Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE)

Swedish engineer Erik Andersson has personally investigated the September 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. He is perhaps the most informed independent investigator of the incident and the associated legal and political drama.

Andersson provided an updated defense document filed by the pipelines’ insurers (attached) and posted his observations on X. His X comments are consolidated below.

• Nord Stream insurers Lloyds & Arch just filed an amended defense document (attached) which reveals technical details confirming a fifth Nord Stream bomb, which failed to break the NS1B line, placed just 90 meters from the successful bomb on NS1 line A.
• Lloyds & Arch intend to prove in court that the government of Ukraine ordered the destruction.
• The insurers have access to classified information in the criminal investigation which not even the victims have had up to now.
• The insurers doubled down on their previous claim that the destruction was an act of war (and thus they are not liable). They all but say it was ordered by the Ukrainian government, and will rely on “expert evidence” of this.
• The locations of the northern Nord Stream bombs are marked on the nautical chart (pasted below). The previously known bombs have orange markers and the new bomb we learned about in the NS vs Lloyds filing is marked red.
• I (Andersson) have repeatedly said that I dismissed Seymour Hersh claim of 8 bombs after my expedition, and have assumed there were exactly four bombs. This has now been proven false, and I think that we again have to account for the possibility that there were perhaps 8 bombs, and that Sy Hersh is perhaps right in his claim that “the Americans sped back to the crime scene to remove the unexploded bombs.”
• Andersson’s personal view is that it doesn’t matter much if Team USA trusted and protected the Ukrainian sailboat crew so they could place the bombs, or if they just waited for the sailboat cover operation to finish before detonating the bombs they had placed there by other means (making sure they didn’t do anything that couldn’t have been done from a sailboat).
• The presence of American, Danish and Swedish warships in the area, with all their surveillance capabilities, including the underwater surveillance, makes it a very hard sell that the Ukrainians did this alone without American participation.
• American warships were also present at the crime scene when it was closed off (justified by an erroneous interpretation of international law) and cleaned up by the Swedish investigation. If any materials were found which contradicted the sailboat narrative, these materials could have been removed.
• It’s impossible to trust the investigations when (1) the crime scene was illegally blocked & cleaned with US military protection, (2) international investigation was blocked, and (3) the Swedish and Danish investigations were closed with a bogus justification contradicting the premise of “jurisdiction” which was used to seize control of all information in the first place. (Very interesting point about Sweden and Denmark. After 16+ months of investigation, they both punted. Sweden suddenly didn’t have jurisdiction and Denmark decided they didn’t have sufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case.)

Read Full Post »