A few weeks ago, I wrote about the theory – some would say ‘conspiracy theory’ – that the U.S. provoked Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to sabotage Nord Stream 2. I said that although there is circumstantial evidence, there isn’t any direct evidence, “so for the time being it should be regarded with appropriate scepticism”.
Since my article was published, the ‘Nord Stream theory’ has been covered in at least two other places.
On September 15th, Sohrab Ahmari posted a brief interview he’d done with the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Discussing the Western response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Ahmari writes:
Is the United States really prepared to see Europe turn itself into an energy and economic basket case for no tangible gains against Moscow? … The most cynical Hungarian answer is that that is exactly what Washington wants to bring about: to downgrade German manufactures and sever the energy-manufacturing synergy between Russia and Germany, to end Europe’s aspirations to “strategic autonomy” and induce a total dependence on America.
These are Ahmari’s words, not Orbán’s. But they appear to be based on a conversation that took place between the two.
Then on October 11th, Thomas Fazi wrote a piece for UnHerd where he discusses the theory at length. He makes many of the points I made in my Daily Sceptic article, as well as several others that are of interest. Fazi quotes the American geostrategist George Friedman, who said the following in 2015:
The overriding interest of the United States, for which we have fought wars for centuries – the First, Second and Cold War – has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united there they are the only force that could threaten us. And we need to make sure that doesn’t happen.
The theory is still far from proven, but Ahmari and Fazi’s articles are worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
A rough translation – “Indian variant households may have been larger because they’re Indian”. I seem to remember a story a few years back about a terrace of houses in Blackburn having about a score of people living in the walkway between the attics of the houses.
Anyhow, like I said yesterday, Pantsdown said it, so it must be true…
“This factor means the 64% claim should be ignored”. Oh well, that’s the end of that then…
“secondary attack rates?”
Right, better mobilise the reserves.
Send for Captain Mainwaring, we need at least a platoon of our best men to fight this dastardly new mutation. Tell the men to throw everything at it – we can’t be too careful.
What a joke.
Don’t panic! Do not panic, there’s a scariant on the loose. Fix bayonets – CHARGE!
Might as well have corporal Jones in command…
In other words, more fraud
“Where we’re going, we don’t need evidence”
It’s the Delta Elephant in the room they won’t talk about
CFR rates are interesting
Great find! With a death rate so low, those deaths could by chance be due to something else entirely, like say old age or being at death’s door because of serious pre-existing conditions??
Very illuminating, thank you. Just imagining a world where our news broadcasts actually shared this information….
Have you got a reference for this?
Page 11 of the briefing, linked in the LDS article. (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/993198/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing.pdf)
Delta probably less deadly than the “vaccines”.
Zahawi (AKA Anton LaVey) is a pathological liar and sociopath.
Yep, aka he is a politician.
Sadly the headlines in MSM will 64% more transmissible, and no-one will ask compared to what?
Too obvious a question!
Nothing has ever been put in context by the MSM or government and the majority of people to dull to ask.
Excellent article from Will again. Which country in Europe has the highest number of persons from The Indian Subcontinent? UK. Which country in Europe has now an increasing number of C 19 cases mainly delta? UK.Is this of concern? All viruses mutates and most often they become less deadly, less disease prone but more efficient in transmission. Why should this be different despite the scare of “deadly”virus? Earlier PHE had statistics about ethnicity of C-19 cases. Have not seen them for the current outbreak incl. for the hospitalizations. This will run its course in a subsegment of the population and most likely have less hospitalizations and deaths.
But wouldn’t the attack rate be dependent on the level of susceptibility in the population. Presumably we have more immunity now than in January.
That is exactly the point!
Putting myself in his position, I can see his logic of monitoring the situation and keeping a close eye on the data AS WE OPEN UP AGAIN to see what happens when restrictions are repealed. However, just delaying the reopening for another month achieves precisely diddly squat to that end!
The “squandering” argument – “let’s not reverse all the progress we’ve made by throwing caution to the wind” – in epidemiological terms applies everywhere and always. There is not a scenario that one can imagine where we do not have the opportunity to “carelessly squander” our achievements.
This is yet another trick of the mind. It is easy to see how the less astute viewers may be taken in by that argument. But on a deeper reflection on this philosophy, it becomes evident that this becomes analogous to continuing antibiotic prescriptions to patient whose infection has completely cleared just in case their effects get “squandered” and re-infection occurs.
There is always the RISK of reinfection by any number of agents… so why not just stay on antibiotics indefinitely? What could possibly go wrong?
However, this argument will predictably be worn to the nub and used to sell us the pretense that lockdowns are wise. Don’t buy it!
Tim Spectre from Zoe is talking about an R number of 6, how does this tie in do you think?