Why is NATO’s cover-up for terrorist attacks in Russia so sloppy?
By Drago Bosnic | March 27, 2024
The diabolical massacre of over 300 people (nearly half of whom are dead now) at the Crocus City Hall is the worst terrorist attack in Russia in the last 20 years and one of the worst in the world in the last half a decade. And yet, many in the mainstream propaganda machine called it a “shooting”, possibly a “mass shooting” or simply an “attack” and similar terms that show just how little empathy there is for Russian civilians. The terrorist attack in and of itself was horrible enough, but the monstrous glee that was coming from the Neo-Nazi junta and its supporters made things far worse. What’s more, Russian intelligence found disturbing evidence pointing to the political West, particularly the United States, as the true organizer of the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack.
On the other hand, Washington DC insists that it has “undeniable evidence” that ISIS is behind it. Rather interesting how the US could claim this mere hours after the terrorist attack, when not even Russian services who were on the ground had all the details, but it “doesn’t really know” who destroyed the Nord Stream pipelines, except that it was a “mysterious deep-diving Ukrainian group”. Even worse, Washington DC is yet to conclude the 9/11 investigation 23 years after the attacks that were a defining moment of America’s 21st-century history. It’s “almost as if” the political elites are hiding something. But, for some reason, they “immediately know” who’s behind a terrorist attack 10,000 km away and insist their favorite puppet regime “most certainly had nothing to do with it”.
What’s more, the US started defending the Neo-Nazi junta before Russia came out with any official statements about its involvement. And while the troubled Biden administration, including vice president Kamala Harris, is fighting tooth and nail to “prove” the Kiev regime’s “innocence”, the latter’s on the brink of throwing parties to celebrate the brutal massacre of hundreds of unarmed Russian civilians. There are at least two such disturbing cases, one where a Ukrainian restaurant included something called “the Crocus City set” in its menu and another where Ukrainian gamers created a map of the Crocus City Hall concert hall in the globally popular Counter Strike FPS game, where they can shoot and set fire to virtual hostages or even plant explosives to blow them up.
However, while dealing with such behavior should be left to psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, the reactions of the Neo-Nazi junta’s top-ranking officials clearly demonstrate who’s really behind the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack. Apart from the (now former) Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksiy Danilov, who not only praised the terrorist attack, but also mocked the victims and Russia as a whole and threatened with more such massacres, there’s also the SBU head Vasyl Malyuk who openly boasted about organizing terrorist attacks that killed a number of Russian public figures, including Darya Dugina and Maxim Fomin (aka Vladlen Tatarsky), clearly implying that he’s also involved in the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack.
Earlier this year, GUR (Kiev regime’s military intelligence) head Kyrylo Budanov also threatened to go “deeper and deeper” with terrorist attacks in Russia. When top-ranking officials of the Neo-Nazi junta’s two most important intelligence services (SBU and GUR) say such things, it instantly incriminates the entire NATO-backed puppet regime. However, as it’s rather dangerous for Volodymyr Zelensky to fire either Malyuk or Budanov, the Neo-Nazi junta frontman is forced to cover his tracks by dismissing lower-ranking officials such as Danilov. One of Zelensky’s closest associates, Danilov has been extremely hawkish since day one and has openly insisted on launching as many sabotage and terrorist attacks as possible, all coordinated with the US-led NATO.
This brings us to another similar episode that happened in the US when the infamous neocon warmonger Victoria Nuland used the opportunity to threaten Russia on the second anniversary of its special military operation (SMO). Namely, she said that the so-called “military aid” provided by Washington DC to the Kiev regime will ensure that “Putin faces some nasty surprises on the battlefield this year”. Days later, she left the State Department. It seems the Neo-Nazi junta isn’t the only one trying to cover their tracks, although Nuland appears to have been a bit more cunning by leaving before the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack. But Nuland is not the only one. Last year, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, made similar threats.
“There should be no Russian who goes to sleep without wondering if they’re going to get their throat slit in the middle of the night,” Washington Post quoted Milley, who also added: “You gotta get back there, and create a campaign behind the lines.”
What happened with Milley soon after this? You guessed it – he retired. But terrorist attacks across Russia keep escalating. In the meantime, the political West is further exposing its monstrous hypocrisy by condemning the treatment of the terrorists who committed the Crocus City Hall massacre. American journalist Julia Davis is “worried” about their well-being, while the former chief of the CIA’s Russia ops Steve Hall stated that this demonstrates the supposed “difference in values between what is happening in Russia and what is happening in the West”. Yes, there’s a clear difference, because Russia didn’t run the infamous Abu Ghraib prison where American occupation forces tortured countless Iraqi soldiers and civilians.
Russia also doesn’t run the brutal Guantanamo Bay detention camp where hundreds (if not thousands) have been illegally incarcerated, some of whom have been in solitary confinement for decades without ever being charged with a crime. Thus, while Russia is punishing actual terrorists, the US is “worried” about these mass murderers who killed and wounded over 300 people. At the same time, the belligerent thalassocracy is torturing and imprisoning people who were fighting a foreign invader, or worse, those who haven’t done anything. In that regard, Mr Hall is certainly right, there’s a gaping difference between values held in Moscow and Washington DC. All this clearly indicates that the political West and its Neo-Nazi puppets are engaged in a cover-up.
However, the question is – why is it all so sloppy and too obvious? If analysts and journalists noticed all this so easily, Russian intelligence and state services certainly know far more. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently pointed out this hypocrisy, referring to the offer by so-called “international institutions” to supposedly “help” with the investigation regarding the latest terrorist attack, but ignored similar Russian requests regarding the Nord Stream sabotage. It should be noted that this terrorist attack was also previously announced by the US, which pledged to ensure that the pipeline becomes “a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea”. In other words, the true terrorists aren’t even bothering to hide anymore (and haven’t been for quite some time now).
All this clearly indicates that NATO wants war with Russia. It recently sent French President Emmanuel Macron to test this with pompous announcements of direct involvement. However, as most of Europe said it won’t take part in this madness, NATO now needs a way to push Russia to attack first. The only way to do so is to provoke a reaction, which is why the world’s most aggressive military cartel organized the terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall. In that way, NATO is pushing Russia to retaliate and then present it as the “aggressor”, giving the political West a perfect pretext to wage a “defensive war”. That’s the only way to ensure the participation of the entire (or at least most of) NATO. However, once the Pandora’s Box is opened, there won’t be any going back.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
NATO Mulls ‘Shooting Down’ Missiles Straying Close to Its Borders – Report
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 27.03.2024
On March 24, the Polish Armed Forces Operational Command claimed that a Russian cruise missile had breached the country’s airspace overnight near the village of Oserdow, close to the Ukraine border, remaining in Polish airspace for 39 seconds.
NATO members are reportedly considering the possibility of shooting down missiles that fly in close proximity to the alliance’s borders.
“Various concepts are being analyzed within NATO, including for such missiles to be shot down when they are very close to a NATO member’s border,” Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Andrzej Szejna stated, speaking on the radio station RMF24.
He noted, however, that this would have to happen with the consent of the Ukrainian side, and taking into account the international consequences, as then NATO missiles would be targeting Russian missiles outside the territory of the alliance.
On Sunday, the Polish Armed Forces Operational Command in a statement said that there was a violation of Polish airspace at 4:23 a.m. (03:23 GMT) by “a Russian cruise missile.” The missile was said to have breached the country’s airspace near the village of Oserdow, close to the Ukraine border, and remained in flight there for 39 seconds.
However, there was no evidence offered in the text to support these claims.
According to Polish Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz, the missile would have been shot down had there been “any signs that this object was heading for a certain target located on the territory of the Republic (of Poland).” Poland scrambled its fighter jets over the incident.
Oserdow is located in Lublin province in the southeastern part of the country, which borders the Volyn and Lvov regions of Ukraine.
Russian Ambassador to Poland Sergey Andreev later told Sputnik that he skipped a meeting at the Polish Foreign Ministry over the “missile incident” because Warsaw had failed to present any evidence on the issue.
After being summoned to the Polish Foreign Ministry to meet with one of the deputy ministers, Andreev asked if the Polish side intended to provide Russia with any evidence of the allegations. However, as he did not receive an answer from the Polish side, Andreev decided not to attend the meeting.
At the end of last year, Poland announced a similar incident. The Polish military claimed that a missile belonging to Russia performed a maneuver in Polish airspace and then returned to Ukraine. While Chief of the Polish General Staff Wieslaw Kukula told reporters that according to Polish radar control systems the missile belonged to Russia, Moscow’s Ambassador to Warsaw Sergey Andreev said that Poland had not provided evidence to substantiate the claims.
After a missile crashed on Polish territory in an incident on November 15, 2022, Polish investigators later came to the conclusion that it was a stray Ukrainian anti-air projectile.
Meanwhile, it is worth noting that ever since the Ukraine conflict intensified, there has also been a surge in incidents involving NATO aircraft flying near Russia’s maritime borders. Warships from the United States and other NATO countries have also increased provocative forays into the Black Sea.
The alleged Sunday incident came as Russia was carrying out strikes targeting Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, energy facilities, railway junctions, and ammunition depots between March 16 and 22 in response to the shelling of its territory and attempts to break through and seize Russian border settlements, according to Russia’s Ministry of Defense.
The Russian Aerospace Forces subsequently carried out high-precision missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian power facilities on March 24. The combined strike with long-range airborne precision weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles targeted “electric power facilities, gas production facilities, and assembly and testing sites for unmanned boats,” the MoD said.
At the same time, Russian air defenses destroyed 172 Ukrainian drones, 11 Storm Shadow cruise missiles, and three Neptun anti-ship missiles, as well as 22 multiple launch rocket system shells and other targets, the military said.
Moscow massacre: Who created Daesh and whose agenda does it serve
By Shabbir Rizvi | Press TV | March 26, 2024
A massive tragedy struck Moscow last week as five armed assailants stormed the Crocus Concert Hall and opened indiscriminate fire on concertgoers, murdering over 130 and wounding many more.
The horrific massacre at the glitzy commercial center, which prompted a massive manhunt, led to the arrest of one assailant at the scene of the crime and others in the Bryansk forest, about 340 km southwest of the Russian capital.
Almost immediately, Daesh (or as the West calls “ISIS”) claimed responsibility for the ghastly massacre, releasing body cam footage of the shooters opening fire on people at the popular concert hall.
Since then, many have raised questions about the terrorist group’s motivations and objectives of the attack – and rightfully so.
Daesh has historically been at the service of Western powers. For example, any time the US needs an excuse to justify military operations from Syria to Iraq – Daesh just happens to raise its ugly face and sow chaos and destabilization.
In fact, Daesh is still the main justification for why the US illegally occupies much of Syria and Iraq – despite Axis of Resistance forces led by the late anti-terror commander General Qassem Soleimani destroying the edifice of the terror group in the region.
Or when Iran faced foreign plots in the form of armed riots in 2022 – rioters that had received training and financial support from American agencies – Daesh took advantage of the chaos and killed over a dozen pilgrims in a cowardly attack on the Shah Cheragh shrine in southern Iran’s Shiraz city.
The timing of the attack came as local security agencies were busy containing the armed rioters, and was seemingly a final bid by foreign hostile powers to foment chaos and disorder in Iran.
Chaos and destabilization are key to the nefarious plots hatched by US imperialists to push their hegemonic agendas. Since the very beginning of the Cold War, the US has been notorious for using mercenary proxy forces in order to advance its imperialistic goals.
So what is Daesh doing in Moscow? Three events come to mind that suggest things aren’t exactly what they seem. In other words, there is more to it than meets the eye.
Let’s switch back to January 2024 – outgoing US Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland said “Putin faces some nasty surprises on the battlefield this year.”
Nuland was referencing the $60 billion supplemental funding for Ukraine from US Congress – funding that has from the start never been kept track of. Billions of dollars worth of money go into weapons, logistics, and other “aid.” It is no secret that Ukraine has been using mercenaries – even Takfiris.
Daesh fighting in Ukraine is not even a new development. Reports of Daesh fighters fleeing Syria to fight in Ukraine could be recorded as far back as 2015. Fighters were trained under Daesh and then sent to Ukraine to fight Donbas separatists on behalf of the Kiev regime.
We have seen Daesh fighting on the same side as American interests at least twice in recent times – once in Syria against the democratically-elected Syrian government, and second in Ukraine, against Russia – a key US adversary. Also, let’s not forget Afghanistan where Daesh fought the Taliban alongside the US.
Nuland insists that Putin will face challenges on the “battlefield” but Ukrainian drone attacks and bombings throughout Moscow have already set a terroristic precedent for attacks on Russian soil.
A diversity of tactics by employing Takfiri terrorists is still carrying out the same violence by other, more shocking means.
Second, the US knew in advance of a terrorist attack – with the US embassy in Moscow cautioning Americans to avoid large gatherings days before the dastardly attack that claimed more than 130 lives.
In a message to Americans, the embassy stated: “The Embassy is monitoring reports that extremists are planning to attack large gatherings in Moscow, including concerts, in the near future, and US citizens should avoid large gatherings for the next 48 hours.”
Though the message was posted on March 7 and warned of an imminent attack within two days, it seems the US had some damning intelligence. To what degree this information was shared – if it was shared at all – remains unclear.
It is well within the US playbook to post a message of this nature before an attack to absolve themselves of any wrongdoing – but what did the embassy staff and their handlers knew in advance?
The knowledge of the imminent attack also raises other questions. The apprehended shooters revealed they were recruited by unknown people via Telegram, and offered a million rubles for the job.
This is not the modus operandi of Daesh – who typically send fighters on missions that would most certainly ensure they do not survive. However, this does have the markings of the US – which has previously tested Daesh recruitment methods via entrapment cases.
Furthermore, Russian intelligence confirmed years ago that the US has been training Daesh for attacks on Russian soil. So regardless of whether the assailants were Daesh or not, US influence is clearly in one way or another seen in this attack.
Even if Daesh wants to take credit for the attack, ultimately they are just tools in the hands of their American financiers who are seemingly only deployed when the US needs to cause commotion.
And of course, there is the final point – the timing of the attack, and the usage of Daesh itself – corresponds to the international critical lens on Israel.
The Tel Aviv regime has never been under more pressure and detested to such a degree. Its war crimes in the besieged Gaza Strip and disregard for international law have exposed its illegitimate nature.
The public image of Israel has simply never been worse, and they would need something absolutely horrific – and something they can use to their own benefit politically – to get out of the mess.
So where does Daesh come in? One must recall the first few weeks of the Al Aqsa Storm operation – where Zionist media started a campaign falsely equating Hamas with Daesh (ISIS).
The campaign, circulated with the false slogan “Hamas is ISIS” painted Hamas resistance fighters as Takfiri terrorists in order to gain international support for the Zionist cause.
This backfired massively. Hamas and Daesh are well-known enemies, are not ideologically aligned, and do not consider themselves allies in the slightest matter.
This Zionist lie was so far-fetched that even Western media outlets such as Time magazine, Politico, and AP news agency published articles detailing how the two groups are not alike.
Now, as the Zionist image is in tatters, a Daesh attack works in its favor – as it always has.
Racist Zionist politicians and pundits scrambled to social media to warn the world of “Islamism” and to insist yet again that Daesh is the same as Hamas, warning that if they do not destroy Hamas the world would see these attacks in Europe and in the United States, carried out by Hamas (who have never conducted terrorist operations as all of their targets are military targets, and further Hamas operations are limited to only occupied Palestine).
The attack that killed over a hundred innocents is being used as Israeli propaganda to conduct their own war crimes against the Palestinian people.
At best, this is standard Zionist racism and propaganda. At worst, the Zionists themselves had a direct hand in this, at a bare minimum having some knowledge from US intelligence services.
The entire situation screams of foreign manipulation and shadowy Western actors. Daesh has been the Western tool for over a decade now to sow chaos and mayhem – and it seemingly continues to be a go-to tactic for CIA-Mossad operations.
Over a hundred lives were lost and thousands were changed forever. The world must mourn with Moscow and the Russian people over this horrific loss of life – but it must also remain vigilant and ask the right questions.
Who really benefits from chaos and destruction in Russia? Who really benefits from chaos and destruction in Somalia, Iraq and Syria, where Daesh also operates?
One thing is undeniable: wherever you find Daesh, you will always find the shadow of the US with it.
Shabbir Rizvi is a Chicago-based political analyst with a focus on US internal security and foreign policy.
US still operating biolabs in Ukraine – Russian envoy
RT | March 25, 2024
The US continues to operate 30 biolabs on the territory of Ukraine as part of an illegal military-biological program, Russia’s envoy to the Netherlands has claimed.
The number of American laboratories on Ukrainian territory has been “well-known for a long time,” Vladimir Tarabrin, who is also Russia’s Permanent Representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), said in an interview with the Izvestia newspaper on Sunday.
The diplomat recalled that the head of Russia’s Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Protection Forces, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, had claimed in March 2022 that 30 such biolabs existed.
“Our armed forces discovered documents confirming the extensive military biological program deployed by the US and NATO countries on the territory of Ukraine and other former Soviet republics,” he said.
The Kiev government allegedly began destroying dangerous pathogens in the laboratories and suspending research on February 24, 2022, the day Russia launched its military operation against Ukraine, but “in 2023 the implementation of those programs resumed, only their name was changed,” Tarabrin claimed.
Asked if the number of the US biolabs in Ukraine still stands at 30, the ambassador said: “According to our data, yes.”
“It’s not surprising, therefore, that over the past 20 years, Washington has been blocking all Russian initiatives aimed at strengthening the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) regime and creating an effective mechanism for verifying compliance with its provisions by all participating countries,” Tarabrin said.
Over the past two years Moscow has repeatedly raised concerns over an alleged network of secretive US-funded laboratories in Ukraine, publishing troves of documents captured from Kiev authorities, which it claims are linked to the operations of those facilities.
Last April, Kirillov said Russia had “no doubt that the US, under the guise of ensuring global biosecurity, conducted dual-use research, including the creation of biological weapons components, in close proximity to Russian borders.”
The US government has confirmed the existence of the biolabs in Ukraine, but insisted that they are entirely legal and not intended for military purposes, despite mostly being funded via the Pentagon. Washington has denied Moscow’s claims of the labs being used to work on bio-weapons as a “Russian disinformation campaign.”
Kirillov also said a year ago that the US biolab program in Ukraine, which was previously known as ‘Joint biological research’, was rebranded as ‘Biological control research’ so that it could continue its operations.
Macron’s Psycho-Play to Keep Aloft the Punctured Balloon of a ‘Geo-Political EU’
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 25, 2024
Charles Michel, the European Council President, has called on Europe to switch to a ‘war economy’. He justifies this call partly as urgent support for Ukraine, but more pertinently, as the need for relaunching the (beached) European economy by focussing on the defence industry.
Calls ring out across Europe: ‘We are in a pre-war era’, Polish PM Donald Tusk says. Macron, after mooting the possibility ambiguously several times, says, “Maybe at some point – I don’t want it – we will have to have operations [French troops in Ukraine], on the ground, to counter the Russian forces”.
What has spooked the Europeans so? We know the French Intelligence briefing reaching Macron in recent days was dire; it seems to have triggered his initial sally into direct French military intervention in Ukraine. French classified Intelligence warned that the collapse of the Contact Line, and the disintegration of the AFU as a functioning military force, might be imminent.
Macron played coy: Might he send troops? At one time seemingly ‘yes’; but then frustratingly the prospect was uncertain, yet still possibly on the table. Confusion reigned. Nobody knew for sure, as the President is nothing if not volatile, and General De Gaulle bequeathed to his successors, quasi-regal powers. So yes, constitutionally he could do it.
The general view in Europe was that Macron was playing complex mind-games, firstly with the French people, and secondly with Russia. Nevertheless, it seems that there could be some substance to Macron’s sabre-rattling: The French Chief of Army Staff said he has 20,000 troops ready to be inserted in 30 days. And the Head of Russia’s SVR Intelligence Agency, Naryshkin, more modestly assessed that France seemingly is preparing a military contingent for sending to Ukraine, which at the initial stage, will be about two thousand people.
Just to be clear however, even a 20,000-man division by standards of classical military theory is supposed to be able to hold at maximum, a 10km-front. An insertion of two or twenty thousand French troops would change nothing strategically; it would not halt the vastly larger Russian steamroller, grinding on westwards. So what is Macron playing at?
Is this all bluff, then?
Likely, it is part ‘grandstanding’ by Macron, pre-occupied to present himself as ‘Mr Strongman Europe’ – particularly toward his French constituency.
His posturing comes however, at a more significant conjunction of events for the so-called ‘Geo-political EU’:
Clarity: Light has pierced, and has illuminated a space hitherto occupied by shadows. It is now as clear as it can be – after Putin’s overwhelming win in elections on a record turnout – that President Putin is here to stay. All the western shadow-play of ‘régime change’ in Moscow simply shrunk to naught in the bright light of events.
Snorts of anger can be heard from some quarters in Europe. Yet they will subside. There is no choice. The reality, as Marianne newspaper, quoting a senior French officer, derisively noting in respect to Macron’s Ukraine’s posturing: “We must make no mistake, facing the Russians; we are an army of cheerleaders” and sending French troops to the Ukrainian front would simply be “not reasonable”.
At the Élysée, an unnamed advisor argued that Macron “wanted to send a strong signal … (in) milli-metered and calibrated words”.
What pains the EU ‘neocon ever-hopefuls’ more is that Putin’s clear electoral victory coincides, almost precisely, with an EU (and NATO) humiliation in Ukraine. It is not just that the AFU appears to be in a cascading implosion, but that the retreat is accelerating, as Ukraine tries to retreat into unprepared and near indefensible terrain.
Into this grim EU prospect is that second shaft of clarifying light: The U.S. is slowly but surely turning its back on the financing and arming of Kiev, leaving Europe’s impotence exposed for all the world to see.
The EU simply cannot substitute for the U.S. pivot. Yet more hurtful for some is that a U.S. retreat represents a ‘punch in the guts’ for much of the Brussels leadership, who had fallen on the Biden Administration with almost indecent glee, upon Trump’s leaving of office. They used the moment to proclaim the cementing of a pro-Atlanticist, pro-NATO EU.
Now, as former Indian diplomat MK Bhadrakumar perfectly defines it, “France [is] all dressed up – with nowhere to go”:
“Ever since its ignominious defeat in the Napoleonic wars, France is entrapped in the predicament of countries that get sandwiched between great powers. Following World War II, France addressed this predicament by forging an axis with Germany in Europe”.
“Caught up in a similar predicament, Britain adapted itself to a subaltern role tapping into the American power globally but France never gave up its quest to regain glory as a global power. And it continues to be a work in progress”.
“The angst in the French mind is understandable as the five centuries of western dominance of the world order is drawing to a close. This predicament condemns France to a diplomacy that is constantly in a state of suspended animation, interspersed with sudden bouts of activism”.
The problems here for the exalted aspiration for the EU qua global power are three-fold: Firstly, the Franco-German Axis has dissolved, as Germany swerved towards the U.S. as its new foreign-policy dogma. Secondly, France’s clout is diminished further in European affairs as Scholtz has embraced Poland (not France) as its like-minded, ‘best friend forever’; and thirdly, Macron’s personal relations with Chancellor Scholz are on a dive.
The other plane to the EU geo-political project is that the embrace of Washington’s financial wars on Russia and China has resulted in “the U.S. has dramatically outgrowing the EU and the United Kingdom combined – over the last 15 years. In 2008, the EU’s economy was somewhat larger than America’s … America’s economy is now however, nearly one-third bigger. [And] it is more than 50 per cent larger than the EU without the UK”.
In other words, being America’s ally, in its ill-judged Ukraine-proxy war, has – and is – costing Europe dearly. Eurointelligence reports that a survey amongst small and medium-sized companies in Germany has registered an extreme shift in sentiment against the EU. Of the sample of 1,000 small and medium sized companies, 90% were unhappy with the EU to varying degrees, driving many to re-locate from Europe to the U.S.
Put plainly, the effort to inflate and hold aloft the notion of a ‘geo-political Europe’ is ending in débacle. Living standards are sinking and Brussel’s regulatory promiscuity and high energy costs are resulting in the de-industrialisation and impoverishment of Europe.
Macron, in a blunt interview in late 2019 with The Economist magazine, declared that Europe stood on “the edge of a precipice” and needed to start thinking of itself strategically as a geo-political power, lest we will “no longer be in control of our destiny.” (Macron’s remark preceded the war in Ukraine by 3 years).
Today, Macron’s fears are reality.
So, to turn to what the EU plans to do about this crisis, EC President Michel says he wants to buy twice as many weapons from European producers by 2030; to use the profits from Russian frozen assets to finance weapons purchases for Ukraine; to facilitate financial access for the European defence industry, including by issuing a European defence bond and getting the European Investment Bank to add defence purposes to its lending criteria.
Michel sells it to the public as a way to create jobs and growth. In reality, however, the EU is looking to create a new slush fund to replace the QE purchases by the ECB of EU states’ sovereign bonds, which the interest rate spike in the U.S. effectively killed.
The defence industry ploy is a means to create more cash flows: The EU’s various mooted ‘transitions’ (Climate, Greening and Tech) clearly required mammoth money-printing. This was just about manageable when the project could be financed at zero cost interest rates. Now the EU states’ debt explosion to fund the pandemic and ‘transitions’ threatens to take the entire geo-political ‘revolution’ into financial crisis. There is a financing crisis underway.
Defence, Michael hopes, may be saleable to the public as the new ‘transition’ to be financed by unorthodox means. Wolfgang Münchau at EuroIntellignce however, writes on ‘Michel’s rosy war economy’ – that he wants a geo-political Europe, and so concludes his letter with the familiar cold war adage – that ‘if you want peace you need to prepare for war’”.
“Are those weapons in Michel’s war economy to speak for our failures in diplomacy? What is our historic contribution to this conflict? Should we not start from there?”
“The language Michel uses is dramatic and dangerous. Some of our older citizens still remember what it means to live in a war economy. Michel’s loose talk is disrespectful”.
Eurointelligence is not alone in its criticism. Macron’s gambit has divided Europe, with a majority firmly opposed to inserting troops into Ukraine – sleep-walking into war. Marianne’s editor Natacha Polony has written:
“It is no longer about Emmanuel Macron or his postures as a virile little leader. It is no longer even about France or its weakening by blind and irresponsible élites. It is a question of whether we will collectively agree to sleepwalk into war. A war that no one can claim will be controlled or contained. It’s a question of whether we agree to send our children to die because the United States insisted on setting up bases on Russia’s borders”.
The bigger question concerns the whole ‘Von der Leyen-Macron’ geo-political gambit of the EU needing to think of itself as a geo-political power. It is the pursuit of this geo-political ‘chimaera’ (in no little part, an ego-project) that paradoxically, has brought the EU exactly to the brink of crisis.
Do a majority of Europeans truly wish to be a geo-political power, if that requires relinquishing what remains of their national sovereignty and autonomy (and parliamentary oversight) to the supra-national plane; to the Brussels technocrats? Maybe Europeans are content for the EU to remain as a trade bloc.
So why is Macron nonetheless doing this? No one is sure, but it seems that he imagines he is playing some complicated game of psycho-deterrence with Moscow – one characterised by radical ambiguity.
His is just another psy-ops, in other words.
It is possible nonetheless, that he thinks his ambiguous on/off threat of an European deployment into Ukraine might just give Kiev enough negotiating ‘leverage’ to bluff Russia into agreeing to ‘rump Ukraine’ remaining in the western (and even NATO) sphere, in which case Macron will claim have been Ukraine’s ‘saviour’.
If this is the case, it is pie in the sky. President Putin, armed with his recent electoral victory, simply swept Macron’s psy-op off the table: ‘Any insertion of French troops would be ‘invaders’ and a legitimate target for our forces’, Putin made explicit.
The French Road to Nuclear War
Consortium News | March 24, 2024
ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: On the Brink of Nuclear War
Mr. President:
France is reportedly preparing to dispatch a force of some 2,000 troops — roughly a reinforced brigade built around an armored battalion and two mechanized battalions, with supporting logistical, engineering, and artillery troops attached — into Ukraine sometime in the not-so-distant future.
This force is purely symbolic, inasmuch as it would have zero survivability in a modern high-intensity conflict of the scope and scale of what is transpiring in Ukraine today. It would not be deployed directly in a conflict zone, but would serve either as (1) a screening force/tripwire to stop Russia’s advance; or (2) a replacement force deployed to a non-active zone to free up Ukrainian soldiers for combat duty. The French Brigade reportedly will be supplemented by smaller units from the Baltic states.
This would be introducing combat troops of a NATO country into a theater of war, making them “lawful targets” under the Law of War.
Such units would apparently lack a NATO mandate. In Russia’s view, however, this may be a distinction without a difference. France appears to be betting – naively – that its membership in NATO would prevent Russia from attacking French troops. Rather, it is highly likely that Russia would attack any French/Baltic contingent in Ukraine and quickly destroy/degrade its combat viability.
In that case, French President Macron may calculate that, after Russian attacks on the troops of NATO members – NATO mandate or not – he could invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter and get the NATO alliance to intervene. Such intervention would likely take the form of aircraft operating from NATO nations – and perhaps include interdiction missions against tactical targets inside Russia.
On Precipice of Nuclear War?
Doctrinally, and by legal right, Russia’s response would be to launch retaliatory strikes also against targets in NATO countries. If NATO then attacks strategic targets inside Russia, at that point Russia’s nuclear doctrine takes over, and NATO decision-making centers would be hit with nuclear weapons.
We do not believe Russia will initiate a nuclear attack against the U.S., but rather would leave it up to the United States to decide if it wants to risk destruction by preparing to launch a nuclear strike on Russia. That said, Russian strategic forces have improved to the point that, in some areas – hypersonic missiles, for example – its capability surpasses that of the U.S. and NATO.
In other words, the Russian temptation to strike first may be a bit stronger than during past crises, and we are somewhat less confident that Russia would want to “go second”. Another disquieting factor is that the Russians are likely to believe that Macron’s folly has the tacit approval of some key U.S. and other Western officials, who seem desperate to find some way to alter the trajectory of the war in Ukraine – the more so, as elections draw near.
What Needs to Be Done
Europe needs to understand that France is leading it down a path of inevitable self-destruction.
The American people need to understand that Europe is leading them to the cusp of nuclear annihilation.
Since Russian leaders may suspect that Macron is working hand in glove with Washington, the U.S. needs to make its position publicly and unambiguously clear.
And if France and the Baltics insist on sending troops into Ukraine, it must also be made clear that such action has no NATO mandate; that Article 5 will not be triggered by any Russian retaliation; and that the U.S. nuclear arsenal, including those nuclear weapons that are part of the NATO deterrent force, will not be employed as a result of any Russian military action against French or Baltic troops.
Void of such clarity, France would be leading the American people down a path toward a nuclear conflict decidedly not in the interests of the American people – or of humanity itself.
FOR THE STEERING GROUP,
VETERAN INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS FOR SANITY
- William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
- Richard Black, former Virginia State Senator; Colonel, USA (ret.); Former Chief, Criminal Law Division, Judge Advocate General (associate VIPS)
- Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer (ret) and former Office Director in the State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research
- Bogdan Dzakovic, former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security, (ret.) (associate VIPS)
- Graham E. Fuller, Vice-Chair, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
- Philip Giraldi, C.I.A., Operations Officer (ret.)
- Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq and Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
- James George Jatras, former U.S. diplomat and former foreign policy adviser to Senate leadership (Associate VIPS)
- Larry C. Johnson, former C.I.A. and State Department Counter Terrorism officer
- John Kiriakou, former C.I.A. Counterterrorism Officer and former senior investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
- Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., U.S. Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
- Douglas Macgregor, Colonel, USA (ret.) (associate VIPS)
- Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army infantry/intelligence officer & C.I.A. analyst; C.I.A. Presidential briefer (ret.)
- Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East, National Intelligence Council & C.I.A. political analyst (ret.)
- Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, U.S. Army Judge Advocate (ret.)
- Pedro Israel Orta, former C.I.A. and Intelligence Community (Inspector General) officer
- Scott Ritter, former MAJ, USMC; former U.N. Weapons Inspector, Iraq
- Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
- Lawrence Wilkerson, Colonel USA, ret.), Distinguished Visiting Professor, College of William and Mary (associate VIPS)
- Sarah G. Wilton, CDR, USNR, (ret.); Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)
- Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA
- Robert Wing, former Foreign Service Officer (associate VIPS)
- Ann Wright, retired U.S. Army reserve colonel and former U.S. diplomat who resigned in 2003 in opposition to the Iraq War
Background: Earlier VIPS Memos for President Biden on Ukraine
May 1, 2022
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Nuclear Weapons Cannot Be Un-invented, Thus …
“The growing possibility that nuclear weapons might be used, as hostilities in Ukraine continue to escalate, merits your full attention.”
++++++++++++++++++++++
Sept. 5, 2022
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: VIPS
SUBJECT: Ukraine Decision Time & Secretary of Defense
“If Austin tells you Kyiv is beating back the Russians, kick the tires”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jan. 26, 2023
ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: VIPS
SUBJECT: Leopards to Ukraine: Decisions in an Intelligence Vacuum
“None of the newly promised weaponry will stop Russia from defeating what’s left of the Ukrainian army. If you have been told otherwise, replace your intelligence and military advisers with competent professionals – the sooner the better.”
“There is a large conceptual – and exceptionally dangerous – disconnect. Simply stated, it is not possible to “win the war against Russia” AND avoid WWIII. It is downright scary that Defense Secretary Austin may think it possible. In any case, the Kremlin has to assume he thinks so. It is a very dangerous delusion.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++
January 25, 2024
ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: VIPS
SUBJECT: Throwing Good Money After Bad
“On Jan. 26, 2023, we reminded you that National Intelligence Director Avril Haines had said Russia was using up ammunition extraordinarily quickly and could not indigenously produce what it was expending.”
“On July 13, you said Putin “has already lost the war”. You may have gotten that from C.I.A. Director William Burns who, a week before, wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post saying: “Putin’s war has already been a strategic failure for Russia – its military weaknesses laid bare.” Both statements are incorrect. Nor is the war a “stalemate”, as Jake Sullivan has claimed more recently.”
Spain denounces “indiscriminate massacres” in Gaza but exports weapons to Ukraine
By Ahmed Adel | March 25, 2024
Spain will acquire combat-tested Israeli military material worth €207 million at a time when the Iberian country also promised to recognise a Palestinian state and cut military exports to Israel. Decisionmakers in Madrid justify cutting exports to Israel due to “massacres” against Palestinians, but at the same time, export weapons to Ukraine, contributing to the massacre of civilians in eastern Europe.
The Ministry of Defence of Spain, through the General Subdirectorate of Acquisitions of Weapons and Materials, has initiated the purchase of Israeli-made weapons by awarding a contract to Rafael Advanced Defence Systems, one of the three largest military-industrial companies in Israel, to equip the Air Force’s Eurofighter Litening V fleet. In the award announcement, Rafael was claimed to be “the only one technically qualified to develop the project from a technical point of view” since it included the use of laser-guided precision munitions.
It also happens that the Litening V laser pods by Rafael have been used for months in Israel’s bombing campaign of Gaza, which has caused more than 31,000 deaths to date. Like almost all the war material that Israel usually exports, the Litening V laser pods are weapon support equipment whose manufacturers boast of their “combat proven” status due to their effectiveness against the Palestinians.
Spanish Foreign Affairs Minister José Manuel Albares announced on more than one occasion the “total embargo” on the export of weapons to Israel. The contract awarded to Rafael obviously concerns an import and not an export, and, in this manner, Spain virtue signals against Israel whilst still benefiting from its military-industrial complex.
However, according to a study by the Delàs Center for Peace Studies, Israeli weapons imports carry a greater severity than military exports to Tel Aviv. In effect, the purchase of military material from Israel strengthens the country’s military and security model and, more importantly, contributes to subduing the Palestinians, which Israel makes economically viable with the sale of its combat-tested military products.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez says he is going to recognise Palestine as an independent State and that he considers what Israel is committing in the Gaza Strip “an indiscriminate massacre,” but then he continues to buy weapons from Israel. Therefore, it is not feasible to grant any type of credibility to the statements of the members of the Spanish government.
Last November, Sánchez vowed to prioritise the recognition of Palestinian statehood as its main foreign policy priority. However, when speaking after a summit in Brussels on March 22, he suggested to reporters that Spain would coordinate with other EU countries instead of unilaterally making the decision to recognise Palestinian statehood.
“We want to take this step united. It’s a decisive step in order to lay the foundations of a lasting peace,” he said in an evident u-turn, adding that the EU should “carefully calibrate” the right moment to take the step.
At the same time, before the Congressional Defence Commission, the Secretary of State for Commerce reported on the list of shipments of military material to Ukraine between March 2022 and February 2024. The amount supplied is equivalent to €190 million. These are mainly drones, grenade launchers, anti-tank mines, artillery ammunition, anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles, tracked vehicles, night vision equipment, and 10 Leopard 2A4 tanks.
But this list does not take into account a new batch of Leopard 2A4 battle tanks since the Interministerial Board for Trade and Control of Defence Material and Dual-Use Technologies (JIMDDU) authorised the shipment of another 19 of these armoured vehicles to Kiev once they are repaired and conditioned at the facilities of the Santa Bárbara Sistemas factory in the province of Seville.
Ten of the 19 tanks have already been transferred from the Army base in Casetas near Zaragoza, where they were stored. According to military sources cited by El Heraldo de Aragón, the plan is to send them to Ukraine at the end of June. To this end, the parts and spare parts necessary for its reconstruction must first be found, and when the entire process is completed, Spain will have sent a total of 29 Leopard tanks to Ukraine.
Nonetheless, shipping will be complicated since these vehicles are in even worse condition than the dozen reconditioned Leopards already shipped in 2023. Spain is sending such poor-conditioned vehicles to Kiev to increase its rearmament because the old stock must be disposed of before buying new weapons and equipment.
In this context, Spain justifies not exporting weapons to Israel because of the “indiscriminate massacre” of Palestinians but exports weapons to Ukraine, which contributes to the massacre of people in Ukraine and Russia’s newly liberated territories. Compounding the contradiction is then the fact that Spain imports military equipment from Israel while refusing to export to the Jewish state and promising to recognise a Palestinian state.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Terrorist attack in Russia – enemies want to generate domestic instability
By Lucas Leiroz | March 25, 2024
The recent terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall, in the suburbs of Moscow, was undoubtedly one of the greatest tragedies in the recent history of the Russian Federation. More than 130 civilians, including several children, were brutally murdered by gunmen on the night of March 22. The death toll is expected to rise further, considering that there are several people hospitalized.
The criminals who participated in the attack have already been captured by Russian security forces. In total, eleven people were arrested, including the four shooters. The killers were Tajik immigrants, apparently linked to radical Islamic groups. They were arrested on the border of Bryansk oblast while trying to escape into Ukrainian territory. After interrogation, they said they were hired via Telegram. The hirers allegedly gave them the weapons used in the crime and promised a reward of half a million Russian rubles.
Interestingly, immediately after the attack rumors began to circulate in the Western media about alleged ISIS responsibility. American newspapers not only accused the Islamic extremist group, but also emphasized on several occasions that there was no Ukrainian responsibility for the attack. This hypothesis, however, seems untrue given the facts so far elucidated during the investigations.
The killers clearly worked as mercenaries in the attack. Despite being Islamic radicals, there is no evidence that their work in the specific case of Crocus City Hall has any connection with this extremist ideology. The killers’ modus operandi did not appear to be related to ISIS (a group with which they do not appear to have any ties). In addition to killing for money, they tried to escape the place and cross the border into Ukraine, which is not expected from ISIS militants, who almost always carry out suicide attacks in search of “martyrdom”.
It is also necessary to remember that ISIS is currently a weak organization and incapable of carrying out large-scale attacks. Since the Russian intervention in Syria, most of ISIS has been liquidated, with only remaining militias from the original group operating in several countries – including Ukraine itself, where radical Islamic militants are often seen among anti-Russian troops. There appears to be a strategic use of the acronym “ISIS” by Western intelligence, with the attribution of responsibility to the group whenever Washington wants to disguise its own involvement in a crime.
Furthermore, the terrorists tried to escape through the Bryansk border, which is a region heavily protected by Russian forces, with a large presence of minefields. Not even during the recent Ukrainian incursions on the border was there an attempt at a Ukrainian land invasion through Bryansk, which shows how difficult to cross this region is. To try to escape there, the terrorists certainly had solid support from Ukrainian intelligence, with precise data on how to circumvent the Russian defense and escape the minefields – which contradicts the Western narrative about Kiev not participating in the attack.
The reasons why the West wants to disguise Ukrainian participation in the case are easy to understand. Kiev does not act alone in its terrorist acts, always having the co-participation of the West. Being a vassal state, Ukraine only obeys orders from its Western backers, which means that, if there was Ukrainian participation in the attack against Moscow, Western agents certainly cooperated in some way to make the incident happen.
It must be remembered that there have been open threats against Russia from Western leaders for a long time. Recently, US former Under Secretary, Victoria Nuland, promised “surprises” to the Russian government in a statement interpreted by many analysts as a sign that sabotage operations would begin to take place within Russian territory. Furthermore, the American Embassy recently advised US citizens to avoid public gathering in Moscow, citing information about terrorist risk. This information was never shared with the Russian authorities, which indicates that, even if there was no American participation in the attack, there was at least an absence of willingness to act jointly against terror.
It must be remembered that these terrorist attacks occur amid an increase in Ukrainian incursions across the border. The Kiev regime has been bombing peaceful Russian cities, such as Belgorod and Kursk, even though there are no military targets in these regions. There appears to be a clear intention on the part of the regime and its supporters to promote terror deep in Russian territory. Faced with military failure, asymmetrical warfare, using terrorism, is the only “alternative” left for the neo-Nazi regime.
The choice of Central Asian immigrants to play the role of assassins seems even more interesting for the intentions of the Ukrainian regime and the West. Russia’s enemies hope to encourage the growth of racism and ethnic polarization in Russian society, trying to move the majority of the population against immigrants from the post-Soviet space. There is no evidence that such a plan will be successful, given the high level of social cohesion in contemporary Russia, but it is well known that fomenting domestic chaos in Russia is an old plan of the West.
The West and Ukraine want to make ordinary Russians feel insecure and start criticizing the government. They are working to recover a scenario similar to that of the 1990s and 2000s, when several terrorist attacks affected the main Russian cities. By awakening such traumas and memories in the Russian people, Western intelligence networks hope to succeed in creating a crisis of legitimacy against the government in the country.
However, the tendency is for precisely the opposite to occur: the more it is attacked, the more the Russian people endorse the government and support the special military operation, as they understand that this is the only way to neutralize terror.
Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.
You can follow Lucas on X (former Twitter) and Telegram.
Italy’s Salvini says ‘warmonger’ Macron ‘danger’ for Europe as Ukraine tension rises
Press TV – March 24, 2024
Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini says French President Emmanuel Macron is a “warmonger” and represents a “danger” for Europe by refusing to rule out sending Western ground troops to Ukraine.
Salvini’s remarks came on Saturday during a gathering in Rome of right-wing and nationalist European leaders to rally support ahead of EU parliamentary elections in June.
Salvini whose far-right League party is a member of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s coalition government, said that Macron’s suggestion last month that Western ground troops could be sent to Ukraine was “extremely dangerous, excessive and out of balance.”
“I think that President Macron, with his words, represents a danger for our country and our continent,” he said during his speech.
“The problem isn’t mums and dads but the warmongers like Macron who talk about war as if there were no problem now,” he added. “I don’t want to leave our children a continent ready to enter World War Three.”
In similar remarks, Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani also said in mid-March that his country does not support deploying NATO troops in Ukraine, warning that the move could spark World War III.
The French president told a press conference he did not rule out sending troops last month, after a high-level meeting in Paris of mainly European partners to discuss what urgent steps could be taken to shore up Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s recent frontline advances.
Following his remarks he faced criticism from France’s Nato and EU partners and a warning of conflict from Russia.
Last week, Sergey Naryshkin, Russia’s foreign intelligence (SVR) top brass said any French military unit sent to Ukraine to help it fight Russia would be a “priority” target for the Russian army.
This warning came after Kremlin received information that Paris is preparing to dispatch a contingent of 2,000 troops to Ukraine to fight against Russia.
Naryshkin said that Macron is concealing the actual number of French soldiers who have lost their lives in Ukraine due to concerns over potential widespread demonstrations in France.
In response, the French army chief of staff, Pierre Schill has said France is ready to face whatever developments unfold internationally and is prepared for the “toughest engagements” to protect itself.
Ties between France and Russia have further deteriorated in recent weeks after Paris signed a bilateral security accord with Ukraine and vowed to send more long-range cruise missiles.
Earlier this month, Macron also said there are “no limits” to French support for Ukraine. He added that France “would be ready to make sure that Russia never wins that war.”
Russia launched what it calls “a special military operation” in Ukraine on February 24, 2022, over the perceived threat of the ex-Soviet republic joining NATO.
Since then, the United States and Ukraine’s other Western allies have sent Kiev tens of billions of dollars worth of weapons, including rocket systems, drones, armored vehicles, tanks, and communication systems.
Western countries have also imposed a slew of economic sanctions on Moscow. The Kremlin has said the sanctions and the Western military assistance will only prolong the war.
Observation on the Moscow attack
By Kevork Almassian | March 23, 2024
I am originally from Syria and have watched hundreds of ISIS footage, closely monitoring their attacking patterns. After analyzing the available footage of the Moscow terrorist attack, I have drawn the following observation:
1 – The attackers were trained in shooting, but they were not professional killers. They (thankfully) failed to hit some easy targets in the mall.
2 – The assault was carefully orchestrated, complete with an exit strategy. It appears to be more than just a solo attack, possibly connected to foreign intelligence.
3 – Although the individuals responsible for the attack may be Muslims, it is important to note that they are not necessarily affiliated with ISIS. I have observed numerous attacks conducted by ISIS in Syria, and typically, the terrorists strive for “martyrdom” and often resort to wearing suicide vests when facing capture. This particular type of suicide mission is referred to as “إنغماسي” in Arabic.
4 – On March 7, 2024, the US embassy in Moscow released a security advisory, stating that it “is monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and U.S. citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours.”
The security alert reveals that US intelligence was aware of the plot and anticipated the imminent terrorist attack. The US Embassy refrained from making speculations and instead referred to the plans as “imminent.”
Who is responsible for the attack?
Jake Sullivan, President Joe Biden’s top foreign policy adviser, travelled to Kiev on 20 March 2024 and reportedly urged Ukraine against targeting Russian oil refineries and energy infrastructure.
Did Jake Sullivan caution Ukraine about potential attacks similar to the recent one in Moscow?
Over the past few months, Ukrainian intelligence orchestrated two successful assassination attempts in Russia. One of these attempts targeted Alexander Dugin, but tragically, his daughter lost her life due to a bomb planted beneath their car.
Ukraine may not be responsible for the attack, but if Kiev authorities are indeed behind it, it would be a very foolish decision. The fact that major Western media outlets keep blaming ISIS without any concrete evidence from detained terrorists only adds to the suspicion.
In my personal experience, I have yet to encounter a captured ISIS terrorist who doesn’t openly admit their affiliation with the terror organization. This situation could potentially set a new standard. However, it’s also possible that it may not.
FSB reports 11 suspects detained over terrorist attack
RT | March 23, 2024
Eleven people have been detained over the terrorist attack on the Crocus Crocus City Hall concert venue outside Moscow, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) has said in a statement.
The arrested suspects include “four terrorists who were directly involved in the terrorist attack on Crocus,” the statement read. Investigative work to track down other accomplices are ongoing, it added.
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.
Russia’s Investigative Committee also confirmed that four suspects, who “committed the terrorist attack” on Crocus City Hall, were detained in Bryansk Region, “not far from the border with Ukraine.”
Crocus City Hall, in the town of Krasnogorsk in Moscow’s western outskirts, was attacked by gunmen on Friday night. It happened before a concert by Russian rock band Picnic, when the venue, which has an estimated capacity of 7,500, was nearly at capacity.
The attackers shot at the crowd indiscriminately then set the building on fire. They managed to flee the scene in what was said to be a white Renault Symbol/Clio car, prompting a large-scale manhunt.
According to Russia’s Investigative Committee, the death toll in the attack has reached at least 115. The Moscow Region Health Ministry said that at least 121 people were also wounded, with 107 requiring hospitalization.
Featured Video
Iran, China & Russia v. Trump
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Free Book
Tell Me Again, Who Made The Desert Bloom?
Lawrence of Cyberia | March 19, 2010
In December 1945 and January 1946, the British Mandate authorities carried out an extensive survey of Palestine, in support of the work of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. The results were published in the Survey of Palestine, which has been scanned and made available online by Palestine Remembered; all 1300 pages can be read here.
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Israeli General: War with Iran does not serve Israel as global standing erodes over Gaza
- The collapse is real – Lebanon ceasefire marks a historic strategic defeat
- Trump keeps Hormuz blockade despite Iran reopening passage
- ‘New order’ in Strait of Hormuz: IRGC Navy mandates authorization for all vessels
- Persian Gulf oil production can take two years to recover from war: IEA chief
- Washington hiding billion-dollar combat losses to Iran’s precision strikes: Report
- Israel Considers Ceasefire a Betrayal
- Iran Opens Strait of Hormuz for Duration of Lebanon Ceasefire
- Russian security chief issues warning to four NATO states
- Seyed M. Marandi: U.S. Naval Blockade & Ground Invasion of Iran?
- If Americans Knew
- Number of Palestinian Prisoners Rises By 83% Since October 2023
- With multiple “ceasefires” in place, Israel keeps on killing in Gaza and Lebanon – Daily Update
- Mearsheimer: Israel Owns Trump
- Mark Levin and Jonathan Pollard Push for Nuking Iran
- TCN: America Enables Israel’s Crimes
- Israel’s Next Leader Will Be Just Like Bibi – but Without the Corruption
- Born into war, raised across borders: The story of Gaza’s premature babies separated from their parents amid Israel’s genocide
- Israeli soldiers suspected of raping Palestinian detainee allowed to return to service
- Gaza flooded with sweets as fuel and medicine withheld, health official warns
- Israel, US ready for wars to resume, as Gaza healthcare is in freefall – Daily Update
- No Tricks Zone
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
Aletho News 