←back to thread

“How America took out the Nord Stream pipeline”

(seymourhersh.substack.com)
688 points hunglee2 | 1 comments | 08 Feb 23 12:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
dang ◴[08 Feb 23 18:31 UTC] No.34712496[source]▶
All: Whether he is right or not or one likes him or not, Hersh reporting on this counts as significant new information (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...), so I've turned off the flags on this submission.

If you're going to comment in this thread, please make sure you're up on the site guidlelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html) and note this one: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." We don't want political or nationalistic flamewar here, and any substantive point can be made without it.

replies(21): >>34712914 #>>34712943 #>>34712970 #>>34713108 #>>34713117 #>>34713129 #>>34713157 #>>34713159 #>>34713244 #>>34713412 #>>34713419 #>>34713491 #>>34713823 #>>34713938 #>>34714182 #>>34714703 #>>34714882 #>>34715435 #>>34715469 #>>34716015 #>>34724637 #
k1m ◴[08 Feb 23 21:28 UTC] No.34715469[source]▶
I'm surprised at the reaction here. There's plenty of stuff posted on HN I don't agree with, but don't think I've ever felt so strongly about a submission that I'd want the rest of the HN community not to read it because of my personal reaction to it. If you don't like something you read on HN, why not let the rest of us read it and make up our own minds?

Thanks dang. I'm glad HN has moderators that make calls like.

replies(1): >>34715651 #
archagon ◴[08 Feb 23 21:40 UTC] No.34715651[source]▶
If you’ve been on HN (or any link-sharing community) for a while, it’s easy to see that certain articles are posted and/or upvoted largely for the sake of zeitgeist-shaping, not out of a sense of intellectual curiosity. This feels like one of those articles.
replies(2): >>34715735 #>>34716361 #
1. blub ◴[08 Feb 23 22:24 UTC] No.34716361[source]▶
I’ve been on HN for 10+ years and articles are certainly flagged when they don’t match the zeitgeist.

Anything discussing controversial social topics is nuked. Which would explain the sheer panic and replies to dang: it must be truly terrible to not be able to make undesirable stories disappear instead of having to refute them. :-/

In the end this story doesn’t really present any ironclad proof and should be easy to point that out. Except that would open a discussion which could make the EU and US look quite poorly…