Many Kremlin insiders reject Vladimir Putin's claim of Ukraine's connection to the recent Moscow terror attack, Bloomberg reported.
  • Putin’s inner circle isn’t buying his claim that Kyiv is connected to the Moscow terror attack, Bloomberg reported.
  • Putin continues to say that Ukraine had a role in the attack, which was claimed by ISIS-K.
  • He thinks that pushing the theory is beneficial for galvanizing support for his war, per Bloomberg.

Many Kremlin insiders disagree with President Vladimir Putin’s claims that Ukraine may be connected to last Friday’s terror attack in Moscow, Bloomberg reported.

    • Windex007@lemmy.worldEnglish
      76·
      9 months ago

      There is a CRITICAL piece of information that was neglected in this and most articles:

      In the late 90s, a relatively newly minted President Putin was embroiled in a military operation against Chechnya.

      Then, there were a series of apartment bombings in Russia. The party line was that they were Chechen terrorists.

      Now, a few REALLY strange things happened:

      1. the government accidentally referenced a 4th bombing… 3 days before the bombing occurred

      2. local police foiled a 5th bombing. The people arrested ended up being FSB. Putin was immediately before becoming a leader of Russia was the head of the FSB.

      3. An independent investigation on if the Kremlin was involved resulted in everyone involved being jailed or assasinated.

      The strong suspicion was that this was a false flag operation, at least outside of Russia.

      The RESULT of the bombing was a massive galvanization of the populace around Putin and his Chechnya war.

      So, long story short: this was the event that propelled Putin into the Russian political stratosphere.

      There shouldn’t be any confusion as to Putin’s experience with political gain from terrorist attacks.

      I’m not suggesting Putin was responsible for this last attack, but using such an attack for political gain is absolutely a strategy he has succeeded with in the past.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        461·
        9 months ago

        Putin’s apartment bombings in the late 90s were just an all around jaw-droppingly brazen false flag. This bit in particular always gets me:

        A suspicious device resembling those used in the bombings was found and defused in an apartment block in the Russian city of Ryazan on 22 September.[3][4] On 23 September, Vladimir Putin praised the vigilance of the inhabitants of Ryazan and ordered the air bombing of Grozny, which marked the beginning of the Second Chechen War.[5] Three FSB agents who had planted the devices at Ryazan were arrested by the local police.[6] The next day, FSB director Nikolay Patrushev announced that the incident in Ryazan had been an anti-terror drill and the device found there contained only sugar, and freed the FSB agents involved.[7]

        Because the FSB ran a terrorism training op using a package of sugar as a bomb stand-in days after multiple bombings occurred all over the country. And they totally didn’t need anyone else to corroborate that - they’re the FSB, of course they’re trustworthy.

        suuuuuuuuure.

        • Windex007@lemmy.worldEnglish
          16·
          9 months ago

          I appreciate your citations!

          In a documentary I watched on the subject, an “expert” stated that local police had tested the device tested before the FSB grown ups showed up and their findings that they WERE explosives, not sugar.

          I don’t have a definitive source, but it’s my understanding that the “sugar” line actually was actually directly disputed by initial findings.

          • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            171·
            9 months ago

            Full disclosure: I literally just copied part of the wiki text lol

            And yeah - I am sure the local cop who tested the explosives had a very long and productive life for the next week, at which point he probably fell off a balcony onto several bullets, head-first.