared for them on the Ukrainian side to cross the state border.” But he stopped short of finger-pointing as the investigation was a work in progress.

That is to say, from Putin’s disclosure, it appears that the perpetrators’ mentors / handlers gave them instructions to exit Russian territory after their mission by using a particular route for border crossing into Ukraine where they were expected by people on the Ukrainian side of the border. What now remains in the realm of the ‘known unknown’ is really about the chain of command. This is the first thing.

Second, a storyline has been propagated by Washington that this was an ISIS attack. Indeed, it has been effectively propagated by the western media and was intended as a red herring to confuse dumb-witted folks abroad.

However, in reality, the perpetrators did not behave like ISIS killers on suicide missions who would have sought martyrdom but in this case behaved like fugitives on the run. Nor were they answering the call of ‘jihad’. They were reportedly ethnic Tajiks who admitted that they were hirelings lured by the money in it.

The expert opinion from released videos is also that their movements inside the mall did not show battle skills attributed to well-trained fighters, and they had ‘poor muzzle discipline’, which means they had only minimal rifle training. In sum, theirs was quintessentially an act of motiveless malignity — that is, except the money part.

That said, the US military has been ‘retooling’ erstwhile ISIS fighters lately. Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) alleged in a statement on February 13 that the US was recruiting the jihadist fighters to carry out terrorist attacks on the territory of Russia and the CIS countries.

The statement said, “Sixty such terrorists with combat experience in the Middle East were selected this year in January… they are undergoing a fast-track training course at the US base in Syria’s Al-Tanf, where they are being taught how to make and use improvised explosive devices, as well as subversive methods. Particular emphasis is paid to planning attacks on heavily guarded facilities, including foreign diplomatic missions… In the near future, there are plans to deploy militants in small groups to the territory of Russia and the CIS countries.”

The SVR also noted that “special attention was paid to the involvement of natives of the Russian North Caucasus and Central Asia.”

Significantly, on March 26, Alexander Bortnikov, Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB) said in an interview with Rossiya TV channel that from the interrogation of the detainees so far, there is a political background to the incident. He said radical Islamists alone could not prepare such an action on their own, they were assisted from the outside.

Bortnikov stated: “The primary data that we received from the detainees confirm this. Therefore, we will continue to refine the information that should show us whether the participation of the Ukrainian side is real or not. But in any case, so far there is every reason to say that this is exactly the case. Since the bandits themselves intended to go abroad, it was to the territory of Ukraine, according to our preliminary operational information, they were waiting there.”

Bortnikov added that the terrorist attack had the support of not only the special services of Ukraine, but countries such as Britain and the United States are also behind the massacre. According to him, the prime mover of the incident has not yet been identified, and the threat of a terrorist act in Russia still persists.

Bortnikov’s remarks hint at a classic predicament: Russia possesses evidence of Ukrainian involvement but no ‘proof’ remains inadequate as yet. This is a predicament that countries often face in countering the cross-border terrorism, especially when it happens to be state-sponsored terrorism. Of course, no amount of evidence will be accepted as proof by the adversary ultimately — while in Ukraine’s case, often there is an eagerness to claim credit for bleeding Russia by staging operations on its soil, such as assassinations.

As for the US or the UK, Russians assess that without intelligence inputs, satellite imagery, and even logistical backing by the western powers, Ukraine does not have the capability to undertake operations deep inside Russia or the sort of complex attacks targeting Russian war ships of the Black Sea Fleet. But the western powers are invariably in a denial mode when confronted with such accusations by Russia.

There is no question that the Crocus City Hall attack will have profound geopolitical consequences and will impact the trajectory of the Ukraine war. The incident has rallied world sympathy massively for Russia. It is a huge challenge of statecraft now for Putin to act decisively, as the Russian public will expect, to completely uproot the dark forces entrenched next-door.

Conceivably, that may involve Moscow shaking up the very foundations of the house that Washington built in Kiev after the 2024 coup. The New York Times recently disclosed that the CIA keeps a string of intelligence outposts all along the Ukraine-Russia border regions.

Make no mistake, the US is determined to hold on to the extensive infrastructure it created in Ukraine to mount covert operations and destabilise Russia, no matter what it takes. The bottom line in the western strategy is to weaken Russia and prevent it from playing an adversarial role on the global stage.

TS Eliot’s lines from the play Murder in the Cathedral come to mind: ‘What peace can be found / To grow between the hammer and the anvil?’ The war is slated to escalate dramatically and it is a matter of time before western combat deployment takes place in Ukraine to salvage that country’s residual potential as a frontline state for NATO in the proxy war against Russia. On their part, Russia may have no alternative but to seek a total military victory. The multi-layered Russian reaction will unfold depending on the outcome of the ongoing investigation.

https://www.indianpunchline.com/ukraine ... e-balance/

******

Putin & The Patriarch Reminded Russians That Ethno-Religious Hate Speech Is Unacceptable



ANDREW KORYBKO
MAR 28, 2024

Those migrants that refuse to assimilate and integrate threaten national unity by provoking a negative reaction from their hosts, while those Russians that spew ethno-religious hate speech (especially against Tajiks, migrants, and Muslims) threaten the same by provoking a negative reaction from non-Russians.

Last week’s terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall venue in Moscow, which was carried out by radical Islamists but could have been ordered by Ukraine with Anglo-American assistance according to FSB chief Bortnikov, was one of the worst in Russian history. The fact that four Tajik migrants were most directly responsible for what happened raised the risk of an ultra-nationalist reaction among some members of society, which could threaten this historically cosmopolitan civilization-state’s unity to its foes’ benefit.

President Putin immediately reminded his people the day after the attack in his national address that “Terrorists, murderers, those inhumane individuals who have no nationality and cannot have one, face one and the same gloomy prospect – retribution and oblivion. They have no future. Our common duty now, shared by our comrades–in-arms at the front and all citizens of our country, is to stand united as one.” This signaled that the state will be strictly enforcing Article 282 of the Russian Criminal Code.

That piece of legislation prohibits the instigation of ethno-religious hatred. It’s designed to protect Russia from this toxic ideology that’s still spewed by some fringe elements within society and aggressively promoted among the population by foreign intelligence agencies like Ukraine’s and the West’s. Article 282 is more relevant than ever since some people might now be tempted to embrace ultra-nationalism and could thus fall under the influence of those aforesaid forces that want to “Balkanize” Russia.

In order to set the most positive example possible, President Putin then said on Tuesday that “It is extremely important for us now, when we’re dealing with what happened last Friday, to rely on these values of creativity, humanism and mercy. They unite us in supporting all victims, in our determination to stay strong and together.” The message being sent is that the social discourse must remain calm and not drift towards talk of unbridled bloodlust or blanket retribution against certain identity groups.

He implicitly reinforced this message the day after on Wednesday when clarifying that “We do not have any unfriendly nations, we have unfriendly elites in those nations”, adding that Russia “has never tried to cancel” anyone’s culture. Although he’s previously talked about this in the past, the context within which he once again reaffirmed this policy suggests a connection to recent events and wasn’t just because he was meeting with cultural professionals that day.

Patriarch Kirill, who warned late last year that “the whole Russian world is under threat” from some migrants’ refusal to assimilate and integrate into society and that this “threaten(s) interreligious and interethnic peace and harmony”, chimed in on the same day as well. He told the World Russian People’s Council that “Many consider migration a threat, but the threat lies not just in migration, but in the reluctance of some migrants to respect the culture of the country where they came to work.”

After repeating his message from late last year, he then importantly added that “Around us live fraternal peoples, with whom we have always strived to build good neighborly relations, understanding the difficult economic situation that has developed in a number of countries of the former Soviet Union. Let no one scare us with Russian nationalism. Russian nationalism does not exist in nature, everyone knows that.” In other words, migrants must assimilate and integrate, and Russians must embrace those that do.

Those migrants that refuse to assimilate and integrate threaten national unity by provoking a negative reaction from their hosts, while those Russians that spew ethno-religious hate speech (especially against Tajiks, migrants, and Muslims) threaten the same by provoking a negative reaction from non-Russians. The only way for Russia to remain united is for non-ethnic Russians (Rossiyskiye) and ethnic Russians (Russkiye) to follow President Putin’s and Patriarchy Kirill’s advice, which the vast majority already do.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/putin-an ... h-reminded

I suppose the ROC is good for something...It is nonetheless a regressive, reactionary force in society.

******

PUTIN’S SOCIAL PROMISES LOOK SET TO CREATE NEW CENTER OF POWER
MARCH 27, 2024 NATYLIESB

By Andrey Pertsev, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 3/11/24

The social spending commitments made by Russian President Vladimir Putin in his February state of the nation address indicate that at least one Russian official will get an influential new job. The lucky person will likely be either a deputy prime minister with expanded powers, or a special coordinator. Either way, they’ll get regular access to the president, the opportunity to disburse large sums, and the tools to shape their public image. That will automatically create an alternative center of power within the government.

Putin has not made any campaign pledges ahead of Russia’s presidential elections in March. Instead, he chose to use his state of the nation address to announce five new “national projects,” titled “Personnel,” “Youth of Russia,” “Family,” “Long and Active Life,” and “Data Economy.” Four of them are obviously socially orientated, and will involve subsidized mortgages, social handouts to families, and higher salaries for state employees, as well as building and modernizing schools, universities, and hospitals.

The reasoning is clear: the Kremlin reaps the biggest political dividends from social spending. People always notice when a local school or hospital is renovated. Of course, governors and the ruling United Russia party benefit from these projects, but the main beneficiary is Putin.

The new national projects will also be a boon for all those involved in executing them: above all, the deputy prime minister in charge of social affairs. Currently, this post is held by Tatiana Golikova, but after this month’s presidential election, the government will be required to resign, and there will likely be a reshuffle. To a lesser extent, the deputy prime ministers in charge of industry and construction will also be involved.

There are several possible benefits for these managers. Firstly, by manipulating the tender process, they can choose to award contracts to “friendly” companies with which it suits them to work. Secondly, they will get access to Putin, who will likely be hosting regular meetings on the national projects’ implementation: both in public and behind closed doors. That’s what happened with Russia’s first four national projects when they were launched in 2005.

Close contact with Putin is an extremely valuable resource in the Russian power vertical, bestowing financial and political rewards and often outweighing formal status. The best example is Dmitry Medvedev, who was the first person appointed to oversee the national projects in 2005. Then a deputy prime minister, Medvedev was selected by Putin three years later to succeed him as president.

It will be easy for the person in charge of the national projects to generate good PR for themselves. Indeed, they will be able to position themselves as something of an avuncular figure, doling out cash from a magic money tree. Any problems can be blamed on those in government who are directly responsible for the economy. The post will be an ideal opportunity to promote a personal brand.

Of course, whoever gets the job will have to be careful not to be seen to be dishing out more cash than Putin. But it’s clearly possible to have your own personal brand in Russian politics. Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, for example, has fashioned an image for himself of both a professional operator and the sort of guy who can pat a minister on the back while dropping slang into conversation with them. The profile of Sergei Kiriyenko, the Kremlin deputy chief of staff in charge of domestic politics, is something along the lines of “Lord of the Donbas,” inspecting social infrastructure in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine and handing out largesse in the form of pensions and salaries.

Indeed, Kiriyenko is undoubtedly the frontrunner for the post of deputy prime minister overseeing the socially focused national projects. Apart from his close involvement in social issues in occupied Ukraine, he also previously headed the state nuclear corporation Rosatom, which ran a lot of social projects, and had a short stint as prime minister in the 1990s. He also works closely with the government’s social ministries, helped develop the ideological component of Russia’s school curriculum and new “Fundamentals of Russian Statehood” university course, and has organized major conferences and forums.

Of course, there are other possible candidates. Deputy Prime Minister Yury Trutnev, who is also the presidential envoy to the Far East, has long overseen social and infrastructure projects in that part of the country. Marat Khusnullin, one of Putin’s favorites, regularly reports to the president on the success of ambitious infrastructure ventures. There’s also Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Chernyshenko, who oversees digitization and sport, and enjoys Putin’s favor. However, none of them are as well suited as Kiriyenko.

Either way, the creation of a new deputy prime minister post will cause a major shift in the balance of power within Russia’s bureaucracy. Considering Medevdev’s rise from national projects to the presidency, the appointment will mean the elite starts thinking about a possible successor to Putin. The person who gets the job will inevitably be seen in a new light. In addition, the emergence of a new center of influence in the government will likely generate conflicts with the prime minister, who will be required to find the money.

For many years now, Putin has avoided a major reshuffle among Russia’s top officials in order to head off any speculation about power transitions or successors. Now, however, he has little choice but to empower a major new political player.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/03/put ... -of-power/

[blindpig]

Did The US First Catch Wind Of The Crocus Terrorist Attack By Spying On Kiev?



ANDREW KORYBKO
MAR 29, 2024

This accounts for why the US only passed along vague information to Russia since it assumed that the GUR wouldn’t go through with the Crocus plot after ordering them to call it off, but Washington still wanted to discredit its rival’s government and security services, ergo its embassy’s provocative warning at the time.

The New York Times (NYT) cited unnamed sources on Thursday to report that “The adversarial relationship between Washington and Moscow prevented U.S. officials from sharing any information about the (Crocus terrorist attack) plot beyond what was necessary, out of fear Russian authorities might learn their intelligence sources or methods.” This vindicates President Putin, who the West hitherto claimed had downplayed terrorist threats in the run-up to one of the worst attacks in Russian history.

Without actionable intelligence and informed only of the US’ vague warning that large gatherings like concerts could soon be targeted, his security services were unable to stop the plotters, thus meaning that Washington is partially responsible for what happened by withholding specific information about it. Just as scandalously, this bombshell also prompted speculation about the exact sources and methods that America employed to first catch wind of this attack.

While it’s possible that the US learned about this from spying on the radical Telegram channel whose curators reportedly recruited the culprits, such as if the CIA had a mole inside that preacher’s team, the case can compellingly be made that this might have actually been brought to its attention by spying on Kiev. Last spring’s Pentagon leaks confirmed that the US has been spying on Zelensky, which Ukrainian officials told CNN was “unsurprising” but still left them “deeply frustrated”.

Those documents also confirmed that the US was spying on Ukraine’s military-intelligence service GUR as well, from whom they learned about a plot to attack the Russian port of Novorossiysk on the first anniversary of the special operation and then ordered them to stand down to avoid provoking Moscow. Seeing as how the Washington Post (WaPo) reported half a year later that the CIA rebuilt the GUR from the ground-up after 2014, it’s obvious that they embedded moles within that institution from the get-go.

They don’t always learn about terrorist plots ahead of time since their infiltration of the GUR and other Ukrainian government agencies isn’t total, but they’re still usually able to conclude sometime afterwards that Kiev was responsible whenever a serious attack happens in Russia. Such was the case last May when the NYT reported that Kiev was responsible for the Kremlin drone attack, in which piece they also reminded their reader that it was behind other attacks up until that point too.

These include the assassinations of Darya Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky, cross-border terrorist raids into Russia’s Belgorod Region, and the Nord Stream II bombing. About that last-mentioned one, the claim of Ukrainian complicity might very well be a preplanned red herring for deflecting from American involvement after Seymour Hersh served as the conduit for dissident members of the Intelligence Community (IC) to inform the public that their country was the one that ordered that attack.

Nevertheless, what’s important to note in this larger narrative context is that the Wall Street Journal claimed last summer that the US learned about Ukraine’s plans to blow up that pipeline from Dutch sources and then told Kiev to not to go through with it. Irrespective of whether Ukraine really was involved and despite however the US allegedly obtained the information, not to mention whether that even happened, the point is that IC wanted Americans to know that it told Ukraine to stand down.

WaPo then reported last November that a former senior official from GUR coordinated the Nord Stream II bombing with more senior officials, who supposedly took orders from former Commander-in-Chief Valery Zaluzhny, and all of this purportedly went on behind Zelensky’s back. It’s unimportant whether any of that is true since the significance lies in the fact that IC-connected WaPo introduced this narrative into the global discourse of ostensibly rogue members of the Ukrainian IC plotting such major attacks.

To recap everything that’s been shared thus far by the Mainstream Media: the US spies on Zelensky, the GUR, and other Ukrainian institutions; they’ve learned via these means that Kiev was responsible for prior terrorist attacks; sometimes they catch wind of them ahead of time and order their proxies to stand down; which succeeded in February 2023 when Ukraine then decided not to attack Novorossiysk; but failed in summer 2022 after putatively rogue members of the Ukrainian IC then bombed Nord Stream II.

With this in mind, suspicions that the US withheld possibly actionable intelligence about the then-impending Crocus terrorist attack in order to not reveal their Ukrainian sources and methods make a lot more sense. The FSB and Security Council chiefs already suspected Ukrainian involvement, President Putin informed the nation that the terrorists’ contacts in that country had prepared a “window” for them to cross the border, and investigators just discovered evidence that Kiev paid them via cryptocurrency.

The Deputy Chairman of Turkiye’s ruling party also recently said that “It is obvious that it is impossible to carry out such a professional action without the support of intelligence of any state. Such events always have sponsors, lobbies that want the (Ukrainian) war to continue.” Seeing as how his country is a NATO member, arms Ukraine, votes against Russia at the UN, and doesn’t recognize Crimea’s reunification, there are no reasons to suspect that he has ulterior motives so his words should be taken seriously.

In the face of these allegations, the US feverishly doubled down on its claim that Ukraine wasn’t responsible, which Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov described as “suspiciously” “obsessive”. His spokeswoman Maria Zakharova had earlier described Bloomberg’s report that Kremlin insiders doubt Ukraine’s involvement, which was arguably an IC-planted narrative deflection, as “the mother of all fakes.” The trend is that the US is desperately trying to convince everyone that Kiev wasn’t responsible.

All of this suggests that the US knows that Ukraine was involved but fears what Russia might do once the evidence becomes indisputable. For instance, this could then be shared with the world for justifying the legal transformation of Russia’s special operation into an all-out war, which could precede another offensive. A breakthrough might eventually occur and the government could collapse soon thereafter exactly as the Ukrainian Intelligence Committee warned in late February might happen by this summer.

This insight adds context to the NYT’s bombshell since it might very well have been that the CIA learned about the Crocus plot by spying on its GUR protégés, which this analysis here explains how they could have orchestrated everything, but then told them to call it off. Just like the GUR reportedly delayed the Nord Stream II bombing, so too does it seem in hindsight like it delayed this bloodbath, only to later carry out both irrespective of whether they were formally approved or done by rogue IC members.

The aforesaid version of events accounts for why the US only passed along vague information to Russia since it assumed that the GUR wouldn’t go through with the Crocus plot, but Washington still wanted to discredit its rival’s government and security services, ergo its embassy’s provocative warning at the time. After the terrorist attack happened and evidence began piling up of Ukraine’s involvement, the US swiftly ran interference for its proxies because it fears the consequences of Russia’s possible military reaction.

It's unclear what those members of the US IC that spoke to the NYT were thinking when they told that outlet to report that their services withheld details of the then-impending Crocus terrorist attack from Russia in order to not betray their sources and methods, but the larger narrative context within which this pivotal detail entered the global discourse casts more aspersions on Ukraine. It seems more and more obvious that Kiev was involved, and it’s likely only a matter of time before a smoking gun is found.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/did-the- ... ind-of-the

******

The Crocus Concert Hall Atrocity: No Going Back
Alastair Crooke
Source: Al Mayadeen English
28 Mar 2024 00:37

The details of the arrested perpetrators of the Crocus Concert Hall massacre and their mode of operation does not comport with the notion of their being ideological supporters of ISIS.



Why is it that the EU and the US are so adamant about who is behind the Crocus Concert Hall atrocity, that they will not wait out the investigation? Within 55 minutes of the attack, the US spokesperson said ‘Ukraine wasn’t involved’. Now the US is saying – definitively - that only ISIS was involved.

“No concrete advance warning - nothing was transferred to us”, Russia’s Washington Ambassador insists.

Why are Western states so certain? It is most unusual for Intelligence services to pronounce within the hour. Though the actual perpetrators are now known, the key question remains: Who stands behind the attack? Things are not always as they seem.

At the moment, there is insufficient evidence to say -- let alone with absolute certainty -- that the attack committed in Moscow was planned, prepared and executed to some Islamic State master-plan.

ISIS-K has been operating for some years, more as a ‘rat-run’ extending from Turkey to Syria; to Afghanistan and Iran. It is a franchise on behalf of which terrorist acts are committed, funds raised, and resources prepared.

ISIS-K, which originated amongst Tajik dissidents in northern Afghanistan, unites certain groups and conducts active operations largely against the Taliban movement. It provides an umbrella for terrorist actions too in northern Iran. It has had no particular interest in Russia.

Behind ISIS have stood certain Muslim States -- and their Western backers.

The details of the arrested perpetrators and their mode of operation however, does not comport with the notion of their being ideological supporters of ISIS. They may have ostensibly been broadly Islamist, but were in reality mercenaries motivated by the lure of money. ISIS recruits expect and get martyrdom. These men simply jumped in a car, wanting to escape. In an ISIS operation, they would have continued the massacre -- until shot dead.

There are many other inconsistencies to the ISIS claim. The assailants may have been pious Islamists, but likely not ISIS. Even their oath with the left hand raised was wrong. The Amaq statement too, is problematic in several respects. In the past Amaq has claimed attacks in Iran, with subsequent Amaq communiques having to be ‘corrected’. Livestream coverage of an attack is unheard of.

The Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov insists that though Russia knows who carried out the attack, it is too early to speculate on ‘who gave the ultimate order’ (President Putin’s, as yet, unanswered question).

All of which returns to the question, why has the West been hyper-adamant about the ISIS sole attribution? Why does it wish to pre-empt the Russian investigation?

Beijing’s Global Times says that it is unlikely for the IS to have masterminded the attack because the situation in Syria has already stabilized. But it goes to the heart when it warns that support for Kiev would dwindle, were Ukraine’s involvement in the terror attack to be established.

The EU élites’ commitment to Ukraine represents the unspoken disaster that is quashing any lingering aspirations for Europe achieving its genuine strategic autonomy; it is vassalizing Europe to the United States, and leaving the Continent at its weakest since the end of World War II. Europe has lost badly.

Macron’s fear of a Russian victory in Ukraine obliterating Europe’s ‘credibility’ only makes sense when the Ruling Strata’s imperial project of a top-down, centralised Geo-political EU is precisely leveraged on Ukrainian plight.

Yet, against the reality of last summer’s failed Ukrainian military offensive, the fervour for ‘Project Ukraine’ persists -- and trumps all other considerations.

Why?

Because the EU’s panglossian ‘hunt’ after strategic autonomy (encapsulated in its mantra of building a geo-political EU) is tied to Ukraine.

“Recognizing the emotive power of Ukraine’s struggle against Russian dominance”, Arta Moeini writes, “European élites have appropriated this struggle to preach the ideological precepts of “European-ness” and, indeed, of civilization itself”;

“Seemingly overnight, Ukraine came to stand for enlightened “European values”—freedom, democracy, tolerance, good governance, and so on — with Russia transformed into ‘civilized Europe’s opposite, the barbarian horde at the gate”.

“As Nietzsche was the first to grasp, modernity is an epoch in which the world is experienced primarily through the lens of oppression with identities formed out of the “ethic of ressentiment”: The downtrodden are deemed inherently righteous and accorded the ultimate moral value. Under this dispensation, the defense of “the oppressed” - becomes the … vehicle for the ruling class to gain and consolidate power - sanctifying their supremacy and planting the seed for their future power as the great liberators”.

Ultimately, the EU’s ruling élites seek to ‘trans-nationalise’ power upwards from member states to Brussels.

Here lies the seeds of the present putative panic: When it became evident that Ukraine’s conventional military efforts were a flop, a number of hawks in the US and Europe quickly swung to singing the praises of asymmetric warfare -- on Russia and its civilian population, itself.

This asymmetry began slowly: a few random drone attacks that did little damage. This then accelerated to missiles fired into the centres of Belgorod killing civilians; then it became an attack on a Russian transport Ilyushin plane transporting prisoners; and then moved to drone attacks on Russian refineries and naval drone war on Crimea.

The process accelerated. And on the eve of last week’s Russian elections, there was the attempt by purported dissidents to disrupt the elections by invading Russia in order to seize small towns and Russian civilians to hold as hostages. (It failed; Russia had prior knowledge of the plan).

The question the Euro-élites must be asking themselves now is: Has this Ukrainian asymmetric warfare effort spun out of Washington’s and European control? Who is in charge, if anyone? It is unproven yet, but the fear haunting the West must be that either directly, or even very indirectly, it will emerge that they may find themselves complicit in mass terrorism -- sheltering under an ISIS-K franchise?

The implications: Huge.

https://english.almayadeen.net/articles ... going-back

******

Communists send solidarity to a Russian nation in mourning after terror attack

Nobody who retains a shred of critical thinking capacity is buying into the western narrative about ‘jihadi terrorists’ having planned this heinous operation.

Proletarian TV
Party statement
Wednesday 27 March 2024



The peace-loving peoples of the world woke up last Saturday to the shocking news that, on Friday night, a terrorist attack had killed 150 young concertgoers in Moscow and injured hundreds more, many of whom are in critical condition and fighting for their lives.

With all eyes inevitably looking toward the Nato-backed fascists in Ukraine, the US imperialists were quick – too quick, in fact – to declare that they knew for a fact that the Ukrainians had not been involved. Within an hour of the attack, during which four gunmen opened fire on the audience at the Crocus city hall and then set fire to the building before leaving the scene, the White House made its statement – and imperialist media went into overdrive to amplify the US narrative, which claims that the attack was carried out by an islamist terror group called ‘Isis K’ that has no connection whatsoever to the Ukrainian government.

Leaving aside the fact that Isis is a proxy army created, trained and armed by US and British imperialism, several facts failed to stack up regarding this assertion.

First is that the gunmen did not seek martyrdom in the traditional jihadi manner, but jumped in their car and fled like any hired mercenaries on completion of their mission. Indeed, Scott Ritter has pointed out that in the video in which they recorded their intention to commit this ‘divine’ act ‘for Allah’, the supposed ‘jihadists’ held up the wrong hand as they swore – a change that may not mean much to the uninitiated, but which according to Islam is the difference between God and the Devil.

Next, having been allowed to flee by Russian security forces, which quietly followed them, the supposed ‘jihadis’ headed for the Ukrainian border. All four gunmen were taken into custody once their object had been clearly ascertained by the Russians, who picked them up in a rural location where no bystanders could be hurt during the course of their capture.

No doubt more information will be discovered by investigators over the coming days. A few facts are already clear, however.

The first is that the USA undoubtedly had advance warning of the attack. This is either because it directly ordered it, or because its security agents picked up information which they failed to pass on.

The US embassy in Russia had been carrying a notice on its website warning US citizens to avoid mass gatherings such as concerts.

The likelihood of US involvement is also underlined by the fact that Ukraine’s (now demoted) puppetmaster-in-chief Victoria Nuland, blurted out in an unscheduled street interview the last time she was in Kiev that Russia was in for some “nice surprises”.

Meanwhile, Oleksiy Danilov, until recently the head of Ukraine’s national security and defence council, gloated on television the day after the attack on the concert: “Is it fun in Moscow today? I think a lot of fun for you. I think we ought to do this sort of fun more often, You are after all ‘brotherly people’, and maybe we should visit you more regularly.”

In fact, it is quite possible that west-backed mercenaries posing as ‘islamist’ may have been involved in some way, answering to western and/or Ukrainian handlers. It has long been known to military observers that Ukraine is the new focus of operations for British and US-trained gangsters who have been evacuated from the imperialists’ failed regime-change war in Syria. Meanwhile, some Russian analysts believe the trigger-pullers were recent additions to such forces, with signs that they may have been recruited through Ukraine’s embassy in Tajikistan.

Whoever pulled the trigger, there can be no doubt this action was ultimately carried out on the orders of some part of the Nato alliance, acting alone or together, in the hope of creating unrest and dissatisfaction in Russia. Whatever occurs on the battlefield of the war in Ukraine, the west’s overarching goal remains that of regime change in Moscow.

Certainly, hopes for achieving this via the battlefield are waning fast, as conditions on the field are turning decisively towards an outright Russian victory this year. In this context, the imperialists’ desperation to somehow delay or reverse what even they can now see is an unstoppable trend is palpable.

Hence their increasing resort to terror tactics against the wider Russian population, of which the attack on the Crocus concert hall was not the first but was by far and away the bloodiest.

Hence also President Emmanuel Macron’s desperate efforts to get some small French force officially on the ground in Ukraine, presumably in the mistaken belief that Russia would not dare to attack it, and other Nato soldiers could gradually be brought in to expand it, thus maintaining at least some part of a rump Ukrainian state that the Nato powers could continue to use as a battering ram against Russia.

Not only is Russia not going to allow France to establish an official military presence on the ground in Ukraine, but President Vladimir Putin made it clear in his recent address to the Russian people that the country will not allow the perpetrators of this latest attack to go unpunished either. The investigators will find out who was behind the attack and the country will take all necessary measures to bring the backers as well as their footsoldiers to justice.

As in the case of Palestine, the imperialists may yet live to regret their wanton and ill-disguised criminality, carried out in the arrogant belief that they will always be able to behave as they like with impunity.

British solidarity
On Sunday 24 March, comrades of the CPGB-ML joined a long line of mourners outside the Russian embassy in London. They laid a floral tribute there and delivered the following statement:

We express our deepest condolences for the victims of the atrocities in Moscow on 22 March.

The twenty-fourth of March was a day of mourning in Russia and ordinary people in Britain came to pay their respects, to give sympathy both to the families who lost loved ones and to Russia as a whole. This was a horrific crime in which 150 were slaughtered and many more were injured by the enemies of Russia.

The purpose of the terrorists and their paymasters is to destroy Russia and the morale of its proud peoples, but we know that the legacy of Russian history is to resist and create.

Remembering the victims of this attack, we will continue to honour the countless sacrifices of the peoples of Russia in their fight against fascism.

We have faith in Russia’s tremendous resilience in defending its sovereignty against the US-led Nato and its cowardly proxies. They shall not pass.

As members of the British working class and as communists of the CPGB-ML, we extend our sympathy and heartfelt solidarity to the peoples of Russia and their elected government in their valiant flight against the darkness of imperialism.

In Russia, as in Palestine, the enemy is one, but humanity’s struggle towards light will prevail.

https://thecommunists.org/2024/03/27/ne ... or-attack/

******

THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT TRIPS ON A NEW LIE ABOUT YULIA AND SERGEI SKRIPAL



by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

For the first time in six years, the British Government has officially told Moscow that Russian citizen Yulia Skripal, one of the victims of a nerve spray attack in Salisbury on March 4, 2018, has “rejected the offer of consular assistance” from the Russian Embassy in London. A British diplomatic note, delivered to the Foreign Ministry in Moscow this week and made public by the Ministry spokesman, also claimed “the Russian woman has the contact details of the consular department of the Russian Embassy in London in case of need.”

Omitted from the document is that the British have not allowed Yulia Skripal to sign a document, send an email, or make a telephone call since 2020.

The new Foreign Office paper failed to identify the whereabouts or wishes of Yulia’s father, Sergei Skripal, a dual Russian and British citizen who was also the target of the 2018 attack. The calculated omissions, and the record of subterfuge and faking which British officials, coroners, and judges have been making since 2018, indicate that, in fact, Yulia Skripal is imprisoned and incommunicado, and that Sergei Skripal is dead.

“The British authorities,” said Maria Zakharova at her ministry briefing on March 27, “do not say a word about the fate of Sergei Skripal. It is completely unclear why. I would like to ask the British if he is alive? Can you at least tell me that?”

After years of stonewalling in London, the new lie appears to indicate that Sergei Skripal has died in British captivity.

Since the Skripals slumped unconscious on a Salisbury town bench and were kept in hospital under police guard, three British prime ministers — Theresa May, Boris Johnson (lead image, left), and Rishi Sunak (right) — have continued the story that three Russian military officers attacked the Skripals with a Novichok nerve agent they had brought by plane into England, and sprayed on to the door handle of Sergei Skripal’s home; that was several hours before he and his daughter showed sudden symptoms and collapsed.

The British have presented no evidence of Novichok on the Skripal door handle; in the blood, skin, and urine testing of the Skripals in hospital; or in subsequent court proceedings. The alleged Russian attack weapon – a perfume bottle atomiser – did not materialize for months until July 2018, when police claim to have found it on a kitchen bench in the home of another alleged victim, Dawn Sturgess, ten days after exhaustive police searches of the premises had failed to find it. The last Sturgess case report, dated a month ago, can be read here.

Sergei Skripal has not been seen in public since the day of the alleged Novichok attack, March 4, 2018. He has not been heard on the telephone by family members since June 26, 2019. Yulia Skripal was last seen in a government-directed interview at a US bomber base in England in May 2018; her last telephone call was heard on November 20, 2020.

The full story of what happened and didn’t happen, and of the High Court and coroners’ court hearings which have followed since 2018, has been documented in the book published in 2020; then in reports of the ongoing cover-up by a retired Appeal Court judge, Lord Anthony Hughes.

In March 2022 Hughes announced he had appointed a London lawyer, Adam Chapman, to represent the Skripals; but the judge, his spokesman, and the lawyer have repeatedly refused to confirm how the Skripals communicated to them, if at all. The lawyer refuses to answer press questions; in court he has said nothing on the Skripals’ behalf.


Left: click for the book. Right: left to right, Sergei Skripal; the government-appointed lawyer Adam Chapman; Yulia Skripal. Chapman is not the first legal representative of the Skripals in a London court. On March 20, 2018, Vikram Sachdeva QC appeared to be speaking for them in the Court of Protection of the High Court. But at the time they were reported to be “under heavy sedation” in Salisbury District Hospital. Chapman and Sachdeva have made no contact with the Russian Consul-General in London; with the Skripal family in Russia; or with the press. Hughes refuses to say in court or to press questions that he will call the Skripals to testify in person in the investigation of the alleged use of Novichok as a Russian weapon in England.

Timed earlier this month on the sixth anniversary of the disappearance of the Skripals, the Russian Embassy in London sent the Foreign Office a new request for what the Embassy had described last June as a “demand that the British authorities allow us to ascertain they are safe and sound. London carries full responsibility for their well-being.”

Zakharova revealed the reply on Wednesday. “It’s hard to believe,” she said, “but the Russian Foreign Ministry has received a response from Britain to the request on the Skripals. The Russian side continues to make efforts to clarify the circumstances of the incident that occurred in Salisbury in March 2018, with the participation of citizens of our country: S.V. Skripal and his daughter Y.S.Skripal. It’s been almost six years. All this time, the Russian Foreign Ministry has been sending dozens of diplomatic notes. In response, we received nothing but ‘non-subscriber notices.’ For the first time since mid-2018, a response note was finally received from the British Foreign Ministry in response to another note from the Russian Embassy in London. With some reservations, it can be considered a kind of belated official reaction. They say they have been waiting for the promised three years. It took twice as long here.”

“In this note, it is reported that Y.S. Skripal allegedly took note of the offer of consular assistance, but rejected it…According to the assurances of the British Foreign Ministry, the Russian woman has the contact details of the consular department of the Russian Embassy in London in case of need. In addition, responding to the demand to provide information on the official results of the investigation into the incident in Salisbury, British diplomats said they would not comment on this topic, since ‘the relevant legal procedures are still ongoing.’”

“The British authorities do not say a word about the fate of Sergei Skripal. It is completely unclear why. I would like to ask the British if he is alive? Can you at least tell me that? We consider the forced reaction of the British side as an unsuccessful attempt to justify itself for the inexplicable and unlawful long-term concealment of information about Russian citizens. This is another information manipulation. We will continue to methodically seek comprehensive information about the fate of Russian citizens who disappeared without a trace in Britain six years ago, clarify all the components of the Salisbury incident and, in general, insist on justice in this case.”

The only evidence of Yulia Skripal signing anything was presented in a brief, carefully orchestrated presentation at a US nuclear bomber base in England in May of 2018. Two script pages were visible on a side table during the filming; the one on top Skripal was filmed signing. The two papers appear to be in a different handwriting from Skripal’s signature and in a different pen from the pen she is seen to use. On the top page, apparently the Russian language text, Skripal added words after her signature; these are her first and family names in Russian, but without her patronymic, as Russians usually record their names in official documents. The handwriting of that name and the handwriting of the Russian statement are not the same. Nor the pen and ink used.

In construction, the Russian version followed after the English; several important English expressions are not repeated in the Russian paper, nor in Skripal’s speech. The most obvious is the English text in which she purportedly referred to “offers of assistance from the Russian Embassy but at the moment I do not wish to avail myself of their services.” Skripal’s Russian text speaks of “help” from the Russian Embassy: “now I don’t want and not ready to use it.”

“The Russian version of Yulia’s speech is soft, simple, and balanced,” a professional translator comments. “There is no hint or innuendo suggesting hostility towards anything Russian. The English version is sharper and more complicated than the Russian. The meaning is different.”


Source: https://johnhelmer.net/

The garden staging was subsequently identified as the joint US Air Force and Royal Air Force base at Fairford, Gloucestershire.

In its official reply to Moscow this week, the British Government has done more than repeat what Yulia Skripal appeared to be saying but didn’t, six years ago.

The new Foreign Office line, “the relevant legal procedures are still ongoing”, is a reference to the Lord Hughes proceeding. In this, the involvement of the Skripals, their signed consents, their instructions to their purported lawyer, and their willingness to testify to the alleged Novichok attack have been fabricated, then covered in state secrecy.

NOTE: Parallel to the Hughes investigation of the death of Dawn Sturgess, the Novichok weapon, and the government allegations against the Russians, a recent attempt at opening the files on a suspicious death which occurred in Salisbury at the same time has been blocked by the Salisbury coroner; he has already claimed (without inquest) that Russian Novichok was the cause of Sturgess’s death.

On March 16, 2018, ten days after the Skripals were attacked, Nicholas Young’s body was found hanging from a tree in the Salisbury area. Young, a 26-year old with a criminal record, was reported to have committed suicide. The local newspaper reporting the circumstances said: “This is not linked to the on-going incident in Salisbury city centre.”

Suspicion that it might be linked, that MI6 was fabricating the Novichok evidence and looking for corpses to identify the Novichok weapon and pinpoint the cause of death, was reinforced when an editor of the Financial Times, Lionel Barber, asked President Vladimir Putin to talk about the Skripal case. In their conversation, Barber said: “Some people might say that a human life is worth more than five pennies. But do you believe, Mr President that whatever happened…Vladimir Putin: Did anybody die? [Barber] Oh yes. The gentleman who had a drug problem and he died after touching the Novichok in the car park. I mean somebody did that because of the perfume. It was more than one person that died, not the Skripals. I am just…Vladimir Putin: And you think this is absolutely Russia’s fault? [Barber] I did not say that. I said somebody died. Vladimir Putin: You did not say that, but if it has nothing to do with Russia… Yes, a man died, and that is a tragedy, I agree. But what do we have to do with it?”

This exchange occurred at the Kremlin on June 23, 2019, a year after Dawn Sturgess had been identified as the singular fatal victim of the alleged Russian assassination scheme after spraying Novichok on herself from a perfume bottle. However, at the Kremlin Barber told Putin there had been a second fatal Novichok victim in Salisbury; that the victim was male; and that he had died after touching the poison in a Salisbury carpark – these were details which had never been published before. They have not been published since.

Because the Skripals were refusing to testify publicly that they believed they had been Novichok or Russian targets, and because the door-handle fabrication had failed the police, prosecutor, coroner’s court tests, Barber’s identification of another victim, “a gentleman who had a drug problem”, appeared to refer to Young. However, the public record of his death was confirmed in the coroner’s court to have been suicide.

To check what the police and inquest evidence had been in the Young case, a request was made to Coroner David Ridley in Salisbury for details of the investigation of Young’s death and the reported suicide finding by his court. “I request,” I wrote Ridley last month, on February 5, “to know who was the presiding coroner; the list of witnesses called and deponents in the proceeding; the Home Office pathologist who conducted the post-mortem; and the finding, ruling or inquest report on cause of death.”

Ridley refused in a formal ruling on March 14.


https://johnhelmer.net/the-british-gove ... more-89606

[blindpig]

(The tears of liberals are sweeter than honey))

THE BELL: LESS CAPITALISM, MORE STATE
MARCH 29, 2024 NATYLIESB
The Bell, 3/1/24

Putin’s state-of-the-nation address offers Soviet vision of Russia’s future

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state-of-the-nation address Thursday broke records, both for length and the number of “spontaneous” outbreaks of applause (there were 116 of them, according to one count). But the parallels with the Soviet Union don’t end there. Putin spent only a short time talking about the main threat to the economy – Russia’s war in Ukraine – and instead threatened the West, engaged in nuclear saber-rattling, and appeared to promise a far greater role for the state in the Russian economy.

Putin competing with Putin
Unlike last year, Putin radiated confidence in his speech to lawmakers. He is clearly satisfied with the situation at the front, and believes there are enough resources to continue fighting for at least another year. However, opinion polls suggest that the most popular candidate in presidential elections next month would be someone who does not harp on about the war, but who offers solutions to Russia’s domestic problems. So, once he’d got the saber-rattling out of the way, the lion’s share of Putin’s speech was about his plans through 2030.

According to the president, Russia needs more social spending, higher birth rates, longer life expectancy and fewer imports. Of course, that’s basically what the country needed during his previous six-year presidential term. Putin continues to compete with himself.

One of the new initiatives that Putin announced was five “national projects.” Four of these (Family, Youth, Long and Active Life, and Personnel) are related to human capital. Only one, Data Economy, relates directly to the economy.

Putin’s speech suggested the state intends to act as the major player on the market – not just as a guarantor. He set a target to double capitalization on the Russian stock market by 2030 – not a hugely ambitious goal considering that the S&P 500 Index in the U.S. doubles in value roughly every seven years (and inflation in Russia is much higher than the U.S.).

Putin also pledged billions of dollars of spending. The promised new spending over the next six years comes to around 6 trillion ($66 billion), or about one trillion rubles a year. It may sound like a lot, but in reality it is relatively little – about 0.6% of GDP each year.

New taxes?
However, even these relatively modest sums must come from somewhere. And Putin hinted that the state could impose new taxes, or raise existing ones, to pay for its additional social spending, as well as to boost productivity and to wean the country off imports.

In particular, Putin suggested raising corporate taxes and hiking income tax for the wealthy. Coincidentally, just three days before the speech, pro-Kremlin media reported the existence of legislation that would raise taxes for high earners. That legislation was not backed by the United Russia party, so it is unlikely to gain traction. It should be seen as a trial balloon. However, the idea of raising income tax to 25% on those who earn above 500 million rubles a year would raise about 1 trillion rubles a year – enough to fund all Putin’s spending promises.

Russian officials have spent years talking about shifting from Russia’s flat rate 13% income tax to a more progressive system. In 2021, income tax rate was increased to 15% on individuals who earn more 5 million rubles ($55,000) a year. The higher tax applies to all earnings above this threshold. From a bureaucratic point of view, however, implementing a progressive income tax presents several major problems:

Income tax goes to regional governments, which means that raising taxes will increase Russia’s already significant level of regional inequality;
Progressive taxation could cause companies to take salaries off the books and pay wages in cash – resulting in an overall fall in revenue;
Progressive income tax is first and foremost a tax on the middle class. In modern Russia, a large proportion of the middle class are state employees, particularly security officers and soldiers who the Kremlin would not like to irritate by taking money out of their pocket. They would likely need preferential treatment.
A more realistic alternative to hiking income tax would be a review of corporate income tax, which currently stands at 20%. Indeed, businesses have already suggested they would not be unhappy with higher taxes. Alexander Shokhin, chairman of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, a lobby group, said in December that businesses had no objection to a tax rise if the government stopped levying one-off payments.

A new elite
Another important takeaway from Putin’s speech was that those pursuing private business have, in effect, been erased from the national elite. Putin put it bluntly. “The word “elite” has discredited itself, especially when applied to those who lined their pockets in the 1990s,” he said. “The real elite are the workers and warriors who serve Russia.”

Putin confirmed what businessmen already understand: the nationalization of assets will continue. Strikingly, up until now, Putin has acted as guarantor of the outcome of the 1990s privatization. And as recently as last year he said there would be no new nationalization. But a creeping reversal is well underway. The former assets of Mikhail Abyzov and Andrey Melnichenko’s Metafrax company reverted to state ownership in 2023, and, so far this year, the state has taken control of leading auto-dealer Rolf, and a large metals holding formerly owned by Yuri Antipov, a 1990s billionaire who was detained on fraud charges.

Putin believes the true elite are the “heroes” of Russia’s armed forces fighting in Ukraine. And he called for military veterans to play a greater role in managing enterprises, teaching and state service. Starting March 1, veterans will be able to sign up for a special program called “Time of Heroes.” Soldiers in Ukraine already enjoy more social benefits than anyone else in Russia. Among the most recent proposals, the Finance Ministry suggested exempting them from interest payments on outstanding loans.

Come again?
There were also some odd moments in Putin’s speech. The president praised Russians for drinking less, despite the fact that recent official figures showed the first increase in the number of alcoholics in Russia for a decade. He also said the number of people in poverty should be reduced to 7% of the population – even though six years earlier he had set a far more ambitious target.

Ominously, Putin promised to prevent an economic collapse like the one that occurred in the late Soviet Union. Putin said that military spending accounted for 13% of GDP in the1980s (a figure that tallies with accepted Western estimates). However, Russian military and related expenditure is currently estimated to be running at 10% of GDP.

Why the world should care
State capitalism in Russia is becoming more and more about the state, and less and less about capitalism. State spending, national projects and inflated government outlays are now a much better pathway to wealth than the free market. Nor did Putin much bother with presenting a new vision for the future in his speech. His new six-year plan can be summed up as: everything will be like before, only better. Some of Putin’s planned projects have obvious beneficiaries, such as the construction sector, and the new military elite. But who exactly will be better off, and how exactly this will work, is not at all clear.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/03/the ... ore-state/

******



The Moscow Crocus City Hall Attack: A Preliminary View
by GORDONHAHN
March 27, 2024

The proper approach to explaining any event — say, a murder, a revolution, a war, or a terrorist attack — is not to fly exclude any cause, perpetrator, contractor and begin to narrow the range of possible causes and perpetrators, and contractors solely on the basis of evidence carefully gathered and analyzed. It would be a fool’s errand to immediately focus on a single cause or actor to the exclusion of all others. We still and may always lack sufficient information to determine the gamut of players that might or might not have been involved in ordering, organizing, facilitating, and carrying out the 22 March 2024 Crocus City Hall terrorist attack in Moscow that killed some 150 and wounded as many and whether Ukraine may have participated in any way.

However, there is good preliminary reason not to exclude but rather include ISIS-Khorosan, based in Afghanistan, in the list of those possibly or even, perhaps, likely involved. ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack. However, ISIS has a record of playing loose in its claims of responsibility by including being responsible not just because of its recruitment for, and organisation, planning, and execution of attacks but for simply having inspired attackers (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 70116.html and https://www.huffpost.com/entry/isis-res ... c4816b118c). One of the four gunmen told security services on video after being captured that he was inspired by a “preacher” through Telegram. Another caveat is the same perpetrator claims that the terrorists were offered money to carry out the attack (https://news.ru/russia/ubil-vseh-za-500 ... v-krokuse/). But jihadi attacks are rarely carried out for money. Rather they are driven by the above-mentioned inspiration, jihadism-oriented inspiration. Radical Takfirst jihadist theo-ideology and its teaching that killing the kufr/infidel will give one eternal bliss in paradise is the motivation. These caveats bring in the possibility that this was an attack involving multiple parties, one of which might be one or more elements in Ukraine and/or the West in addition to ISIS-Khorosan and perhaps others.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 25 March speech to an expanded meeting of the Russian government seemed confused on this subject and was filled with indications that he strongly suspects Ukraine, the US and perhaps other elements in the West were somehow involved in, and might be those who ordered the attack— the orderers or contractors, zakazchiki. On the one hand, he said that it is known that the Crocus attack was carried out by “radical Islamists.” But on the other hand, he seemed to cast doubt on this version of events. Rather than focusing on the terrorists’ claim that he did it for money and jihadi takfirism or ‘radical Islamism’, Putin focused on more general questions, saying the Russian secret services need to find answers to the following: “Are radical and even terrorist Islamic organizations really interested in striking at Russia, which today stands for a just solution to the escalated Middle East conflict? And how do radical Islamists, who position themselves, by the way, as faithful Muslims, professing the so-called pure Islam, commit grave atrocities and crimes in the holy month of Ramadan for all Muslims?” Russia’s Investigate Committee and other security organs would waste their time preparing an answer to these two questions. The answers are obvious. Regarding the first: Russia has been supporting Palestinians for decades and yet has seen ISIS and other jihadi groups (foreign- and domestic-based) recruit, target, and attack Russia at the same time. On the second issue, ISIS has a history of carrying out attacks during Ramadan. In 2016, ISIS claimed responsibility for four attacks during Ramadan, including three attacks targeting fellow Muslims in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey.

Putin’s and Russia’s main concern, the Russian president said, is who might have ordered the attack. In this regard, he made it clear that he has intense suspicions that Ukrainians were involved and held the US and the West are responsible even in the did not participate in any way. He noted:

“Who benefits from this? This atrocity can only be a link in a series of attempts by those who have been fighting our country since 2014 at the hands of the neo-Nazi Kiev regime. And the Nazis, as is well known, never disdained to use the dirtiest and most inhumane means to achieve their goals.

Especially today, when their advertised counteroffensive has completely failed. This has already been recognized by everyone, it is not disputed. The Russian Armed Forces are holding the initiative along the entire line of contact, and all measures taken by the enemy to stabilize the front are not successful.

Hence the attempts to enter and gain a foothold in our border territories, shelling, including with the use of multiple rocket launchers, peaceful neighborhoods, civilian facilities, including energy infrastructure, attempts at missile strikes on the Crimean Bridge and the peninsula itself.

Bloody acts of intimidation, such as the terrorist attack in Moscow, quite logically fit into this series. The goal, as I have already said, is to sow panic in our society and at the same time show our own population that all is not lost for the Kiev regime. …

(I)t is necessary to answer the question: why did the terrorists, after committing a crime, try to leave for Ukraine, who was waiting for them there? It is clear that those who support the Kiev regime do not want to be accomplices of terror and sponsors of terrorism. But there are really a lot of questions.

Why did the terrorists, after committing the crime, try to leave for Ukraine, who was waiting for them there? It is clear that those who support the Kiev regime do not want to be accomplices of terror and sponsors of terrorism. ” (http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/73732).

In the last paragraph from Putin’s comments above Putin touches on the only significant evidence, albeit circumstantial, that Russian officials have offered to demonstrate that Ukraine might have been involved in the Crocus operation. This is the fact that after escaping the site, the four main terrorist perpetrators of the attack drove nearly 200 miles from Moscow on the M3/E101 highway which leads towards Ukraine before being stopped and arrested in Bryansk Oblast north-northwest of the Znamenskii Forest. Some have countered that the terrorists would have been hard put to gain the border in a war zone, needing to manoeuvre through Russian defense lines. But the area to which the terrorists may have been headed would have been one of the least populated in terms of Russian defense forces and where there has been no fighting. If one uses Google Maps and follows from the M3/E101 highway through Bryansk towards the Russian-Ukrainian border, one will find a left turn off E101 before the Russian Border Customs Point that leads to the small border town of Nekislitsa. From southern Nekislitsa’s most souther point it is a short, 700 ft. jaunt to the Kleven River. From that point it is some 500-1,000 ft. before the Kleven River becomes the Russian-Ukrainian border itself. The river is not wide, maybe 30ft. Could the terrorists have been making a run to the Kleven River? If so, were they heading to Ukraine because they had co-conspirators, contractors there or just because it was the nearest exit from Russia? The area I describe is not that which Ukrainian forces invaded or made incursions in the Belgorod direction, discounting the hypothesis that the area was made a window for their escape.

FSB chief Aleksandr Bortnikov upped the ante on the Ukrainian involvement by saying the terrorists were waited for by curators on the other side of the Ukrainian border. On March 26th he said on Russia’s main evening news program on First Channel that the SBU had “general information,” which is still being checked, indicating that the US, Great Britain, and Ukraine were behind the attack, that the terrorists were in Ukraine shortly before the attack, that the SBU could be declared a terrorist organization, and that it, the HRU, and HRU chief Budanov are legal targets for Russian operations (https://iz.ru/1672178/2024-03-26/bortni ... -v-krokuse; https://iz.ru/1672003/2024-03-26/bortni ... na-ukraine; and https://iz.ru/1672065/2024-03-26/bortni ... liu-rossii).

Nevertheless, no Russian official so far — and it is still early — has offered truly convincing evidence of Western or Ukrainian involvement. To be sure, several things seem odd. Regarding Ukraine, as noted, the terrorists run in the direction of the Ukrainian border is curious. Regarding the US and the West, the US and other Western governments’ instant claim that ISIS-Khorosan was wholly responsible and that Ukraine played no role seemed odd. Indeed, even with the information the US government had and presumably provided in early March about a potentially impending attack (see below), there is no way Washington could no for sure that this was the same plot and that it had all information about its participants. For me, the mass Western unison singing of the same tune, ’no Ukrainian involvement’, rings curious. Although the Western media’s unison was especially rapid and unified in this case, it is hard to gauge the meaning, since loud unified messaging, much like a state-controlled media, is the modus operandi of the increasingly authoritarian US and West and their tied-to-the-hip media now. The unison often exceeds Russian state-controlled media’s robust solidarity.

Additional suspicion is cast on the US in this way, given the recent (February 25) New York Times article on the CIA’s 14 intelligence-operational centers near the Russian-Ukrainian border and/or frontlines, which acknowledged the role of the Ukrainian SBU (Ukrainian Security Service), HRU (Main Military Intelligence of Ukraine), and especially HRU chief Kirill Budanov in numerous assassinations and terrorist attacks against Russian and pro-Russian civilian and/or non-military targets, depending on the case (https://gordonhahn.com/2024/03/10/updat ... in-to-war/). Could the Crocus attack be another case of the Ukrainian secret services ‘going rogue”? Was the NYT article — one that had to have been cleared by the CIA at the highest level, given the secrets it revealed — an attempt to wash its hands regarding its involvement in the previous attacks? Or, most disturbingly, did the CIA already have knowledge of Ukrainian involvement in the Crocus attack and was preemptively washing its hands of that attack, having played a role or not?

The US has let it be known that it had prior warning about a similar kind of attack. On March 7th, US embassy in Moscow warning to Americans of possible terrorist attack in Russia and not to attend public gatherings “such as concerts.” The same day, a cell member, perhaps its leader, cased out Crocus City Hall, and was photographed by a venue photographer. Russia’s most popular pop singer Shaman was scheduled to perform on Saturday, March 9th. (https://iz.ru/1670895/2024-03-24/istoch ... =read_more and https://news.ru/russia/odin-iz-terroris ... ource=smi2). The same terrorist who was photographed casing Crocus, one of seven already arrested, Shamsuddin Fariduni, has been shown by Russian security confessing to carrying out the attack for $10,000, but he also said he was influenced by a preacher, presumably a jihadi theo-ideologist (https://iz.ru/1670895/2024-03-24/istoch ... =read_more). Perhaps the terrorists were planning to attack on the 9th, but the venue had a heavy security presence on that day. The US embassy warning may have sparked both the heavy security and the terrorists’ decision to attack the March 9th concert, which it then reversed because of the heavy security. Clearly an attack on the weekend prior to that on which it occurred would have had the ‘benefit’ of upsetting the 15-17 March Russian elections, including the presidential election, perhaps undermining support for Putin, it may have been thought.

Putin’s spokesman Dmitri Peskov originally said that the Kremlin received no information from the US about an imminent attack, but that intelligence exchanges are usually made between intelligence services not to the executive branch (https://iz.ru/1671260/2024-03-25/peskov ... rakte-v-rf). Later, FSB chief Aleksandr Bortnikov said Moscow received some “general” information from the US and that the Russian government took it into account (https://iz.ru/1672003/2024-03-26/bortni ... na-ukraine). This might explain the beefed up security at Crocus on 7 and/or 9 March, causing the terrorists to delay the attack for two weeks. Some, mostly Russian sources, have claimed that the Ukrainian invasion of Belgorod was an effort not just to create fear and dissent on the even of the presidential elections but also to insert the terrorists into Russia. This claim does not hold water, since the large-scale assault in the Belgorod direction a cross the border into Russia began on 11-12 March, that is, 4-5 days after March 7th when one terrorist was supposedly already casing out the Crocus venue in Moscow for a March 9th operation.

There is some evidence that the Crocus terrorists may have been trained in Turkey for some two months. There are reports that information about the cells and training sites of some 40 terrorists detained in Turkey on March 25th was transmitted from Moscow likely on the 24th (https://www.turkishminute.com/2024/03/2 ... -minister/ and https://x.com/vicktop55/status/17723361 ... 3DfCRCwexQ). Crocus terrorist Fariduni said under questioning that he had arrived in Russia on March 4th from Turkey (https://iz.ru/1670895/2024-03-24/istoch ... =read_more)). He reportedly posted photographs of himself in Turkey on the social web on February 23rd (https://iz.ru/1671184/2024-03-25/odin-i ... z-stambula and https://regnum.ru/news/3876730). Turkey is a NATO member, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is expert at playing many sides of the fence at once and paying little cost. Asa a NATO member Erdogan’s Turkey is nevertheless seeking BRICS+ membership and cooperates with the Sino-Russian-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Turkey proposed to mediate new Russo-Ukrainian peace talks during the visit, which Zelenskiy rejected out of hand, while it provides air and sea drones to Kiev. Could Turkey have been in on a joint NATO-Ukrainian operation? The noted Zelenskiy visit to Erdogan took place on March 8th, adding intrigue to this line of reasoning (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-ea ... 024-03-08/).

We know that the Maidan Ukraine leadership has the mentality, motive, and means to participate, even solely generate such an attack. Ukraine’s Maidan regime was born in the spilling of blood of fellow Ukrainians. On 20 February 2014, the Maidan protest movement’s ultranationalist/neofascist wing carried out a snipers’ massacre of over a hundred of their ‘own’ protestors, firing on both Berkut security forces and demonstrators simultaneously and thereby provoking further protestor violence overthrowing the Viktor Yanukovych government.* Once upon a time, when he stood outside the political elite, even then presidential candidate Volodomyr Zelenskiy noted this fact (https://interfax.com.ua/news/political/ ... _JbxrZOHuU). The West blamed it on Yanukovych and the Berkut and has so ever since. If the Maidan movement could countenance the slaughter of more than a hundred its own, then it quite easily could join in the murder of hundreds of Russians in conditions of a bloody war it is losing. After all, for a decade now Kiev has been targeting its own civilians in Russian-populated territories they claim as Ukrainian sovereign territory, and it has carried out several assassinations of mere Russian commentators and propagandists since February 2022. Regarding the Crocus attack, Secretary of Ukraine’s Defense and Security Council Oleksiy Danilov called for more attacks in Russia similar to Crocus: “Is it fun in Moscow today? I think it’s a lot of fun. I would like to believe that we will arrange such fun for them more often. After all, they are “brotherly” people, and we need to please our relatives more often, go to visit them more often. So, we will go” (https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-world/3 ... vijni.html and https://x.com/mazzenilsson/status/17712 ... 29269?s=20). Is this why Zelenskii fired Danilov three days after the latter’s comments that “we will arrange” “fun in Moscow” more often? (www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2024/03/26/7448225/) Did Danilov spill the beans like a Ukrainian Joe Biden (‘son of a gun, they fired him’). In sum, Ukraine is minded to, and capable of ordering, helping to organise, and even executing such an attack (although in this case we have Tajik who were perhaps jihadists to one extent or another).

Ultimately, the Russians must prove that their suspicions of some sort of Ukrainian involvement are correct by producing evidence and proof. Suffice it to say here that their suspicions are not just understandable but are to be expected given the history of Western-Russian post-Cold War relations, NATO expansion, Western meddling in Ukraine to facilitate that expansion to Ukraine, and the numerous cases of lies and deception directed at Russia from the West. Ukraine and their allies cannot as yet be removed from the list of potential suspects. Those who did so within a mere several days or hours have done so as a result of bias, denial, and/or propagandistic motives,

==================================

* See https://gordonhahn.com/2016/03/09/the-r ... ing-paper/; https://www.academia.edu/8776021/The_Sn ... UswfS7IGOU; https://strana.ua/news/280175-zhvanija- ... ReSOPY1K0s; https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... estigation; www.youtube.com/watch?v=JChtKpaulOs&fea ... EU7nATfGEA; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF_-nrS ... GMCTjx5Jr4; https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 0596862745; and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uybqayf ... 3qTq5nbOMw.

https://gordonhahn.com/2024/03/27/the-m ... nary-view/

[blindpig]

Turks About New Reality...

... Sabah notes:


Russian leader Vladimir Putin, who was targeted by the West with the Ukraine war, broke the mold of the global status quo/order based on the norms of the Atlantic and made his country one of the most effective alternative power centers for the non-Western world. Because the West's campaign of anti-Russian pressure did not result in international exclusion as it was touted. On the contrary, it accelerated the geopolitical integration of the non-Western world. The secret of this success lies in Russia's military and economic power. As the West runs out of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine, the enormous production capacity of the Russian military industry has taken everyone by surprise.

Keep in mind that it is not just about military industry of Russia, however mighty and with unrivaled surge capability. As Sabah continues:


Russia's economy grew by 3.6 percent in 2023, more than any other G7 country. The IMF forecasts growth of 0.9 percent in 2004 for Europe, while growth in Russia is forecast at 2.6 percent. This rate is double the previous estimates. Russia is also currently at an all-time low of 2.9 percent, hitting a record high of 2.9 percent.

And here is what I was stressing when talking about whole of economy, not just military-industrial complex. Here are some, very few, indices:


Наибольший рост среди обрабатывающих производств показали: производство готовых металлических изделий, кроме машин и оборудования — 151,5%, производство компьютеров, электронных и оптических изделий — 147,2%, производство прочих транспортных средств и оборудования — 138,6%, производство автотранспортных средств, прицепов и полуприцепов — 137,9%, производство напитков — 129,8%, производство лекарственных средств и материалов — 122,8%. Индекс добывающих производств составил 102,1%.

Translation: The greatest growth among manufacturing industries was shown by: production of finished metal products, except machinery and equipment - 151.5%, production of computers, electronic and optical products - 147.2%, production of other vehicles and equipment — 138.6%, production of vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers — 137.9%, beverage production — 129.8%, production of medicines and materials — 122.8%. The extractive industries index amounted to 102.1%.

Bunch of other manufactured items from furniture, to food, to paper, to clothing to other finished products--all show two digit growth.

In related news, Kiev now is ready to talk about borders as they were prior to February 2022. Moscow is not interested--it already stressed that the starting point of any talks are full new regions of: Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson and then... Russia will begin to dictate what and how the rest will go.



It is not going to go well for Kiev regime. In the end, it is between Russia and the United States. Kiev now is in Bargaining mode per Kubler-Ross. So is the US.

P.S. Per teeth--five hours (it was agreed in advance) yesterday: six "posts" (pivots), one root canal, four temporary segments (including two bridges). Now a month or two with temporaries until metal-ceramic permanents will be installed. But that will be easy now--the main job was done yesterday. I need a drink, my dentist also said so, LOL))) Ah, YES, completely forgot--I finished the book, now only Foreword remains, technical work of finishing editing by Clarity Press, indexing and off we go. I really need a drink!

http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2024/03 ... ality.html

******

JIMMY DORE: U.S. MEDIA ADMITS RUSSIA’S ECONOMY BOOMING DESPITE WESTERN SANCTIONS
MARCH 30, 2024 NATYLIESB



https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2024/03/jim ... sanctions/

[blindpig]

Russia has increased supplies of nitrocellulose from NATO countries
April 1, 11:27



Russia has increased supplies of nitrocellulose from NATO countries

The latest American investigations have come to depressing results: “Russia has increased imports of explosives and components necessary for the production of ammunition, including from companies based in the United States and other Western countries.

Russian imports of nitrocellulose, one of the main components in the production of gunpowder, grew by 70% in 2022 and amounted to 3,039 tons by mid-2023, almost double the 2021 level. Defense companies around the world are trying to find sources of nitrocellulose in times of shortage. This has led to a sharp rise in prices and the market is concentrated around a few production centers, few countries produce it and it is subject to international trade restrictions.

Russia doesn't produce enough, so the ability to source and buy it overseas will play a key role in 2023, U.S. officials and analysts say. In addition to China, which has increased supplies to Russia since 2022, companies from the USA, Germany and Taiwan have also appeared, with supplies going through the small company NOY IC VE DIS TICARET LTD. STI" in Turkey (almost 50% of imported nitrocellulose, and before the start of the SVO, this company supplied no more than 1%). The majority of Istanbul-based Noy's sales were to Russian companies, according to corporate documents.

One of the Russian importers, Analytical Marketing Chemical Group, has received almost $700,000 worth of nitrocellulose from Taiwan over the past two years. As reported on the company's website, the importer is a permanent partner of the Russian Kazan State Powder Plant.

The German subsidiaries of New York-based
International Flavors & Fragrances sold at least 80 tons of nitrocellulose to Noy, which then shipped the product to Russia, last year. An International Flavors & Fragrances spokesman said the company was surprised to learn that shipments of its nitrocellulose products to Russia, which it had suspended in April 2022, continued through a third country.

Taiwanese company TNC Industrial produced more than 500 tons of nitrocellulose, which Noy shipped to Russia last year. The company said authorities in Taiwan earlier this month reviewed the firm's compliance with safety requirements. “Our company will continue to export industrial grade nitrocellulose,” TNC said. And the Department of International Trade of Taiwan remained completely silent.

Hagedorn-NC, which has been producing nitrocellulose in western Germany for more than a century, has produced a similar quantity shipped to Russia by Noy over the past two years. In response to questions about the export of nitrocellulose, a spokeswoman for the German Ministry of Economic Affairs, Marie Güttler, replied: “In accordance with the restrictions, both direct and indirect export (via third countries) of nitrocellulose is prohibited. The same applies to cotton pulp and other cotton products that can be used in the production of explosives." That's the entire official response to the confirmed facts of deliveries. Hagedorn itself has stated that it does not produce nitrocellulose for military purposes, and that its product is used as a binder in civilian printing inks and varnishes. “All exports have been approved by the relevant authorities,” the company said in an open letter.

Exports from Western companies to Russia come amid a global shortage of nitrocellulose, which is slowing the production of artillery shells by NATO countries for Ukraine. Poland, for example, has invested in restarting nitrocellulose production to meet growing demand. We will not be surprised if these products also end up in Russia. Western business is very pragmatic, and will sell its products only to solvent buyers, and sanctions are not an obstacle for them, but it is difficult to classify Ukraine as a reliable partner, and maybe there are other reasons...

https://t.me/neinsider/6280 - zinc

Sanctions are working.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9063480.html

Google Translator

******

Blaming Russia For “Havana Syndrome” Pushes The Opposite Narrative Than Intended



ANDREW KORYBKO
APR 01, 2024

For Russia to have successfully used a mobile directed energy weapon over 1,500 times, including against the US’ “top 5%, 10% performing officers across the Defense Intelligence Agency”, then it must have deeply penetrated the US Government in order to discover those elite targets’ identities and locations.

CBS News, The Insider, and Der Spiegel released the findings of their joint investigation on Sunday blaming Russia for “Havana Syndrome”, which refers to the mysterious ear and head pain that over 1,500 US Government (USG) staffers across the world claim to have experienced since 2016. It appeared timed to coincide with Congress’ plans to vote on Ukraine aid sometime later this month, with the intent obviously being to scare lawmakers into approving more funds for America’s proxy war on Russia.

It might have the opposite effect than intended, however, since those outlets’ dramatic claims paint a picture of deep Russian intelligence penetration of the US’ diplomatic and security services that can’t be remedied by simply sending more money to Ukraine. If what they wrote is true, then Russia has created a mobile directed energy weapon (DEW) that it’s already successfully used over 1,500 times, including against the US’ “top 5%, 10% performing officers across the Defense Intelligence Agency”.

This startling statistic comes from the recently retired Army lieutenant colonel who ran the Pentagon’s investigation into the matter. He claimed that this elite echelon of victims had all “worked against Russia, focused on Russia, and done extremely well” but were then “neutralized” after their injuries. His allegations contradict the Intelligence Community’s (IC) official review from last year that no DEWs nor foreign adversaries were responsible for these “anomalous health incidents”.

Those who take the IC’s official review at face value suspect that the prior hysteria about “Havana syndrome” was just a means of fearmongering about Russia, which they also naturally believe is the motive behind the latest joint investigation’s findings. Meanwhile, those who suspected that the IC’s official review was a cover-up take the latest joint investigation’s findings at face value, which means that they truly believe that Russia has deeply penetrated the US’ diplomatic and security services.

There’s no credible evidence to suggest that this is the case, especially since Russia would have presumably been much better prepared for responding to America’s diplomatic and military provocations throughout the course of their ongoing proxy war if it had moles within both. Nevertheless, the only way that one can believe that it’s systematically targeting members of those institutions who had all worked against it “extremely well” in the past is if it knew who they were and where they lived.

That in turn obliges one to believe that it must have deeply penetrated them in order to obtain this highly classified information, thus meaning that Russian spies are more highly placed than anyone had thought even after the witch hunt that followed the Russiagate hysteria. Once again, there’s no credible evidence that this is the case, and another argument against this theory is that Russia isn’t targeting any similarly prominent Ukrainian diplomats or security officials despite being at “war” with their country.

Reflecting on the abovementioned insight, it’s much more likely that Russia has nothing to do with “Havana syndrome” and that the latest joint investigation’s findings are just a desperate attempt to scare lawmakers into approving more Ukraine aid ahead of their planned vote later this month. Any penetration of the IC at the level that this conspiracy theory implies would have led to the past two years unfolding in a very different way and Russia not being caught off guard by the proxy war that broke out.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/blaming- ... a-syndrome

******

Russia Demands Extradition of Terrorists Based in Ukraine


Building that houses the Russian Foreign Ministry in Moscow. | Photo: https://mid.ru/en/

Published 31 March 2024 (14 hours 49 minutes ago)

The ministry did not reveal any of the names of those it has demanded due to their suspected involvement, aside from the head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Vasily Malyuk.

Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has demanded this Sunday that Ukraine extradite all those involved in the terrorist attack perpetrated on 22 March in the concert hall Crocus City Hall, as well as other attacks committed in the Eurasian country.

The Russian FM stressed that this latest attack "is not the first terrorist attack" against Russia in recent times. " The investigative actions carried out by the competent Russian authorities indicate that the traces of all these crimes lead to Ukraine".

This diplomatic entity also cited other attacks: the murders of journalist Daria Dúguina and war correspondent Vladlén Tatarski, the assassination attempt on the novelist and political activist Zajar Prilepin and the blowing up of the Crimean bridge that left five dead, among other attacks.


In this sense the Russian Foreign Ministry transmitted to the Kiev government the demands "for the immediate arrest and extradition of all persons involved in the attacks".

Also included in the petition is the head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Vasili Malyuk, "that on 25 March cynically admitted that Ukraine had organized the attack on the Crimean bridge in October 2022 and revealed details of other terrorist attacks".

The ministry did not reveal any of the names of those it has demanded due to their suspected involvement, aside from the head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), Vasily Malyuk. If Ukraine does not comply with Moscow’s request will constitute a breach of Ukraine’s international obligations with respect to fighting terrorism and “entail its international legal responsibility,” the ministry warned.

“Fighting against international terrorism is the responsibility of every state. The Russian side demands that the Kiev regime immediately stop any support for terrorist activities, hand over the perpetrators and compensate for the damage done to the victims,” it stressed.



https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Rus ... -0007.html