Ukraine has denied any involvement in last September's attack on the Nord Stream pipelines, which carried Russian gas to Europe.

 

Kyiv's remarks follow a report from the New York Times, which cites anonymous US intelligence officials who suggest a pro-Ukrainian group was to blame.

 

In a separate report, German media say investigators believe they identified the boat used to plant the explosives.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64877979

 

56 minutes ago, internationalism said:

this is deflection by the USA to accuse it's political partner, ukraine, for the crime of gross international terrorism they have committed themselves.

"Suggestion" by anonymous american spook is a worthless statement. That is spooks job to spread disinformation.

Germany is colluding with the usa to cover up. Scholtz has visited washington the last week for a 2 days stay. That is unusually long stay, so many secret subjects were discussed, and in details.

They are trying to patch up their relations and a public relations exercise, as at senate and bundestag some have started to ask difficult questions.

I go with seymour hersh 54 years track record for investigative journalism - with a lot of details on why, who and how did it.. He said in several interviews that more is coming from him on the subject.

 

That article is misinformation, trying to suggest, that it was not a terrorism, but some kind of accident. Swedes, Danes and Germans has already concluded in November that C4 explosive was used.

"The exact cause of the 26 September blasts that hit the natural gas pipelines is unknown, but it is widely believed they were attacked."

It has repeatedly pointed out to you how Seymour Hersh has repeatedly made dubious reports on other issues. In addition, a novel also can provide all sorts of detailed information. But most of us recognize that a novel is fiction. There have also been plenty of reports of how Hersh's alleged details simply can't be true. Your continued allegiance to Hersh is one that is unmoored by fact.

Bit more detail in the New York Times report:

 

"U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials."

 

Intelligence Suggests Pro-Ukrainian Group Sabotaged Pipelines, U.S. Officials Say

https://archive.ph/Txmqs

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/us/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-sabotage-ukraine.html

so we are expected to believe that a gang of Ukrainian sympathisers had the technical and political expertise to carry out deep water sabotage in the Baltics???  Because the Russians do not have????

Or maybe it was just sh!te pipelines laid by sh!te Russian skimming contractors just like the skimming of billion of roubles by umpteen Russians from everything from the postal service to the entire Russian military arsenal.

How would Ukraine with NO deepwater equipment get to the pipes in the first place, let alone place charge/s on said pipeline to blow it up?

I know what to do we need to contact Tucker Carlson he'll know what really happened. Tucker will tell us all the TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!

 

From the same source that brought you "Iraq has the capability of launching weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes".

 

Lots of people believed that until the truth emerged.

21 minutes ago, mrfill said:

From the same source that brought you "Iraq has the capability of launching weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes".

 

Lots of people believed that until the truth emerged.

Actually most Americans believed that. Like the Vietnam war, the main exception at first was a few lefties. At Fox, they all stuck American flag pins onto their lapels.

9 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Bit more detail in the New York Times report:

 

"U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials."

 

Intelligence Suggests Pro-Ukrainian Group Sabotaged Pipelines, U.S. Officials Say

https://archive.ph/Txmqs

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/us/politics/nord-stream-pipeline-sabotage-ukraine.html

from reading your link without paywall, it looks like spooks don't know much and how credible their source is.  It's their new source. Some believe this source is not credible. It can't be compared to Hersh very exact details:

 

"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."  

 

So why the senate and house can't form investigative body, why president can't order reports from all security agencies? That is because an answer is already well known to them?

Why america and the UK openly oppose investigation by the UN security council?

That would be the best way for them to clear their name in eyes of an international opinion.

That is a better way than throwing baseless accusations around to offend their partners. 

8 minutes ago, internationalism said:

from reading your link without paywall, it looks like spooks don't know much and how credible their source is.  It's their new source. Some believe this source is not credible. It can't be compared to Hersh very exact details:

 

"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."  

 

So why the senate and house can't form investigative body, why president can't order reports from all security agencies? That is because an answer is already well known to them?

Why america and the UK openly oppose investigation by the UN security council?

That would be the best way for them to clear their name in eyes of an international opinion.

That is a better way than throwing baseless accusations around to offend their partners. 

Your constant reference to Hersh and his conspiracey is tedious, not even the Russians are still bringing that up.

 

The group, made up of five men and one woman, traveled to the northern city of Rostock in September 2022, rented a yacht using fake passports, and sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines, public broadcaster ARD reported.

The yacht used in the operation was rented by a company based in Poland, which was apparently owned by two Ukrainians, according to the investigators.

The group believed to have consisted of two divers, two assistants, one captain, and a medic.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/economy/german-investigators-uncovered-group-who-blew-up-nord-stream-pipelines-report/2839721

 

Germany’s defense minister voiced caution Wednesday over media reports that a pro-Ukraine group was involved in blowing up the Nord Stream gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea last year.

German daily newspaper Die Zeit and public broadcasters ARD and SWR reported Tuesday that investigators were able to largely reconstruct how the pipelines from Russia to Germany were sabotaged on the night of Sept. 26, 2022.

https://apnews.com/article/germany-ukraine-russia-gas-pipeline-attack-nordstream-d267ad7dcff560c9ecaebf4f213e5229

Edited March 8, 20233 yr by Bkk Brian

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said he read the news reports “with great interest” but warned against drawing hasty conclusions. Speaking on the sidelines of a European Union defense ministers meeting, Pistorius said some experts also had raised the possibility of a so-called false flag operation by a group pretending to be Ukrainian.

https://apnews.com/article/germany-ukraine-russia-gas-pipeline-attack-nordstream-d267ad7dcff560c9ecaebf4f213e5229

UPDATE (this is an evolving story and has no reference to Hersh so please keep on topic)

 

German prosecutors searched ship over Nord Stream blast

 

According to the German reports, a yacht was used in the incident and was rented out by a company based in Poland, belonging to two Ukrainians.

 

The commando group is said to have set sail from the north German port of Rostock on September 6, 2022, and was located the following day on the Danish island of Christianso in the Baltic.

 

The yacht was subsequently returned to the owner uncleaned, and investigators were able to find traces of explosives on the table in the cabin, according to the detailed report.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/german-prosecutors-searched-ship-over-122224381.html

 

11 hours ago, bangon04 said:

so we are expected to believe that a gang of Ukrainian sympathisers had the technical and political expertise to carry out deep water sabotage in the Baltics???  Because the Russians do not have????

No, we are supposed to believe the Russians blew up there own pipeline to spite themselves. 

12 hours ago, internationalism said:

from reading your link without paywall, it looks like spooks don't know much and how credible their source is.  It's their new source. Some believe this source is not credible. It can't be compared to Hersh very exact details:

 

"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."  

 

So why the senate and house can't form investigative body, why president can't order reports from all security agencies? That is because an answer is already well known to them?

Why america and the UK openly oppose investigation by the UN security council?

That would be the best way for them to clear their name in eyes of an international opinion.

That is a better way than throwing baseless accusations around to offend their partners. 

What is it with this bizarre fixation you have on details? Details can be invented. They can also be debunked. And they have been debunked.

5 hours ago, Venom said:

No, we are supposed to believe the Russians blew up there own pipeline to spite themselves. 

No. They could have blown up the pipelines to spare themselve being massively sued for not fulfilling their contract to provide gas. Keep in mind that before the explosion Gazprom blamed equipment problems for the lack of delivery. That kind of pretense can only be sustained for so long. With the pipeline blown up, they could plead force majeure and not be held liable.

41 minutes ago, placeholder said:

What is it with this bizarre fixation you have on details? Details can be invented. They can also be debunked. And they have been debunked.

so you have a bizarre fixation on avoiding any details and accusing russia for blowing their own pipelines (in a post below that yours and in many other posts on 2 threads about nord stream international terrorism).

 

So who are those 6 terrorists? pictures, names - for the international community, including citizens, to find them and expose their backers. 

What the name of the boat they have used? what technical specification it had to allow to carry over 500kg of C4, a specialised equipment for diving at such depths (ukrainians can't do it, as they don't train that techniques).

What is name of this pro-ukrainian group, who is their leader, commander. Who set up them, who sponsors, what actions they have taken, where are they based, how many membership and what military equipment they posses?

Getting 500kg of high explosive is not possible without strong state back up. Which government supplied it? As traces of explosive were found on the boat, it would be possible to find out composition of C4 and as each production batch can be identified to what country made it, what month and where it was stored and where it was sold.

 

"European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell and German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius were among the officials warning against jumping to conclusions after a media report said intelligence reviewed by U.S. officials indicated that a pro-Ukrainian group was behind last year's attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nord-stream-times-report-reaction-1.6771536

 

""I am not afraid of the truth. Any truth. But we are talking about ... speculations," he told reporters on Wednesday after a meeting of EU defence ministers in Stockholm, adding investigations were still continuing in Sweden, Denmark and Germany."

https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2023/03/08/eus-borrell-says-not-afraid-of-truth-on-nord-stream-but-investigations-ongoing

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

No. They could have blown up the pipelines to spare themselve being massively sued for not fulfilling their contract to provide gas. Keep in mind that before the explosion Gazprom blamed equipment problems for the lack of delivery. That kind of pretense can only be sustained for so long. With the pipeline blown up, they could plead force majeure and not be held liable.

"“There is no evidence at this point that Russia was behind the sabotage,” said one European official, echoing the assessment of 23 diplomatic and intelligence officials in nine countries interviewed in recent weeks."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/12/21/russia-nord-stream-explosions/

 

"German investigators currently have no evidence that Russia is behind the explosions on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines, German Attorney General Peter Frank told Die Welt."

https://kyivindependent.com/news-feed/german-top-official-says-no-evidence-of-russian-sabotage-of-nord-stream-pipeline

 

"Western media reports on the blowing-up of the Nord Stream gas pipelines are a coordinated bid to divert attention and Russia is perplexed that U.S. officials can assume anything about the attacks without an investigation, the Kremlin said on Wednesday."

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-says-nord-stream-attack-reports-are-coordinated-demands-open-2023-03-08/

Edited March 9, 20233 yr by internationalism

14 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Your constant reference to Hersh and his conspiracey is tedious, not even the Russians are still bringing that up.

False. RT made multiple references to Hersh in the last 24 hours. Occam's Razor would suggest that what Hersh says has merit. 

6 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

False. RT made multiple references to Hersh in the last 24 hours. Occam's Razor would suggest that what Hersh says has merit. 

Really? Good to know you watch RT so keenly then, such credible media as that should have you fully convinced. Nothing in official channels however Sergey Lavrov and the other clowns

Edited March 9, 20233 yr by Bkk Brian

2 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

False. RT made multiple references to Hersh in the last 24 hours. Occam's Razor would suggest that what Hersh says has merit. 

Occam's Razor? Essentially Occam's razor says the simplest explanation that fits the facts is best? But since many of Hersh's facts have been disproven, how does Occam's Razor even apply?

22 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Occam's Razor? Essentially Occam's razor says the simplest explanation that fits the facts is best? But since many of Hersh's facts have been disproven, how does Occam's Razor even apply?

It means 1)who had the means to do it, 2)who had the biggest motive to do it, 3)who recently threatened to end the pipeline if a Ukraine invasion occurred - which it did, is probably the one that dunnit. 

 Still no representative of the left has adequately explained why Putin would destroy his lucrative pipeline when he could have simply turned it off.

17 hours ago, internationalism said:

from reading your link without paywall, it looks like spooks don't know much and how credible their source is.  It's their new source. Some believe this source is not credible. It can't be compared to Hersh very exact details:

 

"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."  

 

So why the senate and house can't form investigative body, why president can't order reports from all security agencies? That is because an answer is already well known to them?

Why america and the UK openly oppose investigation by the UN security council?

That would be the best way for them to clear their name in eyes of an international opinion.

That is a better way than throwing baseless accusations around to offend their partners. 

We look forward to the Leaked intelligence emails. Where is Julian Assange when you need him?

Just now, SunnyinBangrak said:

It means 1)who had the means to do it, 2)who had the biggest motive to do it, 3)who recently threatened to end the pipeline if a Ukraine invasion occurred - which it did, is probably the one that dunnit. 

 Still no representative of the left has adequately explained why Putin would destroy his lucrative pipeline when he could have simply turned it off.

"Still no representative of the left has adequately explained why Putin would destroy his lucrative pipeline when he could have simply turned it off."

 

Do check, they were already off and had been for some time.

4 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

It means 1)who had the means to do it, 2)who had the biggest motive to do it, 3)who recently threatened to end the pipeline if a Ukraine invasion occurred - which it did, is probably the one that dunnit. 

 Still no representative of the left has adequately explained why Putin would destroy his lucrative pipeline when he could have simply turned it off.

Actually, motivation has been adequately explained. If Gazprom turned it off, it would be in violation of  contracts and subject to paying massive damages. But,, because of force majeure, it wouldn't have to.

I'm not claiming that Russia was behind it. Just that it has a strong motivation. Remember, they had already cut off most shipments by claiming that the system was undergoing repairs.

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

"Still no representative of the left has adequately explained why Putin would destroy his lucrative pipeline when he could have simply turned it off."

 

Do check, they were already off and had been for some time.

 My understanding of the NS2 was that it was a new pipeline ready to come online having undergone testing and filling with gas(major release of greenhouse gasses which escaped and nary a peep was heard from the climate crowd), and my point stands. Why destroy your own valuable asset that increases your power internationally and particularly with energy hungry Europe when you can simply turn it on/off

25 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 My understanding of the NS2 was that it was a new pipeline ready to come online having undergone testing and filling with gas(major release of greenhouse gasses which escaped and nary a peep was heard from the climate crowd), and my point stands. Why destroy your own valuable asset that increases your power internationally and particularly with energy hungry Europe when you can simply turn it on/off

Like I said, check first:

 

Germany freezes Nord Stream 2 gas project as Ukraine crisis

Feb 22, 2565 BE — Germany on Tuesday halted the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea gas pipeline project, designed to double the flow of Russian gas direct to Germany

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germanys-scholz-halts-nord-stream-2-certification-2022-02-22/

 

Your attempt to bring climate activists into it is bizarre, who would they protest to? It was fixed as quickly as possible or did you expect them to send Greta there in a boat?

Edited March 9, 20233 yr by Bkk Brian

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 My understanding of the NS2 was that it was a new pipeline ready to come online having undergone testing and filling with gas(major release of greenhouse gasses which escaped and nary a peep was heard from the climate crowd), and my point stands. Why destroy your own valuable asset that increases your power internationally and particularly with energy hungry Europe when you can simply turn it on/off

I see you are determined to ignore the perfectly reasonable rationale of why the Russians would do this. I'm not claiming that they did, but that's the rationale. Which answers your question "Why destroy your own valuable asset that increases your power internationally and particularly with energy hungry Europe when you can simply turn it on/off"

Nor did they or anyone else "destroy this valuable asset". The damage was vey limited.

16 hours ago, internationalism said:

so you have a bizarre fixation on avoiding any details and accusing russia for blowing their own pipelines (in a post below that yours and in many other posts on 2 threads about nord stream international terrorism).

 

So who are those 6 terrorists? pictures, names - for the international community, including citizens, to find them and expose their backers. 

What the name of the boat they have used? what technical specification it had to allow to carry over 500kg of C4, a specialised equipment for diving at such depths (ukrainians can't do it, as they don't train that techniques).

What is name of this pro-ukrainian group, who is their leader, commander. Who set up them, who sponsors, what actions they have taken, where are they based, how many membership and what military equipment they posses?

Getting 500kg of high explosive is not possible without strong state back up. Which government supplied it? As traces of explosive were found on the boat, it would be possible to find out composition of C4 and as each production batch can be identified to what country made it, what month and where it was stored and where it was sold.

 

"European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell and German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius were among the officials warning against jumping to conclusions after a media report said intelligence reviewed by U.S. officials indicated that a pro-Ukrainian group was behind last year's attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nord-stream-times-report-reaction-1.6771536

 

""I am not afraid of the truth. Any truth. But we are talking about ... speculations," he told reporters on Wednesday after a meeting of EU defence ministers in Stockholm, adding investigations were still continuing in Sweden, Denmark and Germany."

https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2023/03/08/eus-borrell-says-not-afraid-of-truth-on-nord-stream-but-investigations-ongoing

Getting 500kg of high explosive is not possible without strong state back up.

 

Go to any hard rock mining site and they have literally tons of explosive on hand

13 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 My understanding of the NS2 was that it was a new pipeline ready to come online having undergone testing and filling with gas(major release of greenhouse gasses which escaped and nary a peep was heard from the climate crowd), and my point stands. Why destroy your own valuable asset that increases your power internationally and particularly with energy hungry Europe when you can simply turn it on/off

Nordstream 2 was hydro tested and ready for service, It was denied operating permits by Demark before the war happened. It might have had a very small load on the line, about 30 psi is what I have seen used elsewhere, but nowhere near operating pressure. 

The pictures of the sea bubbling is from Nordstream 1 which was at operating pressure, about 1000psi

As to who blew them up, I wonder if we'll ever get the truth

The name of the yacht/sailing boat was "Andromeda"

 

Latest info all here updated a few hours ago, source links are all in the article which is worthwhile reading:

 

The Nord Stream Andromeda Story: What We Know and What We Don’t

This could then be further narrowed down to the specific vessel the “Andromeda” through the help of several sources with knowledge of the investigation. This has now been publicly confirmed by the SPIEGEL. The Andromeda can be seen in this 2017 video from Yacht TV.

https://oalexanderdk.substack.com/p/the-nord-stream-andromeda-story-what

 

5 hours ago, kwonitoy said:

Nordstream 2 was hydro tested and ready for service, It was denied operating permits by Demark before the war happened. It might have had a very small load on the line, about 30 psi is what I have seen used elsewhere, but nowhere near operating pressure. 

The pictures of the sea bubbling is from Nordstream 1 which was at operating pressure, about 1000psi

As to who blew them up, I wonder if we'll ever get the truth

NB. Pressure in the NS-2 pipe-A dropped from 105 bar (~104 atmospheres) to 7 bar after the explosion [1  , 2]. (105 bar = 1523 psi)  Otherwise yes, we are likely to never know. 

 

Seeing current very close NATO and US/EU relations, it is highly unlikely the US sabotaged the pipes to spite the EU as a few Putin cheerleaders claim.

 

Edited March 10, 20233 yr by rabas