(Minor editing for presentation. 12:30 pm Eastern – promoted by ek hornbeck)

It’s only been three years since the New York Times publicly apologized for promoting Bush Administration fairy tales about Iraqi WMD, and still the Grey Lady continues to carry heavy water for the Bush Administration, this time regurgitating Neocon lies claims that the target of the Israeli bombing strike in Syria was a nuclear facility.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 – Israel’s air attack on Syria last month was directed against a site that Israeli and American intelligence analysts judged was a partly constructed nuclear reactor, apparently modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel, according to American and foreign officials with access to the intelligence reports.
…
Many details remain unclear, most notably how much progress the Syrians had made in construction before the Israelis struck, the role of any assistance provided by North Korea, and whether the Syrians could make a plausible case that the reactor was intended to produce electricity. In Washington and Israel, information about the raid has been wrapped in extraordinary secrecy and restricted to just a handful of officials, while the Israeli press has been prohibited from publishing information about the attack.

See how easy it is to make a news story seem credible?  Just quote some unnamed Administration officials with access to reports they can’t otherwise talk about, and Voila!

Instant nukes, ready for framing!

Of course, you might expect professional (or at least competent) journalists to make some attempt to corroborate these bombastic reports, especially considering the Times’ embarrassing track record when it comes to the topic of WMD in Middle Eastern countries. Right?

Heh.

Happily embracing a propagandist fiction that the veracity of anonymous ‘American and foreign (read Israeli) officials’ is unimpeachable (ahem), trusting Times’ reporters apparently feel no need to provide even a single, independent source to back up the Bush Administration’s claim that the Syrians were breaking ground on a nuclear facility at Deir ez-Zor.  Not one.

Fool me once….

Yet even as the stenographer’s pool at the Times continues to pass off mere dictation of BushCo bunker fantasies as honest reporting, serious analysts in the real world remain convinced the target was NOT a nuclear facility.

Last week I blogged Laura Rozen’s report that the real target of the Israeli raid was a shipment of SCUD missile parts from North Korea.

Dair el Zor(sic) houses a huge underground base where the Syrian army stores the long and medium-range missiles it mostly buys from Iran and North Korea. The attack by the Israeli air force coincided with the arrival of a stock of parts for Syria’s 200 Scud B and 60 Scud C weapons.

The story goes that the US Navy was unable to interdict the missile shipment in Moroccan waters, so the Israelis waited until the parts arrived at their final destination in Syria before taking them out.

Dr. Jeffrey Lewis at Arms Control Wonk (think Juan Cole for the nuclear set) calls Syrian nuclear claims silly. Professor Lewis also believes the Israeli strike targeted missile parts, and quotes strategic analyst Chris Nelson:

In fact, as our headline, above, notes, we have absolutely solid information that the Israeli bombing raid on Syria was aimed at…and took out…missiles and/or weapons parts. Period.

All the stories being floated about Israeli intelligence sources hinting that it was a North Korean/Syrian nuclear weapons project, or site, are BS, albeit of varying motivation.

What remains under some debate is whether the missiles/parts can be 100% ascribed to N. Korea. Most unclassified evidence … points at Pyongyang.

Dr Lewis further points out that a 2004 Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) WMD report (PDF) is consistent with a North Korean missile shipment.

From the DNI report:

Syria
Nuclear.
Syria-an NPT signatory with full-scope IAEA safeguards-has nuclear research facilities at Dayr Al Hajar and Dubaya. In 2004 Syria continued to develop civilian nuclear capabilities, including uranium extraction technology and hot cell facilities, which may also be potentially applicable to a weapons program. Pakistani investigators in late January 2004 said they had “confirmation” of an IAEA allegation that A.Q. Khan offered nuclear technology and hardware to Syria, according to Pakistani press, and we are concerned that expertise or technology could have been transferred. We continue to monitor Syrian nuclear intentions with concern.

Ballistic Missile.
During 2004, Damascus continued to seek help from abroad to establish a solid-propellant rocket motor development and production capability. Syria’s liquid-propellant missile program continued to depend on essential foreign equipment and assistance-primarily from North Korean entities. Damascus also continued to manufacture liquid-propellant Scud missiles. In addition, Syria was developing longer-range missile programs, such as a Scud D and possibly other variants, with assistance from North Korea and Iran.

Basically, the DNI report not only confirms an ongoing arms relationship between North Korea and Syria for missiles and parts, but also suggests that if the Syrians were actually interested in acquiring nukes, the most likely supplier would be Pakistan, not North Korea.  (I’d also point out that the Syrian nuclear facilities identified in the DNI report are hundreds of kilometers from the site of the Israeli attack.)

Finally, the highly respected SIPRI has a nice overview on the history and extent of Syrian nuclear development, which states:

Syria possesses what appears to be a nascent nuclear programme and limited nuclear infrastructure. Though this country has been mentioned as a potential nuclear proliferation risk, there is little evidence that it has ever had serious nuclear weapons ambitions.

Here’s another question. Why on earth would North Korea start developing a nuclear relationship with Syria now, especially when North Korea is in the process dismantling its own nuclear program?

[T]alks produced the February 13 accord under which impoverished, food-short North Korea is to dismantle its nuclear programs and jettison its weapons in return for economic assistance, security guarantees and diplomatic relations with the United States.

North Korea shut down its main plutonium-producing reactor at Yongbyon in July and received 50,000 tons of fuel oil from South Korea.

The answer is, of course, that North Korea has absolutely no reason whatsoever to jeopardize its nuclear dismantlement deal with the major powers just to sell nuclear materials to pariah state Syria. 

There are, however, those in the Administration who would very much like to use a bogus charge of North Korean proliferation to torpedo the dismantlement deal (from the Times article):

Behind closed doors, however, Vice President Dick Cheney and other hawkish members of the administration have made the case that the same intelligence that prompted Israel to attack should lead the United States to reconsider delicate negotiations with North Korea over ending its nuclear program, as well as America’s diplomatic strategy toward Syria, which has been invited to join Middle East peace talks in Annapolis, Md., next month.>

Basically, what we have is a Neo Con Nuclear Three-fer: take out the missiles, discredit the Syrians, and sabotage Korean nuclear dismantlement, all in one shameless disinformation campaign reminiscent of Judy Miller at her worst.

Now that’s what I call renewing your Times’ Home Delivery service….

(x-posted at Hoot at the Dark and Big Orange).

Hat tip to Magnifico.

Update: 
Major overnight rewrite as well as a title change to avoid unintentionally copying this article at HuffPo.  It seems I’m not the first to notice the resurrection of some very bad journalistic habits at the New York Times.

Much to my surprise Blackwater proudly exhibits itself online, and who can blame them what with the constant need for more itchy trigger fingers.  So, I got to thinking, if we can googlebomb corrupt politicians, we can googlebomb fascist businesses like Blackwater.

I need your help on this.  We need to find the most damning but true articles, blog entries, stories regarding Blackwater.  Everyone should take the time to visit the entries and tell the group which ones are the most effective.  I will then create the coding for the links and post them.  Anytime we mention Blackwater we include one of the coded links.

It’s simple and effective. It could help open the eyes of both new recruits and those who happen to click on the links. 

Articles that tie Blackwater to other corporate entities will be helpful for a second generation of googlebombs.  Submitting your own past posts on the issue is fine  as long as they have some concrete facts incorporated.  We can’t boycott them but we can sure as hell change the way they are perceived.

Googlebombing is not as severe as it sounds to all you pacifists out there, it simply means pointing people to various links based on a specific keyword or keywords.  Any suggestions for keywords besides Blackwater would be helpful.

Thanks team.

(10PM – promoted by buhdydharma )

Mychal Bell is a bad boy, didja know that?  He was violent.  He was a bad boy.  And because of that, no one should protest on his behalf, because if they do, they’re misguided, yes, they are misguided because it was far worse, his beating up that white boy, than it was to put some nooses on a tree.  No one was sent to the emergency room as a result of nooses on a tree.  But Mychal Bell sent a white boy to the emergency room, and he is bad.

Yep.  He was violent.  And further more, I’m no racist!  Oh no, I would be the first to say those white boys who put a noose on a tree should have been expelled!  Yes, expelled!  And those school board folks and the DA, well they should be held to account, yes they should!  But that Mychal Bell, he’s a bad boy, and you are misguided to protest on his behalf.  After all, he was violent.  What would Martin Luther King say?  He would never have marched in Jena.

And I have to say, that Mychal Bell is a lucky fellow, he’s going to have so many opportunities because of all that media attention, all that money coming his way, he’s a lucky boy and I hope he takes advantage of all these opportunities.  I wish him no ill, I just hope he realizes how lucky he is!

*****

All the sentiments above are from comments I have read both at Daily Kos and elsewhere over the Jena 6.  My response is below.

To All The Racists Hiding Behind Martin Luther King

That boy he was bad,
he hurt that other boy
he piled on with five others,
beat him with a shoe
that boy was bad,
I won’t lift a finger
for that boy

Sure, they shoulda
punished those folks
who put a noose on a tree
that was wrong,
but no one got
sent to the emergency room
as a result!
No, that boy was bad.

You bleeding hearts,
you want to reward that boy?
Reward him for such awful violence?
What would the good
Reverend Martin Luther King
have to say about that?
He abhorred violence.
He would not
have marched
in Jena.

No, no, the good Reverend
would have picked someone better
for his cause, someone who
wasn’t so bad and violent
(oh! I heard that bad boy
had done awful things before!)
No, the good Reverend
would have picked someone better
for his cause!

Yes, I sure love the
Reverend Martin Luther King,
now THAT man had it right!
Nonviolence, that’s the ticket.
Well sure, that boy should not
have been tried as an adult,
oh no, I think that was wrong.
But why are you
defending violence?

The Reverend Martin Luther King
would not have marched in Jena,
oh no, not for that bad boy.
Well, yes, those white boys
who beat up a black boy,
who pulled a gun, sure,
they should have been punished!
And those white boys who
put up the noose, they
should have been expelled!

But why should I care about
that bad black boy?
Why do you defend violence?
The Reverend Martin Luther King
would not agree, oh no, he
would  not have marched in Jena.

Malcolm?  Malcolm X?  Who’s that?

*****

From a debate at Oxford in 1964:

From Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence by Reverend Martin Luther King (please substitute the word Iraq for Vietnam and “towns across America” for “ghettos”):

My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years — especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

Yeah, keep trying to hide behind Martin Luther King.  He wouldn’t have given a shit about Mychal Bell.  He would never have marched in Jena.

Amidst all the excitement about Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize, the questions and dreams about a possible presidential campaign, and the inevitable criticism from right wing cynics (demonstrating, once again, that they neither understand nor even like the concept of peace), let’s not lose focus on what really matters. It is not about the man, it is about his cause; and he is the man he is because he puts the cause above any personal considerations, and whether or not he runs will undoubtedly be determined by his best assessment of whether it will be the best way to serve the cause! We need also keep that priority straight! The coming weeks are critical, and we can help!

Largely because of Al Gore and the IPCC, global warming and climate change have now come to be frontline political issues. Bush no longer ignores it, and now tries to spin it (the best he will ever do on any political issue), and Congress is finally crafting legislation to address it. For now, this is where we need focus.

Mark Hertsgaard, the environmental correspondent for The Nation, puts it directly:

Now that Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, will the US Congress take the IPCC’s scientific advice on how to fight global warming? The IPCC holds that the world must reduce greenhouse gas emissions at least 80 percent by the year 2050. Few in Congress seem prepared to go that far, however. And judging from the discussion at a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill last week, even lawmakers who personally embrace the “gold standard” of 80 percent reductions are prepared to endorse a weaker measure in the name of getting some form of climate legislation moving in Congress.

If we take Al Gore seriously, and we take seriously his Nobel Prize, we need to immediately begin lobbying Congress to do the same. This is no time for the compromises that define the usual failures of our political system. With the issue in the headlines, we need let our Congressional representatives know that we are watching, and that we are expecting more than lip service.

The question is, what bill will reformers get behind? How ambitious will they be? Will they demand what the scientific community says is the minimum necessary to enable our civilization to (perhaps) avoid the worst future scenarios of global warming: deep cuts in emissions by 2020 on the way to 80-90 percent cuts by 2050? Or, in the name of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, will they favor a more modest and gradual approach?

The weak, ineffectual compromise approach is being championed by those champions of political weakness and ineffectual compromise, Senators John Warner (R-VA) and Joseph Lieberman (?-CT). Their bill would mandate emission reductions of 10 percent by 2020, and 70 percent by 2050. That they would, for some reason, decide on an approach that falls 10 percent short on such a critical goal says everything. It won’t solve the problem, but it will make nice window dressing. It’s not just embarrassing and absurd, it’s dangerous!

Not only do these provisions fall short of the scientific standard; there is even less here than meets the eye. The bill, as described in briefings and press accounts, contains a number of loopholes, including provisions that (1) will give rather than sell greenhouse-gas-emissions permits to polluters, thus violating the “polluter pays” principle of environmental accounting, and (2) count so-called carbon offsets–that is, paying someone else to reduce emissions while continuing to emit oneself–as genuine reductions.

An alternative has been proposed by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Bernard Sanders (I-VT), with a similar bill in the House being sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA). Their bills mandate the 80 percent reductions, on real terms, rather than with carbon offsets, and they make the polluters pay. Hertsgaard links to the World Resource Institute’s comparison of these, and other, proposals.

Of course, only one of the bills is getting traction, on Congress.

According to sources speaking on background because of the confidential nature of the discussions, most Senate Democrats and many environmental and other public interest groups are preparing to support the Lieberman-Warner bill, despite misgivings about its shortcomings.

.

While some in Congress apparently believe it is important to pass something, anything, environmental writer Bill McKibben disagrees. Since Bush is likely to veto even Warner-Lieberman, McKibben believes that even passing it will only serve to lower the bar, for the next Congress and the next president. It will make Warner-Lieberman appear to be the proper standard. Clearly, that would be unacceptable.

As McKibben explained to Hertsgaard, in a previous interview:

Since Bush is going to veto it anyway, there is no reason to make [a climate bill] less ambitious than what science requires. Climate change isn’t like other issues. It doesn’t do any good to split the difference to reach a deal everyone can live with. Climate change is about the laws of physics and chemistry, and they don’t give.

We’re all thrilled that Al Gore and the IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize. It’s time for us to help them leverage that prestige, by pressuring Congress to do what is right. Call your senators and congresspeople. Tell them that Warner-Lieberman is unacceptable, and that the only valid options are Boxer-Sanders and Waxman. We now have the political momentum. Let’s not waste it!

“IMMUNITY” IS NOT the word that should be being used to highlight and headline stories regarding the case of the telecoms and the FISA bill. “Retroactive immunity” is not even right. These terms put the focus of this story on the telecoms. It belongs on the White House. If the word is going to be used at all, it should be along the lines of “Bush seeking protection for possible White House crimes with immunity request.”?

Here’s my Senator on this:

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., an intelligence committee member, fears the language would go far beyond protecting private companies and their employees, also giving cover to any government officials who may have broken the law.

“I and others are going to make sure that anything that is done is done in a narrow, targeted way,” Wyden said.

“Giving cover to government officials who may have broken the law.” Like Alberto Gonazales, Dick Cheney, and George Bush, along with a host of others.

Most people here know that this is what’s going on, but I think headlines should reflect that, and the “Bush seeking immunity for telecoms” isn’t forwarding that correct message. This is about stopping the dozens of lawsuits currently ongoing against the telecoms – and explicitly to stop what would be revealed in those cases were allowed to go through.

And they’re not just waiting for this FISA bill, they’re desperately fighting in court to get the cases squashed even without this legislation. And they may win.

SAn appeals court in San Francisco is weighing the government’s argument that these cases should be thrown out on the grounds that the subject matter is a “state secret” and that its disclosure would jeopardize national security.

More from Wired:

The telecoms are defending themselves against some 50 lawsuits seeking damages and a halt to the cooperation.  Nearly all of those are consolidated in a San Francisco federal court, where lawyers for the government, rights groups, and the telecoms are waiting for the 9th Circuit Appeals Court to rule on whether the suits must be dismissed on the grounds that they will endanger national security.

Why doesn’t the Bush administration want these suits to go through? It’s not national security. It’s just not. They’re lying. They are covering their own asses.

Editor’s note: I am not a crook. Nor a lawyer. Please inform me of any ridiculous errors I may have made.

Crossposted

This weekend, buyers from across the Gulf states and the Middle East will descend on a huge arms fair in Dubai. Sheikhs, emirs, princes and kings will be buying anything from specialised sniper ammunition by the ton, to the highest-tech surveillance gear and even the odd British Aerospace gunboat or Eurofighter.

The Arab world will use the International Defence Exhibition (IDEX), to tool up for a coming confrontation with Iran, and to arm Sunni insurgents to fight Iran’s allies in Iraq, the Shia militias.

http://www.thefirstp…

How awesome is that?  Tooling up the Middle East for an expanded war into Iran.  I couldn’t find many details on the upcoming event.  Perhaps it’s this one:

Security and Safety ME 2007

  * Venue:  Abu Dhabi National Exhibition Centre (ADNEC)
  * Country:  United Arab Emirates

  * Start date:  Sunday, October 28 – 2007
  * End date:  Wednesday, October 31 – 2007

  * Website:  http://www.adnec.ae
http://www.ameinfo.c…

While we may not have much info in this upcoming conference, we only need look back to the super-swanky arms bazaar last February 2007.  Man, was it a hit. Arms shopping is very sexy stuff:

Shop till you drop. Two women walk past tanks as they attend the opening of the IDEX Defence Exhibition in Abu Dhabi 18 February 2007. The Middle East’s biggest arms fair, IDEX-2007, opened today in the United Arab Emirates with hundreds of manufacturers displaying state-of-the-art weaponry to oil-rich monarchies that are keen on upgrading their armed forces.
http://www.spacewar….

It looks like a beautiful place, Abu Dhabi, rich and modern as all get out.  Yeah, they got the filthy lucre alright.  Weren’t they the ones who wanted to control our ports and buy 20% of the NASDAQ stock exchange? 

The exhibition in 2007 attracted more than 630 companies from 49 countries, representing a 54% growth on the previous year.

What can you say?  Arms sales and security are flat-out growth industries, anymore.  I bet Lockheed, Boeing, Northrup, Raytheon, et al are making a killing of planetary proportions on all this action.

These countless exhibitions offer the entire security package. You think we have Homeland Security problems?  Just look to the burning horizon of the Middle East, and consider the investment opportunities.  Next January’s Intersec Exhibition is going to be chockablock with the world’s Global Security and Safety leaders meeting to press the flesh with other lucre-packing-lugals.

Global Security and Safety Leaders to Converge On Dubai in January
Steep rise of 60% in the rate of booking for Intersec Middle East

Intersec Middle East has attracted involvement by key security, policing, safety and fire & rescue solution providers, reflecting a remarkable growth rate of more than 60% as compared to the booking rate for the exhibition in July 2007. The annual trade fair and conference is recognised as the ideal regional platform for debating and providing solutions for security, fire, police health and safety concerns which set international standards for monitoring commercial developments.

Organised by Messe Frankfurt, the world’s second largest exhibition organiser, Intersec Middle East is scheduled to take place from the 13-15 January 2008 at the Dubai International Convention & Exhibition Centre in the United Arab Emirates.

Ines Gruslinger, the show manger of the event proclaims that, “Intersec Middle East in 2007 attracted over 16,000 visitors from 79 countries, and 98% of the exhibitors stated that their overall objectives in terms of establishing contacts for future sales had been met or surpassed. The 10th edition of this prestigious networking event will present an ideal opportunity for industry related companies to showcase to a global audience of commercial and government buyers, launch new products, source distribution and business partners, and reinforce existing business relationships.”

Over the past eight years $277 billion has been allocated to defence and security in the GCC and the projected growth of the security systems and equipment market, especially for safety, within the UAE is estimated to be 25% per year over the next five years.

Lt. Col. Aqil Mustafa Al-Jenahi, Director of the Mechanical & Technical Dept., Dubai Police HQ, General Department of Operations, cited that “The Dubai Police HQ has been supporting Intersec Middle East for years and regards the show as a very important source for Police & Homeland Security equipment in the region. The Dubai Police also organized outside demonstrations for the first time at Intersec Middle East in 2007 and used the show as a platform to show its services to the Intersec visitors, media and specialized audiences.”

I think when they say, “specialized audiences” they mean wealthy lugals who want to keep hold of their loot.  Don’t expect any free-speech zones popping up unexpectedly amongst the restive populations anytime soon.  Those probably weren’t “anti-government” demonstrations organized by the police.  25% annual growth means they mean business.  You don’t fuck with the lucre-packing lugals.  With oil above 80 bucks a barrel, they can afford it.  And as for the exhibitors, it surpassed their wildest dreams.  Who says disaster capitalism isn’t profitable?  Who says ending the Iraq debacle is a good idea?

Meanwhile, back at home, so what if the value of our money, homes, jobs, and institutions goes down the shitter.  Let’s just have a giant yard sale, liquidate the whole American project, and re-invest elsewhere.  Isn’t that  what we’re doing anyway?  What in the world are people so angry about?

Norman Podhoretz just can’t figure it out:

Mr. P. gave a cogent presentation of his views about WW IV, Islamofascism and his high regard for G.W. Bush’s approach to the matter and the audience listened in respectful silence. Come the Q and A, things were different.

  I don’t know if I’ll get the order of all these incidents correct, but: The first question dealt in part with the need for an investigation into the real story behind 9/11. This, at least, was hooted down but not before the young man quickly asked how it felt for N.P. to be “a suspect” in the matter. He continued to go on until finally shushed by security (or someone)….Soon after, someone asked about the deposing of the Shah back in the 50s. N.P. admitted the CIA was involved but said that he wasn’t interested at the moment in ancient history….

  A man in the front row, taking off on N.P.’s comment that it might be necessary, in his view, to bomb Iran in order to keep them from attaining nuclear capability said why not go after Saudi Arabia, since they were the ones behind 9/11. He became so irate that a staff member had to go over to quieten him. As I remember, it was about then that things pretty much fell apart. A lady stood to say that she had over a hundred relatives in Iran: Why do you want to kill them?! Another woman called him a fascist and a murderer. Somewhere around this point, N.P. said that he had lived on the Upper West Side for over twenty years and was now being reminded why he moved away….

http://corner.nation…

I bet Nancy Pelosi would know what to do with such dirty fucking hippies.  Arrest them for vagrancy!  We’ve got business to do.

Positive for lead:

L’Oreal Colour Riche “True Red”: 0.65 ppm

L’Oreal Colour Riche “Classic Wine”: 0.58 ppm

Cover Girl Incredifull Lipcolor “Maximum Red”: 0.56 ppm

Dior Addict “Positive Red”: 0.21 ppm

kiss of death