USS Enterprise to be Sunk in False-Flag?

[parky76]

http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/104451

A rational thinker must ask..."how do they know all these things?"

Perhaps the conspiracy theorists are in on it? How else could they predict these events with such detail.

[Unsecured Coins]

Maybe THEY are the disinfo agents!

[Alareth]

Ok, I was somewhat amused by the first comment on the article about the America and Oriskany have an effect on the cost of steel ...

They already tried sinking the Enterprise once by slamming it into Bishops Rock, but it didn't take.

I really love the CTist concept of the "false-flag". They can make any outrageous claim they want, and when it doesn't happen they all slap themselves on the back and take credit for stopping it due their own dilligence for "getting the word out"

Remember last year when they saved Chicago from being blown up by posting a thread about it at LCF?

My heroes.

[Belz...]

I really love the CTist concept of the "false-flag". They can make any outrageous claim they want, and when it doesn't happen they all slap themselves on the back and take credit for stopping it due their own dilligence for "getting the word out"

Yep. That's the same kind of post hoc reasoning that psychics engage in. Make the prediction, pat yourself on the back when correct, explain away the times when you're not.

[Belz...]

My DVD Collection

You've got a small collection.

[Darth Rotor]

http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/104451

A rational thinker must ask..."how do they know all these things?"

Perhaps the conspiracy theorists are in on it? How else could they predict these events with such detail.
Trial Run - The USS Oriskany reaches for new depths. USS Enterprise not so rusty.

Obviously, if one crosses this story with Max Photon's posts, all one needs to do is fly an aluminum aircraft into a rusty aircraft carrier, the water is there, and the immense, spontaneous creation of hot hot hot thermate will take care of the rest. Scratch one flattop!

They don't need no ASCM's.

Also, in the PG, it's a lot easier to sink/damage a ship using mines, torpedoes, or a combination of both. "Easier to sink a ship by letting water in from the bottom than by letting the air out from the top." :D

If it's gonna be a false flag, a few Mk 48's will do the trick.

DR

[Regnad Kcin]

...How else could they predict these events with such detail.I'd look for a team of people in strange uniforms, one of them muttering, "Keptin, it is a nuclear wessel!"

[Horatius]

This plan will never work.....


http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2759012#post2759012



...unless they use the Nimitz.

[PhantomWolf]

Hmmmmm...

Saturday, September 30, 2006

The Hal Turner Show has been told that within the next five (5) weeks, the United States will "suffer" a missile attack upon the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise

I must have missed them announcing this attack and the war with Iran that followed....

[T.A.M.]

probably the same Russian who gave Warpster Tepley the info on the imminent attack by the USA on Iran some months ago...lol

TAM:)

[JimBenArm]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...

[Devil's Advocate]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...

It's a pretext for war with Iran, Gulf Of Tonkin!!@!!11
/sigh
I'm hungry.

[Alareth]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...

JimBenArm, did you every get into an arguement over the validity of mock damage during a repair training drill? I did in GITMO with some of the instructors once.

They called me up from repair 2 to the Chiefs mess and told me there was 14" hole in the bulkhead and water was coming in at X hundred gallons per minute. I told them that was impossible and unrealistic. It caught them by surprise and they wanted to know what I was talking about.

I told them that the location was 15 feet above the waterline, the only thing that would be pouring through that hole was sunshine. At that point the DC Senior Chief (DC is Damage Controlman for you non Navy types) started laughing and said was right, but just pretend to humor the instructors.

I learned a lot about damage control from that Senior Chief. He took it seriously. He was young Hull Tech on his first tour of duty onboard the Forrestal when she went up in flames.

[procrastinate maybe]

I've lost count on the number of imminent false-flag operations that Truthers claim are about to happen. On DU I remember a load of Truthers getting excited over some sort of false-flag event that was "going to happen on 6 April 2007". I wonder how that turned out.

[CptColumbo]

I've lost count on the number of imminent false-flag operations that Truthers claim are about to happen. On DU I remember a load of Truthers getting excited over some sort of false-flag event that was "going to happen on 6 April 2007". I wonder how that turned out.
The Pentagon Cafeteria ran out of "Freedom Fries." (cue ominous music)

The next will be on August 7th, 2007. When the President will stub his toe on an end table and say it hurt like a "Mother F[rule 8]er." You've been warned.

When the predictions do not come to pass they'll either claim that the prediction prevented it from happening or they'll find some obscure occurance to call a "hit." Does that remind you of another group?

[JimBenArm]

JimBenArm, did you every get into an arguement over the validity of mock damage during a repair training drill? I did in GITMO with some of the instructors once.

They called me up from repair 2 to the Chiefs mess and told me there was 14" hole in the bulkhead and water was coming in at X hundred gallons per minute. I told them that was impossible and unrealistic. It caught them by surprise and they wanted to know what I was talking about.

I told them that the location was 15 feet above the waterline, the only thing that would be pouring through that hole was sunshine. At that point the DC Senior Chief (DC is Damage Controlman for you non Navy types) started laughing and said was right, but just pretend to humor the instructors.

I learned a lot about damage control from that Senior Chief. He took it seriously. He was young Hull Tech on his first tour of duty onboard the Forrestal when she went up in flames.
No, never argued with the drill initiators, 'cause on the boats they were usually the CO, XO or Eng. Or, if it was an ORSE (Operational Reactor Safeguard Exam for the non-Navy ones) it would be someone like a Captain or Commander from Naval Reactors. Generally not too willing to have a give-and-take with you! But they knew submarines, and I can't think of any time they came up with an unrealistic scenario. Sometimes pretty far-fetched, but not unrealistic.
The Forrestal should be an example for those idiots to consider. How long did it take them to get it under control? How many planes went up in flames, how many missiles cooked off? They had fully fueled planes armed to the teeth with missiles when it started. I know it was a massive fire, yet they got it put out, and saved the ship.
Yet, a couple of sub-launched cruise missiles will sink the Enterprise. Uh-huh, you betcha! Freaking morons!

[AZCat]

Yet, a couple of sub-launched cruise missiles will sink the Enterprise. Uh-huh, you betcha! Freaking morons!

Sure they would! You saw what a cruise missile did to the Pentagon. </snark>

[ktesibios]

I couldn't help but notice that that article was dated Sept. 30, 2006. So the big false flag atack is about 7 months over due.

Also, one sentence in it tells you everything you need to know about the claim contained therein:

The Hal Turner Show has been told that within the next five (5) weeks, the United States will "suffer" a missile attack upon the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, presently on patrol near the Persian Gulf.

Just do a little Googling on Hal Turner. If that vile little neo-Nazi told me it was raining, I wouldn't believe it unless I checked it personally.

Is that an ad hom and logically invalid? Perhaps, but I don't give a @#$%. There are sources that have some credibility and there are those that deserve none.

[ConspiRaider]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...
Yeah but CAP'N!!!11one!!11

Didn't you SEE?!? They're using SUNBURN missiles, dude! What if the Enterprise uses SPF-30 for protection that day and the Sunburns are like enHANCED to go after any flattop not using SPF-like-50?!? The friggin' Enterprise is TOAST, see? And toast don't float!

[Rahne Everson]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four.

MK 48 torpedo? Of course not. They used photon torpedos, silly.

[qarnos]

Looks like we're too late...

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/26434695d5f86bd74.jpg

[Ranb]

However TerraHetz is, he or she is not very smart. Sinking a nuclear powered carrier would not contaminate any body of water enough to stop ships from moving across it. The reactor coolant activity level is too low to cause a problem and the fuel is clad in metal strong enough to resist rupture even if the ship is blown apart.

The Enterprise is still fully operational. It has no back-up to power the screws, only the main engines which use stream from the reactor plant can do that.

In 2006, the Michigan was still in overhaul (not refit), not capable of doing the things proposed in the article.

TerraHetz seems to have forgotten that the two US reactors on the bottom of the ocean have not created "dead zones" in the ocean even though they have been on the bottom since 1963 and 1968.

Ranb

[JimBenArm]

However TerraHetz is, he or she is not very smart. Sinking a nuclear powered carrier would not contaminate any body of water enough to stop ships from moving across it. The reactor coolant activity level is too low to cause a problem and the fuel is clad in metal strong enough to resist rupture even if the ship is blown apart.

The Enterprise is still fully operational. It has no back-up to power the screws, only the main engines which use stream from the reactor plant can do that.

In 2006, the Michigan was still in overhaul (not refit), not capable of doing the things proposed in the article.

TerraHetz seems to have forgotten that the two US reactors on the bottom of the ocean have not created "dead zones" in the ocean even though they have been on the bottom since 1963 and 1968.

Ranb
Yep. USS Thresher (SSN593) and USS Scorpion (SSN589).

[JimBenArm]

Yeah but CAP'N!!!11one!!11

Didn't you SEE?!? They're using SUNBURN missiles, dude! What if the Enterprise uses SPF-30 for protection that day and the Sunburns are like enHANCED to go after any flattop not using SPF-like-50?!? The friggin' Enterprise is TOAST, see? And toast don't float!
Hey, buds, where you been, on deployment?

[uk_dave]

And toast don't float!

And Charlie don't surf.

[Corsair 115]

TerraHetz seems to have forgotten that the two US reactors on the bottom of the ocean have not created "dead zones" in the ocean even though they have been on the bottom since 1963 and 1968.There are a couple of Soviet nuclear-powered submarines that went to the bottom as well.

[Mince]

http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/104451

A rational thinker must ask..."how do they know all these things?"


Because IT'S BEEN ADMITTED!!!!!!!!!1!!11!11!!1 IT'S BEEN DOCUMENTED!!!!11!!!!1!1!!!!1! Don't you know the government admits to and documents all of its crimes? (For some inexplicable reason)

[JimBenArm]

Because IT'S BEEN ADMITTED!!!!!!!!!1!!11!11!!1 IT'S BEEN DOCUMENTED!!!!11!!!!1!1!!!!1! Don't you know the government admits to and documents all of its crimes? (For some inexplicable reason)
Ah. Must be true. Lots of exclamation points.

[SOMERLED]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...
What about the Titanic? They had no difficulty with that and they weren't even trying.

[PhantomWolf]

What about the Titanic? They had no difficulty with that and they weren't even trying.

Who's they and do you realise the slight difference in size between the Enterprise and the Titanic?

[Regnad Kcin]

What about the Titanic? They had no difficulty with that and they weren't even trying.Yerp, one Titanic is ezatlee the same as a Enterprise ship! Okee-doker.

[Corsair 115]

Who's they and do you realise the slight difference in size between the Enterprise and the Titanic?Maybe malcolm is confused and is thinking of the CV-6 Enterprise and not the CVN-65 Enterprise.

[DarkMagician]

Maybe malcolm is confused and is thinking of the CV-6 Enterprise and not the CVN-65 Enterprise.

Better than me thinking of the Starship Enterprise every time.

[The Great Hairy One]

Surely it would be done by one of these:

http://www.randyasplund.com/asplund/modelcov/kbop.jpg

(Stupid image won't paste as an image...)

Cheers,
TGHO

[JimBenArm]

What about the Titanic? They had no difficulty with that and they weren't even trying.
Yes, and we learned nothing about shipbuilding or damage control from 1918 to 1961. We still build them exactly the same way. Of course, Malcolm. Yep, right down to the rivetted hull plates.
Is there anything you can actually get correct, or is being wrong a way of life for you?

[MG1962]

Yes, and we learned nothing about shipbuilding or damage control from 1918 to 1961. We still build them exactly the same way. Of course, Malcolm. Yep, right down to the rivetted hull plates.


Okay so now you are claiming the Titanic was a Nuklea Vessel ;)

[Gurdur]

I see no-one stated the obvious, about how a false-flag op could take out the Enterprise easily.

All you need to do is raise the false flag over the Enterprise (having dumped the real one first). Bob's your uncle and it's all over bar the shouting.

[JimBenArm]

Okay so now you are claiming the Titanic was a Nuklea Vessel ;)
Yep. Shovelling coal was just for show.

[Darth Rotor]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...

In the exercises I recall, the arguments went on and on about how many Mk 48's it would take to sink a carrier (the whole "break it's keel" scenario) with the usual discussions about anti-torpedo maneuvers, etc. I always took the position that after the first hit, and expected casualty to ship speed and maneuverability, the sub had to re-attack in a short time window before the dippers sank the sub, but the reattack would be what sank the CV.

As to ASCM"s from, for example, Charlie II SSGN's, I think the conventional wisdom was that, with non nuke warheads, it would take from six to eight hits with those enormous missiles to sink the CV, and few less for "a mission kill."

Not sure what the same number is on Sunburn, but the warhead is smaller.

No matter the missile, given the IAD methodology of current Navy AAW doctrine, you'd need a significantly large salvo launch, tightly timed, to get through the AAW zones, partly in thanks to CEC and of course the Aegis/Spy 1D, not to mention the increases in processing power that makes multi track ingagements relatively simple (as compared to when Aegis was first fielded. )

DR

[MG1962]

In the exercises I recall, the arguments went on and on about how many Mk 48's it would take to sink a carrier (the whole "break it's keel" scenario) with the usual discussions about anti-torpedo maneuvers, etc. I always took the position that after the first hit, and expected casualty to ship speed and maneuverability, the sub had to re-attack in a short time window before the dippers sank the sub, but the reattack would be what sank the CV.

As to ASCM"s from, for example, Charlie II SSGN's, I think the conventional wisdom was that, with non nuke warheads, it would take from six to eight hits with those enormous missiles to sink the CV, and few less for "a mission kill."

Not sure what the same number is on Sunburn, but the warhead is smaller.

No matter the missile, given the IAD methodology f current Navy AAW doctrine, you'd need a significantly large salvo launch to get through the AAW zones, partly in thanks to CEC and of course the Aegis/Spy 1D, not to mention the increases in processing power that makes multi track ingagements relatively simple (as compared to when Aegis was first fielded. )


Yeah!!!! What he said.... I think

[Darth Rotor]

Yeah!!!! What he said.... I think
I guess I was rambling, a bit.

*cue Allman Brothers Band, Ramblin' Man.*

Okay so now you are claiming the Titanic was a Nuklea Vessel
That's nukular, sir. The President said so. :p

DR

[HawksFan]

Do they have any idea how hard it is to sink a ship the size of the Enterprise? A Mk 48 torpedo might get lucky, and do it, but I think it would take more than one to sink it. Maybe even three or four. Missiles? Maybe cruise missiles, but even then probably not. They would do damage to the superstructure, and the hull above the waterline, but sink it? I seriously doubt it. When they sank the Oriskany, it took months of prep, cutting holes, running det cord, setting charges. Plus, there wasn't a crew on board closing watertight hatches and doing damage control. Damage control teams are highly trained and skilled at their jobs, and it isn't an easy thing to sink any ship, let alone a floating city!
Twoofers and their fantasies...

[ct mode] Ok, hotshot, you might have acutally servered on subs, or whatever, but MY expertise from my years of playing Silent Hunter II proves that the first thing that the NWO scum would do is turn off realistic sinking times and then *POW*....three shot spred and down she goes like a rock.

Yeah...debunk THAT!!!!1111111!!!!!! [/ct mode]

:D

[JimBenArm]

[ct mode] Ok, hotshot, you might have acutally servered on subs, or whatever, but MY expertise from my years of playing Silent Hunter II proves that the first thing that the NWO scum would do is turn off realistic sinking times and then *POW*....three shot spred and down she goes like a rock.

Yeah...debunk THAT!!!!1111111!!!!!! [/ct mode]

:D
:mgduh OMFGBBQ!!!111!!!! You're right! I forgot about that! Say 'bye to the Enterprise!

[fezzic]

What about the Titanic? They had no difficulty with that and they weren't even trying.


The Titanic suffered a significant amount of hull damage in the collision. How does the amount of hull damage equate to numbers of torpedos?

One, two, more?

Do enough damage to any ship and it will sink inspite of the best efforts of its crew in damage control. All you need is to achieve a bit of negative bouyancy.

Since the Enterprise, as a warship and a high-value one at that, would be expected to be a priority target, the ship's design would try to maximize its capacity to survive battle damage consistent with being able to do its mission. That is not to say that it would be impossible to score a hit in just the right spot that would doom the ship, just that the design would try to minimize that possibility.

[SOMERLED]

Yerp, one Titanic is ezatlee the same as a Enterprise ship! Okee-doker.
okee - dokee

[peteweaver]

The enterprise to be sunk in a false flag?

It better not be, I'd have to find a new avatar !

[MG1962]

I guess I was rambling, a bit.

*cue Allman Brothers Band, Ramblin' Man.*


That's nukular, sir. The President said so. :p

DR


LOL - what an abject failure I am - I was shooting for a Checkov reference from Star Trek - need to rework the routine I fear ;)

[ConspiRaider]

Yes, and we learned nothing about shipbuilding or damage control from 1918 to 1961. We still build them exactly the same way. Of course, Malcolm. Yep, right down to the rivetted hull plates.
Is there anything you can actually get correct, or is being wrong a way of life for you?
All I knows, Cap'n, is that the snot-nosed little bastards SANK MY SHIP about two years ago!!!!! My bunk is sitting on the bottom of the Atlantic rusting into oblivion, probably with my Betty Grable pictures still taped to the side! Oh wait. I served on USS America (CV-66) in the late 70s, so I guess those would have been Farah Fawcett pics.

http://www.ussamerica.org/

And I'll betcha, Cap'n, that it was a bunch of sniveling officers who made this cockamamie decision to off the America. Holy friggin' Toledo. Don't get me started on military officers...

[JimBenArm]

All I knows, Cap'n, is that the snot-nosed little bastards SANK MY SHIP about two years ago!!!!! My bunk is sitting on the bottom of the Atlantic rusting into oblivion, probably with my Betty Grable pictures still taped to the side! Oh wait. I served on USS America (CV-66) in the late 70s, so I guess those would have been Farah Fawcett pics.

http://www.ussamerica.org/

And I'll betcha, Cap'n, that it was a bunch of sniveling officers who made this cockamamie decision to off the America. Holy friggin' Toledo. Don't get me started on military officers...
Yeah, the same ones that decided all my dear old boats would be better used as Bic Shavers! Even the George Washington!
At least they made the GW's sail into a memorial, but every time I cut my whiskers, I die a bit inside...

[ConspiRaider]

Yeah, the same ones that decided all my dear old boats would be better used as Bic Shavers! Even the George Washington!
At least they made the GW's sail into a memorial, but every time I cut my whiskers, I die a bit inside...
Abso-bloomin-lutely un-friggin-believable.
You CAN'T go around sinking a boat named George Washington!!!!111one!!1

At least they should have renamed the GW the GWB and THEN sunk the living hell out of her/him! That would have been very satisfactory.

I'll never drag my Gilette Turbo Mach 3 across my comical face again without feeling as if my eardrums are gonna implode from an emergency dive...

[jhunter1163]

Chekov: Keptin, there is a nukle-eer wessel off our port bow.

Kirk: Spock, sensor report.

Spock: One damn minute, Admiral.

Kirk: And Chekov, I'm an admiral now. I got promoted before the first movie.

Chekov: Sorry, sir.

Spock: (snickers to himself)

[Devil's Advocate]

LOL - what an abject failure I am - I was shooting for a Checkov reference from Star Trek - need to rework the routine I fear ;)

You just need a W instead of a V in Vessel and you're golden.
:)

[parky76]

Remember this? What happened? Did we get cold feet?

[Drudgewire]

What about the Titanic? They had no difficulty with that and they weren't even trying.
Who are they? A cabal of shadowy international ice miners?

[parky76]

first, make your own false flag. then i will comment further...=)

[Alareth]

Remember this? What happened? Did we get cold feet?


Obviously the NWO high command had to cancel it because the vigilant posters on teh Intarwebz revealed their cunning plan to the world.

[parky76]

Not so. We have a even bigger false flag planned!!!

Ever wonder what would happen if the Moon crashed into the Earth?

Well, you're gonna find out!!!!

[NYCEMT86]

Not so. We have a even bigger false flag planned!!!

Ever wonder what would happen if the Moon crashed into the Earth?

Well, you're gonna find out!!!!


But doesn't that mean we have to actually go to the moon now? :D



oh yeah....I CALL SHOTGUN!

[Horatius]

Obviously the NWO high command had to cancel it because the vigilant posters on teh Intarwebz revealed their cunning plan to the world.


No! It was the Trekies! I've even got video evidence:

http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/horatius/strip/2007/07/11/they-dont-know-who-theyre-messing-with.png


In case anyone missed it:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=87005