By John Helmer, Moscow
@bears_with
Photographs published in the German media, then republished in the press of the NATO allies, of an explosive device allegedly planted by Russian agents at Leipzig airport last month “do not correspond to what airport employees initially saw at the scene…the drone itself was a small, inexpensive consumer device intended primarily for photography and video recording.”
This has been reported by Ukrainian investigative journalist Anatoly Sharij in two lengthy Twitter (X) posts on September 6.
Sharij’s account is based on sources identified as Leipzig airport employees who said they were eye-witnesses of the discovery of the drone and of the official reaction which followed. According to Sharij, one of the sources “doubts that such a device could have carried any significant additional payload at all.”
The German government has officially blamed Russia for the Leipzig incident.
“With the attempted attack in Leipzig,” declared German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul on September 1, “Russia’s leadership has instead made a conscious decision to inflict further significant damage on our bilateral relations, which are already under tremendous strain. The Federal Government’s line, which the Federal Minister of the Interior has just mentioned, thus applies. Germany remains secure, and Germany is defending itself against opponents who seek to spread insecurity. The Federal Government is therefore taking action against Russia as the perpetrator of the hybrid attack in Leipzig.”
“The dangerous conduct of the Russian Federation described just now is part of a long series of attempts to destabilise, spread disinformation, threaten, sabotage and show aggression towards Europe. Unfortunately, Germany is no exception here. Russia’s leadership is treating our country with blatant hostility.”
President Vladimir Putin responded, telling the Russian press on September 1 the drone incident was a plant. “I believe that it mostly has to do with the internal political situation. The Chancellor’s political standing is complicated. He is not trusted by his citizens, and it is clear why – because he does not uphold but sells out national interests, and because of apparent economic missteps: enterprises are being shut down, people are losing their jobs, and living standards are plummeting. It is not clear why they did what they did. They have only one explanation: they need to stand up against ‘aggressive Russia.’ You want proof? Here you are; they have planted it.”
“I would like to remind everyone that some time ago – several months or even a year ago – the German authorities accused Russia of blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline. I was really surprised that they came up with such a strange idea because we were interested in selling gas to Europe. We would be ready to provide gas today too. They only need to press the button, to make the decision to do it. But they don’t have the stomach for this, because of the US sanctions and everything else. Good, but now they need to explain the reasons behind their actions. Considering the falling ratings and the upcoming elections, including in Saxony, this puts the political future of the German ruling circles in question. I believe that this is the explanation. I think that this is yet another blunder, and that it runs contrary to the interests of the German people.”
On September 6, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the German government’s fabrication was an act of war. “ ‘Leipzig, the airport. They found some drone there. They said it was a Russian drone, and no one bothered to investigate. This is, in essence, the beginning of a real war. They expelled the Consulate General from Bonn, announced that they had terminated the agreement. The Russian House in Berlin is being closed. I recall that before the start of World War II, or more precisely the Great Patriotic War, the Germans also closed their diplomatic missions,’ he said, with the head of Russian diplomacy’s words quoted on the Vesti website. ‘And all those statements made by Merz about making Germany the leading military power in Europe again — they are being put into practice. He is essentially declaring war on us. And the lessons of history have not been learned at all. It turns out that these metastases of Nazism are beginning to break through. This is a dangerous phenomenon. I believe the Russian leadership will draw appropriate conclusions,” Lavrov said.”
German sources have told me that “useful idiots”, German opposition groups monitored and infiltrated by German police and intelligence agents, are likely to have been involved in the Leipzig incident, with foreknowledge on the part of the German services. “There are forces in Germany like the old Red Army Faction, belonging to extreme left groups, which are training now to interfere with military production. Also, the Ukrainians could very easily with their drone experience build drones with Russian parts and launch them in Germany. They are able to perform a false flag operation. And not least, I see the connection to the Nordstream case here. Kiev has a motive to avenge the imprisoned divers in Germany.”
Two years before the Nordstream sabotage on September 26, 2022, German officials participated in the fabrication of the Novichok poisoning claims of Alexei Navalny in August 2020. For the full account of that deception operation, read this book.
Sharij, the author of the new and detailed account of the Leipzig incident, has been in forced exile from the Ukraine since 2012 and has been the target of reputational and physical attacks for many years.
Sharij’s report was published by him in English. It follows verbatim. The lead photograph, right, was published by him without source attribution. Parentheses and links in have been added to the text for clarification of the references.
Sources: https://x.com/anatoliisharii/status/2096521560337141926 and https://x.com/anatoliisharii/status/2096521615123055064
On 1 August 2024, seven climate activists from the “Letzte Generation” (“Last Generation” https://theloadstar.com/climate-activists-stuck-to-runway-hold-up-cargo-flights-at-leipzig/ ) movement illegally entered the grounds of Leipzig/Halle Airport. They cut through the outer security fence in three separate places and entered the airport’s restricted area.
Five of the activists managed to glue themselves to the taxiways, while two others were detained before they were able to do so.
Thus, as early as 2024, there was a documented case in which unauthorized individuals managed to breach the secured perimeter at night and gain direct access to the airside area of Leipzig/Halle Airport.
Against this background, particular attention should be paid to an account given to me by an airport employee concerning another incident — one involving a drone.
His account differs significantly from the version presented in the media.
According to him, everything happened at night during the loading of a cargo aircraft in the Vorfeld 2 area, where, among other things, DHL aircraft are serviced and Antonov aircraft are located.
Airport employees had noticed drones in the vicinity of the airport before. Near the S8a road, which runs along the perimeter of the airport, there is an emergency gate and a location offering a good view of the runway.
At night, aviation spotters occasionally stand there photographing aircraft taking off and landing.
According to the source, drones had also been seen in this area on numerous occasions, although they normally did not approach people or aircraft at close range.
This time, however, the situation was different. During the loading operation, a small drone began circling near the cargo aircraft and then hovered directly next to an employee.
According to the source, none of those present saw where exactly it had come from.
When the device came close enough, the employee lowered it to the ground and pinned it down with his hand, damaging its propellers. He then reported over the radio that the drone was on the ground.
It is what happened next that the source considers extremely strange. According to him, within just a few minutes, police officers, bomb-disposal specialists, firefighters, television crews and bomb-disposal equipment, including a specialized robot, appeared at the scene.
The employee says that the speed of their arrival has raised questions among airport staff. The airport is located approximately 20 kilometres from Leipzig, and it is not possible to simply drive up to the terminal and enter the restricted airfield area.
To gain access, outsiders are required to pass through security checks and obtain the appropriate permit, including a temporary Tagesausweis [“day pass”].
According to the source’s estimate, the process of obtaining authorization and passing through the checkpoint alone takes time.
He therefore does not understand how a specialized team, a television crew and heavy equipment could have reached the airfield itself almost immediately after the radio report.
The source particularly strongly disputes reports that the device allegedly carried explosives or a detonator.
According to him, the employee who brought the drone down with his own hands did not see either a detonator or any explosive material attached to it. The source also claims that photographs subsequently published in the media showing the drone with explosive material next to it do not correspond to what airport employees initially saw at the scene. The reference to Czech-made Semtex also raised particular suspicions for him.
According to the source, the drone itself was a small, inexpensive consumer device intended primarily for photography and video recording.
He doubts that such a device could have carried any significant additional payload at all.
According to the source, after seeing the news reports, the employee who personally brought the drone down was outraged by the way the incident had been presented to the public, but is unable to speak openly because he fears losing his job.
The source also draws attention to the situation around the airport following the incident. According to him, police officers are now stationed around the clock near the emergency gate by the S8a, where spotters previously gathered at night and from where drones had periodically been observed.
As a result, there are two fundamentally different versions of what happened.
The public version involves the discovery of a potentially dangerous unmanned aerial vehicle and the subsequent response by emergency services.
The airport employee’s version is that an ordinary small civilian drone appeared on the airport grounds, that an employee brought it down himself, and that this was followed almost immediately by a response from law-enforcement agencies and the media that, in terms of its scale, appeared unusually well prepared in advance.
The airport employee’s account, of course, does not in itself prove that the incident was staged or constituted a provocation.
Independent evidence would be required to reach such a conclusion.
However, his claims raise a number of verifiable questions:
At exactly what time was the drone discovered and the radio report made?
When were the police, bomb-disposal specialists, firefighters and journalists called?
When did each of them actually arrive in the restricted area?
Who first discovered the alleged explosive material, and when?
Was it physically attached to the drone at the moment the drone was brought down?
Who was the first person to examine the device?
Are there any photographs of the drone taken before the bomb-disposal specialists arrived?
And how did media representatives gain access to the airport grounds?
Answers to these questions would make it possible to distinguish confirmed circumstances from witness claims and establish the actual sequence of events.
Leave a Reply