Baltimore Bridge Collapse Linked to Moscow Massacre?

Connecting the dots

On March 22, gunmen massacred at least 137 people Crocus Hall massacre in Moscow. Russian president Vladimir Putin blames the US and its Ukrainian/ISIS proxies.

Four days later, on March 26, the container ship Dali slammed into the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. According to the BBC:

Then at 01:25 MarineTraffic data shows that the ship suddenly diverted from its straight course and began to slow down.

Around this time, video shows that all lights on the exterior of the ship suddenly went out and smoke began emanating from the ship's funnel.

Shortly afterwards it hit the bridge.

Western mainstream media, which normally blame Russia for nearly everything, immediately shot down the too-obvious possibility of a Russian cyber-attack on the ship and bridge. Such an attack might seem to be a natural act of retaliation for the Crocus Hall massacre—and the many other US-sponsored attacks inside Russia that Scott Ritter says have brought us to the edge of nuclear World War III.

While online influencers like Andrew Tate and Alex Jones raised the obvious questions, MSM pushed back with with articles like “Baltimore bridge collapse sparks baseless attack theories.”

Even American MSM, whose primary job is to run interference for Israeli genocide, couldn’t ignore the voices on social media fingering Israel as a likely suspect in the bridge collapse:

…some accounts are linking the tragedy to the United States' abstention in a UN Security Council vote calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza war.

"Did Israel just hit the US over not using the Veto power yesterday??" one account said in a post with thousands of interactions.

The MSM attack on “conspiracy theories” around the Baltimore bridge collapse echoes earlier attacks on Putin’s “conspiracy theories” blaming Ukraine and the US for the Moscow attack. Just as the MSM tells us that the JFK coup was merely a random shooting by a deranged commie who got lucky, and the 9/11 coup was accomplished by incompetent coke-snorting stripper-loving jihadi hijackers who got even luckier, they are now telling us that the Crocus Hall massacre was done by random angry Muslim amateurs who were randomly offered $10,000 on Telegram to shoot up a concert hall.

And if you want to indulge in conspiracies about Crocus Hall, Brett Stephens of The New York Times tells us, there is only one acceptable way to do it: Blame Putin. Stephens opens with a classic false dichotomy fallacy:

There are two plausible hypotheses regarding Friday’s terrorist attack at a concert hall outside Moscow, in which at least 139 people were killed. The first is that it was an inside job — orchestrated by Russian security services, or at least carried out with their foreknowledge.

The second is that it wasn’t.

In open societies, conspiracy theories are for cranks. In closed societies, they’re a reasonable (if not always correct) way to understand political phenomena.

As neocon liar Stephens knows, there are far more than two “plausible hypotheses” about the Moscow and Baltimore attacks. The most plausible, and most obvious, hypothesis about the Crocus Hall massacre is that it, like almost everything attributed to “ISIS”, was a US-NATO-(neocon-Zionist) operation, as Vladimir Putin has opined and Pepe Escobar fleshed out in greater detail. If that is the case, then the destruction of the Baltimore Bridge—an important bit of American infrastructure whose loss will take a top-ten port out of operation indefinitely and gum up supply chains—looks, at first glance, suspiciously like retaliation.

But what about the other “retaliation” scenario: Israel, or rather Netanyahu’s faction, retaliating against the US for refusing to veto Monday’s UN Security Council ceasefire resolution? By gumming up supply chains and harming the US economy, Bibi would be punishing Biden politically and enhancing Trump’s chances in the November elections. He might also be sending a message heralding bigger and worse things to come if Biden continues to obstruct his plans to complete the genocide of Gaza and help people like Jared Kushner make a literal killing in real estate.

Alongside the Israel-did-Baltimore theory, we might throw in the parallel Israel-did-Moscow theory. This one is a bit more complex: The Israelis would have designed the operation to be blamed on ISIS-Ukraine-NATO with an eye to ramping up US-Russia tensions to distract from Gaza and derail the recent US move toward joining the world consensus by forcing Israel to withdraw. Under this scenario, Israel might have followed its attempt to make Russia believe it had been attacked by the US (Moscow) with an attempt to make the US believe it had been attacked by Russia (Baltimore). By pushing the nuclear superpowers to the edge of a nuclear World War III, and possibly over the edge, Bibi’s faction might hope to create so much chaos that “finishing the job in Gaza” would look like small potatoes compared to events elsewhere. Bibi might figure that if the US is desperately flailing to stop nuclear war, or involved in one and trying to keep it limited, “Biden” won’t be in any position to invest energy and political capital in saving the Gazans and removing Bibi from power.

This all may sound outlandish to the uninitiated. But there is ample historical precedent for Israel and its American agents whipping up US-vs.-Russia tensions, and repeatedly bringing the two nuclear superpowers to the verge of World War III, in order to distract from, and enable, the Zionist genocide of Palestine. For the full story, read Laurent Guyénot’s From Yahweh to Zion.

According to Guyénot, Israel orchestrated the assassination of John F. Kennedy in order to save its nuclear program and install its man, Lyndon Johnson, in the White House. The key plotter, CIA counterintelligence chief and de facto Mossad mole James Jesus Angleton, had an imposter posing as Lee Harvey Oswald appear to visit the KGB’s assassinations chief at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City shortly before the assassination. That allowed Lyndon Johnson, Allan Dulles, and other pro-assassination figures to persuade the non-complicit, including Chief Justice Earl Warren, that “if the truth comes out, it will be World War III.”

Guyénot argues that Israel opposed JFK’s moves to end the Cold War because it needed the distraction of US-vs.-Russia and US-vs.-Vietnam in order to get away with its 1967 war of aggression and subsequent land grab. Additionally, Russia had become a supporter of Arab causes including Palestine, so leading Jews suddenly abandoned Communism in favor of rabidly anti-Communist, ultra-Zionist neoconservatism.

After brandishing the specter of nuclear war to shut down any real investigation of the JFK assassination in 1963, Israel brought the US to within minutes of World War III in 1967 with its false flag attack against the USS Liberty spy ship. That attack, orchestrated with the complicity of then-president Johnson, was designed to be blamed on Egypt in order to bring the US into the war. According to Peter Hounem’s Operation Cyanide, nuclear-armed US bombers targeting Russian bases in Egypt were just a few minutes from no-recall range when the attack was called off due to the Liberty’s stubborn refusal to sink.

Guyénot’s suggestion that the whole Cold War was basically an Israeli-orchestrated distraction from the slow-motion genocide of Palestine may be an exaggeration. But he provides enough evidence to convince reasonable readers that the Israelis are not above stoking US-Russia conflict, right up to the edge of nuclear World War III, in pursuit of their Greater Israel project. It would, therefore, not be surprising if Israel were deliberately orchestrating or exacerbating the US war on Russia through Ukraine for its own advantage. Nor would it be surprising if Netanyahu’s faction, facing imminent demise in the form of a US order to stop or at least slow the genocide, might seek to ramp up US-Russia tension by orchestrating the recent disasters in Moscow and/or Baltimore.