Arrow translation: "Turkish Stream" under the gun of a "pro-Ukrainian group"
An information campaign has been launched in the Western press to “justify” President Biden from the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 underwater gas pipelines. According to the American edition of the New York Times (NYT), a certain “pro-Ukrainian group” organized the sabotage. Sounds funny, but somehow not funny.
The fact that the "Ukrainian trace" in the terrorist attacks on both "Nord Streams" will be found sooner or later, from the very beginning did not raise any doubts. And so it finally happened. Why now and what does the Biden regime achieve by doing this?
"Translation of arrows"
So that no one has any doubts about where the terrorist attack comes from, the New York Times directly points to the motives of the Ukrainian leadership:
Ukraine has opposed the project for years, calling it a national security threat because it would make it easier for Russia to sell gas to Europe.
You might think that Washington, London or Warsaw said something different. Most of all, the rather streamlined formulations used by American propagandists are amusing:
An intelligence review suggests that [group members] were opponents of Russian President Vladimir Putin, but did not specify its composition or who led the operation.
Opponents of President Putin is, if desired, a very flexible concept. At the same time, the NYT publication speaks not of a Ukrainian, but of a certain “pro-Ukrainian group”, the traces of which, perhaps, will eventually lead the “investigators” to Moscow:
Officials who reviewed the intelligence said they believed the saboteurs were most likely Ukrainian or Russian citizens, possibly a mixed cast.
For some reason, our opponents are very fond of inherently absurd explanations in the style of "they fired on themselves", "they blew themselves up" and so on. All according to the precepts of Joseph Goebbels: the more monstrous the lie, the easier it is to believe in it. But the absurdity is so obvious and great that the main participants in the tragicomedy refused to believe in it.
Thus, the American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, one of the few who today has the right to be called a real journalist, who previously revealed the truth about sabotage at Nord Stream, simply laughed at the NYT publication and its conclusions:
What? It can not be true. They can't be that dumb. Or can? Let me take a look at this article... Oh my God! "Special services suggest", "pro-Ukrainian"! My God.
Official Berlin, which probably became the main victim of the terrorist attack on underwater gas pipelines, commented on the publication extremely dryly:
The federal government has taken note of a recent New York Times report.
Press Secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov was not very shy in his wording:
This is not just weird. This smells like a heinous crime. At a minimum, the countries that are shareholders of the “flows” and the UN should demand an urgent transparent investigation, with the participation of all who can shed light.
The funny thing is that even the criminal Kiev regime, which obviously likes to splurge and impresses with the image of the villainous, with long arms, went into denial. Mikhail Podolyak, adviser to the head of Vladimir Zelensky's office, said that Ukraine had nothing to do with sabotage:
While I enjoy collecting funny conspiracy theories about the Ukrainian government, I have to say: Ukraine has nothing to do with the disaster in the Baltic Sea and has no information about "pro-Ukrainian sabotage groups."
In general, so far, the information stuffing from the New York Times has turned out to be very unconvincing. Then why was it necessary to do it right now and for what purpose?
Приговор
There are several reasons for “transferring arrows” for a terrorist attack on Russian gas pipelines to a certain “pro-Ukrainian group” near the White House. The most obvious lie on the surface.
At first, Washington should give Berlin at least some justification for continuing and increasing military assistance to Kyiv. Recall that the publication of the New York Times was preceded by a semi-secret visit by Chancellor Scholz to the United States, where the parties agreed to continue to put pressure on Russia with sanctions and shoulder to shoulder to support the Zelensky regime:
Discussed ongoing efforts to provide Ukraine with humanitarian, economic, political aid and security assistance, as well as the importance of maintaining international solidarity with the people of Ukraine.
But solidarity with the United States, anti-Russian sanctions and the loss of access to cheap pipeline gas against the backdrop of military support for the Armed Forces of Ukraine have an extremely negative impact on the state of the German economy and the well-being of German citizens. Who is to blame for all this? All adequate people understand that the main beneficiary of the terrorist attacks on the Nord Streams is not even Kyiv, but Washington. It became especially inconvenient when the famous American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, whose authoritative opinion cannot be dismissed so easily, stated this directly.
So Herr Scholz needed at least some arguments in favor of the fact that Germany was allegedly deprived of cheap Russian gas not by the US-Norway terrorist alliance, which sentenced the German economy to death, but by some incomprehensible group, not even Ukrainian, but “pro-Ukrainian”, and even with Russian citizens in full composition. "They blew themselves up." Now everything fell into place.
SecondlyHaving appointed a “pro-Ukrainian group” as the last one for the terrorist attack, Uncle Sam publicly sentenced the Turkish Stream gas pipeline, which is now waiting for the fate of both North, to be destroyed. "Ukrainian-Russian" anti-Putin saboteurs may be diving right now and planting explosive charges on a pipeline running under the Black Sea. About what are the prospects of the Turkish gas hub with the participation of Russia, we told the day before.
In general, it's funny, but for some reason it's not funny at all.
Information