{"article":{"id":218704,"heading":"Bush\/PNAC Escalates 'Covert Operations' in Iran","author":"Terrorism by Any Other Name","created":"2008-07-03 23:23:39","modified":"2013-11-11 00:53:49","last_modified":"Mon, 11 Nov 2013 07:53:49","article":"

U.S. escalating covert operations against Iran: report

Sun Jun 29, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. congressional leaders agreed late last year to President George W. Bush's funding request for a major escalation of covert operations against Iran aimed at destabilizing its leadership, according to a report in The New Yorker magazine published online on Sunday.

(In other words, they're funding Terrorism inside the country ...)

The article by reporter Seymour Hersh, from the magazine's July 7 and 14 issue, centers on a highly classified Presidential Finding signed by Bush which by U.S. law must be made known to Democratic and Republican House and Senate leaders and ranking members of the intelligence committees.

\"The Finding was focused on undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change,\" the article cited a person familiar with its contents as saying, and involved \"working with opposition groups and passing money.\"

(But since Iran has no such \"nuclear ambitions\", this is solely about Regime Change. Is The Shah, Chapter II, just around the corner? These people must not study their own histories ...)

Hersh has written previously about possible administration plans to go to war to stop Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons, including an April 2006 article in the New Yorker that suggested regime change in Iran, whether by diplomatic or military means, was Bush's ultimate goal.

(Yes, since Iran is not trying to obtain nuclear weapons, and this unfounded allegation - LIE - is simply the same BS these Extremists pulled on their own citizens before starting the disastrous war in Iraq.)

Funding for the covert escalation, for which Bush requested up to $400 million, was approved by congressional leaders, according to the article, citing current and former military, intelligence and congressional sources.

Clandestine operations against Iran are not new. U.S. Special Operations Forces have been conducting crossborder operations from southern Iraq since last year, the article said.

(They've actually been conducting these for several years.)

These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of \"high-value targets\" in Bush's war on terrorism, who may be captured or killed, according to the article.

(As well as the targeting of Government personnel, and the funding of terrorist groups within the country.)

The U.S. ambassador in Iraq, Ryan Crocker, told CNN's \"Late Edition\" he had not read the article, but denied the allegations of cross-border operations.

(They are not \"allegations\" ...)

\"I'll tell you flatly that U.S. forces are not operating across the Iraqi border into Iran, in the south or anywhere else,\" he said in an interview from Baghdad on Sunday.

The scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which include the Central Intelligence Agency, have now been significantly expanded, the New Yorker article said, citing current and former officials.

Many of these activities are not specified in the new finding, and some congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature, it said.

Among groups inside Iran benefiting from U.S. support is the Jundallah, also known as the Iranian People's Resistance Movement, according to former CIA officer Robert Baer. Council on Foreign Relations analyst Vali Nasr described it to Hersh as a vicious organization suspected of links to al Qaeda.

('Al Qaeda', of course, being nothing more than a Front for the nastier parts of the American and Israeli intelligence services.)

The article said U.S. support for the dissident groups could prompt a violent crackdown by Iran, which could give the Bush administration a reason to intervene.

None of the Democratic leaders in Congress would comment on the finding, the article said. The White House, which has repeatedly denied preparing for military action against Iran, and the CIA also declined comment.

(But everyone knows better than that ...)

The United States is leading international efforts to rein in Iran's suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, although Washington concedes Iran has the right to develop nuclear power for civilian uses.

(No, they are attempting to again feign a justification for an illegal war they see as an inevitability. The weak-kneed press has completely discredited itself by incessantly repeating this LIE.)

(Additional reporting by Paul Eckert in Washington; writing by Chris Michaud; editing by Eric Beech and David Wiessler)

Iran Will Cooperate with UN Probe into US\/Israeli Allegations

http:\/\/www.winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?13896S<\/a>

Israel's Syrian Air Strike Was Aimed at Iran

http:\/\/www.winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8196S<\/a>

The ME has had a Secretive Nuclear Power in its Midst for Years

http:\/\/www.winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8195S<\/a>

Spooks Refuse to Toe Cheney's Line on Iran

http:\/\/www.winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8173S<\/a>

IAEA Again Verifies Iranian Compliance

http:\/\/www.winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?8130S<\/a>

Israel Considering Strike on Iran Despite US Intelligence Report

http:\/\/www.guardian.co.uk\/iran\/story\/0<\/a>,,2224052,00.html

US intelligence report heightens danger of Israeli strike on Iran

http:\/\/www.wsws.org\/articles\/2007\/dec2007\/isra-d06.shtml<\/a>

'Laptop of Death': Revising the NIE on Iran

The entire claim that Iran was building nuclear weapons rests on a laptop provided by a single, dubious source.

http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/ips\/akhavi.php?articleid=12028<\/a> www.antiwar.com\/prather\/?articleid=12025

Israeli Extremists Prep for Nuclear Strike on Iran http:\/\/www.israel.indymedia.org\/newswire\/display\/7903\/index.php<\/a>

Hersh: Israel Pressed me to Write Syrian Site was Nuclear http:\/\/www.rawstory.com\/news\/2008\/Sy_Hersh_Israeli_raid_on_Syria_0208.html<\/a>

Sy Hersh confirms: Syrian Facility Bombed by Israel Not Nuclear

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?10935S<\/a>

A Strike in the Dark - What did Israel bomb in Syria?

by Seymour M. Hersh http:\/\/www.newyorker.com\/reporting\/2008\/02\/11\/080211fa_fact_hersh\/?printable=tr<\/a>

War Clouds Over Mideast

http:\/\/www.arabnews.com\/?page=7<\/a>§ion=0&article=108719&d=8&m=4&y=2008

Israel & The 'Clash of Civilizations'

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?11022S<\/a>

The largest threat to the region doesn't come from Iran: it comes from Israel's success in having had the US \"neutralize\" countries which it believes to be an existential threat to it's existence. However, there's just one little problem with this approach concerning Iran. Russia's diplomats have stated unequivocally that any attack against Iran will be perceived as an attack on Russia.

UN Nuclear Watchdog in Milestone Iran Deal

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14262S<\/a>

Iran Dumps US Dollar in Oil Trading, US Preps War

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14276S<\/a>

Israel's Extremists STILL Beating Iran War Drums

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14360S<\/a>

Iran Mosque Blast Plotters Admit Israeli, US Links

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?14997S<\/a>

Israel, US Joint Plotting Against Iran, Attack ElBaredei http:\/\/www.israel.indymedia.org\/newswire\/display\/7888\/index.php<\/a> llll

ElBaradei: Iran Not After Bomb

www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399278.html

Israel Calls for US Blockade of Iran

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399342.html<\/a>

US Report on 'Iranian Weapons' Postponed Due to Lack of Evidence

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?17560C<\/a>

Pakistan May Turn Over U.S. Terrorists To Iran

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399471.html<\/a>

Iranian Mosque Blast Plotters Admit Israeli, US Links

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399467.html<\/a>

Bombing Iran: Extremists' Mad Clamor Persists

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399468.html<\/a>

Carter: Israel Has At Least 150 Nukes

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399591.html<\/a>

IAEA Again Confirms: No Weaponization in Iran

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/05\/399625.html<\/a>

McLellan's Warning on Iran

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?15853S<\/a>

'Hate Iran Week' at AIPAC

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?15852S<\/a>

Israel Launches 'Iran Command' for War

http:\/\/winnipeg.indymedia.org\/item.php?16362S<\/a>

Bush Resurrects a Whopper

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/06\/400896.html<\/a>

Israeli Extremists STILL Pushing for War With Iran

http:\/\/www.indymedia.org.uk\/en\/2008\/06\/401063.html<\/a>

http:\/\/www.reuters.com\/article\/topNews\/idUSB65580520080629<\/a> <\/p>\n","contact":"","link":"","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/plain","summary":"So much for opposing 'any state supporting terrorists' ... \r\n\r\nOf course, immorality breeds contradiction. ","numcomment":1,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2008\/07\/218704.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":218706,"heading":"NY'er Report in Full","article":"Preparing the Battlefield \r\nThe Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran. \r\nby Seymour M. Hersh \r\nJuly 7, 2008 \r\n\r\nOperations outside the knowledge and control of commanders have eroded \u201cthe coherence of military strategy,\u201d one general says. \r\n\r\nLate last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country\u2019s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They also include gathering intelligence about Iran\u2019s suspected nuclear-weapons program. \r\n\r\nClandestine operations against Iran are not new. United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since last year. These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of \u201chigh-value targets\u201d in the President\u2019s war on terror, who may be captured or killed. But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have now been significantly expanded, according to the current and former officials. Many of these activities are not specified in the new Finding, and some congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature. \r\n\r\nUnder federal law, a Presidential Finding, which is highly classified, must be issued when a covert intelligence operation gets under way and, at a minimum, must be made known to Democratic and Republican leaders in the House and the Senate and to the ranking members of their respective intelligence committees\u2014the so-called Gang of Eight. Money for the operation can then be reprogrammed from previous appropriations, as needed, by the relevant congressional committees, which also can be briefed. \r\n\r\n\u201cThe Finding was focussed on undermining Iran\u2019s nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change,\u201d a person familiar with its contents said, and involved \u201cworking with opposition groups and passing money.\u201d The Finding provided for a whole new range of activities in southern Iran and in the areas, in the east, where Baluchi political opposition is strong, he said. \r\n\r\nAlthough some legislators were troubled by aspects of the Finding, and \u201cthere was a significant amount of high-level discussion\u201d about it, according to the source familiar with it, the funding for the escalation was approved. In other words, some members of the Democratic leadership\u2014Congress has been under Democratic control since the 2006 elections\u2014were willing, in secret, to go along with the Administration in expanding covert activities directed at Iran, while the Party\u2019s presumptive candidate for President, Barack Obama, has said that he favors direct talks and diplomacy. \r\n\r\nThe request for funding came in the same period in which the Administration was coming to terms with a National Intelligence Estimate, released in December, that concluded that Iran had halted its work on nuclear weapons in 2003. The Administration downplayed the significance of the N.I.E., and, while saying that it was committed to diplomacy, continued to emphasize that urgent action was essential to counter the Iranian nuclear threat. President Bush questioned the N.I.E.\u2019s conclusions, and senior national-security officials, including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, made similar statements. (So did Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee.) Meanwhile, the Administration also revived charges that the Iranian leadership has been involved in the killing of American soldiers in Iraq: both directly, by dispatching commando units into Iraq, and indirectly, by supplying materials used for roadside bombs and other lethal goods. (There have been questions about the accuracy of the claims; the Times, among others, has reported that \u201csignificant uncertainties remain about the extent of that involvement.\u201d) \r\n\r\n\r\nfrom the issuecartoon banke-mail thisMilitary and civilian leaders in the Pentagon share the White House\u2019s concern about Iran\u2019s nuclear ambitions, but there is disagreement about whether a military strike is the right solution. Some Pentagon officials believe, as they have let Congress and the media know, that bombing Iran is not a viable response to the nuclear-proliferation issue, and that more diplomacy is necessary. \r\n\r\nA Democratic senator told me that, late last year, in an off-the-record lunch meeting, Secretary of Defense Gates met with the Democratic caucus in the Senate. (Such meetings are held regularly.) Gates warned of the consequences if the Bush Administration staged a pre\u00ebmptive strike on Iran, saying, as the senator recalled, \u201cWe\u2019ll create generations of jihadists, and our grandchildren will be battling our enemies here in America.\u201d Gates\u2019s comments stunned the Democrats at the lunch, and another senator asked whether Gates was speaking for Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney. Gates\u2019s answer, the senator told me, was \u201cLet\u2019s just say that I\u2019m here speaking for myself.\u201d (A spokesman for Gates confirmed that he discussed the consequences of a strike at the meeting, but would not address what he said, other than to dispute the senator\u2019s characterization.) \r\n\r\nThe Joint Chiefs of Staff, whose chairman is Admiral Mike Mullen, were \u201cpushing back very hard\u201d against White House pressure to undertake a military strike against Iran, the person familiar with the Finding told me. Similarly, a Pentagon consultant who is involved in the war on terror said that \u201cat least ten senior flag and general officers, including combatant commanders\u201d\u2014the four-star officers who direct military operations around the world\u2014\u201chave weighed in on that issue.\u201d \r\n\r\nThe most outspoken of those officers is Admiral William Fallon, who until recently was the head of U.S. Central Command, and thus in charge of American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. In March, Fallon resigned under pressure, after giving a series of interviews stating his reservations about an armed attack on Iran. For example, late last year he told the Financial Times that the \u201creal objective\u201d of U.S. policy was to change the Iranians\u2019 behavior, and that \u201cattacking them as a means to get to that spot strikes me as being not the first choice.\u201d \r\n\r\nhttp:\/\/www.newyorker.com\/reporting\/2008\/07\/07\/080707fa_fact_hersh\r\n\r\n","author":"Seymour Hersh","parent_id":218704,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2008-07-03 23:32:28","modified":"2013-11-11 00:53:49","fileurl":""}]}