Without breaking down my reasoning (which was pretty half-baked and underthought)--I was just trying to understand the OP's point. OP used all kinds of languag

Without breaking down my reasoning (which was pretty half-baked and underthought)--I was just trying to understand the OP's point. OP used all kinds of language we associate with governments doing sketchy stuff: "what could be sold as reasonable doubt to shut down the pipeline"; "created the impetus" ("impetus" is often used to claim the real motivations were something else); "political cover"; etc. I just didn't know how else to interpret all the cloak-and-dagger language about the US's behavior. Personally, it seems to me like our response was pretty reasonable. I think the "government takes advantage of crises" line of argument only goes so far, and at its extreme leads to dumb stuff like 9/11 truthers.