News Ticker

What Was the Middle East Oil Tanker Vandalism All About?

Damaged Norwegian ship Andrea Victory is seen off the Port of Fujairah, United Arab Emirates, May 13, 2019. PHOTO: Reuters/Satish Kumar

The alleged attack on four oil tankers in the Middle East is a squirrely story. The Wall Street Journal reported late on Monday that, according to an initial U.S. assessment, “Iran was likely behind the attack” on two Saudi Arabian oil tankers and two other vessels damaged over the weekend near the Strait of Hormuz.

The U.S. official, who declined to be identified, didn’t offer details about what led to the assessment or its implications for a possible U.S. response. Typical. Then we have the standard Trump fare.

Donald Trump has reportedly been presented with a plan to send as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East to counter the so-called Iranian threat, The New York Times (aka NY Slimes) reports.

Naturally, Trump, in a wash-rinse-repeat manner, called this fake news. He said there’s currently no plans to send troops; but, if he did, it would be far more than 120,000.

Reports indicate “significant damage to the structures of the two vessels” — identified by shipping monitors as the Amjad and crude tanker Al Marzoqah. Other tankers were also reported damaged in the UAE’s Fujairan port.

But, if this was real sabotage, why attack empty oil tankers? And what a hokey looking fire, mostly on the water.

A reporter covering the tanker story went out on the water and pulled alongside one of the vessels. There was no apparent damage.

According to Michael Frodl, a Washington, D.C.-based maritime security and intelligence consultant who runs C-Level Maritime Risks, military-level training and precision was needed to attack four ships at once. He said a limpet mine may have been used on the vessels, or a remote-controlled underwater drone.

But, if it was commando-level skills needed to carry this out, why didn’t they do any real harm? In what cartoon world does a ship (Andre Victoria) stay floating out at sea with a gaping hole well below the water line? Just enough damage for show. Then we learn from ship manager Thome Ship Management that this Aft peak tanker location is empty or used to carry water, so is contained. Did the three stooges carry out this “sabotage”?

Arguably, whoever did this was making a gesture, not inflicting real harm. If the Iranians did it, it was like the scene in the Godfather where the director they wanted to intimidate wakes up with the horse head in his bed. See what we can potentially do, see how sleuth-like we are. This actually might make some sense as part of Iran’s forward defense tactics.

Update: Russ’ Takeaway:  I am really leaning towards this being an Iranian operation, and quite brilliant at that. It was conducted in two dispersed locations. It demonstrated Iran’s “forward defense” to the emirates and Saudi Arabia and the ability to appear out of nowhere to leave horse’s heads. The action was more like a ghost like “Kilroy was here” message or tap on the shoulder than sabotage. It should give the Saudis and their Emirate allies serious pause for reflection that they will pay a heavy price. The western media fumbled around coming up a narrative to explain it.

Of note, there are a half million Iranians in UAE and only about one million actual Emiratis. This poses a major 5th column issue for UAE.

Later, the U.S. stated that their best theory was that it was Iranian proxies — either the Houthis or Iraqi Shiites. But do those parties have underwater commando units in this region? The Houthis are at war with Saudi Arabia, with no love lost. They would have destroyed the Saudi tankers and left the neutral tanker alone — not left a horse’s head.

WASHINGTON, May 14 (Reuters) – U.S. national security agencies now believe proxies sympathetic to or working for Iran may have attacked four tankers off the United Arab Emirates rather than Iranian forces themselves, a U.S. official familiar with the latest U.S. assessments said on Tuesday.

The official said possible perpetrators might include Houthi rebels in Yemen and Iran-backed Shi’ite militias based in Iraq but said Washington did not have hard evidence on who sabotaged the four vessels,

The final theory is that this was false-flag light, an implied threat to Iran that more severe false flags can be carried out.

Another consideration would be Iran’s reaction to a full U.S. mobilization in the region. With a full-on sanction — 120,000 plus troops, the Abraham Lincoln Carrier group, four B-52 bombers, F-15C Eagle and F-35A Lightning II strike aircraft and USS Arlington, an amphibious transport dock full of MIM-104 Patriot surface-to-air missile systems headed to the scene — would the War Party in Iran be tempted to score a Pearl Harbor pre-emptive raid before they arrive? In this raid, real destruction would take place probably all over Saudi Arabia. Certain parties would love that.

Meanwhile, news appears to be developing involving another “attack” on Saudi oil. Saudi officials claim a pipeline and pumping station were attacked by drones on Tuesday near Rihadh, Reuters TV reports.

6 Comments on What Was the Middle East Oil Tanker Vandalism All About?

  1. I think Jim Stone has the best perspective on this “incident”.

    The U.S. / Israel is HELL BENT on war with Iran. NEW ATTACK TODAY
    Ok, so with the precedent that has been set, there might not have actually been an attack, the ziopress can bring fiction to life by spewing a lie and sticking to it. Here is the new line:
    Drones carrying explosives damaged two oil pumping stations in Saudi Arabia. And Iran has a very good drone program. People can laugh all they want after the propaganda spew, but it is a fact that Iran is not a backwards country.

    So obviously, what is going on with this is that to get a plausible story out there, an attack, which only Iran, Israel, the United States, and (maybe) the Sauds could have pulled off. There’s not much else out there with drone programs that good.

    So let’s plug this into the thinktabulator
    What happened in the UAE early Sunday morning CST? A MASSIVE 911 scale terror attack was reported in the Arab press (including Iran). This attack had 10 oil tankers ablaze in a UAE owned port with “American and French” planes being the cause. That’s BIG. But it did not happen. But it was REPORTED EVERYWHERE, far too many news outlets had this story “as it was happening” for it to have been a mistake. Only, the attack did not happen. Obviously then, there was a plan to do this and someone released the story line to the press, fully scripted, as if it happened and it could therefore not happen FIVE HOURS LATER – it was supposed to happen at 8:30 AM CST and someone spilled the beans on it right around 3 AM CST. That’s a GREAT way to kill a false flag, ONLY NO.
    Drooling over an opportunity to blow Iran away, Israeli puppet state Saudi Arabia reported that 4 of it’s tankers were attacked by Iran, with a large hole blown through the hull of each one. Only, they did not catch fire, the vapors did not explode (if they were empty) and there’s no pictures and no casualties. THINKTABULATOR SAYS: TODAY’S ATTACKS ON SAUDI ARABIA ARE A HOAX, YOU CAN’T JUST SPEW LIKE THIS AFTER A MAJOR FALSE FLAG WAS BLOWN TO THE WILD BLUE YONDER EVEN IF YOU CLAIM YOU WERE ATTACKED AFTER IT WAS BLOWN TO THE WILD BLUE YONDER.

    Israel would not be stupid enough to do this after having the lid blown off a plan the way it was with the “10 oil tankers ablaze”, but the Sauds? Believe me, they are not very bright and are underachievers on top of it. I lay this “drone attack” that likely did not happen at all squarely on Saudi Arabia. The first one that got busted before it happened was no doubt Israel and the U.S., and after that failed the Sauds could not cope so they started spewing “multiple attack by Iran” BULLSHIT.

    http://82.221.129.208/.wl4.html

    • Jim Stone update: “Iran has stated the “attacks” against Sauds were false flags
      And NEW DEVELOPMENT: Yesterday they were blaming “scuba divers” or “a rogue Iranian ship” that attacked the Saudi tankers, but there’s a problem with both stories: Scuba divers need support and any Iranian ship would have been on video or at least identified. So for the attacks on Saudi ships they have settled on the story line “drones” that vanished like a UFO (they would be hard to get on video) so a Saudi think tank at least got up to American 8th grade level and said “Drones it is”.
      With Iran clearly and prominently stating all the attacks are false flags, the element of surprise is gone now and the precedent is set. Also, if the Iranian people know they were framed, they’ll fight a lot harder now. SO, if you are going to do your false flag, be careful with who you trust with the script or it might get blown open before it happens.”

      • I am really leaning towards this being an Iranian operation, and quite brilliant at that. It demonstrates to the emirates and Saudi Arabia Iran’s “forward defense” and ability to appear out of nowhere. The action was more like a ghost like Kilroy was here message or tap on the shoulder than sabotage. It should give the Saudis and their emirate allies serious pause for reflection that they will pay a heavy price. The western media fumbled around coming up a narrative to explain it.

  2. Another possibility, set out in contributor articles on Henry Makow’s site, is that the Iranian regime is co-staging conflict in closet collaboration with Israel and the Western powers

    Look at how the new Iranian Parliament building is a Masonic pyramid, weird like the Rothschild-funded also-Masonic new Israeli Supreme Court building

    Going back to the start of the Iranian Islamic revolution, Khomeini was arguably a figure groomed by Western UK-US intel and the usual suspects … Aangirfan has material on the spooky Khomeini on her site … who was he really? A prop like al-Baghdadi?

    Going back half a century ago, Antony Sutton proved the US – Soviet ‘Cold War’ was fake, with the US transferring tech to Moscow, often via Israel … Can we trust any of the ‘rivalries’ today being real, even tho there might indeed be much war and death in the offing? – Big conflict, and even humiliation and downfall of the USA, are standard scenarios to prelude the NWO

    Iran was a curious social experiment given how it enshrined the Shia ‘temporary marriage’ for the weekend etc, essentially normalising prostitution (‘wedding gift’) with a religious cover … combined with contraception and educating women, Iran’s birth rate imploded, and Iran will be saddled more than most with many elderly and few young, unless it kills millions off in a war

    Iran has a quite awful government with its hundreds annually of slow-torture short-rope hangings, floggings, amputations, burying women alive up to their necks and stoning them … makes it difficult to be sympathetic to their regime, tho obviously they are targeted with a lot of nonsense … how many Iranians realise ‘nuclear weapons’ may not be real at all?

    • Very informative and I’m inclined to agree with your perspective. I’m pretty much always convinced that any event involving damage or supposed death, that gets sudden and hyped media attention, has most likely been perpetrated by the “victims”. There’s no good explanation for an assault on empty freighters. The video footage reveals a lame fire. Mossad is often behind many false flags and there’s a lot of energy behind endless reports now of Iranian military transgressions. This won’t be the last.

      I did NOT know about their weekend wedding law, or their aging population issues. Most countries are aware that either medical sabotage (vaccines, drugs) or military conflict is the quickest way to balance out a population and most world leaders are sufficiently sociopathic enough to implement those solutions when necessary. Collusion among countries towards those ends cannot be ruled out either. Iran is a strange place, its government is capable of anything.

      And we mustn’t forget all the Satanic bloodbath sacrifices required to appease whatever entities thrive on them. Perhaps Yemen has lost its allure and it’s time for a new one.

    • Another reason the West hate Iran is that it has an Islamic banking system and central bank. Islamic banking does not allow interest to be charged on loans just a set fee for the transactions instead of compound interest. The Rothschilds MUST bring Iran down as it is a threat to it`s world financial dominance. Is it anti semitic to point this out ?

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this:
Secured By miniOrange