http://www.tridentploughshares.org/prel/prel02/r021116.html
This happened on Friday-Saturday night.
They spent half an hour on the ship before they hit the alarm.
My guess:
**I forgot my opinion (the debate) in my original OP, (so that nobody asks if it’s a poll or what?)
The news are mostly ‘selected’, not very objective and full of propaganda.
(All boldings mine)
See also the news about the “Worshippers who left the Tomb… and was ambushed”-news
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/021115/80/desvh.html
Then:
The following was issued today by the Spokesman for Secretary-General Kofi Annan (who seems to believe what he has been told):
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2002/sgsm8498.doc.htm
(Kofi Annan is my hero in international politics. Sic!)
Collin Powell (Us department of State website) :
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2002/15191.htm
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer,
Then we have AFP, EU’s Solana and so on, trumpeting the same truth, ad infinitum.
And what says Hebron settlers’ own website???
http://www.hebron.org.il/news.htm
(bolding mine)
Sometimes the official truth is contradicted with most unbelievable sources/directions!
As far as I know, nobody of the killed or wounded was a civilian.
Some of the news-agencies has though given later a more “balanced” picture.
In any other country the occupied people who fights the occupying solidiers (not civilians) would be called “freedom-fighters”, not “terrorists”.
Those who have killed civilians are, by all means, terrorists.
So, to the point:
Massmedia is just a piece of entertainment, sometimes, like in this case, a horror-manuscript and often a tool in politics.
Anywhere!
Independent/objective news and massmedia is a myth. Research before publishing is zero. Except in a case of nuke-submarines. The research seems endless.
I don’t think either the Palestinian terrorists or the Israeli security forces are likely to increase radioactive emissions by ringing bells in Devonport.
Henry, you’re overlooking a couple of important things–first, all the Western news sources agree on what happened, and I might add, they are well-respected news sources like CNN. “Jewish worshipers were attacked and killed”. Presumably these news sources don’t have any motivation to slant the news.
The second thing you’re overlooking is that Jewish soldiers and security forces go to church, too. True, the use of the words “soldiers” and “security forces” implies a pitched battle, with the Jews in uniform fighting against Arab terrorists, but that’s just spin control. I can see how the the Israelis might want to view it as a killing of “soldiers” and “security forces” rather than “worshipers”, because that way it looks like the commander of the Hebron brigade and the director of security in Kiryat Arba went down fighting, instead of ambushed on their way to church. Some people would prefer to be remembered that way.
And probably the reason why CNN and the others didn’t phrase it as “soldiers” and “security forces” is, first, because that makes it sound like a pitched battle, which it evidently wasn’t, and second, because it’s actually more factual to specify simply “Jewish worshippers”. Probably not all of the 12 who died were “soldiers” and “security forces”, so CNN was going with the simple facts.
And “spin control” on the part of one Israeli news outlet, and that news outlet the one that obviously stands the most to gain by its spin control, hardly amounts to a media conspiracy. You’ll have to come up with better evidence than that, sorry.
And as for your Trident “news blackout”, two seconds with GoogleNews searching under “trident ring bell” would have showed you the error of your assumption.
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_710811.html
http://www.scotlandonsunday.com/uk.cfm?id=1279982002
So there you go–four reasonably mainstream media sources, all running the story. No news blackout here.
Duck Duck
About Trident:
I tried all kind of nuclear - Davenport - Trident - submarine etc., in all kind of combinations, but found only the cite I posted before.
I did check out BBC and Reuters, both English as I understand, and found nothing. Absolutely nothing. It was mysterious for me, because this happened in England.
For me it is alarming news. Much more alarming than a plane crash, a flood or some other disasterous news we can daily read.
Also the news that there is no news is alarming. BBC, AFP, Reuters etc.
You found “four reasonably mainstream media sources”. For me they are not very mainstream, but I think “reasonable mainstream” from Your part of the world. I live here and You live there, so what can I say?
Naturally I do not think that there is a cover-up in itself, it is just that the media does write about everything like it always does. Like a daily routine. News about anything and out of nothing at the same time.
There are positive exceptions, usually columnists.
About “The Worshippers who left the Tomb”:
The whole story begun with the news that The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared on its web-site,
I am sorry I have so little time just now, but also Ha’aretz claims that they were soldiers. Naturally You are right in that also soldiers pray.
That it was not soldiers, or only some soldiers, but mostly civilians is quite obvious in many newspapers. But if You read it “two - three times”, You find out that nothing is really claimed as a fact. We can read whatever news and come to the conclusion that everything can be interpreted in many ways.
Who reads the news two - three times?
People do not remember news, an average human “feel and remember selectivily” what happened.
It is one of the most used tactic, in any propaganda war, in any corner of the world, when we are unconsiously taking in “facts”.
The press is not actually in a propaganda war, but seem not to see that the different countries are.
And thus they become a tool in this war. Surrounded by it.
It is not only the tiny small words that makes the difference. The words are quite loaded and heavy: “worshipper” - “terrorist” and armed people (from the other side) are “security personnel” (as described by Collin Powell).
You can see in news that the papers are reading each other, publishing almost the same story and in the end it becomes “a fact”. The result is the parrot effect.
And it is revealed only when the news are shown not to be true.
Naturally when they are true, and they mostly are, it is natural that the news are reported in a very same line.
The media people seem to be very glad when there is a ready written official truth.
If You ever want the media to publish something, write everything on paper and hand it over to the press. You will be amazed how many will publish Your pressrelease, changes here and there. The higher up it comes from the more holy the piece of paper seem to be.
Even more alarming is when politicians from all over the world, begins to make speeches reading some newsbulletin!
They should have the best opportunity, even better than the press, to check out the truth.
They have, in every country, personnel, the embassies, whose work is, among other works, to look what is really happening.
But You are right; it is not about a “black out”. I see it as pure blindness.
When I worked in the field; news, politics and cultures, I learned a little bit about this trade.
Many times the news are written “in the lobby of a hotel”, based on “facts” that a regime hands the “reporters and media-people”.
It is not a coincidence that in films, even in Hollywood films, the reporters in an exotic foreign country, meets in the bar of the hotel where they are living. It is a quite truthful vision. And understandable.
Our media (anywhere) is not working very well.
And to believe that there is no self-censorship is simply not true.
I still see these two separate news as:
On the other hand, the yellow papers usually does big news of this kind of nuke-submarine-news. That underlines even more “that there is nothing to worry about”-attitude among the people. It’s just a scandal. Like the last week scandal. Burried and forgotten.
Just a note that the naval base is apparently spelled “Devonport,” not “Davenport;” this is probably the reason some of the searches didn’t work.
The security breach, while not unimportant, would have been worse and would probably have gotten more press coverage if it involved actually getting inside the sub, not just climbing onto its top.
What HS said–it wasn’t that big a deal, so I’m not surprised that the BBC and Reuters didn’t feature it. Allow me to give you a link to www.news.google.com if you don’t already have it. It’s much faster than trying to find things using the BBC’s search engine.
All media outlets are going to exercise some kind of spin control, if only by the very fact that they can’t possibly run every single story that comes over the wire. Even reputable news outlets like Reuters and the BBC and CNN are editing what we see, just because their editors have to pick and choose what stories they feature. I don’t see anything particularly “wrong” with that–it’s just the way things work.
And you have to be familiar with your news sources, and when you’re reading something from an obviously biased news source like the various political house organs, you just have to take it with a grain of salt, you have to suspend your judgement, until you can hear some other news source’s version of the story. You can’t accept everything you read, from whatever source, as “the truth”.
And this is why it’s important to get your daily news from more than one source. That way you’re sure of getting a balanced diet. For example, I subscribe to the Chicago Tribune, which I read in hard copy every morning, and then while I’m sitting at the computer doing SDMB, I have things like CNN.com and the BBC online open in other windows, and while I’m waiting for threads to load (sigh 
) I read the other news, and very often there’s stuff in there that the Tribune didn’t run. And often the BBC will have a British slant on some American story, and I read it and think, “Oh, that’s interesting, I never thought of it that way.”
And I also learn a lot about what’s going on in the world from reading threads here.
So, eat a balanced diet of news and take a SDMB vitamin every day, and you will be News-Healthy. 
Humble Servant
You are naturally right, but:
I still claim that the news around the world is just light stuff, mostly selling advertisements to people.
I am quite doubtful they could have planted a bomb on a submarine. I can walk into a police station; that doesn’t mean all the prisoners are sure to be let free.
Thanks Duck Duck for the link.
I read electronically quite a lot of news in 2-3 languages daily. They do not sell any foreign news-papers here. Not even with a delay.
The original source for the submarine I got from a Finnish newspaper that even could tell what an English politician (I forgot the name) had to say about it.
Btw. he was not Labour.
Anyhow, the English news did not go that “deep”, did they?
And I strongly oppose that this was not a big thing. I see this nuke-things when they are not taken properly care of as a quite serious thing. Even if a bomb would not hurt the nukes in that way that they would go off. As I understand, that is not possible, but the reactions would be unbelievable.
I just want to add that I live in a country where the officials (the ministery), oficcialy tells that there is nukes unprotected, nuclear wast dumped in the sea and stolen nukes.
Should I shrug? Should You?
Anyhow, that is not the topic. The topic is why we get so much news that is just a piece of shit?
Why does there be so many unproffessional reporters around?
As a former journalist I know quite a lot about what to take and what is just biased. However, I read also biased news, because many times, as You also point out, there can be a suprising angle.
Btw.
What I never have found in the Net is a serious “Fark.com”. Do You know any?
erislover Why do You think that they could not put a bomb there when they where there undetected for half an hour?
How many kilograms of Semtex do You think they need?
I think 10 - 20 kg is quite enough, 5 - 10 kg each. And that amount You can have belted on two persons without bigger difficulties to move.
The BBC did cover the incident but treated it as a local story.
I can’t say I feel that it deserved that much more attention.
Hi Henry B.
Many docks are huge, busy places staffed by civilians. When military ships are at sea, it is not so hard for Greenpeace ships to approach. It is the nature of the business. I would however agree that there is a problem with security when a nuclear sub in drydock can be freely approached. I hope the problem will be promptly addressed by the Royal Navy.**
The reactors on nuclear subs are designed to withstand breakups under deep sea pressures. Similarly, the hulls of subs have to be very tough to withstand water pressure. There have been several fairly recent incidents (here’s one) of subs colliding with ships. Such an impact probably has force similar to that of a randomly placed exterior bomb. I am not very concerned about a bomb planted outside a sub–a bomb planted inside at sub at the site of the reactor is a very different thing.**
I don’t know–I’d guess about the same.**
I would guess that the lack of any real harm that would result from an outside-planted bomb would be explained and there would be no panic.**
You’re right–it would be nice to see additional explanation. I suspect the navy issued a statement and refused to comment further, but that shouldn’t stop the reporters from looking for a fuller explanation. Perhaps their investigation revealed that an outside bomb is pretty harmless and that the security preventing an intrusion inside the sub is pretty good.
**
A lot of it is. There is some that is not.
On Preview: Could 20kg of plastic explosives planted on the outside of a sub lead to a nuclear explosion? I doubt it. Anything less, and it is only the equivalent of bombing a conventional military vessel which, while a bad thing, should not cause panic generally.
I don’t think any amount of bombing of a nuclear reactor would cause a nuclear explosion. It could of course release a lot of nuclear material via the initial bomb damage or a meltdown, though.
The only one I know is the real one. All the links that people submit are, as far as I know, real links to real stories, albeit rather strange ones.
The only other news website I can think of that features “strange but true” news stories would be News of the Weird…
…and Ananova. Ananova also runs mainstream news items, but I notice that they tend to have a taste for the strange.
And of course you can search regular Google www.google.com under “weird news” and find other “weird news” websites, but a lot of them have the same items.
Is that what you mean by “a serious fark.com”? “Strange but true news items”?
You’re right–please read my post as a “nuclear-problematic explosion.”
Naturally You can’t blow up a nuke with just blowing, lets say the tower of a sub.
I do not think that it would even be possible if You put the bomb under the nuke.
Maybe it is no news. Not until the terrorists does the next attack in this mode. Remember Cole? Local news? Or was it the dead soldiers that was the news? Last week I think there has been accidents with trains, air-planes or whatever where there has been even more deaths than in the Cole case.
So what?
It can be put on the page 5, down in the left corner, that it is proven that terrorists can do this and that…
And if the English are really fixing their Tridents in “open” dock-yards for the next 7 years…, well, what can I say?
The USS Cole was hit by a “small boat loaded with explosives” that was moored alongside her, and I’m not a ballistics expert but I believe that a “small boat loaded with explosives” would pack considerably more punch than a few pounds of Semtex smuggled in under somebody’s jacket.
http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/news/news_stories/cole.html
What exactly are you worried is going to happen to the British submarine fleet, moored there in those “open” dockyards? As I see it, there are a limited number of possibilities for death, destruction, and general doom. I see only two.
It has already been shown, I believe, that simply detonating a bomb on board a nuclear sub doesn’t cause the nuclear plant to explode. Sum total of destruction–about as much damage as the Cole had done to her. People would die, the ship would be damaged, the ship would be repaired. Life would go on.
Please be more specific in what you’re worried is going to happen if the British don’t tighten up their dockyard security. Frankly, I think you’re worrying for nothing.
Or are you just worried that terrorists could steal or blow up a nuclear sub, and the media wouldn’t tell us, or would slant the coverage so much that we wouldn’t know what had really happened? It seems to me you’ve got two different subjects going in this thread.
And, what happens in “7 years”? 
Certainly not. In order to detonate, a nuclear weapon it has to be in a specific configuration. This is brought about with conventional explosives but they have to be very accurately timed and located. At most, an outside explosion will cause sympathetic detonation of the conventional explosive (but not in a fashion to cause the payload to go supercritical) and spread the nuclear material around a bit (quite an easy cleanup).
A worse (or better, depending on your POV) scenario would be to plant conventional explosives capable of breaching the reactor core of the vessel (a good trick since those things are, by design, very well shielded). This would expose (and spread around) irradiated fuel which is much more radioactive than the stuff you find in weapons.