We All Know Who Did This!

When Faith Birol, Head of the International Energy Agency, said that, it was "very obvious," who was behind the 'suspected' sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline, one can merely speculate as to the degrees of scrambling that may have taken place within the various western media outlets. Whether his words were part of or outside of the plot remains to be determined.

What is, however, less open to interpretation, or even now misinterpretation, is the manner in which Faith Birol's words will be dealt with by the UK's and (most of) US's MSM.

Hot of the heels of a BBC conveyed "Putin's illegal war in Ukraine" statement by either of the current House of Commons cabal's front benches it may be deemed sufficient that enough of the electorate will already have cast a 'vote.'

When the weightier words of Pulitzer Prize Winner, Seymour Hersh, placed blame more firmly in the US camp the scramble will have gathered momentum, changed trajectory or intensity. Peopled, as is MSM, by so many self-important egos any resultant impetus will have been impossible to fully contain or direct. Although, it is unlikely that many of the 'news reports' that surface over the coming days will be quite as clumsy as is that penned by Yazoo's Mia Jankowicz- 'The claim by discredited journalist that the US secretly blew up the Nord Stream pipeline is proving a gift to Putin.' Merely to have labelled Seymour Hersh as, 'discredited journalist,' so early in the hack informs the discerning reader that any research has likely been minimal at 'best.'

When news of the act of likely sabotage entered my living space my first thoughts rounded upon the consideration of 'motive.' 'Quite who' I considered, 'is likely to have gleaned much in the way of benefit from such an act?' Then, 'means?' 'Who will have had sufficient means with which to carry out such an act of sabotage?' if sabotage is what it turns out (most likely) to have been?

Of course, at the time, the BBC- it may also have involved Channel 4- dutifully herded all listeners into the pre-selected and only available pen. "Why would the USA have performed such an act?" or some such question will likely have been pseudo-asked. Carefully, the listener/viewer will have been shepherded towards the appointed conclusion. Perhaps a US Secretary of State, likely a BBC 'correspondent,' a Commons front bench appointee, will have faced a quickly prepared counter-statement to camera, a smear, something to cast suitable doubt. Fait accompli!

Now that the BBC is quite stuffed to the rafters with handpicked appointees who might 'deliver correctly' and 'on demand,' the drip drip feedback of hedged inefficiencies really should take very few by surprise. The Corporation's 10-Point Impartiality Plan- no, don't laugh!- has dared to offer up scant insight into the organisation's given societal role, with its publication of a 'thematic review into taxation, public spending, government borrowing and debt output.' Should the Corporation ever dare to skate out towards the thinner ice, would that it may be permitted to even mention the Corporation's evasion of the 'Forde Report' into anti-Semitism within the Labour Party, Amnesty International's adjudication upon Israel's fascist apartheid system in the Occupied Territories, or, heaven forbid, the real state of the economy now that Brexit has (or hasn't) been done!

Surprise! Martin Forde, commissioned by Sir Kier Starmer- once Head of Public Prosecutions, just in case you've missed Kier's daily announcement- did find that anti-Semitism had been 'overstated' (weaponised) for political purposes. The Labour Party, as it currently stands, retains its historic connection to the NHS now merely for PR purposes. If the likes of Margaret Hodge and Rachael Reeves had wielded such power within Clement Attlee's Party Aneurin Bevan would likely have been expelled as a socialist and the NHS never been born. And yes, Amnesty really has researched Israel to be an apartheid state. But then, so has Human Rights Watch and Israel's largest human rights organisation, B'Tselem and any number of other less shackled observers around the globe. With Israel's lurch yet further to the political right- who'd have thought such space any longer existed?- even former PM, Ehud Barak has recently been heard to warn of fascist elements operating within current Israeli Government. Hiding the dire consequences of the Brexit miscarriage is so irretrievably beyond reach, such that the viewer/listener is now invariably subjected merely to the occasional effort at mitigation, painful to behold! Why, even Champion Boris can be witnessed bumptioning the call for Ukraine to be embraced into the EU fold. Really, you'd struggle to make it up. But, 'make it up' our fearless MSM has done! Anyway, I digress...

So, when Seymour Hersh chose to protect his source(s) and to self publish the report that he considered it highly probable that the Nord Stream sabotage was the work of the CIA, any genuine shock felt must, more-likely, have been that 'the UK's MSM even deigned to report his observations in the first instance.' When any such news outbreak happens across the Atlantic suppression, by necessity, is more likely to morph into mitigation.

As Hersh explains, there is a great deal of radar evidence (record of significant US helicopter activity, hundreds of miles from all official business) to support his observation that the US was best placed to undertake the act. And, Hersh's credentials- star reporter for the New York Times and the New Yorker, Watergate and My Lai Massacre- hardly live down to Mia Jankowicz's accusations, or her own comparative anonymity. There is, or once was, a BBC policy requirement for worthy news reports to have been gleaned from two independent sources, which Hersh's report has thus far failed to do, hence his has been self-published but accredited accordingly. There may, of course, be various legitimate reasons for his refusal to cite vulnerable sources, not least the implied involvement of the globe's most notorious illegal operations organisation, the CIA. Julian Assange would no doubt appreciate and applaud the stance. The BBC's 'prize' political journo, Laura Kuenssberg, has entirely different, thus far undisclosed, reasons for shunning the two source policy, hence her key recent promotion, As recently suggested, 'you really couldn't...' but they did anyway!

Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, also recently dared to raise his head above the parapet, with identical researched observations, that the CIA was the most likely cause of the sabotage. Although hardly proof, there is considerable record of Biden talking revealingly tough on Nord Stream. Elsewhere, both Denmark and Sweden have announced separate investigations into the 'act of sabotage,' neither having yet been prepared to commit to a conclusion, although both have already independently ruled out Russia.

Unquestionably, Putin is one scary character; the globe might well be better off without the shadow of his seemingly omnipotent presence. Yet he is but one part of a greater and unwelcomed umbra, fast spreading across our horizons. All manner of benign-presented characters have willingly played their part in patching in the darkness, some even elected, although not openly to this specific task.

The Doomsday Clock is currently set at 90 seconds to midnight. And whilst 'achieving' midnight is unlikely to be capable of bringing about the ultimate ends, 'the utter destruction of humanity' the acknowledgement that it is again creeping towards the hour should serve as due warning. And yet...

Schrodinger's BBC may duly report (sullen voice) the resetting of the Clock then, with seamless lack of insight, perhaps the latest venture into (not) space-flight, of a character resembling nothing so much as some-sort-of grinning spray-tanned cartoon orang-utan. Then our own clocks may be reset, as we listen to Matthew Parris "writer and journalist" pontificate upon the unfortunate downward drag of "Putin's illegal war in Ukraine," and "the Pandemic" upon the UK's (otherwise) 'buoyant' infrastructure. "Journalist," note, never "former Conservative MP and journalist." And here to discuss further, the latest developments, we have "just about anybody from the Spectator" and (is it?) "Dan Cole from the Sun," just to maintain the balance. In half an hour we will have, "Giles Brandreth and any four others in that popular panel show, 'Just a Minute.'"

Military-display shooting down of balloons aside- US slight of hand- all evidence must surely point resolutely across the Atlantic. The upper echelons of the CIA are anyway well practised at batting away concerns, evidence, ultimately proof, as to their covert operations, their overseas regime-change ops. "So what!" they almost dare to boast. Watch the hawks and it would take more than a pinch to conclude that current alarms at secrecy barely any-longer register within those sacred shores- protectors of the free world, don'tcha know! Anyone notice the Peruvian Coup? Thought not!

We should be concerned, we should definitely be more concerned than seems evident. 90 second to midnight! In 1947 the Clock's setting likely caused a greater number of hearts to race, then calibrated at a relatively 'insignificant' 7 minutes to midnight. Cited by some, as the moment of greatest concern in many a living memory, the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) saw the Clock resolutely again at 'a yawning' seven minutes to midnight. If, as seems probable, Hersh and Sachs are correct the CIA has not only perpetrated an Act of War against the signposted foe, Russia, it has also perpetrated an Act of War against Germany and wider Europe, including standalone Little Britain!

With all those COP targets to meet, there might even be a few who view the sabotage as a serendipitous step in the right direction. If only it wasn't for the consequent and eye-watering mark-up upon 'replacement natural gas coming from- surprise!- the US of A! Tah-da! It's not quite yet regime change but neither is it the actions of any worthy ally.