There remain a number of unanswered questions about this whole episode.
For example, why were the attackers able to wander at will for nearly an hour around the Crocus Hall with absolutely no apparent sense of urgency?
In a country where the police and special services, notably the FSB, are omnipresent, these gunmen behaved as if they knew they were not going to be interrupted by a police SWAT team. Police outside Crocus City Hall in MoscowImage source, EPA
Then there are the weapons - not just handguns but powerful, modern automatic assault rifles. How were they able to acquire these and smuggle them undetected into the venue?
Their swift capture is also surprising.
Unlike many jihadist gunmen on a raid like this, these men were not wearing suicide vests or belts, in the manner of those who prefer death to capture.
And yet, it did not take long for the Russian authorities - the same Russian authorities who failed to stop the worst terror plot in 20 years unfolding beneath their noses - to round up the suspects and put them on trial.
All this is prompting some analysts to speculate about some sort of so-called "inside job" by the Kremlin, or a "false flag operation" to garner popular support for the war on Ukraine.
However, there is no hard evidence to support that theory and US intelligence has confirmed that in their view, it was Islamic State behind this hideous attack.
This is pitiful stuff. Lots of hinting and nudging, in fact the entire body of that part of the article is dedicated to nudging people to think it was a Russian set-up, before he finally says "some analysts" think it was an "inside job" with the obligatory one-line denial.
Also, he just blows past the fact that they didn't have suicide belts and were attempting to flee, which to an "analyst" you would suppose would raise some questions as to whether they were actually radical religious fanatics of the normal ISIS type or just patsies recruited with the promise of money and supplied with weapons by....someone with access to that kind of thing...but not our Frank.
He also completely ignores WHERE they were attempting to flee to because, you know, that gets uncomfortable.
Also he seems to think their swift capture was dodgy completely ignoring the idea that once the attack had happened the entire Russian security apparatus wouuld have been on high alert, all nearby borders checked and descriptions of the attackers being circulated and every warm body in boots with a gun would be looking for them. Why wouldn't they get captured?
He also asks how they "smuggled" the guns into the venue. They didn't. They rocked up at the place got out of the car and started lighting everyone up.
The article screams of the continued, "look over there a squirrel" spook narrative that started almost immediately after the attack, itself a sign that it is probably false....no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party...So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
“Tortured confessions are worthless in a court of law.”
Yes. They weren’t beaten to confess, its all on their phones. Nothing to do with confession at all. They were beaten to give up the network.
Like Brits are hounded to death to cough up the frickin BBC license fee.
You have to be a very special kind of stupid to be targeted by the BBC. Must be a badge of honor to be in that club.
Re: Certainly true.
Posted by RaskolnikovX on March 26, 2024, 10:29 am, in reply to "Certainly true. "
Then there are the weapons - not just handguns but powerful, modern automatic assault rifles. How were they able to acquire these and smuggle them undetected into the venue?
As I noted above, they didn't smuggle them in they came in blasting but more importantly, "How were they able to acquire these...". Well, maybe there's a state that is at war with Russia that has recently been receiving untold tons of weopons and arms...dunno...just a thought...
I tend to avoid the BBC, certainly for news, but anytime I see something from them it seems to have become even more blatantly propagandistic....no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party...So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
"I tend to avoid the BBC, certainly for news..."
Posted by Morrissey on March 26, 2024, 11:59 am, in reply to "Re: Certainly true. "
Their drama is equally pitiful. No more Dennis Potter, no more Glittering Prizes, no more Pennies From Heaven.
As for their comedy productions, Dad's Army is no more, but Ian Hislop seems to be on an eternal loop.
And they haven't done a decent documentary since Alan "Botney" Yentob presented his series on modern architecture.
Re: "I tend to avoid the BBC, certainly for news..."
I don't take in much of their other output but I'm almost allergic to BBC news; even slight exposure turns me into one of the zombies from "28 Days Later"....no amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party...So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.
I might have mentioned this once or twice. The Babe watches newsnight and Question Time when I'm out of the room. She used to think that Mason was a lefty but I pointed out that he was on CommercialPrivateEquitybbc so he couldn't be. The Squeethster proved right again.The last working-class hero in England.
Clio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 Jasper the Ruffian cat ? ? ? - 4 November 2021
All of the drama and natural history is just there as a honeytrap…