How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline

Seymour Hersh's report

“The New York Times called it a “mystery,” but the United States executed a covert sea operation that was kept secret—until now“.

Most of the media say “one anonymous source” is not enough proof.

Correct. So, when are they going to start doing their job and looking for more – or to find indications that refute the above claim?

Here‘s Tucker Carlson on the whole thing.

Update (10/02/2023):

Independent Evidence Video Confirms Key Part of Sy Hersh’s Report on the Attack on Nord Stream 2

Update (13/02/2023): Tom Luongo calls Hersh a “useful idiot” who is “advancing what is clearly only half the story”. He points out that Hersh mentions the US and Norway as culprits, but never mentions the UK: “This pathological need to absolve the UK of any involvement in the Nordstream bombings and setting the world on a course for total infrastructural war, like Russia is now doing in Ukraine, borders on creepy.”

Luongo’s conclusion:

I could spin out a host of possible Act IIIs here:

  • A quid pro quo between sovereigntist US forces and NATO to keep the UK and Poland out of the story to scapegoat “Biden” and begin cleaning up the State Department of the Nulandistas and British Intelligence influences to begin winding down the war in Ukraine This is my preferred story.
  • Further put the US and Russia on a collision course by having a journalist of Sy Hersh’s reputation confirm what everyone wants to believe, the US is a rogue state. This further degrades the US’s reputation and hastening the collapse of the US (Soros’ openly stated goal) on the eve of the Munich Security Conference (next week).
  • Leave Putin with even fewer domestically-palatable political options at home other than further escalation pushing the world closer to the brink of nuclear war to effect Davos’ Great Reset

To name a few.

But what’s really clear here is that there are no Ethan Hunts or even Jason Bournes out there to swoop in at the last second and stop this runaway train of evolution through catastrophe from going off the cliff and going boom.

Update (14/02/2023):

Edward Snowden Says UFO Hysteria Is “Engineered” Distraction From Nord Stream Pipeline Bombshell

Update (15/02/2023):

Pepe Escobar has some interesting things to say about this (“The Plot Thickens“):

The Special Military Operation (SMO) was launched on February 24, almost a year ago. The Nord Stream 1 and 2 blow up happened on September 26. Hersh assures there were “more than nine months of highly secret back and forth debate inside Washington’s national security community about how to ‘sabotage the pipelines’”.

So that confirms that the terror attack planning preceded, by months, not only the SMO but, crucially, the letters sent by Moscow to Washington on December 2022, requesting a serious discussion on “indivisibility of security” involving NATO, Russia and the post-Soviet space. The request was met by a dismissive American non-response response.

While he was writing the story of a terror response to a serious geopolitical issue, it does raise eyebrows that a first-rate pro like Hersh does not even bother to examine the complex geopolitical background.

In a nutshell: the ultimate Mackinderian anathema for the U.S. ruling classes – and that’s bipartisan – is a Germany-Russia alliance, extended to China: that would mean the U.S. expelled from Eurasia, and that conditions everything any American government thinks and does in terms of NATO and Russia.

Hersh should also have noticed that the timing of the preparation to “sabotage the pipelines” completely blows apart the official United States government narrative, according to which this a collective West effort to help Ukraine against “unprovoked Russian aggression”.

[…]

What everyone already knew by then – as the record shows even on YouTube – is that the combo behind “Biden” were dead set on terminating the Nord Streams by whatever means necessary. After the start of the SMO, the only thing missing was to find a mechanism for plausible deniability.

The mainstream media have given up on truth

The Washington Post is openly calling on news outlets to abandon objectivity.

Writes Jenny Holland:

Journalism’s brief period of objectivity was an interregnum between the rough-and-tumble newspaper class wars of the early 20th century and whatever you want to call the pantomime hellscape of today. Now, that period of objectivity is officially dead and buried. It is clear from Downie’s article that the industry has been wholly captured. What used to be thought of as a workman-like job, in which you dug up facts and presented them to your readership, has been taken over by an elite clique of pampered millennials. Members of this clique went to all the same schools and have all the same opinions. Their sworn mission is to make sure their shrinking readership knows how ideologically pure they are. Factual reality – once the king of the newsroom – doesn’t come into the equation. The king is dead. Long live the king.

[…]

There is a silver lining in this op-ed, and I found it in the comments. Judging from the people commenting under the piece, even the ultra-liberal, vote-blue-no-matter-who readers of the Washington Post were not buying what Downie was trying to sell them.

One commenter wrote:

‘What’s really happening is young reporters are using emotional blackmail and not-very-sophisticated [postmodern] sophistry to excuse themselves from professional standards. I understand why new reporters would like to be liberated from dull, but necessary, professional standards, but I don’t understand why the grown-ups go along with it to the detriment of their profession.’

The biggest problem with journalists may not even be their recent swing to the left, their intolerance of differing opinions or their backstabbing newsrooms – all characteristics of younger, woke media staff. Instead, the biggest blindspot for journalists of generations new and old is their tendency to vastly overestimate their own importance, and vastly underestimate just how few people share their outlook outside their media bubbles.

I’m not sure this last conclusion is quite right. Journalists do not “vastly overestimate their own importance”. Among the “few people that share their outlook” are the vast majority of the policy makers. And that is all that matters.

The Models are OK, the Predictions are Wrong

Dr Jordan B Peterson and Dr Judith Curry discuss climate change

From the video description:

Dr Jordan B Peterson and Dr. Judith Curry discuss climate change, the major error in current models and future predictions, academic fraud, and the need for dissenting opinions.

Dr. Judith Curry is an American climatologist with a Bachelor’s degree in geography from Northern Illinois University, and a geophysical sciences Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. Curry is the professor Emerita and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She has had an accomplished career, working with NASA, the US Government, and numerous academic institutions in the field of climate change. Curry advocates for a non-alarmist approach, acknowledging Earth’s rising temperature with a grain of salt—in-field research, and a refusal to shut the doors of science to those with opposing views and findings. In 2017 Dr. Curry retired from her position at the Georgia Institute of Technology, citing “the poisonous nature of the scientific discussion around man-made climate change” as a key factor. Curry co-founded and acts as president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network (CFAN), which seeks to translate cutting-edge weather and climate research into tenable forecast products.

On the total absence of evidence for the efficacy of masking

Yet again, The Science follows politics

The blogger Eugyppius writes:

The Cochrane mask review I wrote about last week has hit Team Mask very hard, in fact much harder than I thought it would. They’ve been frantically coping for days now – combing through the fine print, seizing upon every moment of expressed uncertainty or caution in the paper to claim that population-wide masking might still be justified, somehow, because reasons.

[…]

Plainly, the conviction that mask mandates were necessary came first; The Science followed. All the while, though, the evidence didn’t go away. It was just suspended slightly out of view, diluted with weak excuses and deprived of influence over policy, until the ideological fervour dissipated and the plain truth could be spoken again. The lesson is that regime authorities, particularly when they enjoy the collaboration of the press and academia, can tell almost any lie, but suppressing the truth requires active effort, and sooner or later their myths come crashing down. The mask mythology was among the first to take shape, and it has been the first to fall.

In the coming months other pandemic fantasies will also begin unravel.

Update (08/02/2023):

Tom Woods writes:

The Cochrane Library describes itself as “a collection of databases in medicine and other healthcare specialties provided by Cochrane and other organizations. At its core is the collection of Cochrane Reviews, a database of systematic reviews and meta-analyses which summarize and interpret the results of medical research.”

It is highly respected, and is known for its serious research methods.

The crazies are hysterical about it. But they can’t refute it.

Vinay Prasad, a political liberal who has been honest during Covid, puts it like this: “It is irrational to mask.”

Prasad sums it up: “Here is the big summary finding. With 276,000 participants in RCTs or cluster RCTs, masking does nothing. No reduction in influenza-like or Covid-like illness and no reduction in confirmed flu or COVID. That’s stone-cold negative. See those effect sizes and confidence intervals.”

(To read the study yourself, do a search for “Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses,” from 2023.)

This includes the ballyhooed N95 mask as well.

Everybody in the medical establishment knew masking didn’t do anything, Prasad says:

There was a reason why Tony Fauci went out initially and said it didn’t work. There was a reason why the CDC said not to do it and the WHO said not to do it. And between March 1st and April 15th of 2020, there ain’t no new evidence that was generated of any plausibility. But two things happened.

There was a concerted movement by activists who don’t know evidence-based medicine to hashtag #wearaclothmask and hashtag #savelives and…you know, making stupid TikTok videos.

Why? Because they’re scared. They’re in their house, they’re scared. They don’t know what to do. They just grasp for anything, just like our primitive ancestors would have maybe slaughtered a chicken or done a rain dance. They’re doing the same thing….

They saw that Donald Trump didn’t do it. And the moment he didn’t do it, they knew they were right, because if he didn’t do it, I got to be right on it. It’s got to be right if he doesn’t do it, because he always does the wrong thing.

That was truly how juvenile the universal masking movement was.

Actually, that’s the wrong word. It was frankly sinister.

As with “social distancing,” you were accused of essentially being a murderer if you didn’t go along. It didn’t matter that a scatterplot of places in the US showed no connection between Covid restrictions and health outcomes.

This was never about science or evidence. It was a sinister confluence of some people’s irrational fear with other people’s desire to control, shame, and isolate.

Stuff you should know about Ukraine

Setting the record straight

On February 16, 2022, a full week before Putin sent combat troops into Ukraine, the Ukrainian Army began the heavy bombardment of the area (in east Ukraine) occupied by mainly ethnic Russians. Officials from the Observer Mission of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) were located in the vicinity at the time and kept a record of the shelling as it took place. What the OSCE discovered was that the bombardment dramatically intensified as the week went on until it reached a peak on February 19, when a total of 2,026 artillery strikes were recorded. Keep in mind, the Ukrainian Army was, in fact, shelling civilian areas along the Line of Contact that were occupied by other Ukrainians.

We want to emphasize that the officials from the OSCE were operating in their professional capacity gathering first-hand evidence of shelling in the area. What their data shows is that Ukrainian Forces were bombing and killing their own people. This has all been documented and has not been challenged.

So, the question we must all ask ourselves is this: Is the bombardment and slaughter of one’s own people an ‘act of war’?

Continue reading here.

Jordan Peterson wants to create an anti-WEF

The famed psychologist lays out his plans and vision in a discussion with Joe Rogan.

This is a very inspiring idea. However, lately JP has been somewhat uncritical to certain kinds of interventionist ideas that dovetail nicely with what typical WEF-types might say. Paul Joseph Watson commented recently on this. So it remains to be seen in which direction the Canadian sage is moving.