“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

I agree that sources should be given. But this is the name of a famous journalist, so instead of flagging the article, perhaps the Substack people could weigh in:

a) Is this the real Seymour Hersh?

b) If so, perhaps people should ask him for sources.

You won’t need a source once the news comes out. This little text bomb thrown by CIA at the Executive can only mean that the Swedes have found conclusive evidence.

https://www.rferl.org/a/nord-stream-sabotage-investigation-r...

Please note that Radio Free Europe is run by CIA.

> This little text bomb thrown by CIA at the Executive can only mean that the Swedes have found conclusive evidence.

That’s a bizarre interpretation, since what the Swedish government says in that article, which is no different than non-US-government news source reporting on the same Swedish statement, is additional evidence of sabotage but no evidence of by whom.

> Please note that Radio Free Europe is run by CIA.

No, its run by a private 501(c)3 that used to be (more thab 59 years ago) covertly funded by the CIA, but is now overtly funded by the federal government through the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

> Is this the real Seymour Hersh?

I feel like too many outlets are glossing over this question and are reporting it as fact that he wrote it. I haven't found a single confirmation that he actually did so if anyone has one I'd love to see it.

The article was -just- a link to the latest official news. Yes, I am implying that whoever is “the source” for Mr. Hersh knows much more than you and I and the internet about this matter.

Just do a ctrl-f on “the source” on the OP. And read those lines. That’s the message.

Matt Taibbi is claiming that it is: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1623352901111517185?t=b59...

Wait, what.. found enough evidence? Wasn't the Swede's (aka as most US obliging, as not only profoundly shown e.g. in the Assange case) reaction after they were first to the site and "removed" all the evidence already sign enough of that, or even being accomplice?

To put a name to this organization, it is called the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

It is widely understood to be a propaganda arm of the US, developing media presences in countries where the US wishes to increase its power by manipulating narratives around contentious political topics. "Radio Free Europe/Asia/etc." is a common offering of theirs, typically skeptical or outright critical of regimes the US wishes to weaken in those regions through civil unrest.

> To put a name to this organization, it is called the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

No, NED is a completely unrelated organization. The 501c3 that runs Radio Free Europe is RFE/RL, Inc. (the name conbining the abbreviations for Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty.)

> Radio Free Europe/Asia/etc." is a common offering of theirs

No, Radio Free Asia is a separate 501c3, which is, like RFE/RL, funded by the Broadcasting Board of Governors through the U.S. Agency for Global Media; NED isn’t connected to it.

Shell companies. Circles within circles. Fractal foundations.

Turns out the Board at the USAGM is disbanded. It is now controlled by a Senate-confirmed (presumably president-appointed) CEO. Now they are even less accountable than before!

> NED is a completely unrelated organization

Interesting, then what are they involved in, and why the common refrain that they control Radio Free X?

You're right that I misattributed, but it is still fact that both organizations (NED and USAGM) fund propaganda-style campaigns in foreign nations with the goal of changing public opinion toward pro-Western viewpoints.