Ramped-Up Rhetoric & Continued Set Up for the Upcoming NATO-led False Flag Global Cyberattack

Commentary by Dan Fournier, published Thursday, Nov. 21, 2024, 12:50 EST on fournier.substack.com

I was going to simply add a tenth (yes tenth!) addendum to my August 2023 Cyber Attack Crisis article, but since they are desperately ramping things up lately, I thought it would be worthwhile to bring this to the forefront where it merits more coverage and attention.

For some optional background context, I invite the reader to have a look at my prior post on the subject:

For over a year now, I’ve been repeatedly dissecting and exposing the mainstream media’s laughable reporting of “instances” of so-called cyberattacks, hacks, or intrusions by the usual of three boogeymen (i.e., Russia, China, and Iran).

For a previous taste of their very dishonest and deceitful methods, you can simply brush up on their propaganda tactics employed, as per my reporting.

So what is the latest one all about?

In the past few days it has been reported that a Chinese vessel coming from Russia sabotaged or severed a fibre-optic telecommunications cable in the Baltic Sea (see map hereunder for reference):

Map showing the location of the alleged cable break in the Baltic Sea. Source: The Financial Times.

Before we dive into the details, what’s interesting about this particular “incident” is that they appear to be killing two birds with one stone. That is to say, why not combine two boogeymen – Russia and China to make it appear more nefarious?

After all, the NATO-US-Intelligence-Military-Industrial-Complex needs multiple bad guys to keep their war machine churning hundreds of billions in [taxpayer paid] profits.

And who better to pick than two superpowers at once?

Okay, now for the exposition of their ridiculous claims and “reporting.”

First, let me provide some key background articles on this incident:

• ZeroHedge: Baltic Undersea Data Cable 'Disruption' May Take Two Weeks To Repair, Nov. 18, 2024

• The Wall Street Journal (WSJ): Russia Suspected as Baltic Undersea Cables Cut in Apparent Sabotage, Updated Nov. 19, 2024 10:57 am ET

• The Financial Times: Germany and Finland ‘deeply concerned’ about severed undersea cable, Nov. 18, 2024

• The Financial Times: Chinese vessel spotted where Baltic Sea cables were severed, Nov. 19, 2024

• ZeroHedge: Danish Navy Hunts Down Chinese Ship Suspected Of 'Sabotaging' Baltic Sea Cables, Nov. 20, 2024

What immediately struck me on this reporting was the fact that the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) appeared to be a main contributor to this story; and the fact that it was just a few days ago that I reported on some of the WSJ ridiculous reporting of supposed hack or cyberattack of a major telecommunications carrier in the United States called T-Mobile made me even more suspicious.

As I reported, the telecom giant, T-Mobile, actually never confirmed that their data or communications records were ever taken/copied/breached!

The two ZeroHedge articles from above basically cite information from the Wall Street Journal piece. So, let us dissect this one, shall we?

Please bear with me, for what I am about to present is almost a compendium of copy-paste / insert-the-usual-bs-talking-points employed by the “journalists” of these mainstream institutions that are absolutely not controlled by outside commercial, intelligence, and think-tank/foreign policy interests.

The first thing I would like to bring to your attention is the buzz phrase “hybrid warfare.”

This will be repeated throughout the WSJ’s Russia Suspected as Baltic Undersea Cables Cut in Apparent Sabotage article.

If you are curious, hybrid warfare includes the simultaneous use of multiple types of warfare including fake news, lawfare, and – most notably – cyberwarfare.

But let’s begin with the article title itself. It uses the term “suspected,” implying Russia’s involvement in this alleged incident of undersea cables sabotage. In other words, it is speculative from the very start.

Both in the subtitle for the article and in the following paragraph, they cite they usual anonymous sources:

“Western officials said there are indications that Russia was behind the incidents, which they said were similar to other operations resulting from Moscow’s escalating hybrid warfare against NATO countries in Europe.”

They cite “Western officials” without naming who they are. Western officials could mean hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people in certain government positions or the like across multiple western nations. So, this citation basically carries zero credibility or verifiability.

The following paragraph does, however, manage to cite an actual state official – German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius:

““Nobody believes that these cables were accidentally cut off,” German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters. “Therefore we must conclude—without yet knowing specifically who was behind it—that this is a hybrid operation.””

But as you can see from the quotation above, this official merely provides a generalisation about what [may have] transpired in the incident. Moreover, all he has to offer is a contradictory statement, i.e., “we must conclude” and “without yet knowing who was behind it” that it was a “hybrid operation”.

Note his use here of that infamous buzz phrase “hybrid operation.”

Mind you this absurd statement is coming from an actual Defense Minister.

I really wonder who hired this buffoon.

But hey, at least the German Defense Minister got some backing from his fellow German Minister of Foreign Affairs Annalena Baerbock and her Finnish counterpart Elina Valtonen. So that must count for something, right?

Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen, left, and her German counterpart Annalena Baerbock in June. The pair issued a joint statement on Monday in which they warned of ‘hybrid warfare by malicious actors.’ Source: Lehtikuva/AFP/Getty Images via the Financial Times.

In their joint-statement, the two Foreign Ministers said: “We are deeply concerned about the severed undersea cable connecting Finland and Germany in the Baltic Sea. The fact that such an incident immediately raises suspicions of intentional damage speaks volumes about the volatility of our times.”

Again, this is a general statement that provides zero evidence of who may be behind this alleged incident, if it ever occurred in the first place.

But at least Finnish Foreign Minister Valtonen got to mention that she would not hesitate to attribute blame for this “hybrid act.”

Why do I get the feeling were are going to be hearing this buzz phrase in the media ad nauseum in the weeks and months to come?

The WSJ article continues:

“The preliminary investigation involving Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Germany and other nations found that the cables were likely cut in Swedish economic waters, where the two cables intersect in a relatively small area, according to two people familiar with the findings.”

Here, we have the usual speculative language employed. The preliminary investigation involving Sweden, Finland, and Lithuania, and Germany (and “other,” unspecified nations) found that the cables were “likely” cut in Swedish economic waters.

Again, pure speculation.

Furthermore, the statement is according to “people familiar” with the findings. In other words, anonymous/unspecified sources.

What is also quite suspect about this statement is the timing in which it was issued. Would a preliminary investigation involving multiple countries with their respective investigative teams really just take a couple of days? Maybe, but quite doubtful.

And the next paragraph also used speculatory language [bolded]:

“The damage was near-certain to be a result of human interference rather than caused by any natural phenomena, these people said.”

Sorry, “near-certain” doesn’t really cut it when we are talking about an official investigation by authorities. “Near-certain,” is like saying “near-pregnant.” It is absolutely absurd. Moreover, we have the usual reliable source: “these people.”

Could they be more mediocre?

It really amazes me.

I should also note that the four countries in question (Germany, Finland, Sweden, and Lithuania) are all NATO countries. Moreover, Finland joined the alliance in 2023 while Sweden did so just months ago – both after Russia invaded the Ukraine.

We all know that NATO states in Europe are essentially puppet states of the U.S. and must follow their orders when it comes to these kinds of affairs. A clear case in point that comes to mind is how Germany just let the U.S. bomb the undersea Russian pipeline that fed Germany with natural gas, as was reported on by Seymour Hirsh.

So, it would come as little surprise that the foreign ministers for these countries would easily acquiesce to American hegemonic demands, lest they be punished for not doing so.

Continuing, the WSJ propaganda article explores the possible motive for the “clandestine offensive:

“The likely motive behind this clandestine offensive is to spread panic, bind security resources, and increase pressure on Western governments by boosting political parties who are campaigning against the massive aid provided to Ukraine, according to politicians, security and law-enforcement officials and intelligence operatives from several European nations and the U.S.”

So let me get this right folks. The Russians and/or Chinese want to sever undersea telecom cables in order to “spread panic” and “increase pressure on Western governments” to boost “political parties who are campaigning against the massive aid provided to Ukraine.”

Of course!

How can I not see that?

I mean, it should be obvious to anyone, no?

For heaven sakes, this just stinks as a pure propaganda ploy to get support – which has been significantly waning as of late – for European NATO countries wishing to further sink billions of dollars in an unwinnable war which was entirely based on lies.

But hey, what would such efforts be without the usual, trademark, fancy graphics to support the theme?

The WSJ article embeds the following image [with original caption]:

Original caption: Underwater fiber-optic cables, carrying transactions worth trillions of dollars a day, are central to the U.S.-China tech war. WSJ explains the battle for influence beneath the waves. Illustration: Ksenia Shaikhutdinova.

Here is where the article gets subliminally creative.

You see the greater objective or purpose of these articles is to instill a certain pre-conceived notion in its readers’ minds.

In this case, the broader goal is to help to continue to lay the foundation of who should be blamed for the coming large-scale false flag cyberattack and what could be the damages caused by them.

Looking at the caption for the image really helps to reinforce my theory. You see these very important fiber-optic cables carry “trillions of dollars a day” worth of data which are also “central to the U.S.-China tech war.”

You following me yet?

No?

Okay, suppose there is a major outage (be it internet, electricity, or both) in the Western word that lasts for several days.

The damages caused (problem) would be “catastrophic” for the masses (reaction) and someone would be need to be held accountable along with consequences (solution).

And in this case, China would need to be held accountable.

It’s textbook Hegelian Dialectic, more simply known as PROBLEM-REACTION-SOLUTION.

Going back to the caption for that image above, you will notice that it comes from Ksenia Shaikhutdinova who is a Senior Video Journalist from The Wall Street Journal based in London.

The WSJ has even recently prepared a video which touches upon this hybrid tech war between the two superpowers (click the image to view it):

The video largely focuses on the strategic interests about undersea fiber-optic communications cables held by both the United States and China.

It can be easily argued that undersea cable for telecommunications is even more important than undersea gas pipelines, given that data is the “oil of the 21^st century.”

The videos states concerns of the U.S.:

“...this did little, however to alleviate Washington’s fears that underwater cables are increasingly vulnerable to Beijing’s espionage.”

”What U.S. officials are worried about is that if too many Chinese companies play an active role in building and owning and maintaining these cables, they aren’t going to be able to stop surveillance of some of this internet traffic – not just between the U.S. and its allies, but among other countries around the world.”

These concerns are in addition to “billions of dollars of infrastructure investments at stake” for U.S. companies.

Screenshot of the WSJ video showing U.S. President Joe Biden (right), German Chancellor Olaf Shultz (middle), and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the 2022 G7 Summit in Krun, Germany.

The video also mentions the successful bid, a $600 million contract for U.S.-based SubCom to lay cables running through Southeast Asia to the Middle East in competition with the Chinese amidst the U.S.-China tech war.

A July 2023 Special Report by Reuters referred to SubCom as a “company born out of a U.S. Cold War project to spy on Soviet submarines.”

The article adds that SubCom is one of the world’s biggest developers of undersea fiber-optic cables for telecom firms and tech giants like Alphabet’s Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Meta Platforms.

Hence, we can easily observe that there are huge commercial interests at play here.

And the U.S. has a tradition of using its military power and influence in these respects.

Nothing new under the sun.

There are many more holes and instances of insincere reporting in the WSJ article. It would take me too long to go through all of them. But they mostly consists of more of the same – anonymous source and unsubstantiated claims and statements. You can check for yourself.

Given the recent absurdity of the reporting coming out of the Wall Street Journal, we can see easily see what is at play here.

Multiple interests are being served all at once with this alleged incident, and it is the same usual parties who are poised to benefit from it.

Support Independent Journalism

As an independent journalist, I take great care and pride in providing my audience with quality investigatory work and writings.

This is the kind of work that is seldom reported on in as much detail by the mainstream media, for they also tend to avoid the subjects and sometimes controversial topics that I, myself cover.

As an independent, I get paid very little for this work, for the bulk of my revenue comes from Substack subscriptions, and I am mostly surviving and supporting my family by means of personal savings.

You can support my work by considering a paid subscription to my Substack – Dan Fournier’s Inconvenient Truths (for only $5 a month, or $50 a year).

For one-time donations, you can also buy me a coffee.

If you are unable to support my work financially, it is greatly appreciated if you can share it on your social media feeds, for this brings additional exposure (and much needed eyeballs) which can lead to new paid subscribers.

Your comments are most welcome and appreciated and can be given in the Comments section below.

I sincerely thank you for your time and support.

Disclaimer:

See the author’s About page for full disclaimer.

Tweet this article (re-post on X)

Share this article on Facebook

Follow me on X, formerly known as Twitter:

I can also be followed on:

• Primal (which is a Nostr decentralised alternative to X that cannot be censored, and where users cannot be de-platformed). If you are tired of X, you can create your own account on Primal.

• PickAx