Comment from Francis Soyer:
This posting here is one of the more important postings this reader has come accross this year. It is a smoking gun, un refutable smoking gun piece of evidence of why all readers of this posts and others should turn off their TV if they are seeking any form of news. Also throw away your news papers, most magazines and other forms of Journalism you can think of. It is all crap and lies. The majority of news company's are owned by a handful of companies that have agendas to serve, opinions to manipulate to esnure the survival of their advertising constituents. Below is a clear and un mistakable example of why not to listen to FOX, CNBC, MSN, YAHOO, Wall Street Journal, NY Times, The Globe, Bloomberg News, NBC, CBS, ABC, Time Warner, Jim Cramer, and yes even CNN. These are ALL corporate owned media companies who could care less about real journalism. What they do care about: Serve the financial agenda of their shareholders (owners) e.g. members of the richest .01% of the Global population that own 75% of the planets wealth. What is it that they fear? They fear change plain and simple. Change that could cause them to lose control over others by means of wealth -master (those who own) and slave (those who must do what those who own to survive) relationship. Ron Paul is one of those few who have dared to speak out against this relationship in man and how we treat eachother. The only other two men of noteworthy attempt to challenge this relationship where Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy. We all know what happened to them, so lets all put Ron Paul into our thoughts for safety and success and may God Bless.
FOX News Creates Fraudulent Video to Discredit Ron Paul
Submitted by EB on 02/17/2011 08:27 -0500
Fox NewsRon Paul
As Paul Joseph Watson of PrisonPlanet writes:
In a shocking act of mass public deception, Fox News attempted to skew Ron Paul’s 2011 CPAC straw poll win by representing it with footage from the previous year’s CPAC event, at which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed the result, another example of the continuing dirty tricks campaign being waged against Paul by the establishment media.
Congressman Paul replicated his 2010 victory over Mitt Romney by defeating the former Governor of Massachusetts for a second consecutive year at the annual CPAC conference.
However, before anchor Bill Hemmer introduced a segment concerning the story, Fox News played a clip of the 2010 announcement of the poll results, during which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed Ron Paul’s victory, passing off last year’s footage as representative of this year’s event.
Hemmer then proceeded to state, “In the end he was the winner, probably not the reaction he was hoping for,” describing the reaction as “mixed applause and boos,” before directly asking Ron Paul if he knew who was booing him.
Robert Wenzel comments:
This is the most incredible act of news media deception ever caught in smoking gun style. This video is a must view, and notice how the FOX anchors set up the lie and Bill Hemmer, the anchor interviewing Congressman Paul, brings the LIE right into the interview, in a further attempt to dilute Paul's victory.
These boys are scared, really scared. Get this video clip out to everyone and let people know what is going on.
Did FOX News [sic] and Bill Hemmer just have their very own CBS/Dan Rather moment?
Update per Mediaite (ht Cleve Meater):
...Fox News claims it was completely accidental. Mediaite received the following statementfrom Senior Vice President of News Michael Clemente:
“We made a mistake with some of the video we aired, and plan on issuing a correction onAmerica’s Newsroom tomorrow morning explaining exactly what happened.”
Thursday, February 17, 2011
It's Official: Iran Says It Will Send 2 Warships Through Suez Canal
It's Official: Iran Says It Will Send 2 Warships Through Suez Canal
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/17/2011 08:45 -0500
After nothing happened last night, following Egypt's statement that it had not received a request to allow Iranian warships through the canal, PressTV has just announced that an Iran Navy official says the 2 warships are in fact on their way to the Canal and will pass shortly. Per Reuters, "the Iran state TV says Egypt sees nothing wrong with passage of Iranian warships through Suez Canal." The vessels in question are the Alvand frigate and the Kharg, a supply vessel.
Photo of the Alvand:
Look for kneejerk reaction in crude.
Some more perspectives from Information Dissemination:
The two Iranian ships are the corvette Alvand and supply ship Kharg, both pictured in this blog post. The Alvand is the flagship of the Iranian Navy. Displacing around 1,500 tons, the ship comes armed with 4 C-802 anti-ship missiles, a 4.5in gun, torpedo launchers, and various smaller machine guns and mortars. The US Navy has seen this class of ship before, in battle. During Operation Preying Mantis in 1988, the Iranian corvette Sabalan was left paralyzed and on fire from a 500 lb bomb from an A-6, while another pair of A-6s crippled the Sahand where she later sunk southwest of Larak Island following a Harpoon strike from the USS Joseph Strauss (DDG-16). For the sake of symmetry, I'll note the A-6s involved in Operation Preying Mantis that slapped around the sister ships of Alvand were from the VA-95 "Green Lizards" and flown off none other than the USS Enterprise (CVN 65).
The Iranian flagship Alvand is not a naval threat to anyone in the region, and is not why Israel is raising concern. The ship has terrible anti-air capabilities that are no match against the capabilities of the Egyptian Air Force, the Royal Saudi Air Force, the Israeli Air Force, or Carrier Air Wing One on the USS Enterprise (CVN 65). While the media portrayal of the Iranian Navy near the Suez is one of distressing concern, the reality is that corvette represents the biggest regional target at sea for thousands of nautical miles. The media may describe the presence of the Iranian corvette in the context of doubt, fear, and concern; but given Israel's outrage and tendency to be trigger happy - allow me to suggest the scariest place to be in the Red Sea today is anywhere near that ship. I note the irony between how the news narrative represents a complete disconnect between perception and reality.
Speaking of Israeli concern, assuming it is legitimate and not parochial; it likely has to do with the supply ship Kharg and not the corvette Alvand.
The supply ship Kharg is much more interesting. The Kharg is the largest ship in the Iranian Navy displacing around 33,000 tons and is a modified Olwen class fast fleet tanker. This is a big ship, and with the current tensions between Israel and Hezbollah, Israel is likely very concerned about what the ship is carrying. As a Navy ship rather than a commercial ship, the ship will not be searched for cargo so the concern by the Israeli's is that the ship could carry weapons to Syria where weapons can be unloaded and sent to Lebanon. There are rumors that go back several years that the Kharg has been often been observed in the Gulf of Aden delivering weapons from Iran to destinations like Eritrea and the Sudan.
If you follow the Wikileaks cables you will note that this known arms smuggling connection between Iran and Eritrea was how the Government of Yemen believed the Houthis were being armed, although the cables actually reveal that is not how the Houthis are being armed based on different intelligence.
Are the Israeli's being paranoid? Probably not. The Kharg is the best choice of vessel to move substantial arms from Iran to Hezbollah quickly and without harassment. It is around 2,150nm from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia - where these Iranian ships made port last week. While I understand that a little corvette might have to make stops every few thousand nautical miles - even a corvette with the range of the Alvand - why does a fast fleet tanker like Kharg need a fill up after only a few thousand miles travel?
Probably because the tanker is carrying more than fuel.
What To Do
The Israeli's can get trigger happy in a hurry, so I have no idea what they will do. However, I noted with interest that PJ Crowley described the US position on the presence of the Iranian ships approaching the Suez Canal as one of "curiosity." OK, I buy that, I'm certainly curious as well. But the real question is what if anything should the United States do?
Well, if you are the US it depends if you think the Israel will attack the ships. If you do think Israel is going to get trigger happy, we should do nothing. However, if the US does not believe the Israeli's are going to attack the Iranian ships, this is what I believe the US should do.
It is more than a little disturbing to me that a ~1,500 ton Iranian corvette built in 1971 with 4 ASMs and no air defenses escorted by an old oil tanker can send the price of US oil up 1.8% for simply sailing on the ocean. Iran just significantly shifted an economic market in the US with a piece of shit corvette even though the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) was literally right there. Think about that a second...
An increase of 1.8% comes to $.67 per bbl of oil, and the United States uses 21,000,000 bbls of oil per day. That means that through soft power presence alone the Iranian Navy flagship, which by every modern naval standard is nothing more than a ~1,500 ton unrated corvette with a questionably trained crew and supported an old tanker, and yet the Iranian Navy just sent a $14 million shiver down the spine of the energy economy of the United States. To add insult to injury, that bump in oil cost could potentially sustain itself for several days while the Iranian Navy operates in that region.
How do we reconcile the ability of an Iranian corvette half way around the world to influence a US economic market with the rhetoric by the United States Navy leadership who attempts to link US naval power with US economy? How can observers not draw the conclusion that investors in this country have lost all association with American naval power and the sustainability of regional peace when an Iranian corvette can make this kind of economic impact while operating right next to a US aircraft carrier strike group? Investors in the US oil futures market must not even associate US naval power as a deterrent to economic disruption when oil shoots up 1.8% based on presence alone, and in this case the US naval power present is a carrier strike group. Is this a matter of stupidity or ignorance on the part of the investors, or does this say something about the US Navy's ability to articulate it's own value to the nation?
So, clearly the Navy has a communication problem... How can the US Navy address this? Well, if I was given 5-star rank for a day I would sail my Arleigh Burke class destroyer along side the Iranian Navy flagship for a "wave and hello" and take a photograph of the two ships side by side while underway. I realize that strategic communication is a forgotten, and perhaps lost art in the US Navy, but if you put a photograph on Navy.mil with the two warships in near proximity that illustrates the sheer size difference between the flagship of the Iranian Navy and a US Navy Arleigh Burke class destroyer, I will predict that the unofficial PASSEX is worth several thousand words to a great many reporters and Americans while also being a photograph worth about $14 million in savings to the US energy economy a day.
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/17/2011 08:45 -0500
After nothing happened last night, following Egypt's statement that it had not received a request to allow Iranian warships through the canal, PressTV has just announced that an Iran Navy official says the 2 warships are in fact on their way to the Canal and will pass shortly. Per Reuters, "the Iran state TV says Egypt sees nothing wrong with passage of Iranian warships through Suez Canal." The vessels in question are the Alvand frigate and the Kharg, a supply vessel.
Photo of the Alvand:
Look for kneejerk reaction in crude.
Some more perspectives from Information Dissemination:
The two Iranian ships are the corvette Alvand and supply ship Kharg, both pictured in this blog post. The Alvand is the flagship of the Iranian Navy. Displacing around 1,500 tons, the ship comes armed with 4 C-802 anti-ship missiles, a 4.5in gun, torpedo launchers, and various smaller machine guns and mortars. The US Navy has seen this class of ship before, in battle. During Operation Preying Mantis in 1988, the Iranian corvette Sabalan was left paralyzed and on fire from a 500 lb bomb from an A-6, while another pair of A-6s crippled the Sahand where she later sunk southwest of Larak Island following a Harpoon strike from the USS Joseph Strauss (DDG-16). For the sake of symmetry, I'll note the A-6s involved in Operation Preying Mantis that slapped around the sister ships of Alvand were from the VA-95 "Green Lizards" and flown off none other than the USS Enterprise (CVN 65).
The Iranian flagship Alvand is not a naval threat to anyone in the region, and is not why Israel is raising concern. The ship has terrible anti-air capabilities that are no match against the capabilities of the Egyptian Air Force, the Royal Saudi Air Force, the Israeli Air Force, or Carrier Air Wing One on the USS Enterprise (CVN 65). While the media portrayal of the Iranian Navy near the Suez is one of distressing concern, the reality is that corvette represents the biggest regional target at sea for thousands of nautical miles. The media may describe the presence of the Iranian corvette in the context of doubt, fear, and concern; but given Israel's outrage and tendency to be trigger happy - allow me to suggest the scariest place to be in the Red Sea today is anywhere near that ship. I note the irony between how the news narrative represents a complete disconnect between perception and reality.
Speaking of Israeli concern, assuming it is legitimate and not parochial; it likely has to do with the supply ship Kharg and not the corvette Alvand.
The supply ship Kharg is much more interesting. The Kharg is the largest ship in the Iranian Navy displacing around 33,000 tons and is a modified Olwen class fast fleet tanker. This is a big ship, and with the current tensions between Israel and Hezbollah, Israel is likely very concerned about what the ship is carrying. As a Navy ship rather than a commercial ship, the ship will not be searched for cargo so the concern by the Israeli's is that the ship could carry weapons to Syria where weapons can be unloaded and sent to Lebanon. There are rumors that go back several years that the Kharg has been often been observed in the Gulf of Aden delivering weapons from Iran to destinations like Eritrea and the Sudan.
If you follow the Wikileaks cables you will note that this known arms smuggling connection between Iran and Eritrea was how the Government of Yemen believed the Houthis were being armed, although the cables actually reveal that is not how the Houthis are being armed based on different intelligence.
Are the Israeli's being paranoid? Probably not. The Kharg is the best choice of vessel to move substantial arms from Iran to Hezbollah quickly and without harassment. It is around 2,150nm from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia - where these Iranian ships made port last week. While I understand that a little corvette might have to make stops every few thousand nautical miles - even a corvette with the range of the Alvand - why does a fast fleet tanker like Kharg need a fill up after only a few thousand miles travel?
Probably because the tanker is carrying more than fuel.
What To Do
The Israeli's can get trigger happy in a hurry, so I have no idea what they will do. However, I noted with interest that PJ Crowley described the US position on the presence of the Iranian ships approaching the Suez Canal as one of "curiosity." OK, I buy that, I'm certainly curious as well. But the real question is what if anything should the United States do?
Well, if you are the US it depends if you think the Israel will attack the ships. If you do think Israel is going to get trigger happy, we should do nothing. However, if the US does not believe the Israeli's are going to attack the Iranian ships, this is what I believe the US should do.
It is more than a little disturbing to me that a ~1,500 ton Iranian corvette built in 1971 with 4 ASMs and no air defenses escorted by an old oil tanker can send the price of US oil up 1.8% for simply sailing on the ocean. Iran just significantly shifted an economic market in the US with a piece of shit corvette even though the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) was literally right there. Think about that a second...
An increase of 1.8% comes to $.67 per bbl of oil, and the United States uses 21,000,000 bbls of oil per day. That means that through soft power presence alone the Iranian Navy flagship, which by every modern naval standard is nothing more than a ~1,500 ton unrated corvette with a questionably trained crew and supported an old tanker, and yet the Iranian Navy just sent a $14 million shiver down the spine of the energy economy of the United States. To add insult to injury, that bump in oil cost could potentially sustain itself for several days while the Iranian Navy operates in that region.
How do we reconcile the ability of an Iranian corvette half way around the world to influence a US economic market with the rhetoric by the United States Navy leadership who attempts to link US naval power with US economy? How can observers not draw the conclusion that investors in this country have lost all association with American naval power and the sustainability of regional peace when an Iranian corvette can make this kind of economic impact while operating right next to a US aircraft carrier strike group? Investors in the US oil futures market must not even associate US naval power as a deterrent to economic disruption when oil shoots up 1.8% based on presence alone, and in this case the US naval power present is a carrier strike group. Is this a matter of stupidity or ignorance on the part of the investors, or does this say something about the US Navy's ability to articulate it's own value to the nation?
So, clearly the Navy has a communication problem... How can the US Navy address this? Well, if I was given 5-star rank for a day I would sail my Arleigh Burke class destroyer along side the Iranian Navy flagship for a "wave and hello" and take a photograph of the two ships side by side while underway. I realize that strategic communication is a forgotten, and perhaps lost art in the US Navy, but if you put a photograph on Navy.mil with the two warships in near proximity that illustrates the sheer size difference between the flagship of the Iranian Navy and a US Navy Arleigh Burke class destroyer, I will predict that the unofficial PASSEX is worth several thousand words to a great many reporters and Americans while also being a photograph worth about $14 million in savings to the US energy economy a day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)