Surprise Surprise: “Laptop of Death” a Possible Forgery

Almost four years ago today, Colin Powell presented some dodgy intelligence suggesting Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. Powell’s announcement had all the trappings of Bush propaganda: sketchy exiles, the pre-emption of IAEA counter-evidence, technical specs that make a known civilian application look like a nuclear weapon, and, of course, Powell himself.

Does it surprise you to learn, via Juan Cole, that that intelligence may well have been forged?

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has obtained evidence suggesting that documents which have been described as technical studies for a secret Iranian nuclear weapons-related research program may have been fabricated.

The documents in question were acquired by U.S. intelligence in 2004 from a still unknown source — most of them in the form of electronic files allegedly stolen from a laptop computer belonging to an Iranian researcher. The US has based much of its push for sanctions against Iran on these documents.

Nope, it doesn’t surprise me either.

Still, even though none of us are surprised, don’t you think it’d be a good idea to figure out who forged all the evidence tailored to get the US involved in wars in the Middle East? Before Dick Cheney absconds with the evidence?

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

89 Responses to Surprise Surprise: “Laptop of Death” a Possible Forgery

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @bmaz Oh, I've got several Burrs under my saddle and it's making me cranky and ruining my weekend, albeit to productive effect.
4mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Does @emptywheel still have a Burr in her saddle today? Or did the Wolvereenie girls in Blue overcome that?
12mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Also, new policy is not particularly firm on non-custodial interrogation/interviews https://t.co/8AeUu4ynfD
14mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz New DOJ policy was first announced a year ago: https://t.co/2HDPx4bcMk The "exceptions" are huge+significant though. https://t.co/8AeUu4ynfD
19mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Man, this guy Sanford Asman, and his company CaseWebs, sure come off as huge dickheads https://t.co/B1YXYUaQKb
37mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @kgosztola Any leak of "credible reports of threats against cops"? They seem to release those before these dragnets as legal justification.
41mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mar7k Different functions. Palantir has specific contracts to do stuff w/data. Adobe may be collected under Section 215.
48mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @biasedreporter Yup. I'm beginning to believe that overseas there's no such thing as a discrete "wiretap" anymore.
51mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mar7k Put it this way: For AT&T, $$ seems enough motivator. For MSFT, prolly takes $$ and immunity. VZ and Apple require more coercion.
57mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mar7k But Burr's bill would include a number of other means of coercion.
57mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mar7k They don't get paid under Section 215 right now (not directly anyway). They would be under USAF. Also, immunity would be expanded.
58mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mar7k To be fair, it would be coerced, and appears to try to shut down normal legal means of challenge. Some providers don't want to coop
1hreplyretweetfavorite
November 2008
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30