On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:52:31 -0400, Radey Shouman
<shouman@comcast.net> wrote:

>John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
>>>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
>>>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
>>>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
>>>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
>>>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
>>>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
>>>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
>>>>>>>>> longer possible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
>>>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
>>>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
>>>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
>>>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
>>>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
>>>>>>>> income.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
>>>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
>>>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
>>>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
>>>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
>>>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
>>>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
>>>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
>>>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
>>>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
>>>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
>>>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
>>>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
>>>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
>>>>>> things?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
>>>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
>>>>>> just that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
>>>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
>>>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
>>>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
>>>>> an hour or a day or a week.
>>>>
>>>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
>>>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
>>>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
>>>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
>>>> like a bit of a challenge.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
>>>know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
>>>right. Or not.
>>
>> During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
>> Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
>> (130 kg) TNT
>>
>> As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
>> The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
>> detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
>> of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
>> of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
>> hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
>> 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
>> is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
>> ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
>> because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
>> the distance to the target.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
>
>Those radii seem pretty small to me. I can easily imagine a depth
>charge drifting horizontally more than 10 feet, due to current and so
>forth. I'll bet the pipeline was quite a bit tougher than a WW II sub,

The Royal Navy Type D depth charge was designated the "Mark VII" in
1939.Initial sinking speed was 7 ft/s (2.1 m/s) with a terminal
velocity of 9.9 ft/s (3.0 m/s) at a depth of 250 ft (76 m) Cast iron
weights of 150 lb (68 kg) were attached to the Mark VII at the end of
1940 to increase sinking velocity to 16.8 ft/s (5.1 m/s) The Mark
VII's 290 lb (130 kg) amatol charge was estimated to be capable of
splitting a 7/8 in (22 mm) submarine pressure hull at a distance of 20
ft (6.1 m).

The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.

Yep.

<https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.

Each line of the pipeline consists of about
100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
to Nord Stream.

Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.

So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
981 kPa or 142 psi.

My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
(methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
(pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
to the explosion site:
"Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
<https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
the explosion.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>
>Yep.
>
><https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
>
> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
> to Nord Stream.
>
> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
>
>So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
>places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
>shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
>under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
>collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
>981 kPa or 142 psi.
>
>My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
>it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
>let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
>(methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
>mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
>charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
>be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
>(pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
>to the explosion site:
>"Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
>There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
>pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
><https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
>The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
>the explosion.

I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
see
https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html

Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 10:24:32 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >
> As I understand it (and I'm no expert)
>
That's an understatement. You're an idiot with opinions beyond your station in life.

> But having experienced The Great War
> AKA WWI, it's no surprise if Britain thought early action was prudent
> against Germany.
>
Holy Moses, how ignorant can you get? The British thought exactly the opposite of "early action was prudent against Germany", you foolish clown. Throughout the 1930's Churchill was an outsider with a ruined career because he stood virtually alone in warning against a rising Germany and against Hitler. Far, far from "Britain thought early action was prudent against Germany" (your own stupid words, Franki-boy), senior members of the Cabinet, including all who were thought to be in the circle from which the next Prime Minister would be chosen, were Appeasers, people who said publicly that they didn't want to fight Hitler, and who didn't fight Hitler over Czechoslovakia: "Peace in our time!" said the Prime Minister, waving a worthless piece of paper signed by Hitler claiming that he had no further territorial ambitions.
>
But here we have the self-styled "professor" Frank Krygowsky, lately a factory maintenance instructor at some no-count provincial college, telling us on his own authority that "Britain thought early action was prudent against Germany."
>
How ignorant can even an Ohio hick get? What makes it worse is that this particular Ohio hick, Franki-boy Krygowski, has a Polish name, so one presumes his parents or grandparents were Polish immigrants. But he doesn't even know that Britain when it went to war belatedly (not at all "early action", "professor" Ignoramus) because Germany invaded Poland.
>
Ugh! How even a hick school can let such a moron loose on the nation's children is absolutely beyond belief.
>
This message and its irrefutable facts are given on his own authority by Andre Jute
>

On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 11:11:28 PM UTC+1, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 11:01:03 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> > AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> >
> > > On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > >>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
> > >>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
> > >>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
> > >>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
> > >>>>> fear of being cancelled.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
> > >>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
> > >>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
> > >>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Andre Jute
> > >>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
> > >>>>> longer possible.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
> > >>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
> > >>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
> > >>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
> > >>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
> > >>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
> > >>>> income.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
> > >>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
> > >>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
> > >>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
> > >>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
> > >>>>
> > >>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
> > >>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
> > >> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
> > >> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
> > >> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
> > >> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
> > >> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
> > >> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
> > >> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
> > >> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
> > >> things?
> > >>
> > >> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
> > >> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
> > >> just that.
> > >>
> > >
> > > It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
> > > or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
> > > well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
> > > path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
> > > an hour or a day or a week.
> > Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
> > fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
> > sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
> > equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
> > like a bit of a challenge.
> a hundred tons of TNT is not very much C4. This doesn't work if you're near. You have to be in direct contact.
>
Those gas tubes are stabilised against earthquakes, so I should think we're talking about resisting tremendous water pressure. That's how submarines used to be sunk, setting off much bigger volumes of explosives than would required on land where the firing party could count on a direct hit. The water pressure would spring riveted plates on the sub's hull, and the water would do the rest.
>
Me, I think this sort of pinpoint limited target exercise had to be done by drivers or drone subs planting shaped explosives, otherwise they risked the destruction of too much of the pipeline or failing altogether to damage the pipeline. Direct contact sounds right.
>
There was a good point made upthread that those are heavily trafficked waters and the fishing trawlers are well surveilled. But they're well surveilled by, in addition to satellites, other trawlers fully fitted out for spying missions. Such a spy trawler could conceivably carry robot subs for planting comms spying gear, which could plant shaped charges on of a couple of meters in diameter, easy peasy, as they would normally work on much smaller cables.
>
Andre Jute
Unless the miscreants are publicly decorated for this crime, or confess, it is unlikely we will ever know precisely how the job was done.>

On 9/29/2022 8:42 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 20:03:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 9/29/2022 6:12 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
>>>>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
>>>>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
>>>>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
>>>>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
>>>>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
>>>>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
>>>>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
>>>>>>>>>> longer possible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
>>>>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
>>>>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
>>>>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
>>>>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
>>>>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
>>>>>>>>> income.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
>>>>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
>>>>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
>>>>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
>>>>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
>>>>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
>>>>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
>>>>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
>>>>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
>>>>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
>>>>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
>>>>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
>>>>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
>>>>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
>>>>>>> things?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
>>>>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
>>>>>>> just that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
>>>>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
>>>>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
>>>>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
>>>>>> an hour or a day or a week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
>>>>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
>>>>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
>>>>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
>>>>> like a bit of a challenge.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
>>>> know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
>>>> right. Or not.
>>>
>>> During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
>>> Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
>>> (130 kg) TNT
>>>
>>> As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
>>> The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
>>> detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
>>> of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
>>> of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
>>> hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
>>> 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
>>> is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
>>> ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
>>> because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
>>> the distance to the target.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
>>>
>>
>> Thanks but there's still a lot we do not know. Submarines
>> are double-hull steel (or now titanium) but pipelines have a
>> concrete outer casing and some resilient liner between.
>> Also, these pipelines are in only 80~100 meters of water,
>> much more shallow than usual submarine operations.
>
> Pipe lines vary in construction but here is more detail about the Nord
> Stream pipeline
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzibtVSamrY
>
> Re Submarines. I think that WW II subs were single plate hulls with
> external buoyancy chambers, while more modern vessels are the "two
> hull" design.
>
> Another point is that the pipeline has probably sunk below the normal
> sea bed which might have an effect on explosions.
>

Good point but someone successfully breached them.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 9/29/2022 10:21 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:52:31 -0400, Radey Shouman
> <shouman@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
>>>>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
>>>>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
>>>>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
>>>>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
>>>>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
>>>>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
>>>>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
>>>>>>>>>> longer possible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
>>>>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
>>>>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
>>>>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
>>>>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
>>>>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
>>>>>>>>> income.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
>>>>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
>>>>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
>>>>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
>>>>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
>>>>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
>>>>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
>>>>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
>>>>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
>>>>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
>>>>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
>>>>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
>>>>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
>>>>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
>>>>>>> things?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
>>>>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
>>>>>>> just that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
>>>>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
>>>>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
>>>>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
>>>>>> an hour or a day or a week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
>>>>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
>>>>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
>>>>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
>>>>> like a bit of a challenge.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
>>>> know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
>>>> right. Or not.
>>>
>>> During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
>>> Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
>>> (130 kg) TNT
>>>
>>> As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
>>> The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
>>> detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
>>> of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
>>> of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
>>> hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
>>> 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
>>> is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
>>> ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
>>> because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
>>> the distance to the target.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
>>
>> Those radii seem pretty small to me. I can easily imagine a depth
>> charge drifting horizontally more than 10 feet, due to current and so
>> forth. I'll bet the pipeline was quite a bit tougher than a WW II sub,
>
> The Royal Navy Type D depth charge was designated the "Mark VII" in
> 1939.Initial sinking speed was 7 ft/s (2.1 m/s) with a terminal
> velocity of 9.9 ft/s (3.0 m/s) at a depth of 250 ft (76 m) Cast iron
> weights of 150 lb (68 kg) were attached to the Mark VII at the end of
> 1940 to increase sinking velocity to 16.8 ft/s (5.1 m/s) The Mark
> VII's 290 lb (130 kg) amatol charge was estimated to be capable of
> splitting a 7/8 in (22 mm) submarine pressure hull at a distance of 20
> ft (6.1 m).
>
> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>

The pipelines aren't moving, the positions are known and so
descent rate is immaterial. Despite various impedimenta
someone did successfully breach them.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 07:43:45 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 9/29/2022 10:21 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:52:31 -0400, Radey Shouman
>> <shouman@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>>>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
>>>>>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
>>>>>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
>>>>>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
>>>>>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
>>>>>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
>>>>>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
>>>>>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
>>>>>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
>>>>>>>>>>> longer possible.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
>>>>>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
>>>>>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
>>>>>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
>>>>>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
>>>>>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
>>>>>>>>>> income.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
>>>>>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
>>>>>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
>>>>>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
>>>>>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
>>>>>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
>>>>>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
>>>>>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
>>>>>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
>>>>>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
>>>>>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
>>>>>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
>>>>>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
>>>>>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
>>>>>>>> things?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
>>>>>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
>>>>>>>> just that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
>>>>>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
>>>>>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
>>>>>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
>>>>>>> an hour or a day or a week.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
>>>>>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
>>>>>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
>>>>>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
>>>>>> like a bit of a challenge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
>>>>> know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
>>>>> right. Or not.
>>>>
>>>> During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
>>>> Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
>>>> (130 kg) TNT
>>>>
>>>> As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
>>>> The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
>>>> detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
>>>> of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
>>>> of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
>>>> hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
>>>> 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
>>>> is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
>>>> ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
>>>> because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
>>>> the distance to the target.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
>>>
>>> Those radii seem pretty small to me. I can easily imagine a depth
>>> charge drifting horizontally more than 10 feet, due to current and so
>>> forth. I'll bet the pipeline was quite a bit tougher than a WW II sub,
>>
>> The Royal Navy Type D depth charge was designated the "Mark VII" in
>> 1939.Initial sinking speed was 7 ft/s (2.1 m/s) with a terminal
>> velocity of 9.9 ft/s (3.0 m/s) at a depth of 250 ft (76 m) Cast iron
>> weights of 150 lb (68 kg) were attached to the Mark VII at the end of
>> 1940 to increase sinking velocity to 16.8 ft/s (5.1 m/s) The Mark
>> VII's 290 lb (130 kg) amatol charge was estimated to be capable of
>> splitting a 7/8 in (22 mm) submarine pressure hull at a distance of 20
>> ft (6.1 m).
>>
>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>>
>
>The pipelines aren't moving, the positions are known and so
>descent rate is immaterial. Despite various impedimenta
>someone did successfully breach them.

If you are dropping something in absolutely calm waters then no the
decent rate is meaningless however it is a rare experience at sea to
find totally calm water. There is almost always a current or tide that
causes movement at the surface or at depth so yes the decent rate is,
or rather can be, important.

But regardless to all other facts or notions they did, as you say,
damage the pipeline sufficiently to cause a leak.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:52:35 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> John B. <sloc...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >>On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >>> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
> >>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
> >>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
> >>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
> >>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
> >>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
> >>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
> >>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Andre Jute
> >>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
> >>>>>>>> longer possible.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
> >>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
> >>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
> >>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
> >>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
> >>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
> >>>>>>> income.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
> >>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
> >>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
> >>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
> >>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
> >>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
> >>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
> >>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
> >>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
> >>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
> >>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
> >>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
> >>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
> >>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
> >>>>> things?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
> >>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
> >>>>> just that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
> >>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
> >>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
> >>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
> >>>> an hour or a day or a week.
> >>>
> >>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
> >>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
> >>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
> >>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
> >>> like a bit of a challenge.
> >>>
> >>
> >>I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
> >>know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
> >>right. Or not.
> >
> > During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
> > Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
> > (130 kg) TNT
> >
> > As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
> > The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
> > detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
> > of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
> > of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
> > hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
> > 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
> > is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
> > ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
> > because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
> > the distance to the target.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
> Those radii seem pretty small to me. I can easily imagine a depth
> charge drifting horizontally more than 10 feet, due to current and so
> forth. I'll bet the pipeline was quite a bit tougher than a WW II sub,
You have to understand that Slocumb had an idiot's job in the Air Force. And now he is telling you about the Navy.

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 4:57:36 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 10:24:32 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >
> > As I understand it (and I'm no expert)
> >
> That's an understatement. You're an idiot with opinions beyond your station in life.
> > But having experienced The Great War
> > AKA WWI, it's no surprise if Britain thought early action was prudent
> > against Germany.
> >
> Holy Moses, how ignorant can you get? The British thought exactly the opposite of "early action was prudent against Germany", you foolish clown. Throughout the 1930's Churchill was an outsider with a ruined career because he stood virtually alone in warning against a rising Germany and against Hitler. Far, far from "Britain thought early action was prudent against Germany" (your own stupid words, Franki-boy), senior members of the Cabinet, including all who were thought to be in the circle from which the next Prime Minister would be chosen, were Appeasers, people who said publicly that they didn't want to fight Hitler, and who didn't fight Hitler over Czechoslovakia: "Peace in our time!" said the Prime Minister, waving a worthless piece of paper signed by Hitler claiming that he had no further territorial ambitions.
> >
> But here we have the self-styled "professor" Frank Krygowsky, lately a factory maintenance instructor at some no-count provincial college, telling us on his own authority that "Britain thought early action was prudent against Germany."
> >
> How ignorant can even an Ohio hick get? What makes it worse is that this particular Ohio hick, Franki-boy Krygowski, has a Polish name, so one presumes his parents or grandparents were Polish immigrants. But he doesn't even know that Britain when it went to war belatedly (not at all "early action", "professor" Ignoramus) because Germany invaded Poland.
> >
> Ugh! How even a hick school can let such a moron loose on the nation's children is absolutely beyond belief.
> >
> This message and its irrefutable facts are given on his own authority by Andre Jute
> >
Frank appears to be to be barely educated. He knows nothing whatsoever about recent history that effected the polish people. Certainly his parents or grandparents would have had something to say about it around the supper table but he is so stupid he couldn't pick it up. Maybe he and Ridesalittle should worry more about the door zones and bike lanes.

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 5:13:55 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 11:11:28 PM UTC+1, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 11:01:03 AM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> > > AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> > >
> > > > On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > >> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > > >>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > >>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> > > >>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
> > > >>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
> > > >>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
> > > >>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
> > > >>>>> fear of being cancelled.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
> > > >>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
> > > >>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
> > > >>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Andre Jute
> > > >>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
> > > >>>>> longer possible.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
> > > >>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
> > > >>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
> > > >>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
> > > >>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
> > > >>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
> > > >>>> income.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
> > > >>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
> > > >>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
> > > >>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
> > > >>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
> > > >>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
> > > >> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
> > > >> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
> > > >> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
> > > >> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
> > > >> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
> > > >> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
> > > >> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
> > > >> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
> > > >> things?
> > > >>
> > > >> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
> > > >> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
> > > >> just that.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
> > > > or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
> > > > well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
> > > > path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
> > > > an hour or a day or a week.
> > > Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
> > > fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
> > > sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
> > > equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
> > > like a bit of a challenge.
> > a hundred tons of TNT is not very much C4. This doesn't work if you're near. You have to be in direct contact.
> >
> Those gas tubes are stabilised against earthquakes, so I should think we're talking about resisting tremendous water pressure. That's how submarines used to be sunk, setting off much bigger volumes of explosives than would required on land where the firing party could count on a direct hit. The water pressure would spring riveted plates on the sub's hull, and the water would do the rest.
> >
> Me, I think this sort of pinpoint limited target exercise had to be done by drivers or drone subs planting shaped explosives, otherwise they risked the destruction of too much of the pipeline or failing altogether to damage the pipeline. Direct contact sounds right.
> >
> There was a good point made upthread that those are heavily trafficked waters and the fishing trawlers are well surveilled. But they're well surveilled by, in addition to satellites, other trawlers fully fitted out for spying missions. Such a spy trawler could conceivably carry robot subs for planting comms spying gear, which could plant shaped charges on of a couple of meters in diameter, easy peasy, as they would normally work on much smaller cables.
> >
> Andre Jute
> Unless the miscreants are publicly decorated for this crime, or confess, it is unlikely we will ever know precisely how the job was done.>
I doubt that any surface ship was involved because the black sea is so closely controlled. Drones leave RF traces since RF traffic is also monitored. AI drones cannot be trusted and a miss is much worse than a hit.

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/29/2022 10:21 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:52:31 -0400, Radey Shouman
> > <sho...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> John B. <sloc...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:27:10 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 9/29/2022 1:01 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >>>>> AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 9/28/2022 10:50 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 8:42:23 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/2022 9:25 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 2:05:57 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> https://townhall.com/columnists/victordavishanson/2022/09/27/the-world-wants-no-part-of-woke-but-its-glad-we-do-n2613688
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> It wasn't "Americans" who screwed the United States with "woke"
> >>>>>>>>>> ideology, Mr Hanson. It was the Democrat Party pandering to its
> >>>>>>>>>> insane left wing, and its intimidated so-called "centre" or, even
> >>>>>>>>>> more risibly, "moderates" doing absolutely nothing about it for
> >>>>>>>>>> fear of being cancelled.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There are too many Americans to be lumped together. The good
> >>>>>>>>>> people need to identify the America-haters and put them down with
> >>>>>>>>>> utmost brutality as an existential threat, for reasons Victor
> >>>>>>>>>> Davis Hanson has pithily summarised in a very short article.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Andre Jute
> >>>>>>>>>> Credit where it is due, and specific blame where compromise is no
> >>>>>>>>>> longer possible.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The Slime Stream Media is crying Climate Change but blaming Putin
> >>>>>>>>> for the destruction of the Russian-European natural gas
> >>>>>>>>> pipeline. Methane is one of the most powerful greenhouse gases and
> >>>>>>>>> Biden stated that IF Russia invaded the Ukraine he would blow the
> >>>>>>>>> pipeline up. And you certainly can't blame Russia - a country
> >>>>>>>>> teetering on Bankruptcy for destroying a major source of hard
> >>>>>>>>> income.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> So again the left is exposed for their utter hypocrisy. They
> >>>>>>>>> couldn't care less about climate change - that is for the little
> >>>>>>>>> man that they convinced it was real. Well, Methane (natural gas)
> >>>>>>>>> is real and the destruction of that pipeline was a greater blow to
> >>>>>>>>> the environment than the 1960's to 980's car culture.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The pipeline attack is like an Agatha Christie piece- way
> >>>>>>>> too many actors with both means and motivation.
> >>>>>>> There were THREE very large underwater explosions. There are not a
> >>>>>>> lot of people that can accomplish that without leaving traces all
> >>>>>>> over the place. Andre points out to what occurs to losers in the
> >>>>>>> Russian political atmosphere. Putin used to be the head of the KGB
> >>>>>>> so he is well aware of what can and might be done. Especially now
> >>>>>>> that his attack on the Ukraine has turned into losing the cream of
> >>>>>>> his military might. Does anyone with a shred of intelligence believe
> >>>>>>> that supplying nothing more than cannon fodder is going to change
> >>>>>>> things?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No, the only one with a motive and the capability was Biden and he
> >>>>>>> told the entire world in a press conference that he intended to do
> >>>>>>> just that.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's not a technically daunting problem. No need for submarines or UDT
> >>>>>> or SBS commandos. As noted in a British paper yesterday the routes are
> >>>>>> well publicized. One need only pass a 'fishing' trawler across the
> >>>>>> path, drop a timed explosive and keep moving. 'Timed explosive' can be
> >>>>>> an hour or a day or a week.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Very near, or inside, the Danish or Swedish economic zones? I'll bet
> >>>>> fishing trawlers are pretty well surveiled. On the other hand I'm not
> >>>>> sure I would bet on dropping an explosive (estimated 500 Kg TNT
> >>>>> equivalent) accurately enough through 90 meters of seawater, that sounds
> >>>>> like a bit of a challenge.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't know. My search yesterday was fruitless and I don't
> >>>> know anyone with relevant military experience so you may be
> >>>> right. Or not.
> >>>
> >>> During WW II the Royal Navy's 450 lb (200 kg) Mark VII depth charge.
> >>> Note, this was the total weight of the device which contained 290 lb
> >>> (130 kg) TNT
> >>>
> >>> As for effectiveness, the following from the Wikki
> >>> The killing radius of a depth charge depends on the depth of
> >>> detonation, the payload of the depth charge and the size and strength
> >>> of the submarine hull. A depth charge of approximately 220 lb (100 kg)
> >>> of TNT (400 MJ) would normally have a killing radius (resulting in a
> >>> hull breach) of only 9.8–13.1 ft (3–4 m) against a conventional
> >>> 1000-ton submarine, while the disablement radius (where the submarine
> >>> is not sunk but is put out of commission) would be approximately 26–33
> >>> ft (8–10 m). A larger payload increases the radius only slightly
> >>> because the effect of an underwater explosion decreases as the cube of
> >>> the distance to the target.
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_charge#Effectiveness
> >>
> >> Those radii seem pretty small to me. I can easily imagine a depth
> >> charge drifting horizontally more than 10 feet, due to current and so
> >> forth. I'll bet the pipeline was quite a bit tougher than a WW II sub,
> >
> > The Royal Navy Type D depth charge was designated the "Mark VII" in
> > 1939.Initial sinking speed was 7 ft/s (2.1 m/s) with a terminal
> > velocity of 9.9 ft/s (3.0 m/s) at a depth of 250 ft (76 m) Cast iron
> > weights of 150 lb (68 kg) were attached to the Mark VII at the end of
> > 1940 to increase sinking velocity to 16.8 ft/s (5.1 m/s) The Mark
> > VII's 290 lb (130 kg) amatol charge was estimated to be capable of
> > splitting a 7/8 in (22 mm) submarine pressure hull at a distance of 20
> > ft (6.1 m).
> >
> > The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
> >
> The pipelines aren't moving, the positions are known and so
> descent rate is immaterial. Despite various impedimenta
> someone did successfully breach them.

Andrew, you CANNOT be close and expect to destroy a pipeline with a charge that small. The charge was directly attached to the pipeline and probably at a junction.

On 9/30/2022 2:14 AM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>> <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
>> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
>> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
>>
>> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
>> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
>> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
>> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
>> to Nord Stream.
>>
>> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
>>
>> So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
>> places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
>> shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
>> under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
>> collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
>> 981 kPa or 142 psi.
>>
>> My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
>> it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
>> let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
>> (methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
>> mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
>> charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
>> be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
>> (pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
>> to the explosion site:
>> "Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
>> There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
>> pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
>> <https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
>> The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
>> the explosion.
>
> I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
> pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
> dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
> see
> https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
>
> Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
> would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
> the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
> something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
> https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/
>

I agree an internal explosive is highly unlikely.
Meanwhile Norway reports increased 'unidentified drone'
activity near their oil/gas facilities:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/norway-oil-safety-regulator-warns-threats-unidentified-drones-2022-09-26/

https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/09/26/norway-oil-safety

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:14:51 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>>
>>Yep.
>>
>><https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
>> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
>> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
>>
>> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
>> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
>> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
>> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
>> to Nord Stream.
>>
>> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
>>
>>So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
>>places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
>>shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
>>under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
>>collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
>>981 kPa or 142 psi.
>>
>>My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
>>it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
>>let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
>>(methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
>>mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
>>charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
>>be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
>>(pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
>>to the explosion site:
>>"Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
>><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
>>There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
>>pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
>><https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
>>The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
>>the explosion.

>I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
>pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
>dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
>see
>https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
>
>Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
>would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
>the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
>something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
>https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/

Good points and I don't have any answers today. I did make one big
mistake. At the time, I assumed that the explosion was only in Nord
Stream 2. However, the two additional leaks discovered are both in
Nord Stream 1 and sufficiently far away that explosive coupling is
unlikely. For my guess(tm) to be correct, there would need to be two
pigs involved, one for each pipe.

According to one expert, all the methane will have leaked out of the
pipelines by Sunday. That should allow inspection of the explosion
site. If the edges of the hole point inward, the explosive was
outside of the pipe. If the edges point outward, the explosive was
inside the pipe. If debris is found from a pig, then a pig was
involved.

The methane gas is being displaced by sea water, which will likely
ruin the steel pipe. The outside of the pipe is obviously well
protected from sea water corrosion. I'm not so sure about the inside
of the pipe.

Any idea what "test gas" is composed of? Nord Stream 2 may have been
filled with the stuff at the time of the explosion. See comments in
this video at 7:08:
"Potential sabotage: What's behind the Nord Stream pipeline leaks? |
DW News"
<https://youtu.be/ShXmPA21j-E?t=417>

Some more on how the pipeline works:
"The Engineering Behind Russia's Deadlocked Pipeline: Nord Stream 2"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzibtVSamrY>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 8:38:21 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/30/2022 2:14 AM, John B. wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
> >>
> >> Yep.
> >>
> >> <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
> >> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
> >> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
> >>
> >> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
> >> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
> >> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
> >> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
> >> to Nord Stream.
> >>
> >> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
> >>
> >> So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
> >> places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
> >> shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
> >> under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
> >> collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
> >> 981 kPa or 142 psi.
> >>
> >> My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
> >> it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
> >> let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
> >> (methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
> >> mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
> >> charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
> >> be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
> >> (pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
> >> to the explosion site:
> >> "Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
> >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
> >> There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
> >> pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
> >> <https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
> >> The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
> >> the explosion.
> >
> > I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
> > pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
> > dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
> > see
> > https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
> >
> > Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
> > would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
> > the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
> > something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
> > https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/
> >
> I agree an internal explosive is highly unlikely.
> Meanwhile Norway reports increased 'unidentified drone'
> activity near their oil/gas facilities:
>
> https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/norway-oil-safety-regulator-warns-threats-unidentified-drones-2022-09-26/
>
> https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/09/26/norway-oil-safety
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
These were without a doubt every news service in the world

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 04:57:34 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
<fiultra1@yahoo.com> wrote:

>But here we have the self-styled "professor" Frank Krygowsky,
>lately a factory maintenance instructor at some no-count provincial college...

I did a bit of searching on Google Groups to see if Frank had previous
referred to himself as "professor". I did not find any such
reference. He did mention several acquaintances, who are professors.
Google doesn't make searching easy, so I might have missed the article
where Frank declared himself to be a professor. Try your luck or find
a more accurate accusation:
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/search?q=professor+author%3Afrank+author%3Akrygowski>

"Difference Between Lecturer and Professor - Lecturer Vs Professor"
<https://www.collegedisha.com/articles/difference-between-lecturer-and-professor>

Also, I've noticed that you and Tom are posting inaccurate and
insulting "information" about your targets for the day. I suspect you
both believe that if you continue to lie about someone, such as
calling Frank a "factory maintenance instructor", some of the lies
will be assumed to be correct by those not familiar with RBT. I
believe you refer to this as "bullying". I would appreciate it if you
would cease "bullying" in RBT and attempt to act in a manner more
consistent with your pretensions.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 9/30/2022 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:14:51 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>>>
>>> Yep.
>>>
>>> <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
>>> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
>>> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
>>>
>>> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
>>> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
>>> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
>>> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
>>> to Nord Stream.
>>>
>>> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
>>>
>>> So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
>>> places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
>>> shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
>>> under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
>>> collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
>>> 981 kPa or 142 psi.
>>>
>>> My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
>>> it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
>>> let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
>>> (methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
>>> mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
>>> charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
>>> be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
>>> (pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
>>> to the explosion site:
>>> "Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
>>> There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
>>> pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
>>> <https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
>>> The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
>>> the explosion.
>
>> I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
>> pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
>> dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
>> see
>> https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
>>
>> Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
>> would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
>> the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
>> something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
>> https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/
>
> Good points and I don't have any answers today. I did make one big
> mistake. At the time, I assumed that the explosion was only in Nord
> Stream 2. However, the two additional leaks discovered are both in
> Nord Stream 1 and sufficiently far away that explosive coupling is
> unlikely. For my guess(tm) to be correct, there would need to be two
> pigs involved, one for each pipe.
>
> According to one expert, all the methane will have leaked out of the
> pipelines by Sunday. That should allow inspection of the explosion
> site. If the edges of the hole point inward, the explosive was
> outside of the pipe. If the edges point outward, the explosive was
> inside the pipe. If debris is found from a pig, then a pig was
> involved.
>
> The methane gas is being displaced by sea water, which will likely
> ruin the steel pipe. The outside of the pipe is obviously well
> protected from sea water corrosion. I'm not so sure about the inside
> of the pipe.
>
> Any idea what "test gas" is composed of? Nord Stream 2 may have been
> filled with the stuff at the time of the explosion. See comments in
> this video at 7:08:
> "Potential sabotage: What's behind the Nord Stream pipeline leaks? |
> DW News"
> <https://youtu.be/ShXmPA21j-E?t=417>
>
> Some more on how the pipeline works:
> "The Engineering Behind Russia's Deadlocked Pipeline: Nord Stream 2"
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzibtVSamrY>
>

NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
international waters.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 10:40:53 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/30/2022 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:14:51 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
> >>>
> >>> Yep.
> >>>
> >>> <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
> >>> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
> >>> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
> >>>
> >>> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
> >>> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
> >>> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
> >>> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
> >>> to Nord Stream.
> >>>
> >>> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
> >>>
> >>> So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
> >>> places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
> >>> shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
> >>> under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
> >>> collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
> >>> 981 kPa or 142 psi.
> >>>
> >>> My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
> >>> it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
> >>> let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
> >>> (methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
> >>> mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
> >>> charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
> >>> be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
> >>> (pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
> >>> to the explosion site:
> >>> "Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
> >>> There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
> >>> pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
> >>> <https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
> >>> The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
> >>> the explosion.
> >
> >> I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
> >> pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
> >> dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
> >> see
> >> https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
> >>
> >> Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
> >> would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
> >> the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
> >> something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
> >> https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/
> >
> > Good points and I don't have any answers today. I did make one big
> > mistake. At the time, I assumed that the explosion was only in Nord
> > Stream 2. However, the two additional leaks discovered are both in
> > Nord Stream 1 and sufficiently far away that explosive coupling is
> > unlikely. For my guess(tm) to be correct, there would need to be two
> > pigs involved, one for each pipe.
> >
> > According to one expert, all the methane will have leaked out of the
> > pipelines by Sunday. That should allow inspection of the explosion
> > site. If the edges of the hole point inward, the explosive was
> > outside of the pipe. If the edges point outward, the explosive was
> > inside the pipe. If debris is found from a pig, then a pig was
> > involved.
> >
> > The methane gas is being displaced by sea water, which will likely
> > ruin the steel pipe. The outside of the pipe is obviously well
> > protected from sea water corrosion. I'm not so sure about the inside
> > of the pipe.
> >
> > Any idea what "test gas" is composed of? Nord Stream 2 may have been
> > filled with the stuff at the time of the explosion. See comments in
> > this video at 7:08:
> > "Potential sabotage: What's behind the Nord Stream pipeline leaks? |
> > DW News"
> > <https://youtu.be/ShXmPA21j-E?t=417>
> >
> > Some more on how the pipeline works:
> > "The Engineering Behind Russia's Deadlocked Pipeline: Nord Stream 2"
> > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzibtVSamrY>
> >
> NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
> 'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
> forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
> international waters.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Are you trying to tell the experts all about this?

On 9/30/2022 12:47 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 10:40:53 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 9/30/2022 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:14:51 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
>>>>> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
>>>>> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
>>>>>
>>>>> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
>>>>> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
>>>>> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
>>>>> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
>>>>> to Nord Stream.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
>>>>> places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
>>>>> shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
>>>>> under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
>>>>> collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
>>>>> 981 kPa or 142 psi.
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
>>>>> it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
>>>>> let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
>>>>> (methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
>>>>> mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
>>>>> charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
>>>>> be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
>>>>> (pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
>>>>> to the explosion site:
>>>>> "Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
>>>>> There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
>>>>> pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
>>>>> <https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
>>>>> The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
>>>>> the explosion.
>>>
>>>> I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
>>>> pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
>>>> dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
>>>> see
>>>> https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
>>>>
>>>> Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
>>>> would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
>>>> the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
>>>> something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
>>>> https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/
>>>
>>> Good points and I don't have any answers today. I did make one big
>>> mistake. At the time, I assumed that the explosion was only in Nord
>>> Stream 2. However, the two additional leaks discovered are both in
>>> Nord Stream 1 and sufficiently far away that explosive coupling is
>>> unlikely. For my guess(tm) to be correct, there would need to be two
>>> pigs involved, one for each pipe.
>>>
>>> According to one expert, all the methane will have leaked out of the
>>> pipelines by Sunday. That should allow inspection of the explosion
>>> site. If the edges of the hole point inward, the explosive was
>>> outside of the pipe. If the edges point outward, the explosive was
>>> inside the pipe. If debris is found from a pig, then a pig was
>>> involved.
>>>
>>> The methane gas is being displaced by sea water, which will likely
>>> ruin the steel pipe. The outside of the pipe is obviously well
>>> protected from sea water corrosion. I'm not so sure about the inside
>>> of the pipe.
>>>
>>> Any idea what "test gas" is composed of? Nord Stream 2 may have been
>>> filled with the stuff at the time of the explosion. See comments in
>>> this video at 7:08:
>>> "Potential sabotage: What's behind the Nord Stream pipeline leaks? |
>>> DW News"
>>> <https://youtu.be/ShXmPA21j-E?t=417>
>>>
>>> Some more on how the pipeline works:
>>> "The Engineering Behind Russia's Deadlocked Pipeline: Nord Stream 2"
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzibtVSamrY>
>>>
>> NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
>> 'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
>> forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
>> international waters.

> Are you trying to tell the experts all about this?
>

Nope.

https://tinyurl.com/2p8fs7f4

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:40:56 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
>'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
>forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
>international waters.

Please forgive my suspicious nature, but I'm temporarily ignoring such
declarations from organizations who are very quick to assign blame,
without offering even a clue as to why they think it's sabotage:

"The NATO Invitees associate themselves with this Statement."
<https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_207733.htm>
"All currently available information indicates that this is the result
of deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage."

Ok, so where is this information? Am I suppose to take NATO's word at
face value? Notice they were careful not to mention Russia.

I'm fairly sure there will be more information available after the
NATO saber rattling dies down, and an investigation is initiated.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 11:17:20 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 9/30/2022 12:47 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 10:40:53 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 9/30/2022 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:14:51 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 22:10:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:21:20 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The Nord Stream pipeline is said to be at 80 - 110 meters.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yep.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/27/qa-what-is-known-so-far-about-the-nord-stream-gas-pipeline-leak>
> >>>>> Both pipelines still contain gas under pressure,
> >>>>> but are not delivering the fuel to Europe.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Each line of the pipeline consists of about
> >>>>> 100,000 24-tonne concrete-weight coated steel
> >>>>> pipes laid on the seabed. The pipelines have a
> >>>>> constant internal diameter of 1.153m, according
> >>>>> to Nord Stream.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sections lie at a depth of around 80-110m.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, what could cause a pipeline under pressure to rupture in several
> >>>>> places at the same time? It's probably not a bomb, depth charge, or
> >>>>> shaped charge from the outside. The pipe was full of non-moving gas
> >>>>> under pressure. The pressure is needed to keep the pipe from
> >>>>> collapsing from water pressure. At 100 meters, that would be 10 bar,
> >>>>> 981 kPa or 142 psi.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My guess(tm) is something exploded on the inside. I was thinking that
> >>>>> it might be that someone injected air or oxygen into the pipeline and
> >>>>> let it diffuse. When the stoichiometric mixture of 1:2
> >>>>> (methane:oxygen) is achieved, any kind of spark will detonate the
> >>>>> mixture, cause a major explosion and destroy the pipe. A shaped
> >>>>> charge could burn its way into the pipe from the outside, but it would
> >>>>> be easier to just put a timed ignition device on an inspection PIG
> >>>>> (pipeline inspection gadget) and have it drive the length of the pipe
> >>>>> to the explosion site:
> >>>>> "Smart Pig Pipeline Inspection"
> >>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJnO8exGgng>
> >>>>> There's no way to section off part of the pipeline with valves as each
> >>>>> pipe only has a huge valve at each end:
> >>>>> <https://www.nord-stream.com/press-info/press-releases/worlds-heaviest-gate-valves-arrive-in-greifswald-for-nord-stream-pipeline-227/>
> >>>>> The other leaks are probably marginal welds or seals broken loose by
> >>>>> the explosion.
> >>>
> >>>> I doubt that is defective welds as an undersea gas line would have a
> >>>> pretty stringent inspection system set up to check the weld before
> >>>> dropping the pipe 100 meters to the bottom of the sea.
> >>>> see
> >>>> https://www.wermac.org/nordstream/nordstream_part8.html
> >>>>
> >>>> Your "theory" of an explosive "pig" is pretty much fantasy as how
> >>>> would you get it into the pipeline? You would have to have access to
> >>>> the "pig launcher" and a "pig" for that size pipe wouldn't be
> >>>> something that you would smuggle into the yard in your hip pocket.
> >>>> https://hollandia.biz/en/projecten/pig-launcher-receiver-heads-for-nordstream-2/
> >>>
> >>> Good points and I don't have any answers today. I did make one big
> >>> mistake. At the time, I assumed that the explosion was only in Nord
> >>> Stream 2. However, the two additional leaks discovered are both in
> >>> Nord Stream 1 and sufficiently far away that explosive coupling is
> >>> unlikely. For my guess(tm) to be correct, there would need to be two
> >>> pigs involved, one for each pipe.
> >>>
> >>> According to one expert, all the methane will have leaked out of the
> >>> pipelines by Sunday. That should allow inspection of the explosion
> >>> site. If the edges of the hole point inward, the explosive was
> >>> outside of the pipe. If the edges point outward, the explosive was
> >>> inside the pipe. If debris is found from a pig, then a pig was
> >>> involved.
> >>>
> >>> The methane gas is being displaced by sea water, which will likely
> >>> ruin the steel pipe. The outside of the pipe is obviously well
> >>> protected from sea water corrosion. I'm not so sure about the inside
> >>> of the pipe.
> >>>
> >>> Any idea what "test gas" is composed of? Nord Stream 2 may have been
> >>> filled with the stuff at the time of the explosion. See comments in
> >>> this video at 7:08:
> >>> "Potential sabotage: What's behind the Nord Stream pipeline leaks? |
> >>> DW News"
> >>> <https://youtu.be/ShXmPA21j-E?t=417>
> >>>
> >>> Some more on how the pipeline works:
> >>> "The Engineering Behind Russia's Deadlocked Pipeline: Nord Stream 2"
> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzibtVSamrY>
> >>>
> >> NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
> >> 'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
> >> forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
> >> international waters.
> > Are you trying to tell the experts all about this?
> >
> Nope.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/2p8fs7f4
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Then perhaps people like Slocumb and Liebermann should stop considering themselves experts because they can get 10% of the story from Google.

On 9/30/2022 1:39 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:40:56 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
>> 'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
>> forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
>> international waters.
>
> Please forgive my suspicious nature, but I'm temporarily ignoring such
> declarations from organizations who are very quick to assign blame,
> without offering even a clue as to why they think it's sabotage:
>
> "The NATO Invitees associate themselves with this Statement."
> <https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_207733.htm>
> "All currently available information indicates that this is the result
> of deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage."
>
> Ok, so where is this information? Am I suppose to take NATO's word at
> face value? Notice they were careful not to mention Russia.
>
> I'm fairly sure there will be more information available after the
> NATO saber rattling dies down, and an investigation is initiated.
>

I thought it was humorous in a 'satire of bureaucracy' sort
of way.

'Sabotage by whom?' remains unanswered and the usual
translation of 'collective response' is a series of
meetings, hearings, study groups but never action.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:34:19 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 9/30/2022 1:39 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:40:56 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>> NATO has officially stated that the explosions were
>>> 'sabotage' and that 'collective response' will be
>>> forthcoming. NATO also notes that both explosions were in
>>> international waters.
>>
>> Please forgive my suspicious nature, but I'm temporarily ignoring such
>> declarations from organizations who are very quick to assign blame,
>> without offering even a clue as to why they think it's sabotage:
>>
>> "The NATO Invitees associate themselves with this Statement."
>> <https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_207733.htm>
>> "All currently available information indicates that this is the result
>> of deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage."
>>
>> Ok, so where is this information? Am I suppose to take NATO's word at
>> face value? Notice they were careful not to mention Russia.
>>
>> I'm fairly sure there will be more information available after the
>> NATO saber rattling dies down, and an investigation is initiated.

>I thought it was humorous in a 'satire of bureaucracy' sort
>of way.

More like a caricature of bureaucracy. Such press releases are
usually the result of pre-processing by a large committee.

Incidentally, I had some difficulty decoding the title. What was a
NATO invitee? Apparently, it's the new countries that were ostensibly
invited to join NATA but have not been officially recognized as a
member. It took me a few milliseconds to realize why they were in the
title. These countries are all form Soviet Bloc Eastern European
countries, the same countries that angered Putin enough to invade
Ukraine. I guess whomever wrote the press release wanted to anger
Putin, or at least get his attention:
<https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/19/two-maps-show-natos-growth-and-russias-growing-isolation-since-1990.html>

>'Sabotage by whom?' remains unanswered and the usual
>translation of 'collective response' is a series of
>meetings, hearings, study groups but never action.

Oh, I think there will likely be many conspiracy theories and
prospective culprits. I could easily be accused of providing one such
theory in this thread. Like the multitude of Kennedy Assassination
theories, the more preposterous the theory, the more press coverage it
will receive. Was it sabotage by space aliens, Amazon, Google,
Democrats, Republicans, radicals, dissidents, nationalists,
anarchists, presidential candidates, zombies, etc? Never mind trying
to dream up more likely culprits and theories. Just give the problem
to a teenager, and you'll soon be reading the latest theories and
horror stories in RBT courtesy of super spreaders Andre and Tom.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>> On 9/30/2022 1:39 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>>> "The NATO Invitees associate themselves with this Statement."

> Incidentally, I had some difficulty decoding the title. What was a
> NATO invitee? Apparently, it's the new countries that were ostensibly
> invited to join NATA but have not been officially recognized as a
> member. It took me a few milliseconds to realize why they were in the
> title. These countries are all form Soviet Bloc Eastern European
> countries

No, Jeff, not really.
<https://nypost.com/2022/06/29/nato-formally-invites-finland-sweden-to-join-alliance/>
Just enjoy being far away from it. If you really want to learn more,
send Francis to Gdynia, and Bornholm, to pose as a Canadian researcher
and lecturer on bicycle facilities, and to leisurely chat with the
fishermen whose stories of witnessed naval traffic, and Seahawks
enjoying the moonless nights, will grow ever more gripping with each
drunken night that followed.

--
<https://alive-ag.de/media/image/49/b3/c5/Nacht-Fiel-Ueber-Gotenhafen-08_Kineos_NACHT_FIEL_UEBER_GOTENHAFEN_copyright_Kineos.jpg>

On 9/28/2022 1:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 9/28/2022 12:57 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>
>> Checking my Gmail around I see that Krygowski who has proven wrong on
>> every single thing he has said in 20 years is presently pretending
>> that his God - Biden - would NEVER say directly that he would commit
>> an international act of terrorism after saying he would.
>>
>> https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-what-happened-nord-stream-pipeline?yptr=yahoo
>
> :-)  Ah, Tom! I suspected you got your delusion from Tucker Carlson,
> World's Whackiest News Propagandist!
>
> Now to prove your point, please highlight the _quotation_ of President
> Biden saying he would blow up that pipeline. Note, I'm not interested in
> Tucker Carlson's pretending or rephrasing, because Carlson is as crazy
> as you. I'm interested in a direct Biden quotation.
>
> Here's a hint to help your dismal reading comprehension: When Carlson
> ends a sentence with a question mark, as in "So once again, did the
> Biden administration really do this?" it is NOT a statement of fact.
> It's a hypothetical and inflammatory question intended to suck in idiot
> right wing "true believers." And predictably, it worked on you.
>
> Oddly, other people don't seem to blame Biden.
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-lawmakers-break-europes-silence-105844953.html
> They tend to suspect Russia. But Carlson and his disciples are willing
> to attack Biden in order to protect their true love, Putin.

Some corroboration of what I said above: First, Tom's wild implications,
blaming Biden for blowing up the pipeline, did originate with Tucker
Carlson. No surprise there.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/wild-baseless-claims-biden-blew-185612325.html

"Within hours, the claim was being promoted by far-right influencers in
the US, and pushed by the network of Russian state media networks,
despite a lack of credible evidence that US warships or operatives had
taken part."

Also: "Carlson's coverage of the war in Ukraine has consistently aligned
with that of Russia's government. He is part of a segment of the
American right that is blithely uninterested in the suffering of
Ukrainians, credulous of Vladimir Putin's stated motivations, and
generally more interested in denouncing the US government than the
Russian one."

And so we have Tom, who accuses others of being communists, sucking down
any nonsense from a pro-Putin talking head and echoing what the Russian
propaganda machine pumps out on state-run media.

But Tom's too dim to realize he's been recruited to work for Putin.

--
- Frank Krygowski