Discover more from @amuse
The Biden Administration is Fingering Ukraine for the Terror Attack on the German & Russian-Owned Nord Stream Pipeline
Just weeks after damning evidence presented by Seymour Hersh proved that the Biden administration destroyed the $12 billion Nord Stream pipeline jointly owned by Germany and Russia1 the White House suddenly ‘found’ the true culprit: Ukraine.2
Shortly after the terror attack on the Nord Stream pipeline the White House delivered talking points to the media falsely blaming Russia for destroying their own pipeline—accusations that Russia called “stupid” and “absurd”.3 Talking points the administration has since abandoned. After Seymour Hersh’s bombshell reporting the decision was made to have US intelligence officials share a new ‘alternative theory’ with sympathetic reporters from the New York Times.
The White House was very selective in picking the right New York Times reporters ultimately selecting Adam Entous who won a Pulitzer Prize and Polk Award for his reporting on the Trump/Russia collusion hoax4 and Adam Goldman who also won the Pulitzer Prize for his reporting on the Trump/Russia collusion hoax.5 The administration assumed they could count on both men to carry their water as neither bothered to return their Pulitzers.
Despite this, both Adams were very tentative in their reporting going to great lengths to point out that their story was little more than a headline designed to placate their masters in the White House. The article made it clear that the administration officials weren’t willing to say who the perpetrators were, what their affiliations were, who directed them, or who paid them—only suggesting the perpetrators didn’t like Putin—but ‘alluding’ to the possibility that the attack was ordered by the Ukrainian government.6 The Adam’s reporting read like a hostage note—a forced recitation of claims they felt embarrassed to report.7
First, what does the Biden administration get from this new ‘theory of the crime’? If anything it could complicate NATO’s support of Ukraine. Based on this intel Germany would be within its rights to invoke Article 4 of the treaty and demand that the North Atlantic Council investigate the administration’s claims.8 If Ukraine attacked the Nord Stream pipeline Germany could invoke Article 5 of the treaty meaning NATO would be at defacto war with Ukraine.
Second, what does the claim say about NATO and its member’s control of the Baltic Sea? The White House would have us believe that Ukraine or its mercenaries were able to launch an attack, undetected, against the Nord Stream pipeline in a region filled with NATO warships, submarines, and aircraft? At the time of the explosions, the United States had multiple planes and helicopters overhead and yet they never detected the presence of Ukraine’s deadly undersea demolition experts? This story just seems too far-fetched to be true.
At the end of the day, the mainstream media’s talking point is that the attack was conducted by ‘someone’ who opposes Putin—the most likely culprit is the United States. We never wanted the pipeline in the first place and we promised that if Putin invaded we’d destroy it—why can’t we just take credit for the attack and move on?
“U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations. The review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation. U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence, how it was obtained or any details of the strength of the evidence it contains. They have said that there are no firm conclusions about it, leaving open the possibility that the operation might have been conducted off the books by a proxy force with connections to the Ukrainian government or its security services.”
Subscribe to @amuse
@amuse (formerly Politique Republic) is a newsletter dedicated to the political issues facing America from a conservative viewpoint.