063 - The Sikorski moment in the Nordstream affair

"The Sikorski moment is among

the most misunderstood

geo-political statements"

(Note: this post is a collection of tweets.
It includes many screenshots,
all are properly referenced to original sources)

How many of you still remember this puzzle?

The two most straight forward theories would be that: 1. He thanks the USA for destroying NS pipelines. 2. He thanks the USA for something else.

-> The 2nd option is correct! The USA has been excluded from suspects by SWE prosecutor here.

So what was did he mean by "Thank you, USA"?

The USA had to do something great,

and Sikorski left online a aloud note to recognize their contribution.

So, what kind of information could he have others did not have?

The only meaningful move the USA did

was it left Baltic Sea before explosions happened.

Kaersarge group left Gdynsk port on 19th of September,

first cruised in the area, but later changed the course and for some reason

on 21st LEFT Baltic Sea hastily,passing out on 22nd.

WHY?

The only correct logical conclusion based on the set of data I collected

is that the USA LEARNED about impending attack somewhere,

Sikorski knew they knew and tells the USA [my words/speculation based on available data] "Thank you for not stopping the operation and letting it happen".

It did not appear to him that his words could mean also the culpability of the USA.

So the USA has decided not to interfere when one European country attacks another one,

and left the Baltic Sea just four days before explosions happen on the 26th.

Remember how USA has warned its allies already in June

about the Threat against BOTH pipelines but they did NOT specify the time?

 

So does it just makes sense that they left before SHTF?!

Perhaps it was what drove USA strategists to withdraw their assets from the future hot area?

The Kaersarge group left the Baltic sea on the 22nd of September.

At the same time, just after Liz Truss returned from the USA... Was it unclear if Trans-Atlantic alliance was still solid?

... to withstand possible Russian retaliation?

... for what was about to happen on the 26th of September?

Liz Truss, after she returned went into hiding.

Even media noticed after few days.

The mini budget was delivered in the House of Commons by Kwasi Kwarteng,

the Chancellor of the Exchequer, n Friday 23rd, but without Liz Truss.

It is unclear when exactly she was seen last, in the NY? I put there safe 23r not 21st.

Meanwhile...

The USA was sending daily their assets (P-8 helicopters)

to map the situation and have operational awareness.

It looks like they left Baltic Sea just in case this attack on the Nordstream

would spark next European war.

They did NOT want to be involved. The risk of confrontation would be too high. Yet they needed to know what was happening.

They could not depend on the compromised intel going through NATO channels.

It was a non-NATO operation but the UK has operational leadership of NATO naval powers

As I said many times, all puzzles must match together perfectly or the hypothesis is wrong.

About the same time SWE and DK navy started to search for something under in the area of Bornholm.

Most people focus on the final part of the crime, that is for Forensic team.

My investigation focuses on actions of perpetrators - governments.

What exactly happened at the blow site is unclear. More scenarios are possible, just to draw fast two possible scenarios:

Lets examine again if it a USA idea, or the UK idea or both as Sy Hersh tells us:

Well Truss said it is about the UK security, and energy security...

but why? Who is threatening the UK?

Note Cleverly/Truss & Blinken/Biden meetings are about energy and security.

The full story is HERE.

Liz Truss was last seen at the UN meeting on 21st where she said this shocking part about:

cutting off toxic power and pipelines of authoritative regimes:

-> WHAT DID SHE JUST SAY? <-

How it is possible that she said this at the UN meeting and nobody noticed?

How could be Britain "cutting off pipelines"? ...stressing to work together.

Something VERY SERIOUS HAPPENED there in NY:

What reason could "suspend UK-US Special relationship status?

Based on this data it looks like the USA was shocked and put the US-UK Special relationship on ice.

After Truss returned she made another change in security structure of UK.

***

(there is more about the story than this short extract - e.g. here)

***

Is there other evidence of some submarines in the area? Yes. Except they were not Russian as all Baltic subs were anchored in port and locations known. So whose asset it was if not Russian as all submarines were accounted for?

And why would the USA offer only 'hesitantly' their help?

Why would only 'consider'? Perhaps as a leverage to manage politics?

Perhaps to tell the perpetrator (prime suspect UK)

that if they do not behave then they disclose?

Perhaps to stop further escalation by UK?

Was it a false flag? Possibly.

Ben Wallace, Tony Radakin had in October many ad-hoc strategic meetings in the USA. Perhaps USA wanted to tell the UK chihuahua to keep down and stop further escalation?

Perhaps we were really close to WW3 as the UK led NATO subgroup,

called JEF (Joint Expeditionary Force) was in air and fully loaded: Note that JEF Group is not bound by Article 5...

But lets roll back a little,..'

Note that the UK has decided to keep communication channels open for

de-risking on 26th of September, the day the attack happened:

Radakin was alto telling warning Russia against Strong Response if they retaliate in space:

Perhaps this is also connected to the case? Or just a coincidence? Originally I suspected that the submarine or minisubmarine

after being disturbed waited and then escaped at night. Other possibility would be that there were als

some explosives on the cable to blame Russia?

There could be more attempts to draw Russia into confrontation - see here.

What else supports the claim that the USA knew beforehand?

Well, the ad-hoc request from Jens Stoltenberg from Friday 23rd of September

...just a 3 days before the bombing and it was for the 26th.

request from just a 3 days before the bombing on the 23rd?

Perhaps US knew, perhaps NATO head knew, who else would knew?

And where from? Whom from?

s it possible that some hight level information about the mission has been shared on the 20-21 September in New York along the UN meetings?

If you have missed the part that Truss said it is a "sabotage" and not some other definition, I highly advise to recheck this in my post about "Who said it is sabotage first?" and the one connected which describes legal definitions here.

***

(there is more about the story than this short extract - e.g. here)

***

Did anyone expect the attack?

Well it looks like Germans did take the USA´s warning from June about possible FUTURE attacks seriously. Someone should rack all naval ships and see if they changed course at some point.

This news is also eyebrows rising...

The note about "new actors" does not point to Ukraine but other naval non EU power.

German admiral Kaack admits there exists some data but states

that it is likely that the perpetrator will not be named

Germany has been humiliated, by whom?

---

So whom did Sikorski learn this secret that US was not involved by UK was? From USA? Or perhaps from the UK beforehand to help to manage expected negative outcry that ally attacked EU key infrastructure? Journalist and investigators should ask him...¨

***

PLEASE INVESTIGATE!

***