Who sabotaged the Nordstream pipelines?
The answer is We do not know.
However, we do know that some of the theories and claims that have been made do not stand up to the available evidence. A stand-out among these debunked claims is the story by Seymour Hersh that it was an American operation using Norwegian vessels. Wired describes the work of the independent people using available data sources to investigate the claims.
13 thoughts on “Still a mystery.”
RE: “A stand-out among these debunked claims is the story by Seymour Hersh that it was an American operation using Norwegian vessels.”
No one has debunked Hersh’s story, but a correction to the assertion needs to be noted. Hersh never said Norwegian vessels were used to perform the operation. Rather, he claimed that American vessels — part of the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet — were used.
In case anyone is interested, it should be possible to solve the mystery using a sample of the explosive residue:
…”he claimed that American vessels — part of the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet — were used.”
With NO evidence? Then, by Gum, the great Seymour MUST be believed.
Hersh’s evidence consists of anonymous sources. Given his reputation, I give him the benefit of the doubt. I only note that the story he published has not been debunked as Mr. Murphy claims.
You are obviously unfamiliar with Hersh’s story. You said . . .
Hersh never said Norwegian vessels were used to perform the operation. Rather, he claimed that American vessels — part of the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet — were used.
Wrong. He said that exercises by our Navy would serve as cover but the mission was to be carried out by Norwegians diving from a Norwegian ship.
Following is a direct quote . . .
“The Norwegian navy was quick to find the right spot, in the shallow waters of the Baltic sea a few miles off Denmark’s Bornholm Island. The pipelines ran more than a mile apart along a seafloor that was only 260 feet deep. That would be well within the range of the divers, who, operating from a Norwegian Alta class mine hunter, would dive with a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen and helium streaming from their tanks, and plant shaped C4 charges on the four pipelines with concrete protective covers.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wait? You mean Mr. Roberts told a fib? I am aghast, I say. Absolutely aghast.
RE: “You are obviously unfamiliar with Hersh’s story.”
Wrong. Here is the applicable quotation:
“The Americans provided one vital element: they convinced the Sixth Fleet planners to add a research and development exercise to the program. The exercise, as made public by the Navy, involved the Sixth Fleet in collaboration with the Navy’s ‘research and warfare centers.’ The at-sea event would be held off the coast of Bornholm Island and involve NATO teams of divers planting mines, with competing teams using the latest underwater technology to find and destroy them.”
That was the cover I referenced above. A lot of activity in the area so that the actual mission described above could be carried out without arousing suspicion.
Anyhow, it is all irrelevant. The story did not stand up to the evidence available. And the idea that Norway would be complicit to the extent described in Hersch’s piece in order to boost sales of its natural gas is ridiculous on its face.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “That was the cover I referenced above. ”
The way I read it, Norway participated in the operational planning with the U.S. deciding the final plan. Hersh never described the execution in sufficient detail to support your claims about it. Most important, Hersh’s story remains plausible, despite your denials.
I do not disagree with your reading. Hersch described it as an American plan. Yes it was – according to the story told.
But, contrary to your reading, he is quite clear in stating was going to do the deed – divers working off a “Norwegian Alta class mine hunter.” Read it again.
And that is the part of his story that is not supported by the open source intelligence community which found that no such Norwegian vessel was in the right spot to match the story Hersch told. Thus, with a key “fact” debunked and nothing but anonymous sources, the whole story becomes dubious. And, as I said at the outset, it is still a mystery who did it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hersh’s evidence is a fairy tale. His anonymous sources, the Brothers Grimm.
The trouble for you is you can’t prove it. No one has debunked it.
You have the same issue. You just believe him to accurate because he tells you what you want to hear. Bubble thinking in a nutshell.
“No one has debunked it.”
And his proof is NOT.
“Given his reputation, I give him the benefit of the doubt”…
Of course you do. If they agree with you, regardless of whether their reputation is good, bad, or has “evolved”, as long as YOUR opinion is supported, it just doesn’t matter. But, G-d forbid, if it is someone who’s reputation is as good or better than Hersh’s, if they disagree with you, they are irreputable and cannot be trusted. Even if the sources are NOT anonymous.