Moscow attack: Did Russia ignore US 'extremist' attacks warning?

BBC ^ | 3/23/2024 | Gordon Corera

[marcusmaximus]

There are always questions after any attack as to why it was not stopped or detected. But the Moscow attack raises particularly difficult issues for Vladimir Putin at a time of international tension and mistrust. And much of that comes because of a warning from Washington.

The 7 March warning from the US to its own citizens was unusually specific. It talked of reports that "extremists" had "imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow" and specifically mentioned concerts. It advised Americans in the city to avoid large gatherings over the coming 48 hours.

The timing may not quite match, but other details do tally closely with events on 22 March. It seems clear Washington had some kind of intelligence and that it related to Islamic State (IS) - the group that has issued a statement saying it was behind the Moscow attack.

As well as the public warning to its own citizens, the US also said it had communicated with the Russian government directly.

"The US government also shared this information with Russian authorities in accordance with its long-standing 'duty to warn' policy," a US official said in a statement after the attack.

There are channels through which intelligence is shared between countries - even those that are not allies - especially when it relates to possible attacks on civilians.

But the problem is that Moscow dismissed the warnings.

[Red6]

Nord Stream was either outright us, or at a minimum sponsored by us.

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream

The idea that the Ukraine pulled this off is absurd.

If the source of the Washington Post was USG, then it’s obvious, we do that all the time. Throw out counter accusations or claims, create doubt and confusion to take the heat off oneself.

People that do this sort of work, we in the US refer to as SEALS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_Demolition_Team

Making things go boom underwater and having it do what you want, to the scale that was necessary (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/sep/30/nord-stream-blasts-size-equal-to-large-amount-of-explosive-un-told), getting there unnoticed, getting away unnoticed, having it go boom with a big delay reliably, without leaving a trace of who did it, working at depths of 80 meters (Nitrogen narcosis and Oxygen poisoning depths), darkness, in cold water... it’s not so simple.

This is completely outside of Ukraine’s AO / AOR. But we have folks there all the time.

[mass55th]

"The idea that the Ukraine pulled this off is absurd."

Tell that to the CIA that reported to other European countries, except Russia, that they knew 3 months in advance, and had a detailed report that Ukraine was going to blow up the pipeline. As stated in the article I posted, when asked, Ukraine officials, the Biden White House and the CIA refused to comment.

[Red6]

Trusting anything the CIA states, especially regarding this issue, is like trusting the testimony of the prime suspect in a murder trial against someone else.

Nothing they say can be trusted or should be believed at face value. They are habitual liars. Unless they back it up with concrete facts, things they can prove and even then be very sceptical if they have interests pushing them in a certain direction, example Iraq and all their “facts” concerning WMD.

This is an organization that has shown a flagrant disregard for the truth, lying to the public, under oath, by its most senior leadership, on issues of international or national interests.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/jun/07/privacy-wyden-clapper-nsa-video (lie)

In this case, they are likely part of the bigger mechanism behind the attack in the first place. It is in their interests to distract, confuse, to create doubt.

You can believe what you want, but laying ones trust in someone with zero credibility that has an active interest most likely in lying to you, isn’t the smartest thing to do.

[mass55th]

Thanks for your insight on the CIA. Long before the CIA existed, it was the CIC, and after WWII ended, the agency was involved in rounding up Nazi war criminals, and using them counter-intelligence. One of those war criminals was Klaus Barbie aka "The Butcher of Lyon," who was wanted by France. The CIC helped him escape to Bolivia, and eventually made arrangements for him to move his family there. When France asked the CIC if they knew his whereabouts, they lied and said they had no idea where he was. It wasn't until years later that Nazi hunters Serge and Beate Klarsfeld tracked him down to Peru. He was eventually apprehended, and extradited to France, stood trial, and because the death penalty had been outlawed prior to his arrest, he died in prison in 1991.

All these Nazi war criminals paid by our government for supposed counter-intelligence work against Russia, etc., yet to this day, no one knows exactly what information these Nazis provided to our government, or what benefits came from it during the Cold War. And we'll likely never know. But it couldn't have been much because while we were distracted fighting commies overseas, domestic communism blossomed and flourished here. And that's why we are where we are today.

So, I have a hatred for the CIA, and I wouldn't trust them or any three-letter government agency as far as I could throw them, and that's not very far.

[Red6]

Our bureaucracy needs reformed, I’m particular how the senior heads of agencies and departments are selected.

I get that they work for the executive office, i.e. President. But what it has turned into is that all of them turn their organizations into weaponized organs of a polit buero coordinated from the White House.

People are just beginning to wake up to this concept, i.e. all the articles written lately about “lawfare” and how the DOJ is politicized. Truth is, that’s across the board and it’s a consequence of the senior most leadership in these organizations which are all political hacks.

In many cases, these people have padded resume’s and are in reality inexperienced, untrained, not respected by the rank and file members of the organization, BUT they fit the political agenda and they are almost always, above all else, loyal to their master in the White House.

There needs to be reform in who/how folks are nominated, how they are vetted and selected for these positions. We get a lot of these types today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Fanning

Zero experience
Zero education/training
Zero historical personal ties to the DOD

An average Army Spouse knew more about the Army than that terd did, and that’s no joke!

But he met the right demographic, was in the right party and 100% loyal.

What sort of decisions do you think people like that make?

Once you go down 2 levels from these political @ssholes, you find that there are many people in the government that actually believe in the cause and try to do their best, fairly and objectively. These jerks simply bring the politics into the bureaucracy.

[HereInTheHeartland]

So you are defending ISIS even though they released video taking credit .
That’s the height of paranoia and delusion .

[aMorePerfectUnion]

—> So you are defending

SO poster!

😅

[mass55th]

"I’m particular how the senior heads of agencies and departments are selected."

One thing I've noticed over the years is that individuals working for the State Department tend to have had family members that were also State Department officials, ie., John Kerry's father, and Antony Blinken's father. There are probably other examples of this, and I'm wondering if this generational thing occurs in the other government agencies as well. We know that there have been families with generations of politicians, so it makes sense that this would occur in Federal agencies as well, and those generational employees would be bringing their family's political associations along with them in their jobs.

[Allegra]

Oh, dang! The “So…” posters are a trip. They wield that two-letter word like a manipulative little weapon, don’t they?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

They are great entertainment!🤣😂😅

[Red6]

The FBI (what I retired from) is the same.

The national political stage is very much like that. Family dynasty’s are a reality: https://www.google.com/search?q=american+polical+dynasty

Did you know even Newsome in Cal. is related to Pelosi?

They help each other out, have people in the bureaucracy they installed long ago pulling for them (bureaucratic loyalty), and established ties to those folks who pay the money to the party and candidate, if you are willing to play ball and give these folks what they want. The family insider definitely has the advantage in these respects.

There is an easy fix for all of that, but it will never happen because just like our election system is broke (by design), so is the process of buying political influence.

***Congressional term limits.***

Implement term limits, and the political dynasties, the pay to play schemes you have today, will mostly end. You might actually get elected folks that represent “the people,” but no one in Congress wants that. The probability of term limits ever passing, is about as likely as Congress forgoing on a self given pay raise in a recession.

Most folks in Congress become very wealthy while in office, even if their tax return says otherwise (they hide it, legally). Most become literal millionaires or even billionaires off their “public servants” salaries. Likewise, the folks buying the politicians want someone they can buy/influence and they prefer the stability/continuity the current system provides.

What that creates is a US Congress quite literally for sale to the highest bidder and it is why when it comes to policy making our government usually favors the interests of a small elite (i.e. our government behaves like an oligarchy): https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746