Going to come out and say that the train blast in St Petersburg, Russia, is probably a (Russian) state-organised false-flag.
There is a tendency across most alternative media to refrain from suggesting such things when it concerns Russia and to limit suspicion only to the US, EU or British state activity when it comes to things like false-flags.
I, however, do not have a team or a side, and am therefore willing to call out Russian agencies just as much as I would American or French agencies in these kinds of circumstances.
The #PrayForSaintPetersburg hashtags were already trending before I even started watching the news reports. And the images and footage being played on news channels are very sanitised, looking like highly organised drills with crisis actors.
There doesn’t appear to be much evidence of an explosion either, at least not judging by the photographs or by various mobile-video clips. Just images of very choreographed scenes, a little bit of organised chaos, including some very casual-looking participants taking selfies, some even smirking or smiling, and a number of them unable to resist looking directly into cameras.
Peruse the photo and video evidence and you find very staged-looking scenes similar to the staged/fake footage from the Boston Marathon Bombing or from staged terror drills like this one in London.
The icing on the cake is the almost immediately released surveillance image of the alleged perpetrator (pictured below) at the scene of the crime, which has a marked air of staged pantomime villain to it.
Also suspicious is that the metro station was open for business as usual already, just a couple of hours later. That really shouldn’t be enough time for clean-up, forensic analysis or investigation.
I could be wrong, of course. This could’ve been an entirely real ‘Islamist terror’ attack: there would be obvious motives for various Islamist factions to attack a Russian target (particularly Chechen factions or people linked to jihadists in Syria). The timing is curious though.
Russian chess master Garry Kasparov strongly hinted at this in a Tweet, in which he concluded ‘Forget protests, back to fear’. The Intercept journalist and Ed Snowden collaborator Glenn Greenwald suggests the same, and highlights the gullibility of conspiracy theorists who only see false-flags when it involves the US or Western states.
The motive would be fairly straightforward, in keeping with Kasparov’s point about the protests. Russia was currently being unsettled by large protests against government corruption and cronyism.
This hasn’t been small-scaled protesting at all; and it was going on right up until the St Petersburg bomb attack. From Deutsche Welle just yesterday. From CNN just yesterday.
A week ago, The Telegraph suggested that the ‘Protests in Russia could represent major threat to Vladimir Putin’s iron grip on power’.
It further highlighted that the reason this round of protests and dissatisfaction was particularly troubling for the state was ‘the geography’: specifically, the problem that these protests have reportedly been going on in cities all across Russia. ‘Five years ago, the authorities were able – with some justification – to characterise the demonstrators who filled the capital’s boulevards and squares as members of a coddled metropolitan elite, divorced from the lives and opinions of the vast majority of Russians living beyond the Moscow ring road. After Sunday, however, that idea is dead.’
St Petersburg has also been a location for these growing protests. On March 26th, it was reported that ‘about 5,000 protesters’ were ‘shouting slogans including “Putin resign!” and “Down with the thieves in the Kremlin!”‘
A perceived terror attack serves to reinforce a sense of national unity behind the state by re-focusing everyone on a perceived external threat.
Tragedy in St. Petersburg. Once again "unknown terrorists" perfectly timed to serve Putin's political agenda. Forget protests, back to fear.
— Garry Kasparov (@Kasparov63) April 3, 2017
It could also help justify a security crackdown – on the surface of it, to combat further possible terror attacks, but at the same time to also suppress large gatherings or protests. Another service it might perform is to help try to dissuade some of the anti-Russia propaganda by having Russia suffer the same sort of attack as France, Britain, Germany, Belgium, etc, and trying to evoke some of the we’re-all-in-this-together solidarity.
Of course, it is standard in 2017 for various platforms – particularly on the Alt-Right – to dismiss all and any protesters anywhere as Soros-funded entities: and the protests in Russia, unsurprisingly, have been characterised by many as such. I don’t dismiss that possibility. Nor the possibility that protest movements would be a standard way of destabilising Russia and trying to weaken or bring down Putin; and given the scale and persistence of anti-Russia and anti-Putin propaganda activity being waged across the West, it is highly likely that various options for unseating Putin and effecting a sort of regime change in Russia have been considered (with some possibly even attempted).
However, even were that the case, the motive for Russian state actors was still strong for staging a false-flag attack to deflect away the opposition or to at least take the wind out of the sails of the protests and unrest. It’s hardly new thinking, but pretty standard.
The use of false-flag terrorism appears not to be alien to Russia. A substantial case for this was the 1999 apartment bombings (see details here): a series of attacks carried out on four apartment blocks in the Russian cities of Buynaksk, Moscow, and Volgodonsk in September 1999 and for which strong evidence exists to suggest a state-sponsored false-flag attack (utilising a terror drill) in order to justify the Second Chechen War.
It would be interesting to see if Paris, Berlin, London or other cities illuminate their landmarks in Russian flag colours as the standard act of solidarity – or whether the prevailing anti-Russia paradigm will prevent that gesture.
Also, just to get it out here: I want to go on record as predicting there may be a staged terror attack somewhere in France between now and the weekend: or, perhaps more likely, some time between now and the second round of the French Presidential Elections in May. I hope there isn’t: but I suspect there will be and, if so, it will probably be aimed at bolstering support for Marine Le Pen and the Front National.
Near top of the list in importance for false-flaggers, are for those on the media desks, to keep their mouth’s shut. Go along. Show allegiance to the Beast and bow. Conduct the choir – sorry to have to say but… – smug and stupid ones, who read supposed ‘serious press’ but call us-like “conspiracy theorists”. Farcical and yet, this be pride’s magic touch. Greenwald knows what goes – as do they all. Kasparov – the LOT. All suck-up and along, in politically expedient and career opportunities’ cover-ups. Next stage; WE ALL admit AND accept, these goings on for decades, the bombs/shootings, been a sick and nasty trick. Murderous rituals by society’s leadership. But hey, news flash and life moves on. Drugs work and “that’s entertainment”. Gets fifteen minutes of fame and… “what’s on next?” Probably go-blame rogue elements, for full-full-on NWO to nicely sort. Of course, this one could/does suit Putin but reverse psychology would suggest it hurts. Throws suspicion, he needs to do this and not simply crack-down on any internal opp. Could argue fuels resistance – what then? Who wants what? Main mystery; Putin-in with the Globalists (call them this), more or less -or- possibly not in all but living with an internal, Atlanticist, faction? Aside from what/when human suffering’s involved – we need false-flags. Many as. Again the need for crack-downs on us and this much of an excuse? One cyber-enough attack=net’s off, for starters. No explosions there. Maybe we’ll see one on the physical, leave the door too wide-open and cats out? Perhaps there’s an all-purpose, multi-national, false-flag unit? With target Russia and threats? This here, would make Putin (at least him and a handful) national-ists and not so in with the baddest crowd. Or… Putin is, at it? If I read the press, would shout “come-on” and those itching to name Putin -yet- want to hold on to their shot to pieces cred. and keep “y’conspiracy nuts” in your “gullible” place. Errr… Sandy Hook/Pulse/Nice/Berlin/Oklahoma/911 etc.etc. – which Western-based “terrorist attack” do they mean? So, let’s hope they push-it, canny resist calling “Putin the false-flagger” out. Maybe he did order this, for them to accuse, for this reflect back on and finally, let’s get it out there? Photo evidence and schlew of senior whistle-blowers. Oh for lids off. 9/11 the domino. Building 7. All we need is this.
Thanks Mark; I view false-flags now as just standard practise in different countries. Western states do it, but so does Turkey and so does Russia. If it generally works, then why not, right?
But I’m taking a lot of flack from people elsewhere for suggesting a Russian false-flag: which I knew would happen, because it has become virtually forbidden to call out Russia in alt-media, even though I clearly wrote of the possibility too of the protests being manipulated from the outside.
As though being wrong is the issue? Post yesterday’s comment, immediately disagreeing with myself about some of what I wrote. Mostly about putting down/out thoughts, that in retrospect, rather than because of… – let’s say reasons… Ok: Because of God. Wrote in a glum mood. In better light, want to proclaim some faith. Say things like; We’ll see the wake-up and not go back to sleep-so. And don’t ‘want to see more’ false-flags and certainly not, terrorist acts/mainstream suspects. Because… there’s been some degree of overcome and turnaround. Come exposures and political awakening. Obviously, what there can’t be, is freedom without enough justice and historical f.flags. By good women and men, somehow stopping these seniors, authority and business’ deceivers. I comment as a way to process thinking and through public self-expression, one more, turning up to the march. Somehow the purpose of ‘the march’ is to hold the small piece of free-speech ground with presence – output. As for alt. media? It’s as ‘alternative’ as prepared to consider false-flag possibilities. Otherwise it’s alt. lite media. Neigh-sayers are generally those with platforms, considering their credibility is about being safely right and acceptable to their perceptions of reasonableness. With narky comment-ers, bashing those mainstream sceptical, albeit sometimes in reaction to someone’s glib overconfidence. Personally, not about fascination kicks, in considering ‘child-abuse and false-flags’ are where it’s most at. The nub and vulnerable gate. Here I believe, where to address, get crimes caught and somewhat stopped. At least in the main ritual-driven, scheme of things. And guess what? These the two contentious areas in the depleting world of alt. media, get the most internal flack and external pressure/came censorship. Why? Because Sandy Hook is ongoing with the BBC pushing out this past week and Wolfgang Halbig not giving up. Evidentially, where the-battle, is-at. Similarly, Chief Constable Mike Veale on Edward Heath – more, where… – there’s ‘a lot of flack from people elsewhere’ could be signs of towards deliverance and corresponding persecution (mild, in contrary opinions).
Concluding// You light a lamp here. What’s frustrating for some, is your intent on turning rocks over and staring at the bugs, being prepared to consider possibilities, prepared to be wrong. And ‘there is a tendency across most alternative media to refrain from suggesting such things’ – full stop. Pride and prejudice – why/mostly. Come to this site to do my bit – learn, identify, relate and speak-up. The pressing issue for alt. media is lack of wider involvement. Everything is ‘depleting’ down because there’s not enough encouragement to be wrong. To DIY, to be a Bedlam. To consider and grow through mistaken thinking. Not enough “jump-on have your say”. Therefore – usual disclaimers where causalities/condolences apply – ‘suggesting a Russian false-flag’ is entirely reasonable, logical and journalistically considerate. Thanks and risk on.
If there is an analogy between “falce-flag” attacks here and there, why not analogy between the “protests” in Russia and those in Syria, Ukraina, Libya, Bulgaria, Chille…etc.? We all have seen the consequences
The SAME scenario
Sure, I did acknowledge that point in the article too.
The point, however, is that the footage of the attack looks inauthentic. Regardless of what the motive for a *false-flag* attack would be (including a strategically *justified* motive to combat what might be externally-influenced protests), it would still be dishonest for someone like me to ignore what LOOKS like a staged operation in St Petersburg while *not* ignoring what looked like a staged operation in Westminster or Nice.
If we’re going to question things or analyse evidences, it is only honest if we apply the same scrutiny to everyone: which means not just demonising Western governments or states and refraining from any questioning of what goes on in Russia.