West Desperately Deflects as Ukraine’s ISIS Gambit Backfires

By SIMPLICIUS THE THINKER    27 March 2024

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But getting back.

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

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

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

Here’s one in-depth theory as to how it likely really happened:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read the final bolded part again.

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

CONTINUE READING