Nord Stream Explosions Investigations: What We Know So Far | WSJ
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 май 2024
- Western investigators have shifted focus as they search for answers behind explosions on the Nord Stream gas pipelines last September. Months after considerable leaks halted gas flow from Russia, German prosecutors appeared to mark a significant shift in the investigation.
WSJ explains what we know about the latest assessments of the incident.
0:00 Explosions at the Nord Stream pipelines sparked multinational investigations
0:47 A recap of events surrounding the explosions
1:40 What investigations into the explosions revealed
#NordStream2 #Gas #WSJ
They lie straight to our faces as if we are sheeps. Its insulting.
Few of us aren’t but many are sheeps ..Very many ..
Conspiracy theorists 😂😂
Do you often talk to sheep? And why are lying to turn if you are?
Best way to ruin any respectability you have is to call others animals when you're functioning with adolescent logic as an adult.
@@realShikha885this dhruv rathee video watchers should became adult first😂
So let me get this straight. A couple of Ukrainians somehow brought with them all the way from Ukraine to the Baltic Sea 1000 pounds of plastic explosives plus industrial diving gear and underwater demolition tools. They rented a small boat, stuffed it with all of that equipment without nobody noticing. Then they went to the location of the pipeline, found it, rigged it with half a ton of explosives in four places and sailed away all in one night. Sure, that's very believable. Piece of cake.
By the way WSJ has another article in the economy section about a brand new bridge that's for sale and it's very, very cheap. Anyone interested?
is it the one in Brooklyn that WJ is selling?
some people say that they hired a mermaid to set the explosives
Don't forget they dropped their passports in the boat and left some explosives :s
Because Ukraine and the west would totally never do something like this
State funding from Russia from pro Russian Ukrainians, yes. It's extremely plausible
The Nord Stream pipeline was Russia's leverage. It wouldn't make sense if they blew it up.
Russia blew it up like they blew up gas pipelines in Eurasia before to pressure countries there, it is an old tactic and also now they dont need to fulfill contracts with Germany that they broke by not sending what they WERE REQUIRED to send, it is all politics manipulation and lies. Wake up
I know who did it. I did it with an inflatable rubber duck and I work for Donald Duck and his merry men.
Biden blew it up. He said he would. Theres tons of videos for everyone to see.
Number 1 perpetrator is Ukraine as they don't want a slightest chance that EU would return to Russia (business as usual after or during the war).
this would make sense if russia did anything that made sense.
Not even a mention of Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hirsh's recent article that says it was a CIA operation. Well done WSJ - really restoring faith in journalism..
Actually there is so much left out of this video it was hardly worth watching.
We pretty much know the US and Norway did it. Everything points at the US. These reports don't even mention Seymour Hersh which proves that they are trying to distract and spread conspiracy theory and REALLY don't want people to know about Seymour Hersh's story (which pretty much conclusively proves that he told the truth, that they know it, and they are trying to bury it). Hersh didn't reveal his sources but he presented a comprehensive and only credible actual case so far. The US did it and anyone who is trying to push the idea that there are other serious suspects is try to distract from the practically certain guilt of the US war criminal, capitalist regime.
@@bobjohnbowlesLeaving relevant angles out makes it feel like a confession
bunch of liars and corrupted media, people that what it is.
Based on recent investigations it seems likely that the Russian research vessels Sibirjakov and Lomonosov in cooperation with the Russian submarine Kronsjtadt installed the explosives during very suspicious activity around the area where the Nord Stream pipelines exploded in the period of June 7th - 15th based on tracking data and various communications from the vessels. They both had equipment onboard that would enable them to carry out such an underwater operation. This is classic Putin behavior to create a narrative of the big threat from the west and gain support for his war. The pipelines were of no use to him anyway, but he left one intact just in case Germany got desperate.
Would WSJ just do us a favour by not insulting our intelligence
What intelligence do you have that contradicts it?
Guessing isn’t the same as facts
@@jtgd i trust more Seymor Hersh report that actually have been reporting facts duo to his carreer then a media controlled by the goverment
Chinese balloon > F22
Russian boat > US carrier
They are just reporting the findings of german investigation dude go be insulted at them.
Good video.
@@jtgd You need a lot, and I mean a lot of explosives to blow up a pipeline like that, it's thick steel encased in concrete. Rigging that takes multiple divers many hours of diving at 350 feet. That means they need decompression treatment afterwards and I don't think there is a way to fit a decompression chamber in a boat that size.
Seymour Harsh wrote an article called "How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline"
It has also been thoroughly debunked by anyone willing to spend five minutes on Google fact checking
@@currawong60911368 Which facts were debunked? I only saw character attacks.
@@FArca123 The aircraft in his story was not in service with Norway at that time. The ship in his story had been parked since 2012, to be scraped. Stoltenburg, the “US intelligence asset since the Vietnam War”, was only a child at the time. There is more…
Why don't we see the clip with Biden saying "We are going to bring an end to it".
Why don’t we see a clip of Mr Putin saying “I’m not bluffing” four days before the explosions? Probably because neither statement is relevant….
Because that would just make too much sense 🤣
We pretty much know the US and Norway did it. Everything points at the US. These reports don't even mention Seymour Hersh which proves that they are trying to distract and spread conspiracy theory and REALLY don't want people to know about Seymour Hersh's story (which pretty much conclusively proves that he told the truth, that they know it, and they are trying to bury it). Hersh didn't reveal his sources but he presented a comprehensive and only credible actual case so far. The US did it and anyone who is trying to push the idea that there are other serious suspects is try to distract from the practically certain guilt of the US war criminal, capitalist regime.
@@lynth Nobody wants to touch the Hersh story because it is full of holes, its that simple. Sure, the US may have done it, but it wasn't like Hersh called it.
Since WSJ has no problems of mentioning Russia being the suspect, should it also mention that the bombshell report by Seymour Hersh alleging the US being responsible for this act? Or was it just a deliberate negligence?
I would not have mentioned either as it is a ludicrous idea. It would be the most stupid act ever to sabotage a pipeline of an important NATO ally.
@@Uncommonsensetoo I don’t have the time to explain why it is ludicrous to think Russia is the one bombed the pipeline. Both The Hill and Breaking Points have done several episodes to explain that. U should watch them.
@@waynew2835 All evidence points to Russia. Several of Russian "research" vessels has been observed in the exact areas of the blasts acting very suspiciously based on tracking data and communications from the vessels. These includes the Sibirjakov and Lomonosov, as well as, the SS-750 ships and they all have the capability of underwater operations. It is rather blatant behavior but then again Russia and Putin would not even care if we had video evidence of them doing it as they would deny it nonetheless. After all Sergey Lavrov went as far as claiming Ukraine started the war. Most Russians are unfortunately conditioned to accept whatever the authorities claim as the truth regardless of how ludicrous it is and blaming the west for this is a perfect narrative for Putin to gain support for his war. Biden really played into Putin's hands by stating that the US would stop the pipeline if Russia invaded Ukraine. That of course was never necessary since Germany never turned on Nord Steam 2 and Russia shut off Nord Stream 1. The pipelines were of no use to Putin anyway, but he left one intact just in case Germany got desperate. If Ukraine or US were behind it, surely they would have blown up all 4 pipelines.
You’re not helping by using Hershs report which main source is an “anonymous insider person” the report contains several claims that are straight up false or lies.
Hersh is just a naive distraction. Utterly wrong. Check out Black Rock’s investment in Gazprom and the pipeline..especially the rebuild contract. It is called forward planning and “Putin control”.
You gotta appreciate the energy of the video. One of the major and shady events of the war and WSJ is just satisfied with a random boat itinerary and a few vague political comments. Case solved folks, good job, we can all go home now.
if adolf told his followers such bs, they would have demonstrated .. this far have we got now .
It literally says in the video title: "what we know so far". As in, nothing is concluded, we don't have answers yet, but here is what we do know. They never claimed to provide answers, why are you saying they did?
@@user-hl2vh2ip8d Excuse? I'll tell you what's BS: what you just said. For like, so many reasons. Principal of those reasons: Hitler regularly lied to his peoples, aggressively, and they believed him because they'd been trained to know everything he said as objective fact.
Would have been informative to know the physical amount of explosives and diving equipment required to carry out such a mission then to compare that to the payload of the suspect yacht.
@phiiz3r I would imagine that it's difficult to determine that now since the explosives have... y'know, exploded
Suddenly after the US and Norway become large suppliers of gas to Germany.
Who stands to benefit?
Why would Russia even do that when they just have switch off a valve?!
...because they have so little to loose (the EU already stopped all import) and are so desperate that the war is NOT going well and their energy blackmail didnt work at all. Thas why
They already did. Before sanctions came into effect.
I saw a longer video that states a bunch of possibilities.
Russian Govt - Did it as a false flag
Russians that are anti-war - Did it to weaken Putin
Ukraine govt - Did it to weaken Putin
Ukraine partisans - Did it to weaken put in
Germans - Anti-Russians that didn't like the idea of using Russian gas again
Norway - Most likely to financially benefit the most from it
US - Most likely to strategically benefit from it.
My opinion is either the US or Anti-Putin Russians did it
Not a single mention of Seymour Hersh's investigative report???? 😒 Does Ukraine have acoustic triggers and combat divers???
Hersh is not credible. He's a puppet of Russia who's been frequently interviewed on RT. Also, his "investigative report" was all from "anonymous sources". If I were you, I'd go elsewhere for theories on this.
🤣
@@Mishn0 He's a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who has broken a number of high profile investigations. Your desperate and pathetic attempt at slander is fooling no one.
Perun’s recent video debunks Hersh’s report, including its anonymous source.
@@SoCalFreelance His prizes were all 50 years ago. He's lost all credibility by his recent dancing to Putin's tune. I'm not saying Russia blew the pipeline, I'm just saying that Hersh telling me Russia didn't do it doesn't convince me of anything. But go ahead and continue to believe what Putin's puppet tells you to.
It was the CIA
WSJ just ridicule themselves by not mentioning Hersh report.
WSJ really insulting our intelligence
I gave up my WSJ subscription about a year ago due to their glossing over the inflation projections but they are still the least polluted fish in the pond.
Seymore Hersch said the U.S. did it and that's good enough for me.
I personally think it was America, they said that they were going to do it a long time before.
An American says ''I think''. Non Americans tend to say ''I know it was America''.
It was America. Case closed.
Uncle Sam did it!
What annoys me the most is that this doesn't say a word about Seymour Hersh and his investigation which pointed towards CIA, even if this wasn't proved false until now. I thought WSJ is impartial, but apparently everyone feels the need to bring out more news to fill up the informational space and distract from that article... I think I'll start mentioning it a bit more often in my comments...
Seymour Hersh is a hack.
Hersh starts the article by claiming (for no clear reason) that NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg has worked with US intelligence agencies “since the Vietnam War”. Stoltenberg was 13 years old when the US withdrew from Vietnam and 16 when the war definitely ended.
When the article starts with such a howler and then goes on making unverifiable claims, in some cases quite outlandish (his claim of Norwegian involvement in helping the US mislead Danes, Swedes and Germans is particularly implausible), don’t be surprised if nobody takes him seriously , especially since these last years he had become a regular on Russia Today…
well the simple fact that US didnt acept a independent investigation to the origin of the nord stream sabotage explains a lot, if wasnt them they wouldnt have any problem in acept the independent investigation... only a braindead cant see u was the real responsible of this sabotage.
@@antoniolsls7774 do you have a source for the US not accepting an independent investigation? sounds interesting
Pretty sure its either the US or Ukraine, Russia has a leverage on the pipelines now it has none. But the media isn't pointing this out sadly
1. Hersh couldn’t get anyone to go on the record.
2. This is a brief video report and not an expansive print piece.
Diving to 80 meters and spending time at that depth required decompression, perhaps it was Bin Laden he also worked for the CIA at one time. Who can you trust?
yes, decompression stops. It's standard operating procedure. You need a special gas mix in your diving tanks but it's very much not unfeasible. Also not saying that that's how it happened but that also does not debunk it.
Exactly my thoughts. The last time someone saw Bin Laden he was under water!
its easy peasy. you just need like 10 Tanks of trimix for each of the three divers. You can tow them together with the 1000 Pounds of explosives behind your boat..
Also the Pipeline is on charts, so easy to find down there in the 20 Minutes of time you have .. you know, seabeds are tiny and very well maped, if in doubt just ask the guy hangin out down there with his nephiew Ariel.. i think he calles Neptune..
What a horrible Story this nonsense is 🤣🤣🤣🤣
When did Bin Laden work for the CIA? In his own words he never received aid from the USA while I'm Afghanistan
@@user-hl2vh2ip8d do you actually have any real diving/naval experience? If so, you would have known that for that kind of a dive, especially considering that it was "tactical", they wouldn't have used open circuit diving equipment, but rebreathers, which are way more "efficient" at deeper depths. I also see a lot of people that keep posting about the 1000 pounds of explosives. You do realize that the water tank alone on that boat fits 850 litres which equates to over 1800 pounds. Carrying 1000 pounds of cargo wouldn't be an issue for a vessel that size. As I said, not saying that that's how it happened, but none of what you mentioned even remotely debunks it.
USA/ Norway fully responsible! Doesn’t take a genius to figure it it!
It does take evidence though. Where is yours?
@@mattt9187 His boss Putin told him so.
@@mattt9187 literally all of the US politicians saying they were gonna do it and then celebrated that was blown up right after, but oh the guy who has no incentive whatsoever to blow up his own pipeline did it, yeaah okay😂
Quick question, would this lead to NATO Article 5 being activated? So would the USA go to war with NATO?
@@qwerty9714 Literally? So the conspiracy theory is that a few divers in a dingy, dove 300 feet in the north Atlantic planted (how many pounds of C-4?) And blew it up. Tom Clancy wants to use this in his next book. Or, Russia who boasted the pipeline was under audio and video surveillance but hasn't produced any, blew up to prevent backward pressure that would have damaged their plant.
I keep telling you it was Godzilla.
🔥🦖
I love how nobody is buying this story
Remember Saddam's farts in 45 mins as that evil mutant freak Tony Blair would hysterically screech
This tiny boat deflection is so HILARIOUS! :D We know who did it LOL
Who is that?
I don't know who did it.
@@Blondul11 Anglo saxons power
@@Blondul11 your uncle
Yup the Russians…
Yeah, right! They did it with a 50 ft sailboat. Team of highly trained divers and support team, a few thousands of pounds of explosives, huge amount of cylinders with a special mix of gases, on a boat without a crane. So, they would have to put explosive in place manually, that would take several dives. Diving to such depths takes hours of decompression. This would take a week, easily, not to mention that a boat at the same spot for such a long time would raise suspicion.
Bedtime stories.
Not TNT, this was missile strikes from a very specialized weapons system.
@@CL-yp1bs No, they placed explosives down there. Remember, this is about 80 m (roughly 270-280 ft) deep. someone had to place it there. Well, someone... Who could that be?
@@fifi23o5 possibly, I’m just saying it was not TNT. There is much more concentrated and compact explosives that won’t require you to lug around thousands of pounds of explosives. They said 1000lbs of TNT - there are explosives that are 3-5x as strong as TNT so it’s possible they had 200lbs of specialized explosives.
But I still think it’s possible that is was hit with a missle from a battleship or a submarine
@@CL-yp1bsThere are more powerfull explosives than TNT for sure. TNT equivalent has became en etalon. But there are no explosives that are a magnitude more powerful. Maybe twice mor powerful.
Trust me, it was placed there, no missiles involved. Below the surface there is no GPS, it doesn't work even inside of buildings. It was placed very precisely.
And, BTW, there are no battleships any more.
@@CL-yp1bs ¨Still, you can't get to 200 lbs, just follow sweedish and danish seizmolologic reports. Times three, at least.
There is no conventional explosive 10 times stronger than TNT.
They flaunted the boat hard but never said there was proof of it’s involvement at all.
'Traces of explosives' can mean anything. During the Troubles in Northern Ireland I remember many people being arrested and wrongfully convicted on the basis of 'traces of explosives' being found on them. Turned out the tests used at that time could not distinguish between glycerin and nitroglycerin. The victims of these injustices had washed their hands with soap.
"You're gonna need a bigger boat." - Jaws 1975. The overstated "yacht"Andromeda is a base 6-person recreational sloop fitted with bunks and couches options to sleep 11 (Bavaria Cruiser 50 @ 49.18' - note a "yacht" is defined @ 50' and over, and the author stretches the description). The harbor Wieck auf dem Darß charts @ 1.4m vs. Andromeda's keel @ 2.25m and is inaccessible with Andromeda's keel and load. Andromeda is simply not large enough to carry 2x500kg explosives, 1,500kg decompression chamber, compressors, technical diving and welding equipment, diving sleds, diving gear, divers, welder(s), explosives engineer, support crew and boat crew, supplies, etc.
Add in a 5000lb decompression chamber..yes indeed this is some kind of joke. Sy Hersh is actually believable.
@@robvannNS Agreed.... added. At 260' commercial divers and welder(s) usually require a decompression chamber at hand for scheduled decompression and insurance against the myriad decompression issues which potentially cause permeant damage and death.
by definition, it is a yacht. And it is completely normal to count the bunks and couches when counting beds. Also, it comes standard with 11 beds. It wasn't refitted to fit 11! A quick look on Bavaria's website also tells you it is not a 6-person ship. It clearly states a crew capacity of 10-11. Don't know about the other stuff, but you clearly don't know much about sailing and boats.
And a Bavaria Cruiser has a keel depth of 1.85m and the depth of the harbour Wiek is 2.8-3m. It would have easily fit. (Wiek is not the same place as Wieck! The ship was in Wiek, not Wieck!)
@@leonkrug4841 Not with several tons of cargo and equipment, plus diving crew on board. With that much weight there would not have been much freeboard, never mind keel clearance.
We already know who did it..
actually i did it , i used a kayak to go there and put some boom boom
👉Two rules in geopolitics:
1. Never trust America.
2. Don't forget rule no.1
Ask yourselves, whose natural gas industry benefits the most from having Russia's cut off?
(whispers quietly.... USA)
It's impossible to do that kind of dive from a sailboat.
Genuine curiosity, why is it impossible? As an ASA 104 rated sailor, I can understand why it's not ideal, but why is it impossible?
@@L0stEngineer I think, but I might be completely off, that for doing such a dive you need a hyperbaric chamber for decompression treatment afterwards. And I don't think there is a chance you can fit one of those on board a small sailboat like that.
@@L0stEngineer also the quanity of explosives to rupture a 1.6 inch thick steel pipe wrapped w 4.6 in concrete probably weighs few tons. Doubt they can unload it into the ocean without a crane
To do something like this requires a saturation dive. The training, experience, equipment, and boat required is way too sophisticated to do from a sailboat.
@@NotYourBusiness-bp2qn No, you don't need a hyperbaric chamber. You have to breathe heliox and do decompression stops on your way back up but you don't need a hyperbaric chamber. In a commercial setting, it's often still kept on hand in case of an emergency however...
We all know it was the USA!
Prove it.
You can’t.
I can say “we all know Russia did it”, and that doubt of innocence and motive MUST mean it’s true, even though that’s not evidence
it was Russia, they did this before in Eurasia and they broke gas supply contracts before blowing this up from Kaliningrad which is right next to it
@@jtgd Nice argument but it’s obvious the USA did it!
No mention of Seymour Hersh = journalist disintegrity.
Believing Hersh = R.E.T.A.R.D.
Isn't his list of knowingly false reporting, ignoring evidence, and basing his books on a singular source with nothing to back him up longer than a CVS receipt? Hersh always manages to recite a very coherent story, which seems very convincing but which is rarely backed up by any other sources. And the few sources that he does claim, often form a circle. I was genuinely interested in him which is why I followed up on a whole bunch of his "sources" which went nowhere. Recommend you do the same
@@leonkrug4841ratio
Ask Brandon who did this
Did your parents ban curse words for you?
@@jtgd Did your parents ban education for you?
Does anyone know the depth at that location?
I have read that it’s 177 feet.
270... its around 80-85 meters
@@janezjonsa3165 Wikipedia stated 177 feet. I’m trying to figure out if a diver or an ROV planted the explosives.
@@nzs316 i think it was thrown overboard, directly on top of pipeline. A diver went down just to check it, and if needed corrected position of explosives.
It was the US😮Shocker
If only i had a small boat the world is MINE!!!!!
Those who benefits the most, more likely the culprit.
They really think we are that dumb huh. Stop insulting the people and come up with a better cover up story lol
I can make a better cover story in the morning after my coffee
It was the US
Why would Russia blow up its own pipeline. 😑
Let me make it easier. It was the USA
Why would USA destroy it?
It was not in use after Russia stopped the gas export many months before.
Russia said they would not turn on the gas export that winter so nothing pointed that it would be used.
Russia break a gas export contract and could get huge fine.
If USA get caught or it in the future come out it could destroy NATO when the pipeline was half owned by Germany.
Why do it just the same week Russia made a fake election in Ukraine and annex part of Ukraine, ( old Russian tactic ).
And the biggest question, why only completely destroyed the old pipeline and only damage the new pipeline, the one Biden threaded to stop?
*Can someone explain the lines on the bottom right* @0:05? I can't work out what they are. If you look around the disturbance, there are more smaller ones at slightly different angles that end sooner
What a waste of cover up.
Did I miss it or was there no mention of Seymour Hersh in this report?
No mention. Ironically, even this video acts as a diversion from what looks like the truth. Ukraine are small fries, they aren't blowing up anything outside of Ukraine, let alone doing it in secret
They don't use his theory at all. His claim is completely different than in the top video.
The news just degraded this news portal to a clown portal
I have a screenshot of the american navy's ship in position over northstream from marine trafic the day before the explosion
Show
I believe we shouldn’t dive too deep into conspiracy theories: it must’ve been an innovative pool construction company (a startup maybe) trying to make a bunch of jacuzzis. That’s the most straightforward guess.
The funniest thing is everyone knows that it was performed by USA . but it is a big joke to blame it on Russia who genuinely need this pipeline for money. 🤣🤣🤣.
At first I thought it was highly unlikely that for instance the CIA would have blown up the pipeline. But now I'm not so sure. Seems like a very small sailboat. And 80 meters of depth is a lot for divers? A state actors looks most likely. But which one.
You don't need a big boat or lots of explosives...80 metres is no problem for experienced commercial divers.
Doesn’t have to be state actors.
States aren’t the only organization that can do covert actions
The way I see it the operation itself is doable for a professional commercial diver. But getting explosives and move undetected screams state involvement
@@joncarlosmjs4502
Not necessarily.
Explosives are easy to come by for paramilitary groups fighting in the Donbas or other parts of the Ukraine..
@@charlesharper2357 You do need a fair bit of explosives though, the pipeline is made of thick steel and encased in concrete. To do a 80 meter dive for as long as it takes to set up a demolition like that you need decompression treatment afterwards. Now please explain to me how you can fit a decompression chamber in that tiny sailboat... agent Smith.
2 divers with a ton of C4 bit without decompression chamber on a tiny boat loosing their passports.
Could it be any more obvious, what this is?
Everyone knows it's done by the only superpower. 🤣
How much did CIA pay WSJ for this? 😂
WSJ is the CIA... this the propaganda division
What’s your evidence the CIA was involved?
You have none.
How much does KGB pay you? Go f some sheep and pray to Kadyrov
@@jtgd Seymour hersh…
Operation Mockingbird 2.0
After the pipe blow up, usa benifited max by exporting to Europe! Wsj stop beating around the bush!!
Who benefited? The US. My money is on the US.
Is it correct that the antenna from the special war against the North Stream gas pipeline has Wagner imprinted on it?
Dear USA can yo ustop blowing our pipelines please?
So, it is still leaking gas as of now?
Don't be fooled. Our own CIA had a hand in this.
Both hands
THIS WAS HIT WITH AN UNDER WATER MISSLE STRIKE, WITH SPECIALIZED EXPLOSIVES NOT TNT.
I get a strong feeling this is going to be a movie one day when the "truth" finally emerges from the depths. I can't wait.
Oh! Look! A shiny object!
I think alien conducted their invasion drill.
Throw more fuzzy informations 😅 to obfuscate
The obvious casting choice for a Hollywood blockbuster about the sabotage, would be Sean Pentagon as renegade US-Ukrainian bombist, Stryker McHazzard, tasked by the CIA to MacGyver the Nord Stream from his luxury yacht using readily available components from Ali Express, thus creating plausible deniability. The parts would then be traced back to China, creating a sequel: McHazzard II: Target Balloon, a Hollywood epic about one man's mission to rid the skies of helium-filled condoms and keep the world safe for The American Way.
We all know it’s the United States
Not a mention about Seymour Hersh...
It just proves him right.
Watching from India
Thanks to the comments, I have avoided wasting 4mins of my time watching this.
U.S.A.
Seymor may sue the administration. Ask somebody under oath. it is so easy.
He won’t because he made the story up. If he didn’t make it up then his source made it up and he was dumb enough to believe what seems like a 6th grade attempt at imitating Tom Clancy
This was done by USA and Norway under the cover of Nato Baltic 22. And it is easy to prove: Just ask somebody under oath.
If it's easy to prove why has No one proved it
@@Dan-lg2by because US is bully
Politicians talking? Can only be one thing: Propaganda.
Last time I heard it was somebody's mother blew up the pipes.
This sounds like part of a James Bond plot.
Not a single mention of the environmental disaster that this has created
Greta said nothing but then she's a shill anyway
I don't understand this , why does a publication as esteemed as WSJ, decided to be a propagandist for the shady parties responsible for blowing up the pipeline..
It is so pathetic.
😳😳😳
They try to be NYT Visual Investigations so hard, but always fail miserably
US did it.
(upbeat music)
Seals. Wouldn't be many others capable .
I came on this channel primarily to read the comments made - a lot more entertaining than the contents of this channel which in itself already very funny.
Aside from the CIA/US Navy planning and prep, the remote detonation was likely outsourced to a client state (Norway?) to preserve plausible deniability.
Maybe Ukrainian operatives under CIA?Nordic planning
nah they definitely just had black ops do it. why would you include a 3rd state and possibly screw things up?
Its not the USA, Russia, Ukraine, or Germany. It's a country that no one would ever think of who blew it up.
Whoever did it, thank you. Someone had to cut Germany's umbilical cord. Germany needs to grow up and stop being dependent on fascist energy.
😂😂😂
Radar shows Sweden's Navy ships in the area when explosions happened. Oh, dear.
Bold claims, any proof?
No they don't.
Omg !! Seymour Herch called Scholt a lapdog if that doesn’t wake him up nothing will.
Russia could just shut their valves, they did not need to blow the pipes.
The name of the yacht is andromeda. It is from Greek mythology and a metaphor for the current situation in Ukraine. Read about Andromeda.
Ned baking soda to neutralize the water
Very disappointed with WSJ take on this.Completely ignoring Hersh's report.Ok if you have stooped so low already,then we will let it pass that your reporting is insulting our intelligence.
Hersh starts the article by claiming (for no clear reason) that NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg has worked with US intelligence agencies “since the Vietnam War”. Stoltenberg was 13 years old when the US withdrew from Vietnam and 16 when the war definitely ended. He's a hack. All he has are 'anonymous sources'...
When the article starts with such a howler and then goes on making unverifiable claims, in some cases quite outlandish (his claim of Norwegian involvement in helping the US mislead Danes, Swedes and Germans is particularly implausible), don’t be surprised if nobody takes him seriously , especially since these last years he had become a regular on Russia Today…
@@velox__ I don't want to get into the western narrative (US and NATO) and God forbid the reputation of their intelligence services.The world history is testament of their truthfulness!!! When we have Minsk agreement and the western reasons and intent regarding that which warrants no elucidation.
Your reply is appreciated but no thank you.A humble request,Please don't insult our intelligence.
In addition I drew parallels between Russia today and your CNN since 2003 Iraq WMD invasion.
Patiently waiting for you to reply to my question....
Just come to say that… the explanation that they are giving now is wrong. Some of the points of the pipes are at 75m depth… and you need special equipament, a lot of them, to do this job. You CAN NOT do it from a small ship like this… probably was the CIA or the MI6… but is imposible to do this job from this sail boat. My big brother was a special diver and the other is a sailor… you need compresor, generators, equipament… is imposible. They need a support ship a big one. Don’t belive all you see or come from the Inteligens companies …
It points to us
Its simple, find out who profits from this. Its not that hard to find out.
Man, This report is like if someone lying to your face..
so shameless.
I wonder why neither Sweden nor Denmark utters a word about the effects of their investigations. They must have recollected some artefacts. According to Seymour Hersh - his version is much more plausible, almost surely true - there were 8 explosives. Six of them went off but two others must have been left. One pipeline has been intact. It means that explosives were there after 26 September or there were no explosives at all on the fourth line.
It seems to me that it was not difficult for Swedish and Danish authorities to establish facts pertaining to this. Why there is no word?
For me, it is clear that the authorities know exactly that the USA is the culprit but they are afraid of the consequences of admitting this. On the other side, they don't want to give false information in case the truth will be revealed anyway.
Where is the free press to ask questions to Swedish and Danish authorities?
Seymour Hersh's story is littered with blatant inaccuracies. For example, the surveillance plane that he mentioned wasn't even operated by Norway at the time. And that's just the one that I can remember off the top of my head. There are numerous articles debunking his admittedly very coherent-sounding story with openly accessible evidence from a wide range of sources, that can be followed. Not just one person claiming that's how it went.
@@leonkrug4841 You can believe whatever you want. But don't try to convince yourself that the official NYT version is not laughable.
1. Seymour Hersh is much more credible than CIA who is the author of the alternative version.
2. Hersh's version is plausible one (the task of blowing up pipes 80 meters below the surface is possible provided the perpetrators have the most advanced equipment, it is possible according to the law of physics) whereas the alternative version of an amateurish group of pro-Ukrainians guys scuba divers on a boat is simply laughable. Impossible from point of view of modern physics. Scientists know what can be done or what cannot. People landed on the Moon. But it was not as if was described by Verne. Nobody sane can think that sending people to the Moon is possible by using a big gun.
You also brought up the argument that many articles were written in favour or against. It doesn't matter how people think it could be. But it matters if it is possible according to physics. Or you just believe in miracles. Than it could've been done by the Olsen's Gang
ruclips.net/video/E_qX6RFWeI4/видео.html&ab_channel=OlsenbandenFanNorge
@@KazimierzSurma Im not claiming that the NYT version is how it happened. It also has A LOT of questions that are left unanswered. All I care about is that it gets debunked for the right reasons. But scrolling through the comments you'll find a whole bunch of people claiming that you cant dive to 80 meters without a hypobaric chamber (which you can), that the boat couldn't carry a capacity of 1000 kg (which it can) etc... If it gets debunked it should be based, like you said, on the laws of physics and not by keyboard warriors doing 5 minutes of bad research that most likely haven't ever dived and arent experienced seamen knowing what can and cannot be done.
My issue with Hersh's version is that it is riddled with inaccuracies that can be easily verified, like for example the equipment, ships and planes that were claimed to be used.
I want to know the truth but so far, both theories, the NYT's and Hersh's aren't living up to that!
@@leonkrug4841 No. I see what you mean, but I'm not entirely convinced.
The NYT version is impossible and naive. Simply impossible from point of view of the laws of physics. As for the decompression chamber, it is necessary when you work in 80 m depth. It may be possible to dive there and come back but not possible to dive and spend some time at 80 m doing some work. You know that the more time you spend at the depth the slower you have to decompress.
As for the explosives, I think it takes a high-class professional to prepare everything. It is not so easy to buy this amount on the black market without being noticed by criminal police. It seems to me very funny to say there are some traces of explosives on the table of the yacht.
BALTOPS 2022 took place and was an ideal cover for this action. Military services have all the needed equipment. They have diving vehicles and diving robots capable of doing the work.
Moreover, there is another source complying with Hersh's version.
ruclips.net/video/s6DWe-M9_w4/видео.html&ab_channel=JohnMarkDougan
I am quite sure that Swedish and Danish investigators know the truth. That is why they don't say a word. Sweden only once announced that it was sabotage and Germany said it wasn't Russia.
You said about the inaccuracies of Hersh's version. Could you name them? Tell me what you mean exactly.
Weird how a major ops like this takes place and they use their original Ukrainian passports.
How were they able to use a civilian water craft to locate the pipe.
I checked the date but it is not yet April first. Please WSJ, don't try to compete with the Onion!
What we already know so far is that the USA blew up the Nord Stream 1&2 pipelines.
Good, the gas station became annoying so need to cut off selling gas.
Let them eat it if they get hungry.
Prove it.
“I think they did it” isn’t evidence that did it