Bush Admin Lying on Iran-Iraq Arms?

[Nickdfresh]

U.S. general: No evidence Iran is arming Iraqis
Pace contradicts claims by other U.S. military, administration officials

The Associated Press
Updated: 3:32 p.m. ET Feb 13, 2007

JAKARTA, Indonesia - A top U.S. general said Tuesday there was no evidence the Iranian government was supplying Iraqi insurgents with highly lethal roadside bombs, apparently contradicting claims by other U.S. military and administration officials.

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said U.S. forces hunting down militant networks that produced roadside bombs had arrested Iranians and that some of the material used in the devices were made in Iran.

“That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is directly involved in doing this,” Pace told reporters in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta. “What it does say is that things made in Iran are being used in Iraq to kill coalition soldiers.”

His remarks might raise questions on the credibility of the claims of high-level Iranian involvement, especially following the faulty U.S. intelligence that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Three senior military officials in Baghdad said Sunday that the highest levels of Iranian government were responsible for arming Shiite militants in Iraq with the bombs, blamed for the deaths of more than 170 U.S. troops

Asked Monday directly if the White House was confident that the weaponry is coming on the approval of the Iranian government, spokesman Tony Snow said, “Yes.”

Iran on Monday denied any involvement.

“Such accusations cannot be relied upon or be presented as evidence. The United States has a long history in fabricating evidence. Such charges are unacceptable,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told reporters in Tehran.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17129144/)

[hideyoursheep]

Who's to say the sunnis aren't getting some from hezbollah in Lebanon? More than likely,since it's such a small amount.

This is really Dickie The Bull's idea.

[Nickdfresh]

The Sunnis are getting weapons (used against Americans) from the Saudis (your gas money at work)...

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
The Sunnis are getting weapons (used against Americans) from the Saudis (your gas money at work)...

Al-Qaida(sunni) uses anything it can get-don't forget the millions of tons of munitions left behind during the invasion.

It's the AP munitions Hezbollah uses in Lebanon Dick is referring to-hence the Iranian serial #'s

Somehow, according to Dick, it comes DIRECTLY from Iran,but no one belives him.

I wonder why.... :rolleyes:

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
The Sunnis are getting weapons (used against Americans) from the Saudis (your gas money at work)...

Saudi's have weapons?

[Nickdfresh]

They have M-1 tanks and F-15s...

[hideyoursheep]

315 M-1 MBT's,with the "export armor" package. meaning they got shit. The armor on the M-1 and all its versions remains classified.

They and the Aussies got the "stepped on" versions.

[Nickdfresh]

Chobham armor? Both versions use chobham, and they still have M-1 tanks, AH-64 Apaches, and a state of the art air force. But they're not giving the Sunnis this stuff, the insurgents don't need them to kill Americans.

[LoungeMachine]

You 2 are cracking me up.

Do we need a military nerdspeak sub-forum? ;)

Chobham Armor?

Isn't that what Warham calls condoms?

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by hideyoursheep
Saudi's have weapons?


Yes.

It's called OIL.

And BushCO is as guilty as they are. :mad:

[Hardrock69]

Yeah I saw the general testifying on CNN a little while ago.

Of course organ grinder and themonkey are lying.

But then, themonkey can only say what his master tells him to say.

[Guitar Shark]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Chobham Armor?


There's this place downtown that serves a kickass chop chop salad... ham, turkey, the works. Yum.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
You 2 are cracking me up.

Do we need a military nerdspeak sub-forum? ;)

Yes.


Chobham Armor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chobham_armour)?

Isn't that what Warham calls condoms?

:)

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Chobham armor? Both versions use chobham, and they still have M-1 tanks, AH-64 Apaches, and a state of the art air force. But they're not giving the Sunnis this stuff, the insurgents don't need them to kill Americans.

*sigh*

The Imported models DO NOT have the same armor protection.

If they think they do, or Wiki or whoever,well, ok. Just don't tell them that they DONT.

Now you're saying the Saudi's, who want nothing to do with Bin-Laden or Al Qaida are giving/selling weapons to them?

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
But then, themonkey can only say what his master tells him to say.

Remember when WE were the master?












Me neither.

[Nickdfresh]

I didn't say they did have the same armor protection, they don't.

But the Saudi M-1s are pretty fucking good. Of course, there's a roadside bomb that can kill an American M-1, and Hezbollah used Iranian Sagger upgrades to kill Israeli Merkavas...

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
military nerdspeak

Maybe start with a glossary of terms and acronyms so's you don't step on your dick when you chime in. :D :D :cool:

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I didn't say they did have the same armor protection, they don't.

But the Saudi M-1s are pretty fucking good. Of course, there's a roadside bomb that can kill an American M-1, and Hezbollah used Iranian Sagger upgrades to kill Israeli Merkavas...


Disable,as in throw a track, yeah. Kill? The concussion can fuck you up and the tank still roll.But I get the point.

These upgrades that are coming(more than likely) Lebanon are the type of thing Darth is trying to pin on Iran. These whatever-they-are projectiles that can penetrate armored Humvees.
The same ones the ISF are using.
But like I said somewhere else around here I wouldn't look for much to come out of the new Cheney "intel".
Unless he has pictures of the Iranian Army rolling through Baghdad,he's just bumping his dentures-no one will belive him.:cool:

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
The Sunnis are getting weapons (used against Americans) from the Saudis (your gas money at work)...

I use Citco!:D

[Hardrock69]

Neocon Iranian Mortar Ruse Fizzles
Sunday February 11th 2007, 3:37 pm


Is there something wrong with this picture?

http://kurtnimmo.com/images/mortar.jpg

“America today blamed Iran for the deaths of 170 US troops inside Iraq, accusing Teheran of supplying insurgents with increasingly sophisticated bombs,” reports the neocon-infested UK Telegraph, a trusty propaganda tool.

“Senior defense officials in Baghdad said that Iranian-supplied “explosively formed projectiles” were frequently being used against coalition forces” and “the ‘highest levels’ of Iran’s regime were responsible for giving them to Shia militias in Iraq.”

Although the Telegraph does not mention what particular Shi’a group would use the purported Iranian “explosively formed projectiles” against American troops, we must assume they are making reference to Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi army. In general, Shi’a militias are too busy killing Sunnis, and vice versa, although late last month the killing of five American soldiers at a supposedly secure U.S. facility in Karbala was blamed on “Iranian intelligence agents in conjunction with Iraq’s Shiite Mahdi Army militia,” according to the Examiner. For some unexplained reason these militant Shi’ites decided to dump the bodies of their victims in the town of Mahawil, a predominantly Sunni area.

But never mind. As the photo above supposedly demonstrates, the Pentagon has seized a number of 81mm mortar rounds, used as roadside bombs. “These bombs are specially designed to penetrate heavily armored military vehicles and are capable of crippling the US army’s main battle tank, the Abrams M1,” the Telegraph ominously reports, or rather reads from a Pentagon script. “They have killed 170 US troops since June 2004, according to the American officials. They added that some weapons have been captured and they bore the hallmarks of having been manufactured in Iran…. Many were made as recently as last year—ruling out the possibility that they could have been left over from the many arms caches scattered across Iraq by Saddam Hussein’s regime.”

Of course, as this is a sloppy neocon ruse, as per usual, there is a problem here. Can you guess what it is?

If you guessed the date, you win a Cupie doll. For some reason the geniuses at the Pentagon have failed to explain why the Iranians used a date from the Christian Gregorian calendar and not one from the Islamic Persian calendar. According to the Muslim calendar, the date stenciled on this mortar shell should read 1427, not 2006. And why did Iran, a country speaking and writing in Persian, a language written in a version of the Arabic script, decide to label their shells in English? Maybe they thought it would fool the infidels?

I’m not taking the bait. As usual, this attempt to frame Muslims stinks of neocon sloppiness. Once again, the neocons blow it. Not that it particularly matters, as most Americans are oblivious and, besides, millions of them still think Osama and Saddam are twin brothers.


http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=764

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Neocon Iranian Mortar Ruse Fizzles
Sunday February 11th 2007, 3:37 pm
Is there something wrong with this picture?
http://kurtnimmo.com/images/mortar.jpg

As the photo above supposedly demonstrates, the Pentagon has seized a number of 81mm mortar rounds, used as roadside bombs. “These bombs are specially designed to penetrate heavily armored military vehicles and are capable of crippling the US army’s main battle tank, the Abrams M1,” the Telegraph ominously reports, or rather reads from a Pentagon script. “They have killed 170 US troops since June 2004, according to the American officials. They added that some weapons have been captured and they bore the hallmarks of having been manufactured in Iran…. Many were made as recently as last year—ruling out the possibility that they could have been left over from the many arms caches scattered across Iraq by Saddam Hussein’s regime.”
Of course, as this is a sloppy neocon ruse, as per usual, there is a problem here. Can you guess what it is?
If you guessed the date, you win a Cupie doll. For some reason the geniuses at the Pentagon have failed to explain why the Iranians used a date from the Christian Gregorian calendar and not one from the Islamic Persian calendar. According to the Muslim calendar, the date stenciled on this mortar shell should read 1427, not 2006. And why did Iran, a country speaking and writing in Persian, a language written in a version of the Arabic script, decide to label their shells in English? Maybe they thought it would fool the infidels?http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=764
Good eye,Hardrocker. Let me expand on this one a little bit.
1)The 81mm round is used by US, Canadian, and British forces. the Iranians, IF they have an 81 mm mortar,would have had to copy it from Israel,and use western rounds. There is a Chinese 81mm, but I didn't see any chinese writing on those particular rounds.The mortar of choice for iran has been the 37mm marsh mortar,used on the soft ground during the 8 year war.
But let me get to the real reason this is all Bushit.
2)This round not only has a fuse(grey cone on top) so it could be fired directly from a mortar tube,it would make no sense to use an 81mm shell as a means to destroy vehicles when: it's an HE(high explosive) round,which could do some damage,but not to a hevily armored vehicle such as the M-1.The RPG rounds designed to penetrate reactive armor aren't always successful even with a direct hit,and they clock in at over 100mm.
And why use a perfectly good 81mm mortar round as an IED when there are literally tons of 152mm artillery shells that can be used with a remote homemade detonator? Which by the way is what they use lots of times.
This is going to go away faster than you can say "Scooter", 'cause this just doesn't hold water.

[Nickdfresh]

Interesting...

But remember the calibers (81mm) are tough to pin down in Iran, since they have a whole hodgepodge mix of US, Euro, and Asian weapons stockpiles...

In any case, any Iranian involvement is being seriously exaggerated here; this info is YEARS old!

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Interesting...

But remember the calibers (81mm) are tough to pin down in Iran, since they have a whole hodgepodge mix of US, Euro, and Asian weapons stockpiles...

In any case, any Iranian involvement is being seriously exaggerated here; this info is YEARS old!


ALLEGEDLY, we haven't sold arms to them since 79. With the heavy inventory of russian weapons they have, I seriously doubt an 81mm mortar. Besides, the proof is right there, Mar. 06. Hardly pinpoints anything. BTW, the equipment we sold them is so old,and has been so long since we dealt with them, they've figured out how to make replacement parts for our old shit on their own.
But this mortar round BS...?
"C'mon, Dick!" :mad:

[BITEYOASS]

That mortar round is BS! I know for a fact that a mortar round from any country does not have a nomenclature font in "Times new Roman" with that large a size of lettering. And why the fuck that round doesn't have any cyrillic or farsi letters stenciled or chemically etched with a UN number, is just beyond comprehension. I've worked on explosives whether ground or aviation for several years in the USMC and have seen russian explosives also. This is the biggest fake I've ever seen.

[FORD]

Originally posted by BITEYOASS
That mortar round is BS! I know for a fact that a mortar round from any country does not have a nomenclature font in "Times new Roman" with that large a size of lettering. And why the fuck that round doesn't have any cyrillic or farsi letters stenciled or chemically etched with a UN number, is just beyond comprehension. I've worked on explosives whether ground or aviation for several years in the USMC and have seen russian explosives also. This is the biggest fake I've ever seen.

You should pass this knowledge onto your congressman and let them know that the BCE is lying to them (again).

Maybe write some "letters to the editor" to your local media as well. Everything you say about languages and UN numbers makes perfect sense, but the 29% percent who still buy Chimpy's bullshit will probably still fall for it. Seeing the facts from a marine trained to identify explosives might shake the cobwebs loose in their skulls faster than a report from 60 Minutes would.

[BITEYOASS]

Besides that it is too polished. Any explosive manufactured has a rough paint coat to it that keeps it from shining.

[BITEYOASS]

And even if they are iranian rounds. Isn't it bushes fault for not making Iraq border security a top priority for this war in the first place. Of course he can't even get US border security solved, so I must be expecting too much. Seems that the chimp must under the notion of that free-trade NWO BS.

[hideyoursheep]

Originally posted by BITEYOASS
Besides that it is too polished. Any explosive manufactured has a rough paint coat to it that keeps it from shining.


It's not DoD,that's for sure. the lot # is missing.

If the colors are correct OD green Lt. Green markings, It's a smoke round.

It sure is..:D

[hideyoursheep]

Wish there was a closeup of the tip-

Iranians put their flag insignia relief there......

[hideyoursheep]

Catch Mojo Nixon's "lying cocksuckers" show on Sirius 102 @ 6:00pm.

[Hardrock69]

US Iran intelligence 'is incorrect'


Julian Borger in Vienna
Thursday February 22, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

Much of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by US spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, diplomatic sources in Vienna said today.

The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme.

That report, delivered to the security council by the IAEA director general, Mohammed ElBaradei, sets the stage for a fierce international debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran and raises the possibility that the US could resort to military action against Iranian nuclear sites.


At the heart of the debate are accusations - spearheaded by the US - that Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons.

However, most of the tip-offs about supposed secret weapons sites provided by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have led to dead ends when investigated by IAEA inspectors, according to informed sources in Vienna.

"Most of it has turned out to be incorrect," a diplomat at the IAEA with detailed knowledge of the agency's investigations said.

"They gave us a paper with a list of sites. [The inspectors] did some follow-up, they went to some military sites, but there was no sign of [banned nuclear] activities.

"Now [the inspectors] don't go in blindly. Only if it passes a credibility test."

One particularly contentious issue was records of plans to build a nuclear warhead, which the CIA said it found on a stolen laptop computer supplied by an informant inside Iran.

In July 2005, US intelligence officials showed printed versions of the material to IAEA officials, who judged it to be sufficiently specific to confront Iran.

Tehran rejected the material as forged, and there are still reservations within the IAEA about its authenticity, according to officials with knowledge of the internal debate in the agency.

"First of all, if you have a clandestine programme, you don't put it on laptops which can walk away," one official said. "The data is all in English which may be reasonable for some of the technical matters, but at some point you'd have thought there would be at least some notes in Farsi. So there is some doubt over the provenance of the computer."

IAEA officials do not comment on intelligence passed to the watchdog agency by foreign governments, saying all such assistance is confidential.

A western counter-proliferation official accepted that intelligence on Iran had sometimes been patchy, but argued that the essential point was Tehran's failure to live up to its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty.

"I take on board on what they're saying, but the bottom line is that for nearly 20 years [the Iranians] were violating safeguards agreements," the official said. "There is a confidence deficit here about the regime's true intentions."

That deficit will be deepened by yesterday's IAEA report, which concluded bluntly that "Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities", in defiance of a December UN ultimatum to stop.

The report noted that Iran had continued with the operation of a pilot enrichment plant.

Furthermore, the report said Iran had informed the agency of its plan to install 18 arrays, or cascades, of 164 centrifuges in an underground plant by May - a total of nearly 3,000.

At the moment, Iran's centrifuges are being used to make low enriched uranium, but if they were switched to making highly enriched, weapons grade uranium they could produce enough for a bomb in less than a year.

Mr ElBaradei's report said that Iran had so far not agreed to the IAEA installing remote monitoring devices in the enrichment plant to keep constant tabs on what the Iranians were doing with them.

Furthermore, the IAEA still has a string of questions about the Iranian programme that remain unanswered. Until they are, the agency will not give Iran a clear bill of health.

One of the "outstanding issues" listed in yesterday's report involves a 15-page document that appears to have been handed to IAEA inspectors by mistake with a batch of unrelated paperwork in October 2005.

That document roughly describes how to make hemispheres of enriched uranium, for which the only known use is in nuclear warheads. Iran has yet to present a satisfactory explanation of how and why it has the document.

"The issue here is the Iranians have not addressed outstanding issues, and we are still uncertain about the scope and intent of the programme," a senior UN official said last night.

"We cannot ensure the correctness and completeness of their declaration."




http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0%2C%2C2019235%2C00.html