The media wants World War 3; blames Russia for Nord Stream attacks

The pretext for World War 3 is coming together, and it's looking more and more like this might have been the plan from the start.

Call me a contrarian if you must, but when everyone suddenly jumps on the attack train to make out as though Russia would blow up their own pipelines — pipelines that drive the very lifeblood of Russia’s economy — I suddenly find myself becoming increasingly skeptical. In my last article about the Nord Stream pipeline attacks, I presented said theory about Russia with my own take on it, but I can’t see it truly being feasible unless Russia pinned the blame prominently on someone. Especially as CNN has joined in and is now attempting to help push the Russian false flag theory, though is operating in a more tentative manner than others. Some are outright saying this is the case.

A lack of major wars has made it impossible for the military industrial complex to truly slake its thirst for bloody profits. This, I believe was one of the primary reasons for the hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan by American armed forces, leaving behind more than $80 billion in military weapons and equipment. At least then we would have to buy more to resupply our own forces, but the U.S.’s primary export is weapons, so that just won’t do — we need a constant state of warfare. Luckily, we now have an avenue to peddle our wares by propping up the shaky Ukrainian regime led by cross-dressing comedian Volodymyr Zelenskyy, especially now as Ukraine formally applies for accelerated accession to NATO after Russia declares the annexation of 4 Ukrainian territories. Between that and the pipeline alone, I’d say we have quite the pretext for a world war. Add to that also Biden’s constant gaffes surrounding Taiwan wherein he declares that the U.S. would intervene in a China-Taiwan conflict, as well as that reckless political stunt by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other representatives visiting Taiwan to check on Nancy’s semiconductor investments, and we have a geopolitical powder keg waiting on a spark. Cue mainstream media mainstays striking matches and hoping for a cataclysm.

Time Magazine is not known for even-handed rhetoric in the modern era. Once a respected publication, it now seemingly occupies the genre of sensationalist rags as it tries to prop itself up in a rapidly changing world that no longer supports its antiquated business model. The reason I say this is they outright declared Russia to be the culprits with the very title of this article about it: “Russia blows up gas pipelines, declaring an all-out energy war they may have already lost.” Weekly world news, eat your heart out. In this article they cite the reasons why this operation may have been carried out by Putin and his forces, likening it to a retreating force scuttling their own ships as they claim Russia pulled back from Ukraine due to being repelled by the left’s favorite underdog nation. And rather than go through this article in-depth, I’ll just show you the dumbest part of it.

The stupidest reason listed that effectively destroys Time’s writer’s own hypothesis of Russian foul play with the Nord Stream pipelines is the idea that they did it in response to a pipeline unveiled by Norway and Poland expressly meant to bypass Russia. And they call me the conspiracy theorist. If that were the case, why wouldn’t Russia just blow that one up instead of their own pipelines? That’s like spitting in your own food to spite someone else who wasn’t going to be eating it in the first place. This part of the article in particular smacks of copium as the writer says, “Putin has misplayed his hand,” when referring to allowing a rival pipeline to exist which has allowed European nations to build up their natural gas reserves in preparation for the coming winter, citing that most countries have 87% of their natural gas storage capacity filled. That fails to address, however, how much that actually is, and whether that means these countries will not need a constant resupply for at least a few months. Having a full tank doesn’t necessarily mean you will not need more in the short term.

Do you know what else convinces me that Russia didn’t do it? The Brookings Institution is now warning of “podcasters” spreading “Kremlin narratives” about the Nord Stream pipeline attacks. That’s really all I needed to see, as the Brookings Institution is one of the worst offenders when it comes to gatekeeping the truth while pushing official narratives.

”As is typical following an event like this, conspiracy theories about who was responsible quickly proliferated online, with the Kremlin promoting a familiar trope: that the United States was responsible for a nefarious, clandestine plot.” Really? And why do you think that is a familiar trope, I wonder?

The authors act like there is no precedent for the U.S. government utilizing nefarious, clandestine plots to further their agenda. Gulf of Tonkin incident, anyone? That one was outright admitted. What about Ed Snowden blowing the lid off the mass surveillance conspiracy theory and proving it to be true from the inside? How about we go way back to prohibition where government agents were poisoning alcohol to try and dissuade the public from drinking. Does that one count?

To say that there is no truth to the U.S. being capable of a ‘nefarious plot’ is to ignore reality. But then, the Brookings Institution is rarely rooted in reality. They are, however, a neocon think tank that will often push whatever narrative gets us closer to war. 9/11 was their Christmas.

Things are getting truly scary on the world stage, and it doesn’t help that we have a bunch of aging oligarchs salivating at the prospect of watching the world get destroyed, hoping the weight of their words will give them what they desire.

Step out of the echo chambers and do your own research, you’ll be shocked by what you might find.