Fishy story from the Straits of Hormuz

It’s usually sensible to wait for clarity when initial reports of incidents come in.   But here’s a story that is developing that just seems fishy….  Link here to the BBC story

So…. the story is from the Straits of Hormuz, a key flashpoint and area of tension. An area where a large proportion of the world’s oil passes through, where incidents have occurred before (including missiles being fired at ships).  It happened on a Japanese tanker carrying a cargo of oil.  So possible geopolitical impacts to Iran, Japan, the Gulf and the world in general.  The ship and the owners of the ship and the Japanese government say it was an explosion related to “piracy” whatever that means.  But the local coastguard say that is was a “wave”.  The damage was to the “upper accommodation of the ship” including some doors and windows”. A life boat was blown off the ship.  Furniture in one cabin was broken but the cabin was dry showing no evidence of water from a wave.

So… the Iranians are saying it was an earth tremor causing a tsunami, but the US geological survey says there was no record of such a tremor. The USGS are known to be pretty reliable in comparison to perhaps the Iranian coastguard.  Do you think a Captain of an oil tanker would recognise a big wave that damaged the upper accommodation of his ship but left no sign of water?  You’d think that the single crew member whith injures from flying glass might remember the wave bit, wouldn’t you?

Spider-senses are tingling.  Watch out.

Share:

1 Comment

  1. Jim Blackburn
    2nd August 2010 / 3:24 pm

    The lack of damage to the surface of the ship doesn’t indicate a direct contact with either an explosive device or for that matter a "Ramming Vessel" Also unless some oil has been off loaded. Incidently if the ship in the photo hasn’t been off loaded, it is significantly above the water-line indicating that the ballast tanks were pretty much empty making the frame much less resistant to denting (although still not easy). It also seems that the focal point of the dent is significantly above the waterline, which isn’t entirely consistant with a mine on the surface. Would be interested if anyone figures it out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Close Me
Looking for Something?
Search:
Post Categories: