Making sense of current events
Making sense of current events
The most effective way to cut through any deception and 'noise'
As Lenin supposedly said:
“There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen.”
I have a sneaking suspicion that we are in “weeks where decades happen” right now, especially when also considering the implications of the recent airstrike by Israel which killed several high ranking generals of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in the Iranian consulate in Damascus and the fact that the full implications of this event remain unclear at this stage, although could potentially be dire…and not just for Israel.
These events also have deep connection (and potentially impact) to the Russia/Ukraine conflict as this excellent 15 minute video explains:
The death toll from the attack in Moscow is sitting at 144 with at least 551 additional people injured in the attack on the Crocus City concert hall.
Meanwhile, it is now almost common knowledge that this video of Kate (supposedly) announcing that she has been diagnosed with cancer is not quite what it looks like, to put it mildly:
I’ll touch on that in more detail towards the end of this article but just as a bit of a teaser, watch very very closely this two minute video uploaded in April of 2016 (and especially from 0:44 onward):
You may need to watch the above two videos several times to let what you’re watching sink in properly.
Kate must really like that sweater…and that pair of blue jeans too by the looks of it!
As I said, we’ll get back to that further down in this article but here’s an appetizer to get those juices flowing:
George Orwell famously said:
In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
I’d like to paraphrase slightly that famous Orwell quote into one more ‘appropriate’ for the topic of this article:
In times of universal deceit, uncovering the truth becomes increasingly hard.
Add a bit of ‘deepfake’ generated using AI into the mix and things really get ‘interesting’.
How to figure out what is true “in times of universal deceit”…and advanced AI (available to almost anyone)?
There is no doubt that it is becoming increasingly hard to figure out what is real and what is fake and most importantly: what is the truth behind world events.
This applies to almost anything taking place in our world these days with the examples discussed in this post being a very typical representation of such world events.
The answer is simple to understand but not so much to implement
There are only two questions you need to be able to answer correctly for the truth to reveal itself.
I discussed these in this post about the Israel-Hamas war but here they are again for your convenience:
Cui bono? (or in English "to whom is it a benefit?"); and
Money: who/where does it come from and who/where does it go to?
That’s it!
Answer these two questions correctly (that’s the tricky bit) and you are guaranteed to uncover the truth!
Even if you can answer correctly (again, that’s the tricky bit!) just one of these two questions, you have a good probability of finding out the truth.
This is especially the case for the “Cui bono?” question because money flows can (and often do) get obfuscated and it’s unfortunately also relatively easy to do so.
As such, the focus of this article will be firmly on answering question 1 above.
Before we get started though, I want to remind you of the underlying concept behind EVERYTHING that is happening in our world today. This has been the case for at least three centuries but likely much longer:
Another much more ‘dramatic’ way to explain the above is that:
“They are guarding ALL the doors. They are holding ALL the keys”
Keep that in mind (always!) and strap in as we dig deep into three events from the last month or so which are still very much ‘in play’.
The attack in Russia
Below is a video of what is allegedly the first minutes of the attack on the Crocus City concert hall as republished by RT, a major legacy media outlet fully owned by the Russian state.
RT are openly saying that they found this video on social media and it was supposedly filmed by someone who was inside the concert hall but “reportedly managed to escape the attackers”.
They don’t elaborate who this person is, whether he was interviewed by them or not or whether they have made any attempts to verify the authenticity of the video (but the wording in their article suggest they did not).
Despite that, they had no issues with putting their logo on the video and posting it as ‘news’.
The video contains some distressing images (and especially sounds) so viewer discretion is advised.
Timeline and associated footage
I am providing a few videos I sourced from this piece which provides a detailed timeline of the events starting from the moment the terrorists first entered Crocus to when they left, a period of 18 minutes in total.
Warning: HIGHLY distressing footage ahead. Viewer discretion strongly advised.
19:55 - The four terrorists enter the Crocus Complex
This is a video from their entry point. A man can be heard saying (in Russian): “They are running there with automatic rifles”.
19:58 (based on this statement released by the Kremlin) - The four terrorists proceed towards the internal entry point of the Crocus City Hall concert venue, shooting as they go.
Footage from other angles showing the members of the public attempting to run away from the attackers:
20:03 - The terrorists are inside the concert hall itself
The article I sourced this from states that “the suspect with the backpack begins lighting fires” but I can’t quite see that in the footage.
Can you?
If so, leave a comment below
The attackers all left the building 8 minutes later at 20:11 based on this statement released by the Kremlin.
Keep the above videos in mind as you listen to the following testimonies as well as this one as aired by RT on the day of the attack:
Whoever filmed all the above videos, they are all either very brave with nerves of steel…or there is something else at play here.
The day after the attack, Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) issued a statement that they have detained 11 suspects and that at least some of those suspects were planning to escape by crossing the border into Ukraine.
More specifically, the FSB said in their statement that there were four primary suspects which were detained early Saturday morning in the Bryansk administrative division, located just north east of the Ukrainian border and just east of the border with Belarus. The statement also said the suspects were armed with what appeared to be AK-47 assault rifles and lots of ammo.
Putin himself also said during his televised address following the attack that at least some of the suspects appeared to be headed to the Ukraine border at the time of their capture and that it also seemed that there were people waiting for them on the Ukrainian side in order to help them cross.
RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan posted on her Telegram channel two videos that are allegedly of the initial questioning of two of the suspects immediately after their capture.
RT re-posted those on their website, which is to be expected given Simonyan’s role in the organisation.
Here is one video as aired on RT and dubbed by them to English where one of the captured suspects is saying that:
Before the attack, he visited Turkey.
When asked what he did at the Crocus City concert venue on Friday evening, he replied: “I shot down... people” and that he done that “for money,” detailing that he had been promised 500,000 Rubles (about US$5,418).
He said that half the sum had already been transferred to his debit card.
He said that the organisers of the attack, whom he claim to not know and have never met in person, had contacted him via Telegram messaging app (which is very popular in Russia and was created by Russian tech billionaire Pavel Durov) and arranged an arms cache to be waiting for them.
he also said that he had been “listening to sermons… by a preacher” on Telegram for some time before being approached by the supposed masterminds of the attack “around a month ago.”
The second Simonyan video was aired on RT France showing the second apprehended suspect speaking through an interpreter as he was unable to communicate directly in Russian with his captors.
The man describes how an acquaintance by the name of Abdullah (last name not provided) who he'd befriended through Telegram “15 to 20 days ago” had purchased a car, presumably with a view to using it as a taxi as he was unemployed for quite awhile.
When asked specifically who Abdullah was, the apprehended suspect said he came to know him through Telegram and met him for the first time “10 to 12 days ago” when they went together to buy the car.
He also said that the car was purchased from someone Abdullah described to him as “a relative of his”.
That second video wasn’t dubbed but RT added subtitles in French to it:
The FSB didn’t provide initially any information about the four suspects they apprehended in Bryansk (allegedly) but has released that information since:
Dalerjon Mirzoev - 32 years old and father of four young children who overstayed his work visa in Russia.
Saidakrom Rachabalizoda - 28 years old, lives in Moscow.
Shamsiddin Fariduni - 24 years old and father of an 8-month-old baby, a factory worker.
Muhammadsobir Fayzov - a hairdresser
All four are citizens of Tajikistan.
The four suspects appeared in court in Moscow late on Sunday night (so two days after the attack) with all looking like they have been clearly ‘worked on’ (with one appearing unresponsive altogether and another missing an ear).
The hairdresser Fayzov needed to be brought in on a stretcher to court as he was unable to walk on his own:
I don’t know about you but to me all these guys seem like they could not possibly be more obvious PATSIES!
We are expected to believe that a hairdresser and factory worker (as well as the two dads) will do something like that?
More importantly: even if they were determined to carry out the attack, there is no way they would have handled themselves in the calm and determined manner displayed by the actual terrorists in the multitude of videos from the attack (including the one I included in this article) shooting at innocent people (including children!) at point blank.
COME ON!!
Here is a short clip (Video only. No audio) of three of the four during the court hearing as published by RT where it also said that:
The court has opted to rule behind closed doors.
The fourth guy (the hairdresser Muhammadsobir Fayzov) had to be wheeled in as he couldn’t walk and appeared to be unconscious.
Here is another video released by the Russian security services themselves showing two of the four arrive to the court building and in the hallway before they enter the courtroom itself.
If you haven’t had enough yet then a mere day later, the FSB announced they have charged three more of the 11 people they captured in connection to the attack.
Here is a direct quote from the RT article covering this ‘development’:
The three latest suspects – Aminchon Islomov, Dilovar Islomov and their 62-year-old father Isroil Islomov – are accused of being involved in organizing the terrorist act, according to Russia’s Investigative Committee.
In an application to the court shared on the service’s Telegram channel, investigators claimed that one of the gunmen, Shamsidin Fariduni, is believed to have recruited Aminchon Islomov in January to join him with the goal of committing a terrorist act. No later than on March 11, he is thought to have also recruited Dilovar Islomov, investigators claimed, demanding the immediate arrest of the two brothers as well as their father.
According to Russian media outlets, Dilovar Islomov is believed to have been the last owner of the white Renault which was allegedly used as a getaway vehicle by the terrorists as part of their plan. However, no official details as to how the three relatives could be connected to the incident have yet been made public.
Here are the two brothers and their dad:
I am not into body shaming anyone but let’s just say the two brothers don’t really look like they are the ‘running and shooting’ type (especially the running).
Here are the two brothers arriving to their court appearance:
If any of these guys are indeed capable of shooting innocent people (many at point blank) without flinching, setting the place on fire and running away without getting apprehended on the scene and then look like they are in utter shock during their court appearance, then they are bloody good actors and Hollywood should sign them up immediately!
Here is another news report focusing mainly on images of the attackers:
I showed the above videos and images to my mum who spent 31 years in the Soviet Union and her ‘assessment’ was immediate and crystal clear:
These are show trials and all these people look like they were randomly picked off the street by the secret police. This happened all the time in the USSR.
Who am I to argue with my mum, right? ;)
On March 26, another person suspected by Russian authorities of involvement in the Crocus attack was arrested.
This time it was 32 year old Alisher Kasimov, a Russian citizen born in Kyrgyzstan (so not Tajikistan this time) who is Chef and Cafe owner.
Kasimov is not accused of being involved in the shooting itself but rather with renting out his Moscow apartment to four of the suspected gunmen.
Three days later on March 29, another suspect was brought before the court, another Tajik by the name of Nazrimad Lutfulloi.
Here is the key part of the story as provided by RT (with bolding of some key information by me):
Lutfulloi was detained by law enforcement near Crocus City Hall on March 23 – one day after the deadly shooting that claimed the lives of more than 140 people.
When police officers asked him to show identification, the suspect allegedly started to behave violently, did not respond to police commands, and insulted the security forces.
On March 25, Moscow’s Preobrazhensky Court arrested Lutfulloi for 15 days for petty hooliganism. He pleaded guilty to the charge.
Several days later, however, Russia’s Investigative Committee asked the court to place the Tajikistani national under arrest as a suspect in the Crocus City Hall attack, accusing him of being involved in funding the terrorists.
No information was provided on how this guy, who appears to be nothing more than a petty criminal, “funded the terrorists”.
On the very same day, it was reported that Tajik security forces arrested nine people on their soil with suspected involvement in the terrorist attack.
The report is very scant on details as to what these people’s involvement is and only says that:
All the suspects were residents of the Vakhdat district, a suburb of the capital (of Tajikistan) Dushanbe. They had allegedly been in contact with the Moscow shooters, and are also suspected of being linked to the Islamic State terrorist organization.
On March 31st, the FSB arrested three more suspects in Dagestan, an autonomous republic that is part of the Russian Federation with six million residents, most of whom are Muslim.
The FSB statement said that:
“The bandits who were taken to custody were planning to commit a number of terrorist crimes.
Automatic weapons, ammunition and a ready-to-use improvised explosive device were discovered at the locations where the suspects were holed up”
Below is a video taken during the arrest as published by RT:
A day later on April 1st, a tenth suspect linked to the terrorist attack was brought to court in Moscow: Yusufzoda Yakubjoni, another citizen of Tajikistan.
He is 25 years old and media reports suggest he has a wife and three children.
RT reports that:
According to the Russian Investigative Committee, several days before the Crocus incident, Yusufzoda is believed to have transferred money to one of the suspects allegedly involved, to provide accommodation for the terrorists.
After the attack, he transferred another sum of money to one of the perpetrators of the massacre.
During his arrest last week, he is said to have “actively resisted” the police and refused to provide identification documents.
On April 5, an 11th suspect in the Crocus attack was brought before the court:
This one is another Tajik national by the name of Muhammad Zoir Sharipzoda. There was no specific information made publicly available as to how Sharipzoda was involved except to say that he “was instrumental in preparing the attack”.
According to one unnamed member of the Russian Parliament (Duma) described as a “Putin-loyalist”, those who are convicted in carrying out the attack are going to be “blindfolded and shot in the head” and that the executions will be carried in Belarus, Russia’s close ally and the other half of the “union state”, in order to ‘bypass’ the moratorium on the death penalty Russia has in place since 1996.
Putin himself pretty quickly after the attack started pushing the narrative that the attack was carried out by “Radical Islamists” but that Ukraine was also involved and should therefore pay the price.
Following that, Russia wasted no time before it started ‘collecting’ with a major attack on the Ukrainian capital:
As the days have gone by, the rhetoric by Russia towards Ukraine has become significantly more blunt.
On March 29, RT published an article which says that the first four suspects, who were apprehended near the Ukrainian border (see discussion above) testified that they received orders from a mystery man to flee to Ukraine after the attack.
The RT piece says that:
In their initial testimonies and during their subsequent interrogations, the suspects said the attacks were prepared in coordination with “a man who introduced himself to them under a pseudonym”. He communicated with them by voice messages sent over Telegram.
“On the instructions of the coordinator, after committing the crime, the terrorists drove in a car towards the Russian-Ukrainian border to subsequently cross it and arrive in Kiev to receive the promised reward.”
The Investigative Committee has said it is continuing to “verify the involvement of representatives of Ukrainian special services in organizing and financing the terrorist attack.”
On April 8, RT published a piece saying the four initial suspects (who were allegedly involved directly in shooting people at Crocus City Hall) have admitted in an investigation that they were provided with a detailed escape plan to flee to Ukraine following the attack and were promised a million Rubles each (just under US$11,000) once they arrive to Ukraine.
RT also provided video footage of the suspects admitting to this in their own voice which you can watch below (Dubbing to English is provided by RT and appears to be accurate from what I can ascertain as all suspects appear to be able to communicate in Russian all of a sudden):
Now I’d urge you to scroll up a bit and go and have a look once more at the photos and videos of the four suspects when they were arrested initially and especially the condition they were in when they were brought to court.
I think it’s safe to say that these statements have been extracted under ‘severe duress’ (to put it mildly) and so the truthfulness of the information provided above is somewhat questionable (again, to put it very mildly).
If you think this is just me speculating and making assumptions, I recommend you check what Human Rights Watch has to say about how these people have been treated. It is also a very well researched and documented fact (not opinion!) that torture almost never produces accurate intelligence, not to mention actionable one.
Next, it is important to mention that there has clearly been a shift in the official Russian position away from ISIS-K being the sole (or even primary) culprit of the attack.
Towards the end of the RT piece it says:
The terrorist group Islamic State Khorasan (ISIS-K) has claimed responsibility for the massacre. The US and EU have insisted that ISIS-K was the sole culprit and that Ukraine was in no way involved.
Moscow, however, remains skeptical. President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and the heads of the FSB and the Investigative Committee have all claimed that multiple clues point to Kiev’s involvement.
Foreign Minister Lavrov said that the West’s insistence on ISIS being the only ones responsible for the attack is “highly suspicious”.
The Russian Investigative Committee also stated that the four suspects received “significant sums of money” from Ukraine, in the form of cryptocurrency, which were then used to prepare the attack on Crocus City Hall.
On March 31st, the Russian rhetoric towards Ukraine has become outright demanding.
The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that Russia demands Ukraine surrender everyone in the country it suspects of terrorism, including the head of SBU, Ukraine’s domestic spy agency, Vasily Malyuk:
The Russian Foreign Ministry has put forward a demand for the Ukrainian authorities, under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism to immediately arrest and extradite every person implicated in the above terrorist acts.
One of the demands is to arrest head of the Security Service of Ukraine, Vasily Malyuk, who cynically admitted on March 25 that Ukraine was behind the bombing of the Crimean Bridge in October 2022 and revealed details of the organisation of other attacks in the Russian Federation.
The fight against international terrorism is the responsibility of every state. The Russian side demands that the Kiev regime immediately cease any support for terrorist activities, extradite the perpetrators and compensate for the damage caused to the victims. Ukraine’s violation of its obligations under the antiterrorist conventions will entail international legal liability.
As you can imagine, Ukraine refused to surrender its domestic spy chief to the Russians although Zelensky appears to be a bit more open now to negotiate with Russia in good faith to end the hostilities and prevent the war from completely spiraling out of control.
While he is saying that, his military continued its attacks on the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (the biggest nuclear power station on the European continent) in what used to be part of Ukraine but is now part of the Russian Federation (according to the Russians at least).
Russia on its part is no longer willing to even entertain the idea of negotating with Zelensky and Russia’s ambassador to the UN has made a very blunt and unequivocal statement only this week saying:
“This is how it will go down in history – as an inhuman and hateful regime of terrorists and Nazis who betrayed the interest of their people and sacrificed it for Western money and for Zelensky and his closest circle.
In these conditions, attempts by the head of the Kiev regime to promote his formula and convene summits in support of the Kiev regime cause only confusion.
Very soon the only topic for any international meetings on Ukraine will be the unconditional capitulation of the Kiev regime.
I advise you all to prepare for this in advance.”
This is significant because it adds credence to one of the potential answers to the “Cui bono?” question for the Crocus Hall attack…and more specifically: Option 1.
An article published by RT on April 1 (which definitely wasn’t an April fool’s day joke) alleged that the US may have been involved indirectly in the attack.
More specifically:
The law enforcement body (Russian Investigative Committee) announced on Monday that it was moving forward with the procedural investigation after reviewing the initial accusations.
The initial claim, which the Committee confirmed receiving last Wednesday, identified the US and its allies as allegedly driving a string of attacks on Russian soil. The agency is looking into the purported “organization, financing and conduct of terrorist acts” by those nations.
On April 9, there has been a major development with the Russian Investigative Committee formally stating that Hunter Biden and his Burisma group appear to be connected to financing terrorist attacks in Russia (but not mentioning the Crocus attack specifically):
It’s all fun and games until those ballistic missiles start flying over, right?
Moving right along…
While the rhetoric by Russia towards Ukraine and its Western allies becomes increasingly direct (to put it mildly), they have also started mass deportations of illegal immigrants, mostly from poor Central Asian countries.
OK, so now that you are as up-to-date with the ‘official narrative/story’, it’s time for the hard part.
Cui bono?
I will propose two potential answers to this question which I feel are the most probable at this stage, as well as my reasoning and supporting evidence.
But first, let’s get rid of the distraction.
ISIS supposedly claimed responsibility…but does it make sense?
Within an hour of news about the attack in Moscow breaking, legacy media in the west (spearheaded by Con News Network, better known by their abbreviated name CNN) started parroting in unison the narrative that ISIS/ISIL is behind the attacks as they have supposedly “claimed responsibility”.
Many, including the Russians themselves, were not impressed the slightest by these claims, to put it mildly…and rightfully so!
The fact that the Russians also rejected this is ‘interesting’ for reasons that will be discussed shortly.
When applying the “Cui bono” principle, it becomes immediately evident that ISIS not only has nothing to gain but everything to lose by butchering innocent Russians and doing so in the Russian capital of all places.
Russia is a close ally of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria which has been engaged in fighting ISIS since the Arab Spring over a decade ago.
North Eastern Syria has been one of their primary strongholds after their presence in Iraq has diminished significantly.
Now, let’s consider a very simple question:
If ISIS kills and injures hundreds of Russian civilians on Russian soil, is that MORE or LESS likely to result in Russia deciding to take a more active role in Syria and engage ISIS directly and in full force?
The only ISIS connection to the attack that seems at least somewhat plausible to me is articulated in this tweet but even there the conclusion is:
If it turns out that the Chechen-Ukrainian trace of ISIL is behind the Crocus terrorist attack, there is no doubt Putin's reaction will be harsh and relentless.
Once again, not much benefit to be had, only a whole world of pain.
Hopefully you are no longer in the camp that says:
“Oh, they are just evil Muslims who want to kill all the infidels.”
9/11 and also the events of October 7 last year have hopefully taught us all that things are not that simple…and never have been!
Despite that (or maybe rather because of that) it’s hardly surprising the US and UK governments ‘wheeled out’ ISIS and got their minions in legacy media to amplify said message.
As this excellent article written almost a decade ago by
explains, ISIS/ISIL have been a very useful tool for western intelligence many times in the past (so why not again now, right?). provides some additional historical context about ISIS in this piece:
Another important point is made by
in this piece:In a normal jihad attack, the perpetrators don’t try to escape. They keep killing until confronted and killed by authorities.
They want to be killed because that’s the only way to receive their promised reward from Allah on the other side of this life. They get their 72 black-eyed, full-breasted virgins and get to have fun for the rest of eternity (or so they believe).
But these killers did not kill for a heavenly reward. They killed for an earthly reward. Money.
OK, so now that we got rid of the nonsense, it’s time to get down to business properly.
Option 1: Russia itself did it
The notion that Russia (or at least element within its government & security forces) allowed a massacre of their own innocent civilians to take place may sound completely outrageous to you but please bare with me before naming me a “FED/CIA plant” and the like, and take a look at the information provided in the note below:
Here is the part I want to highlight the most:
Working strictly on the “who benefits” principle, the one who actually stands to gain the most appears to be Putin himself.
The attack gives him the reason he needs to take most (if not ALL) of Ukraine and make it part of the Russian Federation.
From his perspective (which is understandable to be honest), this is the only way to GUARANTEE with 100% certainty that Ukraine will NEVER join NATO and will NEVER have NATO forces or installations (e.g. Bio-labs) on its soil ever again.
Given what the current US Secretary of State is saying openly and publicly in the video below, Putin and the Russian security apparatus can hardly be blamed for ‘entertaining’ such thoughts:
I’m clearly not the only one who thinks this option of a “false flag”, conducted by Russia itself is plausible as this Tweet by Dr. Thomas Binder (who has one hell of a story to tell back from the early days of WWIII) shows:
The article linked from the above tweet was published by a group called Swiss Policy Research who describe themselves as follows:
Swiss Policy Research (SPR), founded in 2016, is an independent, nonpartisan and nonprofit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda.
SPR is composed of independent academics and receives no external funding other than reader donations.
Our analyses have been published by numerous independent media outlets and have been translated into more than two dozen languages.
In case the above is not enough for you to decide whether SPR are to be trusted or not, maybe this sample of mentions they received (both positive & negative), including links to the source material, will help you make up your own mind.
For me personally, the following statements are more than enough to convince me that this organisation and its work are worthy of some serious consideration:
Newsguard is saying: “Proceed with caution: This website severely violates basic journalistic standards.”
Swiss Federal Intelligence Service is saying: “Known for its dubious reporting”
German public broadcaster ARD is saying: “A propaganda tool”
For me personally, all of the above is probably the most glowing endorsement an independent media outlet can ever get!
Hopefully one day I also get the distinct honour of being called “A propaganda tool” by a public broadcaster and an intelligence service calls my work “dubious reporting”.
When (and if) that day ever comes, I will know for sure that I have done a good job. I mean that in the most serious way possible!
In case you don’t come to the same conclusion based on the above ‘testimonials’, I suggest you familiarise yourself with what role legacy media is playing in the era of fifth generation warfare. This section in one of my past articles will help you get up-to-speed.
After this intro, you are hopefully encouraged to go and at least see what Swiss Policy Research (SPR) have to say. It is a very ‘information dense’ piece (with a lot of references) and thus any attempt by me to summarise it will not do it justice.
The only part of that article which I do want to highlight is this:
The currently available video evidence of the Moscow concert hall attack – about 50 video clips – is consistent with, or even suggestive of, a staged event run by Russian security forces.
Four days after the initial piece was published, SPR released a follow-up piece following some new evidence which has emerged since the initial piece was published.
The article starts with their conclusion which is pretty unambiguous:
On March 25, SPR published a first forensic video analysis and concluded that the March 22 Moscow concert hall “terrorist attack” may have been a staged false-flag event.
Since then, additional evidence has emerged that adds further support to this hypothesis, while none of the arguments provided in the original analysis have so far been invalidated.
Have a read of their follow-up piece and make up your own mind.
Another perspective I want to highlight is this video in Russian uploaded by Ukrainian independent media outlet UNIAN which stands for “Ukrainian Independent Information News Agency” in their native tongue.
I don’t know how “independent” UNIAN can really be given the state of Press Freedom in that country at the moment (you can check out their stated editorial policy using the translate feature in your browser of choice) and the ongoing state of war with Russia, as well as obviously the fact they are heavily ‘invested’, so to speak, in Ukraine NOT being pinned for the attack in Moscow, but I watched the video (I speak Russian) and despite a clear anti-Russian (and especially anti-Putin) undertone that comes out from it, it does provide some important factual information which I believe is important in this context.
Below is that video which I have not modified in any way except adding English subtitles to it:
The above video can also be viewed on Rumble & Odysee (where you can download it freely for further distribution if you wish).
Next, I will outline my own reasons for suspecting a Russian False Flag but before that, there is another point that needs to be addressed.
“But Putin and Russia are against the globalist agenda and actively fighting it”
If you are still at that level of understanding of what is actually going on and how the enemy actually operates then hopefully the following will help snap you out of it:
In case you think Russians enjoy more free speech than the people in the so called “free world”, this very short clip should hopefully put it to rest for you:
I want to end this section with a quote from this truly outstanding article by Kit Knightly:
“It’s 2024 & the world is being hurried fast toward the Brave New (“multi-polar”) Normal. Russia is on board with Agenda 2030 & very powerful western establishment voices are now promoting Putin & his once-sidelined views.
In the face of these realities we should be asking questions about the relevance and purpose of this kind of geopolitical theatrics.”
I could have never said this as well and as succinctly as Kit but below is my humble attempt to communicate the same message:
In case you’re more of a visual person:
And here’s the one diagram to “rule them all”:
Hopefully you no longer think that Putin is in any way opposing the enemy and their diabolical agenda.
I will now expand on each of the points outlined here with factual information that you may find ‘interesting’ (or not but it’s facts nevertheless).
Russia received multiple warnings about an impending attack but chose to ignore them
It is now common knowledge (I presume) that both the US (through its Embassy in Moscow) & the UK, issued alerts on March 7 that a major terrorist attack was “imminent” and more specifically in the case of the US warning: “over the next 48 hours”.
The US State Department has also put out the alert through its official social media channels. Below is an example from Twitter/X:
As you can see above, the US Alert specifically mentions concerts.
Putin dismissed the alerts issued by the US as “provocation” and “blackmail” and in a now infamous speech on March 19 (a mere three days before the attack) he said:
The aim of the recent provocative statements of a number of official Western structures about the possibility of terrorist attacks in Russia was harming Russian society.
All this resembles outright blackmail and the intention to intimidate and destabilize our society
One potential explanation of why Russia chose to ignore the alerts issued by the US is outlined in this article which says:
A warning from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), with its extensive access to communications and human intelligence, is highly credible. While it was not for exactly the same date, the warning that the US issued is close enough to the date of the Crocus City attack to be considered relevant. It also mentioned Moscow and an entertainment venue as targets.
CNN also said it had reports from two sources that since November there had been a steady stream of intelligence that Isis-K was determined to attack Russia.
But the Russian government currently feels like it is in a state of war with the west. They also know that the CIA is heavily involved in providing the Ukrainians with military intelligence.
In this context it is difficult for the Kremlin to take US warnings seriously, and even to admit to having received them.
Dimitri Peskov, a Kremlin spokesman, argued that Russia does not need American intelligence. He told a press conference: “Our security services are working on their own, no assistance is currently on the table.”
So is it simply a matter or pride and/or suspicion of the Americans given the tense relations between Russia and the West?
While that’s possible, I think there is more here that meets the eye given certain arrests in Moscow made by Russia’s security forces on the morning of the attack.
Apparently, it is pretty common for intelligence agencies to share information when it comes to terrorist threats, including between agencies that are technically on the opposite sides and even outright adversaries.
It’s an unwritten convention or a ‘gentlemens agreement’ if you like (as much as something like that can ever really exist between spies) known as “duty to warn”.
This may also explain another advance warning received by Russia which you may have not been aware of until now and that’s an advance warning from Iran.
The Iranians attributed the imminent attack to terrorists within Afghanistan-based ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K), citing information obtained during interrogations of suspects in recent deadly bombings in the country, including a major blast in the city of Kerman that killed about 100 people.
According to RT:
“Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, told reporters he was not aware of such a warning. “I do not know anything about this,” he told reporters.”
So the obvious questions to be asked are:
Was there a serious breakdown in communication within Russia’s intelligence community?
Is Peskov lying about not knowing anything about this?
Are the Iranians lying about warning the Russians in advance?
That last one seems the least likely to me.
What do you think? Let me know in the comments below.
The emergency exits of the concert hall were locked as the attack was underway
There are reports that some emergency exits at the Moscow concert hall could not be opened during the attack.
Some survivors have claimed that they could not open some of the doors, and Russian media have reported that more people may have died from smoke inhalation than gunshot wounds during the attack.
As this article states:
An anonymous survivor told the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper that the gunmen initiated their assault at the concert hall’s main entrance. He opted to exit through the same entrance, as it was the sole escape route available.
“We tried the fire escape ladder, but it was closed. People climbed the ladder, descended the ladder, all closed,” he was quoted as saying.
As per Russian media, smoke inhalation might have claimed more lives than the gunfire. Disturbing accounts from the scene describe people trapped, attempting to escape through jammed exits, with some victims found near these blocked routes.
The incident has also reignited concerns over fire safety in Russia, recalling the 2018 Siberian shopping mall fire where locked exits and disabled alarms led to over 60 deaths. Despite claims from Crocus City Hall’s owner, Aras Agalarov, denying that exits were locked, the tragedy has left many questioning the safety measures in place.
Here is part of a testimony provided by one of the concert attendees to the BBC’s Russian service:
Dave says the crowd tried to get away from the sound of the gunshots. “We ran into the service area of Crocus, towards the balconies. But we just faced a series of locked doors, so people panicked and some were crying, some were calling their relatives, and some were waiting for the lifts, which weren’t working. We ended up in some kind of big, dark room.”
People discovered an exit and service ladder, but the door leading to it was locked. The spectators managed to break it down and get out into the street. The escape had taken roughly 25 minutes.
You can read the rest of it here:
This is obviously a very serious matter as locked emergency exits could have potentially hindered the evacuation process and increased the number of casualties!
As far as Aras Agalarov, we will get to him later.
The Fire suppression systems in the concert hall did not perform as expected when the fire started
Many reports came out that once the attackers were done with shooting people inside the Crocus concert hall, they torched the place.
Here is one example of a typical media report:
After gunning down dozens of fleeing patrons, the assailants then set fire to rows of chairs inside the hall. The blaze quickly engulfed much of the building, including its roof.
The damage from the fire was massive as you can see in the video below as well as this video:
Here is drone footage taken the next day by Russian emergency services showing the extent of the damage as well as the collapsed roof.
Here is footage of the roof collapsing as it happened sourced from here and here:
Here is a photo of the aftermath provided By the Russian Emergency Ministry:
And here is a video from the day after the attack where you can clearly see that firefighters are still on site as there are still fires to be dealt with:
The obvious question to ask is:
How does this happen as a result of a few rows of chairs being torched and why did the fire suppression systems not trigger?
There are multiple unsubstantiated theories attempting to answer the above question including that the terrorists used special ‘military grade’ accelerants to get the fire to spread quickly and burn extremely hot.
There is also another theory that it was not the terrorist themselves who set the chairs on fire but rather a separate team which arrived after the terrorists have finished their killing and left. Some of those theories also allude that the separate team was Russian FSB agents.
I could not find any evidence proving definitively any of these claims but I do have definitive evidence for the following:
Crocus Hall MUST have had appropriate fire suppression systems that could have easily handled a fire such as this (if triggered)
The standard fire safety requirements for public venues in Moscow are governed by the "Rules of Fire Prevention Regime in the Russian Federation" .
These rules establish the requirements of fire safety in public venues and stipulate the following:
General Provisions: These rules establish the requirements of fire safety determining the procedure for behaviour of people, procedure for production organization and content of the territories, buildings, constructions, premises of the organizations, and other subjects to protection.
Detection of Fire: In case of detection of the fire or signs of burning in the building, the room, in the territory (smoke, smell of burning, air temperature increase, etc.) it is necessary for officials, individual entrepreneurs, citizens of the Russian Federation, foreign citizens, stateless persons to phone immediately about it in fire protection with indication of the name of subject to protection, the address of the place of its arrangement, the place of emergence of the fire, and also the name of the person giving information.
Fire Safety Measures: The head of the organization provides operation of buildings, constructions according to requirements of the Federal Law "The Technical Regulation about Requirements of Fire Safety" (where section 41 makes a specific mention of a “fire protection system”).
Training: Persons are allowed to work only after training on the use of the measures of fire safety.
The above leads directly to the second point
The fire suppression systems at Crocus Hall appears to have not perform as expected
‘Interesting’, isn’t it?
Three days after the Crocus City Hall attack, Putin held a meeting (via video-conference) with “the heads of the Government, regions, security services and law-enforcement agencies”.
Here two photos from that meeting as issued by the Kremlin:
The official press release issued following the meeting says the following regarding the fire:
Using the gasoline they had brought with them in plastic bottles, they set fire to the premises and left the building at 8:11 pm….
According to eyewitness testimony, the hall caught fire as a result of the actions of the accused, who spilled gasoline, which they brought with them, on chairs and walls and committed arson.
(I bolded the departure time on purpose. We will get to that soon).
45 people died as a result of the fire, from exposure to high temperature and combustion products.
It is extremely unlikely (in my very unprofessional opinion) that 45 people would die as a result of “exposure to high temperature and combustion products” if there was a compliant and operational “fire protection system” (as defined in section 41 of the Technical Regulation about Requirements of Fire Safety).
The assessment by the experts reporting directly to the Russian President himself during that meeting appears to corroborate my very unprofessional opinion:
In this context, the investigation is examining the possibility of a breach of safety requirements and the fire extinguishing system in the Crocus City Hall concert hall.
For this purpose, consoles, electronic units, and control devices of the fire-extinguishing system in the concert hall have been collected.
They have been sent for analysis and to retrieve data on the mode of the fire safety system operation at the time of the terrorist attack.
The contents of the fire protection system server are being examined by experts.
A fire investigation has been launched to establish the operability and timeliness of response of all fire safety systems.
No results of such investigation have been made public so far (to the best of my knowledge and digging).
During the meeting, Emergencies Minister Alexander Kurenkov said something that appears to contradict the above assessment:
I have something to add, if I may.
The building was equipped with an automatic fire alarm system.
This system responded to the fire as expected.
There was also a set of four robotised fire-fighting hoses and a software control system, which worked in conjunction with other fire protection systems. They were activated during the terrorist attack, but the arson involved the use of flammable substances. According to experts, the system failed to extinguish the fire due to its large area. This is what I wanted to say.
We managed to totally extinguish the fire on wall panels, given the materials they were made of, only at 6.40 pm today. The search and rescue operations continue. They are expected to be completed by 5 pm tomorrow.
This concludes my report.
This is a very bizarre statement given the previous quote just above it.
Furthermore, the statement indicates non-compliant materials were used in the Crocus City Hall construction which raises questions as to how such major public venue was even allowed to operate.
By the emergency minister’s own admission, it has taken over 70 hours to extinguish the fire and this was completed less than three hours before the Presidential briefing which took place at 9:35pm.
Security forces took very long time to arrive to the scene despite their major headquarters being very close by
This was mentioned in the UNIAN video above (which you can also watch here) but someone who has covered that really well is
a ‘pen name’ used by Riley Waggaman, an American writer and journalist who has lived in Russia for close to a decade, in his post below, and more specifically in this section.
As I mentioned above, the Kremlin’s official statement states that the attackers:
left the building at 8:11pm
As Mr. Waggaman wrote in his article above:
TASS reported that OMON units were en route to Crocus City Hall at 20:33. They reached the concert hall at 21:05, according to a TASS correspondent at the scene.
TASS is the official news agency of the Russian government and is also the largest news agency in Russia.
OMON is essentially a special forces unit within the National Guard of the Russian Federation, which is a paramilitary force designed to operate domestically within the borders of Russia. As you probably imagine, they are pretty bad ass.
So according to Russia’s own official news agency, it took these guys 35 minutes since the terrorists first started shooting and 22 minutes after they already left the building to get their shit together and start making their way to Crocus City Hall?
If that wasn’t enough, it then took them 32 minutes to get to Crocus City Hall located only 9.4 Km away, a journey that even with the current road closures following the attack only takes 17 minutes at most, while riding in clearly marked national guard vehicles with sirens blazing and driven by people who can still drive while killing people with their bare hands…and also scratching their noses?
If you believe that then I have an excellent block of land with uninterrupted ocean views on Mars to offer you for a bargain basement price…
Moscow Police making arrests a few hours before the Crocus attack
This one is a real doozy.
There is information floating in various Russian speaking Telegram groups regarding Moscow Police making some arrests a few hours BEFORE the Crocus attack with some of those arrested being suspected of conducting reconnaissance for a potential terrorist attack.
Someone who has attempted to look into this is a group calling themselves Mintel World describing themselves as “an organization that conducts international investigations based on open sources intelligence”
I couldn’t find a website for them and the Twitter account through which they posted the below was only started last month (March 2024):
A Google StreetView image in the vicinity of the coordinates they provided confirms their geo-location is on-point (assuming the coordinates themselves they provided are authenticated) but the footage is ten years old.
If that was the only information regarding this, I would not have included it in this article but there is a certain article I found on the English version of Pravda which I found ‘interesting’:
Now in case you are not familiar with the Russian newspaper Pravda, you are clearly not of Russian heritage because anyone with a Russian background, no matter their age, is well aware of it.
Pravda (“Truth” in Russian which is probably the biggest gaslighting ever by a legacy media outlet) used to be the official mouthpiece of the communist party during the days of the USSR.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Pravda had a 4 year stint as a commercial venture owned by Greek interests but in 1996 has ‘come home’ to be owned by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation which owns it to this day.
The online version (Pravda.ru) was launched in 1999 by a group of ‘journalists’ who worked for the soviet-era Pravda, and is a separate entity to the print version.
To confuse things even more, Pravda.Ru has also started its own print version in 2003.
A 2007 document by the Federation of American Scientists titled “Source Descriptors of Key Russian Media” describes Pravda.RU (not be confused with the OG Pravda still owned to this day by the Russian communist party) as:
Popular leftist, nationalist website providing news and analysis but not owned by the Communist paper.
Make of this what you will but what’s important for the purpose of this article is the mysterious story of Chechen man Askhab Uspanov.
As published in the Pravda.ru article:
According to Baza Telegram channel, officers stopped Uspanov at 16:50 on March 22. About ten minutes later he was taken to the police station and placed in a special detention center. A report of petty hooliganism was filed against the man.
An hour and a half later he was found dead.
According to the official version of law enforcement agencies, the detainee committed suicide at the police station.
The uncle of the deceased asked the Ombudsman to assist in ensuring a thorough investigation into the death of his nephew.
Uspanov's body was found at 18:22. Paramedics pronounced the man dead at 18:36, an hour and a half before the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall.
If Uspanov being pronounced dead less than two hours after his arrest, and about 80 minutes before the Crocus Hall attack started, doesn’t raise any alarms (or at least questions) for you then maybe you should refresh your memory with the story of this one guy called Jeffrey Epstein…
If this wasn’t suspicious enough already, Mansur Soltaev, the “Commissioner for Human Rights” in Chechnya (another obvious gaslighting) said following the ‘incident’ that:
"All attempts to link Uspanov's detention and death to the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall are provocative in nature."
Sure thing Mr. Soltaev, whatever you say…
The ‘interesting’ owner of Crocus
Crocus City Hall was built and is owned by the Crocus Group, a property conglomerate headed by a guy by the name of Aras Agalarov, originally from Azerbaijan.
Below you’ll find a bit of info about Mr. Agalarov as well as his son Emin. Both are very ‘colourful’ characters with some very ‘interesting’ (and close!) connections with the Russian leadership, including Putin himself.
If you wanted further proof of the close relationship Agalarov has with the Russian government, the Russian newsagency TASS (which as you hopefully remember is owned by the Russian state) did a ‘profile interview’ with him in 2021 where no difficult questions of any kind were asked, to put it very mildly.
Next, I want to provide this quote from the excellent investigation conducted by Swiss Policy Research (SPR) I mentioned previously:
The owner of the Crocus City Hall is Azerbaijani billionaire Aras Agalarov. Agalarov is not Jewish, but his wife, Irina Agalarova (born Irina Iosifovna Gril), is Jewish.
The Jewish Forward claimed that their son, Emin Agalarov, identifies as Jewish, but other sources disagree. Until 2015, Emin Agalarov was married to the daughter of Azerbaijani President, Ilham Aliyev, who is a close ally of Israel.
In 2013, Aras Agalarov hosted Donald Trump’s “Miss Universe” contest in the Crocus City Hall in Moscow and, in the same year, received the Russian “Order of Honor” from President Putin.
In 2016, Emin Agalarov asked his American-Jewish music producer, Rob Goldstone, to organize the notorious “Trump Tower meeting” that played a role in the infamous “Russiagate” deception.
Thus, in terms of the date and the concert hall ownership, there might be an indirect “Zionist connection”, but it is not as obvious or compelling as in some other staged terrorist attacks.
I’ll leave it at that but before I wrap up this section, I want to also add that Crocus Group, the owners of Crocus City Hall, have issued a statement following the attack saying:
"We will never forget those who fell victims to terrorists.
What was destroyed by their dirty hands will be restored."
The fact that Crocus City Hall was fully insured and the Insurance company Ingosstrakh, with which the policy is held, has already committed to fulfill their obligations under the policy and foot the 10 billion rubles (about 109.5 million USD) bill to rebuild the property, means that Agalarov and his conglomerate will face minimal (if any) costs themselves following the attack and the resulting fire and roof collapse.
Happy days…except for those who have been killed and injured (and their loved ones) that is!
Further reading:
If you want to look at more information and evidence suggesting the Crocus City Hall attack was a “false flag” conducted by the Russians themselves, I recommend the following two articles by Riley Waggaman .
Both are excellent in terms of the way they are presented and are therefore very easy to follow and understand:
Option 2: The US did it OR ISRAEL did it and the US is helping them cover it up
Remember the bit just above where I quoted the SPR piece discussing a potential connection between the head of the property conglomerate Crocus Group, and his son, to the Zionist regime in Israel?
This is the perfect segue into the only other potential culprit I see behind the Crocus Hall attack.
Saying that, I must admit that the “Cui Bono?” question is not answered in my opinion as definitively and comprehensively in this option as is the case with the first option discussed above.
I will unpack my argument below for an involvement by the US and/or Israel and let you be the judge for yourself.
Let’s start with the ‘executive summary’ of the answer to “Cui Bono?” in the context of the US and/or Israel being behind the attack at Crocus City Hall:
As discussed in the previous section, both the US and the UK have provided warnings about a potential terrorist attack being imminent.
However, according to reports from several sources (this is one), the US didn’t provide anything to the Russian authorities that contained actual operational details their security forces could act on (Who is planning? How will they do it and where?).
According to a NY Times article (a known mouthpiece for the US security state):
The adversarial relationship between Washington and Moscow prevented US officials from sharing any information about the plot beyond what was necessary, out of fear Russian authorities might learn their intelligence sources or methods.
According to a report by the TASS news agency (a mouthpiece for the Russian state):
When asked to comment on this information, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said he was unaware of any such plot and urged to carefully approach the newspaper’s article.
"The information of The New York Times, citing sources, is information that should be treated with great caution," the spokesman pointed out.
The NY Times article mentioned above also says that:
Sources told the Times that Russia tightened security after the warning but may have relaxed it after an attack didn’t happen in the 48-hour window.
The report said it was unclear if US intelligence was wrong about the timing of the attack or if the perpetrators noticed the heightened security and decided to wait.
Did the US carry out a Paltering/Limited Hangout exercise on the Russians revealing an upcoming attack but withholding any operational details (including timing) which would have allowed Russia to ACT on these warnings?
That’s a question that is way above my paygrade to answer so to speak, but is very worth asking nevertheless.
Next I want to include a post by
which summarises all the evidence pointing to a US involvement in the Crocus attack in one of his signature 5 minute videos (4:37 minutes to be exact):Greg mentioned certain remarks made in recent months by one Victoria Nuland. Here they are below in full for your ‘viewing pleasure’ (if you are that way inclined. I personally would rather poke my eye out with a sharp object…):
Interestingly, Mr. Reese’s longtime boss popped up on RT three days after the attack basically saying the same thing, namely that it was US intelligence who is behind this.
You can watch the full 4:30 minute segment below to see the reasoning Alex Jones provided on Russian state TV:
I must admit that Jones makes some valid arguments in the above video but it’s just hard for me personally to take him seriously these days following the things I uncovered as part of my research for my recent Controlled Opposition article.
The Israel connection to the Crocus City Hall attack
On October 19 last year, less than two weeks into the Israel-Hamas war still underway almost six months later, an Israeli politician from Netanyahu’s own Likud party (so not one of the ultra-nationalist nut-jobs that are his coalition partners) made an ‘interesting’ appearance on RT (which to remind you is owned by the Russian state) where he said this:
Such a ‘lovely and likeable’ guy, isn’t he?
The person openly making these threats against Russia and its people on Russian state TV is Amir Weitmann, the head of the libertarian caucus in the Likud Party.
If that guy is a fair representation of a libertarian politician then I think I’d rather stick with the current collectivists instead…
Jokes aside, this video has started going viral all over social media immediately after the Crocus attack which is hardly surprising. This is not a good look for the state of Israel, to put it mildly.
To add insult to injury, the condemnation by Israel of the Crocus attack was slow in comparison to other western countries and as this analysis/opinion piece in Israeli newspaper Ha’Aretz (“the country” in Hebrew) rightly points out: “reeks of Schadenfreude”.
Israel has had relatively cordial (albeit hardly warm) relations with the Russian Federation until the start of the Ukraine war…especially given the number of Russian Passport holders living in Israel as dual-citizens.
When the war started in late February 2022, Israel’s Foreign Minister at the time (later PM for a short period of time and now leader of the opposition) was quick to issue a strong condemnation of Russia which was later repeated by Israel’s deputy ambassador to the UN during a UN General Assembly meeting.
Less than six weeks later, the rhetoric by Israel towards Russia has taken a significant turn for the worse when that very same Foreign Minister (Yair Lapid) issued a statement where he said:
"The images and testimony from Ukraine are horrific.
Russian forces committed war crimes against a defenseless civilian population.
I strongly condemn these war crimes."
As you can probably imagine, the Russians were not pleased, to put it mildly.
Putin, well known as a guy who holds a grudge (and acts on it), took his sweet time when the Hamas attack occurred on October 7 and as this Al-Jazeera article from October 12 last year states:
Putin remained silent about the conflict for three days, offering no condolences to Tel Aviv and refraining from calling Netanyahu – even though at least four Russian nationals were reported killed and six more went missing.
Meanwhile, Russia’s stance this week did not allow the United Nations Security Council to achieve the unanimity needed to condemn Hamas.
Russia’s stance towards Israel has only become more hostile since then which probably explains the reason for Weitmann’s outburst on Russian state TV.
Russia was also very quick to condemn the recent attack by Israel on the Iranian Consulate in Damascus and rightfully so if you ask me.
Now, while I seriously doubt the ‘libertarian’ Weitmann had any concrete intel about an upcoming Israeli ‘payback’ towards Russia or has any ability to influence a decision to conduct such operation, there is no denying that there are elements within Israel’s intelligence or defense establishment who hold a major longstanding grudge against Russia at this stage.
The BIG question is whether said ‘grudge’ is enough for said intelligence or defense establishment (or even rogue elements within it) to orchestrate a major terrorist attack against innocent Russian civilians and in the Russian capital of all places.
Given what Israel allowed to happen to its own people on October 7, it is not out of the question.
HOWEVER, in that instance there was a clear benefit for Israel to be gained as I discuss at length here.
When it comes to the Crocus attack, I can’t really see a clear benefit for Israel specifically.
Satisfying a grudge by launching or facilitating a major terrorist attack against innocent civilians in the capital of a nuclear superpower is a ‘tad’ extreme and I can’t see even the craziest elements within Israel’s deep state (and there are plenty of those I assure you) going for a move as blunt as this…unless ordered to do so by those much higher in the food chain (and who couldn’t care less about Israel or any other nation for that matter).
What do you think? Am I missing something here?
Let me know in the comments below.
Before I close this off, I want to quickly mention one thing that could emerge as being significant.
As the video below discusses, China is starting to get suspicious that both the US and Israel are supporting in various way the ISIS-K group (which has supposedly taken responsibility for the Crocus attack) which has also been attacking its interests in both Afghanistan and Pakistan (the latter specifically in relation to various projects that are part of the PRC’s “belt & road” initiative).
I sure hope that the US and/or Israel are not stupid enough to pick a fight with both Russia and China at the same time but there are obviously other agendas at play here that may be beyond what the selected puppets leading the US or Israel (or China and Russia for that matter) at the moment, have an authority to decide on.
Why so much material from RT?
Before I end the part of this article about the attack in Russia, I want to address a question I anticipate will be raised by at least some readers:
Why did you use so much material from RT in this article? Don’t you know this is a Russian propaganda channel?
I sure do…and that’s exactly why it is beneficial.
Allow me to explain:
Given RT is owned by the Russian government and its editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan is a long-time Putin confidant (she wouldn’t be in this role if she wasn’t), RT is the perfect outlet through which one can get the official Kremlin narrative.
Western media provides the US/NATO narrative.
If you look at what both say as well as what neither is saying, you can get much closer to the actual truth:
Both RT and western media are saying that the attack was carried out by Muslim extremists. To me this indicates that it was NOT Muslim extremists who carried out the actual shooting.
RT is saying that the ultimate culprit behind the attack is Ukraine while western media is saying it was ISIS. To me this indicates that neither Ukraine nor ISIS are the ultimate culprits.
The overwhelming majority of western media is not saying anything about a false flag potentially carried out by Russia itself. RT will obviously never say that either. This to me is very ‘interesting’…
Hopefully that answers any potential questions about my reliance on material from RT in this piece.
The Bridge Collapse in Baltimore
At 1:28a.m on March 26, the Francis Scott Key Bridge (named after the author of the lyrics for the American national anthem) in Baltimore collapsed after the container ship Dali struck one of its piers.
Two people were rescued from the river; one had no injuries, while the other was transported to a hospital in critical condition.
Six members of a maintenance crew working on the roadway were reported missing; three bodies were recovered, and the other three are presumed dead.
The collapse blocked most shipping to and from the Port of Baltimore.
Maryland Governor Wes Moore called the event a "global crisis" that had affected more than 8,000 jobs and the economic impact of the waterway's closure has been estimated at $15 million per day.
Here is the most detailed footage available of the incident as it’s happening:
The above footage was recorded from the live webcam located in the Port of Baltimore. That very same live webcam is still active and you can watch live footage from that very same angle here.
Someone was kind enough to add timestamps to the 6:45 minute video above which you can find below:
0:59 ship lights go off
1:58 lights go back online
3:03 lights go off again
3:36 some lights are back online
5:09 crash
As you can see, it appears the Dali had some kind of an electrical fault/ power loss which may have potentially resulted in it hitting the bridge.
Interestingly enough, another incident occurred three days later not far away in New York City as the Maltese container ship APL QINGDAO, owned by the French shipping company CMA CGM Group, has lost power while transiting New York harbor.
While the event started in an eerily similar way to the one in Baltimore a few days earlier, it luckily didn’t end with the ship hitting the bridge:
Apparently cargo ships losing propulsion is “not uncommon” according to unnamed “maritime experts” who spoke to CBS and also the Coast guard is saying APL QINGDAO did not actually lose power, unlike in Baltimore.
The MV Dali
The Dali, the ship that hit the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, was built in 2015 and a year later in 2016 ran into a steel quay at the Belgian port of Antwerp-Bruges. The ship had hull damage as a result of this and needed repairs before it could sail away.
The Dali had a different owner at the time and was registered in the Marshall Islands.
A much more recent (and therefore potentially relevant) maintenance issue with the Dali was detected in San Antonio in Chile on June 27 last year where the ship was formally cited by port officials for:
A deficiency related to “propulsion and auxiliary machinery.”
The deficiency was described in detail as issues with “gauges, thermometers, etc.” but there was no detention resulting from this single detected deficiency.
Three months later the ship was subject to a follow-up inspection by the United States Coast Guard in New York but no deficiencies were recorded.
A few minor deficiencies is not uncommon for a ship like the Dali however, the recent incident in Baltimore has brought this previous citation back into focus, suggesting the possibility of a recurring issue with the vessel’s propulsion system.
According to a Bloomberg piece, the Government of Singapore (where the ship is currently registered) has said in a statement that:
Records and statutory certificates show the Dali’s structural integrity and the functionality of its equipment were valid at the time of the Baltimore incident
The article also states that:
The vessel also passed two separate foreign port inspections in June and September of last year, although a faulty monitor gauge for fuel pressure was fixed before the ship departed port.
I am definitely no expert on the mechanics of container ships and don’t know whether the above is of any concern (or even unusual).
If you happen to have professional knowledge on this topic, I’d greatly appreciate if you could share your insights in the comments below.
What I do know for sure (because it has been made public knowledge) is that the Dali had electrical problems a mere few hours before leaving the port in Baltimore.
More specifically, while the ship was docked in Baltimore, alarms went off on some of the refrigerated containers, indicating an inconsistent power supply.
Probably nothing…
The Owner of the Dali
The current owner of the Dali is Singaporean Grace Ocean Private Ltd.
The commercial activity of the ship is managed by another Singaporean company called Synergy Marine Pte. Ltd (which we’ll get to shortly).
My understanding is that it is quite common for large container ships of this nature to be professionally managed by companies which specialise in that sort of activity and provide it as a service to the ship’s owners.
Think of it as an agent managing an actor, singer or a sport star and responsible for them always having work and getting paid on time for said work.
At the time of the incident, The Dali was chartered by its management company Synergy Marine to Maersk, one of the biggest shipping and logistics companies on Earth…we well as a proud WEF corporate partner (although you will have to do some digging to uncover that as it does not show up on the WEF corporate partners page).
Grace Ocean Private appears to be keeping a very low profile indeed for a company heavily involved in the global shipping business and which currently owns 43 ships (last one delivered only last month) and two more currently under construction and scheduled to be delivered next year. Other information websites indicate that Grace Ocean Private may be the owner of as many as 55 ships.
Despite my absolute best efforts, I couldn’t find a website for Grace Ocean Private or any social media profile.
They don’t have a page on LinkedIn either and the only employees of the company you can find there are relatively low level staff such as this one.
According to this corporate database service as well as this company register operated by the Singapore Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority, the company’s registered address is here, a corporate office tower called Oue downtown 2 which also has Deloitte’s Singapore office as one of its tenants.
The company was incorporated in June 2009 and has a total share capital of S$3,900,000.
The company’s principal (which is usually the managing director) is listed as Anthony Heng Tock Hin, a Singaporean national. The other two directors are Oliver Pabalan Espino, a Filipino national who is shown here as being exempt back in 2009 from taking the practical assessment component of the Chief Marine Engineer Licensing Exam; and Yoshimasa Abe, a Japanese national.
A quick search reveals the likely reason why the company keeps a low profile:
It and the ships it owns don’t have the best operational history (to put it mildly) and had law suits and what appears as murky tax affairs in its past.
The Manager/Operator of MV Dali & Its ‘interesting’ connections
The Dali is managed by Singaporean Synergy Marine Pte. Ltd.
As I mentioned already, Synergy Marine’s role is to ensure that the Dali always has work (i.e. is chartered) and Grace Ocean Private gets paid, as the ship’s owners.
The Founder of Synergy Marine is Captain Rajesh Unni, a Class 1 Master Mariner graduate from Mumbai’s LBS College of Advanced Maritime Studies and Research. Capt. Unni has also completed the Advanced Management Program at Harvard Business School.
Here is Mr. Unni speaking about himself and his experience in a corporate promo video:
There is also a profile piece about him you can download from the company website.
In August 2023, Capt. Unni stepped down as CEO and instead taken the role of Executive Chairman. You can find the profiles of the rest of Synergy Marine’s executive team here.
In November 2023, Capt. Unni was honoured with a Lifetime Achievement Award and Synergy Marine Group was awarded Ship Manager of the Year for that year.
Capt. Unni was honoured for “significantly advancing maritime technology and championing and achieving decarbonisation”.
Synergy was honoured for its “technical and operational performance, bunker operations, sustainability, technology innovation and future readiness to manage net-zero ships”.
You may or may not find this ‘interesting’ but here is something that definitely got my attention:
The profile page for Capt. Unni on the website of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) has this passage in it:
Captain Unni is joint CEO of Alpha Ori Technologies (AOT) which he founded in 2017.
He recently established AOT’s Centre of Innovation in Singapore which can remotely monitor, diagnose and control most operational aspects of digital vessels using AOT’s patented software, SMARTShip.
This has now received ClassNK approval and installation has been completed on more than 100 ships with another 150 vessels in process.
SMARTShip has an extensive set of features which many shipping companies may find valuable (I assume as I don’t know much about shipping) as well as a partnership with DNV, who are according to their website:
A world-leading provider of digital solutions for managing risk and improving safety and asset performance for ships, pipelines, processing plants, offshore structures, electric grids, smart cities and more.
Our open industry assurance platform Veracity, cyber security and software solutions support business-critical activities across many industries, including maritime, energy and healthcare.
Interesting!
In May 2021, Unni’s Alpha Ori entered a “strategic digitalisation partnership” with BW Group who is according to their website:
One of the world’s leading maritime groups in the tanker, gas, and offshore segments.
We provide energy transportation and infrastructure services across the energy value chain.
Another participant of that “strategic digitalisation partnership” is Norwegian Kongsberg Digital describing themselves as:
a SaaS (Software-As-A-Service) software company that helps organizations in heavy-asset industries automate work and drive increased value over the entire asset lifecycle.
The partnership between Alpha Ori and Kongsberg Digital has become even more tight in October 2022.
Two months later in December 2022, Dry bulk operator Oldendorff Carriers announced they will buy a stake in Unni’s Alpha Ori Technologies (AOT) with their CEO saying in the press release:
Having considered various cleantech, optimisation and fuel savings products on the market, we believe AOT has the right mix of talent, technologies and futuristic vision to be a transformative force in shaping the future of the maritime industry.
With this investment we not only want to support the digitalisation and decarbonisation journey of our industry but also benefit from it directly.
One of the ways Oldendorff “benefit from it directly” is by getting a seat on the AOT board as well as obviously its share from the revenue.
“Cleantech” and “Decarbonisation” are not just buzz words for Oldendorff (who own part of AOT).
They are part of something called the Western Australia-East Asia Iron Ore Green Corridor Consortium which is a collaboration between an organisation called the Global Maritime Forum, Oldendorff Carriers, Star Bulk Carriers as well as mining giants (and WEF strategic corporate partners) BHP & Rio Tinto.
The Global Maritime Forum as you can probably guess by the name, has a close association with Schwab & Co as well as plenty of other ‘interesting’ names:
This probably explains why the WEF was quick to repost on their website the announcement by the Global Maritime Forum that:
More than 20 vessels could sail along the corridor on zero-emission ammonia, reaching 5% adoption by 2050.
An estimated 360 vessels could sail this corridor by 2050.
You hopefully understand how this all works and how the enemy weaves their global web but in case you don’t (or don’t understand who the enemy even is), this should bring you up-to-speed.
But wait, there’s more!
In October 2023, Unni’s Alpha Ori Technologies (AOT) announced it has entered into a formal merger with a Danish company by the name of ZeroNorth.
AOT and ZeroNorth will become ONE entity under the name ZeroNorth, headquartered in Copenhagen, which is also where ZeroNorth was based prior to the merger.
ZeroNorth’s CEO Soren Mayer is appointed CEO of the merged entity.
Basically, ZeroNorth has gobbled up AOT hook, line and sinker…but who are they?
Well, according to their website:
Climate Change poses a serious threat to the planet’s future, but ZeroNorth is dedicated to making a difference.
As a leading technology developer with a strong foundation and owner support, ZeroNorth offers a leading multi-service platform which harnesses the power of data to create insights that enable voyage, vessel and bunker optimisation and inform better decision-making for stakeholders across global trade.
If you smell a rat here then congratulations, you have an excellent sense of smell!
Whenever I see the word “stakeholders”, there is one website I always go to first and it usually doesn’t disappoint. This was the case here as well.
ZeroNorth are one of the signatories to the “Call to Action for Shipping Decarbonization”, an initiative of the Global Maritime Forum I already mentioned above.
The ‘call to action’ document is hosted on the WEF website as is the “Report on Climate Commitments by Signatories to the Call to Action for Shipping Decarbonization which ZeroNorth has also made a major contribution to:
All the names on the cover of the report should hopefully be familiar to you now. If not, just scroll up to the previous image.
All roads eventually lead to Davos (ALWAYS!) when the word “stakeholders” is mentioned in the corporate world.
AOT’s SMARTShip
I was unable to find a definitive answer as to whether SMARTShip was installed on the Dali or not but given the container ship is managed by a company in which the CEO of the system’s maker (or at least was the CEO until the merger with ZeroNorth) is the executive chairman, I’d say it is at least likely.
What is certain beyond reasonable doubt is that as of May 2023, Unni’s Alpha Ori ‘onboarded’ 1000 ships:
This includes “a substantial part of the Bahri fleet”, starting with 40 vessels initially. Bahri is the national shipping carrier of Saudi Arabia.
Below is a summary of the SMARTShip features with some that I found ‘interesting’ bolded:
SmartShip™ is a digital platform developed by Alpha Ori Technologies. It aims to optimize fuel efficiency, reduce CO₂ emissions, and enhance cost savings for maritime fleets.
Connectivity and Data Collection:
SmartShip™ collects 3,000 to 5,000 data points from ships every 30 seconds.
It processes data from various ship systems and sensors.
The platform organizes this information into a user-friendly visual interface.
Real-Time Analytics:
SmartShip™ provides real-time analytics to increase operational efficiency.
Users can monitor and diagnose operational issues promptly.
The dashboard offers an overview of critical assets and real-time location monitoring.
Integration with Third-Party Applications (this is important. Pay attention):
SmartShip™ allows swift integration of third-party applications from other industry players.
Alpha Ori personnel deliver and install an integrated hardware and software solution on vessels, including ruggedized hardware designed for harsh shipboard conditions.
Security and Isolation (this is super important. Pay close attention):
AOT’s platform ensures end-to-end security.
Data transmission over public internet is fully encrypted.
In a multi-tenant environment, each customer’s data is isolated from others.
“Integration of third-party applications” is normally done either through API (Application Programming Interface), direct connection or data exchange through common file formats/standards.
In the case of AOT’s SmartShip, “Data transmission over public internet” is done using something called VIO, another AOT product described as:
AOT VIO is a SaaS cloud-based, highly scalable, near real-time data exchange and analysis platform for the maritime business industry.
It is built to support multi-tenants in a highly secured environment by storing data in customer-centric isolated storage space.
It is a system that can answer “YES” to customers’ questions like – “Do I have the right meaningful data at the right time?”.
In case you are not across tech jargon, “multi-tenant” means that AOT’S VIO can service many different customers (and their ships) through a single cloud-based platform.
While the company claims they have “a highly secured environment” and the storage space allocated to each ‘tenant’ (i.e customer) is “isolated”, I can tell you that this is just marketing speak and properly “isolating” data of different customers hosted in a “multi-tenanted” cloud environment is quite tricky to put it mildly. The details are technical and beyond the scope of this article but if you are interested, this introductory article should give you somewhat of an idea.
SmartShip™ received a “Cyber Safe” certification and AOT itself received the highly coveted (and very expensive to obtain and maintain mainly due to high consultant fees) ISO 27001 cybersecurity certification.
As someone who actually used to work personally on certifying and auditing companies with ISO 27001 certification, let me tell you that this is mainly a “tick & flick” exercise and is often done primarily to comply with various regulatory requirements or to reduce premiums for “cyber insurance” (an insurance product which can sometimes actually increase your chances of getting hacked but that’s a discussion for another time).
Most importantly: ISO 27001-certified companies can and DO get hacked! Ever heard of this ‘little known’ company called Equifax?
CYA underway
If you are not familiar with this acronym, it stands for Cover Your Ass and this is exactly what both the owners and managers of the Dali are currently very busy doing.
On April 1, the two Singaporean companies filed a petition and a motion in the US District Court in Maryland to limit their liability for the destruction of the Francis Scott Key Bridge by the ship they own/manage to only 43.6 million by relying on some obscure law from 1851 which was last used after the Titanic disaster.
According to Michael Sturley, an expert in maritime law and professor at the University of Texas at Austin's School of Law:
In essence, it's treated as though the ship itself is its own one-ship corporation, So you're, in essence, saying, take all the assets of this one ship corporation and use those to pay the claims.
It could save them a billion dollars.
How much will you be willing to pay in legal fees to save a BILLION dollars?
This could happen again (at any time)
As you can see below, there are multiple other bridges across the US which can suffer the same fate if hit by a ship like the Dali.
Amongst them are the iconic Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco as well as the bridge which connects that city with Oakland.
The implications of this incident
According to the US Army Corps Of Engineers, clearing up the channel completely so that ship traffic can fully resume to the normal levels prior to the incident will not happen until the end of May.
ran some numbers which show that:The accumulated costs of goods not flowing through the port could amount to roughly $4.3 billion.
Keep that in mind when you consider that the Dali’s owners and managers are currently in court trying to ensure they don’t fork out more than 43.6 Million in compensation (so just one percent of the economic damage).
Worse yet, rebuilding the actual bridge may take as much as a decade and cost at least 400 million and that’s a conservative estimate. It could end up being more than twice that amount.
But wait, there’s more!
The closure of the channel in Baltimore will indirectly cause a loss of $15 million dollars every day in overall economic activity.
This includes, understandably, a lot of economic activity involving exports and imports or various goods and natural resources such as coal.
Hazardous materials onboard and missing records on the ship’s ‘black box’
On March 27, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released a statement regarding their initial assessment of what happened on the Dali which led to it crashing into the bridge.
The statement included a few videos including the one below which shows the Dali and the NTSB investigators onboard (there is no audio):
Another video made available was of the full press conference by NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy:
One of the most important things the NTSB Chair discussed in the above video is the chain of events that led to the Dali hitting the bridge as well as the specific timeline.
This was done based on the Dali’s Voyage Data Recorder (VDR) which is the marine equivalent of the “black box” found on planes.
Homendy started by saying that the Dali had a “relatively new VDR model” and that the contents of a ship’s VDR is much less complete than that of an aircraft black box.
She said that the NTSB has long wanted more data and information to be recorded as standard by the VDR system.
It was also revealed in the above briefing that the Dali had 56 containers of hazardous materials on board at the time of the incident with total weight of 764 tonnes. These included lithium-ion batteries as well as other flammable and corrosive material.
Homendy said that some containers (not necessarily those with hazardous contents) were in the water and some were breached.
This article outlines the timeline of the accident according to what the NTSB was able to ascertain based on the recovered VDR.
This is the bit that I find most interesting:
At about 0125, multiple alarms went off, and the VDR ceased recording the ship's electronic system data.
Using backup power, the VDR kept recording bridge audio, and it captured the pilot's verbal rudder commands.
One minute later, at 0126, the VDR was able to resume recording the ship's electronic data.
What is especially interesting is that if the Dali had AOT’s SmartShip™ installed (Which it may have or not. I was unable to determine if the system was installed and active on the Dali at the time of the incident and my email to Synergy Marine regarding this remains unanswered), this could have acted as a backup to the VDR because as discussed above:
SmartShip™ collects 3,000 to 5,000 data points from ships every 30 seconds; and
It processes data from various ship systems and sensors.
What’s important to note in that context is that the NTSB Chair said that while the data from the VDR is consistent with a power outage, it does not confirm a power outage.
Make of it what you will…
The video and article below provide a good summary and ask some pertinent questions which I would definitely like answered as well:
The Redacted video above mentioned towards the end of it a claim by journalist Lara Logan that according to her intelligence sources, the Dali was a victim of a Cyber attack and this has resulted in the ship crashing into the bridge.
We’ll get to that shortly but first I want to touch quickly on one very recent development.
The FBI has formally commenced a criminal investigation
A few days ago, it was reported that the FBI is launching a criminal investigation into the events sorrounding the Dali crashing into the the Francis Scott Key Bridge.
There isn’t much information available at present as to what prompted this decision by the FBI to launch a criminal investigation (although some media are happy to jump the gun) but given it is happening, it is safe to assume that they at least suspect some aspect of either foul play or criminal negligence.
As this segment from a local Baltimore station suggests, it may be the latter (at least at this stage):
What caused the Dali to crash into the bridge?
As multiple investigations into this incident are still underway, it is impossible to answer the above question definitively.
For starters, have a listen to this testimonial of US Coast Guard Officer Claudio Giugliano who boarded the Dali on the first day after it crashed into the bridge and describes what he saw as: “like something no one has ever seen before”.
Keep in mind that Mr Giugliano is not just some random eyewitness. He is a Coast Guard officer in the specialist salvage unit and this is the sort of stuff he does for a living!
While no one knows for sure at this stage what caused the Dali to crash into the bridge that night, it is certain that there are a lot of oddities about this incident and especially about the Dali itself.
The ship that hit the bridge was out of control due to a cyber attack
As I mentioned above, journalist Lara Logan stated that, according to her intelligence sources, the Dali was a victim of a Cyber attack.
Ms. Logan’s full claim can be found here and I am also including it below as a series of screenshots:
That last part of Lara Logan’s statement is especially pertinent as it basically discusses the “flood the zone” tactic which is a very potent tactic of information warfare.
I covered that in more detail here but here is a diagram which makes it easier to understand:
Lara Logan also articulated her claim about a cyber attack in a few interviews she gave. This is the one that has really gone viral on Twitter/X (potentially due to the person interviewing her and her callout to the “Anons”):
Logan’s claim that based on her sources, the incident in Baltimore was the result of a cyber attack was also covered in this article in the Gateway Pundit as well as in the piece below:
The article below by
makes a potential connection between a possible cyber attack on the Dali which resulted in this crash, and the terrorist attack at Crocus Hall alluding that it was a Russian response of sorts (a ‘shot across the bow’ if you will).I personally am not convinced of this due to some of sources cited in the article (whose credibility is doubtful in my mind) as well as my suspicion that Russia may have carried out the Crocus Hall attack itself (or at least facilitated it) but I am still including it below for the sake of completeness so that you can have a read and make your own assessments.
Ultimately, no one knows for sure at this stage (except the potential perpetrators that is, assuming foul play was indeed involved).
What I am happy to say for the record though is that based on the public information available to-date as well as my experience in the cybersecurity space, such attack is definitely possible and especially if the Dali had AOT’s SmartShip™ installed.
This is due to the fact it may have potentially made it possible to ‘inject’ false data to the ship’s gauges through a backdoor (which may have existed in the system with or without the knowledge of its maker AOT), a zero day or a previously undisclosed vulnerability or one of many possible ‘flavours’ of a man-in-the-middle attack.
I want to end this section with another Redacted video which touches briefly (the video is less than 7 minutes long) on the economic and defense implications of this alleged cyber attack although I must say their report below does have a bit more conjecture than I personally am comfortable with, including statements such as: “we know for a fact this was a cyber attack”.
Anyone who ever worked in cybersecurity will tell you that making such a definitive determination based on the currently available public information is premature, to put it mildly.
Unless Clayton & Natali have access to some information that is not in the public domain, I think they are jumping the gun on this but the discussion on the economic and defense implications is well worth listening to.
The Redacted video above mentioned briefly a barge hitting a bridge in Oklahoma and that similar incidents may occur again in the near future.
Looks like they were absolutely spot on with that one as a pretty big incident happened in Pittsburgh only a few days ago but the damage so far seems to be nowhere near what happened in Baltimore.
Loss of power
There is no doubt at this stage that the Dali has experienced some kind of a power failure immediately before it hit the bridge.
Specifically, the Dali has lost power on at least two seperate occasions as it was coming out of the port and approaching the bridge:
As I mentioned previously, the ship also had some kind of an issue with its power supply a few hours before it left the port, as well as multiple times in its past (including under previous ownership).
It’s also important to mention that loss of propulsion in cargo ships like the Dali is apprently “not that uncommon”.
Despite all that, there is something about the loss of power scenario that doesn’t quite add up in this particular instance.
This 70 second video discusses one aspect of the loss of power scenario which doesn’t quite add up to the ship crashing into the bridge. The edit for this video makes some parts of it repeat in a loop to convey a certain message. I understand the reason for this and can agree with this edit choice but it is a bit annoying nevertheless.
It does makes an important point which is why I decided to include it here:
As
discusses in her article and the video below, there are instances where the secondary/backup power system may fail as well and it could even be as a direct result of the primary power system failing.Peggy’s article links to an article in the Telegraph written by Tom Sharpe who spent 27 years at sea (not all at once… ;) ), including as the Commander of four warships in the Royal Navy which gives his assessment below some extra credibility in my mind (to put it mildly):
A total electrical failure (TLF) happens when whatever is producing your power trips out. There is always redundancy, especially when operating in confined waters, but the surge in load on those secondary systems can cause them to trip as well. It can also happen when the switchboard, or whatever you have in place to manage that power, itself trips. There are lots of variations within this: the point being, that the order in which it happens determines what systems you lose along the way and in those first few seconds, you don’t know.
In this case, Dali lost control and started being set to starboard (to the right as you look forward in a ship) either because the rudder was stuck in that direction, or by the wind (10 knots on her port beam) or by the current (unknown but can be significant).
On realising this was going to take them out of the navigable channel, and without knowing how long it would take to recover (the lights went out a second time indicating that all was still not well) the bridge team would have had no option but to try and slow the ship by coming hard astern.
This could account for the black smoke coming from the funnel although this is just as likely to have been from an emergency generator kicking in.
The way the ship sheers towards the pillar towards the end suggests that she was going hard astern – single screw ships react differently under astern propulsion and can swing, sometimes dramatically.
Stopping distances in ships of that size are significant. At 300 metres long and able to carry 9,971 twenty-foot containers (TEU), the Dali is large but not a monster – there are container ships of 400m and over 20,000 TEU. Either way, on realising they weren’t stopping in time, the ship’s Master ‘let go’ the port anchor. It’s unlikely this would stop the ship but would certainly slow it. What they did with the starboard anchor is unknown as that was lost in the collision.
While doing all this a Mayday call was issued (indicating an incident with risk to life is imminent), alerting the harbour authorities that the Dali had “lost control and that a collision with the bridge was possible”.
This quick thinking allowed traffic to be stopped from heading on to the bridge and likely saved many lives.
I suggest you read the full article for yourself but below is Mr. Sharpe’s conclusion. Make of it what you will:
My overall assessment of this though is that this was a tragic maritime accident.
Those pointing to a cyber-attack or terrorism should stand down.
It is also far from unprecedented. A 2018 report for the World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure catalogued 35 bridge collapses caused by boat strikes between 1960 and 2015.
It’s a function of the complexity and harshness of life at sea that when you need power most, you are most likely not to have it.
Every mariner seeing this incident will recall when something similar happened to them and ‘by the grace of God’ got away with it.
Personally, a lot of what he says makes sense to me but in my humble (and unqualified) opinion, making a statement such as “those pointing to a cyber-attack or terrorism should stand down” is also premature at this stage, especially given the starboard anchor was lost and has therefore not been inspected by investigators.
To close off this section, I also want to point out a theory discussed in this article whereby there was no loss of power at all on the Dali and the crew lost control of the vessel because someone hacked the controls:
The “aural alarms” (i.e. pants-shitting terror) that we hear from the bridge crew isn’t because of any power outage — which is in fact impossible, given the recording itself required power, and shut off after the screaming started.
When coupled with the dispatcher’s quote — and the obvious fact the ship was capable of steering, right up until the last moment — what freaked them out is that they had lost control of at least one of their steering/propulsion systems to hackers.
So what we saw towards the end was not a struggle by the crew to keep the power ON, but one to shut it OFF, and then hopefully drop anchor and/or buy time for assistance.
This last sentence regarding the crew trying to bring the ship to a stop by any means they could, is inline with what was discussed by Tom Sharpe, with the only difference (which is a BIG one) being the reason for why the crew wanted to do that.
Explosive charges may have been used to bring the bridge down
This may sound as an outrageous claim to make but hopefully you understand at this stage that if something is outrageous, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is impossible and may even potentially make it more likely.
There are quite a few videos floating online which make the claim that the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapsed not just because the Dali hit one of its pillars but also (and maybe even primarily) because it was wired with explosives and the detonation of said explosives was done to coincide with the ship hitting the bridge in order to achieve two purposes:
Destroy the bridge; and
Make it look like it was due to the fact it was hit by the ship.
As outrageous as this scenario may sound to you (if at all), one only needs to think of a certain event which happened in NYC on a clear September morning in 2001 to understand that it is definitely at least somewhat possible…
As Samuel Clemens (a.k.a. Mark Twain) put it very succinctly:
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes."
Here are two videos which do the best job in my opinion to convey this point:
The second video makes a connection to a certain agenda being pushed in Baltimore at the moment which I believe may be very pertinent. Listen closely:
The “smart city” agenda for Baltimore is definitely not a hoax.
The first proposal by the Mayor of Baltimore’s “Smarter City Task Force” and the Baltimore Development Corporation was released as far back as 2015 under the name: “A Smarter Baltimore” which you can download from the Baltimore City website.
You can also find it below (just in case):
Three years later in 2018, the Baltimore mayor presented a 5 year plan for an “inclusive digital transformation” in the city.
And then in December last year, Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott presented another 5 year plan. This one is aimed at addressing the “City's Digital Divide” saying things like:
“Digital equity is not just about technology, it’s also about social equity and closing the digital divide is one of the biggest civil rights issues of our lifetimes”
and
“This plan is a commitment to build a Baltimore that leaves no one behind in the digital age. The strategy will not only help enhance the quality of life for our residents, but also make Baltimore a more competitive and resilient city”
A quick look through the “Baltimore City’s digital inclusion strategy 2024-2029” document quickly gives the impression that the ultimate objective is to make Baltimore’s residents more reliant on online services and the Internet through “supporting digital equity”, a term really popular with the WEF which openly says on their website for all to see that will also as well help power the “Great Reset”.
Enough said.
Cui Bono?
OK, so now to the most interesting part:
Who BENEFITS from this?
The way I see it, assuming there is actually foul play behind the Baltimore incident which involves a cyber attack or sabotage (or both), there are two answers that are the most likely.
Option 1: China did it
Or was it “Chaaaiiina” rather?
Jokes aside, If China is preparing to make a move for Taiwan (something it openly said many times it intends to do, including in Xi’s latest New Year’s address), the destruction of the bridge in Baltimore has a definite strategic benefit as it makes it harder for the US to resupply its forces in the area as well as bring reinforcements in order to help Taiwan defend itself.
Only a few days ago, an article was published by the Washington Times which said the following:
Retired Rear Adm. Mike Studeman of the US Navy has claimed that when he met Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen, Vice President-elect Hsiao Bi-khim and senior Taiwanese national security and military leaders, they expressed apprehension that China would invade the island.
They also feared that the US would "isolate and withdraw" from the international stage.
If that wasn’t enough, the “Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party” of the US house of representatives (yes, it does actually exist) issued a report titled:
TEN FOR TAIWAN: Policy Recommendations to Preserve PEACE and STABILITY in the Taiwan Strait.
(Apparently with the objective of ensuring that “freedom is the victor”).
Page 12 of the 15 page reports states the following:
“PLA hackers could target naval and aerial ports of embarkation to slow down our ability to send American forces to the theatre, as well as shut down much of our nation’s economic activity”
Here is the screenshot of that page so you can see what else it says and verify I haven’t taken things out of context:
I think that’s probably enough for this option.
Option 2: The US did it to itself
Or more specifically, rogue elements within its government and military (the aforementioned “deep state”).
If you think this is preposterous, check this out.
In addition to that, it’s worth mentioning in this context a certain Executive Order issued by Biden just this February which says the following (amongst other things):
Evidence of sabotage, subversive activity, or an actual or threatened cyber incident involving or endangering any vessel, harbor, port, or waterfront facility, including any data, information, network, program, system, or other digital infrastructure thereon or therein, shall be reported immediately to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (for any cyber incident), and the Captain of the Port, or to their respective representatives.”;
There is little doubt in my mind that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is part of the US deep state!
This is not based on a hunch but rather on the irrefutable fact that CISA plays a major role in combating so called “disinformation” including around elections and COVID-19.
The Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives has issued a scathing report on CISA in June last year showing that the agency engaged in extensive censorship and then also tried to hide the fact it was doing that.
You can read the full 37 page report for yourself by clicking on the image below:
If that wasn’t enough, the head of CISA attended the highly secretive Bilderberg meetings in both 2022 and last year in 2023.
Both options for Cui Bono as discussed above make perfect sense if the destruction of the bridge was the result of a cyber attack on the Dali or on the port of Baltimore.
They both remain possible for any other scenario that does not solely involve human error or negligence.
It is a well known fact that the enemy (the real one) is aiming, other than to potentially trigger a global armed conflict, to also significantly disrupt global supply chains, especially when it comes to food and other essential goods and services, such as power generation and distribution.
As usual (and as required by their belief system/religion) they must (it’s not optional!) signal their intentions in advance and “reveal the method” which they have done with a certain recent Netflix movie produced by the Obamas:
The deepfake video of Catherine, Princess of Wales
I’ve touched on this briefly at the top of this article but let’s dive deeper now.
However, before I do that, there is one question that I expect some of you may want to ask me (or yourselves):
“Why should I even care?”
Well, if you live in the UK, this is your future Queen (potentially if the concept of the monarchy survives WWIII which I personally hope it will not).
Even if you are a British person who couldn’t care less about the royals, the most recent figures indicate that 40% of your compatriots think the nation will be worse off if the monarchy was no more and only 25% think it will be better.
Kate herself appears to be the single most popular member of the royal family by a wide margin.
For the rest of us non-Brits, this matters because it brings into the forefront our new collective reality in this ‘brave new world’ (a.k.a “the new normal”) whereby someone with an extremely high public profile, as well actual public duties (albeit mostly ceremonial in nature) can just disappear for months without anyone knowing what has actually happened to them.
Worse yet, the situation can be further complicated due to obfuscation and deception utilising new technology which has reached unprecedented capability and has become widely available to almost anyone (at least in the developed world).
The rise of the AI-generated “Deepfake”
Deepfakes can potentially be a very serious matter indeed as demonstrated by the fake video of Ukrainian President Zelenksy which was floated online at the start of the current conflict with Russia in which ‘Zelensky’ is calling his own troops to surrender to the Russians.
This video was actually broadcast on Ukrainian TV after the station was hacked by Russian hackers (allegedly).
Now, as the presenter in the above video stated, this was a very very (very!) bad example of a “deepfake” and can definitely be described as a “cheap fake” as she called it.
To me it seems obvious that the hackers who managed to get it on Ukrainian TV did not really aim for it to achieve the strategic objective of getting the Ukrainian armed forces to lay down their weapons but instead wanted to:
Demonstrate their capabilities to hack a Ukrainian TV channel; and
Humiliate Ukraine and its President.
However, not all attempts at deepfake are that bad.
Here is an example of a deepfake of Barack Obama produced in 2017 by researchers at the University of Washington.
To quote the video description by the BBC (who uploaded this to their Youtube channel):
Artificial intelligence was used to precisely model how Mr Obama moves his mouth when he speaks.
Their technique allows them to put any words into their synthetic Barack Obama’s mouth.
Take a look at the final result:
Can you tell the real Obama from the ‘deepfaked’ Obama? Keep in mind that this was made almost seven years ago!
Now, here is a more recent example uploaded by British Channel 4 to YouTube on Christmas Day 2020 (which is still over 3 years ago now!):
Once again: would you be able to tell the real Queen from the deepfaked ‘Queen’?
Here is another video Channel 4 uploaded to their YouTube channel on the same day where they show exactly how they created the above video:
Here is ‘Morgan Freeman’ in July 2021 (almost three years ago):
And here are a few more examples created by tech that is at least 5.5 years old:
Did you notice in the above video Bloomberg’s technology reporter saying:
It’s actually extremely easy to make one of these things
That was in 2018!!
Now that you understand the issue and its importance (hopefully), let’s get back to Kate.
The Princess of Wales announces she has cancer
On March 22 (the same day of the Crocus Hall attack in Moscow), Kensington Palace released a video with the Princess of Wales where she is announcing that she has been diagnosed with cancer and will be having “a course of preventative chemotherapy”.
Here is the full video directly as released by the Palace with no alterations and modifications of any kind on my part:
I’ll openly admit that when I first saw it, I thought nothing of it except that maybe the cancer diagnosis has something to do with a certain ‘procedure’ Kate has had (supposedly, as we don’t know for certain what she was actually injected with, if anything) in late May 2021:
Others like
had similar thoughts it seems:
I also thought that this may be the reason why the PR department of the Prince & Princess of Wales have tried this previous stunt, which was so poorly executed that if there was a genuine intention there to convince anyone that it was really William and Kate doing a bit of shopping, EVERYONE on that team should be sacked on the spot:
Things get strange (really strange this time!)
I moved on with life and kept my focus on the unfolding events in Moscow which I thought were much more significant back then (and still do so now for the record) but then I came across this note:
And thus began my tumble yet another rabbit hole!
I then found this video posted on Twitter showing a fairly convincing ‘replacement’ of Kate’s face with another one (that kinda looks like a younger version of her sister in-law Meghan) created using an off-the-shelf tool:
Others noticed there was something not quite right with Kate’s mouth in that video and specifically that it appears like there are two rows of teeth at the bottom:
Others (like
) noticed that Kate’s wedding ring was missing in some of the frames:If you are interested in how the wedding ring disappears and reappears, here is one explanation I’ve seen suggested online which made sense to me:
The factoid below may not be directly related but I thought it is still worth mentioning it here given how significantly more strange this story gets later and especially given this was a mere four days before the release of the ‘Kate’ video, as well as Obama’s unusual behaviour where he flatly refused to interact in any way with the media that was parked outside 10 Downing street.
Things get outright ‘Twilight Zone’ strange
On March 25 (three days after the video of ‘Kate’ was first released), the following piece was published by the I, a UK national newspaper published by the media conglomerate Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT), whose chair and controlling shareholder is a fella with the very fancy title of: the fourth Viscount Rothermere (but you can call him Johnny…):
The objective of the article (I assume) was to discredit any so called “conspiracy theories” and those ‘irresponsible bastards’ who propagate them (lifts hand slowly…).
Like with the case of ‘Kate’ going ‘shopping’ a few days after supposedly being released from hospital following an “abdominal surgery”, this stunt also backfired, to put it mildly.
You see, the article featured this paragraph in it attributed to head of the BBC or one of their minions:
“Kensington Palace chose BBC Studios, the corporation’s commercial wing, to shoot the Princess of Wales’s video announcement that she is being treated for cancer, in part because the broadcaster’s involvement would prevent any wild speculation about its veracity.”
This story all of a sudden got much (much!) more Interesting!!
The reason why it got so much more interesting (for me at least) is because it became obvious that this video was professionally shot (yet had quite poor quality which any kid with a five year old iPhone could have shot at better quality) and most likely not taken with Kate sitting on what is known as the Queens Bench in the Rose Garden at Windsor Castle.
But if that wasn’t enough, things got even MORE interesting when I saw people were pointing out to this article published on February 29 this year:
Here is the part in the above article which I found the most ‘interesting’:
“To enhance operational efficiency, the BBC is exploring the use of Gen AI tools to support journalists with tasks such as generating headline options and summarizing articles. Another area of focus is the improvement of content organization and labelling to facilitate quicker content creation, such as compiling clips or collections from existing programs.
The BBC reiterated its commitment to using Gen AI responsibly guided by principles that ensure the technology supports the corporation’s public mission while prioritizing human talent and creativity.”
YEA BABY!!
In case you don’t know exactly what a “generative AI” is, let’s go and ask one (ChatGPT/Bing AI to be exact) to explain itself:
Generative AI is a subset of artificial intelligence that leverages machine learning techniques to generate data that is similar to the data it was trained on. This can include a wide range of data types, such as images, music, speech, or text.
The goal of generative AI is not just to replicate the input data, but to understand and learn the underlying patterns in order to create new data that is similar but not identical. This is achieved through algorithms like Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), Variational Autoencoders (VAEs), and others.
For example, a generative AI model trained on a dataset of paintings could potentially create a new painting that resembles the style and content of the training data, but is a unique piece of art in its own right. Similarly, a generative AI model trained on a dataset of human speech could generate new speech utterances.
It's important to note that while generative AI can create impressive results, it's still a rapidly evolving field with many challenges and ethical considerations to be addressed. For instance, ensuring the generated content is not harmful or misleading, respecting copyright laws, and considering the implications of AI-generated content that is indistinguishable from human-created content.
You got that?
I can’t possibly make this one more “directly from the horse’s mouth” than this!
Interestingly enough, the “Kate Video” as posted by the Daily Mail (owner of the I as discussed above) on their YouTube channel now has an ‘interesting’ addition to it which did NOT appear in the original video as posted by Kensington Palace.
Feel free to scroll up and verify that for yourself.
Below is a good summary courtesy of
of the main questions about the video of ‘Kate’ touched on so far:There is little doubt in my mind the video IS indeed a “deepfake”
If you still have your doubts, let’s go back full circle to the little ‘teaser’ I gave you at the start of this article.
In April 2016 (pay attention to the year, it’s important) a little known blog (to me at least) about Royal Families around the world, published a post about a mental health campaign launched by Kate, her husband William and brother-in-law Harry called “Heads Together".
The article also has a few images of Kate with her husband and brother-in-law:
Now in case you are not quite sure, below is the video some of those images were taken from.
As you can easily see for yourself, the video was uploaded to the YouTube channel of the “Heads Together” organisation, which is also showing as a verified account on YouTube.
The video you are about to watch was uploaded to YouTube on 24 Apr 2016, which is the same day the article mentioned above was published:
Hopefully you can see now the issue as well as the fact this video is definitely authentic.
Here are a few reminders of how one Generative AI tool (ChatGPT/BING AI) described its own capabilities:
Generate data that is similar to the data it was trained on. This can include a wide range of data types, such as images, music, speech, or text.
Learn the underlying patterns in order to create new data that is similar but not identical.
AI-generated content that is indistinguishable from human-created content.
(It sure is Mr. Powers, it sure as hell is. Welcome to the 2020s!)
I could probably end this here but I want to cover another ‘interesting’ development which further proves that something is not quite ‘kosher’ (or to put it more bluntly: that the “Kate video” is a deepfake).
The BBC gets FOIed
FOI stands for a Freedom Of Information request in case you don’t know.
Unity News Network (UNN) is a british media outlet describing itself as:
A News and Grassroots Information Centre established in April 2018
Its public face is a guy called David Clews.
When Mr. Clews read the article about the BBC using generative AI in its studios, he got suspicious (and rightfully so!).
As a journalist and UK citizen, he thought he deserved a few clear answers from his own public broadcaster. A reasonable request I think given it is his taxes which pay for this ‘little operation’ they have.
On March 25, Mr. Clews said the following formal FOI request to the BBC:
Pretty reasonable questions to ask given the nature of the speaker in the video, don’t you think?
A day later, Mr. Clews received a formal reply from the BBC to his FOI request:
“20 working days” seems a bit long given the nature of the questions and the very high profile of that particular BBC ‘production’ but sure. 20 working days it is.
Meanwhile on April 5, the BBC issued a public statement following criticism of its ‘coverage’ of the “Kate Video” and its aftermath:
We broadcast in full the highly personal video message from the Princess of Wales, in which she spoke directly to the public about her cancer diagnosis. Our coverage reflected the significance of this story and the outpouring of support for the princess from around the globe. We explained to our audience what was known about Catherine’s condition, but did not speculate on details that had not been made public.
Our reporting made clear that this is a difficult time for the princess and the rest of the Royal Family; we have been mindful at all times to approach our coverage with sensitivity.
As part of our analysis, we examined the intense speculation there had been in the preceding weeks about the princess’s health. We also reported on Catherine’s request for privacy and detailed the statement from Kensington Palace regarding the princess having the right to privacy in relation to her medical issues.
We always give careful consideration to the editorial decisions we make. While we have a responsibility to report on stories that are of interest to our audience, we appreciate that not everyone would have approved of the approach we took.
Then on April 11, the BBC provided their formal reply to the FOI request lodged by Mr. Clews which said as follows:
This is the future Queen of the UK (which could be fairly immediate future given Charles’s cancer diagnosis) and this is how its public broadcaster responds to a question by a British journalist which has direct implications for her well-being?
I’ll leave you to contemplate on this one yourself…
Below I am including a video of Mr. Clews commenting on the BBC’s response to his FOI Request:
With regards to the “death of Thomas Kingston”, what David is referring to is this tweet he posted on March 24 (so a day before he FOIed the BBC):
This is the video that was included in that tweet:
Thomas Kingston seems like a potential massive rabbit hole in itself which I will not explore in this article…but will definitely be following closely to see if David or someone else do uncover something.
Let’s Recap
The Princess of Wales (and the designated future Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain!) hasn’t been seen in public since Christmas Day when she appeared for Christmas Service at Sandringham Church. That’s close to four months now!
There have been several attempts to try and convince the public that Kate is fine by showing a picture of her with her kids or out and about doing some shopping (supposedly). All of these attempts (without exception!) were horrifically amateurish and unsurprisingly, the public picked up on the fact these were hoaxes almost immediately.
A video was released by Kensington Palace allegedly showing Kate sitting on the Queens Bench in the Rose Garden at Windsor Castle and letting her ‘loyal British subjects’ (as well as everyone else) know that she has been diagnosed with Cancer.
The video is quickly (literally within hours) identified as a deepfake and shortly after, the source footage which was almost certainly used to generate it, is discovered on Google-owned YouTube.
COME ON!
Remember that this is the UK royal family we are talking about…not the freaking Kardashians!
They have access to the vast resources of the British state, including MI5 and GCHQ.
If they needed to create a convincing deepfake of Kate (for whatever reason), they could have easily utilised the capabilities these two spy agencies no doubt have…and I can pretty much guarantee that no one would have been the wiser (except those spooks who created the deepfake and the royals themselves that is)!
Something else is at play here!
Kate was supposed to resume her “royal duties” after Easter and while her Husband resumed his ‘duties’ a few days ago with a visit to a food redistribution charity, his wife is nowhere to be seen and there have been no video or audio messages from her since that video.
William was also seen in a football match on April 11 together with the couple’s eldest son George (there is a video of both of them sitting in the VIP box).
The only follow-up since the video was a note obtained by celebrity/royal gossip magazine Hello (something I never ever imagined I would ever reference as a source) who claim they obtained a short message on a paper with Kensington Palace letterhead which read:
"Thank you for your kind well wishes to Her Royal Highness The Princess of Wales. Your thoughtful gesture is very much appreciated."
Apparently, there was also this:
In a break with royal tradition, no photograph accompanied the note, which was instead left blank on one side.
Then, on April 13, there was another statement released by Kensigton palace in relation to the incident at the Bondi Junction shopping centre in Sydney.
This is obviously no proof of any kind that Kate had any involvement in drafting the above statement.
I’ll stop here.
Cui Bono?
I will present three potential theories starting from the relatively benign, with each one getting increasingly more dark.
There are ‘miracle cures for cancer’ to promote and money to be made
The UK government currently has two major contracts for the development and purchase of cancer ‘vaccines’.
One is for a ‘vaccine’ for lung cancer made by the same people who ‘developed’ the AstraZeneca COVID-19 injectable:
The other is with BioNTech which is the company that is actually behind the Pfizer COVID-19 injectable:
Both involve “manipulating DNA” which in layman terms can be simply called: GENE THERAPY.
You honestly can’t make this stuff up!
“But how is that deriving a benefit from the Kate ‘saga’?”
Excellent question. Here’s a summary of the answer:
Next, let’s make that connection together.
As a reminder, the UK royal family released a statement in February this year announcing that Charles was being treated for cancer and there are also persistent rumors (as there are no official confirmations as of yet) that his condition is a lot worse than was communicated to the public.
After delivering his traditional Easter address via audio instead of in-person at Church, the British King finally made an in-person appearance for the traditional Church service on Easter Sunday but chose to be driven from the Palace to St. George’s Chapel which is only about 10 minutes away by foot.
Charlie is either clearly unwell or he is doing a decent job at faking it.
Either way, Kate being diagnosed with Cancer as well (whether true or not) ensures cancer becomes top of mind for many Brits, as well as many other royal watchers around the Commonwealth (of which Australia, New-Zealand and Canada are all part of) and elsewhere.
With Kate this becomes especially potent due to:
Her young age (she is only 42 years old); and
The fact she is the most popular royal by far (unlike the King and his “Queen consort”).
Now the ‘punchline’:
What happens if all of a sudden the highly popular Kate makes a ‘miraculous recovery’ from her ‘cancer’ thanks to some revolutionary new injectable and rejoins her loving husband and kids???!!
The only hole in that theory that I can think of (and it’s a fairly big one) is why hide Kate from public view?
The same objective can easily be achieved by simply instructing Kate to say she has cancer (assuming she doesn’t actually have one) and then say she has made a “full recovery” thanks to the ‘amazing’ injectables by Oxford University and/or BioNTech.
Now, it is possible that this was the original plan but Kate refused to lie about a fake cancer diagnosis but even then…
What do you think? Let me know.
Censorship & fully regulated Internet
Another more sinister answer to the “Cui Bono?” question in relation to the Kate Video is the idea that there is an intention to create speculation online about the highly popular british royal and then come out and say that this is further proof that speech on the Internet needs to be “properly regulated” (i.e. censored!) in order to prevent such “nasty rumours” from spreading and undermining the credibility of an important national institution like the royal family.
This will then be used as further proof that the “Online Safety Bill” in the UK is urgently needed, as well as similar legislation in other countries.
But hey, the “fact checkers” are saying this is all just ‘fake news’ so nothing to worry about, right? 🙄
This possible answer to “Cui Bono?” appears to hold water given the very angry reactions in the general public towards anyone asking legitimate questions about Kate’s condition and whereabouts.
This includes towards celebrities as well as academics.
Accessible only to those with a digital ID
Following the enemy’s tried and true ‘recipe’ of never letting a good crisis go to waste, the ‘authorities’ can then go and say that deepfakes have become a major problem but “don’t worry peasant. We have a way to save you!”.
That way is…a DIGITAL ID:
If you are not familiar with the concept of the digital ID and how dangerous it is (and more importantly: why?) then this section in one of my past articles should help bring you up to speed.
Kate is dead or incapacitated
This is where the potential answer to “Cui Bono” gets really dark.
It is unfortunately the option that in my opinion seems the most likely as it provides the most logical and comprehensive answer to “Cui Bono?”, especially as time goes by.
There are essentially two possibilities in this option but both share the common thread that:
Something really terrible has happened to Kate and the British Royal family needs to ‘stage manage’ it so that they can release the news at the time they consider to be the most appropriate and/or opportune for them.
The cover story that will be used is that Kate has suffered complications as a result of her cancer and has subsequently gone to meet her maker.
If you think this is just a crazy theory (or “utter bollocks” if you’re British) then I suggest you check out this article suggesting that there are elements in William’s behaviour that may indicate his wife’s situation is a lot worse than what we are led to believe based on that infamous video.
This is the specific section that I find to be the most ‘interesting’:
“The common practice dictates that either the Monarch or their delegate represents them in the biennial Commonwealth Heads of Government Meetings (CHOGM)
Since 1973, Queen Elizabeth II maintained this arrangement until 2011, when she started delegating this role to King Charles III and then Prince of Wales due to her failing health.
Slated for October 24, 2024, this year’s CHOGM will be in Samoa, thus creating a problem for King Charles III. He is currently being treated for cancer, and doctors have advised him not to travel much.
Now, it's obvious that Prince William would be the one to step in; however, Express UK noted that “Attending the CHOGM is not something William can take on at this time due to Kate’s health, and although Anne and other working royals are doing a great job stepping in to plug the gaps at home, they are not viewed as high level enough to represent the sovereign as leader of the Commonwealth.”
On its face, this statement may seem innocuous but it actually implies that Prince William expects the duchess’ illness will continue through another six months. The severity of her condition has not been fully disclosed but the duration of treatment suggests a long road ahead with possible postponement of official duties until around 2025.
The report also stated, “King Charles's presence at both the Commonwealth meeting and in Australia is viewed as instrumental in preserving Commonwealth unity,” and added, “Despite medical advice recommending against travelling long distances, particularly due to the time difference which can add to exhaustion, the King remains resolute in his decision to undertake the trip.”
So both William and his dad seem to know that he won’t be able to perform his royal duties in October this year.
The only question is: WHY?
It’s the C19 Injectable
I’ll openly admit that when I first saw this option being floated online, I considered it to be utter nonsense.
I did not think for a second that a senior royal and the future Queen will ever be given the 'real thing’.
However, I have since come across this video by David Icke (published a day before the “Kate Video” came out) which leads me to at least consider the notion that whoever is on the level above the Windsors (and there are definitely levels above them), has decided that they have served their purpose and it’s time to go.
This will also destablilise the UK’s national identity which is always a good thing in their books. After all, they are not called “globalists” for nothing!
The video also raised the idea that not just Kate was injected with the ‘real deal’ but the late Queen was as well (which is why she is the “late Queen”)!
It’s the Royal Family itself
If someone within the royal family caused Kate to be “dead or incapacitated” then her own husband is a potential ‘candidate’:
Apparently William has a pretty hot temper (allegedly) and maybe Kate did something that really pissed him off (like cheat on him with one of her exes as some of the rumours suggest).
It is also possible that William has had enough of Kate (for whatever reason) and needed her out of the way (for example that he could marry one of his old flames he has been cheating on Kate with for awhile, as other rumours suggest).
Another theory directly related to that is that Kate discovered William was cheating on her and demanded a divorce, which could result in bad PR for the royal family, especially given the history of William’s dad (and the current King).
These are all theories. No one knows for sure whether any of them are true or not.
However, they all add credence to the possibility that something was done to Kate by the royal family itself.
What is interesting in this context is this article published on February 27 this year:
The article above discusses the concept of “Sovereign immunity” which is:
“A legal doctrine whereby a sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution, strictly speaking in modern texts in its own courts.
State immunity is a similar, stronger doctrine, that applies to foreign courts.”
The plot thickens…
The video below goes deeper into the article and the concept of “Sovereign immunity” as it applies to William, both as first in line to the throne and as the future King (i.e. “Sovereign”) of the UK:
If all of the above seems completely outrageous to you (or “bonkers” if you’re british), keep in mind that an instance of the Princess of Wales being murdered by her own husband (or his family) may have already happened, and not that long ago as well:
The full report of the Inquiry can be downloaded from here and is also provided below (just in case):
Closing Words
If you’re reading this after going through the entire article then I’m sure you’ll agree we’ve been on quite a journey together!
Ultimately, the purpose of this article is not just to communicate certain facts (as well as some theories) about three recent events but primarily to illustrate a certain way of thinking which I feel is very important for all of us to adopt during the crazy times of the “new normal”.
WWIII (of which we are now into the fifth year) is first and foremost a war that is taking place in our minds and failure to adapt our thinking to the current state of the battlefield can potentially have grave implications indeed!
LOSING THIS WAR IS NOT AN OPTION!!
To allow me to continue this work and expand it further and in pursuit of the mission to “propagate the truth like a MANTRA”, your financial contribution is greatly appreciated.
WEW.
And I had the exact same reaction as your mum when I saw the 'terrorists.'
Thanks for your work.
My "most effective way to cut through any deception and noise" is to totally avoid main stream media with as much contempt as I view Soap Operas.