Fact Check: No evidence Moscow fire linked to direct energy weapons or Putin interview

A fire erupted in a Moscow residential building Feb. 9 at about the same time that Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin was broadcast. But there is no evidence from news reports or authorities that the fire is related to the interview or that it was caused by direct energy weapons, as social media users have claimed. 

TikTok users shared a video of the fire with the text that read, “Russia was just attacked with Direct Energy Weapons after the Tucker and Putin interview released.” The video has more than 14,000 likes.   

TikTok identified this post as part of its efforts to counter inauthentic, misleading or false content. (Read more about PolitiFact’s partnership with TikTok.)

The video was published in a Feb. 8 Daily Mail article about a fire in a six-story Moscow residential building. 

The fire started in an apartment on the building’s top floor and spread to the roof before spreading to two adjacent houses, The Moscow Times reported. Helicopters and fire trucks contained the fire and more than 400 residents were evacuated. 

Reports about the fire in local and international news outlets provided no evidence that direct energy weapons caused the fire or that it was related to Carlson’s interview. 

Agence France-Presse reported Feb. 8 that authorities had not announced the cause of the fire. Newsweek reported Feb. 9 that Russia’s state-run Tass news agency said authorities were investigating a short circuit as a possible cause of the fire.  

Direct energy weapons are real and can use energy fired at light speed. Countries including the U.S. are researching their use, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. 

PolitiFact has previously debunked a similar conspiracy theory that direct energy weapons caused the Maui, Hawaii, wildfires in 2023. 

We rate the claim that a video shows Russia was attacked with direct energy weapons after Carlson’s interview with Putin was released False.



Source