Streetwise Professor

January 4, 2012

сюрприз, сюрприз, сюрприз

Filed under: Military,Politics,Russia — The Professor @ 9:42 am

That would be Gomer Pyle, in Russian.  The (ironic) surprise is that the initial official Russian account of the fire on the Yekaterinburg was bunk.

Those accounts claimed that the rubber coating of the hull (intended to reduce the sub’s noise profile) burned, and that the hull was not breached.  The maintenance of hull integrity supposedly meant that the partial submerging of the sub did no damage internally.  The account also put the blame for the fire on welding igniting wood scaffolding.

But these fascinating photos, uhm, poke a big hole in that story.  And by “hole” I mean that literally as well as figuratively: there was already a large opening in the hull, in the torpedo room (forward).  The flames are clearly coming from inside the torpedo room.  There is no evidence of fire on the exterior of the hull.  The scaffolding actually looks metal (though from the photos it appears that the decking might have been wood).  The scaffolding on the starboard side is intact. The scaffolding on the port side near the opening does not appear to be on fire, and anyways the flames are shooting from the ship towards the scaffolding, not the other way around.  Given the location and size of the hole, it is clear that the sub took on water when it was partially sunk to the depth illustrated in the photos.

In other words, every statement made about the fire was a complete crock.

Again: surprise, surprise, surprise.  Or, if you like, сюрприз, сюрприз,сюрприз.

So, ’tis a mystery what was being done in the forward torpedo room (presumably some major modification) and how the fire started there. What’s not a mystery is that the first impulse of Russian officialdom–especially military officialdom–is to lie, lie, lie.

But there is a huge disconnect between the old habit of reflexive lying and the new world in which bloggers can routinely approach nuclear subs in drydock, snap pictures, and post them on the internet.

So what will happen going forward? 1. Will officialdom continue in its dinosaur ways, and lie reflexively despite the fact that its lies can be disproved by somebody with a digital camera (or a phone) and an internet connection?  2. Or will officialdom recognize that the old ways don’t work anymore, and resist the Pavlovian instinct to lie in the face of disaster? 3.  Or will officialdom redouble its commitment to cracking down on the messengers who reveal officialdom’s lies.

I’m putting on a butterfly trade.  I’m shorting 2, and buying 1 and 3.  The torpor of some officials favors 1.  The repressive instincts of others 3.

Further thoughts: The fact that there was an internal fire gives the lie to the claim that the reactors were never in any danger.  Moreover, the fact that there was a fire inside the pressure hull means that the estimate that the ship would be repaired within a year are likely wildly optimistic.  Depending on how quickly the watertight doors were closed, there could be substantial smoke damage in the after compartments.  The heat of such an intense fire could cause major damage to the structural integrity of the ship: would you want to take her deep after parts of the pressure hull and structural frames of the boat had been subjected to intense heat?  Heat and smoke also probably wreaked havoc with wiring and electrical systems on the boat.

And insofar as the hole is concerned, another hypothesis: the Yekaterinburg had been in a collision that had caused major damage that was being repaired.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

40 Comments »

  1. Please #2 is a call on hope, #1,3 are puts on Russia remaining the same. One weird butterfly!

    Comment by Sotos — January 4, 2012 @ 9:57 am

  2. @Sotos–I was thinking a fixed income butterfly, not an options butterfly.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — January 4, 2012 @ 10:31 am

  3. Thankfully, there will be an investigation, so we will soon know the answers to our questions about this incident.

    Comment by Charles — January 4, 2012 @ 12:39 pm

  4. Wooden boards on steel scaffolding is fine, even in oil and gas sites, provided the boards have been treated with a fire-retardent chemical. They’re more versatile than steel boards, and nicer to work on. On a non-hydrocarbon site like a dry dock, even treating the boards wouldn’t be required, common sense and decent, inspected equipment is enough to prevent fires in such circumstances.

    Comment by Tim Newman — January 4, 2012 @ 12:45 pm

  5. My bad – time I spent more time studying the physical/moral hazard curve!

    Comment by Sotos — January 4, 2012 @ 6:53 pm

  6. Wooden boards are generally not used in locations where fire may be a hazard, such as when welding, at least not in most of the places I have worked.

    Comment by Andrew — January 5, 2012 @ 3:13 am

  7. Speaking of the Russian army, Russia’s brutal demographic crisis has left the country utterly defenseless, by its own admission:

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20111117/168776056.html

    Nice work, Mr. Putin!

    Comment by La Russophobe — January 5, 2012 @ 4:09 am

  8. http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/why-2012-is-starting-to-look-like-1984/

    The Obama administration says it does not intend to exercise these powers. Even if that’s true, now that they’re law the only way they can be undone is with additional legislation that repeals the provisions, or through a court challenge, which would almost certainly ensure if the powers were ever utilized. But just because the Obama administration says it won’t use the powers doesn’t mean future administrations won’t. And let’s not forget that, at least in the case of Anwar al-Awlaki, the Obama administration concluded it has the power to assassinate U.S. citizens without trail. (The American-born al-Awlaki was killed in Yemen by a targeted U.S. drone strike in September 2011.)

    The bottom line here is that it doesn’t matter whether the U.S. government ever exercises the powers granted under this year’s NDAA: the very fact they exist suppresses American civil liberties by explicitly authorizing the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without trial, anywhere in the world. For folks who hold unpopular views, or merely know people who do, that’s a sobering thing to consider.

    And vorobey will be cheering Big Sis on while the FEMA camps are stocked.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 5, 2012 @ 4:01 pm

  9. One Thing is Quite Certain – Russian conscripts do not want to kill Americans , unlike Mr X and Anwar al-Awlaki,

    http://www.theotherrussia.org/tag/conscription/

    Comment by Anders — January 5, 2012 @ 4:53 pm

  10. Anders, you aren’t even an American, or you’re an un-American sorry excuse for one of my countrymen trolling while pretending to be a stupid foreigner. You are a provocateur plain and simple, and I hope to hell you’re not a paid one at that. So when you put me in the same sentence as a guy who got killed by drone, who is the person suggesting or hinting at violence or liquidating people for political speech? That’s you, fascist troll.

    And one last thing Professor — soldiers praising President Bush or Obama in uniform never had their satellite feeds interrupted. But Paul? Zap! They took him out faster than Shep Smith shushed that Ossetian little girl after 08/08/08.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 5, 2012 @ 8:35 pm

  11. LOL-lol – The KGBs unuseful idiot Mr X . Pravda , Russia Today ,Anwar al-Awlaki and Mr X same fascist idiologi – MR x and Kremlin Sorry to See Kim Jong Il Go – Havel, Not So Much

    http://www.theotherrussia.org/2011/12/19/kremlin-sorry-to-see-kim-jong-il-go-havel-not-so-much/

    Comment by Anders — January 5, 2012 @ 9:15 pm

  12. Mr X -Putins unuseful facist -toll –

    Havel has described the current Russian regime as the harshest of all known forms of post-communist political systems, calling it a “specific combination of old stereo types and a new business-mafia environment.” He views the current developments in Russia as resembling more the events in the communist bloc in 1989–1990, than the Arab Spring, and says the most important thing now is to convince Russia’s citizens that the current regime, which presents itself as democratic, is in fact not democratic at all.

    http://fortnightlyreview.co.uk/2011/12/havel-on-russia/

    Comment by Anders — January 5, 2012 @ 9:20 pm

  13. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/2590282166_2ccf7360c4.jpg

    Don’t Feed the Troll

    Comment by Mr. X — January 5, 2012 @ 9:31 pm

  14. Don’t Feed -Putins unuseful LEFT -facist -toll -Mr X

    Russian military production procedures there is a big problem. Russia’s “view” also analysis, in recent years, the Russian armed forces and military industry accident-prone, often can cause very serious damage, many of these incidents because of safety criteria were as unheeded. The newspaper cited a number of similar incidents, many of them, “a cigarette ignited the whole arsenal” This may sound absurd but shocking enough to the situation

    http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/71507

    Nerpa 2008 accident

    On 27 October 2008, it was reported that K-152 Nerpa of the Russian Pacific Fleet had begun her sea trials in the Sea of Japan before handover under a lease agreement to the Indian Navy.[11] On 8 November 2008, while conducting one of these trials, an accidental activation of the freon-based fire-extinguishing system took place in the fore section of the vessel. Within seconds the freon gas had displaced all breathable air from the compartment. As a result, 20 people (17 civilians and 3 seamen )
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akula_class_submarine#Nerpa_2008_accident

    Comment by Anders — January 6, 2012 @ 12:31 am

  15. Actually M.X, HRW disproved all the Russian & Ossetian allegations of deliberate targeting of civilians by Georgian troops, including the stories of Georgians “burning down churches” (especially as the Churches in South Ossetia are Georgian and built of stone….) or firing upon refugees cars with tanks. The cars were filled with Ossetian militia, and therefore a legitimate target.
    The Georgians crime was to use Grad rocket launchers to attack what were legitimate targets, those targets were in a built up area.
    However, it is interesting to note that morons such as yourself fail to condemn the Russians for using area effect weapons such as Grads in their 3 day bombardment of Tshkinvali (the Russians did the vast majority of damage to the city) or their indiscriminate use of cluster bombs on Georgian civilian targets.

    If you care to read their report, and those of Memorial, you will find that:

    1. The Georgians actually behaved very well towards civilians.
    2. The Russians and Ossetian militia behaved terribly towards civilians.
    3. The Russian and Ossetian lies about Georgian actions were intended to incite hatred, and to facilitate a pre-planned campaign of ethnic cleansing of Georgians, and pro Georgian Ossetians, from the province.

    Comment by Andrew — January 6, 2012 @ 1:36 am

  16. One of Mr. Havel’s great worries was lack of American engagement. He complained frequently in public and private about the Obama Administration’s diminishing interest in Europe. He was nervous about the reset in relations with Russia, and bemoaned the clumsy sacrifice of allies’ goodwill on missile defense. Like his pre-war predecessor Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, he knew that Central Europe was especially vulnerable to machinations by the neighbors. But whereas Masaryk had trusted in the League of Nations, Mr. Havel’s faith lay in the institutions of the EU and particularly of NATO. It would be a fitting tribute to his towering contribution to the Atlantic alliance if the Chicago NATO Summit next year marked a renaissance of, not a retreat from, the ideals Václav Havel espoused.

    http://www.cepa.org/ced/view.aspx?record_id=328

    Comment by Anders — January 6, 2012 @ 8:09 am

  17. In the Russian workplace (I am not speaking in regards to international news) when something like this happens everyone knows that verbal reports are complete BS. It takes a written signed report to get closer to the truth.

    Come to think of it there is a lot of that going around these days in US coporations.

    Comment by pahoben — January 6, 2012 @ 9:17 am

  18. @Andrew–re Grads, don’t forget that the Georgians might have learned a trick from the Russians, who used Grads indiscriminately in their assaults on Grozny. Note the second paragraph: “Many civilians killed.”

    I’m reading a book titled The Russian Origins of the First World War, in which the following sentence appears, and would fit in this discussion quite well: “It took a certain chutzpah to claim, after the Sarajevo outrage, that Russia was the real victim of Terrorism. Sazonov [the Russian Foreign Minister in 1914] was clearly up to the challenge.” [The context here is that if the Austrians had a right to invade Serbia to retaliate for the assassination of Grand Duke Ferdinand, Russia had a right to invade Sweden or Switzerland because of all the anti-Czarist elements holed up there.]

    @Anders–re missile defense, I’m sure you’ll be thrilled to learn that in defiance of Congress, Obama is going to share technical details of the SM-3 AMD system with the Russians, to convince them that they cannot be used against Russian ICBMs. Farcical.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — January 6, 2012 @ 9:56 am

  19. I’m reading a book titled The Russian Origins of the First World War

    Give it a few more years, and they’ll be writing – and you’ll no doubt be reading – books such as The Russian Origins of the War of the Roses.

    Comment by Sublime Oblivion — January 6, 2012 @ 12:33 pm

  20. Damn, the Professor must have missed Grif Nach Der Weltmacht by Fritz Fischer published in the late 1960s, since it’s out of print. Niall Ferguson missed it too. Nope, no Second Reich goals in 1917 remarkably similar to Generalplan Ost twenty four years later, minus the genocidal element. Move on folks.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 6, 2012 @ 5:33 pm

  21. No, I didn’t miss Fischer’s book. I read it about 25 years ago. This book is a rebuttal to that , FYI. Further FYI, the Fischer hypothesis has been subject to substantial criticism in recent years. Maybe you should read this book before opening your yap. And by the way, out of curiosity: have you read Fischer?

    S/O. No doubt you’re wrong. Again: why don’t you read the book before sharing your opinion about it with the world? Just a suggestion.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — January 6, 2012 @ 5:41 pm

  22. By the way, I’m not completely sold on the conclusions of Russian Origins. I’ve just completed the chapter on the July crisis. It does present some interesting evidence to the effect that Russia was actually the first mover and thereby caused the crisis to metastasize from a local conflict involving Austria-Hungary and Serbia into a world war: specifically, Russia preemptively but secretly mobilized (after consulting with France), and that Germany became aware of this, triggering its mobilization. Much of the evidence is circumstantial–in large part because the Russian and French diplomatic records from the crucial days are missing. Given the nature of the evidence, the case is plausible and suggestive, but not overwhelming.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — January 6, 2012 @ 5:47 pm

  23. And you might be surprised, Mr. X, but libraries have out of print books. Also, there are 3 copies of Germany’s Aims in the First World War on eBay. And it’s not really out of print: the paperback is available on Amazon.

    That took me all of 30 seconds.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — January 6, 2012 @ 6:18 pm

  24. Mr x HAVE NO TIME FOR reading books , he is in FSBs propaganda apparatus .

    Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
    Those who do not remember their past are condemned to repeat their mistakes.
    Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it.
    Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them.
    Those who do not know history’s mistakes are doomed to repeat them.

    Comment by Anders — January 6, 2012 @ 7:34 pm

  25. Well my five second Google search to find all the references on Zerohedge to the Russian protests you said didn’t exist beats your thirty seconds of Googling re: FF. Grif Nach Der Weltmacht (I like the German title better). And Fritz Fischer’s masterpiece was out of print 10 years ago when I read it fiftee years after SWP, but I did find a copy at a library.

    “HRW disproved all the Russian & Ossetian allegations of deliberate targeting of civilians by Georgian troops” How the hell would they have done that Andrew, by peering into the magical past-revealing Palantir George Soros gave them when he bequeathed the funds for HRW?

    And since the original topic of this thread was the troops, how do you SWP and pahoben drip more condescension on the troops backing Ron Paul? It’s reported today on mainstream wire services that he’s now raised SEVEN TIMES MORE FROM ACTIVE DUTY U.S. MILITARY than Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney combined through the last quarter of 2011 (Center for Responsive Politics).

    And no, given the average age of career military, I don’t think you two can pretend those are all idealistic eighteen year old kids who just don’t want to go fight in Af-crapistan and would’ve voted for Obama four years ago. You’re all going to have to do better than that to dump a big heaping load of crappy smug on the jobless and underemployed youth of America.

    Status Quo-Forever Propaganda Staffel needs a new talking point to discredit Paul, or at least until SOPA starts letting Uncle Sam shut sites down for ‘copyright infringement’ with the burden of proof all on the sites themselves never on the accusers. Maybe they can just ask Alan Dershowtz to write more articles for the Jerusalem Post calling Paul anti-Semite because he hasn’t scoured the Internet to identify every single white supremacist (or more likely, plant, since Rand Paul’s opponent dressed up some operatives to look like KKK rednecks who backed Rand on a street corner) who may have ever said anything good about him.

    While we’re at it, why don’t I write a column about how SWP’s a fascist because he never condemned vorobey for urging people to be sent to concentration camps?

    Comment by Mr. X — January 6, 2012 @ 9:56 pm

  26. SWP — fair enough, I’ll check out the book if you follow up on your promise to read other opinions contrary to your initial one on NDAA, including from Yale constitutional law scholar and Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes.

    I’d rather have you hating Russia but outspoken about our own country’s turn towards authoritarianism than loving the Kremlins and saying nothing about Big Sis save for the occasional weak sop about security theater at airports. It’s waaaaaaaay bigger and past that now.

    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/01/06/paul_campaign_pulls_in_cash_from_military_donors/

    Here ya go. Anders, do you still think you know better what America needs than her own soldiers, sailors and airmen? Once again, what did Russia ever do to Norway, besides having its sailors get very drunk with yours during the Cold War? Moscow may have given the world the $90 bowl of rice with a teesny cup of miso and tea on Tverskaya, but Oslo gave the world the $30 cheeseburger. And if it weren’t for Muscovites of Medvedev’s generation Aha! wouldn’t have any sellouts any more.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 6, 2012 @ 10:03 pm

  27. Russia preemptively but secretly mobilized

    It’s a long time since I reviewed WW1, but I thought it is common knowledge that Russia began an open but partial mobilization in response to A-H’s pressure against Serbia.

    This partial mobilization was far too small-scale to present a threat to Germany or even A-H. It was a signal of resolve. But for all that Russia tried very hard to encourage Serbia to reach a compromise with A-H.

    A-H, in contrast, presented Serbia with a ridiculous ultimatum on a short deadline. The Russian inquiry to see Austrian evidence of Serbia’s official complicity in the assassination were rebuffed by A-H (because they didn’t have it).

    Finally, it was expressly not in Russia’s interests to go to war. As Moltke himself observed, its military reforms would only be finished by 1916-17. Germany saw all this as the last good historical opportunity it would get to achieve European domination.

    Summing up, if assigning blame for WW1, I’d estimate: Germany 75%; A-H 20%; Serbia and Russia: 5%.

    What challenge, if any, to this commonly held narrative does this book mount?

    Comment by Sublime Oblivion — January 6, 2012 @ 10:17 pm

  28. @S/O-This book’s claim is that the partial mobilization was in fact a blind. Russia could not truly partially mobilize, and again according to this book, actually engaged in a much more extensive mobilization, against both Germany and A-H. I think the takeaway is that any single villain theory about the origin of the war is simplistic. All major powers took steps that were necessary to cause the ultimate cataclysm. McMeeking’s argument is that Russia’s actions made it impossible to keep the conflict localized to Serbia v. A-H.

    I am now reading his critique of the theory that Russia sacrificed itself to save France in August-September, 1914. There he is on much more solid ground in his critique.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — January 7, 2012 @ 8:48 am

  29. LOL, Mr.X, you see Soros everywhere.

    In fact, both HRW and Memorial sent investigators into the conflict zone during and immediately after the war.

    If you had read either report you would know that.

    Then there is the Russians trumpeting 2000+ dead in the first 5 minutes of the fighting, spreading (false) stories of war crimes, and then having to quietly admit 180 or so Ossetian civilians were killed, and Memorial has suggested that the vast majority of those were killed by the Russian counter attack which involved a 3 day bombardment of Tshkinvali with Grads and heavy artillery (152mm and greater).
    As for the “honesty” of Russian Official information, remember those scum were claiming there was no destruction of Georgian villages in the conflict zone while it was actually being filmed by Memorial, HRW, and Andrei Neksarov….

    I know you are poorly educated, paranoid, and probably retarded Mr.X but do try and look at facts…..

    As Anders says, you are probably related to Quisling.

    Comment by Andrew — January 7, 2012 @ 11:45 am

  30. The Putin regims agent Mr. X – Here ya go.
    Soviet dissident Bukovsky, who has learned from experience to recognize the KGB, hinted that Udaltsov and Mr X is a FSB agent.

    “The KGB gained the experience of manipulation, no one can say that they were in the 80s sat around doing nothing. They gained experience, how to manipulate, how to control the mass movements.

    The techniques are quite standard, they are not invented by the KGB: the infiltration of agents, the creation of false movements – all sort of “fronts” – this is all nothing new. That they will they use it, that we should be ready for it. Some personalities already, I will not name them, flashing there, and I have strong suspicion in them”.

    Comment by Anders — January 7, 2012 @ 11:50 am

  31. Mr X is lying again, as usual

    But there is one Big Lie that Mr. Paul’s supporters like to throw out there that really gets my dander up. It gets my dander up because it annoys so many people who are bravely defending this country day in and day out while standing on a wall and in the line of enemy fire. Something that few people, even ravenous Paulbots, have the courage to do. I hear it every day because the election is upon us. The Paulbot emails me and says, “Ron Paul has more support from the military than any other candidate!” Military personnel email me every day telling me that on base there is at best one Ron Paul supporter and how frustrated they are that the Paulbots are telling this Big Lie.

    See, members of the military do not like Mr. Paul all that much because they have heard him denigrate America and its military as the source of evil in the world. While I have yet to meet a member of the American military who does not, in general, agree with Congressman Paul that the U.S. military is used too freely, too often and is too diluted around the world. I have also met very few members of the military who do not think that Ron Paul is a dangerous isolationist and worse, someone who cannot be trusted to stand up to evil when it rears its ugly head.

    So I thought I would break it down in a manner so simple that we can put the issue of Ron Paul’s military support to rest once and for all and do so using the same standard that Paulbots use to tout how great and mighty this support really is. That method is to look at campaign donations by members of the military. The common refrain from Paulbots is that Ron Paul has more donations from military personnel than any other candidate. Ergo he has the most support. So let’s look at that shall we?

    According to the numbers available on January 6th, 2012[1], Ron Paul has received $24,503, $23,335 and $17,432 from people who declared themselves as working for the U.S. Army, the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy respectively. The total is $65,270. They are the top three donors listed.

    Now, let’s assume that this $65,270 donated to Mr. Paul’s campaign by members of the military all came in one dollar increments. The average donation was in fact higher. But bear with me as we make the number that follows as big, and as unrealistic, as possible to give the Paulbots as much of an advantage as possible ok?

    So, $65,270 made in one dollar increments would mean 65,270 members of the military donated to Ron Paul. In September 2011[2] there were 1,468,364 total active duty military personnel in the United States. Divide the inflated number of Paul donors by the total active members of the military and you get 4.4%. Hardly an outpouring of support if you ask me. This leaves over 95% of the military that do not, but the Paulbots’ own flawed methodology, that do not support Ron Paul.

    Now assume that the average donation by declared military personnel to Ron Paul is ten dollars instead of one dollar. The percentage of active duty personnel that support Paul dips to a pathetic 0.44%. Again, using the argument of Ron Paul’s supporters who like to tout that we look only at the dollar amounts of the donations by members of the military to him that is.

    If the average donation was one hundred dollars? Well, that makes the percentage just 0.044%.

    When you look at other candidates, it is true that you do not see anywhere near these numbers for these military professions if you even see them at all. There are however reasons for this. First, active duty personnel stationed overseas will often have their spouses make donation for their household to candidates. These donations are then listed under the spouse’s information which is often times not military related. Secondly is that members of the military, from my personal experience, hate to be used as political pawns and when they donate to political candidates they often do not list their military service as their profession. Thirdly, military personnel, as I have been told by military personnel themselves, generally really hate to be used for political purposes thus they again do not like to list their service on donations made to military candidates so that their donations cannot be used in this manner. And fourthly is that there is a concerted effort by Ron Paul supporters in the military to make sure that their donations are listed as coming from military personnel in order to perpetuate this talking point for political gain. But let’s ignore all that. Let’s ignore it because Ron Paul’s supporters use simply the dollar numbers as the end all and be all of the proof to support their supposed claims.

    When you look at the numbers alone and apply a little logic you see that less than 5% of active duty military personnel support Ron Paul at best. In reality however the number is less than half a percent. Again, using the “logic” of the Paulbots of course. Not the numbers they want to paint. But the numbers they are forcing us to accept if they want us to accept their initial premise.

    http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-pittsburgh/ron-paul-s-support-among-military-4-4-at-best

    Comment by Andrew — January 7, 2012 @ 11:55 am

  32. Oslo gave the world the $30 cheeseburger , says LIER – Mr X – Quisling.

    Five most expensive (22 July 2010) (not considering the fact that the buyer’s equivalent purchasing power is different)
    Norway – $7.20 (45 kr.)-

    FSB gives free Vodka in Oslo to loyal agents Mr X – Quisling. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index#Figures

    Comment by Anders — January 7, 2012 @ 12:59 pm

  33. Andy, this guy wouldn’t have spewed that many words if the Establishment was not afraid of this particular Paul talking point.

    “First, active duty personnel stationed overseas will often have their spouses make donation for their household to candidates. These donations are then listed under the spouse’s information which is often times not military related…” ah so that explains it. Oh wait, it doesn’t really explain anything. You could discount all of the other candidates donations using the same logic. But only one candidate’s donations get discounted using it. Kinda reminds of the Iowa Governor saying ignore his state’s caucuses if Ron Paul wins while the Virginia Governor never said ignore his state’s primary because only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul made it on the ballot [seen this talking point anywhere? Of course not, because Romney is supposed to win]. The same thing applies to the rest of his ‘logic’ saying only 4.4% of the military sympathizes with Ron Paul. Well the percentages for the other candidates are even more pitiful, so what does that mean???

    “Now, let’s assume that this $65,270 donated to Mr. Paul’s campaign by members of the military all came in one dollar increments…” an idiotic assumption since obviously the donations come from a smaller number than that and were not in $1 increments. A piss poor grasp of statistics the Professor would never tolerate if it backed an argument he opposed.

    “And fourthly is that there is a concerted effort by Ron Paul supporters in the military to make sure that their donations are listed as coming from military personnel in order to perpetuate this talking point for political gain.” Really? What evidence does the author present for this assertion, besides

    See this is what gets me about this whole site. Andy and Anders all fling wild charges around and various claims with abandon without linking to anything backing it up, or link to people who do the same. But I’M the conspiracy theorist when I point out the U.S. is getting more tyrannical (damn you could almost say in the case of SOPA shutting down sites for ‘copyright infringement’ aping the worst excesses of Russia and China), linking to multiple sources, or at least sites like Zerohedge that link to people who’ve had the same views for years (i.e. before the alleged ‘Bulgarian KGB plant’ came along and apparently had a mindmeld with them). I’m the jerk for asking SWP to stop just popping off about the TSA groping him once and actually do something about it. I’m the Putin apologist because I tell foreigners to butt out of disputes between Americans about America’s future. Check with the Professor, he knows damn well it’s a U.S. IP. What about you guys?

    Not ‘Joe Schmoe blogger from Pittsburgh’ who just appeared to discredit Ron Paul and before that nobody had ever read or heard of him. Not ‘Bryan Preston of Pajamas Media-Austin who used to work for the Republican Party of Texas but never denounced or said a public peep about Ron Paul in that previous position, when Paul’s views were well known’.

    See the pattern here? The people I link to are consistent, highly public (save for ‘Durden’ himself, but mostly it’s known commenters) have honest views, and don’t pop out with sudden hatred against a candidate just because he’s suddenly a threat to the status quo and starts doing well and lots of money is being dumped on ‘conservative’ bloggers to denounce him. And even the ‘Ron Paul has a few good ideas remarks’ by this schmoe are half-assed, as usual. He’ll probably get paid to hold a sign for Santorum or Romney.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 7, 2012 @ 9:25 pm

  34. As usual, Mr.X is unable to argue the numbers and actual logic, so he descends into conspiracy theories.

    As for anyone rubbishing links who then links to morons like Zerohedge…… hypocrisy in the extreme, but what we have come to expect from the demented troll that is Mr.X

    And yes, you are a jerk, a tosser, and a moron, not to mention a supporter of ethnic cleansing, racism, and someone more likely to be a fascist than those you accuse of being so.

    Fascism is a left wing ideology.

    Comment by Andrew — January 8, 2012 @ 11:05 am

  35. BTW Mr.X we can see how Paulbot you are when you miss this bit

    When you look at other candidates, it is true that you do not see anywhere near these numbers for these military professions if you even see them at all. There are however reasons for this. First, active duty personnel stationed overseas will often have their spouses make donation for their household to candidates. These donations are then listed under the spouse’s information which is often times not military related. Secondly is that members of the military, from my personal experience, hate to be used as political pawns and when they donate to political candidates they often do not list their military service as their profession. Thirdly, military personnel, as I have been told by military personnel themselves, generally really hate to be used for political purposes thus they again do not like to list their service on donations made to military candidates so that their donations cannot be used in this manner. And fourthly is that there is a concerted effort by Ron Paul supporters in the military to make sure that their donations are listed as coming from military personnel in order to perpetuate this talking point for political gain. But let’s ignore all that. Let’s ignore it because Ron Paul’s supporters use simply the dollar numbers as the end all and be all of the proof to support their supposed claims.

    Comment by Andrew — January 8, 2012 @ 11:06 am

  36. “As for anyone rubbishing links who then links to morons like Zerohedge……” ‘morons’ who are in the top 1,000 U.S. sites nationwide and probably the 50 for politics and the top 10 for finance. But hey, with some luck at this pace the Prof will catch up in 10,000 years.

    Like I said, ZH, lots of active duty and credible retired military versus one schlubby tubby dude from Pittsburgh. Fail. SWP’s little campaign against ZH: serious fail. And a Kiwi and a Norwegian apologizing for the status quo in the U.S.? That’s rich. Why don’t we ask whether or not people in Lichinstein or Luxmebourg support Ron Paul too.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 8, 2012 @ 9:57 pm

  37. It takes a written signed report to get closer to the truth.

    Good luck getting thme out of Russians. I was with a colleague on the Shtokman project on Thursday, he told me the Russians don’t like him taking minutes of meetings, let alone asking them to sign them off. They always want the option to just change their mind whenever they like. Which may explain why the project FID has been pushed another 3 months to the right.

    Comment by Tim Newman — January 8, 2012 @ 10:56 pm

  38. “Fascism is a left wing ideology.” Who said you didn’t love Lefties so long as they hate Roosha, as vorobey used to call it? Remember you’re from the country that gave the world Helen Clark. I remember NZ Pundit fondly. But that’s the limit of my shots at Kiwi pols, cuz I can’t name another one. You on the other hand seem obsessed with who America nominates, or at least who they won’t.

    Comment by Mr. X — January 9, 2012 @ 2:06 am

  39. LOL, I did not vote for Helen Clark, and she was fascistic in her tendencies.

    Your arguments are running very thin Mr X.

    And as for it being a bit rich my having an opinion on US politics, nope, not at all. Me, you SWP, we all have the right to comment on anything we like, and as who is the next US president pretty much affects the whole world…..

    Comment by Andrew — January 9, 2012 @ 5:03 am

  40. Russian officialdom–especially military officialdom–is to lie, lie, lie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Nikitin the head of Bellona Foundation’s St. Petersburg branch says the same –

    The official explanation for the fire was that unsafe welding works set a wooden scaffolding around the submarine ablaze, which then spread to the rubber outer hull of the submarine. The Emergency Service’s Ministry reported that it had submerged the submarine up to its conning tower on Thursday night, when the fire broke out, but battled smoldering flames between the outer hull and the inner hull until Friday morning.

    According to the analysis by Nikitin, who is also chairman of Bellona’s Environmental Rights Center Bellona in St. Petersburg, this explanation is essentially untrue: There was no wooden scaffolding. The scaffolding was made of metal. The hydro-acoustic chamber, he said, is typically filled not only with water, but heavy oils and other contaminants that are found in the waters near naval ports. The antennas themselves also contain a certain amount of oil for isolation. In additions there are high-pressure air tanks located in between the inner and outer hulls. This, said Nikitin would explain the duration and intensity of the fire: The oil residues that were left behind after the water was taken out of the acoustic chamber would have burned for a long time, and damaged air pressure tanks would have accounted for the intensity and height of the flames reported by witnesses via various internet social networks.

    Flames of up to 10 meters at some periods and were seen from kilometers away as the fire blazed. The fire was initially reported to the local branch of the Emergency Service Ministry by civilians, not the navy.

    http://static.theforeigner.no/images/pages/2012/01/08/HolecutinYekaterintorpedocompartment-large.jpg

    Comment by Anders — January 9, 2012 @ 2:12 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress