Wednesday, October 22, 2008

More Speculation on the Iran Dirty Bomb Ship

This post began life as a short response to NJArtist’s comment on last night’s news feed.

However, my "brief" response took on a life of its own and grew very quickly. As I’ve said to Afonso on more than one occasion, “if a comment is longer than five hundred words it is not a comment, it is a post.” When I did a word count, this thing had become more than a thousand words (including the excerpt). Thus it morphed itself into a post.

[Hint to Afonso: start your own blog for windy comments-cum-posts. Then you can go and do likewise. We would be most appreciative and would gladly link to you in our blog roll, especially if you write it in English for the mono-linguists among us, me included.]

Now for the story…


The link in last night’s news feed was to further information on that radioactive pirate ship which killed off a number of its looters. When the Baron first posted his speculation on the incident it caused a fair amount of comment.

In fact, Iranian Death Ship drew a goodly share of doubtful response, including outright ridicule. Just read the titles of some of the trackbacks in that post of the Baron's to get a flavor for what other bloggers thought of our wisdom -- not to mention integrity -- for even talking about it.

That’s why I put the link up in last night’s news feed to a post entitled “Iran Ship was a Dirty Bomb, Part 2”. As I said in the feed, this story is quite long. It brings in a number of plausible motivations for maintaining a shroud on the whole incident.

Not being particularly a critic of George Bush (as commenter, pleas, has noted) this story is not one I enjoyed reading.
- - - - - - - - -
On the other hand, as y’all have maintained, it’s all rather speculative. But what are we left with besides speculation when any “news” available has been so thoroughly blocked? The usual cover-up steps seem to have been taken, but does that make the more ominous aspects of this story less accurate? It is hard to say.

Blocking all news leaks and then ridiculing the messenger contaminates whatever evidence might be available for verification. People tend to yawn and wander away as all the now-corrupted details are slowly sucked down to their tomb in the memory hole. Not a pleasant sound.

If you’ll note the trackbacks to the first post, among other ummm..."tepid" responses is a blog whose owner condescends to title his reaction “A Reminder Of Why I Have Gates of Vienna On The Same List As Boing-Boing”. I haven’t a clue as to what/who Boing-Boing is, but obviously he didn’t put us in good company for being so rash as to put this story up for all to see while speculating about its veracity.

But, again, isn’t that how information gets buried in the first place? Enough heaps of ridicule and stone-walling and we end up with segments of the population who become sensitized to conspiracy theories. That is one of the sequelae of being lied to and misdirected.

Obviously, this is not my area of expertise. Were the Baron around, I’d leave it to him to ponder the implications of the various claims presented in “Part 2”. However, is his absence I will say that this has an Occam’s Razor feel to it.

Among other points, Part 2 says:

Russian sources indicate that the ship was carrying a “highly radioactive” cargo in specially built” containers and that this cargo was falsely listed in the ship’s manifest. Also, there were many falsities in the manifest, to include a false listing of the cargo, “chemicals,” “rocks,” “oil,” or “iron ore” and other fictions, and the destination of it. A subsequent investigation into the alleged German firm to whom the ‘chemicals and ‘machine parts’ were to be delivered proved that there was no such German firm involved. At the request of American authorities, the Russians have refused to release any further information.

I have a correct copy of the ship’s real manifest that a U.S. Navy source faxed me about two hours ago. There was no rocket fuel on board. Her cargo contained “a significant quantity” of radioactive waste from China, in lead-lined and secured cargo containers. The ship was never boarded by anyone from the time she left Nanjing in China until the Somali pirates grabbed her. Sixteen pirates died within two weeks, of heavy radiation poisoning, and three more are expected to die. An international force consisting of American, Russian, French and Dutch ships were involved in blockading the ship and preventing her from leaving Somalian waters.

A “ransom” of $250,000 was eventually paid by the U.S., the ship boarded by the Navy, her cargo secured and the crew interrogated and eventually released and the ship was moved, under her own power and with an American crew, to the Muscat port where the U.S. Navy has docking rights. Her manifest was entirely false. The ship was not going to Rotterdam and there was no “German businessman” to take charge of the fictional cargo.

The entire matter has been shut up and you will never see any mention of it in any mainstream media. The matter is now considered closed.

There still remain a number of questions that need to be answered. [my emphasis here - D] Both [in] Israel, and at her behest, from Washington, there has been a great outpouring of animosity directed at Tehran, and many threats; for economic sanctions by the United States and overt attacks by Israel. In light of this past behavior, the most important question is why this incident, with its horrifying implications, has been studiously ignored, even shut down, by both countries.

Perhaps the reason might lie in the fact that Bush is planning to announce his intention to open a ‘US Interest Section’ in Tehran just after the presidential elections on November 4th. This would follow a period of almost 30 years when diplomatic relations between the two countries were broken off. The movers behind this effort are U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice and a number of high-level officials in the Department of State, the CIA and more recently by Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

He compares the US behavior here with how we handled the debacle in Georgia. Bush’s part in both makes for intriguing reading…if this blogger’s prediction regarding Bush’s post-election plans to open a US “Interest Section” in Tehran turn out to be true, then perhaps this revelation will lend credence to the rest of his story. Since we’re dealing with a short time frame here, his thesis will be up for examination very soon.

I would be most interested to hear what those more expert in matters of intel have to say about this “Part 2”. Anyway, the comment thread on the “Death Ship” post was getting long, so this might be the place to begin anew with your contemplations on the subject.

I second NJ artist: at the very least please read the story.

21 comments:

Afonso Henriques said...

"As I’ve said to Afonso on more than one occasion"

Yes you did... And thanks for the tip. About the blog, I'm working on it, but don't count on it before Christmas due to lack of time / other priorities.

I will then be glad to have you to comment at will or lenght in my blog over my crazy, or simply stupid, theories.

But, and sorry for the ignorance, what is a "windy" comment? And that "cum" means "comma" right? Like this: ","
Be easy with those expressions because the non mono-linguistics are consequently less especialised...

Robohobo said...

Afonso-

What D means is that comments over about 100 words suck up bandwidth that they pay for. Donate and she will not have as much of a beef with your long comments. You do tend to get 'windy' as we say. That means 'wordy'. Not that you do not have good points, just.....

This story will NOT see the light of day because it is most likely the causus belli for war. I think dirty bomb headed for tel Aviv or maybe NYC.

There is much bad juju coming from the nutters in Tehran these days. With the price of crude down so much they do not have anything to lose.

Vladtepesblog.com said...

There is certainly compelling evidence for a couple of scenarios. I still maintain that the US used the Somali pirates as a proxy navy to avoid direct US Iranian conflict which would escalate and Iran wants this. They just want to set the context in such a way as that the western anti American left will as usual, create obstacles for the US and Israel in the name of 'peace'.
Iran is now publicly contemplating a 'preemptive preemptive strike on Israel. Imadinnerjacket is a man of his word. When he states he intends to destroy Israel its not comparable to Obama saying he plans to re open the Canada US free trade deal.
Tehran really means it.

Zenster said...

I'll post what I observed about this in the news feed:

It just goes to show just how insane all Muslims are in their genocidal hatred of the Jews. Does anyone in their right mind really think that Israel—after being bombarded with a vast maelstrom of highly toxic radioactive waste—wouldn't launch a nuclear attack against Iran and even possibly exercise the Samson Option?

Genocidal Muslim loons like Ahmadinejad may well prove the most dangerous enemy of all to Islam. As Wretchard observes in his superb "Three Conjectures":

The greatest threat to Muslims is radical Islam; and the greatest threat of all is a radical Islam armed with weapons of mass destruction.

Just how narrowly did the entire MME (Muslim Middle East) escape nuclear annihilation? While we may never know, it remains that Islam is literally foreordained to bring about its own obliteration.

By its intensely virulent nature and intransigent ideology, Islam assures that it must be addressed with overwhelming force. All that remains to be seen is exactly how much damage Israel or the Western world is prepared to absorb before finally exterminating the Islamic threat.

Robohobo: With the price of crude down so much they do not have anything to lose.

The price of crude has, at best, only a superficial effect upon this situation. This involves a far deeper underlying malaise.

Shiite doctrine is truly apocalyptic in nature. As a "twelver", Ahmahdinejad sincerely believes that the 12th imam can only be summoned forth from his subterranean well by cataclysmic events.

Now, combine this sort of fatalism with the nihilistic code expressed by ayatollah Khomeini in his 1980 speech at Qom:

We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.

The intersection of genocide and Islamic martyrdom represents an almost inescapable path towards annihilation. One might think that other Muslim nations would be stridently demanding military intercession—if not actively intervening themselves—against Iran in order to avert their collective demise.

Instead, genocidal hatred of the Jews blinds them to even the most comprehensive destruction of their own cultures and domains. It is difficult to imagine anything more foolhardy or suicidal.

Small wonder that Israel is prepared to make all Islam pay dearly for its genocidal intent. Nothing could be more fitting, save that Islam voluntarily and wholeheartedly brings such disaster upon itself.

joe six-pack said...

They hate everyone. I suppose they have a list in order of which is first priority. The U.S. is on the 'short' list.

These guys are worse a threat than Japan in 1935. It took nuclear weapons to get rid of the repeated suicide attack the first time.

I would much rather a 'dirty' bomb than an effective nuclear weapon. A problem here is that I doubt anything less than a nuclear attack will wake up the Western world.

Yorkshireminer said...

What makes you think that it was heading for Israel? Something here doesn't quiet make sense, there is no mention of explosives in the ship. How the hell are they going to blow it up without explosives, use a foot pump? I think it mentions in the article that the ship was 44,000 tons. I don't know if any of you know but the greatest man made explosion before dropping the Atomic bomb on Hiroshima was the explosion in Halifax harbor of a French merchant ship carrying 3,000 tons of explosives in 1917, it would make it about one third of the explosive force of the Hiroshima explosion. That wiped most of down town Halifax off the map. Why wasn't there about 40,000 ton of explosives on board four times the explosive force of the Hiroshima bomb ? Another Question springs to mind why Israel? I can't imagine them getting within twenty miles of the coast with the Israeli navy on the prowl. I think the manifesto said it was going to Rotterdam. Rotterdam is Europe's largest port, it is the main point of entry for most of Europe's oil and the main port for Holland Germany and Switzerland and with the opening of the Rhine Danube canal about 10 years ago too 3,000 ton barges takes traffic from eastern Europe. Imagine what an explosion four times that of Hiroshima would do to Rotterdam with all the miles of Refineries they would stop Europe's main traffic artery instantly. A radioactive cloud with a good westerly wind could seriously damage the health of about 60,000,000 people who live within radius of 150 miles of there, mine included. Even this too me seems fantasy, they would quickly be found out and retribution would quickly follow. America could react using the excuse of an attack on a N.A.T.O. Ally. Personally I think that what they were up too was to get the Radioactive containers that if they were really radioactive into Europe and distribute them once they are in Europe there will be no way of finding them. My wife as a buyer brings many containers from China in through Rotterdam very few are checked. Once distributed through Europe with its open boarders they can be quickly moved around and positioned in the different capitals and use them to blackmail Europe with while they finish the bomb they are buggering around with. Once they have got the bomb they will feel safe. You will know when they have got the bomb by an increase in the tone and shrillness of the threats.

NJArtist said...

1. What is China's complicity in this matter?
2. The fact that there were no explosives -- as far as we are told -- on the boat may mean that a) China did not trust the Iranians to not blow up the boat in Chinese waters; or b) the boat was to have been met at the appropriate point in its journey by Iranians with explosives and then blown up. In both cases, the original crew is unaware of its coming sacrifice/murder.

CarnackiUK said...

Didn't Frederick Forsyth's novel 'The Afghan' have a scenario similar to this - especially Yorkshireminer's extrapolation?

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

The explosives problem isn't so much of a problem if you think about how the radioactive material would be distributed. It won't be an explosion as big as a nuclear bomb because it's not, strictly speaking a nuclear bomb. It's a dirty bomb. That being the case, you'd only need enough explosives to spread the sand into the air, where it would settle over a broad area with a devastating effect.

Zenster said...

Yorkshireminer: Why wasn't there about 40,000 ton of explosives on board four times the explosive force of the Hiroshima bomb ?

As Archonix observed, dispersal of the toxic material doesn't necessarily require a massive blast. In some respects, a nice slow burning high temperature blaze (of bunker oil?), would create a strong updraft that would better distribute a huge plume. A huge blast might sink the ship before its payload could become airborne. The key issue is making sure the containers were all sprung open before the conflagration so that their own bulk doesn't absorb or deflect the actual blast front.

Also, in the tinfoil hat department: If they are blacking out all reporting of this incident, how likely is it that we're going to hear about any explosives being onboard?

Another Question springs to mind why Israel?

To comprehend the reason why requires an understanding of high context cultures like those of the MME (Muslim Middle East). Imagine a country the size of Costa Rica beating America's military like a cheap dime store drum. This is the sort of defeat Israel handed to Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.

In Muslim cultures humiliation is worse than death. Loss of face imposes far greater disgrace and reduction of social standing or status. The creation of Israel is called the naqba or catastrophe. Mind you, that's just the mere existence of Israel itself upon supposedly "Arab" soil. Now, combine that with the military defeats, not to mention how Israel is such a tremendous economic success without any petrodollar revenues and the dimensions of Israel's standing rebuke to the Muslim world become apparent.

Hell, let's also throw in the TWENTYFIVE to ONE ratio of Jewish Nobel prizes compared to those won by Muslims. Even if we disregard the farce of Yasser Arafat and Mohammed elBaradei having won, the disproportionate nature is still quite glaring. Now, consider that Muslims outnumber Jews by nearly a thousand to one and this of Nobel prize ratio skyrockets to 25,000:1. Ouch!

The list of Israel's achievements is as endless as the Muslim one is barren. That Israel also controls the Dome of the Rock mosque is just icing on the cake.

All of the foregoing is a veritable laundry list of why Jews experience nothing short of incendiary hatred by the Muslims. Every last thing Israel does, however unintentional, nonetheless shows up Islamic nations for the culturally stagnant Neanderthal cesspits that the vast majority of them truly are.

That's "why Israel".

Vladtepesblog.com said...

Zenster excellent well said. I just wish to add this one thing as to the dome of the rock.
(sorry i don't know how to embed links here)
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=2210

this video shows how the dome of the rock is a post hoc attempt to claim Israel as a 'holy site' of Islam.

One_of_the_last_few_Patriots_left said...

Dymphna wrote:

"In fact, Iranian Death Ship drew a goodly share of doubtful response , including outright ridicule."

Actually, Dymphna, I, for one, would not want to ridicule anything that you and the Baron put up here on GoV.
This is one of the very best blogs that I have seen on the subject of Counterjihad and I very much appreciate the work that you do. I believe that (if the West survives)
we will eventually come to learn the truth, but deliberate obfuscation and disinformation is an integral part of war, so it is at times difficult to determine if a particular story is accurate or just another tall tale.
I do in fact find the basic outline of the story quite plausible, and of course Mahmoud I'm-mad-on-jihad is certainly loony enough to do something like this.
Sad to say, I do not believe, however, that the West would finally wake up. Sometimes it seems as if nothing can wake us up as we sleepwalk to our own destruction.

christian soldier said...

It was my understanding -from reading previous posts here on the pirate issue- that another country paid tribute to the pirates..$250,000.
I even quoted Pres. Madison on the US view to paying tribute to any nation ...also-I quoted Kipling "...any in Dane-geld..no matter how trifling the cost...oppression and shame and the nation that pays it is lost..." full quotes are on my blog...
If - now - we know that this administration paid tribute...we have bigger problems than even I believed!!!!

The Mojo Bison said...

Owner here of the blog comparing GoV to Boing-Boing. Flattered that I merit a quote, but sure wish you had paid closer attention to my last line:

I'm not saying that GoV is totally full of beans, but the leaps in logic from factual stone to factual stone in this piece make me shake my head.

My point is that like Boing-Boing --which is a lefty site-- you and the Baron provide food for thought but then throw out a questionable oyster and it puts me off my feed. Make a more convincing case for the giant fallout bomb next time. Meanwhile, all the speculation just sounds desperate, and does you no credit and no favors.

FWIW I no longer read Boing-Boing. Those guys are just plain nuts.

xlbrl said...

Posters have raised many interesting and plausible possibilites denied us by the blackout. I tend to favor the radioactive Eurabian concession business.
It does not seem this ship was equipped for the process of explosive dispersal, but substantial explosive ordinance is not necessary to create tremendous exposive power in a tanker. Nearly emtpty grain silos are incredibly explosive, as well as fuel tanks.

Dymphna said...

But...mojo bison! Surely such a large mammal can chew on the occasional questionable oyster without too much indigestion.

It was, and remains, a story full of speculation. The actual details that can be verified --e.g., the radioactively dead pirates -- are of enough concern to generate speculation.

As far as I know, speculating is a time-honored tradition, as long as one frames the ideas as just that: a series of "what ifs?"

Given that we are regularly lied to, told to move along, and otherwise disrespected, it is up to us to figure out what we can based on the crumbs left on the trail. So that's what we do.

Not having to abide by the Olympian standards of MSM "journalism" we can speculate to our hearts' content, never having to pretend we posssess special access to the truth.

Besides, it looks like this story might be gaining legs. It's not a millipede yet, but it's moving.

If I weren't so tired, I'd google Boing Boing. Are they as tiresome as "Sadly No"? The latter appear to suffer from terminal dyspepsia; one of those sites whose loathing for us makes me know we're on the right track.

The Mojo Bison said...

True, D, but it's not an experience you willingly repeat...

One must be careful. While other explanations for the cargo are equally speculative, none are so volatile as the Fallout Bomb line. It makes the casual observer go, "Wow, those people at Gates of Vienna are real nutballs!" And thus are you instantly put into the Dustbin of the Irrelevant and Marginal. You risk becoming an echo chamber of true believers, marginalized by knowledge of wie es eigentlich gewesen ist. You even leave yourself open to manipulation --speaking of bad food, I don't like red herrings, either.

heroyalwhyness said...

Since everyone is speculating . . .

quote: "Perhaps the reason might lie in the fact that Bush is planning to announce his intention to open a ‘US Interest Section’ in Tehran just after the presidential elections on November 4th."

The date of November 4th could be a bit pre-mature. There has been speculation that Israel is restrained from pre-emptive action until after the American elections take place.

Such circumstances sure make it plausible that the US would re-consider establishing a diplomatic venue with a severely weakened political force in Tehran.

Zenster said...

The Mojo Bison: You risk becoming an echo chamber of true believers, marginalized by knowledge of wie es eigentlich gewesen ist.

I think we can safely entrust that resonant task to those far more able who reside at a particular (ahem) diminutive verdant pigskins web site.

While there is much speculation going on about this topic, there is one aspect not open to speculation: That would be Amahdinejad's vow to "wipe Israel off the map."

In light of that one pre-established fact, suddenly the possibility of a ship-borne "dirty bomb" assumes a degree of credibility it otherwise clearly might not have. That the captured ship is of Iranian registry merely cements this all the more.

Furthermore—for reasons I have already submitted—Muslim hatred of Israel is so profound that such an intention is entirely within the realm of expectability.

Finally, in light of how Arab nations in general are both incapable of fielding a functional fighting force and bereft of nuclear arms; The deployment of a quasi-conventional weapon by the one country currently attempting to construct a fission device for specific use against Israel—who has openly vowed to obstruct such aims—would constitute (as Vladtepes duly notes), a sort of "preemptive preemptive strike on Israel".

Given the foregoing, far too many elements pass a rough litmus test of predictability. Granted, that does not make them into fact, it's just that literally all of this scenario fits the exact sort of models—with respect to previously demonstrated Muslim strategies and tactics—that we have come to expect from Islam.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

Someone, somewhere, mentioned Al Aqsa as a reason why this wouldn't be targeted at Israel. I have one thing to say to that:

If a muslim bomb destroyed al aqsa in the process of destroying the jewish nation and Israel, they wouldn't give a damn. They'd see every single muslim wiped out if it meant they could destroy the jews.

Zenster said...

Archonix: If a muslim bomb destroyed al aqsa in the process of destroying the jewish nation and Israel, they wouldn't give a damn. They'd see every single muslim wiped out if it meant they could destroy the jews. [emphasis added]

One would think the foregoing—and absolutely correct conclusion—might give pause to the Palestinians in how the Islamic powers that be clearly regard them as nothing but cannon fodder. Alas, hatred of Jews runs so deep that these obsessive thugs are blind to what sort of pawns they are being played for.

Furthermore, to lend even greater impact to an already significant point: There are some radical Muslims who view death as preferrable to the humiliating ordeal of living among unbelievers. Please remember what I have already posted about how Muslims consider humiliation to be worse than death.

An even more radical offshoot of these supremely intolerant maggots takes things one step further. Rather than endure for another second the unbearable humiliation of coexisting with even a single unbeliever;

They would just as soon see every last human life wiped from the face of this earth, with all Muslims cavorting in their paradise and the kuffar roasting in eternal Hell.

Bearing that in mind, exactly how reluctant do you think a majority of Muslims would be to sacrifice al Aqsa mosque for the purpose of obliterating Israel and its hated Jews?

Khomeini was more than happy to see his nation turned into one massive suicide bomber if it achieved a final sho'ah (Holocaust) against the Jews. Does anyone imagine that a single mosque's loss outweighs the importance of reversing the naqba (catastrophe) embodied in the existence of a Jewish state on what Muslims conceitedly deem to be "Arab" soil?