Deepwater Horizon : could this be a terrorist attack ?

One thing is clear : nobody knows for sure, today, what is the cause of the explosion which has sunk Deepwater Horizon.

Some have spoken of a "blowout".

BUT ...

Source

We don't yet know precisely what happened to cause the blowout--there will no doubt be months of investigations.
The basic idea of what happened is that Transocean, under contract with BP, was attempting to drill a new well, not too far from existing wells in a deep water area of the Gulf of Mexico.
The well was almost complete--in fact, the well seemed to be far enough along that the danger of blowout appeared to be very low. The casing had been cemented, and work was being done on getting a production pipe installed.
Apparently, a pressure surge occurred that could not be controlled. While the equipment includes all kinds of controls and alarms, and a huge 450 ton device called a blowout preventer, somehow it was still not possible to control the hydrocarbon flow.
At such high pressures, some of the natural gas separated from the oil within the hydrocarbon stream and ignited causing the explosion.

Also :

Source

Transocean officials said workers had recently finished installing a steel production pipe into the well.
The pipe also had been cementing the well in place by filling up the open area between the pipe and well walls. This should have prevented oil or gas from moving up the well, said Robert MacKenzie, managing director of energy and natural resources at FBR Capital Markets and a former cementing engineer in the oil industry.
"A blowout after you set your final casing and cement, I've never heard of that," he said. "I cannot recall anything even remotely close to this, in terms of magnitude and scale. This is something that is exceedingly rare."
There are gauges and alarms to alert workers on the rig to a pressure build, allowing them to pour a heavy liquid called drilling mud into the well to weigh down the oil and gas. There are also blowout prevention devices on the seabed to automatically sever the pipe and seal the well.

So, it appears that the "blowout" hypothesis is highly unlikely.

Now, please, just have a look on this :

StrategyPage

North Korea has developed several mini-sub designs, most of them available to anyone with the cash to pay.
The largest is the 250 ton Sang-O, which is actually a coastal sub modified for special operations. There is a crew of 19, plus either six scuba swimmer commandos, or a dozen men who can go ashore in an inflatable boat. Some Sang-Os have two or four torpedo tubes. Over thirty were built, and one was captured by South Korea when it ran aground in 1996.
The most popular mini-sub is the M100D, a 76 ton, 19 meter (58 foot) long boat that has a crew of four and can carry eight divers and their equipment. The North Koreans got the idea for the M100D when they bought the plans for a 25 ton Yugoslav mini-sub in the 1980s. Only four were built, apparently as experiments to develop a larger North Korean design.
There are to be over 30 M100Ds. North Korea is believed to have fitted some of the Song-Os and M100Ds with acoustic tiles, to make them more difficult to detect by sonar. This technology was popular with the Russians, and that's where the North Koreans were believed to have got the technology.

OK ???
And also this information :

Al Qaeda Submarines

Al Qaeda has access to drug smuggling submarines bound for the US.
From Reuters: Colombian guerrillas have entered into "an unholy alliance" with Islamic extremists who are helping the Marxist rebels smuggle coc aine through Africa on its way to European consumers, a U.S. official told Reuters
Interdiction efforts have made it more difficult to send coc aine straight from Colombia and other Andean producer nations to the United States and Europe. So criminal organizations including the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, are going through Africa to access the European market. And they are doing it with the help of al Qaeda and other groups branded terrorists by Washington, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. ..... To reach the U.S. market, Colombian smugglers are meanwhile being driven to use disposable, fiberglass submarines.
The homemade craft are constructed in the mangroves of Colombia's Pacific coast, used to carry drugs to Mexico for transshipment to the United States, then sunk.

Sure these submarines are used to transport drugs, but does anyone doubt that Al Qaeda hasn't thought about using them to smuggle operatives into the US? Armed with Anthrax/PETN/You Name It??

Now, tie the pieces together, and just ask yourself : couldn't it be possible that the "Deepwater Horizon incident" be in fact the result of a terrorist attack ?

Why would US need terrorist attacks for a job they can do easily by themself ?
Even if it's not a false flag, companies want fast profits : it means lack of security measures, lack of staff and lack of long term vision.

Terrorist don't have to move, US do it by itself !

.
The question of terrorism is well worth asking.

What kind of security do these oil platforms have? They must have some measures in place as the threat of terrorism would seem obvious.

Is it plausible that due to the cost of updating security, the threats have outpaced the defenses? Remember that just recently a South Korean ship was apparently sunk by torpedo. That was a warship complete with sonar and the gamut of military technology.
Certainly a stationary oil rig would be easy prey for any similar attack.

.

This is an angle to look into, and it seems quite probable. What I have learned about this particular rig, it had man safeguards and alarms to alert the rig crew to manage the scenario before becoming a disaster.

It seems like sabotage may have been the result of this disaster? If it was sabotage, who is the culprit and why? Now, this can go in many directions, but given what I have learned, this rig was quite a sophisticated platform. Maybe the official story is true, but all angles need to be considered. I am sure months and months of investigations and hearings will result from this epic disaster along the Gulf Coast. Hopefully, we get answers everyone is comfortable with. Sadly, transparency is a thing of the past, and spin rules the day when the time comes to divulge information about an issue of controversy. We have to wait and see.

Its not. Why are people so paranoid?

reply to post by dave2770


On floating rigs, what are the protection measures taken in order to avoid a submarine attack ?

Isn't it true that a simple explosive charge shaped as a ring, whith a pressure detonator, laid around the steel production pipe by a diver, and sinking till it detonates, is able to provoke the "fatal pressure surge" which laid to the loss of Deepwater Horizon ?

Who doesn't see that the "reward" of such an action is tremendously "positive" for a terrorist organisation ?

It is the only independant energy source of the USA which is mortally threatened by an action which is quite simple to fullfill.

It is a whole coastal shore which is engulfed in a horrible mess for decades.

If I'm right, prepare to see other attacks laid on other rigs ...

They know they can succeed : fourty years ago, the israelis were underwater successfully attacked by commando frogmen :

Source

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c3dc56af374c.jpg[/atsimg]

Was Deepwater Horizon equiped with such a device ?

Kongsberg's Underwater Surveillance System

You can't really say you have a private beach until you've installed a SM 2000 Underwater Surveillance System by Kongsberg to keep out the riffraff.
The system is designed to protect commercial piers, government and military vessels, cruise ships, terminals, and other high-value assets, but it'll work just as well for your hideaway surf break.
You know it's good if the oil sheiks buy it. Kongsberg installed an integrated system at a "High-Value Seaside resort" in the United Arab Emirates; the exact location is classified. The U.S. Coast Guard just picked up $2 million of Kongsberg gear to enhance its Integrated Anti-swimmer Systems (IAS) program at the nation's ports. The purchase follows the initial IAS contract worth $3 million. Using software and sonar the system can detect and differentiate between "malicious swimmers and divers" and other targets, such as marine life and debris, at up to 1000 meters, according to the British Columbia-based company.
A processor "captures a wide acoustic swath" to positively identify and localize the threat, then notifies security (PDF). You'll be relieved to know that the Coast Guard and the EPA have concluded that the system will not "adversely affect threatened or endangered species or critical habitat." Whether a diver could do enough damage to justify the multimillion-dollar investment is open to debate.
Someone poaching in your favorite abalone patch? A frogman can be warned that he is in a restricted area and should surface immediately by "underwater loudhailer." If that doesn't work, deploy the "nonlethal interdiction acoustic impulse," an underwater shockwave emitter--which, despite its name, can be set on stun or kill.

Note the very weird picture illustrating the quoted source :

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/eedfa862cc43.jpg[/atsimg]

Hmmmm.

Hey ATSers !
Seems that the "biggest conspiracy site" is lacking conspiracists !
Uh ... OOOPS ! sorry : "open minded people".
In the meantime, others medias are trying to pull the truth out of the ... rig !

Let's see ...
This one :
Was the Gulf Oil Rig Explosion a Deliberate Attack on America?

Before I could finish writing my thoughts here, I just heard Michael Savage posing the same questions. He also said there is a theory on a Russian website that claims North Korea is behind this. The article claims that North Korea torpedoed the Deepwater Horizon, which was apparently built and financed by South Korea. Torpedoes would make sense for the results we see. The platform exploded, despite redundant safety features; plus, something apparently also happened on the Gulf floor at the opening of the well to prevent engineers from being able to stop the flow of oil from it. Two torpedoes launched from a submarine could cause those things to happen.

This other :
OIL RIGS UNDER ATTACK?-Im not into conspiracies but this is interesting

Many of our members may have already heard that those in the industry agree that this DEFINITELY wasn't an accident. I've heard this from enough people who I trust to consider it to be likely, and now it's time to reach out to try to confirm this. Let's face it; considering the response, with SWAT teams on every rig, I'm inclined to agree that those assessments are far more likely to be accurate than inaccurate.
And one only needs to remember every major disaster/attack to realize that the press seems to ALWAYS gets through to SOMEONE who was a survivor/witness. Yet not only are we not seeing those interviews, but we aren't hearing a peep from the press, clamoring that there's no access to the survivors.
And then there's the inconvenient truth that a SECOND OIL RIG went down later, but only a single news story has been done on it, and it was just a tiny blurb in Marketwatch. Scroll down past this first article to read the news of the SECOND oil rig to go down in a week.

Has anyone a link towards the russian site speaking of a NORTH-COREAN sub on Deepwater ?

Originally posted by orksonHas anyone a link towards the russian site speaking of a NORTH-COREAN sub on Deepwater?

US Orders Blackout Over North Korean Torpedoing Of Gulf Of Mexico Oil Rig — but it's not a russian site

Sorcha Faal... Internet Hoax Queen Courtesy of David Booth...

The russian intelligence website is called whatdoesitmean.com

And then there's the inconvenient truth that a SECOND OIL RIG went down later, but only a single news story has been done on it, and it was just a tiny blurb in Marketwatch. Scroll down past this first article to read the news of the SECOND oil rig to go down in a week.

First off, this other rig accident was nothing at all. They were towing an old used up rig to a salvage yard and the thing flipped over. Wow, big breaking news there. Call the Marines!!

That type of poor fact checking undermines all your other arguments for the far fetched terrorism theory. Terrorists can't get a car bomb right, what makes you think they can operate flawlessly in 5000 ft of ocean? What type of manned subs capable of carrying weapons can withstand those types of depths? I'm pretty sure those little Korean ones they talk about in your article can't get anywhere near that deep without crushing. Good luck with the terrorism theory.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by ethancoop]

reply to post by ethancoop


Hi.
First of, the "second accident" was NOT emphasized by me, but by a journalist, and it was cited into a quote.
I knew it was a small incident and it was INland.

I tell you : watch the next SUBMARINE incident to come.

Then, I think that you haven't figured what I've written :

Isn't it true that a simple explosive charge shaped as a ring, whith a pressure detonator, laid around the steel production pipe by a diver, and sinking till it detonates, is able to provoke the "fatal pressure surge" which laid to the loss of Deepwater Horizon ?

This means that :

1) a sub comes not far from the rig.
2) one or several divers get out of it and swinm until reaching the main tube, underneath the rig, at a depth of about 30 meters.
3) they dispose around the main tube a RING of explosives, with a pressure detonator.
4) They let this ring to SINK AROUND the tube.
5) they flee. Get into the sub. The sub flees.
6) In the meantime, the ring of explosives has reached a place not far from the bottom of the tube, and explodes, due to the wright pressure.
"
It's not necessary to dive to "5000 ft"

Not sure that this is "a poor theory".

The problem with your ring bomb theory is that the pipes don't go straight down and such a device wouldn't slide down to the sea bed.

Also, if this explosive ring were to detonate at the sea floor, severing the pipeline, why did the rig burn for 2 days? The oil and gas that supplied the fuel for the fire would have been cut due to the detonation. Right?

Originally posted by ethancoop

And then there's the inconvenient truth that a SECOND OIL RIG went down later, but only a single news story has been done on it, and it was just a tiny blurb in Marketwatch. Scroll down past this first article to read the news of the SECOND oil rig to go down in a week.

That type of poor fact checking undermines all your other arguments for the far fetched terrorism theory. Terrorists can't get a car bomb right, what makes you think they can operate flawlessly in 5000 ft of ocean? What type of manned subs capable of carrying weapons can withstand those types of depths?
[edit on 3-5-2010 by ethancoop]

A weapon could be deployed say like a depth charge with pressure detonation. Just a thought.

reply to post by ethancoop


Yes good point. The blast was up on the platform?

What are eye witnesses saying? Maybe some radio trafic was recorded.




[edit on 4-5-2010 by Logarock]

reply to post by ethancoop


You have to address this problem : WHY didn't the automatic anti-blowout systems do their job ?

My answer is : because they are at two levels : on the flotaing rig and on the head, on the sea-bed.

If you destroy the tube by an explosion, next to the sea-bed,
- the anti-blowout systems of the floating rig are no more effective.
- those of the head are destroyed

Therefore, nothing prevents from a flowing up of gazes and oil, provoking an explosion, then fueling a fire which lasted until the rig sinks.

Then, the oil continues to flow out, and nothing but a solid concrete and steel cap could now stop it.

Thing is, if you explosively disable the preventers then you're more than likely going to sever the pipe and then you wouldn't get the sustained fire they had on the rig.

You'd still have the oil leak we've got now, but the long sustained fire on the rig wouldn't have happened.

reply to post by orkson


I started a thread a way back regarding the threat of a sub attack by terrorists as it was discovered that Worlds first terrorist submarine had been captured in Sri Lanka. www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'd like to understand :

One of THREE leaks has been stopped

The capped leak was more than 800 feet from the blowout preventer, which sits over the well head on the seafloor.

Most of the oil is coming from a leak about 460 feet from the preventer, while a smaller leak is still allowing oil to escape from a crack where the pipe casing bent about 5 feet from the top of the preventer.

If there is only ONE well concerned, the only configuration that fits whith that description is that the tube (which remaining length is 800 feet) bent down on the sea-bed.

- a crack occured at the origin of the tube and made a first leak (not the main one)

- then there's a big hole in the tube at about 460 feet from the well head (main leak)

- then the tube ends (broken apart) at about 800 feet from the well head.

OK. Now, the good questions are :

- WHAT broke apart the tube at 800 feet from the sea-bed ?
- WHAT digged a big hole in the tube (WITHOUT BREAKING IT) at 460 feet from the sea-bed ?

- Are these facts explanable only by the fact that the floating rig sunk after burning ?