Vladimir Gusinsky and Mikhail Lesin were two influential Russian media figures involved in the post-Soviet media landscape. Gusinsky, a prominent media mogul and founder of the NTV television network, had a contentious relationship with the Kremlin and ultimately fled Russia.Lesin, a former press minister and media advisor to the Kremlin, was instrumental in shaping the state-controlled media and played a key role in developing the industry. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
Here’s a breakdown of their roles and interactions:
Media Mogul:Gusinsky was a highly successful businessman who founded NTV, the first major independent television network in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Controversial Figure:His media outlets were critical of the government, leading to ongoing conflict with the Kremlin and President Vladimir Putin.
Fled Russia:After facing criminal charges and pressure from the government, Gusinsky was forced to flee Russia in 2000.
Later Life:He continued to be involved in media, though his influence in Russia diminished.
Government Official and Advisor:Lesin served as Russia’s Minister of Press, Television, and Radio, and later as an advisor to President Putin.
Shaped State Media:He played a significant role in establishing and controlling state-aligned media, often working to consolidate power and promote the Kremlin’s agenda.
Controversial Figure:Like Gusinsky, Lesin was a complex and controversial figure, with critics accusing him of suppressing media freedom.
Mysterious Death:Lesin died in 2015 under circumstances that remain debated, with some sources attributing his death to natural causes and others suggesting foul play.
Gusinsky and Lesin’s paths crossed when Lesin was in a position of power within the government and Gusinsky was a target. Lesin was instrumental in the crackdown on independent media, including NTV, and ultimately contributed to the decline of Gusinsky’s media empire.
In essence, Gusinsky represented the struggle for independent media in Russia, while Lesin represented the state’s efforts to control the narrative. [1, 26, 27, 28]
https://x.com/mikenov/status/1965116765475574234
How far did the Gusinsky’s money and connections, with the FBI especially, go in the cover up of the true cause of death: Lesin was severely beaten up and his neck was broken?
Was his friend Charles McGonigal involved?
Who else? https://share.google/aimode/m4is6S48SjesaT09U Murder of Mikhail Y. Lesin: the hyoid neck bone was broken
The potential perpetrators are selected, programmed, and “egged on” by these Intelligence Services, which may be closely related to the Organized Crime, the various Mafias.
Statistical correlation between the frequency, intensity, and mortality of the mass killings and the specific geopolitical events supports the Intelligence Services hypothesis.
AI Overview
Studies on mass killings have identified correlations between their frequency, intensity, and mortality and specific geopolitical events or conditions, potentially supporting a hypothesis that links these phenomena. Here’s a summary of the findings:
Risk Factors and Mass Killings: Research identifies specific factors that can heighten the risk of mass killings. These include, but are not limited to, geopolitical instability, a decline in democratic freedom, the presence of ongoing conflicts, and discrimination against certain groups. The Early Warning Project utilizes statistical models to assess the risk of new mass killings based on these factors.
Mass Killings are Rare, but the Risk Factors Persist: While mass killings are statistically rare, occurring in only a small percentage of countries annually, the Early Warning Project notes that a few countries consistently face high risk due to these factors. This suggests that the underlying conditions can be persistent.
Geopolitical Dynamics and Mass Atrocities: Research highlights that geopolitical dynamics, alongside factors like radicalization and nationalism, can exacerbate the risk of mass atrocities. Geopolitical events and tensions can fuel terrorist narratives and recruitment efforts, further potentially contributing to violence and extremism.
Limitations of Current Models: It’s important to note that predictive models like the Early Warning Project’s focus on intrastate mass killings and may not encompass all forms of mass violence, such as civilian fatalities in interstate conflicts. These models are also correlational, meaning they identify associations but don’t establish causality.
Ongoing Research and the Need for Better Data: Continued research is crucial to fully understand the relationship between mass killings and geopolitical events. There’s a particular need for more in-depth analysis of the proximate drivers and triggers of mass violence.
In conclusion, a growing body of research supports the existence of statistical correlations between mass killings and specific geopolitical events and conditions. While models can identify countries at risk, further investigation is needed to fully understand the causal mechanisms and develop effective prevention strategies.
“Reports by US intelligence and research organizations often highlight correlations between mass killings and geopolitical events, though they may not always explicitly state a “hypothesis” in the way a scientific paper would”.
“Some sources suggest a relationship between geopolitical events and the risk of mass killings and atrocities, which might align with an Intelligence Services hypothesis.”
Full article: The Relationship between Violent Political Rhetoric and Mass Shootings
The “egging on” can be performed online or by the special (including unsuspecting and unaware) handlers, specifically trained for these purposes. These handlers can be the family members or the “loved ones”, and their influence can be complex, not just one-dimensional.
Radford “described the loved one [whom he lost – M.N.] as a safe haven and someone who cared deeply about his present and future.”
More details and particulars are needed in his case.
This is a rare case when the perpetrator was left alive, and all the circumstances have to be studied carefully, as they may have clues to the problem and the process of the mass shootings in general.
The possibility of the two or more shooters, with the “designated perpetrator” acting as a patsy and subsequently killed by these shooters – controllers, sometimes with killed by them victims, has to be considered also. The FBI does not pay enough attention to this hypothesis, in my opinion.
Mass Shootings as the Message Delivery System: Fort Stewart – Steward (GS):
The “three-way bargain” hypothesis.
Recent news reports suggest a different dynamic regarding the relationship between Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Benjamin Netanyahu, and the possibility of a “three-way bargain”:
Recent news reports suggest a different dynamic regarding the relationship between Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Benjamin Netanyahu, and the possibility of a “three-way bargain”:
Differing Agendas: There is no evidence of a “three-way bargain” involving the annexation of Gaza in exchange for a pro-Russian realignment of Ukraine.
Gaza and Ukraine Treated Separately: Recent discussions indicate that Gaza and Ukraine are being addressed as distinct issues in the context of international diplomacy.
Trump and Putin’s Relationship: While a meeting between Trump and Putin has been suggested to discuss Ukraine, there is no evidence to suggest it involves a deal for Gaza annexation.
Netanyahu and Gaza: Netanyahu faces internal and external pressure regarding Israel’s actions in Gaza, and annexation remains a possibility. However, there is no indication it is linked to a deal on Ukraine’s alignment with Russia.
Trump’s Focus on Ukraine: Reports highlight Trump’s desire for a quick resolution to the war in Ukraine and the imposition of sanctions on Russia if progress isn’t made.
In conclusion, the idea of a “three-way bargain” seems to be a speculative claim without supporting evidence. The leaders are currently involved in separate discussions concerning Gaza and Ukraine, and their respective agendas do not appear to be intertwined in the manner suggested by the “bargain” theory.
–
In the first Google AI note on “Samentrio name meaning” the connection with the name Samuel was present, and later it was omitted.
The name Radford, of Old English origin, generally means “from the reedy ford” or “red ford”, referring to a shallow river crossing. It can also be interpreted as a place name, specifically designating a ford near red soil or a ford that can be crossed on horseback.
Also:
“Rad” in Russian means: “Glad”.
and the “Radford” allusions to Redford – the actor is evident.
The overall interpretation of the telling name
Quornelius Samentrio Radford:
The (geopolitical) Power (Quornelius, “horn” – “Взять быка за рога”, the power of taking the bull by its horns”
belongs to the same trio – Samentrio: Trump, Putin, Netanyahu. Just like the Biblical prophet Samuel, it signifies the transition of the modern Israel to the fully fledged State entity.
Radford: Glad – “Rad” is the Fort – ford! This is the crossing for them (Redford like actors): from the Trump’s low approval ratings to the higher ground, and for Putin (another Redford like actor) to solution on Ukraine. And of course for Netanyahu, it is his political salvation via the Gaza annexation.
The allusion to the name Ratcliffe is also present, with the sub-allusion of the rats on the cliff vs rats crossing the fort – ford.
The Power belongs to the same trio of actors, but behind them is the Power of Samuel! This is the message of the Fort Stewart (shooting).
This interpretation suggests the hypothetical role of Mossad in this incident. It loves the Biblical references, and the overall meaning fits their conceptual philosophy.
On the basis of the chronological comparison of the incidents of the mass killings as the messages, the hypothesis can be formed that they are the dueling and competing series of arguments between the two leading contenders for the roles of the Stewards: these two frenemies are the GRU and the Mossad.
The FBI should explore this hypothesis, if they have some intelligence and broad outlook in their usual and so easy and undemanding tunnel vision approach. They need a collective brain transplant.
Some final notes on the stylistic and differentiating aspects of the GRU vs Mossad hypothetical messages: these differences are present, they are complex, and they should be professionally and carefully studied.
To FBI – #FBI, Kash Patel – #KashPatel#MassShootings: There is a pressing need to look into this issue: “Mass shootings as the Message Delivery System orchestrated by the Intelligence Services”. In my opinion, the GRU and the Mossad are in the front row of suspects. See… pic.twitter.com/38pLk0hmgB
Fort Stewart shooting suspect was relentlessly mocked for stutter, soldiers say | Georgia | The Guardian https://t.co/jcpE9Es16j M.N.: It is more complex than the simple teasing. “The battalion’s commander, Lt Col Mike Sanford, said on Thursday that he’s unaware of any problems…
_(cropped).jpg/500px-Saul_and_the_Witch_of_Endor_(Stom%2C_1635)_(cropped).jpg)
