Possible Conspiracy Happening right Now???

minidazzler

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7218008.stm

I don't know why but this doesnt fly well with me at all. Middle Eastern Countries loose internet???

If something happens soon we will know I am right about something but I am not sure what.

Just a little fishy.

meglome

or maybe a cable was accidentally damaged as has happened elsewhere in the past.

Oracle

Yes, it's possible, but the key question is to who's advantage would this interruption be? It seems unlikely a ships anchor would damage an underground sea cable. It would be more likely that underwater exploration or excavation on the seabed would be the cause. But I don't know enough about this subject to comment further.

jessop1

Middle East Undersea
Cable Cutting A Zionist-NeoCon
Covert Operation?

meglome

Oracle wrote: »

Yes, it's possible, but the key question is to who's advantage would this interruption be? It seems unlikely a ships anchor would damage an underground sea cable. It would be more likely that underwater exploration or excavation on the seabed would be the cause. But I don't know enough about this subject to comment further.

Why does it seem unlikely that a cable lying on the seabed could be damaged by a ships anchor lying on the seabed? Especially given the huge tankers that pass through the area.

meglome

jessop1 wrote: »

Middle East Undersea
Cable Cutting A Zionist-NeoCon
Covert Operation?

Nice story but in what previous war did all undersea communication cables get cut?

jessop1

cutting communications is a well used tactic in war, but to answer your question, world war 1.

at the outset of the war, the Germans had five transatlantic cables that ran through the English Channel. One went to Brest in France, another to Vigo in Spain, one to Tenerife in North Africa and two to New York via the Azores. The English cable ship Telconia cut them all in England's first offensive action in the war.

This could well be a prelude to military action or perhaps USA/Israel are testing the responses of their middle east enemies. Maybe something to do with the impending iranian oil bourse? wasnt saddam about to do something similar before they invaded iraq?

meglome

jessop1 wrote: »

cutting communications is a well used tactic in war, but to answer your question, world war 1.

at the outset of the war, the Germans had five transatlantic cables that ran through the English Channel. One went to Brest in France, another to Vigo in Spain, one to Tenerife in North Africa and two to New York via the Azores. The English cable ship Telconia cut them all in England's first offensive action in the war.

This could well be a prelude to military action or perhaps USA/Israel are testing the responses of their middle east enemies. Maybe something to do with the impending iranian oil bourse? wasnt saddam about to do something similar before they invaded iraq?

Okay I'll rephrase my point. There are numerous forms of communication in the modern world. It would be very difficult now to completely knock out communications. In fact I'd suggest it would be near impossible to do so. Why knock out internet communication as a prelude to an invasion? The Iranian military are sending each other emails when they want to issue orders? Was the Iraqi internet knocked out?

Why would the USA and Israel need to test things on the real cables? They could use any cable lying on the seabed.

jessop1

meglome wrote: »

Okay I'll rephrase my point.

You mean you will make a new one. You asked in what previous war undersea cables had been cut and I told you.

meglome wrote: »

There are numerous forms of communication in the modern world. It would be very difficult now to completely knock out communications. In fact I'd suggest it would be near impossible to do so.

Who said anything about completely knocking out communications? Its the internet we are talking about here.

meglome wrote: »

Why knock out internet communication as a prelude to an invasion?
The Iranian military are sending each other emails when they want to issue orders?

You are being trite. But I will humour you. A couple of examples of why it would be of benefit to take out the internet.
Example1: restricting the enemy's capacity to operate, financially and otherwise. Given the amount of transactions that happen electronically these days, this one is kind of a no brainer.
Example2: narrowing the bandwidth they have to monitor in order to spy on all of the enemy's communications.

I'm sure there are a host of other strategic reasons why an attacker would take out internet communications as a prelude to war.

meglome wrote: »

Why would the USA and Israel need to test things on the real cables?

You're missing the point completely. I'm talking about testing or the enemy's response, for example monitoring their capacity to mobilise alternative communication methods.

Mahatma coat

there is something a wee bit suspect about more than one cable 'breaking' at the same time alright.

Meglome, ah I wont even bother, theres no point tryin to talk to you.

meglome

jessop1 wrote: »

You mean you will make a new one. You asked in what previous war undersea cables had been cut and I told you.

In WWI these were telegraph cables. You were talking about internet communications.

jessop1 wrote: »

Who said anything about completely knocking out communications? Its the internet we are talking about here.

Indeed. Why would knocking out the internet stop any country's military from operating? Especially in the middle east.

jessop1 wrote: »

You are being trite. But I will humour you. A couple of examples of why it would be of benefit to take out the internet.
Example1: restricting the enemy's capacity to operate, financially and otherwise. Given the amount of transactions that happen electronically these days, this one is kind of a no brainer.

So Iran has an open economy with lot's of foreign internet transactions? They extensively use the internet to operate what exactly? How high is internet usage in Iran?

jessop1 wrote: »

Example2: narrowing the bandwidth they have to monitor in order to spy on all of the enemy's communications.

According to you, you were talking about internet communications, not general communications. Why would cutting international internet links effect local communications in any way?

jessop1 wrote: »

I'm sure there are a host of other strategic reasons why an attacker would take out internet communications as a prelude to war.

Which ones?

jessop1 wrote: »

You're missing the point completely. I'm talking about testing or the enemy's response, for example monitoring their capacity to mobilise alternative communication methods.

Why would testing the enemies response to fixing international internet cables be relevant in a war situation?

meglome

Mahatma coat wrote: »

there is something a wee bit suspect about more than one cable 'breaking' at the same time alright.

Meglome, ah I wont even bother, theres no point tryin to talk to you.

I never said it wasn't suspicious or unusual. But given that these are some of the busiest shipping lanes in the world then the official reasons given for this are perfectly plausible. However that doesn't exclude any other possibility. I'm just fascinated that without any actual foundation we now have another big conspiracy on our hands.

I have no problem seeing both sides of this, which is more than I can say for you generally.

jessop1

I got this from another forum:

. wrote:

4 total cables, 3 separate locations

First cable cut
===============
Jan 30 (Wed) 0800 FLAG cable; 8.3km from Alexandria in Egypt.
URL="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7218008.stm"]link to news.bbc.co.uk[/URL


Second cable cut
================
Jan 30 (Wed) SEA-ME-WE4 cable thought to lie alongside FLAG cable was also split; 56km from Dubai.
(same BBC link as first cable above)


Third cable cut
===============
Feb 1 (Fri) FLAG Falcon fibre optic cable running through the Suez to Sri Lanka; cut somewhere between Dubai and Muscat.
URL="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/third-undersea-cable-reportedly-cut/story.aspx?guid=%7B1AAB2A79-E983-4E0E-BC39-68A120DC16D9%7D"]link to www.marketwatch.com[/URL


Fourth cable cut
================
Feb 1 (Fri) An undersea telecoms cable was damaged between the Qatari island of Haloul and the UAE island of Das.
URL="http://www.arabianbusiness.com/510132-internet-problems-continue-with-fourth-cable-break?ln=en"]link to www.arabianbusiness.com[/URL

there is no official story yet as to how it happened, just speculation that it was anchor dragging. But cuts in 3 completely separate locations all in the same week? suspicious. all areas in the region bar israel and us occupied iraq? suspiciouser.

Info in the links as to how this is impacting the affected areas. Meglome have a read of those. I'm not asnwering any more of your questions you are obviously taking the piss.

meglome

jessop1 wrote: »

Info in the links as to how this is impacting the affected areas. Meglome have a read of those. I'm not asnwering any more of your questions you are obviously taking the piss.

As I said above it is unusual and possibly suspicious.

Maybe there were some undersea quakes... Maybe it was a competitor of the this Flag company who own the cables... Maybe it was storm... Maybe it was a ships anchor... Maybe it was different random events that caused the damage. I really don't know and neither does anyone else so why take the view it's an American and Israeli plot over any other possibility?

jessop1

Undersea internet cable cut in Middle East – Should Iran be worried?

meglome

jessop1 wrote: »

Undersea internet cable cut in Middle East – Should Iran be worried?

That's just repeating the potential for an attack on Iran, which we already know there is no evidence of. It doesn't give any proper reason why cutting international internet links would greatly effect Iran or make an invasion more likely to succeed. Pure speculation... actually I think it was aliens, they are going to grab our oil then move out from there. Bound to be true, evidence be damned.

egan007

False alarm, Turns out Nemo chewed the Cable.

bonkey

jessop1 wrote: »

Undersea internet cable cut in Middle East – Should Iran be worried?

http://www.renesys.com/blog/2008/02/attention_iran_is_not_disconne_1.shtml

minidazzler

When I started this thread it was Farfetched even in my mind and it was only the bones of a Theory. But the More I look at the Evidence the more it seems plausible.

Just think the Middle east is gone Dark because of Cables breaking. But, American interest can still be served to their full extent. A little Fishy if you ask me.

I dont think it will be too long until the World Leaders decide it is time for America to go to war with Iran.

What excuses will be used this time? Any Idea's?

humanji

Do they need one?

pirelli

http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/02/06/conspiracy-theories-behind-those-cut-undersea-cables/

Its happened 7 times.

Point to remember It's hard to locate a cable.
They are buried closer to shore.
It's harder again to cut it as it is so deep.

It could be about Business interest's or mafia problems.

humanji

pirelli wrote: »

http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/02/06/conspiracy-theories-behind-those-cut-undersea-cables/

Its happened 7 times.

Point to remember It's hard to locate a cable.
They are buried closer to shore.
It's harder again to cut it as it is so deep.

It could be about Business interest's or mafia problems.

Well, I go with the "shark with lasers strapped to it" option. It's the only logical explanation!

Mahatma coat

theres skepticism, and then theres attempts at active derailment of a thread.

I personaly believe that there may be something more sinister behind these outages, I'm not sure what it is yet tho.

if infantile humor is ALL you wish to contribute then why bother?

Mahatma coat

and its 'frickin Sharks with Frickin Lazerbeams'

humanji

Mahatma coat wrote: »

theres skepticism, and then theres attempts at active derailment of a thread.

I personaly believe that there may be something more sinister behind these outages, I'm not sure what it is yet tho.

if infantile humor is ALL you wish to contribute then why bother?

Have you looked at the link?

humanji

Mahatma coat wrote: »

and its 'frickin Sharks with Frickin Lazerbeams'

Damn, I couldn't remember what the quote was

Mahatma coat

yes, and its a bit wierd. if there was no story why the denial. like I said it seems to point to something more, go after the conspiracy nuts and ridicule them in the mainstream press is a time honoured tactic

humanji

But a denial isn't proof of a cover up. And making fun of conspiracy nuts isn't a disinfo tactic, it's just making fun of conspiracy nuts. The media needs to sell itself. And the best way to do that is by the car crash mentality, make your audience feel superior to the subject of the article. It's nothing against the conspiracy nut themselves, it's just the media trying to make money.

Mahatma coat

they still felt the need to make the denial, there are other views of what is and isnt a disinfo tactic, this is one of them in my view

meathstevie

Maybe shutting up a couple of Middle-East hosted fundi websites for a little amount of time ? Intelligence based operation against e-mail traffic from certain quarters ? Creating an opportunity to put in some high tech monitoring hardware ? Or maybe just incompetent navigators having ships anchoring in the wrong place ?

esskay

Just a thought, if you could get physical access those cables, what type of monitoring equipment could be installed? Rather than knock out internet access, maybe its to monitor or even inject false data so that it physically originates from that area?

As I said, it just a thought that floated through my head...

humanji

I'm thinking it would be a hell of a lot easier to simply do that at the servers, not at the cables. It would just be making things really awkward (although I do have a bizarre image of a scuba diver with a laptop, sitting on one of those cables).

bonkey

esskay wrote: »

Just a thought, if you could get physical access those cables, what type of monitoring equipment could be installed? Rather than knock out internet access, maybe its to monitor or even inject false data so that it physically originates from that area?

You could do all sorts of fun things, most of which would be variants of the basic "man-in-the-middle" attack.

The thing is this, though.....lets forget for a second that we're talking about an undersea cable, but rather a straightforward pole-to-pole telegraph and you're a seekr1t agent who wants to tap the line.

If you had no access to the company who owns/maintains the line, then cutting the cable is the last thing you want to do, because that will force said phone company to come out and repair it....at which point, they'll notice some stuff (your tapping equipment) where it isn't supposed to be. At the very least, one can expect that they'd remove it.

If you had access to the company, then there wouldn't be any need to cut the cable. You could just install whatever you wanted under the guise of standard repairs / line-checking...or indeed just do it where the cable terminates, rather than hidden under the ocean somewhere.

Bearing in mind that this cable is underwater, there are more problems. Lets say you've somehow cut it to tap it and that's what it was all about. So you now have a tap, underwater. What do you do? String another cable along the seabed, where none is supposed to be, to where you can actually do something and just hope no-one ever sees it? Rig up a powerful transmitter and work wirelessly, and just hope that no-one ever notices that there's a big radio signal originating from around where the cables were cut, and ends up listening-in to your listening-in operation?

At the end of the day, none of it really makes sense, except maybe the possibility that someone wanted someone else to have seriously reduced bandwidth for some reason, for a short period of time. Beyond that...trying to guess who the various someone's are, and why they might want it is just an exercise in fantasy, to be honest.

meglome

I was wondering are we still waiting for something to happen here? or have certain people accepted it was just coincidence?

DubTony

I missed this thread way back when, but I thought it was obvious what's happening here. This link shows an agent of the NWO and his latest recruit

meglome

This old thread popped into my mind earlier. I think it's a classic example of Occam's Razor, assuming a conspiracy when there are plenty of other straightforward possibilities.

The reason i brought it up is does it make any of the CT'er here question their belief that these events are conspiracy's in general. We could call up numerous old threads like this one where nothing actually happened whatsoever. Sure i have no doubt that something will happen as predicted eventually, if you say enough things will happen you'll get lucky at some point. But that's all it will be. So really does it not make you wonder?

uprising2

meglome wrote: »

This old thread popped into my mind earlier. I think it's a classic example of Occam's Razor, assuming a conspiracy when there are plenty of other straightforward possibilities.

The reason i brought it up is does it make any of the CT'er here question their belief that these events are conspiracy's in general. We could call up numerous old threads like this one where nothing actually happened whatsoever. Sure i have no doubt that something will happen as predicted eventually, if you say enough things will happen you'll get lucky at some point. But that's all it will be. So really does it not make you wonder?

But do you know it was an accident?, maybe a kill switch installed, with a man in the middle device, it occured "somewhere" between Alexandria, Egypt, and Palermo, Italy, running to the middle east,south east asia, lots of info passing through that fibre optic cable, why is that only explanation is they were severed by anchors?, because most people believed it and said it?

If I were Israel and I had that cable off my coast, I'd sever it in 2 locations, one I'd rejoin with said device, quickly, the other I'd leave cut.

Any number of hightech devices could be inserted into the cable, coating material seamless,rejoined at a 180 degree angle, virtually impossible to detect, the repair men come along and find the severed piece a distance away, fix it, all's well, internet restored.

Whats this internet kill switch obomber was talking about, take an awful lot of server shutdowns to use.

The device wouldn't need high transmitting power and a reciever, tansmitter, remote killswitch on the sea bed not too far away would make a great gadget to intercept an awful lot of info, and turn off an awful lot of connections at will, when need be.

Einhard

meglome wrote: »

This old thread popped into my mind earlier. I think it's a classic example of Occam's Razor, assuming a conspiracy when there are plenty of other straightforward possibilities.

The reason i brought it up is does it make any of the CT'er here question their belief that these events are conspiracy's in general. We could call up numerous old threads like this one where nothing actually happened whatsoever. Sure i have no doubt that something will happen as predicted eventually, if you say enough things will happen you'll get lucky at some point. But that's all it will be. So really does it not make you wonder?

LOL I was actually thinking the same about this thread:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055949195

Every time I pop onto boards, it seems to be on the front page. Invasion imminent we're assured, and nearly six weeks later we're still waiting on it!

Einhard

uprising2 wrote: »

But do you know it was an accident?, maybe a kill switch installed, with a man in the middle device, it occured "somewhere" between Alexandria, Egypt, and Palermo, Italy, running to the middle east,south east asia, lots of info passing through that fibre optic cable, why is that only explanation is they were severed by anchors?, because most people believed it and said it?

If I were Israel and I had that cable off my coast, I'd sever it in 2 locations, one I'd rejoin with said device, quickly, the other I'd leave cut.

Any number of hightech devices could be inserted into the cable, coating material seamless,rejoined at a 180 degree angle, virtually impossible to detect, the repair men come along and find the severed piece a distance away, fix it, all's well, internet restored.

Whats this internet kill switch obomber was talking about, take an awful lot of server shutdowns to use.

The device wouldn't need high transmitting power and a reciever, tansmitter, remote killswitch on the sea bed not too far away would make a great gadget to intercept an awful lot of info, and turn off an awful lot of connections at will, when need be.

There's a reason he stated "Occam's Razor" in his post.

uprising2

Einhard wrote: »

There's a reason he stated "Occam's Razor" in his post.

Why is that, so we have no other possibilities to think about?, great principle to keep everyone dumb and question nothing, must use it sometime, just not now.

Einhard

uprising2 wrote: »

Why is that, so we have no other possibilities to think about?, great principle to keep everyone dumb and question nothing, must use it sometime, just not now.

Occam's Razor does the opposite of excluding thinking. It encourages it with a view to arriving at a conclusion that's most likely given the facts.

meglome

uprising2 wrote: »

Why is that, so we have no other possibilities to think about?, great principle to keep everyone dumb and question nothing, must use it sometime, just not now.

Look as Einhard said I'm not excluding anything whatsoever. We know that undersea cables get accidentally cut all over the world. Obviously they get cut more often in places they are nearer the surface and where there are a lot of ships. Also how would cutting Iran partially off the internet really effect them too much. They'd still have other cables, both sea and land based, satellites, radio, microwave etc. So by far the most likely explanation is accidental damage but instead it was a prelude to invasion.... sound familiar?

And what bonkey said.

bonkey wrote: »

You could do all sorts of fun things, most of which would be variants of the basic "man-in-the-middle" attack.

The thing is this, though.....lets forget for a second that we're talking about an undersea cable, but rather a straightforward pole-to-pole telegraph and you're a seekr1t agent who wants to tap the line.

If you had no access to the company who owns/maintains the line, then cutting the cable is the last thing you want to do, because that will force said phone company to come out and repair it....at which point, they'll notice some stuff (your tapping equipment) where it isn't supposed to be. At the very least, one can expect that they'd remove it.

If you had access to the company, then there wouldn't be any need to cut the cable. You could just install whatever you wanted under the guise of standard repairs / line-checking...or indeed just do it where the cable terminates, rather than hidden under the ocean somewhere.

Bearing in mind that this cable is underwater, there are more problems. Lets say you've somehow cut it to tap it and that's what it was all about. So you now have a tap, underwater. What do you do? String another cable along the seabed, where none is supposed to be, to where you can actually do something and just hope no-one ever sees it? Rig up a powerful transmitter and work wirelessly, and just hope that no-one ever notices that there's a big radio signal originating from around where the cables were cut, and ends up listening-in to your listening-in operation?

At the end of the day, none of it really makes sense, except maybe the possibility that someone wanted someone else to have seriously reduced bandwidth for some reason, for a short period of time. Beyond that...trying to guess who the various someone's are, and why they might want it is just an exercise in fantasy, to be honest.

Joshua Jones

Einhard wrote: »

Occam's Razor does the opposite of excluding thinking. It encourages it with a view to arriving at a conclusion that's most likely given the facts.

I agree, but in oreder to use occams razor you first need facts. If your facts are wrong then you'll come to the wrong conclusion. You must have the true facts for it to be useful.

bonkey

Joshua Jones wrote: »

I agree, but in oreder to use occams razor you first need facts. If your facts are wrong then you'll come to the wrong conclusion. You must have the true facts for it to be useful.

This, however, is not a limitation of OR per se, but rather of all methods of reasoning.

No matter what line of thought you take, if you base your thinking on incorrect information, you'll come to the wrong conclusion (barring luck, which would also apply in the case of Occam's Razor).

Didn't this happen while Iran was opening its oil bourse though..
This has happened a couple of times..

uprising2

Einhard wrote: »

Occam's Razor does the opposite of excluding thinking. It encourages it with a view to arriving at a conclusion that's most likely given the facts.

Ohh so using occams razor, if more people believe me and assume my assumption is the most obvious then I'm right and it's fact, case closed?

Does truth ever be considered while shaving with your occam?

uprising2

Einhard wrote: »

LOL I was actually thinking the same about this thread:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055949195

Every time I pop onto boards, it seems to be on the front page. Invasion imminent we're assured, and nearly six weeks later we're still waiting on it!

What will happen when it does happen, time can be counted in second's, minute's, hour's, day's, week's, month's, year's, decade's etc.

6 weeks is 42 days, so it hasn't happened in 42 days, I dont remember digme giving an exact number of days, I'm 13,000 days old, am I wrong to count my age in days?

This wasn't a prediction, they've been ready to strike Iran for a long time, many days, maybe they were on the brink, even within minutes many times and something happened that it was cancelled.

Any idea when Ahmadinajad and hillary will make love, his box of cuban's are getting stale.

Jeboa Safari

uprising2 wrote: »

What will happen when it does happen, time can be counted in second's, minute's, hour's, day's, week's, month's, year's, decade's etc.

6 weeks is 42 days, so it hasn't happened in 42 days, I dont remember digme giving an exact number of days, I'm 13,000 days old, am I wrong to count my age in days?

This wasn't a prediction, they've been ready to strike Iran for a long time, many days, maybe they were on the brink, even within minutes many times and something happened that it was cancelled.

Any idea when Ahmadinajad and hillary will make love, his box of cuban's are getting stale.

I think it's fair to say he implied that Iran would be attacked within days, whatever way you want to spin it now that that hasn't happened