By David Swanson
This cable was submitted as evidence by the prosecution in the trial of Jeffrey Sterling, a trial in which Sterling was convicted on entirely circumstantial evidence of leaking to a reporter that the CIA had given nuclear weapons part plans (with flaws added) to Iran. The cable makes crystal clear that the CIA proposed to do the same with Iraq.
There are only two nations beginning with a vowel and containing in adjectival form five letters: IRAQI and OMANI. The United States has neither worried about slowing down a nuclear weapons program in Oman nor sought to concoct reasons for a war on Oman. Iraq is of course a different story.
The above cable is in a font with each character receiving equal space. The letters line up in vertical columns. There are in two places blanks that will hold the word "IRAQI" and in one the word "IRAQIS." There is no way that OMANI and OMANIS makes sense. No other countries fit at all. And it has to be a country. And it has to be a country that follows the word "AN" not "A."
I reported on this on Friday morning, and the reaction was complete disinterest.
If any other nation in the world were discovered to be handing out nuclear weapons plans, it\’d be interesting. Maybe the U.S. just does too much of this stuff. But whether you believe the CIA was attempting through a reasonable means to impede weapons proliferation or you think they were recklessly contributing to it, the sheer irony of having worked on giving Iraq nuke plans not long before attacking Iraq over the false accusation that it was building nukes should be of interest. There should be a half dozen people alive and awake in the United States who find themselves at least vaguely curious as to how far this plan was carried out.
Now, I recognize that the corporate media obeys the CIA\’s wishes. If the CIA wants us to pretend we can\’t spell the names of countries or count the letters in words, then it is our patriotic duty to uphold that pretense. But what about people whose jobs don\’t depend on the good wishes of the corporate media?
I\’ve had people tell me that the CIA would not put something out that\’s so obvious, and therefore it\’s false.
I\’ve had people tell me it simply must be forged, as if the CIA wants to pretend it was giving nukes to Iraq, as if that helps its image.
I\’ve had people give me all sorts of screwy reasons for not giving a shit (and a few people expressing actual interest) but in the end it seems to come down to this: We\’ve reached saturation. If we\’re not among those who consider it a duty to think what we\’re told, we\’re among those who — with growing disgust and fatigue — see a cop choke a man on video and walk, see a government lie about Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria and Ukraine and Russia and ISIS and launch wars right and left, and see Henry Kissinger treated as an honored guest in Congress (with a handful of honorable protesters).
That\’s not all it is, of course. There\’s also the combination. There\’s the person who knows the government lies and commits evil acts but wants the government to openly and explicitly say it was giving nuclear plans to Iraq, not let it slip in a redacted memo, before it can be deemed believable. The human experimentation at Guantanamo should be announced at a press conference, not buried in footnotes in masses of reports. What kind of a manner is that in which to present a hideous crime of such proportions. It just doesn\’t fit.
Well, I don\’t know what to do about that. But, unlike the government, I\’ve never lied to you. And I\’m not making any assertion anyway. You can trust me or not, it\’s completely irrelevant. Read the cable above and see what it says and what it must have said with the blanks filled in. And then see if you can bring yourself to give a damn. The rest of the world already thinks we\’re insane. Imagine it they knew that this is the sort of thing we just accept with our morning coffee before going about our wasteful lives.
David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host.
The views expressed in this article are the author\’s own and do not necessarily reflect The Times Of Earth\’s editorial policy.