Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 14, 2005

The Laptop

In mid-July, senior American intelligence officials called the leaders of the international atomic inspection agency to the top of a skyscraper overlooking the Danube in Vienna and unveiled the contents of what they said was a stolen Iranian laptop computer.

The Americans flashed on a screen and spread over a conference table selections from more than a thousand pages of Iranian computer simulations and accounts of experiments, saying they showed a long effort to design a nuclear warhead, according to a half-dozen European and American participants in the meeting.
Relying on Computer, U.S. Seeks to Prove Iran's Nuclear Aims, Nov. 13, 2005

---

Where most Iraqi politicians will speak in infuriating generalities, Chalabi, adept on laptop computers and his iPod music player, is almost wonkish in his grasp of details.
Iraq deal-maker has big plans, Nov. 6, 2005

---

IN AN E-MAIL to Foer, Times executive editor Bill Keller — who reportedly wrote the editors’ note himself — defended Miller, saying, "Judy is a smart, relentless, incredibly well-sourced, and fearless reporter. It’s a little galling to watch her pursued by some of these armchair media ethicists who have never ventured into a war zone or earned the right to carry Judy’s laptop."
Miller’s Times - June 4, 2004

---

Chalabi, of course, has been elected by no one except the neocons. As P. Mitchell Prothero points out in the Washington Times, "in the fledgling opinion polls of the new Iraq, Chalabi always polls lower in popularity than Saddam." But that is quite enough for Ms. Pletka and her coterie of laptop bombardiers, who now have a martyr to the somewhat quixotic cause of Iraqi "democracy."
The Chalabi Follies - May 24, 2004

---

In a remarkable display of how much loyalty Mr. Chalabi commands among some Americans, one Pentagon official opened his laptop computer to display a photograph of Mr. Chalabi and King Abdullah to refute the recent statements by the king that he had never met Mr. Chalabi
Opposition Groups to Help to Create Assembly in Iraq, May 6, 2003

---

Dr. Chalabi is a hands-on kind of guy. He doesn't seem to like delegating authority when he's got the time to excercise it himself. This is intensely irritating when you're trying to configure his laptop's TCP/IP settings and he insists on driving. From a computing standpoint, he's the most dangerous type: enough knowledge to be dangerous and not enough to know what he's doing.
Meeting Mr. Chalabi - Dec. 7, 2003

---

THE man who could be Saddam Hussein's successor is hunched over a laptop computer with his comrades inside a top-floor room of a rented terraced house on Capitol Hill, Washington. Downstairs, security cameras are trained on the entrance, back door and street outside.

Suddenly, Ahmad Chalabi emerges, a chunky man wearing a tweed jacket and armed with the cheery confidence of someone who is used to getting his way. For years he has dreamed of a free Iraq and now that goal appears to be within reach.
Plotter of Saddam's fall pleads case in US,  Apr. 27, 2002

---

American officials, citing the need to protect their source, have largely refused to provide details of the origins of the laptop computer beyond saying that they obtained it in mid-2004 from a longtime contact in Iran.
...
"I can fabricate that data," a senior European diplomat said of the documents. "It looks beautiful, but is open to doubt."
Relying on Computer, U.S. Seeks to Prove Iran's Nuclear Aims, Nov. 13, 2005

Translated senior European diplospeech: "Bullshit!"

Posted by b on November 14, 2005 at 21:06 UTC | Permalink

Comments

LOL :)

Posted by: Outraged | Nov 14 2005 21:26 utc | 1

Jeffrey, the ArmControlWonk, explains why, even if the laptop would be somehow authentic, the article is bullshit. He cites:

William J. Broad and David E. Sanger repeatedly characterize the contents of computer files as containing information about a nuclear warhead design when the information actually describes a reentry vehicle for a missile. This distinction is not minor, and Broad should understand the difference between the two objects, particularly when the information does not contain any words such as nuclear or nuclear warhead.

Posted by: b | Nov 14 2005 21:28 utc | 2

US officials cited in support of their invasion plans that 'A search of Google records showed that "how to build a nuclear device" was the 2nd most widely searched term from IP numbers from within Iran.'

Posted by: PeeDee | Nov 14 2005 22:33 utc | 3

@PeeDee

Good to hear that after Iraq they are only going to use hard evidence now as grounds for preemptive invasions.

Posted by: Monolycus | Nov 14 2005 22:42 utc | 4

@PeeDee - the most widly searched term from IP numbers in Iran was "sex".

The CIA analysed this fact and determined that an attack on US politicians verility was imminant.

Posted by: b | Nov 14 2005 22:43 utc | 5

Forgot to close my sarcasm tag above.

Posted by: Monolycus | Nov 14 2005 22:44 utc | 6

Likewise.

Posted by: PeeDee | Nov 14 2005 22:53 utc | 7

45 minutes

Posted by: Friendly Fire | Nov 14 2005 22:55 utc | 8

Sure, come home from a hard day at work, have dinner with the family, then settle down at the laptop to relax. Which would you search for: How to build a "nuclear device", or the dirt on your favorite soccer player? That is, after you had made sure your wife was asleep, and had searched for "women without burkas" first.

Who believes this shit?

Where is the hard evidence that this claim is true, and how can it be corroborated? It can't be, because we control the internet. If we wanted to, we could search from America and rout it through Iranian IPs to manipulate the data. If the Iranians were interested in building a "nuclear device", whatever the word "device" means, would they have every Tom, Dick and Abdul with a computer searching the web for info? From Iran? Why not fly to Saudi Arabia and implicate their neighbors? What could they find on the web that was so secret that their nuclear scientists don't already know? Couldn't the Nuclear scientists just search once, or one hundred times, and save the results, so no one knows you are searching 10,000 times? How many searches were conducted, using which search engines, over what time period, and what were the exact search terms, in what language, and who translated? Did this information come from the search engines themselves, or the CIA, or some massive spy software (who's code is as well written as Diebold's), or the Iranian Busboy at the Palm Steakhouse, or where?

Would Nuclear Scientists really have to search the web for basic or even advanced, information? Isn't it more of a question of getting the proper materials and equipment to build a bomb, than basic knowledge? I mean the Iraqi Nuclear Scientist Imad Khadduri had the "plans", whatever that means (architectural blueprints?), to built a nuclear weapon buried in his front yard, beneath Fidobad's bones, for a decade, and that didn't help Iraq.

This is the standard disinformation technique we see repeated time and time again: Make a clear, unprovable, definitive, claim about something your enemy is doing, but not to an international body, or not in any way designed to ferret out the truth. Make it straight to the most uneducated of your own people, and keep hammering them with it until it is firmly embedded in their psyche. Disinformation is designed to spread fear among your own populace, and that is what this claim does--just like the "mushroom cloud", the "45 minutes", the "unmaned vehicles", etc.

So, what does this tell us? That they actually plan to invade Iran sometime soon, or that they need to take heat off of their own liesand falling popularity, and implicating Iran is the way to do this?

Posted by: Malooga | Nov 15 2005 1:17 utc | 9

Magic laptops, they got a woman to confess to participating in the bombings in Annan last week, but none of these things prove anything as far as I'm concerned. The confession could easily be coerced; her children could be being held captive for instance: a mother could be made to say anything to protect her children. With the video from Jordan showing a woman making shocking accusations, it is worth recalling the last time when a woman was shown on TV making shocking accusations.

The day after Iraq invaded Kuwait, the Kuwaitis living in the US hired the public relations firm Hill and Knowlton - a job worth $1 million a month. This was the biggest ever contract in the history of public relations to improve the image of their corrupt, oil-rich regime.

The story of how Iraqi troops, in the first days of the invasion, went into Al-Adan hospital, tore the sick babies from incubators and left them on the cold floor to die was graphically told to Congress on November 1990 before the crucial vote to send US troops (passed by about 5 votes).

What the audience didn't know however was that the 15-year old girl who made the moving, tearful testimony was none other than Niyirah al-Sabah - daughter of the US Ambassador to Kuwait. She had allegedly worked as a volunteer in the maternity ward of the hospital. But nurses who live in the two story white building opposite the hospital in Kuwait City claimed that they had never seen the girl before in their life.

The entire move towards the Gulf War had thus been motivated by a blatant lie. The girl had been "trained" by Hill and Knowlton. The renowned international human rights group Amnesty International took out full-page newspaper spreads to publicise the babies incident. It had unwittingly (and not for the first time) transformed itself from a charity to a propaganda tool. Andrew Whitley of Middle East Watch described the story as a fabrication but it took months for the truth to come out. President Bush mentioned the incubator incident in five of his speeches and seven senators referred to them in speeches backing a pro-war resolution.

SAG or non-SAG?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Nov 15 2005 4:02 utc | 10

Hey America,
Just so you know , the rest of the world doesn't believe a word you say anymore.
look out the sky is falling!!
Fire!!
wolf!!
the rest of the world hates you for your freedom, pass it on

Posted by: einstein | Nov 15 2005 5:31 utc | 11

hey, Einstein,

you don't have to be Freud to figure that out

Posted by: christofay | Nov 15 2005 5:58 utc | 12

b - you got me, whoo duhh! finally compre' what
you are showing, in sequence, the chalabizing of
so-called Iranian nuclear laptop data. you and
uncle $cam should read this, about halfway down:

http://tinyurl.com/a7evr

it's pretty clear the Higher's strategy is to use
this modality of ratcheting up Noise, to reduce
correct T-F indentification by Americans, until DoD PsyOp's can say just about anything, and from
this study, 2/3rd's of respondents will believe it, which correlates with 2/3rd's of Americans who believe Saddam blew up the WTC 9/11.

Noise. Roses and chocolate.

The good news is that in the *absence* of Noise, which if anything was exactly what Fitz was all
about, the majority of respondents will be able
to correctly distinguish true and false, which
Americans did, to their credit, withholding a
judgement until the indictments came down, then
like w/ Ken Lay, they saw George Bush is a s--t.

Unfortunately, nearly 1/3rd of respondents still
adamantly believe George Bush is a G-d. No doubt
all that Noise coming down from the pulpit. And
last time I checked, it only takes 28% in this
country to elect a president. S--t, oh dear!

the recent iraqi 'torture' pics here and iranian laptop and jordan bombing tell me just one thing: Karl Rove has too much f--king time on his hands!
(Don Rumsfeld has way too much black ops budget.)
Reid better get cracking, or they will toast US.

?Why is the MSM not covering Arie Fleischer, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and the other Zionistas?
It's not like they crawled back under their rock.
We all better start some Noise of our own, before They slam-dunk the whole damn government on US.

http://tinyurl.com/4fzvl

Speaking of the Jesus Landing Pad, when will all those high-price cell biologists and virologists finish sequencing avian flu H5N1, so we can see just how much the bug borrowed from US GMO genes?

Doesn't it seem kinda spoon-fed, like the iranian laptop and woman bomber in jordan, here suddenly
avian flu is popping up in populations where they have kept birds successfully for *centuries*?

GMO corn in the US-CA-UK -> suddenly bovine BSE.
GMO corn dumped in China and Viet Nam -> suddenly
a virulent (we're told) form of 'avian flu' that
might just spread to humans, although obversely,
we're told not to worry about BSE, you can't get it, and USDA'll be sure to spot all the downers,
so just keep right on eating at Mickey Dees.

What if this whole avian flu thing is a political move by Tyson's, who is dumping millions of tons of chicken on ASEAN and Central American, and especially Russia. What if they're freaking out the ASEANS will start reverse-dumping chicken back into the US, like they're dumping fish now?
So DoD sets up a clandestine lab, laces GMO
corn with a virulent avian flu strain developed in secret, and wipes out half the earth's food,
just so Tyson won't go out of business first,
and so Don Rumsfeld's Gilead stock will go up?

all this T-F discrimination bulls--t is a downer.
it reeks too much of 1984 Ministry of Truth. I'm
getting a migraine from all Higher's chalabizing.

Posted by: a7evr8& | Nov 15 2005 6:45 utc | 13

I can't reliably verify the majority of the pull quotes which have been posted here by Bernhard.

I do, however, know the individual who was quoted in "Meeting Mr. Chalabi", and can vouch for his integrity, accuracy, discipline and ethics.

Would that it were otherwise. Shit.

--

Posted by: marquer | Nov 15 2005 9:24 utc | 14

On the "Iranian" laptop - emptywheel debunks the story.

Please read this. It will come handy when you discuss these persian "aluminium tubes" with others.

Posted by: b | Nov 15 2005 22:39 utc | 16

The point I was making in a somewhat obtuse manner with the Google search (which was a snark) was that anyone could put 1,000 pages of information on a laptop on nuclear anything in about 15 minutes on a fast link.

Those dreaded "Nuclear programme-related activities".

I agree with the wag-the-dog theory, expounded in some detail on TomDispatch today.

Posted by: PeeDee | Nov 16 2005 7:28 utc | 17

The comments to this entry are closed.