It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ships struck near Strait by IRAN and MSM presents FAKE Narrative to discredit Trump Administration

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

The tanker captain disputes at least part of US account of the attack.

thehill.com... Ig0BDhI-AO5bnKq-o

Tend to believe someone who was actually there rather than speculation designed to inflame the incident.




posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Why are they not saying if the had communication with the "iranian" ship that was a long side them? Do they deny that the video shows a small boat along side them doing something? It makes no sense to dispute it simply because they saw flying objects, when they should have more familiarity with the incident in the video.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

Waterglass, you have a PM.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: TheLead

Those are questions that need to be answered.

The video, not exactly the best.

Where is whatever they removed, we need to see that?

Could be anything or anywhere by now all the same.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
Before we declare that the tanker Captain evidently speaks out both sides of his mouth, let us address the real issues here of disinformation versus misinformation. Facts is, we don't know if the Captain himself saw anything, uncoordinated crew reports aren't great evidence without a timeline of events. Did the flying object come before the explosion or after? Does the appearance of flying objects in a overt surveillance situation constitute evidence of involvement in the attack?

Video evidence exists of a boat pulling the mine off the tanker. Alleged photo exists of limpet mine attached to ship taken by US military. Military reports drone activity and some Iranian missile engagement with drones, but doesn't lay claim to the drones.

It was reported that the crew decided to abandon ship after the first explosion BECAUSE they spotted the mine attached to the side of the ship.

Both the ship owner and the management company are making statements based on what they think they know, but until someone actually puts these reports into an investigative format, it's all misinformation and conjecture.

Disinformation on the other hand would be if the US Military video is faked, if no reports of drone activity happened, if there are not surveillance photos showing the mine attached to the side of the ship. And then there's the inevitable SPIN which implies causative effect, infers relationship motivations, and purports to know what exactly is the thinking processes of various power player individuals (Trump et al).

ganjoa



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Well, a limpet mine can be small and a drone could actually fly it over and stick it to the ship with the limpet magnets on the mine. It doesn't actually sound like it is a conventual mine like in the old days. A mine does not have to be big to punch a hole in a ship.

Any terrorist group or government could do that, A bigger drone is not that expensive anymore to buy, ten grand would buy a drone that could deliver a package like that, it is cheaper than a guided missile and less able to be detected.

There was an unexploded mine attached, looks like one failed to explode. It could also have been attached at port before the ship left and detonated remotely. I do not believe it is definitely Iran that did this, but evidently someone did it. It could even be a group like ISIS or something or anyone who would want a war to start. It could be a European country that wants us to get into a wrongly war started by the Trump administration. It could even be a setup created by the deep state funding a group to discredit Trump.

We know that ships were attacked and they found some evidence but what is being disputed was the way it was done. It could be that a drone was needed to get close to initiate the bombs that were attached, maybe the drone sent out a burst signal to explode them, that could be done with a five hundred dollar drone. Maybe there were other bombs attached to ships that will be detonated seperately, using short range high burst signaling from a drone to set them off at a limited distance. New technology,



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse




Any terrorist group or government could do that, A bigger drone is not that expensive anymore to buy, ten grand would buy a drone that could deliver a package like that, it is cheaper than a guided missile and less able to be detected.


It could be a 400 pound trust fund loser, living in his daddy's mansion's basement...

(sorry, couldn't resist)



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake


I believe the USA military and I believe that the ships crew saw flying objects.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

For that matter it could be a bored ex business owner in the midwest that hates Trump.

"By any means necessary"

But that would imply intellect.

I'm still thinking the Chinese, no logic for it at all but there it is.

this is more like Go than Chess as I stated, chess strategy is usually easy to "logic" out,

Go is much more subtle. Using logic does not always work.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

I believe further information is required.

Do you know who i don't believe, John Bolton and his ilk by default, without unequivocally proof, considering they lie for a career.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: thedigirati




For that matter it could be a bored ex business owner in the midwest that hates Trump.


...or China, or the Middle East...

But I fail to see how this incident hurts Trump at all.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I agree. I need to rewrite thread. Crew saw something. DOD video saw something but my opine remains same. Iran bad and USA MSM bad.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

There all as bad as one another if truth be told.

Truth to these people is detestable as 9 times out of 10 "They" would rather tell a lie to suit there own agenda and purpose.

If Iran done it then so be it, but my bets on the world bank team playing games to support the inevitable coming invasion of Iran.
edit on 15-6-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes... that is why I said China.... if you had read the post I supose..

I don't think this was mossad, they have too much to lose in a shooting war with Iran.

The House of Saud is possible, but again, little gain, lots to lose.

it could be like Pelosi and Nadler, both in the Government and on the same "side", working toward the same ends, just different methods reaching the goal.

Like parents and children, everyone knows kids get away with stuff all the time that parents have no idea about.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Leftleaningrighty

I'm not entirely sure if this comment is serious or not, but if so, "conspiracy theorist" is a paint from the brush of the CIA to discredit people seriously investigating or challenging the official narratives - historically, all too often worth questioning - presented that don't otherwise always jive with reality. Apparently the CIA did so fairly successfully, despite how many confirmed conspiracies have been documented.

I've never really understood the tarring that comes with the moniker, anyway. The government, at its various levels, is the greatest conspiracy theorist of all. Always more than happy to levy charges of conspiracy against anyone who might have discussed or planned an illegal action with someone else. But somehow us commons seem to think that officials and people in high positions of power and authority might never conspire, themselves? Nonsensical.

And the US has an impressive history of false flag incidents, participating in those of others, and so forth. This smacks directly of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which...didn't even occur, but managed to drag us into Vietnam. Various groups in our own military industrial structure have presented false flag recommendations (Operation Northwoods) to implicate other parties to open the door for military action when they had otherwise lacked the justification to do so...Northwoods specifically having been shot down by Kennedy, I believe...who just happened to be assassinated under ongoing suspicious circumstances the following year.

So...take that 'conspiracy theorist' tripe somewhere else as it is CIA training that apparently paid off in your case. If we can't have doubts regarding the official story when our government has been looking for excuses to go after Iran for DECADES, we might as well just shut down all critical thinking processes and give those in power free reign to do as they will. Their track record in having done so previously with similar (and later disproven) claims must be spotless in your view.




posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Leftleaningrighty
a reply to: Sillyolme

Lol that video sure did look like what it is claimed to be.

Hmm theMuslim terrorist nation of Iran is lying or we are lying.

You believe Iran go figure.

Terrorist sympathizer.

"Terrorist sympathizer" crikey.

Our own intelligence analysts as well as those of Israel have previously confirmed that, obviously, Iran is not suicidal. And history has shown, repeatedly as implied in my prior response, that yes, the US leadership DOES in fact have a history of lying (and conspiring with other nations, NGOs, private military contractors, etc.) to forward specific policy goals.

We rattle our sabers SO HARD at Iran over alleged nuclear weapons aspirations, which I find odd. North Korea HAS nuclear weapons and has more or less consistently taken VERY aggressive rhetorical stances against us, but I don't believe they have much oil. Iran, on the other hand, over the last decade or two, been confirmed by the IAEA to be conforming to the various nuclear treaties they are signatory to and has NOT taken such an aggressive stance toward us (despite what I would almost consider justification to do so, given our interference in their national interests going back at least to 1953), but they have oil. Which one would seem to spark more concern?

Ahh, the puppets on this stage, and our same old tired song and dance when someone who happens to be COMPLETELY SURROUNDED by our military allies and installations has something that we want. And everything went so well for all the other nations (and ourselves) we've involved ourselves with in the region for the past few decades.

"Physician, heal thyself" is a concept I'd love to see us live by on the world scene before we decide to wreck yet another sovereign nation and further contribute to mass exodus and migrations we cause then decide to point to as alleged proof of various cultural plots.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




r they are so bad at their job nothing they publish can be taken seriously and it should all be assumed to be fake news.


Pretty much any time trump speaks....



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

No one is saying Iran is the good guy for christs sake. Put words in my mouth why dont you?
Its just that there is no evidence that they are responsible. The attack seems rather amateurish for any militarily trained attack.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Woodcarver

I believe trump would go with blaming Iran whether there is proof or not.



posted on Jun, 15 2019 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: andy06shake

triggered HON????


He said meep meep as a road runner noise reference to it being ACME.




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join