Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

seymourhersh.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 1001 posts

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#211

Post by mmastrac »

rsync wrote: post #207
mmastrac wrote: post #97

It's a great story, but it's all unsourced and could be a decent Tom Clancy story at best. You could probably write a similar one with Russia or German agents as the key players and be just as convincing. The only anchor in reality appears to be Biden suggesting that they knew how to take it out which seems like a pretty weak place to build a large story. What I find particularly odd is that this entire thing appears…

"You could probably write a similar one with Russia ..." I disagree - there is no credible motive here for Russia and, in fact, the outcome was directly opposed to every outcome they are, or were trying, to achieve. Not only do I, as a US citizen, believe that the US perpetrated this act but further: I believe it is an overtly hostile action against EU citizens and, particularly, Germans, who will suffer the most eco…

There are plenty of credible motives for Russia to do this (some even listed in this thread), but they are all just as weakly supported as this theory.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#213

Post by vinaypai »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #151
Haunted_Cabbage wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get really upset when claims are made without evidence to support them. It might be a moral failing of mine, but for some reason I really loathe when assertions are made without evidence.

One thing to keep in mind is that counter assertions have been made without evidence. > Asked for comment, Adrienne Watson, a White House spokesperson, said in an email, “This is false and complete fiction.” Tammy Thorp, a spokesperson for the Central Intelligence Agency, similarly wrote: “This claim is completely and utterly false.” "This is ... complete fiction." is a claim that the story was fabricated. I think it…

I assert that you are a Russian agent personally appointed by Vladimir Putin, paid $250,000 through a bank in the Cayman Islands, tasked with sowing discord in the US by posting fictitious stories on Hacker News.

Care to comment?

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#214

Post by ceejayoz »

pphysch wrote: post #185
partiallypro wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the only crazy conspiracy theory he has claimed in the past 10-20 years.

Go on. Link some examples.

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bi...

> According to Hersh's story, Navy SEALs met no resistance at Abbottabad and were escorted by a Pakistani intelligence officer to bin Laden's bedroom, where they killed him. Bin Laden's body was "torn apart with rifle fire" and pieces of the corpse "tossed out over the Hindu Kush mountains" by Navy SEALs during the flight home (no reason is given for this action). There was no burial at sea because "there wouldn’t have been much left of bin Laden to put into the sea in any case."

> The first hints came in the latter years of the Bush administration, when Hersh reported repeatedly that the US was on the verging of striking Iran. These included reports stating that the US might even bomb Iran with a nuclear warhead, and later that the administration had considered using US special forces disguised as Iranians to launch a "false flag" attack as a premise for war.

> The moment when a lot of journalists started to question whether Hersh had veered from investigative reporting into something else came in January 2011. That month, he spoke at Georgetown University's branch campus in Qatar, where he gave a bizarre and rambling address alleging that top military and special forces leaders "are all members of, or at least supporters of, Knights of Malta ... many of them are members of Opus Dei." He suggested that they belong to a network first formed by former Vice President Dick Cheney that is steering US foreign policy toward an agenda of bringing Christianity to the Middle East.

> The next year, in 2012, Hersh reported in the New Yorker that the Bush administration had secretly armed and funded an Iranian terrorist group known as the MEK in 2005. Two sources, neither with direct knowledge, told Hersh that American special forces had flown the Iranians all the way to Nevada to train at a base there. This detail was both spectacular and puzzling: the US has bases throughout the world, including several in the Middle East; why bring terrorists to Nevada?

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#215

Post by LarryMullins »

partiallypro wrote: post #153
pphysch wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Questioning the narratives around the ongoing Syrian Dirty War is not a "crazy conspiracy theory".

That's not the only crazy conspiracy theory he has claimed in the past 10-20 years.

Project Azorian was a crazy conspiracy theory, and also true. You discredit yourself by using "conspiracy theory" in the "obviously false" sense. Intelligence agencies really do conspire to do things. That's their job.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#216

Post by foota »

rsync wrote: post #207
mmastrac wrote: post #97

It's a great story, but it's all unsourced and could be a decent Tom Clancy story at best. You could probably write a similar one with Russia or German agents as the key players and be just as convincing. The only anchor in reality appears to be Biden suggesting that they knew how to take it out which seems like a pretty weak place to build a large story. What I find particularly odd is that this entire thing appears…

"You could probably write a similar one with Russia ..." I disagree - there is no credible motive here for Russia and, in fact, the outcome was directly opposed to every outcome they are, or were trying, to achieve. Not only do I, as a US citizen, believe that the US perpetrated this act but further: I believe it is an overtly hostile action against EU citizens and, particularly, Germans, who will suffer the most eco…

I remember reading at the time that the motive would have been to remove the oligarch's desire to end the war. If you can't sell the gas anyway, then you can't complain about it.

Seeing as Russia was already using gas supplies as a political tool, it doesn't seem too far fetched.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#217

Post by Sed47_ »

miguelazo wrote: post #81
r721 wrote: post #66

>The White House on Wednesday dismissed a blog post by a U.S. investigative journalist alleging the United States was behind explosions of the Nord Stream gas pipelines as "utterly false and complete fiction." >... >"This is utterly false and complete fiction," said Adrienne Watson, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council. Spokespeople for the CIA and State Department said the same. https://www.r…

Was this included for comic relief? Or did you actually think we should take the CIA or State Department PR seriously?

I will definitely take a random substack blog more seriously. After all, he is citing "unnamed sources"! Very credible!

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#218

Post by hef19898 »

dang wrote: post #186
davesque wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm honestly really shocked by your stance on this. Regardless of whether or not this information is credible, this seems like text book flame war kindling. In the past, I've thought HN's policy of "you can discuss things like this in other forums" was wise and I've been corrected by it myself many times. Why wouldn't that apply in this case?

Because it's interesting. Hersh reporting on it is an interesting story in its own right. Is what he says true? I have no idea. We don't have a truth meter here.

But we do have a proofen and working mechanism: Flagging. If the submission doesn't get flagged, cool. If it does, it does. I don't see a reason to intervene here.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#219

Post by threeseed »

dang wrote: post #196
twblalock wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone else had written this, would it be significant? Wouldn't it just be written off as a conspiracy theory that provides little to no evidence for its claims? If the only thing that gets this on HN is Seymour Hersh's reputation (which has lately become somewhat questionable) then you might want to reconsider. Plus, the quality of the comments has not been very good so far.

No, I don't think it would be. Hersh is inevitably part of the story because of his historical significance and the network of government sources that he's cultivated for decades. It doesn't follow that his claims are true (even if he's accurately reporting, his sources must have their own agendas). That's why I added the question mark to the title above. The story being on HN doesn't imply anything about that—only t…

a) I don't understand the relevance at all to Hacker News. There are plenty of interesting things going on in the tech world that aren't making the front page.

b) There is a lack of evidence in the article. I can claim that you destroyed the pipeline and it would be equally as valid at this point.

c) His previous reputation is important but history is littered with examples of people making mistakes and relying on their own hubris. That is why we demand evidence.

Re: “How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

#220

Post by JumpCrisscross »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #126
davesque wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm honestly really shocked by your stance on this. Regardless of whether or not this information is credible, this seems like text book flame war kindling. In the past, I've thought HN's policy of "you can discuss things like this in other forums" was wise and I've been corrected by it myself many times. Why wouldn't that apply in this case?

One thing that makes this distinct from much of said kindling is that it hasn't been reported on before. This isn't someone coming into an unrelated comment thread and commenting "9/11 was an inside job!" I would encourage any who disagree to consider truly why this reporting upsets them.

> it hasn't been reported on before

Wasn't the U.S. being behind the bombing a leading alternative hypothesis when the news broke?

Post reply on HN