It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


URGENT: Japanese tanker explodes near Strait of Hormuz

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 11:15 PM
Would one of you geniuses like to explain to me why this story is not in screaming headlines on every MSM news outlet? Its been almost 24 hours since the news broke and the only place I am seeing it given the attention it deserves is on ATS and a few other "alternative" sites. Sure, there are MSM stories on it, but its not being treated as front-page news! I called my brother earlier -- a smart but much more "mainstream" character than myself who stays on top of the "straight" news -- and he had no idea what I was talking about when I mentioned this incident.

Yes, yes, we all know the frustration of the MSM burying or ignoring important stories, but this seems far too large to cover up like this! I'm quite certain even five years ago this would be too big for the MSM to ignore. It would have been "spun," but it would be a big deal. Today they don't even bother to "spin" it. Has the information situation really deteriorated to this level?

posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 11:16 PM
Again, does someone know how freak waves are recorded from land ?
It seems to me the officials that pointed to a freak wave were only guessing at best, they hadn't seen the ship and talked to the crew.

We may be speculating here too much but we are not the only ones. I can imagine the outrage if the official story was a rogue attack on the ship and ATS members shouting flase flag, it's certainly a freak wave before any pic of the damage was released.

posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 11:49 PM

Originally posted by TheSam
Could it be a submarine or another vessel that has ramming capabilities?

Or that didn't have ramming capabilities.

Anyone missing a submarine? Or have a very bent one?

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 12:13 AM

Originally posted by Chakotay

Originally posted by TheSam
Could it be a submarine or another vessel that has ramming capabilities?

Or that didn't have ramming capabilities.

Anyone missing a submarine? Or have a very bent one?


On that thought an unmanned sub could just as easily do the same task without the risk to human life.

Maybe both vessels were meant to go down but only one did which is why we're seeing the MSM panicing for an excuse.

Umm... which nations have a large naval force in the area again... ?

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:32 AM
The only thing holding up the dollar since it was taken off the gold standard is the petro-dollar system. China and other countries need to buy our TBills and debt to have a strong dollar to buy import oil.

One of the major deals of Lawrence of Arabia was to make an agreement with the house of Saud, to make him king over all the other tribes if he only sold oil in dollars. This is how the dollar is thhe world reserve currency.

However, now Iran and Venesuela are selling oil to Japan in yen and oil to China in Yuan. So, China doesnt need a strong dollar any more and they dont need our TBills. The only people buying our debt now are the banks who are using stimulus money to buy up TBills and the fED which usually doesnt buy long term TBills. So, now we are paying the banks interest to take our money. Usually its the other way around.

Once the stimulus money runs out, then there will be no more cash to buy up our TBills and no demand for US dollars means the value of the dollar crashes. If Iran sells oil to countries in their currency and not in dollars that will bankrupt the US dollar and the Euro. The Ponzi scheme will finally fall apart.

In fact this was the real reason in part why the US went to war against IRaq. Saddam Hussein was selling China, France, Russia oil in Euros. That would have bankrupted the united states. Of course the globalists know this and set this whole system up to manipulate.

My point here is that Iran would never bomb a Japanese ship because Iran and Japan are friends and Japan is already getting a great deal buying oil from Iran in yen and not having to buy US dollars first.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by davedan978]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:59 AM
This is why i love ATS, Puterman you rock! And everyone else's input is great too

I still have no idea, but i'm even more convinced that it is not a "normal" event. No seismic activity, and no other reports of a freak wave in a very busy shipping channel, it's NOT that.

Explosion? There's black something smeared on the side, perhaps consistent with scorch marks? The symmetry of the damage is wierd too, it wasn't a glancing blow, it was square on?? And look how the impact rises to the top of the ship, less but no less marked. You can see where the railing was broken too.

I would imagine that photo was taken as it came inito view of the dock, so would have still been loaded. Is it usually so high in the water? And how is the impact above the waterline?

Any object/boat would have shown on radar. And even if it had been rammed, isn't being bumped different from an explosion?

This is high strangeness on the high seas, the only possible thing i can think is a directed energy weapon. Range 20-30km, accuracy to within 50metres (at this point). Perhaps a test? Make it a Japanese ship just to remind everyone who is in charge?

It's important imho that the damage is above the waterline, hence it is not a submerged weapon. But it doesnot seem to carry and shrapnel, which almost any conventional weapon would create. Focussed energy?

The other possibility is a dhow with conventional explosive, that exploded before it was close enough. Wood would not pierce the ship, and would be less visible on radar. c4 against the hull would have created a massive hole, but moving away from the ship the shock waves would diminish quickly. Leaving only the imprint of a pressure "sphere".

The boat and any occupants would have gone straight down, leaving no apparent evidence.

The light on the horizon is important, either as a signal or perhaps "muzzle flash" of sorts?

Taking it to a logical conclusion, remote controlled boat, loaded with conventional explosives, perhaps guided by IR. Something tells me that this is a line of sight weapon .... just a hunch.

Maybe a message to Iran regarding their "many small boats" planning against the any destroyer type ships. The message would be: we can do that to, and we don't need humans to make make it happen.

I'm looking forward to other ideas.

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:53 AM
An interesting alternative view :

Pirates or rogue Iranian Guards suspected in Hormuz Japanese tanker explosion

But the most striking feature of the incident, noted by debkafile's military and intelligence sources, is the unusual degree of assent between US Navy and Iranian officials that the damage to the supertanker was caused by an explosion by an unknown hand.

"The fire which was triggered by an explosion on the deck of the vessel was contained with the help of the crew and regional forces," Fars News Agency quoted head of marine department of southern Hormozgan Province, Ali Akbar Saffai, as saying, after two Iranian officials before him had attributed the blast to a low-magnitude earthquake.

So regional forces helped contain the fire. Regional ?

Clearly both Washington and Tehran were taken unawares by the first attack ever mounted on a commercial vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow transit channel for some 40 percent of the oil shipped worldwide and one of the most carefully secured waterways in the world.

Both the US and Iran need time to find its cause and decide what to do. Meanwhile, this exceptional circumstance finds them of one mind on at least one issue, the incident must not be allowed to spiral out of control into a larger event.

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:46 AM
Oh you have to love a good conspiracy.

So firstly it was an "attack"

Then it was an earthquake that caused a "freak wave"

and now...


posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 04:48 AM
Looks like they missed an opportunity to turn this into a false flag.

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:06 AM

Edit - oh crap guys -


and a bit more ---


Very, very interesting.

[edit on 7/29/2010 by jonny2410]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:17 AM

Originally posted by jennybee35
So the tanker arrived at port empty? Where was the fuel offloaded? Wouldn't that part of the hull have been underwater if the tanker was fully loaded?

I am assuming that this picture shows a laden tanker - low in the water.

I think you have a point there, and since this was supposed to be laden and on it's way to Japan was this a false flag?. Should it have sunk - empty so as not to lose the valuable oil? That ship seems very high to be laden - but I don't know if that much hull showing below the plymsol line would indicate empty.

Originally posted by oozyism

they are just testing you guys, see how easy it is to manipulate our kind, the crazies

Yup, that's us!

reply to post by jonny2410

OK, so now we have official version number three. Collision with a sub. Mm, a collision with a sub that leapt out of the water and blew the hatches off?

Well I suppose it is possible but just how many versions of this tale do we have to go through before they finally don't tell us the truth?

Edit: Thinking about your post I consider the actually proves that this was originally intended to be a false flag event.

[edit on 29/7/2010 by PuterMan]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:18 AM

Originally posted by jonny2410

Edit - oh crap guys -


[edit on 7/29/2010 by jonny2410]

this is really getting weirder all the time... what next "collision was caused by white whale,running from 4 days old tremors with old mine strapped on its back"

but seriously ,seems like somebody has damaged/ missing sub or somebodys plans to sink the vessel went bad... it would of been yet another oil spill that seems to happen all over the world with alarming rate.

Is somedy trying to get rid of earths oil ? and is this somebody doing it cause they have found a new source of energy that they can make more money with? hmm... sure makes you wonder

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 07:05 AM
I seriously believe that TPTB should come to ATS and say "Look Guys and Gals we need to create a story that people like you are not going to chew up and spit out. Can you give us an official line on this 'accident'"

To which we would reply,

In the opinion of the members this event was caused, in order of likelihood, by one of the following:
  • A failed attack by mine or missile by persons unknown with US connections (we know you won't want to use that one - but rest assured our members would believe that.)
  • An attempt by the US Navy to sink the tanker and make it look like the Iranian Revolutionary Guard had done it.
  • An attempt by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to sink the tanker and make it look like the US Navy had done it.
  • A humpbacked whale which research scientists were tracking using a searchlight from the shore.
  • A US Navy Dolphin with a mine attached that was trained to seek and destroy all Japanese tankers.
  • A submarine surfacing at speed with a rubber bow that bounced off the tanker sustaining no damage and then submerged again and carried on it's way.
  • A rogue wave which had been travelling up and down the Straits of Hormuz and was caused by the earthquake 3 weeks ago in the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas.
  • A mini-wave about 20ft high by 20 ft wide that flashed and crept up unaware on the tanker in a pretty much calm sea.
  • A mud slide from a 2 metre high cliff that caused a tsunami.
  • Ship attacked by Al Quaeda or Iraq or Afghani or Arabic Insurgents with RPG's and/or Missiles.
  • An energy beam weapon fired from the shore that missed due to the high waves caused by the 7 mph winds.
  • All of the above.
  • None of the above.

With regard to option 1, on second thoughts perhaps you had better NOT use that one on the basis that if you say that is what happened then our members probably will NOT believe it and will prefer option 4 or probably 11.

(Edit to correct the inevitable spelling error.)

[edit on 29/7/2010 by PuterMan]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 07:46 AM
Japan's Mitsui hires military expert for tank checks

A Dubai based military specialist is reportedly involved with the investigation of the damage beginning today.

"The ship's captain said he didn't see any other ships around the vessel when the incident occurred because it was too dark," Mourad said earlier, adding that the strait remained open, with normal traffic flows.

Were they not using radar at the time?

In Tokyo, Masahiko Hibino, Mitsui O.S.K.'s general manager of tanker safety, said reports of a wave caused by an earthquake were difficult to believe.

"There were some media reports saying that strong waves that come with earthquakes may have damaged the vessel...but the doors that were broken were not wet, so that kind of thing is hard to believe," he told a news conference.

A seismologist in Iran said an earthquake with a magnitude of 3.4 had struck the Gulf port of Bandar Abbas.

But Hibino said: "Visibility was not bad, and the wind was calm, according to the crew's report." "Calm means there were no waves," he added.

I think the freak wave story can be ruled out with that.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by TheSam]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 07:56 AM
Mystery solved!!
Clive Cussler was successful in relaunching the CSS Hunley. Note the explosive charge dangling off the bow.

After looking at the picture of the damage again it is very clear that whatever damaged this ship made its point of contact right at the water line based on the deformation above and below the line. Which makes sense if it was running fully loaded with crude.

However, When was the oil off loaded as mentioned by others? Not exactly a quick process.

This gets stranger by the day. We certainly know what can be ruled out.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by jibeho]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by jibeho]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by jibeho]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 08:09 AM
Is it just me or didn't the Somali Pirates say they were heading for there, just last week??
Rouge wave?? more like Rouge Imagination lol

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 09:40 AM
reply to post by TheSam

I note from the report you quoted

A seismologist in Iran said an earthquake with a magnitude of 3.4 had struck the Gulf port of Bandar Abbas.

What a shame that their own seismological information does not back that up.

First this incident happened at 00:30 approx local time on Wednesday 28th July. Local time in the area is exactly the same as Bandar Abbas so let's take a look at the reported quake yet again, this time showing local time:

Date Time(UTC), Time(Local), Lat., Lon., Depth, Mag., Region,
2010/07/26 18:00:37.6, 22:30:37, 27.89, 56.36, 18, ML:3, 79 km North of Bandar-e abbas
2010/07/27 04:37:07.3, 09:07:07, 35.54, 58.47, 14, ML:2.8, 33 km North of Kashmar
>>>> This one? 121+km from the port(See map below) It does not appear on EMSC (See below)

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 09:56 AM
reply to post by PuterMan

The Emirates' official state news agency WAM quoted Fujairah port director Musa Murad as saying the tanker sustained damage when it was hit by a large wave caused by a tremor. Ataollah Sadr, an Iranian shipping official, also said the damage was likely caused as a result of an earthquake and rejected the possibility of a terrorist attack, according to Iran's semiofficial Mehr news agency.

It isn't like the uS government hasn't lied before
when has Iran be caught lying?
or the saudis?

the republicans just initiated war resolutions against Iran
so to trust a US government controlled source is ... well risky

the wave is claimed to be siesmic so weather is not a factor

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 10:07 AM

Emerson said congress had been “hookwinked” into thinking that privatizing the USGS operation would save money. “The USGS has lied through their teeth about the whole project,” Emerson said.

whoa now I gotta go find out who owns the USGS?
was I mistaken in assuming they are US government...?
are they credible?
the plot thickens...

now I gotta go kick the horse again Puterman
it farted.
the old grey mare might have some life in her after all...

starbucks is expensive
I aint giving up that easy.

BTW damn good work on your part
if I loose the bet It'll be to a good man.

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 10:15 AM
hmmm theUSGS gets its info through spy satilites
never let a good crisis go to waste
you may very well be right
here is a reasonable doubt on your source.
in this case they would have reason to tell yet another lie

The study group that established policies for the NAO was jointly funded by the ODNI and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), one of only two domestic U.S. agencies that is currently allowed, under rules set in the 1970s, to use classified intelligence from spy satellites. (The other is NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.) The group was chaired by Keith Hall, a Booz Allen vice president who manages his firm's extensive contracts with the NGA and previously served as the director of the NRO.
Other members of the group included seven former intelligence officers working for Booz Allen, as well as retired Army Lt. Gen. Patrick M. Hughes, the former director of the DIA and vice president of homeland security for L-3 Communications, a key NSA contractor; and Thomas W. Conroy, the vice president of national security programs for Northrop Grumman, which has extensive contracts with the NSA and the NGA and throughout the intelligence community.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

new topics

top topics

<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in