AUSTRALIANS AT WAR

AUSTRALIANS AT WAR
THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.

Sunday, October 07, 2007

‘FINAL CONFRONTATION’ NEWS.

‘SYRIA HAD NUCLEAR FACILITY’ STORY IS BACK ON THE FRONT BURNER.

During the time that the Israeli Defence Forces blocked all news from Israeli sources regarding its attack on Syria back in early September it was leaked that the Israeli Air Force (IAF) had bombed a Syrian nuclear facility that contained nuclear material from North Korea. Quickly realising that bombing a facility that was ‘hot’ with nuclear material would have been a completely stupid thing to do given that radio active nuclear dust could well have spread all over the Middle East, including Israel, and beyond, it was decided to embellish the ‘leak’ of the Syria nuke story by adding that just prior to the air raid a special forces ground operation was mounted to remove the ‘nuclear’ material from the facility.

Then, realising that this story was really pushing the bounds of credibility into the realms of James Bond-like fantasy, the story was changed yet again. This time the air raid was said to have been against North Korean missiles that had found its way to Syria.

Now it seems the story has morphed yet again apparently in order to perpetuate the ‘Syria going nuclear’ myth as part of the continuing propaganda and rhetoric geared to bolster public support for the Final Confrontation between the US-Israel and Iran-Syria. The Jerusalem Post, citing an ABC News report, now claims that the IAF did indeed bomb a Syrian facility but one that contained ‘North Korean nuclear technology’ rather than actual ‘North Korean nuclear material’ implying that there was no danger from nuclear contamination of the region as a result of the bombing. Predictably, no further mention of the James Bond-like ground raid on the ‘facility’ is made; a part of the story that seems to have quietly disappeared from the pages of this particular piece of Israeli military history.

The ABC News report also mentions that the US was privy to Israeli plans well in advance of the planned strike and, indeed, had debated whether or not the Israelis should go a head. In the end, so the article implies, Israel went ahead despite US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice’s opposition to the strike. Her failure to halt the raid is further evidence demonstrating that Rice is increasingly losing influence over both Israeli policies and the polices of their supporters in the Bush administration, especially Vice-President Dick Cheney and his hawk supporters among the neoconservatives who are itching to get the Final Confrontation against Syria and Iran off the ground.


BUSH SAYS HE HAS ‘NO PLANS TO ATTACK IRAN’.

On 29 March 2002 Bush also told the world he had no plans to attack Iraq. Bush’s non-existent credibility isn’t exactly on the line anymore – he’s told that many lies that the world simply doesn’t believe a word he says. The only difference between the propaganda and rhetoric in the lead up to the attack on Iraq and the lead up to the coming attack on Iran is that this time the US only has Israel as an ally.

Of course, if President Bush insists that there will be no attack on Iran, then there is always the ‘lone deranged gunman’ option. Vice-President Dick Cheney, currently pushing Bush to bomb Iran, once having been sworn in as President, would not hesitate to bomb Iran in his push for the Final Confrontation.

2 comments:

Craig Rowley said...

Hello Damian,

It seems the preferred local (Australian) variant of the demonisation meme for this week is the "Iran IED" strain from the "Tehran Terrorist HQ" family.

It fits well within the "War on Terror as code for Clash of Civilisations" memeplex.

There are two ways in which the US has attempted to link Iran to weapons in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

The first is a general argument, which centres on a a type of IED dubbed the ‘explosively formed projectile’ (EFP). It's basically a tube of explosives with a concave lid of metal capping one end. EFPs fire and the force re-shapes the lid into a high-speed, super-hot projectile. That's what pierces heavy armour.

The New York Times published an article by Michael E. Gordon back in February this year that include this claim:

"The manufacture of the key metal components required sophisticated machinery, raw material and expertise that American intelligence agencies do not believe can be found in Iraq."

So, it's on the weak and circumstantial basis that Iran's seen to be more able to manufacture with "sophisticated machinery" than Iraq that some part of the so-called evidence promoted by pro-war propagandists must rest. Nothing reliable; just speculation that because Iran is a "rogue" (but not yet a "ruined" nation it must be the bad guy making all the bombs killing our boys. I reckon most punters wouldn't realise that's how weak the "evidence" is.

It was back in June 2006 that the UK's Daily Telegraph first revealed the use of EFPs in Iraq. That report included the "news" that:

"This newspaper understands that Government scientists have established that the mines are precision-made weapons which have been turned on a lathe by craftsmen trained in the manufacture of munitions."

Then down the track we're to believe that Iran is obviously the only nation anywhere near the region with lathes, and craftsmen capable of turning out munitions!

What about the other key ingredients of what's looking like cooked up "Intel" on Iran? Is Iran the only place where one can find the "raw material"? No-where else in the mideast or the broader region does anyone make metal tubes? No-one else has any stock of explosive compounds?

Well according to the NYT article by Michael E. Gordon you can't find those things in Iraq. No lathes; no craftsmen; no munitions manufacturing capabilities; no metal tubes, no explosives (except the IEDs; including EFPs, which must all be made elsewhere).

Australians this week will be served up this same bullshit by our local pollies using the MSM. And sadly it'll be swallowed by so many.

Craig Rowley said...

The second and more specific argument being used by the "Iran IED" meme marketing machine centres on claims about manufacturing marks.

Some of the bombs and fragments the US Army put on display at their Baghdad briefing back in February were said to have Iranian factory markings. That's remained in focus for the "Iran IED" meme relay teams. The fact that the senior US defence analyst presenting the "evidence" also said that there was no "smoking gun" linking Tehran and Iraqi militants has (it would seem most appropriate to say) just about vanished from the page of time. Those marketing the "Iran IED" meme never mention it, that's for sure.

I said (on Webdiary) at the time that I wondered whether the fragments marked "Made in Iran" would turn up in a UNSC briefing similar to the one Colin Powell had to make for his masters, intent on proving the existence of non-existant WMD in Iraq to provide the casus belli they must've felt they needed that time. So far we haven't seen the "evidence" mounted on a board with red circles around the "unmistakable" markings revealing the true identity of the bomb-makers. The photos obviously were not "clear" enough or something, so US officials couldn't just leave in the hands of journalists who'd publish them for the whole world to be able to scrutinize (these things need 'expert explanation', you see ... can't leave it to mere citizens of free nations to make up their own minds about things, you know.)

Now all this talk of bomb manufacturers markings reminds me of the story of those women and children killed southern Lebanon in 1996 by a Lockheed-made Hellfire 1 missile that an IDF pilot used to target and take out what he must of thought was a "heavy armour military vehicle" rather than the Red-Crescent marked ambulance it really was ... but that's a story to share again another time -- perhaps best for when the hypocrisy of the pro-war lot needs highlighting again.

There have been other mentions these mysterious "Made in Iran" markings by US officials, but noticably not by the officials of any other nations ... well that was true until Dr. Nelson took it upon itself to make everything he's read of Mark Steyn's seem that much more true (at least to those who seem capable of glossing over Steyn's stomach for genocide of all Muslims in Europe)!

What's the bet that our new "top-tier military ally status" means Howard, Downer, Nelson and other insiders don't get to see the material with the "Made in Iran" markings, but do get to read all about them and be briefed by people who'll mouth to them dumbly drawing attention to what they've read in the reports and nothing more.