Is Baltimore Bridge Retaliation For Crocus?

And will this lead to nuclear war?

Mar 31, 2024

There’s a lot about this subject of the bridge collision in Baltimore, Maryland (MD) the media aren’t talking about.

Would it surprise you to find out there are a lot of military bases near the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore?

Some names you will probably immediately recognise. For example, Fort Detrick (also known as ‘United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases’ or USAMRIID for short), is a mere hour’s drive from the bridge:

Fort Detrick deals in biowarfare. It holds the ire of both Russia and China, who suspect their involvement in SARS-CoV-2.

Fort Detrick has had lab leaks previously, including suspected anthrax leaks.

There are other areas of interest here — clearly a military target — but first, let us roll back the clock to ask, why does The Daily Beagle suspect this bridge collapse is retaliation for Crocus?

US And UK Embassy Issues A Suspect Warning

Back in March 7th, the US Embassy issued an oddly specific warning, telling Americans to avoid concert halls and Moscow specifically.

Ironically, The Daily Beagle was going to cover this to ask what on Earth the US government were planning prior to going on hiatus, however a single link and speculation does not make good journalistic reporting.

After the US government started taking heat for this obviously suspiciously specific warning, they started making the webpage unavailable for archiving, citing “technical difficulties”:

The UK Embassy parroted the warning on March 8th, although they seem to have since scrubbed this warning, the Independent reported on it at the time:

The Terrorist Arrives On The Same Day As The Warning

The Russians published evidence showing that the terrorist involved in the shooting at Crocus hall, had arrived at the scene of the crime, to scope it out, on the same date the US Embassy issued their warning:

The attack didn’t take place on this day. This was the planning stages. How did the US have foreknowledge of the planning of the attack? Obviously, the Russians find this extremely suspicious, as anybody would. Even Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic found it suspicious.

Russian Politicians Vow Retaliation For Anyone Involved In Crocus

To say Crocus is something of a sore point for Russia is a major understatement. The closest analogy for America, is this is Russia’s version of 9/11 (minus the ‘false flag’ connotations). The same political fervor and outrage permeates. Nothing sums it up better than this quote:

Kill them all!
— Dmitry Medvedev

These calls include the demand to reinstate the death penalty, which has been suspended since the 1990s in Russia. They are extremely angry.

The ties to the Ukrainians almost immediately fell out. Screenshots of recruitment notices were published, along with declarations finances and cryptocurrency from Ukraine had financed the terrorists.

The suspects had purportedly confessed they did the attack in exchange for money (purportedly half a million rubles), although the confession was obtained under physical beating and torture. Western media have tried to spin it as an ISIS terrorist attack, however, as noted, they tried to flee to Ukraine, and did not commit ‘suicidal Jihad’ like you would expect of ISIS-related terrorist attacks.

Given Ukraine is flat-broke, the only way they could have money to hire what is a senseless attack on innocent civilians, is via US financing. Indeed, days before the attack, on March 12th, the US DoD managed to sneak in an extra $300 million weapons package to Ukraine. The attack occurred on 22nd March.

Even The ISIS Misdirect Is Connected To Ukraine

Even now, Wikipedia misleadingly, without evidence, claims it is an attack by the Islamic State.

Even if the thin veneer was true, it is known IS fighters work for Ukraine (their flags can be seen on their troops, as highlighted below).

The Independent even did a rag piece about how ISIS ‘leaders’ were “fleeing” to Ukraine:

Except this article is from 2019. Meaning Ukraine were already housing ISIS before the war even began. Oops.

Radio Free Europe, a CIA financed media organisation, came to the defence of the terrorists by bewailing their supposed mistreatment at the hands of Russian forces.

Bearing in mind these people shot innocent civilians, before running over the leg of a child and causing a building to collapse on the people inside, the genocide-enabling CIA and the journalist shooting US government are hardly ones to talk, and serves to reinforce suspicions the Americans were involved in the Crocus attacks.

Based on the above, we can conclude the Crocus attack is Ukrainian financed, however Ukraine has shown deference to the US in regards to all attacks, meaning the US must have greenlighted this Ukrainian financed attack. Naturally, the Russians are pissed.

At America.

Demonstrating Baltimore Bridge Is Viably An Attack

Now we have motive — an act of war on their home soil against innocent civilians — we have to establish means. Firstly, to get the elephant out of the room, the Dali — the ship that crashed into the Francis Scott Key bridge…

…is captained by a Ukrainian called Sergei.

And the ship was carrying hazardous materials in containers. The Daily Beagle predicted this ship was carrying hazardous materials once we realised that Baltimore was a hub for military logistics.

Locals gave the rumour that hazardous materials were transported over the Francis Scott Key bridge, and not via the tunnel due to risks (namely, toxic gases spilling out and killing everyone in the tunnel due to an accident). So taking out the bridge is a military strategic move preventing the transport of hazardous material goods to Ukraine via Baltimore.

Chemical Weapons Are Based In Baltimore

We can reinforce this with several key points. Firstly, Aberdeen Proving Ground, host to the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Activity, deals with chemical weapons (which they claim to simply ‘destroy’ rather than make). It is a mere 47 minutes away from the collapsed bridge where locals rumoured hazardous materials are transported for the military:

The destruction of the bridge actually cuts off Aberdeen Proving Ground from the US Naval Academy, forcing a detour through the city. Which is not somewhere chemical materials (or weapons) ought to go.

If we couple this with the recent approval of the Pentagon to finance weapons in Ukraine back in March 12th, we can conclude the materiel (weapons’ supplies) for Ukraine has to ship from somewhere. Baltimore is the logical choice.

Indeed, the media are already trying to run a story that the ship is sitting above a mysteriously convenient gas mains as an excuse if it blows up. It is more likely the ship is carrying explosive materials (destined for war) that could go off at any time.

One is reminded of the Halifax explosion of 1917 that destroyed a town and killed many people when the ship, carrying war munitions during WW1, detonated, and that ship is far smaller than the Dali. The Dali is located near a city, we hate to think of the consequences.

Military Transport Targets

Baltimore is also host to several US Navy ‘Ready Reserve Force’ (RRF) transport vessels, namely Antares and Denebola:

They’re presently both trapped in port, which again, is another military strategic win if this is an attack:

Bioweapons Facilities Nearby As Well

As earlier mentioned, Fort Detrick is one, but there are others, such as Walter Reed National Military Medical Center:

If this sounds familiar, we mentioned Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in our article exposing Ian Copeland’s ties to the US Army. Specifically, we highlighted Walter Reed's involvement — and thus the US army — in the mass manufacturing of the SARS-CoV-2 poison shots.

They engaged in some bizarre research involving a “spike ferritin nanoparticle”:

[…] the PBF [Pilot Bioproduction Facility] staff threw themselves into their work, working around the clock to oversee the completion of building renovations, the calibration and qualification of equipment according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s current good manufacturing practices and development of a manufacturing process for WRAIR’s COVID-19 vaccine, known as spike ferritin nanoparticle

More on that topic at the original Daily Beagle article. Suffice to say, bioweapons research is occurring here. Again, making this area a valid military target.

Could The Attack Have Happened?

Absolutely, yes, and we bring receipts.

First, let us examine the reported symptomology, and combine that with some naval knowledge. CNN reported the lights flickered before it veered off course.

Sky News reported something vaguely similar, but instead of ‘lights flickering’, they claimed it ‘lost power’ (they didn’t specify how they knew this) and that it started smoking:

The Daily Beagle knows from study and analysis that lights cannot just “lose power” on a ship. All ships must have emergency power systems (it is a requirement), meaning even if the mains generator malfunctioned (to the point of the engine room billowing smoke), the lights should not have flickered.

Backup power can be as advanced as a separate generator, and as simple as lithium-ion backup batteries installed locally on each lighting installation.

We have no reason to doubt the visual evidence and reporting, so our question then becomes, what caused the lights to flicker?

Hacking

The lights might have back-up power, but they must always respond to computer commands, and therefore can be ordered to turn off. This is the only reasonable way for the lights to turn-off despite having in-built backup power systems.

Can ship’s navigation systems be hacked? They absolutely can.

War on the Rocks, which discusses national security and military related topics, reported back in 2021 about the Hack the Sea Village “SeaTF” hacking challenge, where hackers would dive into the deep end of maritime (sea) vessels’ systems, specifically with a focus on navigation, steering and throttle controls.

The winning team had no experience with maritime systems.

The winning team had neither experience in the simulated environment or in maritime hacking in general

Meaning an ‘unskilled’ attacker could easily take over a maritime vessels’ navigation and steering systems. German hackers had already demonstrated this capability remotely back in 2017, hijacking a container ship’s navigation systems for 10 hours.

Experts back in 2017 remarked that:

[…] in their opinion the case serves as a "pre-warning", about what will happen in the future of shipping […]

Unsurprisingly, the ships run the horribly insecure Windows Operating System, and no lessons were learned.

War on the Rocks issued a similar ‘obvious in hindsight’ statement, by pointing out maritime chokepoints were ideal targets (emphasis added):

The vast bulk of the world’s critical economic and military traffic passes through a handful of narrow strategic waterways known as “maritime chokepoints.” While these waterways have always been prey to pirates, weather, and maritime accidents, these perils are now joined by maritime cyber attacks […]

A study, titled “Case Study of a Cyber-Physical Attack Affecting Port and Ship Operational Safety”, written in 2022, echoed a similar dire warning:

[…] using real data and lab equipment to create an awareness raising, but plausible, scenario, where hijacking a large container ship’s rudder while it enters a port can block the entrance and effectively reduce cargo throughput. […]

In their mind, the ship would simply rotate and block ingress and egress for a few hours. No-one could conceive of the hijacked ship being used to ram an object, and it appears the bridge builders also overlooked this possible scenario.

Ramming Speed

Container ships are vast monstrosities in size, often eclipsing even small skyscrapers horizontally. It is evident the designers of the Francis Scott Key bridge did not anticipate the possibility of a container ship ramming — even in an accidental scenario — given how threadbare the supports look:

They might look big to you, but they’re smaller than a Roll-on, Roll-off (RoRo) ferry:

…and a Roll-on, Roll-off ferry is much smaller than a large container ship, which you can tell by the fact the container ship absolutely eclipses the structural support base:

What is noticeable — and lends further credence that this is a strike — is the ship rammed into the structural support head-on, making what is clearly a direct hit.

Normally when large ships lose control, they drift and move sideways, as the sides of the ship are larger, impacted by wind and underwater currents. They don’t just point in a specific direction and then plough directly into a thing. Even if power was lost, the rudder would not suddenly change direction.

What do we make of this?

Control was lost, 2 minutes within approach of a bridge, as lights with back-up power went out, in a ship captained by a Ukrainian — from a country implicated in a terrorist attack — carrying hazardous materials from an area that is a hive of military activity, that ends up directly ramming a critical vulnerability on a bridge that serves as the main access point for military supply ships and carry-over of hazardous materials…

…during a period of minimal bridge activity, in a country recently implicated as causing terrorist action against another nation state. Even General Flynn called it a “black swan event”, raising eyebrows at the suspicious nature.

We call this an attack. The US government is desperate this narrative does not emerge…

[…] the White House and federal government agencies have been quick to declare this was not a terror attack.
— ZeroHedge

…Why? It will mean one thing…

Formal Declaration Of War

Russia exchanging an attack on their home soil with an attack on American soil isn’t surprising, but it does mean we have crossed the rubicon and are now in direct conflict, with a death spiral towards nuclear war.

Extremely important to this context is Germany is trying to build up a flimsy pretext for sending NATO troops to Ukraine by falsely claiming Russia retaliating wouldn’t constitute an Article 5 breach, lowering the threshold for direct war significantly.

However, Russian President Putin has made it very clear they will not restrict their combat to just Ukraine if other powers get involved.

If F-16s are used against the Russian Armed Forces from airfields in third countries, then these airfields will become a legitimate target for the Russian Federation
— Intel Slava Z

The German parliament report cynically omits what would happen if Russia were to directly bomb countries that get explicitly involved in Ukraine. The obvious conclusion is it would trigger Article 5. Meaning nuclear war.

One Last Plot Twist

The only thing to muddy the waters on The Daily Beagle’s theory is the presence of one specific agency in Maryland near to the bridge.

The National Security Agency based at Fort Meade. The NSA are infamous for causing such cyber disasters as ‘WannaCry’.

If one wanted to don their convoluted thinking cap, it could be the US caused the container ship to crash themselves, and then awaited journalistic reports highlighting how it is likely Russia’s response to Crocus, so they could justify war with Russia without them saying it themselves.

Strategic Overthinking

Whilst this could be a possibility, it likely attributes far too much intelligence to American strategic thinking, something they lack in recent years. The civilian casualties are also minimal, not a typical hallmark for US false flags. It is however a hallmark for Russian military activities.

It is more likely the US financed the Crocus shooting, to provoke a retaliation from Russia, that they could then justify a war upon. After all, remember this:

We think they finally have it.

The Daily Beagle

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?