PCC-772 Cheonan: An Unacceptable Provocation by the United States of America and the International Community has a Duty To Respond

edit: (please read Aug 31st article; PCC-772 Cheonan: Newly Revealed Report from March 2010 Proves the Tragedy of the Cheonan is Being Used as Just Another Pretext in the Global Free Market Wars)

by Scott Creighton

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton made this statement in South Korea just one day ago on the subject of the March 26th sinking of the PCC-772 Cheonan a vessel belonging to the people of South Korea …

“… The international, independent, investigation… was objective. The evidence… overwhelming. The conclusion… inescapable. This was an unacceptable provocation by North Korea and the international community has a responsibility and a duty to respond.”  Hilary Clinton, 5/26/2010

This is simply … untrue. It is… a lie. And the evidence is… overwhelming. The conclusion… inescapable.  My own government is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today… and my silence would be betrayal.

“... and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government.” Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. April 4, 1967 (one year to the day before his assassination on April 4, 1968)

South Korea is staging anti-submarine exercises in coastal waters as we speak. They are talking about continuing with the propaganda broadcasts across to North Korea that were halted 6 years ago. If they do that, North Korea has promised to destroy the broadcast towers and or loud-speakers. Trade agreements have been halted, workers from North Korea who had been employed by South Korean companies have been forced to stop. All of this just a few years after serious re-unification talks between the two countries and merely a week since the “international, independent, investigation” named North Korea as the nation responsible for sinking the Cheonan and killing 46 of her crew.

In one short week, years of progress on the Korean peninsula has come to a grinding halt with two nation states poised to take up arms against one another. Seventy million lives lie in the balance and at the center of the political decay and growing instability, is the sneering, lying Secretary of State of the United States of America who delivered her speech, on foreign soil,  with the pompous arrogance of a dictator daring anyone to disagree. 

Well, let’s get to it…

“The international, independent, investigation… was objective.”

The investigation that was made public on May 20, 2010, which Hilary Clinton was referring to,  was anything but objective and for that matter you can seriously question whether or not you can even call it an investigation.

The Investigation Report on the Sinking of the ROKS “Cheonan“, the official report that Hilary Clinton is speaking of is a 5 page, unsigned report prepared by 25 South Korean members of the Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group with assistance from “24 foreign experts constituting 4 support teams from the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Sweden“.

The three nations selected to assist in this “investigation” are about as “objective” toward the United States as we are toward Israel and considering the fact that the United States was participating with South Korea in the war games that were taking place at the time the Cheonan was sunk, it would seem that the “objective investigation” was a little stacked on the side of one of the possible culprits.  The report makes no mention of these war games or the US vessels that were involved.

March 26th 2010 –  “The Foal/Eagle US-South Korean joint exercise is currently underway in the West Sea as US Aegis ships arrived May 25 at the Pyongtaek Naval Base where the Second Fleet is headquartered“.

… Failure to discuss the presence in the war games on the fateful March 26 night of four Aegis ships, the USS Shiloh (CG-67), a 9,600-ton Ticonderoga class cruiser, the USS Curtis Wilbur (DDG-54), a 6,800-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer, the USS Lassen, a 9,200-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer and Sejong the Great, a 8,500-ton South Korean guided-missile destroyer, most probably supported by US nuclear and South Korean German Type 209 and 212 AIP submarines.  Asia Times, May 26 2010

This “investigation” was hardly objective in any stretch of the imagination. Ironically, North Korea has requested access to the evidence in order to conduct their own investigation into the matter but the South Koreans have refused their request on the grounds that it would be inappropriate to allow a suspect to investigate the scene of the crime, or something like that.  The irony being that is exactly what the South Korean government did when they allowed the United States to take over the “objective” investigation with the help of 2 nations who were members of the Coalition of the Willing and a third whose financial ties to the US run as deep a our very own central banking system.

” The evidence… is overwhelming.”

Depends on what your definition of “is” is.

The evidence supplied by the independent investigation is scant at best and probably fraudulent (which may explain why the report remains unsigned).

The report in no way proves the conclusions that it reached:

Based on all such relevant facts and classified analysis, we have reached the clear conclusion that ROKS “Cheonan” was sunk as the result of an external underwater explosion caused by a torpedo made in North Korea. The evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that the torpedo was fired by a North Korean submarine. There is no other plausible explanation. The Investigation Report on the Sinking of the ROKS “Cheonan

Flaw #1 – The first flaw in their conclusion comes from the idea that only a torpedo could have caused the recorded damage to the PCC-772 Cheonan. This is simply not true and the official “international” report does not provide enough substantive evidence to prove that the damage could only have come from the detonation of a torpedo directly under the hull of the ship.

A reader here provided this researcher with some very interesting alternative causes for the damage by way of linking me to the work of Mr. Shin. Though I am certainly not qualified as a nautical engineer to assess the validity of his claims, Mr. Shin is qualified.  He also happens to be South Korean and also just happened to have been one of the three investigators recommended by the Korean National Assembly to work on the very report Hilary Clinton is citing.

The mans name is S.C. Shin and he wrote a letter yesterday to Hilary Clinton trying to explain to her why he felt the findings of the “investigation” were flawed.

I am S.C. Shin, a civil investigator recommended by Korean National Assembly for the sinking of Cheonan and I’m writing this letter to let you know the truth exactly here in Korea.

I have graduated Korea Maritime University in 1982, served 2 years in Navy as a sailing & gunnery officer, worked for Hanjin Shipping on a containership regular line between Far East & West coast of U.S as a navigator for several years and experienced shipbuilding inspect affair for 7 years in Major Shipyards in Korea such as Hyundai, Samsung, Daewoo and Hanjin Heavy Industry.

I have built 3 bulk carriers of 136,000 tons and 10 container ships of 2,000~4,000 teu in charge of hull structure, shipping machinery and outfittings, paint and nautical equipments including navigation system.

… I didn’t agree with the conclusion of the Korean military administration and now sued for libel by them.

… So I want to talk to you about my oppinion and I think this might be a meaningful information to lead you to the truth of the unfortunate accident in Korea.

…  The Military Administration made a conclusion that Cheonan had torn in two and sunken by the ‘Explosion of Torpedo’.

But my oppinion is quite different from it because I could not find even a slight sign of ‘Explosion’ but could find so many evidences of grounding in/out of the vessel.

I want to ask you fully understood that a tiny voice for the truth may prevent unexpected disaster and assure the safety of 70 million people in Korean Peninsula.  S.C. Shin, May 26,2010

Mr. Shin goes into great detail to provide Clinton evidence of his claims.  It is Mr. Shin’s conclusion that the Cheonan grounded at some time in the evening of March 26th 2010 during manuevers in a very tight and shallow area off Baengnyeong Island in the Yellow Sea.

Any vessel coming out of the Narrow Strait has no choice but to keep her course steady due to shallow water both right and left. Vessels can easily face dangerous situations in this kind of unique area and fallen in the status of  ‘Running aground’ or ‘Collision’.   S.C. Shin, May 26,2010

The information that Mr. Shin provides is compelling when you consider that grounding of the vessel was the official story for a very long time after the accident.

The first call from 772 to Headquarter was “Grounded !”
The first call from HQ to Korea Coast Guard was “Grounded !”
The first report to the Administration was “Grounded !”

Naval administration and the survivals gave a briefing to the families of victims on Mar. 27th – the next day of accident, showing a mark of the exact position of grounding on operation map on which the time of tidal current and the depth of water commented on the top-left corner.  S.C. Shin, May 26,2010


Mr. Shin also provides excellent photos of the damage to the Cheonan which seem to support his conclusion, that the Cheonan ran aground in shallow waters and then managed to limp off.  But it is what is suggested after that by Mr. Shin that probably got him in the most trouble… Mr. Shin suggested that his findings led him to conclude the Cheonan ran aground then afterward at some time, collided with another vessel, probably military, and THAT is ultimately what sank the Cheonan.

His findings should be an important part of what is quickly becoming the international narrative of the Sinking of the Cheonan, but they aren’t.  Mr. Shin was brought in by his own National Assembly to add his experience to the important investigation of this event and he was subsequently removed and silenced when he didn’t report back with the agreed upon fabricated story that blamed North Korea.

Mr. Shin proves that there is certainly another “plausible explanation” to what happened and he was as close to the investigation as anyone else so his conclusions must be considered along with the rest.

Flaw #2 –  As the Asia Times reported, the idea that a North Korean sub could have snuck up on the Cheonan and gotten off a shot in waters that shallow, is absurd. The Cheonan itself was well equiped with sonar equipment and it was engaged in war-games with several other vessels that were equally if not better equiped. The idea that the North Korean sub was able to get in, sink the Cheonan, and then get out undetected, is beyond plausible.

The investigation team did not prove at all the presence of a North Korean submarine at the scene of the sinking at the time of one of the world’s greatest military exercises, as illustrated by telltale failures:

… Failure to discuss the manner in which the suspected slow-moving North Korean submarine managed to penetrate South Korean waters, operate in shallow waters (depth of less than 30 meters) without being detected by the state-of-art radar and sonar-mounted US and South Korean ships and get away scot-free after the corvette sank in an explosion with a column of water so high (about 100 meters), so flashy and so noisy that a sentry on the shore of the Island of Baekryon witnessed it.  Asia Times

This is by no means a small issue. By implication is that a small, older North Korean sub could sneak past the joint operations of the South Korean Navy and the U.S. Navy, undetected, and sink a major target in shallow waters.  By comparison it is the equivalent of the “lone gunman” theory where a crazy lone individual can somehow defeat the entire shared efforts of the Secret Service and law enforcement in order to assassinate a president. Well, we all know what the “lone gunman” story is. My guess is this “lone sub” story is somehow very similar indeed.

Flaw #3 – The killers sign their work.  The discovery of the North Korean writing is way too convenient for anyone to believe. The writing looks like it was done after they brought the “evidence” up from the floor of the ocean and they might as well have written “Yes We Did It! Ha Ha Ha… signed North Korea” on the thing.  It’s so blatantly staged one has to laugh at it when anyone here in the States mentions it on tv.

Well, guess what? Its even funnier than that.  Apparently they couldn’t even get the “fix” right, as is pointed out in the Asia Times article…

 The investigation team produced what it termed “conclusive evidence”: the eye-catching hand-written Korean markings “ilbon” or “No 1” in English found on the propulsion section of the used torpedo allegedly recovered from the sea bed.

This turns out to be most inconclusive and counter-productive, calling into serious question the credibility of the findings. The use of “ilbon” in Korean script – not in Chinese characters – may look like North Korean writing, which is distinctly different from what is written in South Korea.

But native North Koreans use “ilho” for the English “No 1”. “Ilbon” is what South Koreans would use, although North Korean street addresses more often than often not do contain numerals like “ilbon“.

A likely theory for this blunder is the sense on the part of the investigators that there was an absence of hard evidence to impress a skeptical South Korean and world audience.  Asia Times

 A commenter here just made the same observation. He lives in South Korea and he said that the usage of the word is common in his country as well. This would be laughable if only it weren’t evidence that someone is attempting to drive two nations to war.

As I stated before, this fact in itself may explain the fact that this “independent investigation” remains unsigned. Might not be that difficult to compare handwriting samples to find out just who in fact signed the “#1”

Flaw #4 – The evidence drawn from the bottom of the sea and the image of the North Korean torpedo are not, as they claim, “a perfect match”. In fact they are far from it.  The following is from my first article on the subject of the sinking of the Cheonan…

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.  American Everyman

These are not small differences that can be explained away by some kind of after market upgrades like MTVs “pimp my torpedo”.  These differences have a major effect on the operation of the weapon, the harmonics, the drive, the propulsion system.  In fact, the differences are so obvious, I don’t the tail end of the two torpedos would even look similar at all.

The fact is, they are not a “perfect match” by any stretch of the imagination. That is obvious to even a casual observer.

Flaw #5 –  This investigation completely ignores the previous findings of the May 6th investigation which concluded that German metal and German RDX was found in traces on the evidence collected from the actual wreckage of the Cheonan and from the sea floor. This May 20th investigation never even mentions the earlier findings and attempts no chemical analysis of its own.

It said a team of civilian and military specialists confirmed that a chemical substance used in making torpedoes has been identified from residue found on the funnel, the stern, as well as the seabed, where the broken half of the ship rested.

Each of the chemical elements of the explosives traces was confirmed as those of the RDX, a more powerful explosive than TNT,” he said

They came to the conclusion because the RDX is used for torpedoes, not sea mines.”

RDX stands for research department explosive. It is a highly explosive compound, commonly used as a main ingredient in plastic explosives.

About four alloy fragments have also been found in the salvaged wreckage and an analysis has suggested that they were made of an aluminum-magnesium alloy used to produce a torpedo’s casing, the official said.

The government is expected to make public its findings around May 20 as an investigation is underway to determine the manufacturer of the torpedo and who fired it. Korean Times May 7, 2010


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 May 7, 2010

The Asia Times article also points this out…

Failure to refer to the German explosives found at the wreckage of the corvette despite an initial announcement. The Korea Times reported on May 7, “The multinational investigation team is also closely looking into the possibility that a North Korean submarine fired a German-made torpedo used both by the South Korean and American navies in an attempt to dodge its responsibility.”

The Blue House (presidential house) was dismayed at the multinational investigators’ May 7 announcement that they had detected German RDX in the wreckage and pressured the Defense Ministry not to accept the findings, as Yonhap reported two days later.  Asia Times

By ignoring the previous findings and by failing to perform comparable tests on the evidence they found, the new investigation proved it was not “scientific” nor was it comprehensive in any way.


These 5 flaws, and the many others that are surfacing as I am writing now, prove that what Hilary Clinton said on May 26th was absolutely untrue. Hilary Clinton is trying to establish a history of credibility for the narrative they have chosen for this tragic event.  By doing this with a willful intent of purpose what Hilary Clinton is doing is attempting to provoke two nation states into combat readiness in the hopes that something will happen while the tensions are at the highest level.

One of the three people asked by the National Assembly to investigate the incident has stated he does not support the conclusion that North Korea sank the Cheonan with a torpedo. Sweden even resisted that finding up till May 19th, 2010. This evidence shown here proves that this is not an “inescapable conclusion” like Hilary Clinton has claimed it is.

 CBS News reported on May 19 a significant Iraq War-like split among multi-national investigators: “The US, Britain and Australia – all of which helped in the investigation – are all prepared to back up the findings. Only Sweden, which also sent investigators, is a reluctant partner in blaming the North Koreans.”  Asia Times

Her involvement in the deeply flawed investigation, her inflammatory and accusatory statements, all of this represents an unacceptable provocation of the peoples of Korea by the United States of America and it is my opinion that the International Community has a duty to respond.

(I wish the peoples of South and North Korea, peace.  I write to you at a time when our futures are uncertain and our prospects, grim. I write to you to condemn the words of one false American and in closing I offer to you the best of which we as a people have to offer in the words of another. A true American. I can only pray that we find our way out of this and away from those who would pleasure in seeing the worst come true.)

“… and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: “A time comes when silence is betrayal.” 

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.”  Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., April 4, 1967

33 Responses

  1. […] willyloman пишет: In one short week, years of progress on the Korean peninsula has come to a grinding halt with two nation states poised to take up arms against one another. Seventy million lives lie in the balance and at the center of the political decay and growing instability, is the sneering, …. 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. … […]

  2. Thank you for your great service.

    I am a S. Korean and I know most rational-minded S.Koreans do not believe the govt report. To base U.S. policy on such a fraudlent report will result in huge embarrassment for the U.S.

    The current Korean govt is composed of liars, cheaters, and criminals – from the president to the mid-level officals. The most corrupted & deceptive govt ever in S. Korean history since the dictator Chun Do Hwan.

    Lastly a word about S. Korean media, which is in bed with the current regime, – They’re like Fox News, only worse, much worse. What they fabricate everyday and present as news is the best comedy in the world. (Too bad the S Koreans have to live with htem.)

  3. Thank you for this article. Your article may save many lives of those who speak truth or those who questioning to the government report.
    Thanks again and I will try to bring more people with more evidence in English.
    For sure, this page will be hit thousands time(?)…

  4. Hello Scott

    Another nice write up, thanks for that.

    I would however caution you against relying too much on Kim Myong-chol. Even though he makes seemingly valid points here (which you can verify from other sources), Id urge you to find and quote other sources, because even though his articles may appear in the Asia Times, he hardly seems a very credible figure or impartial observer:

    Some paragraphs in the articles you actually linked to should have raised red (no pun intended) flags, like his claim that “Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il is one click away from turning Seoul, Tokyo and New York into a sea of fire with a fleet of nuclear-tipped North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles.”

    Another point and possible trail for you is seismic data; have a look at this:

    Im totally baffled by how someone could accurately derive a torpedo’s exact speed and depth of impact from seismic data (!) but even if that is possible, note their conclusion:

    “After the initial explosion, it was observed that a series of internal explosions occurred in the stern for about 80 seconds,” he said. That suggests the Cheonan was not hit by a bubble jet, as previously assumed, but received a direct blow from a gunpowder explosion. ”

    This predates the official report. Perhaps worth looking deeper in to this.

  5. BTW, another wild and totally unsubstantiated theory.. is it possible the cheonan dropped a depth charge in too shallow water (or that exploded too soon?)

  6. BTW, another possibility is…….
    Crash between Cheonan and Submarine…
    Have you heard of it? A Japanese journalist has strongly suggested this possibility.
    http://tanakanews.com/100507korea.htm in Japanese
    http://japanfocus.org/-Tanaka-Sakai/3361 in English
    Take a look.

  7. Who Sank the South Korean Warship Cheonan? A New Stage in the US-Korean War and US-China RelationsThe original Japanese text is available here

    Tanaka Sakai

    Translated by Kyoko Selden

    Introduction [Updated May 24, 2010]

  8. Just re-posted a partial blog from Dandelion Salad. It appears that one of the inspectors, disagrred with the findings, and sent a letter to Hilary Clinton about it. He is being sued for libel by the government. According to him and the evidence, the ship ran aground in dangerous waters and split in two. He states that distress calls prior to the sinking all confirm this. The torpedo could have just been placed, or was it possible that the ship carried such torpedos itself.

  9. Hello Kay, I received email from Scott and he was amazed at the numbers of ‘clicks’ coming from S. Korea. He said tens of thousands have read his article !!

    I wonder if N. Koreans know ?

  10. Willo:
    Watch this Interview.
    There is a Sweeden Guy who also speaks about your point of view.


  11. yes, I saw that earlier lennon. Its a good interview. especially the part where the guy from washington can’t come up with one single plausable reason why North Korea would attack a South Korean sub.

    Roy A. posted a link earlier.

    I noticed the swedish guy from South Korea was saying exactly the same thing I was saying in my earlier article. I wonder if he hadn’t read it…

    someone put up a link to some main stream media outlet in South Korea that was using my article and illustration as a reference…


    I don’t I have influenced anything over there. The South Koreans seem to have known something was amiss all along. But I am glad that I have contributed to the dialog in a small way. I only hope we can promote the same kind of dialog here in the states.

  12. Mr. Creighton,
    In an effort to help get the word out and break the MSM politically motivated monopoly on what “news” makes it out there to the people, we have republished, with full attribution to you and linked to your website, this very important story.

    The posting may be found here

    Very good work.
    Please email me and let me know if we need to make any changes.
    (I do plan to possibly add the Real News story linked to by a reader from above.)
    Thank you for your activism and voice,
    Lisa McB

  13. ps
    I won’t be adding the Real News story because we actually published that a few days ago. Sorry for the double post- couldn’t find how to edit the first.

  14. Lisa McB

    I am very glad you posted the article, I too hope that this information becomes more readily available here in the US.

    You and your readers might be interested to know that currently this story is receiving a lot of attention from the people of South Korea.

    A recent New York Times op ed is attempting to justify why the young people of South Korea don’t seem to be up in arms about all this and ready to invade North Korea.

    The truth is, the people of South Korea seem to be very aware that the official story is untrue.

    My website has seen more hits on this story than any other I have written in the past and it has been translated and reposted on several sites over there.


    The people of South Korea don’t want a war based on lies.

    I am very happy that you have put this up on Axis of Logic and I am sure the people of South Korea appreciate it as well (though I certainly cannot speak for anyone but myself)

    thank you again,

    scott creighton
    American Everyman

  15. I’m glad to see this effort gaining some momentum. Hillary Clinton, war dog, needs to be muzzled. She is hardly representative of the “gentler sex”. There is more vitriol and venom spewing from her wrinkled puss than all of her predecessors combined. It would seem that if she had her way we’d be bombing Iran, N Korea, Pakistan and WhoeverPissesHerOffistan. And that’s the short list. She and her minions must be stopped from giving the gift of 9/11 to every country in the world. For the love of humanity she must be silenced. Most immediately, the lives of millions of Koreans are at stake. It is good to hear that many S Koreans are not as blindly accepting of the official story as Americans have shown themselves to be. May cooler heads prevail.

  16. Well. Shawn, many Koreans actually believe the official report because most of Korean medias are controlled by the current regime. They don’t have access to info helpful for reasonable judgment. I urge you guys in the world to stop Clintion from driving millions in Korean peninular to the war.

  17. Also, I have to say that the media team from the Korean government will try to refute the opinion here. Lee’s administration is good at controlling media both inside and outside Korea in order to make people believe what he want them to believe and he has fund to do so.

  18. It appears that this fiasco among other things is about influencing the Chinese to stop supporting N Korea. I have seen at least 3 articles on the AP wire attempting to insinuate that China is on the edge of seeing things “our way”. Here’s the latest:

    China stands in the way of sanctions and any other offensives in N Korea and the MSM is hyping their ambigous position statements as supportive of the U.S. story (reported as the S Korean story).

    Jedi, I understand that the S Korean gov’t controls much of the media there much like gov’ts do everywhere including the U.S. But like the U.S. there is some degree of freedom for alternative outlets willing and desparately trying to expose the truth whatever it may be. It is those groups and the people from SK commenting on this site that I was referring to. Relative to N Korea their freedom is substantial and I cheer the use of it.

  19. it is my opinion Shawn that this is about Iran as well. North Korea may be a consolation prize the the US and the other free market capitalist nation states want from Russia and China in exchange for minimal sanctions on Iran. The idea being that the US and Britain and Israel will get to go in and neoliberalize North Korea as long as Iran is left pretty much alone. If Russia comes down on the side of the obviously flawed “objective investigation” then we all know the scales have been tipped and it will be up to China and Russia to convince Kim Jung Il to step down and retire in China somewhere while the neoliberal capitalists chop up North Korea and enslave their people into a life-time of starvation wage jobs and privatized national treasures. that is my greatest fear; that this has been long since decided.

    Now, Kim Jong Il could take the Sampson Option route and that would mean a great deal of suffering for all the people of Korea. Hopefully I am wrong and Russia will look at the flawed evidence and have the determination to call it what it is. In that case, I believe the Chinese will go along with Russia.

  20. Hello Mr. Creighton

    This post is really amazing and fantastic. Your opinion is definitely clear and impressive.

    As you know already it, your previous post was referenced in a news media which is backing current government and ruling party.
    (http://news.joins.com/article/960/4203960.html?ctg=12), but the media described your post just one of internet rumours and refutated your opinion by using the mention of military officials. Let me translate the words of the military officials in English as follows.

    An officer from Ministry of National Defence refuted the article’s opinion “The torpedo for the evidence is the same weapon in the diagram” “Other foreign investigators have agreed it.” “Although we have no information about the level of writers’ knowledge in military area, I would like to point out that the investigators are all experts who has been working more than 40 years.” “In addition, the result was also agreed by British investigator.”

    I am afraid that this Korean news article might make you unpleasant but I hope it helps you understand this situation.

    Thanks again for your effort and admire your will for the truth. God bless to you.

    Best regards,


  21. Thank you for that part of the translation Greg…

    You know I was wondering why the article left out one of the most important differences that I had illustrated… the one labeled “C”

    They left this out of their quote of my article…

    “* “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).”

    If you or someone else would be so kind, please leave a comment posting the above quote and ask the author of that article why he chose to leave that out of his work?

    You could also ask them if they wouldn’t mind referencing the so-called CHT-02D torpedo with a reference that dates back to before May the 15th of this year… for the LIFE of me, I can’t find ANYTHING about that type of torpedo on the entire internet that pre-dates thier claim that it matches this evidence.

    And for that matter I would love it if someone would point out that it didn’t take a “military expert” to determine that George Bush and Dick Cheney were lying about every single reason they gave the American people to go to war with Iraq.

    The Niger Yellow Cake forgery was exposed by a non-military expert.

    The fraudulent connections to al Qaeda was exposed by a non-military expert.

    The WMDs lie WAS in fact exposed by a military expert, Scott Ritter… so there is that….

    But in the history of political lies to justify wars of aggression, the fact is, most of them have been CREATED by the “military experts” and the ones that were exposed were often exposed by people with little to no military background at all.

    So my not being a ‘military expert” is pretty much just a smoke screen, isn’t it? Either the propellers are the same as those shown on the drawing or they are not. Either the actuators are in front of the plate or they are not. Either my argument is based on solid evidence or it is not, and if he is saying it is not, then the military expert should stand up and show me how exactly my conclusions are false. Does he offer that proof? No. He offers nothing but to say he is a “military expert”. Sorry, but that is woefully insificiant as proof.

    Now, if their “military experts” would like to debate me on the topic of the validity of their evidence, I would certainly welcome that opportunity.

    But thanks again Greg for pointing this out to me. It’s not that “unpleasant”… rather expected I suppose.

    thanks again.

  22. Who Sank the South Korean Warship Cheonan? A New Stage in the US-Korean War and US-China RelationsThe original Japanese text is available here
    Tanaka Sakai
    Translated by Kyoko Selden
    Introduction [Updated May 24, 2010]

  23. […] ******Here are Scott Creighton’s “5-point flaws” of the report of the “international investigation team.” https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/pcc-772-cheonan-an-unacceptable-provocation-by-the-united… […]

  24. NK Major General may be a fan of yours Willy – saying a lot of the same things here:

    N.Korea rejects warship sinking evidence


    Major General Pak Rim Su, director of the policy department of the NDC, said the North does not have a 130-tonne “Salmon-class” submarine, which the South says torpedoed its 1200-ton corvette, the Cheonan, in the Yellow Sea.

    “We don’t have anything like a 130-tonne Salmon-class submersible,” Pak was quoted by Pyongyang’s Chungang TV as telling reporters.

    South Korean investigators said a Salmon-class midget submarine had intruded into South Korean waters via international waters.

    But Pak said: “It does not make any sense militarily that a 130-tonne submersible carrying a heavy 1.7-tonne torpedo travelled through the open sea into the South, sank the ship and returned home.”

    He also rebutted Seoul’s allegation that salvaged fragments of the torpedo matched design specifications that appeared on brochures the North allegedly sent to an unidentified potential buyer of North Korean torpedoes.

    “Who in the world would hand over torpedo designs while selling torpedoes?” he said.

    Senior Colonel Ri Son Gwon dismissed as a “fabrication” a serial number hand-written on a torpedo fragment reading “1 bun” or number one.

    South Korea said the serial number handwritten in Korean was strong evidence of Pyongyang’s involvement in the sinking.

    “When we put serial numbers on weapons, we engrave them with machines,” Ri said. “We use ‘bun’ only for football or basketball players,” he said.

    Ri said the blame for the incident rested with the “commander-in-chief of the puppet armed forces and military bosses”.

    Pak said the Seoul-led multinational investigation team was not in a position to conduct an objective probe, attacking Seoul for rejecting Pyongyang’s demand that it will dispatch its own investigation team.

  25. Jan,
    Glad to hear that, and I have a feeling that Cheionan incident is going to be the biggest international scandal involved with US and S. Korea, maybe also with Japan. I am not sure if N. Korea knows about this article at all. Bests.

  26. Hello, Scott

    Thanks for your kind reply. Just to comment about the article referenced your post. Although the reporter cut some part of your picture showing important point “C”, they explained it briefly in the main text. So it appears that they did not leave it out on purpose.

    Two more updated news. One is from NK as you can see from the post of fuz. If I give you details about “No. 1” – “1번 (bun, 番) in Korean ” indicating the first number of something. NK rebutted that they use the numbering system usually for the back number of the sports player, rather they use the different numbering system for the weapons like “1호 (ho, 號) “. Basically, two numbering systems are used in mixed way in South Korea but I am not sure abut it in North.

    The other important news is about the ‘TOD footage’. The SK Government has been denied the existence of any footage on the explosion moment but the footage was revealed yesterday although it does not contain all scenes. Some members of investigative team confirmed the existence of it and observed ship was not torn into two parts after 36 seconds of reported explosion time.

    It helps your understanding. Cheers.

  27. Hello Willyoman,

    Just correct that the article you referred was originally from here:
    Although the did not take your ABCD picture, she did mention in the text part about the “C” :
    “He (Scott Creighton) claimed that “C” – 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).”

    In the mean time, the reporter’ name is Oh Yejin (not sure in English), an “internship reporter” of Money Today, I could not find email address of her.

    I believe what Greg said, most likely they just took the picture part of your article to reduce picture size.


  28. It look like she put a same article in two different newspaper, in just 3 minutes different time…
    The first one at 2010.05.28 15:09
    The second one at 2010.05.28 15:12

  29. hello. read Scott’s newest article.. looks like there will be no war!!!

    “New war unlikely over sinking of S.Korean warship – Russian experts”
    Posted on May 29, 2010 by willyloman
    by RIANOVOSTI May 27, 2010

  30. If the international investigation team is so sure of its evidence, why does it not allow inspection by a North Korean expert? What is there to fear?
    In criminal justice, it is contrary to centuries of jurisprudence to convict someone without the accused being able to see and rebut the evidence used to convict him/her.
    Why, on such an important matter of war and peace, do we not follow similar procedures in the case of nation-states?
    The spirit of dictatorship and anti-democracy lies behind such procedural flaws. Hilary Clinton has a lot to answer for, in not protesting such injustice.

  31. […] 6]”PCC-772 Cheonan: An Unacceptable Provocation by the United States of America and the International Community has a Duty To Respond” – Scott Creighton 기자 2010/05/27 https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/pcc-772-cheonan-an-unacceptable-provocation-by-the-united… […]

  32. […] 6]”PCC-772 Cheonan: An Unacceptable Provocation by the United States of America and the International Community has a Duty To Respond” – Scott Creighton 기자 2010/05/27 https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/pcc-772-cheonan-an-unacceptable-provocation-by-the-united… […]

  33. That’s some scholarly article!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: