Seymour Hersh Exposes New US Covert Operations In Iran (VIDEO)

The New Yorker's Seymour Hersh reports on how the Bush Administration has stepped up covert operations against Iran:

Late 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's 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's suspected nuclear-weapons program.

Clandestine 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 "high-value targets" in the President's 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.

Under 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--the 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.

Read Hersh's full report here.

Watch Hersh discuss his article on CNN below:

Comments

[HotATL]

Thanks everybody. I think that I got it now. The system is set up to give the President more power than the congress. So the congress needs a bigger majority than they have now to stop the president. The Republicans had a bigger majority in the house when Clinton was the president. They also may not want to take away some authority from the president because they may want to use it later when a Democrat becomes president. Also, some may have some skeletons in their closet. They may also be afraid to vote against funding the war because of the backlash.

Don’t laugh, I know it’s Politics 101, but if you didn’t get it in school it’s better to get it somewhere than not at all!

Thanks again. Good night everyone.

[darthmaul]

Listen to Seymour Hersh interviewed on Fresh Air and you will be even more frightened and disgusted. Essentially this is a scheme by Cheney to goad Iran into an overt response. By the way the funding for this is only $400 Million. And despite all that's happened with this administration Pelosi and Reed sign off on this potential debacle. I can't tell you how many times I've heard both of them complain and deride the administration. When they actually have the chance to check the administration, they do nothing. It's really pathetic and disappointing.

[PigLipstick]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-ducat/understanding-obamas-rece_b_109796.html

See Ducat's story on this website. The Democrats are doing nothing so they can't be accused by the Republicans of being soft on Terrorism. Pelosi and Reid make a Jelly Fish look like a bullet proof vest, they make it so easy for the Republicans !

[Pleidian]

Which is so lame considering how many people realize that the 'war on terror' (not terrorism, but terror itself by some magic), as presented by the White House, is vastly exaggerated and misleading. But apparently a good way to loot the US of wealth and freedom.

[waynesmyer]

OK, fellow GOPers! Heres the plan! See! I starts another great and wonderful war with Iran, See! Me and my best buds "Dickie FY Cheney still got's 6 months left, See! and then we do the next four years blaming The Demorats for starting 3, tolally useless wars! Right!
Damn, I yam so smart! Your beloved and really smart Great War Presinator, GW "Baby" Bush
IT WILL BE A SLAM DUNK! GOPERS FOREVER!

[BlueStateMan]

It makes one wonder just what kind of dirt the Administration might have on the Dem leadership having used the "Patriot Act" to spy on them.

[Vinca]

To Blue StateMan: We will never know what they have heard from their phone converasations, Who let out Alex Baldwin,s private conversation with his daughter?E


v

[cam]

The amount is likely much larger then $400 M. Much of it might be hidden in other unit's logistic and transport allocations. Also, special forces have historically financed thier black operations with drugs, diamonds, etc. The temptation to trade Iraqi oil outside the audit is so overwhelmingly seductive that it is almost a given.

[PigLipstick]

Hersh gave Amy Goodman www.DemocracyNow.orgg) an extended interview this morning that contains some additional info. We've had military forces in the gulf with weapons already aimed at key targets for quite a while and Hersh said that the hammers are already cocked. He also went into the Israel connection and the fact that Chaney said that it didn't matter whether we, Iran, or Israel made the first move because we would ultimately be blamed for it. The Bush people are just waiting to see who wins the election; electing McCain could delay World War III for a couple of months into 09 but electing Obama could bring us a Thanksgiving surprise !

[Princeton]

I see something similar to the boxers' rebellion in our future. And this one would target the politician and the oil tycoons. So, for now, let them make a mess of this world.

The Iraq debacle was the last gasp of a dying empire whose dollar nobody wants. The only contacts the U.S. oil companies can get are the no bid ones since they can't compete on their business or technological merits. It's a sort of socialist capitalism that needs to be backed up with guns and threats. The Chinese and the Iranians are bypassing these predators and deal fairly and squarely without one taking advantage of the other. That's the future.

[Pyrrhus]

Okay I'll take a stab at this one. Don't know much about the Boxer rebellion, but I do remember the basics. Something about a grassroots uprising, anti-foreigner, that was bloodily put down by Europe, Japan, and the US to keep the open door policy for China, so that we coulld sell them their crap free of monopolies, trade restrictions, etc.

So the premise is that the people of the US would be to rise up? Maybe, but I doubt it. Remember Rousseau, who said [paraphrase] that when a man perceives another with more freedom, he will necessarily pull that person down with the rest rather than lift his own self up. It might have happened in 1933 had FDR not been elected, but after the fall of communism I doubt there's an economic or political system that we could use to replace what we have now.

Will we become merely a market for other peoples' stuff? Maybe, but not if we don't have any more money.

[Princeton]

My reference to the boxers wasn't about the government systems as it was about there so much bad government and corruption people would tolerate before eventually losing their cool and civility.

Bush is a born again who believes in Armageddon. He may be thinking that after his failed presidency he's got nothing to look forward to so why not bring about the end of the world by collapsing its economic system by making the price of gas around $20/gallon by attacking Iran for no good reason -- short or long term. If attacked, the Iranians will get on a "crash course" of building nuclear weapons and produce them in 6 months according to Dr. EL Baradei of the International Atomic Energy.

[SharonB]

God help us all. When is this nightmare going to end.

Tell me something, are people still enlisting in the military? I know we are supposed to repsect our troops, but there would have to be something seriously wrong with someone who would sign on for this kind of hot mess.

[FirstShirt]

"God help us all. When is this nightmare going to end."

When the war on terror ends, Sharon. We didn't start it. Don't shoot the messenger.

[NoMercy]

It won't end until Islam reforms itself - until the balance goes to separation of mosque and state. Turkey is a model, but it is still very shaky.

[spriggig]

What? Really? "We didn't start it."? You're saying we didn't start it?

So, perhaps you believe "the start" of all this was 9/11?

When does a "war on terror" end, when all people bow to the christian god, perhaps? Who are the terrorists? What activity defines a terrorist. Can you even open your mind far enough to imagine that perhaps Americans have engaged covertly in terrorist activities?

If you're not outraged you're not paying attention.

[mccabe49]

we didn't start it? Well we went to the wrong country attacked a country that did nothing to us, destroyed it killed it's citizens, gave no bid contracts to American oil companies and now we are occupying it. Yes right we are just innocent in this whole mess. You love fairy tales don't you?

[EndAllWars]

How to bring down empires:

1- Hand an election to a bombastic inexperienced leader

2- Support him with fanatical followers driven by endofworld fantasies to bring about a mythical religious figure

3- Start wars of aggression against defenseless countries who would be easy sells to the population. Manufacture false reasons for the attack. Call them the aggressors.

4- Bleed the country of its wealth and future, getting bogged down in hopeless quagmires

5- Continue to scare the population with warnings of doom and gloom in order to finance the continuation of the war. Call anyone who disagrees names such as traitors, defeatists, appeasers, unpatriotic.

You'll see scary parallels to the rise of Hitler, a bombastic inexperienced nobody driven by hate and hopes of the revival of the holy Roman Empire (Reich). His attack of Poland which launched WWII was justified by how the Polish were the aggressors, the same Polish whose soldiers had horses instead of vehicles. He ended up completely destroying Germany. Before he committed suicide he blamed the Germans for having failed him.

Sometimes, the worst thing that happens to you is what you wished. If someone had talked sense into a naive Bush before his invasion of Iraq, that might have helped prevent the Iraq disaster and the disgrace to accompany GW's name for all history because of the damage that he has done to this country and the world.

[earthwealth]

How to execute a successful robbery? Create effective smoke screens!
GWB is the smartest and most informed American. For the same reason he was chosen to lead the country.

[FirstShirt]

History is the better judge. Churchill was unceremoniously voted out of office after WWII.

Roosevelt incarcerated thousands of innocent japanese americans without due process of law and is considered one of your liberal icons. I think he also tried to pack the Supreme Court and is the main reason we limit the terms of a President. Yet I am sure you liberals would consider him one of your best. go figure.

[researcher]

tis apporach worked very well in vietnam

when iran kills one or more of our soldiers then americans will be outraged and give our wars for profits folks the excuse to wage war.

americans fell for it during the vietnam war will fall for it again.

capitalism has led to imperialism and imperialism is leading to the self destruction of our economic system

oh the price of imperialism

universal law demands that we self destruct

universal law one imperialism zero.

[FirstShirt]

"when iran kills one or more of our soldiers then americans will be outraged and give our wars for profits folks the excuse to wage war."

Like the Gulf of Tonkin resolution demanded by Lyndon Johnson [a democrat]. And the military industrial complex that we were warned about by Eisenhower, a republican president.

[Redrover666]

The collapse of our economic system has nothing to do with the war. This is an industrial powerhouse. However, it runs on fuel and a hell of a lot of it.
Democrats have decided we ought to run the industrial empire on something other than coal, oil or nuclear energy.
So.... the price of food, fuel and every other commodity is skyrocketing. While our competitors, like China and India excel.
When diesel is at $5 a gallon, what do you suppose that does to a worker making $8/hr. Has a liberal ever wondered about that? I mean other than to say that he ought to sell his SUV.

[stevensosebee2]

It seems W does not only want to be our worst president, but our last president! No more wars!

[Postroad]

I like Hersh. I like The New Yorker. But the Right raises an interesting question. Since Hersh never gives any evidence but simply says "inside sources," who fact checks the article to make sure he is accurate?
Why should we believe what he says qwhen he does not tell us how , where, when, etc he got hold of the ideas he is expressing?

[RickyJ]

I think the answer is Hersh's track record, stretching back to the Pentagon Papers. History has shown him to be correct on just about everything. Anybody here have counter examples?

[ClevelandTom]

Woodward and Bernstein never had any tangible evidence of Nixon's involvement in Watergate, etc. either. But they mostly got it right. What they did almost always have was two sources for their stories.

I think Hersch takes the same approach. He has a pretty good track record too.

[mikegoodyearaz85338]

"Mostly got it right" is a great journalistic standard.

[FirstShirt]

Hypothetical here: What if the information was planted and he is being used? Everyone knows there are black ops. it isn't created by Disney. What if he is part of a plan to provide disinformation or better yet to put pressure on Iran through legitimate news sources?

[midnoon]

I think you miss the point. HUFFPO is telling us about yet another traitor amongst us. If he's correct, he has just endangered American lives by telling Iran we have people over there undermining their government. If it's true, the congress knows about it and approves.

Seymore Hussein Hersh, I've never heard of you, but, Close your mouth!!

[BWonka]

Pssst...wa­nna bet they already knew we were there?

[earthwealth]

The fact that you never heard of him, it shows how much you know! For your infomation Iran knew about from long time ago. Apparently you were one of few who just found out about this!

[Economike]

You've never heard of Seymour Hersh? That speaks volumes.

[GeorgeKaplan]

You would a have better argument if you were not talking about a corrupt war mongering administration that lied to us with every breath it has taken in the last 7 and 1/2 years. Bush would like the lunch menu at the White House kept secret.

If it were not for brave patriots like Hersh to give us information on all the CRIMES our government has committed in OUR name we would be just as forsaken as the residents of Cuba or China. The reason Hersh has the story is because someone in government no doubt leaked the information to him. It happens every day and in every branch of government. The worst branch would be the executive branch headed up by a man by the name of George W. Bush.

This administration pardons leakers. So, when that hearing starts for people who are "undermining their government" i would call GWB as the first defendant.

Another Thing:
"If it's true, the congress knows about it and approves."

I don't see much oversight from congress..­. it sickens me to say it, but I do wonder if the congress is in the loop. At this point, how could anybody be shocked by anything?

[PepperzMom]

The reality is, Hersh may have just stopped WW3 in Iran. With these "covert teams" in Iran, who do you think was going to light the proverbial match that would give Shrub-a-dub-dub-u the "a-ok, let's go into Iran" reason? That there was something done in Iran to "prove" that Iran was a great source of all that is wrong in Iraq and open that door to h-e-double hockey sticks?

Frankly, Hersh deserves a heck of a lot of kudos...fo­r a dose of much needed preventive medicine.

Too bad the Congressional "leaders" who bought into this didn't have so much as the brain the scarecrow had at the beginning of the tale...bef­ore he was rewarded by that Wonderful Wizard of Oz.

[peacekitten]

he's not the only one who's been trying to bring attention to this issue.

scott ritter has been saying almost the same thing for almost as long.

[Tomlastliberalleft]

Please help me out here; just exactly when did the right ever bother to place any value on facts? Much less on verified factual information. We have had almost eight years of Bush on "Fantasy Island" with Cheney acting as a larger version of Tatoo. What is clear from the article is many "insiders" are commenting off the record such that the insanity of this administrations policy on Iran may be brought to light. This is what happens when a administration acts like a fascist state with the only thing missing are the jackboots and the playing of the Horst Wessel song. Any adult who has been awake the last 30 years understands both the motives and the methods the CIA/DOD have used to further so called "national goals." If we were dealing with any other administration in it's last months of power I'd say Hersh is simply rehashing ugly stories from Iraq.Howev­er, this administration has a proven track record of lies, falsehoods, illegal activities and a massive ability to screw things up. So the story "has legs."

[Quotidien]

I sure hope the Iranians can't read this. Oh I forgot, they don't speak English.

We have nothing to worry about.

[Dezionmeister]

It's a red jersey-blue jersey charade. As Eric Alterman has said, if you're a politician with national aspirations, you had better kiss AIPAC's ring. Though I thought Obama did a pretty fair job of assuming the position at the last confab. Indeed his life may well be on the line. What, he's a minority and an ambivalent Zionist?? Where the hell does he think he is?

Despite 70% public disapproval of the war and no publicly valid reason for even being there, we're skipping like a domino right into Iran. Think about that: the sanitized reasons have all been thoroughly discredited, WMD's, Hussein's ouster.

The only causi belli are surreptitious ones: Joe Klein's 'benign domino theory' and oil. Amazing! But you won't read about these in the WaPo and NYT (certainly not the former) because they're covert reasons, not to be shared with the American public. No wonder reportage on the war has fallen off. There is nothing to report but dishonesty.

[LWkcma]

bush's aversion to reading and to paying attention to what has gone before has manifested itself with his intrigue in Iran. Our meddeling in Iran gave us Kohmeni and set us down the path to our current situation in Iran. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

[EndAllWars]

I agree with all your points. This has been a self-destructive pattern of psychopathic foreign policy decisions which all end up in blow-back, such as the 1953 toppling of Iran's government, our duping USSR into Afghanistan and then supporting the Mujahedins and the Talibans, our blind support of the Arab dictators, our taking sides in the Arab/Israeli issues instead of remaining impartial, and our invasions of Iraq.

[HotATL]

I came here to learn so please I am not just trying to make a point. I have an honest question. Maybe someone here can answer it for me. How can a lame duck president keep doing anything that he wants when we have the opposite party in control of both houses on congress?

[ProudNeoCon]

If you read article if says that Congress had approved the budget. So clearly democrats who are in the control of Congress had agreed with Bush's logic behind those operations­...

[tommybones]

I find those still bogged down in this type of partisan rhetoric amusing. This farce is clearly seen in the "Democrat" vs. "Republican" debates, which implies that the two are not in fact the same business party, with common goals (imperialist power and corporate control for profit for the wealthy elite) and only slightly varying strategies and tactics for achieving those goals. The Democrats believe it's a smarter move to let some crumbs fall to the masses to keep them complacent, while the GOP believes you don't have to give any crumbs away when a truly strong propaganda campaign can fool the "bewildered herd" easily enough.

Political Scientist Chalmers Johnson wrote of the "sorrow of empire," arguing that, "militarism, the arrogance of power and the euphemisms required to justify imperialism inevitably conflict with America's democratic structure of government and distort it's basic culture and values." Secrecy surrounding covert actions undermines democratic control. If present trends continue, Johnson said, "we will face a state of perpetual war," and the loss of democracy and constitutional rights; "propaganda, disinformation, and the glorification of war" will replace truthfulness; and economic "bankruptcy" will undermine the education, health, and safety of our fellow citizens."

Tell me, "ProudNeoCon," what makes your political philosophy any different than that of the German Brown Shirts in the early 1930's?

[Pyrrhus]

HotATL-

I'm pretty sure you want the non-cynical version of my opinion on this, so I'll try not to criticise too much.

The US Pres can send troops wherever he wants w/o congressional approval for up to 60 days if the US is already under attack or threat of attack. All he has to do is let Congress know 48 hours in advance. If he wants to keep them there after 60 days, he needs congressional approval for that.

The War Powers act was meant to stop actions like Vietnam where US troops are abroad for years w/o a declaration of war. However, thanks to the loophole, the Pres can send troops somewhere.

I'm not sure what it says about air power (any attack on Iran would be from the air- we simply cannot hold enough of Iran or the important parts with our current ground forces), but assuming the same thing he can bomb for about 60 days without approval.

Doubtful Congress would do anything about it- it's an election year ya know.

Unfortunately, the more I see the more I think any real change will come from the people. O Bama acts a lot like FDR in the sense of a "Great Man", but if he's not then who knows when we'll get real change.

Maybe we don't deserve change anyway.

Ah, cynicism came in anway, sorry. But my name is Pyrrhus.

[HotATL]

Thank you Pyrrhus, and I really mean that. But I already knew about the War Power Act. I was talking about everything.

1) Getting the funding for the wars without time lines.
2) Getting the FISER bill passed with the provision to keep phone companies from being suited.
3) Having impeachment taken off of the table.

Those kinds of things.

Thanks again.

[strangelet]

Because the executive is granted great power by the Constitution with respect to the conduct of foreign affairs and war, and the "control" of the opposite party is less than one vote in the Senate, and about 4% in the House. As it has been sinceJan 2007.

[FirstShirt]

Because they don't have the votes to override a veto by the lame duck.

[nukemind]

I've had the pleasure of seeing Mr. Hersh do some talks in real life here in NYC and he's always very methodical and evidence-driven. He's a skeptic who looks for evidence to convince himself it seems and after Iraq he's been very incisive (with Abu Ghraib for example) and was one of the few investigative journalists (a dying breed) to really look into the recent Israeli bombing in Syria. I heard him on Democracy Now and his evidence on the matter is scary. Imagine, while our leaders tell us how Iranians are hurting our troops, we're staging sorties into Iran itself! This administration claims, without evidence and even counter-evidence, that Iran's building nukes AND yet refuses to talk to them directly and wants us to buy it after the WMD crap they pulled with Iraq? And that Iran will use those nukes on Israel even though Iran hasn't attacked any of its neighbors in centuries (while Israel has, including the recent Lebanon fiasco, and, of course, we have in Iraq). While I appreciate the need to prevent further nuclear proliferation, anyone else get the irony of 2 nuclear armed states (the US and Israel) demanding that Iran not get nukes? Hersh, as always, one of the good guys giving us real news as opposed to the mass media talking heads.

[tommybones]

Hersch is a national treasure and one of the few remaining mainstream journalists in the country who takes his role seriously.

[earthwealth]

One of the main reasons for Al Capon success in his time was that he was one of few guys who were in possession of a machine gun. If you were Al Capon, wouldn’t you prefer the guys on the street NOT having a machine gun as well?

[Redrover666]

No. I don't see the irony at all. Iran has promised to exterminate their Jewish neighbors and have for quite some time provided money, munitions and training to surrogates to do it in their stead. They are currently activly assisting in the killing of our boys and young women in Iraq and have told the world they have developed and are testing an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the US.
So you on the left, keep taking the side of our enemies. I'm retired, live in a small, inland town in the Smokey Mountains. You live in large urban, mostly democratic enclaves. Good luck with that.

Best wishes.

[BlueStateMan]

Israel is MORE than capable of dealing with Iran if the need actually ever arises.

How does Iran's (supposed) incursion into Iraq differ from our OWN?

When the French joined in our struggle for Independence, were they akin to OUR invasion of Iraq.... or more like Iran's (supposed) incursion?

Serious question.

[SonnyBono]

The new policy for the 21st Century - the United States will spread peace, love and democracy throughout the Middle East if we have to kill every last Arab - (Yes, I know Iranians are not Arabs but Bush and McCain don't know the difference and it would spoil their talking points if we injected some facts.)

We, by god, are going to keep making war until we get it right. And if Iran turns out to be another disaster like Iraq - well, there's always Syria.

[ADR]

"...Congre­ss agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran..."

How much does Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton know about this? Will anyone ask them that question???

[syllepsis]

we get the point.
I posit that if impeachment hearings were held today, Republicans would join Democrats in convicting Bush- because their bluff had been called , and they have a desire to save their own necks come election time.
But inexplicably, failure has been built into everything the Democrats have done.
I don't understand it.

[biglover]

You must be dreaming. There are dyed in the wool puglies in the house that would never vote for impeachment - never never never. You are living in a dream world.

[Ramirez]

True dat. The Democrats have a culture of defeat and it affects every issue they touch.