Is the Moscow terror attack actually a Putin false-flag operation?

The focal point of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggressive war against Ukraine has now shifted to Moscow’s Crocus City Hall.

Although ISIS claimed responsibility for the concert shooting that resulted in 133 deaths and 140 injuries, the Kremlin is suggesting that Kyiv may be to blame.

It’s uncertain whether ISIS was actually involved, and if not, it’s likely that the Federal Security Service (FSB) was behind the attack.

ISIS often takes credit for attacks they did not commit to enhance their reputation and influence.

Given the heavily guarded nature of Moscow, it seems unlikely that ISIS could have orchestrated such an attack in the city.

The concert venue that was devastated is located only 14 miles away from the Kremlin and the FSB’s headquarters at Lubyanka Square.

Putin’s response and accusations following the attack raise suspicions and provide insights into the situation.

In an address to the Russian people, he claimed that the perpetrators were attempting to escape to Ukraine, where they were assisted in crossing the border.

However, there are doubts about Putin’s claims, given his past behavior.

Previous incidents involving Putin suggest a pattern of exploiting attacks to further his political agenda.

Putin used bombings in 1999 to justify a second invasion of Chechnya and solidify his power as Russia’s president.

Most analysts believe he was behind those attacks, leading to concerns about similar tactics being used again.

The potential for a similar false-flag operation is high, with Putin potentially trying to manipulate US intelligence to confirm ISIS’s involvement.

The US embassy’s warning about an impending attack in Moscow and Putin’s dismissive response hint at possible deception by the FSB.

This could be a new tactic to divert attention and justify further military actions in Ukraine.

A meeting with Palestinian leaders in Moscow prior to the attack raises questions about possible involvement of hired Arab gunmen disguised as ISIS militants.

The lack of security at the venue and delayed response by Russian forces suggest a potential facilitation of the attack by the FSB.

The aftermath of the attack, including alleged torture of ISIS terrorists, may be a diversion tactic by Putin.

His motives likely revolve around justifying continued aggression in Ukraine and rallying support for the war effort.

Despite Putin’s attempts at deception, the truth behind the attack is crucial for understanding the situation in Ukraine.

Mark Toth, a national security and foreign policy writer, and Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Sweet, with 30 years of military intelligence experience, contributed to this analysis.