|
|
|
|
|
by srvmshr
670 days ago
|
|
The article, funnily enough, made a better argument in pointing that Andromeda sailing boat might not have been involved - but rather some other vessel. The whole article felt like reading a 'proof by contradiction in prose' - from the shabby state of diving enclosure, to the extreme technicalities in executing the sabotage, and lastly even mentioning naval presence in the area. As a person not following the details of Nordstrom case, this article didn't tell me anything new except how a skeleton crew on a shabbily maintained skiff could/couldn't blow up a pipeline (better technical discussion offered by user:greenavocado in other thread). Are there other state actors involved? Maybe. Is it being used as a distraction for some cover-up? Possibly. Who knows And the icing: the person charged criminally is 'one Mr. Volodymir Z, who denies being involved' :) |
|