Bothersome Introductory Note: The USS Cole moors in Yemen, and the security detail is called off duty. Of course. Only a conspiracy theorist would find it significant that a battle ship docks at a location in the Middle East not too far from a desert hellhole where hostilities have escalated to shooting war status, known to harbor terrorists, AND THE SECURITY PEOPLE ARE RECALLED, I guess: ³ ... many armed crew members who had patrolled the decks on lookout for trouble during the mooring had been relieved of duty.² What the Hell is up with THAT??? Of course, I'm no conspiracy theorist (sniff), but sometimes you just HAVE to wonder. ‹ Alex ‹‹‹‹‹‹‹‹‹ Times of London MONDAY OCTOBER 23 2000 Bombers waved to crew before being blown up FROM IAN BRODIE IN WASHINGTON THE US Navy has significantly altered its account of the sneak attack on the USS Cole, raising new questions of how the suicide bombers foiled Navy security in Aden harbour. According to the revised version, the explosion that caused extensive damage, killing 17 American sailors and injuring 39, occurred nearly two hours after the destroyer was moored to a fuel dock and not during the mooring operation. This means that the terrorists who detonated the explosive did not use a flotilla of small mooring craft as cover, thereby making the attack all but impossible to prevent, as the Navy had previously claimed. It is unclear how the attacking boat Ñ now described as a white fibreglass skiff, rather than a rubber dinghy Ñ could have circled the shipÕs bow and sailed along its port side without arousing suspicion. Another unanswered question is how many armed crew members who had patrolled the decks on lookout for trouble during the mooring had been relieved of duty. Some of the crew waved to the two men on the boat, who waved back before standing to attention and being blown apart by the blast, which is now thought to have involved 500lb of powerful plastic explosive. It tore a huge, jagged hole in the destroyerÕs hull. The Navy admitted that its earlier statements were erroneous only after an independent newspaper that covers naval affairs reported a timeline of events that contradicted the official account. Explaining its revisions, the Navy said it had relied on initial reports relayed from the ship that were either wrong or misunderstood at the Pentagon. Either way, the change of story caused enough embarrassment and confusion for senior officers to be granted more time to prepare before testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee. The committee is investigating possible security lapses. It also wants to know why the Navy refuelled in Aden, which, by the admission of General Anthony Zinni, former US commander of the region, was in an area known as a ÒratsÕ nestÓ of terrorists. The general, now retired, told the committee that he decided to use Aden as the least dangerous of several poor choices, adding: ÒI pass that buck to nobody.Ó Another mystery, only now emerging, is why the Cole needed to refuel in Aden when its oil tanks were about half-full. The Navy refuses to say if the ship could have reached Bahrain, its destination, without refuelling, leading to speculation that it could. As for suggestions that a refuelling tanker should have accompanied the Cole and remove any risk of anchoring in a hazardous port, the Pentagon said that cuts have left the Navy with only eight tankers on active duty worldwide, an example of reduced defence resources that have been criticised by the Republican presidential ticket of George W. Bush and Richard Cheney. In Aden, American investigators have established that the bombers, both in their late 20s, pushed off from a boat ramp under a bridge in Little Aden, six miles across the bay from the Cole. They had lived in the neighbourhood for about six weeks, using a Òsafe houseÓ, where they put together the boat and bomb. This much was traced after a 12-year-old boy said that two men had tipped him to watch their car and boat trailer. They never came back.
