One pager summary of the Mortymer´s Nordstream hypothesis

The one pager 

 

Nordstream affair Summary

 

 

Dear -------,

This blog is a private, detailed, and independent in-depth investigation into the Nord Stream affair.

The investigation aims to delve into the incident's origins, motives, methods, and political game surrounding the affair. It emphasizes the use of legally obtained public domain data.

The style offers readers to form independently their own opinions about what happened and why.

The blog posts focus on the chronology of official statements, explores Nord Stream incident from different points of view in several timelines and explores definitions, and events related to sanctions.

The investigation involves analysing evidence, including the possibility of involvement by various governments and parties, such as Russia, the United States or Ukraine.

It also explores political involvement of other countries such as Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, or Belgium.

Using best practices of criminal profiling it identifies the UK government as the prime suspect of the Nordstream affair based on different types of evidence. It eliminates other possible perpetrators through careful crosscheck of available data.

After identifying the UK government as the main suspect the blog looks at evidence of UK conducting preparations to the event, warnings, changing its security structures or it looks into the Nordstream related statements and events in UK under Boris Johnson and Liz Truss and looks at the post Brexit Britain in relation to Russian energy exports.

The investigation raises questions about the attack on the Nord Stream energy infrastructure and explores possible primary, secondary and other motives or legal aspects the UK could have to target the EU's key energy infrastructure. Was it a false flag? Were there more attacks planned? What was the role of JEF?

It seeks to shed light on the legal definitions and severity of the attack and the geopolitical context.

It also explores shaping of the narrative that it was the “sabotage” and not a “terrorist act”. The author describes based on small indices the possible coverup of inconvenient truth by EU governments on the unofficial Prague summit  shortly after the event happened and how the UK possibly appeased other states like France not to disclose who was the perpetrator. It extrapolates how several top individuals could have known about the impending attack but have not for political or other reasons acted on such information.

The blog highlights the significance of impartial and professional inquiries to establish facts and accountability regarding the sabotage. It explores other hypothesis such as Hersh´s claim about BALTOPS and possibly debunks it here, here and here.

The blog author stresses the importance of uncovering the truth and ensuring accountability. As a result of his work several criminal investigations were submitted. He reflects on the news released by Swedish prosecutor.                                                                                             

Version 1.

A picture version:

I plan to improve this into more understandable description and shorter claim. In time.