Nord-Stream Sabotage:. US blows up Russian Pipelines?

[Being There]

PRESS STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT VON DER LEYEN

https://www.bitchute.com/video/o3R0pJBxfqtO/

[Being There]

Blasts Detected Near Nord Stream 2 – Months After Biden Vowed to “End” Pipeline If Russia Invades Uk

The Alex Jones Show

Infowars
September 28th, 2022.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SSlgSiEeP4k1/

[Fred]

I give up.

Send him a private message/

[Sarah]

The fact that Biden made that comment, that he intentionally zeroed in on taking out Nord Stream as the consequence of bad behavior - and then it happened, all with the planned narrative that it was the US's doing, so now Russia is justified in attacking....Its so in our faces it should be obvious that this is a big circus show. It's not simply stupidity on Biden's part. The only reason these guys appear to want war is because it's part of the script that both sides are working together on. They are all on the same team, and our guys and gals are traitorously handing over our nation to Russia and China.

I suspect that Russia is behind the blasts one way or another - they might have had one of their puppets do the job. I say this because I know that their plan has been to cut off oil to Europe as part of the final phase leading us into WW3. They know they can ride out the chaos better than Western Europe. I have this from a dreamer over a decade ago. Looks like war is coming soon.

[Robin Hood]

If the US has done this, and it is a big "IF", it is the greatest act of folly in modern times. The Russians will retaliate and who can blame them?
Not only that, but many of the USA's allies will abandon her and seek alliance with Russia, or at least neutrality.
Russia will regard this as a direct act of war, and they would be right.

[blitzinstripes]

Hang on folks ...life could get interesting....

Agreed. Enter full on war propaganda, I hope you have access to true messengers, because anything online and especially from the MSM is sus.

How can we warn the Q15 about this?

I'll be honest, I hope they don't even figure it out. They are vastly underqualified to speak on the situation. That would require some actual revelation or seership. I see NONE. They will say something really generic and stupid. Like "trust the powers that be", your wise and thoughtful leaders.

The same leaders that will ultimately be responsible for a lot of innocent blood spilt over this stupid escalation of war. And I pray that they didn't just bring this war here, to our homeland. I pray that God removes the short feather that shakes hands with invisible people and falls UP the stairs, before he gets us all killed.

[Chip]

Brother Nathanael says Poland, The Netherlands, and Sweden blew up the pipelines with CIA and Mossad planning. Even Ted Cruz was against Nord Stream 2.

http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/n ... -nathanael

America had already decided a while back that Europe would be buying its energy from America. Buying energy from Russia was "a very bad idea".

[TheDuke]

Personally I don't think it is about buying energy from US. We cannot supply natural gas (which this was, not gasoline) to Europe in any quantity, despite previous ill-understood statements of cryo-tankers or something a few months ago. IMO, it is just about have NO energy. Not to have US sell more but to have world use less. Get cold, get hungry, die, reduce population, destroy economy, save world by introducing new world order. Thankfully, then we will own nothing and be happy about it!

[Durzan]

Here's the thing. Europe was at the mercy of Russia with them being the only real suppliers of natural gas in the area, meaning that they could just turn off the pipelines and wait winter out as a form of pressure to force Germany to lift their sanctions. The damaging of the pipelines effectively removes or at least limits the use of that particular card from Russia's options.

ASSUMING that the US actually did it (which isn't 100% clear but does make some amount of sense), then blowing up the pipeline can be seen as choosing one bad option from a list of bad options. In a way, this can be seen as us pulling a Tony Stark and cutting the wire. Its still a risky move on our part, as it could damage our relations with our allies, as well as add additional tension to a bad situation. It backs Putin further into the corner that he's in.

ASSUMING that Russia did it, presumably in a gamble to make it look like the US did it (in order to cause division among the ranks of NATO), then it was still a very risky and arguably stupid move, as it cripples their economy all the more and gets rid of one of the few forms of leverage they have over the EU and the west. Still, there have been plenty of instances where companies or nations were able to benefit in the end from long term actions that seemed foolish or stupid at the time.

[Chip]

Personally I don't think it is about buying energy from US. We cannot supply natural gas (which this was, not gasoline) to Europe in any quantity, despite previous ill-understood statements of cryo-tankers or something a few months ago. IMO, it is just about have NO energy. Not to have US sell more but to have world use less. Get cold, get hungry, die, reduce population, destroy economy, save world by introducing new world order. Thankfully, then we will own nothing and be happy about it!

I had read somewhere, many months ago, that the US plan was to strip Europe of Russian energy and then force them to buy very expensive LNG.

[Peeps]

This magazine cover implies the pipeline fiasco maybe a psyop. Not that the effects of the psyop won't be real and devastating. But if you look at a mirror image of this cover, as one would have to do if looking at DaVinci's real sketchbooks, you will see it says "Putin's pipelines" and there's a Pinocchio with a long nose.

The video footage did not show the pipeline, just the surface of the water with some kind of disturbance "they" said was because of a ruptured pipeline.

The elites want World War III. It has been a part of "their" plans for years, a way to bring order out of chaos and depopulate simultaneously.

[Chip]

Here it is mirrored.

putin.jpg (198 KiB) Viewed 473 times

[Durzan]

This magazine cover implies the pipeline fiasco maybe a psyop. Not that the effects of the psyop won't be real and devastating. But if you look at a mirror image of this cover, as one would have to do if looking at DaVinci's real sketchbooks, you will see it says "Putin's pipelines" and there's a Pinocchio with a long nose.

The video footage did not show the pipeline, just the surface of the water with some kind of disturbance "they" said was because of a ruptured pipeline.

That raises another question... if the Russians turned off the valve letting natural gas flow through the Nord stream pipelines before the sabotage, then it wouldn't matter much if the pipelines were damaged, so long as Russia keeps the pipes turned off, right? Turn them on again, and only THEN it starts leaking. Maybe the US or Mercenaries sabotaged the pipelines and then Russia turned the gas back on to cause environmental damage in an attempt to make it backfire on NATO.

Or maybe the explosions ruptured the ground enough to cause leaks from pockets of Natural Gas in the sea. Or perhaps it was tremors in the earth's crust that caused the whole thing. At this point, we can't really say for sure.

[Peeps]

This magazine cover implies the pipeline fiasco maybe a psyop. Not that the effects of the psyop won't be real and devastating. But if you look at a mirror image of this cover, as one would have to do if looking at DaVinci's real sketchbooks, you will see it says "Putin's pipelines" and there's a Pinocchio with a long nose.

The video footage did not show the pipeline, just the surface of the water with some kind of disturbance "they" said was because of a ruptured pipeline.

That raises another question... if the Russians turned off the valve letting natural gas flow through the Nord stream pipelines before the sabotage, then it wouldn't matter much if the pipelines were damaged, so long as Russia keeps the pipes turned off, right? Turn them on again, and only THEN it starts leaking. Maybe the US or Mercenaries sabotaged the pipelines and then Russia turned the gas back on to cause environmental damage in an attempt to make it backfire on NATO.

Or maybe the explosions ruptured the ground enough to cause leaks from pockets of Natural Gas in the sea. Or perhaps it was tremors in the earth's crust that caused the whole thing. At this point, we can't really say for sure.

The elites do things that seem nonsensical to us plebs. Until years later, and we finally realize that we are spied on by the NSA, harangued at airports by the TSA, and the POTUS can rule by decree by writing executive orders because of the Patriot Act...this is when "their" logic of destroying the twin towers and building 7 starts to make sense.

[Durzan]

This magazine cover implies the pipeline fiasco maybe a psyop. Not that the effects of the psyop won't be real and devastating. But if you look at a mirror image of this cover, as one would have to do if looking at DaVinci's real sketchbooks, you will see it says "Putin's pipelines" and there's a Pinocchio with a long nose.

The video footage did not show the pipeline, just the surface of the water with some kind of disturbance "they" said was because of a ruptured pipeline.

That raises another question... if the Russians turned off the valve letting natural gas flow through the Nord stream pipelines before the sabotage, then it wouldn't matter much if the pipelines were damaged, so long as Russia keeps the pipes turned off, right? Turn them on again, and only THEN it starts leaking. Maybe the US or Mercenaries sabotaged the pipelines and then Russia turned the gas back on to cause environmental damage in an attempt to make it backfire on NATO.

Or maybe the explosions ruptured the ground enough to cause leaks from pockets of Natural Gas in the sea. Or perhaps it was tremors in the earth's crust that caused the whole thing. At this point, we can't really say for sure.

The elites do things that seem nonsensical to us plebs. Until years later, and we finally realize that we are spied on by the NSA, harangued at airports by the TSA, and the POTUS can rule by decree by writing executive orders because of the Patriot Act...this is when "their" logic of destroying the twin towers and building 7 starts to make sense.

I don't think they actually destroyed the Twin Towers. At least, not directly. It's far more likely that they deliberately cultivated a situation that would result in a terrorist attack, and that said ultimate result was 9/11. That makes far more sense with both what the mainstream narrative says and whatever inconsistencies exist. And its also a far easier conspiracy to conceal overall, one that'd give them plausible deniability.

[Peeps]

This magazine cover implies the pipeline fiasco maybe a psyop. Not that the effects of the psyop won't be real and devastating. But if you look at a mirror image of this cover, as one would have to do if looking at DaVinci's real sketchbooks, you will see it says "Putin's pipelines" and there's a Pinocchio with a long nose.

The video footage did not show the pipeline, just the surface of the water with some kind of disturbance "they" said was because of a ruptured pipeline.

That raises another question... if the Russians turned off the valve letting natural gas flow through the Nord stream pipelines before the sabotage, then it wouldn't matter much if the pipelines were damaged, so long as Russia keeps the pipes turned off, right? Turn them on again, and only THEN it starts leaking. Maybe the US or Mercenaries sabotaged the pipelines and then Russia turned the gas back on to cause environmental damage in an attempt to make it backfire on NATO.

Or maybe the explosions ruptured the ground enough to cause leaks from pockets of Natural Gas in the sea. Or perhaps it was tremors in the earth's crust that caused the whole thing. At this point, we can't really say for sure.

The elites do things that seem nonsensical to us plebs. Until years later, and we finally realize that we are spied on by the NSA, harangued at airports by the TSA, and the POTUS can rule by decree by writing executive orders because of the Patriot Act...this is when "their" logic of destroying the twin towers and building 7 starts to make sense.

I don't think they actually destroyed the Twin Towers. At least, not directly. It's far more likely that they deliberately cultivated a situation that would result in a terrorist attack, and that said ultimate result was 9/11. That makes far more sense with both what the mainstream narrative says and whatever inconsistencies exist. And its also a far easier conspiracy to conceal overall, one that'd give them plausible deniability.

The buildings went down like a controlled demolition. Jet fuel melts steel beams, but does not burn up the terrorists' passports. Yeah, right.

[larsenb]

This magazine cover implies the pipeline fiasco maybe a psyop. Not that the effects of the psyop won't be real and devastating. But if you look at a mirror image of this cover, as one would have to do if looking at DaVinci's real sketchbooks, you will see it says "Putin's pipelines" and there's a Pinocchio with a long nose.

The video footage did not show the pipeline, just the surface of the water with some kind of disturbance "they" said was because of a ruptured pipeline.

That raises another question... if the Russians turned off the valve letting natural gas flow through the Nord stream pipelines before the sabotage, then it wouldn't matter much if the pipelines were damaged, so long as Russia keeps the pipes turned off, right? Turn them on again, and only THEN it starts leaking. Maybe the US or Mercenaries sabotaged the pipelines and then Russia turned the gas back on to cause environmental damage in an attempt to make it backfire on NATO.

Or maybe the explosions ruptured the ground enough to cause leaks from pockets of Natural Gas in the sea. Or perhaps it was tremors in the earth's crust that caused the whole thing. At this point, we can't really say for sure.

The elites do things that seem nonsensical to us plebs. Until years later, and we finally realize that we are spied on by the NSA, harangued at airports by the TSA, and the POTUS can rule by decree by writing executive orders because of the Patriot Act...this is when "their" logic of destroying the twin towers and building 7 starts to make sense.

I don't think they actually destroyed the Twin Towers. At least, not directly. It's far more likely that they deliberately cultivated a situation that would result in a terrorist attack, and that said ultimate result was 9/11. That makes far more sense with both what the mainstream narrative says and whatever inconsistencies exist. And its also a far easier conspiracy to conceal overall, one that'd give them plausible deniability.

The main problem with this idea is that it's negated by the science of the collapses of all 3 WTC towers, which strongly indicates explosives were used. There is no way alleged Muslim terrorists could have set up, coordinated and pulled off the WTC demolitions. This, coupled with the strong evidence that they were patsies, fall-guys and/or a key distraction setup to take the blame, as well as the evidence identifying many of the actual perpetrators, makes this idea untenable.

[Chip]

That raises another question... if the Russians turned off the valve letting natural gas flow through the Nord stream pipelines before the sabotage, then it wouldn't matter much if the pipelines were damaged, so long as Russia keeps the pipes turned off, right? Turn them on again, and only THEN it starts leaking. Maybe the US or Mercenaries sabotaged the pipelines and then Russia turned the gas back on to cause environmental damage in an attempt to make it backfire on NATO.

Or maybe the explosions ruptured the ground enough to cause leaks from pockets of Natural Gas in the sea. Or perhaps it was tremors in the earth's crust that caused the whole thing. At this point, we can't really say for sure.

The elites do things that seem nonsensical to us plebs. Until years later, and we finally realize that we are spied on by the NSA, harangued at airports by the TSA, and the POTUS can rule by decree by writing executive orders because of the Patriot Act...this is when "their" logic of destroying the twin towers and building 7 starts to make sense.

I don't think they actually destroyed the Twin Towers. At least, not directly. It's far more likely that they deliberately cultivated a situation that would result in a terrorist attack, and that said ultimate result was 9/11. That makes far more sense with both what the mainstream narrative says and whatever inconsistencies exist. And its also a far easier conspiracy to conceal overall, one that'd give them plausible deniability.

The buildings went down like a controlled demolition. Jet fuel melts steel beams, but does not burn up the terrorists' passports. Yeah, right.

Anybody with an understanding of physics (who isn't brainwashed -better throw that in) would recognize that all three buildings were brought down with explosives and incendiaries.

[Fred]

The elites do things that seem nonsensical to us plebs. Until years later, and we finally realize that we are spied on by the NSA, harangued at airports by the TSA, and the POTUS can rule by decree by writing executive orders because of the Patriot Act...this is when "their" logic of destroying the twin towers and building 7 starts to make sense.

I don't think they actually destroyed the Twin Towers. At least, not directly. It's far more likely that they deliberately cultivated a situation that would result in a terrorist attack, and that said ultimate result was 9/11. That makes far more sense with both what the mainstream narrative says and whatever inconsistencies exist. And its also a far easier conspiracy to conceal overall, one that'd give them plausible deniability.

The buildings went down like a controlled demolition. Jet fuel melts steel beams, but does not burn up the terrorists' passports. Yeah, right.

Anybody with an understanding of physics (who isn't brainwashed -better throw that in) would recognize that all three buildings were brought down with explosives and incendiaries.

When the buildings were wired for Internet. It was planned farrrrr in advance.

[OCDMOM]

What else is the cover telling us?

[Peeps]

What else is the cover telling us?

It shows a moon, and that is how the Jews determine Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. It was on the 25th-27th of September.

Edit:
The 2022 Nord Stream gas leaks refer to a series of explosions and subsequent gas leaks that occurred on the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipelines on 26 September 2022. Wikipedia

The 26th is dead center of Rosh Hashanah.

[Peeps]

"The Economist" magazine covers seem to predict the future in a "Simpson-esque" way. Here are some past examples:

[Alexander]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshe ... -minister/

Both pipelines have sudden ruptures.

Leaks into the ocean.

Seismic stations confirm it was explosions.

In February Biden and his team repeatedly threatened the pipeline.

"If Russia invades,” said Biden, “then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since...the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that."

Today, Government Officials from Sweden, Poland and Denmark blame the US.

The sabotage of Nord Stream 1 and 2 came the day before Poland and Norway opened a new, 850-kilometer natural gas pipeline, Baltic Pipe, through Denmark.

Europe will have a cold winter. Will the freezing working class love America? Or side with Russia?

[DJB]

What else is the cover telling us?

Exactly! My question also They show us beforehand. Sick twisted narcissists.

[Peeps]

What else is the cover telling us?

Exactly! My question also They show us beforehand. Sick twisted narcissists.

From 1996:


It is part of how their "chaos magick" works. It requires a type of disclosure. Preferably hidden in plain sight.