Erik Andersson 🐘

Engineer, entrepreneur, grandpa, populist

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

The media reports insinuating involvement of my yellow rubber boat in the Nord Stream sabotage are misleading, Here's the original expedition video by Agnes Andersson.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

The premiere of Moriz Enders film "Nordstream The Sabotage" is almost fully booked at the classic Babylon Theatre in Berlin. Hurry up if you want a seat!

https://t.co/3ftbU0RykE

https://t.co/tFgem3TnJJ

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

I have commented on Bojan's story on Substack here https://t.co/WUpgsIzu0e and here: https://t.co/V1POwx0zup

the second article based on Claude AI analysis, reveals that if you read Bojan's book "objectively" (as claude calls it) you end up concluding that the Nord Stream attack was US sponsored terrorism -so insurance compensation should be paid out to Nord Stream. Bojan himself though insists that it was an acto of Ukrainian patriotism, and the USA was taken by surprise in September 26 2022. I think there is plenty of circumstantial evidence indicating that the USA and also other western militaries were aware of the coming attack.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Both parties in the Insurance trial between Nord Stream and its insurers agree it was terror, and Nord Stream paid for special terror insurance, but is still likely to loose. This essay untangles the situation.

https://t.co/fzFTYedNtE

[Dr. Jonas Toegel @JonasToegel]

Die Sprengung der Nordstream-Pipeline hat die Haupt-Schlagader für günstige Energie zerstört und die deutsche Wirtschaft massiv geschädigt.

Der Erfolgs-Regisseur Moritz Enders ("Toxic NATO") untersucht in seinem neuen Dokumentarfilm "Nordstream - Die Sprengung" die Hintergründe, mögliche Täter und die bis heute andauernde, massive Propaganda um den Vorfall.

Es war mir eine Ehre und eine große Freude, gemeinsam mit Ray McGovern, Dirk Pohlmann, Prof. Theodore Postol, Dr. Werner Rügemer, Prof. Ola Tunander, Erik Andersson und Harald Kujat an der Aufklärung mitwirken zu dürfen.

Die Premiere ist am 2. Juli um 19.30 Uhr im Babylon in Berlin.

Nähere Informationen gibt es hier: https://t.co/VkqXrXRlZk

Folgen Sie mir auf Telegram: https://t.co/wC1x0C7toA

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

I'm re-upping this thread now since Spiegels reporting about Burba/Chervinsky plans to blow up Nord Stream already 2019 seem to contradict @bopanc 's record which Lloyds are heavily relying on in the London trial.
Lloyds claims the sabotage was because of the war, and Nord Stream has a strong argument that "war" in the insurance sense must mean a "hot war" like it was after Feb 2022. Information that the Ukrainian instigators planned the attack already 2019 in close cooperation with CIA would make Lloyd's case weaker.

@diehljoerg @FideliusSchmid

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

If it's true what Der Spiegel writes here, can someone explain to me how the CIA can not be responsible for the Nord Stream bombing?

AI Translation of Spiegel: "For a long time, Roman Chervinsky belonged to a group in the Ukrainian security authorities that was considered to be particularly conspiratorial, built up by US agents. Because the Ukrainian services were riddled with former KGB cadres, the Americans were looking for trustworthy people years ago who could be trained in isolation from Russian informers. The most important goal was to set up capable sabotage units.

Chervinsky was one of them, as was his long-time boss: Lieutenant General Vasyl Burba, former head of Ukrainian military intelligence.

The men have CIA training. They are trained to think big.

Nord Stream is an obvious target for them. Early on, even before the war. The gas finances the Russian military apparatus. Nord Stream is also a thorn in Washington's side. Changing American governments warn the Germans emphatically against dependence on Russian energy"

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

@bopanc @ronzheimer 580 million, obviously.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

@ClimateAudit @MichaKobs @andreaslmunk

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

1/ This precedent from Nord Stream AG's final argument vs Loyd's is pure gold. The war provided an opportunity to sabotage Nord Stream, but it still wasn't a direct consequence of the war.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

3/ It's worth reading the full argument. Even though the context is about how to interpret an insurance policy, the general reasoning about causation is valid in the broader analysis about who is responsible for the attack.

https://t.co/Qh6PrHOC73

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

@marcelvandenber What else could this wording mean? After reading their entire argument, I see no other possible purpose of this paragraph.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Wow! Nord Stream's insurer's Lloyds&Arch all but say in their final trial submission that the Ukrainian commando op to blow up Nord Stream had western support.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

No. If Ukrainians blew it up, it was to help the USA.

not the other way around.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Maybe the most convoluted Lloyds arguments: "Even if the USA blew up the pipeline on their own, it was to help Ukraine"

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

I've previewed this excellent Nord Stream documentary. Premiere in the Berlin Babylon theatre on July 2.

Unlike deceptive mainstream coverage, it puts the Nord Stream destruction in the great power competition context where it belongs. Don't miss it!

https://t.co/R4Fe4eXHvL

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Maybe the most convoluted Lloyds arguments: "Even if the USA blew up the pipeline on their own, it was to help Ukraine"

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

@MichaKobs @freddie_ponton @BillyBostickson

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

This excellent flow-chart describes Nord Stream AG's reasoning for why they should get coverage. There are multiple interpretations of what the policy is, and also multiple interpretations of the evidence of who's behind the sabotage. But "come what may", there's coverage.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

In spite of having victim-access to the German Nord Stream investigation, Nord Stream AG claims in it's final submission of the insurance trial that the sabotage was NOT and act of war.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Full document https://t.co/Qh6PrHOC73

Defendants submissions:

https://t.co/HFtYc8NNJd

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

@MichaKobs

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Lloyds argument is reliant on the idea that the Nord Stream sabotage was an act of war. So much so that the small budget Ukrainian sailboat op described by @bopanc is hardly an option.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Wow! Nord Stream's insurer's Lloyds&Arch all but say in their final trial submission that the Ukrainian commando op to blow up Nord Stream had western support.

[Erik Andersson 🐘 @Erkperk]

Maybe the most convoluted Lloyds arguments: "Even if the USA blew up the pipeline on their own, it was to help Ukraine"