PREFACE/ISSUE
The attack on Nordstream is classified as done by a state actor.
In previous posts it was established that UK belongs to strong suspects.
- Were more countries involved or just one actor?
- It is unimaginable that NATO would not know more than admitted.
- Is it not a NATO failure to protect EU key infrastructure?
- WHO approved the act and through which process?
- It was a navy operation. Main HQs are in London, Northwoods.
- Were more NATO countries involved?
- Did Jens Stoltenberg + UK hijacked the NATO decision-making process?
- If the UK was behind the Nordstream job, was the decision at NATO level in consensus or bypassed or ignored?
- The UK leads JEF, was that somehow involved?
- => If NATO was not involved (and it seems as it was not) how that effects its cohesion and unity? When did NATO alliance learn who was it? It is unimaginable that NATO does not know about it so it covers up.
Hit-Boy x The Alchemist - Slipping Into Darkness
- Was the decision making consensus broken?
- Who is responsible? All NATO, some members, one or a few members and some individuals?
- What implications will the attack on Nordstream have on the NATO alliance as a whole? Did it fracture the alliance irreversibly?
- Could NATO put their $it together and act as an alliance afterwards when/if the trust among members has been broken?
- Would this mean an end of NATO as we know it and truly EU new security architecture to be built?
- Why was the state actor not expelled? It endangered peace.
- What could we predict IF this rationale is correct to validate it later?
- Who was the very top NAVY dude who signed the order?
PRECONDITION:
It is widely agreed that the Nordstream affair has been done by a state actor.
It is not known if that state has been acting alone or if there were others involved.
Consensus decision-making at NATO
Consensus decision-making means that there is no voting at NATO. Consultations take place until a decision that is acceptable to all is reached. Sometimes member countries agree to disagree on an issue. In general, this negotiation process is rapid since members consult each other on a regular basis and therefore often know and understand each other's positions in advance
Facilitating the process of consultation and consensus decision-making is one of the NATO Secretary General's main tasks.
The Secretary General is the Alliance’s top international civil servant. This person is responsible for steering the process of consultation and decision-making in the Alliance and ensuring that decisions are implemented.
The post is currently held by Jens Stoltenberg, former Prime Minister of Norway, who took up his responsibilities on 1 October 2014.
[M: The Head of NATO is responsible - now the BIG question is whether a member state acted on their own inside NATO, were some NATO assets used in the attack, were some states part of the plot or just one rogue state plus a few individuals who abused their power, did not follow rules, processes? Is he responsible if he knew or didn´t know? THIS WOULD BE FOR LAWYERS AND INVESTIGATORS]
Leadership-wise: NATO has agreed that top officials in NATO will be:
#1 European (NATO secretary general)
#2 US Supreme Allied Commander
Supreme Allied Commander Europe always American - nuclear weapons remain the ultimate weapon of deterrence for the Alliance, and because the bulk of these weapons come from the United States, it is important to have an American officer in command.
To balance the leading role played by Americans in the command structure, other key NATO positions have been reserved for non-Americans.
The Nordstream operation had to be done on some operational/strategic level and if it was a NATO member then it needed to be handled somehow inside the organization.
for NAVAL data, command and control operations
Is Jens Stoltenberg personally responsible for fracturing the NATO?
- The NATO command structure
- Lets say that Jens was aware that UK was attempting to take NS down.
- Then Jens Stoltenberg may be in future remembered as the worst ever military leader. That act may have fractured the alliance.
- With the largest the most powerful joint forces he would be remember as not able to win a proxy war in Ukraine against a weaker enemy and as one who allowed the alliance to break down creating a vacuum and uncertainty.
- Clues lead me to believe that he actively took part in the #Nordstream fiasco by allowing it to happen actively helping to shape the narrative.
[M: Note that I have reported Jens Stoltenberg to EPPO, The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) for this. For possible collusion as the narrative that it was "sabotage" and not "terrorist attack by state actor" is clearly tracked to him - timewise.
I find it very very suspicious as he must have known already who did it, what are legal implications, differences... He, is the top in charge with all available information.
If you think there is some merit on my writing, if you think that it is a good for investigation, report it in your state as suspicious activity needed to be investigated, consult your politicians or you can also express your worries here by reporting a crime. Spreading misinformation is wrong, but investigation seems to be stalled. Rise awareness. Ask questions.
I do not know if this is the right procedure, I do not know if he is guilty, what was his role, but possible leads must be checked by some serious investigators, not me. So please consult someone if you want to know answers like me. I have contacted many, nobody has taken my case publicly yet.]
What implications would the attack on Nordstream have on the NATO alliance if the attacker was a member state?
- Was the operation part of NATO?
- Was NATO aware of the threat to EU key infrastructure and let it happen?
- What roles had heads of different departments and organizations?
- What was t information flow?
- How was the conflict resolved and avoided between NATO and Russia?
[M: The attack on the Nordstream from the NATO chain of command is clear. Either it is a joint effort using the processes, infrastructure, data, resources of NATO or it is just the one state. It can not be both.
So lets assume further that a Rogue State was behind, just one NATO member. Signs and clues I present here show it indeed a state actors, response was that NATO protected that actor. NATO started to protect the European other infrastructure do not somehow show signs that it was an official attack by all NATO.
The role of Jens Stoltenberg is very very important. If he is personally involved then that means NATO has attacked NS? Could it be that One member + Jens Stoltenberg (+ a few individuals) were behind? The reaction of others, when they learned is also VERY important. If they actively supported the suppression, covering tracks then it is also NATO which is billable, responsible?]
The long hack of NATO web pages
On Sunday 12-02-2023 at night I was trying to learn about the NATO command, namely the Allied Maritime Control, aka MARCOM. The wiki page did not lead me to the desired place. The next morning I stumbled on news that NATO pages were hacked. The reason why I was trying to learn was the thought of looking at the NATO command structure and who is the highest ranking UK person.
It seems that there were many NATO web pages hacked. Jens Stoltenberg said on one video that it was just pages and no operational services communications were affected. I suppose he had on mind some classical DDoS attack.
[M: If I was Russia I would try to get a real data evidence about movement of NATO assets from their own servers. That is what I would do, to check the movement of NATO subs and other assets in the Bronholm area. Would I release it? Perhaps not, it would be security to keep the opponent on the short leash to play my game. That is what I would do.]
Is NATO heading into the same direction as CENTO and SEATO?
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), and the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) were considered necessary in the postwar period to protect member-countries from Communist aggression and conspiracy. Only NATO is active now.
PREDICTION:
The NATO will be phased out by separate direct agreements with USA.
The NATO will morph into an organization with different structure.
The EU will create a separate security structures, it will be spearheaded by FRA-GER, it will be built around French nuclear deterrence.
[M: As predicted on 16/03 I have found out this news below:]
14 Feb 2023 - The Nordic Region Strengthens Double-Edged Defense Cooperation With the US
New bilateral defense agreements between the USA and the Nordic countries will make it easier for American forces to operate in the High North. In November, the American forces participated in the Finnish army exercise Hammer 22 in Niinisalo, Western Finland. Here is an American tank of the Abrams type in action during the exercise.
While Norway's new defense agreement with the US is implemented, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark are negotiating similar agreements with Washington D.C. The agreements are meant to provide quicker and more efficient American support if needed but can also facilitate unpredictable presence.
[M: This is redundant as NATO agreements more or less allow the above. This looks like NATO "brain-dead" turned after 26-09-2022 Nordstream affair into a "zombie alliance".]
Against this background, for Macron, Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine “may precede broader geopolitical rivalries and a future that we have no reason to accept with fatalism.” Not only that. The president stressed that “[…] because this war clarifies the state of the world in which we live, the collapse of norms and taboos, the abuse of power, it qualifies that dangerous moment where the old balance is being contested but the new one is not yet established.”
LATEST NEWS
18 Feb 2022 - The Nordic Region Strengthens Double-Edged Defense Cooperation With the US
[M: To me it spells that countries are replacing NATO security with direct US security deals in haste. I will add here more similar news in time...]
GUILT PAYMENT? (/funny speculation)
17 Feb 2022 - Norway approves $7.4B Ukraine aid package
Money to be provided in form of military, humanitarian assistance, with approximately $1.5B being allocated each year
20 Feb 2022 - U.S. to send Ukraine $5.5 billion in new fiscal, military aid.
[M: Is this altruistic or admitting guilt payment for illegally destroying EU infrastructure and milking its taxpayers? /Speculation]
SUGGESTION: (/funny thought)
[M: Should Liz Truss be nominated to Nobel Peace Prize for destroying the NATO alliance by green-lighting and approving the Nordstream job by these who believe the NATO is a dangerous organization?
// ...that is... IF... the claim is proven as correct. Presumption of innocence must be followed, it is up to pro investigators, not me to do their job without the political interference and bureaucratical obstructions.
What news, behaviour of actors should/could we expect IF NATO knows due to MARCOM/RN/JEF HQs all being in Northwood in London?
Can investigation in SWE, DK be finished if they are part of JEF?
And all 3 DK, SWE, GER part of NATO?].
NOTE: List of 2022 NATO exercises - here
SUM
Was the Nordstream affair done with the knowledge of NATO?
Based on the non-NATO involvement it looks like it was not.
There had to be some de-escallation down the road after 26/09.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.
Every bit helps keep this mission alive!
No comments:
Post a Comment