Breaking - Shooting and Explosion at Concert Hall in Moscow

Sand

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998135#Comment_121998135

The attempt to undermine the investigation by pointing the mistreatment of the gunmen at the arrest site is malicious in my view. The Russians don't need to beat a confession out of the gunmen. They clearly did it. Beat a confession out of them…they still did it. They seem like morons, so they probably don't know much about who organised things.

What is more important to the investigation is the objective evidence. I've already noted they were arrested on route to the Ukrainian border. That isnt changed by any beating. More importantly the gunmen were being directed by a third party via their phones. They apparently tried to destroy their phones at the time of their arrest, but it seems the Russians were able to secure them and are pulling information of those phones. So far, that includes evidence that the planning of the attack started at least as early as Feb 24th when one of the gunmen took images of Crocus City Hall and its entrances and surrounding roads. Again, beatings or lackthereof doesn't change that.

I think for all the people who are certain the investigation is just a conclusion (Ukraine is responsible) in search of evidence, they themselves have a conclusion (Ukraine isn't responsible) and they'll ignore all evidence to the contrary. The Russians have every motivation to identify the culprits and punish them. Lets see where the evidence leads.

And lets face, we in the West cant ride too high on the moral high horses. The US ran (and no doubt continues to run) "black sites" (a neutral term for torture site) in friendly European countries like Poland and the Baltic states, which gave the Americans old bases where there was no one around to hear the screaming so that it was all nice and civilised. Where do people think "US intelligence" comes from?

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998206#Comment_121998206

And you know it's well known that tortured confessions are considered useless.... And that's been pointed out in relation to the US use of them in the past, torture victims will say anything that the torturers want them to... They're not classified as reliable.

The Russians have not provided credible proof that the Ukrainians were responsible for the attack, that's the reality. There's no indication that they ever will produce such evidence. Instead conspiracy theorists and such will claim the MSM are failing to cover the truth of it....

It's slightly telling that the guy who won't admit the genocide in Ukraine seems to be desperate for Ukraine to have been responsible for this...

fash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998206#Comment_121998206

1. There is no benefit to Ukraine in committing terrorism and only disadvantage: terrorism influences democracies - it has effectively no impact on totalitarian dictatorships. Aside from that, it would reduce support for the perpetrator with third parties which do not approve of terrorism.

2. Whatever accusations may be thrown at ISIS, "liars" is not one of them -and they declared they carried out the action.

3. Russia has every reason to falsely hold Ukraine responsible: if someone else were responsible, it would make Putin (especially given that he dismissed the US & Iranian warnings of the imminent terrorism attack) look like an inept buffoon.

Furthermore, giving additional reasons for the Russian people to accept the hardships they face to facilitate Putin's invasion are always useful.

That is not too forget Putin's own history of false flag terrorist activities- amongst other things to launch his political career.

Sand

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998241#Comment_121998241

As I noted, the Russians don't need confessions from the gunmen, tortured or otherwise. They have objective leads they can follow-up regardless of co-operation from the gunmen or not.

And, while I don't agree with torture, there is a factor to keep in mind: there is 4 of them being interrogated, not 1. That means 4 accounts, that would all need to align with each other and the objective evidence.

Sand

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998265#Comment_121998265

1. Hasn't stopped the Ukrainian SBU doing it before. Terrorism has the same influence in every country - it hardens attitudes against the terrorists. And yet it still happens. Its worth noting that since the attack The Times has reported that Ukraine is running a psyops campaign in Russia to try stir up ethnic tension on the basis of the killings. So they see some benefit.
2. Clearly ISIS cant be ruled out, but ISIS has lied in the past. The claimed they carried out the Las Vegas mass shooting several years ago, and they also claimed they carried out Barcelona terrorist attack in the same year. Their involvement was ruled out both times. There was a flaw with their claim in this attack too - they claimed the gunmen had returned to base. But they hadn't returned to base- they were arrested, which implies ISIS wasn't in close contact with them. Its also worth noting that ISIS is known to take responsibility for "franchise" attacks by gunmen that are otherwise unconnected to them and which ISIS didn't have any direct role in. That could be exploited by a third party looking for plausible deniability.
3. The US warnings were at best incorrect. It was for a 48 hour period starting March 7th. Nothing happened. The US issued no further warnings or updates. The US warning didn't even identify the potential attackers: just "extremists", which could be anyone. The Russians say the US provided no useful or actionable information. The New York Times has run a story saying that the US actually decided to withhold information from Russia regarding the threat, which if true is wrong. The US "warning" wasn't really all its cracked up to be.

As for Putin's "history of false flag terrorist activities", I think we need to file that with conspiracy theories like "Putin is dying from 18 different types of terminal cancer", "The Ghost of Kiev is real", "The Russians are running out of X" and so on and so forth. It's getting into Alex Jones crisis actors type stuff.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998276#Comment_121998276

And you'd need to know how the torture was approached to even make that assumption. Getting people to make certain statements might be the entire intent of such an interrogation so it doesn't suddenly become reliable as a result.

You can refer to all these leads but so far they haven't provided any verifiable information that Ukraine were responsible for the attack. They've made vague claims and that's it. So while they fail to produce any verifiable evidence that Ukraine was responsible, nobody will take their claims seriously. Except for those who seem to have an existing history of trying to justify or defend the invasion.

brickster69

Russia now investigating funding of terrorism by a company called Burisma holdings in Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/deSunShineBand/status/1777757668423172432

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998386#Comment_121998386

Burisma, ah yes pulling Joe Biden into the conspiracy. This is just conspiracy pushing, that's the reality. And you're being incredibly undiscerning as usual.

Sand

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998371#Comment_121998371

Lets be clear - Ukraine can carry out terrorist attacks on Russia because its already clear their backers will not withdraw support on account of them. There are people in this very thread supporting the murder of Russian journalists because they didn't like the stories those journalist wrote (ironically, something Putin is often accused of).

So it's well understood that "nobody (in NATO) will take their claims seriously". NATO isn't a neutral arbiter that anything needs to be proven to by Russia. Within 2 hours of the attack, before the fires had even been put out, before the investigation had even started, the US was pushing the narrative that Ukraine absolutely positively had nothing to do with it.

But there is an investigation going on anyway, and lets see where the evidence leads. If it leads to state or non-state actors (and its entirely possible its non-state ultra nationalist groups), in Ukraine or elsewhere, I don't think the Russians will be relying on co-operation from NATO to achieve justice.

brickster69

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998412#Comment_121998412

We need to wait for the evidence Chewy, everything else is just pure speculation until then.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998414#Comment_121998414

But to be credible, they have to actually provide the evidence. They aren't going to do that but people such as yourself will lap it up.... That's the reality.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998414#Comment_121998414

Readers addes context: Ukraine has not carried out any terrorist attacks in Russia. This is Russian propaganda.

Remember the same poster assured us that Russia was not going to invade Ukraine because Russia said so. It was all US and NATO lies.

The claims about the Russian "investigation" have the same credibility about previous claims from the same discredited Russian propaganda outlets.

Podge_irl

Maybe the Tajik terrorists who claimed they were from ISIS, and whose attack was claimed by ISIS, who provided video from the attackers of the attack, were in fact part of a Ukrainian masterplan, the end of which involved driving towards Ukraine to pop across the most heavily militarised crossing in the world.

That sounds perfectly sensible alright.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998429#Comment_121998429

Simple one, I don't believe either @Sand or @brickster69 would be willing to admit that Russia is pursuing a genocidal agenda in Ukraine.... But they're incredibly trusting in Russian investigations that say what they like to hear.

Sand

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998425#Comment_121998425

Credible to who though? You've already got your conclusion and you've prepped your rationale to dismiss the investigation if it disagrees with your pre-formed conclusion. The problem is that I don't think your conclusion is all that important to the outcome. As I have said before, the Russians have every motivation to identify the organiser of the attacks and punish them. It is their conclusion that matters most.

For my own perspective, I'm intrigued by the discrepancies - Why did ISIS say the gunmen returned to base, when they did not? Who was directing the gunmen by phone? Who were the gunmen expecting to pay them and where/how? Why were apparent ISIS gunmen heading in the direction of Ukraine? Were they planning to cross the border? If so, how? Were they going to stay in Ukraine or travel on elsewhere?

The answers to these questions might be irrelevant to you, but I don't think they are.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998634#Comment_121998634

Provide some verifiable evidence that can be evaluated by the press, public and governments. If they don't do so, then they have **** all credibility.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998634#Comment_121998634

Given how many Russian lies you have dumped on this forum, your standard for credibility certainly has no evidential basis.

Russia has every incentive to pin this on Ukraine given it is at war with them.

And while Russia may have an incentive to find out the real culprits, that does not translate in them having a reason to publicise that - especially if it contradicts the narratives they have already shared about Ukraine, past and present.

This has been pointed out to you multiple times on the thread already, and you've had zero credible answer.

If Ukraine were not involved, and Putin has directed Russian's military and security services focus to attacking Ukraine, instead of defending against other threats such as ISIS-K … such information would make Putin look bad. Therefore the chances of its emerging from Russia are slim to none.

So it is can be clearly seen your posts are just exercises in redressing Russian propaganda. Nothing more, nothing less.

Wibbs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998431#Comment_121998431

This, pretty much. Regardless of one's position on the two countries and/or this epic clusterfcuk, it makes no sense. Ukraine targeting Russian assets within Russia, military, or indeed "regime adjacent" civilians does make sense. Getting a third party involved, especially one that's seen as way beyond the pale to allies(and enemies alike) to shoot up innocent men, women and kids in a public place would be beyond counterproductive in keeping foreign support going, especially in the US, where those seeking to halt such support would be playing pocket billiards at such a revelation. Never mind messy and open to failure. Put it another way; how many actual Ukrainian attackers within Russia have been caught and paraded on Russian TV?

And it's not as if Russia like many countries in the West haven't had a long list of radical islamists trying and succeeding in terrorist attacks. In 2019 Putin even thanked the Yanks for warning them of an attack. Russia warned America too in the case of the Boston marathon attacks(one that went unheeded). And it's not as if it would be extremely advantageous to Russia to pin such a terrorist attack on Ukraine. Something even complete morons in the Ukrainian services would realise would be playing right into Moscow's hands.

As you note any "plan" for the terrorist scumbags to get across the Russian/Ukrainian border would be doomed to failure. Putin going on about the Ukrainians opening a "window" on the border is beyond laughable and one would have to be extremely credulous to believe it. For a start such a "window" would by near definition require at least some Russian collusion to work. Eh…

As for Russian justice and investigations… Both Russia and Ukraine are corrupt in ways we're lucky not to live under, but Ukraine over the last ten years has at least acknowledged the presence of corruption within. Russia never does. Plus Ukraine is very much more under a general Western beady eye over it. Russia simply doesn't care.

Forget the Truth© for a moment: Which narrative would Russia would prefer to push to their people and the world?

A) ISIS terrorist attack unconnected to their "SMO", which showed Ukraine isn't their only enemy, on top of lapses in internal security in a time of war, and serious lapses in response, where even civilian emergency ambulance and fire services in their capital city took over an hour to get to the attack site?

Or:

B) Pin it on their enemy Ukraine to distract from such lapses and rev up more internal and external support?

extra-ordinary_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998634#Comment_121998634

I'm intrigued by the discrepancies - Why did ISIS say the gunmen returned to base, when they did not?

Where are you getting this news from.? Who said they didn't return?

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998634#Comment_121998634

 As I have said before, the Russians have every motivation to identify the organiser of the attacks and punish them.

This betrays a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of the current Russian "government".

They don't give a **** about their people, they will only want to use this to a) direct anger towards Ukraine and b) deflect from the incompetence of their security services.

astrofool

Do you think the putinistas will take advantage of their negative credibility by posting positive "spin" for Ukraine?

There doesn't seem any logical reason that they would continually undermine and debase themselves in defending war crimes and child kidnappings.

fash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121998634#Comment_121998634

As previously clarified that Russia has no reason to publicly correctly identify the organizer, especially given that it makes Putin look like an incompetent buffoon, given that he publicly dismissed warnings just beforehand, many reasons to point the finger at Ukraine to justify his invasion, a history of false flags & a history of misidentifying culprits to fulfill political aims - including launching Putin's political career and justifying further ethnic cleansing/war in Chechnya.

It is noteworthy that you are unable to address that point.

crusd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121980000#Comment_121980000

By your standard every single Russian bomb and missile fired at civilian targets in Ukraine is a terrorist attack.

Also, "gunmen fleeing to Ukraine" is evidence of a narrative being developed rather than of them being supported by Ukraine. The Ukraine / Russia border is the last place any attacker would flee towards irrespective of motive.

crusd

Occams razor applies. If you believe the confessions are legitimate the most likely explanation is the FSB or similar Moscow government linked group were the handlers of these people who told them to flee to Kiev - for two reasons - they have done similar previously and if Ukraine were to sponsor something like this they are not so stupid as to tell the perpetrators to take the main road from Moscow to Kiev.

jmreire

I guess that we will have to wait until ISIS decide to clear their name and reputation by instigating another attack to prove their Bonafide's.

brickster69

They had a strange bunch of characters running this Burisma outfit.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cofer_Black

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122001911#Comment_122001911

And what precisely does Burisma have to do with the Concert Hall attack?

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122001911#Comment_122001911

Somewhat telling that you and the other guy won't comment on if Russia are pursuing a campaign of genocide in Ukraine.

In relation to Burisma, it's Russia trying to push Joe and Hunter Biden conspiracy theories... Something that MAGA types will no doubt lap up but once again, no actual evidence to backup your claims... Gonna bring up biolabs next?