Putin's soldiers drag Ukrainian prisoner to death behind motorbike in sick video
Sickening new footage has emerged showing a Ukrainian prisoner of war being dragged to his death behind a Russian military motorbike - a harrowing display of brutality that has sparked international outrage.
The chilling video, which is not being shared due to its horrific content, allegedly captures the defenceless captive hogtied and lashed to the back of a motorbike with rope. The grainy aerial clip shows the moment two Russian soldiers - one driving and the other positioning the man - prepare for the cruel act on a deserted road in occupied territory. Moments later, the bike roars into motion, pulling the prisoner behind it along the tarmac.
The exact location of the atrocity remains unconfirmed, but Ukrainian officials have condemned the act as a blatant war crime. Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine 's human rights commissioner, said: 'A video is being circulated on social media: it shows a man tied to a motorcycle and dragged along the road. This is demonstrative cruelty and another war crime by the Russian Federation.'
Lubinets has contacted both the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross, demanding action. If verified, the incident would constitute a 'gross violation' of the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law. ' Russia is acting like a terrorist state,' Lubinets added. 'And it must bear fair responsibility for every crime.'
According to Ukraine's Prosecutor General's Office, as of May 23, authorities are investigating 75 separate cases involving the murder of 268 prisoners of war by Russian forces since the full-scale invasion began.
The latest horror is one of many incidents involving the torture and killing of Ukrainian PoWs. In January, a group of Russian troops were filmed executing six Ukrainian PoWs in cold blood.
One of the killers was heard saying: 'This one's mine,' before demanding: 'Give me two machine guns.' Kyiv launched a formal investigation and alerted international bodies.
In another shocking episode last October, nine Ukrainian drone operators were stripped to their underwear and shot dead by Russian forces. The entire execution was filmed.
This week, a Ukrainian former prisoner said Kremlin soldiers burned the words 'Glory to Russia' on his abdomen in a barbaric act of torture. Andriy Pereverzev said he was captured in February 2024 on the battlefield after being severely wounded.
Once in the custody, he said Putin's fighters electrocuted him in his open wound, seeking to extract any useful intelligence and burned the words 'Glory to Russia' onto his stomach.
'I lifted my head just to look at my stomach,' he said. 'And there it was. 'Glory to Russia.' Burned into my skin with a medical cautery tool.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Pentagon cuts off some weapons to Ukraine as munitions run low
Ukraine and the United States are "clarifying all the details of defense support, including air defense," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a video statement posted to X on July 2. At a meeting the same day, Ukraine's foreign minister told John Ginkel, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Kyiv that "any delay or slowing down in supporting Ukraine's defense capabilities would only encourage the aggressor to continue war and terror, rather than seek peace," according to a press release from the Ukrainian foreign ministry. It's unclear which weapons are held up in the pause. According to reports, the delay includes dozens of Patriot missiles, more than 100 Hellfire missiles and more than 250 missiles for precision-guided missile systems called GMLRS. Parnell said the Defense Department would not release any information about the types of weapons or munitions that are delayed or the timeline of the review. It's also unclear if the pause would apply to the $3.4 billion that the United States sends to Israel annually to bolster its missile defense. The announcement comes days after the State Department greenlit another $510 million in munitions support equipment on June 30, handing it to Congress for approval. As of mid-March, the U.S. had provided Ukraine with $66.9 billion in military assistance since Russia launched its invasion in February of 2022, according to the State Department. That includes three Patriot air defense systems, which can take down ballistic and cruise missiles, 12 NASAMS surface-to-air missile systems, more than 3,000 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and more than 3 million rounds of 155mm artillery. President Donald Trump temporarily shut down all military aid to Ukraine in March following an volatile meeting with Zelenskyy in the Oval Office, but restarted it weeks later. US support for Ukraine, Israel leaves missile stocks low The pause on weapons comes amid growing worry in Washington that American military support for Ukraine and Israel in its 12-day aerial war with Iran in June has left the Pentagon's stockpiles of munitions and air defense systems at concerningly low levels. Between Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the blows traded between Israel and Iran, "I'm not familiar with another instance in which we've had this level of a consumption rate" of missiles and interceptors, said Jon Ludwigson, director of the Government Accountability Office's contracting and national security acquisitions team. More: Israel may run low on missile interceptors, putting US in a 'bind' Adm. James Kilby, the chief of Naval operations, told Congress in early May, "Many of our munition inventories still fall below the total munition requirement." "Munitions transfers and expenditures related to the war in Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas conflict," and Houthi attacks on U.S. ships in the Red Sea have added up to $2.3 billion, according to Kilby's testimony. The Navy is also using SM-3s - Navy interceptors that can take down ballistic missiles - at an "alarming rate," Kilby said at a June 24 Senate budget hearing. The United States also used Patriot air defense systems to defend Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar from Iranian ballistic missiles in an attack Iran launched in retaliation for the U.S. bombing of three of its nuclear facilities on June 21. The Trump administration used more than $200 million worth of munitions in the first three weeks of Operation Rough Rider, its two-month attack on Houthi forces in Yemen, the New York Times reported. Israel burned through missile interceptors at a rapid clip to take down projectiles fired by Iran during the 12-day war, leaving its stockpiles depleted, according to reports. Brandan Buck, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, previously told USA TODAY that if the United States replenishes those interceptors, it would need to draw from other stockpiles.
NBC News
8 hours ago
- NBC News
CIA review criticizes procedures but not conclusions of intelligence report on 2016 Russia election interference
WASHINGTON — CIA officials failed in some cases to follow standard procedures in an intelligence analysis of Russian interference efforts in the 2016 election, according to an internal review declassified on Wednesday. Intelligence officers were given an unusually short timeline for the analysis, there was 'excessive involvement' by senior leaders and staff were given uneven access to crucial intelligence about Russia, the 'lessons-learned' review stated. But the review did not refute the findings of the 2017 intelligence assessment that Russia had waged an information warfare campaign designed to undermine Americans' confidence in the electoral process, damage Hillary Clinton and boost Donald Trump 's prospects in the 2016 election. 'While the overall assessment was deemed defensible, the identified procedural anomalies and tradecraft issues highlight critical lessons for handling controversial or politically charged topics,' the review stated. Trump and his allies have long rejected intelligence and other reporting indicating that Russia employed false information and propaganda to try to influence the 2016 election and tip the scales in Trump's favor. They have accused intelligence and law enforcement officials of plotting to tie Trump to Russia and cast doubt on the legitimacy of Trump's electoral victory in 2016. A special counsel appointed under the first Trump administration looked extensively into how the CIA crafted its assessment but filed no criminal charges and reported no clear evidence that the process was tainted by political bias. A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation in 2020 concurred with the 2017 intelligence assessment and found no reason to dispute its conclusions. In Trump's second presidential term, his deputies have vowed to bring more transparency to the intelligence community and prevent any attempt to politicize its work. CIA Director John Ratcliffe ordered the internal review this year and declassified it on Wednesday, according to the spy agency. The intelligence assessment of the 2016 vote, which was requested by then President Barack Obama after the November election, found that Russia sought to undermine public faith in the democratic process, denigrate Clinton and that Moscow 'aspired' to help Trump win the election. Two senior leaders of a CIA mission center focusing on Russia objected to including the conclusion that Russia aimed to help secure Trump's victory, according to the internal review. They argued that the view was mainly supported by a single intelligence report while other judgments were backed up by more information. The review stated that the assessment was conducted in an unusually short timeline. Instead of having months to prepare a complex and politically sensitive analysis, the authors had 'less than a week to draft the assessment' and 'less than two days to formally coordinate it' with other intelligence officers. Multiple intelligence officers 'said they felt 'jammed' by the compressed timeline,' according to the review. The review said top CIA officials were heavily involved in the assessment effort, which 'was highly unusual in both scope and intensity.' As a result, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research were 'entirely shut out' of the analysis, which was a 'significant deviation' from standard practice in the intelligence community, according to the review. Authors of the 2016 assessment and other CIA officers also 'strongly opposed' including a reference in the analysis to the so-called 'Trump dossier' compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. The dossier had unverified allegations about Trump colluding with Russia. In the end, a summary of the dossier was included in an annex, with a disclaimer that it was not used 'to reach the analytic conclusions' in the assessment. The review of the 2016 assessment also found reasons to praise the effort, saying much of the team's work showed 'robust' tradecraft with extensive sourcing and there was no sign of systemic problems. John Brennan, who was CIA director at the time of the assessment, told NBC News on Wednesday he was aware of the review but had not had a chance to read it yet.
Spectator
9 hours ago
- Spectator
Putin's stranglehold on the Russian press
Since Vladimir Putin came to power in 2000, the Russian press has been slowly, methodically strangled, which has forced existential choices on newspaper and TV journalists. Twenty-one have been killed – beaten, poisoned or gunned down. Others, such as Andrei Soldatov and Irina Borogan, highly regarded investigative reporters, have been forced into exile. Yet others, like the 'dear friends' of this book's title, have chosen a different path – to cleave ever closer to the regime. The authors tell the fascinating story of those choices and allow us a glimpse of why they were taken. In 2000, Soldatov and Borogan were employed by the political department of the newspaper Izvestiya, where they made new friends – slightly older and more experienced journalists, whom they envied for their access to people in power and admired for their intelligence and bohemian glamour. This group's ideas about Russia seemed a bit 'retro': Petya Akopov envisaged the country as a spiritual power, in contrast to the West's moral decadence; Zhenya Baranov had pan-Slav leanings; while their patron, Evgeny Krutikov, was obsessed with the secret services. But at the time these views appeared eccentric, provocative and certainly harmless. At first, Izvestiya was free enough to allow some criticism of government policy; but after barely six months, Soldatov and Borogan were squeezed out by increasing demands to toe the Putinist line. As they arrived at the office to clear their desks, they noticed a new employee – a nondescript, secretive man with no media experience. Just ten years after the 1991 putsch, the security services were back on the editorial floor. Moving from publication to publication, the pair found ways to get into print for most of the next decade. In the unlikely pages of Versia, the offshoot of an unscrupulous tabloid called Sovershchenno Sekretno (Completely Secret), they published an exposé of the official account of the Nord-Ost crisis, in which hundreds of hostages trapped in a theatre by Chechen suicide bombers were gassed by the security services. The FSB responded by harassing them and the paper for months, and this set a pattern. Subsequent employers crumpled under pressure from above. Each time the pair published a too-truthful report they'd be out on the street again. For some years, interestingly, the principle that the press should act as a check on state power still held true among their 'dear friends' from Izvestiya days, who helped them get articles printed. And for a while both Akopov and Krutikov were even happy to cooperate with Soldatov and Borogan on the website they'd set up, providing analysis and comment on Russia's security and intelligence services. In 2008, the authors' efforts to investigate the murder of their colleague Anna Politkovskaya got them sacked from their final paper. Bravely, they clung on in Moscow, writing books for PublicAffairs, their New York publisher, that were later translated into Russian. 'It felt as if we and our friends had discovered some sort of arrangement whereby we could coexist with the country's political regime.' One day, the liberals hoped, Putin would be gone and things would return to 'normal'. Their Izvestiya friends, meanwhile, had gone a different route, straight to the heart of the regime. By 2014, Baranov was a presenter for Channel 1, the Kremlin propaganda channel, pushing a narrative of Nazis in Ukraine and Nato aggression, while his wife crossed the barely discernible line between state and press to become deputy minister of culture the following year. Akopov is now known as the author of a triumphalist essay, published in February 2022: 'Putin has resolved the Ukrainian question.' It was swiftly removed from the internet when the Ukrainians stopped the Russian army outside Kyiv. All three are subject to sanctions. Why did these intelligent, well-travelled people agree to be the mouthpieces for state misinformation? Basically it was their only option if they wanted to stay in Russia and work as journalists. Financial need and family and health pressures weighed on them, as on anyone, and general lawlessness and corruption in Russia encourage conformity in all but the bravest. The emotional hangover of the Soviet Union is also considerable – nostalgia for the USSR's former status, the certainties of their childhood and family trauma working themselves out in complicated ways. Perhaps even more significant is another Soviet legacy – a profound cynicism that reasserted itself, as powerfully as ever, once Putin's direction was clear. Many of the propagandists are connected to Soviet dynasties such as the Mikhalkovs, who seem quite comfortable with telling lies in return for success and comfort. Trying to gauge the views of ordinary Muscovites, Soldatov and Borodan noted a collective determination to enjoy this rare moment of Russian prosperity without rocking the boat. Their interviewees often clammed up, snapping: 'We just want to trust our security services!' Yet almost before people had noticed, the Russia they knew had been transformed 'from a highly globalised and aspirational society to a dismal walled-in fortress'. In a flash, the moment when they could have chosen another future had passed.
