First oddity: The U.S. Embassy warned Russia on the night of March 7-8 that terrorists were preparing for an attack. Putin ridiculed the American warnings and then ignored them. It is known that one of the attackers conducted reconnaissance at Crocus the day before the US Embassy's warning about the attack: the terrorist was then captured by cameras.
If the Kremlin, despite the warnings, did not even suspect the terrorists' plans, then this is the biggest failure of the Russian security services in recent years.
The second oddity: Special forces took too long to arrive at the scene of the terrorist attack. The Rosgvardeys arrived at the scene of the terrorist attack almost an hour after it began. During this time, the terrorists could have escaped, which they did. The firefighters could not begin to fully extinguish the fire, as they were waiting for the special forces to clear the area.
The third oddity: Official Kremlin statements. While the fire in Crocus City Hall had not even been extinguished yet, Russian authorities blamed Ukraine for the terrorist attack with absolutely no evidence. Despite the fact that the suspects in the terrorist attack turned out to be Tajik citizens associated with ISIS, and the group itself claimed responsibility, the Kremlin has not given up on the "Ukrainian trace". Although this version is so untenable that even in Putin's entourage do not believe in it, it fits perfectly into the overall picture of Russian propaganda designed to demonize Ukraine. The investigation itself and official statements by the authorities have been adjusted to this version, and Russian propagandists have been instructed to disseminate it as much as possible in the media. According to the Kremlin's logic, by blaming Ukraine for this barbaric terrorist attack, it will be able to rally Russians to facilitate the upcoming mobilization. It is also worth noting that Putin did not address the nation on the day of the attack, but only almost 24 hours later. The Kremlin spent almost a full day looking for any evidence of Ukraine's involvement, but failed to find any.
The fourth oddity: The route of the terrorists. The alleged perpetrators of the terrorist attack did not change their car when they escaped, even though it had already been flagged. This made their escape virtually impossible. Armed men, having left Moscow, could easily hide in a forest belt in the Moscow region, after which they could change vehicles several times. However, they did not do this and decided to break through to the border in a car, which the law enforcement officers were looking for according to their orientation cards.
The terrorists drove through the Moscow region on one of the main highways at a speed of 50 kilometers per hour. They were stopped only after 300 kilometers. Why were they allowed to get so far away?
Putin claims that the terrorists initially broke through to the Ukrainian border because there was a window open for them there. Later, Lukashenko, the dictator of Belarus, made Putin's version null and void, saying that the Crocus attackers "could not enter" Belarus because of the reinforced border, so they headed toward Ukraine. That is, they did not plan to go to Ukraine from the beginning, which is logical: everything is booby-trapped and unsafe there, while in Belarus, given the open border with Russia, it's faster and easier to get there. There is also a variant that the terrorists got lost and went wherever they were going, although, given that the attack itself was well-planned, the escape plan should be planned as well.
Fifth oddity: The reaction of the Russian authorities to the terrorist attack. Russian security services missed the preparation of the attack, failed to prevent it or to eliminate the terrorists at the scene of the crime. It is not known where the terrorists got the weapons and how many of them there actually were.
The suspects were subjected to cruel torture - the ear of one of the alleged terrorists was cut off and forced to eat it, another suspect was tortured by electrocution, bringing wires to his genitals. It is no secret that Russian security forces torture people, but in the past they tried to do it secretly.
The leak of this shocking footage was a show and a concerted effort to intimidate not so much real terrorists as anti-war Russians in the Russian Federation. Arson attacks on military recruitment centers, sabotage of railroads and other violent methods of disobedience are considered terrorism by the Russian authorities. The publication of the torture footage was met with a wave of positive comments on the Russian Internet, suggesting that it was also an element of psychological gratification for Russians who demanded brutal punishment of terrorists.
In addition, after the terrorist attack, the abolition of the moratorium on the death penalty was actively discussed in Russia, which may signal the beginning of a new round of repression.
Conclusion: At the moment, the terrorist attack in Crocus leaves more questions than answers. One thing is known: the Kremlin was unable or unwilling to prevent it, although it had every chance. Now Putin wants to use the terrorist attack to fuel anti-Ukrainian hysteria and rally his supporters. The official version of the Russian authorities does not inspire any confidence.
