Hidden Meanings In NYT’s Nord Stream ‘Revelations’

From today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:

On Tuesday the New York Times published an incendiary story – based on anonymous Biden Administration officials – that the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines was carried out not by the US military, as Seymour Hersh has discovered, but rather by Ukrainian forces not associated with President Zelensky. Why put out such a transparently bogus counter-narrative? Many reasons. Also today: what does yesterday’s Syria vote mean?

Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.

8 thoughts on “Hidden Meanings In NYT’s Nord Stream ‘Revelations’”

  1. The “story” that has been “leaked” claims it was a pro-Ukrainian group but not a “official” Ukrainian one.
    Translation: American contractors were paid by Ukrainians who got their money from the US.
    Plausible deniabilty for everyone (as long as no one asks too many questions it will work, at least with our media;-)

    1. Modified nine II muddy the water chaff, with all kinds of bogus attributions of responsibility for the N. Stream blast. Just throw it at the wall 2C if it sticks. Interesting that NYT would pedal such feces. Just goes to show what WHORES they have B-cum. The supposedly paper of record spewing such ersaz garbage after ignoring the most compelling stuff from one of our most renowned investigative reporters who was also was once 1of their own!! Shows how far they’ve fallen. Also it’s an insult to the purported intelligence of their readers. Has our American press become another victim of exceptionalism? We’re exceptional SO what we write is true!

      1. The NYT has always been a mouthpiece for the establishment manajorial class.
        When have they not spread propoganda for one side, namely the Progressive/leftist point of view?
        There were no political prisoners nor mass starvation in Stalin’s USSR, those Chinese Muslim prisoner camps are just dorms and factories don’t you know? We need to be the only nation that does not care about our borders (even the new UK PM has just announced that mass deportations of illegals will start soon and if you try to come in, you will be deported) but darn it, don’t send them into the Hamptons but according to Nancy they do need to stay to pick our crops because it would be just awful if pay was raised enough to entice those who have such pesky money issues such as car insurence and income taxes.
        Mass surveillance of the masses and social media censorship? The NYT’s is OK with that but would like more to be done to those who don’t share their world view.

          1. They were not against it in the beginning when JFK first sent in the troops. Perhaps the world did not begin in 1961 and NYT’s hackery did not begin then either?

  2. Can’t have the truth out there like a beacon for all to clearly see. Must muddy the waters. Can’t have the truth incriminate the West. MSM has to make the West and NATO look exceptional. Part of the global agenda. Can’t get there without Russian resources not controlled by Putin.

Comments are closed.