World War III may be ushered in by the Kremlin drone attack of May 3, 2023. However, this attack was staged, and then photoshopped. An attack on the Kremlin never took place !
Russia claims Ukraine attempted to assassinate Vladimir Putin. Assassinating a President is an Act of War, whether successful or not. This attack clears the way for Russia to declare war on Ukraine, and mobilize its entire population to conquer Ukraine. The US and Europe may then use their militaries to prevent this, which could start WWIII and a nuclear war.
While we are still a longways from this doomsday event, this attack has made a pathway to it.
The title picture is just one of the pieces of evidence to support the conclusions of this article. The picture shows a reflection in the window of a room that could well be the control room of the staged drone attack. The woman is holding something in her hand that looks to be a cell phone, and may have set off the explosion of the drone. She is illuminated by the explosion she is looking at, causing her reflection in the window.
The picture is from the best video of this drone attack. The full picture is displayed below. She is in the upper right of this picture. The best video can be found at: en.wikipedia.org/…
Also seen in the picture of the blue woman is a brown bulletin board in the background with various papers neatly pinned to it. In the left is a brown desk with a black computer monitor on it.
In the larger picture, there is another reflection of a desk with a computer monitor on the left.
If one listens carefully to the soundtrack of the video, one can hear something drop early on. Then, when the drone appears in the upper left, a short, low audible gasp can be heard. The gasp sounds like it is from a man.
Even though an explosion is heard in the video, one doesn’t hear it in the soundtrack. The control room must be soundproof, which is typical for control rooms.
In order for the people in the room to be ready to film the drone attack, as well as to set off the explosion, they had to know when the drone was coming. The only way they could have known this is for the attack to be staged.
There are three other videos of the drone attacks from the BBC — 2 from cell phones, and one from a camera. It is found at www.bbc.com/..., and contains a running commentary and the video discussed above. A picture from the other video camera is below, and shows the likely location of the control room.
There are over 10 pieces of evidence to support the claims of this article, including those above. Some of this evidence is presented below in outline format for ease of reference. There are two pictures that are annotated with numbers and letters that refer to the evidence below for ease of location. Two have been given above. The other is below.
1. Russia says that the drone was destroyed by its Air Defense. However, we don’t see any tracers, missiles, or anything else hitting the drone prior to its explosion. Russia also says the drone was destroyed by “electronic radar assets.” However, radar isn’t used to blow up drones. It is used to find drones. (Also, all radars are electronic.)
2. The drone got way too close to its target before exploding. If this was a real attack, then the drone should have been shot down well away from the Kremlin. Instead of a successful defense of the Kremlin, this appears to be a failure of Russian Air Defense.
3. Flags — the waving of the flags is inconsistent with the drone attack videos
A. The small flag flying on top of the Senatskaya Tower continues to wave the same way throughout the explosion, oblivious to the explosive forces. However, the nearby flag flying on top of the Senate dome stops waving just after the explosion.
B. The flag on top of the Senate dome should have been incinerated by the fireball, but it survived.
C. The Senate flag in the second BBC cell phone video is strongly waving after the explosion, despite something burning beneath the flag pole.
4. The drone is white in the best video. The drone should be black to avoid detection.
5. The drone looks like it is coming in for a landing instead of an attack. Just before the explosion, the drone has leveled out, and pulled slightly up from its prior trajectory.
6. The smoke from the explosion quickly dissipates and then the best video stops. The two cell phone videos show smoke rising from the direction of the Senate Building. One of these is from the same view as the best video of the drone attack. If this was a real drone attack, then there would be no need to stop the best video, nor to rely upon two cell phones for video of the smoke.
7. We aren’t shown any pictures or video of the damage from the drone attack, nor do we see the wreckage of the drone. In a real drone attack, we normally are shown the damage and the remains of the drone. But, Russia says no damage occurred, despite the videos of the smoke and something burning on top of the dome. If the drone attack was staged, then there shouldn’t be any damage, and Russia wouldn’t want to show the drone, or whatever was used to represent the drone.
8. The best video is said to be from a CCTV camera. However, there is no time and date stamp on the video. These are hallmarks of surveillance CCTV videos. Furthermore, the best video is slightly moving up and down and from right to left. Such movement is typical for a hand held camera, but not for a fixed CCTV camera. As described in the initial comments, the camera being used for the best video was from the likely control room, as opposed to a CCTV camera.
9. Russia needed 12 hours before posting the videos and making their claims. This provided them the time to edit and photoshop the videos.
10. The Institute of War (ISW) said that this 12 hours was fast for a Russian response. It normally takes at least 24 hours for them to respond to a surprise event. Partly based upon this comment, as well some other reasons (but no detailed analysis of the videos), they concluded that the drone attacks were staged. The ISW analysis and conclusion can be found at www.understandingwar.org/…, 2nd full paragraph.
Russia says that there were two drone attacks. The second attack is said to be shown in the second full video is in the BBC article. A picture of when the explosion is just occurring is shown earlier. There are workers in the right foreground of the picture (labeled W). In the video, the workers are moving around, and oblivious to the explosion that is occurring. This behavior is in contrast to the people in the best video. The two men climbing the ladder on the dome duck when the explosion occurs (labeled M). There is also someone walking or riding a bike in the bottom of the video (labeled P). They appear to stop and look up when the explosion occurs.
In this video, there are red circles showing the drone approaching. When these circles are blown up, there is nothing inside of them, just black.
As such, it is doubtful that this video shows an attack. Instead, it looks like this video has been photoshopped to show where Russia says there is a drone, and an explosion has been added to the video at the far left.
Please note that there is a long Twitter feed by Mark Krutov on May 3. It contains one of these circles with a small white mark in it. Unfortunately, the BBC video starts after this circle. There is also a picture of burn marks on the dome, which need more analysis.
There has been a lot of discussion in the media and elsewhere that the drone attack is a false flag attack. It doesn’t rise to this level, as no attack took place. The only support for an attack is Russia’s statement that the Kremlin was attacked. But Russia has made unfounded claims based upon false videos before. See www.cnn.com/…
All of the evidence presented above supports that NO drone attack occurred. Only a staged drone attack took place, and was a false attack.
It would be a great tragedy that a declaration of war on Ukraine would be made based upon a claim of an attack that never occurred. And this declaration could lead to WWIII and a potential nuclear war. But this war has been one of great tragedies.
Note: This update is to my earlier article on May 5 with a similar name. It reflects additional information, and my coming to the conclusion that the drone attack videos were both staged and photoshopped. I wish to thank all the commentators for their input, and especially to marlosan and Jay Cuasay for their insights and encouragement of a new writer. HLB