The Kiev Regime Glories in Its Own False Flag as Western Media is Exposed as Totally Impotent

A false flag flying above a circus tent

In an age where many geopolitical observers have become accustomed to looking for signs of false flag attacks of one variety or another, the Kiev regime made this task all the more easy when regime officials admitted to staging a crude false flag regarding the “murder” of a Russian journalist in the Ukrainian capital who is in fact alive and well.

On the 29th of May, controversial journalist Arkady Babchenko was proclaimed dead by regime officials after being “shot in the back” while entering his apartment. Makeshift memorials had already gone up and pro-regime politicians were already accusing the Russian President of ordering the murder when Babchenko appeared at a press conference on the 30th where he admitted his complicity in staging a false flag designed to “entrap” the “real would-be killer”. Making things even more bizarre was the fact that Babchenko’s wife was apparently obvious to the hoax while regime officials claim they were inspired by fictional detective Sherlock Holmes when decided to execute the charade.

Kiev accidentally reveals the anatomy of a ‘false flag for dummies’

Apart from the clear comical value of the entire episode, the incompetence of the Kiev regime has helped to expose the anatomy of a false flag attack at such a rudimentary level that it actually proved to be highly instructive for all those trying to determine the provenance of more elaborate false flag attacks.

While regime spokesmen claim the false flag took months of planning, in reality it would appear that the entire thing could have and likely was staged in a matter of hours. All that was involved was having Babchenko lie down in a shirt spattered with fake blood while someone took a photo and after that, all he had to do was stay off-line and away from the public eye for a few hours while the regime pronounced him dead. Then a few hours later, he woke up and went before the cameras to announce it was all fake. Such a charade was hardly sophisticated in any way.

While the narrative regarding the alleged poisoning of Sergey and Yulia Skripal in England is filled with holes in respect of any hard evidence, any clear signs of a culprit and no clue as to any motive on the part of the alleged aggressor (the Russian state, if London is to be believed), it was nevertheless a far more elaborate episode than Babchenko’s “death and resurrection” in Kiev.

Thus far, the mainstream media has been negligent in failing to draw the obvious parallels between the ongoing Skripal narrative and the Babchenko hoax. In both cases, Russian born “dissidents” (in Sergey Skripal’s case an ex-traitor) in a foreign state were attacked with lethal force on the order of the Russian state. In both cases the “deadly” attack turned out to be the opposite of deadly as in Babchenko’s case no one was injured at all while the in the Skripal saga both alleged victims are now alive and well while un-evidenced tales of their injury leave more questions than answers.

Vindication of my Skripal theory 

There are many theories surrounding what may or may not have happened to Sergey and Yulia Skripal and this includes the official western narrative which remains frozen at the stage of speculation as no universally convincing legitimate evidence as to what actually happened has been proffered by those seemingly in a position to offer such evidence.

Thus, I offered a theory which contradicts the western narrative (‘the Skripals were poisoned by Russia with a deadly nerve agent that for some reason wasn’t deadly at all) and the official Russian narrative (something happened to the Skripals about which we have been told nothing and now both victims are being held by a foreign state against their will).

According to my theory Sergey Skripal was not a victim of a conspiracy but that instead he was a willing conspirator. It is my theory that in exchange for money, Skripal agreed to participate in a spectacle where he and his daughter would be given a light dose of an agent which would temporarily reduce their consciousness (e.g. put them to sleep) and then would disappear from all public life for a few months after. In the case of Yulia this would mean staying away from social media for several months even though this part may not have been fully thought through as it later emerged that her VK account was displayed as “on line” at a time when Yulia was allegedly incapacitated.

In exchange for taking the small non-lethal dose of what may have well been little more than a strong sleeping pill, he and his daughter would then be brought to a so-called safe house where they would live in comfort and isolation for several months while UK government ministers, the media and other regimes did their job in sowing a narrative that both Sergey and Yulia were poisoned by people working for the Russian state.

Of course, there is a chance that Yulia was a patsy used and abused by her father for these purposes, but the fact that the younger and “prettier” of the two “victims” is now posing for the camera after having previously complained on her VK account that she’s tired of not being married, would indicate that the apple didn’t fall far from the tree and that in exchange for money, VIP status and a new potentially more exciting life, Yulia joined her father in conspiring to create a spectacle to implicate Russia in a false flag attack.

Connecting the dots 

The Babchenko false flag and the Skripal incident clearly had the same goal – to portray Russia’s leaders as menacing global hitmen while portraying Russians with explicitly negative views about their homeland as the favourite targets of the “Russian state menace”.

In both cases, the “deadly” attack was not only far from deadly, but after the “attack” both Babchenko and Yulia Skripal came before the cameras to speak with an odd mixture of pride and pleasure regarding the “attack”.

Thus, the only significant differences between the Babchenko scandal and the Skripal scandal is that the alleged weapon of choice in both “attacks” was different and that while Babchenko has admitted collaborating with a foreign regime in an anti-Russian false flag, at this stage, the cooperation of the Skripals with a foreign regime in an anti-Russian false flag remains theoretical rather than clear beyond a reasonable doubt.


If false flags were films, the Babchenko saga was clearly a low budget spy film whose cast and crew were straight out of the drama club at a school for the mentally challenged. By contrast, the strange incident involving a Russian traitor and his daughter in England could be billed as Skripal Spielberg. However, the crude anatomy of the Kiev false flag must necessarily give one pause to reflect on whether both the western powers and Russia are proffering a false narrative. In other words, it is becoming increasingly clear that my own theory regarding the Skripals willingly participating in a false flag could highly likely be the theory which best reflects the facts of the Skripal saga. It is after all exactly what happened in Kiev over the pat 48 hours.

Comments are closed.