Debunking the Martin Armstrong and Seymour Hersh Nord Stream Story

Absurd conspiracy theories never go away. People believe BS because BS is sexy or more exciting or whatever. You tell me.

As expected, when I wrote Nord Stream Pipeline Blowback: Germany to Stop All New Aid to Ukraine the Armstrong and Hersh supporters would come out of the woodwork, and they did.

Comments ranged from unprofessional divers could not do this, the ship could not carry the required amount of explosives, and they couldn’t possibly locate the pipeline at that depth. Another asked “where was the decompression chamber?”

None of these respondents bothered to read anything easily findable debunking all of these lines of thought.

And on top of it Hersh made a number of serious mistakes. I wrote part of this up as an addendum but decided to do this follow-up post.

Blasting the Hersh BS Sky High

Please consider All at sea: Seymour Hersh and his Nord Stream sabotage story

“Any serious student of the event would know that you cannot anchor a sailboat in waters that are 260 feet deep.”

Though factually correct, this is a silly thing to say: the boat wouldn’t need to anchor,

Hersh makes a factually correct statement but one that is 100% meaningless.

Medium writer Brian Whitaker goes over most of the BS about a tiny little 49-foot boat couldn’t do this or that.

Hersh: ““You cannot just walk off the street with a fake passport and lease a boat.”

More BS.

Whitaker blasts that out of the water too.

The captain and the divers would need to show proof of their competence, but it’s unclear why the expert thinks this would be a problem. If you want to blow up pipelines it’s best to have competent people to do it. They wouldn’t want to have their real names on the certificates, but for people who know how to get false passports getting the extra documentation shouldn’t be too difficult.

Actually, it’s very clear why Hersh would do this. He sells conspiracy theories.

This reminds me of all the BS about Lee Harvey Oswald could not walk to the location in the allotted time or could not have fired the shots in the allotted time. Then many people did both.

Decompression BS

A reader just asked “Where was the decompression chamber?”

The short answer is none was needed despite allegations by many.

Brian Whitaker discussed that in a follow-up article Nord Stream sabotage: a look at the evidence so far

There have been repeated claims that it would not be feasible to carry out 80-metre dives from such a small boat, since the Andromeda had no space for a decompression chamber. However, a mention of helium in the intelligence report about the Ukrainian plan points to an alternative solution. By breathing a mixture of oxygen and helium and pausing at intervals while returning to the surface, the need for a decompression chamber could be avoided. A Dutch military website describes the process when used by navy divers.

In an interview with the Ostsee-Zeitung, Achim Schloeffel, an “extreme diver” and trainer, suggested the difficulties have been exaggerated. The pipeline would be easy to locate from sea charts or with an echo sounder costing around $3,000. The location could be marked by dropping a 15kg weight attached to a line with a marker buoy on the other end and divers would follow the line down to the exact spot. Explosives could be guided down the line in the same way. The boat would continue sailing and return to the marker buoy to pick up the divers when they surfaced

“Anyone who has completed level two in our diving school would be able to do this,” Schloeffel told the paper. “Especially for those who regularly go wreck diving, a dive to the pipeline would not be a problem for them. 

Regardless of that, the most popular (and most believed) theory on social media is that the US blew up Nord Stream. This is mainly the result of an article by the American journalist Seymour Hersh claiming that US Navy divers carried out the attack with assistance from Norway.

More Mistakes by Hersh

Please consider More mistakes about Norwegian interference in the Nord Stream sabotage translated to English from Norwegian.

American journalist Seymour Hersh claims the latter. On 8 February, he published an article in which he writes in detail about how the Norwegian defense forces are said to have contributed to carrying out the sabotage attacks in the Danish and Swedish economic zone in the Baltic Sea.

In the past month, the article has been spread all over the world, including via Norwegian alternative websites.

Among other things, Hersh mentions Norwegian naval bases that do not exist and ships that, by all accounts, have been in Norway during the period in question. He also writes that Jens Stoltenberg was already a trusted source for American intelligence as a teenager.

Ship data, satellite images and documentation that Faktisk.no has reviewed show, among other things, that:

• None of the Norwegian minesweepers of the Alta class took part in the NATO exercise in the Baltic Sea.
• Satellite images confirm that one vessel was at Haakonsvern naval base three days after BALTOPS 22 had started.
• Satellite images, ship data and images suggest that the second vessel underwent maintenance at Umoe shipyard.
• The Norwegian P-8A Poseidon aircraft were not operational at the time Hersh writes that such an aircraft was on a “routine flight” over the Baltic Sea. Avinor informs Faktisk.no that no P-8 aircraft took off from Evenes airport on 25 or 26 September. One must also assume that the aircraft would have been visible on the radars of several countries that monitor the airspace over the Baltic Sea.

One of the details that many Norwegian readers have probably stumbled upon in Hersh’s article is the section where he explains why Norway was the perfect partner for the USA.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg is described as a dedicated anti-communist who has been a trusted source for US intelligence ever since the Vietnam War.

The Vietnam War took place in the years 1957-1975. Jens Stoltenberg was born on 16 March 1959 and was therefore a teenager when the war was over.

Hersh has also published a map that places Norwegian naval bases at Evenes, Sola and Rygge, and air bases in Tromsø and Ramsund. Hersh clarifies that the map “is not accurate”. That is an understatement.

There is much more debunking in the above article as well, with details.

This will not convince many, and perhaps no one. People who believe BS generally stick to believing BS.

The Real Story of Nord Stream

The Wall Street Journal comments A Drunken Evening, a Rented Yacht: The Real Story of the Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage

Occam’s Razor

I am one of the biggest fans of Occam’s Razor around. Occam’s Razor proposes the simplest explanation that requires the fewest assumptions is the one most likely to be true.

After debunking nonsense about the amount of explosives needed, scuba training needed, ease at finding the pipeline, and decompression chambers what’s left?

Competing Theories

• A group of dedicated Ukrainians rented a boat, located the pipeline from published documents and a $3,000 finder, used high-power, timed explosives (traces found on the boat), timed stops to eliminate decompression, and blew up the pipelines. They accidentally hit one pipeline twice and missed the fourth. As amateurs, they failed to remove all evidence of explosives on the ship. The WSJ spoke to four senior Ukrainian defense and security officials who either participated in or had direct knowledge of the plot. All of them said the pipelines were a legitimate target in Ukraine’s war of defense against Russia.
• The US in conjunction with Norwegian defense forces, blew up the pipelines, and planted evidence pointing to Ukraine. The US and Norway forces were not competent enough to get all four pipelines (or missed one on purpose to deflect suspicion). Meanwhile, evidence contradicts the idea that Norwegian defense forces were in the area. As professionals, they failed to remove all evidence of explosives on the ship on purpose. Failure to remove all of the evidence was part of the plot to make it look like amateurs did this. The operation involved minesweepers and Poseidon aircraft that were not even in service, and no radar picked up the aircraft, or the radar is fake involving still more accomplices. The WSJ is lying or complicit in the US coverup. And finally the fact that Zelensky has not denied the WSJ account is meaningless or US blackmail.

To deflect the idea the US warned Ukraine not to do this, one reader suggests “Yea, right – the CIA warned Zelensky. Don’t you mean they ordered Zelensky or the next tranche of blood money would be halted?”

The above idea adds even more complexity and obvious contradictions to US Norway idea.

Now, you tell me, which one of those competing versions makes more sense. If you still believe #2 you are hopelessly delusional.

My guess: If you were hopelessly conspiratorial before, you likely still are. Perhaps I am wrong. Did I convince anyone?

Shame Shame

Zelensky approved the pipeline attack according to the WSJ. And he has not denied it. That alone should settle matters.

Shame on the US for causing this entire mess. It started with US involvement in 2014.

But I do not approve of Russia’s actions. So shame on Russia. But the US knew Russia’s red lines and ignored them.

Shame on UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson for telling Zelensky not to take a Peace Deal shortly after the invasion. Johnson pressured Kyiv into continuing the fight. David Arahamiya, the leader of Ukraine’s ruling party confirmed in an interview.

Finally, shame on Zelensky for not accepting a good deal when he had one.

Yeah, there is plenty of shame!