In a special session held requested by Russia at the UN, the USA representative refused to allow for an independent investigation to take place enquiring into the sabotage of the Nordstream gas pipelines. Why did they do this? Isn’t asking the question also providing  the answer?

Journalists of the New York Times (NYT) reported the words of some US officials. They relied on them and gave credence to the suggestion that the sabotage was carried out by individuals and not by a state. How convenient ! These obscure representatives of the US state apparatus do not know the identity of those responsible for the crime committed, but they know that the individuals involved are not Americans. Our good NYT journalists did not ask them a question that was obvious: if they do not know the identity of the individuals responsible for this crime, why do they say and how do they know that these individuals are not Americans?

Our great NYT journalists do not hesitate to report the words of US officials without questioning or criticizing them, and by giving them credibility, but they had nothing to say concerning the detailed article of the great journalist Seymour Hersh, which appeared a few weeks earlier and which had an international impact. As a matter of fact, they did not even take it into account. This attitude of the NYT journalists betrays an obvious bad faith. It shows once again to what extent this « corporate media » is subservient to the government and not to the population and its right to properly be informed.

In a recent blog published on the Substack platform,  Hersh asks other very good questions.

The German journalist who also published the alternative version denies that his source could have been US officials. If the source of information is not the same in Die Zeit and in the NYT, namely « the US officials », how come an American newspaper located almost 4,000 kilometers away published the same allegation and how could it do this almost at the same time?

Another juicy detail that you won’t hear in a North American mass media newscast is the following fact that the author of the German article told Hersh, which Hersh reports thus:

« shortly after the pipeline explosion, officials in Germany, Sweden and Denmark decided to send teams to the scene to retrieve the one mine that had not exploded. He [the German journalist] said, it was too late; a U.S. ship had already rushed to the scene and recovered the mine and other materials. »

The Americans don’t want an independent investigation to take place within th UN, but they also apparently don’t want the Danish, Swedish or German authorities to be able to carry out this investigation as well. I wonder why. Moreover, the authorities concerned have said that they will not provide any information about their investigation, for reasons related to national security. Again, I wonder why.

An intelligence expert told Seymour Hersh: « When you do an operation like the gas pipelines you have to plan a parallel operation – a red herring with an air of reality attached to it. And it has to be as detailed as possible to be believed.

What? The story reported in the New York Times and Die Zeit is a fake news? No way!

The expert adds:

« Anyone who was seriously involved in the event would know that you can’t anchor a sailboat in 80-meter deep water ».

« You can’t just show up with a fake passport and rent a boat. You must either have a captain provided by the charter agent or yacht owner, or have a captain’s license, as required by maritime law. Anyone who has ever chartered a yacht knows this.

« Similar proof of expertise in scuba diving, which requires a special gas mixture, would also be required for divers and the doctor. »

The expert has yet more questions to ask:

« How does a 15-meter-long sailboat find the pipelines in the Baltic Sea? » The pipelines are not that big and they are not indicated on the charts provided with the lease. »

Did the divers have to find them on their own? This raises another question:

« How long can a diver stay there in his or her wetsuit? Maybe 15 minutes. That means it would take a diver four years to cover a square mile. »

One might also wonder how a yacht could carry such a huge cargo of explosives. But even more prosaically:

« So there are six people on the yacht – two divers, two helpers, a doctor, and a captain who rented the boat. But one thing is missing: who should run the yacht? Or cook? What about the logbook that the charterer has to keep for legal reasons? None of this happened, » said the expert. « Stop associating this with reality. This is a travesty. »

Go ahead and answer this other question, too.

« For what reason would a passenger on a yacht leave passports, fake or not, on board? »

In short, it is obvious that the United States are responsible for the sabotage. Everyone knows it. Condoleezza Rice, Donald Trump, Victoria Nuland and Joe Biden have openly said they wanted to stop the Nordstream projects. The Rand Corporation made a recommendation to that effect in « Extending Russia », a document released in 2019. Victoria Nuland told Congress in December 2021 that all options were being considered to end the Nordstream pipelines.

But how can anyone imagine the U.S. doing that to an allied country? It’s implausible, right? No. We can answer that with another question. If the Americans could not do this to Germany, then why did Anthony Blinken rejoice in the opportunities that were available to the United States as a result of this sabotage instead of being sorry, dismayed and in solidarity with the German people? If the Americans could not do this to Germany, why did Victoria Nuland also rejoice in front of Congress with Senator Ted Cruz that the pipeline was now just a chunk of metal at the bottom of the ocean? The Americans did not express an ounce of empathy. As you can see, the United States have no friends, only interests. Do you doubt it? Didn’t they step in to replace France in the submarine contract to be delivered to Australia?

The Americans who are not officially involved in the war in Ukraine have as a matter of fact committed a war crime. We are in wartime. And since we are in wartime, the mass medias all adopt the same attitude. They submit to the law of omerta.