The CIA has been quite busy discrediting actual reporting and the Euro's don't want to make public any accusation/data supporting the clear/obvious conclusion that Biden ordered this. Sweden is the one investigating it nominally but has already said...'we're not going to embarrass the US.'
The farcical red herring was that a sailboat had anchored in the 260 foot water to allow a private team to go blow it up. LOL.
It was a sophisticated operation in a heavily patrolled area of the sea only a government/military with demolitions experience/training could pull off. We just so happen to have had our forces trained as such right there, and Biden had bragged about ending the pipeline the month before. But sure, maybe it was Russia doing it, or some rogue group out of Ukraine etc. hahahaha...and Fauci is a hero.Quote:
In Sweden, they said that the perpetrators of the undermining of Nord Streams will be difficult to establish. This statement was made by district attorney Mats Lyngqvist, stressing that it will not be easy to find those responsible. He added that the mass of assumptions about the incident does not affect the course of the investigation, which relies on "facts and data obtained as a result of analyzes, crime scene examinations and interaction with the authorities of Sweden and other countries."
Earlier, MEP Mick Wallace pointed out that because of its loyalty to Washington, the EU has not shown any sincere interest in revealing the truth about sabotage on pipelines. Analysts, in turn, expect that the results of the investigation of pipeline explosions "will be very much filtered", since the collective West in this situation seeks to fence off the United States and discredit Russia.
The farcical red herring was that a sailboat had anchored in the 260 foot water to allow a private team to go blow it up. LOL.
The CCP-Dems-WEF types running our White House wanted this big war to spike inflation/energy/food prices and cause a crisis globally in supply chains. The Nordstream explosion was a component of the war plan. That's it, it's that simple.Quote:
What's oddest of all about the piece, though, is that at no point does it single out one particular "friendly government" that has been publicly accused in Seymour Hersh's report of bombing Nord Stream: the United States. Without pointing explicitly to that subtext, the writers say:Hersh chimes in againQuote:
In the absence of concrete clues, an awkward silence has prevailed.
"It's like a corpse at a family gathering," the European diplomat said, reaching for a grim analogy. Everyone can see there's a body lying there, but pretends things are normal. "It's better not to know."
Hersh would add that this "better not to know" mindset affects quite a few Western news media organizations, including the Post. "No American officials were quoted, even anonymously, by the Post," he notes in a new April 5 article of his own.
"The Biden administration has become a Nord Stream-free reporting zone," he writes. "Chalk one up for the various CIA officials who have been supplying phony stories to the media here and abroad in what has been a successful effort to keep the world focused on any possible suspects outside of what has emerged as the most logical one the president of the United States."
Hersh writes that the author of one of the German reports that were published the same day as the New York Times report is Holger Stark of Die Zeit, "an experienced journalist whom I have known since he worked in Washington a decade or so ago."
Stark, Hersh says, "told me he had excellent sources in the German federal police and learned what he did from those links, and not from any intelligence agency, German or American. I believed him." But Hersh had trouble with the story those sources told to Stark.
Stark told him that officials in Germany, Sweden and Denmark had decided shortly after the September 26, 2o22, pipeline bombings "to send teams to the site to recover the one mine that has not gone off. He said they were too late; an American ship had sped to the site within a day or two and recovered the mine and other materials. I asked him why he thought the Americans had been so quick to get to the site and he answered, with a wave of his hand, 'You know what Americans are like. Always wanting to be first.'"
Says Hersh:Quote:
There was another very obvious explanation.
The trick of a good propaganda operation is to provide the targets in this case the Western media with what they want to hear. One intelligence expert put it to me more succinctly: "When you do an operation like the pipelines, you need to plan a counter-op a red herring that has a whiff of reality. And it must be as detailed as possible to be believed."
"People today have forgotten that there is such a thing as a parody," the expert said…. "The CIA's goal in the pipeline case was to produce a parody that was so good that the press would believe it. But where to start? Cannot have the pipelines destroyed by a bomb from an airplane or sailors on a rubber boat.
"But why not a sailboat? Any serious student of the event would know that you cannot anchor a sailboat in waters that are 260 feet deep" the depth at which the four pipelines were destroyed "but the story was not aimed at him but at the press who would not know a parody when presented with one."
