It is a clear indicator of the disappearance of freedom from our so-called western democracies, that Sy Hersh, arguably the greatest living journalist, cannot get this monumental revelation on the front of the Washington Post or New York Times, but has to self-publish on the net.
Hersh tells the story of the US destruction of the Nordstream pipelines in forensic detail, giving dates, times, method and military units involved. He also outlines the importance of the Norwegian armed forces working alongside the US Navy in the operation.
One point Sy does not much stress, but it is worth saying more about, is that Norway and the USA are of course the two countries who have benefitted financially, to an enormous degree, from blowing up the pipeline.
Both not only have gained huge export surpluses from the jump in gas prices, but Norway has directly replaced Russian gas to the tune of some $40 billion per year. From 2023 the United States will appear in that list in second place behind Norway, following the opening in the last two months of two new Liquefied Natural Gas terminals in Germany, built to replace Russian gas with US and Qatari supplies.
So Russia lost out massively financially from the destruction of Nordstream and who benefited? The USA and Norway, the two countries who blew up the pipeline.
But of course, this war is nothing to do with money or hydrocarbons and is all about freedom and democracy…
To return to Hersh’s account, particularly interesting are the series of decisions taken to avoid classification of the operation in various ways which would require it to be reported to Congress. In terms of United States history, this ought to be a big deal.
For the Executive to commit what is an act of war without the approval of the Legislature is fundamentally unconstitutional. But that is one of those quaint remnants of democracy that the neo-liberal elite consensus can quietly sidestep nowadays.
Hersh sets out the well known background in compelling detail, including the fact that, from Biden down, the Americans effectively announced what they were going to do, openly.
But what most worries me about the entire story is the unanimous complicity of the mainstream media in ignoring the completely obvious.
The media line, parroted here relentlessly by the BBC and corporate media, was that the Russians had probably themselves blown up the pipeline on which they had expended such great resources and three decades of intense diplomatic activity, and which was to be the key to Russia’s single most valuable source of income for the next 40 years.
This was always quite literally incredible. You would have to be deranged to believe it.
It actually taught me not just that we truly are in the realm of totalitarianism and the Big Lie, but I learnt something very important about how the Big Lie works.
The secret is not that people genuinely believe an outrageous claim. The secret is that people do genuinely believe that they are in a battle of good against evil, and it is necessary to accept the narrative being promoted, in the interests of fighting evil.
Don’t question, just follow. If you do question, you are promoting evil.
I am sure that is how it works.
State and corporate stenographer journalists are actually intelligent individuals. If they thought about it, they would realise that the narrative that Russia blew up its own pipeline is obvious nonsense.
But they are convinced it is morally wrong to think about it.
Which is why none of them challenged the equally mad claims that Russia was repeatedly shelling its own forces occupying the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station, and indeed is why none of them challenged the utterly risible official version of the Skripal story.
I previously told the anecdote from when I worked in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and asked a good friend if he really believed the misinformatioin on Iraqi WMD with which he was involved.
He replied by referring to the video game Championship Manager (now renamed Football Manager), which we used to play together. He said when he was in the game, it was immersive, he was manager of Liverpool, and it fully absorbed him.
Similarly, when he walked through the FCO gates, the world of the intelligence reports was immersive and Iraq did have these WMDs inside that world. He worked in the “reality” of the FCO. Once he left in the evening, he lived in a different reality, the world of us in the pub.
I do know of one or two journalists bright enough to detach their professional output from what they really think, in a similar way. (I once had a conversation along these lines with Jeremy Bowen in Tashkent.)
Most however don’t think like this. They simply think that all right thinking people support the historic struggle against the evil Russians, so it must be right to read out the propaganda without thinking too much about it.
Those of us critical of the aggressive promotion of war in Europe, are not only barred from all mainstream media and confined to corners of the internet, and even then heavily suppressed on social media (which is why Sy Hersh’s article does not have the scores of millions of readers it merits).
We can’t even obtain freedom of assembly.
Two established left wing venues have cancelled the No 2 Nato meeting I am addressing in London on 25 February. Conway Hall’s reasons for cancellation included threats to funding and fears for the safety of staff.
We are now reduced to a guerrilla meeting, the Central London venue for which will not be announced until the evening before.
Is this really a democracy, where it is not possible for dissidents to hold a public meeting without secrecy, subterfuge and hiding from supporters of the state?
I do urge you to come along on the day, whatever your views on the subject, to support the right to freedom of speech.
I have a different view from perhaps all of the other speakers, on the legitimacy of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which I oppose.
But I also oppose NATO expansion which is an underlying cause of the war, and indeed oppose the existence of NATO itself.
NATO is a war machine which sucks resources from working people to benefit the military industrial complex, and unleashes devastating destruction on developing states which do not make their natural resources available to western billionaire elites.
It is also a fundamental node of the propaganda apparatus which manipulates and controls our society, particularly as counter narrative and dissident thought is now rigorously and systematically excluded.
There is no longer an Overton window of permitted debate. It has narrowed and should be renamed the Overton letterbox.
One of those small difficult ones right down at the bottom of the door. With a very fierce spring, and snarling dogs guarding it.
————————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
“The secret is not that people genuinely believe an outrageous claim. The secret is that people do genuinely believe that they are in a battle of good against evil, and it is necessary to accept the narrative being promoted, in the interests of fighting evil.”
Exactly this. It was the same with the fabricated “institutionally antisemitic” Labour/Corbyn nonsense too. I very much doubt any of the media truly believed it, but the importance of preserving the status quo in terms of British economic and foreign policy overrode such minor inconveniences as veracity.
What I noticed was no matter “Left” Right “Centre”, accusation would start something like: “Corbyn is a good honorable man not Racist BUT …………. “
Great article.
Russia had no reason to invade Ukraine. It was a completely unprovoked attack, according to NATO apologists. And Adolf Heusinger, the Wehrmacht chief of staff under Hitler who became head of Nato in the 1960s, was just a good guy – probably misunderstood – and simply the best man for the job.
A close ally and personal friend of Hitler running NATO is absolutely no reflection on the integrity of that institution!
We’re always in the right, our politicians (who we know for a fact are constantly lying and cheating) are 100% in good faith when it comes to wars, and the Americans are (and always have been) impeccable in the nobility of their intentions.
Of course. It would be positively perverse, traitorous even, to suggest otherwise. Just ask a NATO apologist.
“We’re always in the right”
and now, it seems, we’re always on the right, too.
After checking couple of suggested videos I was seriously thinking: are Centre Left turning into national Socialist with a human face?
Didn’t we have some years ago something like “Humanistic capitalism”?
Compassionate Conservatives?.
That one time when US sabotaged a Soviet gas pipeline…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_the_Abyss
In the best of worlds Russia should sabotage one of US pipelines and then deny it as staunchly as the americans and norweigans are doing now.
The Yanks would be delighted to see that as an act of war, and respond accordingly. Just as they would if Russia had threatened America with a fraction of what NATO has been doing to Russia for decades.
I wasn’t aware of that story, Jack.
Interestingly there are some quite credible refutations of his claim. The thing is if you are privy to such details they are usually all bound up with security classifications that can send you to jail for many years.
However, no one can send you to jail for saying something that is completely fictional.
I wonder what giant explosion caused by deliberately introduced malware that someone associated with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory might know about, that ISN’T a gas pipeline?
I guess we need to start by making a list of all the giant explosions in the Soviet Union during the Reagan years….
What an unsolvable mystery!
All true sadly. Here’s another fine commentary on Hersh’s revelation and its craven suppression by European media.
https://twitter.com/afshinrattansi/status/1623662698301992960?s=20&t=5qFCU5lMyYY9kwAqapS_Ag
Afshin was really good jurno while RT was available. I still remember him on O’Neill Show as they say destroying Andrew and his propaganda nonsense.
I miss “Going Underground” and Lee Camp “Redacted tonight”
Going Underground is here, as is the RT site (you can navigate back from the page below of course):
https://swentr.site/shows/going-underground/
“The secret is not that people genuinely believe an outrageous claim. The secret is that people do genuinely believe that they are in a battle of good against evil, and it is necessary to accept the narrative being promoted, in the interests of fighting evil”
This is so simple but so profound!
I was wondering is it bribes or threats or blackmail to make our spineless politician spineless around Europe behave like they do of course
excluding the real nutters.
Thank You CM
For literally 100 of years you were listening how Soviets and than Russians are evil (bad guys) apart from Gorbachev. Cold war was ended but Russia was still the enemy.
What was and still is the purpose of NATO?
Warsaw pact (created after Nato btw)
Warsaw pact gone but not Nato. Defensive alliance against whom?
Of course Iran!
Baltic countries were the best place to put missiles!
Warsaw pact Commies did not Attack West Europe but now Russia will attack UK and Ireland.
Those Chinese are threat and let’s escalate and built couple of military basis more
Does not the old adage that “it is difficult to get a man to believe something when his salary depends on him not believing it” also apply here, most especially to journalists and most civil servants, not CM obviously!
Yes I found this sentence spot on.
It echoes a previous article on Craig’s German tour referring to the work of the historian Norman Cohn’s account of the rise and fall of the Anabaptists as dedicated pursuers of their version of “good” against their version of “evil”.
The genuine belief in an outrageous claim is fundamental to all forms of witch hunting, traditional and modern. In the context of sexual abuse – think of cases like that of Alex Salmond – a former chief inspector of social services once said on TV many years ago, “It may be that innocent people are convicted, but we should be more worried about the people who are guilty who might get away”. (Webster R. The Secret of Bryn Alyn, Orwell Press 2009 p549).
I cannot think of any better explanation of the dynamic that is driving the current politicians of the collective west on to irresponsibly and criminally fill Zelenski’s ever bigger begging bowl to defeat the “evil” that is Putin and Putin’s Russia, and being prepared in support of that narrative to sacrifice thousands on thousands of innocent lives in the process.
Lots of bribes. Udo Ulfkotte wrote about it in “Gekaufte Jounalisten”.
“I was wondering is it bribes or threats or blackmail to make our spineless politician spineless around Europe behave like they do of course”
No, I think it is something far more genteel than that, the desire to be part of a group of powerful people, to get in with “the people that matter”, as so memorably analysed by C.S.Lewis in his essay “The Inner Ring” I linked to earlier. How many of these politicians have connections with a US-sponsored group, or have been on a US-run course and met other aspirants to position and power. Politics works entirely through such “inner rings”. Some are official (like the British Cabinet) and some are no (like being invited to Davos). Even at Davos, though, there are probably rings within rings. As C.S.Lewis puts it:
“Over a drink, or a cup of coffee, disguised as triviality and sandwiched between two jokes, from the lips of a man, or woman, whom you have recently been getting to know rather better and whom you hope to know better still — just at the moment when you are most anxious not to appear crude, or naïf or a prig — the hint will come. It will be the hint of something which the public, the ignorant, romantic public, would never understand: something which even the outsiders in your own profession are apt to make a fuss about: but something, says your new friend, which ‘we’ — and at the word ‘we’ you try not to blush for mere pleasure — something ‘we always do’.
“And you will be drawn in, if you are drawn in, not by desire for gain or ease, but simply because at that moment, when the cup was so near your lips, you cannot bear to be thrust back again into the cold outer world. It would be so terrible to see the other man’s face — that genial, confidential, delightfully sophisticated face — turn suddenly cold and contemptuous, to know that you had been tried for the Inner Ring and rejected. And then, if you are drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules, and next year something further still, but all in the jolliest, friendliest spirit. It may end in a crash, a scandal, and penal servitude; it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at your old school. But you will be a scoundrel.”
What goes around comes around, and Norway has many energy transporting pipelines, pipelines that are vulnerable to attack. Flying over the Nordstream pipelines in a P8 aircraft and triggering the explosives will ultimately lead to a bit of payback from Russia.
I wonder who this was
From october last year: “Fears grow as more suspicious drones appear above Norway’s offshore facilities ”
https://www.euronews.com/2022/10/23/fears-grow-as-more-suspicious-drones-appear-above-norways-offshore-facilities
Interesting Jack, though I wouldn’t put it past the US to sabotage Norwegian pipelines and blame it on Russia.
Noting all the security around Norwegian pipelines and oil producing facilities in the article, it appears to me that the Norwegians clearly know what they did and are expecting a bit of payback for it, afterall what they did is clearly an act of war.
There’s a pretty good story in the Mail about Hersh’s article, it’s quite thorough. Looking at the comments there and the New York Post 90% believe Hersh.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11728747/Who-blew-20-billion-Nord-Stream-pipeline-White-House-denies-attack.html
I am trying to imagine the likely consequences. Some of Hersh’s recent work has been called inconsequential but he is a serious man with a hell of a record and his article is very believable. Biden, Scholz etc can deny it all they want but if it is true the media will have to face it I would have thought as the Mail already is doing. And where does that leave the “good guys”, the US and the EU?
Many of Craig’s followers will not agree with me but Putin is guilty of far worse many times over. But that is not really gone into by the press either. No you actually have to read a book or two to get into that.
Time for a reality check.
They won’t deny it, they’ll ignore it.
Recently we discussed new tariffs for transit through the Ukrainian pipeline…what can I say. It looks like Russia treats its supposed enemy better than the US treats its supposed friend.
They write in the news that 11 members of the US Congress signed an initiative to Biden to stop aid to Ukraine.
https://ria.ru/20230209/trebovanie-1850970315.html
They also write that Roger Waters spoke at the UN Security Council.
https://ria.ru/20230209/putin-1850895689.html
He gave an interview (to the Telegraph) and said that he began to respect Putin more after subscribing to The Duran. I know this media! Red maroon button 🙂
Did I tell you that Mr Waters is my hero? I believed that he would definitely understand what’s going on. My type of person, not lazy.
By chance I have just listened to a The Duran broadcast today on Telegram (sorry I can’t give the link) featuring Noam Chomsky discussing the role of propaganda in the Ukraine conflict and comparing it with previous wars such as Vietnam. If I got him rightly he was saying that opposition to the prevailing narrative, if anything, is marginally better than it was at the time of Vietnam.
I then scrolled through the comments which were up to 200. I could only identify one or two that actually dealt with what Chomsky had actually said in the broadcast.
The vast majority were ad hominem attacks on Chomsky himself or his views on other matters, particularly vaccination (I understood he stood up for vaccination), 9/11, Zionism, for being Jewish, for being old etc.) Very little of this seemed to be bot trolling, but more the responses of prejudiced thinkers who have been ill-educated in whatever country they have been educated in, which of course is hard to tell. This does not forebode well for the future of open societies with open debates on the issues that matter.
You are too generous in calling them “thinkers”.
Unfortunately, most people seem unable to think, in the sense of maintaining a coherent train of reasoning for more than a very few seconds.
EU is getting more and more authoritarian
Von Der Leyen: we will go after Putin’s propagandists
https://youtu.be/ULN4LvKjeHA?t=1052
I guess Sy Hersh is considered one of “putin’s propagandists”
Geez.. EU having their gas pipelines destroyed by the US and the useful idiot Von Der Leyen threat to hunt down Putin’s “propagandists”. What she mean is people like us, this blog soon Craig Murray will be sanctioned.
What the hell is this? These people getting more and more erratic and radicalized.
There is no change we will see diplomacy solving this war, EU leaders are unhinged by now.
Hitler would be proud of this german woman and her aggressiveness against the slavs.
Craig’s blog probably won’t survive the UK’s Online Safety Bill, which has been mockingly dubbed the ‘Dangerous Blogs Act’.. after the fiasco that was the UK’s Dangerous Dogs Act. Ofcom are being given ridiculous powers, to decide who is and who isn’t, a journalist.
It’s happening in every country too.
The “Online Safety Bill” is a strong attack on freedom of expression and on investigative journalism – which nowadays is done mostly by independent journalists like Seymour Hersh, Glenn Greenwald and several others including Craig Murray. The State has managed to exclude real journalism from most newspapers and other mainstream media.
The Online Safety Bill is 262 pages of dense legal language. Simply understanding what it requires is a significant burden on a lone journalist. It defines “Recognised News Publisher” in a way which excludes all the blogs mentioned above, and refers to that term more than 30 times, generally conceding rights to “Recognised News Publishers” that ordinary people and bloggers do not have.
The Bill repeatedly refers to “Terrorism Offences”. Of course nobody wants to promote terrorism. But “terrorism offences” is defined for the purposes of the bill in its Schedule 5, starting on page 212, and include such things as “expressing an opinion or belief supportive of a proscribed organisation”. Yes, “expressing an opinion or belief” can count as a terrorism offence. (What is a “proscribed organisation”, by the way?)
“collection of information likely to be of use to a terrorist” is also a terrorism offence. Of course every newspaper collects “information likely to be of use to a terrorist” (a tube map is likely to be of use to a terrorist), but they’re “Recognised News Publishers”, so it’s OK. A blogger isn’t, so it’s not OK. There’s more, much much more.
You may end up with Russian and Chinese servers hosting all the blog sites the UK and EU have banned, with people accessing them via vpns and Tor. How will that improve internet ‘safety’ if people are exposed to malware and hackers? And with cheap overseas hosting, spinning up a vps takes little time and money. Wonder if anyone at GCHQ pointed this out to naive MPs and Dame Melanie Henrietta Dawes DCB, at Ofcom?
If these plans become as onerous and burdensome for companies as they potentially could, then they will do lots of economic harm to the UK. State censorship is basically self-sabotage in today’s interconnected world.
Josep Borrell’s recent comments were amusing, I paraphrase, but he said something along the lines of, we support freedom of expression, just not freedom of expression for those with opinions we don’t like.
We’re going back to the C19th, when you could be hanged for any number of trivial offences. The purpose of this was so that the authorities could get rid of undesirables. Although the prescribed penalty was death, most people “of good character” could reasonably expect to be let off with a lesser punishment. Anyone who was a thorn in authority’s side however, could could be easily got rid of.
” “Recognised News Publisher”
A two-tier freedom of speech system, then.
When all this NATO fuss began, about a year ago, I asked my husband why NATO in Ukraine is such a serious threat. He said briefly: the time of arrival and the length of the border. I asked for clarification, and this is what he replied:
one day you will hear on the radio that the US is unhappy with the violation of the rights of some gay man, to protect his rights, they decided to launch a preventive nuclear strike on Russia. The border is 2000 kilometers, so many missiles can be installed, and they will arrive so quickly that you will evaporate without listening to the end of that radio message.
Oh come on Tatyana.
You are better than that.
“The gays are invading”?
FFS.
Good night.
John
I believe that Tatyana was expressing that NATO will use any BS pretext & doesn’t give a flying fuck about humans, let alone their rights, if they happen to be the wrong sort of human and/or in the wrong country. Which is undoubtedly true…
If you choose to interpret that as “Russians fear invasion by “gayboy sardukar” then you’re being obtuse.
Thanks Urban Fox.
English, as you can see, is not my native language, so sometimes I doubt my ability to convey the meaning correctly. Your post gives me confidence that I’m doing okay, and people understand me.
Thank you!
Tatyana,
I think we must assume English is a language in which John Kinsella lacks proficiency. Your post was perfectly clear; Kinsella’s reply betrayed a failure of reading comprehension.
Mart, I’ve come across this problem before with other people and I think it’s not a failure of vision, comprehension or hearing, it’s a problem with memory: the sufferer sees, hears or reads what you and I would see, hear or read, but they remember something different, something more congenial to the narratives and prejudices already in their brain.
This from David A, with whom I have more than a passing acquaintance, speaking of Seymour Hersh on Twitter.
Of the man who revealed My Lai and Abu Ghraib to the world, all he has to say is “nonsense.”
David Aaronovitch
@DAaronovitch
·
Feb 8
A shame that no credibility can be attached to Hersh’s ‘reports’. It is, of course, nonsense.
DA who said re WMDs in Iraq “If nothing is eventually found, I – as a supporter of the war – will never believe another thing I am told by our government or that of the US, ever again. And more to the point, neither will anyone else. Those weapons had better be there somewhere.”
Nowadays he appears to believe everthing the US/UK govts say about Ukraine and other things too numerous to mention.
“Nowadays he appears to believe everthing the US/UK govts say about Ukraine and other things too numerous to mention.”
I wonder if he had a Damascene conversion.
I promised to keep you informed on what’s discussed in Russian media. Before I say ‘good night’ to you, here is one from Pikabu. Re: freedom of speech.
Former Twitter executives invited to congressional hearing
https://pikabu.ru/story/byivshee_rukovodstvo_twitter_priglasili_na_slushaniya_v_kongress_9934499
The videos are in English, the text is Russian translation.
The black and white thinking, probably due to social media have really corrupted the west population.
Here we have the likely culprit of a grave crime but atleast 70% of westerners refuse to come to terms that US is behind this, they have been brainwashed it was Russia. It is so scary to see normal, often highly educated people acting like they are sheep, still accusing Russia or try to smear Hersh!
I also wonder if Hersh and his source will come forward with more details due to the suppression of this revelation.
This story is way too big to just die.
Even if Hersh sat there alongside the source. The press would ignore, and that source would be dismissed a fantasist, without some physical proof, then destroyed. If it’s all true(?), wheels are probably already turning, they’ll be investigating everyone involved.
Look at the lengths Edward Snowden had to go to. If Snowden hadn’t had actual proof, thanks to being a systems administrator with highly privileged system access, his revelations would’ve been dismissed as those of a fantasist. According to reports, after Snowden, the NSA dramatically tightened security checks and at least two people are needed to authorise access to sensitive data. As Craig has stated, intel agencies are highly compartmentalised, precisely to prevent one person dropping a great abundance of damaging information.
From time to time I have to think of Katherine Gun and how they manipulated her. And only because she did not back off they folded. So eventually the entire system does / or at least back then – did also rely very much on projecting fear. She knew she was right and they were not.
Did they make any legal changes since? To prevent something like that happening again?
p.s. I was at the European premiere of “Official Secrets”. Gun was there. I had planned to talk to her. But after the film I just kept quiet. I didn´t know any more what to say. “Thank you for being so brave.” ? So I said nothing.
Public interest disclosures have been made all but impossible. And the parliamentary oversight body, the ISC, rarely meets and is fairly useless. Staggeringly, for a western democracy, we have no democratic oversight of special forces. I honestly think the vast bulk of politicians would rather not know anything, so they can sleep at night.
After the Snowden revelations, MPs here in the UK were talking about giving parliamentary protection to intel service whistleblowers. Like everything else tho, the dogs bark and then the caravan moves on.
I’ve given up on UK politics altogether, and I won’t be voting. The system needs radical reform just to make it democratic.
“I’ve given up on UK politics altogether, and I won’t be voting.”
You should vote for some no-hoper; that way your displeasure is registered and the no-hoper is encouraged.
I’m no economist but if German business and households can’t afford to pay the increased costs for gas etc levied by the US and Norway do they not fold while India and China receive cheap Russian gas etc do they not have the capacity to expand and the start to trade in non dollar currency? Who came up with this nonsense.
“The United States is now totally frank about putting its cards on the table…. Its official declared policy is now defined as ‘full spectrum dominance’. That is not my term, it is theirs. ‘Full spectrum dominance’ means control of land, sea, air and space and all attendant resources”. [Harold Pinter, Nobel Lecture.]
But ‘Full Spectrum Dominance’ is not a new concept – even if the words have changed. It originated well over a hundred years ago, though for long periods it was cloaked in secrecy – particularly in the run up to WWI and more particularly in the inter-war years, when important elements of the Anglo-American elites were intriguing to sow the seeds of future Eurasian full-spectrum dominance in Germany.
American strategists are now quite open about this aim – indeed they boast about it:
“The primordial interest of the United States, over which for centuries we have fought wars– the First, the Second and Cold Wars– has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united there, they’re the only force that could threaten us. And to make sure that that doesn’t happen.” George Friedman, STRATFOR CEO at The Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs.
[Watch Friedman making this public statement at: https://uaposition.com/stratfor-founder-and-ceo-george-friedman-about-europe-ukraine-and-us-military-power/
UA Position, Sunday, April 5, 2015]
Friedman is an extremely well-connected strategic forecaster with access to US imperial thinking at the highest levels. The title of his most recent book gives a flavour of that thinking and intent.
The Storm Before the Calm: America’s Discord, the Coming Crisis of the 2020s, and the Triumph Beyond (2020). [Friedman, G. 2021, Anchor Books, Penguin, New York]
This is now mainstream public US imperialist thinking.
Germany was conquered and has been occupied since 1945.
Phase I against Russia was completed with the the destruction of the USSR, a drunken puppet put in place, and the Chicago boys despatched to plunder its assets. Putin put a stop to that and hence became the enemy.
He fell into the NATO (in reality the US) trap last February (I agree entirely with Craig’s assessment of him).
But let us not be in any doubt. Full Spectrum dominance and the control of all Eurasian assets is the aim, and the present NATO action is in pursuit of that.
We are sleepwalking into WWIII.
Lee Stranahan inferred a short time ago on his show on Radio Sputnik from Hershs failure to mention Brits in his story (despite indicators like Truss’s tweet) that Hersh’s source(s) was/were British.
Hersh wrote three pieces on Ghouta that contradicted the official story. He couldn’t get any of them published by his previous normal outlet The New Yorker or anybody else in the US. The first two he got published in the London Review of Books. For the third, he had to turn to Germany and the Springer publication Die Welt am Sonntag. Now he has to turn to Substack.
Hopefully atleast Tucker Carlson will interview him on Fox, he seems to be the only guy in western msm that makes any sense these days on this type of topics.
Jack
Indeed.. T.C.. recently had Jimmy Dore and Aaron Maté on his show.
Hm. I’ve always assumed it was the Yanks wot dunnit. But his revelation seems to consist of Mr Hersh saying “Trust me, guv, this bloke wot I know swears on his Ma’s grave that it went down just like this …”
I don’t believe denials from the US govt; why should I believe this account either? Maybe Hersh’s source is doing a Colin Powell, eh?
Could it even be an elaborate hoax to pass Joe Biden off as a Firm Man of Decision? No; that probably is too far fetched.
Right after the demolition of the pipeline, it was conceivable that Russia had demolished it in order to degrade the industrial capacity and reduce the wartime resolve of central Europe, which was already de facto at war with Russia. Possibly, maybe, Russia had done this to subject Germany and others to a harsh winter and the degradation of their industries which require natural gas to function, and to make them rethink their priorities. The German leadership, if not the public, was obviously skeptical. But then, when Western “investigations” failed to provide any convincing explanations or evidence about what had happened, and when the whole affair was swept under the rug, that’s when it really became obvious.
It was at that point that “journalists” were required to exercise doublethink. Here in America, there was an illuminating episode on the Joe Rogan podcast with Krystal Ball & Saagar Enjeti just a few days ago. They’re considered to be left-liberal activists. Rogan made them watch a clip of Jimmy Dore asserting various things, one of which was that the US was behind NS’s destruction. Saagar says, immediately after the clip, which was a damning indictment of many US policies: “Nord Stream man, I forgot about that one”. That’s emblematic about how media is required to think. A qualification for the job is the ability to put — at an almost unconscious level, just as Orwell suggested Outer Party members would be required to do — any inconvenient fact down the memory hole.
The fact that the German public remains willfully oblivious to all of it is the saddest part, and the biggest obstacle to change. If they were to realize it, there could be changes in the EU.
the first major piece on NS 1 in German Sueddeutsche Zeitung has appeared.
Written by Stefan Kornelius. Chief editor of domestic politics. It is a laughable item with almost no knowledge of the person Seymour Hersh.
I only post it here to document what CM has said in his blog entry.
And to present a German example for British phenomena regularly discussed here.
Sueddeutsche Zeitung was once a good publication.
Then it was taken over by some investor.
Since good people have left, staff is being shuffled, costs had to be cut.
Stefan Kornelius has been correspondent in D.C., is member of the “Atlantikbrücke” a NATO affiliate.
According to Wiki: member of German Council on Foreign Relations, Federal Academy for Security Policy, and also the Russia-German Forum, which however is in a state of shock since Febr.
He has been criticized publicly (TV in fact 8 years ago) for his all too open “Americanism”.
I only remember that his texts are mediocre, even child-like in style and since he is chief editor contain nil serious research.
The stuff he has written about 9/11 and the War on Terror was among the worst I can remember.
I am too tired to translate the short piece.
But at least here you can read the German text if you wish.
It´s a disgrace not least because Kornelius so obviously makes no effort at all.
“(…)
Die Schattenseiten eines Star-Reporters
Seymor Hersh deckte die wohl größten Kriegsgräuel in Vietnam auf und wurde dadurch als Journalist weltbekannt. Seinen jüngsten Stücken haftet jedoch immer mehr der Geruch der Konspiration an – und die Szene liebt ihn dafür.
Von Stefan Kornelius
Seymour Myron Hersh, von Freunden und Kollegen nur Sy genannt, hat große Tage in seiner Profession gesehen. Wenige Journalisten schaffen es, zu einer weltweit bekannten Marke zu werden, vor allem, wenn sie nicht auf dem Bildschirm erscheinen. Hersh war nie ein Bildschirm-Typ, sondern eher das Gegenteil: ein Mann der Archive und Bibliotheken, der vertraulichen Interviews, der Investigation im Verborgenen. Das hat ihm eine gewaltige Reputation eingebracht, viele Preise und den Ruf eines bedingungslosen Rechercheurs. Aber es gibt die Schattenseiten des Reporters Hersh, der nun 85 Jahre alt ist und offenbar bereit zu sein scheint, seine Lebensreputation dem Geschäft mit der Konspiration zu opfern.
Hershs journalistische Glanztat fällt in die späten Sechzigerjahre, als er die wohl größten Kriegsgräuel der US-Streitkräfte in Vietnam aufdeckte, das Massaker von My Lai. Bis zu 504 vietnamesische Zivilisten waren 1968 von einer US-Einheit zum Teil bestialisch getötet, viele vergewaltigt worden. Die juristische Aufarbeitung sollte vor der Öffentlichkeit versteckt werden, Hersh aber machte den Fall öffentlich.
Es folgten unzählige investigative Recherchen im Milieu der Sicherheitspolitik und der Geheimdienste. Hersh arbeitete zunächst für die New York Times, danach veröffentlichte er seine Recherchen im New Yorker, aber eigentlich blieb er stets der einsame Wolf unter den Rechercheuren, nicht selten im heftigen Konflikt mit seinen Chefredakteuren, angetrieben von großem Misstrauen und offenbar guten Quellen, die ihm die Abgründe der klandestinen und in der Regel konservativen Welt ausleuchteten.
Knallige Thesen, wenige Belege
Doch schon vor gut 15 Jahren haftete Hershs Recherchen öfter der Geruch der Konspiration an. Immer häufiger fiel der Autor durch knallige Thesen und wenig belegte Behauptungen auf: Giftgas in Syrien, Osama bin Ladens Tötung – stets waren mehr Fantasien als Fakten im Spiel. Die sich über viele Seiten erstreckenden Elaborate lesen sich wie Thriller. Der New Yorker stellte die Zusammenarbeit ein, seriöse Medien prüften die Texte und blieben anschließend auf Distanz. Sein jüngstes Werk, gerade veröffentlicht auf Hershs eigenem Blog, bildet da keine Ausnahme.
Hersh behauptet in dem Stück, er wisse, wer die Nord-Stream-Pipeline am 26. September 2022 in der Ostsee gesprengt habe: Die USA selbst waren es, auf Befehl des Präsidenten. Belege für seine These liefert Hersh nicht. Er beruft sich auf eine einzige anonyme Quelle. Die Geschichte selbst ist freilich überladen mit ausgeschmückten Details und handelt von einer riesigen Gruppe von Mittätern aus allen Ebenen der US-Regierung und der US-Sicherheitskräfte nebst befreundeter Staaten wie Norwegen, Schweden, Dänemark und natürlich Deutschland. Offenbar fand sich nicht einer, der die erste Quelle stützen wollte.
Auch der politische Plausibilitätstest hält der flimmernden These nicht stand: eine ursprünglich gegen Deutschland und dessen Energieinteressen gerichtete Geheimaktion innerhalb des Nato-Bündnisses? Während dieses Deutschland gleichzeitig weitreichende Sicherheitsgarantien für den Betrieb der Pipeline gibt und dann plötzlich deren Nutzung nach Kriegsbeginn allemal einstellt?
Die Urheberschaft für die Pipeline-Zerstörung ist bis heute nicht belegt. Westliche Dienste deuten auf Russland, aber genauso halten sich andere Gerüchte. Die Spurensuche ist schwierig, natürlich wächst die Faszination für das Rätsel. Umso verständlicher, dass sich Hershs neue Fans aus der Konspirationsszene nun zu Wort melden und mit Verweis auf die Reputation des Mannes raunen. Das Weiße Haus hat die Sache jedenfalls dementiert, und die norwegische Regierung hielt eine Reaktion bislang für überflüssig. Sicher ist, dass sich Hershs These halten wird – bis zu ihrem tatsächlichen Beweis oder eher dem Beleg des Gegenteils. (…)”.
Please delete this if someone comes up with something better.
This is DeepL’s version of the Stefan Kornelius piece:
The dark side of a star reporter
Seymor Hersh uncovered arguably the greatest war atrocities in Vietnam, making him world-famous as a journalist. His most recent pieces, however, are increasingly tainted by the smell of conspiracy – and the scene loves him for it.
Seymour Myron Hersh, known only as Sy to friends and colleagues, has seen great days in his profession. Few journalists manage to become a world-renowned brand, especially when they don’t appear on screen. Hersh was never a screen guy, but rather the opposite: a man of archives and libraries, of confidential interviews, of investigating in secret. This has earned him a formidable reputation, many awards and a reputation as an unquestioning investigator. But there is the darker side of reporter Hersh, now 85 years old, who seems willing to sacrifice his life’s reputation to the business of conspiracy.
Hersh’s journalistic tour de force came in the late 1960s, when he exposed what was arguably the greatest wartime atrocity committed by U.S. forces in Vietnam, the My Lai massacre. Up to 504 Vietnamese civilians had been killed in 1968 by a U.S. unit, some of them in a bestial manner, many of them raped. The legal investigation was supposed to be hidden from the public, but Hersh made the case public.
Countless investigative researches in the milieu of security policy and intelligence services followed. Hersh first worked for the New York Times, then published his research in the New Yorker, but in fact he always remained the lone wolf among investigators, not infrequently in fierce conflict with his editors-in-chief, driven by great distrust and apparently good sources who illuminated for him the abysses of the clandestine and usually conservative world.
Glaring theses, little evidence
But even 15 years ago, Hersh’s research often smacked of conspiracy. More and more often, the author was conspicuous for his gaudy theses and unsubstantiated claims: Poison gas in Syria, Osama bin Laden’s killing – there were always more fantasies than facts involved. The elaborations, which stretch over many pages, read like thrillers. The New Yorker stopped cooperating, serious media examined the texts and subsequently kept their distance. His latest piece, just published on Hersh’s own blog, is no exception.
In the piece, Hersh claims to know who blew up the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea on September 26, 2022: It was the U.S. itself, on presidential orders. Hersh does not provide evidence for his thesis. He refers to a single anonymous source. The story itself, of course, is overloaded with embellished details and deals with a huge group of accomplices from all levels of the U.S. government and the U.S. security forces, along with friendly states such as Norway, Sweden, Denmark and, of course, Germany. Apparently, not one could be found to support the first source.
Even the political plausibility test does not stand up to the flickering thesis: a secret operation within the NATO alliance originally directed against Germany and its energy interests? While at the same time Germany gives far-reaching security guarantees for the operation of the pipeline and then suddenly stops its use after the start of the war?
The authorship of the pipeline destruction has not been proven until today. Western services point to Russia, but equally other rumors persist. The search for clues is difficult, of course the fascination for the mystery is growing. All the more understandable that Hersh’s new fans from the conspiracy scene are now speaking out and murmuring with reference to the man’s reputation. In any case, the White House has denied the matter, and the Norwegian government has so far deemed a reaction superfluous. What is certain is that Hersh’s thesis will hold up – until it is actually proven, or rather proven otherwise. (…)”.
Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
journalism increasingly consists of smearing any dissenter to the official line., even when the official line is that of a state which has just demolished your critical infrastructure. this suddeutsche gentleman must be trusted by germans because he has the imprimatur of corporate media and dutifully peddles official line of washington dc. that’s why they know they can trust him.
” sacrifice his life’s reputation to the business of conspiracy.”
Blowing up a pipeline is necessarily a conspiracy, so any theory about who did it is necessarily a conspiracy theory. Or is it only a ‘conspiracy theory’ if it says western governments were involved?
The word ‘conspiracy’ here is being used to mark Hersh’s theory as not politically acceptable. Remember, the point of propaganda is to tell you what you are permitted to say, not to convince you of any argument. In connection with this here is a piece about ‘Questioning The Official Story About Official Stories: A Role for Citizen Investigations’ from Tim Hayward.
https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2022/12/11/questioning-the-official-story-about-official-stories-a-role-for-citizen-investigations/
“It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter.”
Harold Pinter.
Now that Chemical weapons are reported used by Ukraine…Escalation might well be inevitable..
Scott Ritter Asks straight to the OPCW –
” Why are you Silent in the face of what is clearly a war crime..A war crime of Horrific Proportions, and here’s the Danger, Silence is Consent ..
Watch this – Horrific implications – Starting at 48;40 mins –
They just crossed the RED line and Putin readies response | Redacted with Clayton Morris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziK3d5q2uDU
The ‘chemical weapons’ in that video are bog standard grenades supplied by Germany. Red denotes fragmentation, white – stun. Scott Ritter talking out of his backside as usual.
Seymour Hersh; well known conspiracy theorist who in the words of Vox’s Max Fisher “… has appeared increasingly to have gone off the rails. His stories, often alleging vast and shadowy conspiracies, have made startling — and often internally inconsistent — accusations, based on little or no proof beyond a handful of anonymous ‘officials’.
This story is another that relies on evidence from an ‘anonymous source’ and people wonder why no mainstream journalist will touch it? Not quite true as the ‘Mail’ did run it which probably tells you all you need to know.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11728747/Who-blew-20-billion-Nord-Stream-pipeline-White-House-denies-attack.html
How does this fit with the previous and contradictory theory that NS2 was blown up by MI5/SBS and Liz Truss’s “It’s done” text?
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/29/russia-says-uk-navy-blew-up-nord-stream-london-denies-claim
https://www.hindustantimes.com/videos/news/its-done-putin-fumes-after-liz-truss-message-to-blinken-over-nord-stream-attack-revealed-101667320595987.html
All neglecting to mention that the pipelines were not operational at the time.
As you know there were totally unevidenced claims that Russia itself blew up its own pipelines. Those claims were far more widely publicised and treated far more seriously by the Max Fishers of this world than Hersh’s detailed account. The Russia Dunnit narrative seems a much more absurd conspiracy theory, than Hersh’s but I don’t remember you rushing to pour scorn on it. Point being, I’m not at all clear on what meets your criteria for a conspiracy theory.
Yeah! And they claimed the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation.
Surprise! it turned out to be true!
Twitter users complained of shadow ban and other forms of supressing, those people were mocked and called conspiracy theorists.
Surprise! it turned out to be true as well
https://youtu.be/_iYOf7lC5-k
Yes I remember there was a similar media blackout on that other “conspiracy theory” on the eve of the last US Presidential election.. Unlike other countries, we’re very fortunate here to have mainstream journalists who guard us against disinformation!
Can I offer a translation of some of the comments? What Russians think about freedom of speech in the West.
– All of that is well and good, but will they go to jail for it? After all, they won’t put you in jail. And it turns out “the dog barks, and the caravan moves on”
– What are you going to jail them for? Private company, parking my car as I wish* (*Russian idiom, akin “I don’t give a damn about anyone”). According to the user agreement, they most likely can not only ban you yourself, but also fuck your dog.
– For interfering in elections, spreading false information, manipulating public opinion and endangering democracy.
What you listed right now is a rotten excuse. Companies use this excuse. And this excuse is because they have “freedom of speech” when the information they need comes out and “we are a private company” when it is necessary to strangle inconvenient information.
It is interesting to see whether the United States, which considers itself a democracy, can bang this excuse.
– This is America. The more money, the more lawyers will be hired and will parse every comma. And English (*language) is more abstract. You can talk for hours and it will not be clear what gender is (*the person) being discussed, and they are still yelling for pronouns. Endings, conjugations and declensions would fucking kill all the logic of these lawyers.
In the end there will be a conclusion that Dick O’Cunt did good by his actions; and off we go to the trial of every deleted or highlighted post. After all, their perception of words is only their perception. And they will say that the interpretation of Trump’s words: ” I’m gonna eat sandwich” be like this:
” I ” – So he thinks only about his own benefit
” Gonna ” – is an abbreviation and a common phrase. So he supports rednecks who fuck and eat their children
” Sandwich ” – is the representation of American Pie. How can he say that?! So he is against multiculturalism. And it’s right that we banned him, the fucking racist.
—
Sorry for the obscene words, it’s
SpartaRussia 🙂“Hello Tatyana
This video clip confirms that the Biden regime blatantly lies to the US people.
I mean blatantly.
Sad to say, many (perhaps most) posters here support the Biden regime.
Auld tankies….”
—-
Sorry, the ability to wait patiently for a long time is not in my nature. The original takes too long to arrive, so I had to make a DIY copy myself.
A ‘detailed account’ is worthless without evidence and Hersh has produced none.
So never mind other conspiracy theories that may have turned out to be true. That doesn’t support Hersh’s story. And what about the Russian claim that it was the Brits what done it? Were they lying? They must have been, if Hersh is correct; or maybe it’s the other way around, or maybe both are wrong.
I’ve never expressed an opinion on Nordstream. As neither pipeline was operational and not likely to be operational in the foreseeable future, I’m at a loss to understand why anyone went to the bother of blowing holes in them.
“And what about…”
Well, well, well, well…
Are we now to reassess all past scoldings and dismissals of those engaging in “whataboutery”? Or is it just so obviously legitimate in this particular instance that it should not to be drawn attention to?
BTW you seem rather disinclined to spell out your criteria for what constitutes a conspiracy theory. It’s a term you deploy at the drop of a hat so it would help readers if you could explain what you mean. Not everybody implicitly understands why Hersh’s story is an obvious conspiracy theory but the mainstream Russia Dunnit narrative is not.
Here’s the opportunity to clearly explain what constitutes a conspiracy theory and also when ‘whataboutery’ can be legitimately deployed.
” I’m at a loss to understand why anyone went to the bother of blowing holes in them.”
In case the germans changed their mind about not buying russian gas.
I’m sensing a reluctance to discuss the Russian claims. This is not classic ‘whataboutery’, Russia and Hersh can’t both be right. Can they?
The unlikely decision to resume supply wouldn’t only have rested with Germany. NS1 was shut down by the Russians on probably spurious technical grounds. Anyway the company that ran the pipelines, Nordstream AG, filed for bankruptcy and sacked all its employees back in March; the pipeline wasn’t blown up until September.
“So never mind other conspiracy theories that may have turned out to be true. That doesn’t support Hersh’s story.”
What does support Hersh’s story is that the pipelines were blown up. That much is undeniable. So someone must have done it. The main suspect, the USA had motive. That, too is undeniable. It doesn’t mean they did it, but it makes it far more likely that they did it than another country that didn’t have a motive, like Russia, or at least not one that stands up to any serious scrutiny. What Hersh points out is how the USA could have had the means and the opportunity, too. It doesn’t have to be true, it just has to be probable. If the USA had the means and the opportunity and Russia didn’t: no easy access to the pipelines off Bornholm, no naval exercise in the vicinity just beforehand, the balance of probability is that the USA blew up the pipelines and Russia didn’t. Of course Hersh’s story isn’t proof, because in these stories, no proof is good enough.
“I’m sensing a reluctance to discuss the Russian claims. This is not classic ‘whataboutery’, Russia and Hersh can’t both be right. Can they?”
This looks to me like the classic “If I can prove you wrong on one tiny detail, that shows you are wrong about everything” arguing tactic.
“NS1 was shut down by the Russians on probably spurious technical grounds. Anyway the company that ran the pipelines, Nordstream AG, filed for bankruptcy and sacked all its employees back in March; ”
Does that not argue that Russia had no need to blow up the pipeline if it could completely stop its use by other, less drastic means? Six months after they closed it down they suddenly feel the need to blow it up, perhaps in case some saboteurs recommissioned it overnight without their permission? Is it not more likely that six months after it was closed down someone wanted to make sure it stayed that way?
That’s how it develops today.
The US State Department:
“The US authorities’ denial of involvement in the Nord Stream attacks is credible. All allegations of Washington’s involvement in what happened are “complete nonsense,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said.
During the briefing, Price tried to interrupt a journalist who asked a question about Nord Stream by saying that “it would be better if propaganda did not circulate in the press room.”
The Pentagon:
replied to the Russian Information Agency’s request: “The United States has nothing to do with blowing up Nord Stream”.
United Nations:
Farhan Haq said he could not verify Mr. Hersh’s information.
Mr. Hersh:
was invited to speak in the State Duma in Russia. He refused, commenting that he was engaged in stories, not politics.
Sweden:
The prosecutor’s office and the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs do not comment on the investigation of the American journalist, Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh, about the explosions on the Nord Stream gas pipelines.
As RIA Novosti was told in the press service of the Swedish Foreign Ministry, “the competent authorities of Sweden are currently conducting a criminal investigation.”
Utah Senator Mike Lee:
expressed concern on Twitter that the alleged attack on Nord Stream could have been carried out by the US authorities without the consent of Congress.
Flightradar24:
The archive on Flightradar24 does not contain information about the Norwegian aircraft that could drop the buoy, as it apparently flew with the transponder turned off. But the resource has preserved the flight track of the P-8A Poseidon, which arrived in the area of the incident exactly one hour after the explosion.
According to the resource entry, the American plane flew in from the Atlantic, passed over Denmark, flew up to the island of Bornholm. Then it refueled over Poland from the tanker aircraft KS-135R.
After that, Poseidon returned to Bornholm and at about 04:45 European Summer Time made a full circle exactly over the area of the explosion, began to descend. Having made a U-turn to the right it moved away from the scene. The reconnaissance aircraft gradually descended from a height of 7,300 meters to 2,200 meters, after which it disappeared from the radar, turning off the transponder.
As a military expert, editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine Igor Korotchenko told RIA Novosti, the track of an American aircraft from Flightradar24 confirms Hersh’s version.
“Flightradar24:
The archive on Flightradar24 does not contain information about the Norwegian aircraft that could drop the buoy, as it apparently flew with the transponder turned off.”
Or maybe there never was such a flight.
“But the resource has preserved the flight track of the P-8A Poseidon, which arrived in the area of the incident exactly one hour after the explosion.”
Sent to investigate perhaps?
Hey, if you look at the page 1, you can see the comment I left yesterday
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2023/02/sy-hersh-and-the-way-we-live-now/comment-page-1/#comment-1033027
So, I’m just reporting on what is in Russian media. I live in Russia, it’s war going on here, so I’m trying to imagine what to expect if the story proves true.
—
Nord Stream AG is a consortium. Shareholders provided 30% of the project budget in proportion to their shares. The remaining 70% were attracted from external sources – banks and export credit agencies – in the form of project financing.
I don’t know who are banks and agencies.
There is the list of the shareholders
https://www.nord-stream.com/about-us/our-shareholders/
Gazprom 51%, Wintershall Dea 15.5%, PEG Infrastruktur AG (E.ON) 15.5%, N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie 9%, ENGIE 9%
So, Krauts only sucks 31% of 30%, it’s about 10% of the total investment 7.4 billion euros. Let the French and Dutch take comfort in the fact that Russia will have to suck more than them. Although, wait, there are still unknown banks and agencies that swallowed 70% of it.
“Sent to investigate?”.
It was observed over the detonation site approximately one hour after the explosions, after a flight of some hours.
If its mission was purely investigatory, that would imply prior knowledge.
Gordon Hahn with a short piece now but mainly just summary:
“Like him or not, when asking why Putin decided to invade the reasons were legion to undertake a preemptive measure obviating the need for a larger future war that could face the country in a less advantageous correlation of forces between Russian and the West.
Why did Putin invade? Zelinskiy’s nuclear threat, Biden’s NordStream threat, Ukraine’s increasingly powerful NATOized military, the substantial and growing ultranationalist and neofascist nature of Ukraine’s state ideology and political culture? Take your pick or take them altogether.”
Re: the point of time to invade:
“The more immediate causes I have demonstrated include Zelenskiy’s threat to develop nuclear weapons a week before Putin’s invasion, a deployment of Ukrainian forces to the contact line perhaps in a posture that signaed an imminent attack on Donbas, and a sharp escalation in fighting initiated and ratcheted up by Kiev’s forces (regular and neofascist ‘national batallions’), who frequently targeted civilians, along the Donbas line of contact days before Putin;s invasion and precisely he took the decision to invade.”
As for the nuclear weapons threat one should point out to Hahn that such a thing doesn´t happen over night.
There was a Russian call to convene the UN SC because of rising tensions in Donbas in January, I believe, which was declined – ?
– all of this said while Turkey is desaster territory –
Here an American judge weighs in on the illegality of blowing up NS pipelines.
https://youtu.be/SfqacYEXtKQ?t=156
Thank you for the link!
What Judge Napolitano says about the US probably committed an act of war against Germany, if proved true, then it puts a question of NATO membership. It turns out that NATO membership does not guarantee protection against allies themselves. In fact, if one Nato member attacks another Nato member, then whom will the rest of the Nato members protect? Is there any rule?
Moonofalabama makes some sensible looking corrections to Sy Hersh’s article.
We hear a lot about “compliance with international law” from the US gov and its vassals, though it seems the laws only apply to those countries which are not in that club.
The US benefited from destruction of the pipelines, they had opportunity, their representatives stated their intention before, and their satisfaction following the incident. If there were a credible international order, representatives of the US gov would surely be under arrest and refused bail while charges were pressed under anti-terrorism laws.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/02/some-small-corrections-to-seymour-hershs-new-nord-stream-revelations.html#more
“The secret is that people do genuinely believe that they are in a battle of good against evil, and it is necessary to accept the narrative being promoted, in the interests of fighting evil.”
Craig, I think you have hit the nail on the head here, at least insofar as I have come to the exact same conclusion based on direct experience.
I have engaged in some limited discussions about the Western narrative versus reality and it inevitably comes down to this: it simply does not matter what facts you present or how solid an argument you build based on these facts. I have, in fact, never been challenged with a substantial counterargument of any kind, even when practically begging for one! I have concluded that for most people all inconvenient facts and narratives are easily overridden by the perceived good vs evil setting. And yes, that certainly implies that anyone attempting to cast doubts on the Western story are labeled morally dubious. It’s an argument that cannot be won, in other words, and engaging in it becomes insufferable in the end. Yet what else is there to be done?
As ANDREW R was so kind to translate the SZ piece on Hersh earlier here –
I now offer another article, in translation, by “left” German daily TAZ, the Greens´ house-paper. It is more factual. However – of course – unnecessary terms like “pro-Russian propaganda” pop up. (Don´t know why this Cold-War fairytale-ism is so widespread. It seriously hurts the article´s conclusion.)
Here too as expected, and as I earlier pointed out myself, the author takes issue with only one source mentioned – even though this text overemphasizes the overall significance of the single source. It is not used by Hersh re: D.C.s workings. Those he knows himself, where he is quoting known names and places.
It would now be media analysts´ job to look into the TAZ archive e.g. and scrutinize their reporting regarding other stories. Do they hold up to hailed principles of journalism? Or do they possibly only use them now as handy pretext for a political agenda?
And this one allegation is also in the text: would Hersh seriously claim to be the ‘greatest living investigative journalist’ – or is this one of those evil ad-hominems? Especially as it is stated without a source ;-P and we cannot verify. But trust the author in ways we shall (not) trust Hersh. (But I can be wrong of course)
p.s. (For me personally there were more important journalists such as Barbara Ehrenreich, Allan Nairn, Jeff Cohen, Spotlight´s team etc. But this just being a minor biographical footnote.)
* * *
https://taz.de/Seymour-Hersh-zur-Nord-Stream-Sprengung/!5914963/
TAZ, 10.2.23
by Pacal Beucker (a decent journalist I believe without fancy NATO-connections, as much as decency today is compatible with earning a living for his family and staff dynamics, and good manners, I guess).
“(…)
Seymour Hersh on Nord Stream blast: Pulitzer Prize winner gone astray
Who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines? Seymour Hersh believes he has found an answer. Unfortunately, he disregards journalistic standards.
The legends have grown old. Carl Bernstein will turn 79 on Tuesday, Bob Woodward 80 in March, and Seymour Hersh will even turn 86 in April. Along with the two Watergate revelators, the indefatigable Hersh is considered the world’s most famous investigator. He received the Pulitzer Prize in 1970 for exposing the Mỹ Lai massacre, a horrific war crime committed by the U.S. Army. Quite a few revelations followed in the decades since. Hersh has always been one to take on the powerful.
To cite just one more example, in 2004 he was instrumental in making public the torture practices of the U.S. in Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison. Without a doubt, this is a man who has earned great journalistic merits. Even if he has occasionally missed the mark. As in the case of his Kennedy biography, where he allowed himself to be led astray by forged documents. But that does not make us forget his merits.
Hersh calls himself “the world’s leading investigative journalist. If his latest story is true, it would indeed be difficult to dispute. Regrettably, it is at least as likely that Hersh will completely ruin his reputation at the conclusion of his highly creditable journalistic career.
In any case, his latest “revelation” has enormous explosive power: For him, it is a fact that the U.S., with the help of Norway, blew up the Nord Stream pipelines in September 2022 in a daring secret operation a few kilometers off the Danish island of Bornholm. That’s how he’s written it up now in an article more than 31,000 characters and more than 5,200 words long – on the online platform Substack, not in a reputable newspaper like the New York Times or the Washington Post. And there are good reasons for that. Even the taz would have rejected the text if it had been offered to it.
Poor factual basis
The basic problem of Hersh’s article is the more than scanty factual basis. It is completely devoid of evidence. That alone does not make the story dubious. But when the veteran journalist instead relies exclusively on a single anonymous “source with direct knowledge of operational planning,” that is too little to meet journalistic standards. For that, he should have at least adhered to the two-source principle, which requires that information be confirmed by two reliable and independent sources. This is supposed to protect against falling for predatory pistols.
Hersh’s alleged whistleblower should therefore have been the starting point, not the end point, of the research. Especially since, according to Hersh, an astonishing number of people should have known about the operation: in the U.S. administration, the CIA, the U.S. Navy, all the way to the Social Democratic-led government and the Norwegian Navy. And no one else could be found during what he claims was three months of research? If that was the case, then it’s just not enough. As bitter as that is.
Kennedy biographer Arthur Schlesinger once called Hersh “the most gullible investigative reporter I’ve ever met.” Is his new story further proof of this? In any case, Hersh’s overly loose handling of anonymous sources has already gotten him into trouble from time to time in the past. But this time only one?
Nevertheless, the weekly newspaper Freitag attests to the high plausibility of his account in its online edition. But is that so? Let’s take just one very small passage for examination: the one about NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. The former Norwegian prime minister is, Hersh quotes his anonymous source, “the glove that fits the American hand.”
Lack of plausibility
In justification, Hersh states that Stoltenberg is a “convinced anti-communist” who “has worked with American intelligence since the Vietnam War.” Since then, he has enjoyed “complete confidence.” Well, that might be true if Stoltenberg were as old as Hersh.
But he isn’t. When the Paris Agreement on ending the war and restoring peace in Vietnam was concluded on January 27, 1973, Stoltenberg was just 13 years old. And before that, he was supposed to have already cooperated with the U.S. secret service? Now that doesn’t really sound all that plausible.
No question, Hersh has written an exciting story. But it doesn’t sound plausible.
This also applies to the attack itself: After months of meticulous planning, which began in December 2021 – two months before the Russian invasion of Ukraine – everything was turned upside down overnight during a NATO exercise in June 2022. So that the U.S. divers did not equip the bombs on the gas pipelines with a 48-hour timer as intended, but with more sophisticated detonators, with which the explosive devices could only be detonated months later by means of a sonar buoy dropped by a surveillance aircraft of the Norwegian Navy.
And then, miraculously, it all worked out perfectly without any prior testing. That sounds pretty fantastic. However, Hersh fails to explain why only three of the four tubes were detonated.
Too many questionabilities and inconsistencies
The fact that both the U.S. and Norwegian governments strongly deny Hersh’s allegations is not important. Russia, too, has resolutely denied involvement in the crime. Just as any country would do when faced with such an accusation. But there are too many questionabilities and inconsistencies to simply take Hersh’s story at face value.
Nevertheless, it has been eagerly taken up not only by Russian and Chinese government circles. Die junge Welt published it in German translation, ex-left-wing party leader Sahra Wagenknecht attested to Hersh’s “meticulous research” on Twitter, and AfD leader Tino Chrupalla tweeted, “The German government must investigate this suspicion!” What they all have in common is that Hersh’s story fits into their narrative that the U.S. is responsible for all evil in the world. And it fits perfectly into their pro-Russian propaganda.
But who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines? That remains completely open. Thus, the claim that it was Russia, which was already spread in numerous Western media immediately after the attack, is just as little based on facts. The same applies here: Journalism should not be interest-driven, but rather enlightening. Drawing premature conclusions on the basis of what corresponds to one’s own ideological world of ideas is never helpful – this is especially true for a geopolitical event of this magnitude.
And the cui bono question can be helpful as a research approach, but anyone who equates the answer with the solution exposes himself to the great danger of being taken in by a conspiracy theory. For it is a fatal fallacy to assume that those who benefit from something are always those who cause it.
Unfortunately, one must not delude oneself: Fact-free accusations in one direction or another will continue to flourish. This is helped by the fact that even five and a half months after the explosions, no results of the investigation have been made public.
The fact that the federal government has so far not answered questions about the state of the investigation “for reasons of the welfare of the state” does not necessarily seem helpful in this regard. But it is possible that only investigative journalists will eventually uncover what actually happened in the Baltic Sea. Perhaps Woodward and Bernstein will have the time and inclination to look into it again.
(…)”.
One of the German papers I looked at yesterday offered the criticism that Hersh’s story was too carefully constructed with all pieces fitting together neatly to be authentic (work the logic of that out!). Moonofalabama (linked above) points out possible inaccuracies, which suggest Hersh’s account was not as watertight as all that in all respects, but very helpfully provides evidence that acts both as corrections and additions that strengthen Hersh’s account.
Yeah the critics are looking everywhere to somehow tarnish Hersh revelation, it is like that they cannot fathom that US that they hold so dear are able to commit such a crime. However if Hersh made the same revelation but with Russia as the culprit, oh, one can only imagine the same journalists foaming.
Speaking on Germany. The germans seems to have lost it completely after Merkel departed…
German defense minster’s remark about world without Putin inadmissible — Russian MFA
https://tass.com/politics/1574649
Is that a threat even?
Are the germans unaware that the guy coming after Putin may be even “worse” in the eyes of Germany? It is like these people have no diplomatic education, that they are totally clueless about the world.
re: New German MoD
it´s the latest sport.
Like the first day at high school – you learn the ins and outs, you adapt, you leave behind convictions because those are the rules of the new game.
How and why those particular rules apply eventually no one knows.
AND: No one is asking, most importantly.
So Mr. Pistorius is creating background chatter for an expensive mass scene on the sound stage.
As long as Putin and Scholz are having a phone chat from time to time, there is still a higher order at play here.
How well that holds up facing real power I have no clue. As I have no clue about anything any more.
So I go back to Bertrand Russell in London, as if nothing had changed.
Its absurd times and currently just the worst of it, I see no “best” right now.
But I carry on.
” miraculously, it all worked out perfectly without any prior testing. That sounds pretty fantastic. However, Hersh fails to explain why only three of the four tubes were detonated. ”
One of the two pipelines that make up Nordstream 2 was undamaged but one of the Nordstream 1 pipes was severed in two places. Sounds like the divers/ROV operators got lost and accidentally put one of the charges on the wrong pipe. The explosions also occurred 17 hours and 6km apart but Hersh doesn’t even mention that, let alone explain it.
Moon of Alabama did take that question up and gave a sound explanation, I think
Can I play a little conspiracy theorist?
Long before the event, Biden answered the question of a journalist how exactly he was going to get rid of the Nord Stream. He said that he was completely sure that he would do it.
It seemed to me that explosive devices were planted at the stage of pipeline construction. Either the US, or Norgs, maybe someone else who had access. Baltops is an annual military exercise. They just laid it down so that there was a lever of control. That’s exactly what I would do in their place.
” miraculously, it all worked out perfectly without any prior testing. That sounds pretty fantastic. However, Hersh fails to explain why only three of the four tubes were detonated. ”
When does anyone get to test something like this? I can just imagine the conversation, “Hello, is that Vladimir Putin? it’s Joe Biden here. Hi, Vlad, we’re training some divers to blow up undersea pipelines and we wanted to test them before we carry out the main operation. I was thinking, you’re not using the Nordstream pipes right now, so could we use one of them for a test. No, of course we won’t be blowing up the others later on, would we do that? Yes I know I said something of the sort, but I was just joking!”
That’s the point of this sort of operation, it has to go perfectly first time without testing, and in any case it didn’t go perfectly, because only three out of the four pipes were breached. So the fact that it “worked perfectly” shows that Hersh made it all up, as does the fact that it didn’t. Heads I win, tails you lose.
re: when Germany loved Seymour Hersh
3 examples for how German press loved S.H.
2010, DER SPIEGEL
https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/journalismus-ikone-seymour-hersh-das-internet-muss-unkontrolliert-bleiben-a-722693.html
2010, Interview with SUEDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG (in short: He is a saint)
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/seymour-hersh-im-interview-das-raetsel-bleibt-wie-verrueckte-die-regierung-uebernehmen-konnten-1.652610
2017 FAZ (more conservative than SZ, based in Frankfurt)
This on is so overblown I quote a few phrases, it´s almost like a proposal of marriage, by one of those notorious journalists who seem to be around forever, always happy always beloved. It´s for Hershy´s 80th:
“(…)It is possible that without Seymour Hersh’s work over the past fifty years, we would have a different picture today of the United States and its policies as a great power and of war crimes committed in its name (…) the work of this reporter, author, journalist cannot be praised loudly enough (…) Because celebrating him is also celebrating oneself; after all, a figure like him, assertive, committed to the truth, and unafraid of authority, is only conceivable in a country that upholds the freedom of the press and actually respects this fourth power in the state.(…)”
I like the ending especially.
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/seymour-hersh-zum-80-ganz-grosse-geschichten-14962211.html
AG
When there are commercial flight tracking apps like this, available to ordinary citizens. German, Denmark and Sweden authorities must be able to easily ascertain the veracity of the reports: https://twitter.com/shuttletvnews/status/1624008542855258112/photo/3
unless of course those authorities order you to ignore or manipulate the “truth” aka “law” – just like with Assange and that particular one Swedish police-officer who first said, there is no basis to arrest Assenge, but then got the explicit “order”. And we know this order was in accordance with what the British government wished. If am not completely fooled by my memory.