Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Thursday, October 20, 2005

Fish In A Barrel

The Sub Report directed me to a review of the moonbatty French documentary, "Kursk: A Submarine In Troubled Waters", which I discussed earlier this week. As I read the review, from a Hartford, CT, newspaper, my blood pressure started to rise. Here's why:

"French filmmaker Jean-Michel Carré has tried to address some of these questions in Kursk: A Submarine in Troubled Waters . It is a choppy, entirely porous conspiracy theory of a movie that nonetheless is pretty convincing. What seems likely is that the U.S. Navy was involved in the sinking of the boat...
"...So here's the theory. The Russians were testing a new torpedo, the shkval , which could travel an astonishing 300 miles an hour, and they were showing it off to Chinese officials. The Kursk was also carrying nuclear warheads. This annoyed the Americans, who trailed the Kursk with two subs of their own, the Memphis and the Toledo . In the shallow waters, the Toledo and the Kursk collided. As the Toledo limped away after leaving a tear in the hull of the Kursk the Memphis came in to cover, and when it seemed that the Kursk was going to fire a torpedo at the fleeing Toledo , the Memphis fired one of its own: an MK-48, which sent the Kursk to the bottom. Supporting this theory: The Toledo soon took refuge in a Norwegian port under secrecy, for repairs. What also seems hard to refute is the very round puncture hole in the Kursk hull, which was visible when it was raised." {Emphasis mine}

My first thought was to use whatever power I've gained in the blogosphere to rain down holy indignation on this newspaper. How could a paper in Connecticut -- home of the Submarine Capitol of the World, and also home to the two boats slandered -- print such irresponsible trash? Even the most retarded newspaper columnist with a dial-up internet connection could figure out in five minutes that the premise of the film is so completely out to lunch that it's not worth considering.

But then I thought some more... look, it's not the Hartford Courant, it's the Hartford Advocate, which probably has a circulation of about 10. I think it's one of those weekly papers that you pick up for free next to the house rental circulars. The author of the piece appears to write for every single "alternative" free newspaper in the state, so I'm sure he's (she's?) too busy to actually check facts. The author probably wouldn't understand concepts like "the American subs were dropping off sonar tapes to fly to the U.S." or "Mk 48 torpedos don't make neat little holes" so it'd probably be a waste of time.

But, if you don't feel like it'd be a waste of time to let them know how ridiculous they sound, they do invite feedback from readers at the bottom of the article, to: Tell 'em Bubblehead sent ya.

Important Follow-up: In my earlier post on the documentary, I mentioned that I had heard that Blind Man's Bluff co-author Sherry Sontag was apparently listed in the credits of the documentary, and I invited her to disavow any support of the film's conclusions. I got a very nice E-mail from her colleague, and the other co-author of the book, NY Times reporter Christopher Drew, who provided the following information:

"My memory is that both Sherry and I gave an interview several years ago to these French folks, who had said only that they were doing a documentary on the Kursk and on what subs had done during the Cold War. Then, as they were asking questions, it became apparent that they were chasing after some of the most ridiculous theories blaming the Kursk sinking on a collision with a US sub etc.
"I had helped write the most definitive early story in the New York Times debunking all those Russian theories, and we told the French crew that we were certain that there had not been any collision and that the Kursk had sunk because of a malfunction with its own weaponry. They clearly thought that we were just lackies for the US Navy, and we figured by the end of the interview that they would either leave us on the cutting room floor or just use us as the "to be sure" folks saying, "No, the problem was something else," which also would have been fine with us.
"I've been down in New Orleans (my hometown) for the last several weeks covering the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and I haven't had a chance to talk to Sherry about this. But as far as I know, this is the first we've heard about their documentary since that interview."

Thanks, Chris, for taking time out of your busy schedule to explain this... I feel bad for having fleetingly entertained even a modicum of doubt about Ms. Sontag.

Moonbat update: If you want to see how moonbats really think, check out the lunacy of this conspiracy theorist over at BlameBush...

Thanks to Citizen Smash at the Indepundit for his Morning Quarters.


Anonymous subcomunic8r said...

Reviewer didn't even get the plot line right. In the "documentary", the Memphis pulled into Bergen while Toledo "limped" home.

10/21/2005 6:54 AM

Anonymous subcomunic8r said...

Perhaps they listed Sherry Sontag (didn't notice if Christopher Drew was in the credits) in an effort to lend their story an air of crediblity.

10/21/2005 7:36 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

We all know that if the French we involved that they would have immediately surrendered. Nobody "reaches for the sky" like the French.

10/21/2005 11:12 AM

Blogger Roberto Iza Valdes said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11/02/2005 7:49 AM

Blogger Iza Firewall said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

8/26/2007 3:55 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home