How do you write "March 2006" in Farsi?

I can't believe I'm going to write a diary on this.  I feel like slamming my head on a desk, repeatedly.  Heck, I have slammed my head on my desk, often, in the last couple of days.

We've been shown proof that the bombs are coming from Iran.  Incontrovertible proof, impeccable logic, so much so that the people presenting the proof don't want to be named.  What proof, exactly?

Below...

OK, let me see if I can do this with pictures:

Here is some of the proof (fair use, source below):

Source: Fairfax Digital's The Age.

Elsewhere, we're seeing the same '2006' with a '-3-', supposedly made in the month of March, the year 2006.  So far, so good.

Now, in Iran, people speak Farsi(Persian).

No big deal, right?  With me so far?

OK, now we have all this wonderful stuff on The Internets tubes, which we can find with the wonderful The Google.  Interesting stuff, like an English-Farsi automated translator.

Now, what do you suppose might happen if I ask that translator how to write "March 2006" in Farsi?

I tell you, I was shocked when I saw the translation:

Is it just me, or is that completely different from what the Pentagon 'proof' of Iranian manufacture shows?

My apologies to the diary police,  I just can't wrap my head around this enough to write another 500 words on the subject.  I'm going back to banging my head on my desk, it seems more productive.

Edited to add:
Kossak fujigmo (UID 117530)informs me below that the Iranian national defense industry does indeed make these shells, and does mark them in English.  He/she provides me with a nice link to the official website of the Iranian Defense Industries Organization.

I've taken a few screenshots, I'm cropping and posting them here.  Let's see if you can notice what's amiss (fair use, and I don't think the Pentagon psy-ops guys are going to sue me over this):

The English portal:

The Farsi portal:

The Arabic portal:

The 105mm shell page:

The money shot:

Random problems with the site:

Notice the bad formatting, the catchy slogan "The Best in the Middle East!" (anyone who knows an Iranian will tell you that Iranians are not very likely to have writen that slogan), and my favorite, the .org email.

Not to mention the English messages telling us that the Farsi and Arabic portals are under construction.  And all the "Page not found" error messages, when you try to get some specs on the weapons.  But they will take your name and credit card number, if you want to buy some of this stuff....  Ha!  You'd need an IQ in turnip-range to fall for that, methinks.

OK, my bullshit detector just went into overdrive on this story.

•  I can't believe

  I just wrote this.

  Why?  Please, can someone tell me why?

  by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 01:50:27 PM PDT

•  Well

  do we have any evidence that their munitions use farsi  numbers or not?  I'm not sure it's something we should automatically assume, especially if they have any intentions of selling them to anyone (not necessarily unusual)

  by FleetAdmiralJ on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 01:56:04 PM PDT

•  Worth checking though. n/t

  by Asinus Asinum Fricat on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:00:42 PM PDT

•  It's because

  english is the international language of capitalism.  That's not me saying that, it was a real blogger like Ezra or someone.  Someone smarter than me at least.

  by james richardson on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:06:18 PM PDT

  •  That's funny.

    In Iran, English is the language of the Great Satan.

    by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:09:10 PM PDT

    •  Nonetheless,

      the majority of them speak it :-)

      by james richardson on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:13:16 PM PDT

  •  apparently -English is the norm

    in international arms trade.

    by annefrank on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:25:15 PM PDT

    •  Yet their plastic explosives and TNT

      were marked in Farsi.

      Not to mention their might be a slight calendar issue between our March and theirs.

      by pinche tejano on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:11:46 PM PDT

      •  Those are raw materials, bulk goods

        like burlap sacks of rice to nicely packaged rice krispy treats.(The value of a weapon isn't the TNT, but how it is packaged)

        by Kudos on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:25:52 PM PDT

        •  So they label some crates in Farsi and some in

          English to confuse their own forces?

          Wow.

          Neat trick.

          Or someone one is full of shit.

          by pinche tejano on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:28:11 PM PDT

          •  I'm going with the

            'or' part of that comment.  Someone is full of shit.

            by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 04:14:13 PM PDT

          •  I'm still not convinced

            And the reason is that the US found English-labeled mortars in the Iraqi during the first invasion in 1991.  See the high-resolution version of this photo.  Aside from the fact that this is a 60mm mortar round instead of an 81mm mortar round, it is absolutely identical to the ones displayed by the Bush administration as proof of Iranian involvement.  As a result, I'm inclined to believe that English-labeled mortar rounds are fairly common in mideast military stockpiles.

            As a result, I'd have to say that the lettering on the mortar rounds proves absolutely nothing either way.

            by silence on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 10:41:08 AM PDT

•  Is the farsi word for "March"

  Mars?

  Because that's what it looks like from the arabic script.

  Sorry.  Linghead here.

  by Cheez Whiz on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:07:14 PM PDT

  •  french

    I believe that's the French word which is perhaps why they use it as well, since their own calendar is totally different.

    by sunshineonthebay on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:22:19 PM PDT

    •  march 2006 in the farsi calendar...

      would be either esfand 1384 or farvardin 1385, depending on which day.

      by propagandism on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 04:26:02 PM PDT

      •  so they did a straight transliteration then

        looked like it.

        by Cheez Whiz on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 06:24:14 PM PDT

  •  Great, another smoking gun...

    leading us down the path to our invasion of the red planet.

    by Kudos on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:27:13 PM PDT

•  They did it in English for our benefit ;-)

  Wasn't that thoughtful?
  I have no idea how a typical munitions thingy would be labelled in a middle eastern country.  Maybe English is standard because it's easier to print.  

  by goldberry on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:07:55 PM PDT

•  And 81 mm, too

  If it's Iranian munitions being developed for use by whomever (presumably those who speak the language of the manufacturer), shouldn't the caliber (81 mm) be in Farsi as well.

  And the word "lot" too.

  Or do ALL munitions manufacturers use English, because hey, we want the Americans to know exactly what kind of device is blowing them up?

  by kmiddle on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:07:58 PM PDT

  •  I'm seriously expecting their next 'proof'

    will come in the form of a "Made in Iran - With Pride!" sticker.  In English.

    by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:10:35 PM PDT

  •  81 MM is likely universal. The metric system

    is used throughout the world, even here in most manufacturing.

    by Spud1 on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:17:24 PM PDT

    •  Yes, but I doubt...

      their word for "millimeter" is spelled with the western MM. After all, their writing system is completely different from ours, even running in the opposite direction (right to left, not left to right). So even if the designation of number and size was universal, if it were Iranian, wouldn't it be written MM 81? At least, then it's in the correct orientation to the way they read.

      What about Russian arms? Or Chinese? Do they put western alphabets on their munitions? Seems a little odd to me that they would use an alphabet that they don't normally use themselves for dangerous stuff like guns and bullets and shells.

      Very, very odd.

      by kmiddle on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:23:33 PM PDT

      •  The only non-Western munitions I've personally

        seen were Russian, and they used the Russian (Cyrillic?) alphabet.  I couldn't understand the codes.

        by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:26:54 PM PDT

      •  Actually, it would be mm18....n/t

        by kmiddle on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:54:02 PM PDT

        •  In Arabic, the numbers go left to right

          but the letters right to left.  Don't know about Farsi though.  There is a good amount of English on public buildings and such in Iraq.  Our language is pretty well travelled.

          by slothlax on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:01:00 PM PDT

          •  Geez...

            I wouldn't want to try to buy .25 caliber ammunition! Or a 13 mm socket wrench, for that matter.

            by kmiddle on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:06:43 PM PDT

•  Again, all of you just don't understand:

  The munitions were stamped using western characters so that it would appear that they looked like they came from a source other than Iran. In other words, the Iranians forged the markings to look western.

  Sincerely

  Richard Pipes

  by Spud1 on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:15:49 PM PDT

•  My guess is the machines that make

  the munitions were originally made using english for the lot and date stamping.  I don't have a clue as to what company makes a machine to turn out the parts for a 81mm mortor.  Does anyone know if 81mm is some international standard for the size?  

  by coloradocomet on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:17:44 PM PDT

•  The fact that you had to ask

  is exactly the reason that numbering like the example is fairly standardized worldwide - a venezuelan, russian or american consumer of Iranian made weapons wants to understand what's been stamped on his bomb without learning Farsi.

  So, while this picture doesn't disprove Iranian origin, it does suggest tht if it is Iranian, the devices are intended to enter the worldwide marketplace. It isn't a stretch to assume that there's a healthy underground arms trade evnironment in Iraq these days.

  Iran has no need to directly supply anyone in Iraq - the free market is much more efficient.

  Did the U.S. carpet-bomb Lebanon last year? If you looked at the markings on the fragments collected in each crater scarring that country's landscape, using the rationale that Bush has adopted, then America did. But, we didn't. Israel did. They used OUR bombs, but we didn't drop them.

  by Kudos on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:20:09 PM PDT

•  Of course because they always leaving their

  calling cards so that you know where to go for refills!
  NOT!

  by LibertyGuard on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:32:14 PM PDT

  •  This entire website could be from Iran

    یک بوش درکمکتان اختیارفروشی شبیه است

    by Kudos on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:15:08 PM PDT

•  You're assuming...

  ...that Iranian weapons are Iranian-made.

  If this whole story has any truth to it, they were likely made in a western country and tracked to Iran by the microscopic chemical tags added. From that, you can figure out who they were initially sold to, then follow "intelligence" reports to see how they got it Iran.

  And Yes, I realize how many assumptions this story requires.

  by dennisl on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:37:58 PM PDT

  •  Again,

    without any proof, I assumed that Iran must have some weapons-making ability since the Iran-Iraq war.  There's nothing hi-tech or hard to manufacture about artillery shells and mortar rounds.  Iran wouldn't have wanted to be vulnerable to supply shortages from international isolation or pressure from the USA, which was active on the Iraq side.  

    Pure conjecture on my part, but it's the same reason I assumed Iranian mortars would be stamped in Farsi.  It would be a matter of national pride.

    by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 02:44:32 PM PDT

  •  Iran doesn't make under 110mm mortars

    but they did make the fuses.

    But how come no one is busting Austria's chops over the sniper rifles?

    by pinche tejano on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 03:13:44 PM PDT

    •  Cause that story is bogus

      It appears that the whole story about Austrian rifles is completely bogus:

      Franz Holzschuh, Steyr-Mannlicher's new owner, said he had no evidence that the rifles in question were produced by his company. So far, there had been none of the official inquiries common in such cases, he told the Austrian Press Agency.

      Apart from that, the patent for the rifle expired a few years ago, so it could just as well be a copy.

      by silence on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 10:31:10 AM PDT

    •  Iran does make small mortar rounds

      See the photo of an 81mm mortar round on page 57 (PDF numbering) of the document at https://naveodtechdiv.jeodnet.mil/...

      by silence on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 01:08:57 PM PDT

•  Even if these markings don't disprove

  Iranian origin, can anybody anywhere please explain to me how they prove Iranian origin?

  How would serial numbers trace to Iran?

  by elmo on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 04:10:18 PM PDT

•  As a matter of fact, they use English

  Here is a photo of some Iranian artillery shells, and here is a picture of an 81 mm mortar from the catalog of Iran's state-owned defense industry.

  Of course, there are still dozens of other reasons why the evidence is bullshit.

  by fujigmo on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 04:17:30 PM PDT

  •  How conveeeeeeeeenient!

    I looked up the website, I was fascinated that they would have a full English version of the (crappy) site, complete with pictures of the very weapons we're talking about, marked in English.

    Then I tried checking out the site in Arabic and Farsi, to see if they had weapons stencilled in those languages as well.

    Guess what?  "DOI's Arabic/Farsi Site is Under construction..." (message in English, of course)

    So the Iranian national defense manufacturer has a website in English only?  Which just happens to confirm the Pentagon's 'proof'?  And the registry for domain names is in Washington?  I smelled a rat when I wrote the diary, but I take this site as actual proof that there's something fishy going on.

    by Kingsmeg on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 07:49:30 PM PDT

    •  I wondered about that myself...

      But the DIO is a major entity in Iran, and you'd think somebody would have noticed if we shammed their website.

      My guess is that the people they hired to set up their crappy website aren't in Iran. Or else they set up the English site first, since they export about 60% of what they produce, and English (by virtue of our overwhelming dominance of the international arms trade) is the industry standard.

      If you're still feeling suspicious, the website did list contact info:

      • Address: Pasdaran Street, Enterance of Babaie Highway, Permanent Expo of Defence Industries Organization, Tehran, Iran
      • P.O. Box: 19585-777
      • Telephone: [phone])
      • Fax: [phone])
      • E-mail: [e-mail]
      • Web Site: www.diomil.ir

      Drop them an e-mail, maybe, and inquire about the conspicuous lack of Farsi.

      by fujigmo on Tue Feb 13, 2007 at 09:34:12 PM PDT

      •  Bullshit.

        I've seen many Iranian webpages, they're a country of many millions with a strong University tradition, and strong nationalist feelings.  You're telling me they outsourced the main website for their military sales to someone with an .org email?

        Bullshit.

        by Kingsmeg on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 06:31:25 AM PDT

        •  I called them

          And it turns out that they're in the process of moving their website from the (now defunct) "www.sasad.ir". You're right, they didn't outsource it, but they did set up the English page first since the website exists primarily for international sales.

          If this website is a hoax, somebody went to an unbelievable amount of trouble just to dupe the tiny handful of people that are referencing that information in this debate. First, that presupposes far more competence than the Bush administration has ever demonstrated. Second, it would have been much easier to just buy Iranian mortars. For fuck's sake, www.diomil.ir takes credit cards.

          And there's still the matter of the other photo.

          There are a lot of problems with the evidence against Iran, but this isn't one of them.

          by fujigmo on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 02:48:16 PM PDT

          •  Yes,

            For fuck's sake, www.diomil.ir takes credit cards.

            I thought that was a nice touch.  I'm tempted to order my very own anti-personnel mine, paid for with my Mastercard.  Which do you think would show up at my door, the weapon or some law enforcement agency?

            As I mentioned, you would have to have an IQ in the range of a turnip to fall for that one.

            by Kingsmeg on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 03:18:51 PM PDT

            •  Just playing turnip's advocate

              Which do you think would show up at my door, the weapon or some law enforcement agency?

              Most likely the latter, even if the website is legit. We've got pretty strict regulations on importing arms.

              Look, maybe you're right, and the Pentagon usurped the website of the Iranian defense industry in an attempt to counter an already dubious criticism of the evidence against Iran.

              I'm just saying we ought to apply Occam's Razor a bit.

              by fujigmo on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 04:13:54 PM PDT

              •  Dude,

                do you know if a person can die from laughing too hard?

                You called them and asked?  You, presumably a US citizen or soldier (from your ref. to Article 88 of the UCMJ), called the Iranian defense ministry and asked them about their web hosting, and they told you that they're switching over their servers which just happen to be in the US, and several parts of that site point to the US.

                Never mind that any US citizen or company stupid enough to host an actual website of the Iranian defense ministry would be in serious legal trouble.  Assuming Iranians are too clueless to host or design their own website.

                So who signs your paychecks?

                And btw, yes Occam's razor is useful, but by default now I assume that everything Bushco says is a lie until it's proven true.  Sort of a 'null hypothesis'.  Seems a safe enough assumption, at this point, and useful for finding stuff like the empty Farsi and Arabic pages on that site.

                

                by Kingsmeg on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 05:09:18 PM PDT

                •  I'll admit, I felt pretty stupid

                  But what the hell, I had a calling card left over from the last time I was overseas, and thought it might be interesting to check these guys out. I just asked them when they expected the Farsi site to be up, and that's what they told me.

                  If it's a hoax, at least it's a consistent hoax, with operational call centers and everything.

                  Yes, my paychecks do come from the DoD, though lately I've been regretting that fact. I'd certainly regret it more if we went to war with Iran over this load of codswallop.

                  Hence, I'm not likely to argue for the factual accuracy of any part of this evidence, unless I'm fairly certain it's... well, a fact.

                  In this case, it appears that we have every reason to believe that (at least some) Iranian munitions bear English markings, and not much of a reason to believe that the DIO website is a fraud. Come on, do you really think we can get away with putting up a fake DIO website, without anybody saying a damned thing about it? Something tells me IRAN might take issue...

                  But yeah, I still can't believe I called them.

                  by fujigmo on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 05:49:09 PM PDT

                  •  I admire your tenacity.

                    But we have no reason at all to believe that Iranian munitions are marked in English (I've just searched a 212-page DoD pdf for Iranian munitions, and they're clearly marked in Farsi), and since the US gov't controls domain names I have no doubt at all that someone in the US has the ability to make that fake site visible to select countries but not to Iran.

                    Which is another reason Iran wouldn't be hosting their Defense ministry's website in the US, or using US developers to construct it (and manage their credit card orders, no less - rofl).

                    Come on, do you really think we can get away with putting up a fake DIO website, without anybody saying a damned thing about it?

                    Actually no, I'm saying something about it, and I'm going to keep on making a fuss over this obvious propaganda.

                    As far as the whole sales pitch, it doesn't look like anyone is buying it, except for the 28% of Americans who would believe Bush was the 43rd incarnation of the Dalai Lama or the remnant of the Lost Tribes of Israel, if he went on the TeeVee and said so.

                    by Kingsmeg on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 06:14:19 PM PDT

        •  One more thing

          The website works properly in IE, but not Firefox for some reason.

          by fujigmo on Wed Feb 14, 2007 at 02:51:48 PM PDT