Let’s play spot the media spin
This sounds like a scene taken out of the movie “Lord of War”. Could this be common place for arms traders? Did someone cross the line on the rules of trade for this type of commerce? I wonder if Iran can be brought into this, or could it be the state of arms sales for the region or world for that matter. I really don’t expect the media to get it right, I am surprised it even made it to the news.
OK, the BBC version cites multiple warnings before the small boat was fired on. Also I note that of all the hawker’s boats, only one did not turn back and only one was fired on. I’ve got to be honest, the idea of hijacking a container ship in the Suez Canal does seem a bit odd. How would the hijackers know which container they wanted? If they did take over the whole ship, where would they go? I think the guys in the boat were up to something nefarious, perhaps blowing up the cargo vessel, perhaps a plot to mess up shipping the the canal, perhaps something else. Regardless, I find it very easy to believe that the guys in the boat needed killing.
That said, on this website, I suppose my attitude about Islamists and Palestinians is pretty well known. For anyone new here, I don’t like them and I don’t trust them. There are some questions I have to ask though; Don’t the Egyptians have a responsibility to keep ships in the Suez Canal safe? Since when does a freighter traveling in the waters of a foreign country carry arms? I’ll admit that it makes a lot of sense to carry arms, especially in that part of the world, but something seems a bit wrong. I suspect there is a lot more going on here than a couple more towel headed fools getting killed while claiming innocence.
Well now. Lets think USS Cole, shall we? Or pirates? They do exist still today. Whichever, they didn’t open fire without warning, and they were undoubtedly carrying cargo that didn’t need either of those options manifested. MSM, ain’t it great?
Doc, from what I’ve been able to gather, it looks like the ship was already through the Canal, and in the waiting area right by the Med. Pull up the Canal on Google Earth or Google Maps and take a look. So scuttling it wouldn’t make much sense, but hijacking it could. Gaza is barely 50 miles away, and there isn’t much of anything at all between the Canal and Gaza’s southern border to the northeast.
I don’t know what the rules are for ships in transit, but if it’s anything like big trucks on the highways, they’d have to show their manifest at the entrance to the Canal. A little bribe, a phone call, and a small group of opportunists could set up a snatch ‘n grab plan in a short time. Even one container filled with guns and ammo could outfit a couple thousand terrorists, what if the ship was carrying hundreds of containers like that? Or shoulder launched anti-tank or anti-aircraft missiles, which the palis really don’t seem to have?
Modern ships are highly automated; I doubt that this one has as many as 30 crew members. So they’d be an easy mark for pirates, especially since the ship couldn’t really go anywhere and the political climate in those waters may not be very friendly.
Or it could be as written, an overreaction to innocent circumstances. But considering all the factors - the area, the politics, the cargo - I find too many coincidences to let me accept that view at first glance.
This article from CNN adds some interesting details.
U.S. ship fires on boat in Suez Canal
Drew, I think your ideas are sounding pretty good right now. The only other possibility I can think of is the equivalent of the USS Cole. Blowing a hole in the side of the freighter could easily be another terror tactic. One thing I’m sure of is that the guys in the boat weren’t innocent.Looks like a fit up to me, but IF the ship did have to fire why only one dead?? whip the bad shots now to sharpen the rest!!! I guess after pushing their luck some of the dead boatmans good mates shot him to make political gain?
Posted by Chris Edwards
03/25/2008 at 06:18 PM
Two things:
1. Nitpicking details:
Your post is among the few places on the web where it’s mentioned that this incident happened after sunset. Kudos!2. Pouring oil on troubled fires:
This could be a botched (and stupid) hijacking attempt, some sort of mistake (the boat’s pilot was deaf and blind?), or something else.I think it’s possible that we’re looking at a Middle Eastern equivalent of suicide by cop: that someone on the boat decided to end it all by making a mock-attack run at an armed American ship.
Why would anyone do this? The usual reasons for suicide, or an effort to discredit America: with the bonus of cashing in on that 72-virgin club that some Muslims believe in. (I harangued briefly about this in ”U.S. Warship Kills Innocent Egyptian!! No Wonder Everybody Hates America!!!.")
Posted by Norski
03/25/2008 at 10:33 PM
I agree.. This seems to ‘convenient’… From my experience when I was in the Navy, Ammo carriers are usually armed, especially in that part of the world, and the poor Arabian vendors know the rules, and the consequences for breaking them, thus are very careful about the invisible barrier, and the consequences of crossing them.
The ship, which is under the Auspices of the Military Sealift Command, IS armed, and probably has some US Sailors or Marines on for security, especially with Ammo aboard, and the way the Middle east is at the moment.
You do know, however, that the media doesn’t spin anything the correct way. They report it as they see it, which is through rose tinted Liberal glasses, where black is white, up is down, and head chopping terrorists belong to the religion of peace. I’m not expecting to learn anything from CNN, or BBC, but I have a brother-in-law in the Merchant Marine, and he has friends. If I hear anything I will update.
-BillPlease do, good Doctor. I’m of the opinion this was an msm twist to something we are totally good on. Facts? We don’t need no stinking facts! An American ship was involved so they MUST be guilty!
