|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,076
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,076 |
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity. Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes. What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge. Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video. I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem. I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction. I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity. Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes. What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge. Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video. I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem. I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction. Sure it does. But wouldn’t you like to hear from the pilot? Wouldn’t you like an actual explanation? Sure. Why not? Until then, I’m not going around raving about some nutty conspiracy theory when a logical explanation fits better.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804 |
I don’t know. You if this happened in the 1930s, therewould have been 200 reporters waiting on the pilot as soon as he set foot on the dock. We’d already have a statement from him and know at least what he said caused it. But now? Maybe if there are lawsuits we’ll get a deposition in five years IF the government decides it isn’t national security.
People decry conspiracy theories. Well, official secrecy breeds them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804 |
I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity. Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes. What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge. Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video. I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem. I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction. I seem to remember an assassination several decades ago where our Intel agencies said “there is no proof”, “anyone that claims otherwise is a conspiracy nut” and poof like magic they lied.
I also seem to remember just a few short months ago that 50+ former US Intel operatives signed a letter stating that The Hunter Laptop was 100% Bullschit and Russian Disinformation, and poof like magic, there is proof and proof they lied.
So, you do you and believe our Deep State and our Intel Community is honest and chucked full of integrity. Absolutely not. I don’t believe anything coming from them, but that doesn’t require me to believe something different from what I saw with my own eyes. What did we see? It’s hard to say without knowing what went on. I mean if you look, the first turn towards the support happened immediately before the power went out the first time. Then the big one came immediately after it came back on. It looks to me like if the power had stayed off, it would have slid right under that bridge. Once again, I don’t know what happen and an accident is the likeliest thing but looks can be deceiving and are heavily influenced by what you decide to believe. For instance, if you were in a car and someone hacked it and you couldn’t control the steering, what would you do? You know what you would do, you would try to put it in neutral or turn off the engine. So, what if the ship were hacked and the crew tried to turn off the power? Then, when the auxiliary power came back on, the hacker still had control and steered it into the pylons. I’m not saying that happened, but if it had, it would probably look like what we saw in that video. I don’t know that any of this happened, but it could. We have the strongest military on earth but we are so vulnerable in so many ways. And as for a hacker knowing exactly what would happen or how the ship and crew would react, who says he did if it happened? I suspect that to the extent there is cyber frickery going on with our infrastructure, a lot of it is pretty random to just see it any damage can be done. For all we know, this could have been the fifteenth time in the last year something similar had happened but nothing bad happened until now. With our current government, I wouldn’t rely upon the to tell us or fix the problem. I agree with you about our vunerabilities and about our dishonest government and press. All I’m saying is that if you’ve ever operated a boat, what we see happen in the video makes perfect sense for an equipment malfunction. Sure it does. But wouldn’t you like to hear from the pilot? Wouldn’t you like an actual explanation? Sure. Why not? Until then, I’m not going around raving about some nutty conspiracy theory when a logical explanation fits better. Who is raving? I merely pointed out that what you “saw” could be explained differently.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,076
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,076 |
I don’t know. You if this happened in the 1930s, therewould have been 200 reporters waiting on the pilot as soon as he set foot on the dock. We’d already have a statement from him and know at least what he said caused it. But now? Maybe if there are lawsuits we’ll get a deposition in five years IF the government decides it isn’t national security.
People decry conspiracy theories. Well, official secrecy breeds them. You do make a good point. I expect the shipping company wants to get his story straight before putting him in front of a camera and microphone. Hell, he may have been injured.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804 |
I don’t know. You if this happened in the 1930s, therewould have been 200 reporters waiting on the pilot as soon as he set foot on the dock. We’d already have a statement from him and know at least what he said caused it. But now? Maybe if there are lawsuits we’ll get a deposition in five years IF the government decides it isn’t national security.
People decry conspiracy theories. Well, official secrecy breeds them. You do make a good point. I expect the shipping company wants to get his story straight before putting him in front of a camera and microphone. Hell, he may have been injured. Pilot works for the port.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,537 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,537 Likes: 3 |
Here’s a clue,
The Biden Administration claimed there was no evidence of foul play, or terrorist activity, within a few hours of the collision.
That be some quick top notch investigators there, that God Biden and his Administration are that good. It doesn't take long and it doesn't take an "investigation" to ask the pilot if he saw any evidence of foul play does it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,522
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,522 |
It’s apparent that if you watch the video that the ship made a pretty damned dramatic hard turn to hit that support. Why? I’m not saying it was on purpose or terrorism, but why? I mean if the ship was in the channel as alleged and from all the videos and diagrams I’ve seen it looks like once you are in the channel it’s a straight shot out. So, if you’re going straight in the channel and the power goes out, you’re likely to coast through and under the bridge if you do nothing. Presumably, the current in that spot is running out with the river, so it shouldn’t have caused that hard turn.
So for me, I would like to know why the hard turn? Because, it’s there if you watch. Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,659
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,659 |
Would bad fuel make the lights go out?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,368 Likes: 1
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,368 Likes: 1 |
How similar is this to the container ship that got stuck in the Suez canal a while back? Did they ever find a real cause for that one?
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,537 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,537 Likes: 3 |
It’s apparent that if you watch the video that the ship made a pretty damned dramatic hard turn to hit that support. Why? I’m not saying it was on purpose or terrorism, but why? I mean if the ship was in the channel as alleged and from all the videos and diagrams I’ve seen it looks like once you are in the channel it’s a straight shot out. So, if you’re going straight in the channel and the power goes out, you’re likely to coast through and under the bridge if you do nothing. Presumably, the current in that spot is running out with the river, so it shouldn’t have caused that hard turn.
So for me, I would like to know why the hard turn? Because, it’s there if you watch. Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line. There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 17,882
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 17,882 |
Here’s a clue,
The Biden Administration claimed there was no evidence of foul play, or terrorist activity, within a few hours of the collision.
That be some quick top notch investigators there, that God Biden and his Administration are that good. It doesn't take long and it doesn't take an "investigation" to ask the pilot if he saw any evidence of foul play does it? No, no, no. Connect the dots here Paul. The pilot is in on it. Think Rothschilds. Think Cabal. Think Jews. Think every possible nefarious explanation other than the most likely. This is the campfire; after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,512
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,512 |
Would bad fuel make the lights go out? Merchant marine captain on the news explained that these ships have emergency generators that run off better fuel and can run the auxiliary items but cannot run the propulsion system.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,724
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,724 |
.
Seems like they should have a couple of tugs running with the ship until all the tight maneuvering is done.
But that's added cost.
B L M - Bureau of Land Management
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,522
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,522 |
It’s apparent that if you watch the video that the ship made a pretty damned dramatic hard turn to hit that support. Why? I’m not saying it was on purpose or terrorism, but why? I mean if the ship was in the channel as alleged and from all the videos and diagrams I’ve seen it looks like once you are in the channel it’s a straight shot out. So, if you’re going straight in the channel and the power goes out, you’re likely to coast through and under the bridge if you do nothing. Presumably, the current in that spot is running out with the river, so it shouldn’t have caused that hard turn.
So for me, I would like to know why the hard turn? Because, it’s there if you watch. Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line. There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections. I think it would be fun to be on the inside investigating, just because of the complexity, but yeah, hardly worth guessing at this point, there's so much hasn't been revealed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2024
Posts: 160
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Mar 2024
Posts: 160 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2024
Posts: 160
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Mar 2024
Posts: 160 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,926
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,926 |
Very interesting, thanks.
Roy
What this world needs is a few more Rednecks.
The Dildō Of Consequence Rarely Arrives Lubed
Waterboarding isn't illegal if you use diesel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,537 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 26,537 Likes: 3 |
It’s apparent that if you watch the video that the ship made a pretty damned dramatic hard turn to hit that support. Why? I’m not saying it was on purpose or terrorism, but why? I mean if the ship was in the channel as alleged and from all the videos and diagrams I’ve seen it looks like once you are in the channel it’s a straight shot out. So, if you’re going straight in the channel and the power goes out, you’re likely to coast through and under the bridge if you do nothing. Presumably, the current in that spot is running out with the river, so it shouldn’t have caused that hard turn.
So for me, I would like to know why the hard turn? Because, it’s there if you watch. Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line. There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections. I think it would be fun to be on the inside investigating, just because of the complexity, but yeah, hardly worth guessing at this point, there's so much hasn't been revealed. The NTSB amazes me with how thorough they are with their investigations. Some years back a Coast Guard boat struck a recreational boat in the San Diego area, killing an 8 year old boy. I read the full NTSB report and was awed by how much they learned about not just the incident but CG culture and culture at the unit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 23,426
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 23,426 |
Here’s a clue,
The Biden Administration claimed there was no evidence of foul play, or terrorist activity, within a few hours of the collision.
That be some quick top notch investigators there, that God Biden and his Administration are that good. It doesn't take long and it doesn't take an "investigation" to ask the pilot if he saw any evidence of foul play does it? No, no, no. Connect the dots here Paul. The pilot is in on it. Think Rothschilds. Think Cabal. Think Jews. Think every possible nefarious explanation other than the most likely. This is the campfire; after all. It’s starting to border on mental retardation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,804 |
It’s apparent that if you watch the video that the ship made a pretty damned dramatic hard turn to hit that support. Why? I’m not saying it was on purpose or terrorism, but why? I mean if the ship was in the channel as alleged and from all the videos and diagrams I’ve seen it looks like once you are in the channel it’s a straight shot out. So, if you’re going straight in the channel and the power goes out, you’re likely to coast through and under the bridge if you do nothing. Presumably, the current in that spot is running out with the river, so it shouldn’t have caused that hard turn.
So for me, I would like to know why the hard turn? Because, it’s there if you watch. Current, tide, and wind can individually or jointly work to point the ship somewhere different than you want it to go, most especially after you lose propulsion. I'm recalling one time going out the channel to sea (maybe Kings Bay, not sure) and we had Standard rudder on just to crab in a straight line. There are so many possible variables at play that it's simply not possible for us to draw any conclusions based on the information that we have. A transit is a continuous series of rudder corrections. I think it would be fun to be on the inside investigating, just because of the complexity, but yeah, hardly worth guessing at this point, there's so much hasn't been revealed. Not really. Investigator, “Mr, Pilot, what happened?” From there, you’re going to get a pretty good idea. The whys and the wherefores concerning certain things might be complex, but the basic happenings should be pretty easy to tell pretty quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
658 members (10gaugemag, 007FJ, 10Glocks, 10ring1, 12344mag, 160user, 72 invisible),
2,304
guests, and
1,360
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,955
Posts18,480,430
Members73,954
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
