The Story Changes: The Pentagon Is No Longer Sure Yemen Fired Missiles At A US Ship

Tyler Durden's picture

Last Thursday, after two consecutive missile attacks on the US Navy ship USS Mason, which allegedly were launched by Houthi rebel forces in Yemen, the US entered its latest military engagement in the middle east, when the USS Nitze launched several Tomahawk cruise missiles aimed at radar installations located by the Bab el-Mandab straight, and which enabled the launch of at least three missiles against the U.S. ship.


The USS Mason (DDG 87), a guided missile destroyer

As Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said, "these limited self-defense strikes were conducted to protect our personnel, our ships and our freedom of navigation," adding that "these radars were active during previous attacks and attempted attacks on ships in the Red Sea," including the USS Mason, one of the officials said, adding the targeted radar sites were in remote areas where the risk of civilian casualties was low. That said, as we highlighted, the U.S. said while there growing indications, there was no official proof that Houthi fighters, or forces aligned with them, were responsible for the attempted strikes which targeted US ships. Still, the lack of concrete proof did not bother the US which, cavalier as usual, unleashed the missile assault on Yemeni territory, breaching the country's sovereignty and potentially killing an unknown number of people.

However, today - four days after the US "counterattack" - the story changes. According to Reuters earlier today the Pentagon declined to say whether the USS Mason destroyer was targeted by multiple inbound missiles fired from Yemen on Saturday, as initially thought, saying a review was underway to determine what happened.

"We are still assessing the situation. There are still some aspects to this that we are trying to clarify for ourselves given the threat -- the potential threat -- to our people," Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook told a news briefing."So this is still a situation that we're assessing closely."

And yet, the US had no problem with "clarifying" the source of the threat on Thursday when it fired American cruise missiles at Yemeni targets.

At this point we refer readers to what we said on Thursday, when we once again put on the cynical hat, and voiced what those who have not been brainwashed by US media thought, to wit:

In retrospect one now wonders if the "cruise missiles" that fell close to the US ships were merely the latest false flag providing the US cover to launch another foreign intervention.To be sure, the Houthis, who are battling the internationally-recognized government of Yemen President Abd Rabbu Mansour al-Hadi, denied any involvement in Sunday's attempt to strike the USS Mason.

A few days later, we have the closest thing possible to a confirmation that, even as the Pentagon itself admits, the "open and closed" case that Yemeni rebel fighters would, for some unknown reason, provoke the US and fire unperforming cruise missiles at a US ship, has just been significantly weakened. Of course, it if it wasn't Yemen rebels, the only logical alternative is the adversary of Yemen's rebels: Saudi Arabia. Although with the Saudis in the press so much as of late, almost exclusively in a negative light, we doubt that the Pentagon's "assessment" would ever get to the point where it would admit that America's Saudi allies launched missiles at US ships in a false flag attempt to get the US involved in the Yemen conflict by attacking the Saudi opponents and in the process aiding and abetting the Saudi execution of even more "war crimes."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
drink or die's picture

It did make a nice distraction though.

nyse's picture

Maybe it was actually a 747 that nearly crashed into the ship (9/11 pentagon missle joke, people)

Stackers's picture

Everyone should listen to the audio recording of the generals talking about Vietnam torpedo attacks in the Gulf of Tonkin too.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR1ooWmxQQM

BuddyEffed's picture

Did a whistleblower speak up to force this clarification?

Jim Sampson's picture

Thousands of satellites... Guess none work?

RafterManFMJ's picture

They are all pointed at Trump...

Derezzed's picture

When in doubt, blame the ruskies
Can only be the ruskies

any_mouse's picture

"the Houthis, who are battling the internationally-recognized government of Yemen President Abd Rabbu Mansour al-Hadi"

Hmm, should not the US support the Houthis as the USA supports the opposition to the internationally recognized government of Syria.

Oh wait, no need for a pipeline through Yemen.

Maybe the Saudis fired the missiles as a passive aggressive response to the forthcoming 9/11 suits.

Loftie's picture
Loftie (not verified) any_mouse Oct 17, 2016 9:24 PM

FALSE FLAG went wrong. Should have called the Mossad, they have experience with 9/11. http://goo.gl/l6d22d

philipat's picture

Hey Loftie, previously known as mofio then santafe then Aristotle of Greece then Gargoyle then bleu then oops then most recently lance-a-lot.

You are a serial spammer and a serial pain in the ass. Might I politely suggest that you go fuck yourself? And get a life.

PS. You might have noticed that my attempt to expose you for what you are is always the same. That’s because your Spam is always the same (Using fake links to your BS site which has no connection to your comments, which are deliberately dramatic to encourage people to click on the fake link) so it seems only fair that my exposure of your crap should also always be the same. An eye for an eye.

 

Stuck on Zero's picture

Did the Navy ever state how the USS Mason prevented the "missiles" from hitting the ship?  Was it an IFF signal?

ThirteenthFloor's picture

Boris - finding myself more and more Russian everyday. My first thought exactly.

robertsgt40's picture

I would like to get the USS Liberty survivors take on this.

Taint Boil's picture

Well they didn't work when we had our spy satellites over the MH17 incident .... why would they work now ....

Tall Tom's picture

 

 

 

 

His response was directed toward a post, from Stackers, about the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin non incident.

 

Apples and bananas may both be fruits but they are not the same.

Taint Boil's picture

Just having fun with the word satellites .... not directed / relating to the post he was replying to, man – tough crowd.

 

Tall Tom's picture

 

 

 

You got no junks bro....not from me. Just keepin' it accurate and on track

Tall Tom's picture

 

 

 

 

Thousands of satellites? Huh?  Not in 1964.  Nowhere near hundreds even. Furthermore photos from Spy Satellites were shot on film and then the packages were returned to earth by reentry pods, scooped up by aircraft. Nothing was "Real Time" and data was weeks old. No digital telemetry was transmitted and resolutions were poor.

 

We were still depending upon the U-2 and SR-71 Spy planes for data.

 

NASA launch success rates ran at roughly 60% and Russia's was not any better. Low Earth Orbit was difficult and expensive to achieve for any spacecraft at the time. Human Spaceflight was extremely dangerous.

 

Hell we had just made the first Intercontiental Satellite Televison broafcast with the AT&T Telstar satellite in 1962. We were very primitive compared to that of the current technology.

 

It would be a total culture shock to you

mary mary's picture

No, thousands of satellites NOW taking pictures continuously of what is going on in the Middle East, particularly where the USA has destroyers and other military assets.

SixIsNinE's picture

high altitude planes do the spying

 

pods's picture

Easy peasy, we just recall the missiles. Right?

Another shining moment of our great military killing people around the world in my name. 

How many more countries will we attack before the sheep stop with the reflexive support of our "troops fighting for my freedom."

Hate to tell ya boys and girls in uniform, if you are fighting for MY freedom, you lost miserably. Better come up with a better reason, and quick.

pods

whatamaroon's picture

Good thing ohfuckhead won his Nobel Peace Prize first.

True Blue's picture

Way OT, but interestingly, Rear Admiral George S. Morrison was in command of US Naval Forces in the Gulf of Tonkin during the 'incident'.

Odds are, his name means nothing to you. But I bet you have heard of his son -Jim Morrison who began a skyrocketingly successful career just two years later with 'The Doors'.

 

King Tut's picture
King Tut (not verified) True Blue Oct 17, 2016 6:09 PM

There's a lot of theories that the CIA was heavily involved in the 60s music scene in So Cal- Morrison just one example of that

SixIsNinE's picture

my dad was in the military too; had no bearing on the impact of the most amazing nutrient derived from ergot -  the lysergic  aciiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiid!  #25    

listen to the music, listen to Jim, listen to Robby, listen to Densmore and then listen to Manzarek.

Never doubt the power that the youth Rock & Roll movement had and why the Deep State had to do everything within it's reach to try to stop it and smear it.  

better than gold, BiiitChezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

 

any_mouse's picture

The Doors were the same as The Monkees, except created by the CIA, instead of a TV network.

Came ready with lyrics and music. Pied Pipers of drugs and sex.

Spawned in "counter-culture" hothouses at the foot of the road leading up to a top secret (USAF cover) motion picture production facility.

The fact Jim was the Admiral's son is not coincidence. Admiral Morrison served two masters.

The youth rebellion was a CIA production. Vietnam was a CIA production.

Also no coincidence that "Apocalypse Now" showcased Doors' music, weaving the threads together in front of our eyes.

BlindMonkey's picture

I'd reference the USS Vincennes and the shootdown of the Iranian airliner.  Was it a basketball?  A cruise missile?  No!  It was a fucking airliner full of people.

 

I'm waiting for the Pentagram's "ooopsies" related to sending the Tomahawks downrange from the Mason.  Fucking evil cunts in DC.  

Raffie's picture

FALSE FLAG anyone?

Just an excuse to destroy the radar in Yemen for the Saudies.

cro_maat's picture

Not just the Saudies. Remember the shutdown of the Aegis system on the Donald Cook back in April by the Russians in the Baltic. Apparantly the Russians not only can disable electronics systems but they have detection systems that can find stealth aircraft. The system was modeled on older radar systems which use longer wave technology. The radars in Yemen are older and most likely use the longer wave technology and hence can "see" stealth aircraft. If the USSA is about to use stealth aircraft in Yemen or Syria then they needed to knock out these radar facilities.

MopWater's picture

Jesus... never thought of that. Perfect way to run covert ops to assist the Saudis and nail the Iranians.

East Indian's picture

Russians are always saying that the "stealth" planes and ships are perfectly visible to their radars, because they use a different frequency. They never hide this fact.

Mr Twitch's picture

Anyone remember the USS Liberty?

sgt_doom's picture

Yes, and extremely well covered in the recently published book by Joan Mellen, entitled:

Faustian Bargains (pp. 207 --- 214)

A false flag by LBJ and covered up with help of Adm. McCain, John McCain's war criminal daddy (under Articles 99 and 118 of the UCMJ, both Johnson and McCain qualify as war criminals under THE LAW).

Too many American servicemen died. . . .

Kidbuck's picture

I believe the area is inhabited with large sea birds known as Gulf of Tonkin geese.

ConnectingTheDots's picture

But WE still did launch a retaliatory attack that killed people, despite not having accurate information.

No problem, just call them 'collateral damage" and no one will care, (except for maybe family, tribe members, and friends of those who were killed and who will now have one drivinig goal, ---- to hurt those who hurt their loved ones).

We are creating terrorists faster than we can kill them.

roadhazard's picture

Pootin would never admit anything like that.

wombats's picture

Exactly.  When does O or Hitlery blame Putin and use as pretext for some planned action?

BlindMonkey's picture

Lemme know when they launch against targets they didn't intend to destroy.

 

(Bullshit claims of hospitals don't count)

nyse's picture

The propoganda hits keep on comin!

Budnacho's picture

Anything to drag us in as an excuse to save the failing Saudi's.....

MopWater's picture

The Bitter Lake agreement back to bite us.

UpTo11's picture

Must be Ruskies

Savyindallas's picture

That sly devil Putin. He may have a hand a hand in 911 also. I used to be sure it was a joint Bush/Cheney/Mossad/Saudi/larry silverstein operation. Now I think it may have been Putin. I'm pretty sure. Hacking the DNC and Clinton emails and trying to get Trump elected was the final straw for me.

It was Putin and the Russians who did 911. My apologies to all the other parties I have accused in the past.  

Smerf's picture

Soon they won't even bother with the 'false flag' operations.

roadhazard's picture

That'll be a relief all the false alarms gives me a tic.