The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To

There is no doubt about it, there is no longer any reason to hold back, I have looked at the “evidence” and have concluded that we are being lied to, again, by our “leaders” in the White House in order to fabricate a measure of moral justification for yet another “regime change” campaign or an all out war with North Korea.

There simply is no “perfect match” like the recent unsigned report claims there is.

The White House said Monday that President Barack Obama “fully supports” the South Korean president and his response to the torpedo attack by North Korea that sank a South Korean naval ship. MSNBC

South Korea’s president said Monday his nation will no longer tolerate North Korea’s “brutality” and said the regime would pay for a surprise torpedo attack that killed 46 South Korean sailors. ABC News

North Korea has denied responsibility for the sinking of the South Korean warship, the Cheonan, on March 26, which left 46 sailors dead. A growing body of evidence assembled by the South has suggested a North Korean torpedo sank the ship. New York Times

The Growing Body Of Evidence

Clinton told reporters the evidence announced Thursday that North Korea sank the Cheonan “is overwhelming and condemning.”

… Daniel Pinkston, a North Korea expert with the International Crisis Group, a multinational not-for-profit organization, said Friday that evidence that North Korea caused the sinking is “pretty irrefutable.” Stars and Stripes

The International Crisis Group was founded by World Bank Vice-President for External Affairs, Malloch Brown and is funded by other globalist institutions. Their stated mission is to “prevent” international conflict yet somehow or another they always seem to come up with suggestions involving invading other nations or imposing strict sanctions like the kind that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children. Oh yeah, the nations they target usually have a state-owned central bank system… till we invade that is.

So lets take a look at all the “overwhelming” and “irrefutable” evidence. 1. Someone wrote “number 1.” on one single piece of the salvaged torpedo… 2. they claim the torpedo remains are a “perfect match” of a North Korean type of weapon, a “CHT-02D” torpedo. This conclusion was reached via an international research team from US, the UK, Australia, and Sweden. Here is their May 20th, 2010 report. In the report, they make the following conclusion;

The torpedo parts recovered at the site of the explosion by a dredging ship on May 15th, which include the 5×5 bladed contra-rotating propellers, propulsion motor and a steering section, perfectly match the schematics of the CHT-02D torpedo included in introductory brochures provided to foreign countries by North Korea for export purposes. The markings in Hangul, which reads “1번(or No. 1 in English)”, found inside the end of the propulsion section, is consistent with the marking of a previously obtained North Korean torpedo.

… Based on all such relevant facts and classified analysis, we have reached the clear conclusion that ROKS ”Cheonan” was sunk as the result of an external underwater explosion caused by a torpedo made in North Korea. The evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that the torpedo was fired by a North Korean submarine. There is no other plausible explanation. Investigation on the Sinking of the Cheonan

That’s it. That’s all their “evidence” that the international investigators presented in their UNSIGNED report. That’s right, no one knows who the “investigators” were since they didn’t take the time to sign their work.

A Perfect Match?

This is the presentation refered to in the paper linked above. They mention that during a presentation of their findings, they showed the schematics of a CHT-02D torpedo in relation to the evidence they found. They claimed in their investigation that these are a “perfect match” and that claim is being repeated endlessly on both sides of the fake political divide. (please click on image for a larger view)

This is by no means a “perfect match”. No wonder they didn’t want to sign that “investigation” of theirs. (please click on image for a larger view)

There are 4 clear differences in the design of these weapons and one is without a doubt, the key to proving these are not the same.

* “A” & “D” – Here you can clearly see major differences in the design of the hub of the propellers. In the diagram above you can see it has a smaller hub whereas in the evidence below it, the hub is larger.

* “B” – The actual shape of the propellers is very different. You can see a notch in the diagram above that doesn’t exist in the actual evidence propeller below. The overall shape of the blades are vastly different as well, both the front and the rear propeller sets.

All of this might be explained away by suggesting that these propellers were switched out. Thought it might be possible, remember that these are finely tuned and designed systems; one just can’t switch these hub designs “willy nilly” like one would on their John-Boat. But, that aside, though it may be possible to have put different kinds of propellers on this fish, it is certainly NOT a “perfect match”.

Now, the last point proves they are not the same torpedo.

* “C” - As you can plainly see, the stabilizers (or propulsion system?) in the diagram above are clearly shown IN FRONT of the separation plate as it is lined up in the display with the evidence below. However, the torpedo below houses that same stabilizer (or propulsion system) BEHIND the separation plate (separating the body and the tail section of the torpedo).

This is a major difference that cannot be explained by saying it was some kind of after market modification. This is part of a key design of the workings of these weapons and can not have been changed. This difference clearly indicates these are different weapons altogether.

(there are other differences that have been pointed out to this researcher; “Jan” noticed that the axle shape is tapered on the evidence and straight on the diagram. A good point. There are probably others as well (I noticed a difference in the shape of the “fin” in the guidance section in the back as well…. clearly there is no way to say these are a “perfect match”)

It is no wonder the “investigators” chose not to sign their work.

The Forgotten Investigation

On May 6th, 2010 a report came out conducted by South Korea and others that said the torpedo’s metal and explosive residue indicated that it had come from a German origin.

The team of South Korean and foreign investigators found traces of explosives used in torpedoes on several parts of the sunken ship as well as pieces of composite metal used in such weapons, South Korea’s Yonhap news agency said quoting a senior government official.

… The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia, Yonhap quoted the official as saying. REUTERS News Agency

This report has been all but forgotten by the media and the Clinton led state department as they press for crippling sanctions and perhaps more. But there is a confirmation of sorts in the May 20th unsigned “investigation”.

The first thing they should do, rather than attempt to convince the people that the two are “perfectly matched” in design (when they clearly aren’t) is a chemical and metallic debris analysis of the evidence. The May 20th “investigation” does not make mention of this crucial part of the investigation at all… they don’t mention it at all.

The reason for that is clear; if they were to address these two key scientific points, they would have to have admitted that the science shows these pieces of evidence are of German construction and therefore not of North Korean origin.

By ignoring these two important parts of the investigation, the May 20th paper confirms the earlier work of the May 6th study… the torpedo is of German origin.

The “CHT-02D” Torpedo

An earlier report stated that there were only 4 different types of North Korean torpedos that could have caused this damage.

Type EO-6 and ET-80A “Some experts downplayed the possibility of homing torpedoes, citing the low capability of North Korea’s Sang-O (Shark) class submarines.”

Russian Type 53-56

Russian Type 53-59

There had been no mention of the CHT-02D torpedo, and in fact, this researcher can’t find any information on this torpedo aside from links to this story. There is various info on all the other types of North Korean torpedos, but there seems to be none on this one. Why is that? According to the official unsigned report this torpedo is “listed in a brochure” as something North Korea sells, but they do not offer the brochure nor a link to where it can be found. I am still looking for other sources on this matter.

But it appears this weapon came out of no-where.

In a paper I wrote yesterday I questioned whether or not the German-made DM2-A3 looked more like what was found.

“The DM2 A-3 version is also used by the Norwegian Ula class (German Type 210 subs) with an option for a later upgrade). The Italian Type 212 B submarines use the DM2 A-4 version. The Israeli Dolphin-class (German Type S-300) are also being equipped with the DM2 A-4 Torpedo.”

It is only a possibility but it is of German design. More investigation into the schematics of this weapon are needed before any conclusion can be reached.

Questions Being Asked

Most MSM and “progressive” parrot websites are running with the “evil North Korea” story without any investigations what-so-ever. But questions are being asked on a few sites.

Democratic Underground has compiled a list of issues surrounding the “official story” and they deserve to be reviewed. They bring up some very good points and I would hope that someone who posts there might provide them with a link to this study of mine. “What if North Korea didn’t fire the torpedo?” Democratic Underground

They bring out many points that I have not addressed here that need to be. One such point is that North Korea vehemently denies the allegations and they have asked to see the evidence inspect it themselves and they have been denied access to it.

Conclusion

It is clear that we are being lied to and manipulated into believing that North Korea is behind the sinking of the South Korean vessel, the Cheonan. It is impossible to draw conclusions at this time as to who is responsible but we can conclude based on the evidence, that the official story is yet another lie being pawned off on the American people. This lie is obvious and could be used to instigate military action against the people of North Korea.