Not even Marcus Maximus, Timber Rattler or Speedy in Texas should be dumb to believe that? Could they?
That is an amazing bomb that can spew residue all over passports from an explosion 200 feet underwater.
Well, Brandon is more into shooting balloons.
Nuland-Sullivan dastardly doings.
Rep. Ilhan Omar Said: Some people did something.
Yes, its total bullshit, designed merely as smoke and flash-bang to be shot from MSM propaganda cannons.
No doubt the zeepers and paid agents here will push this nonsense, at least for a day or two.
Couldn’t have been us. Proof? The ship would have had LGBTWXYZwhatever colored flag, along with the frog”persons” carrying similarly colored ox tanks and also sporting the sick little colored collection on their sleeves. Guaranteed!! ;-)
On September 28 2022, a day after the Nord Stream pipelines were blown up, I published the available open source evidence which strongly suggested that the U.S. had done it:
Whodunnit? - Facts Related to The Sabotage Attack On The Nord Stream Pipelines
On February 8 the legendary investigative reporter Seymour Hersh published a remarkable similar tale of the story based on insider witnesses.
Hersh: "How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline"
I then suggested some minor corrections to Hersh's version of the story.
While Hersh's story found an echo in Europe's newspapers, U.S. mainstream media did all they could to avoid it:
Scores of hits from publications across the globe pop up from an internet search for veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh’s claim that the US destroyed Russia’s Nord Stream gas pipeline.
But what is most striking about the page after page of results from Google, Bing and DuckDuckGo in the weeks following the February 8 posting of Hersh’s story isn’t what is there, but what is not to be found:
- The Times of London (2/8/23) reported Hersh’s story hours after he posted it on his Substack account, but nothing in the New York Times.
- Britain’s Reuters News Agency moved at least ten stories (2/8/23, 2/9/23, 2/12/2, 2/15/23, among others), the Associated Press not one.
- Not a word broadcast by the major US broadcast networks—NBC, ABC, CBS—or the publicly funded broadcasters PBS and NPR.
- No news stories on the nation’s major cable outlets, CNN, MSNBC and Fox News.
Is there justification for such self-censorship? True, Hersh’s story is based on a single anonymous source. But anonymous sources are a staple of mainstream reporting on the US government, used by all major outlets. Further, countless stories of lesser national and international import have been published with the caveat that the facts reported have not been independently verified.
Doubts about Hersh’s story aside, by every journalistic standard, the extensive international coverage given the story, as well as the adamant White House and Pentagon denials, should have made it big news in the United States.
More important, if Hersh got it wrong, his story needs to be knocked down. Silence is not acceptable journalism.
Some papers later mentioned the Hersh story but only in other context. Still the pressure on the U.S. government and media to react to the story continued to build.
The results came today, a full month after the Hersh story, with New York Times publishing another of the usual 'intelligence' fairytales:
Intelligence Suggests Pro-Ukrainian Group Sabotaged Pipelines, U.S. Officials Say
New intelligence reporting amounts to the first significant known lead about who was responsible for the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines that carried natural gas from Russia to Europe.
All fine - except that there is no 'intelligence'. There are only claims by anonymous 'officials' to NYT reporters that some vague 'intelligence' may exist.
Cont. reading: Nord Stream Attack - White House Counters Hersh's Reputation With Weak 'Intelligence'
Just two days ago I reported that Bakhmut is falling. The Ukrainian soldiers there are outgunned 1 to 10 and die under artillery fire with little chance to shot back. More reports from the front have since come in. They support my dire view.
The German pro-Ukrainian news outlet Bild reported this morning that there were misgivings in the Ukrainian war leadership:
President Volodymyr Zelensky and Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine’s Armed Forces Valerii Zaluzhnyi have conflicting views on how the military should handle the situation in Bakhmut, according to unnamed sources within the Ukrainian political leadership cited in a report by Bild.
Bild writes that Zaluzhnyi was deliberating a tactical withdrawal from Bakhmut weeks ago over concern for the wellbeing of his troops.
The Ukrainian government told Bild that remaining in Bakhmut was the right decision due to the serious damage it inflicted on Russian military personnel and equipment. However, according to other sources cited by the publication, the situation is at risk of becoming untenable.
"The vast majority of soldiers in Bakhmut do not understand why the city is being held," a Ukrainian military analyst told Bild on condition of anonymity.
Just hours after that item came out Zelensky's office issued a press release denying any such trouble (machine translation):
On Monday, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy held a regular meeting of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief's Staff.The commanders of the operational and strategic troop groups reported on the situation on the main front lines.
The members of the Staff considered the situation in Bakhmut in particular. Assessing the course of the defense operation, the President asked Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valeriy Zaluzhnyi and Commander of the operational and strategic grouping of troops "Khortytsia" Oleksandr Syrskyi about further actions in the Bakhmut direction. They spoke in favor of continuing the defense operation and further strengthening our positions in Bakhmut.
I do not believe that Zaluzhnyi and Sirskyi gave such advice. The situation for the Ukrainians in Bakhmut (Ru: Artyomovsk) is hopeless and they certainly know it. Losses would be less if the troops would pull back to the next defense line on the higher grounds west of Bakhmut.
The current situation is a mess:
Word games! It WASN’T Biden! He didn’t put the charges on the pipeline, and he didn’t push the button.
I’m surprised they haven’t blamed the pipeline explosion on Climate Change.
Al Gore and Greta Thunberg should look into that.
We have no idea who it was, but we definitely know it wasn’t Biden.
That pretty much means we know it is Biden, but we need misdirection to keep the idiots from knowing it.
the memo there appears to have been to avoid discussion of details and, if one engaged on the nordstream topic at all, focus on ad hominem attacks on the author.
They will continue to lie because if the truth gets out, the German public isn’t going to be happy about it and might vote out their politicians who are total lackeys of the US. Just wait until major German industry closes down or moves to another country because it’s financially unviable to continue operations at energy prices 4x normal due to the Russian sanctions. Europe’s economies are totally screwed without the cheap Russian energy, I wouldn’t be surprised if this results in the breakup of NATO/EU in a couple of years.
There are only a few nations with the ability to do this. Ukraine ain’t one of them.
To find out who did it, ask who benefited, who denied doing it, who refuses to investiate who did it.
I cannot think of a more “pro-Ukrainian group” than the Joe Stolen/”Que mala” Harris regime and their henchmen right here in the US. This was no casual “one-off” action by amateurs, this was done by skilled undersea demolitions experts in the employ of a well-financed agency. The threads keep on circling back to a very limited list of suspects.
Who had the means, motive, and opportunity? I leave that to speculation by others, but the signposts are all up and ready to direct to the real perpetrators. Whoever it was, this was an act of war.
