Last Friday, while I have having our bi-weekly "vidchat" for this website's member-subscribers, one of the participants informed us that Mr. Boris Nemtsov, a principal opponent of Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, was gunned down in Red Square in Moscow, in the sight of the Kremlin walls and of St. Basil's Cathedrial. I did not have time then to comment, but it was the almost universal consensus of those of us in the vidchat that the act was not coming from Mr. Putin. Then, within a few minutes, the same individual who was following the story informed us that Mr Putin had taken personal control of the investigation within minutes after the assassination. After the vidchat was done, I quickly recorded a News and Views from the Nefarium (for Feb 27, 2015), without having had time to watch any of the news coverage. I predicted then that the whole thing would be blamed on Mr. Putin, and used as yet another example of his "thuggish ways." Well, if Mr. Putin is a thug, then he appears to have departed from his standard modus operandi, which in the past - if we are to believe the "Putin professionals" of the West - has been simply to "imprison enemies on trumped up charges after a show trial." You know, the standard sort of Neo-Brezhnev approach, rather than a Stalinesque purge complete with Lavrenty Beria and the appropriate wetwork.
But now the story is beginning to evolve a bit (as they always do). Mr. T.M. sent this one, and its worth consideration in the light of today's "high octane speculation":
The meat of this short article is here:
"There is no doubt that the crime was meticulously planned, as well as the place chosen for the murder," the powerful Investigative Committee, which has been put in charge of the probe, said in its first detailed statement on the drive-by shooting of the 55-year-old politician.
"Investigators said they believed Nemtsov was shot in the back from a car using a Makarov pistol, used by the Russian military and police."
It goes on to point out that his murderers knew of his movements. What is more interesting however is that Mr. Nemtsov was scheduled to be a key speaker at an anti-Putin demonstration that was scheduled a few days after his murder. In this respect it is worth nothing that Mr. Nemtsov held a post as governor of the Nizhny Novgorod oblast and also as a deputy prime minister during the Yeltsin years(see Russian opposition politician Boris Nemtsov was shot to death in central Moscow late Friday).
So, what are we to make of this, one week later? Today, as a week ago, there are but two choices here: (1) Mr. Putin and/or his allies planned and carried out the murder to rid themselves of a nuisance, or (2) it was a false flag provocation-event designed to embarass Mr. Putin's government, perhaps the first of a series of covert operations designed to weaken and eventually overturn his government. In other words, it was a deliberately conceived operation designed to be one component of the "covert operations/regime change" game played in Russia itself.
We can dispense with the first alternative almost immediately, for it makes almost no sense from any point of view one might choose to examine it. For Mr. Putin's government, Nemtsov was almost a non-entity, for Mr. Putin himself is immensely popular among Russians according to recent polls, some of which have him at over 80% approval rating. Stop and ponder that one for a moment, and compare it to your local Kanzler, Prime Minister, or sock-puppet president. Additionally, as noted above, outright direct assassination has not typically been the way Mr. Putin has operated. Nor did he need to here, for as noted, Mr. Nemtsov and the anti-Putin opposition in Russia is for the moment a negligible force. More importantly, Mr. Putin has nothing to gain by such an operation and everything to lose. He would gain nothing but the permanent removal of a relatively unimportant political opponent, while gaining the ire of the West, for he would only provide confirmation to the Western media which has been consistently trying to portray him as nothing but a common thug, a kind of Russian Mafia Capo.
I lean, therefore, one week later, where I leaned last week: this is an event - a provocation and a false flag - designed not for Russian audiences but for western ones, and may be - and I certainly think it is - the first of possibly many more such "incidents" that might be in the works to de-stablize Russia and bring about "regime change" and "democracy" in Russia. Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts certainly is thinking along these lines:
The problem here, as I suggested above, is that if the West has reached the point of such transparent desperation as to resort to "wet work" on one of their own "assets," then the real goal here is not any immediate propaganda gain (indeed, in my polling of personal friends since Mr. Nemtsov's murder, no one, absolutely no one believes that Mr. Putin nor any agency of the Russian state had anything to do with it, and, by the same token, everyone I polled thinks the West, and principally America, had something to do with it). So if the propaganda gain is not the issue here, then what is? I strongly suspect that it is to create instability, to portray Mr. Putin's government to the Russians as weak and ineffective, and therefore, that more such operations are probably already carefully planned. In short, we are in a hot war, being fought by proxies and covert operations, and as I've consistently tried to warn the nutjobs in charge of the west, covert operations of this sort are a game two people can play. How Mr. Putin responds to all of this remains to be seen... What to expect?
Expect the unexpected...
See you on the flip side...