It's interesting that otherwise smart people here believe that it must be true because two anonymous and unverified sources also say it's true.
And this is purportedly intelligence information coming from the FSB! I mean, military intelligence, what could go wrong with trusting sensitive intelligence of an ongoing war that someone posted on Twitter or Facebook?
I don't consider myself super smart, but i read a lot of news on the non government controlled websites (vc.ru, tjournal.ru, exler.ru for instance), that usually have an audience that is more intelligent than the average population. The common motif from those who worked for the Russian authorities that this is indeed the case in various parts of the government, total corruption and incompetence and talented people usually don't stay long.
It also comes together with what we see about Russian army progress in Ukraine, looks like quite a failure considering how much armed forces they have.
Don't get me wrong, it definitely seems plausible. But wouldn't a disinformation tactic be to spread plausible but slightly distorted "insider info"?
I'm saying it's weird to trust a piece of military intel (precisely the kind of intel that gets frequently faked) just because some journalist claims two unnamed FSB spooks he happens to know "say it's legit". Well, would you trust unnamed experts on any other security related matter, just because someone on Twitter says so? And specifically in a context where we know disinformation is being spread left and right?
I think the biggest issue I know off is their response to the OPCW leaks [1], where they argued that they agree the leaks are authentic but they suddenly have proof that no one else had access to to change the narrative.
> A draft version of a letter seen by Bellingcat and not publicly released by either ‘Alex’, Wikileaks or any of the journalists who have covered the so-called scandal, proves that a chemical attack did occur.
This seems super suspicious and is a deus ex machina that undermines all material inconvenient to the US. I don't find the "screenshot" very convincing, especially with the source being the director general of the organisation in question.
And this is purportedly intelligence information coming from the FSB! I mean, military intelligence, what could go wrong with trusting sensitive intelligence of an ongoing war that someone posted on Twitter or Facebook?