What's going on with this mysterious disappearing Artic Sea ship?

[Dillinger4]

They're doing a shit job if it at the moment then

Are they? What happened then? Beyond a ship being hijacked. Who was it by? Why?

 

[xes]

It was the butler, in the library, with a 24 mile long penis.

 

[Dillinger4]

If this were a British ship, it would probably be all over the news, then there would be a closed enquiry in a years time costing £17 million pounds, then some of the more general findings that everybody knew already would be published as a footnote years later.

Those Russian sailors will probably just disappear.

 

[xes]

Are you building a conspiracy here?

if so, I'm in!!

 

[Dillinger4]

Nah.

 

[xes]

you suck

 

[detective-boy]

So, the reading of the emails, constant CCTV coverage, logging of phone calls ect, isn't over the top even a teensy little bit? And the thousands upon thousands of requests for data our goverment made last year alone (didn't it equate to roughly enough requests to cover 1 out of every 4 people in the country or something?)

You have clearly fallen for the hyperbole of the conspiraloons.

Have you thought how much computer memory and processing capacity would be required to do what you say is done? How many human operatives would be needed to review, file and cross-reference all hits? To watch all cameras all the time? To watch all the footage from all the cameras that aren't being watched in real-time? To identify who is in the footage and to file and cross-reference that?

Reality check 1: There may well be computer programmes running at GCHQ identifying trigger words in communications and "pinging" them for human consideration ... but the volumes capable of being handled by the staff available are tiny.

Reality check 2: There are undoubtedly targetted monitoring of all communications for a very small number of identified suspects for serious crime (measured in thousands at absolute most).

Reality check 3: Less than about 5% of CCTV cameras are actively monitored at any one time. There is no wholesale identification of people caught in CCTV footage - it targets incidents or places for the vast majority of the time.

Reality check 4: The vast majority of CCTV footage is never viewed by anyone, for any reason. It is retained for 30 days and then destroyed unless an actual incident is known to have happened in which it is used reactively for investigative purposes.

Reality check 5: The hundreds of thousands checks on communications data (the vast majority of which are simple subscriber checks (who's number is this?) or lists of numbers called in a specific period are not that huge when compared against the number of crimes investigated and the fact that a single, large enquiry such as a murder investigation can easily generate several hundred requests.

Reality check 6: No-one, but no-one is routinely knitting together your communications data, e-mail and phone call content, CCTV footage, vehicle sightings and everything else unless you are targetted suspect for major crime.

THIS is the truth ... and anyone who has a couple of brain cells and a moment or two to think about it will realise that we wouldn't have a fucking unemployment / unused office space problem if what you think was happening was actually happening.

 

[xes]

sorry coppah, but I ain't gonna listen to a single word you say. You're ex filth. Simple.

And anyone who has a couple of brain cells can see that there is something very fucking wrong in the way "we" operate. 20% of the worlds CCTV in 1 small country? And you think that's just normal? Explains so much with what's gone so horribly fucking wrong with the police force.

Makes me wonder how many innocent people you battered because you thought it was "normal" to do. Because you haven't the sense to see what's right and what's wrong.

 

[Dillinger4]

I admire your technique, xes.

 

[xes]

I FUCKING hate coppers. On a par with wasps IMO. Fucking useless cunts.

 

[Badger Kitten]

The mystery is revealed...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6823300.ece

It has all the classic ingredients of a Sunday Times story - Mossad, pirates, kidnapping, dodgy Russians, and Iran....

A CARGO ship that vanished in the Channel was carrying arms to Iran and was being tracked by Mossad, the Israeli security service, according to sources in both Russia and Israel.

The Arctic Sea, officially carrying a cargo of timber worth £1.3m, disappeared en route from Finland to Algeria on July 24. It was recovered off west Africa on August 17 when eight alleged hijackers were arrested. The Kremlin has consistently denied that the vessel was carrying a secret cargo. It claims the ship was hijacked by criminals who demanded a £1m ransom.

The official version was challenged by sources in Tel Aviv and Moscow who claimed the ship had been loaded with S-300 missiles, Russia’s most advanced anti-aircraft weapon, while undergoing repairs in the Russian port of Kaliningrad.

Mossad, which closely monitors arms supplies to Iran, is said to have tipped off the Russian government that the shipment had been sold by former military officers linked to the underworld.




The Kremlin then ordered a naval rescue mission which involved destroyers and submarines. Any evidence that the Kremlin had let advanced weaponry fall into the hands of criminals or be sold to Iran would be highly embarrassing, so military officials believe a “cover story” was concocted.

“The official version is ridiculous and was given to allow the Kremlin to save face,” said a Russian military source. “I’ve spoken to people close to the investigation and they’ve pretty much confirmed Mossad’s involvement. It’s laughable to believe all this fuss was over a load of timber. I’m not alone in believing that it was carrying weapons to Iran.”

The alleged hijackers, four Estonians, two Russians and two Latvians, will go on trial in Moscow. According to the Kremlin’s account, they boarded the Arctic Sea in the Baltic by claiming their inflatable craft was in trouble and then took over the ship at gunpoint.

Sources in Moscow suggested Mossad may have played a part in the alleged hijacking by setting up a criminal gang, who were unlikely to have known anything about a secret cargo. “The best way for the Israelis to block the cargo from reaching Iran would have been to create a lot of noise around the ship,” said a former army officer.

“Once the news of the hijack broke, the game was up for the arms dealers. The Russians had to act. That’s why I don’t rule out Mossad being behind the hijacking. It stopped the shipment and gave the Kremlin a way out so that it can now claim it mounted a brilliant rescue mission.”

According to Israeli military sources, Israel received intelligence that weapons bound for Iran were being loaded in Kaliningrad, a port notorious for gun runners. “A decision was then taken to inform the Kremlin,” said the source.

Had the S-300 missiles been delivered, Iran would have significantly strengthened its air defences. An Israeli air force source said that in the event of an attack on Iranian nuclear installations, such missiles could increase Israeli casualties by 50%.

Since the Arctic Sea was retaken, Russia has imposed a security blackout. The hijackers, the crew and two investigative teams were flown back to Moscow in three Il-76 air freight planes. For more than a week after being freed the crew were not allowed to talk to their families. The captain and three crew are still on board the ship, which has resumed its voyage to Algeria, but they have not been able to call home.

Last week Mikhail Voitenko, an outspoken piracy expert who disputed the Kremlin’s original version of events, fled Russia, claiming he had received threats from an official angered by his statements.

Admiral Tarmo Kouts, former commander of Estonia’s armed forces and the European Union’s rapporteur on piracy, has infuriated Moscow by saying the only plausible explanation of the mystery is that the ship was transporting weapons. A spokesman for the Finnish owners denied that missiles could have been secretly loaded onto the ship.

Sources who suspect Mossad’s involvement point to a visit to Moscow by Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, the day after the Arctic Sea was rescued. Peres held four hours of private talks with Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president. Although the Israeli foreign ministry would not be drawn on the Arctic Sea, it confirmed that the two leaders had discussed the sale of Russian weapons to countries hostile to Israel. According to Israeli officials, Peres received verbal guarantees from the Russians that they would not sell advanced weapons systems to Iran or Syria.

“Clearly the Israelis played a role in the whole Arctic Sea saga,” said a Russian military source. “Peres used the incident as a bargaining chip over the issue of arms sales to Arab states, while Israel allowed the Kremlin a way out with its claims to have successfully foiled a piracy incident.

 

[DJ Squelch]

Interesting, the mystery deepens.

If they were smuggling missiles surely they would of had some arms on board and wouldn't of let a dinghy full of blokes take over their ship so easily.

 

[DeepStoat]

I FUCKING hate coppers. On a par with wasps IMO. Fucking useless cunts.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Interesting, the mystery deepens.

If they were smuggling missiles surely they would of had some arms on board and wouldn't of let a dinghy full of blokes take over their ship so easily.

Didn't you read about how Mossad fooled some muppet crims into hijacking it, in order to 'make some noise' about the ship and get it at the centre of an international kidnapping rescue drama?

 

[DJ Squelch]

Yes got that, but with all these boat hijacks it seems odd that people in a little inflatable can board some huge container ship, surely they are aware of this risk & are armed to prevent it The original story where they were pretending to be drug agents sounds more likely.

 

[gnoriac]

Sources in Moscow suggested Mossad may have played a part in the alleged hijacking by setting up a criminal gang, who were unlikely to have known anything about a secret cargo.

Which brings us back to the original point, why would pirates want to go to all that trouble for a bunch of wood? Surely, they were either spooks rather than crims, or they'd been told there was a secret and valuable cargo on board.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Perhaps they pitched up and said ''we know you've got arms on there, we've got a better offer to make you''.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Probably had a rocket launcher in the inflatable as well, pointed right at the ship.

 

[Fuchs66]

I FUCKING hate coppers. On a par with wasps IMO. Fucking useless cunts.

Oh I don't know, wasps play a big role in removing pests that would otherwise cause us a lot of problems, they're only seen as useless by ignorant twats.

 

[Spion]

Oh I don't know, wasps play a big role in removing pests that would otherwise cause us a lot of problems, they're only seen as useless by ignorant twats.

That's the first time I ever saw someone get so shirty defending wasps

 

[not-bono-ever]

You have clearly fallen for the hyperbole of the conspiraloons.

Have you thought how much computer memory and processing capacity would be required to do what you say is done? How many human operatives would be needed to review, file and cross-reference all hits? To watch all cameras all the time? To watch all the footage from all the cameras that aren't being watched in real-time? To identify who is in the footage and to file and cross-reference that?

Reality check 1: There may well be computer programmes running at GCHQ identifying trigger words in communications and "pinging" them for human consideration ... but the volumes capable of being handled by the staff available are tiny.

Reality check 2: There are undoubtedly targetted monitoring of all communications for a very small number of identified suspects for serious crime (measured in thousands at absolute most).

Reality check 3: Less than about 5% of CCTV cameras are actively monitored at any one time. There is no wholesale identification of people caught in CCTV footage - it targets incidents or places for the vast majority of the time.

Reality check 4: The vast majority of CCTV footage is never viewed by anyone, for any reason. It is retained for 30 days and then destroyed unless an actual incident is known to have happened in which it is used reactively for investigative purposes.

Reality check 5: The hundreds of thousands checks on communications data (the vast majority of which are simple subscriber checks (who's number is this?) or lists of numbers called in a specific period are not that huge when compared against the number of crimes investigated and the fact that a single, large enquiry such as a murder investigation can easily generate several hundred requests.

Reality check 6: No-one, but no-one is routinely knitting together your communications data, e-mail and phone call content, CCTV footage, vehicle sightings and everything else unless you are targetted suspect for major crime.

THIS is the truth ... and anyone who has a couple of brain cells and a moment or two to think about it will realise that we wouldn't have a fucking unemployment / unused office space problem if what you think was happening was actually happening.

not sure about the ending para, but the rest of pretty much straight


...for the minute

 

[Fuchs66]

That's the first time I ever saw someone get so shirty defending wasps

Hey I like wasps they're very misunderstood