Questioning Seymour Hersh's Reporting on Nord Stream Pipeline Explosions
An Investigation into the Authenticity of Seymour Hersh's Report Regarding the Explosions at the Nord Stream Pipelines
Seymour Hersh recently caused a stir with his report on the Nord Stream pipeline explosions in the Baltic Sea. In his Substack article, he claims that the United States was behind the blasts that resulted in leaks from Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines, transporting Russian gas to Germany. This statement was rejected by both the US government and the Norwegian Foreign Affairs Ministry as "false."
The explosions in September, which took place in the economic zones of Denmark and Sweden, caused substantial harm to the pipelines and raised suspicions of sabotage. Swedish officials have discovered traces of explosive material at the site, while Russia denies any involvement. The German Attorney General, Peter Frank, has also stated that there is no connection between Russia and the explosions.
The origin of Hersh's assertion can be traced back to President Biden's comments in February 2022. Biden warned that if Russia invaded Ukraine, there would be no more Nord Stream 2, and he promised to halt the project. At the time, there was speculation that the US might use sanctions against Nord Stream 2 AG to prevent the pipeline from becoming operational. However, the German government ultimately suspended the project in response to Russia's recognition of separatist regions in eastern Ukraine.
Hersh, famous for his investigative reporting on the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War and the US use of torture at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, has become a polarizing figure in journalism in recent years. He has written pieces that have faced significant criticism, including his 2013 questioning of the Syrian government's role in a deadly gas attack.
Sarah Wagenknecht, a German politician, posted a tweet in response to the article by Seymour Hersh. She stated, "While the German federal government invokes transatlantic friendship and blindly follows the US, the US government is responsible for the explosion of the North Stream pipelines, as Hersh meticulously researched. So whose interests are the German federal government representing?"
Who is Seymour Hersh?
Seymour Hersh is a well-known journalist who has been working in the field for several decades, reporting on a wide range of topics. However, in recent years, some of his reporting has come under fire for being inaccurate, inconsistent, and not supported by evidence. As a result, these allegations have been leveled against him. Because of this, the most recent article he posted on his Substack should not be relied upon as a reliable source of information.
The fact that Hersh's most recent work does not cite any credible sources and instead relies on hearsay and unconfirmed information is one of the most significant problems with it. For instance, he relies on unnamed sources that he claims to be "well-placed" in the article, but these sources offer no evidence to support their assertions. Because of this, it is difficult to determine whether or not the information being presented is accurate, which undermines the article's credibility as a whole.
In addition to this, Hersh has a history of making claims that other journalists and industry professionals have subsequently disproved. For instance, in one of his more recent articles, he made a series of allegations concerning the intelligence agencies and military of the United States, all of which turned out to be untrue at a later date. This casts doubt on Hersh's ability to collect and verify the information and the dependability of the reporting he has produced.
Hersh's writing style has also been criticized for being sensationalist and lacking the depth and nuance typically found in credible journalism. This is one of the criticisms that has been leveled against Hersh's writing. Instead of providing a comprehensive and well-balanced overview of the topics he writes about, he frequently uses sensationalist headlines and exaggerated claims. Because of this, it may be challenging for readers to form an understanding that is both clear and accurate of the events and issues he is reporting on.
In conclusion, it is essential to bring up the fact that Hersh has been charged with having a political agenda, which is said to impact his reporting. Credible journalists try to present a balanced view of the topics they are reporting on, even though every journalist has their perspectives and opinions on the topics they cover. However, the credibility of Hersh's reporting has been called into question because he is perceived to present an unbalanced and biased perspective on the events he covers.
Even though Seymour Hersh has an extensive and illustrious career in journalism, his recent work on his Substack should be regarded as something other than a credible source of information. Questions regarding the dependability and accuracy of the presented information are raised due to the absence of credible sources, the inconsistencies in his reporting, the sensationalistic writing style, and the political agenda influencing his reporting.
This is an interesting piece on Mr. Hersh, and very timely. So, accepting Mr. Kuenne's evidence as trustworthy, how should we evaluate Mr. Hersh's revelations?
First, the source. Is Hersh a good journalist? Yes, very. Is he politically biased? In the sense that he views America as something of a bully on the world stage, the answer has to be yes.
Second, the piece itself. Does it tell a coherent story, without any loose ends or unexplained events? I would say, yes. Does the story fit the known facts? Again, I would say yes.
So I would say that the story is genuine and broadly accurate. It is also extremely embarrassing for the American government, and helpful for America's enemies. I can well imagine other journalists, who are unwilling to write anything helpful for Putin, would censor themselves. Hersh has no such inhibitions. Whether that is a good or bad thing, we will have to see.
You say Hersh's recent articles lack sources or context, but your own article is lacking these same things.
Also who cares if he has a left wing bias, it's not like he hides that. He's not pretending to be an objective enlightened liberal.