Saturday, July 14, 2012

MEK Spokesmen and Their Cozy Home at The Huffington Post



Earlier this week, Glenn Greenwald reported that, on Tuesday,
The Huffington Post published a post by Hossein Abedini, who was identified in the byline as a “Member of Parliament in exile of Iranian Resistance.” His extended HuffPost bio says that he “belongs to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran” (NCRI). The NCRI is the political arm of the Mujahideen-e Khalq, (MeK), the Iranian dissident group (and longtime Saddam ally) that has been formally designated by the U.S. State Department since 1997 as a Terrorist organization, yet has been paying large sums of money to a bipartisan cast of former U.S. officials to advocate on its behalf (the in-hiding President of the NCRI, Massoud Rajavi, is, along with his wife Maryam Rajavi, MeK’s leader). Abedini, the HuffPost poster, has been identified as a MeK spokesman in news reports, and has identified himself the same way when, for instance, writing letters to NBC News objecting to negative reports about the group.
After noted journalists Hooman Majd, Robert Mackey, Greenwald himself, and others "noted the oddity that HuffPost was publishing pieces from a designated Terrorist group, HuffPost deleted the piece."  A HuffPo spokesperson also told Greenwald that Abedini's post "was published by mistake," adding, "By policy, we don't publish blog posts by people affiliated with designated terrorist organizations. The blog editor who published it was unaware that NCRI is MEK's political arm. When the mistake was discovered the post was removed."

Nevertheless, all of Abedini's previous articles remain archived on HuffPo.  Furthermore, Greenwald points out that "The Huffington Post has also repeatedly published Ali Safavi, who is also identified as 'a member of Iran’s Parliament in Exile, National Council of Resistance of Iran'" and "use[s] his HuffPost platform to propagate standard MeK propaganda."  All of Safavi's posts remain accessible.

But that's not all.

There's yet another MeK/NCRI spokesman and propagandist who also regularly posts articles on HuffPo: Alireza Jafarzadeh.  All of his posts remain live on HuffPo, where he is touted (in a bio written by himself) as a foreign affairs analyst who has appeared all over Western media, speaking on behalf of the terrorist group.  Fox News has long featured him as a contributing commentator and he currently runs his own "consulting" firm in Washington D.C. called "Strategic Policy Consulting" which is pretty much just a phony company that manages his own media appearances and lobbying to Congress.  One look at his Twitter feed removes all doubt as to Jafarzadeh's affiliation (at the highest level) with the MeK.

In a tweet from June 2, 2012, Jafarzadeh linked to a New York Times article about potential MeK delisting and added the hastag #WhatIDreamAbout.



Many of his online bios ignore his clear connection to the MeK; however, his bio on the "Strategic Policy" site and HuffPo itself contain a version of the following: "Until August 2003, Jafarzadeh acted for a dozen years as the chief congressional liaison and media spokesperson for the US representative office of Iran’s parliament in exile, the National Council of Resistance of Iran."

When the D.C. office of NCRI was shut down in 2003 by the State Department, Jafarzadeh and others like him created a network of front organizations to continue spreading the MeK message without explicitly using the name.  According to a 2004 FBI report, Alireza Jafarzadeh was said "to be running the MEK cell in the Washington D.C. area" along with another MeK shill Soona Samsami.  No one would honestly believe that Jafarzadeh's role as MeK spokesman is something of the past.

At a Capitol Hill hearing last July, Jafarzadeh, along with well-known MeK spokesman Ali Safavi, was seen counseling three of the panel's witnesses - Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Representative Bob Filner (D-CA), and former Bush Administration Attorney General Michael Mukasey - in the halls of Congress right before the hearing.  This would appear to demonstrate even more evidence of direct coordination between current and former U.S. officials and representatives of a designated terrorist group - in the halls of our own government no less.  Shockingly, Capitol Hill police made no arrests.

But hey, at least it's not like these designated terrorists throw parties, attended by people like House Foreign Affairs Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and former Homeland Security secretary and Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, in Congress itself.  Oh wait, never mind.

It should also be noted that neocon hawk Danielle Pletka of AEI is even disgusted by the high-priced advocacy on behalf of the MeK by U.S. political players.  Earlier this month, she referenced the Foreign Agents Registration Act in a post excoriating paid MeK shills like Howard Dean, Mike Mukasey and Jim Jones, writing,

This litany of whoring (is there any other word?) for foreign terrorists is appalling. And don’t soothe yourself with the notion that the MEK aren’t really terrorists or are about to be delisted by the State Department. Delisting is ridiculous, but also irrelevant. Foreign principals are foreign principals, and people who do their bidding are foreign agents. FARA is a criminal statute; let’s see what Justice does about enforcing it. For shame on these lobbyists for terrorists, each and every one.

And that's coming from a pal and defender of fake dissident leader/regime change hero Ahmad Chalabi.  Yikes.

*****

Monday, July 9, 2012

Threats and Propaganda: 30 Years of U.S. Policy towards Iran [VIDEO]

Late last month I addressed a "Teach-In on Iran," co-sponsored by the Peace & Justice Task Force of All Souls and the Granny Peace Brigade and held at the Unitarian Church of All Souls in New York City.

I was honored to speak alongside Phyllis Bennis, Director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington, D.C., whose credentials and expertise on United States foreign policy and current events in the Middle East, along with her commitment to truth and justice, are not only impeccable, but unimpeachable.

The event was endorsed by Brooklyn For Peace, United for Peace & Justice, Code Pink, WILPF-NYC Metro, Veterans for Peace, Peace Action Staten Island, Jewish Voice for Peace, American Iranian Friendship Committee, Black Radical Congress, War Resisters League-NYC, and Peace Action Manhattan.

My 20-minute presentation, which can be seen below, focused primarily on some of the major falsehoods, misperceptions and double standards regarding Iran in our current discourse.  Phyllis' speech - which followed my own - can be seen here.

[Note: Despite what the frozen-frame on the video screen below may indicate, my talk was not entitled, "I Once Caught A Lie Thiiiiis Big."  But maybe it should have been.]


Many thanks and much appreciation is due to Joe Friendly for recording the event.

*****

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Death of a Proud, Self-Avowed Terrorist:
Former Israeli PM Yitzhak Shamir Goes to the Great Hague in the Sky

Palestine Police Force Wanted Poster offering rewards for the capture of Stern Gang members,
including (at center) Yitzhak Yezernitzky

Sometimes terrible people live long lives. Such is the case with Icchak Yezernitsky, a Russian-born racist, terrorist and eager ethnic cleanser who is better known to the world as former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.  Shamir died today, June 30, 2012, at a Tel Aviv nursing home from Alzheimer's Disease at the ripe old age of 96.  One can only wonder if he had forgotten all the war crimes he committed.

Nearly every mainstream media outlet has eulogized Shamir with encomiums, or at least profound respect.  Here are some of Shamir's greatest hits, most of which have been omitted from most of the media's effusive obituaries:

Shamir was one of the leaders of Lehi (also known as The Stern Gang), a Zionist terrorist militia which rampaged through Palestine in the 1940s.  Were anyone to dispute that Lehi was a terrorist group, Shamir proudly affirmed that particular description in a 1943 article he wrote entitled "Terror."  Shamir wrote,

Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can be used to disallow terror as a means of war...We are very far from any moral hesitations when concerned with the national struggle.

First and foremost, terror is for us a part of the political war appropriate for the circumstances of today, and its task is a major one: it demonstrates in the clearest language, heard throughout the world including by our unfortunate brethren outside the gates of this country, our war against the occupier.

The following year, Shamir was responsible for ordering the assassination in Cairo of British Resident Minister of State in the Middle East Walter Edward Guinness, also known as Lord Moyne, who was in charge of implementing British policy in Palestine.

The Zionist terror campaign of Plan Dalet, put into effect in early 1948 and described by Israeli historian Ilan Pappe, consisted of "large-scale intimidation; laying siege to and bombarding population centres; setting fires to homes, properties, and goods; expulsion; demolition; and finally, planting mines among the rubble to prevent any of the expelled inhabitants from returning."

Shamir seemed to relish the opportunity to terrorize, murder and ethnically cleanse Palestine of its indigenous population into order to make room for the nascent state of Israel.  The massacre of Deir Yassin in April 1948, during which over 100 unarmed villagers were murdered, was carried out by Zionist commandos of Shamir's Lehi and Menachem Begin's Irgun (of which Shamir was a former member).

Following Israel's unilateral declaration of independence in May 1948, the United Nations reassessed its approach to the partition of Palestine and appointed a mediator, Swedish diplomat Folke Bernadotte, to come up with new proposal while taking into account "the aspirations of the Jews, the political difficulties and differences of opinion of the Arab leaders, the strategic interests of Great Britain, the financial commitment of the United States and the Soviet Union, the outcome of the war, and finally the authority and prestige of the United Nations."  Notice that the rights of the indigenous Palestinians were not included in this mandate.

Nevertheless, while Bernadotte's second proposal was produced in consultation with British and American emissaries, then-President Harry Truman undermined its progress in the UN due to pre-election Zionist influence in the United States.  When Bernadotte finally presented his progress report, "Mediation, Truce Supervision, Refugees, Proposals for Peaceful Settlement," on September 16, 1948, it included this unequivocal statement regarding the Palestinian Right of Return:
It is not yet known what the policy of the Provisional Government of Israel with regard to the return of Arab refugees will be when the final terms of settlement are reached. It is, however, undeniable that no settlement can be just and complete if recognition is not accorded to the right of the Arab refugee to return to the home from which he has been dislodged by the hazards and strategy of the armed conflict between Arabs and Jews in Palestine. The majority of these refugees have come from territory which, under the Assembly resolution of 29 November, was to be included in the Jewish State. The exodus of Palestinian Arabs resulted from panic created by fighting in their communities, by rumours concerning real or alleged acts of terrorism, or expulsion. It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes while Jewish immigrants flow into Palestine, and, indeed, at least offer the threat of permanent replacement of the Arab refugees who have been rooted in the land for centuries. (A/648 1.V.6)
The very next day, September 17, 1948, Bernadotte was assassinated in West Jerusalem by members of Lehi, acting on Shamir's explicit orders.

In 1969, Shamir formally joined Begin's "Freedom Party" (Herut), which Jewish luminaries such as Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt had decried years earlier as "a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties" which "preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority."

In April 1988, during the first Intifada, then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir warned that any Palestinian caught protesting would have his "head smashed against the boulders and walls.'' He continued, "We say to them from the heights of this mountain and from the perspective of thousands of years of history that they are like grasshoppers compared to us."

Shamir was a committed colonialist.  Even when, in September 1991, U.S. President George H.W. Bush threatened to withhold "loan guarantees sought by Israel unless the Israeli Government, which has ignored all of his previous appeals to halt settlement-building in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, freezes building activity," Shamir never halted further colonization of Palestine.

During a visit to the United States in November 1991, Shamir delivered speeches in which he "insisted that Israel will not agree to withdraw from the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights even in exchange for a peace agreement with its Arab antagonists."

In June 1993, after being voted out of office, Shamir stated his desire to deliberately subvert any efforts to establish a Palestinian state by carrying out peace talks under false pretenses.  "I would have conducted the autonomy negotiations for 10 years, and in the meantime we would have reached half a million [Jewish] souls in Judea and Samaria."  Lamenting the end of his administration, Shamir said it was "painful that in the coming four years I won't be able to increase settlements in Judea and Samaria and Gaza."

It is no wonder then that Shamir once declared, "For Eretz Yisrael it is permissible to lie."

In 2005, Israelis voted Shamir the 29th Greatest Israeli in a poll conducted by Ynet.

Despite Shamir's history of despicable violence and willful abrogation of international law, Barack Obama's press secretary Jay Carney released a statement on behalf of the White House at the news of Shamir's death.

"Yitzhak Shamir dedicated his life to the State of Israel," the statement read. "From his days working for Israel's independence to his service as Prime Minister, he strengthened Israel's security and advanced the partnership between the United States and Israel."

It is unsurprising that Benjamin Netanyahu praised his Likud predecessor, saying, "He was a paragon of loyalty to the Land of Israel and the eternal values of the Jewish people," and adding that "Yitzhak Shamir belongs to a generation of giants, who founded the State of Israel and fought for the freedom of the Jewish people in its land."

One should remind Netanyahu of Shamir's proud justification of terrorism or perhaps simply note the words of the mayor of Tel Aviv under British Mandate, Israel Rokach, who in 1944 accused Shamir's Zionist militia of "lacking even a spark of humanity and Jewish conscience" after Lehi gunmen murdered three British police officers in a public shooting.

Shamir's daughter, Gilada Diamant, claimed her father "belonged to a different generation of leaders, people with values and beliefs. I hope that we have more people like him in the future."  Certainly anyone who values human rights, justice, sovereignty, and self-determination for the Palestinian people, the rule of law, the Geneva Conventions, and the Nuremberg Principles does not share Diamant's hope.

Thomas Friedman once wrote that Shamir "exemplifies those Israeli leaders whose vision of tomorrow is yesterday."  For all those whose innocent lives were obliterated or whose families suffered at the hands of Yitzhak Shamir due to his commitment to ethnosupremacism, colonialism and mass murder, any more visions of violence and bigotry that he may have had thankfully died today.

***** ***** *****

A shorter version of this piece was cross-posted on Mondoweiss and Consortiumnews.

*****

UPDATE:

July 1, 2012 - It should also be remembered that, when he was leading terror campaigns during the British Mandate, Shamir nicknamed himself "Michael" after Michael Collins, the Irish revolutionary and Director of Intelligence and ostensible Commander-in-Chief of the IRA, which fought a war of independence against the British between 1919 and 1921.  Known as coldblooded, ruthless, and calculating, Collins was responsible for creating a special assassination unit, called "The Squad" or "The Twelve Apostles," established for the express purpose of finding and executing spies and informants.  "For the future the rule should be guilty until proven innocent," Collins said of British agents.

What is perhaps ironic, however, is that, while Shamir and his cohorts considered Zionist opposition to the British Mandate to be analogous to the Irish fight against British domination, this comparison totally ignores the fact that the indigenous Palestinians were actually analogous to the native Irish in this situation, not the Zionist immigrants from Europe.

Further, even from the British point of view - the controlling, colonial power of both Ireland and Palestine - the Zionists were not recognized as playing the role of the occupied, colonized Catholics of Ireland, but as the Anglicans.

In One Palestine, Complete, Israeli historian Tom Segev devotes an entire chapter to this comparison - it's even called "Ireland in Palestine" - in which he tells us:
"The parallel between Palestine and Ireland is 'singularly complete,' wrote Colonial Secretary Ormsby-Gore, comparing the Jews in Palestine to the Protestants in Ulster. The country should be partitioned between its inhabitants, he believed.  Foreign Office officials debated whether the mufti was like Michael Collins and Gandhi: 'It was the Arab movement which made him rather than he who made the Arab movement,' wrote one official, adding, 'He does not seem to be a leader with the dynamic qualities of Collins or Gandhi.'"
(h/t Marsha Cohen)

*****

UPDATE II:

July 2, 2012 - In perhaps one of the most appalling eulogies in recent memory, Knesset chairman Reuven Rivlin said of Shamir:
You were a solid, unbreakable rock. You carry upon your shoulders the nation's journey – its past and its future… not a thing could distract you from your path. Only one small weakness gnawed at you unremittingly: Love. Your love for this persecuted nation, for the homeland, for your home, and your greatest love of all: your wife, Shlomit.
One can be fairly certain that Shamir's wife Shlomit herself never advocated on behalf of Palestinian rights or the rule of international law; if she had, she probably would have been assassinated by her husband rather than adored.

Such obsequious comments should not be surprising considering Rivlin's own beliefs regarding the continued Zionist domination over all of historic Palestine - a passion shared by the departed Shamir.

Following the brutal murders of five members of a settler family, including three young children, in August 2011, Rivlin declared his firm belief that "the land of Israel is ours in its entirety."  In case anyone wasn't sure about Rivlin's own commitment to the continued Jewish colonization of Palestine, he added, "Populating the land of Israel is a part of Zionism, which was once based entirely on a policy of settlement."

Nevertheless, in the past, Rivlin has expressed a level of sympathy for Palestinians not often seen in the Israeli government.  For example, in August 2009, he delivered a speech in Jerusalem in which he stated that "the establishment of Israel was accompanied by much pain and suffering and a real trauma for the Palestinians," though he placed most of the responsibility for such tragedy on the Palestinian leadership rather than Zionist ethnic cleansing and colonization.  Rivlin added, "Many of them encounter racism and arrogance from Israel's Jews; the inequality in the allocation of state funds also does not contribute to any extra love."

One wonders if Rivlin thinks Palestinians love their actual homeland as much as Russian-born Icchak Yezernitsky loved his adopted home and if he believes they have a right to violently resist occupation, domination, colonization, and subjugation as forcefully and aggressively as the former Prime Minister he so warmly eulogized.

*****

There's also this:




*****

And this, from a New York Times slideshow:

Barbra Streisand with Prime Minister Shamir in his office in Jerusalem on April 3, 1984. 
Credit: Max Nash/Associated Press

***** ***** *****

On July 16, 2012, a Czech translation of this article appeared on the Czech Free Press! website (Vlajková Loď českého Nezávislého Webu!).  It was translated by Karel Hyka.

I am honored that someone would take the time to do this.
16 Červenec 2012
Nima Širazi

Strašní lidé někdy žijí dlouhý život. Příkladem toho je Icchak Ezernickij, v Rusku narozený rasista, terorista a horlivý etnický čistič, který je světu lépe znám jako bývalý izraelský premiér Jicchak Šamir. Šamir zemřel 30. června v telavivském pečovatelském domě na Alzheimerovu chorobu ve věku 96 let. Bylo by s podivem, pokud by zapomněl na veškeré válečné zločiny, kterých se dopustil.
*****

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Blood, Heat and Tears:
Why I Can't Root for Miami in the NBA Finals

Miami Heat head coach Eric Spoelstra, Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, and majority owner Micky Arison

Last week, The Nation's sports editor Dave Zirin presented a number of excellent arguments in favor of rooting against the Oklahoma City Thunder in favor of the Miami Heat in this year's NBA Finals. In justifiably painting a lurid and grotesque picture of right-wing Thunder owners Clay Bennett and Aubrey McClendon, who uprooted the Seattle SuperSonics and moved the team to Oklahoma City in collusion with NBA commissioner David Stern in order to maximize corporate profits, Zirin dubs Bennett and McClendon "the kinds of sports owners whose villainy should never be forgotten."

But while Zirin reveals the greed and chauvinism of the Oklahoma City back office, he mentions only the famous players of Miami - Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Bosh - in his juxtaposition of the two competing franchises, omitting completely the Heat's own ownership from his critical lens.

Zirin is right: Clay Bennett and Aubrey McClendon are both odious big-money, politically despicable, homophobic, environment-ruining robber barons who have committed a grave crime against the people of the Emerald City.  But what he doesn't tell you is that the Miami Heat's ownership consists of some of the richest people on the planet who happen to be committed to providing the colonial infrastructure of Apartheid and promoting the ethnic cleansing of an indigenous population from their ancestral homeland.

The Miami Heat is largely an Israeli-owned organization. The Arison family, one of the wealthiest families in the world, has owned the team from its early years in the 1980s. Its patriarch, Ted Arison, was the son of Romanian settlers who, in 1882, helped (along with Baron Edmond James de Rothschild) to establish Zikhron Ya'akov, one of the first Jewish agricultural colonies in Palestine in the late nineteenth century. His father, Meir, was a multi-millionaire in his own right, owning the largest shipping company in Palestine under British Mandate. Ted served in the nascent Israeli army after the unilateral Israeli declaration of independence in 1948 that literally wiped Palestine off the map.

After relocating to the United States in the early 1950s and pursuing a number of different business ventures (some successful, others not), Arison eventually retired to Miami and founded Carnival Cruise Lines in 1972. Carnival is now the world's biggest and most lucrative cruise ship line in the world.

In 1990, Arison renounced his U.S. citizenship in an effort to avoid estate tax in the United States and returned to Israel to found Arison Investments. In 1997, he led a business consortium that purchased a controlling share in Israel's Bank Hapoalim for more than $1 billion, a deal that marked the largest privatization in Israel's history. Sadly, he died just nine months shy of being able to reap the benefits of his tax avoidance scheme.

Upon his death in 1999, Ted Arison was called "the world's wealthiest Jew" by the Bay Area's J. Weekly and described as "a natural ally and close friend of free-market champion Benjamin Netanyahu." Ehud Barak eulogized Arison, writing, "Arison's contribution shall be remembered for generations," while pre-coma "Likud leader Ariel Sharon mourned Arison as 'a precious human being, a proud Jew and Zionist, who connected his own lot with that of the state of Israel and the Jewish people in all walks of life.'"

The Arison Group, in addition to its Carnival and Miami Heat holdings, also owns the Israeli Shikun & Binui construction and real estate development behemoth which operates not only in Israel, Asia and Africa, but also in the occupied and colonized Palestinian territories.

Two days ago, on June 17, 2012, The Times of Israel reported that "Norway’s Ministry of Finance announced Friday that a state fund that is Europe's largest equity investor would no longer invest in Israeli construction company Shikun and Binui." The decision was made due to "a recommendation from a state ethics board, which found the company was in contravention of international law by being involved in building projects in East Jerusalem," such as "a residential project in Kibbutz Ramat Rachel," in addition to construction and infrastructure contracts in illegal Israeli colonies such as "a 1994 project in the Maaleh Adumim settlement and the involvement of subsidiary Solel Boneh in projects over the Green Line, including in Har Homa."

Norway's ministry released a statement which read, in part, that Arison's company is "involved in the building of settlements in breach of international humanitarian law in East Jerusalem" and that "the construction of such settlements on occupied territory represents a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention." The ministry explained its divestment on ethical grounds, stating, "The exclusion is based on an evaluation of the future risk that the company will contribute to serious violations of the rights of individuals in war or conflict."

Ted's son Micky is currently the CEO of Carnival Cruises and majority owner of the Heat. He is a multi-billionaire and, as of March 2012, is the 72nd richest person in the United States. During the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Carnival was gifted with a government contract to the tune of $236 million for the use of cruise ships to house hurricane victims, despite an offer by a Greek company to provide two of its own ships for free. The Carnival ships were barely used and sat docked and mostly empty. Two United States Senators, Tom Coburn (R-OK) and none other than Barack Obama (D-IL) even called the contract a "sweetheart" deal in a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff asking him to explain the contract with the Miami-based company. Furthermore, "the senators alleged the contract guaranteed the Carnival Cruise Lines brand rates that were much higher than market levels."

Shari Arison, Ted's daughter, currently holds the elite title of Israel's richest woman and has, in the past, faced allegations by her second husband that she kidnapped their son and defended her third husband during a a sexual harassment suit that ended in conviction.

Furthermore, the Ted Arison Family Foundation - a "philanthropic" charity - has contributed millions of dollars to Birthright Israel, the racist, militarist and ethnosupremacist organization that provides free propaganda trips to Israel for young Jews. Incidentally, the Adelson Family Foundation (yes, that Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, of Citizens United fame) has contributed over $100 million to Birthright Israel since 2007.

A common scene from Birthright

But the Heat's connection to the State of Israel isn't just limited to the Arison clan. Israeli multi-millionaire real estate magnate, nosy landlord, and free speech enemy Raanan Katz is a minority owner of the Heat (along with Julio Igelsias, billionaire Sidney Kimmel and casino group CEO Robert Sturges), owning approximately 12% of the franchise. Katz is a former Israeli basketball player and former owner of the Maccabi Tel Aviv ball club.

Last night, Katz was pictured with former Israeli Occupation Soldier Gilad Shalit, who was held prisoner in Gaza for over five years before being released by Hamas in a prisoner exchange eight months ago and who is now attending the NBA Finals as a sports correspondent for the Israeli press for some reason.

"God can always help; we need him on our side against Dallas," joked Katz, back in 2006 when the Heat were poised to play the Mavericks. "Every Israeli must support us; they must go the Western Wall and pray for us. Miami Heat is no less Israeli than Maccabi. This is also a group with Israeli ownership in which many Americans play."

Sounds like Congress.

The Heat went on to win their first national championship that year. One wonders if a renewed call for prayer will help them beat the Thunder this time around.

The Seattle SuperSonics played their first NBA season in 1967 - just months after Israel launched an aggressive military operation and occupied the remaining 22% of historic Palestine that it hadn't already seized in 1948.  The Sonics' tenure in Seattle lasted until 2008.  The occupation of Palestine continues unabated to this day, subsidized by U.S. taxpayers and further entrenched by corporate ideologues like the Arisons, with no end in sight.

Fans queue before a security check upon arrival for Game 2 of the NBA Finals at the Chesapeake Energy Arena in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, June 14, 2012. (Robyn Beck, AFP/GettyImages)

IDF Hawara Checkpoint, June 2006 (photo: Magne Hagesæter)

So yes, Bennett and McClendon are undoubtedly greedy rich conservatives with a terrible agenda and it's appalling to steal a beloved sports team from its hometown after 41 years.  But it's actually a war crime to build illegal and discriminatory colonies on stolen land, something the Arison family makes millions doing.

With this in mind, maybe we should start referring to Arison and Katz's squad as The Har Homa Heat.

*****

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

That Was Now, This is Then:
Another Pro-War Resolution Hits the House Floor

United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs ranking member Howard Berman and chairperson Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

On Tuesday afternoon, the U.S. House of Representatives debated H.Res. 568, an AIPAC-sponsored bill designed to outlaw diplomacy with Iran and take the United States Congress one step closer to authorizing an illegal, unprovoked and premeditated military attack on Iran.

Debunking statements about Iran made by House Representatives and Senators on the floor of Congress is tedious and boring. Most of the statements are inarticulate readings of AIPAC-drafted talking points and boilerplate hasbara. M.J. Rosenberg has already excellently addressed the point of this legislation and there is no need to repeat, ad nauseum, why most of what's in the bill is wrong, how 13,000 AIPAC operatives were dispatched through the halls of Congress to garner sponsorship and support for the bill, how shameful it is for elected officials to spout pure propaganda about silly cartoon drawings and absurd assassination plots, and how - despite the many repetitions of the same infamous and long-debunked claim (which has literally appeared in over 50 Congressional resolutions since 2005) - even Israeli Minister of Intelligence and Atomic Energy Dan Meridor admitted on Al Jazeera that Iran has never threatened to "wipe Israel off the map."

No, this time around it's best to simply look at how statements made during Tuesday's floor debate compare to statements made a decade ago (and longer).  After so much deceit, destruction and death, how can anyone take this stuff seriously?

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), October 9, 2002:
Saddam Hussein is not far from developing and acquiring the means to strike the United States, our friends and our allies with weapons of mass destruction. Thus, if we do not act now, when?
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), May 15, 2012:
The Iranian regime continues to pose an immediate and growing threat to the United States, to our allies, and to the Iranian people.  We are running out of time to stop the nightmare of a nuclear weapons-capable Iran from becoming a reality...We must meet our responsibility to the American people and protect the security of our Nation, our allies, and the world from this threat of a nuclear capable Iran.
Madeleine Albright, February 18, 1998:
[T]hat the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.
Rush Holt (D-NJ), May 15, 2012:
The threat of nuclear proliferation is the greatest threat to world peace. A nuclear Iran would destabilize the region and threaten the United States and our allies.
Howard Berman (D-CA), October 10, 2002:
But under today's circumstances, the best way to give peace a chance and to save the most lives, American and Iraqi, is for America to stand united and for Congress to authorize the President to use force if Saddam does not give up his weapons of mass destruction. Confront Saddam now, or pay a much heavier price later.
Howard Berman (D-CA), May 15, 2012:
What better time for this body to send an unambiguous message that Iran must never be allowed to achieve a nuclear weapons capability and that its nuclear weapons program must end once and for all?
George W. Bush, January 29, 2002:
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror.
Howard Berman (D-CA), May 15, 2012:
Iran has flaunted its flagrant disregard for U.N. Security Council resolutions, is an active state sponsor of terrorism, has engaged in serious human rights abuses against its own citizens, and plotted a heinous terrorist attack on American soil.
George W. Bush, January 29, 2002:
By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger...[T]ime is not on our side.  I will not wait on events, while dangers gather.  I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer.  The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.
Gene Green (D-TX), May 15, 2012:
Iran is developing the capability to quickly produce a nuclear weapon at a time of its choosing. Iran's acquisition of such a capability would create a significant new regional danger and be an immediate threat to America's interest and allies in the Middle East.
John McCain (R-AZ), Jesse Helms (R-NC), Henry Hyde (R-IL), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Harold Ford (D-TN), Jr., Joe Lieberman (D-CT), Trent Lott (R-MS), Ben Gilman (R-NY) and Sam Brownback (R-KS), December 5, 2001:
The threat from Iraq is real, and it cannot be permanently contained...We have no doubt that these deadly weapons are intended for use against the United States and its allies. Consequently, we believe we must directly confront Saddam, sooner rather than later.
Howard Berman (D-CA), May 15, 2012:
And so, as the window is closing, we send a clear message that the House is aligned with the administration in thoroughly rejecting containment...In fact, we have no choice but to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program before it ever reaches that point.
Steny Hoyer, (D-MD), October 9, 2002:
[Saddam Hussein] continues his efforts to develop and acquire weapons of mass destruction, and he sponsors international terrorism. Saddam Hussein continues to be an unacceptable threat whose duplicity requires action, action now.
Steny Hoyer (D-MD), May 15, 2012:
The most significant threat to peace, regional security, and American interests in the Middle East is Iran's nuclear program...Iran continues to be a sponsor of groups committed to the destruction of our ally Israel and of groups that threaten Americans throughout the world.
John Edwards (D-NC), October 7, 2002:
Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel... Every day he gets closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability. We must not allow him to get nuclear weapons.
Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa), May 15, 2012:
[I]t is imperative that the United States and the international community understand that a nuclear-capable Iran is a global threat and a danger to the United States and, just as important, to the State of Israel...This is a direct threat to our closest ally in the Middle East.
Hillary Clinton (D-NY), October 10, 2002:
[I]f left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), May 15, 2012:
We need to stop the regime before it possesses the capability to develop nuclear weapons, not before it makes a decision to develop nuclear weapons, because we may not know that they have actually made that decision until it is too late.
Chuck Schumer (D-NY), October 10, 2002:
[I]t is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and potential future support for terrorist acts and organizations, that make him a terrible danger to the people to the United States.
Ted Deutch (D-FL), May 15, 2012:
[F]ailing to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran would ignite a destabilizing arms race in the Middle East, would threaten the very existence of our ally Israel, and would endanger the security of the American people.
Chris Dodd (D-CT), October 9, 2002:
There is no question that Iraq possesses biological and chemical weapons and that he seeks to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. That is not in debate.
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), May 15, 2012:
Iran has been involved in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, whether they are nuclear or chemical or biological...We must not underestimate their ability to manufacture nuclear weapons.
George W. Bush, March 19, 2003:
The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, May 15, 2012:
For the Iranian regime, the possession of the capability to produce a nuclear weapon would be almost as useful as actually having one...Tehran would be in the driver's seat, and the security of the United States, Israel, and our many other allies would be in their hands.
George W. Bush, March 6, 2003:
[Saddam Hussein's] weapons of terror...are a direct threat to this country, to our people, and to all free people.
Rob Andrews (D-NJ), May 15, 2012:
[Iran's] attainment of a nuclear weapon would be fraught with peril for free people everywhere... [O]ur position must be that we will not support or stand for an Iran with nuclear weapons.
Al Gore, September 23, 2002:
[Saddam Hussein's] continued pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially a threat to the vital interests of the United States.
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), May 15, 2012:
[I]t is vital to our national interest to prevent Iran from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.  It also makes clear that our time is limited and we must act to prevent Iran from acquiring full nuclear weapons capability.
George W. Bush, March 13, 2002:
First of all, we've got all options on the table, because we want to make it very clear to nations that you will not threaten the United States or use weapons of mass destruction against us, or our allies or friends...[Saddam Hussein] is a problem, and we're going to deal with him. But the first stage is to consult with our allies and friends, and that's exactly what we're doing.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, May 15, 2012:
With a nuclear weapons capability, the regime would dramatically increase its ability to threaten the United States and our allies. We are running out of time to stop the nightmare of a nuclear weapons-capable Iran from becoming a reality.
George W. Bush, August 13, 2005:
As I say, all options are on the table. The use of force is the last option for any president and you know, we've used force in the recent past to secure our country...In all these instances we want diplomacy to work and so we're working feverishly on the diplomatic route and we'll see if we're successful or not.
Barack Obama, January 24, 2012:
Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal. But a peaceful resolution of this issue is still possible, and far better, and if Iran changes course and meets its obligations, it can rejoin the community of nations.
Howard Berman (D-CA), May 15, 2012:
The urgent nature of the Iranian nuclear threat demands that the United States work with our allies to do everything possible diplomatically, politically, and economically to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. No option, as the President has said, can be taken off the table.
It is no surprise - as Congressman Dennis Kucinich pointed out in his own admirable statement from the house floor - that Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former Chief of Staff, has warned, "This resolution reads like the same sheet of music that got us into the Iraq war, and could be the precursor for a war with Iran. It's effectively a thinly-disguised effort to bless war."

Actually, it hardly seems disguised at all.

*****

UPDATE:

May 17, 2012 - This afternoon, H.Res.568 overwhelmingly passed in the U.S. House of Representatives with a vote of 401-11.

Below are the eleven Congressmembers who voted against the absurd resolution:


---- NAYS    11 ---

Justin Amash (R-MI)
Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)
Geoff Davis (R-KY)
John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-TN)
Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
Barbara Lee (D-CA)
Jim McDermott (D-WA)
John Olver (D-MA)
Ron Paul (R-TX)
Fortney Pete Stark (D-CA)
Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)

Nine Representatives, all Democrats, voted "Present," a meaningless, non-committal exercise in transparent, sniveling cowardice.  These cowards are John Conyers (D-MI), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Mike Honda (D-CA), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Betty McCollum (D-MN), Gwen Moore (D-WI), and Jackie Speier (D-CA).

But hey, it's better to be a coward than to be firmly in AIPAC's bloody pocket.

*****  

Monday, May 14, 2012

Wall Street Journal Shocker: Iranians Have Democratic Values
or, OMG! Iranians are Like Totally Almost Like Real Humans!

A chart from IranResearch.org


"Iranians Have Democratic Values," screams a headline in The Wall Street Journal.  The article that follows, written by "Israeli political strategist" Yuval Porat, publicizes the findings of a recent public opinion poll conducted by the author and his colleagues.

Porat explains that the results of the survey reveal that, believe it or not, Iranian society is actually populated with real human beings who think and feel the way real human beings do.  He writes,
An analysis of the Iranian sample showed that alongside conservative values, such as conformity and tradition, Iranian society is characterized by strong support for pro-liberal values such as a belief in the importance of self-direction and benevolence. For example, 94% of the respondents identified with the sentence "freedom to choose what he does is important to him," and 71% of the respondents identified with the sentence "being tolerant toward all kinds of people and groups is important to him."
The poll was carried out using "a psychological questionnaire" that Porat says was developed by Israeli "cross-cultural psychology expert Shalom Schwartz as part of his 'Theory of Basic Human Values'" and which is designed to "measures the basic values of society without posing a single question in political terms."  Results were then analyzed to create "an index which measures the potential of a society to foster democratization, based on its values."

Porat was "amazed by how forthcoming the Iranian people were" during the polling interviews and was equally stunned by the results, writing,
Remarkably, in comparison to 47 countries surveyed in the World Values Survey, Iranian society's potential for liberal democracy was found to be higher than that of 23 others—including Arab countries such as Egypt, Morocco and Jordan, and Asian countries such as South Korea, India and Thailand. In comparison to 29 countries surveyed In the European Social Survey, Iran was found to have higher tendencies toward liberal democracy than Russia, Ukraine, Slovakia and Romania. 
Neat, huh?  What a fresh perspective on the Islamic Republic...and in The Wall Street Journal no less!

But the article is a smoke-screen and the research it's based on is transparently agenda-driven.  Basically, Porat's piece is one long infomercial for regime change in Iran.  In fact, the author tips his hand in his very first sentence when he references "high-stakes international discussions surrounding Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons."

As a researcher, Porat should maybe do a little research on the Iranian nuclear program before making such claims.  Western and Israeli intelligence have long assessed that Iran has no nuclear weapons program, a conclusion backed up by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

But, of course, that's not the point.  Porat knows full well what he's writing and why.  His Wall Street Journal article reads like something out of MAD Magazine or National Lampoon.  'Golly-gee, folks, those Eye-ranians are just like you and me!  Now let's get the regime change planes fueled up and ready to fly!'

The poll cited is one of the most patronizing, if not least scientific, ever conducted.  The research itself has barely been made public and is housed on a strangely amateurish website with hardly any content called IranResearch.org.  There is no press about this enterprise other than the Wall Street Journal article, which is also posted on the website.  Each page of the site is topped by a banner reading, "Could Iran Turn Into A Liberal Democracy?"  Porat's other researchers are mostly students at The Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel with past or current connections to the IDF.  The agenda could not be more obvious.

Furthermore, the researchers - in their quest to justify foreign intervention and regime change - seem not to understand (or care) that, for most Iranians, sentences like "It is important to him to make his own decisions about his life" and "Thinking creatively is important to him" are not seen as anathema to the current Iranian political system.  Also, the supposed "findings" of this poll are in no way shocking to anyone familiar with (a) Iranian society, which obviously doesn't include most neoconservative WSJ readers, or Israeli pollsters for that matter, and (b) have read other polls of the Iranian public.

In late 2010, for example, the International Peace Institute together with Charney Research, released an actual poll on Iranian public opinion.  Among the findings was the strong support (67%) for developing "closer connections with developed Western countries," yet this had no effect on the fact that 87% of respondents viewed the United States unfavorably, 68% considered the US "the greatest threat in the region," and a majority (55%) viewed European nations in a negative light.  An overwhelming majority (68%) continued to support Iran's relationship with and support for Hamas and Hezbollah.

In response to a question about whether Iranian society needs "controls to protect Islam and Iran from its enemies" or needs "more democracy, freedom and the rule of law," 51% of those polled chose the former versus 31% who picked the "more democracy" option.  Nevertheless, 54% said they "have real opportunities to improve their lives" and 60% said they "have much hope for the future."

Whereas a plurality of respondents (47%) said that the Rahbar and Guardian Council should have the last word on political decisions, 53% believed that, over the next decade, the elected President and Majlis would assume more powerful roles and make final decisions for the Islamic Republic.

Results like these show that Iranians don't believe themselves to be powerless in their own country (for example, the voter turnout and those voting for Ahmadinejad were found by the Charney report to be nearly identical to the official Iranian results).  Former Presidents Khatami and Rafsanjani still enjoyed broad support, while opposition leaders Mousavi and Karroubi were far less popular, each receiving "favorable" reactions from fewer than 40% of respondents.  The so-called "Green Movement" was even less popular, garnering a mere 26% approval rating.

The Israeli poll cited by the Wall Street Journal is yet another example of using an Orientalist frame (those people are almost just like us so we can finally convince ourselves it makes sense to go and save them from themselves!) in order to promote an agenda that the Iranian people across all social strata and the political spectrum reject out of hand - that is, Western-influenced regime change.

In case the purpose of the poll, and its publicity in the Wall Street Journal, wasn't explicit enough, here's how Porat concludes:
Our findings demonstrate that Iranian society as a whole is characterized by a pro-liberal value structure that is deeply at odds with the fundamentalist regime. This presents considerable potential for regime change in Iran and for the development of liberal democracy.
But how do Mr. Porat, his colleagues, and his compatriots actually define "liberal democracy"?  It might be instructive for Mr. Porat to turn his polling sights on his own state to find out if his own state, Israel, really fits the definition of a pluralistic, liberal society with democratic values wherein "being tolerant toward all kinds of people and groups is important" to the majority of the population.


Sunday, May 13, 2012

I Want My - I Want My - I Want My NPT:
This Weekend's Extravaganza of Crapoganda on Iran's Nuclear Program

 
Two news reports by major wire services this weekend demonstrate just how pervasive misinformation and propaganda are in the mainstream media when it comes to the Iranian nuclear issue.

The first:

Reuters reported this week that Catherine Ashton, the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and chief nuclear negotiator for the P5+1, has high hopes for the new round of talks with Iran resuming May 23rd in Baghdad and will approach the meeting as a “serious set of discussions that can lead to concrete results.”

Sounds positive enough, especially when coupled with the statement Ashton made at the end of last month's meeting in Istanbul. "We have agreed that the Non-Proliferation Treaty forms a key basis for what must be serious engagement, to ensure all the obligations under the NPT are met by Iran while fully respecting Iran’s right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy."

However, another comment made by Ashton on Friday is cause for considerable concern. She told reporters in Brussels, "My ambition is that we come away with the beginning of the end of the nuclear weapons programme in Iran. I hope we’ll see the beginnings of success.”

Such a statement is certainly alarming. Despite the hysterical cries of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing acolytes here in the U.S., both Western and Israeli intelligence, along with the IAEA, have consistently confirmed that Iran has no nuclear weapons program.

One would assume that the chief P5+1 negotiator would understand and acknowledge this simple - and vitally important - fact. Perhaps Ashton's recent private audience with Netanyahu in Jerusalem was more dangerous and detrimental to the negotiations than one would even expect.

(Of course, the sheer absurdity of Ashton's meeting with the Prime Minister of a state that is not a signatory of the NPT, has an undeclared stockpile of hundreds of nuclear warheads, is a constant violator of international law and perpetrator of war crimes, and which is in consistent breach of countless Security Council resolutions goes without saying. That Netanyahu would have any role whatsoever in these discussions, let alone issuing demands to both the U.S. government and Ashton herself, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt how designed for failure these negotiations were from the start.)

The second:

In one of the most embarrassing examples of published propaganda over the Iranian nuclear program to date, The Associated Press today "reported" that it has obtained an undated "computer-generated drawing" of "an explosives containment chamber of the type needed for nuclear arms-related tests that U.N. inspectors suspect Tehran has conducted" at its Parchin military complex.  The news agency says it was bequeathed this rendering "by an official of a country tracking Iran’s nuclear program who said it proves the structure exists."

One version of the AP exclusive contains this detail:
That official said the image is based on information from a person who had seen the chamber at the Parchin military site, adding that going into detail would endanger the life of that informant. The official comes from an IAEA member country that is severely critical of Iran's assertions that its nuclear activities are peaceful and asserts they are a springboard for making atomic arms.
What mysterious country could that possibly be, one wonders?!  The answer is so painfully obvious as to make AP scoopster George Jahn's attempts at anonymity patently ridiculous and pathetic.  Jahn, unsurprisingly, has a long history of silly reporting on the Iran nuclear issue.

This detonation chamber stuff, by the way, has been debunked for half a year now. 

The story also notes that former IAEA official Olli Heinonen, who himself has a long history of pushing dubious information about Iran's nuclear file, said that the computer graphic provided to the press is "'very similar' to a photo he recently saw that he believes to be the pressure chamber the IAEA suspects is at Parchin."  Heinonen added that "even the colors of the computer-generated drawing matched that of the photo."

Pretty convincing, huh?  Ok, here's the computer drawing this whole thing is about:


Yes, really.  That's it.  Really.  No, please stop laughing and believe me.  That's really the thing they're talking about.  Yes, seriously.  I mean it.

These are the depths to which propaganda about the Iranian nuclear program have sunk.  It's not even clever anymore, it's just stupid.

And just in case anyone is interested, I have successfully uncovered the true identities of the crack Israeli computer graphics team that came up with that drawing:



To be promoting such desperate and amateurish offerings like this Parchin drawing is actually unequivocal evidence that the warmongers and propagandists are in dire straits.

I want my NPT.

*****

UPDATE:

May 13, 2012 - For those who have forgotten, "b" over at the excellent Moon Of Alabama blog was quick to remind us about the "rather infamous drawings of mobile bio-weapon laboratories Colin Powell presented to the United Nations Security Council as 'proof' for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."  Powell cited alleged evidence "from the thick intelligence file we have on Iraq's biological weapons" that he said proved "the existence of mobile production facilities used to make biological agents." He referenced "what we know from eyewitness accounts" and insisted, "We have firsthand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails."  He then presented these graphics to the Council:




Yup.  And then the United States invaded Iraq, occupied it for almost a decade, and killed hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of human beings there.  Take another look at these images and think about that.  For a decade.

*****

UPDATE II:

May 15, 2012 - One more thing: Remember how the mysterious unnamed "official" from "an IAEA member country that is severely critical of Iran's assertions" and which "asserts they are a springboard for making atomic arms" and who "said the image is based on information from a person who had seen the chamber at the Parchin military site," also noted (as I already quoted above) that "going into detail" about the source of this ridiculous drawing "would endanger the life of that informant"?

Well, let's recall what Colin Powell told the United Nations Security Council on February 5, 2003 at the outset of his 75-minute cavalcade of lies that he subsequently called "one of my most momentous failures" and "the lowest point in my life":
The material I will present to you comes from a variety of sources. Some are U.S. sources. And some are those of other countries.

Some of the sources are technical, such as intercepted telephone conversations and photos taken by satellites. Other sources are people who have risked their lives to let the world know what Saddam Hussein is really up to.

I cannot tell you everything that we know. But what I can share with you, when combined with what all of us have learned over the years, is deeply troubling.
"Deeply troubling," is one way to put it.  War crimes and crimes against humanity is another.

*****

UPDATE III:

May 19, 2012 - Hey, remember when The New York Times reported:
The Bush Administration showed reconnaissance photographs to the United Nations Security Council today to back up its assertion that Iraq is trying to conceal equipment used for making nuclear explosives.

At a private briefing this morning, American intelligence officials showed the 15-member Council classified photographs of uranium-enrichment machinery being moved around on trucks or buried to evade detection by United Nations inspectors.
As noted above, that was in early 2003, right?  Wrong.  It was June 27, 1991 and the "Bush Administration" was that of George Herbert Walker Bush, not his imbecilic successor.

At that time, the United States' deputy representative to the U.N. Security Council, Alexander F. Watson, claimed that the U.S. had "'strong evidence' that Iraq was trying to conceal factories for manufacturing these weapons," yet government officials "said the photographs that were shown to the Security Council at the briefing this morning could not be released because they would enable experts to assess American reconnaissance capability."

Furthermore, the Times reported that "a defecting Iraqi scientist" who had given himself up to American troops was insistent that "Baghdad had a secret nuclear weapons program in which it was using about 25 calutrons to produce highly enriched uranium" and "had suceeded in enriching some 90 pounds of uranium to weapons-grade level, providing it enough explosive material for several crude atomic bombs."  The paper of record then qualified its statements with this: "No trace of this uranium has been found by inspectors."

Meanwhile, the Times quoted State Department spokeswoman Margaret D. Tutwiler as declaring, "There is ample evidence from multiple sources that Iraq has been conducting a covert nuclear weapons program that has included activities to produce nuclear weapons material."

Uh huh.

*****