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. When that interview is posted later today or tomorrow, I will provide the link below.
However, this dish is best served while warm and so 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