I omitted the word “conclusive” that was included in the Washington Post headline. Why? Because it’s weasel wording included to cast doubt. You see if there is no “conclusive” evidence than you have to consider their may be circumstantial evidence. Which is a red herring. – The red herring fallacy specifically involves using that irrelevant claim to redirect the discussion and avoid discussion/debate about the original topic.
The original and actual topic is there is no evidence. It’s an irrelevant claim to imply there is no conclusive evidence. There is simply no evidence at all. Period. Not circumstantial- Not documentary. Not demonstrative. Nothing
World leaders were quick to blame ( guilt via media propaganda) Moscow for explosions along the undersea natural gas pipelines. But some Western officials now doubt the Kremlin was responsible.
But now, after months of investigation, numerous officials privately say that Russia may not be to blame after all for the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines.
“There is no evidence at this point that Russia was behind the sabotage,” said one European official, echoing the assessment of 23 diplomatic and intelligence officials in nine countries interviewed in recent weeks.
Some went so far as to say they didn’t think Russia was responsible.
No one doubts that the damage was deliberate. An official with the German government, which is conducting its own investigation, said explosives appear to have been placed on the outside of the structures.
But even those with inside knowledge of the forensic details don’t tie Russia to the attack, officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to share information about the progress of the investigation, some of which is based on classified intelligence.
Given the relatively shallow depth of the damaged pipelines — approximately 80 yards at the site of one explosion — a number of different actors could have pulled off the attack,possibly with the use of submersible drones or with the aid of surface ships, officials said.
The leaks occurred in the exclusive economic zones of Sweden and Denmark. European nations have been attempting to map which ships were in the region in the days before the explosions, in the hope of winnowing the field of suspects.
Makes the most sense to look at Sweden, Denmark and their allies.
How about a NATO partner?
“We know that this amount of explosives has to be a state-level actor,” Finnish Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto said in an interview this month. “It’s not just a single fisherman who decides to put the bomb there. It’s very professional.”
But a handful of officials expressed regret that so many world leaders pointed the finger at Moscow without considering other countries….
But as the investigation drags on, skeptics point out that Moscow had little to gain from damaging pipelines that fed Western Europe natural gas from Russia and generated billions of dollars in annual revenue.
