On Feb 4, 12:37 am, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:



On Feb 3, 9:28 pm, hhc...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Feb 3, 10:57 pm, n...@isp.com (Dersu Uzala) wrote:

In article <M7WdnYWq8dkhFDvanZ2dnUVZ_uKpn...@comcast.com>, n...@isp.com
says...

In article
34dee4f5-ddbb-494a-b933-e266bfc29...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
hhc...@yahoo.com says...

On Feb 3, 1:10=A0am, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C327588%2C00.html

Damn, it must be some terrible conspiracy at work, perhaps the the
Illuminati or the Jews! Lord knows that it could not have been a
simple accident caused by a ship anchor snagging a cable (which it is
in most instances). How much shipping did you say goes on in that
stretch of water? Was the shown on the navigation charts, so ships
would be are of its presence (at 38-miles offshore, those little on
the shoreline signs that say "Cable Crossing, Do Not Anchor" would be
somewhat difficult to read).

Yeah, but two cables were cut in the Mediterranean, and two in the Persian
Gulf, all within a few days. Maybe someone doesn't want Iran to have access.

I forgot to include this:

Iran Oil Bourse to deal blow to dollar
Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:45:41

The long-awaited Iranian Oil Bourse, a place for trading oil, petrochemicals
and gas in various non-dollar currencies, will soon open.

Iran's Finance Minister Davoud Danesh-Jafari told reporters the bourse will be
inaugurated during the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution (February 1-11)
at the latest.

"All preparations have been made to launch the bourse; it will open during the
Ten-Day Dawn (the ceremonies marking the victory of the 1979 Islamic
Revolution in Iran)," he said.

The Minister had earlier stated that the Oil Bourse is located on the Persian
Gulf island of Kish.

Some expert opinions hold inauguration of the bourse cold significantly
devalue the greenback.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Perhaps you should take a few steps back and remember what happened
during the "6 Day War".

I was just a college kid at the time, and my physics class consisted
at a mis of Arabs from Egypt and Lebanon, some Jewish kids (mostly
from New York, and about 1/3 of the class was us common American
worker's children. Frankly other than our class standing, none of us
American's gave much thought to what some of those crazy guys from the
middle east thought or believed.

For the record, this was at Drexel in Philadelphia, circa 1956. That
was to put it mildly a strange time. Still you have to consider that
the class I cite was one for physics majors.

What seemed strange to me at that time was that the Egyptian and Arab
kids literally cited an attack on horseback and with swords would
literally drive Israel back into the sea. I think that they actually
believe this, and these kids were majors in physics! It made
absolutely no sense to the rest us at the time. It was arguable a
testimonial to the value of brainwashing. Then came the "6 day war."
The outcome was a "no brainer".

Still, as physics students, nobody gave very much notice to that
event. College life went on as usual, but some of the Arab students
decided to go home, but a few remained on to earn their degrees. Most
of these who remained later became US citizens.

Hell, at that age, what do kids know?

Some 50 years later, I have evolved to be a rather mean bastard, one
which would make Vlad the Impaler appear to be broad minded mellow
sort of chap. Actually, were it entirely up to me, I'd advocate nuking
the middle east and parts of North Africa off the map and turning the
entire areas into a sort of vitrified sand. After all, the
inhabitants of this part of the world have persisted in their attacks
on civilized people for over 1,000 years, so they must be the product
of defective genes of some sort. :-)

Harry C.

They are "nuking" the middle east one shell at a time.http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=depleted+uranium&btnG=Search-Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You idiot, don't you even realize that shooting depleted uranium
bullets at these guys is equivalent to shooting bullets made of
Granite against then, alhough much more effective?

Harry C.

p.s., I really have to ask you this question: Are you terminally
ignorant that you don't know the difference in toxicity resulting from
being hit with a depleted uranium bullet and a copper encased lead
bullet? Dhuh!

The bullets atomize and distribute alpha particles.

Ok, we know from whom this post originated,

so lets cut that guy a
break. I don't know who he is, but everyone here know what I want to
say, but won't.

Harry C.

On Feb 3, 10:42 pm, n...@isp.com (Dersu Uzala) wrote:

In article

Trust me Dersu, I mean no offence, but the gentleman that originally
posted this article has long been known for his fondness with
conspiracy theories.

Yeah, but two cables were cut in the Mediterranean, and two in the Persian
Gulf, all within a few days. Maybe someone doesn't want Iran to have access.

Dersu, access to precisely what? Also, deliberate espionage and
modern technology fly in the face of each other here. Countries in the
Persian Gulf are very wealthy (Dubain in particular), and
technologically sophisticated. (I only wish that the US was so
wealthy.) Something does not fly right with this story. First, marine
cables are today alway today laid in reduntant pairs located miles
apart, so it one is cut, the other continues to function. Second,
usually back-up land lines exist with broad-band optical communication
via lines going to adjacient nations (sort of an International Comcast
Network). All that failing, there are microwave communication links to
nearby countries, and satellite links to nations throughout the world.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/04/2153455.htm
Ships did not cut internet cables: Egypt

No one yet knows what cut the cables. Ship anchors remail the usual
suspects.

Ships are not responsible for damaging undersea internet cables in the
Mediterranean, Egypt's Government says.

You seem to trust a great deal on what Egypt's goverment says. While
ships anchoring offshore are not liable for cable damage anywhere in
the world, where the cables are not clearly marked on navigational
charts, if they anchor in an area documented on the charts to contain
a cable, they are subject to court charges. This appies to any
submarine cable, and there are no marine cables that I know of that
are specific to internet use.

Two cables were damaged earlier this week in the Mediterranean sea and another
off the coast of Dubai, causing widespread disruption to internet and
international telephone services in Egypt, Gulf Arab states and South Asia.

So what? A submarine cable was cut last month by a large fishing boat
anchoring off "Georges Bank" near the coast of Massachusetts. Shit
happens!

A fourth cable linking Qatar to the United Arab Emirates was damaged on Sunday
causing yet more disruptions, telecommunication provider Qtel said.

So, perhaps a plot is afoot, but do you have any grasp about how hard
it is to locate a marine cable, yet alone hook it, haul it up, and
then cut it? I logically have to ask why would anyone bother, since
the marine cables nearly all have redundant companions. Why whould
anyone at great risk and expense even bother.

Egypt's transport ministry said footage recorded by onshore video cameras of
the location of the cables showed no maritime traffic in the area when the
cables were damaged.

This is somewhat surprising, since the sea area in question is among
one of the most frequently transited in the world. Odd, don't you
think, that Egypts cameras were recording photos of an area, what was
it, 38-miles offshore? It is also rather odd that the Egyptian
cameras "showed no maritime traffic" in a area of sea that is among
the most transited in the world. Evidently the Egyptian camera's have
a serious problem, or you are making this up as you go along. Take a
look at Google Earth's image of this region, and then you'll start to
wonder why there are not more ship collisions.

"The ministry's maritime transport committee reviewed footage covering the
period of 12 hours before and 12 hours after the cables were cut and no ships
sailed the area," a statement said.

Then, no ships being in the region, the cable naturally failed.
Evidently the "ministry of maritime transport" proves this.

"The area is also marked on maps as a no-go zone and it is therefore ruled out
that the damage to the cables was caused by ships."

Right, and I've like to see these charts that are easily available.
Simply post the coordinates.

Earlier reports said that the damage had been caused by ships that had been
diverted off their usual route because of bad weather.

Has it crossed your mind that in bad weather, ships frequently drop
anchor. Then too, your earlier claims indicate that Egypt reported no
ships in the area at the time of the cable break.

Which lie or fabrication would you rather stick to?

Harry C.

On Feb 3, 8:48 pm, hhc...@yahoo.com wrote:



On Feb 3, 10:42 pm, n...@isp.com (Dersu Uzala) wrote:

In article

Trust me Dersu, I mean no offence, but the gentleman that originally
posted this article has long been known for his fondness with
conspiracy theories.

Yeah, but two cables were cut in the Mediterranean, and two in the Persian
Gulf, all within a few days. Maybe someone doesn't want Iran to have access.

Dersu, access to precisely what? Also, deliberate espionage and
modern technology fly in the face of each other here. Countries in the
Persian Gulf are very wealthy (Dubain in particular), and
technologically sophisticated. (I only wish that the US was so
wealthy.) Something does not fly right with this story. First, marine
cables are today alway today laid in reduntant pairs located miles
apart, so it one is cut, the other continues to function. Second,
usually back-up land lines exist with broad-band optical communication
via lines going to adjacient nations (sort of an International Comcast
Network). All that failing, there are microwave communication links to
nearby countries, and satellite links to nations throughout the world.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/04/2153455.htm
Ships did not cut internet cables: Egypt

No one yet knows what cut the cables. Ship anchors remail the usual
suspects.

Ships are not responsible for damaging undersea internet cables in the
Mediterranean, Egypt's Government says.

You seem to trust a great deal on what Egypt's goverment says. While
ships anchoring offshore are not liable for cable damage anywhere in
the world, where the cables are not clearly marked on navigational
charts, if they anchor in an area documented on the charts to contain
a cable, they are subject to court charges. This appies to any
submarine cable, and there are no marine cables that I know of that
are specific to internet use.

Two cables were damaged earlier this week in the Mediterranean sea and another
off the coast of Dubai, causing widespread disruption to internet and
international telephone services in Egypt, Gulf Arab states and South Asia.

So what? A submarine cable was cut last month by a large fishing boat
anchoring off "Georges Bank" near the coast of Massachusetts. Shit
happens!

A fourth cable linking Qatar to the United Arab Emirates was damaged on Sunday
causing yet more disruptions, telecommunication provider Qtel said.

So, perhaps a plot is afoot, but do you have any grasp about how hard
it is to locate a marine cable, yet alone hook it, haul it up, and
then cut it? I logically have to ask why would anyone bother, since
the marine cables nearly all have redundant companions. Why whould
anyone at great risk and expense even bother.

Egypt's transport ministry said footage recorded by onshore video cameras of
the location of the cables showed no maritime traffic in the area when the
cables were damaged.

This is somewhat surprising, since the sea area in question is among
one of the most frequently transited in the world. Odd, don't you
think, that Egypts cameras were recording photos of an area, what was
it, 38-miles offshore? It is also rather odd that the Egyptian
cameras "showed no maritime traffic" in a area of sea that is among
the most transited in the world. Evidently the Egyptian camera's have
a serious problem, or you are making this up as you go along. Take a
look at Google Earth's image of this region, and then you'll start to
wonder why there are not more ship collisions.

"The ministry's maritime transport committee reviewed footage covering the
period of 12 hours before and 12 hours after the cables were cut and no ships
sailed the area," a statement said.

Then, no ships being in the region, the cable naturally failed.
Evidently the "ministry of maritime transport" proves this.

"The area is also marked on maps as a no-go zone and it is therefore ruled out
that the damage to the cables was caused by ships."

Right, and I've like to see these charts that are easily available.
Simply post the coordinates.

Earlier reports said that the damage had been caused by ships that had been
diverted off their usual route because of bad weather.

Has it crossed your mind that in bad weather, ships frequently drop
anchor. Then too, your earlier claims indicate that Egypt reported no
ships in the area at the time of the cable break.

Which lie or fabrication would you rather stick to?

Harry C.

Which one do you stick to CONover?http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/internet-cables-cut-prel...

On Feb 5, 12:32 pm, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Feb 3, 8:48 pm, hhc...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Feb 3, 10:42 pm, n...@isp.com (Dersu Uzala) wrote:

In article

Trust me Dersu, I mean no offence, but the gentleman that originally
posted this article has long been known for his fondness with
conspiracy theories.

Dersu, access to precisely what? Also, deliberate espionage and
modern technology fly in the face of each other here. Countries in the
Persian Gulf are very wealthy (Dubain in particular), and
technologically sophisticated. (I only wish that the US was so
wealthy.) Something does not fly right with this story. First, marine
cables are today alway today laid in reduntant pairs located miles
apart, so it one is cut, the other continues to function. Second,
usually back-up land lines exist with broad-band optical communication
via lines going to adjacient nations (sort of an International Comcast
Network). All that failing, there are microwave communication links to
nearby countries, and satellite links to nations throughout the world.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/04/2153455.htm
Ships did not cut internet cables: Egypt

No one yet knows what cut the cables. Ship anchors remail the usual
suspects.

Ships are not responsible for damaging undersea internet cables in the
Mediterranean, Egypt's Government says.

You seem to trust a great deal on what Egypt's goverment says. While
ships anchoring offshore are not liable for cable damage anywhere in
the world, where the cables are not clearly marked on navigational
charts, if they anchor in an area documented on the charts to contain
a cable, they are subject to court charges. This appies to any
submarine cable, and there are no marine cables that I know of that
are specific to internet use.

Two cables were damaged earlier this week in the Mediterranean sea and another
off the coast of Dubai, causing widespread disruption to internet and
international telephone services in Egypt, Gulf Arab states and South Asia.

So what? A submarine cable was cut last month by a large fishing boat
anchoring off "Georges Bank" near the coast of Massachusetts. Shit
happens!

A fourth cable linking Qatar to the United Arab Emirates was damaged on Sunday
causing yet more disruptions, telecommunication provider Qtel said.

So, perhaps a plot is afoot, but do you have any grasp about how hard
it is to locate a marine cable, yet alone hook it, haul it up, and
then cut it? I logically have to ask why would anyone bother, since
the marine cables nearly all have redundant companions. Why whould
anyone at great risk and expense even bother.

Egypt's transport ministry said footage recorded by onshore video cameras of
the location of the cables showed no maritime traffic in the area when the
cables were damaged.

This is somewhat surprising, since the sea area in question is among
one of the most frequently transited in the world. Odd, don't you
think, that Egypts cameras were recording photos of an area, what was
it, 38-miles offshore? It is also rather odd that the Egyptian
cameras "showed no maritime traffic" in a area of sea that is among
the most transited in the world. Evidently the Egyptian camera's have
a serious problem, or you are making this up as you go along. Take a
look at Google Earth's image of this region, and then you'll start to
wonder why there are not more ship collisions.

"The ministry's maritime transport committee reviewed footage covering the
period of 12 hours before and 12 hours after the cables were cut and no ships
sailed the area," a statement said.

Then, no ships being in the region, the cable naturally failed.
Evidently the "ministry of maritime transport" proves this.

"The area is also marked on maps as a no-go zone and it is therefore ruled out
that the damage to the cables was caused by ships."

Right, and I've like to see these charts that are easily available.
Simply post the coordinates.

Earlier reports said that the damage had been caused by ships that had been
diverted off their usual route because of bad weather.

Has it crossed your mind that in bad weather, ships frequently drop
anchor. Then too, your earlier claims indicate that Egypt reported no
ships in the area at the time of the cable break.

Which lie or fabrication would you rather stick to?

Harry C.

Which one do you stick to CONover?http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/internet-cables-cut-prel...

Seems it's 9 cuts now.http://rense.com/wacky.news

The question then becomes: are there any actors on the international
stage who exhibit a strong Muslim bias in their foreign
relations, who have the technical capability to carry out clandestine
especially in the Middle East region?

On Feb 5, 12:32 pm, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:



On Feb 3, 8:48 pm, hhc...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Feb 3, 10:42 pm, n...@isp.com (Dersu Uzala) wrote:

In article

Trust me Dersu, I mean no offence, but the gentleman that originally
posted this article has long been known for his fondness with
conspiracy theories.

Yeah, but two cables were cut in the Mediterranean, and two in the Persian
Gulf, all within a few days. Maybe someone doesn't want Iran to have access.

Dersu, access to precisely what? Also, deliberate espionage and
modern technology fly in the face of each other here. Countries in the
Persian Gulf are very wealthy (Dubain in particular), and
technologically sophisticated. (I only wish that the US was so
wealthy.) Something does not fly right with this story. First, marine
cables are today alway today laid in reduntant pairs located miles
apart, so it one is cut, the other continues to function. Second,
usually back-up land lines exist with broad-band optical communication
via lines going to adjacient nations (sort of an International Comcast
Network). All that failing, there are microwave communication links to
nearby countries, and satellite links to nations throughout the world.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/04/2153455.htm
Ships did not cut internet cables: Egypt

No one yet knows what cut the cables. Ship anchors remail the usual
suspects.

Ships are not responsible for damaging undersea internet cables in the
Mediterranean, Egypt's Government says.

You seem to trust a great deal on what Egypt's goverment says. While
ships anchoring offshore are not liable for cable damage anywhere in
the world, where the cables are not clearly marked on navigational
charts, if they anchor in an area documented on the charts to contain
a cable, they are subject to court charges. This appies to any
submarine cable, and there are no marine cables that I know of that
are specific to internet use.

Two cables were damaged earlier this week in the Mediterranean sea and another
off the coast of Dubai, causing widespread disruption to internet and
international telephone services in Egypt, Gulf Arab states and South Asia.

So what? A submarine cable was cut last month by a large fishing boat
anchoring off "Georges Bank" near the coast of Massachusetts. Shit
happens!

A fourth cable linking Qatar to the United Arab Emirates was damaged on Sunday
causing yet more disruptions, telecommunication provider Qtel said.

So, perhaps a plot is afoot, but do you have any grasp about how hard
it is to locate a marine cable, yet alone hook it, haul it up, and
then cut it? I logically have to ask why would anyone bother, since
the marine cables nearly all have redundant companions. Why whould
anyone at great risk and expense even bother.

Egypt's transport ministry said footage recorded by onshore video cameras of
the location of the cables showed no maritime traffic in the area when the
cables were damaged.

This is somewhat surprising, since the sea area in question is among
one of the most frequently transited in the world. Odd, don't you
think, that Egypts cameras were recording photos of an area, what was
it, 38-miles offshore? It is also rather odd that the Egyptian
cameras "showed no maritime traffic" in a area of sea that is among
the most transited in the world. Evidently the Egyptian camera's have
a serious problem, or you are making this up as you go along. Take a
look at Google Earth's image of this region, and then you'll start to
wonder why there are not more ship collisions.

"The ministry's maritime transport committee reviewed footage covering the
period of 12 hours before and 12 hours after the cables were cut and no ships
sailed the area," a statement said.

Then, no ships being in the region, the cable naturally failed.
Evidently the "ministry of maritime transport" proves this.

"The area is also marked on maps as a no-go zone and it is therefore ruled out
that the damage to the cables was caused by ships."

Right, and I've like to see these charts that are easily available.
Simply post the coordinates.

Earlier reports said that the damage had been caused by ships that had been
diverted off their usual route because of bad weather.

Has it crossed your mind that in bad weather, ships frequently drop
anchor. Then too, your earlier claims indicate that Egypt reported no
ships in the area at the time of the cable break.

Which lie or fabrication would you rather stick to?

Harry C.

Which one do you stick to CONover?http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/internet-cables-cut-prel...

Seems it's 9 cuts now.http://rense.com/general80/cable.htm

By my count, we are probably dealing with as many as eight, maybe even
nine, unexplained cut or damaged undersea cables within the last week,
and not the mere three or four that most mainstream news media outlets
in the United States are presently reporting. Given all this cable-
cutting mayhem in the last several days, who knows but what there may
possibly be other cut and/or damaged cables that have not made it into
the news cycle, because they are lost in the general cable-cutting
noise by this point. Nevertheless, let me enumerate what I can, and
keep in mind, I am not pulling these out of a hat; all of the sources
are referenced at the conclusion of the article; you can click through
and look at all the evidence that I have. It's there if you care to
read through it all.

one off of Marseille, France
two off of Alexandria, Egypt
one off of Dubai, in the Persian Gulf
one off of Bandar Abbas, Iran in the Persian Gulf
one between Qatar and the UAE, in the Persian Gulf
one in the Suez, Egypt
one near Penang, Malaysia
initially unreported cable cut on 23 January 2008 (Persian Gulf?)

Three things stand out about these incidents:

all of them, save one, have occurred in waters near predominantly
Muslim nations, causing disruption in those countries;
all but two of the cut/damaged cables are in Middle Eastern waters;
so many like incidents in such a short period of time suggests that
they are not accidents, but are in fact deliberate acts, i.e.,
sabotage.

The evidence therefore suggests that we are looking at a coordinated
program of undersea cable sabotage by an actor, or actors, on the
international stage with an anti-Muslim bias, as well as a proclivity
for destructive violence in the Middle Eastern region.

The question then becomes: are there any actors on the international
stage who exhibit a strong, anti-Muslim bias in their foreign
relations, who have the technical capability to carry out clandestine
sabotage operations on the sea floor, and who have exhibited a pattern
of violently destructive policies towards Muslim peoples and nations,
especially in the Middle East region?