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