Costa Concordia incident, Friday 13 Jan 2012

Anything on the news and elsewhere in the media with evidence of digital manipulation, bogus story-lines and propaganda

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby Heiwa on January 22nd, 2012, 7:50 am

nonhocapito wrote:Image
Source for the above pictures: http://cryptome.org/2012-info/costa-concordia/0041.htm

I am seriously puzzled by this piece of rock.

How is it possible for it to be so perfectly shaped? Does this really look like something violently eradicated from the bottom of the sea? From genuine rock formations?

What if this is riprap, picked from a sea wall, and stuck there on purpose before the ship even began its navigation from Civitavecchia? I ask to the ship experts (namely Heiwa when he'll read this): could the Concordia theoretically sail the short distance to Giglio island with this boulder stuck in the hull, for the purposes of a scam?


I have only seen the boulder and the hull bilge damages or whatever it is from a distance and I wonder too how it came about. The outer steel plate may be as thin as 10-12 mm and the supporting structure same. Due to the hull getting narrower aft, the structural damages are away from the extreme breadth of the ship and can only be explained by ships aft end swinging out in a turn when contact occurs and the boulder got lodged into the hole.

When US oil tanker Exxon Valdez went off course for 8 miles in 1989 (I think it was) and finally grounded and ripped open the bottom (causing a little oil spill - most oil remained aboard), one boulder also got stuck in the ripped open bottom (as seen when the damaged tanker was finally drydocked).
Why did Exxon Valdez get off course? It seems the watch keeping female 3/0 had an affair with a male AB aboard and both got distracted on the bridge while cuddling. The helmsman was halfblind and deaf and not actually fit but a member of the US Seamen's Union and couldn't be fired. The Master was sleeping, alone, in his cabin. :rolleyes:
The Exxon Valdez accident encouraged ship designers to develop better oil tankers spilling less oil in accidents.
My design, the Coulombi Egg tanker is the only alternative design (to double hull) approved by the International Maritime Organization, IMO, of the United Nations 9/1997 as it spills much less oil than double hull in groundings (and is safer in all other respects). http://heiwaco.tripod.com/ce_coulombiegg.htm

Everyone was very happy :D when my design was approved by the IMO, but it lasted only 5 minutes as the USA declared that they (as only IMO member) could not accept the decision of approval by the IMO and that any tanker of my design would never get admitted into US ports! :blink:
Heiwa
Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 7:20 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby nonhocapito on January 22nd, 2012, 8:12 am

Heiwa wrote:I have only seen the boulder and the hull bilge damages or whatever it is from a distance and I wonder too how it came about. The outer steel plate may be as thin as 10-12 mm and the supporting structure same. Due to the hull getting narrower aft, the structural damages are away from the extreme breadth of the ship and can only be explained by ships aft end swinging out in a turn when contact occurs and the boulder got lodged into the hole.
When US oil tanker Exxon Valdez went off course for 8 miles in 1989 (I think it was) and finally grounded and ripped open the bottom (causing a little oil spill - most oil remained aboard), one boulder also got stuck in the ripped open bottom (as seen when the damaged tanker was finally drydocked).
Why did Exxon Valdez get off course? It seems the watch keeping female 3/0 had an affair with a male AB aboard and both got distracted on the bridge while cuddling. The helmsman was halfblind and deaf and not actually fit but a member of the US Seamen's Union and couldn't be fired. The Master was sleeping, alone, in his cabin. :rolleyes:
The Exxon Valdez accident encouraged ship designers to develop better oil tankers spilling less oil in accidents. My design, the Coulombi Egg tanker is the only alternative design (to double hull) approved by the International Maritime Organization, IMO, of the United Nations 9/1997 as it spills much less oil than double hull in groundings (and is safer in all other respects). Everyone was very happy :D when my design was approved by the IMO, but it lasted only 5 minutes as the USA declared that they (as only IMO member) could not accept the decision of approval by the IMO and that any tanker of my design would never get admitted into US ports! :blink:


Thanks for your answer Heiwa! I am ever more impressed by your knowledge and experience in this field.
I found pictures of the Valdez dry docked here: http://www.aukevisser.nl/exxon/id888.htm. The boulder can in fact be seen in one, although these are very small pics.

But at risk of sounding obnoxious, and aside of what you have seen with your eyes: I wanted to know

1) if the appearance of the rock stuck in the Concordia, as seen in the high-res pictures on cryptome, looked legit to you (or is it too "geometric" so to speak).

2) I was also curious to know, for pure speculation, if the ship could sail from Civitavecchia to Giglio with that rock deliberately stuck into it, in a way to allow navigation.
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2494
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby Heiwa on January 22nd, 2012, 9:16 am

nonhocapito wrote:I wanted to know

1) if the appearance of the rock stuck in the Concordia, as seen in the high-res pictures on cryptome, looked legit to you (or is it too "geometric" so to speak).

2) I was also curious to know, for pure speculation, if the ship could sail from Civitavecchia to Giglio with that rock deliberately stuck into it, in a way to allow navigation.


I assume there are seaweed, seagrowth and clams, etc, on anything below water in the Med ... and also on any boulder under water, but do we see it on the photos? :rolleyes:

Regardless - at the aft end of the ship there were two propellers and rudders sticking out say 5+ meter below the hull. I wonder if the Master left at least the port prop/rudder behind ... somewhere ... say 800 meters south of present position? It would be good evidence that he actually passed there.

I wonder what attracts people to cruise in west Med in January? Temperature is 3°C in morning, fog and rain and storms are frequent and Savona or Marseille is not really Acapulco or Virgin Islands. I though this is the ski season! :P
Heiwa
Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 7:20 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby simonshack on January 22nd, 2012, 3:11 pm

nonhocapito wrote:1) if the appearance of the rock stuck in the Concordia, as seen in the high-res pictures on cryptome, looked legit to you (or is it too "geometric" so to speak).

2) I was also curious to know, for pure speculation, if the ship could sail from Civitavecchia to Giglio with that rock deliberately stuck into it, in a way to allow navigation.


Nonho,

I really don't know what to make of what follows, but as for what regards the appearance of the rock (and other details of the hull damage) there's something that doesn't quite add up. Just compare the 2 pictures below (as released in the media) - firstly with each other / and then with my own picture (3d one below):

MEDIA picture A
Image

MEDIA picture B
Image

My own photo (sorry that I couldn't manage a sharper picture, as I never got close enough with my small Olympus camera):
Image

Here are a couple of observations we may do:
- In my photo, we can see that the wedge-shaped white/and black-speckled debris has now been removed. How and why this was done is, in my opinion, rather puzzling - since the 'crash investigation' is far from over yet.
- The two MEDIA pictures A and B show remarkably different color tonalities. Why? I don't know. I find it difficult to ascribe this to any mundane photographic issues. But let's just accept these are real/untampered photos for now.

I also find this discrepancy between the gash-shapes pretty odd:
Image
Image

Again, not that I know what to make out of this - but there seems to be a certain degree of fishyness around this rock and the gash that it caused. I will just leave it at that, for now.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6361
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby Heiwa on January 22nd, 2012, 4:08 pm

Image
Source: Heiwa Co
I estimate, for whatever it is worth, the total length of the indent of the upper part of the rounded bilge plate to abt 35 meter. We cannot see the flat, horizontal bottom of the ship at abt 8 meter draft, i.e. the damage in the side/bilge is from 0.5 m below waterline to say 6.5 m below waterline. The boulder is at least 6 m long with slightly less height/breadth - weight 100 tons???. The boulder must have been resting against something (the granite rock reef outside Giglio?) when it first deformed and then ripped apart the ship's steel structure and finally dislodged itself in the damaged structure.

It looks very strange. :rolleyes:
Heiwa
Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 7:20 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby upstream on January 22nd, 2012, 4:19 pm

Capsized Costa Concordia may have had unregistered passengers aboard

GIGLIO, ITALY — Unregistered passengers might have been aboard the stricken cruise liner that capsized off this Tuscan island, a top rescue official said Sunday, raising the possibility that the number of missing might be higher than the 20 previously announced.
[...]
Gabrielli said that relatives of a Hungarian woman have told Italian authorities that she had telephoned them from aboard the ship and that they haven’t heard from her since the accident. He said it was possible that a woman’s body pulled from the wreckage by divers on Saturday might be that of the unregistered passenger.

But the identity of that body and of three male bodies, all badly decomposed after days in the water, have yet to be established. Gabrielli said they have identified the other eight bodies: four French, an Italian, a Hungarian, a German and a Spanish national.
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1119334--capsized-costa-concordia-may-have-had-unregistered-passengers-aboard?bn=1
upstream
Member
 
Posts: 132
Joined: September 17th, 2011, 12:18 am

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby brianv on January 22nd, 2012, 5:31 pm

Multi Million Pound Navigation System Failure

Hypthetical question:

Could a ship of this nature be controlled remotely by the owners?

Could they seize the entire operation of the ship - in the case of a ahem "hijacking" for instance? http://www.specialoperations.com/Images ... hille.html

Just throwing it out there?
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3861
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby Heiwa on January 22nd, 2012, 6:09 pm

brianv wrote:Could a ship of this nature be controlled remotely by the owners?


All operations are computer controlled and recorded and all data of any kind are continuously registered on computer. The shipowner at Genoa or Fort Lauderdale can probably call up the ship's computer any time to find out what's going on; speed, course, position, consumption of engines and in the bars, who is sleeping with who, if ship stops and crew goes fishing, etc. There are no secrets anymore. In principle you can navigate the ship from shore w/o crew with some simple modifications of the software aboard.
But then there would be no fun. The Master's most important function is that he can marry passengers and the marriage is (only) valid as long as bride and groom passengers remain aboard.
The most important officer aboard today is the electronics/computer person.
That the ship-owner says he doesn't know what's going on on his ship is simple not true. And very poor upbringing to blame the Master.
Heiwa
Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 7:20 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby brianv on January 22nd, 2012, 6:39 pm

Heiwa wrote:
brianv wrote:Could a ship of this nature be controlled remotely by the owners?


All operations are computer controlled and recorded and all data of any kind are continuously registered on computer. The shipowner at Genoa or Fort Lauderdale can probably call up the ship's computer any time to find out what's going on; speed, course, position, consumption of engines and in the bars, who is sleeping with who, if ship stops and crew goes fishing, etc. There are no secrets anymore. In principle you can navigate the ship from shore w/o crew with some simple modifications of the software aboard.
But then there would be no fun. The Master's most important function is that he can marry passengers and the marriage is (only) valid as long as bride and groom passengers remain aboard.
The most important officer aboard today is the electronics/computer person.
That the ship-owner says he doesn't know what's going on on his ship is simple not true. And very poor upbringing to blame the Master.


And when the ship left it's "seaways" or "sea-lanes" and ventured into prohibited waters, alarms would ring remotely?
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3861
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby simonshack on January 22nd, 2012, 8:56 pm

brianv wrote:Nice one guys! Great to see some real photos on the site for a change!
Did you speak to anyone about the "passengers" aspect of it Simon? How they managed to get them all away so promptly!


HEIWA'S & SIMON'S CONCORDIA SIGHTSEEING DAY (part2)

As Heiwa and I walked around the Giglio port, I pretended to be Heiwa's Swedish/Italian translator - and casually 'interviewed' a bunch of individuals there: a few friendly locals, a military-clad scubadiver, a team of three medics (sitting in the one-and-only ambulance stationed in the port) and the receptionist of the Bahamas Hotel - where apparently the Concordia captain had taken refuge after the disaster.

My prime interest - as you may imagine - was to get some notion about the whole "passengers" aspect - and to see if the feedback I gathered would help dispel my 'working suspicion' that the event was wholly phony (apart from the fact of the ship lying in front of the Giglio port which was, of course, beyond question), that the ship was deliberately sunk there, and that - possibly - NO real passengers were on that ship. In other words, if this was yet another media-backed psyop of sorts - featuring fake victims in a high-profile mega-disaster, just HOW - I wondered - might this have played out in reality?

Image(photo by Simon Shack)

Well, please know that the little port of Giglio seems almost tailor-made for such an operation: Yes, it does provide an 'alibi' for the official story ("the Giglio residents must have witnessed it all") but, at a closer look, this 'alibi' is very thin indeed: most of the 1400 Giglio residents live 6km away in the "Castello" - or in houses/villas spread around the island - far from the tiny Giglio harbour. Only a handful of people (mostly oldtimers) lives by the little port - and in January, tourism is pretty close to zero. Add this to the fact that the Concordia event happened at nighttime - when most of the few port residents would have been fast asleep.

As I chatted with one of these residents, however, he told me he had been awake and had witnessed the event. As I asked him about the 4200 people salvaged from the ship (and how they had been handled/tended to) he told me they had been quickly been embarked on buses and brought up to the Castello. "Had he witnessed any triage, medical activity, stretchers with wounded/drowned people?" - I asked him; "No", he said, "the dead and wounded were probably shipped straight back to the mainland".The 4200 people were then, within the day, brought down again to the port, shipped to the mainland in (small) ferryboats - put into many buses, and driven down to Rome! Wow - that's ...uh...Italian efficiency at its very best, folks! Pretty surreal, if you ask me.

I then talked to a military-clad man leaning on a van which said "squadra sommozzatori" (Scuba Divers team). I asked him if the searches for the 22 missing people were still ongoing. He basically said "No, because it is now feared that the ship might slip down into deeper waters, so we've had to suspend our searches - as we might contribute to destabilize the ship." Mumble...mumble... Makes sense, huh?

Next, I decided to chat up the three medics sitting in the sole ambulance (with wide-open doors) stationed in the port. So I just leaned into the ambulance and asked: "Hello, can I ask you guys a question or two?" Almost simultaneously (in chorus!), the 3 medics responded - shaking their heads in unison: "No, you can't!" I was a bit taken aback, as their reaction seemed unduly aggressive, but I nonetheless managed to add "Well, uh, I only wondered if you guys - or any of your colleagues - were present on the night of the event!" Again, the curt and off-putting reply was: "No!" Shaking my head in mild disbelief, I just turned back to Heiwa and instinctively muttered: "Holy Moly! These medics must be under some kind of gag order..." I still believe that this is the case.

Heiwa was eager to go visit the Bahamas Hotel where (he had read in the French FIGARO newspaper) the Concordia captain Francesco Schettino had reportedly been staying after the disaster. (In fact, the FIGARO had reported the Bahamas being located 6km away from the port, and that Mr. Schettino had arrived there by Taxi). Instead, we soon found the small Hotel was only about 80m away from the harbour. Anyhow, we walked into the small reception and had a chat with the receptionist. The guy seemed quite elated to talk to us! He went on and on in consummate detail - almost in a wild frenzy - about how he had seen the whole nighttime incident, with the Concordia turning up very close to the shore (not visible from his reception), its lights going out and then back on again (although only emergency lights), etc. He confirmed the Captain had turned up in a taxi (I still wonder who the heck hitches a taxi for an 80m ride!), but only to change his wet clothes. Then, as the Captain dried, an Italian TV news team (TG COM) interviewed him in the Hotel lobby (those news people are DAMN FAST ON THE FOOT!). "But he was soon interrupted by a lady who rushed in, telling Schettino not to talk with the press. It seemed to me as if she was Schettino's lawyer", said the receptionist. I then asked the talkative receptionist, basically, if his Hotel had been crowded with Concordia survivors. He then got really excited, gesticulating in descriptive manner: "Of course!!! We were all stacked up like sardines here, and I had 3/or 4 people sleeping behind my reception desk RIGHT HERE!" (Now folks, we're talking about a 3mX50cm space !).That's when the guy's credibility suddenly vaporized - and Heiwa and I walked out after politely thanking him for his kind 'witness account'...

So let's GET REAL now: Let's forget for a minute about the alleged victims (apparently now "13", as of today). According to the official Concordia story, the 4200 passengers were safely evacuated from this ship, at night, most of them supposedly climbing down the 2 "escape-ladders" we can see here:
Image(photo by Simon Shack)
(It's up to you to believe that most people were rescued on the other side of the ship - before it capsized...)

Now, according to this "infrared helicopter video" allegedly filmed by the Italian Coast Guard, there were still a whole lot of people on board as the Concordia toppled over on its side - at a 90° angle...
"Infrared COAST GUARD VIDEO": http://video.repubblica.it/dossier/nauf ... 5900?video
Image
Image

Are we to believe almost ALL of these passengers and crew (mostly older people, we are told, and many kids and toddlers), managed to climb up onto the side of the ship as it capsized at 90° - in the nick of time?
It is quite MIRACULOUS that only 13 people - or so - were lost !!!!!!!! <_<


(To make myself clear: I believe the "Infrared COAST GUARD VIDEO" is a total fabrication - produced in order to convey to the public at least SOME visual "evidence" of there being passengers on board of the CONCORDIA vessel. I personally don't buy it. Watch it yourself in its entirety and decide.)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6361
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby whatsgoingon on January 22nd, 2012, 9:46 pm

a
Last edited by whatsgoingon on May 24th, 2013, 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
whatsgoingon
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
 
Posts: 578
Joined: October 13th, 2011, 8:56 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby simonshack on January 22nd, 2012, 10:05 pm

whatsgoingon wrote:The TPTB have already estimated the gross sales based on the operation. Once they include the insurance claim, they should make 200-300 million bucks. :lol:

Dear Whatsgoingon,

We are not talking about 200-300 million bucks. We are talking about something between 800 million and 1.200.000.000 (1.2 billion) euro :

"La polizza garantisce e copre tutti i danni. Il calcolo dei danni assicurativi per feriti, vittime e rimozione del relitto dalle acque antistanti l’isola del Giglio: «potrebbe aggirarsi tra gli 800 milioni e gli 1,2 miliardi di euro."
http://www.ultimaora.net/notizie-cronac ... danno.html

And those are only figures which get published in the press... <_<
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6361
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby Heiwa on January 22nd, 2012, 11:04 pm

simonshack wrote:(To make myself clear: I believe the "Infrared COAST GUARD VIDEO" is a total fabrication - produced in order to convey to the public at least SOME visual "evidence" of there being passengers on board of the CONCORDIA vessel. I personally don't buy it. Watch it yourself in its entirety and decide.)

I agree with Simon. Just look at the beginning ... filming the shore and the goats. :P
Heiwa
Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 7:20 pm

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby icarusinbound on January 22nd, 2012, 11:32 pm

The helicopter video long-shot in IR: why can't we see any signs of lighting, to aid the escaping passengers? No bright-out/hotspots, no swinging beams, no Nightsun playing down from the Coastguard helo to assist in the evac? Or even torches/flashlights carried by some of the rescuers? The helicopter could have taken post at 200/200m out to sea, with incident lights, until a coastal support ship took over....Nor can we see any hot-spot engines or exhausts on the vehicle movements (it will be a seach-and-locate/SAR camera, not a sight-seeing camera).

Is that another helicopter that tracks across the top-left of the shot? The 'ball', with only the slightest suggestion of a tail-rotor. Isn't it...curiously small? What..is it? (even meant to be?)

Also....see below for some odd disinfo:

Costa Concordia: Spanish newspaper site caught using old flood footage from other disasters http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/9028696/Costa-Concordia-Spanish-newspaper-site-caught-using-old-flood-footage-from-other-disasters.html
The Telegraph wrote:A video posted on a Spanish newspaper site purporting to show harrowing scenes of the evacuation of the Costa Concordia was in fact old footage of floods from other disasters.
icarusinbound
Member
 
Posts: 392
Joined: November 28th, 2011, 9:49 am

Re: Costa Concordia

Postby Terence.drew on January 23rd, 2012, 12:58 am

simonshack wrote:

(To make myself clear: I believe the "Infrared COAST GUARD VIDEO" is a total fabrication - produced in order to convey to the public at least SOME visual "evidence" of there being passengers on board of the CONCORDIA vessel. I personally don't buy it. Watch it yourself in its entirety and decide.)


NIght vision versus infrared/thermal imaging..

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAvnMYqj2c0

Italian coastguards have thermal imagining cameras where hot spots come outblackinstead of white..why is this??
Image
Image
Terence.drew
Member
 
Posts: 248
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Worldwide media deceptions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests