 My sources corroborate Psy Hirsch's Nord Stream report. Notes from the edge of the narrative matrix. My sources corroborate seeing more Hirsch's report that the U.S. was behind the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage. My sources are logic, common sense, and public statements by U.S. government officials. If Putin and senior Russian officials had said what Biden and senior U.S. officials have been saying about how much they hate the Nord Stream pipelines and how great it is that they were bombed, every member of the Western political media class would blame Russia for the bombing, and we would never hear the end of it. Some video clips of Biden saying if Russia invades, that means tanks or troops crossing the border of Ukraine, then there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it. Reporter asks him, how will you do that? Biden says, I promise you, we will be able to do it. Another clip by Secretary of State Antony Blinken saying the Nord Stream pipeline bombing offers tremendous strategic opportunity for the years to come. Another one, Victoria Newland, also of the State Department, saying Senator Cruz, like you, I am, and I think the administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now, as you like to say, a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea. Is Mike Pompeo back when he was Secretary of State, saying the U.S. will do everything to stop the Nord Stream 2 project? Russia would stand nothing to gain by bombing its own pipeline whose gas flow it could control on its own end, while U.S. officials are openly acknowledging that the U.S. benefits from it directly. It's just so silly how Imperial spinmeisters are falling all over themselves to dismiss a claim that they all privately know is true because it's so glaringly obvious. The Nord Stream sabotage is like what 9-11 would look like if, before 9-11, you had top U.S. officials saying, yeah, we're definitely going to bring an end to the World Trade Center, and then after 9-11 they were saying, it's good that the World Trade Center was destroyed because it advances our interests. The compilations of evidence we've been seeing that the U.S. was behind this attack look a lot like the evidence compiled by 9-11 conspiracy analysts, except the evidence is way stronger and U.S. officials are pretty much just saying they did it in plain English. It's just a basic fact that conspiracies happen. Powerful people do conspire with each other, and they are often able to keep their conspiring secret for a very long time. It really is a cruel joke that our rulers hide their actions behind thick veils of government secrecy, punishing anyone who tries to look behind those veils with harsh prison sentences, and then have the gall to smear those who try to form theories about what they're doing behind those veils as conspiracy theorists. Just something to keep in mind as the mad narrative management scramble to brand Cy Hirsch a conspiracy theorist continues. The Empire has been frantically ramping up propaganda and censorship because its great power competition against Russia and China is going to require economic warfare, massive military spending, and nuclear brinkmanship that no one would consent to without lots of manipulation. Economic warfare, exploded military spending, and nuclear brinkmanship all harm slash threaten the interests of the rank and file public. Nobody's going to consent to being made poorer and less safe over some global power struggle that doesn't benefit them without being manipulated to. That's why the media have been acting so weird lately. That's why dissident voices are getting harder and harder to find online. And that's the purpose of the new fact checking industry and other forms of narrative control. Controlling the narrative is growing more crucial. It would never occur to a normal person that China needs to be made to submit to US interests, and that economic sacrifices must be made to obtain this goal, which would make their wallet lighter, for example. That's the kind of change you only get consent for if you manufacture it. The fact that the Empire's great power competition happens to be occurring at the same time as widespread access to the Internet means that drastic measures must be made to ensure the Empire's information dominance so it can march the public into playing along with this agenda. So many Americans in my social media notifications bought fully into the shrieking hysteria about a fucking balloon the other day. Doesn't bode well for how critically they'll be thinking once the anti-China propaganda campaign really gets going. It still blows my mind how the Empire can rob Americans blind, keep them poor, deprive them of all normal social safety nets, oppress them, exploit them, throw them into the largest prison system on Earth, work them into the ground, and then convince them to be angry at China. All major US foreign policy maneuvers in today's world are ultimately about preventing China from becoming an obstacle to US planetary rule. That's all its shenanigans with Russia, Iran, etc. are ultimately about, and that's what Ukraine is about too. If you don't see this, you don't see anything. If you say you oppose US foreign policy toward Russia but not toward China, then you don't really oppose US foreign policy toward Russia, because it's the same foreign policy. They're just two aspects of the same one agenda. Rank and file Australians are so pathetically aligned with US interests in their opinions because we have the most concentrated media ownership in the Western world, a huge amount of it by Murdoch, who has been intimately intertwined with US government agencies for many decades. A sizable percentage of the people who shriek at me for criticizing US foreign policy are Bernie Sanders' progressives and self-described anarchists. Very few of the people who think of themselves as fighting the power in opposing tyranny actually do. The best measure of character for a journalist, analyst or commentator is whether they spend their time punching up or punching down. Are they always throwing shots at the world's top power structure, or are they punching at weaker governments, other commentators, tankies, marginalized groups, etc. This is the best measure of character because consistently throwing punches at the top is the least effective way to rise and influence and build a brand, because those who facilitate the interests of the powerful will be uplifted and amplified by the establishment power structure, while those who work against those interests will not be. Someone who's only ever punching up as high as possible, never down or laterally, is more likely to be in it for nobler reasons than fame and fortune. This is also a good way to evaluate your own character. Are you always punching up as high as your arms can reach? Or are you getting lost in sectarianism, social media drama, or power-serving attacks on parts of the rank-and-file public? How high are your fists going? It's a good habit to check in on this from time to time.