All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 1, 2022 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
16:13
All signs of Nord Stream pipeline destruction point to the US Navy
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Got an update for you here on the Nord Stream pipeline situation, but also a quick update in the aftermath of Hurricane Ian with so many Floridians displaced.
We at the Health Ranger store, we are now connecting with a ministry in Florida.
I believe their name is Harvest.
We're connecting with the ministry to see about what kinds of food donations we can make, just physical food that we could get to the right people to hand out to the people of Florida.
I'll keep you posted on that as we find out more.
We don't want to just give money out because money has a way of not getting to the people, if you know what I mean, sometimes through some of these...
Sort of bigger non-profits.
It's like, oh, it ends up in somebody's salaries or bonuses, but not helping the people.
So we don't want to do that.
We want to give out actual food to help the people on the ground.
But I'll keep you posted about that effort.
Now, getting to Nord Stream, the Nord Stream pipelines, the sabotage that took place to blow up both the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines.
In fact, I think there were three explosions So a couple segments of Nord Stream 2 were severely damaged while blown up.
And these are big, thick steel pipes that are surrounded by, I think, what was it, 12 centimeters of concrete.
So these aren't small, little tubes or anything.
I mean, you have to use a lot of explosives.
And it was estimated...
I think NATO has now estimated that there were 500 kilos.
Was it 500 kilos of explosives?
Yeah.
Yeah, that's what they estimated.
Gosh, that seems like a lot.
Anyway...
Wow, 500 kilograms of explosives of TNT, or at least the equivalent of that, is what they said was used to blow up these pipelines.
And so now a lot of official sources, including NATO, are saying, yes, this was sabotage, and we're going to severely punish whoever's responsible for this.
Well, wait till they find out it was the United States.
By the way, that should be interesting.
That cover-up is going to be more epic than 9-11.
Trust me on that point.
But at least the officials in Europe are realizing that this could only have been carried out by a state actor.
In other words, there's a very high degree of technical expertise that is required to engage in those kinds of deep sea operations to plant explosives and to also understand the physics of explosives and how you blow up big thick concrete and steel pipes.
Underwater demolition is a whole different deal than above-ground demolitions because of the physics of water and also the lack of compressibility of water, by the way.
So explosive charges actually ripple through water more efficiently than the way they ripple through air.
Just an interesting little physics factoid for you there.
But you've got to have expertise in order to pull this off.
So this wasn't just a bunch of fishermen with some You know, fireworks or M80s or a couple of sticks of dynamite.
This is a state level operation.
Somebody knew what they were doing.
Somebody had probably unmanned underwater drones or deep dive mini submarines of some kind.
Or this could have even been done with a regular human dive because I believe the depth in these areas, at least what I read was it was around 90 meters.
That's diveable, folks, by certain specially trained people.
Now, a lot of people don't know this, but I'm actually certified as a diver.
I was certified in Australia under the PADI system, P-A-D-I. That's scuba diving and everything.
And so I'm certified to dive 20 meters.
That's kind of your beginner level deep sea diving type of course.
You know, certification.
It was multiple days of training that I went through when I was in Australia in order to do that kind of thing.
And I actually, one time, I went down 20 meters just one time to see what it looked like from there, like looking up.
And it was a little bit terrifying at that moment back then.
I probably wouldn't be as afraid of it today, but It was freaky.
It's like, whoa, you are really deep here.
And you're talking about six stories of water above you.
And of course, I did not stay at that depth very long because I didn't want to deal with the bends coming up.
The longer you spend down there, the more carbon dioxide you get in solution in your blood.
Obviously, there's all the physics and chemistry of deep sea diving that I'm not going to get into here.
Even to just get entry-level diving certification, you've got to go through the physics courses and understand how all this stuff works.
So the more time you spend at depth, then you either have to go through a decompression chamber, Or you have to come up, you have to surface very, very slowly, which means you've got to monitor how much oxygen you have left in your tanks because if you run out of oxygen and you haven't surfaced yet, then obviously you're in a world of hurt.
So my point is that, yes, the United States Navy has divers that can dive to a depth of 90 meters.
In fact, they can probably go a lot deeper than that.
It is well within the reach of U.S. Navy, you know, military divers, okay?
They can pull that off.
I'm not saying that they didn't use an unmanned vehicle or a submarine or even some other, I don't know, remote system, but they could have done it.
There are people who can do that.
And by the way, there are also people who do that in the oil industry.
Who do you think dives down underneath the deep oil rigs in the Gulf Coast and welds the repairs of whatever stuff is broken underneath the water?
There's a job that pays a lot and is also very high risk.
You get stuck in one of those...
Containers or vessels or something at depth.
And you are in a real emergency, by the way.
So again, highly skilled, highly capable, mostly men who do that job.
But it can be done.
The point is that it was a state-level actor.
And that means that it's a pretty short list of who could have done this.
So if you're asking the question, who blew up Nord Stream?
Well, is Russia technically capable of doing it?
Yes, they are technically capable because they also have deep sea diving capabilities and a lot of technology and so on and knowledge of explosives.
Is the United States capable of doing it?
Absolutely.
The U.S. Navy is actually very, very capable.
They've got underwater demolitions teams.
Let's say, would Ukraine be capable of doing it?
I doubt it.
I don't think that Ukraine has the naval expertise or even the diving expertise.
I'm very skeptical of the idea that Ukraine could do this.
Could Germany do it?
Probably.
I would imagine somebody, there's probably enough German soldiers who have been trained in undersea operations, they probably could have carried it out.
But why would they?
Why would Germany blow up the pipeline that provides gas to Germany?
And at the same time, why would Russia blow up the gas pipeline that would provide a lot of money to Russia?
I mean, and also Russia owns the pipeline.
Why would they blow up their own pipeline?
What about Poland?
Well, Poland has this other pipeline that's about to open up, I think, in a few weeks or maybe next week that is going to bring Poland quite a bit of natural gas.
It's a Nordic pipeline.
So would Poland want to blow up the Russian pipeline?
Well, I don't know.
It doesn't seem...
Like, why would you?
Why would you bother?
I mean, you're getting your own gas pipeline coming in, so why do you need to blow up the Russian pipeline?
There's no gas coming through it.
You know, Nord Stream 2 never even opened.
And Nord Stream 1 has been shut down to 0% flow anyway, so I don't see any advantage to Poland.
And what about the U.K.? Why would they blow it up?
I mean, the UK is one of the least affected countries in Europe in terms of actual gas flow from Gazprom.
So I don't see any strong incentive for the UK to do this.
The incentive rests with the United States, frankly, because the US wants to both weaken Russia and weaken Western Europe at the same time.
Blowing up that pipeline accomplishes both tasks.
And it's the US actually that has the most capabilities in terms of deep sea diving and underwater demolitions.
And it's also the United States that historically has targeted civilian infrastructure in times of war.
You know, the U.S. blows up power plants and water treatment centers and hospitals and things like that.
I mean, just look at the Middle East.
Just look at Iraq and a desert storm, all that.
Why did half a million Iraqis die from U.S. operations there?
Because the U.S. Pentagon blew up all the civilian infrastructure.
People starved to death and they died.
No water, no food, no hospitals, no electricity, power grid, down, all of it.
Yeah, that's classic U.S. imperialistic wartime You know, targeting of civilian targets of opportunity.
So yeah, the US has a history of doing this, sadly.
Very, very sad that that's the way the US Pentagon wages war.
So my question is, if NATO really investigates this, you know, what are they going to do to cover up the evidence that the US pulled this thing off?
Or who are they going to find as a scapegoat to try to blame for this?
And by the way, some people said, oh, this could be a cyber attack.
And I don't agree with that assessment, although it's worth considering.
It's just that I don't see any way the cyber attack could pull this off because there aren't remotely controlled individual valves in every single segment and there's no way to ignite the gas through the pipes.
I mean, it's just cyber attack could do things like maybe stop the gas flow Or keep the flow on or maybe control flow rates and things like that.
But I don't see that a cyber attack could cause a massive underwater explosion.
That doesn't seem likely.
This was a detonation with explosives, which means somebody with high capabilities did this.
A state actor, in other words.
So as more and more evidence is collected on this, such as ship positions and satellite images and archives of satellites, and just looking at timing of what happened, I mean, on one hand, this was a very easy target because there are no video cameras watching under the Baltic Sea.
Like, no one got caught on camera because there aren't cameras down there.
So it's pretty easy for the U.S. or somebody else to pull this off and get away with it.
But there are satellite images of surface vessels.
So the question would be, well, were there surface vessels around that time or sometime earlier?
I think the best theory is that the United States Navy was running those drills in the middle of June.
And they even called them underwater, what was it, mine removal drill teams.
It was the U.S. 6th Fleet.
I forgot what was it, like number 68, if that's the right number.
It was the 6th Fleet, I know.
They were running operations that was written up in one of those war magazines with photos and everything.
And we're practicing mine clearing operations with our undersea drones and everything.
I think the best explanation is that they set the explosives in June.
And then they detonated them in September.
So until I hear otherwise, to me, Occam's razor, that's the simplest explanation of how this was pulled off.
Because if you're the U.S. Navy and you want to blow up these pipelines, you don't want your ships sitting right above those pipelines the day before, because that's too suspicious.
You'd want to have some time delay, you know?
You don't want to be near the scene of the crime, in other words, when the detonation takes place.
You want to be far from there.
But they need a cover story.
And it's not enough to just blame Russia.
Russia did it!
And then just say, ah, Putin did it.
Well, where's your proof?
Where's your evidence that the Russians did it?
I mean, we have evidence that the United States wanted this pipeline blown up.
We've got Victoria Nuland promising to make sure the pipeline would be taken offline.
We've got Joe Biden promising to take it out on video.
We've got Senator Ron Johnson just actually begging Victoria Nuland to say, well, what can we do to make sure it's never operational again?
I don't have any video of any Russian officials saying that they want to destroy the pipeline.
But we've got video of at least three U.S. officials, or one being a senator, saying that they absolutely want to end that pipeline.
So there's the weight of evidence right now.
And Joe Biden also had that little smug smirk expression that he does when he thinks he's a big gangster.
When he promised, oh, we'll find a way.
We'll take it offline.
Whatever he said.
I'm paraphrasing, but he said something like that.
Because he already knew the way they're going to do this.
He's just going to do it by brute force.
With guns and explosives and military means.
So we are in a state of war.
If NATO ever figures out that the United States did this, what do you think is going to happen?
Would the Europeans...
Would the British government turn?
Could this be the breakup of NATO? What would happen then?
If NATO is broken up, maybe a divorce, what if this leaks out?
And NATO breaks up, and that means that Europe would not have the protection of the United States if Europe were to be attacked by Russia.
And so that would almost incentivize Putin to launch an assault With, you know, his 300,000 plus newly mobilized troops and everything to push hard, push west across Ukraine and into Germany and Poland and what have you.
So there are a lot of scenarios here.
None of them look like a de-escalation.
Every scenario that I can think of looks like it's just going to get worse.
And, you know, shame on the U.S. for doing this.
I mean, talk about a provocation.
You don't just go blow up civilian pipelines that provide energy and electricity and heat to an entire continent of people as winter is approaching.
My God!
I just wonder how the U.S. thinks they're going to get away with this forever.
You know they blew up TWA Flight 800, by the way.
That was a Navy missile exercise that went wrong, and they accidentally shot down this civilian jetliner.
You know, TWA 800.
At least they weren't doing it on purpose.
But they were incompetent.
So, you know, the Navy has been covering that up since, what year was that?
It was in the 1990s, I think.
It would cover that up for a long time.
They're going to try to cover up this Nord Stream sabotage for as long as they can, but the truth may leak out even faster than the gas.
We'll see.
Stay tuned.
I'm Mike Adams here, naturalnews.com and also brighttown.com.
Take care.
A global reset is coming.
And that's why I've recorded a new nine-hour audiobook.
It's called The Global Reset Survival Guide.
You can download it for free by subscribing to the naturalnews.com email newsletter, which is also free.
I'll describe how the monetary system fails.
I also cover emergency medicine and first aid and what to buy to help you avoid infections.
So download this guide.
It's free.
▲
Export Selection