Iran 106

'"From the Wonderful Folks Who Brought You Iraq"

Craig Unger on How the Neoconservatives Are Pushing For An Attack on Iran

“Once again, neocon ideologues have been flogging questionable intelligence about W.M.D.," Unger writes. "Once again, dubious Middle East exile groups are making the rounds in Washington—this time urging regime change in Syria and Iran. Once again, heroic new exile leaders are promising freedom." [includes rush transcript]

New allegations against Iran are heightening fears the Bush administration is planning a second war in the Persian Gulf. This weekend, administration and military officials accused the Iranian government of sending sophisticated roadside bombs to Iraq that have killed 170 coalition troops in the last three years. Military officials formally unveiled the charges at an unusual news conference in Baghdad. The officials refused to be quoted by name and barred all recording devices from the room. Reporters were shown images of weapons with serial numbers the Pentagon says originate in Iran.
The Iranian government is denying the accusations. On Monday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was asked by ABC's Diane Sawyer whether Iran is sending weapons into Iraq to kill Americans.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, talking to ABC's Diane Sawyer.
Meanwhile, the top US military commander, General Peter Pace, added to growing doubts about the accusations Monday when he admitted he could not endorse them.
Gen. Peter Pace: "Gen. Peter Pace: "We know that the explosively formed projectiles are manufactured in Iran. What I would not say is that the Iranian government, per se, knows about this. It is clear that Iranians are involved, and it's clear that materials from Iran are involved, but I would not say by what I know that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit."
General Peter Pace, speaking in Australia. The Bush administration is insisting the new allegations do not signify a build-up towards war. In an interview with C-Span Monday, President Bush defended the White House pressure on Iran and mocked speculation of a possible US attack.
President Bush: “I guess my reaction to all the noise about, you know, ‘He wants to go to war’ is, first of all, I don’t understand the tactics, and I guess I would say it’s political."
Amid these new developments, a new article in Vanity Fair magazine says the behind-the-scenes maneuvering that led to the Iraq war is being repeated today. The article says: “Once again, neocon ideologues have been flogging questionable intelligence about W.M.D. Once again, dubious Middle East exile groups are making the rounds in Washington—this time urging regime change in Syria and Iran. Once again, heroic new exile leaders are promising freedom."
The article is called "From the Wonderful Folks Who Brought You Iraq." Craig Unger is the author of the piece. He joins me here in the firehouse studio. Welcome to Democracy Now!
Craig Unger, journalist and author. His latest article appears in Vanity Fair. It's called "From the Wonderful Folks Who Brought You Iraq." He is the author of "House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties."'

Lees verder: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/13/154246

Iran 105

En voordat iemand ook maar iets heeft kunnen checken van hetgeen de autoriteiten die logen over Irak nu over Iran beweren, heeft een malloot in de Tweede Kamer al vragen gesteld over wat bij noemt 'bewijs.' Net als Gods wegen zijn ook de wegen van de democratie ondoorgrondelijk en zelden aangenaam.

'Gebruik Iraanse bommen door Iraakse terroristen - Kamervragen.

dinsdag 13 februari 2007.

Vragen van het lid Wilders (PVV) aan de Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken over het recent gevonden bewijs dat Iraakse terroristen explosieven van Iraanse makelij gebruiken
1.)Heeft u kennis genomen van de berichten “Zwaarste bommen Irak zijn made in Iran”* en “Iraanse bommen doodden 170 VS-militairen in Irak”**?
2.) Hoe beoordeelt u de omstandigheid dat de door terroristen in Irak ingezette zogenoemde Explosively Formed Penetrator (EFP)-explosieven – verantwoordelijk voor de dood of verwonding van bijna 800 in Irak gestationeerde Amerikaanse militairen en tevens de zwaarste explosieven gebruikt door terroristen in Irak – naar alle waarschijnlijkheid van Iraanse makelij zijn?
3.) Bent u het met mij eens dat nu bovengenoemde explosieven uitsluitend gehanteerd worden door Sjiitische terroristen in Irak dit er op wijst dat bedoelde explosieven inderdaad van Iraanse makelij zijn en voorts vanuit Iran naar Irak zijn gesmokkeld? Zo nee, waarom niet?
4.) Bent u het mij eens dat nu Iran in de regio rondom Irak de enige producent is van bovengenoemde explosieven dit er op wijst dat bedoelde explosieven inderdaad van Iraanse makelij zijn en voorts vanuit Iran naar Irak zijn gesmokkeld? Zo nee, waarom niet?
5.) Deelt u mijn verontrusting met betrekking tot het bericht dat de Iraanse regering naar alle waarschijnlijkheid weet heeft van bovengenoemde wapensmokkel? Zo nee, waarom niet?
6.) Deelt u mijn verontrusting aangaande bovenomschreven Iraanse inmenging in Irak? Zo nee, waarom niet?
7.) Deelt u gezien het bovenstaande mijn mening dat de Iraanse regering de veiligheidssituatie in Irak tracht te verslechteren? Zo nee, waarom niet?
8.) Gaat u tegen de Iraanse regering actie ondernemen – bilateraal en in EU-verband – nu naar alle waarschijnlijkheid met haar medeweten zeer zware explosieven van Iraanse makelij vanuit Iran naar Irak gesmokkeld zijn en deze verantwoordelijk zijn voor de dood of verwonding van bijna 800 in Irak gestationeerde Amerikaanse militairen? Zo ja, welke actie gaat u ondernemen? Zo nee, waarom niet?
* Elsevier, 10 februari 2007** De Telegraaf, 11 februari 2007'

Iran 104

'Iran rejects US claims of supplying weapons in Iraq.
By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 13 February 2007

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian President, has flatly denied American charges that his country is supplying sophisticated weaponry to Shia militant groups, saying that Washington was blaming others in order to hide its own defeat in Iraq.
"The US administration and [President George] Bush are used to accusing others," Mr Ahmadinejad told ABC television's Good Morning America yesterday, less than 24 hours after US military officials in Baghdad showed reporters part of what they called "a growing body" of evidence that roadside bombs and other devices made in Iran had been used to kill 170 American and coalition soldiers.
The officials displayed fragments of some of the weapons involved, claiming that those at the "highest levels" of government in Tehran were involved in arming Iraqi militants. But the fact that US forces were "showing some pieces of papers" and calling them documents proved nothing, the Iranian President said.
Mr Ahmadinejad's remarks came amid growing fears that the Bush administration was moving towards some form of military action against Iran, probably aimed at nuclear facilities involved in what Washington says is a programme to build an atomic weapon.
There were, however, signs that both sides are seeking to cool things down.
Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, was notably restrained, saying merely that "if the President of Iran wants to put a stop to it, we wish him luck and hope he'll do it real soon".
Mr Ahmadinejad also sounded less belligerent than usual, insisting he wanted dialogue, and arguing that turmoil in Iraq did not serve Iran's interests. "We shy away from any kind of conflict, any kind of bloodshed," he said. World problems could be solved through dialogue, logic "and a sense of friendship". '

Zie: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2264671.ece

En nu opletten of de Nederlandse commerciele massamedia ook dit bericht opnemen.

Martelen 66

Ik kreeg vandaag deze email:

'PERSBERICHT AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
13 FEBRUARY 2007.

TOMORROW’S CIA VOTE IN EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT SHOULD MARK BEGINNING OF ACCOUNTABILITY


Adopt a report that is strong enough to make European governments finally face up to human rights abuse in the fight against terrorism, says Amnesty International to Members of the European Parliament ahead of tomorrow’s crucial vote on CIA renditions in Europe.

“The European Parliament usually has no difficulty coming together to condemn the human rights violations of others. Tomorrow we shall see if it is also capable of addressing those happening at home”, said Dick Oosting, Director of Amnesty International’s EU Office from Strasbourg, where the vote will take place.

Last minute attempts to weaken the report are a worrying sign of the European Parliament’s vulnerability to national and party interests, despite the grave nature of abuses: kidnapping, torture and disappearances.

“The EU Council has not even acknowledged that extraordinary renditions are extra-judicial practices breaching international law. Without sufficient pressure from the European Parliament it is unlikely that governments will take responsibility”, said Oosting.

“A large majority is needed for the message to be heard in capitals but if it is too diluted the European Parliament will not be credible in calling governments to account” he added.

At stake tomorrow is how Europe deals with some of the worst violations in recent years. Amnesty International considers it imperative that the European Parliament insists on:

proper national investigation of illegal CIA activity;
reparation for the victims;
preventive measures to ensure that such practices cannot happen again.'

De Commerciele Massamedia 32

In de VS wordt de berichtgeving over de beweerde Iraanse betrokkenheid bij de oorlog in Irak gefileerd. Let u nu eens op wat de Nederlandse commerciele massamedia doen.

'Propaganda Extravaganza.

So I have spent a good deal of this evening reading the accounts of the "highly" secretive, "ultra-classified" and "on monumental background" Iran briefing that the White House orchestrated today, just in time for Monday's breaking news. What is quite clear is that US corporate press has become an extension of the White House public relations department.
Under what circumstances would the following criteria for a news story ever be considered "journalism:"1). Reporters met with experts and analysts who would not provide their names, background, or any identifying information - even off the record. There is no way to know who these unnamed experts were, what made them experts, or anything that could be used to confirm or debunk their allegations. In other words, the sources were not vetted and unknown.2). The allegations that Iran was responsible for the downing of US helicopter in Iraq by using advanced weapons were based on a set of photographs of unknown origin, date, time, or any other contextual information that could be confirmed or debunked. In other words, the facts of the story are unsupportable and cannot be in any way explored.3). The White House led officials present at the briefing would not give their names either, despite this presentation being cleared by the White House. In other words, despite this not being a leak, no one would stand by the story.4). The alleged intelligence was put together like a presentation one would find at a new product roll out, planned weeks in advance even. Yet the reason given for providing this information to the press is concern for US troops on the ground in Iraq. Obviously something is wrong with either the motive (when one works a story, one wants to understand motive for informaton provided). The motive, as claimed, is concern for the troops - but if there was concern for the troops, why did this presentation require weeks of planning? If there was enough evidence to support a full blown briefing such as this, then instead of planning for a public relations extravaganza, one would think that the White House might be doing something more important - for example, holding emergency briefings for Congress. 5). White House officials, however, caution that this information cannot be independently verified.So, we have source of unknown credentials, allegations based on evidence that cannot be vetted or properly investigated, officials who despite being authorized to present this information to the press are unwilling to go on the record, and a motive for providing this information that appears to be disingenuous. What then, I ask, makes this news? Furthermore, what makes this front page material with titles ranging from the mild "Iran arming insurgents sources say" to the absurd "Iran killing US soldiers in Iraq?"If the White House wants to stage a public relations event, they can do so by the light of day. Journalists agreeing to attend this charade and then reporting on it as though it were a). news and b). credible, need to resign. I am really ashamed at the way my colleagues have presented themselves today.There are, however, a few exceptions... some who did show up, at least covered the farce as it should have been covered, with subtle "I call bullshit":LA Times made this observation:
"The briefing seemed deliberately limited. The officials appeared to back away from previous U.S. claims that Iran, a mostly Shiite country, was supporting the Sunni Arab insurgents who have by far killed the largest number of U.S. troops. Instead, the officials alleged that Shiite groups ostensibly loyal to radical anti-American cleric Muqtada Sadr were involved in the smuggling and use of the weapons."'

Lees verder: http://www.atlargely.com/2007/02/propaganda_extr.html#more

De Commerciele Massamedia 31

Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired) writes from Virginia Beach, Virginia. Read his commentaries at Pen and Sword.

'Iran: NYT Repeats History, WaPo Rewrites It
Posted by Jeff Huber

The echo chamber has kicked into high gear on the "proof" that Iran has been sending weapons into Iraq. Here's how this latest propaganda campaign evolved, and how two of our most "trusted" news sources enabled it.
Again.
On Saturday, February 10, the New York Times ran a story by Michael R. Gordon titled "Deadliest Bomb in Iraq Is Made by Iran, U.S. Says."
The most lethal weapon directed against American troops in Iraq is an explosive-packed cylinder that United States intelligence asserts is being supplied by Iran.
That's some assertion, especially considering that it's sourced to the nameless, faceless "United States Intelligence." Gordon also wrote that, "The assertion of an Iranian role in supplying the device to Shiite militias reflects broad agreement among American intelligence agencies, although officials acknowledge that the picture is not entirely complete."
No, it's not entirely complete. And it doesn't look entirely on the up-and-up either. Gordon also said that "The Bush administration is expected to make public this weekend some of what intelligence agencies regard as an increasing body of evidence pointing to an Iranian link, including information gleaned from Iranians and Iraqis captured in recent American raids on an Iranian office in Erbil and another site in Baghdad."
Lo and behold, this story by Joshua Partlow appeared on Sunday at the Washington Post web site.
Iran Sending Explosives to Extremist Groups in Iraq, Officials Say
By Joshua PartlowWashington Post Foreign ServiceSunday, February 11, 2007; 1:54 PM
BAGHDAD Feb 11 -- Iranian security forces, taking orders from the "highest levels" of the Iranian government, are funneling sophisticated explosives to extremist groups in Iraq, and the weapons have grown increasingly deadly for U.S.-led troops over the past two years, senior defense officials said Sunday in Baghdad.
Once again, we had allegations being made by unnamed "senior defense officials" who included an "unnamed" weapons expert. But there's even more monkey business involved in this WaPo story.
Sunday afternoon, I raised holy Hamas about Partlow's story at Pen and Sword and elsewhere, and included a link to the Partlow article. Monday, in the process of preparing this article, I clicked on the hyperlink, and to my shock and awe I found this:
Military Ties Iran To Arms In IraqExplosives Supplied To Shiite Militias, U.S. Officials SayBy Joshua PartlowWashington Post Foreign ServiceMonday, February 12, 2007; Page A01
BAGHDAD, Feb. 11 -- Senior U.S. military officials in Iraq sought Sunday to link Iran to deadly armor-piercing explosives and other weapons that they said are being used to kill U.S. and Iraqi troops with increasing regularity.
Thinking I may have somehow made a mistake, I went to the WaPo site and searched Joshua Partlow." The search results included one link to Partlow's February 12 story and two links to his February 11 story. Funny thing--both links to the February 11 story led to the February 12 story.
It looks like the grownups came in on Monday morning, saw the February 11 story, and said, "What the hell have we done?" So they had Partlow or someone else (Danfa Linzer, it looks like) rewrite the Feb 11 story to include the responsible disclaimers and skepticism that should have been in the article in the first place.'

Lees verder: http://www.atlargely.com/2007/02/iran_nyt_repeat.html#more

De Commerciele Massamedia 30

De New York Times functioneert weer als spreekbuis van de Bush Bende

´NYT" Reporter Who Got Iraqi WMDs Wrong Now Highlights Iran Claims
By Greg Mitchell
Editor & Publisher

New York - Saturday's New York Times features an article, posted at the top of its Web site late Friday, that suggests very strongly that Iran is supplying the "deadliest weapon aimed at American troops" in Iraq. The author notes, "Any assertion of an Iranian contribution to attacks on Americans in Iraq is both politically and diplomatically volatile."
What is the source of this volatile information? Nothing less than "civilian and military officials from a broad range of government agencies."
Sound pretty convincing? It may be worth noting that the author is Michael R. Gordon, the same Times reporter who, on his own, or with Judith Miller, wrote some of the key, and badly misleading or downright inaccurate, articles about Iraqi WMDs in the run-up to the 2003 invasion.
Gordon wrote with Miller the paper's most widely criticized - even by the Times itself - WMD story of all, the Sept. 8, 2002, "aluminum tubes" story that proved so influential, especially since the administration trumpeted it on TV talk shows.
When the Times eventually carried an editors' note that admitted some of its Iraq coverage was wrong and/or overblown, it criticized two Miller-Gordon stories, andnoted that the Sept. 8, 2002, article on page one of the newspaper "gave the first detailed account of the aluminum tubes. The article cited unidentified senior administration officials who insisted that the dimensions, specifications and numbers of tubes sought showed that they were intended for a nuclear weapons program."
This, of course, proved bogus.
The Times "mea-culpa" story dryly observed: "The article gave no hint of a debate over the tubes," adding, "The White House did much to increase the impact of The Times article." This was the famous "mushroom cloud" over America article.
Now, more than four years later, Gordon reveals: "The Bush administration is expected to make public this weekend some of what intelligence agencies regard as an increasing body of evidence pointing to an Iranian link, including information gleaned from Iranians and Iraqis captured in recent American raids on an Iranian office in Erbil and another site in Baghdad."
Gordon also wrote, following Secretary of State Colin Powell's crucial, and appallingly wrong, speech to the United Nations in 2003 that helped sell the war, that "it will be difficult for skeptics to argue that Washington's case against Iraq is based on groundless suspicions and not intelligence information."
Today, in contrast to the Times' report, Dafna Linzer in The Washington Post simply notes, "Yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said serial numbers and markings on some explosives used in Iraq indicate that the material came from Iran, but he offered no evidence."
For some perspective, here is how that "mushroom cloud" Gordon-Miller story of Sept. 8, 2002, opened:
"More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.
"In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes, which American officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium. American officials said several efforts to arrange the shipment of the aluminum tubes were blocked or intercepted but declined to say, citing the sensitivity of the intelligence, where they came from or how they were stopped.
"The diameter, thickness and other technical specifications of the aluminum tubes had persuaded American intelligence experts that they were meant for Iraq's nuclear program, officials said, and that the latest attempt to ship the material had taken place in recent months.
"The attempted purchases are not the only signs of a renewed Iraqi interest in acquiring nuclear arms. President Hussein has met repeatedly in recent months with Iraq's top nuclear scientists and, according to American intelligence, praised their efforts as part of his campaign against the West.'

Lees verder: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021207L.shtml