Friday, August 15, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Insider source: How the US and Norway carried out the attack on Nord Stream

The new cold war

  • Citing a source with insight into the Nord Stream attack, award-winning journalist Seymour Hersh has given a harrowing account of how the attack on the gas pipelines is alleged to have taken place.
  • At the initiative of the United States, Norway was reportedly chosen as a partner for the operation for a number of reasons, including NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg's transparency and contacts following his time as Prime Minister of the country.
  • After months of careful planning, the NATO exercise Baltops in June was allegedly used as a cover for Norwegian and US dive teams to place the bombs just off Bornholm.
  • The final order to detonate the charges on 27 September is said to have come directly from Washington.
Published 13 February 2023
– By Editorial Staff
US President Joe Biden with NATO Secretary General, former Norwegian prime minister Jens Stoltenberg, at a NATO meeting in Madrid in June, a few weeks before the NATO exercise in the Baltic Sea where the bombs were allegedly placed on the gas pipelines by Norwegian and US divers.
8 minute read

Seymour Hersh, previously celebrated for his revelations of US war crimes against civilians in Vietnam and against prisoners of war in Iraq, is in the news with the extraordinary details of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 blasts. His accounts are referred to, in particular, to a source with a good insight into the details of how the US and Norway, working closely together under the NATO umbrella, blew up the gas pipelines with the result that large parts of Europe are now being dragged into an energy crisis and increasingly severe economic depression.


Don’t miss our exclusive series about the mysterious runes of the old Norse!


In December 2021, White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan is said to have arranged a meeting with a newly formed task force of men and representatives from the CIA, State Department, Treasury Department and US Department of Defense to discuss and ask for recommendations on how best to respond to a supposed invasion by Russia of Ukraine.

According to the source, the secret meeting was followed by further meetings and, on Sullivan’s initiative, a plan was eventually agreed for the destruction of the two Nord Stream gas pipelines – and that it was President Joe Biden who personally asked for this.

After discussing options for the attack, it was suggested, among other things, that the gas pipelines be attacked with submarines or bombs that could be remotely detonated afterwards. The CIA argued that the operation had to be carried out in secret whichever route was chosen – because an attack of this magnitude would be considered an act of war if it could be traced back to the US.

The CIA, headed by former Russian ambassador William Burns, who was also deputy secretary of state during the Obama administration, in turn commissioned a task force to draw up a plan for the covert operation, using deep-sea divers to trigger an explosion along the gas pipelines.

Biden’s security advisor Jake Sullivan and CIA Director William Burns.

Experience in similar operations

It is noteworthy that similar operations have been carried out in the past by American intelligence. In 1971, with the help of divers and submarines, it succeeded in deploying advanced interception equipment at an underwater cable in the Sea of Okhotsk used for communications by the Russian Navy.

The Russians were convinced that their communications were secure and covert and used no other encryption, the US interception was able to continue for a decade before an American civilian NSA employee exposed the whole thing. The interception allegedly provided the Americans with “invaluable intelligence information about the Russian Navy’s intentions and planning“.

One problem seen with this secret deep-sea attack in the Baltic is that the sea is patrolled by the Russian Navy and there are no oil rigs to use as cover for a diving operation.

Biden couldn’t keep quiet

On February 7 – just a few weeks before Russia entered Ukraine, President Joe Biden declared, after a meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, that the US will “end” Nord Stream 2 if Russia invades.

 

Less than three weeks earlier, the Foreign Ministry’s Victoria Nuland had conveyed the same message at a press briefing.

– I’ll be very clear with you. If Russia invades Ukraine, Nord Stream 2 will one way or another not be able to go ahead,’ she said at the time

 It was like putting a nuclear bomb on the ground in Tokyo and telling the Japanese that we are going to detonate it, the source says, adding that several people involved in the upcoming attack were upset by the politicians’ public references to the same.

– The plan was that the various options would be implemented after the invasion and not announced publicly. Biden simply didn’t get it or he just ignored it.

According to the source, Biden and Nuland’s “thoughtlessness” also created an opportunity at the same time. Several CIA directors argued that after Biden’s statement, blowing up the gas pipelines could no longer be considered a covert operation – and therefore did not need to be reported to Congress. Shortly thereafter, the President, through CIA Director Bill Burns, gave the go-ahead.

– There was no longer a legal requirement to report the operation to Congress. All they had to do now was just carry it out – but it still had to be secret, he says.

Norway “the perfect partner”

It was decided that Norway was the perfect base for the mission – a country where the US military has greatly expanded its presence in recent years and where it has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in facilities for its air force and navy – including advanced radar equipment. A US submarine base in Norway had also recently been completed and, according to the source, the US was already working full-time with its Norwegian counterparts to spy on Russia in the East.

Military cooperation between the countries is also said to have been facilitated by Norway’s former prime minister Jens Stoltenberg, who is now secretary-general of the US-led NATO military alliance – and for many years also an outspoken opponent of Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

He is the glove that fits the American hand, says the source.

Joe Biden and Jens Stoltenberg meet in Madrid in June. Photo: NATO/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The Americans were also convinced that the Norwegians would keep the attack secret – not only because of loyalty to the US, but also because they had a vested interest in the disappearance of Nord Stream because it would allow them to sell more of their own natural gas.

Sometime in March, some members of the team flew to Norway to meet with Norwegian intelligence and the navy,” writes Seymour Hersh, referring to the source who says that one of the key issues to be discussed was exactly where in the Baltic Sea was the best place to plant the explosive devices.

Soon enough, the Norwegian navy found the best place in shallow waters, a few kilometres off Danish Bornholm, where divers operating from a Norwegian minesweeper would most likely be able to dive down and rig bombs on four gas pipelines.

NATO exercise used as cover

Before US military divers, from a base in Panama City, could be flown in and get to work with their Norwegian colleagues, there was another problem to be solved. The underwater activities could possibly be detected by the Swedish and Danish navies, which risked reporting the matter further.

It was concluded that it was necessary that “certain” high-ranking Danish and Swedish officials were informed before the operation “in general terms”.

What they were told and what they knew was deliberately different, the source explains.

To carry out the attack, it was also necessary to camouflage the bombs so that they would not be detected by Russian surveillance technology – and make them look like part of the natural background in the water.

As for the timing of the operation, the suggestion is said to have come from the Norwegian side. Every June for the past 21 years, the US Navy had sponsored a major NATO exercise in the Baltic involving a large number of allied ships.

The Norwegians suggested that this would be the perfect cover for deploying the mines,” the source further explains.

Ship during NATO exercise Baltops 22. Photo: US Navy/CC BY 2.0

The Americans, in turn, persuaded those in charge of the exercise to add a “research and development exercise” to the programme – which was also made public. This was to be conducted off the coast of Bornholm and was said to involve various NATO groups planting mines – as well as competing groups finding and destroying them.

It was both a useful exercise and an ingenious cover-up. The Panama City boys would do their thing and the C4 explosives would be in place by the end of Baltops 22, with a 48-hour timer attached. All the Americans and Norwegians would be long gone by the first explosion.

Biden demanded changes to the plan

Shortly before everything was ready to go, the political leadership in Washington had second thoughts. The bombs would still be planted during the NATO exercise, but the White House worried that only two days between the exercise and the detonations was far too short a time – and that it would be all too obvious that the US was directly involved. Instead, it demanded that the operators find a way to remotely detonate the gas lines at a later stage.

Once again, President Biden’s “indecision” and last-minute changes are said to have caused outrage and frustration within his own ranks – but they had no choice but to go ahead with the specific requests. The C4 bombs attached to the gas pipelines were to be triggered by a sonar buoy dropped by an aircraft at very short notice in a procedure which, according to the source, involved “the most advanced signal processing technology”.

There was also concern that the bombs would be accidentally and pre-emptively triggered by the sound of various ships on the heavily trafficked Baltic Sea – or by underwater drilling, waves or by disturbances from animals in the sea.

To avoid this, the sonar buoy, once in place, would emit a sequence of unique low-frequency sounds – much like those produced by a flute or piano – that would be recognized by the timing device and, after a preset one-hour delay, trigger the explosives.

On 26 September 2022, the Norwegian Navy’s surveillance plan carried out what appeared to be a routine flight and dropped a sonar buoy. A few hours later, the bombs exploded and three of the four gas lines were immediately rendered inoperable, and the signal was transmitted underwater – first to Nord Stream 1 and later to Nord Stream 2.

Gas leak after the blast. Photo: Coast Guard

The media were uninterested in the truth

In the immediate aftermath of the pipeline bombing, American media treated the whole thing as an unsolved mystery. Russia was repeatedly singled out as the likely culprit, spurred by leaks from the White House but without ever establishing a clear motive for such an act of self-sabotage, other than simple retaliation.

He points out that no US news media seemed interested in delving into the issue or the earlier threats by Joe Biden and Victoria Nuland that Nord Stream would be “stopped”.

No clarification on why Russia would bomb its own lucrative gas pipelines, rather than just temporarily turning off the tap, ever came. However, Foreign Secretary Anthony Blinken was clear that it was the US that benefited from the whole thing.

– It is a huge opportunity to remove once and for all dependence on Russian energy and thus take away from Vladimir Putin the use of energy as a weapon, Blinken declared, arguing that the blasts offered “enormous strategic opportunities for years to come”.

Victoria Nuland has also openly expressed delight at the attack, saying she is “very pleased” that Nord Stream 2 is now “a pile of metal at the bottom of the sea“.

The source notes that Joe Biden “said he would do it – and he did it” and he describes the extensive planning and cover-up as “beautiful“.

The only flaw was the decision to actually go through with it.

Seymour Hersh, born in 1937, is an American-Jewish investigative journalist who was awarded the prestigious Pulitzer Prize after revealing how American soldiers during the Vietnam War executed hundreds of South Vietnamese civilians - the majority of them women and children.

Considered one of the world's most prominent investigative journalists, Hersh has also revealed how the US tortured Iraqi prisoners at the now infamous Abu Ghraib prison and covered the Watergate scandal for the New York Times.

In recent years, he has attracted attention and criticism for questioning the US history of Osama Bin Laden's death, reporting on US plans to assassinate political opponents in Iran and rejecting US claims that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against civilians.

Among the many awards Hersh has received for his journalistic work, in addition to the Pulitzer Prize, is the George Polk Award - an American journalism prize he has received no less than five times, which is also more than any other person.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Greene: Ukraine support a betrayal of the American people

The war in Ukraine

Published 6 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Greene is highly critical of the neoconservative "war hawks" within the Republican Party - and their influence.
2 minute read

Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene directs harsh criticism at party colleagues and other politicians who continue to want to send American aid to Ukraine.

In a post on X, she describes the support as a “complete betrayal” of the American people – and argues that voters have already said no to financing foreign conflicts.

“Funding, fueling, and ultimately fighting Russia in Ukraine would be a complete betrayal to the majority of Americans”, she writes, referring to the recent presidential election where Trump defeated Joe Biden and returned to the White House.

According to Greene, one of the voters’ clearest signals was to put a stop to US involvement in foreign wars.

“America voted to end funding and fighting foreign wars”, the Republican adds.

Her statement came the day after a new bill was presented in the Senate, where $54.6 billion is proposed to be earmarked for Ukraine for budget years 2026 and 2027.

“Don’t want to pay to murder people”

Greene accuses politicians on both sides of the aisle of ignoring the message voters conveyed in the election. She argues that young Americans in particular feel betrayed:

“Republicans supporting such policies could lose the younger generation of voters and may never get them back”.

She argues that people under 50 increasingly feel unrepresented by both Republicans and Democrats, not least because of how tax money is used:

“Various taxpayer-funded initiatives have made life unaffordable and the future bleak for the vast majority of average American”, she continued.

In the same post, Greene criticizes the moral foundation for American Ukraine support:

“American taxpayers do not want to pay to murder people in some foreign land over a foreign conflict that has absolutely zero effect on our lives”.

Corrupt leadership?

She also supports the president’s line, where European countries are expected to bear greater responsibility for the war in Ukraine. Trump has since his return to the White House opposed continued economic support to Kyiv and has repeatedly questioned how the money is used and warned that billions from the Biden administration’s previous aid packages may have been embezzled.

Trump’s former advisor Steve Cortes has also expressed harsh criticism. He has called Ukraine “corrupt” and warned that its leadership “cannot be trusted,” referring to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy acting against independent anti-corruption bodies.

Greene has in previous statements called Zelensky a “dictator” and accused him of blocking all peace initiatives.

The Russian government has in turn repeatedly warned that the Western world’s military and economic support to Ukraine only prolongs the war and leads to more bloodshed. According to Moscow, every new aid package is an obstacle to peace negotiations.

Russia: Britain plotting attacks on oil fleet

The new cold war

Published 5 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
According to the SVR (Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service), the goal is to pressure Washington to impose harsh sanctions against buyers of Russian oil.
2 minute read

Britain’s intelligence services are planning to involve NATO in a large-scale sabotage operation targeting the so-called “shadow fleet,” a network of tankers used to transport Russian oil. This is according to Russia’s foreign intelligence service SVR.

“British secret services are planning ecological disaster in international waters. The press bureau of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation informs that, according to the information coming to the SVR, the British secret services are planning to involve NATO allies in a massive roundup for the ‘shadow fleet’”, the statement reads.

According to the document, the British goal is to create an incident that provokes strong international reactions involving one or more tankers – an incident that could be used as a pretext for further measures against Russian oil exports.

“The plan involves organizing a major act of sabotage the losses of which would allow the transportation of Russian oil to be declared a threat to all international shipping. This would untie Western countries’ hands in choosing methods of counteraction”, it states.

Ukrainian saboteurs

According to the SVR, Britain is working with two possible scenarios.

The first involves a staged accident with an “unwanted” tanker in a bottleneck of global maritime traffic – for example, a strait – where oil spills and blocking of shipping lanes could give NATO a “sufficient” reason to introduce a new practice of ship inspections under the pretext of safety and environmental protection.

The second scenario involves setting fire to a vessel during loading at a port in a country with good relations with Russia, where the fire is expected to cause major damage to port infrastructure and spread to other ships – something that would in turn trigger an international investigation.

“London is going to entrust Ukrainian security forces with the implementation of both terrorist attacks. Their expectedly dirty work and inability to ‘cover up’ their tracks are considered by the British as a guarantee of impunity for themselves. The international investigation would hold either Russia or at worst Ukraine responsible for the accident, similar to the situation with the Nord Stream gas pipeline explosion”, the SVR emphasizes.

Wants to pressure Trump into more sanctions

According to the statement, the timing of a potential attack is strategically chosen to maximize its media impact and put pressure on US President Donald Trump’s administration.

“The aim is to force Washington, in defiance of its national interests, to impose the most severe secondary sanctions against Russian energy resources buyers, making them seen as ‘indirect culprits of the tragedy’”, the intelligence service writes.

“It seems like nostalgia for the lost dominance at sea and for authorized by the Crown pirate lawlessness have completely deprived the British Intelligence of the remnants of common sense. It’s high time for our British colleagues to understand that their increasingly bold attempts not only ‘to get back at’ their rivals, but also to cause damage to the global energy security and ecology are capable to make even their most loyal allies run out of patience”, it concludes.

Russia: Sanctions have cost the EU 1000 billion euros

The new cold war

Published 4 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Alexander Grusjko points out that the EU's previously extensive trade with Russia today "is practically approaching zero".
2 minute read

The EU’s economic losses following the termination of energy cooperation and reduced trade with Russia now exceed one trillion (1,000 billion) euros. This according to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko.

– There are different estimates. If we talk about the majority of experts, the total amounts to as much as more than a trillion euros taking into account losses from termination of energy cooperation with Russia, from the curtailment of trade. In 2013, our trade was worth 417 billion euros, last year it equaled 60 billion euros, now it is practically approaching zero. This is lost profit, said Grushko, according to several Russian media outlets.

He also highlighted differences in energy costs between Europe and the USA:

– The cost of natural gas in Europe is 4-5 times higher than in the US while electricity is 2-3 times more expensive. This is the price that Europe has to pay for curtailing all economic contacts with Russia.

More expensive deals with the USA

The statement comes shortly after the EU concluded a new trade agreement with the USA, which commits the union to purchasing large volumes of American energy. According to Moscow, these deliveries are significantly more expensive than those previously supplied by Russia. The agreement also includes 15 percent tariffs on important EU products, which several European politicians have criticized as unbalanced and harmful to Europe’s interests.

Earlier in June, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that EU countries had lost around 200 billion euros (231 billion dollars) solely by forgoing Russian gas deliveries. Towards the end of 2024, Russian officials estimated that total EU losses linked to sanctions had reached 1.5 trillion dollars.

At the same time, Moscow claims that the country has achieved a certain “immunity” against Western sanctions.

Sanctions since 2014

In a comment on the new USA-EU agreement, Putin claimed that the EU has in practice lost its political sovereignty, which according to him has directly led to weakened economic independence.

The EU began imposing sanctions against Russia in 2014 following the annexation of Crimea and the erupting conflict in eastern Ukraine, and has significantly expanded them since 2022. The sanctions target areas including the banking sector, energy exports, and Russian industrial companies.

Moscow, in turn, regards the sanctions as illegal and argues that they violate international trade rules and threaten global economic stability.

Slovakia urges West to engage in dialogue with Russia

The new cold war

Published 2 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Slovak Deputy Prime Minister Juraj Blanar believes that Western leaders must use diplomacy and dialogue to end the war.
2 minute read

Slovakia’s Foreign Minister Juraj Blanar believes that the war in Ukraine cannot be decided on the battlefield. Instead, he urges the Western world to seek a peaceful solution through direct dialogue with Russia – and warns that continued tensions could lead to a catastrophic large-scale war between NATO and Moscow.

– We do not want a war between Russia and NATO to break out, because that would be the Third World War. We want the conflict to be settled peacefully, Blanar said during a discussion program on Slovak public broadcaster STVR last Sunday.

Blanar emphasized the importance of diplomacy and called for a return to “respect for international law”. He also suggested that the Western world should seek ways to renew contact with Moscow – “and perhaps even forgive everything that has happened”.

Slovakia, like Hungary, has consistently pushed for de-escalation of the conflict and opposed additional EU sanctions against Russia.

The country’s president Peter Pellegrini has also urged EU member states to resume direct talks with Moscow and has simultaneously rejected demands for rapid military buildup within NATO, arguing that defense spending should reflect each country’s own priorities – rather than concerns about Russia.

Russia demands Ukrainian neutrality

Russian officials have condemned the US-led bloc’s decision last week that member countries should raise their defense budgets to 5 percent of GDP – a measure that NATO says will deter the “long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security”.

The Kremlin has repeatedly stated that it has no intentions of attacking any NATO country and has called the accusations “nonsense” – a scare tactic that, according to Moscow, is used by the West to legitimize increased defense spending.

Moscow states that it seeks a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine war, and Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that a lasting agreement must include recognition of the actual situation “on the ground”, as well as Ukrainian neutrality.

According to Putin, contacts between Moscow and Kyiv are being maintained regarding a possible third round of peace negotiations. Previous talks have been held in Turkey, where the parties have exchanged draft peace proposals and carried out several prisoner exchanges.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.