The initial South Korean review stated that the explosive was gunpowder, which would conform to North Korea’s crude munitions. This claim was later overturned by the inquiry board, which found the chemical residues to be similar to German advanced explosives. Due to sanctions against Pyongyang and its few allies, it is hardly credible that North Korea could obtain NATO-grade ordnance.

Thus, the mystery centers on the USNS Salvor, which happened to be yet right near Byeongyang Island at the time of the Cheonan sinking and far from its home base, Pearl Harbor. The inquiry board in Seoul has not questioned the officers and divers of the Salvor, which oddly is not under the command of the 7th Fleet but controlled by the innocuous-sounding Military Sealift Command. Diving-support ships like the Salvor are closely connected with the Office of Naval Intelligence since their duties include secret operations such as retrieving weapons from sunken foreign ships, scouting harbor channels and laying mines, as when the Salvor trained Royal Thai Marine divers in mine-laying in the Gulf of Thailand in 2006, for example.

The Salvor’s presence points to an inadvertent release of a rising mine, perhaps because its activation system was not switched off. A human error or technical glitch is very much within the realm of possibility due to the swift current and strong tides that race through the Byeongnyeong Channel. The arduous task of mooring the launch platforms to the sea floor allows the divers precious little time for double-checking the electronic systems.

If indeed it was an American rising mine that sank the Cheonan, it would constitute a friendly-fire accident. That in itself is not grounds for a criminal investigation against the presidential office and, at worst, amounts only to negligence by the military. However, any attempt to falsify evidence and engage in a media cover-up for political purposes constitutes tampering, fraud, perjury and possibly treason.

Yoichi Shimatsu, former editor of the Japan Times, is an environmental consultant and a commentator on Asian affairs for CCTV-9 Dialogue.

http://newamericamedia.org/2010/05/did-an-american-mine-sink-the-south-korean-ship.php

North Korea admits it does not possess an underwater craft stealthy enough to slip past the advanced sonar and audio arrays around Byeongnyeong Island, explained North Korean intelligence analyst Kim Myong Chol in a news release. “The sinking took place not in North Korean waters but well inside tightly guarded South Korean waters, where a slow-moving North Korean submarine would have great difficulty operating covertly and safely, unless it was equipped with AIP (air-independent propulsion) technology.”

The Cheonan sinking occurred in the aftermath of the March 11-18 Foal Eagle Exercise, which included anti-submarine maneuvers by a joint U.S.-South Korean squadron of five missile ships. A mystery surrounds the continued presence of the U.S. missile cruisers for more than eight days after the ASW exercise ended.

Only one reporter, Joohee Cho of ABC News, picked up the key fact that the Foal Eagle flotilla curiously included the USNS Salvor, a diving-support ship with a crew of 12 Navy divers. The lack of any minesweepers during the exercise leaves only one possibility: the Salvor was laying bottom mines.

Ever since an American cruiser was damaged by one of Saddam Hussein’s rising mines, also known as bottom mines, in the Iraq War, the U.S. Navy has pushed a crash program to develop a new generation of mines. The U.S. Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command has also been focused on developing counterparts to the fearsome Chinese naval “assassin’s mace,” which is propelled by a rocket engine.

A rising mine, which is effective only in shallow waters, rests atop a small platform on the sea floor under a camouflage of sand and gravel. Its detection system uses acoustics and magnetic readings to pick up enemy ships and submarines. When activated, jets of compressed air or solid-fuel rockets lift the bomb, which self-guides toward the magnetic center of the target. The blast rips the keel, splitting the ship or submarine into two neat pieces, just as was done to the RKOS Cheonan.

A lateral-fired torpedo, in contrast, “holes” the target’s hull, tilting the vessel in the classic war movie manner. The South Korean government displayed to the press the intact propeller shaft of a torpedo that supposedly struck the Cheonan. 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.

Did an American Mine Sink South Korean Ship?

New America Media, News Analysis, Yoichi Shimatsu, Posted: May 27, 2010

BEIJING – South Korean Prime Minister Lee Myung-bak has claimed “overwhelming evidence” that a North Korean torpedo sank the corvette Cheonan on March 26, killing 46 sailors. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed that there’s “overwhelming evidence” in favor of the theory that North Korea sank the South Korean Navy warship Cheonan. But the articles of proof presented so far by military investigators to an official inquiry board have been scanty and inconsistent.

There’s yet another possibility, that a U.S. rising mine sank the Cheonan in a friendly-fire accident.

In the recent U.S.-China strategic talks in Shanghai and Beijing, the Chinese side dismissed the official scenario presented by the Americans and their South Korean allies as not credible. This conclusion was based on an independent technical assessment by the Chinese military, according to a Beijing-based military affairs consultant to the People Liberation Army.

Hardly any of the relevant facts that counter the official verdict have made headline news in either South Korea or its senior ally, the United States.

The first telltale sign of an official smokescreen involves the location of the Choenan sinking – Byeongnyeong Island (pronounced Pyongnang) in the Yellow Sea. On the westernmost fringe of South Korean territory, the island is dominated by a joint U.S.-Korean base for anti-submarine warfare (ASW) operations. The sea channel between Byeongnyeong and the North Korean coast is narrow enough for both sides to be in artillery range of each other.

Anti-sub warfare is based on sonar and acoustic detection of underwater craft. Since civilian traffic is not routed through the channel, the noiseless conditions are near-perfect for picking up the slightest agitation, for example from a torpedo and any submarine that might fire it.

Typical hasbarat response. Insults and a demand for less information to be available. That would make your job spamming support for the zionist status quo somewhat easier, though. Clever boy.

Let’s at least try to agree on a few definitions:
Questioning Jewish supremacism and questioning U.S. funding for Israel is anti-semitism.
Questioning war is anti-Americanism. Questioning the government is a lack of patriotism. And mass questioning of the government is home-grown terrorism.

Please refer to http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5056 for further enlightenment.

Robert Simms
(aka Ezra Feingold)

Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette By Wayne Madsen May 28, 2010, 00:18

(excerpts)

“The Cheonan, an ASW corvette, was decked out with state-of-the-art sonar, plus it was operating in waters with extensive hydrophone sonar arrays and acoustic underwater sensors. There is no South Korean sonar or audio evidence of a torpedo, submarine or mini-sub in the area. Since there is next to no shipping in the channel, the sea was silent at the time of the sinking.

However, Baengnyeong Island hosts a joint US-South Korea military intelligence base and the US Navy SEALS operate out of the base. In addition, four U.S. Navy ships were in the area, part of the joint U.S-South Korean Exercise Foal Eagle, during the sinking of the Cheonan. An investigation of the suspect torpedo’s metallic and chemical fingerprints show it to be of German manufacture. There are suspicions that the US Navy SEALS maintains a sampling of European torpedoes for sake of plausible deniability for false flag attacks. Also, Berlin does not sell torpedoes to North Korea, however, Germany does maintain a close joint submarine and submarine weapons development program with Israel.

The presence of the USNS Salvor, one of the participants in Foal Eagle, so close to Baengnyeong Island during the sinking of the South Korean corvette also raises questions.

The Salvor, a civilian Navy salvage ship, which participated in mine laying activities for the Thai Marines in the Gulf of Thailand in 2006, was present near the time of the blast with a complement of 12 deep sea divers.

Beijing, satisfied with North Korea’s Kim Jong Il’s claim of innocence after a hurried train trip from Pyongyang to Beijing, suspects the U.S. Navy’s role in the Cheonan’s sinking, with particular suspicion on the role of the Salvor. The suspicions are as follows:

1. The Salvor engaged in a seabed mine-installation operation, in other words, attaching horizontally fired anti-submarine mines on the sea floor in the channel.

2. The Salvor was doing routine inspection and maintenance on seabed mines, and put them into an electronic active mode (hair trigger release) as part of the inspection program.

3. A SEALS diver attached a magnetic mine to the Cheonan, as part of a covert program aimed at influencing public opinion in South Korea, Japan and China.”

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

South Korea, U.S. maneuvers threaten war on DPRK

By Deirdre Griswold Published May 26, 2010 1:41 PM

“China later expressed skepticism that a DPRK submarine had sunk the South Korean ship, but their skepticism got little publicity here.

The DPRK denied any involvement and counter-charged that the Lee regime was trying to torpedo agreements made some years ago between the north and the south that had improved relations between the two. It also announced that it would send a team from its National Defense Council to examine the “evidence” the south claimed to have.”

http://www.workers.org/2010/world/korea_0603/

Also:

The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To

by Scott Creighton

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/the-sinking-of-the-cheonan-we-are-being-lied-to/

This article goes into detail on the “torpedo” parts “found” and how they actually compare with the North Korean torpedo they are claimed by the israeloamericans to be a part of. As the title says, the israeloamericans are lying. Imagine that!

Another view:

If North Korea Sunk The Cheonan, Why Didn’t They Sink The USS Pueblo?

Written by therev Monday, 24 May 2010 17:20

“I really think North Korea had no motive to sink the Cheonan. In fact it is probably a planned bad deed gone bad by US operatives directing S.Korean manueuvers. They have pictures of N. Korean torpedo’s and so how hard is it to make a replica? Not hard. And if they decided to use the Cheonan to drop the Torpedo into the ocean, so some fishing vessel will hit it, upon an investigation blame N. Korea for sinking a fishing vessel to give reason to implement sanctions, is more likely the scenario. Except there was a mishap and it detonated in their ship sinking it instead. Same story line, except now it is the S. Korean Navy who suffered the plot. And they still can spin the story that N. Korea torpedoed them.”

http://news-public.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1870:if-north-korea-sunk-the-cheonan-why-didnt-they-sink-the-uss-pueblo&catid=129:world-news&Itemid=339

Russian expert doubts Pyongyang’s involvement in warship sinking 14:1027/05/2010

(excerpts)

“I personally have serous doubts that it was North Korea that sank the ship. Why do this? For what purpose?… I don’t see any logic,” said Konstantin Pulikovsky, who maintained official contacts with Pyongyang while serving as presidential envoy to Russia’s Far East in 2000-2005.”

“Russian President Dmitry Medvedev sent on Wednesday a group of Russian experts to South Korea to examine the results of the investigation into the Yellow Sea incident.”

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20100527/159180871.html

Russian experts to look into warship’s sinking in S.Korea (Update) 22:2226/05/2010

http://en.rian.ru/world/20100526/159171770.html

&

China to weigh evidence before blaming N.Korea for warship sinking 12:3227/05/2010

http://en.rian.ru/world/20100527/159179030.html

The North Koreans also want to examine the “evidence”, but the South is playing coy.

From the initial claims by the u.s and South Korea that they didn’t think the North had a part in the sinking, I suspect the Korean ship was not deliberately sunk, but was the victim of an accident. Perhaps it triggered an old mine (there are many in that area still) or an internal mishap. And the israeloamericans are now using the sinking to bash North Korea, after the fact. Another interesting thing is the green netting covering the fore part of the after section of the ship as it sits on a barge. It appears somebody doesn’t want analysis of the damage to that part of the ship where it broke in two. Why? Was it in fact an external explosion? Or was it internal?

I’ve been watching this story develop, wondering when the israeloamericans would kick in their propaganda. It’s obvious North Korea is an unresolved failure in israeloamerican eyes. Both because they have positive relations with Iran and because they kicked yank arse during the Korean war (not many ami know, but the objective of the american forces during that war was the conquest of North Korea, in which they failed completely to achieve) and the americans (not to mention, ziofascists) don’t like it that small nations can remain independent of their fascist control.

“Responsibility for stating that evidence points to the conclusion “overwhelmingly” rests entirely with the authors of the document. The key peace of evidence cited is a fragment of a torpedo propeller – somehow recovered at the final phase of the investigation – with a marking which reads “No. 1” and matches a N. Korean torpedo found 7 years ago in the Yellow Sea. Considering that the blast was allegedly caused by a torpedo carrying a net explosive weight of 250 kg, investigators must have been remarkably lucky to find the right fragment with the marking implicating N. Korea. The marking, which is the sole indication of the country of origin of the torpedo, could of course look exactly the same on a South Korean torpedo.

The commission is churning out new facts and details evidently meant to shatter one`s imagination. Reportedly, several N. Korean mini-subs and a mother-ship left the country`s unspecified naval base in the Yellow Sea 2-3 days before the incident, headed for an unknown destination, and returned 2-3 days after the incident. Though the subs had to be maneuvering in a heavily monitored zone near the maritime border between the Koreas, their routes had not been tracked as they managed to evade radars. The version contradicts the previous US claim that satellite and acoustic reconnaissance showed no signs of presence of any N. Korean ships or subs in the region of the Cheonan sinking.

The spin-off of the version offered by the report commenced immediately upon its being circulated, and there is a distinct impression that the developments are following an a priori blueprint. The White House endorsed the commission`s conclusions implicating N. Korea and condemned “the act of aggression” in a statement made available almost synchronously with the report. Even earlier, US President B. Obama talked to S. Korean President Lee Myung-bak over the phone and agreed that all contacts with N. Korea should be suspended until it becomes clear what caused the tragedy and who perpetrated the attack. Japan, the country espousing greater pressure on N. Korea and its international isolation as a universal approach, also expressed full support for Seoul in no way assessing the data collected by the investigation.”

The Conundrum of the South Korean Corvette (I) 25.05.2010

http://en.interaffairs.ru/events.php?n=17

Full Spectrum Dominance and Iran Pt2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD6ygOzRrgk

I notice the significant absence of israel and zionism there. Considering their profound control of the american guv and multinational finances, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to discern what’s really bugging “Robert Simms” about this article. A rather pathetic strawman attempt, the israelis really are scraping the bottom of the barrel now. :D

The problem for me is the overwhelming amount of news that is becoming available to us 24/7. Most of it is biased, but I don’t see that as the major problem. For me, the questions are: how much news on a particular topic do we really need in order to make an informed decision? Can we become so overloaded with the steady stream of analysis and propaganda that we are unable to make a decision? Can a new and improved (and supposedly unbiased) news source guide us toward making better decisions? I think not.

For example, do we really need to read more pundit analyses and ‘breaking news’ about the oil volcano in the Gulf in order to understand – how it happened, the coverups, who’s to blame, the severity of the problem and what needs to be done with regard to future oil drilling and exploration? We already know. We already know what Obama is all about. We already know what Congress is all about. And we already know what corporations are all about.

When do we stop searching for ‘new’ information and begin the difficult task of disrupting the military-industrial-congressional complex from causing further destruction of our planet and its peoples? When do we start ACTING on what we already know, instead of just talking more about it?

Concerning TRNN’s failures it may not be sinister but rather victims perpetuating what they have learned as normal. Certain things never occur to people waking up from their lifelong nap while other things do—even if those things are contradictory.

Noam Chomsky once described how many people in the media business were not aware of what they were pushing…and these guys trying to do clean may not have a clue as to what you’re telling us (heheh, i love referencing that guy here)

I watched the show once and my only thought was why it needed to be visual…copying the formula of image making propaganda seems like a bad idea

Cheers for the piece

While TRNN promotes itself as being “independent” of government and corporate money there needs to be further scrutiny of the private money they receive.

For example, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! was especially aggitated during the height of the Madoff scandal of the “[Jewish] foundations” that lost money and the resulting fallout of donations to “charities” to “organizations” like her own. Why would Goodman be concerned about this? As James Petras wrote at the time Madoff perhaps did more to setback Zionism than any [lack of] action from the left.

The point here is that needs to be more scrutiny of WHO are the donors to these outfits that are positioning themselves as “alternatives”. The Left has been led down an extremely crooked road these past 40 years following the so-called “greatest living intellectual.” That experience should have taught us to maintain OUR independence and not allow anyone to think for us.