and there's a painful iron in, in what denmark in belgium and britain and germany, the netherlands, norway are now doing trip item number to those countries. wanna make sure underwater pipelines are not blown up. truth bomb number 3 to those countries to in those countries. you know, a lot about blowing up pipelines. i'm rec center. busy this is directive pack the okay, so this is one of those stories that makes you kind of want to shake your head and wonder i, i've a stupid are they really that stupid or maybe they just think we're about stupid. so here's what's now. 6 countries and we're going to show you where they are on a map. these countries, denmark, belgium, britain, germany, benevolence, norway, norway is important in this case. so it's germany by the way,

but let me continue. those countries have decided to come together to build a security a lot else. what is the purpose of this international security consortium to protect what connects them under the north sea pipelines? there are obviously pipelines that travel at the bottom of the north say right, well, okay, that seems like a good idea, right? make sure that those pipelines are safe, guarded. but when we get into the why, right, why are they doing this? that's when this good idea seems both curious and hypocritical. so let's start with why they are doing this. the reason is this tonight sabotaged it. see, that's what president 5 is calling the leaks and explosions on the north stream pipelines pipe. announced it interesting to remember that as we go through the

story. so yes, on september 26th, 2020 to 3 huge explosions, erupt along the underwater, north stream. pipeline, sending an estimated $300000.00 tons of has it has methane gas pouring into the baltic sea. the pipeline belongs to russia, which is used to transport natural gas to other european countries. it was a devastating act of sabotage, targeting the russian economy. and more specifically, the russian energy industry, somebody who wanted to heard russia, obviously did this. so who did it? who did this? apparently, the us and other western countries blamed swear you can't make this stuff up. you know, they blamed russia. they blamed russia. and that is the absolutely ridiculous story that cnn's of the world ran with. because here and let me just say

it as a person who used to work at the cnn, that's what the us state department told them to say. we think it was russia ok. they say it was russia and that's what they report it's. it's not. but along comes seymour hersh for the most respected reporters in the world. former new york times reporter who was fired by them because he was very honest about stories is considered one of the best in the business. and he and covers cool really blew up the north stream pipelines. and it certainly wasn't russia right. he defines, according to his sources, that it was an act of sabotage, coordinated by, according to his reporting president joe, by, along with the c i a g f, as well as the state department head anthony blinking, and the other secretary victoria know that all of whom have a historical hatred for russia and nordstrom, imagine all of those people in a room coming up with some kind of plan about how what we're going to do with north

stream, right? so in this meeting to try and figure out what they can do about nord straight him according to hers in his article. they come up with a way to secretly blow up the pipeline using specially trained divers from but maybe diving school in panama city, florida. so immediately we read the article, i read the article and we got on the phone with seymour hersh and say, and we said, would you, would you mind coming on and taking us through the story. here's mr. hersh the united states and those who did it, the know the president did it. you can do another way of asking this question that know reporters asking a press conference the, the, the let we blow up the pipeline and pipe and bite. and so k, a group, a, c, i, a officers and other agencies are put together and, uh, early this year, last year, a year ago at this time, that there is something else that hirsch on covers that makes this new story

regarding the security arrangement between denmark, belgium brenton, the netherlands in germany so, so peculiar, you know, which country according to hersh help pull off the sabotage the explosion of these russian pipelines. obviously us divers or us military the c i. but which other country had to know because they needed their cooperation to do it physically do it . according to hersh, norway. that's right, nor way. the country that more and more is becoming a giant us military installation with extremely close ties to washington. and it has its own energy industry and pipelines who compete with russians, nordstrom project. oh, and guess who norway shares a border with russia. by the way, according to hers, both norway and germany were on the pipeline. we're, we're, or we're in on the plan to destroy the pipeline. i want to talk to you about 2

things, norway and germany. why, when, if germans, germany is a chancellor, went along with us, mr. shoals. why would he do that? and given what we know about how this is hurt, the german people don't get that. they've always been worried about the fact rush, it has a norm is deposits of natural gas and oil. tons of it. yeah. for. and the russians have been selling gas, particularly methane gas, clean gas that can cheat businesses at homes to germany for decades since the sixty's. ok. so it's all about the business and the relationship. so no way to, according to her, she may have help bought the pipeline is now joining forces with 5 other countries to help them figure out how to protect their pipelines. k would know right. a, but does it does, is that, doesn't that seem hypocritical? and why not invite, by the way, russia in this consortium, if not as

a group in the, in the group at least to ask for their opinions after all, that they were the victims of a pipeline explosion. no, in fact pressure's not even mentioned in their report that i have been reading since they put this out yesterday. and as far as the attack on their pipelines go, well, every single one of these north sea border or lions countries, or whatever the heck, it's called, i have taken a position at this explosion. it was simply the unsolved mysteries. nobody knows what happened, maybe the bike was just bought themselves up. maybe it was a way or a big giant shocked bit. who knows. yep. and what about the country that according to hers, actually sabotaged the pipeline? the one who's president actually said she would in fact do it. oh yeah. i mean, i don't know if you've seen this or not, but there's actually tape of president biden branding about his plans to destroy

the north stream pipeline. here it is different russian beach. so that means tanks or troops crossing the, the border of ukraine's again, then there will be, as we, there will be no longer a nor stream to we. we will figure it out with how we do. how will you do that exactly. since the project and control of the project is within germany's control, we will, i promise you will be able to yeah, link i promise you will be able to do it. we'll be able to get rid of the non stream pipeline. and then when the noise stream pipeline explodes, mr. biting is office at the state department. see, i'll go, can imagine or did it probably rush. all right. once again, the 1st question i asked when we started this story was,

what are they that stupid or do we do? they think we're that stupid actually the us is an unofficial part of this security consortium that we've been telling you about with all these countries. why? well, because the alliance is a part of nato, and guess who is the kind of unofficial head of nato the us. and sometimes you just can't make this stuff up. i would strongly mean out of talking about it is george swelling. he's a senior research fellow at global policy institute and the author of the book, bombs for peace nato's, you manage area and war on yugoslavia. and once again, here we are talking about bombs and talking about nato. um, what do you make of this? is there a didn't couldn't, can you find, please find some fault in my premise and the questions that i asked them. what i just postulated is there it was, i, am i wrong of this whole saying your firm is, i mean, if you can, you highlighted that moment in early february of 2022 when

president buying and he's standing the next to chunk of the shows in dc and he says quite clearly what the united states is going to do. and then lo and behold, he does it the moment it happens. we have uh the current flow as far minutes, the products that gorski. busy or farm is at the time sending out an excel and sweet thing. thank you. united states. the lady withdrew that sweet. um and then you have victoria newland. uh, it's telling senator is that and she said it's a cruise, i'm sure send it to like me, your delight to the north stream pipelines that just a bunch of rusting metal at the bottom of the sea. and then you had the secretary of state blinking saying, hey, what was this great, this is a, an exciting opportunity for your to diversify its energy sources. so you've got the

culprits, or pretty much, pretty much making no secret that they did it. um, it's only the sort of the very same bones of the media that for a while went to the story that's oh, yeah, well, i think russia did it. uh because uh, because what they do because russia wanted to destroy it. so is it just like every time it is a terrorist attack in russia is always russia. that's responsible for some reason. they always want to develop themselves. it's uncanny kind of people. you've got to have bang intestinal fortitude to do and say these things with knowing that will be no impunity. i mean the person united states as i'm going to do something it happens and then he says, oh my god, look somebody did this, it wasn't bad. and nobody asked tim and when, when, when, when seymour hersh, who as you saw, i had here on the show exactly where you are right now. and i had

a conversation with them at the time. one of the things that we talked about that i didn't include was that he was being attacked, assailed by the media for bearing to suggest that perhaps the united states and the west would be involved with blowing up this pipeline. which obviously was either blowing up by russia or it just happened by itself. or as i suggested, a large shock. you are absolutely right because he was attacked for russia's late as a conspiracy theorist. you know, that's a conspiracy, as opposed to when you blame me, that was washer. that did it. that's not a conspiracy theory that did it. they did it to them. and then of course in response to pushes story, then the german media and then the american of the british media in. so came up with this alternative ridiculous story about this. um, um independence uh, freelance ukrainians, more involved. nobody knows who they were. they had absolutely nothing to do with

the landscape and rest assured it was an entirely a freelance operation. it was a whole baby involved with the beginning. you know, she was part of the project. but the amazing thing is they never came up with a name, just one name or one address somebody that you know, that's the story and the media when with this ridiculous nonsense for, for a while. but now it's all being completely forgotten. i didn't expect that whole story, but the intrepid the freelance is or just we did this amazing thing going d d, but the war to the freezing cold water released to the bones and blew it out. but this amazing throwing in it and it's open, but don't put it back in that. that wasn't a conspiracy area. you know, it's interesting now though, that they're creating this consortium. and by the way, as i think, i stated, i don't know if i made this as clearly as i want it to. that's a good idea. but they should have a security consortium where countries come together to protect something as important as this. i mean, there should have been

a security consortium between russia and germany and norway and sweden and whatever other countries i don't know my maps well enough for my geography. well enough to tell you all the countries that surround the baltic sea, but all the countries around the baltic sea should have a pipeline consortium to protect it, and they should put their navies together and work to do. in fact, i think back now to why doesn't that exist? is it because if we did that, then we'd have to team up with russia and we're not willing to do that as well. i could well be because obviously as you said in your, in show russia is the primary victim and all of this, it was a russian bill pipeline that was destroyed. and yet, um, within a week or so of this disruption. um they just secretary general. yeah. and shelton buck stops, it was like, you know, we are your, our energy infrastructure is very vulnerable. but you have to do something about, you know, it's all ruble infrastructure and not the, you know,

accepting of all the as back. but it's rushes energy infrastructure that has been destroyed. and what is the most amazing is that even in this announcement? no one is asking the obvious question. i mean, what was that? who did it? just take them. all right, well, crime is being committed as a was backed them in the ask those that with those edward and yeah, there's a complete lack of curiosity as to who did it or who committed nevada. um and that's it. and so we had these investigations with us, we investigate investigated my own. i said, oh it does have we don't actually have any jurisdiction. so we'll just do a close down the investigations or opportunities. mama, southern figure. oh, we don't have jurisdiction. and then deadlock, they closed it down and said we just, we were just not getting anywhere with this. but the interesting thing is that them, i didn't the police like what you've been working on this for a few months. how about publishing a report? you know, what have you found? you know, you've spent, i know,

89 months on it. you must have found something that we never had a record and i guess the germans are now investigating and i would be borrowing away and i guess something. yeah. right. but it's currently or if you're on our yeah, i did. sure they are george. yeah. all hallway. yeah. it's a any day now. in fact, uh, i think maybe sometime tomorrow we might be right most a knew you were in about, and i know you're a expert on nato. when we come back, i want to push you a little bit to share with as information about how nato the united states and other western countries can get away with these narratives that they're so good at creating that seem to go on challenge george, sam. well, when we come back talking about that very thing right here, stay with us because we've got a lot more to ask about this curious, curious situation. the,

the magenta itself, the gaining independence and from the form of the ivory coast remained under the strong influence of its foam and metropolitan pro french president, phoenix, who say, borne, you rule the country for 33 years, ensuring the interest to from the dead, the guaranteed event in the new house, including the foster ladies, chestnut goods was douglas who saw him and the more appropriate after the death of, of a one year, a new lead to long combat the ball came to power. reset the drum. right double for example. yeah. curious, why do you know if we're feed lacrosse or they're going to use it isn't good enough for tiffany to one is the one that the bronze to meet,

usually deemed good luck. boeing, enemy, a deep political crisis is huge. walk a, the country 2nd largest city, turned into a theater of law. looking to talk with somebody from 130 to the other 2 on the other thoughts about this. how did the dramatic events unfold and how is walk a recovering from? he is a bloody conflict. watch on see the,

the fad. welcome back. i'm rick sanchez. george sam welly is a senior research fellow at the global policy institute and the author of the book, bottoms for peace, nato's humanitarian war on yugoslavia. and make sure if you reach out to him, you reach out to some welly samuel as i pronounced it earlier, he won't respond to you. that's his cousin. so it goes towards. so you went about they don't, you are an expert on nato. i want understand. what made those same thing is when they create these narratives like this one that we're reporting on today, and they all come together and they always seem to have

a cover story and they always protect each other. and i get it. nations should come together and help each other and we should be unified. but when you do it as a group and you exclude other nations, then i don't think it's so positive. and that's what we seem to see more and more of. it's these uh, well, in high school, we call them clicks, right? the yeah, i yeah, right now the big lie at the heart of nato is that it's a defense of the lines. it never was a defense of alliance. i mean, even for the very beginning when a claim that we are defending the west against the law, so it's helpful for, for the most of the well not to know the most basic fact which is a major was 1st made. it was created in 1949. we also backed, didn't come into existence until 6 years later in 1955. so how happens you to be

defending anyone from the war? so, okay. um and then we have this uh, phenomenon with century late. so, waging one more often another, so it waged a war against the bosnia in 1995 and you this love, you 1999, then it's wage war against olivia 2011 is wage war in iraq and left counties and yeah, nature continues this and this defense that well, who is defending cool again, sorry about that. okay. so you know, i the rest of the and i'll give you a better example. i mean, i don't know if you caught this, but if you happen to see the i think it was a 15 hour interview the talk across and did with the bottom or button. uh, i think at the time button says to him and we knew this. i know guys i do, and i probably know this, but some people didn't. very important said we tried to convince the west to let last join nato. we rush out if we're a part of it, but you don't have to be scared of us because we're all on the same team. he even

went to them, went to the united states. i believe it was kind of lisa rice and said look, why don't we come up with a new deal where we share nuclear arm immense and use them against anybody who tries to attack either one of us will hear back and you have our back on both occasions the west, the united states said, hell no, we don't want to be joining with you guys. we'd rather fight you. we'd rather be against do that stupid. are you ever use that word way too much today? pardon me for doing it again, but your thoughts? good, yeah, that, that history is absolutely correct. he did put in a did offer a bill clinton in to 1000, to join me. so of course, when he did that, it made a lot of sense because he said he's essentially saying, look, we've had these uh, security agreements. we have the else thank you, final act of 1975. we had the treaty of the the chopper of paris and 1990. the whole point of having these security framework is that everybody's in it and

everybody feels secure. everybody guarantees everybody else is for those. but if you create a lines that excludes us, then obviously we see this alliance as being directed that of nature was made no secret of the fact that it was, it is directed at russia. rock ritual got drugs, the enemy, and it keeps incorporating once they got through and now the, the states that border russia with a view to walk with a view of assist you in set russia and eventually weakening and waging war is russia. i mean, i think, you know, it's very obvious because if they use, if that wasn't the nature of project, then why did they say no to russia saying, okay, well, we were going just as we were 5 of the, the o. s. c were part of the house and you find that and as far mentioned, norway is looking like it's gonna be the 51st state of the united states. pretty soon with all the military bases that we seem to be putting there. i want to share something else with you. we're learning today that no less than $194.00 were us military officials and sending them because brief. which is essentially like

a friendly note of information they want the court to consider to the supreme court of the united states. regarding former president donald trump, here's the headline for you, the headline where you can see how it says that giving trump sweeping immunity would bring k also according to former us generals avenue. busy and military service leaders. what's it about? well, it's about mr. trump asking for immunity from prosecution because he was after all the press, the united states, as the former generals argue that as mr. trump gets immunity, us troops stationed everywhere else will feel like if the president doesn't have to abide by the law. then why should we? the generals are telling the court that if it grant mr. trump's request for immunity, will threaten to inject chaos in the military operations. and also threatens to damage potentially irreparably, the public's trust in the military. that's what they say. okay, look, while that reasoning, george seems like a bit of a reach. the overall method presented by these generals is correct there, right? no one under any system of governance should be above the law. if you commit

a crime, it doesn't matter who you are. if you're found guilty, you go to jail, that's just the way it is. there's no kings here or there. should there be anywhere else. i think so my problem with this brief isn't the message. it's the messengers . former military officials become highly politicized in america, not to mention wealthy when they leave office. i know the media puts them on these pedestals, but i'm not sure that they're take on issues like this is really any more significant amount of any other citizen. in fact, i think it may even be less. so why do you use that? well, i, i don't agree with you and sorry, where you are in the 1st part of what you said, because i do think there is such a thing as solve. really, unity, i mean, that's a, it's a basic constitutional principle. going back to the 17th century, which is the sovereign makes the lowest of the solver. it isn't bound by the law because we know the sovereigns do things that we as ordinary citizens, cannot do. i mean, we know, precedents, order assassinations, presidents,

older invasions, president for the attacks on other countries. they don't get prosecute, just because you know, that they, they're acting as a heads of state as uh, you know, acting in the nation's interest as private individuals, you cannot do those things. but as a, as heads up states that you can so um, but what they doing here is that everybody is always no lives. and whenever anyone has gone through a quote to say, well, i'm gonna assume, fortunately, approach because waging of the legal warrants on the notes are always thrown out. correct. and you know what? they think of george w bush. he did it as present to the united states. he has immunity for, for doing it. but what these people are doing is they thing, well, some of them unit is fine, except that you don't have like the donald trump just if it was the, the, the from the fact that yeah, yeah, yeah, this is, um, you know, every, all the president can do this, but except for donald trump got your voice the same thing. know when the other thing they do, um they, they still go to taking go. they get drunk to bring it criminal charges because he

kept is he's paperless. every president takes drastic bite documents from the white house who was so living there right then ma'am, was ever present this, done it, you know, present as being prosecuted except for try. while i was that where i wanted to give you a shot at that because i wanted to just not talk about geo politics. i also want to include something else, but we're out of time. my friend george and wiley, it is always a pleasure having a conversation with you. thank you for joining us. my friend. i thank you very much . regular was a pleasure. before we go, i want to remind you of our mission. simple. really. we tried the silo, the world truths don't live in boxes. neither do we. i'm rick sanchez. this is direct impact. the

screen of the boss can do either to speak to them with key at the washington state, the bruce to complete the rest of the us, just to phone up, send that to professional and city and to keep the list of all but huge. but they used to do this for the is a lot is can be cited by lines,

please can be expanded by a true importance of we can never be kind of a station. so that transparency is an extraordinary john. mystic patrice then just succeeded in finding the documents that existed in making them available to the public. i mean, what could be more than that? but publishing information and sharing information with the public, he was exercise and the right to free speech. she did so in the public interest, i'd watched this alone realized tends to me and golf and, and honestly, i believe continuously. and i know why advice may assume that no one who is the guy that illegal anymore wisely bought. adjustments for to be on box weighing a 175 used to go through the sentence. are we going to let that stay the

the leader all hell not stays, palestine will know it's about to is really pressure off of the idea of kills 3 of his sons and pull off his grandchildren in guns that bo claiming to have targeted terrace. also, this water nature has been raging here in russia's for in the region for almost a week. more than 10000 residential buildings were affected by the flood. we report from the flood stricken central russia as long as the impacts the regional capital of r and the following a has a specific down breach law suite most go to the sounds, the law never dissolved with risks post by escalating ukrainian to slice on these down for don't see a nuclear power.