West Desperately Deflects as Ukraine's ISIS Gambit Backfires

Since the Krokus attacks occurred, the West has been in utter overdrive to pin the blame on ISIS while absolving Ukraine from any responsibility. The heavy-handed desperation with which they’ve gone to lengths in doing this reveals the game and tells us everything we need to know about the nature of the attacks.

Listen to Grant Shapps at the end of the video above, whose mask slips when he openly reveals: “We must resist Putin’s effort to link ISIS to Ukraine.”

But before we go on, let’s remember how almost every previous terrorist attack that was denied by Ukraine ended up being quietly admitted later.

Same goes for Nord Stream and many others. So why this pearl clutching by the Western commentariat that Ukraine would never resort to killing civilians?

After all, just yesterday Ukraine’s head of the SBU Vasyl Malyuk went on a long confession spree, “unofficially” admitting Ukraine’s responsibility for killing Ilia Kiva, Vladlen Tatarsky, and others.

And who can forget Ukraine’s usage of an unwitting civilian ‘suicide bomber’ in their terror attack on the Kerch Bridge? By the way, the same Malyuk above also just admitted that the Kerch Bridge is no longer even used for military purposes:

https://english.nv.ua/nation/russia-not-using-damaged-crimean-bridge-to-transport-weapons-sbu-50404271.html

Ukraine could “potentially” destroy Russia’s illegally constructed Crimean Bridge in Kerch, although it’s not currently used to bring weapons and ammunition into occupied Crimea, head of Ukraine’s SBU security service Lt. Gen. Vasyl Malyuk said in an interview with Ukrainian broadcaster ICTV on March 25.

That alone exposes so much about Ukraine and its perverted strategy to somehow win the war by ‘cornering’ Russia with the destruction of the bridge. They now admit the bridge plays no military role for Russian forces, so why would destroying it have any effect whatsoever on Russia’s ability to hold Crimea? It’s clear that the bridge as sacred target is only there for the typical PR purposes, not real victory.

But getting back.

The U.S. and friends really, really, really want you to know it wasn’t Ukraine who did the Moscow attacks, it was “ISIS”. Anyone who has even a functionally adult understanding of how the world works will innately comprehend that Ukraine is behind the attack. Of course, it’s possible it was one of its sponsors, the CIA or MI6—but the fact that the CIA claimed to have warned Russia of an impending terror action seems to imply to me that Ukraine had gone rogue, and even the U.S. was not standing with their gravely overreaching gambits.

It was just made known that the U.S. ‘warned’ Ukraine to stop provoking Russia by striking its energy facilities, remember? The U.S. has clearly diverged with its little pitbull on how to proceed further, as Biden’s admin is becoming averse to the increasing risks of poking the nuclear Bear.

Thus, it becomes quite plausible that the CIA attempted to warn Russia as a potentially indirect way of putting Ukraine off from the plan at the final hour. But desperate, bloodthirsty Zelensky will stop at nothing to appease his more occult masters, who operate through the unseen folds of the greater ‘U.S.’ apparatus.

Here’s one indepth theory as to how it likely really happened:

According to the "subjective data" available to me, terrorists from among the citizens of Tajikistan fell under religious lessons conducted on the Internet (watch the video), which were the ideological instructions of the "Islamic State of Valayat Khorosan (IGVC)".

Also, as I know, at least one of them was in a chat room called "Rahnamo ba Khuroson" (Rohnamo ba Khuroson).

A citizen of Tajikistan, Salmon Khurosoni, was (and is) curating religious processing groups. It was Salmon Khurosoni who made the primary recruitment approach to Islamic terrorists.

There is also information in certain circles that Khurosoni is an intermediate link between the Islamic State of Khorosan Wilayat (IGVC) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States.

Despite the fact that the terrorists of the Islamic State do not promise financial rewards for their terrorist attacks, but promise eternal Paradise ... nevertheless, with the assistance of Salmon Khorosani, an amount of 500,000 rubles was approved, which was supposed to cover the costs of the attack.

After that, the tasks and instructions in Turkey were already set by an emissary-mediator, who, presumably, is a staff member of a foreign special service (resident). And they, in turn, sent bayats (the oath of ISIS) to the same Salmon Khurosoni.

Also, Ukraine was not the last link in their withdrawal plan. Another unidentified emissary of foreign intelligence, who is in Ukraine, was supposed to send them directly to Turkey, and then to Afghanistan.

It is in Afghanistan that the alleged ideological (namely ideological, I'm not talking about the customer) leader of the terrorist attack in Moscow, Salmon Khurosoni, is located.

In fact, we see the apotheosis of the development of hybrid terrorism, namely brand franchising – one side aiming to strike at the other, resorts to the help of a third. Including on the basis when the performer is recruited under the third flag, that is, he thinks that he is fulfilling one will, when in reality there is another behind it.

Read the final bolded part again.

This is how modern hybrid warfare works. Each attack is different: there are some where Ukraine wants to have its footprint or responsibility publicly known as a direct message to Russia, as well as morale-boosting effort for its own audience. But there is another class of attack whose purpose is to destabilize Russia from the inside without acknowledging Ukraine’s fingerprints on the action.

In fact, to know Ukraine did it in this case would be to defeat the whole point: the entire purpose of this attack was to engineer the narrative that “Putin’s regime” is generating such global discontent that it’s starting to boomerang on its own people, with the aim being to mobilize discord within society against the Kremlin. Were people to know Ukraine was behind it, it would totally reverse the effect, making Ukraine the lightning rod for the devastating terror attack and galvanizing Russians even more against their enemy.

In this case, it was absolutely paramount that Ukraine had to utilize the services of a third party—so they hired some patsies through an intermediary with a convenient ‘ISIS’ link. But the timing is too ludicrous to believe—it’s akin to the CIA’s ‘best hits’, like the farfetched gas attack Assad carried out just when he had broken the enemy’s back and was winning the war. It’s utterly unbelievable that just as Russia had dealt some unprecedented blows to Ukraine, including a massively crippling air attack, and just as MSM outlets were sputtering out reams of devastating headlines about Ukraine’s impending collapse, ISIS just happens to decide to make a totally uncharacteristic attack in Moscow? You have to be infantilely credulous to believe such improbable coincidences.

There are a few simple facts:

1. First and the most important, these mercenaries did not declare ISIS goals and its ideology in any way during the action. They did not make any demands. They did not voice any statements.

2. They followed a well-planned timing that allowed them to leave the scene of the crime before the Special Forces arrived. Then they tried to run away to Ukraine. Any ideological self-sacrifice was out of the question.

3. They received money for the attack. Half of the amount was given to them before the terrorist attack, the other half is to be received after the evacuation.

4. They did not commit suicide while being detained. They did not even try to do it. They just ran like rats. They did not even try to fight. They were all captured alive.

And another expert opinion.

That’s not even to mention that the attackers were obviously caught heading to Ukraine, a fact now established with precise geolocation from on the ground videos:

You’ll note that at Bryansk there’s a fork where you can go several ways: they specifically chose the southern route into Ukraine’s Sumy region.

And an important clarification: right now there’s Ukrainian propaganda going around that today Lukashenko “disproved the Kremlin narrative” by pointing out that the terrorists first attempted to go into Belarus, but Belarusian forces blocked them, forcing them to choose Ukraine as a second option.

This is a total lie.

I’ve now studied Lukashenko’s exact statement, and he is in fact responding to a reporter who asked: “Is it possible they could have gone into Belarus?”

What he says is basically, no because we put up forces and either way they would be forced to go elsewhere. In short, he’s responding to a hypothetical, that even if they had wanted to come into Belarus, they would not be able to—but he by no means stated they definitively were coming to Belarus. This is a deliberate mischaracterization by Ukrainian propagandists.

In fact, during wartime you can imagine the border is impossible to cross without very special accommodations, which the terrorists clearly had from their Ukrainian friends. That’s not to mention that “ISIS” is incapable of supplying a stash of weapons into Russia for the patsies to have used—only Ukrainian SBU leads would have provided that weaponry from Ukraine deep inside Russia.

Most of the above is in line with what Russian FSB head Bortnikov believes happened, as per his statements today:

What he says:

• He believes Ukraine, U.S., and UK are behind the attacks

• He has some preliminary evidence to suggest this link, while investigations are ongoing

• His preliminary findings are that the terrorists were in fact “expected” on the Ukrainian border by their handlers

• He implies Budanov will be eliminated for his actions

And of course Patrushev adds his two cents as well:

“Of course it was Ukraine.”

Putin also made some new statements on the ongoing investigation, corroborating the link to Ukraine:

Some analysts have even speculated that Putin’s choice of ambiguous language is a hidden signal to the West: he knows precisely who did it and can reveal it at any moment, but—he’s giving the West a chance to make favorable concessions and gestures of reconciliation, to some extent.

Pay attention:

Putin’s performance yesterday demonstrates that there is a behind-the-scenes auction. Pay attention to ambiguous language:

- We know that the attack was committed by the hands of radical Islamists, we are interested in the customer;

- We need to get answers to a number of questions, did the radical Islamists really decide to strike at Russia;

- It is absolutely clear that the terrible crime in « Crocus » — is an action of intimidation, the question arises to whom it is beneficial.

Add here today's statement by Peskov that Russia is open for dialogue with the United States, but all problems must be discussed in a comprehensive manner, the Kremlin said.

Peskov is clearly hinting at a return to strategic dialogue.

That is, there is still a chance that the problem of jihadists can become a common denominator for the start of negotiations. This opens up opportunities for a return to discuss Erdogan's proposals for strategic stability.

If this does not happen with a high degree of probability, blows to bridges across the Dnieper (including in Kiev) and new attempts to achieve blackout as now will be added to strikes on energy and gas storage in Kharkov.

In short: “We’re willing to pretend this was ISIS if you sit back at the table and make some amends while working toward common goals. But if you want to play hard ball, we’ll “find” blame for Ukraine and then up the temperature severely on them, by way of massive infrastructure strikes and military escalations.”

Another possibility:

#hearings
Judging by the analysis of the events of the last three weeks, someone specifically provokes an increase in temperature in the Ukrainian crisis.

From this follows:
1. Events will peak for two weeks and return to normal again.
2. The Ukrainian crisis is waiting for maximum intensity, tragedies will be massive, and constant.

Be careful. The denouement is very close…

The source explains that the Ukrainian crisis has reached a dead end, where directors need a new increase for two things.
1. Knock out money to further finance the crisis.
2. Reset the Ukrainian crisis until the Taiwanese case begins.

We are watching…

Some even believe Putin could issue an ultimatum to Ukraine: leave all Donbass territories or hell will be unleashed on all the previously off-limits targets—depending on what the ‘answer’ from the West on the backdoor Krokus parley will be:

One source from the Russian President’s entourage reported information that Vladimir Putin is considering a harsh ultimatum to Ukraine. The people demand victory and the President is ready for tough decisions.

In order to complete the Northern Military District and save as many lives of our soldiers as possible, and also to avoid a new mobilization, Vladimir Putin is considering the option of a harsh ultimatum to Ukraine. Putin will demand the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Russian territory (new regions) and the voluntary surrender of Kharkov, Nikolaev and Odessa. In case of refusal, Moscow will declare real war on Kyiv within 24 hours. After which, within 72 hours, Kyiv, Lviv, Dnieper, Poltava, Ternopil and Vinnitsa will be destroyed. The rest of Ukraine will be subject to massive missile and bomb attacks. Tu-22M3 bombers using FAB-5000 bombs will destroy all bridges across the Dnieper, civilian airports, and all railway infrastructure. The center of Kyiv, all administrative buildings and bunkers will be destroyed by "Daggers". All power station substations will be destroyed by a single missile and bomb attack from Tu-95ms bombers.

The special forces of the Russian Armed Forces in Kyiv will detain the entire top leadership of Ukraine, and if impossible, liquidate them on the spot.

And this is just the beginning! In 48 hours the climax will begin.

Take the above with a Ropucha-class cargo of salt, but such things are at least remotely possible given the scope of the catastrophe that occurred, which I believe now ranks third in post-Soviet tragedies—in terms of number of victims—after the Beslan attack and Moscow apartment bombings of ‘99, even surpassing the Moscow Theater attack of 2002 casualties.

So, while the Ukrainians hid their trail well—for now—it’s clear to anyone with a brain unclouded by dogmatic faith that Ukraine is who alone benefits from this. Of course, it’s also interesting that the attack happened merely hours before the start of Purim—a holiday celebrating the Jewish people’s destruction of their arch nemesis. I say this in light of the infamous ‘threats’ made by one of the leaders of the Likud party, Amir Weitmann, that Russia will pay a heavy price for its support of Palestine.

Just a symbolic coincidence, most likely.

That being said, many in Ukraine and the West did celebrate the attacks, like this French station below:

On French news channel LCI, well-known French journalist Anne Nivat speaks with admiration about the terror attack in Moscow: "If the Ukrainians are behind it, it is an absolute masterpiece, phenomenal work."

Or this Australian mercenary:

To wrap up, it’s needless to say that Ukraine’s links to ISIS were innumerable and well known:

Of course, the West has been threatening ordinary Russians since the start of the war:

—

What does that all foretell for the war?

Clearly, the conflict is entering a new phase—though I won’t be as dramatic as some in exaggerating that this will bring some immediate epochal shifts. Ukraine is merely being forced to resort to increasingly desperate and dangerous maneuvers to dislodge Russia’s unity, and Russian elite are increasingly consolidating under one form of ideological solidarity when it comes to the war’s end-game objectives. Those who may have toed the line previously, now recognize that only maximalist goals will achieve national security for Russia.

Not only did Peskov promote the conflict to a ‘war’ but now Russia’s security services are openly talking about designating Ukraine as a terrorist state, eliminating the leadership, etc. And the recent strikes prove some of this escalatory rhetoric is not mere lip service. Russia not only struck what it claims to be some leadership positions with hypersonic missiles in Kiev yesterday, but has also dealt devastating blows to the electric grid, this time targeting actual irreparable engine and turbine rooms.

Russia is striking leadership positions more and more; just today a Polish general was mysteriously announced as having died of sudden and unexpected ‘natural causes’ just after Russia laid waste to a mercenary stronghold in Chasov Yar. Coincidence?

Obviously this is joined in by NATO and the EU’s own escalations, with a new report claiming that NATO is now “considering” shooting down Russian missiles on the Polish border after one allegedly briefly veered into Polish airspace in the recent strikes on Lvov region.

In fact what’s interesting is how ‘out in the open’ NATO’s agenda has been forced, in light of recent exigencies. Here, Borrell openly admits—no longer even bothering to cling to the facade—that the Ukraine war is all about Europe’s interests and has nothing to do with caring for the Ukrainian people:

The secret to decoding his already clear language is to understand that Borrell—like the rest of the Euro-technocrat mafia—is unelected by real citizens, but rather appointed by some faceless high commission.

Thus, when he says “we cannot afford for Russia to win this war” because it would be damaging to “our” interests, who might he possibly be referring to? The we is certainly not the people whom he doesn’t politically represent. It’s of course the rest of the comprador elite who control the upper layer of the world government apparatus, i.e. the financiers and banking elite. He’s speaking on their behalf.

Thus, he’s saying that the world banking cabal cannot afford Russia winning the war, because it would initiate a cascade of untold consequences for the monetary hegemonic web they’ve tentacularly enwreathed the entire globe in.

These second echelon compradors now scramble to fashion together some last minute “containment” strategy for Russia—which is where Macron recently took the lead.

Their idea of Cold War-era containment revolves around more of the same—militarizing society by spending record amounts on armament, as well as bolstering Russia’s other “next-in-line” neighbors like the Baltics and Moldova to prepare them as the next battlefield to bleed Russia out on.

This Economist article starts off with quite a doozy first paragraph:

https://archive.is/6tIAe

It revolves around the same concept prescribed in the Moscow terror attacks: alienate Putin from the narod—the people; make them hate him for the fear and danger he’s brought into the heart of Russian society. The problem is, Russian citizens are very keen to what’s going on because they’ve developed a reflexive instinct for sniffing out the West’s provocations, after years of suffering them through the ‘90s and onward. So they know precisely where the attacks originated from, and who created ISIS itself, as they created Al-Qaeda to kill Soviets in Afghanistan in the ‘80s, as well as the Chechen jihadists in the ‘90s.

Now the top EU puppet leaders climb over each other to stand out in the new pageant of war the ongoing events have germinated:

Amid the scuffle and bustle, everyone sees opportunity to gain more power—after all, crisis is the absolute most ideal time to distinguish oneself from the pack and gain inordinate advantage.

But ultimately, the reason these attacks had to happen, as I said in the beginning, was to mask the ongoing degradation of the Ukrainian armed forces:

https://archive.is/ceSMj

The above article details the Ukrainian Rada’s tumultuous struggle to lower the conscription age:

“We’re struggling to lower the age to 25—it’s an unpopular decision,” said Fedir Venislavskyi, a member of the Rada in President Volodymyr Zelensky’s ruling party, who has been one of the law’s leading backers. “We need to increase the number of people who can be mobilized.”

One interesting facet is this was in fact the first article finally confirming for us something we’ve been talking about here for a long time, namely the precise breakdown of Ukraine’s combat vs. noncombat forces:

Ukraine’s military has nearly 600,000 personnel, according to estimates from Zelensky. Most are in support roles away from combat at the front. Zelensky said in December that the military has requested 500,000 more troops, although commanders said it didn’t need all of them immediately.

This confirms that the majority of their estimated 600k total personnel are noncombat support roles, which further confirms the number I had long maintained was their direct frontline combat troop amount: around 200-250k at most. This itself was corroborated by the Pentagon leaks, which listed each individual front number totalling a mere 200-250k or less.

The most dire problem Ukraine faces is not necessarily total “troops”—if you can call them that—but capable assault troops in particular. Rezident UA channel reports:

TCK is not able to fulfill the mobilization plan on minimum terms, and the General Staff urgently needs 200 thousand Ukrainians to restore reserves and another 200-300 thousand to be able to conduct counterattacks.

And now there’s even talk that lowering the age to 25 will not do much to staunch the losses, and they are now talking about lowering it straight down to 19, as outlined this week by chairman of the Rada, Dmytro Razumkov:

Recall that Razumkov is arguably the second or third most powerful person in Ukraine and was ‘rumored’ to be in line to take the presidency when Zelensky should fall. So his words above carry weight.

—

Beneath the gimmicks, terror diversions, and misdirecting but pointless missile attacks on Crimea, Ukraine continues to retreat as Russia steamrolls forward, breaking through the AFU’s lines:

We should technically be entering Rasputitsa now until May or early June, but time is now ticking until Russia could be ready to launch its finishing blow offensive on the AFU. Once that happens and Ukraine starts taking inordinately heavy losses again, Zelensky may be faced with no choice but to initiate the heaviest of mobilizations, which could finally set off the powder keg of society against him. Then the real fireworks could begin this summer.

As a final item, for those interested in more indepth information about the ‘ISIS’ connections and the possible British MI6 hand in the Moscow attacks, here’s a highly informed writeup from Russian frontline correspondent and journalist Marat Khairulin:

Terrorist attack in Moscow:

Tajik trail leads to the British London took out the old skeletons from the closet By Marat Khairulin

The monstrous tragedy at Crocus City Hall has very deep roots and far-reaching consequences. We will return to them more than once. But today, let's talk about where the attack came from this time. And let's try to trace its genesis at least approximately and understand what the main enemy is throwing against us, if not the last forces, then certainly playing the cards that it held until the last moment.

Two days after the bloody attack, there was such a general opinion in the Russian political and intelligence community that the United Kingdom, or rather Mi6, was behind the terrorist attack. It's a very similar handwriting for this organization. It is an indisputable fact that all the major terrorist attacks in Russia of the post-Soviet period from Beslan to Dubrovka had a British trace in one way or another. The terrorist leaders who directed the militants were recruited by Mi6. And in some cases (like Basayev and Khattab) they openly collaborated with Mi6.

In contrast to this opinion, Britain has thrown out an obvious blank in its top media: a certain organization Vilayat Khorosan (a branch of the Islamic State operating in Afghanistan) is behind the terrorist attack. For experts, this approach clearly speaks in favor of the version that in this particular case it has the english trace too. Here we must immediately say that the story is not easy, and it is very difficult to understand it, so today we will outline only some of the features. In its heyday, ISIS was a collection of tribal gangs united primarily on the basis of funding from the United Kingdom. Both the bandit ash-Shishani (a native of Georgia, Batirashvili) and his replacement, Tajik Khalimov, were direct Mi6 mercenaries.

The scope of ISIS's activities, as a proxy for the British, eventually became so serious that it began to interfere with US influence in the Middle East and Central Asia, and the UK had to partially scale back its operations in order not to anger the hegemon. And for a while, all these terrorists in the service of Mi6 went into the shadows, some were even declared dead.

They have started to surface again since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. That's when the ISIS from Khorosan appeared on the scene. But in fact, a number of Pashtun tribal leaders who were supported by the British. They are the only ones who agreed to fight the Taliban. This is the key point. Here we are entering the difficult geopolitics of Central Asia.

Most countries in the region support the Taliban's efforts to pacify Afghanistan, hoping to ensure their security in this way. All except Tajikistan. Who cannot find a common language with the Taliban due to the fact that a number of organizations operate under their wing, which are considered terrorist in Tajikistan. It was on this split that Britain played all these years after the Americans left the region, trying with all its might to prevent the establishment of peace in Asia.

To do this, immediately after the US withdrawal, the recruitment of ethnic Afghan Tajiks began in the Vilayat Khorosan gangs. That is, President Rahmon, who is very sensitive to this issue and considers the Tajiks to be one of the largest divided nations in the world, began to show that ISIS Khorosan is like its own. And by joining the support of the Taliban, he is betraying the interests of the Tajiks. In other words, by pointing a finger at ISIS Khorosan, which, I emphasize, at the moment practically does not exist as an organization (there is only a certain community of tribal gangs), Britain is trying to openly drag us into Asia. This is another attempt by the British to impose problems on us in the rear after Kazakhstan. But this is only part of the game. The second one is no less interesting and more explicit. The political support of the very leader of ISIS, Tajik Khalimov, has always been the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan. It has been declared a terrorist organization in its homeland, and since the early 2000s, guess where its headquarters are located? You guessed it - in London.

The scope of ISIS's activities, as a proxy for the British, eventually became so serious that it began to interfere with US influence in the Middle East and Central Asia, and the UK had to partially scale back its operations in order not to anger the hegemon. And for a while, all these terrorists in the service of Mi6 went into the shadows, some were even declared dead. They have started to surface again since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. That's when the ISIS from Khorosan appeared on the scene. But in fact, a number of Pashtun tribal leaders who were supported by the British. They are the only ones who agreed to fight the Taliban. This is the key point. Here we are entering the difficult geopolitics of Central Asia. Most countries in the region support the Taliban's efforts to pacify Afghanistan, hoping to ensure their security in this way. All except Tajikistan. Who cannot find a common language with the Taliban due to the fact that a number of organizations operate under their wing, which are considered terrorist in Tajikistan. It was on this split that Britain played all these years after the Americans left the region, trying with all its might to prevent the establishment of peace in Asia.

On the eve of the Americans running away from Afghanistan, the British fussed over the Tajiks and in 2018 created the National Alliance of Tajikistan in Warsaw on the basis of this party, where they tried to cram the remnants of all Tajik thugs who survived after the defeat of ISIS. The alliance was headed by such a figure Kabirov, who walked beside with Khalimov all his life. The point of creating a new organization was simple: The West was losing the war in Syria, and it was necessary to establish the traffic of militants from Tajikistan.

NAT served as a single window where Britain contributed money, and Kabirov and Halimov were engaged in the export of Tajik "meat". It must be said here that Khalimov has been nominally considered dead since 2017, but there is also a second opinion that he was simply "removed" into the shadows after the Americans turned on ISIS. However, what does all this have to do with the events at Crocus City Hall? Patience, dear readers. We're almost to the point.

In 2022, with the beginning of the SMO, the so-called Jabhat Al-Shamiya brigade appeared as part of the mercenary corps in Ukraine. Or rather, one of her detachments operating in the Aleppo area. This detachment is led by a field commander (Tajik by nationality), Khalimov's right-hand man. All that is known about him is that his nickname is Shusha, and he is a history teacher by education. There is a version that this is one of the many relatives and cousins of Khalimov. I will not talk about the combat path of these Tajik Basmachi in Ukraine now, there is also something to talk about there.

Jabhat Al-Shamiya was one of the main recipients of British money allocated through the National Alliance of Tajikistan. And here (attention!) a month after the failure of the AFU counteroffensive (perhaps a little later at the turn of October and November), Ilya Ponomarev, the political leader of the new "Vlasovites"(Russian Volunteer Corps), and the political leader of the Tajik terrorists Kabirov met in London. After that, a number of other meetings were recorded in Warsaw. Already at the level of functionaries. There are some interesting details of these meetings, in particular, who supervised them. But more on that next time.

And now we see a coordinated attack in Belgorod by new "Vlasovites"(Russian Volunteer Corps), and in Moscow by Tajik militants. I think the affiliation of the arrested terrorists to the National Alliance of Tajikistan will be confirmed one way or another soon. Why go to NAT? It is known for certain that recruitment (on the terms of payment for roads and lifting) in Russia is carried out by the National Union of Migrants of Tajikistan, a member of the alliance, which is also considered an extremist organization at home and in Russia. This very Alliance ensures the existence of a network of sleeper agents from Tajikistan in Russia. Agents are primarily in the hands of Mi6, because needless to say, this Alliance was created in the 2000s under the direct leadership of the British. In other words, the UK began to put together a united terrorist front against Russia as soon as it became clear that the counteroffensive had failed, and Ukraine was doomed. And, moreover, in its traditional manner, the UK tried to frame or incarcerate the hegemon.

Obviously, the hegemon did not like this, and he tried to warn Moscow. At the same time, trying not to give up your closest ally. Although, to be honest, even from this story it is clear that with such allies, the United States does not need any enemies. But that's not all. There is also an opinion in our political and intelligence community, which is not widely spoken about, but it is there: the British showed blatant amateur activity, and now everyone is frozen in anticipation of a showdown between the allies. And Russia's first serious reaction to the terrorist attack has already followed (although perhaps this is a coincidence): Our representative at the UN, Nebenzia, said that Russia would not recognize Zelensky as legitimate after the expiration of his term of office. And since you are nobody in our eyes, it is possible that immediately after that day, Hitler Zelensky will be demonstratively denationalized. Unless, of course, he is taken out by his british friends before that. In anticipation of this glorious event, let's hope that Budanov (a direct Mi6 agent) and Ponomarev (an even more direct agent) will soon go to the judgment of God. It's time, it's time, the devil is clearly waiting for them in hell.

---

Your support is invaluable. If you enjoyed the read, I would greatly appreciate if you subscribed to a monthly/yearly pledge to support my work, so that I may continue providing you with detailed, incisive reports like this one.

Alternatively, you can tip here: Tip Jar

---