Propaganda Alert: Questions about Iran's "Supplying" 81mm Mortar Shells to Iraq

[Jcrowley]

"America today blamed Iran for the deaths of 170 US troops inside Iraq, accusing Teheran of supplying insurgents with increasingly sophisticated bombs.


A photo of a roadside bomb released by the US military today. The US claims the device was made in Iran for insurgents in Iraq

Senior defence officials in Baghdad said that Iranian-supplied "explosively formed projectiles" were frequently being used against coalition forces."

Above from the UK Telegraph: 2-12-07

The 81mm mortar shell offered up to the complicit US media as “evidence” Iran is supplying weaponry to the Shi’a of Iraq is more propaganda, as the date on the proffered shell does not follow the Muslim calendar and other markings are in English when it only makes sense they would appear in Persian script.

Iran does not manufacture 81mm mortar shells. According to a report offered by the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, connected to the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the neocon Brookings Institute, the smallest mortar produced by Iran is the 107mm M-30. This information is included in the JCSS’s “Middle East Military Balance,” updated last February. It can be read in this PDF file on page 15:

http://www.tau.ac.il/jcss/balance/Iran.pdf

Also, Iran gets its weapons, including mortars, from Russia. Russian mortars do NOT use 81MM rounds. They use 82mm.

AND, Modern Iran uses a solar Hijri calendar that is 621 years less than the Western solar calendar, so if this munition were really made in Iran. the date should read 1384 or 1385 (Their new year starts in March). The letters in the center appear to be "HE". "High Explosive" is a common catagory of mortar shell. But "High Explosive" is English, not Farsi.

Iran does not manufacture 81mm mortars—but Pakistan does. Compare the photo from this arms catalog page with the one offered up as “evidence” against the Iranians.

http://www.pof.gov.pk/products/81mmhem57.htm

Minus the nosecone and fins at the bottom, it is almost a dead ringer, see enlargement here:



Is it possible the Pentagon neocons, in their zeal to finger the Iranians and thus kick start World War Four, as they fondly call it, are using a Pakistani mortar and attributing it to Iran?

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Here are my comments from a thread the other day:

HE=High Explosive

LOT 3 = LOT 3

Wow. Farsi seems to be a lot like English. I knew they are both Indo-European languages, but I never dreamed they are that similar.

[Fovea]

3. Tea Spray Alert.

Currently wiping off my screen and keyboard.
Thank you for the laugh.

[originalpckelly]

10. It appears that Iran uses English labeling...

on its arms exports. Their website also is primarily in English.

[Richard Steele]

2. I'm sorry, but no.

Those 2 mortar rounds are clearly not identical in shape.

[Jcrowley]

5. Here's an interesting perspective

Propaganda Extravaganza
So I have spent a good deal of this evening reading the accounts of the "highly" secretive, "ultra-classified" and "on monumental background" Iran briefing that the White House orchestrated today, just in time for Monday's breaking news. What is quite clear is that US corporate press has become an extension of the White House public relations department.

Under what circumstances would the following criteria for a news story ever be considered "journalism:"

1). Reporters met with experts and analysts who would not provide their names, background, or any identifying information - even off the record. There is no way to know who these unnamed experts were, what made them experts, or anything that could be used to confirm or debunk their allegations. In other words, the sources were not vetted and unknown.

2). The allegations that Iran was responsible for the downing of US helicopter in Iraq by using advanced weapons were based on a set of photographs of unknown origin, date, time, or any other contextual information that could be confirmed or debunked. In other words, the facts of the story are unsupportable and cannot be in any way explored.

3). The White House led officials present at the briefing would not give their names either, despite this presentation being cleared by the White House. In other words, despite this not being a leak, no one would stand by the story.

4). The alleged intelligence was put together like a presentation one would find at a new product roll out, planned weeks in advance even. Yet the reason given for providing this information to the press is concern for US troops on the ground in Iraq. Obviously something is wrong with either the motive (when one works a story, one wants to understand motive for informaton provided). The motive, as claimed, is concern for the troops - but if there was concern for the troops, why did this presentation require weeks of planning? If there was enough evidence to support a full blown briefing such as this, then instead of planning for a public relations extravaganza, one would think that the White House might be doing something more important - for example, holding emergency briefings for Congress.

<snip>

http://www.atlargely.com/2007/02/propaganda_extr.html

[Richard Steele]

7. Under -NO- circumstances should any dissemination of this crap be called "journalism".

Even as propaganda, this "press conference" was transparently half-assed.
Not a single piece of their "evidence" actually proves ANYTHING.

Weak!

[tabasco]

4. There's a lot of ordinance lying aound in Iraq.

Most of it manufactured in Russia, but from all over the world, including the US. If this is all they have to prove Iran is public enemy #1, it's a very weak case. But the case for Iraq was weak or non-existent, and the traitorous neocons got their war there.

War profiteers are running this Nation, like Eisenhower warned us about. They want never ending war and do not care if they hurt the USA. We need a new revolution in this country, against the criminal war profiteers.

[underpants]

6. Who did they ask Jessica Lynch or Pat Tillman?

[louis-t]

8. I rarely get a chance to recommend, but this is big.

Chances are, MSM will never report this. They need another war.

[originalpckelly]

9. Actually, Iran does manufacture mortar launchers and rounds...

and the Pakistan mortar is almost totally different.

[Jcrowley]

11. Specifics?

Need more info.

Please detail.

Resources?

[originalpckelly]

12. I've issued a preliminary report on this entire briefing in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x198663

[Rosemary2205]

13. The only proof I need is the Bush administration.

If they said it then it's a lie. That's all I need.

[Ganja Ninja]

14. 81 mm mortars are British and American.

and they are used by the Saudi National Guard. In fact it seems they went on a spending spree in 2006.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/07/the-2006-saudi-shopping-spree-a-hardened-networked-national-guard/index.php