Which Master Do These Rent-A-Generals Serve?
Finally, Ike Skelton has broken the thick silence surrounding Sunday’s exposure of the Pentagon’s Rent-A-General program.
Mr. Speaker, last Sunday, the front page of the New York Times included a story about the efforts of the Pentagon’s public affairs operation to influence retired military officers now working as military analysts for some of our nation’s largest media organizations.
I am very angry about the issues raised by the New York Times’ story, as are many of my colleagues who have called me aside to discuss it. The story does not reflect well on the Pentagon, on the military analysts in question, or on the media organizations that employ them.
Mr. Speaker, maybe I am too idealistic, but this story is appalling to me on a number of levels. For me, it all comes down to trust and credibility. And it would be a dangerous thing for the American people to lose trust in the Pentagon, in our retired officer corps, and in the press, each of which has a critical role to play in preserving our nation’s freedoms.
Through the years, I have frequently urged our military services to improve their efforts to tell America about the good work that is being done by our country’s sons and daughters in uniform. Our military services have an important story to tell, and public affairs offices are critical to that task. But credibility is paramount. Once lost, it is difficult or impossible to regain.
There is nothing inherently wrong with providing information to the public and the press. But there is a problem if the Pentagon is providing special access to retired officers and then basically using them as pawns to spout the Administration’s talking points of the day. There are allegations that analysts who failed to deliver the message required by the Administration mysteriously lost access to future briefings and information. I find this deeply troubling. We deserve to be able to trust the actions of the Pentagon.
We also deserve a retired officer corps that is worthy of the respect it receives from the American people, who place great faith in their judgment and loyalty to our nation. Americans trust our active duty and retired military, and rightly so.
I know a number of the retired officers employed by the media as military analysts to be honorable people. But the special access they are alleged to have received and the circumstances of their employment, without proper disclosure of their outside interests or biases, raise a number of uncomfortable questions that deserve serious answers.
Which master do these analysts serve?
The United States Government, which supplies their retirement pay?
The Pentagon, which may reduce the amount of analysis they actually need to do by providing detailed talking points promoting the current administration’s message agenda?
The defense contractors, who pay them for serving on boards or for their defense expertise, and perhaps more to the point, for their Pentagon connections?
Will their analysis, either by design or just by lucky coincidence, result in contracts or other advantages for the companies from which they take home a paycheck?
It hurts me to my core to think that there are those from the ranks of our retired officers who have decided to cash in and essentially prostitute themselves on the basis of their previous positions within the Department of Defense. I would hate to think that because a few people have blurred ethical boundaries and cashed in on their former positions that we might tarnish the military’s hard won reputation for professionalism and objectivity and love of country first and foremost.
Finally, I think our media have a serious responsibility to disclose potential conflicts of interest when they do their reporting. This applies to all of their stories, of course, and not just those that include retired officer military analysts. I understand that different organizations have different rules, but perhaps it would not be out of order for our journalism schools and professional journalism organizations to develop ethical guidelines for dealing with such issues.
Mr. Speaker, our nation’s military exists to protect America’s freedoms for citizens today and for future generations. The First Amendment guarantees the right of all Americans, including retired service members and members of the press, to speak freely and without restraint. But with our rights come responsibilities to act honestly and ethically. I have no doubt we will continue to discuss these matters in the days ahead.
Please call Skelton, (202) 225-2876, and thank him for condemning the program. You might suggest that an inquiry into the program would go some way to restoring the credibility of the military’s senior retirees. I also invite you to call Carl Levin, Senate Armed Forces Chair, (202) 224-6221, to invite him to join his counterpart in the House in condemning the Rent-A-General program.
Skelton spoke of "discussing these matters in the day ahead." If Skelton (and hopefully Levin with him) treat this threat to the credibility of the military seriously, we might actually get people to begin to report on the Influence Industry in Washington.
Hey the NewsHour just announced that they were going to have a story on the Generals controversy today.
I was also surprised to hear on NBC News tonight a report about the Israeli bombing of a site in Syria last September. They reported the plutonium angle but ended with many analysts doubt that Syria ever had a significant nuclear program.
Just thinking out loud here, but that location is out in the middle of the dessert from what I remember, and unless it’s on top of a large aquifer I don’t think that’s an especially good place for a “nucyaler” facility, because, um, don’t you need a whole lot of water? I mean to cool the fuel rods? And to heat up as steam for the turbines? And where are the power lines? And the lack of power lines might suggest that it’s a weapons facility, but, that doesn’t explain away the lack of water
And not only that but why did it take them a year to come up with this story?
Not that I’m a fan of Syria, but something doesn’t smell right
Just thinking out loud
Aack! I should have consulted my friend Preview. Let me sort that out again:
In response to john in sacramento @ 13
That’s a pretty dry dessert. I prefer chocolate *g*
But anyway, see my comment @8. Your suspicions motivated The Spook to look elsewhere for an explanation.
Bob in HI
Thanks on both counts, Hugh. Interesting that NewsHour is covering it.
The NewsHour is probably one of the few places that can talk about this story without having to apologize for not vetting their “in-house military analysts” before putting them on the network payroll (either a regular gig or with an appearance fee). The NewsHour doesn’t have money to burn for things like that, so they don’t have egg on their faces in the way that the other networks do.
I think you are right that they don’t compensate the ‘analysts’.
But they still manage to burn through one hundred thousand dollars per episode.
Almost none of it is public money.
EW What’s your take on the news push about the Israelis taking out the Syrian Nuclear site?
Withholding judgment.
Nothing we’ve seen so far explains, for example, why this was out there in bumfuck
EgyptSyria. It doesn’t explain why you’d build it away from the river, rather than on it. It doesn’t explain why they say they have videos but apparently only showed a “video” of stills.It’s certainly possible (and possible, too, that it was a plain old nuke facility). But the Israelis have often manufactured intelligence (cf Iraq War). And we have no credibility either.
John Stauber is doing a good job laying out the propaganda aspects. Bob Zelnick is a perfect tool. Media knew the generals reflected Pentagon views but they were employed because of “what they knew.” As for defense contractor ties, Zelnick says everybody knew about those too and that was all perfectly natural. Amazing or maybe not that Zelnick spent 21 years at ABC News.
Hearings! More hearings! Yes, I will call Skelton to thank him, as well as Levin.
Heh. He said “prostitute”.
On a more serious level, this is way overdue, but a very good start. The responsibility to act honestly and ethically has been missing since the start of the Bush administration. I was also very happy that he called out the media and their role in this. The Times was way too lenient about the lapses by the press in this.
From Skelton’s statement, I suspect he has some reservations, a sinking feeling that he’s about to open a very big can of very rotten worms. These guys–and I put Levin alongside him, both of whom deeply respect our military–have a lot of faith in the notion of professionalism.
Remember, this is a house of mirrors. FDL commenter Alfred “The Spook” Kelgarries had a different take on the bombing incident. If that blog interests you, be sure to look at the left sidebar for a series of half a dozen blogs that he wrote in that month last fall, soon after the incident.
I’m not saying The Spook is right, because I don’t know. He’s got a lot of interesting links on this story, however. All I’m saying is to take any news reports on the bombing of that Syrian site with a teaspoon (not just a pinch) of salt, because what you’re probably hearing/seeing is a cover story designed to divert attention from the real story (journalistic equivalent of sleight of hand).
Bob in HI
Hi Bob
Do you have Alfred’s email? He has a small typo in the post you linked to, about halfway down
Should be KXMB
Useless trivia – Senator Byron Dorgan’s brother Darrell used to be news director at the station
“Do you have Alfred’s email? He has a small typo in the post you linked to, about halfway down…”
No, I don’t, but he’s on Facebook.
Bob in HI
And just what would the “real story” be?
“And just what would the “real story” be?”
Do you have your tinfoil hat on securely? The Spook’s analysis of the Syrian incident is part of the longer string of blogs that I cited before. Near the end of his analysis, he wrote this:
He then concludes,
Does that answer your question?
Bob in HI
Put on your tinfoil hat and if you would, share your reaction to this: I’m interested in what your take is on the relation between cheney and the military. There are these foiled plots you quote. They made me recall that during 9/11 cheney ordered the military to shoot down any suspicious planes. His orders were intentionally not passed on to the operations people. Do you sense that the military is onto cheney’s plots and may be looking out to head off his nonsense?
Yes, Fallon in particular. I imagine that he was alerted during the Syrian episode and that he issued some rather emphatic commands requiring immediate action. Cheney must be happy to see him retire.
Based on The Spook’s analysis, and Cheney’s penchant for inserting his own people in every nook and cranny of the Federal Government (including the military), I’ll bet he has his own parallel command structure. Don’t forget that Rumsfeld was his ally, and is still probably esconced in some Pentagon office with all of his knowledge of the Pentagon in Cheney’s service. The real story of the errant bomber carrying armed nuclear warheads from ND to the staging point for the Middle East will never get an honest official read-out until after he is out of power– and maybe even not then.
My tinfoil hat is getting hot– gotta take it off now.
Bob in HI
bobschacht and kspena, is there a full moon tonight?
‘bobschacht and kspena, is there a full moon tonight?’
ah, it would seem so; but just wondering….
“bobschacht and kspena, is there a full moon tonight?”
Nope; full moon was a few days ago. It’s waning now. I stopped howling at the moon on Sunday.
Bob in HI
I’m led to understand it’s the dark of the moon we should be worrying about.
No doubt he does.
Perhaps Cheney flatters himself that his parallel networks are more ‘efficient’ than command structures that didn’t report directly to him.
—————————
BTW: A bit OT, but Crooks&Liars has a clip of Justice Scalia from a “60 Minutes” interview and his arrogance is chilling. Worth viewing.
Glad to see Skelton bring this up. The silence since the story broke has been pretty deafening.
Not all retired Generals do this. One of my favorites is a retired two star that went to some small town in the Northeast and opened a drug store with his wife. I liked him when I served under him and even more when he retired.
Regrettably, not all are like him.
What’s the draw to the military contractors? TO finally make some big bucks, after a career of service? A sense that a retired general can better steward that industry responsible for the US’ (thus far) military superiority? Boredom?
EW – my post at 30 is in reply to your 23 – sorry I didn’t hit the correct button!
What every man of retirement age feels… the need to remain relevant – or to feel that way anyway – after years of being ‘the Man’…
oh yeah, and money. *g
I can tell you from some personal experience that it is “all of the above.” Some of them are attracted by the big bucks. Some are attracted because the military was the only place they could survive, so they set about trying to implement military-style discipline to shape up corporate environments. Others decide to become a big fish in a medium-sized pond, but, for the most part are rather inept at business dealings.
It is probably somewhat akin to the Repug largesse we have seen for those who get their balls caught in a vise… They wind up landing someplace with their resumes intact and lots of money. I suspect most of these military people have run their strings out and had to go find something else to do.
Bush is still on about the Axis of Evil.
Re the Syrian site, if you look at the satellite photos of the building (the new one built on the foundations of the old one apparently), it is maybe about 15-20 thousand sq. feet. Please correct me if you have a better estimate. That is not very big for a nuclear weapons complex. All of this strikes me as hyped up hooey. My guess is this was a small research reactor. Do you notice that no one was giving estimates of how much plutonium it could theoretically produce? No talk of a processing facility for the plutonium. No talk of how hard it is to make a nuclear weapon using plutonium. No talk of what kind of design for a bomb Syria might have. No talk of what kind of a delivery system Syria had or was building for it.
And then the real inside dope on all this is going to given to Congress by the severely truth challenged Mike Hayden. Jeez. All this stunk last September. It continues to do so. It’s the kind of grenade you would expect a neocon like John Bolton to throw into the NK negotiations. With him gone, Cheney apparently had no problems finding another equally enthusiastic loon.
Reminded me of the pictures Powell showed at the UN.
That’s what The Spook thought, too (see my comment @8). In fact, he suspects that that Syrian site was not the original target of the airstrike. His speculation on the original target takes one in a very different direction.
Bob in HI
I really miss AK.
Newshour guest, Bob Zelnick: defending the practice of DoD’s insertion of surrogates onto news programs, nevertheless termed the retired military “analysts”:
Amazing how a defender can betray his own defense!
“Beltway Bandit” is a long time term to label any consultant and/or company that surrounds the DC Beltway and does business with the government. I have no idea the amount of dollars involved but it is immense.
I have been termed a “Beltway Bandit” even tho I live in AZ and most of my work was done outside of DC.
Here is Juan Cole’s original post on the bombing.
http://www.juancole.com/2007/1…..syria.html
This NYT’s article from Oct. 15th is interesting too. Note the correction.
Why is this news coming back now? Interesting, Israel is shaken right now…
Juan’s analysis is good, if you grant his original premis that the original target was in Syria. But what if it wasn’t?
See the comments by Mark Pyrez, “the Syrian Nationalist Pary”, and Charles of MercuryRising.
There’s a lot of disinformation out there.
Bob in HI
35d42m28s(N), 39d49m59s(E)
behindthefall–the story goes that the Israelis wanted to hit it before the plutonium was loaded in, for precisely the reason you point out–hitting it after would generate a big mess. I take no position on the truth of this, just pointing out that the story does hold together in that respect. (On the other hand, I don’t know the legal technicalities of whether it’s possible that Syria was technically not in breach of NPT if Pu had not yet been loaded. I doubt it–I would guess that even unloaded, if it was indeed a nuclear reactor the site would still had to have been reported–but I’m not an NPT lawyer, or any other sort for that matter.)
This whole Syria thing is a vivid demonstration of why the President would be better served by a credible Pentagon. Even if the nuclear allegations are true, no reasonable person is simply agreeing today that it must be a nuclear site if US intelligence says it is.
Best coverage for those interested is probably at armcontrolwonk, esp this latest post. Jeffrey’s been all over this (and skeptical about the nuclear claims) from the beginning. (He calls the target “Box on the Euphrates” (BOE).) The site is close to the Euphrates river, and there is in fact what appears to be a secondary cooling loop pumping station on the river. So there is in fact plenty of coolant water nearby.
Do note–if true, the reactor would constitute a pretty serious breach of the NPT, off-the-cuff the most serious one I can think of to date in the history of the treaty.
Also note: it certainly sort of complements (if not exactly confirming) the wingnut case that “Saddam had nukes but he shipped them all to Syria!”
At the risk of being annoyingly pedantic, I misspoke above–there is a nearby structure which could certainly be a secondary cooling loop pumping station. It is not definitively established that it is. In any case, there is no shortage of nearby available water for cooling.
it will be our military, the generals, both retired and those not retired that we will need to count on if the president does create another “catastrophe”, declare martial law and suspend elections
if there will not be blood in the street for revolt it will be because of the true heroes in our armed forces, those patriots once generals and still in service
we are going to count on them and I fear those that would save us have been “retired”
Yeah, on my more paranoid days, I still wonder if there actually was an unpublished insurrection after the Iranians captured the British sailors a couple years ago. I was convinced that was all Bush needed to attack Iran and wonder if he gave the order but everyone refused. Now with Fallon gone…
As to the on the streets thing, in the end it would be the enlisted guys choosing on their own what to do. I really don’t think Americans would attack one another that way. If Bush manufacture the catastrophe and martial law as you suggest, I really think everything would come to a standstill and everyone would be in the streets until it was over just as in the fall of the Soviet Union and its satellites.
Why would anyone bomb a place they suspected of having plutonium. Plutonium dust, I have understood for some time, is about the most carcinogenic, long-lasting substance known. Why risk generating it and spreading it downwind for who knows what distance. If I had lots of toys and wanted to take out a plutonium site, bombs would be ‘way down on my list of preferences. But then, what the heck do I know?
EW, I would say that all the things you listed play some part, depending on the individual. However, I think the primary thing is ego. These folk have been at the center of the spotlight most of their lives – particularly the last few years of their careers as a GO. This fits a little with your boredom hypothesis, but ego really drives these people. When you have been “in charge” it is hard to sit on the sidelines.
The old story about power and corruption is real. When people have been bowing and scraping about you, it is difficult to have to carry your own bag. Although – another favorite story – there was one Sec of Air Force that refused to let people carry his bag – really pissed off the colonels that were his retinue. The man was so self effacing that he served us coffee when we were at a prep meeting on a Saturday in his office before his Congressional testimony the next week. Talk about dropped jaws!!
I can’t overemphasize the attraction of being exposed to the Sec Def. The military is a hierarchical organization and the SecDef’s inter sanctum is off limits to most of the military. To be invited into it on a personal basis is almost irresistible. The colonels would be peeing their pants if they got an invite.
Conclusion – POWER, EGO, and then the influence (and associated bucks) from their military industrial contacts.
I remember we took a look at those pics last fall. There was a real question about their description of what we were seeing.
Yeah, they started out calling this a video, but then said it was a Powerpoint presentation. I understand PP is more like a slideshow, not what most of us would describe as video (I don’t use it myself, but I’ve seen photos put together in a show using it).
I wonder if they even know what they have, sometimes. [/s]
Hey if Bmaz is around, tell him I saw Bode Miller at a Celebrity Golf fundraiser last night.
This from the UK telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..ran102.xml
and this from today:
http://afp.google.com/article/…..dZnWk84QEA
But I guess China needed to “save face” so I hope their intel is true because it looks like “odd” timing to finally come forward when this hits the fan today:
http://www.theaustralian.news……03,00.html
Have you been following all of this EW?
I’m confident that Lynne Cheney has been!
Unfortunately, for all of us, I imagine Ms. Lynne is following it or has to listen to no end to the one following it.
I just have more “confidence in sunlight” when I know EW is tracking and pulling at a news thread.
OT…sort of… Scott Horton interviews Phillippe Sands
http://tnr.com/politics/story……bff7210220
OT– Wet noodle time for Domenici:
banned at emptywheel’s too?
i guess not…
It’s a load of old wank, as far as I can tell, what the speaker was delivering. I wouldn’ve got up on my hind legs and order him out of the House and not to come back until he can actually muster some criticism of the Pentagon.
but you’re missing a big piece of the puzzle;
what if depopularization is one of the goals?
what then?
God Bless Helen Thomas…
If Dana P says it aint’s so, it ain’t so, so
Q The President has said publicly several times, in two consecutive news conferences a few months ago, and you have said over and over again, we do not torture. Now he has admitted that he did sign off on torture, he did know about it. So how do you reconcile this credibility gap?
MS. PERINO: Helen, you’re taking liberties with what the President said.
The United States has not, is not torturing any detainees in the global war on terror. And General Hayden, amongst others, has spoken on Capitol Hill fully in this regard, and it is — I’ll leave it where it is. The President is accurate in saying what he said.
…Q You’re denying, in this room, that we torture and we have tortured?
MS. PERINO: Yes, I am denying that.
Think Progress had video of the exchange. Pig Missle Perino gave the world’s worst smirk when she called on the next questioner. Before that person got their question started, Helen couldn’t contain herself any more and blared “Where is everybody?” and “For God’s sakes!”. She really is fed up with nobody else in the press having the courage to ask the hard questions.
A number of us emailed her to thank her for doing that. It appears that she answers these emails individually. Helen Thomas is a national treasure.
Update on Syria news in the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl…..inians.usa
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl…..sa.nuclear
FAQ’s pretty good summary:
And I’ll stand by my “questionable source” Juan Cole today:
http://www.juancole.com/
Here’s what we know…
A month and a half ago AIPAC lobbied against states, such as Ohio, that were trying to pass legislation to divest in Iran and Iran supporting nations. AIPAC lobbied hard for reduced investment in Iran, not divestment and were strong on the need to not divest in North Korea, Syria and Sudan.
A few weeks ago, a new Israel, pro peace process, lobby is formed called J-Street.
Carter to Hammas.
An Israel spy is outed.
Israel puts out strong denials in the press that they did not have any spies in the US post Pollard.
We discover many of our military secrets have been compromised, even recently, to Russia and over the years to the former Soviet Union due to a double agent in Israel.
Food, water, power and sewage to Gaza strangled to a breaking point for the UN.
Activity going on with other cases tied to AIPAC.
And the list is longer. The fact that there is “a list” is worth noting and connecting…
Of course the list is in relation to the Syria news as well.
armscontrolwonk has posted the “video” of the Syria presentation. The video is a power-point-like presentation; it consists of about a dozen still photographs taken on the site, about a half-dozen still satellite images of the site, and a lot of spinning 3-d virtual reality of the Google-3d-Earth type. There’s a lot to deconstruct in the video. I didn’t get the sound, some of the presentation is borderline deceptive but maybe there’s an audiotrack that explains better what they’re showing. And I don’t agree with every conclusion in it.
However, those are pictures of a nuclear reactor if I’ve ever seen one. And I have.
The real question now is provenance. If those pictures really are from the site then it was a nuclear reactor.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter…..00806.html
And this interview from the UN archives from October 2007 is worth reading…
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter…..81007.html
One section I enjoy:
And to tie this all to the thread:
This goes for our leaders and our intel too. So again, why now? Where was this information back in September or October? There has been PLENTY of time to address this and there was plenty of time before the strike took place. We have a huge integrity problem and it is getting worse, which severely undermines our national/domestic security. Perhaps THAT is part of the intent?
And posted 16 minutes ago (the video is post with this link):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl…..tworkfront
UN Censors US and Israel Over Syria.
And this is interesting too:
http://afp.google.com/article/…..A8lzaw0BXw
And this post from TPM is worth a read:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsme…..narrative/
nb that El-Baradei’s censure is for the lateness of the evidence, rather than its truth or falsity.
I must disagree with this from the Guardian article you linked to:
There are a number of pictures taken from outside that, I agree, do no indicate that it is nuclear. However, there are three pictures purportedly from the inside (one of the fuel rod bases, one of the rebar, and one of the top of the concrete shielding) that are really just conclusively pictures of a nuclear reactor. They are rather less conclusively pictures of the site in Syria–which is why I think we ought to know a lot more about the provenance of these pictures.
This from Raw Story back in October still has some important facts that stand:
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/….._1018.html
This from the Federation of American Scientists in ovember is worth a read to put the Syria news in perspective:
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/category/north_korea
A quote fro the article:
I’m a Missourian and it is too late. I no longer trust any part of any corner of Bush’s govment. I don’t trust any body associated in any way shape or form with Bush or Cheney. And I’ve yet to trust the dems to clean out these nest of vipers because I haven’t seen it done yet. It may be true that they are acting as if they are abused wives or children, but you would think the newbys coming in would be able to set them straight. We cannot continue to build on this rotten foundation. We have to clean it out and make it whole. Nothing less will get us out of this and be able to deal with all the crises besetting us at once – food shortages, fuel shortages, global disasters, and stupid wars.
Klynn, thanks for the CNN material. El Baradei is obviously angry that the US simply refused to use international institutions. Rightly so.
Most definitely.
I think this is bad for the US in so many ways. There is caution on behalf the UN because “they” have been there before wrt the Niger documents being forgeries. (The credibility factor which EW thread above addresses)
El Baradei has been asking for this intel information for a long time from both the US and Israel. Suddenly, 7.5 months later, there’s an urgent push on the narrative?
So,
(from #67 above)
and in terms of Israel,
(from #74 above)
(my bold)
Might I note, Moscow comes out of this smelling like a rose while playing all sides. Although with Bush-Cheney, it’s probably his best way to respond.
However, it appears we got a partial negotiation out of this tactic:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap…..r-Iran.php
and,
I’m sure the time frame here is also the new deadline Iran faces.
OT
What other seats in the Senate to Dems have a shot at?
Ike Skelton!
The censure is for the lateness of such serious evidence which the UN has requested MANY times. The focus, rightly so, is the “lateness of the import level of intel”, as opposed to just simply “lateness”. Which is an important point.
September 2, 2007 Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Christopher Hill said two days of talks between the United States and North Korea in Geneva had been substantive and would help to improve chances of success later this month when Japan, Russia, South Korea and China meet for six-nation talks aimed at ending the North’s nuclear weapons program and improving relations between North Korea and other countries.
The strike happens on September 6, 2007
This article from the Times UK on September 16, 2007 points out some important issues at play. This quote catches some:
Comments on North Korea
Asst. Sec. Hill
September 27, 2007
In Beijing, China for the Six-Party Talks Assistant Secretary Chris Hill comments on talks with North Korea.
Then Jan. 1, 2008 North Korea fail to meet it’s year end deadline:
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/T…..line/9863/
Asst. Sec of St.,Hill goes to Moscow in mid January to discuss missed deadline:
http://www.reuters.com/article…..5320080111
Then on Jan. 10,2008
On JAN 12, US states they will not set a new deadline for N. Korea
http://www.voanews.com/english…..N=57860252
Then on April 20, this NYT’s article is posted stating criticism about Bush being “soft” on N Korea:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04…..xy.html?hp
http://www.iht.com/articles/20…..a/bush.php
Now lets look at some timing since April 20, 2008:
On April 23, 2008
http://www.globalsecurity.org/…..-cfr01.htm
The same day this:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/…..-voa01.htm
Then this release from North Korea on the same day stating the desire to be a great powerful nation:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/…..kcna01.htm
Then this statement, a day later about hailing the recent nuclear talks with the US. A statement released from Moscow:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/…..osti01.htm
Then we show the video the same day.
In light of this timeline, yes provenance is the bottom line.
(Sorry for the long post EW. I hope that the timeline at least grants me forgiveness.)
Hey EW,
Just sent a comment which is very long because it is a timeline with a number of links. So it is probably sitting for an “okay”. The info is well worth looking at. Sorry for the long comment. Hope it’s okay.
acw has the full text of the Syria briefing for senior US officials.
Though it’s labeled as for senior US officials, it’s clearly for the press.
From that briefing, on Iran–they’re trying to backtrack on the NIE:
Emphasis mine.
klynn et al. — W/r/t provenance of the reactor photos specifically, what if anything shown in them indicates they were actually taken inside the Syrian facility? Is there any reason why those ones couldn’t have been taken inside the North Korean facility instead? Because seeing the North Korean nuclear program head and a number of seemingly Korean people wouldn’t be so unusual in a photo taken in North Korea. And while seeing the Syrian official in North Korea certainly would show a North Korea-Syria nuclear connection, it would be way, way weaker than seeing Koreans and a reactor inside Syria, and certainly not proof of a reactor being built in Syria with North Korean support. So I have to agree with klynn, in this case the interpretation of the interior photos is all.
I submitted a question to El Baradei through the UN IAEA about what kind of timeline we could expect in the examination of the materials from the US to varify the intel and its’ authenticity? When I get a response, I’ll post it.
The piece by Juan Cole cited in the comments is specifically this:
The whole article is worth reading. One should remember the “high confidence” the US proclaimed about Saddam’s nukes. I’m willing to bet that they’re gaming this, trying to pass off genuine reactor photos as if they came from this desolate Syrian outpost.
Bob in HI
So I looked at the video presentation. This untrained eye saw nothing in the ‘under construction’ photos that would rule out them having been taken at some other location, not necessarily limited to North Korea. Though a photo of a North Korean reactor is included in the presentation, so it stands to reason that additional photos of that same North Korean reactor while still under construction might also have been available to whoever was assembling the presentation. And that would certainly explain the strong resemblance in the “comparison” section between the Korean model and the other photo — same reactor, same location, different time.
For that matter, there’s been enough time since the strike to actually construct somewhere a dummy building shell as shown in the exterior photos, and take pictures of that too.
Given the track record, I think something a little more verifiable than a “trust us” from the USG is going to be needed here.
That said, none of this answers the Why now? question.
Hey Bob, thanks for posting the link to Juan Cole again from 62. I hope it was understood that Juan Cole is someone I highly respect and my wording of introduction to his post today was simply snark to an earlier reference to Juan Cole.
AC Wonk has a good read too.
Pay attention to the language of the US presentation. Nothing finite in language. Almost hypothetical.
I’m of the opinion to take in all security, arms control, ME foreign policy AIPAC news, United Nations IAEA and other valid sources, then stir it up into a time line in hopes of getting to the “Why now?”
Not sure I’m there yet but there are some good “chucks” in the picture.
I do like this point made at the Guardian FAQ’s:
Image provenance is important to ferret out accurately.
** If the image was shot on film, then tampering with it is a fair amount of work.
** If it’s a digital image, then it’s easy to alter; pictures of ‘fuel rods’ and ‘reactor parts’ can be dropped in a series of ‘layers’ (like a cake); each individual layer can then be moved and shifted to produce the desired final ‘composite’ image. (Hollywood and ad agencies do this all day long, all over the globe).
** Anyone interested can search ‘Photoshop layers’ or go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlWfZeyvk9Y
Video is more work to doctor, but it’s the same technology Hollywood uses to make ‘The Mummy’ or ‘the Bee Movie’ or anything that has special animated effects. (Game developers do this kind of thing all day long.)
If the BushCheney administration isn’t willing to provide the IAEA with the **original photos and video** for forensic analysis, then the images should be assumed to be bogus.
——————–
Add’l timeline items for klynn:
– US aircraft carrier buildups in the MidEast (current)
– Five Internet/phone cables in the Med were cut in recent months.
– BushCheney got Fallon out of the way and put their special gofer Petraeus in charge.
– BushCheney claim to have ‘proof’ of nuclear buildup that they refuse to show the IAEA, because of ’spies’ (coming from the same crew that outed Valerie Plame, it’s a bit ironic, but whatever…)
– BushCheney have now had enough time to ‘institutionally sanitize’ the NIE that the Spooks Released Suddenly last November. Their newly sanitized, newly ‘refined’ NIE version enables them to reclaim the ‘caussus belli’ they lost last November.
– Time is running out for BushCheney.
This is starting to reek.
Is Cheney being punked by the Israelis? or Putin? or Iran? or China?
He’s being punked by someone. Who?
Cheney might be getting punked by anti-stupid-war actors in the intelligence and defense communities. Not necessarily limited to the US.
ROTL, could not agree more.
IRT Photoshop, live with a Photoshop wiz. It is amazing what someone can does with the layers features.
AFP: Syrian vows to cooperate with IAEA over US nuclear charges
Glenn has a blurry copy of the photo of the North Korean and Syrian nuclear officials, supposedly taken in Syria. I can’t see the car license plate clearly enough to tell whether it matches with a real Syrian license plate, nor whether if it does match, it also looks faked.
Glenn also quotes a White House propaganda document with these words:
There, you see? It is all about Iran, Cheney’s current obsession.
Bob in HI
Yeah, given Cheney’s obsession with Iran, I’ve sometimes wondered whether he was one of the prime ‘negotiators’ with the Iranians to keep those US hostages in 1980 until after the US elections.
What is he trying to destroy in Iran that is such a big, dark secret?
Color me confused.
I think Cheney wants unfettered access to Iraqi oil. I think that he thinks Iran threatens unfettered
U.S./Halliburton/Exxon access to Iraqi oil. Besides which, Iran has a bunch of oil of its own, mostly in the Iranian southwest, adjacent to Iraq. So he probably wants to re-open the Iran-Iraq war in order to grab the oil-rich parts of Iran, then bomb the rest of Iran back into the stone age so that it presents no interference toAmericanHalliburton’s exploitation of Iraqi-Iranian oil for decades.But of course that’s all wild-eyed speculation.
Bob in HI
Bob, it’s just hard to believe that even Cheney could conceivably be THAT stupid.
Even a cold-hearted pragmatist, completely lacking in remorse and ruthless, ought to nevertheless retain enough basic information about the human species to understand that the world doesn’t turn solely on military or economic activities.
IF you are correct, then color me dumber than a doorknob for failing to come to terms much sooner with the utterly breathtaking stupidity of the mindset you describe.
Jeez.
Thanks for the link to Glenn. He referenced some great articles and information.
All I have to say is, this better be the real thing. If it is not, we will not have credibility as an intel community or within the global intel community for a long time. Nor will Israel. With all that is going on here with AIPAC, Franklin, Abramoff, the recent arrest of an Israeli spy and the whole secret Bush “ok” memo for West Bank expansion (God help us if a real letter exists).
I hope the anti-war intel people move fast and restore our credibility.
Regarding the Syrian Caper and the Iran connection, be sure to read “Update II” by Glennzilla (scroll down). The take-home message:
Now tell me again why The Spook’s hypothesis is outlandish.
Bob in HI
I agree this is about Iran but also a little bit about North Korea. Both have UN deadlines coming up. However, I did read an article yesterday (I’ll find the link) that said this will not affect North Korea’s status with the Six-Party talks, that this presentation served the purpose of looking tough on North Korea for the sake of Japan.
Which means:
Thus, all about Iran.
I hope we remember what Russia said if Iran is attacked:
I think we may also be dealing with some intel blackmail. I think we have uncovered how high up the Israeli spy infiltration is in our government. Each time we drop info on Israel, they will have something on us (like the West Bank letter.)
The US-Israeli relationship is on the rocks behind the scenes. The fact that the Jewish community formed a new lobby group last month which states they are a “pro-peace negotiations” lobby (J-Street) only weeks before a spy is outed speaks loudly.
http://www.jstreet.org/
Bob, I posted a question no one has responded to. I’ll run it by you. The state of Ohio in February was passing legislation to divest state investments in Iran, and Iranian supporter states of North Korea, Syria and Sudan. AIPAC in Ohio lobbied hard (and was successful) to keep Ohio from full divestment in Iran and no divestment in North Korea, Syria and Sudan.
What interest would AIPAC have except to end run the concept of financial sanctions and how effective they can be?
For myself, it is yet more evidence that Israel does not want a peace process.
Hey Bob,
This is a great write-up on J-Street. I’m surprised more has not been written about them.
I’m beginning to see a relationship between their founding and what happened here in Ohio. They have some Howard Dean and Clinton history…
http://leftofdayton.wordpress……ael-lobby/