A tale of two conspiracies

'His investigative piece, published in the September American edition of GQ, challenges the official line on a series of bombings that killed hundreds of people in 1999 in Russia. It profiles a former KGB agent who spoke in great detail and on the record, at no small risk to himself. But instead of trumpeting his reporting, GQ's corporate owners went to extraordinary lengths to try to ensure no Russians will ever see it...

"Conde Nast management has decided that the September issue of U.S. GQ magazine containing Scott Anderson's article 'Vladimir Putin's Dark Rise to Power' should not be distributed in Russia," Birenz wrote.'

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112530364

Given that there was good evidence quoted in major publications at the time of the bombings to indicate that they were the work of agents provocateur, it has never ceased to amaze me how disinterested people are in this story.

9/11 truthism has never presented a shred of material evidence to support its case, not a single morsel of detonator nor whiff of explosive. It has presented no eyewitnesses to attest to any pre-rigged explosions. Not one of the hundreds or perhaps thousands who would have had to participate in a 9/11 scale plot have ever come forward to reveal their part in the dastardly plan. No one has ever explained how the US government could organise the huge logistics of doing this without leaving one single piece of concrete evidence. 9/11 truthism relies only on invented 'engineering truths' to support its contentions; and a demented hatred of the people they say did the evil deed.

The bombings in Russia on the other hand have all the pieces of evidence that 9/11 truthism does not. Criminal investigators at the apartment blocks were prevented from taking evidence of what kind of explosive were used in the bombings, in case the trail led back to the GRU (military intelligence). People involved in these 'dark' ops have come forward to talk of their participation in them, presumably after feeling a bit of guilt. The logistics of these ops was easily within the capability of the GRU, as the targets were the ultimate in soft targets. The Russian bombs would not have had to be a huge sophisticated demolition job, like a putative 9/11 set-up. Sergei Stepashin, Russian Interior and Prime Minister for most of 1999, is quoted in the Independent newspaper as saying that the plan to send the Russian army into Chechnya "had been worked out in March" 1999. The bombs went off in August and September of that year. A few medium sized bombs were enough to bring down the very poorly built Soviet-era apartment buildings. And once the finger of blame was pointed at the Chechens, Putin was pushing at an open door. Many Russians already despise Kavkaz- Caucasians like Chechens and are ready to believe pretty much anything evil about them.

Put into the context of all the other behaviour of the Putin regime since it came to power, it is completely credible that the bombings were a provocation to allow the KGB and the other security services to take over the apparatus of Russian government permanently. World reaction? Big yawn.