The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To

edit: (please read Aug 31st article; PCC-772 Cheonan: Newly Revealed Report from March 2010 Proves the Tragedy of the Cheonan is Being Used as Just Another Pretext in the Global Free Market Wars)

by Scott Creighton

Special Thanks to Victor who found the official power point presentation of the briefing given by Ambassador Han, Duk-Soo of the findings of the Joint Military Civilian Investigation Team (JIG). 

Briefing: The Cheonan Situation

The Honorable Han Duk-soo, ROK Ambassador to the United States, joined the CSIS Korea Chair’s Senior Policy Group to discuss the aftermath of the sinking of the Cheonan and the road ahead for the Korean Peninsula. Ambassador Han presented a background briefing to the Group as well as some of his thoughts on the situation. CSIS Washington DC

CSIS is the Center for Strategic and International Studies; one of the first neoliberal think-tanks. Affiliated with CSIS are (to name a few): Sam Nunn, Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Ray L. Hunt , Henry A. Kissinger, Brent Scowcroft .

On page 29 you find the following slide… (click on image for a larger view)

slide 29 of the official version of the Cheonan Story

As you can see, the image that I compared to the evidence in the article below is in fact what the officials from the JIG claim to be the North Korean CHT-O2D torpedo.

But for several reasons that I explain in detail below, it is not a match by any stretch of the imagination. 

Others had told me that this was not the schematic of the North Korean torpedo, but as you can see from this slide, it is. 

Therefore I stand by my original conclusion and I thank everyone who has contributed their time and effort into this investigation. I especially wish to thank Victor once again for leaving a link to this presentation of the official story of the sinking of the Cheonan.  6/14/2010

——————

There is no doubt about it, there is no longer any reason to hold back, I have looked at the “evidence” and have concluded that we are being lied to, again, by our “leaders” in the White House in order to fabricate a measure of moral justification for yet another “regime change” campaign or an all out war with North Korea. 

There simply is no “perfect match” like the recent unsigned report claims there is.

The White House said Monday that President Barack Obama “fully supports” the South Korean president and his response to the torpedo attack by North Korea that sank a South Korean naval ship. MSNBC

South Korea’s president said Monday his nation will no longer tolerate North Korea’s “brutality” and said the regime would pay for a surprise torpedo attack that killed 46 South Korean sailors.  ABC News

North Korea has denied responsibility for the sinking of the South Korean warship, the Cheonan, on March 26, which left 46 sailors dead. A growing body of evidence assembled by the South has suggested a North Korean torpedo sank the ship.  New York Times

The Growing Body Of Evidence

Clinton told reporters the evidence announced Thursday that North Korea sank the Cheonan “is overwhelming and condemning.”

… Daniel Pinkston, a North Korea expert with the International Crisis Group, a multinational not-for-profit organization, said Friday that evidence that North Korea caused the sinking is “pretty irrefutable.” Stars and Stripes

The International Crisis Group was founded by World Bank Vice-President for External Affairs, Malloch Brown and is funded by other globalist institutions. Their stated mission is to “prevent” international conflict yet somehow or another they always seem to come up with suggestions involving invading other nations or imposing strict sanctions like the kind that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children. Oh yeah, the nations they target usually have a state-owned central bank system… till we invade that is.

So lets take a look at all the “overwhelming” and “irrefutable” evidence. 1. Someone wrote “number 1.” on one single piece of the salvaged torpedo… 2. they claim the torpedo remains are a “perfect match” of a North Korean type of weapon, a “CHT-02D” torpedo.  This conclusion was reached via an international research team from US, the UK, Australia, and Sweden.  Here is their May 20th, 2010 report.  In the report, they make the following conclusion;

The torpedo parts recovered at the site of the explosion by a dredging ship on May 15th, which include the 5×5 bladed contra-rotating propellers, propulsion motor and a steering section, perfectly match the schematics of the CHT-02D torpedo included in introductory brochures provided to foreign countries by North Korea for export purposes. The markings in Hangul, which reads “1번(or No. 1 in English)”, found inside the end of the propulsion section, is consistent with the marking of a previously obtained North Korean torpedo. 

…  Based on all such relevant facts and classified analysis, we have reached the clear conclusion that ROKS “Cheonan” was sunk as the result of an external underwater explosion caused by a torpedo made in North Korea. The evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that the torpedo was fired by a North Korean submarine. There is no other plausible explanationInvestigation on the Sinking of the Cheonan

That’s it. That’s all their “evidence” that the international investigators presented in their UNSIGNED report. That’s right, no one knows who the “investigators” were since they didn’t take the time to sign their work.

A Perfect Match?

This is the presentation refered to in the paper linked above. They mention that during a presentation of their findings, they showed the schematics of a CHT-02D torpedo in relation to the evidence they found. They claimed in their investigation that these are a “perfect match” and that claim is being repeated endlessly on both sides of the fake political divide. (please click on image for a larger view)

From slide 29 of the official version of what happened to the Cheonan…

slide 29 of the presentation of JIG findings

The following is a close-up view and then my findings on the compatablity of the evidence and the CHT-O2D diagram.

This is by no means a “perfect match”.  No wonder they didn’t want to sign that “investigation” of theirs. (please click on image for a larger view)

There are 4 clear differences in the design of these weapons and one is without a doubt, the key to proving these are not the same.

* “A” & “D” – Here you can clearly see major differences in the design of the hub of the propellers. In the diagram above you can see it has a smaller hub whereas in the evidence below it, the hub is larger.

* “B” – The actual shape of the propellers is very different. You can see a notch in the diagram above that doesn’t exist in the actual evidence propeller below. The overall shape of the blades are vastly different as well, both the front and the rear propeller sets.

All of this might be explained away by suggesting that these propellers were switched out. Thought it might be possible, remember that these are finely tuned and designed systems; one just can’t switch these hub designs “willy nilly” like one would on their John-Boat. But, that aside, though it may be possible to have put different kinds of propellers on this fish, it is certainly NOT a “perfect match”.

Now, the last point proves they are not the same torpedo.

* “C” – As you can plainly see, the stabilizers (or propulsion system?) in the diagram above are clearly shown IN FRONT of the separation plate as it is lined up in the display with the evidence below. However, the torpedo below houses that same stabilizer (or propulsion system) BEHIND the separation plate (separating the body and the tail section of the torpedo). 

This is a major difference that cannot be explained by saying it was some kind of after market modification. This is part of a key design of the workings of these weapons and can not have been changed. This difference clearly indicates these are different weapons altogether.

(there are other differences that have been pointed out to this researcher; “Jan” noticed that the axle shape is tapered on the evidence and straight on the diagram. A good point. There are probably others as well (I noticed a difference in the shape of the “fin” in the guidance section in the back as well…. clearly there is no way to say these are a “perfect match”)

It is no wonder the “investigators” chose not to sign their work.

The Forgotten Investigation

On May 6th, 2010 a report came out conducted by South Korea and others that said the torpedo’s metal and explosive residue indicated that it had come from a German origin.

The team of South Korean and foreign investigators found traces of explosives used in torpedoes on several parts of the sunken ship as well as pieces of composite metal used in such weapons, South Korea’s Yonhap news agency said quoting a senior government official.

The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia, Yonhap quoted the official as saying.  REUTERS News Agency

This report has been all but forgotten by the media and the Clinton led state department as they press for crippling sanctions and perhaps more. But there is a confirmation of sorts in the May 20th unsigned “investigation”.

The first thing they should do, rather than attempt to convince the people that the two are “perfectly matched” in design (when they clearly aren’t) is a chemical and metallic debris analysis of the evidence.  The May 20th “investigation” does not make mention of this crucial part of the investigation at all… they don’t mention it at all

The reason for that is clear; if they were to address these two key scientific points, they would have to have admitted that the science shows these pieces of evidence are of German construction and therefore not of North Korean origin.

By ignoring these two important parts of the investigation, the May 20th paper confirms the earlier work of the May 6th study… the torpedo is of German origin.

The “CHT-02D” Torpedo

An earlier report stated that there were only 4 different types of North Korean torpedos that could have caused this damage.

Type EO-6 and ET-80A “Some experts downplayed the possibility of homing torpedoes, citing the low capability of North Korea’s Sang-O (Shark) class submarines.”

Russian Type 53-56

Russian Type 53-59

There had been no mention of the CHT-02D torpedo, and in fact, this researcher can’t find any information on this torpedo aside from links to this story. There is various info on all the other types of North Korean torpedos, but there seems to be none on this one. Why is that?  According to the official unsigned report this torpedo is “listed in a brochure” as something North Korea sells, but they do not offer the brochure nor a link to where it can be found. I am still looking for other sources on this matter.

But it appears this weapon came out of no-where.

In a paper I wrote yesterday I questioned whether or not the German-made DM2-A3 looked more like what was found.

The DM2 A-3 version is also used by the Norwegian Ula class (German Type 210 subs) with an option for a later upgrade).  The Italian Type 212 B submarines use the DM2 A-4 version. The Israeli Dolphin-class (German Type S-300) are also being equipped with the DM2 A-4 Torpedo.” 

It is only a possibility but it is of German design. More investigation into the schematics of this weapon are needed before any conclusion can be reached.

Questions Being Asked

Most MSM and “progressive” parrot websites are running with the “evil North Korea” story without any investigations what-so-ever.  But questions are being asked on a few sites.

Democratic Underground has compiled a list of issues surrounding the “official story” and they deserve to be reviewed.  They bring up some very good points and I would hope that someone who posts there might provide them with a link to this study of mine.  “What if North Korea didn’t fire the torpedo?”  Democratic Underground

They bring out many points that I have not addressed here that need to be. One such point is that North Korea vehemently denies the allegations and they have asked to see the evidence inspect it themselves and they have been denied access to it.

Conclusion

It is clear that we are being lied to and manipulated into believing that North Korea is behind the sinking of the South Korean vessel, the Cheonan.  It is impossible to draw conclusions at this time as to who is responsible but we can conclude based on the evidence, that the official story is yet another lie being pawned off on the American people. This lie is obvious and could be used to instigate military action against the people of North Korea.

—–

Additional Material:

New UPDATE – PCC-772 Cheonan: “To do nothing would set the wrong precedent,” (you got that right) – 6/6/2010 political fallout and pending Russian investigation results….

UPDATE – please see the follow-up article posted 5/27/2010 11pm EST – PCC-772 Cheonan: An Unacceptable Provocation by the United States of America and the International Community has a Duty To Respond

UPDATE 2 – Mr. Shin, whose work I included in a recent article listed above, is now “under investigation” for disagreeing with the official South Korean story about the sinking of the Cheonan. PCC-772 Cheonan: Probe member summoned on false rumor allegations – May 29, 2010

UPDATE 3PCC-772 Cheonan: Photographic Evidence that “No. 1″ Written on Top of Rust – May 29, 2010

****UPDATE 4**** – GOOD NEWS –  Looks like China rejected Hialry Clinton’s fraudulent “investigation” results… China will not support sanctions or the claim that North Korea is responsible for the sinking of the Cheonan.    PCC-772 Cheonan: China and Russia Seem to Reject the Conclusions of the U.S.-Led “Objective” Investigation  May 30 2010

——————

About these ads

368 Responses

  1. Nicely done with very good research.

    Since the beginning of this, I have been suspect. From the onset it looked like a staged event of some sort. I believe they would have known long before now where this explosion came from (if there even was an explosion).
    Basically, one cannot trust a single thing our government officials tell us. It IS that far gone.

  2. U.S. Govt. + MSM = LIARS. Case closed.

  3. here we go again!!!

    man, i don’t know how much more of this bullshit I can take.

    I am so sick of the way the corporate media handles all this shit. We are living an Orwellian nightmare.

    Good piece, Willy…

    AJ

  4. TRUST the Government, Media, Congress… F*CK NO !!!!

  5. Well, they can only start another war if the “troops” allow themselves to be shipped over there. Here are a few completely doable solutions:

    1) Refuse to join the murder machine called the U.S. military.
    2) If you do, refuse to be deployed overseas.
    3) If somehow you wind up being deployed overseas, bring back the time-honored tradition of fragging.

    There’s another solution, as well: the criminals who make up Congress could just stop voting to spend money they don’t have on more wars.

    Yeah, like that’ll fucking happen.

  6. ‘The markings in Hangul, which reads “1번(or No. 1 in English)”, found inside the end of the propulsion section, is consistent with the marking of a previously obtained North Korean torpedo.’

    Now, just hang on a minute – a previously obtained NK torpedo? A previously obtained NK torpedo?? How many do they have?

    Is it not beyond the realms of possibility that this ‘evidence’ did not originate from NK at all.

    We really ought to demand the same level of ballistic forensics that apply to crime scenes where ordinary firearms have been discharged.
    After all many more lives could be at stake here.

  7. Read the comments about this on ATS. So many commenters are absolutely convinced that fighting NK is the right thing to do and the attitude appears to be – bring it on!

    Hopeless!

    If I wasn’t several thousand miles away, I’d be tying up traffic in D.C. trying to get the point across that we don’t want any more illegal wars. I suppose I could try this in London if I could get someone to look after my disabled wife.

  8. Let’s see here,

    1. South Korean tests show residue compatible with German weaponry.

    2. Who receives free German subs and weapons while screaming holocaust the whole time?

    3. Who has engaged in multiple random vicious unprovoked attacks on innocent neighbors and atrocious false flag attacks ( ie: USS Liberty) ?

    Hmmmmm, seems pretty clear to me.

  9. John Jasper;

    Isn’t the UK talking about rushing their troops out of Afghanistan right now? I read an article where someone over there said they were getting out “because we are not the policemen of the world”

    is that accurate? if so it’s good news… for you guys at least… and a few million Afghanis…

  10. The question to ask here is who has the most to gain (strategically) from an attack on a South Korean ship during a joint exercise with the US, possibly prompting a war with the North?

    Certainly not North Korea, even though the rhetoric is dictated militarily, they certainly cannot afford an all out war with the South.

    Certainly not South Korea, a full scale war with the North would be devastating for their big business.

    So who then? The US is presently in Afghanistan and Pakistan which would allow access to China via their Western border. Iran though is in the way of direct supply lines (from US stockpiles in Israel) to this region, hence the push for a war with Iran.

    The US also have forces based in South Korea, (and Japan) but direct access to China’s Eastern border is blocked by North Korea.

    Prompting a war between the North and South Korea would allow the US to move it’s forces into and through North Korea to China’s Eastern border (and Western border simultaneously in a pincer type movement) thereby forcing the Chinese to defend themselves along two fronts.

    But who fired the torpedo? According to recent reports, the torpedo in question was actually of German origin. It is interesting to note that just a few weeks before the attack on the South Korean ship, two Israeli Dolphin-class German made diesel/electric quiet subs traversed through the Suez Canal heading out into the Arabian Sea. The same two Israeli subs traversed back through the Suez Canal just a few weeks after the sinking of the South Korean ship.

    The evidence may be circumstantial, but remember the battleship “MAINE”, the “USS Liberty”, the”Gulf of Tonkin” and the”USS Cole”.

    So who did torpedo the South Korean ship?

  11. [...] The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To « American Everyman. May 24th, 2010 | Category: Uncategorized | Comments are closed | [...]

  12. The Israelis have german submarines which in turn have german made torpedos. Are we getting the drift here about another false flag operation by Israel ?

  13. Hans

    this is true and I wrote about the possibilty earlier. But the same German made torpedos are also equiped on Italian and even Danish subs (not to mention the German ones).

    It is possible, but at this point, almost impossibe to determine who fired that torpedo based on the fraudulent investigation that they conducted thus far. However, it wouldn’t take long to trace that torpedo wreckage back to who made it and then find out who it was sold to.

    One thing we do know for sure, the official story is a flat out lie. That much I know.

  14. It is truly refreshing to see that the wool is not so easily pulled anymore.
    A great awakening is upon us and these tyrants days are numbered (and I ain’t talking about NK).

  15. The fact that they won’t let NK examine the ‘evidence’ indicates that it’s phony, or is this another example of American ‘justice’ now, where the accused isn’t allowed to examine the evidence against them?

    This whole thing stinks of false flag. They don’t even try to be clever about it anymore, I guess they don’t have to since so many Americans are so dumb they will believe any lie.

  16. question–what took soooooo long?
    Sure stinks to high hell when it’s UK USi and AsstriLies
    Odd-France and }sreal are not included
    Sweden–makes the liars Saints :^/

  17. Sorcha Faal said North Korea also attacked the oil rig.

    Who has German torpedos? The pride of the Israeli submarine fleet are three Dolphin class submarines–made in GERMANY.

    Mossad–not Muslims–orchestrated 9/11

    ReDiscover911.com

  18. Sorcha Faal said North Korea also attacked the oil rig.

    It might as well have been Obama saying it.

  19. [...] pro war crowd in order to stir up hatred and war hysteria. Don't be too surprised if this happens.The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To Tags: [...]

  20. [...] makt ”hjälpt till” med attacken för att kunna skylla den på Nord-Korea – The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To – There is no doubt about it, there is no longer any reason to hold back, I have looked at the [...]

  21. “It might as well have been Obama saying it.”

    Yep. Faal has been pretty well outed for years now. I didn’t even know that guy was still spinning these days.

  22. In the Tonkin Gulf incident there was irrefutable “evidence” that North Vietnamese Warships launched an “unprovoked” attack against the United States Navy, and of course the US then had to “respond”.

    Never mind the “evidence” was fabricated to start a war.

    Now, why are we supposed to believe these torpedo remains are what the “investigators”(all from US “allies” or vassal states) claim? Maybe this torpedo originated from a US Submarine? What is the death of a 50 or so expendable South Koreans? As long as political goals are met. Did anybody in the US Government in the 1960s care when South Vietnamese died? Absolutely not.

    North Korea has been an open wound for the US Ruling Class since the 1950’s, after a stalemate forced the end of the Korean War. Now some Military and Political leaders could want to finally end that war, of course with large investments into the Military Industrial Complex.

    The question is, what will China do?

  23. that’s a good question, Bill K. and it looks like Shilary is in China right now doing her best to beg them into letting her attack another country

    “Ohhh, come on… Pleeeeeeaaaaase….. you didn’t let us attack Iraaaan… come on, Let us invade this little country… no one will notice… please? here, buy these T-Bills”

  24. I just read the International Crisis Group’s financial statements. The World Bank does not appear on their list of financial supporters. Can you source your assertion that it is founded and funded by the World Bank?

    I did find an interesting Orwellian tidbit in the ICG 2009 Financial Statement:

    “…to identify responses (diplomatic, legal, financial, economic, and *ultimately military*) that are within the capacity of the international community to apply to help prevent or resolve deadly conflict.”

    see also:

    http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/201.html

  25. Its pretty clear the zionists did this. But why? What is their plan now? Or do they want to get caught? Remember, in their sick and twisted minds, 6 million jews need to die so that the messiah can return………there are 6 million living in Israel….if they were nuked, that would fulfill the prophecy……….once everyone knows that they pulled off 911, they might get nuked……

  26. Thank you for being one of those standing up against this despicable world-class hoax. I’m over here in China near the Korean peninsula and I’m watching in horror as this “Remember the Maine”-style incident unfolds.

    There are so many flaws and obvious conflicts of interest in this so-called “expert” investigation. As pointed out by the Korean Central News Agency of DPR (North) Korea: “…The authorities made themselves busy proving the “outside attack” only, far from making public the record of the ship’s track and messages exchanged before and after the case, the statements of survivors, etc., which are the core and basic data for proving the truth about the case…” (Reinvestigation of Warship Called for in S. Korea; May 23, 2010)

    The good news in all this so far is that China has been totally equivocal about the purported torpedo attack ‘evidence’. I’d like to believe that they will will defend N. Korea on the UNSC level.

    I’ll be posting debunkings of the Cheonan incident as it develops at my own WordPress blog, SweetandSourSocialism

  27. “The International Crisis Group was founded in 1995 by World Bank Vice-President Mark Malloch Brown, former US diplomat Morton Abramowitz and Fred Cuny, an international disaster relief specialist who disappeared in Chechnya in 1995.”

    “In 1994 Malloch Brown joined the World Bank as Vice-President for External Affairs…”

    they may not be directly funded by the World Bank, but they are certainly funded by some of the same organizations that fund it….

    (from their site)

    •United Kingdom Department for International Development
    •UK Economic and Social Research Council
    •United States Agency for International Development
    •Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
    •Rockefeller Brothers Fund
    •Open Society Institute
    •The Connect U.S. Fund

    there are many others listed and on the site you can click on the links to each and see how globalist they are.

    http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/support/who-supports.aspx#govts

    But you are correct, I should have made that point clearer, they are certainly supported by globalist institutions that also support the World Bank, but they don’t directly receive funding from them.

    my bad.

  28. we don’t know who did it yet, Billy, but I think maybe we should hold off on talk of “nuking” anyone… North Korea, Germany, or Israel.

    I mean, sinking a ship is an act of war… someone did it… but let’s give it a few days of investigation before we start picking out nuclear targets, alright?

    thanks

  29. S. African Nukes made in Israel?:

  30. A dolphin class sub just transited the Suez Canal, it’s an Israeli boat, and the zionists are already denying the sub did the transit.

    clearly in the diagrams shown here, the torpedo propulsion system is ‘different’ and hence ‘not a match’ that the propagandists want everyone to believe that this was a NK torpedo.

    if there is any residue truly of the explosive in the hull of that corvette, it can easily be matched to the exact type of warhead and explosive in the warhead by spectrography using a gas chromatograph. The mere fact that the Clintstoned whore for Israel is citing that NK will indeed ‘pay’ is also a sign this had nothing to do with NK.

    The Obomb-ya admin. seems to be looking for an emergency or war to justify the nullification of the midterm elections coming up, which in every sense of the word, probably takes away the dinocrat’s advantage in the house and senate, and potentially leads to enough independent and green party wins this fall, to make the last two years of Barry Soetoro’s ram it down your throat Health Care sham find itself in the recall toilet.

    With the gulf oil spill and the total lack of action on the part of either the Government and BP, I would not be whistling past the graveyard with a chimpanzee grin on my face if I were the puppet in charge. There is a rising constituency in the country that just has had more than enough government malfunctioning and blatant lawlessness to hand his slim majority a huge, resounding defeat if the election actually goes forward in November.

    I think this NK thing is a smokescreen being played to get everyone’s eyes off the domestic ball, and that is two fold: one…the U.S. is bankrupt and falling apart, with rising homelessness and unemployment, and two….the war in Afghanistvietnam is going very badly and the military is getting it’s collective ass handed to it by the resistance.

    Obomb-ye or Barry Soetoro, whichever you prefer, desperately needs a big diversion that will last until the last polls close in November, because if he doesn’t get it, his party is going down in flames on November 4th., once the smoke settles. And, adios Health Care mandate with those flames. How does one spell ONE TERM FAILURE puppet??

  31. “..they may not be directly funded by the World Bank, but they are certainly funded by some of the same organizations that fund it…”

    Thanks for responding. I agree that the ICG is part of the same agenda as the WTO. Why not correct the generalization in the article? It’s being widely linked-to. As with 9-11 research, detractors will seize upon small details like this and use them to besmirch the rest of your research, which seems just as important in this instance as correcting the stories about mobile weapons laboratories was during the runup to the Iraq invasion.

    Thanks for the great work!

  32. Good point…

    “The International Crisis Group was founded by World Bank Vice-President for External Affairs, Malloch Brown and is funded by other globalist institutions.”

    link to funding page provided.

    point taken, and thank you.

  33. Motivation? There always needs to be a motive for a crime. North Korea has none, unless it’s suicide :)

  34. [...] Who Sank the South Korean Warship Cheonan? The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To American Everyman The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To Posted on May 24, 2010 by willyloman by Scott [...]

  35. Here are some additional resources:

    South Korean SS-209 class sub – Torpedoes: 14 STN SUT mod 2 (German or license) or LG Whiteshark (Korean built variant)

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/ss-209-specs.htm

    diagram of the Whiteshark (compares well to photo in this article)

    photo of the SUT

  36. [...] un billet traitant de l’étrange étude ayant permis de conclure quant à la culpabilité du Nord dans [...]

  37. The Israeli Global Military Beast

    THE EUROPEAN JEWISH PRESS proudly announced in December of 2008 that NATO and the State of Israel “boosted anti-terror cooperation & military exercises.”

    With the arrival of Israel’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tzipi Livni, to the NATO Ministerial Meeting on December 3, 2008, the NATO Council ratified the Individual Cooperation Programme (ICP), an agreement that expands the working relations between Israel and NATO in the fields of security and diplomacy.

    Thus the infiltration of Israel into the affairs of the European/American infrastructure has now been solidified. Is it any wonder then that both Europe and America have soft-pedaled the massacre of civilians in Gaza now being perpetrated by the Israeli military?

    http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=359

  38. [...] only a short period of time? Why are the initial findings that it is German-made totally ignored? Scott Creighton presents more evidence to suggest that we are being lied to yet again. (See also: The unofficial North Koreans’ View Point: Pyongyang sees US role in [...]

  39. All we now have to do is find out which clearly ‘electrically’ propelled torpedo’s were either originally fitted or retrofitted with SAFT cells for their main propulsion source. Apparently enough of the torpedo has been found in the wreckage of the ship to not only show what the torpedo propulsion looks like, as it’s mostly intact, but we can be reasonably certain that the batteries labels on grey plastic have been found in the torpedo fragments, and this might allow us to narrow down the vendor who made this torpedo. I believe it is german made, from pappy Bush’s old buddies plant, ‘Atlas’, aka Thyssen (thiessen back in ww-II). More information leaking out about the constituent components is coming out, but as I cannot confirm it because I haven’t got the wreckage in my hands, I have to take their word for it. I have used SAFT batteries in other applications, they’re a major supplier, and there probably are a lot of torpedo makers who use them.

  40. Looking at Part `C`, is that a shiny spline to its right ?
    Why shiny ? Was C bashed forward to better accord with the schematic above ?

    Looking at the torpedo motor and shaft in the glass showcase, it looks very very rusty; far far longer on the ocean floor than a mere not even 2 months.

    Years i’d say.

    Why a glass case so soon after the crime ? One would have thought that all the parts would initially be lying on the floor of a secure warehouse, much like aircraft wreckage brought down under suspicious circumstances.

    The torpedo remnant exhibit is so corroded from years (i believe that) of being underwater that there could not possibly be any `metallic detritus and chemical residue` not washed away.

    Conclusion: that exhibit has been in that case for many years in a South Korean naval museum and is of a regular western design.

  41. The torp wreckage could be from the older DM2 A-3.

    I can’t find any pics of this weapon online. It might have a five bladed propeller, one that matches the wreckage.

    The DM2 A-4 appears to have 6 bladed propellers.

    If someone could post clear pics of the DM2 A-3 we might be able to find a close match for the wreckage.

    Great post !

  42. michael masur, strange point…. is that possible?
    that is certainly worth looking into….

    and sounds like something the Obama agents would do.

  43. This is all a smoke screen, Great comment. I think you nailed it. You mentioned obummer needing a war to cancel the midterm elections, have you heard anything about a combat brigade of US army being deployed(not stationed) in the US in oct. prior to the elections? I have asked this question in several of my comments and no one has responded, oh no does this mean I am looseing it?

  44. US Navy Behind Attacks of Cheonan

    Gulf of tonkin documentaries

    Ron Paul warn of repeat of Gulf of tonkin tactics

    War Made Easy

    Newly released “Gulf of tonkin” documentaries by Russia Today

    Vietnam: American Holocaust (part 1)

    Vietnam: American Holocaust (part 2)

    Source: Russia Today dated May 23 2010

    Has Russia indirectly stated their position?

    History is repeating itself….

    Korea: American Holocaust is in the making….

  45. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of th… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  46. Joel, that info about the combat brigade being deployed stateside was something circulating before the presential elections. That may be that , which is dated news you picked up on I never heard whether or not that brigade was in fact deployed.

    I wouldn’t worry too much about one brigade. Thats not a whole lot of troops. A brigade use to consist of two battalions. A battaloin usually consists of a hq company (combat support) . And three line companies.

  47. O-bummer is deploying 80,000 ‘consequences resolution force’ troops into U.S. cities in October. I don’t know the composition of these forces, but they are being put on the street ahead of the mid term election. and yes, this NK crap is a diversionary tactic to get eyes off ISRAEL and the tanking U.S. bankrupted, sold out economy.

    whoever posted the story about ‘don’t worry about the troops’ has their head firmly up dey cheeks. 80,000 troops, though a drop in the bucket, means formal MARTIAL LAW declaration for sure! and it’s a gross violation of POSSE COMITATUS, which the states must oppose, but won’t as they’re all puppets of the oligarchy in Washingtoon, District of Corruption, as well. So, it’ll get mighty interesting in October-November, if we’re not at war in Korea again due to this Israeli Dolphin class sub fired torpedo (based on the stuff here, there can be little doubt that it was a german made DM-A3 from Atlas werk in germany. Who fired it, still has to be determined, but my vote goes to Israel. Anyone else wanna lay odds on the Dolphin????

  48. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of th… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  49. [...] take my word for it there are many better resourced articles dealing with this [...]

  50. http://www.army.mil/-news/2008/09/15/12422-consequence-management-response-force-to-join-army-northern-command/

    Consequence Management Response Force to join Army Northern Command

    Sep 15, 2008
    BY Army News Service

    At Great Lake Naval Station, Ill., CCMRF forces look over compound detecting gear while training to respond to a chemical attack. Photo by U.S. Navy

    WASHINGTON — As America remembers the anniversary of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, more than 800 members of a joint response force are preparing for their new mission of responding to CBRNE, or chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive incidents.

    Elements of the force, known as the CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF, assembled at Fort Stewart, Ga., Sept. 8-19 for a command post exercise called Vibrant Response.

    Three brigades form the core of the force: the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart; the 1st Medical Brigade, Fort Hood, Texas; and the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade, Fort Bragg, N.C.

    The response force will be assigned on Oct. 1 to U.S. Northern Command, Peterson Air Force Base, Colo., and placed under the operational control of U.S. Army North, Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

    This week, Col. Lou Vogler, U.S. Army North’s chief of future operations, and Marine Corps Lt. Col. James Shores, director of plans and policy for Joint Task Force Civil Support, participated in a round table interview with online journalists to discuss the force, including its unique mission and training.

    “U.S. Army North is the Army component of U.S. Northern Command,” said Vogler, “and we’re charged with coordinating the federal military response in the land domain for domestic operations or disasters, to include CBRNE.”

    Vogler said that the response force is a scalable, dedicated force that is prepared to reinforce state and local responders when they request federal assistance. The force’s alignment under U.S. NORTHCOM shortens the line of command to increase readiness and responsiveness.

    Training is a key element of readying the force for its mission, and Vibrant Response offers the opportunity to train in a realistic scenario before a crisis or incident occurs.

    During the exercise, commanders and staff of the force will train, rehearse and exercise – from academic classes to making decisions and executing orders – all to help prepare them for the mission they will assume on Oct. 1, said Vogler.

    “It’s an opportunity for network building in an unprecedented assignment of forces,” said Shores. “DOD always had allocated contingency sourced forces – but this is precedent-setting network building with the forces that we ultimately will go out and execute with. It’s an opportunity to get to know our forces, to see them in execution, to mission-orient them and be that much better – to be that much more responsive.”

    One goal of the exercise is to exercise with partners from the civilian agencies they would support. To that end, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other interagency representatives are participating to ensure integration with civilian consequence managers who would lead a response, said Vogler.

    “The overall federal response builds on the local and state response in accordance with the incident command system and existing plans and processes that are out there,” said Vogler. “The response force would supplement local efforts.”

    The training allows planners and leaders to test and improve upon procedures from previous exercises and training.

    When asked how responders were working to eliminate the communications difficulties of 9/11, Shores said that frequency management planning is a part of that training effort, and those issues are a part of the planning process.

    Both Vogler and Shores reiterated the importance of training and planning to the success of the response force.

    “We at Army North as the joint force land component command of NORTHCOM, and Joint Task Force Civil Support, as the standing CBRNE response headquarters, take this mission very seriously,” said Vogler. “The assignment of the CCMRF just makes us that much more prepared in terms of having standing relationships and an ability to train with a specific force full-time, under the control of NORTHCOM, to ensure we are ready to respond. The force has always been in place, but now the relationships are closer than ever.”

    “This type of planning and coordination and training is a priority both in our headquarters and at NORTHCOM, as we understand our responsibilities to be ready should the requirement arise, God forbid,” said Vogler.

    —god forbid my astrolabe, as Mike Rivero would say!

  51. Keep getting the story out there. Good research. So they are kind of saying that they are the same design as a Ford Escort could be the same design as a BMW 3 series. You know, four stroke engine, four wheels and bumpers. So they definitely done it. Lets nuke ‘em now.

  52. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of the… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  53. Thanks for the info on the combat troops deployed in America. Yes, I”m not looseing it. It is against the law to deploy troops in US for law enforcement. Wonder how they are going to get around that? Oh yeah, Mr. Obama said it was ok. Whatever happened to 3 branches of govt to insure checks and balances? The executive branch sure has a lot of power these days. You don’t suppose the legislative & judical are colluding with the executive to create a facist police state. No this is America, it can’t happen here.

  54. You may want to have a look at this:

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LE26Dg01.html

    Ive not tried verifying any of the claims made there yet, but the comments about the Korean handwritten writings are damning if true, and if there was indeed still a large scale exercise going on, that makes it completely unthinkable a NK sub would have penetrated that deep, sank the cheonan and got away again.

    OTOH, it does provide a rather credible alternative scenario: a friendly fire incident blamed on the North Koreans. Kursk anyone?

  55. Mika;

    You see, that’s what I thought happened. an accident took place, and these people in charge are so used to taking advantage of every single event they just went into spin mode without really thinking the thing out.

    the problem with that theory is China. How the hell would they attempt to spin this by spitting in China’s face?

    It seems to me that someone doesn’t pick a fight with the biggest bear on the block as a quick decision to cover an accident. you would at least hope more thought went into it that that. Unless there is a standing determination going on to provoke China. In that case, it does make sense.

  56. Hi, Great job.
    There a similar report by a member of the investigation team, Mr. S. Shin. You might want to see this:

    http://www.seoprise.com/board/view.php?table=seoprise_12&uid=154146

    Mr. Shin is under investigation by Korean police by not agree with the team report.
    You and his work may save a lot of lives, it is crisis out there in Korea.

  57. willyroman:

    As guessed by Mika, there is a possibility that ‘a friendly fire’ can be a cause of the Cheonan sunken.

    Here are a couple of questions raised by Korean-Americans (in English).

    http://www.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/view/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A0001386621

  58. It seems to me that someone doesn’t pick a fight with the biggest bear on the block as a quick decision to cover an accident. you would at least hope more thought went into it that that. Unless there is a standing determination going on to provoke China. In that case, it does make sense.

    Well, Buddy. I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head.

    I am convinced that we are now right smack dab in the middle of the full assault power grab in the world. We are doing so in virtually every region, especially around China.

    It seems clear that we are surrounding China and a N Korean vantage point would be a great strategic position. We are surrounding them. It is OBVIOUS.

  59. Kay and farside;

    thank you for those links. I am currently working on a new post which will incorporate information from those two sources. It should be up later today.

    thank you again for linking them in your comments. its very important information.

  60. Careful of the link from Kim. McAfee freaked out.

  61. You don’t have to careful… the letter like this….
    (Sorry I’m not good at English. so that site help you guys. )

    Dear Hillary Clinton U.S. Secretary of State,

    Welcome to Korea and I hope you could have a good chance to discuss the Peace in East Asia including Korean Peninsula.

    I am S.C. Shin, a civil investigator recommended by Korean National Assembly for the sinking of Cheonan and I’m writing this letter to let you know the truth exactly here in Korea.

  62. From : S.C.Shin

    * Date : May 26, 2010

    Title : Opinion about Accident of PCC-772

    Dear Hillary Clinton U.S. Secretary of State,

    Welcome to Korea and I hope you could have a good chance to discuss the Peace in East Asia including Korean Peninsula.

    I am S.C. Shin, a civil investigator recommended by Korean National Assembly for the sinking of Cheonan and I’m writing this letter to let you know the truth exactly here in Korea.

    I have graduated Korea Maritime University in 1982, served 2 years in Navy as a sailing & gunnery officer, worked for Hanjin Shipping on a containership regular line between Far East & West coast of U.S as a navigator for several years and experienced shipbuilding inspect affair for 7 years in Major Shipyards in Korea such as Hyundai, Samsung, Daewoo and Hanjin Heavy Industry.

    I have built 3 bulk carriers of 136,000 tons and 10 container ships of 2,000~4,000 teu in charge of hull structure, shipping machinery and outfittings, paint and nautical equipments including navigation system.

    Unbelievable conclusion and posture of the Administration

    I didn’t agree with the conclusion of the Korean military administration and now sued for libel by them.

    Can you imagine this situaton? I was the only person stood on the opposite position. That’s the only reason I am sued. I cannot understand how this happens in a democratic country in the world.

    So I want to talk to you about my oppinion and I think this might be a meaningful information to lead you to the truth of the unfortunate accident in Korea.

    As you know, this is so much important problem for the peace of Korean Peninsula devoting to the world’s peace that you and your country eagerly pursue to complete.

    The Military Administration made a conclusion that Cheonan had torn in two and sunken by the ‘Explosion of Torpedo’.

    But my oppinion is quite different from it because I could not find even a slight sign of ‘Explosion’ but could find so many evidences of grounding in/out of the vessel.

    I want to ask you fully understood that a tiny voice for the truth may prevent unexpected disaster and assure the safety of 70 million people in Korean Peninsula.

    Well, I’m going to tell you about the circumstances which Baengnyeong-do is located in and especially about the geometric background with natural environment, critical for vessels sailing this area.

    1. Where is Baengnyeong-do located ?

    Baengnyeong Island is a South Korean island in the Yellow Sea(West Sea), off the Ongjin peninsula in North Korea. It lies less than 10 miles from the North Korean coast, and is over 100 miles from the mainland of South Korea.

    2. Sky view of Baengnyeong-do & Daecheong-do

    The scenery from the sky is very pretty and calm while the underwater condition is extremely terrible.

    3. Shallow water, Rock fields and Strong tidal current

    The Red marking shows Grounded Position marked on Operation Status map which Naval Fleet 2 explained to the victim’s family the next day of accident, Torn-down Positon, Rescue Position and Aft & Fore Position.

    4. Too much narrow and dangerous Fair way

    Shallow water and Rock fields between Baengnyeong & Daecheong islands seriously disturb safe navigation from east to west, via versa.

    Any vessel coming out of the Narrow Strait has no choice but to keep her course steady due to shallow water both right and left.

    Vessels can easily face dangerous situations in this kind of unique area and fallen in the status of ‘Running aground’ or ‘Collision’.

    Regardless of the Cheonan Accident, this area must be studied and pertinent policy to be needed to prevent disasters.

    5. Geological features

    Daedong River of North Korea has good sands, diatomite soil and silica are raw materials of Glass that accumulates.

    The river carries them to the sea and strong tidal currents carry them down to the Baengnyeong area and make a lot of Sand hills along the sea shore, making the area harder to travel.

    6. What happened on the day of Mar. 26, 2010 ?

    The first call from 772 to Headquarter was “Grounded !”
    The first call from HQ to Korea Coast Guard was “Grounded !”
    The first report to the Administration was “Grounded !”

    7. Confusion – The exact time of 1st accident

    The adminstration on National Defence first announced that the accident broke out at 21:45 but they changed everyday until KIGAM(Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources) reports the very time of Earthquake-wave.

    8. Found an Operation map that indicates ‘First Grounding’

    Naval administration and the survivals gave a briefing to the families of victims on Mar. 27th – the next day of accident, showing a mark of the exact position of grounding on operation map on which the time of tidal current and the depth of water commented on the top-left corner.

    The naval adminstration says “The map is ours but a family of a victim took it up and wrote memo there.”

    But another family of a victim declared that the admistration had a explanation about the accident with the map and obiously told about “First Grounding” on an interview with Korea Broadcasting System(KBS) for the current program titled ‘Trace 60 Minute.’ ( Below : A family of a victim says “I heard that navy explained about ‘first grounding’ with that map.” )

    And recently we found a film that shows Navy explains the situation to the families of victims with that map, as below.

    9. The evidences of ‘Grounding’

    (1) Serious Scratches of lower part of side hull

    (2) Damage of Bilge Keel and Penetration nearby

    (3) Denting damage of 5-Screw blades of starboard side.

    The damage of denting forward proves the vessel have experienced ‘Full Astern Engine’ while grounded on sand hill or mud to get out of the terrible situation.

    (4) Compare the conditions of lower side plate between PCC-772 and PKM-357 which stayed in water for 53 days after sunken in Yellow Sea, in the 2nd battle at Yeonpyeong broken out in June, 2002. (She is now resting in the yard of Korean Navy Fleat 2 where you are staying now.)

    10. Cases of ‘Grounding’ for reference

    Kim Tae-Young, the minister of National Defence said “There was no ‘Grounding’ as we can see the Sonar dome not damaged.”

    But, as you know, it is really out of common sense just like as to say a ball player who is just sliding in home, “You are ‘Out !’ because your left knee is found clean.” How ridiculous !

    The length of 722 is 88m’s long and 10m’s wide. The Sonar dome is only 90cm’s long and 30cm’s wide. There’s no relation between the vessel’s grounding and the damage of sonar dome at all.

    When a vessel grounds the Sonar dome may be damaged, but ‘no damage on Sonar dome’ doesn’t guarantee ‘no grounding’, as you can see below that shows the clean bottom of fore part.

    11. The Mid Report of Administration – April 25

    No penetration
    No burn damage
    No heat
    No splinters
    Cable covers are not damaged
    Oil tank and dump area not damaged at all
    That’s it. That is enough to declare “There was no explosion ! ”
    But their conclusion was ‘Non-contact in-water Torpedo’ !

    Unbelievable. Torpedo exploded 3m’s beneath 772 and there was no damage but there’s only ‘Cutting Down’ the steel !

    12. If Torpedo exploded ;

    How are the bodies of victim who were found near the cutting area so clean while a big explosion broke out that is enough to tear down the vessel in two ?
    How could the bottom of the hull has no penetrations by splinter at all ? The splinters from the torpedo
    How could the vinyl covers of cable have no damage ?
    Why couldn’t we find even a dead fish in that area while a great explosion had broken out ?
    Why nobody got otolaryngologic desease at all ? Even no nose-bleeding.
    13. What is the 2nd accident that caused the serious damage after getting out of ‘Grounding’ ?

    (1) Rock crash (2) Explosion (3) Fatigue Fracture (4) Collision

    Anything else? Those might be enough ..

    (1) There was no rocks in that area torn down. – Rock Excluded !
    (2) Couldn’t find a slight sign of explosion – Explosion Excluded !
    (3) The crack started from the bottom – Fatigue Fx. Excluded !

    The rest one is ‘ Case (4) – It’s Collision ‘.

    That’s why I get to the conclusion – The 1st accident is ‘Grounding’ and the 2nd one is ‘Collision’ – with every knowledge, experience and analysis.

    14. Collision with what ?

    (1) Might be a military vessel. – The rule of military government prohibits fishing at night and required to be back before 1 hour earlier the time of sun-set in that area.
    (2) Maybe, of course, one of ‘Above-water vessel’ or ‘Under-water vessel’
    (3) Who knows? Only God knows?

    15. Brief of my opinion

    (1) The most important thing is there were two series of accidents not one.
    (2) The 1st accident was ‘Grounding’ with the evidences above.
    (3) The ‘Grounding on a sand’ made some damages and led flooding but itself didn’t make those serious situation torn down in two.
    (4) The 2nd accident hit a count-blow to sink.
    (5) I couldn’t find even a slight sign of ‘Explosion’.
    (6) The 2nd accident was ‘Collision’ with my analysis above.

    Dear Secretary of State,

    This is my conclusion with deep analysis and I believe my opinion is very close to the truth.

    Have you known that all? Then please consider again about the tension in Korean Peninsula.

    If you didn’t know that, please ask you staff – “Bring me another report that contains the ‘Truth’ ! ”

    This is not just an accident of a country in East Asia, but now it has grown up to most sensitive topic throughout the world.

    Mr. President of United States, Obama said on his address ” On the issues that have come up that a commander in chief is going to make decisions on, I have shown the judgment to lead. that is the leadership that I want to show when I’m president of the United States.”

    Now is the time, I think, my hero Obama shows us his leadership, truth, faith and justice to solve the puzzled problem for the peace in Korean Peninsula.

    We want to check it again precisely and scientifically according in the way of common sense and with perfect evidences. That’s all.

    That would be the righteous way to approach this matter and that will help to harden the relationship between Korea and Unitied States.

    To tell the truth with you, I am very worry about that so many people in Korea are anxious about ‘How Unite State accept this conclusion so simply – Torpedo Explosion’ without any doubt.

    I say with all my heart, there was no explosion. So there was no Torpedo, either. I could find only mechanical damages with a lot of grounding evidences.

    As they sued me, I am going to establish the cause of the accident in court with every evidence that I found. Would you please pray for me to get good result?

    Thank you for your time and I’ll be very grateful if I can recieve your ideas for this matter, if possible.

    Faithfully,

    S. C. Shin

    원문 주소 – http://www.seoprise.com/board/view.php?table=seoprise_12&uid=154146

  63. Kim,
    Amazing report.
    Are you trying to verify, Willy?

  64. I am in the process of doing that now, Buelahman. What they are claiming in both reports seem to jive with earlier reports that I was reading a month or so ago… that the probable cause was either a collision with a US sub that was trailing the Cheonan, or it was a vessel that was allowed into the war-games that secretly took the ship out with a shot across it’s bow. could have been by accident or it could have been on purpose. I don’t know. but the fact remains, the more information we find, the less it looks like a North Korean sub was able to sneak into a joint operation and sink a South Korean warship and then sneak out without being detected. right now I am in the process of looking as much of this up as I can and writing an updated version of this article.

    interestingly, massive amounts of hits are coming in from South Korea. it seems this article has been translated and it would at least appear that many people in South Korea feel the official government version of this event is deeply flawed. they don’t want to be railroaded into another war anymore than we do.

  65. also you can see evidence picture on that site.
    Thank you for your answer
    I want to…. but I can’t good at English and most South korean believe that story and really serious……

  66. Dear Willyloman and others,

    in my humble opinion, this “Letter to Hillary Clinton” from S. C. Shin is itself a hoax. Well-intentioned perhaps, but ultimately a hoax.

    1) A person who allegedly was an “expert” investigating the Cheonan sinking and now is being sued by the RoK government is asking Hillary Clinton (and by extension Obama) for help? Too naive. He was dissenting from a bunch of US experts. Why would he trust the US at this point? I can’t reconcile the intimidating C.V and technical know-how sprinkled thoughout the “letter” with the facile pleading of the introduction and conclusion. It doesn’t ring true for me.

    2) The diagrams are generally really nice but the English is too poor and the overall narrative too incoherent to rely on them.

    3) The big spoiler for me is Section #9, “Evidences [sic] of grounding”. In photos RA-01, -02, -04 the Cheonan is shown being hoisted by chains. It’s structure is apparently intact, if damaged by the “grounding”. It’s a fact that the corvette was split in half by whatever accident happened, as the author himself later asserts. So I don’t see how a boat in two pieces could be hoisted by cranes, magically re-assembled IN ONE PIECE. Look at the diagrams of the salvage operation here: http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2918834 Two pieces were retrieved.

    There could be an explanation for this and again, maybe there’s useful stuff in here; but having zero familiarity with the host site and with the points I’ve brought up I wouldn’t promote this myself. Let’s be careful.

    Respectfully,

  67. thanks a lot for your tremendous effort to clarify and verify what’s truly true in the midst of pack of lies rendered by rok gov., mod, korean media and so forth. it’s sad enough what happened but regretfully, it’s far more tragic that peope of US and the most of free countries are being lied to by their own gov. officials and media that are dancing over a dying wolf that is north korea. it’s mordern political equivalent of “Le Miserable”….

  68. as I already told Beulahman, I am currently assessing the information through a number of channels (as much as is my capability to do)…

    I do appriciate your caution because that means you care about this issue.

    one thing I can point out at this stage…

    it looks to me like the images of the recovery effort from your source, they are drawn to convey the idea of a ship broken in half and being recovered by pieces.

    that does not mean they attempted to draw them to scale as per how much of the front broke off the vessel, and in fact, wasn’t that illustration done prior to the actual recovery?

    so it was based on the artist having been told what condition the ship was in, rather than a scale version of the sizes of the two parts.

    the image that you see of the actual recovery does not show the ship back together again. That style of ship has an unusually long front end which is broken off of the main body of the ship still and the twisted parts are under the tarp…. the small part of the front end is still gone from the main body.

    but aside from that small point, you make a valid argument about the nature of the letter to Hilary Clinton.

    My biggest issue with all of this is that neither of these “collision” hypothesis deal with the South Korean metallic and explosive residue investigations of May 6th, 2010 which came to the conclusion that the weapon that hit the Cheonan was from Germany.

    Both of these linked articles seem to miss that crucial aspect of all of this.

    I don’t know what that means, but I am doing my best to verify whatever I put up.

    thank you.

  69. 이런 밥마시 우라마시 가튼 이명박 씹활어 쉑키
    개구라 치면서 국제 망신 다시키네
    개샥키

  70. 나? 내가 누구냐고? 내가 바로1분에12타야
    아. 쪽팔려서 이민이라도 가야지..

  71. I do love Korea

  72. now just a preview…

    I did find this official site with an extensive collection of images of the wreckage… one thing I notice is that the Shin letter seems to have a very points…

    wiring doesn’t seem to be melted, no charring, scrapes along the bottom of the hull… now that could be consistant with a torpedo detonating just below the ship, so I have to look more into it, but I can say that the images are quite revealing for those of you who wish to take a look. I am sure most Koreans have already seen this, but many in the US haven’t I feel…

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/Cheosan/cheosan.html

    of course, I still don’t think it was a North Korean torpedo… the evidence is too strong against that possibility.

  73. About time someone outside Korea speaks out !!
    I thank you and congratulate you for the well researched article.
    I have not come across any major foreign medias questioning this Cheonan mystery. I have wondered why ? Are they so naive to just believe and rewrite what the manipulated Korean media is presenting them with?

    In Korea, major medias are heavily censored now and only just recently the South Korean governement threatened the people that they will deal harshly for those questioning the findings.

    There are endless evidence that clearly points to, as you mentioned, some big lies.

    The Korean government has been all along claiming that the state of the art ‘bubble-jet’ torpedo technology is only possible in US, Russia and maybe China. When that seems to have the potential to point the blame at wrong parties, they pointed out to one ‘overwhelming’ evidence that is comical to even the most uneducated.
    This ‘overwhelming’ evidence is a permanent marker handwriting on the torpedo itself !!

    This permanet marker defied the incredible heat from the blast , not to mention the 2 months under the sea.
    Just Google ‘how to remove permanent marker stain with salt.’ and see.
    Did any investigator probe on this?
    Who are these international investigators anyway.. we don’t know who they are and who chose them. The one finvestigator that was appointed from the opposition party, disputed government’s findings and he is now being sued by the government.

    No media fully covered the Exercise Key Resolve/Foal Eagle , a joint military exercise that went on at the time and at the waters where the ship sank. The US and South Korean government are trying to tell us that this old North Korean submarine somehow went unnoticed, blasted the torpedo, struck Cheonan ship in half and went back to its territory unnoticed by at least 5 state of the art 6,800~9,600 ton US and South Korean submarines and naval ships that are the pride of their military might. Shouldn’t they be ashamed if such acts were indeed possible by the North. Instead, they continually tell us proudly how evil North Koreans are.

    How about the fact that the area was at the peak of crabs catching season. Not a single dead crab or fish found..not one!! This torpedo is environmentally sound yet incredible in its effect as to blow up 1,200 ton ship in half and in split second that no survivors could remember what ever happened..when asked, during a press conference almost 2 weeks after the sinking,where they all appeared in hospital gowns (this was really funny), they all supposedly lost their consciousness at the time.
    All survivors were perfectly intact except for few who sustained minor injuries.. they didn’t even get wet!
    No eardrum injuries, when the non-impact blast was to break the ship in half. How do you explain the fact that most windows on the ship was not even broken!

    These survivors were kept out of the public for weeks while the goverment pondered about what exactly happened. When bodies were recovere, they were pointing out to the clothings of the dead soldiers to guess what happened during the sinking. They could have just asked the survivors ,but no,the government told us, they were too traumatized to be bothered. Government told on numerous occasions that these soldiers had to go through an extensive psychological counselling as they are too traumatized. As a Korean, this worries me, I am wondering could these soldiers protect our nation in times of real war?

    I hope what I have said here sheds some light .. The whole world should stop pointing at the wrong guys ( as much as I despise the North regime), and really try to find out the truth. After all, the North just may be crazy enough to do something really crazy!!

  74. See this:

    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5178

    Feffer is clueless and needs to read this article.

  75. to 左手 and everyone else doubting if Chin’s letter is a hoax or not (I doubted it too), have a look here:

    http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/05/113_65828.html

    I think that proves beyond doubt Shin Sang-chul was indeed an investigator and was removed from the team by the SK government. The same article also mentions Chin is president of seoprice.com, the website where the above letter is posted on, so its not someone forging his credentials either.

    Of course this doesnt mean his conclusions have to be correct, but he is who says he is.

  76. We, Saseamo (saseamo@live.com), Korean-Americans for better world-Seattle are ask your help in uncovering the truth behind the recent sinking of the Cheonan, a ROK naval ship happened on March 26 in the Republic of Korea.

    The recent South Korea’s accusation that North Korea torpedoed one of its warships, killing 46 people, has sparked a huge debate in Korea. This official announcement of investigative reports of the multinational probe (sponsored by the South Korean government) on May 20th has only generated increased speculations and suspicions about the validity of the investigation.

    The reason is simple. The scientific, circumstantial and physical evidences that the South Korean government presented genuinely lack “common sense”. The torpedo parts recovered as material evidence is still under the debate on its scientific validity. No signs of burn, limb separations, ear drum rupture from the survivors as well as the dead from its deadly torpedo attack. The government has refused to disclose the TOD images, KNTDS (Korea Naval Tactical Data System), radio transmission records, CCTV from the time of the incident with all kinds of excuses. An examination of any single listed would end the debate.

    Increasing number of South Koreans are becoming more suspicious about the government’s intentions – to use this incident as their political leverage for the upcoming provincial election. Please follow the link below to learn more of the “facts” surrounding the incident and help us uncover the truth!

    Please contact to saseamo@live.com for more information.

    Thank you

    [link]

    http://www.seoprise.com/board/view.php?uid=153031&table=seoprise_12&mode=search&field=nic&s_que=

    http://www.seoprise.com/board/view.php?table=seoprise_12&uid=154146

  77. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of the… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  78. Hi, Willy

    The letter that you just read written by Mr. Shin is not a hoax as far as I have traced the news from the outset of this accident in March. One post that suggests that it can be a hoax is based on two observations – first, the quality of English, and second, why in the heaven he addressed the letter to the Secretary Clinton.

    To begin with, the person, Mr. Shin, I don’t know him by person. But I’ve made visits to his website many times – he is running a website in South Korea which advocates people’s right to know as well as supporting the more democratic minded movements in Korea. In other words, he is not a shadowy figure. He is known well by many people. As a matter of fact, it was reported in Korean news media that he was subpoenaed to the Central Prosecutors Office today for his posts related to this accident. In the beginning, he published his questions and doubts in his website hoping that Korean government would shed truth. But as it turned out, it didn’t. Then he briefed his findings to the opposition party, and the party recommended him as their official investigator representing the party. That’s how he became a member of the Congressional investigation team, which he called ‘National Assembly.’

    As to the quality of English in his letter to the Secretary Clinton, he simply must not be good at English, like many Koreans who don’t use English everyday. Once my pastor in the NYC joked. If one speaks three languages, it’s tri-lingual, two, bilingual, one, then it’s American.

    As to his reason for addressing the letter to Mrs. Clinton, he actually reflected the feelings of many Koreans. Only a few days ago, when many Koreans were skeptical about the truthfulness of the government’s report, Mrs. Clinton as the Secretary of State, made a comment blaming NK for the accident endorsing Korean government’s official investigation report. Then following her visit to China, she stopped over Korea staying a few hours meeting with Korean president Lee giving her support to his hostile policy against NK.

    To illuminate the political backdrop, something may need to be added. There will be elections for Korean provincial government offices on the next Wednesday, June the second. (Just imagine it as elections for the governors and mayors in the US) The current ruling party which has its root from the military dictatorship of 70s and 80s currently feels pinch because its policy of favoring the wealthy people against the poor as well as its dictatorial tendency suppressing people’s opinions has brought down their approval rating low. And their time-proven way to consolidate their supporting base is to make a drumbeat of war blaming the NK. (In the time of crisis we’re the party to count on for the national security, they would like to argue. Doesn’t it sound familiar?) In this context, allegation of torpedoing by NK would help them, they thought.

    To go back to the accident, the sinking happened when the ship was part of joint US-Korean naval exercise. Currently, the Korean armed forces are under operational command of the US. It means that the US military command has all information related to the accident, for example, the location and speed of the ship minute by minute at the time of accident, which the opposition parties have asked to make public. But Korean government refused to make it public. And something very peculiar happened soon after the accident. The US commander in Korea, the Army General Sharp, who was in the US at the time of the accident, flew back to Korea the next day. Then as rescue operation went on, General Sharp and the US ambassador to Korea visited the accident site and met the surviving family of a UDT team member, warrant officer Han, who died during the rescue operation. (Visit of a Korean military accident site by the top US commander is very rare, if not never happened before, let alone a visit by the ambassador, a civilian. Also the US embassy hoisted a half flag. The picture of their visit and the flag was shown in the Korean news media.) And the location where Mr. Han died was not the same spot where the rescue workers lifted the wreckage of the ship later. And a surviving UDT team member was quoted as saying that they saw a ‘structure’ and entered it after ‘opening the hatch.’ Also a US Seahawk helicopter (SH-60 look alike) was photographed by Korean news medias on this spot lifting something. As you guessed, this all contributed to the rumor that the accident involved a collision with a sub and that Mr. Han’s death was something having to do with this mysterious underwater structure, not rescue operation of the sunken Korean ship…

    To go back to the letter to Mrs. Clinton, the initial briefing by the US Statement Department was something of this line, ‘the accident did not appear to involve anything other than the ship itself,’ contradicting Korean government’s hinting of torpedoing by NK. But as time went on, this posture by the US has been changed to the point of Mrs. Clinton’s hawkish remarks. At this many Koreans wondered. They knew that the current Korean government was going to exploit the accident to their political advantage. But when they heard the hawkish remarks of Mrs. Clinton, they wondered if the US was collaborating with the Korean government for whatever reasons they have. Mr. Shin’s letter to Mrs. Clinton is a letter of pleading in this context, in my opinion.

    As to your question why Mr. Shin did not include any analysis on torpedoing, my guess is that he simply didn’t believe that it was the case. As you’ve already found yourself, there simply is not any credible evidence for torpedoing. There are more than a few people who put their opinions against official Korean government’s report. They include a person currently working at the Brookings Institute and a couple of university professors in the US. (There was an interview with CNN with one professor.) Also, an owner of a firm, ship salvage operations, in Korea who had been involved with many ship accidents ruled out torpedoing as a cause of ship splitting. As a side note, if a NK sub was able to penetrate the US –Korea joint naval exercise area, to sink one of its warships and to return without being detected, their sub operation must be one of the best in the world. (As a matter of fact, the US sub was able to track a very small NK spy sub in the East Sea of Korea that left its port in NK and tried to infiltrate South Korean water long time ago.)

    Hope it helps.

  79. Dear all,

    As it was mentioned from previous several posts, the letter written by Mr. Shin who is the president of popular blog, “ Seoprise” dealing political issues in South Korea, is not fake, but is supported by many people in Korea.

    Based on his careers as a navy sailor and ship building worker, he is arguing that the official announcement of Korean government for sinking of warship might not be real fact. He insists that the other reason is involved such as grounding or simple collision.

    Mr. Shin worked as the member of investigation team selected by opposite party, Democratic Party in Korea. However, after working on this formal project for only several weeks, he has been sued by Korean Military Department due to revealing his private opinions to media without their permission.

    Furthermore, the South Korean government and ruling party use this accident for the tool of effective propaganda in general election which will be held 2nd of June in Korea. All important issue and policy debate has been dead by this accident and war panic.

    Although the English of his letter sent to Mrs. Clinton is a bit poor, it definitely contains many reliable facts collected by his own investigation for a long time and we should consider that English is a second language to him.

    If there is anyone who wish contact him, you can reach him by his email contact, ‘seop2002 at hanmail.net’

    Many thanks Willyloman and other friends for posting your excellent views and reading my words.

    Cheers.

  80. To Jay and Greg;

    I want to thank you for contributing your personal perspectives in this matter.

    With regard to the “tone” of Mr. Shin’s letter to Secretary of State Clinton:

    1. I don’t care about his “tone”…
    2. How can I or anyone else say what “tone” the man should take writing a letter to Hilary Clinton? especially considering he is living in a country that is run like a client state to the US State Department? Maybe the man didn’t want to be “disappeared”? Who knows.
    3. Personally, I would opened the letter with “Dear Globalist Swine Clinton”… but that’s just me… I’m not too bright…
    4. It is also quite probable that Mr. Shin is aware of his own political standing and does not want to diminish that in any way by sending insulting letters to leaders of another country.
    5. His pending lawsuit factors in as well…

    But now to the more important issues…

    Yes it does bother me that Mr. Shin did not mention the South Korean study released on May 6th.

    But lets address these points quickly…

    6. How does Mr. Shin explain the massive damage to the Cheonan? The ship was split in two and according to his own research, one of the commanding officers was found dead in his private area in the back of the ship… had this ship been limping along then hit by another ship, unless that damage was massive and sudden, would that officer been on the bridge or at least somewhere on deck during the emergency?

    7. Again, the damage to the ship was massive, it was split right in two. Now, if that had been the result of a collision, wouldn’t the other ship have suffered damage as well? And wouldn’t that have left traces of the ship on the wreckage that Mr. Shin examined?

    8. If Mr. Shin is saying that the ship damage was not that bad and that it only broke in two when it hit the bottom, well that means the ship sank slowly… why didn’t the 46 crew members make way to the life boats or even have time to get into their vests and survival suits? It must have one down very quickly and that implies massive damage to the vessel. Is it possible that much damage was done without leaving tell-tale signs of the other vessel involved?

    9. Again, looking at the actual photos from the site I put a link up to, you can see how the bottom of the ship does seem to be caved inward as if a massive explosion took place directly under the weak point of the ship. This is what modern torpedos do.

    I don’t think Mr. Shin is being deliberately deceptive.

    I think that he and many others are looking at the faked torpedo story and they are therefore dismissing other evidence along with the fake evidence… like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

    I also think the idea that someone else’s torpedo sinking a vessel in his navy gives him reason to pause as well… because that simply means a different war may come with an advisary other than the one Hilary Clinton is trying to pick…

    In short, I don’t think Mr. Shin is trying to deceive anyone… but I also don’t think he has come to a completely accurate conclusion.

    I don’t see how that damage could have been done to the Cheonan without leaving paint, metal, or even sailors from the other vessel behind…

    I don’t see how a collision that didn’t cause massive damage could have taken all those South Koreans sailors (my sympathies to all their families and loved ones) to the bottom so quickly without more of them at least getting into survival suits.

    Aren’t these ships equiped with collision alarms? was the collision alarm sounded?

    Now they may have grounded and then been sunk either by accident or by design… but if I had to guess, by the way the State Department is pimping their “evidence’, I would suggest that they are doing that in a desperate attempt to keep the world (North Korea, China, Russia, the UN) from knowing the truth about the sinking of the Cheonan… and that leads me to believe it wasn’t done by accident… it looks more and more like a torpedo… and if they are lying and can’t prove it was North Korea’s torpedo… then it was someones.

    now again, I am still researching this stuff… anything you can send would be very helpful.

    Again, we should be a bit more tolerant when we discuss Mr. Shin’s “tone” with Hilary Clinton… remember, she holds the key to Gitmo and apparently has the will to use it.

    I thank you for your insight into this issue.

    scott creighton (willyloman)

  81. 천안함의 침몰 : 우리는 계속해서 거짓말을 듣고 있다
    기사 등록 2010, 5월 24일

    스콧 크레이톤

    의심의 여지가 없다. 잠깐 뒤로 물러나서 생각할 이유도 손톱 많치 없다. 나는 천암함 증거물을 유심히 관찰해 봤고 이런 결론에 이르렀다. 또 한번 (북한의)”정권 교체” 캠페인 이나 북한과의 전면전을 치루기 위한 ‘도덕적 정당성’을 급조하기 위해 백악관에 있는 우리 “지도자”들로부터 우리는 또다시 거짓말을 듣고 있다고…

    수거한 어뢰가 완벽하게 일치한다고? 천만에…

    합조단은 천암함 발표중 자신들이 발견한 증거물과 관련해서 CHT – 02d 어뢰의 구조를 보여줬다. 합조단은 이 어뢰가 북한의 어뢰와 “완벽하게 일치”한다고 발표했다.

    하지만 전혀 “완벽한 일치”가 아니다. 외국 조사단들이 자신들이 참여한 “조사”에 서명을 하고 싶어하지 않았던 이유도 바로 이런것 때문이 아닐까?
    합조단 발표시 입수한 어뢰 도면과 실제 수거한 어뢰간에는 분명히 다른점이 4가지 있다. 이중 하나는 결단코 이 둘이 전혀 일치하지 않고 있음을 보여준다.

    A & D – 여기서 ‘프로펠러 허브 디자인’의 차이를 분명히 식별할수 있다. 위 도면상에는 허브가 작은 반면에 아래 수거된 어뢰에서는 허브가 도면상의 것보다 크다.

    B – 프로펠러의 실제 모양이 아주 다르다. 위 도면상에는 움푹 들어간 부위(노취)가 있지만 아래 실제 어뢰는 이 부위가 존재하지 않는다. 프로펠라 세트의 앞과 뒷부분 뿐만아니라 날개의 전체적 모양도 상당히 다르다.

    프로펠라를 바꿔끼우지 않고서야 이 차이를 설명하기가 쉽지 않다. 난 이것이 가능할지도 모른다고 생각했지만 이들 어뢰는 상당히 조율되고 고도로 디자인된 시스템이기에 이 허브 디자인을 자전거 바퀴 바꾸듯이 바꿔치기 할수는 없을 것이다. 아무튼, 다른 종류의 프로펠라로 바꿔 치기할수 있는게 가능하다 라고 쳐도, 위 두가지는 틀림없이 “완벽한 일치”는 아니다.

    위 둘이 같은 어뢰가 아니라는 마지막 증거는,

    C – 찬찬히 보시면 눈치쳈겠지만, 위 도면상의 스테이블라이저(추진 스스템?)는 분명히 분리판의 앞부분에 있지만 아래 수거된 어뢰에서는 분리판(어뢰의 몸체와 꼬리부분을 분리해줌) 뒤쪽에서 이 추진 시스템을 감싸고 있다.

    이점은 이런류의 어뢰가 작동하는 결정적 디자인의 일부이고 따라서 쉽게 바꿀수 없기 때문에 설명이 불가하다. 단연코 이 차이점은 두개의 무기가 전혀 다름을 보여주고 있다.

    연구가 ‘잔’씨가 지적했듯 이밖에 다른점이 많이 있다. 수거된 어뢰의 샤프트(2번)의 형태는 왼쪽으로 가면서 점점 가늘어지지만 도면상에는 원통 파이프처럼 직선형이다. 난 날개의 모양에서도 다른 점을 발견했다.

    이런점으로 봐서 외국 조사자들이 자신들이 한 연구에 서명을 선택하지 않았던건 이해할만 하다.

  82. The actual South Korean President Mr. Lee, Myong-Bak is a kind of dictator such as his North friend M. Kim, Jong-il. Amnesty International, UN rapporteur Mr. La Rue and many other international organizations testimonifided it very recently. In South Korea, anyone could not criticize the government; You will be arrested.

    Two dictators are the same team and have the same goal; increasing the tension to maintain their political power in the own part of Korean peninsular. The actual tention between two Koreas must be understood in this context. Almost every electoral season in South Korea were held in this kind of circumstances.

    Two Korean dictators are just impostors. That is all.

  83. @scott,

    Regarding the collision theory; I tend to agree with what you are saying, and if a ship collision took place, powerful enough to rip the ship in 2, one would expect to see some evidence of that.

    But here is an idea: what if a sub emerged underneath the cheonan? Im no engineer, I have no clue if that could break a ship up, or maybe if this could have happened after the ship was damaged by running aground (Chin does have some credible evidence this happened earlier on).

    Just thinking out loud. It would match a lot of theories and datapoints.

  84. Am I crazy or did I just watch a South Korean say that there are 50 survivors of the sinking of the Cheonan?

    does anyone know how many survivors there were?

    are they being allowed to talk? Its been two months… have they said much?

  85. Jong-Kun Choi said “46 sailors out of 108 people on board were killed”

    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5178

    what is being said by the survivors?

  86. willyloman: No one allowed to talk in public.

  87. Blame the idiot called 2MB. For people who don’t know, it’s a nickname of the South Korean president.

  88. The survivors had not been injured and showered by the water by the explosion. Is it possible? And the survivors said they haven’t seen any flame and haven’t heared any noise. Now you know NK have the most powerful torpedo that can split the ship in two, and don’t kill or harm human and only damage the ship. We call the torpedo “Eco-friendly super Torpedo”

  89. willyloman:

    I have some photos that I would like ask some advice regarding to the wreckage of ship by explosion. How can I upload those photos?

  90. The survivors had not been seriously injured(just slightly hurt) and showered by the water from explosion. Is it possible? And the survivors said they haven’t seen any flame and haven’t heard big noise.(The noise didn’t hurt their ear at all) ….

    Sorry I’m not good at English…

  91. moon;

    you can go to Flickr and set up a photo sharing account… I think it is free..

    http://www.flickr.com/

    you might need a Yahoo ID though…

    http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/edit/id_password/

  92. Willyloman / Scott C.,

    the fact that the investigative report on the Cheonan incident has no testimony from the ship’s survivors (at least that I’ve heard of, I know the North Korean reports have remarked on this omission) is one of the major flaws of the case as presented. I don’t know what any survivors are on record as saying. The North Korean Central News Agency dispatch entitled “National Defence Commission Issues Statement” of May 20 implies that only soldiers died and all officers were rescued.

    A mea culpa — I stand corrected about the “Shin letter”, I was mistaken to think it was a hoax; I apologize and should have done more research and comparison before I wrote anything to that effect. Thanks to Mika for the Korea Times link and also to the Korean friends who provided corroboration in a kind and not cruel way. I also realize that the photos I was questioning do show a broken part of the Cheonan.

    I’d would like to clarify that I didn’t say poor English amounted to proof of some kind of imposture, I was saying that the problematic English would be a big obstacle to using this material as evidence in English-speaking media. I study a foreign language myself and don’t judge anyone by their non-native language skill.

    To peace and unity for the Korean peninsula…

  93. Neo, you have a link or source for those testimonials?

  94. Hi Scott,

    Thanks for your kind response and humor. Despite my general perspective of the situation involving the accident, when it comes to the details, I don’t know much other than what I read. Personally, I see only some dots but too many missing links. Crucial information that should have been made available simply has not been made available.

    There is also a rumor that there is a military TOP (thermal optical device) records that captured the moment of ship’s splitting, which was taken from the nearby island. Allegedly, it didn’t show the characteristic of live torpedo hit. (A water column as high as 300 ft as argued by the government report.) A congresswoman asked for the release of it only to be sued by the government just for asking for it.

    One person that I mentioned above, owner of salvation operation firm, said that the type of the bottom of the ship (caved in) also occurs when a ship is broken by the causes other than torpedo hit. He said he actually saw the wreckage of the ship that was hit by torpedo. In the case of torpedo hit, the inside of ship cannot be as neat as in the case of Cheonan. The pictures of 40 mm and 76 mm shell boxes in the ship show that they were still stacked very orderly which must have disrupted violently if the ship was hit by a torpedo. (This was pointed by a political science professor in the US, who majored in physics as undergraduate.)

    Some one is making a guess that a dummy torpedo might have hit it. But I have no idea of the characteristics of dummy torpedo and how it can be related to sinking of a ship. I am sorry that I am not much of help in details. But let’s hope that the truth will come out eventually. And I appreciate your help on this very much.

    Jay

  95. Jay and everyone else;

    It may be possible that a submerged vessel breeched (surfaced) from underneath the Cheonan? Would that cause damage consistant with what we see in the photos? that would also explain why there wasn’t debris from the other vessel, because the damage came from the Cheonan’s own weight distribution cracking it in half. That would also explain why they are keeping sailors from talking to the press…. it could be a possiblity. and if it were a US sub, that would certainly explain why Hilary is in such a rush to blame North Korea. that would be one hell of a fuck-up though wouldn’t it? is it even possible?

  96. Being lied….. sorry, I tried to read it…
    does anyone know how to translate “Being Lied” comment? Would like to know what he/she has said…. seems it is something about the torpedo and the damage done to the ship and survivors…
    I tried to online translators but mostly all I got was english quoted in a disorgainzed manner….

  97. Jan,
    He just translated Scott article, nothing about torpedo. It is for those Korean who come to this site.
    BTY, this article become an issue in Korea now.
    They are saying WOW, how come the Korean journalist can’t write an article like this….and they think it is because the Korean government restrict them. So sad…

  98. Dr. Choi says the entire event is probably a ploy being used by both the North and South dictators in order to insure their elections that are coming up in June….
    guess they didn’t plan on starting WWIII and now want to back out as peacefully as possible… ???
    62 survivors and none can say anything.. yet some here comment that survivors said they saw no flames and heard no explosion…
    impossible… even if the ship just broke up, a huge amount of noise is bound to have occured.. metal doesn’t rip and tear like a piece of toilet paper…
    and the electrical connections from one end of ship to another is bound to have sparked and at least looked like a fire was about to start… just the sheer jolt of the ship breaking would have thrown everything around..
    and 46 dead? they didn’t die from fear… something violent killed them… and it wasn’t just a wave of water..
    sailors know how to swim… if they died from drowning because they were trapped inside in lower decks because they had no warning about what was taking place.. like sounds of knocking against something and then loud sirens going off…… then it had to be something violent and sudden..like a torpedo.
    I don;t see how another sub could rise hard under the ship without rising the ship up out of the water… after all, the ship was up… up in the water… a sub would have to rise mighty fast and hard to slam that hard to break a ship into two pieces… and lord help the sub, it would have been totaled also… wouldn’t the topside of the sub had been flattened?
    just asking….

  99. Hello Kay,
    yeah, it is sad here also. Our journalists are mostly silenced also.
    it is sad…

  100. Jay, you mean in your country also? I thought it is only in Korea or some communist country…
    Never mind those Korean who come here and write some rubbish (not Being lied), probably those people are the one who controlled by their government…
    They are doing same thing in Korea, and calming those who speak truth as a North Korean spy.
    Remember Korea, is only country (both side) under War and Cold War. I do not know what was wrong. They are still fighting for ideology…

  101. Kay, it is trouble in all nations today… riots in many nations about the working class being forced into lower and lower wage jobs or no job at all.
    the very wealthy (not all of them) have formed a unity of global power and they want to control the world..
    like a real life comic version of the Orwellian world of 1984 (a book) by George Orwell.
    I say ‘comic’ because even if they accomplish their plan, they will be victims of it…. no power group survives long because they ‘eat’ each other up ….destroy each other out of their own fear of being destroyed….
    I hope Korea settles this conflict peacefull.

  102. ㅇㅇ;의 생각…

    요건 또 뭐야. 스모킹 건은 조작됐다!… 원문링크: The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To……

  103. Hi scott

    You got quite famous in S Korea overnight. As you can gather from the number of hits and posts from S. Korea, not a small number of people do not believe the government announcement.

    Though I lack the technical expertise to jugde the evidences by myself, the fact that the S. Korean government is sueing left and right against anyone raising questions about the official story is enogh to tell me that something fish is going on. Mr. Shin whose letter to Ms. Clinton appears above is not alone in this company.

    Ms. Jung-Hee Lee, an opposition party member of the national assembly was recently also sued for claiming that she got an inside leak that there is an video image capturing the moment of the ship’s sinking, and two colonels of the Joint Chief of staffs Office watched it. She was sueed by all the colonels of the Joint Chief’s Office for libel. There were 7 colonels in the Office, and all 7 of them jointly filed the suit.

    Mr. Sun-Won Park who was an aide to the former and late president Mu-Hyun Rho, and is now a visiting scholar at the Brookings Institute was also sued for bringing attention to the joint military exercise going on at the time of ship’s sinking, that information was completly missing at the first wave of media coverage, and raising the possibility of friendly fire.

    And complaints have been filed against 8 newpapers by the governemnt for various reasons to the Media Mediation Comittee, which hear complaints against newpaper or broadcast coverage and can order correction.

    And some other people wrtiting on the internet for spreading rumors.

    This governement has been liberal with libel suit to intimidate and silence the critique. But I’ve never seen them so busy.

    However in the past you got arrested for that, and now you get only sued. I may call it progress.

    By the way, about the German Torpedo. If you want to find a German torpedo, you don’t have to go far. Korean Navy operates German designed submarine Fleet. Some google search tells me that those subs carry German made SUT Mod 2 torpedoes.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_214_submarine

    Do you also know that the sunken patrol ship also carried anti-submarine torpedos. They are MK 46. I heard one of them are still missing, along with 16 depth charges.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pohang_class_corvette

    Hope it will help.
    Whether the cause of the sinking is torpedo or not, if the torpedo is not what they say it is, it will be something.

    By the way, to a lighter note. Though It is completly unrelated story, when I hear that No. 1 was written on the remains of the torpedo, it reminded me of something the Korean navy had done 18 years ago.

    In 1992 Korean navy underwater search and salvage team found a 16th century bronze cannon which was supposed to be carried by the legendary turtle ship. The turtle ship was a warship used by Koreans to fight the Japapnese invasion force in the a 16th century war, and supposed to be the world first ironclad warship.

    1992 being the the 400th anniversary of the beginning of that war and the commander of the Korean navy at that war, adm. Sun-Shin Lee, is a national hero, a navy search and salvage team was assembled by the presidential order to find any relics belonging to him or his fleet. And viola! The team found a bronze cannon belonging to the turtle ship.

    How do you know the cannon belonged to the turtle ship? A nice poem was inscribed on the breech of the cannon. Roughly translated:

    Turtle ship’s cannon scares hell out of enemy ships
    Once fired
    Burry enemy ships under the sea without fail.

    The cannon was accepted as genuine and disignated as the national treasure No. 274.

    4 years later, the cannon turned out to be a fake. The captain in charge of the salvage team was basically given a fool’s errand, and frustrated with no result to show. So he conspired with a shady antique dealer to make his own relics. He made himself a brand new cannon, inscribed the nice poem, and gave it a nice chemical bath to give it an aged look. He dropped it into the sea and later found it.

    The captain was arrested and the fake cannon was struck from the national treasures list. Because of this, the No. 274 is missing in the national treasure list.

    When I heard that No.1 was written on the remains of the torpedo, I thought that it would have been much much better, if the number have been No. 274. If so we can finally fill the gap in the natioanl treasure list.

  104. I cant wait to see the next article about this issue, Korean ship.
    I’ll be back after some time.
    Thank all of you…We all want to know what is truth.

  105. Scott,

    I think that’s what Mr. Shin is thinking and theorizing based on what he sees on the lifted ship – many side scratches, bent stabilizer, bent right screw. Mr. Shin and others also have posted a possibility before that it might have been hit by a sub. But given the sensitive nature of it they are very cautious about it. Bent screw of only starboard side just does not explain torpedo hit. He thinks it occurred when it hit bottom of the sea while the ship was trying to go backward. (Some analyzed that it could happen if the screw hit the surface of steel such as sub’s deck.)

    Personally, I was skeptical on the possibility of collision with a sub because of my trust (?) in the advanced sonar technology of the subs and the shallow depth of the area. To be sure, the information on the ship’s location, speed and course is needed. That way, the possibility of collision can be at least either affirmed or ruled out. But it is not available now. Perhaps my trust in technology may not be warranted because there were at least two or three collisions that involved the US subs and Korean and Japanese civilian ships in recent years. All surface ships involved in collisions sank immediately. But the subs were intact. My guess is that the hulls of the subs are very strong. They are supposed to withstand the high pressure of deep sea even though it may not apply to the outer hull. Regardless, all US nuclear subs can surface in the Artic area breaking the ice of 3 feet thick. And all accidents were said to have been denied by the governments of the US, Japan and Korea initially.

    Some posted the possibility, calling it their imagination or novel, that the ship might have been hit by a Virginia class sub which is designed to operate in the relatively shallow water. And the Virginia class subs can fit a small sub for SEAL team on its rear deck behind the conning tower. Still Virginia class sub is around 7900 ton and 380 ft long, and I am not sure if it was operating in the shallow water like the area around the island. For the curiosity, a Virginia class sub ‘Hawaii’ went to dry dock in Hawaii on 3/31 for repair, five days after the accident date of 3/26. Can it sail to Hawaii in 5 days, if it were to sail from Korea to Hawaii in a hypothetical scenario? Perhaps not given the distance and ships maximum official speed of 25 knots. Some think the arrival date of 3/31 may not to accurate. But I don’t guess anything on this matter. It’s beyond me.

    But one thing that I know for sure is that Korean government keeps changing its words on this accident, and Mrs. Clinton appears to endorse it even though she qualifies it. I’ve been wondering how this kind of word changing with about face could happen. But it happens, sadly.

  106. Lee, Jong-In, a sea rescue expert, claimed in a serise of interviews, that Cheonan ran aground, refloated by whatever methods, but sank due to flooding.

    He said the heavy turbine engines (about 50 tons) combined with flooded sea water and the damages in the engine room area by agrounding broke Cheonan’s hull.

    The turbine engine room was also salvaged, but the Korean govement has not shown any picture of it yet.

    According to the UNSIGNED report, the turbine engine room is the nearest (3 meters away) spot where a torpedo exploded. We can easily expect that the turbine engine room area is most damaged beyond all recognition.

    Since the Korean goverment has a tendancy to never release an evidence that contradicts their claim like the UNSIGNED report, I expect that we won’t be able to see a photo of the turbine engine room.

    The reason Mr. Lee does not believe torpedo theory is that the damages done to the hull does not look like a torpedo hit at all. When flooded ship’s hull could not stand the weight any more, it just breaks, and the wrinkles he saw in a photo of the damaged area matches what he saw from agrounded and broken ships in the past. The wrinkles are just one evidence, the broken propeller screw blades, damaged hull base, scratched surfaces are others.

    KNTDS (a Korean Navy information system) recorded where and how fast Cheonan was moving like a blackbox. The KNTDS data like the coordinates of Cheonan around the accident time can disprove any agounding theory if the ship indeed did not run aground . But whatever reason we can easily guess, the data have never been released.

  107. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of th… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  108. [...] posted this link on another forum: http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010…being-lied-to/ I'm not sure what to make of it yet. [...]

  109. The Korean navy underwater specialist named Jun-ho Han was killed while working on recovering operation of the US submarine sunk in the water close to the spot whare Chonan was sunk. There was no reason that he was working on that spot far removed from the spots where Chonan was sunk unless there is something that could not be revealed. The korean navy underwater specialists who took part in the recovery all said afterward that they saw and got into the “hatch” and saw long wires inside. This is as incriminating as it can get. Also there is no reason the US commander, general Sharp, cut his visit to Washington to testify to US congress and hastily returned to Korea to participate what turned out to be a funeral service for the Korean navy underwater specialist, Jun-ho Han. What is astonishing is that the general is not alone in the funeral, and even US ambassdor Stephens attened in the funeral conducted in the Korean warship named Dokdo. The general even handed out some condolence money to the family of Jun-ho Han. It was a collision between a US submarine and Chonan that resulted in the Killing of 47 korean soldiers, and it was an accident.

  110. Wow, awesome work. I’m ashamed to say that is way more convincing than the reports filed by our own government in South Korea

    Of course there have been researches and articles about the ‘torpedo’ and how it was weird the coarpses and ammos found in the sunken ship were preserved VERY well despite the torpedo attack. I could send you copies but they are all in Korean…There are just too many holes in the ‘investigation’ to overlook.

    However anti-North feeling in the South is enormous and the governmnt seems so determined to label this as a “North Korean attack”.

    Would you mind if I link this article in some South Korean websites? I think an outside opinion of the incident is more likely to be viewed as “objective” whatever the hell that means.

  111. Have you noticed any occasion that US ambassador visits another country solder’s funeral officially?

  112. Nice report. BTW, can you tell me where you’ve downloaded or acquired this “unsigned report”?

  113. kkk..this is simply bs. unless you’re a torpedo expert, you don’t understand the blueprint of CHT-02D. and your misunderstanding leads you to disbelieve in the report. if they wanted to lie to the world, they wouldn’t have said that “the torpedo’s metal and explosive residue indicated that it had come from a German origin.” they would’ve said that they were the same as NK’s.

  114. DO YOU GUYS KNOW THAT THE PRESIDENT OF S.K HAS 14 CRIMINAL RECORDS.

  115. If you want peace, prepare to impeach the President of SK.

  116. it was two seperate reports SA. One released on May 6th and the other released on May20th.

  117. YangMan

    certainly… this is the link to the PDF of the report

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/20_05_10jigreport.pdf

  118. hankyul moon

    that is very odd, and I am going to be looking into that this evening a litle later. thank you for the tip.

  119. Thanks for the link of the report. I was reading their materials on Ministries of Defense and many of their publishings do not have signatures. This could be just their practice which is different from other countries.

    Do you know, if the report does not have signatures because people have refused to sign it or this is just cultural differences.

    Again, I will much appreciate your responses.

  120. I do not understand. Is it really a lie?

  121. Hello all,
    Good hear Korean voice here.
    Just wanted to make few points:

    1) http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%B2%9C%EC%95%88%ED%95%A8_%EC%B9%A8%EB%AA%B0_%EC%82%AC%EA%B1%B4 this is in Korean and I can’t translate all. It is nicely organized and will be good to look if you can read.
    2) one more for Cheonan itsself, http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCC-772_%EC%B2%9C%EC%95%88

    3) A hypothesis about Crash between Cheonan and US submarine. Its been questioned by some Korean people and a Japanese journalist and a Chinese blog. I try to translate them later, not sure if I can.

    http://tanakanews.com/100507korea.htm

    韓国軍艦「天安」沈没の深層 2010年5月7日 田中 宇
    ▼第3ブイに沈没する米潜水艦

    http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_49ba0ec20100hya9.html

    潜艇撞击是“天安舰”沉没的最可能原因 (2010-04-26 21:18:07)

    4) This is by another Nickname, proves the true accident spot although it is not officially confirmed by ROK gov.

    http://www.seoprise.com/board/view.php?table=seoprise_12&uid=145321

    Again, this is in Korean, no time for translation for now. Look some pictures inside.

    Just FYI for now, and hope there are more translations by more people.
    Bests,

  122. There are so many South Koreans who do not want to believe it is not North Korean’s fault, and they are introducing your post to South Koreans.

    I think you become a Messiah for them. Because it has been hard to find foreign people insist the investigation of Cheonan should be hoax.

    They said you are an English reporter and military expert. More and more South Koreans are now watching you.

    I have read some Korean news articles about this post. This is one of them. http://news.joins.com/article/960/4203960.html?ctg=12

    Personally I do not know what the truth is. I hope you can help South Koreans find the truth. Thank you.

  123. Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette (By Wayne Madsen)

    http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_5930.shtml

  124. North Korea is exporting torpedo.
    That means Anyone can buy it.

    So it can not be the evidence, even if the torpedo is really north Korean.

    I

  125. S. Korea Govt’s Blockbuster Thriller

    “1번” – Directed by Blue magic pen

  126. United States have prior knowledge of the sinking of cheonan 2 weeks before the incident actually take place.

    Russia tips: United States advocating South to go to war with North as they’ll stand of gain lucratively in the conflict

  127. As a Korean of the reports, thank you for the truth

  128. it’s show. like 911 terror

  129. 이거 대한민국 사람이면 늙은이들만 빼고 다 안다. 이명박과 미국이 짜고 북한을 치려고 하는것. 천안함은 절대 어뢰에 의해 침몰한게 아니야. 고의로 침몰시켰거나 배가 노후되 파괴된거지. 이걸 미끼로 911테러처럼 북한짓으로 몰고가서 북한을 고립시키려는거야. 좆같은 경우지.

  130. [...] usually the insinuations are directed at the Korean government.  However, Scott Creighton at Willyloman.wordpress.com  implies that it is the American government that is deceiving us – the American citizens: It is [...]

  131. And you can find out so many untold fact about Chun An if you google korean web in Korean.
    For example..- The markings in Hangul, which reads “1번(or No. 1 in English)”, found inside the end of the propulsion section, is consistent with the marking of a previously obtained North Korean torpedo. ..is not fact.
    North Korean does not use expression of 1번( No. 1 in English) marking on torpedo because it is tradition of imperial Japan.But Westerners do not know this.

  132. Thank you Scott Creighton.
    Truth will be with you!

  133. thanx for being aware of this matter cuz I’m really worried about the situation. Actually I’m korean and many old believe explosion was done by N. Korea due to media. unfortunately, medias are favoured by S. Korean Government. they are really rubish.

    appreciate for attention.

  134. help me
    I’m afraid Lee Myung bak

  135. Western countries think sinking of the Cheonan is backed by NK. However, this is very doubtful. The “overwhelming and condemning” evidence is actually very doubtful, because how come marker not be washed out by salty sea water? and what about TOD video record? a representative just exposed the existence of TOD video, and, the ruling party showed the video after 38 seconds of explosion of the Cheonan. If you see the picture, there’s no wave around the Cheonan, and any aftershock of torpedo. I am very sure Western countries were totally deceived by South Korean government, or Western countries are using this situation for WAR.

  136. Sol, 38 seconds after torpedo impact there would be nothing to see on the thermal imagery, besides a sinking ship. Here is a 300kg warhead torpedo impact:

    After about 15s there is pretty much nothing left to see from the shore line.

    I also dont know what makes you think a marker (used on a torpedo no less) wouldnt be salt water resistant.

    Dont get me wrong, I am anything but convinced by the evidence, but lets find facts.

  137. Mika, the No 1 written in marker seems to have been written after the torpedo went rust completly.

  138. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of the… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  139. And the overwhelming and condeming evidence is the No 1 written in the blue market-ONLY.

  140. Strangely, there were 3 Aegis ships (2 American, 1 Korean) in such a small sea area between China and S. Korea and they did not notice the torpedo and what shot it to the corvette even after its sinking!!!!!

  141. the following comment was left by a reader and it did not go through so I am posting it here so that others may read it.

    Mr. Serandos: WordPress sometimes has problems with comments… it should work fine but if posting again presents a problem, just me know. thank you

    scott creighton
    willyloman

    Tom Serandos left the following comment:

    I tried to leave the following message on Mr. Creighton’s site but I don’t think it went through.

    PCC-772 report: I agree with the contents of the report.

    Examine the photographs of the PCC-772 props. The deformation on each fluke is evidence of grounding while making turns. If there was an explosion it occurred after the ship ran aground or only the lower flukes would have been damaged when it settled to the bottom. The damage to the shaft alleys would have locked up the props.

    If there was an explosion perhaps it was an unexploded bomb from the Korean war or a mine the S. Koreans have not retrieved (reportedly there are over 100 of those still out there). It could have been in the vessels path when it grounded.

    Also, the degree of corrosion on the torpedo parts indicates they have been in the sea for a very long time (months). It was long enough for the active alloy in the props to set up a galvanic cell with the other parts.

    I am a degreed metallurgist with 25 years of experience and seven years of service in the U.S. Nuclear Navy.

    Tom Serandos

  142. All the story told by kr.gov about N. Korea attack may be to hide an evidence of 1.5 degree on seismic intensity that was observed from Baekryung-do at 21:22 on May 26, 2010. Based on kr.gov’s calculation, its intensity is equivalent to the explosion of 250 Kg TNT. They might try to frame this evidence by introducing a torpedo explosion. Nevertheless, recently unveiled KNTDS record indicates that this seismic evidence may not correlate to the Cheunan sunk by the torpedo explosion. I am wondering what kind of incident possibly correlate to 1.5 degree of seismic intensity. How about the submarine sunk?

  143. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of th… But I am going to focus on just one. Read [...]

  144. Wouldn’t that take the ‘cake’ ! after reading Tom Serandos’s comment (above in yellow), it seems highly possible the ship ran aground, backed out and then ran into an old mine…….. now politians are pointing the finger at N.K.,,,,, they firmly believe in making use of any unexpected disaster…
    maybe the US sub was close enough to the explosion to be damaged also……

  145. [...] the comments board on the Seoprise site, I found Matt Ceighton’s blog at American Everyman. Creighton makes his case against the official version. So lets take a look at all the “overwhelming” and “irrefutable” evidence. 1. Someone wrote [...]

  146. ////‘The markings in Hangul, which reads “1번(or No. 1 in English)”, found inside the end of the propulsion section, is consistent with the marking of a previously obtained North Korean torpedo.’

    Now, just hang on a minute – a previously obtained NK torpedo? A previously obtained NK torpedo?? How many do they have?///

    In response to that, the South Koreans have 1 or 2 captured NK subs that got caught in fishing nets.

  147. ////Strangely, there were 3 Aegis ships (2 American, 1 Korean) in such a small sea area between China and S. Korea and they did not notice the torpedo and what shot it to the corvette even after its sinking!!!!!/////

    Passive sonar ranges might only be a few miles. Especially if something happened in shallow water.

  148. Hello
    Your opinion is incorrect.
    The real CHT-02D schematic is as below

    As you can see they are perfectly matched.

  149. Hello
    Your opinion is incorrect.
    The real CHT-02D schematic is as below

    As you can see they are perfectly matched.

  150. Korean readers,

    his “opinion” that original evidence presented failed to show a match is absolutely correct, considering that he used photographic data from the alleged matching schematic “unveiled” at the “presentation of evidence” press event on May 20, 2010 (see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2517957/posts).

    The schematic you have provided does look like a better match to my unprofessional eye, but the question is why wasn’t this allegedly ‘real’ schematic unveiled in public on May 20? Why did they originally present a mismatch, or false evidence, to the international public?

    What’s more, the production of an authentic NK torpedo as evidence does not clinch NK’s guilt nor does it contradict Scott’s overall opinion that “we’re being lied to”, as there’s plenty of discrepancies and credibility issues with the “official investigation” — the torpedo schematic issue is one of very many problems here.

    Also, you should know that people who aren’t familiar with the Korean language have no idea how the diagram you provided is related to the investigation of the Cheonan incident and its evidence. There is a Yonhap News watermark but that does not quantify it as official evidence. Scott’s documentation of fake or false evidence submitted by the RoK government on May 20 still stands as far as I can see.

  151. Lee Myung bak.!!!!!!!
    Fuck you!!!!!!
    I’m not trust you!!!!!!!!!

  152. 左手,

    The real schematic is also unveiled in public in May 20.

    The ‘digram’ of the NK torpado Scott compared is
    NOT the true ‘schematic’.

    http://cphoto.asiae.co.kr/listimglink/6/201005201133040677217A_1.jpgshown

    The diagram was just for the purpose of’ size comparison for reporters.

    Sorry my poor English.

  153. 左手,

    The real schematic is also unveiled in public in May 20.

    The ‘digram’ of the NK torpado Scott compared is
    NOT the true ‘schematic’.

    The diagram was just for the purpose of’ size comparison for reporters.

    I wish Scott could read my reply and modify his incorrect opinion.

    Sorry my poor English.

  154. Scott,

    ‘THE REAL SCHEMATIC’ of CHT-02D is shown as below

    (The bottom-right picture of the TV-capture picture.)

    You should modify your incorrect opinion.

  155. “Korean Readers”,

    Thats now 3 apparently different looking schematics for that torpedo, and I struggle to understand why they would make a huge enlargement of the wrong torpedo pic? And it still doesnt match AFAICT. Look at the propeller and propeller hub. They are vastly different.

    The steering section seems to match roughly with that version of the pic, but I would guess it would match roughly with at least a dozen other torpedo’s as well. The engine (I think?) doesnt match at all, they just painted a similar sized, smaller red area on the schema to make it match. That may or may not be accurate, but its hardly convincing. It would also be nice to see this “brochure” where all those different schematics came from. Without that, there is no telling if the schema is even authentic or not tampered with.

    Im willing to keep an open mind on this, but the SK government isnt doing much to convince me. On top of all the things mentioned already, i read the torpedo remains where recovered on may 15th. The final version of the report was released may 20th. That doesnt sound like a serious investigation to me. How did they manage to do thorough chemical and metallurgy tests, forensics, technical analysis, cross reference the evidence with the data, draft, submit, redact, approve, release and present the report in under 5 days?

  156. “Mike”,

    There are only two schematics.

    The colored schematic is just for the purpose of ‘size comparison’ for reporters.
    (You would notice that if you watch the briefing movie
    -You can find it in the YouTube)
    And obiously that is not the schematic of the NK CHT-02D torpado.

    The other one (Black line drawings)is the correct schematic of the NK CHT-02D torpado.

    As you see in the pic, the officer briefed in front of the black pen drawing schematic. NOT the colored schematic.

    If you have the knowledge of the machinery blueprint
    you will agree with that the evidence is matched perfectly.

    The source of the brochure is a kind of state secrets.
    And the source should be protected as you know.

  157. The propella drawing in the schematic below is a ‘cross-sectional diagram.’ not a side view.

    If you understand the ‘cross-sectional diagram’
    you will agree that the propella shape and the schematic is perfectly matched.

  158. Why didnt they provide the right schematics for the “size comparison”? Not that it proves any tampering but It makes no sense to me they provide one large 1-1 scale schematic to show how big it is (how big what is exactly?), manually coloring the key components they found, but using the wrong drawing What torpedo is on that drawing then and what purpose does it serve to show it?

    Then there is this another black/white schematic on the wall that I cant find a highres version of, that of allegedly matches the debris. Where can I find a proper pic ? Many of the links you are giving do not work for me.

    The simple drawing from naver.com, with the colored sections, best I can tell, matches neither other two schematics, but Ill reserve judgement until Ive seen a better from the black/white schema “on the wall”. Also, I cant find a youtube clip of the press briefing, if you have a link, Id appreciate it.

    BTW, I know what a cross section is and how to interpret it. If you make a cross section of a tapered ring like the salvaged prop hub, it renders like a trapezoid, I really cant say I see that on any of the schematics Ive seen so far., but maybe a better pic will help.

    But all of this is a rather moot point if that brochure and its origin are “state secret”. If the source and origin cant be independently verified, then it is no proof, simple as that.. North Korea could just as well produce a similar drawing and claim its from an undocumented south korean “sales brochure” and it would be equally pointless. At the very least I would like to see any evidence this CHT-02D even existed before the cheonan sank. Just a mention of its name. I can not find any reference about it anywhere that predates the accident.

  159. Korean readers:

    Oh you can bet your last Won I am going to “modify” my article…

    in fact, I am going to write an entirely new one, starting now, and starting with the fact that you are agreeing with me, that the first “perfect match” the government of South Korea offered, IS NOT A PERFECT MATCH.

    Then I will move on to explain how you are now offering a TOTALLY DIFFERENT VERSION of the torpedo drawings…

    AND I will make sure to point out to people here that your IP address tracked back to the same services used by the South Korean government in Seoul.

    Which probably means you are nothing more than a propagandist working for the current regime in Seoul trying to spin this story because the people of South Korea didn’t buy the first line of crap sold to them.

    Also, many of your links don’t seem to be working… I wonder why that is…

    So yes, Korean readers, I am certainly going to “modify” my story to reflect the fact that the People of South Korea WON the first round and now you are trying to respin the bullshit story to fix the problem.

    All I can tell you is, this is going to be FUN.

    Thank you SO MUCH for coming here and trying to pass this crap off to me…. you have proven my point and provided me with EVEN MORE EVIDENCE that the official story of the sinking of the South Korean Cheonan and the resulting 46 deaths of her crew is completely FALSE….

  160. Korean readers;

    And you should listen very carefully to Mika… she makes very good points here…

    “But all of this is a rather moot point if that brochure and its origin are “state secret”. If the source and origin cant be independently verified, then it is no proof, simple as that.. North Korea could just as well produce a similar drawing and claim its from an undocumented south korean “sales brochure” and it would be equally pointless. At the very least I would like to see any evidence this CHT-02D even existed before the cheonan sank. Just a mention of its name. I can not find any reference about it anywhere that predates the accident.”

    I too can find no proof of the existence of the CHT-O2D prior to May 15th 2010.

    Why is that? “Janes” covers all kinds of weapons manufactured all over the world.

    There are litterally THOUSANDS of websites of weapons researchers who have images and specs on all kinds of weapons from “closed” nations like China and North Korea…

    … but there is NOTHING about the CHT-O2D prior to May 15 2010 AND the ONLY mentions you find of it relate to this fraudulent story…

    Why don’t you go on over to the capital over there (since its right down the street for you anyway) and ask them to release that secretive “brochure” and lets see which diagram they say is the “perfect match”…

    because until we see that, ALL OF YOUR “PROOF” IS BASED ON A “SECRET” … and that apparently isn’t good enough for the South Korean people.

  161. I’m Korean and many korean ppl know the govt is making things up.

    As you might know, the only reason the govt manipulated the truth is to get more votes on the upcoming election from the old generations. :)

    Keep up the good work!
    We really appreciate the voices from outside Korea

  162. Scott,

    Not that I want to boost my credibility by stating this, but I am a “he” and not a “she” :)

    Some more questions that deserve to be raised. Read this report if you havent already:

    http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/04/30/2010043000459.html

    Read it carefully, and check the date at the bottom. It predates the finding of the torpedo parts by many weeks, but based on seismic evidence, they concluded it was a torpedo and miraculously even manage to determine speed and depth of that torpedo as well as the likely type. That seems flatout impossible to be, unless this “seismic data” was complemented with underwater sonar equipment.

    If there is such equipment (and that wouldnt be an unreasonable assumption in that area, and I can even imagine they SK do not want to mention it) then how come it detected neither of 2 NK submarines, nor the launch of the torpedo while it happened? How come for weeks or month the SK wasnt convinced there was a torpedo involved at all?

    If there isnt such equipment, then how on earth could that professor conclude what he did based on seismic data?

    Interestingly, in that same report, its also concluded that *no* bubblejet occurred, but that the ship was hit directly. The final report mentioned 7 or 8x that a bubblejet caused the destruction of the cheonan, rather than a direct hit, and their whole report hinges on it. No explanation of the discrepancy. No mention of the 80 second “internal explosions” mentioned in the initial report either. Fishy if you ask me.

    I would however also like to point out some facts that dont rhyme well with the conspiracy theory; to my knowledge, the north koreans have not yet denied the salvaged parts look like one of their designs, nor have they refuted the existence of a “CHT-O2D”. If that torpedo is a total fabrication, i would expect them to point that out, like they pointed out they do not have a 130 ton “salmon class” minisub, as the south claims was used to deliver this torpedo.

    Instead all ive read so far about the torpedo is that it would be “crazy” to hand out schematics of their torpedo’s. Crazy or not, and if they handed them out, or if South Korean spies obtained them some how, doesnt matter to me. What matters is the question if these schematics are legit or not..

  163. consider this Mika…

    they “found” the remains of the CHT-O2D on May the 15th, right? A fisherman found it, right?

    They also released the first part of the official results of the “objective” investigation on May 15th… the same day they found the evidence.

    also remember that the early reports about the North Korean torpedos listed 4 they thought was capable of breaking a vessel in two…

    the CHT-O2D was not listed on that list.

    They have presented false documents detailing the design of the CHT-O2D, not once, but twice now, and even possible three times.

    AND they refuse to show the “brochure” from which the original came from.

    Until they produce that, and until I can find cofirmation of the existence of the CHT-O2D that pre-dates all of this misinformation…

    …. I have to come to the conclusion that it may not have existed AT ALL prior to this fabricated story.

    Now you make good points about what the North Korean said and didn’t say about this weapon….

    perhaps its an older weapon…

    that is possible…

    but I have to go with the evidence that I find and the evidence that is the strongest.

    right now, the strongest evidence, like you seem to be suggesting, is the fact that they do not match up with any of the drawings and they keep changing the story.

    so that is what I will focus on for now.

    thanks for your input.

    scott creighton
    willyloman

    ps. opps. Sorry about the “she” thing… my bad

  164. Bravo Scott on the exposure of “Korean readers”. I was starting to realize that it was a troll at least and RoK operative at worst — stomping on the “perfect match” propaganda phrase. At least you know you’re on the right track when this kind of thing happens…

    What a nerve foisting this stuff and seemingly making it up as they go along. Each day it seems to unravel a little more. It’s simultaneously farcical and criminally diabolical. To think that at the original May 20 event they couldn’t even coordinate their torpedo schematics to be the same, let alone “match perfectly”. Thanks for exposing that, Korean readers!

    Korean readers also blew it when trashing the script of the original JIG report regarding the (yet-unrevealed) torpedo brochure: “…The source of the brochure is a kind of state secrets. And the source should be protected as you know.” Setting aside how this special knowledge was obtained, compare with the JIG report: “The [torpedo] evidence matched in size and shape with the specifications on the drawing presented in introductory materials provided to foreign countries by North Korea for export purposes.” The morphing of “introductory materials provided to foreign countries” into “state secrets” is a true howler.

    How’s this for a perfect match…Korean readers and Reich Minister of Propaganda.

  165. Scott,

    Apparently, you missed the SK government’s memo about how stupid Americans are.

    Hilarious is the fact, since they probably get this idea from the US MSM.

    Dude, you have ‘em by the curlies and this could get wild.

  166. I doubt its an older design, I would rather expect the opposite, that its a very new design that NK has kept secret and SK/US had not yet disclosed they were aware of its existence. I really cant rule out that possibility, although it substantially weakens their case as it becomes entirely dependent on believing this secret evidence.

    However, please dont focus on the design of the torpedo alone. Do look in to the bubble jet theory as well; If a government sanctioned sound engineering professor that was given access to all evidence (and therefore I assume was part of the investigation team?) unequivocally states no bubble just occurred but a direct hit, then someone has some explanation to do why the official report claims and depends entirely on the exact opposite theory. The fact this seismic report also claims to be able to determine details about a torpedo when there wasnt even any evidence at that point that a torpedo was involved at all, also strongly points to having drawn a conclusion before investigating the facts, rather than the other way around.

    BTW, that submarine detection system, seabed based sonars I alluded to earlier, apparently doesnt exist there yet:

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/midget-sub-attacks

    But whether or not it exists, something cant be right here.

  167. Lets not dismiss “Korean readers” posts just because his IP points to SK government. Lets focus on the message and not the messenger. If you dismiss evidence or logic just because of who produces it, you are just as guilty of premonition as we claim the SK government is.

  168. Hi, Scott Creighton,

    Your view and analysis look relatively exact.

    Today I saw an article in the internet news, written by Yonhap News Agency, a korean cable news network.

    There was 3 shots of video filmed with TOD(Thermal Observation Device), showing the leaned and perhaps just overturning Cheonan.

    Even if the ship looks so small and uncertain in the photos, it doesn’t seem to be seperated at that time.

    There was no trace, that Cheonan was attacked by a torpedo. Neither fire nor any other tokens of torpedo-shut.

    When you’re also interested in it, take a look at the photos of website(http://media.daum.net/cplist/view.html?cateid=100000&newsid=20100528224104628&cpid=2&fid=20100528224304059&lid=20100528224011717)

    the korean words of the photos are as follows:
    함미: stern/함수: bow
    폭발36초후: 36 seconds after explosion

  169. To all reders…

    Mr. Shin is now under “investigation” for perhaps more than just being sued by the government. He may actually be facing charges for coming to a different conclusion than the official story.

    He also states that he looked at the “no. 1″ written on the evidence and concluded it was written ON TOP OF THE RUST…

    AND…

    “Meanwhile, Prime Minister Chung Un-chan ordered the government to come up with a measure to stop the widespread rumors surrounding the Cheonan’s sinking.”

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/pcc-772-cheonan-probe-member-summoned-on-false-rumor-allegations/

  170. Mika;

    “I doubt its an older design, I would rather expect the opposite, that its a very new design that NK has kept secret and SK/US had not yet disclosed they were aware of its existence”

    do you really think they would be handing out blue-prints of a brand new design of their torpedo, their “secret” torpedo… with a brochure?

  171. Mika:

    “Lets not dismiss “Korean readers” posts just because his IP points to SK government.”

    as I displayed in my response to “Korean readers”, I addressed the falacy of his argument on the basis of logic and evidence.

    that I have done and that is what my new article is going to be about.

    where he comes from is circumstantial. even the fact that the Prime Minister has ordered measures to be taken to counter the information on the web with propaganda and the sudden appearance of “Korean readers” showing up at precisely the same time…

    you might think that I would point to the obvious connection there…

    but I won’t.

    I will stick to the provable evidence and let the readers come to their own conclusions about “Korean readers” intentions.

  172. @scott
    “do you really think they would be handing out blue-prints of a brand new design of their torpedo, their “secret” torpedo… with a brochure?”

    Its been a while since I went shopping for torpedo’s, so what do I know :)
    But yes, i really dont see why you wouldnt give potential customers those kind of “blueprints”. Its more a floorplan than a blueprint, its not like you can build your own wake homing torpedo based on that, and customers would want to assess the torpedo, see how it would impact their tools, subs, etc. I dont see a problem there, and moreover, its also possible those plans where purchased or obtained through espionage. If they dont say, I cant know (and that is of course the problem here).

    The comment about not dismissing the SK goverment guy was general i guess, but certainly more aimed at “左手” than you. Just pointing out Id actually welcome SK government or military people posting here or elsewhere engaging in a discussion to help clarify some issues, for the same reason I like to read the chinese, north korean and russian POVs and data they might provide. If you look for truth, all facts can be valuable. Just ignore the rhetoric ;)

    Did I mention the bubblejet issue already ? :)

  173. Scott,

    “AND I will make sure to point out to people here that your IP address tracked back to the same services used by the South Korean government in Seoul.”

    <— Watch out your mouth Scott.

    I'm not related with south korean gov at all.
    You will know my IP is not Korean gov.'s IP.
    I'm not a propaganda person.
    Stop dirty personal attack.

  174. dear new “korean readers”:

    In case you didn’t notice, your partner signed his name each and evey time with a capitalized “K”…

    your ip address is different than his was but from the same location just outside Seoul.

    hmmm…

    curious….

    what? is his cubicle just down from yours?

    Sides, why don’t you address some of the obvious problems of your earlier comments? got time?

    (by the way… it’s “watch your mouth”… leave the “out” part out. :) )

  175. Mika,

    Below is the briefing movie
    I couldnt find proper movie in the YOUTUBE too. sorry.
    There are another movie instead.

    http://news.naver.com/main/vod/vod.nhn?oid=052&aid=0000299772

    The movie is in Korean speech.

    The colored schematic is shown at the end of briefing
    to show ‘how big’ it is.

    The officer briefed with the black-white drawing.

    I do not know why they show the wrong drawing at the end. Anyway the colored drawing is not the true schematic.

    The NK torpado brochure is provided to many 3rd nations.

    Therefore many nations would have it.
    So South Korean gov could not lie to them.

  176. Scott

    My replys before is written at my office.
    This time I write in my house.

    I’m not good English.
    So I miss- typed ‘k’ and ‘K’
    Stop your funny conspiracy theories.

  177. oh, you “miss-typed” the k

    I see

    Your English also seems to have gotten a little worse since you started “miss-typing”

    point in fact… “miss-type”

  178. What about yourself Scott?
    Have you ever wondered if your family is your true family?

    Whole world is fake. isnt it?
    YOU CONSPIRATOR.

  179. (k)orean readers;

    “Watch out your mouth Scott”

    “Have you ever wondered if your family is your true family?”

    what the hell is that supposed to mean? Is that a veiled threat?

    “Whole world is fake. isnt it?”

    No sir. Obviously the whole world is not fake, but the official story about what happened to the Cheonan is.

    Many good people, Americans, South Koreans, many good REAL people are writing and leaving comments trying to get the truth out.

    Mr. Shin is being investigated because he too is trying to get the truth out.

    The world is full of good, real people “k)orean readers….

    “YOU CONSPIRATOR.”

    careful. You are starting to sound more and more like your Prime Minister.

  180. Yea there are many good person in USA. I think.

    But there are some bad person who slander anyone who against them as a propaganda person.

  181. why did you mention my family….

  182. Serious CONSPIRATOR could doubt his/her own family, isnt he?

  183. there have been many commenters who have disagreed one way or the other with my conclusions…

    … I have not suggested any of them are “propaganda”.

    YOU on the other hand, come here with a NEW OFFICIAL STORY and with NEW DRAWINGS…

    your ISP is located in Seoul… BOTH of your ISP addresses are from Seoul

    and now it seems you suddenly write differently and use words like “conspiracy theorist” and “conspirator”…

    and now you mention my family?

  184. Do you know how many people use network in Seoul and in Korea? Millions.

    People using the same Seoul ISP is the gov person

    <– what a crazy joke?

  185. You post the info you want, I believe in freedom of speech even on websites…

    but if you mention my family again, other than to appologize for bringing them into this in the first place, then everything you have left here will be gone. I will take out every single comment of yours, every single link you left.

    You post what you want, people can form their own opinions…

    I have to finish the article based on the information (K)orean readers left me, about how the South Korean government is changing their official story about the torpedo to accomodate their NEW drawing.

    Do not mention my family again.

  186. NEW OFFICIAL STORY and with NEW DRAWINGS…

    <—-
    That was not NEW story nor NEW drawings.

    Those are presented from the beginning.

    The truth is that you missed those.

  187. Scott.. may I humbly suggest you try and keep these comments on track and on topic? Perhaps delete a few that really dont contribute to the topic at hand.(that includes this one, feel free to destroy after reading ;)/

    FWIW though, korean readers didnt bring up any new evidence, he pointed to information that was given on may 20th, I just hadnt seen the conference until now. There is one rather usable shot in that conference video of the black/white schematics “at the wall”. At first glance it does look like a decent match with the debris but Ill try to super impose it later. But it really is that image they used mainly during the presentation.

  188. really Mika?

    to me that image looked very different from the CHT-O2d drawing they hald up over top of the piece of evidence AND it looks very different from the new drawing that (K)orean readers left a link to as the CHT-O2D torpedo.

    Ask yourself this: if they were just using a different torpedo drawing to compare the size of the torpedo (why they would do that I have no idea) with… WHY did they highlight certain sections of the drawing and heavily outline the propellers?

    and just for the record, I will let the comments stay up so that the people coming here and reading all this can decide for themselves, thank you.

  189. well, now that I look at it in the video, it does look like they showed the other drawing in the slide presentation, but they they showed the other schematic in the live presentation.

    why would they do that?

    it also appears that there is more damage to the evidence in the slide presentation than what is in the glass case….

  190. Why would ‘korean readers’ want a war that would kill many of his neighbors and destroy much of S. Korea and N. Korea? What has he to gain? It amazes me.

    why has this investigation been so slow in developing?
    Is it being fanned into flames to insure an election?

  191. Scott,

    I dont know what the purpose was of that schema, and I agree with you on that. its at the very least strange.

    But the other schema is not new evidence they only present now, much less by the above poster, they did show that on march 20. its only when they show the enlarged doctored schema in front of the other that all journalists start making pictures nonstop as if its Angelina Jolie in monokini and those ended up an almost all reports in the media. But just watch the conference video linked above; they did use the black and white (and apparently matching) schema throughout most of the presentation (and there is even a short flash of what is allegedly a photograph of this CHT-02D).

    If anyone who speaks Korean could tell us what was being said when they unrolled the large incorrect, schema, I would be really interested in hearing that.

  192. korean readers

    Don’t believe the official stories and reports. policians in the ruling party – Grand National Party will not care outbreak of war.

    why policians of the ruling party had focused on authorization of unlimited purchase of overseas real estate and have increased buying it especially in the US although the market of global real estate has collapse. it is clear that these GNP people will runaway Japan or the America when war is occurred.

    therefore policians in S.Korea don’t protect people from war.
    don’t believe govt. you shold improve your critical thinking

  193. notice that the last quick image of the torpedo does say on the image (i took a screen shot) that it is a CHT-O2D… at least not in English (everything else is translated to English)

    but that is very interesting.

    I have to admit… this does put things in a different light.

    I will have to go back over all of this and see what this means…

    why would they show one drawing then change to another?

    Is it because the last image looks more like the large drawing?

  194. (UPDATE- I WASN’T WRONG. KOREAN READER IS MISLEADING US. I HAVE UPDATED THE ARTICLE TO SHOW THE COMPARISON IN FULL)

    well, I guess even I have to admit when I am wrong…

    (take note… it doesn’t happen often)

    (I mean, I don’t admit it often…)

    it looks like Korean readers was in fact correct. If that video he links to does prove to be the original press conference, and it looks to me like it is, then for some reason, the Koreans provided comparison drawings of two seperate types of torpedos to compare with the evidence.

    I have no idea why they would do that.

    However, that said, the image Korean readers linked to is in fact a revised version of the schematic they showed at the press conference. The revision is not in the technicallities of the drawing, but rather in the detailing.

    So for that matter, it is technically a “new” version of existing evidence.

    I’m just nit-picking here.

    Korean readers was correct; it is not “new evidence” as I thought.

    Perhaps someone should make that video more accessable to other audiences….

    But, that said, I was struck watching the video especially at the end when they showed the torpedo that they claim was the kind that hit the Cheonan.

    I noticed something right off the bat… it had no fins like both drawings did that they used to compare the evidence to.

    I am still looking into this.

  195. I have no idea. Thats why I am hoping a Korean reader can tell us what is said during the conference when they unveil that image. For all I know they said “here is a blown up image of one of our own torpedo’s to illustrate more clearly which parts we found. Please note this is NOT a schematic of the north korean cht-whatever, its purely to explain what the parts are.”. I doubt it, but would like to know :)

    Im currently saving the video stream so i can make some screenshots and see what it gives when I overlay the B&W drawing to the debris photograps in gimp, but I expect its indeed an excellent match – except maybe for the tapering of the shaft (which I am not 100% sure of either).

    But isnt this material available online anywhere? Like that slideshow? Id really love to have a closer look at that CHT-02D picture.

    Anyway, lets not forget the broader context; without having assurances those schematics are legit, it means nothing that it matches the debris. If you are going to fake a torpedo, then at least one would expect the drawings to match.

    It also doesnt explain any of the other discrepancies. to name just one.. the bubblejet theory :p.

  196. http://kr.blog.yahoo.com/my9166/40355

    throughout this photograph, we can clearly see that there is a difference between two torpedoes which s.korean invetigators announced and which a fishing boat found.

  197. Dear Scott,

    have you seen this article, “Did an American Mine Sink South Korean Ship?” by one Yoichi Shimatsu: http://newamericamedia.org/2010/05/did-an-american-mine-sink-the-south-korean-ship.php

    He makes many good points, what I’d like to highlight is what he says about the type of torpedo submitted as evidence on May 20:

    “Since torpedoes travel between 40-50 knots per hour (which is faster than collision tests for cars), a drive shaft would crumble upon impacting the hull and its bearing and struts would be shattered or bent by the high-powered blast…”

    My point is that even more bewildering than the various torpedo schema we’ve seen is the very implausible situation that such a relatively intact remnant of the alleged weapon exists as foisted onto us.

    North Korea is also now vigorously bringing forth their defense, which is comprehensively exposing the various contradictions in the “JIG” case. See my link of “Military Commentator on Truth behind ‘Story of Attack by North’ (Part 1)” http://tinyurl.com/29eh9zj The KCNA site won’t link directly, so I’m linking to the article on my own blog.

    People are going to cry about giving North Korea a hearing but they are certainly innocent until proven guilty and their exclusion from the investigation process indicates weakness and fear of exposure in the South Korean position, which has been relying so far on a kind of international kangaroo court or media lynching. I’d very much like to see what evidence they presented at their own press briefing recently to contrast with the “JIG” press event of May 20. Again people will virulently impugn and dismiss them, but you can be sure both Russia and China were paying close attention to all the details of their nearer neighbor’s case.

    It’s also important for your morale to know that South Korean citizens groups and progressive media are banding together as we speak to get to the bottom of this particular Big Lie. Also Mr. Shin is saying he’ll use the suppressive court proceedings initiated against him to expose the whole phony deal.

    Don’t lose sight of the big picture, you’ve taken some “below-the-belt” hits — hang in there man!

  198. Kimi, I see nothing wrong. Those photo’s were taken under a different angle and presumably the parts where cleaned. They look the same to me. Lets not turn this into another “they never landed on the moon” kind of “truth seeking”.

  199. there is another one. this illustration compares seismic wave when cheon-an sank and general bubblejet.

    http://engjjang.egloos.com/10487019

  200. 左手,,

    There is nothing weird about finding remains of a torpedo in that condition.

    Consider the length of a torpedo, the amount of material (like batteries) shielding the shaft and props, consider how the explosives would be arranged to maximize blast up/down, maybe to the front, but certainly not the rear, consider the shape of these parts and imagine how much force such an axle could withstand along the axis of the torpedo.

    Finally, and most importantly, consider the cheonan ultimately was destroyed by its own weight, rather than pure explosive force. If you had detonated that very same warhead right next to it in a drydock,instead of under water, at most it would have blown a small hole in it. probably not even that. A 200kg bomb at several meters distance doesnt even scratch a tank, i dont think it would blast through a ship hull. But the water displacement lift the ship out of the water and caused it to snap under its own weight. Those torpedo components obviously wouldnt even be damaged from that..

    Nothing suspicious there.

    Same about the chemistry and metallurgy . I suggest you read up on the topic before making such allegations. Read about finding drug traces for instances, it may give you a clue. They should have been able to find traces of the explosive, they should have been able to match it with known explosives. Same for the metals. If anything, i would say I havent seen enough of the test results to make up my mind, but that there is absolutely nothing surprising or impossible about that either. Quite on the contrary.

  201. Kimi,

    I dont read Korean, so i cant make much of that. I have no idea what Im looking at, what the sources are etc.

    But yes I agree this is something that should be looked in to. I linked a report higher up from a south korean professor who studied all seismic data (prior to the finding of this torpedo) and categorically ruled out a bubble jet. The official report states the exact opposite and mentions the bubble jet causing this and that at least 7x. At the very least someone should provide a credible explanation for this discrepancy.

  202. read Scott’s newest article…. war may not be in the picture now.. !!!

    “New war unlikely over sinking of S.Korean warship – Russian experts”
    Posted on May 29, 2010 by willyloman
    by RIANOVOSTI May 27, 2010

  203. This whole article was linked from prisonplanet.com

    good to see people awakening to the deceit and corruption we are being fed.

  204. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of the… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  205. The kr.gov will keep trying to paint with dirty mentions in order to wrap this page.
    In addition of that, the kr.gove will keep change their story and evidence, which is a traditional judgment of suspicion. Many people focused on the torpedo; however, a single evidence is not correlated to the explosion. The torpedo that kr.gov presented is not proven evidence of explosion scientifically. For example, there are no proofs of thermal effects, mechanical damages by explosion, corrosion effects by salty water, and corrosion effects by heat and salty water. Only one evidence is letter “1번”, written by bright blue permanent marker. Nevertheless, North kr.gov denied using “1번” on machinery.

  206. hankyul moon

    It looks like the Chinese and the Russians aren’t buying it…

    PCC-772 Cheonan: China and Russia Seem to Reject the Conclusions of the U.S.-Led “Objective” Investigation

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/30/pcc-772-cheonan-china-and-russia-seem-to-reject-the-conclusions-of-the-u-s-led-objective-investigation/

  207. willyloman

    It is a fortune for the world that China and Russia are not buying the story. I wrote why kr.gov is focusing on the explosion. I am wondering what is your opinion. At this moment, I am sure that kr.gov and us,gov are undermining 21C individual information and communication technology.

  208. Some Korean guess, Cheonan was hit by US torpedo for military trainning. As a evidence an comments indicate Otto fuel II and HAP which is used for US torpedo make yellowish and serious rust in the middle of the ship. pls refer.

  209. So much for the No.1 hand written, the lie by the S. Korean government regarding a fabricated evidence of a torpedo and the Cheonan splitted in half without marks of any splinters of the explosives or explosion power. But it seems to be an American made false flag using the S Korean government.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/RTAmerica#p/u/4/7VL5ps5zTTg

  210. willyloman

    You have seen the torpedo photos that kr.gov presented as a critical and irrefutable evidence. Have you seen alumina powder residue on the propeller of explored torpedo like that? My first argument is that if there is an explosion, all the object should move from a point of explosive materials to outer bound by a certain speed. (please add data. it might be a faster than the sound speed, right?) Residual powders also should move by this explosion direction, too. Thus, when these residual powders deposit on surfaces, it should be able to noticed a pattern especially by a shadow effect. Another word, they may not deposit evenly everywhere. However, when I saw the photos, it seems like that the powder have been covered on whole area of the propeller evenly and thickly with some portions of washed out region. If kr.gov made this evidence, they probably miss the nature of explosion. My second argument is the amount of residue. I do think that there will be a little residue left and will be little deposit on a small surface like propeller if a torpedo exploded successfully. However, as you seen, the amount of residual alumina powder on the propeller was overwhelmed. However, I will give up these argument and will agree if someone insists that the white thick layer comes from the galvanic corrosion.

  211. If someone want to see the torpedo photos, here is the link by willyloman.

    NOTE: The critical and irrefutable evidence of the handwritten “1번” (meaning of No. 1) is denied by N. kr.gov. They said that they were using “호” instead of “번” on the machinery. The N. kr.gov argument is true since I saw “4호” letters on the red paper(?) attached on the assembled torpedo that S. kr.gov presented. People should criticize the military iIntelligence of kr.gov or should pat them on the back making mistakes intensionally.

  212. It was the transformers who did this…please get a life. If you knew anything about North Korea, you wouldnt have a conspiracy theory. It was them period. I wonder if you knew S.Korea sunk one of their patrol boats last Nov in the same West coast area and this could simply be a retaliatory move. Or that plus they needed desperately to boost morale in their armed forces. Whatever. To hell with N.Korea. If Bush got one thing right in his life, it is his designation that NK is a rogue nation, a terrorist country.

  213. jil,

    What a Maroon.

  214. This is only the first time the United States and South Korea conspiracy

  215. The stories told by the South Korean Officials kept on changing and evolving everytime new questions arose. And the Korean medias did nothing but to cover up the legitimate and obvious points such as yours. It is pretty clear that the US is in on this, but for what benefits? Perhaps the FTA renegotiation with Korea?? or with Japan in our army base contract renewal?

    Would the truth ever be uncovered???

  216. I am going to write a follow up article to this and I hope that the Russian delegation is there to do a real investigation rather than white wash the tainted U.S. fraud.

  217. [...] are several differences between the torpedo plans and the actual torpedo recovered from the floor of the… But I am going to focus on just [...]

  218. Jil,

    I do not know N. Korea well; however, I do know that S. Korea should not manipulate the evidence.

  219. Now I suspect that S Korean gov’t replaced the remains of the actually used torpedo against the Cheonan which got a friendly shot from the US Hawaii or USNS Salvor, leaving the yellowish mark of otto II fuel on the middle deck and below, propellant energy fuel used in US-made excercise torpedo, with the unrelated remains which S Korean showed as a proof of N Korea’s.
    The following argument is in Korean.

    http://blog.hani.co.kr/nomusa/28806

  220. [...] A reader has left a comment here linking to images of the “No. 1″ that was written on the torpe…. For many reasons, this is clearly forged evidence. But the reader who linked to a website with actual photographic evidence helps to prove beyond any doubt that someone wrote “No. 1″ on the torpedo part AFTER it was brought out of the water. [...]

  221. The investigation report claimed that the torpedo exploded below the ship without physical contact to the hull. The question is, how the torpedo could explode without having physical impact to the detonator? The report didn’t mention this anywhere and no one ever questioned it before either. There are too many evidences that this is not torpedo attack but I haven’t seen any solid evidence that proves it is.

    This is nothing but classical government driven false accusation, and it is obvious they want the war. Those stupid Lee Myung Bak followers still believe that South Korea will benefit from the war. Japan and US will benefit from the war but both North and South Koreas will be definite losers, not to mention hundreds of thousands of casualties.

  222. Those who understand Korean might want to check this video clip.

    http://www.vop.co.kr/2010/06/04/V00000300130.html

  223. US Goverment the biggest Lier
    I am sicked by all that have been done by US government and South Korea.
    I hate the truth that my tax money go to the hand of these warmongers!

  224. Thanks, BuelahMan.

    But that’s more modern torpedoes. You should check this link.

    http://science.howstuffworks.com/torpedo-info.htm

    The one reported in this incidence was originally made in 1970s and 1980s, quite similar to those from WW2.

  225. Bonjour, Nice to join you, I am Susan

  226. This is a test.

    I have some relevant (I believe) comments on the physical aspects of the torpedo, and some suggestions for corrections to this page.

  227. OK, it works.

    I found this website very informative and useful. However, it also has a serious problem. As was first pointed out by “Korean readers”, the drawing of the torpedo presented above, and used to demonstrate that the torpedo fragment recovered from the seabed is not from the same torpedo, is no longer usable in this context because the briefing primarily uses a different drawing, for which the match is much better.

    The problem arises if someone doesn’t spend the time to read all the comments. For example, I was using the information in the main section to prepare a serious report “Fraudulent aspects of the JIG report”, and I was going to use it in a serious way. Fortunately, I did read all the comments before I published, because my report would otherwise have been wrong. Unfortunately, the new information pretty much blew me out of the water.

    So as a minimum, what would be appropriate is to put a large note in the main section, stating that the information was corrected on a later day, and telling the reader to read those comments.

    Next, the new information needs to be summarized at a higher level of complexity, because if that is done, the original conclusions will still be valid, whereas now, the information about the physical shape of the torpedo fragment is a line of investigation that is not helpful.

    I do have some detailed suggestions on this, but I am out of time right now, until tomorrow at least.

  228. I look forward to getting those suggestions from you because I am rewriting the entire work, at least the comparisons of the drawings.

    My main problem though is I can’t understand why they compared the torpedo to two different drawings in the first place.

    I can make an asumption, but without a translation of the reason they gave during the presentation, there is no value to it.

    What I assume is this: the original drawing, the pen and ink drawing, the one that is closest to the actual found evidence, does not resemble the one in the flyer they said they found and compared the evidence to.

    That’s why the held up the long diagram of the other drawing overtop of the evidence then quickly showed the picture from the flyer which was of a long slender torpedo, like the one in the full size graphic.

    I have to know if the last image they showed during that presentation, the picture of a long torpedo and the few specs under it was actually the “flyer” they say of the North Korean torpedo.

    If you could help fill in those gaps I would appreciate it.

    But I look forward to any suggestion you have and I want you to know that I am already working on the revision of the type you are speaking of.

    scott creighton
    American Everyman

  229. OK, I’ll race you.

    The key with the physical aspects of the torpedo fragment, I think, is to note that there are actually THREE pictures of “their” evidence: a photograph, a B/W drawing. and a color drawing. The B/W drawing is the best match to the torpedo fragment, but none of their pictures match each other, and of course there’s much more to say here.

    How do I get pictures onto your website?

  230. so you noticed that as well. I already have screenshots of all three different versions they showed during the presentation and as I said, I can only assume why they did that. My (and probably your) assumption is probably accurate, but without knowing what they said during the presentation, we are both at a disadvantage.

    you can upload your pics at imagr (i think that is it). You don’t have to sign up for anything, just upload them and then click on the image and get the solo page where it shows just the picture. Copy the url and paste it into a comment. It wont show up here, but it will be a link people can go to the picture and see it.

    (you know… there are some problems with the black and white schematic… I am wondering if it is really a real design drawing or is it something they drew to match the “evidence”? just a thought)

    I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

    I myself have been working a lot on the Alvin Greene story but tomorrow I am back to the Cheonan.

    (have you heard anything else about what Russia finally decided? I reported the day they left S. Korea that they didn’t say they came to the same conclusion… that was a week ago. heard anything?)

  231. I haven’t taken the time to read all 200+ comments but I did read about half of them. I am a skeptic all around. I don’t trust the government report, and I don’t trust this report. I currently don’t know what to think. There are some serious flaws in both reports. You already pointed out the holes in the international report, and did a good job of it, so I won’t bother to mention them. The problems with this report however I will take time to mention. Why are you mentioning that something written over has a differant rust rate compared to unmarked metal? A discrepency could occur just because the marker or whatever the hell its written with could be acting as a shield from the metal to the highly corrosive salt water. Have you taken scientific tests yourselves at all to see the rate of rusting that also account for the explosion of the torpedo? What about the discovery of RDX? Finnaly, I can’t fully trust this because you all are not experts on these things. Some of you may be experts, but most of you all are mostly amatures who learned from the internet or other sources. Something like this could easily turn into “Loose Change” which sounded great! But had no scientific credibility what so ever. I take no guise as an expert, I’m just seriously worried that the counterclaim could be just as flawed as the claim in the first place!

  232. So “Loose Change” has no verifiable fact presented? What a maroon.

  233. Anbraxis;

    This blog and the generous efforts of the readers who have taken the time to write and help with this article is an investigation; it is a process.

    If you wish more information on the process of this investigation, go here and read through some of the 13 articles. “We are Being Lied To” was the second one I had done on the subject.

    I am not going to tell you this part of the investigation I have been working on is not flawed. It is.

    But, it was written at a time before the full video of the South Korean evidence presentation had been released or at least been made public here in the states AND it is also based on ONE of the comparison’s presented by the South Korean officials that was represented to us here in the states as being the core of the South Korean’s evidence.

    In short, here in the states, we were told at first that these two images were being purported to be the same thing. Clearly they aren’t. Which is what I focused on.

    But again, this article was only the 2nd of 13 that I put up, and it was one of the first I did on the subject. There are many ofther problems with the story told to us by the U.S. state department.

    Now, as you can see from the last few comments, I am in the process of fixing this problem.

    I don’t want to present to anyone something that I see as flawed even if it was an honestly made mistake based on all the relevant information that was available to me at the time.

    I am writing a follow-up to this article that may even be more damning than this one simply because the South Korean authorities presented THREE different images of THREE different types of torpedos and claimed there were ALL the North Korean torpedo.

    When that is done, I hope you will read it.

    remember, this is a blog. It is an unofficial attempt to communicate information to the public. But I have to base it on other information I have collected.

    The readers here have provided volumes of great info. In fact, the flaw in my article was pointed out by one of those readers and for that I am grateful.

    I am not the MSM nor some “official source” with access to the evidence. I am not trying to mislead and I have no other agenda other than trying to help weed through the official Orwellian story.

    Loose Change is an example of the same thing.

    They admitted that their first attempt was flawed so they went out and made revisions till their “Final Cut” version, which I think is pretty good. Not perfect, but pretty good.

    But just because one or two aspects of their investigation were flawed, as they admitted themselves, that doesn’t mean everything they put in there is also flawed. That just dosn’t stand up to the logic test.

    Check out their “Final Cut” version and give me a day or so to put up my revision of this article based on the new information that has been made available to me.

    It would be worth your time on both counts

  234. …(have you heard anything else about what Russia finally decided?…)

    No official decisions from Russia are forthcoming until next month, apparently.

    RIA Novosti has a June 6 article, “Russian Defense Ministry to report on Cheonan sinking in July”

    A scattering of Asian news websites have referenced a June 10 article from Interfax-AVN Military News Agency in which an anonymous Russian Navy source claims the S. Korean evidence against Pyongyang was found to be less than convincing. Take that for what it’s worth.

    The Interfax-AVN subscriber-access website has several June 10 article titles related to “Cheonan”, including: “Conclusions on S. Korea ship sinking premature – [Russian Defense Minister] Serdyukov”; “Russian experts not totally sure of Pyongyang’s role in South Korean warship sinking – source”; and “Russian experts haven’t made final conclusions yet on S. Korean corvette incident – Gen. Staff”.

  235. thank you. I will read those now.

  236. Scott:

    Check out this website.

    As official as anyone could care.

    Scroll down to slide 29.

    And then have yourself a good laugh.

    http://csis.org/files/attachments/100525_AMB_Briefing-2.pdf

  237. I was right. They are saying it matches!

    where did you find that? that is awesome!

  238. website csis

    us csis: center for strategic & intelligence studies

    not the canadian spy agency

    bear in mind, it is “old”

    but it is after the time at which the official investigation was completed.

    point is that these people may think they are smarter than the peons, but they do make mistakes

    and i found it by googling around

  239. I also like slide 26 where they claim the corrosion on the propellers “matches” that of the ship, but they don’t provide any photos of the corrosion on the ship.

  240. It can’t be all that old because I first published this article on May 24th and they list as part of the background research for this presentation as President Lee’s May 24th address.

    I made some changes to the opening of the article, posted a screen-shot of page 29 there and in the body of the article right before the comparisons of the evidence.

    I also moved the additional links to the end where they should have been in the first place. looks cleaner.

    anyway, thank you again.

  241. Interesting new point:

    Now that we can see your original drawing and the one from the slideshow next to each other, we can see that they are not identical. Look carefully at the fins; they are not the same.

    So it looks like Ambassador Han was working with a different drawing than General Yoon back in Korea.

    And then look closely at your original drawing. Look at the fins, and think three-dimensionally. How are the propellers going to rotate?

    BTW, I don’t mean that it’s “your” drawing. By my count, there are now five official drawings floating around, all different, none matching the torpedo fragment, none matching the torpedo photo. We are going to have to institute a nomenclature.

  242. Scott:

    On June 11, 11:26, you asked some questions.

    To be clear: THREE different drawings, plus a photo, were used in General Yoon’s PP presentation.

    I really don’t have an any answer to your questions, and I’m not going to worry about it (and I suggest you also not worry about it). Deal with the things that can be dealt with definitely.

    Now let me make some guesses, which could be quite reasonable.

    1) NK buys torpedos from China. For example, the Yu-3. If you google Chinese torpedo images, you should be able to pop up some pics. BTW, “heavy” torpedos tend to look rather similar: long cylinder, rounded nose, tapered tail, fins, propellers, all designed for subsonic travel in water.

    2) NK copies the Chinese torpedos. Now they can build their own. What to call them? How about “Conventional Homing Torpedo, version 2D”. Or maybe that’s the NATO designation for something NK calls something else. Just a random thought, but the fact that no-one has been able to find any reference to a CHT-02D torpedo before May 15 doesn’t necessarily mean more than nobody bothered to put it on the web.

    3) If in fact NK is using Chinese torpedo technology, then a Chinese naval expert will be able to look at the recovered torpedo fragment and immediately say “that is (or is not) one of ours”. What is China saying? The JIG story is “not credible”.

  243. And if you want names,

    Yoon Jong-Sung, Brigadier general of the team investigating the sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan

    http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/bloom/2010/0528.html

    Yoon Duk-Yong (R), co-head of the team investigating the sinking

    http://topics.abcnews.go.com/photo/08s033o8rZ9CI

  244. An interesting point:

    The original picture used to show the mismatch has actually been photoshopped.

    At the bottom of this website:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2517243/posts

    there are 2 pictures. The first, smaller one, is correct. It is taken from Gen. Yoon’s briefing.

    In order to better display the size comparison, the owner of that website moved the display case to the right. Look at the wall below the drawing in the larger picture, esp. look through the display case, and you will see what has been done.

    In this particular case, the alteration does not change any aspect of the relevant evidence or the discussion, but we would do well to remember that any still or moving pictures can be altered at will.

  245. test 2:

    I sent a long post, but it didn’t seem to show up

  246. repost, part 1

    Massive data dump.

    This is an excerpt from a report I am preparing entitled “Fraudulent aspects of the JIG report”. The section on the physical aspects of the torpedo fragment is now complete and it is now here. There are some glitches in the text, because I am not providing any pictures, and I have not edited the text to remove the references to pictures. They are helpful anyway. You should be able to access all of the pictures through the links at the end.

    *************************

    Physical aspects of the torpedo fragment

    The critical evidence is the torpedo fragment that is claimed to be from a NK torpedo. This torpedo fragment was supposedly dredged from the sea bed at the site of the sinking about two months after the sinking, and is claimed to be from the torpedo that allegedly struck the Cheonan. Based on the amount of corrosion on the fragment and other physical aspects, I have no reason to disbelieve any of this, except the origin of the torpedo.

    The torpedo fragment has been publicly displayed. [6]

    (6 pictures)

    Various “blueprints” of a specific NK torpedo have been obtained and compared to the recovered torpedo fragment. It will be shown below that the drawings in question may not actually be accurate enough to qualify as blueprints. The primary source of these drawings is a briefing that was held on May 20 by Brigadier General Yoon, Jong-Sung. [7] One black and white drawing was used in the PowerPoint presentation. A second B&W drawing was placed above the display case. A full-size color drawing was held up near the end of the briefing. A picture of the alleged torpedo was also shown. Still photos of some of this information were circulated on the Internet. The most accessible drawing in the English media is the color drawing; we will label that “torpedo drawing 1” (TD-1). [8] A very similar drawing was used by Ambassador Han, Duk-Soo [3, slide 29]; we will label that TD-2. The drawing above the display case [3, slide 25] we will label TD-3. The PowerPoint drawing we will label TD-4. TD-3 and TD-4 are not readily available as still pictures on the Internet, but high-resolution screen captures are provided here.

    The JIG report claims that any and all of these drawings are identical, and that the torpedo fragment matches them perfectly, and that therefore the torpedo fragment came from a very specific NK torpedo, named CHT-02D. However, the material reality is that none of these drawings match each other, and none of them matches the torpedo fragment.

    (4 pictures)

  247. repost, part 2

    seems to be a length limit to comments?
    __________________________________

    A number of elements should be examined and compared. From front to back, they are:

    a) The motor rotor on the fragment has ridges and other details that are not present on the drawings. This mismatch can be ignored, because it can be explained by a lack of detail in the drawings.

    b) The propeller shaft on the fragment is tapered; it is straight on the drawings.

    c) The torpedo housing contains components (navigation control) that are in different locations on the fragment and the drawings TD-1 and TD-2. This mismatch might be due to lack of detail in parts of the drawings.

    d) The propeller blades have different shapes on the fragment and the drawings. The actual blades are quite small. They have a single curve on each of the leading and trailing edges. In all the drawings, the blades tend to be quite large, and their edges are composed of multiple straight lines.

    High-resolution screen captures from Gen. Yoon’s briefing are provided here.

    (2 pictures)

    e) The propeller hubs are different on the fragment and the drawings. This is not actually a mismatch; it is a drawing error. The propeller hubs are the full size of the torpedo housing. The propeller blades and hubs are solid units and should be drawn as such. Especially interesting artifacts can be seen in TD-3; the spikes on the hubs are not physical.

    f) The torpedo fins generally do not match. One bent fin can be seen on the fragment. It matches TD-3 and TD-4, but not TD-1 or TD-2. Incidentally, the top and bottom fins on TD-3 and TD-4 are different, although that isn’t necessarily a problem. An interesting artifact can be seen in TD-1. If the fins were as drawn, the propellers couldn’t rotate. This is a drawing error. Crucially, it needs to be pointed out that the fins in the picture of the alleged NK torpedo [3, slide 29] are quite small and do not match those on the torpedo fragment or any of the drawings.

    Perhaps someone who actually works with torpedoes can explain these differences. Failing that, there are only two possible explanations. Either the drawings are wrong, which means that they have no forensic value in this context, or the drawings represent different torpedoes. It is quite amazing to see these officials claim that the fragment matches the drawings, when it so clearly does not. It is also unclear why they used so many different drawings.

    In any case, the material evidence shows that the main conclusion of the JIG report is invalid, and because the “experts” who prepared the report necessarily knew this, the report is fraudulent.

  248. repost, part 3a

    References

    1] JIG report

    2] “Was the Critical Evidence presented in the South Korean Official Cheonan Report Fabricated?”; Seung-Hun Lee; June, 2010.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.0680

    3] “Briefing – the Cheonan Situation” (slideshow); Ambassador Han, Duk-soo; May 25, 2010.

    http://csis.org/files/attachments/100525_AMB_Briefing-2.pdf

    4] “Briefing on the Cheonan Situation”; Ambassador Han, Duk-soo; May 25, 2010.

    http://csis.org/files/attachments/100525_Presentation_Cheonan.pdf

  249. repost, part 3b

    5] “Probe concludes torpedo sank South Korea ship: report”; Reuters; May 6, 2010.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6460FC20100507

    6] 6 pictures of torpedo fragment recovered on May 15.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2517243/posts

    7] Press briefing; Brig. Gen. Yoon, Jong-Sung; May 20, 2010.

    http://news.naver.com/main/vod/vod.nhn?oid=052&aid=0000299772

    8] Full-size color drawing of alleged NK torpedo.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2517957/posts

  250. “One military official explained they were unable to detect the torpedo since the one used in the attack had a different audio range from those ascertained by the South Korean military, but some respond that it is difficult to understand why they would not have the audio information contained even in brochures regarding a torpedo that has been produced since the 1980s.”

    http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/421856.html

  251. Looks like I’ve driven away all other posters!

    10 of the last 10 posts are mine! All mine!

    Here is an issue that I don’t believe I’ve seen mentioned on this site, or much at all anywhere. But it is really important. Scott, if you want to move it to a different area, go ahead.

    No pics in this one, either; you will need to pull them out of the references. Reference list was posted above.
    _______________________________

    Chemical Analysis

    The purpose of the chemical analysis was to prove that the torpedo fragment recovered is from the torpedo that sank the Cheonan. The general idea is that certain materials might be found that were both on the torpedo and on the wreck of the Cheonan. Bearing in mind that the torpedo exploded several meters away from the ship, completely surrounded by water, it may be impossible to find such materials, because whatever was at the location of the torpedo may not have penetrated the water barrier to reach the Cheonan. Anyway, the attempt was made.

    A sample of material (AM-2) was scraped from the torpedo fragment. Several samples of material (AM-1) were scraped from the wreck of the Cheonan. A test explosion was created, and some material (AM-3) was taken from that. These samples were subjected to chemical analysis.

    Several nondestructive methods are available to determine the chemical composition of substances. Two of them are energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and X-ray diffraction. Both of these techniques were used to analyze the samples.

    A paper by Seung-Hun Lee discusses some of the findings of the JIG report, and refutes their conclusions. [2]

    (EDS pic)

    The JIG report claims that the three EDS scans were nearly identical, so they conclude that the Cheonan and the torpedo were exposed to the same explosion, i.e. that torpedo struck the Cheonan. However, it is obvious that the third scan is quite different from the other two. Let’s not worry about the fact that the first two scans are not identical either. The only thing that we can actually conclude from these scans is that the samples taken from the Cheonan and the torpedo fragment are almost the same material, and that the test explosion material bears no relation to the other samples.

    (X-Ray pic)

    The X-Ray data from the test explosion bears no relation to the other two scans, and the first two scans indicate that the material from the Cheonan and the torpedo are rather different.

    The proper conclusion from the chemical analysis is that you can’t really say much at all. Further tests are required. (Ask for more funding!) However, the JIG report concludes that the Cheonan and the torpedo were exposed to the same explosion. This is deliberate falsification of the experimental results; it is fraud.

    It needs to be pointed out that the JIG report does not mention the chemical analysis, even though it is very important. It is conceivable that Seung-Hun Lee’s paper is entirely bogus. However, it is being reproduced all over the Korean media. Ambassador Han Duk-Soo’s briefing [3], [4] does mention the chemical analysis.

    Another strange aspect of the chemical analysis is that traces of explosive found on the Cheonan were consistent with advanced Western explosives, not the more primitive material used by North Korea. This report received little attention. [5]

  252. I have covered the original chemical analysis report in some detail. I mention that it was determined that the explosive residue is consistant with plastisized RDX commonly used in more modern torpedo weaponry and in underwater mines of the type the U.S. uses.

    Are you aware that I have other writing on the subject?

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/category/sinking-of-the-cheonan/

    the following is one of my favorites

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/pcc-772-cheonan-an-unacceptable-provocation-by-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-international-community-has-a-duty-to-respond/

  253. In an attempt to get this story out to more U.S. viewers, I have taken the time to post it on my FireDogLake Seminal Diary…

    http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/54755

  254. I’m not sure why this wasn’t mentioned before, but it’s at least a theory on how a sub could sneak that far into SK waters and not be detected. Also, interesting comment on the “beon” marking. http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?cataId=nk02500&num=6445

  255. hmmm. A “secret” interview with a guy who won’t show his face says he has been living in South Korea for 15 years now and has a life there and he says he once saw a sub in North Korea’s possession that no other intelligence services have verified for 15 years.

    You don’t think that guy has any reason to help the puppet South Korean regime with this, do you?

  256. “Are you aware that I have other writing on the subject?”

    ArrrH !

    You mean I have to read MORE stuff? I thought I was done with this !

  257. “I have covered the original chemical analysis report in some detail.”

    Where, exactly?

  258. I live in Vancouver, BC. Having finished my analysis, I am now approaching newspapers with it (not MSM).

  259. well, I didn’t really cover it “in detail” but the first chemical and metalurgical analysis was the focus of this article…

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/22/german-made-torpedo-sunk-south-korean-cheonan/

    That was the first thing I wrote about all of this.

  260. good luck finding a paper that will publish your research on this subject.. I think the general rule right now is that no one wants to talk about this subject AT ALL right now… at least down here in the States.

  261. I’m not saying to accept the interview at face value or anything like that. I just thought it COULD explain how a submarine might sneak in and out without being detected, and that it’s a plausible explanation for why a NK torpedo might be labeled in a non-standard way. As for whether it’s written on top of the rust or not, I can’t really tell from your images. Not being a rust or ink expert, I couldn’t say how different a written-on-top versus written-below mark would look like.

  262. if something is written on top of metal that rusts and pits, then the metal flakes off leaving the pit and the ink of course flakes with it.

    pretty obvious isn’t it?

    However, if the ink is down inside the pit that has rusted off, that means it was written after the pit was formed by the rust.

  263. Can someone who is reading this actually do the following experiment?

    1) Write something on a piece of metal with permanent marker.

    2) Prepare a solution of salt water.

    3) Wash the sample with the solution.

  264. “well, I didn’t really cover it “in detail” but the first chemical and metalurgical analysis was the focus of this article…

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/22/german-made-torpedo-sunk-south-korean-cheonan/

    That was the first thing I wrote about all of this.”
    _______________________________

    I don’t see any discussion of chemical analysis in that article.

    (BTW, the link “Germany had already donated two Dolphin submarines to the Israeli navy” is coming up “error 404″ – in Hebrew.)

    Unless I am missing something, you definitely want to be looking at my June 14 “Chemical analysis” post, in particular the main reference:

    “Was the Critical Evidence presented in the South Korean Official Cheonan Report Fabricated?”; Seung-Hun Lee; June, 2010.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.0680

  265. “It was reported that an investigation in South Korea has determined the metal and explosive residues from the torpedo that sank their ship Cheonan, are consistent with that used by German manufacturers.

    The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia, Yonhap quoted the official as saying. Reuters”

  266. Scott:

    re your most recent post:

    I have seen that (perhaps I even saw it first here), and I have referenced it in my own post. However, you will note that no details are provided, and there is nothing there that we can independently verify.

    And that is why I strongly suggest you do read the post I referenced above. That one really does get into the guts of it, and it provides evidence that anyone can look at and assess on their own. (You don’t need to be a physicist (I am), although it helps.)

  267. back at the time they had not released the findings of that investigation… in fact they were already working to undermine it for the new story that it was N. Korea.

    I will read your article on the subject. I look forward to it.

    didn’t Russia take samples of the metal and explosive residue back with them?

  268. “Thus, among the two possible
    scenarios to explain the inconsistency of their data, the second scenario is
    correct. In other words, their first and second samples extracted from the
    Cheonan ship and the torpedo should have exhibited similar sharp Al and Al2O3
    Bragg peaks. But they did not. How can one then explain their EDS data that
    show the Al signal as strong as that observed in the third test-explosion sample?
    The only explanation is that the Al signal was not real but was put in by hands. In
    other words, the EDS data of their first and second “adsorbed materials” were
    fabricated.”

    ok, I’m interested.

    first of all, who are you? and where is the link to the first part of this investigation? I know you posted it up here but I would like to read the PDF like in part 2.

    am I to understand that you are running these tests yourselves or do I misunderstand this?

    If you would prefer staying anon… in public…

    rscdesigns@verizon.net

    obviously some of this material is over my head but if I understand it basically you have shown how they have fabricated certain results of their tests that concluded a torpedo (or an explosion in general?) caused the sinking?

  269. Comments on the Shin Joo Hyun article (Chia’s post).

    1) Some guy makes some claims. By now we should realize that there is no particular reason to believe that he is telling the truth, or that, even if he is, that what he thinks is true is in fact true.

    Trust needs to be earned.

    Media sources in general don’t verify anything.

    So that part of the process is always up to the reader.

    2) Submarine tactics:

    It is generally very hard to detect submarines. So one common way to use a submarine is to sneak it into an area where you are expecting targets, and park it on the bottom (assuming fairly shallow water). The sub is then effectively invisible (actually, inaudible), but the targets are making a lot of noise. The sub waits until a target comes in range, and then shoots. If this tactic is used against many types of ships, it stands a good chance of being successful. Note: Don’t try this against an Arleigh Burke DDG (apparently there were several floating around in the area).

    Bottom line: Mr Shin’s general account is actually plausible. However, Mr. Shin isn’t telling us anything new; you can get this information out of any Tom Clancy book.

    What is unclear is how good a Yono midget sub is to pull such a thing off. Probably its endurance is very low, so it can’t wait very long for targets. Did they know that the Cheonan would be in that area at the right time? Were they gunning for the Cheonan or a random target? What sensors does a Yono have? This is actually a critical question.

    Whether the theory makes sense or not will not be found in the general aspects. You need to get into the nitty-gritty. And, of course, none of us has access to those types of details.

    3) The felt pen marking

    According to Mr. Shin’s story, we should be expecting the torpedo fragment to be literally covered with felt pen markings.

    4) The last paragraph in the article is quite interesting, and really casts doubt on anything else Mr. Shin said in the article “we lost 46 guys … our government said it was NK … let’s punish NK”.

  270. I lost confidence in the first part of the article where the author said pretty much the same thing.

  271. re chemical analysis

    Seung-Hun Lee (not me) is a physicist at U of Virginia. We can be pretty certain of that, because arxiv does test for that, and there is such a person at UVa.

    What we don’t know is whether the paper in question is correct, because it was not peer-reviewed. In principle, it could be completely bogus. However, the guy could lose his job over that type of thing. In fact, he could lose his job over this paper, even if it is 100% legit.

    So why don’t the people who committed fraud with the JIG report lose their jobs? Because they’re working for the man, of course! Sad commentary on the state of our world.

    The first part of the report (actually, the only part I read, the second part was put up more recently, amazing how fast things are moving) is the Appendix to the more recent part (i.e. same pdf).

    As I understand it, someone leaked the JIG raw data to Mr. Lee, he looked at at and concluded the JIG report was bogus, and he was angry enough to risk losing his job by publishing.

    What I did was to read his work. This is not my area of specialization, but it is pretty general; all you have to do is look at the graphs and look for similarities and differences. It’s obvious that all the samples are different materials, so the JIG should have concluded that chemical analysis was inconclusive. Speaking as a physicist, the paper looks legit.

    And to repeat, I have only read part 1 of his work.

  272. Perhaps you didn’t understand the nature of my question earlier… I have a very specific reason for wanting to know why someone at UVA would run these tests. BTW, I used to live in Lynchburg and Richmond and went to JMU and VCU… small world.

  273. Understood. Do you have a link to part one? have you heard back from any of the publications about your work?

    You see, what you stated about him possibly losing his job over this… that’s why I was asking about it. Anything that goes against the establishment school of thought in this country right now is poison to ones career… especially in an institutionalised education envirnment.

  274. On the DailyNK,

    this right-wing media source has always seemed extremely shady to me, trafficking in every kind of speculation and slander against NK (DPR Korea). Turns out it’s a US government propaganda front…

    From New York Times article “Nimble Agencies Sneak News Out of North Korea”, January 24 2010:

    “…Daily NK is one of six news outlets that have emerged in recent years specializing in collecting information from North Korea…

    …All these news outlets pay their informants…Daily NK and Open Radio each have 15 staff members, some of them defectors, and receive U.S. congressional funding through the National Endowment for Democracy, as well as support from other public and private sources…”

    I expect that the damning import of any agency being funded by the US Congress / NED is known to those reading this site.

    And of course the New York Times article itself is thoroughly permeated with anti-DPRK propaganda.

  275. Sorry, should have linked — even though parts of the article are pretty gross, typical NTY BS:

    New York Times, “Nimble Agencies Sneak News Out of North Korea” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/world/asia/25north.html

  276. Mr. Lee’s paper was also published by seoprise … same website mentioned above.

    signing off for a while

  277. Thanks Victor, this is far outside my area of expertise, so I wasn’t sure if the theory was even plausible. (Also, I’ve never read Tom Clancy :p) And just to be clear, I DON’T simply believe a source is credible just because it’s put up on the web. I was not crediting the linked article for even being what it claimed to be. All I was interested in were the theories posited, as I had not heard of them elsewhere. With so many questions, from delivery to actual identification, I’m trying eliminate theories step by step. Now, off to read the chemical analysis. :)

  278. Ton Clancy writes fiction.

    Very accurate descriptions on modern combat, but still fiction.

    So if someone is uncomfortable with using that as a reference, go do the research, and then read Clancy again, and you will find that he pretty much gets it right.

    ***********************

    We can show fairly easily that the JIG report is a fraud.

    But don’t be surprised that I say this, the fact that the JIG report is a fraud does not rule out the possibility that the North Koreans actually did it. And what’s more, it’s even possible that the JIG people have concrete proof that the North Koreans did it, proof that they are unwilling to reveal, so they ran the fraud instead.

    For the sake of argument, I might say that the chance the NKs did it is 1/3.

    “Friendly” fire 1/3

    A black op by “our” side 1/3.

    But these guesses on who did it are purely speculation. We just don’t have the information. There’s not much point in going there.

    Stick with the stuff we do know.

    It would be nice if someone could do my experiment.

  279. Victor;

    For once, we disagree.

    “For the sake of argument, I might say that the chance the NKs did it is 1/3.”

    Though I understand your reasoning, as illogical as it may be, the fact is you cannot seperate motive from the evidence in any investigation. One cannot be considered without the other. Nor can we forget the behavior of the parties involved AFTER the evidence was presented.

    All of these things must be taken into consideration in equal parts along with the weight of the physical evidence presented here and now in many other places by many other researchers.

    So too must past behavior of each of the parties as well as the geo-political climate in which it all takes place.

    First: North Korea has no motive for sinking the Cheonan. Reconsiliation is a strong movement right now in Korea, the reaction of the People of South Korea shows us that.

    Why would N. Korea risk everything just to sink one vessel?

    Aside from the fact that no evidence supports this 1/3 possiblity, what is their motive?

    The end result could easily have been that China and Russia turn their backs on North Korea or that they would secretly work out a deal forcing Kim-Jong Il to step down, forcible regime change.

    The worst case scenario would have been that the U.S. is allowed to implement another “shock and awe” which Il must have known would be their first choice.

    There is no possible motivation on the part of North Korea to have done this aside from suicidal tendencies and that doesn’t hold up too well in court.

    Second – Had North Korea done this, there would be no motive for the U.S. to have fabricated such obviously flawed evidence to present against them.

    The U.S. is suffering from a case of international distrust right now. Your proposal would mean they chose to make that distrust even worse.

    Plus there is the aspect of the deliberate loss of the majority in the ruling Party that is aligned with the U.S. and Western free market influences.

    The June 2 elections, which you write about in your fine essay, illustrates that loss perfectly. What motivation would the JIG and the political influences that formed it have for fabricating such poor evidence of North Korea’s involvement were they to have actually been involved?

    Again… suicidal tendencies?

    Third – The very first investigation conducted by South Korea came to a different conclusion and that was the North Korea had nothing to do it.

    If they wished to protect north Korea all they had to do was stick with that assessment.

    Fourth – Hillary Clinton and our current state department has a long history of fabricating evidence in order to attack regimes they see as “unfriendly” especially since the “Global War on Terror” (read as “Global Free Market Wars”) began… and really, for a long time prior to that as well.

    Hell, it’s been the main occupation of the CIA for decades now.

    In this case, with North Korea marked as a member of the “Axis of Evil” you cannot forget to take this into consideration.

    fifth – Since the May 20th fraudulent investigation came out the U.S. has tried TWICE to stage War Games with South Korea in the waters just off North Korea.

    If we know anything about history, specifically the events leading up to our escalation of hostilities in Vietnam, we cannot assume that is for any other reason other than to provoke North Korea into an act that could be used to justify all out war.

    The South Koreans have delayed those excercises now twice.

    The high military official who resigned this past Sunday and the internal audit (neither mentioned in your essay by the way) also points to a more sinister motive than simply to protect North Korea from retaliation.

    Conclusion – Sorry, but I do not buy it.

    Combined with the evidence, the lack of motive, the behavior of all parties involved since the sinking of the Cheonan, combined the attempt to falsify evidence leaves us with only one or two conclusions about the event itself…

    … and neither of them are that North Korea fired that weapon.

    A 1/3 chance? No. 0% would be my estimate when I factor in the other eliments of an investigation.

    Physical Evidence does not exist in a vacuum. It ONLY serves to strengthen one hypothesis or the other in an investigation. Motive is just as important AFTER the hard physical evidence is collected and examined.

    Though physical evidence is the basis for every single valid investigation, it does not stand onto itself… you use the evidence to support the hypothisis which is also dependant on motive and opportunity (means) for the crime.

    So no, I cannot concur with your final conclusion that the chances are equal that North Korea fired this weapon and that for some unknown reason an elaborate fabrication was created to “shield” their involvement.

    Logically, it is an unsound conclusion.

  280. Sleight of hand, Scott.

  281. willyloman, while I am far from convinced by the current available facts, I can’t agree with all your statements.

    1) Motivation: Revenge for a previous naval clash has been cited, as well as a desire to show military might in face of all the KJI’s health/heir problems. After all, nothing unites a country like war against a foreign enemy, especially if you can claim to be the non-aggressor. It was made clear by the NK government that it disliked the scaling-back of Sunshine aid and that it strongly dislikes the current governing body. (Since when has one country refrained from attacking another because it considered the citizens ahead of the ruling government?) Also, historically, attacks on SK have had little reprecussion. NK KNOWS SK wouldn’t want to provoke a war (after all, Seoul is within easy reach and SK would lose much of the economic gain it’s made in the past decades). At the same time, NK has been able to put itself in a stronger bargaining position via threatening to attack. Also, it’s obvious that China (and Russia) wouldn’t want a stronger US presence right at its borders and wouldn’t abandon NK completely. Also, China already HAS major control over NK. Look at the aid that’s being given! I find it interesting that China refused to send its own investigation team, implying either it didn’t care or already knew.

    2) Also, can you be so sure that the evidence was fabricated? Yes, some things are fishy and don’t add up, but does that mean everything is a lie? There’s rumors of command trying to cover up its incompetence, and even issues of national security could explain many of the holes in the report. The Cheonan sank in SK waters due to a torpedo. (If the Russian “leak”, at least, is credible.) Naturally, NK would be the first suspect. It may NOT be the guilty party, but it makes sense to look at it first. And the biggest arguments against the investigation are 1) German/strange chemical results and 2) Sk government acting suspicious. I have to wait on #1 until the material is released (if ever), but #2 isn’t enough to debunk a theory.

    3) I’m not so sure on this one (where was this initial report printed?), but isn’t it possible that new evidence was uncovered in the intervening time that changed their opinion? If I were SK, I would be REALLY leery of accusing NK when 1) I have China/Russia to contend with and 2) I can’t/don’t want to do anything.

    4) While this may make us more suspicious than usual, the evidence is more important.

    5) The US has to show its support SOMEHOW, while avoiding an actual confrontation, which no one wants. Also, no one can argue that the NK has threatened SK. (Whether justified or not is a separate issue. Personally, I don’t think the best response to a false accusation is belligerence.) Regardless of who sank the Cheonan, increased military training/surveillance is natural.

    Conclusion:

    While the evidence/report of the investigation is suspect, it at least claims to point to NK. And although the original investigation team was made up of 3 allied countries and 1 neutral, it would still take SOME doing (and major guts) to have all of them agree to fabricate evidence. Especially with the scrutiny they knew they would receive from China and Russia, not to mention the rest of the world.

    Whereas the one bit of evidence that the US sank the Cheonan is…German residue found in torpedoes used by many countries? (Now if your theory is that the US/someone else used NK parts, that would be a whole ‘nother ballpark.) The evidence, suspect as it is, that the NK sank the Cheonan is still much more concrete than the evidence that the US did. (And what about China? I’d think China has a lot to gain from this.) Therefore, the possibility of US versus NK involvement is, at best, equal or slightly in favor of NK. Unless you’re relying more on possible motivation than on evidence found.

    (And for the record, if the US is involved, I think it much more likely that an embarassing accident occured which the incompetents tried to cover up. The premeditation needed in a black ops mission seems a bit of a stretch in terms of ability to plan. :/)

  282. Victor;

    For once, we disagree.

    “For the sake of argument, I might say that the chance the NKs did it is 1/3.”

    Conclusion – Sorry, but I do not buy it.

    Logically, it is an unsound conclusion.

    ****************************

    OK, fair enough. You have thought about and researched this more than me.

    I was limiting myself to the narrow aspect of the physical evidence that is publicly available.

  283. “What motivation would the JIG and the political influences that formed it have for fabricating such poor evidence of North Korea’s involvement were they to have actually been involved?”

    ************************************

    I feel that my response is getting somewhat off topic, but let us consider a somewhat related question.

    Anyone who bothers to look at the physical evidence can see that parts of it appear to be fabricated, and the conclusions drawn from it are false.

    How can these people believe that they can actually present this type of evidence in public?

    I think that the answer illustrates something very unfortunate about the English-speaking world. That’s the US, Canada, and UK. In these countries, I have seen that the mass of the population simply sucks up anything the government/media/experts tell them as though it were gospel, no matter how absurd.

    I have personal witnessed a number of cases of pathological behavior. Call it psychotic, actually – that’s an inability to properly observe material reality. Many people are simply unable to observe the reality that is right in front of them when the government/media/experts tell them something different.

    So perhaps the JIG, faced with the problem of getting out the story their political bosses wanted, and being unable to collect any real evidence, simply collected a bunch of manure, shoveled it into a pile, and said “behold, this is the gospel”, and actually believed that it would go over.

    I think that they were surprised by the response of Russia, China, and especially the South Korean people.

  284. “I find it interesting that China refused to send its own investigation team, implying either it didn’t care or already knew.”

    !!!!!!!

    “Also, can you be so sure that the evidence was fabricated?”

    Is someone going to try my experiment? If salt water turns out to be a solvent for permanent felt pen, then we will in fact have direct proof that part of the evidence was fabricated.

    “The Cheonan sank in SK waters due to a torpedo. (If the Russian “leak”, at least, is credible.)”

    This is hardly an IF. Based on the visible damage to the Cheonan, it can’t really be anything else. I’m assuming that this point has already been cleared up. If necessary, we can hash it out in detail, but I hope that won’t be necessary.

    “Also, no one can argue that the NK has threatened SK.”

    Is that a typo?

    “And although the original investigation team was made up of 3 allied countries and 1 neutral, it would still take SOME doing (and major guts) to have all of them agree to fabricate evidence”

    and add Canada to the mix

    I personally have direct experience that Canadian governments fabricate evidence as a matter of course. Lie, cheat, and steal; it seems to be all that they do. And we keep electing these guys.

    I believe that history of the past several decades has shown that the same applies to US/UK.

    Sweden, that would surprise me. Australia, I don’t know.

  285. To the above,

    “I find it interesting that China refused to send its own investigation team, implying either it didn’t care or already knew.”
    > Anyone who can think of any other reasons for not sending a team (and thus losing a chance to confirm/deny the original investigation), I’m interested in hearing them.I’m trying to cover my bases here, hence the many many disclaimers sprinkled throughout my previous post. I’m not saying I buy the JIG report! I just don’t think there’s a “0%” chance that the NK was responsible. At least, not yet.After the SK officially accused the NK, what did it say? My statement has nothing to do with whether the accusation is correct or not, just what the response was.<

    (Btw, is there more than one Victor in this thread? I'm a bit confused. :S)

  286. Umm. Not sure why my comment didn’t post properly. (Parts were cut out.) So here it is again:

    To the above,

    “I find it interesting that China refused to send its own investigation team, implying either it didn’t care or already knew.”

    Anyone who can think of any other reasons for not sending a team (and thus losing a chance to confirm/deny the original investigation), I’m interested in hearing them.

    Also, you know that salt water (water + salt) is different from sea water, right? I’m not sure how big the difference is chemically, but I know that you can’t just add salt to a saltwater aquarium.

    “The Cheonan sank in SK waters due to a torpedo. (If the Russian “leak”, at least, is credible.)”

    I’m trying to cover my bases here, hence the many many disclaimers sprinkled throughout my previous post. I’m not saying I buy the JIG report! I just don’t think there’s a “0%” chance that the NK was responsible. At least, not yet.

    “Also, no one can argue that the NK has threatened SK.”

    After the SK officially accused the NK, what did it say? My statement has nothing to do with whether the accusation is correct or not, just what the response was.

    (Btw, is there more than one Victor in this thread? I’m a bit confused. :S)

  287. you’re missing the point vic.

    yes they fabricated the evidence…

    yes they thought it would go over because they control the media….

    but IF North Korea had actually sunk the Cheonan with a torpedo, … they wouldn’t have HAD TO…

    ergo, North Korea didn’t do it…. at least not with a CHT-O2D

  288. “After the SK officially accused the NK, what did it say? My statement has nothing to do with whether the accusation is correct or not, just what the response was”

    after North Korea was accused of an act of war that they didn’t do, of course they threatened South Korea. What else could they do? They were being framed in such an obivous way, it could only mean that S.K. and the U.S. were attempting to incite the world to attack N.K. in another regime change effort.

  289. 1) regarding China not sending an investigation team:

    I had thought that that meant that China knew that NK didn’t do it, but after Chia pointed this out, I realized that one way China might know this is if they themselves did it. China certainly has the technical capacity to sneak a sub into a major US fleet.

    http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2007/11/chinese_sub_out.php

    If China successfully pulled off the Cheonan sinking, they do stand to gain.

    But would China even contemplate such a politically risky and dirty thing? It seems to me that world and regional events are naturally moving in China’s favor, and this is no time for them to be running such a play.

    As an aside, to all those people who think that it’s easy to detect subs, the link above shows just how dangerous subs can be. If required, I can provide more references for this point.

    2) regarding the composition of sea water:

    It is 99.5% salt water. I think we can safely treat them as being the same to start with.

    I was hoping to try the experiment I mentioned today, but was unable to. The reason should be obvious. If we can show that salt water dissolves permanent felt pen, then … (you complete the sentence). At the same time, to be fair, we should also do the experiment of writing on corroded metal (steel, I think) with permanent felt pen to see what actually happens.

    3) I repeat, the Cheonan was sunk due to a proximity underwater explosion, probably a torpedo. If anybody disagrees with this statement, please say so explicitly, and we can drag out some references. The statement is true not because of the JIG report, but because of the nature of the damage to the ship.

    4) “Also, no one can argue that the NK has threatened SK.”

    Read that statement again, carefully. Aren’t you missing a word?

    5) AFAIK, there is only one person posting here with my name … so far. Do you see any contradictions in what I have posted?

    In the contradiction lies the hope.

    5) “but IF North Korea had actually sunk the Cheonan with a torpedo, … they wouldn’t have HAD TO…

    ergo, North Korea didn’t do it….”

    That does not follow.

    Suppose, for the sake of argument, that NK sunk the Cheonan.

    Either SK/US a) did, or b) did not know the NK did it. There are no other options.

    But even if SK/US knew NK did it, they may not be willing to reveal that evidence.

    Suppose, further, that SK/US want to blame NK. The alternative is irrelevant, bacause we know what SK/US did at that point.

    We can summarize these possibilities in the following logical statement: IF NK sank the Cheonan, AND IF SK/US were unwilling or unable to produce the evidence, AND IF SK/US wanted to blame NK, THEN they would act as they did. (We already know that they are willing to lie and fabricate evidence.) The corollary to this statement is that the existence of the fraudulent JIG report does not impy NK’s innocence.

    Please do not misunderstand this. This is a very narrow statement, dealing only with logic.

  290. Note on Canadian involvement in the investigation of the Cheonan incident

    There was a Canadian government press release(1) on May 16 stating that “Canada is sending three naval experts to South Korea…[to]…join a multinational team currently conducting an investigation into the sinking of the ROK Ship Cheonan.”

    This release was questioned because the timing implied the Canadians, if they did get to Seoul, would have been there too late to participate in any of the investigation. The results were announced on May 20 but the they were being shared with foreign diplomats at least by May 18.

    On June 10, Michael Friscolanti reported(2) in Macleans.ca that:

    “Matthew Lindsey, a National Defence spokesman, insisted that the Canadian delegation ‘played a critical role in the Republic of Korea-led investigation.’ But he refused to provide any more details about that critical role, citing everything from ‘operational security’ to ‘the norms of international diplomacy.’ He wouldn’t say when the experts landed, when they left, or what evidence—if any—they examined. ‘What I can tell you is they were there for a short period of time in the later parts of the investigation, and they came back around the time when President Lee [Myung-bak] made his announcement,’ he said. ‘This is all the information I have.'”

    Following up, on June 22 David Pugliese on the “Defence Watch” blog at the Ottawa Citizen wrote(3), “I received an email sent by [Defence Department spokeswoman] Kathleen Guillot with media talking points…..adding a little more information.”

    Pugliese sums up some of those points:

    “Canada sent three experts in naval operations with significant submarine background to South Korea to support the independent investigation by various international partners. The Canadian team was presented with South Korea’s findings to provide technical analysis. The team studied and completely endorsed the findings, as did all other international participants. Canada was represented by Capt(N) Steve Virgin(4), who led the team of Canadian personnel who supported the independent investigation. The team was in Seoul for approximately eight days.”

    That says that the Canadans did *not* participate in the investigation. Instead. after the investigation, “the Canadian team was presented with South Korea’s findings to provide technical analysis.” Then “the team studied and completely endorsed the findings.”

    Puglise adds, “The Canadian team arrived in South Korean on May 13, according to another email from Guillot.”

    Information provided by the Canadian government is contradictory. Was the team leaving Canada sometime after the announcement on May 16 or did it arrive in Seoul on May 13?

    But neither of these dates agrees with what the 5 page report “Investigation Result on the Sinking of ROKS ‘Cheonan'” by the Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group dated May 20, 2010.

    The JIG report of May 20 mentions Canada only once:

    “. . . . In addition, the findings of the Multinational Combined Intelligence Task Force, comprised of 5 states including the US, Australia, Canada and the UK and operating since May 4th, . . .”

    Considering the Canadian government information which says its experts arrived May 13 or after May 16, at best it appears to exaggerate the role of Canada to include Canada as a participant of something which the JIG claims was operating since May 4th.

    The dates and the role of Canada in something called the Multinational Combined Intelligence Task Force do not seem to justify any suggestion that Canadian experts “participated in the investigation.”
    ———————————————————
    Notes:
    1) (No. 165 – May 16, 2010 – 9:45 a.m. ET) The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence, today announced that, at the invitation of the Government of the Republic of Korea (ROK), Canada is sending three naval experts to South Korea.

    These experts will join a multinational team currently conducting an investigation into the sinking of the ROK Ship Cheonan (PCC-772). On March 26, 2010, the ship sank in waters near the Northern Limit Line.

    “Canada is strongly committed to the security and stability of the Korean Peninsula,” said Minister Cannon. “Canada-Korea bilateral relations are firmly grounded in our history of strong political and economic partnership and cooperation. We are pleased to provide assistance to a key partner in the region.”

    “The Government of Canada is pleased to be providing support to this investigation,” said Minister MacKay. “Our contribution of Canadian Forces expertise and experience to this multinational effort builds on the objective of the Canada First Defence Strategy to deliver excellence and project leadership abroad.”

    Canada has long enjoyed positive relations with the ROK. Both countries are hosting G20 summits this year.
    – 30 –

    2) “Did Canadian experts get there in time?” at http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/06/10/did-canadian-experts/#more-130455

    3) “QUESTIONS ABOUT CANADA’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE SINKING OF THE SOUTH KOREAN WARSHIP CHEONAN” at http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2010/06/22/questions-about-canada-s-involvement-in-the-investigation-into-the-sinking-of-the-south-korean-warship-cheonan.aspx

    (4) promoted to his current rank and appointed to Director Asia-Pacific Policy in 2009. (http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dsa-dns/sa-ns/ab/sobv-vbos-eng.asp?mAction=View&mBiographyID=835)

  291. thankyou, nice post :)

  292. Hi, Scott.

    Just follow up the Korean news about Cheonnan sinking released today.

    The military admitted that the diagram of terpedo they presented as a smoking gun is not the that of CHT-02D. They presented other terpedo’s diagram, PT-97W by mistake.

    I think it is totally poor performances orchestraed by S. Korean goverment and US governments.

    The news link is written in Korean (http://www.cbs.co.kr/nocut/show.asp?idx=1513304). If I could find the English version, I will let you know.

    Thanks again for your intelligent and sharp view in this matter.

    Kind regards,

    Greg

  293. Scott,
    You were correct…
    Have a look:

    http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/06/30/2010063000944.html

    ……A South Korean military spokesman said the error was discovered after the press conference and a presentation of the evidence in front of the UN Security Council featured the correct diagram. ….
    BUT, as Mr. Shin said, there were no torpedo explosion.
    This is again another lie.

  294. The Voice of America (VOA) reported July 2 about US President Obama’s comments at the G-20 press conference in Toronto last weekend.

    http://www1.voanews.com/policy/editorials/Obama-On-North-Korea-97600984.html

    Pres. Obama ” . . . the United States participated in the investigation that was conducted around the Cheonan. Our experts concluded that North Korea had carried out that attack. That was consistent with South Korea’s assessment and others who were observers in the process.”

    It seems to me Pres. Obama is saying, “the United States participated in the investigation . . .” Others “were observers”.

    Is that closer to the truth about what is frequently called the ‘international’ or ‘multi-national’ investigation? Was it a US/ROK investigation with UK, Sweden, and Australia as observers and Canadian experts arriving too late except to read and agree with the conclusion?

  295. You can only believe half of what you see and even less of what you hear. Everybody should know not to trust what the government says

  296. Hi Scott

    Just to post link of another recenty published article on the Nature about this fabrication.

    Controversy over South Korea’s sunken ship (http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100708/full/news.2010.343.html)

    Please enjoy the news.

    Greg

  297. [...] podwodny. Nie ma innego równie prawdopodobnego wyjaśnienia”. W rzeczywistości jednak, jak wykazał Scott Creighton, torpedy w ogóle do siebie nie pasują. Śruba napędowa znalezionej torpedy wcale [...]

  298. See article in “Nature” 15 July 2010 pages 302-303
    “Questions raised over Korean torpedo claims”
    Seung-Hun-Lee a SKorean born physicist who works at the U. of Virginia found no aluminum or aluminium oxide on the torpedo’s propeller from the the Cheronan ship using X-ray diffraction analysis. Panseok Yang a mass spectrometrist at U.of Maitoba in Canada studied the oxygen/metal ratios and concluded that the “material identified could be the torpedo”s own corroded aluminum’. The data was on web sites in June. Conclusion – NKorea’s involvment may be in doubt.

  299. [...] was attacked is NOT the same torpedo shown in the North Korean plans. As I stated above, there are additional differences as well between the blueprints and the actual torpedo, but the actuators are the [...]

  300. I spent 6 years in the US Navy as a Destroyer Sonarman hunting submarines. This contreversy can be cleared up quite easily by inteviewing the Cheonan’s Sonar watch. A running torpedo is VERY NOISY in the water and has a distinctive sound, like am electric razor through a Marshall Amp. It also produces a large noise spoke on the bearing of ANY sonar scope. If there were NO Hydrophone effects or bearing noise spoke, then there was NO Torpedo and she hit a submerged mine.

  301. [...] ei ole käyty, WTC iskut on lavastettu, Kursk törmäsi USA:n sukellusveneeseen ja Pohjois-Korea lavastettiin syylliseksi Cheonanin [...]

  302. Ishmael

    to my knowledge Ishmael, that is one of the first things they looked at. In short, there were no reported soundings not only on board the Cheonan, but remember, they were conducting naval wargames and had multiple ships in the area at the time. None of them picked up anything that could have been a “live fish” in the water prior to the sinking.

    That is one of the main reasons that the South Korean government had pretty much concluded that the sinking was accidental… that is… that is the conclusion they reached before Hillary Clinton rushed down there and convinced them they could “use” this as an opportunity to rachet up sanctions against North Korea and the “independent/objective” JIG investigation team was formed.

    You will also note that the JIG team did NOT mention any sonar hits on a torpedo for their “conclusive” report. Had there been any, you can bet your bottom dollar they would have used it in the report to help bolster their claim. So the fact that any mention of sonar readings is missing from the report, tells us a lot.

    thanks for the comment.

  303. Ishmael

    Quick question if you are still around.

    Do they record sonar readings? And if they do, could a sonar operator tell the difference between TYPES of torpedos? What I am getting at here is, maybe there WAS a sounding picked up because it was supposed to be a drill… but the torpedo could be identified as one NOT from the North Korean fleet, so they kept it from the record.

    Just a thought.

  304. Just simple question, Scott.
    U said the paper is unsigned…where did you get this information? I am digging this as well and it would be great help if you get me a hint about that.
    cheers,

  305. Soo;

    Hi there. The first report they came out with, the short one, wasn’t signed. In fact it was hard at first to figure out who exactly was on the JIG investigation team.

    Here is a link to that first report. I just checked it, and it is still the same. its a PDF by the way

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/20_05_10jigreport.pdf

  306. [...] who the “investigators” were since they didn’t take the time to sign their work.” (See http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/the-sinking-of-the-cheonan-we-are-being-lied-to/ ) The JIG’s statement(or “report”) of May 20th states clearly: “In [...]

  307. [...] who the “investigators” were since they didn’t take the time to sign their work.” (See http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/the-sinking-of-the-cheonan-we-are-being-lied-to/ ) The JIG’s statement(or “report”) of May 20th states clearly: “In addition, the findings [...]

  308. [...] who the “investigators” were since they didn’t take the time to sign their work.” (See http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/the-sinking-of-the-cheonan-we-are-being-lied-to/ [...]

  309. I think you need to learn how to count. Count how many blades are on the screw of the German torpedo. Now count how many are on the one that was found.

    Here is the schematic of the CHT-02D. Looks like an exact match to me.

    http://file.agora.media.daum.net/pcp_download.php?fhandle=N25uZXVAZmlsZS5hZ29yYS5tZWRpYS5kYXVtLm5ldDovSzE1MC8yLzI5Ni5ibXA=&filename=12322.bmp

  310. they have already admitted they used the wrong diagram in the May 20th briefing….

  311. Yes, and the diagram I posted was the correct one that matches exactly. It is taken straight from the N. Korean weapons export brochure.

  312. actually, it doesn’t match exactly. The actuators aren’t nearly as long, the housing in the front of the shaft is a different shape than that of the drawing, and the drawing itself looks like someone Caded it together in a rush.

    Either way, that drawing WAS presented at the same time and during the press conference on May 20th, and it is, according to the JIG investigation team and the South Korean government, the WRONG drawing…. they both were…

  313. What are you talking about? The measured length is exactly right.

    Yes, it was Caded together, by the North Koreans who have that schematic in their brochure.

    Or am I to believe that it is a German torpedo that doesn’t even have the right amount of blades on the screw? What I don’t understand is how you can scrutinize this image which is pretty much exact with the exception that it is warped due to the blast but overlook the the blades on the screw yet adamantly claim it is a German torpedo. Either a heavy amount of delusion or stupidity is at work.

  314. that file was created today. What, are you guys just making this spin up as you go along?

    That proves my point.

    That is a photo of someone pointing to the supposed (there is no proof where that brochure came from) brochure of a north korean weapons dealer some something.

    The detail you are talking about is clearly a detail of the torpedo the South Korean government and the JIG team has already ADMITTED is NOT the same as the piece of evidence found.

    You and your co-workers can keep trying different angles to spin the story… but the rest of the world and most of South Korea already know the truth, and that is, your boss, Hillary Clinton, tried to lie us into another war… or at least, harsher sanctions.

    So you can keep it up if you want. Keep slapping up new photos that prove my point, I don’t care. I got nothing else to do than swat you Burston-Marstellar types all day anyway.

  315. speaking of which… how much does that job pay anyway? I could certainly use the work, and by the looks of it, I could excel at it.

  316. What are you talking about it was created today? The website shows July 6 in the browser.

    I get it. You right clicked it and saved it to your computer so it was created (on your computer) today. Learn how to use the computer and maybe then you can get a cool job spinning conspiracy to the unwitting public.

    The JIB team admitted they used the wrong photo but the use the right one when presenting it to the UN. I can accept that mistake. Hell, there are people who don’t even know the difference between the number 5 or 6 and get way less scrutiny.

  317. BTW, I think it’s cute when someone points out to you that the screws are completely different (just by counting the blades on it) they must be working for the government. Other than completely destroying the entire argument. It’s the ONLY explanation! Forget common sense and basic arithmetic! Everyone who disagrees with you MUST be a paid government employee!

    Seriously, the government would not waste the time to pay for someone to debunk you. Think about it. The majority of people take the government’s version of events and you are fringe. They don’t have to convince anyone of anything, especially quack jobs.

    What do they even care what you think? Are you going to lead a revolution and overthrow them because of this? What threat do you pose to them even if all you said was true? If they were really worried, don’t you think black helicopters would be flying over your house and they would have kidnapped/assassinated you by now? S. Korea hasn’t attacked N. Korea and the situation is contained, so I think the US got what it wanted, which is stability in the region.

    I’m going to quote South Park. We, the government, try to tell people the truth but 1/4 are retards and won’t believe us.

  318. what? you have your Tru-Cast tuned into me? That took like 30 seconds for you to respond…

    first of all, that was NOT created on June 6th… that is the name of the URL… not the date the fake image was posted up so you could post a link here to it…

    want proof?

    there you go, genius… just because you put a date in a URL does not mean that was the date the file was created. And I didn’t open it… i just viewed it.

    “The JIB team admitted they used the wrong photo but the use the right one when presenting it to the UN.”

    Ok. It’s JIG, not JIB… if you are going to get paid for doing this shit, you should at least do the homework, or try and read the morning memos a little better, ok?

    Next, the SHAPE of the blades are DIFFERENT, brainiac… that’s what I argued, that’s the truth. Hard to see in your hand picked photo there, but if you or the other readers care to go back and actually look at what I wrote, you will see a clear difference.

    “Everyone who disagrees with you MUST be a paid government employee!”

    again, another generalization. you guys must love those.

    No sir, many people disagree with me. If you regularly read this, you would know that. you would also know that I don’t hardly ever suggest they are paid PR reps working for a company helping to try and respin the flawed Cheonan false flag.

    But the fact is, you are one. I can tell by how you are quickly responding to this, AS IF you get an automatically generated notice when I post a return comment, and I can tell by how you are desperately trying to spin this lame story back to the Pro-Hillary side.

    Fact is, you are what you are. Question is… are you any good at it? So far, looks like you need a suppurt staff on this one.

    You really think Hillary went through all this trouble trying to frame North Korea for “stability in the region”? I guess you still think Bush thought there were really weapons of mass destruction in Iraq too.

    And if you can’t tell the difference between the drawing and the “evidence” (they just HAPPENED to “find” days before their big announcement) then you had better reconsider throwing around words like “retard”, dimwit.

  319. Yes, I understand that it’s the file location. Seeing as its a Korean site I really don’t think I have admin privileges on it. I was just commenting that that is the date it was posted. It certainly is not as dumb as you saving it to your desktop and assuming it was made today…

    And yes, I wrote JIB instead of JIG, the letters are next to each other on the keyboard. Typos, if that’s the best you have the you are in a really sore spot. And I don’t know what you are talking about. The blades look the same minus deformation.

    And not, I respond quickly because I’m studying at he computer and I need a distraction. There’s also a notify me via email option. If Hillary really wanted a war as you suggested, why aren’t we at war? Why hasn’t the government done anything to convince us? Seems like a lot of effort just to put more sanctions on them. Don’t let common sense hit your ass on the way out.

    PS. You still haven’t explained why the German torpedo has 6 blades per screw when the one that was found only has 5.

  320. “And if you can’t tell the difference between the drawing and the “evidence” (they just HAPPENED to “find” days before their big announcement) then you had better reconsider throwing around words like “retard”, dimwit.”

    This is probably the most laughable argument. The released their findings in May. The incident happened in March. I wouldn’t call they just days before their press release. And yes, of course they released the information together, that’s the whole point of an investigation, is to find evidence and release the conclusion in a presentation.

    Basically, they did the most logical thing any investigation would do and how it should act and then claimed, “HA! THEY BEHAVED NORMALLY! PROOF OF CONSPIRACY!” That’s fucking retarded.

  321. The Koreas aren’t going to war because of cool heads in S. Korea and US counsel, not because of this website.

    Anyways, I’m done. Have fun with the tin hat.

  322. “The Koreas aren’t going to war because of cool heads in S. Korea and US counsel, not because of this website.”

    The Koreans aren’t going to war because the people of South Korea saw through the obvious bullshit propaganda that people like you have been trying to push off on them.

    In fact, the June 2nd election changed course dramatically because of Hillary Clinton’s bullshit… and a ranking defense minister had to resign as well…

    also, China did their own investigation as did Russia, and they both came to the same conclusion… that the Clinton led JIG “investigation” was nothing more than a ham-handed PR spin job…

  323. “Yes, I understand that it’s the file location. Seeing as its a Korean site I really don’t think I have admin privileges on it. I was just commenting that that is the date it was posted. It certainly is not as dumb as you saving it to your desktop and assuming it was made today…”

    let me try to explain the process of the screenshot… I got the properties off the image, like you can do on any website, and took a screenshot of THAT… THAT image went to my desktop… not the one you slapped up on the net somewhere to use as some kind of prop for this set of comments.

    it doesn’t make a difference anyway, since South Korea has already admitted that is a bullshit drawing…

  324. “This is probably the most laughable argument. The released their findings in May. The incident happened in March. I wouldn’t call they just days before their press release.”

    Do you know ANYTHING about this event? anything? I hope your supervisor reads this exchange and realizes just how unprepared you are for your work.

    The sinking of the Cheonan took place on MARCH 26th

    The press event where the JIG “investigation” was announced was on MAY 20th…

    … and they just HAPPENED to find the “evidence” on MAY 15th…

    Just a few days before they announced their “findings” and a whole MONTH AND A HALF after the event.

    you really need to start doing some homework on these projects of yours. either that or your bosses need to have certain people specialize in certain pieces of propaganda so they can know a little something about them before coming into sites like this one.

  325. “If Hillary really wanted a war as you suggested, why aren’t we at war? Why hasn’t the government done anything to convince us? Seems like a lot of effort just to put more sanctions on them.”

    because… China and Russia and most of South Korea (not to mention the tepid response from the UN security council) all have stated that North Korea did not sink the Cheonan.

    not to mention the fact that the President of South Korea has also backed off the claim (reference the joint statement he made with China and Japan …)

    believe it or not, Hillary doesn’t always get her way.

    “Why hasn’t the government done anything to convince us?”

    uh… isn’t that what you PR guys are doing right now? Spinning the story, trying to “control the narrative”?

  326. ohhhhhhhhh…….

    take a look at this folks…

    Cheonan sinking haunts S Korea – Naval experts suggest government cover-up of “simple” maritime accident.

    http://english.aljazeera.net/video/asia-pacific/2010/08/201082943016853536.html

    youtube

  327. You are giving BRex far too much credit. A hack would never be this stupid.

  328. Beulahman;

    you might be right… but still its fun to play with the wildlife when they stroll in, isn’t it?

  329. “In fact, the June 2nd election changed course dramatically because of Hillary Clinton’s bullshit… and a ranking defense minister had to resign as well…”

    You are very deluded.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/08/29/south.korea.resignations/index.html?hpt=Sbin

    From the article. “But Kim bowed to pressure from opposition parties and critics over discrepancies in his testimony during his confirmation hearing, and alleged shady relations with a convicted local businessman, Yonhap reported.” What does that have to do with Hillary Clinton? Nothing. You are bat shit crazy.

    “also, China did their own investigation as did Russia, and they both came to the same conclusion… that the Clinton led JIG “investigation” was nothing more than a ham-handed PR spin job…”

    They are also both Communist countries and have a poor track record for both freedom of speech and human rights violations. China still doesn’t even admit Tienanmen Square happened. But if you want to throw in your lot with them that’s fine I suppose.

    I also don’t know where you got your “May 15″ date.

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-05/10/c_13285608.htm

    They confirmed the explosive residue on May 10.

    “let me try to explain the process of the screenshot… I got the properties off the image, like you can do on any website, and took a screenshot of THAT… THAT image went to my desktop… not the one you slapped up on the net somewhere to use as some kind of prop for this set of comments.”

    So let me get this right. You saved a screenshot to your desktop and then wondered why the file was created on your desktop that day? LOL. Are you really that stupid?

    “because… China and Russia and most of South Korea (not to mention the tepid response from the UN security council) all have stated that North Korea did not sink the Cheonan.”

    Well considering that the US has already proven that it will take unilateral actions even if the entire world disagrees with them (Iraq), I’d say your assessment has zero basis in reality.

    “because… China and Russia and most of South Korea (not to mention the tepid response from the UN security council) all have stated that North Korea did not sink the Cheonan.

    not to mention the fact that the President of South Korea has also backed off the claim (reference the joint statement he made with China and Japan …)”

    What the hell are you talking about?

    http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/south-korea-president-north-korea-apologize/story?id=11031063

    What part of “North Korea must apologize” do you not get?

    http://english.aljazeera.net/video/asia-pacific/2010/08/201082943016853536.html

    This is your funniest assertion, yet. One, you claim that a German torpedo is responsible, then claim this as evidence. Did you even watch the video? This guy claims that the ship ran aground. He doesn’t even mention a torpedo. One I can’t take your “expert” seriously since no ship splits in half for running aground. Two, do some research on the guy, he was kicked out of the Navy as a junior officer. The only reason to be dishonorably discharged is gross incompetence.

    How much crack are you smoking?

    PS. You still haven’t answered why the torpedo recovered has 5 blades on the screw and the German torpedo you claim to be the weapon has 6. Your conspiracy theory is seriously lacking.

  330. Oh and for clarification. They said this was the wrong photo.

    They said this is the right photo.

    The latter is an exact match.

    So you can’t stop your crying about them admitting they used the wrong photo because they corrected their error. You still haven’t corrected your error about the German torpedo and I don’t expect you to since you’ve avoided it since I’ve brought it up.

  331. man, you are really lacking in facts aren’t you?

    China and Russia are “communist countries”? What? Ever hear of Boris Yeltsin? They ended socialist rule in 1991 after an attempted coup of Gorbachev.

    They moved to an IMF “shock therapy” economic model of “when wide-ranging reforms including privatisation and market and trade liberalization were being undertaken”.

    Putin was ELECTED president in 2000 and they have had a CONSTITUTION since 1993… they basically have the same kind of political system we USED to have…

    “The Russian Federation is fundamentally structured as a representative democracy. Executive power is exercised by the government”

    and if you wish to talk about “a poor track record of freedom of speech and human rights violations”…

    ever heard of “free speech zones”?

    ever heard of “net neutrality”?

    ever heard of the enemy belligerent act of 2010?

    how about the Patriot Act?

    Military Commissions Act?

    Gitmo?

    “Shock and Awe”?

    Do you know what the Fire Bombing of Japan was?

    DDT?

    Cluster bombs?

    Depleted uranium?

    Ever done any research into how we ‘won” Florida from the indians and run-away slaves?

    Check out all the “democracy” we brought to …

    Argentina
    Chile
    Panama
    Vietnam
    Korea
    El Salvadore
    Nicaragua
    Yugoslavia
    Iraq
    Iran (1953)
    Afghanistan
    Saudi Arabia

    and on and on and on….

    Lastly, and this is the last comment I will make on this…

    I posted the article on the German torpedo as the first article I did on the subject.

    In the article, I say quite clearly, that the German torpedo MAY be closer to the actual piece of evidence they found. I used it as an example.

    At this point, I think it was a mine.

    But the point is, as if you can’t see it, … is that the verdict is certainly not clear.

    It wasn’t clear when they released their made-up bullshit story that has since fallen apart… and it certainly isn’t clear now.

    Mr. Shin was SELECTED by the South Korean goevernement to take part in the investigation… trying to slander his name now, after he has come out and stated that the story is bullshit, is just pure propaganda, and it proves, without any doubt, what you are and what your role is in this attempt to revise the history of this story.

    as far as the president of South Korea’s statement is concerned…

    “President Lee said South Korea will take appropriate steps to address the naval tragedy in close partnership with China and Japan. However, he stopped short of blaming North Korea.

    … The statement neither mentioned North Korea, nor included any joint action plans on how to handle the communist country.”

    May 30th, 2010 Korean Times… http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/06/116_66754.html

    oh, as for ships “never breaking up because they ran aground”…

    just a few days ago… “A stranded Chinese bulk coal carrier leaking oil into the sea around Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is in danger of breaking up and damaging the reef, government officials said on Sunday.”

    PLUS.. the U.S. military dictionary describes “shipwreck” as follows… “the destruction of a ship at sea by sinking or breaking up, for example in a storm or after running aground.”

    since you are repeatedly ignorant of MANY aspects of the topics you wish to discuss and since you are CLEARLY using troll techniques (straw man, ad hominem attacks, diversion, appeals to authority… ect. ect.) that was your last comment here.

    The only people I ban here are those who call for violence toward others either in the forum or people in general, and obvious PR trolls; people hired to paste up “narrative defining” comments.

    Since you clearly fall into the second category, you are gone.

  332. as far as your claim that the “evidence” of the North Korean torpedo was not “found” on May 15th (just 5 days before the official presentation)…

    “The torpedo parts recovered at the site of the explosion by a dredging ship on May 15…” the JIG Report… May 20th 2010…

    http://www.mnd.go.kr/webmodule/htsboard/template/read/engbdread.jsp?typeID=16&boardid=88&seqno=871&c=TITLE&t=&pagenum=3&tableName=ENGBASIC&pc=undefined&dc=&wc=&lu=&vu=&iu=&du=&st=

  333. as far as the “mix-up” being just an accident that they corrected immediately…

    “When queried by journalists about discrepancies between the CHT-02D torpedo that attacked the Cheonan and the one depicted in the diagram, investigators said Tuesday that the pictured torpedo was of the model PT-97W and that the error was due to “a mix-up by a staff member while preparing for the presentation.”

    A South Korean military spokesman said the error was discovered after the press conference and a presentation of the evidence in front of the UN Security Council featured the correct diagram.”

    http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/06/30/2010063000944.html

    Well, if that was the case, then why did the ambassador go give a presentation to the CSIS (neoliberal/neocon think tank) and use the SAME “evidence” that was presented on May 20th? AFTER they “discovered” the fuck-up?

    “On May 24th, FOUR DAYS after the May 20th presentation with the “wrong torpedo diagram”, Ambassador Han Duc-Soo gave a presentation to the the Center for Strategic and International Studies. During that Power Point presentation, the Ambassador presented SLIDE 29…”

    the TRUTH is, they didn’t just “discover” the fuck up, they worked HARD to make people BELIEVE the bullshit lie…

    and when that didn’t work, they then went around trying to claim, they didn’t REALLY mean it…

    and companies like the one you work for got contracts to run around trying to RESPIN the story….

  334. As someone who’s written on this subject, and published an article here

    http://subversify.com/2010/06/04/the-sinking-of-the-frigate-cheonan/

    I’m extremely grateful for this study of yours and I’ve taken the opportunity to link it in the response column of my article.

  335. thank you Bill. You wrote a good article on the subject. I hope some of the readers go by and check it out.

  336. Thanks for the appreciation. I’ve bookmarked your site and will be returning here.

  337. The question of a torpedo and the sinking of the Cheonan is raised again by “The Joint Investigation Report On the Attack Against ROK Ship Cheonan” issued by the Ministry of National Defense Republic of Korea on Sept 13, 2010 in Seoul Korea.

    The preface is available online at:

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_uploaded_documents/100913_Report%201.pdf

    That URL is given in a post on the Cable Blog at the “Foreign Policy” website:

    http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/13/south_korea_to_russia_the_cheonan_was_sunk_by_a_torpedo_end_of_story

    The Preface of the report is followed by some signatures. Canada is not among them and the Swedish signature is to a statement limiting what is agreed to by the Swedish representative. The Swedish signatory Agne Widholm, states that “I concur with the findings and conclusions of this report relevant to the Swedish team’s participation.” No other signatory has such limits.

    Some press is beginning to report about this, maybe this time, final Report:

    http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_northkorea/439708.html

    http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_northkorea/439707.html

    I hope many people will look at the Report and share their comments.

  338. Jay I read the preface then started looking for the actual report. The damn thing is as big a a book. In fact, it is a book.

    Unfortunately the links you gave to the hani article about the Swedish team not supporting the work of the rest of the investigation group does not load.

    I am currently working on something right now. It is, as you say, an important development. thanks for the heads up

  339. Hi Willy,

    You can see the Report in 3 pdf files at:

    http://captainpark.tistory.com/attachment/cfile8.uf@175D831C4C8ED3097E32A5.pdf

    http://captainpark.tistory.com/attachment/cfile23.uf@155DD01C4C8ED31870D6DB.pdf

    http://captainpark.tistory.com/attachment/cfile4.uf@135E181C4C8ED3295BBE59.pdf

    They are in Korea I think and for me they downloaded slowly.

    The links are on a page in Korean at:

    http://captainpark.tistory.com//541

    I can get to Hankyoreh English at http://english.hani.co.kr

    Take care and thanks for all your good work.

  340. actually, I already found them (not easy to do) and am in the process of reading them.

    I have found several big problems for the official story, I will tell you that.

  341. just finished quick article on this…

    http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/swedish-contingent-of-jig-appears-to-reject-critical-aspects-of-the-official-report-on-the-sinking-of-the-cheonan/

    “Swedish Members of JIG Appear to Reject Critical Aspects of the Official Report on the Sinking of the Cheonan”

  342. The DPRK has released the first part of its more detailed refutation of the ROK JIG Report. In its statement the DPRK acknowledged the contribution of scientists and media abroad including the exposure of the mismatch between physical evidence offered and the blue print purported to match that evidence.

    The statement can be seen at:

    http://juche007-anglo-peopleskoreafriendship.blogspot.com/2010/11/cheonan-case-termed-most-hideous.html

  343. Nuke the hell of them both and lets build the greatest McDonalds the world ever seen…

  344. good good?this post deserves nothing :( ?hahaha just joking :P ?nice post :P

  345. [...] Business Workspace Software – CRM, e-mail marketing, social networking, website management and moreThe Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To .download-info .download-button { background-image: [...]

  346. After I originally commented I seem to have clicked on the -Notify
    me when new comments are added- checkbox and now whenever
    a comment is added I recieve 4 emails with the same comment.
    Perhaps there is an easy method you can remove me from that service?
    Thanks!

    • Hi Trisha

      No, I can’t change that setting in the edit page for your comment, but I did change the email address you left to a nonsensical one so hopefully that will take care of it. Sorry. Hope that fixes it.

      scott

  347. This is obvious conspiracy of by DPRK all evidences are well pointing on them. They are the one who have only a motive to do this.

    • yeah, except for the fact that all the evidence did not point to the North Koreans but rather to an accidental sinking of the ship when it hit one of South Korea’s mines that were planted during the war games. Even the Clinton State Department eventually had to back down from the claims that the North Koreans did it.

  348. Israel has a motive and a history of false flags operations which falsely accuse others and pit enemies of Israel against one another.

    Stealth Dolphin-class submarines given to Israel could have accomplished the sinking of the Cheonan in order to pit the US against North Korea.

    • You’re simply an anti-semite masquerading as someone who cares about South Korean sailors. Why would Israel prod the US into fighting North Korea? It makes no sense. Your facebook profile screams conspiracy nut, but obviously so does this website.

  349. Why would Israel sink the Cheonan with their stealth Dolphin submarine? Why did Israel, along with neocons in the US do 9/11, and with the help of the Jewish mass media, cover it up? ReDiscover911(dot)com and the motives are clear.

  350. Whats up! I just would like to give an enormous thumbs
    up for the nice data you’ve here on this post.
    I will be coming again to your blog for more soon.

  351. Good day! I simply want to give an enormous thumbs up for
    the good data you may have here on this post. I will likely be coming again to your blog for extra soon.

  352. Very quickly this website will be famous among
    all blog users, due to it’s pleasant articles

  353. Our minecraft force op tool has entirely modified the manner in which minecraft servers
    work. An admin believes they are really the
    only models that can control their hosting server. They are really completely wrong!
    Along with the minecraft force op device, you can now consider whole command over the server and do with it,
    as you may remember to. You can also kick the other administrative!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 934 other followers

%d bloggers like this: