Jump to content


Photo

Torpedoed Tankers

false flag or real?

  • Please log in to reply
605 replies to this topic

#561 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 479 posts

Posted 07 July 2019 - 1610 PM


 

 

 

 

 

 

Rick, it's not a decision, just a perception. The Koran has one author (God, via the Archangel Gabriel and the Prophet Muhammd), so it's not surprising it has fewer contradictions in it as there was only one witness to the events described, unlike the New Testament. It has also remained unchanged over the centuries whereas the Bible has been heavily edited and spawned multiple versions. It's logically easier to consider something to be the one true word if it is by one author and immutable. At least that's my perception.

Mitsuo Fuchida and Jacob DeShazer.
From a quick reading in Wikipedia, it seems Fuchida converted because he believed it was a way to embrace western culture, when he, all by himself, determined the Japanese culture was inhumane, and the western one was moral. Through his own logical process he came to that conclusion. No religion has given him that.

Religion has done nothing good in this example. It was merely a tool to help Fuchida get a more concrete view of his morals, but he has done all the work by himself.

Your assertion that all humans who take part in a religion are inherently braindead, is one that may have some truth to it, but far from being a hard fact. Very far from it.
 
Instead of a "quick" Wiki reading, do a good reading of what Fuchida read that changed his life -- the Bible. From the same Wiki article "
...In September 1949, after reading the Bible for himself, he became a Christian. In May 1950, Fuchida and DeShazer met for the first time.[14] Fuchida created the Captain Fuchida Evangelistical Association based in Seattle, Washington and spoke full-time of his conversion to the Christian faith in presentations titled "From Pearl Harbor To Calvary".
As I said, his morals are a result of his own thought. A religion was just a medium.
He was a good person on the inside, just without any exposure to the world of people who are like him.

Religion has done nothing good here. Had there been no religion, he would have read any of the other books written by actual intellectuals, not a bunch of baboons believing in wizardry and fairytales.

The bible is perhaps humanity's best example of honest moral depravity.
 
Oh really? And Jesus Christ is?
Probably a made up guy. Even if he's real and the stories about him are real (well he does have a tomb, but no way to tell if he's truly what people described him as), he's a good person who developed his own moral compass.

My entire point is that the moral compass that people have, is the result of their own capacity to be moral and to process thoughts.

And the absurdity of it all, is that all religions are at least somewhat based on the notion that those practicing it are chosen by their respective god, loved more by their respective god, or are otherwise somehow special compared with infidels.

Man, if god existed, you can be damn sure he wouldn't give a flying fuck about any of you.
He murders babies before they're born, gives people untreatable diseases, outright tortures people who wronged none, brings famine, brings wars, and makes life unfair or non existent to 99% of people.
So he definitely doesn't care what you say during your pre-scheduled Sunday morning whining sessions in church.

And who even says his chosen people are on planet earth? There are statistically endless species of intelligent life forms in this universe.

Not that it matters, because the very idea of treating certain nations/tribes/peoples/religious groups differently, already reeks of a genocidal god.

But if you want to believe he exists, don't humanize him, and don't humiliate yourself by practicing religion.

To you practicing religion looks like a natural thing. But me? All I'm seeing is people doing the rain dance while rubbing their nipples with guacamole because they don't want god to yeet them into a fiery doom.
 
Have you read the Bible?

Yes. Entirely, plus the Kaballah, Mishna, and parts of the Zohar.

I could not think of anything more despicable than the bible.
  • 0

#562 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,153 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 07 July 2019 - 1624 PM

Okay really, do you guys have to have this fight of Evangelical Christianity vs. Jewish atheism on this thread?


  • 0

#563 Rick

Rick

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,960 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Muncie, Indiana

Posted 07 July 2019 - 1632 PM

Okay really, do you guys have to have this fight of Evangelical Christianity vs. Jewish atheism on this thread?

Good idea, perhaps the Moderator(s) would put this into another thread?


  • 0

#564 Rick

Rick

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,960 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Muncie, Indiana

Posted 07 July 2019 - 1642 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rick, it's not a decision, just a perception. The Koran has one author (God, via the Archangel Gabriel and the Prophet Muhammd), so it's not surprising it has fewer contradictions in it as there was only one witness to the events described, unlike the New Testament. It has also remained unchanged over the centuries whereas the Bible has been heavily edited and spawned multiple versions. It's logically easier to consider something to be the one true word if it is by one author and immutable. At least that's my perception.

Mitsuo Fuchida and Jacob DeShazer.
From a quick reading in Wikipedia, it seems Fuchida converted because he believed it was a way to embrace western culture, when he, all by himself, determined the Japanese culture was inhumane, and the western one was moral. Through his own logical process he came to that conclusion. No religion has given him that.

Religion has done nothing good in this example. It was merely a tool to help Fuchida get a more concrete view of his morals, but he has done all the work by himself.

Your assertion that all humans who take part in a religion are inherently braindead, is one that may have some truth to it, but far from being a hard fact. Very far from it.
 
Instead of a "quick" Wiki reading, do a good reading of what Fuchida read that changed his life -- the Bible. From the same Wiki article "
...In September 1949, after reading the Bible for himself, he became a Christian. In May 1950, Fuchida and DeShazer met for the first time.[14] Fuchida created the Captain Fuchida Evangelistical Association based in Seattle, Washington and spoke full-time of his conversion to the Christian faith in presentations titled "From Pearl Harbor To Calvary".
As I said, his morals are a result of his own thought. A religion was just a medium.
He was a good person on the inside, just without any exposure to the world of people who are like him.

Religion has done nothing good here. Had there been no religion, he would have read any of the other books written by actual intellectuals, not a bunch of baboons believing in wizardry and fairytales.

The bible is perhaps humanity's best example of honest moral depravity.
 
Oh really? And Jesus Christ is?
Probably a made up guy. Even if he's real and the stories about him are real (well he does have a tomb, but no way to tell if he's truly what people described him as), he's a good person who developed his own moral compass.

My entire point is that the moral compass that people have, is the result of their own capacity to be moral and to process thoughts.

And the absurdity of it all, is that all religions are at least somewhat based on the notion that those practicing it are chosen by their respective god, loved more by their respective god, or are otherwise somehow special compared with infidels.

Man, if god existed, you can be damn sure he wouldn't give a flying fuck about any of you.
He murders babies before they're born, gives people untreatable diseases, outright tortures people who wronged none, brings famine, brings wars, and makes life unfair or non existent to 99% of people.
So he definitely doesn't care what you say during your pre-scheduled Sunday morning whining sessions in church.

And who even says his chosen people are on planet earth? There are statistically endless species of intelligent life forms in this universe.

Not that it matters, because the very idea of treating certain nations/tribes/peoples/religious groups differently, already reeks of a genocidal god.

But if you want to believe he exists, don't humanize him, and don't humiliate yourself by practicing religion.

To you practicing religion looks like a natural thing. But me? All I'm seeing is people doing the rain dance while rubbing their nipples with guacamole because they don't want god to yeet them into a fiery doom.
 
Have you read the Bible?

Yes. Entirely, plus the Kaballah, Mishna, and parts of the Zohar.

I could not think of anything more despicable than the bible.

 

It is depressing to hear one say that due to entirely purposeful and willful ignorance they state they cannot think of anything worse than the Bible. I wonder if you have read The Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf, or the more recent U.S. liberal writings?


  • 0

#565 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,734 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 08 July 2019 - 0051 AM

 

Okay really, do you guys have to have this fight of Evangelical Christianity vs. Jewish atheism on this thread?

Good idea, perhaps the Moderator(s) would put this into another thread?

 

I think we have one already involved....


  • 0

#566 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 479 posts

Posted 08 July 2019 - 0225 AM


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rick, it's not a decision, just a perception. The Koran has one author (God, via the Archangel Gabriel and the Prophet Muhammd), so it's not surprising it has fewer contradictions in it as there was only one witness to the events described, unlike the New Testament. It has also remained unchanged over the centuries whereas the Bible has been heavily edited and spawned multiple versions. It's logically easier to consider something to be the one true word if it is by one author and immutable. At least that's my perception.

Mitsuo Fuchida and Jacob DeShazer.
From a quick reading in Wikipedia, it seems Fuchida converted because he believed it was a way to embrace western culture, when he, all by himself, determined the Japanese culture was inhumane, and the western one was moral. Through his own logical process he came to that conclusion. No religion has given him that.

Religion has done nothing good in this example. It was merely a tool to help Fuchida get a more concrete view of his morals, but he has done all the work by himself.

Your assertion that all humans who take part in a religion are inherently braindead, is one that may have some truth to it, but far from being a hard fact. Very far from it.
 
Instead of a "quick" Wiki reading, do a good reading of what Fuchida read that changed his life -- the Bible. From the same Wiki article "
...In September 1949, after reading the Bible for himself, he became a Christian. In May 1950, Fuchida and DeShazer met for the first time.[14] Fuchida created the Captain Fuchida Evangelistical Association based in Seattle, Washington and spoke full-time of his conversion to the Christian faith in presentations titled "From Pearl Harbor To Calvary".
As I said, his morals are a result of his own thought. A religion was just a medium.
He was a good person on the inside, just without any exposure to the world of people who are like him.

Religion has done nothing good here. Had there been no religion, he would have read any of the other books written by actual intellectuals, not a bunch of baboons believing in wizardry and fairytales.

The bible is perhaps humanity's best example of honest moral depravity.
 
Oh really? And Jesus Christ is?
Probably a made up guy. Even if he's real and the stories about him are real (well he does have a tomb, but no way to tell if he's truly what people described him as), he's a good person who developed his own moral compass.

My entire point is that the moral compass that people have, is the result of their own capacity to be moral and to process thoughts.

And the absurdity of it all, is that all religions are at least somewhat based on the notion that those practicing it are chosen by their respective god, loved more by their respective god, or are otherwise somehow special compared with infidels.

Man, if god existed, you can be damn sure he wouldn't give a flying fuck about any of you.
He murders babies before they're born, gives people untreatable diseases, outright tortures people who wronged none, brings famine, brings wars, and makes life unfair or non existent to 99% of people.
So he definitely doesn't care what you say during your pre-scheduled Sunday morning whining sessions in church.

And who even says his chosen people are on planet earth? There are statistically endless species of intelligent life forms in this universe.

Not that it matters, because the very idea of treating certain nations/tribes/peoples/religious groups differently, already reeks of a genocidal god.

But if you want to believe he exists, don't humanize him, and don't humiliate yourself by practicing religion.

To you practicing religion looks like a natural thing. But me? All I'm seeing is people doing the rain dance while rubbing their nipples with guacamole because they don't want god to yeet them into a fiery doom.
 
Have you read the Bible?
Yes. Entirely, plus the Kaballah, Mishna, and parts of the Zohar.

I could not think of anything more despicable than the bible.
 
It is depressing to hear one say that due to entirely purposeful and willful ignorance they state they cannot think of anything worse than the Bible. I wonder if you have read The Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf, or the more recent U.S. liberal writings?

You know? For once, you're right. They're in the same category.
I would only say the Mein Kampf and Communist Manifesto are the lesser evil because although they are advocating for the same kind of genocide, racial superiority, and astounding lack of tolerance you can see in the bible, they are a bit more direct about it and don't try to conceal it behind sorcery.
  • 0

#567 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 08 July 2019 - 0229 AM

Can we please stop? If we want to discuss christian and Jewish religious theory, please, use another thread. What is happening in the gulf is important, and its being buried here.

 

https://uk.news.yaho...wkQ9nOSA8Bumj01

US President Donald Trump warned Iran on Sunday to be careful over its imminent breach of a limit on the amount of enriched uranium Tehran can possess.

Trump's top diplomat, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, earlier on Sunday said Iran will face further sanctions in response to the expected breach of the cap set by an nuclear deal reached with international powers in 2015 but from which the United States withdrew last year.

The 3.67 percent enrichment limit set in the agreement is far below the more than 90 percent level required for a nuclear warhead.

"Iran better be careful, because you enrich for one reason, and I won't tell you what that reason is. But it's no good. They better be careful," the US President told reporters in Morristown, New Jersey.

The Islamic republic has threatened to abandon more commitments unless a solution is found with the remaining parties to the 2015 agreement.

The 2015 deal was reached between Iran and six world powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, the United States and Russia -- and saw Tehran agree to drastically scale down its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.

Washington began reimposing sanctions in August 2018 and has targeted crucial sectors including oil exports and the banking system, fuelling a deep recession.

Even after the US pullout, experts said Iran had been complying with the agreement, until early this month when it exceeded a limit on its enriched uranium reserves.


  • 0

#568 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 08 July 2019 - 0230 AM

https://uk.reuters.c...dName=worldNews

 

GENEVA (Reuters) - Britain’s seizing of an Iranian oil tanker last week was a threatening act that will not be tolerated, Iran’s Defence Minister Amir Hatami said on Monday in a speech broadcast live on state television.

Royal Marines impounded the tanker in Gibraltar on Thursday on suspicion it was carrying oil to Syria in violation of European Union sanctions. Iran denies the vessel was headed to Syria, where the government of President Bashar al-Assad is an ally of Tehran.

Authorities in the British territory said the tanker can be held for up to 14 days. An Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander threatened to seize a British ship in retaliation.

“These days we witnessed a threatening act from the government of England in the Strait of Gibraltar against a tanker from the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Hatami said. “This is an incorrect and wrong action, an action similar to maritime robbery...certainly these kind of robberies will not be tolerated.”

The tanker was not headed to Syria, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on Sunday, without specifying the final destination of the vessel.

Hatami said Iran’s downing of an unmanned American aircraft last month sent a message that the Islamic Republic would defend its borders. Washington said the drone was shot down over international waters.

Separately, Iranian army chief Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi said on Monday that Iran is not looking for war with any country, according to the semi-official Mehr news agency.


  • 0

#569 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,318 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sopron, Hungary
  • Interests:history, music

Posted 08 July 2019 - 0957 AM

Could someone please reply with quoting the whole thread, all posts, and subquotes? I hate to use the paginator. Codeword: Homunculus
  • 0

#570 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1136 AM

https://uk.reuters.c...dName=worldNews

 

GENEVA (Reuters) - Britain’s seizing of an Iranian oil tanker last week was a threatening act that will not be tolerated, Iran’s Defence Minister Amir Hatami said on Monday in a speech broadcast live on state television.

Royal Marines impounded the tanker in Gibraltar on Thursday on suspicion it was carrying oil to Syria in violation of European Union sanctions. Iran denies the vessel was headed to Syria, where the government of President Bashar al-Assad is an ally of Tehran.(...)

 

I haven't looked into the affair in detail. How could EU sanctions be a reason to impound a ship that was en route between two non-EU countries and isn't flagged by any EU country?

This looks weird at first glance.


  • 0

#571 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1142 AM

It travelled through British waters. Spanish too I gather.
  • 0

#572 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1157 AM

More here.

https://www.thedrive...nian-oil-tanker

I guess that explains why they didn't go via suez.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 08 July 2019 - 1158 AM.

  • 0

#573 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1159 AM

It travelled through British waters. Spanish too I gather.

 

So the message is Iran as a sovereign nation is allowed to outlaw all oil trade with US and EU and then entitled to board and impound every tanker in its waters that does violate Iranian law???

Would that be the message?

 

Maybe there's some UN (rather than EU) oil embargo against Syria? I only found an oil embargo against ISIL and Al-Nusra Front. They do control a coastal area, albeit without major port city AFAIK.

http://iswresearch.b...10-25-2019.html

https://www.un.org/p...sc11775.doc.htm

 

edit: The Syrian city of Tartus is regime-controlled.


Edited by lastdingo, 08 July 2019 - 1200 PM.

  • 0

#574 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1207 PM

It travelled through British waters. Spanish too I gather.

 
So the message is Iran as a sovereign nation is allowed to outlaw all oil trade with US and EU and then entitled to board and impound every tanker in its waters that does violate Iranian law???
Would that be the message?
 
Maybe there's some UN (rather than EU) oil embargo against Syria? I only found an oil embargo against ISIL and Al-Nusra Front. They do control a coastal area, albeit without major port city AFAIK.
http://iswresearch.b...10-25-2019.html
https://www.un.org/p...sc11775.doc.htm
 
edit: The Syrian city of Tartus is regime-controlled.

It's EU sanctions. Till Brexit happens, we are duty bound to comply.

To be honest, I don't care what message Iran gets.They will ignore it anyway.
  • 0

#575 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,811 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1216 PM

Now would be a good time to assign any nonessential personnel at the British Embassy in Tehran to another posting, as Iran and Iranians have a habit of retaliating against such low hanging fruit when their national rage demands it.
  • 0

#576 Mighty_Zuk

Mighty_Zuk

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 479 posts

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1714 PM


It travelled through British waters. Spanish too I gather.

 
So the message is Iran as a sovereign nation is allowed to outlaw all oil trade with US and EU and then entitled to board and impound every tanker in its waters that does violate Iranian law???
Would that be the message?
 
Maybe there's some UN (rather than EU) oil embargo against Syria? I only found an oil embargo against ISIL and Al-Nusra Front. They do control a coastal area, albeit without major port city AFAIK.
http://iswresearch.b...10-25-2019.html
https://www.un.org/p...sc11775.doc.htm
 
edit: The Syrian city of Tartus is regime-controlled.

If Iran imposes such sanctions and further kills its oil trade, yes. It can. However it will probably also drag some sort of military reaction from the west, that would also be legal.
  • 0

#577 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,666 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 July 2019 - 1733 PM

You seem to be confused.


  • 0

#578 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 10 July 2019 - 0254 AM

https://www.aljazeer...0020439304.html

 

The United States says it is working to form a military coalition to protect commercial shipping off the coast of Iran and Yemen amid heightened tensions in the region following attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf.

Under the proposal, a coalition of nations would safeguard strategic waters in the Gulf area and the sea between the Arabian Peninsula and the Horn of Africa, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Tuesday.

"We're engaging now with a number of countries to see if we can put together a coalition that would ensure freedom of navigation both in the Straits of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandab," said Marine General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Dunford said the Pentagon had developed a specific plan, and that he believed it would be clear within a couple of weeks which nations were willing to join the effort.

The administration of US President Donald Trump has blamed Tehran and its proxies for several attacks on tankers in the Gulf in the past few months.

A fifth of the world's oil exports passes through the area.

Al Jazeera's John Hendren, reporting from Washington DC, said that Trump has said "the US should not pay for this, it should be an international military force".

"But the move presents the potential for conflict with Iran. After all it's only weeks after the US almost launched military strikes on Iran," Hendren said.


  • 0

#579 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 54,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 10 July 2019 - 1211 PM

https://www.thedrive...iranian-threats
The U.K.-flagged tanker Pacific Voyager appears to have had an escort in the form of the Royal Navy's Type 23 frigate HMS Montrose, along with an unknown Sandown-class minehunter, as she sailed from the Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf of Oman today. This comes less than a week after an Iranian official threatened the seizure of a British ship in retaliation for U.K. officials seizing control of the Iranian supertanker Grace 1 off the coast of Gibraltar.
  • 0

#580 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,275 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 17 July 2019 - 0602 AM

In the light of the harassment of the IoM flagged tanker in the Straits of Hormuz, this looks quite promising. Nice reuse of an existing mount.

The Telegraph: Royal Navy trials new missile to target small boats in wake of tensions with Iran.
https://www.telegrap...-wake-tensions/
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users