| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Three or Four Undersea Cables Cut? |
Topic: Three or Four Undersea Cables Cut?
| Author | Message |
| chucho | Posted – 2/5/2008 8:39:54 AM | show profile I think the media, including the International Herald Tribune , is incorrect. Some are reporting that two more cables were cut on Friday after two were cut off the coast of Egypt. They cite Qatar Telecom as one of the sources. But as far as I can tell QTel rents the FALCON (Flag Telecom) line that was cut on Friday. I think the reporters that are saying four are participants in an echo- chamber of misinformation. Somebody along the way said four cables have been cut, including QTel and Falcon off the coast of the UAE. But I think this is a matter of lazy reporting: Qatar Telecom is a telecom company, Flag Telecom is a undersea cable operator, including the FALCON line. FALCON was the one that was cut and Flag Telecom's own website lists three cuts, not four. I think this illustrates the problem with using the Internet to collect string for articles. One error becomes duplicated and then it alters reality. I could be wrong, but I cannot find a definitive list of FOUR undersea cable cuts. people read it in the IHT and they assume it's true. On Friday I think only one cable was cut and the subsequent stories are feeding the error off each other, making it to Internet forums and conspiracy theory websites (including one saying these cuts are a secret Mossad operation to cut Iran off the web). |
| UGoGirl | Posted – 2/5/2008 12:49:05 PM | show profile I have no idea what you're talking about. |
| chucho | Posted – 2/5/2008 1:27:07 PM | show profile You haven't heard about the Internet being affected by the undersea cables that were cut off Egypt? It's all over the place, including today's NYT. |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 2/6/2008 11:41:56 AM | show profile my internets has been working just fine |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 2/6/2008 11:42:17 AM | show profile my internets has been working just fine |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 2/6/2008 11:42:45 AM | show profile my internets has been working just fine |
| Stanley_Milgram | Posted – 2/6/2008 11:47:45 AM | show profile whoa. that's bizarre. i only clicked the "post reply" button one. Maybe there is a secret mossad conspiracy. |
| Mag Girl | Posted – 2/6/2008 11:50:16 AM | show profile Stanley, that just made me giggle. Ha! |
| chucho | Posted – 2/6/2008 1:20:33 PM | show profile Actually, it's quite an interesting story that's been in the media quite a bit recently. I thought this was a media board filled with news junkies? http://news.google.com/news?q=Internet+Cables+cut&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wn (If this doesn't work: Try searching for "Internet Cables cut" in Google News.) The NYT said on Monday that "four" cable were cut and then ran a story from Reuters yesetday that corrected to "three". Meanwhile the right wingnuts have gone crazy (esp. the anti-Israel libertarians -- there's a winderful bunch!) with the story. It's quite funny to read. Once right wing libertarian publication said that "five cables buried deep beneath the seabed" have been cut, but mysteriously Israel and Iraq remain online while the rest of the Middle East is in the dark. (All of this is a big fat lie, of course: it's three cables, they're nor buried, and it only results in slowdowns in Egypt, the Gulf and parts of India.) This story is an object lesson on how conspiracy theories are spurred along by factual reporting errors that go uncorrected. |
| keltoi2 | Posted – 2/6/2008 1:25:03 PM | show profile so do they say who or what is cutting the cables? |
| chucho | Posted – 2/6/2008 2:04:12 PM | show profile According to some it's either the CIA or the Mossad :) And they're doing it to knock Iran off the Internet ::)) I find this story fascinating because it led me here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22938899/ From there you can go to maps of the Internet/Telephony global undersea cable network. The AP reported that the most common way a line is broken is by ships' anchors. The reason why this got so much notice is because in one instance two lines were cut off the coast of Egypt, then, a few days later a cable was cut off the coast of Dubai (that I think has been erroneously reported as two cables and two instances). The question is how many instances occurred in this period of time, and then you can determine the probability that X number of instances could occur in X number of day (by getting an estimate of the annual number of these instances). And then you can begin to detemin how unusual it would be for two instances of three cables being cut could occur in 4-5 days. My theory : the instance that led to two cables being cut in one incident has such a one-time profound effect on Internet and phone traffic (because two major lines were cut at once) that the media then suddenly was paying attention to this phenomenon. Then when a cable was cut off the coast of Dubai in a completely unrelated instance in one of the world's most trafficked sea channels, the media covered extensively because of the first instance. (The New York Times, in the story that erroneously reported that four cables had been, was published under a headline "Questions Are Raised" about the safety of the world's Internet cables. Well, the fact is that the only one raising these questions so far was the NYT reporter herself, creating a buzz of fear about infrastructure safety when there was none.) Then, because of the erroneous reporting that two instances occurred in the Perisan Gulf, the conspiracy theorists went nuts because now they had four cables that were cut in 4-5 days. (In fact,we're talking about two instances in 4-5 days , not four, or in a couple of cases the conspiracy nuts went as high as five cables.) Put it this way, as far as I can assess, the reality is that the likelihood of two instances of cables being cut in 4-5 days is probably pretty big because this stuff happens a lot. But when you double the number of instances, you've just decreased the probability by half, making the story more "amazing" and fueling conspiracy theories. Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe tomorrow we'll catch Mossad agents in spy boats dragging anchors along the floor of the Persian Gulf waging an infrastructure war against Iran :) |
| chucho | Posted – 2/6/2008 2:15:25 PM | show profile By the way, if you think this is a weird thing to talk about -- I'm sure anyone who was trying to contact customer service this past week found him/herself getting lots of busy signals if the call was being routed to India. |
| keltoi2 | Posted – 2/6/2008 3:20:49 PM | show profile Of course, if one wanted to feed the conspiracy angle, all you'd have to do is recall the Navy incident in the Strait of Hormuz a few weeks back, where Iranian boats were allegedly harassing Navy ships, and the video from the US government had someone allegedly Iranian making threats in English. After questions were raised about aspects of the video, the Navy a few days later blames the threats on a "prankster" apparently active in the Persian Gulf. So my question is, since the military can track radar frequencies from AA guns within seconds of activation, and the location of mortar fire in seconds (fast enough to blast the firers), tell me why it can't trace a "prankster" on a radio who almost triggers a war? |
| chucho | Posted – 2/7/2008 8:34:16 AM | show profile You are referring to the "Filipino Monkey" phenomenon (Wiki it; it's quite interesting). Actually it is very hard to track because the frequency is used and monitored by all ships and the "Filipino Monkey" outbursts are usually very short. You heard them in shipping lanes in the Perisan Gulf, Arabian Sea, and the Red Sea. And, yes, they do beleive that the taunting was a prankster, but it didn't stop our wonderfully accurate media from reporting on rumor and innuendo that led to a "reinterpretation" of reality. In once instance, the taunting was falsely reported as having come form Iranian vessels. But the Navy is more than aware of the phenomenon and, fortunately, they reacted much more coolly than the reactionary, fear mongering monkeys in the US media. |
| keltoi2 | Posted – 2/7/2008 12:00:07 PM | show profile Interesting stuff. And yes, the Navy reacted much more cooly and professionally than our media, or the "Bomb bomb Iran" cheerleaders in the White House. You almost get the feeling the WH was feeding the media frenzy and the Navy intentionally put the brakes on it. |
| UGoGirl | Posted – 2/8/2008 11:16:43 AM | show profile It all comes back to oil... again OK, now I'm liking this story! From MarketWatch no less! **** Commentary: Internet interruption in the Middle East looks fishy Nobody knows what caused the cut cables in the Mediterranean that interrupted Internet service to parts of the Middle East last week, but there are now conspiracy theories galore written by bloggers and pundits. Some say it will benefit terrorists and Iran somehow. In fact, the cut cables -- originally blamed on ships dragging anchors -- look more like a ploy by some intelligence agency to disrupt Iranian commerce, specifically an emerging oil bourse that the Iranians have been quietly establishing and hoped to roll out fully in the next 60 days. This concept seems a little farfetched until you look at the details which were provided to me by one of my readers, Martin Kuplens-Ewart who has been following the story from the outset. He notes: "there is a substantial event that has effectively been killed by the loss of connectivity: the launch of the Iranian Oil Bourse. "A marketplace for oil, gas, and various petrochemicals, the Iranian Oil Bourse would trade exclusively in non-dollars and probably substantial negative impact to the U.S. economy and financial system. The bourse was scheduled for launch this week (between Feb. 1 and 11. With complete elimination of Internet connectivity to the country, this launch is now impossible and unlikely to be achievable before month's end (given the estimate 10-14 days for repairs to fiber-optic cables)." He cites various articles expressing the mystery behind the cut cables and describing the bourse and its overall threat to the U.S. economy, as well as how the thing could backfire, ruining the Iranian economy. In most instances Internet connectivity can be rerouted, and much of the Middle East has already done this. But what makes this situation unique is that the bourse was being established on Kish Island, a free-trade zone set up by the Iranians in hopes of creating a cool tourist destination. ...There doesn't seem to be an alternate Internet connection to the island other than the cut cables. ...If the cut cable was done on purpose you can expect the U.S. to get blamed although it could have just as easily benefited Britain, China or even Saudi Arabia for that matter. I'm guessing we will never know how it happened or who suffered the most. All I can say for sure is that it does look fishy. MarketWatch |
| keltoi2 | Posted – 2/8/2008 12:25:06 PM | show profile Curiouser and curiouser, as Alice would say. |
