Mansour Arbabsiar

Today I learned that US citizens may be added to the “Specially Designated Nationals” (SDN) list maintained by the US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control. Those who are added to this list have their assets blocked “and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing with them.”

On Tuesday, 11 October 2011, US citizen Mansour Arbabsiar (who also holds Iranian citizenship) was added to the SDN list:

ARBABSIAR, Manssor (a.k.a. ARBABSIAR, Mansour), 805 Cisco Valley CV, Round Rock, TX  78664; 5403 Everhardt Road, Corpus Christi, TX  78411; DOB 15 Mar 1955; alt. DOB 6 Mar 1955; POB Iran; citizen United States; Driver’s License No. 07442833 (United States)  expires 15 Mar 2016; Passport C2002515 (Iran); alt. Passport 477845448 (United States); Driver’s License is issued by the State of Texas (individual) [SDGT] [IRGC]

Arbabsiar is in custody on charges of conspiring, among other things, to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

I am not a lawyer, but it sure seems to me that pre-trial blocking of a citizen’s assets and prohibiting US persons from dealing with them amounts to punishment without due process of law.

Other United States citizens on the SDN list include Anwar Nasser Aulaqi (who remains on the list some two weeks after his assassination-by-drone), alleged Mexican drug cartel bosses Blanca Cázares Salazar and Victor Cázares Gastelum, alleged Shabab militia member Omar Shafik Hammami, alleged terrorist plotter Raed M. Hijazi, Muhammad Hamid Khalil Salah, who was “found not guilty of conspiring to illegally finance Hamas terrorist activities in Israel” but was convicted on an obstruction of justice charge “related to lies prosecutors said he told about his ties to Hamas,” and Abdul Rahman Yasin, who is wanted in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Justin Fishel

Justin Fishel, who covers the Departments of Defense and State for Fox News, has told one of the boldest lies I’ve seen from a journalist. It comes in a blog post titled, “CIA: Iran Moving Closer to Nuclear Weapon.” The title itself is misleading, but the blatant lie is in the opening sentence:

A recently published report by the Central Intelligence Agency says Iran is still working on building a nuclear weapon despite some technical setbacks and international resistance — and the Pentagon say it’s still concerned about Iran’s ambitions.

The problem: the 9-page CIA report, to which Fishel conveniently provides a link, says no such thing. Nowhere in the report does it say or imply that Iran is “still working on building a nuclear weapon.” Fishel just made it up.

What the report does say about Iran’s nuclear program is this:

We continue to assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons though we do not know whether Tehran eventually will decide to produce nuclear weapons.

That’s a far cry from saying that “Iran is still working on building a nuclear weapon.” Again, nowhere in the report is any such assertion made. At a time of heightened tensions between Iran and the West (with some beating the drums for war) sensational lies such as that told by Fishel are dangerous and should not go unchallenged.

As I write, Fishel’s blog post is featured prominently on Fox News’ website (click image to view full size):

Update: A Fox News on-line poll asks readers, “What Should Be Done About Iran?” The poll repeats Fishel’s lie, framing the question:

A recently published report by the Central Intelligence Agency says Iran is still working on building a nuclear weapon despite some technical setbacks and international resistance — and the Pentagon say it’s still concerned about Iran’s ambitions. How should the U.S. respond? You decide.

At 9:30 EDT on 31 March 2010, some 69% of 20,914 respondents say, “Bomb Iranian nuclear sites”:

Correction: The original title of this post incorrectly referred to Justin Fishel as a “reporter.” He is a producer for Fox News.

Illustration of sāndīses found at www.razavi-canning.com

The reason this word was in the news this past week as that such fruit drinks were distributed at pro-government events. Green Movement adherents disparagingly referred to those who turned out at rallies in support of the government as ساندیسخوران (sāndīskhūrān) or “fruit juice drinkers,” the implication being that the government had bought their support for the price of a few fruit drinks.

I haven’t yet learned the etymology of sāndīs, though I suspect it may be a trade name that has become generic. The sāndīses shown in the illustration above are marketed under the label taqdīs (blessing).

But Gareth Porter of the Inter Press Service News Agency today reports that “U.S. intelligence has concluded that the document published recently by the Times of London…is a fabrication” (emphasis added). Porter notes that while such a document would presumably be highly classified, the document (4.5 mb PDF) does not bear any security markings–a fact that The Times failed to disclose.

I have read The Times’ document for myself and note another significant irregularity that The Times failed to note: this allegedly “Iranian” document was composed on a computer that evidently lacked Persian (Farsi)–the Iranian national language–resources. It is readily apparent that the document was composed using Arabic, not Persian resources. For example, the Arabic letter corresponding to the English “y” is “ي”. In Persian, however, the dots are always omitted when the letter appears at the end of a word. (In fact, with a Persian input method selected, one has to press the shift key to obtain the Arabic letter “ي” with two dots underneath.) Throughout the document, the Arabic form of the letter, with dots underneath, appears:

Telltale Dots

In addition, the Persian word-initial long “a” (آ) consistently appears as a regular “a” (ا) in the document. The “little hat” above the long “a” is generally not considered to be optional.

In short, it is evident that an Arabic, and not a Persian, input method was used for composing this document. Why would a computer at Iran’s “most sensitive military nuclear project” be configured to use Arabic language resources instead of Persian ones?

Moreover, why would the Times fail to note the lack of security markings and the glaring typographical irregularities of this document?

Update: It should be borne in mind that while the use of Arabic input resources is noteworthy, it is not dispositive. Use of Arabic input methods for documents composed in Persian was fairly common in the early 1990s (before Persian input methods became widely available for computers running Microsoft Windows) and is still sometimes seen today. Still, the document’s lack of any date, classification stamp, or special handling instructions, combined with the typographical peculiarities discussed above, preclude me from taking it at face value.

Update 2: Scott Horton of Antiwar.com interviewed Philip Giraldi regarding The Times’ “nuclear trigger” document on 29 January 2009. Audio is available here.

Update 3: Scott Horton interviewed me about The Times’ document (as well as about polygraph policy) on 30 January 2009. That interview is now available on Antiwar.com. On 3 January 2010, Times leader writer Oliver Kamm, in response to comments that I left on his blog two hours before my interview with Scott Horton, wrote, among other things:

George Maschke, the whole of your comment is undermined by your mistake in assuming that the document that you read online was the document in its original form. It was in fact a retyped version of the relevant parts of that original document. The original document contained a lot of classified information. The Times did not publish the original document, because of the danger that it would alert the Iranian authorities to the source of the leak. The full version of the document is in the hands of the IAEA.

It should be noted that The Times represented the Persian version of its purported “nuclear trigger” document as “Iran’s nuclear trigger: document in full.” A running commentary on Oliver Kamm’s blog may be followed here.

In the Name of God

To the honorable nation of Iran, thank you for your enthusiastic turnout and widespread support. Despite numerous instances of cheating and sabotage and widespread shortcomings, incoming reports indicate that a decisive majority of the people’s votes were cast for this servant of theirs. I ask the repsonsible authorities to take utmost care in counting the ballots, and I announce that otherwise, I will employ all legal means to vindicate the lawful rights of the people. I would like to take this opportunity to ask the honorable Iranian nation to be prepared for a victory celebration on the eve of the birth of her eminence Fatima Zahra (peace be upon her).

Mir Hossein Mousavi
Morning of 13 June 2009

The birthday of Fatima Zahra is to be observed on Sunday, 14 June, so the celebration is planned for tonight. A confrontation seems inevitable.