Hamed Aleaziz

What's Happening in the Persian Gulf Explained

Why Iran is talking tough, the US is maneuvering warships, and gasoline is getting more expensive by the hour.

| Tue Jan. 3, 2012 3:58 PM PST

The basics: Iran and the United States appear to be heading for a showdown in the Persian Gulf. Amid already-high tensions over Iran's advancing nuclear program, the US has imposed harsh new economic sanctions on the regime in Tehran. The sanctions have throttled Iran's economy, and the country has responded by threatening to shut down the Gulf to all shipping traffic. Iranian officials have also threatened military action against the United States and its allies in the region if they don't back off. Two US aircraft carriers are en route to the region.

How has the situation escalated? Over New Year's weekend, the Iranians announced that they'd made their first-ever nuclear fuel rods, potentially a major step forward in building a nuclear bomb.* Then they test-fired three anti-ship missiles in the Strait of Hormuz, a 34-mile-wide choke point in the Persian Gulf through which approximately 20 percent of the world's crude oil is transported. An Iranian admiral told state TV that the shots were a warning to America: "The control of the Strait of Hormuz is completely under our authority [too]," he said, warning that Iran would attack "any enemy" that endangered Iranian interests. In response, the US has sent two aircraft carriers steaming toward the Gulf to replace the USS John C. Stennis, which just ended its own Mideast deployment. "Iran advises, recommends and warns them [the US] not to move its carrier back to the previous area in the Gulf because Iran is not used to repeating its warnings and warns just once," a general told state media.

[Read the full article]

Advertise on MotherJones.com

What Happened to Obama's Nuclear Option?

In a showdown over how to deal with Iran, it appears that the president has bowed to Congress.

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Fri Dec. 16, 2011 3:30 AM PST

stocklight/Shutterstock.com /Shutterstock

Now that the essential Defense Authorization Bill has passed through the House and Senate, it carries with it a hard-line amendment that would level sanctions against Iran's central bank. The policy, experts say, could not only inflict pain on Iran for its nuclear weapons ambitions, but also potentially cause global economic repercussions. The White House has been against the amendment. Congress overwhelmingly voted for it.

If signed into law by President Obama, the new sanctions will be enforced against foreign institutions in Europe and around the world that do business with the Central Bank of Iran. (American companies are already forbidden to do so.) Because the CBI acts as negotiator for Iranian oil prices, these sanctions could force banks and companies worldwide to make a choice: terminate participation in the oil trade with Iran or face a penalty from the US. After strong pushback from the White House, which believes the sanctions could be too economically destabilizing, congressional leaders agreed to add a waiver that, according to Foreign Policy's Josh Rogin, would give the "president slightly more flexibility in waiving some of the sanctions on national security grounds." Apparently it may be just enough wiggle room: The White House announced on Wednesday that the president would not veto the bill, despite prior threats that he would.

But the amendment, sponsored by Senators Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), has some experts worried about its potential impact.

Robin Mills, an energy expert and columnist at The National, says, "If the sanctions were successful in substantially reducing Iranian oil exports, then world oil prices would rise significantly—but panic might take prices [even] higher." The Wall Street Journal has reported that disrupting Iran's oil exports could increase gas in the US by as "much as $1 more a gallon, even though the U.S. doesn't import any Iranian oil." And higher gas prices could damage the nation's already gloomy economic outlook.

[Read the full article]

US Freezes Aid to Pakistan

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Thu Dec. 15, 2011 4:06 PM PST

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff/Flickr

The National Defense Authorization Act—the $622 billion bill to fund the military through the next fiscal year—has already been widely criticized for its provisions regarding the detention of terrorist suspects. But the bill also freezes $700 million in aid to Pakistan—a move that is already impacting one of the United States' most important diplomatic relationships.

Specifically, the NDAA freezes aid until Pakistan "demonstrates... significant efforts towards the implementation of a strategy to counter improvised explosive devices." Between April and June 2011, 1,248 NATO forces in Afghanistan were killed in IED attacks, and more than half of the American soldiers killed in Afghanistan in the first eight months of 2011 were killed by IEDs. Congress is blaming Pakistan for the IEDs because "84 percent of the bombs in Afghanistan use calcium ammonium nitrate fertilizer" from Pakistan, according to a US official cited by National Journal. Legislation to reduce the production of the fertilizer is still pending in Islamabad.

[Read more in the MoJo blog]

Mitt Romney, Strangely Unfamiliar With the MEK

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Mon Dec. 12, 2011 12:19 PM PST

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Mitt Romney followed up Saturday's lackluster debate performance with a town hall in New Hampshire on Sunday, where he criticized President Obama, made pointed jabs at Newt, and reflected on his Mormon missionary experience in France. But things got more interesting when an audience member asked the potential Republican nominee if he supported efforts by prominent political leaders in Washington to remove the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, an Iranian dissident terrorist group, from the State Department's list of designated terrorist organizations. Romney responded: "I have not heard of the MEK, so I can't possibly tell you whether I support the MEK. I'll take a look at the issue."

[Read more in the MoJo blog]

Did US Firm Lie to Reporters About Supplying Syrian Regime?

An editor at Slashdot says Blue Coat Systems misled him about whether the firm's internet filtering systems were being used by Syria.

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Fri Dec. 2, 2011 3:00 AM PST

Protestor in Baniyas, Syria on May 5th, 2011.: Syria-Frames-Of-Freedom/Flickr Protesters in Baniyas, Syria, on May 5 Syria-Frames-Of-Freedom/FlickrLast month, Mother Jones reported that the Syrian regime was using internet filtering technology manufactured by an American company, Blue Coat Systems, to aid in its months-long crackdown on dissidents. In the weeks following our report, the State Department and Commerce Department said they were both looking into the matter, and US senators called for congressional probes on the company.

On October 29, Blue Coat finally admitted to the Wall Street Journal that its products had indeed been used in Syria. The company now claims that it learned about its Syria connection the same way Mother Jones did—from computer log files posted on the internet by the hacktivist group Telecomix. But just over a month ago, Blue Coat was telling a completely different story.

Tim Lord, an editor at the massively popular "news for nerds" site Slashdot, claims that Steve Schick, a spokesman for Blue Coat, emailed him a response to the Syria allegations on October 11. Asked for comment, Schick referred Mother Jones to the statement on the Blue Coat website in which the company says it learned of its devices being used in Syria from the leaked logs. Lord has provided Mother Jones with a copy of Schick's email, a portion of which he posted to Slashdot. (You can read the email in full below.) In it, Schick writes that Blue Coat "does not provide any kind of technical support, professional services or software maintenance" to Syria and "has no evidence" its devices are being used there:

Schick's emailed statement directly contradicts what Blue Coat said just weeks later, on October 29, when company officials told the Wall Street Journal that their devices in Syria had been transmitting automatic "heartbeat" messages back to Blue Coat. (The company claims it does not monitor those sorts of messages.) The filtering devices also had active "Blue Coat service and support contracts," according to the Journal.

"Was Schick lying? I think so, sure, though I at least hoped he wasn't," Lord says. "It's within the realm of possibility that the company was mistaken (at the time), but I doubt it."

Bruce Schneier, a respected security analyst, says Blue Coat could have easily determined whether its devices were being used in Syria. To remain effective, internet filtering devices need regular updates and support, similar to the virus definition updates that consumers receive from computer security companies like Norton. Schneier believes the Syrian Blue Coat products would have received updates from the Silicon Valley company—especially given the fact that the devices had active service and support contracts. Blue Coat would have just had to glance at its records.

Lord still has more questions. "I'd like to know what about the logs…they could construe as supporting their former public position that [the logs] came from machines outside Syria," he says. "It's those logs that led Telecomix to the opposite conclusion"—a conclusion that Blue Coat now supports.

Interrogating the Creators of "Homeland"

Howard Gordon and Alex Gansa on Claire Danes, illegal surveillance, and what they regret about "24."

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Fri Nov. 4, 2011 2:00 AM PDT

Claire Danes and Damian Lewis in Showtime's Homeland Showtime

Showtime's hot new psychodrama, Homeland, stars Claire Danes as Carrie Mathison, a CIA agent investigating a returning US Marine named Nicholas Brody (Damian Lewis). While held in captivity by Al Qaeda in Iraq, Brody has converted to Islam. The show's central tension revolves around whether he has "turned"—into someone capable of carrying out a terrorist act. Just five episodes in, Homeland is Showtime's biggest hit in recent memory; the channel has already announced plans to renew for a second season.

The series is the brainchild of Howard Gordon and Alex Gansa, tight friends and cowriters on 24, Fox's post-9/11 adrenaline-fest in which fictional agent Jack Bauer uses whatever means necessary to save America from the evil terrorists. Homeland employs a more nuanced touch, prompting viewers to consider troublesome aspects of the war on terror that 24 largely ignored. I picked up my red telephone last week to interrogate Gordon and Gansa about Islamophobia, why they sought out Claire Danes, and their lingering regrets about 24.

Mother Jones: So, what inspired Homeland?

Alex Gansa: The show, Hatufim, about a couple of POWs who are returned after 17 years of captivity has been a huge hit in Israel. We read the pilot and thought, "My God, this is fantastic!" And we were hoping to just change a few names and turn it into an American version. Unfortunately, it took a lot more work than that.

[Read the full article]

Advertise on MotherJones.com

After MoJo Investigation, US Company Admits Its Technology Used in Syria

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Mon Oct. 31, 2011 7:20 AM PDT

Khalid Albaih/Flickr

On October 19, Mother Jones reported that the autocratic Syrian regime was using internet filtering technology produced by a California company, Blue Coat Systems, to aid its crackdown on dissidents. On Saturday, after 10 days of heightened media scrutiny and the launch of a State Department inquiry, the company finally admitted what publicly available electronic records made obvious, telling the Wall Street Journal that Syria did in fact use its products.

A Blue Coat spokesman told Mother Jones that the company never sold its technology to Syria. So how did the equipment get there? Blue Coat told the Journal it's all a big misunderstanding: "[Blue Coat] shipped the Internet 'filtering' devices to Dubai late last year, believing they were destined for a department of the Iraqi government. However, the devices—which can block websites or record when people visit them—made their way to Syria." Of course, selling the technology to Syria—a country subjected to strict sanctions—would violate US law. Blue Coat has told Mother Jones that it does not allow its customers to resell its products to embargoed countries.

Telecomix, a tech activist group, released electronic records in early October that tech experts said proved Syria was using Blue Coat technology to prevent the public from accessing particular websites. Jacob Appelbaum, a tech expert and computer science researcher, told Mother Jones that it was clear the records connected Blue Coat and Syria: "Every IP address in all of the information released is registered in Syria," he said. And Blue Coat's technology can do more than just filter the internet, Appelbaum added: "It's a super policeman with a general warrant who spies on every person, records everything about that person and their activities and then it acts as the judge, jury and executioner."

[Read more in the MoJo blog]

After MoJo Report, US Probes Tech Company Linked to Syria

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Tue Oct. 25, 2011 6:49 AM PDT

Protesters wave Syrian flags at a May anti-government rally in San Francisco. bleu man/Flickr

The US State Department is looking into allegations—first reported by Mother Jones last week—that the Syrian regime is using a California company's internet-filtering technology to aid its crackdown on dissidents.

The company, Blue Coat Systems, denies selling its products to Syria. But that hasn't been enough to head off a government probe into the matter. "The issue of Blue Coat's technology being used in Syria is one that the State Department is taking very seriously and is very concerned about," a State Department official told the Washington Post on Saturday. State Department officials are "reviewing the information" they have about Syria's use of US technology and "monitoring the facts," a spokeswoman told the BBC on Monday.

Tech experts say that electronic records released by the hacktivist collective Telecomix earlier this month prove that Syria is using Blue Coat's technology. "Every IP address in all of the information released is registered in Syria," Jacob Appelbaum, a computer science researcher at the University of Washington, told Mother Jones last week. "Every IP address routes from Syria or from known Syrian equipment with the expected latency of machines run in Syria."

Appelbaum believes the technology is capable of more than just blocking particular websites and search results: "It's a super policeman with a general warrant who spies on every person, records everything about that person and their activities and then it acts as the judge, jury and executioner," he said.

Selling internet-blocking devices or software to Syria directly would likely violate harsh US sanctions against the country. But if Syria obtained the technology through an intermediary, Blue Coat could be in the clear—provided that the transfer of the equipment happened without Blue Coat's knowledge or consent. A Blue Coat spokesman told Mother Jones last week that the company forbids its customers from reselling its products to embargoed countries. The company has opened its own investigation into the allegations, a spokesman told the BBC.

Syria Uses US Technology in Cyber Crackdown

Tech experts say that Syria is using technology made by an American company, Blue Coat Systems, to block access to the internet—and they have the data to prove it.

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Wed Oct. 19, 2011 2:00 AM PDT

Syria-Frames-of-Freedom/Flickr

UPDATE: The State Department is investigating the use of Blue Coat technology in Syria.

UPDATE 2: Blue Coat has admitted that its technology was used in Syria.

As the autocratic regime in Syria brutally cracks down on a pro-democracy opposition, it is using technology developed by an American company, Blue Coat Systems, to suppress dissent and block access to the internet, tech experts say.

Two weeks ago, Telecomix, a tech activist group, released information from the Syrian government-run Syria Telecommunications Establishment. The release revealed gigabytes of electronic records, called log files, dating back to late July and early August of this year, and the material indicates that Syria's government is using Blue Coat's devices to prevent its citizens from accessing social media, video-sharing, and other websites. By using the devices, the Syrian regime can block information about its abuses from getting out of the country and monitor web activity. (Peter Fein, a hacktivist with Telecomix, says the information came from "publicly accessible, completely unsecured servers which were found using traditional network scans.") Selling most US-manufactured goods to Syria has been forbidden by US law since 2004.

Jacob Appelbaum, a tech expert and computer science researcher at the University of Washington who was dubbed "The Most Dangerous Man in Cyberspace" by Rolling Stone, said in an email that "the log files are direct evidence" that Syria is utilizing Blue Coat's technology. "Every IP address in all of the information released is registered in Syria," Appelbaum added. "Every IP address routes from Syria or from known Syrian equipment with the expected latency of machines run in Syria." Appelbaum believes that the Syrian government uses Blue Coat's device to monitor citizens' internet activity, record it for future reference, and then take action against dissidents. "That is to say that it's a super policeman with a general warrant who spies on every person, records everything about that person and their activities and then it acts as the judge, jury and executioner," he wrote.

The sample log file above clearly states that a Blue Coat device is being used. (You can view the rest of the log files here.)

A Blue Coat spokesman says Blue Coat had not sold its products to Syria.

[Read the full article]

Tonight on PBS: Saga of Muslim World's Hottest Comic Series

—By Hamed Aleaziz

| Thu Oct. 13, 2011 2:00 AM PDT

Teshkeel Comics

Five years ago, comic book series "The 99" became a sensation in the Middle East, winning over magazine writers, think-tank wonks, and a generation of kids who have become obsessed with the comics. Even President Obama has praised it for capturing "the imagination of so many young people, with superheroes who embody the teachings and tolerance of Islam."

Created by clinical psychologist Dr. Naif al-Mutawa, a Kuwaiti American who sought to create positive role models for kids in the Arab world and beyond, the series features 99 superheroes, each representing one of the 99 concepts of God as depicted in Islam—although religion is not explicitly referenced. After coming up with the concept, he raised more than $7 million to fund his project, and then hired the former artists and creators of famous American comic books to make it a reality. Last year, the family friendly Hub TV channel agreed to air the animated version of "The 99" in the United States.

[Read more in the Mixed Media blog]