Hat Joe Biden Nord Stream angegriffen? Seymour Hershs Vorwurf, die USA hätten die Erdgas-Pipelines gesprengt, ist glaubwürdig. Es braucht jetzt eine internationale Untersuchung. Die Mainstream-Medien haben versagt

Hat Joe Biden Nord Stream angegriffen? Seymour Hershs Vorwurf, die USA hätten die Erdgas-Pipelines gesprengt, ist glaubwürdig. Es braucht jetzt eine internationale Untersuchung. Die Mainstream-Medien haben versagt English: Did Joe Biden attack Nord Stream? Seymour Hersh's accusation that the U.S. blew up natural gas pipelines is credible. What is needed now is an international investigation. The mainstream media has failed. Benjamin Abelow, February 17, 2023 I recall only three news events from my childhood. The first was the 1963 assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy. I was four years old. Though I did not understand what was happening, I remember a radio announcement—and my mother bursting into tears. The second event was the Apollo 11 moon landing in 1969. The third event, also in 1969, was the horrific news that the U.S. military had carried out a mass murder of Vietnamese civilians—the My Lai massacre. It was the investigative journalist Seymour Hersh who broke that story. Hersh is one of the most famous and respected investigative journalists in the United States. Some consider him one of the half-dozen greatest journalists in American history. He worked for The New York Times and The New Yorker. He holds five Polk Awards and the Pulitzer Prize. On 8 February, Hersh published a new, 5,000-word article—online and freely accessible on Substack, a private internet platform—claiming that the United States attacked Nord Stream. At the end of this essay, I will comment on what it means that his article was not published in the mainstream media. But first, let us consider what Hersh says and why I find it credible. Hersh claims, based on a confidential source, that the U.S. carried out the Nord Stream attack. He asserts that, acting with President Biden’s approval, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan initiated the process, and that detailed planning was done by a secret group that included Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, and representatives of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Central Intelligence Agency, and Treasury Department. That was bombshell enough, but there is more. Hersh claims that crucial assistance came from Norway—a country whose ex-prime minister, Jens Stoltenberg, is NATO’s Secretary General. Hersh describes how the explosives were set by the Americans and detonated using a communications buoy dropped into the sea by Norway. The White House says the article is “utterly false and complete fiction.” The CIA issued a similar denial. To help explain why I suspect that Hersh’s article is correct, at least in broad outline, I will describe some important background, all from publicly available sources. For the past 51 years, the U.S. Navy has sponsored and carried out an annual training exercise in the Baltic Sea. The exercise is called BALTOPS—for Baltic Operations. In 2022, the exercise began on 5 June and lasted twelve days. The lead ship was the USS Kearsage—a gigantic amphibious assault vessel two and a half times the length of an American football field. In all, fourteen nations participated. A key feature of the BALTOPS exercise involved using unmanned undersea vehicles (so-called “UUVs”) to practice destroying mines and other undersea targets. Such mine-clearing is typically done by planting explosives on the target and detonating them remotely. This part of the exercise took place near the Danish Island of Bornholm, which is located off the Swedish coast. Although the BALTOPS exercise ended on 15 June, the Kearsage and several other U.S. ships remained in the Baltic, visiting various ports, till 24 September. Only then did they leave the Baltic, presumably returning to Italy, where they are based with the U.S. Sixth Fleet. Just two days after the ships left, explosions destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines. Importantly, the explosions occurred near the island of Bornholm, not far from where the BALTOPS exercises were carried out. There were also statements by American officials. A few weeks before Russia’s invasion, President Biden stated publicly that if Russia invaded Ukraine, “we will bring an end” to Nord Stream 2. He added: “I promise you, we will be able to do it.” Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland had likewise warned, “If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.” As if this were not enough, when Biden made his threats, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz stood silently on stage with him. Here one must wonder whether—if the U.S. did in fact attack Nord Stream—Chancellor Scholz had acquiesced to the plans. Many others in the American political establishment have vociferously opposed Nord Stream, fearing that Germany in particular, and Europe in general, might ally itself too closely with Russia. A seven-minute video by Matt Orfalea that captures some of these statements is searchable online by its English-language title: “Who Blew Up Nord Stream Pipelines? A Mystery!” Finally, although Denmark, Sweden, and Germany have all carried out investigations into the attack, none have made their findings public. In Germany, I recall reading that the ministries of interior and defense refused to release information even to a member of the parliament. As I understand it, the refusal was made on the grounds of national security. If there had been evidence pointing to Russia, it seems likely that the conclusions of the investigations (even if not the methods used to reach those conclusions) would have been actively publicized. To my reading, the most likely scenario is that these investigations showed no evidence of Russian involvement and may in fact have pointed to one or more NATO members. Perhaps that was the national security problem—for if a NATO member carried out the attack, and it became publicly known, the result might be strong popular opposition to the NATO alliance. Here I note that, just during the past few weeks, both The New York Times and The Washington Post have published articles indicating there is no evidence of Russian involvement. What I have just described is public information. I was familiar with it well before 8 February. So even before Hersh published his article, I thought it quite possible—even likely—that elements of the U.S. government had either attacked the pipeline or helped another country do so. This helps explain why I find his article credible. Very likely the information on which the article was based came to Hersh from a whistleblower who brought it to him precisely because of his integrity and credibility in the broad public, and because Hersh has a reputation for protecting the identity of sources. Based on all this, and pending the results of a formal, open, international investigation—which I believe should be carried out—I suspect that members of the U.S. government, including President Biden, are responsible for the attack. What conclusions can we draw from the appearance of Hersh’s article in a private online platform? What conclusions can we draw from the article’s having been almost totally ignored by the mainstream media in the USA and Europe, and from the fact that these media are not assertively questioning the White House’s claim that the article is “utterly false and complete fiction”? I believe we are witnesses to a profound and oppressive self-censorship by the media in the USA and in all of the EU. This censorship has grown vastly since the onset of the Ukraine war. Under these circumstances, it behooves the public to avail itself fully of so-called “dissident” sources of information, not only on the bombing of Nord Stream, but on the underlying causes and ongoing conduct of the war in Ukraine.