The Sinking of the Cheonan: We Are Being Lied To!

• The sinking of the Cheonan is very likely a false flag attack engineered by Illuminist intelligence forces of the Anglo-American-Zionist hegemony. The Satanic cabal is setting up the world for their Satanic World War 3 plan. Obama is gathering a huge armada in the Persian gulf in preparation of war with Iran. Pakistan is being dismembered and used as the bogeyman to trigger a South Asia War: India-Pakistan-China. The North Koreans are setup as the fall guy for a planned war against China.
   
• Why would the North Koreans use a German torpedo? Why are the recovered torpedo fragments covered with so much rust, after only a short period of time? Why are the initial findings that it is German-made totally ignored? Scott Creighton presents more evidence to suggest that we are being lied to yet again. (See also: The unofficial North Koreans’ View Point: Pyongyang sees US role in Cheonan sinking)
   
  So lets take a look at all the “overwhelming” and “irrefutable” evidence. 1. Someone wrote “number 1.” on one single piece of the salvaged torpedo… 2. they claim the torpedo remains are a “perfect match” of a North Korean type of weapon, a “CHT-02D” torpedo.  This conclusion was reached via an international research team from US, the UK, Australia, and Sweden. …. That’s it. That’s all their “evidence” that the international investigators presented in their UNSIGNED report. That’s right, no one knows who the “investigators” were since they didn’t take the time to sign their work.
    
  A Perfect Match?
  This is the presentation refered to in the paper linked above. They mention that during a presentation of their findings, they showed the schematics of a CHT-02D torpedo in relation to the evidence they found. They claimed in their investigation that these are a “perfect match ….. (see picture top of post). This is by no means a “perfect match”.  No wonder they didn’t want to sign that “investigation” of theirs.
    ….
  There are 4 clear differences in the design of these weapons and one is without a doubt, the key to proving these are not the same.
   
  * “A” & “D” – Here you can clearly see major differences in the design of the hub of the propellers. In the diagram above you can see it has a smaller hub whereas in the evidence below it, the hub is larger.
   
  * “B” – The actual shape of the propellers is very different. You can see a notch in the diagram above that doesn’t exist in the actual evidence propeller below. The overall shape of the blades are vastly different as well, both the front and the rear propeller sets.
   
  All of this might be explained away by suggesting that these propellers were switched out. Thought it might be possible, remember that these are finely tuned and designed systems; one just can’t switch these hub designs “willy nilly” like one would on their John-Boat. But, that aside, though it may be possible to have put different kinds of propellers on this fish, it is certainly NOT a “perfect match”. Now, the last point proves they are not the same torpedo.
   
  * “C” - As you can plainly see, the stabilizers (or propulsion system?) in the diagram above are clearly shown IN FRONT of the separation plate as it is lined up in the display with the evidence below. However, the torpedo below houses that same stabilizer (or propulsion system) BEHIND the separation plate (separating the body and the tail section of the torpedo). 
   
  This is a major difference that cannot be explained by saying it was some kind of after market modification. This is part of a key design of the workings of these weapons and can not have been changed. This difference clearly indicates these are different weapons altogether.
   
  (there are other differences that have been pointed out to this researcher; “Jan” noticed that the axle shape is tapered on the evidence and straight on the diagram. A good point. There are probably others as well (I noticed a difference in the shape of the “fin” in the guidance section in the back as well…. clearly there is no way to say these are a “perfect match”) It is no wonder the “investigators” chose not to sign their work.
   
  The Forgotten Investigation
  On May 6th, 2010 a report came out conducted by South Korea and others that said the torpedo’s metal and explosive residue indicated that it had come from a German origin.
   
  The team of South Korean and foreign investigators found traces of explosives used in torpedoes on several parts of the sunken ship as well as pieces of composite metal used in such weapons, South Korea’s Yonhap news agency said quoting a senior government official.
   
  … The metallic debris and chemical residue appear to be consistent with a type of torpedo made in Germany, indicating the North may have been trying to disguise its involvement by avoiding arms made by allies China and Russia, Yonhap quoted the official as saying.  REUTERS News Agency
   
  This report has been all but forgotten by the media and the Clinton led state department as they press for crippling sanctions and perhaps more. But there is a confirmation of sorts in the May 20th unsigned “investigation”.
   
  The first thing they should do, rather than attempt to convince the people that the two are “perfectly matched” in design (when they clearly aren’t) is a chemical and metallic debris analysis of the evidence.  The May 20th “investigation” does not make mention of this crucial part of the investigation at all… they don’t mention it at all. 
   
  The reason for that is clear; if they were to address these two key scientific points, they would have to have admitted that the science shows these pieces of evidence are of German construction and therefore not of North Korean origin. By ignoring these two important parts of the investigation, the May 20th paper confirms the earlier work of the May 6th study… the torpedo is of German origin
   
    …. to continue reading click here!

end