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

[SouthpawSass]

Off topic, but could someone explain to me how stating how someone flying a plane and getting shot down is in any way questioning one's service?

The McCainiacs are on a rampage about Gen. Wes Clark's comments on Face the Nation yesterday when he said, "Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.­.." They're comparing this to "swift boating."

Certainly, MSNBC is covering this every 30 minutes and they never bother to give the whole quote, where Clark at the end says, "I certainly honor his service … But he hasn't held executive responsibi­lity."

MEANWHILE:
Nobody is talking about Lieberman earlier on that very show saying, "Our enemies will test the new president early. Remember that the truck bombing of the World Trade Center happened in the first year of the Clinton administration. 9/11 happened in the first year of the Bush administra­tion."

Lieberman, willing another attack on us.

[BlueStateMan]

Phony righteous indignation.

The Republicans cornered the market on that a LONG time ago.

[Vinca]

To BlueStateMan:SO TRUE

[in4success]

it's simple -- it's called "distraction through manufactured outrage."

[ProudNeoCon]

Why would NYT report this? If a single US Special Forces soldier is killed because of this I hope they post Mr. Hersh picture on all military bases just in case anyone wants to have a personal chat with him...

This is not Republican vs, Democrat issue. Congress had approved this (and congress has been Democratic for over a year now...)

[BlueStateMan]

Truth bothers you, does it?

(Look who I'm asking)

[meme13]

exactly. truth is like holy water burning the devil to the armchair soldier, neo-con "elitists" who would rather send other people to fight their wars than do it themselves. of course, they love to dangle the truth out their anyway b/c they know no one is paying attention enough to give a sh*t. well, that is until they shut down their websites, like PNAC did
www.newamericancentury.org

oh, but he "supports the troops" so it's all good. bet he's got the sticker to prove it.
i pray for the day when neo-cons are tried for treason.

[speakingtruth2power]

and you have been a fascist how long?

[thatsitfortheotherone]

Hersh would't know about it if the administraion didn't want him to.

[BlueStateMan]

Please explain.

[peacekitten]

truth hurts, doesn't it?

[ClevelandTom]

Your question rests on the assumption that Bush's authorization of operations inside of Iran is a sound policy. I, for one, do not think it is a wise policy. Bush is playing around with the potential of creating a war with Iran. I suspect he is hoping that Iran will retaliate somehow for these covert operations and give Bush a reason to attack Iran overtly. That is the Hersch's reporting is essential.

[rabprevent]

IF HE DOES THIS, CONGRESS MUST IMPEACH HIS STUPID A**!

HOW DID THIS MAN COME TO BE PRESIDENT? OH YEAH, THESE MORONS DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS VOTED FOR HIM NOT ONCE BUT TWICE!!!!!!!!!

[BlueStateMan]

Gore WON in 2000.

[Annette]

Gore won, but not by enough to keep Bush from stealing it. I suspect Kerry won in 2004 a lot of funny business happened in Ohio.

[research]

HE"S DOING THIS!

We are at war with Iran RIGHT NOW.

[CFAmick]

Israel has been engaged in covert action against Iran for decades. A dead nuclear scientist here, a destroyed shipment of supplies there, and they've avoided all out war. This course of action is an alternative to war. Carried out by the Bush admin, however, it will probably be counterintuitive.

[obamajusrocks]

as usual it's Israel pulling the strings, and the big gorrilla dances to it's tune.

[BlueStateMan]

That's right... ALL of the troubles in the world are because of Israel.

[YellowPanties]

Did you see how the Chicago White Sox lost to the Cubs last week? It's Israel's fault, no question.

[MajorKong]

Covert action is not an "alternative to war". It's still an act of war. It's just a matter of degree.

[vinny]

reading the article, it's becoming clear that BUSH & CONGRESS are sponsoring TERRORISM in Iran...

bombing, killing & injuring civilians is terrorism.­..

[JohnnyBasic]

...but they are the "evildoers".

When this is DONE TO America it is terrorism. When America DOES IT, it is not.

When will you learn? Didn't they teach you this in history class?

[thatsitfortheotherone]

Your logic, Johnny, is only sound for 75% of us. The other 25% just don't get it. And are quite gleeful that they don't.

[meme13]

heres' another thing they forgot in history class:
1953: while claiming to be spreading democracy as a counter to the evil empire, the USA undermines democracy by staging a coup worthy of Shakespeare in Iran.

Result: Mohammad Mosaddeq, who was democratically elected by the people who had been practically indentured under Britain's colonialism, is overthrown and BP gets to keep its oil.
Thanks Churchill & Eisenhower!!

Result 2: Under the US imposed Shah, headscarves and Islamic traditions are outlawed in favor of promoting Westernism. Paving the way for a backlash of extremists to have a cause.

Oh, but wait, our history with Iran only goes back to 1979, nevermind.­..

[KPinSEA]

We can't know that until the alleged perpetrators of terrorist acts are properly interrogated.

"Right this way to Guantanamo, Madame Speaker ... Mr. President ...."

[BrianInNYC]

One can only wonder what motives Mr. Hersh and others have at reporting this story now considering this spending bill was passed over a year ago. And one can only wonder why Mr. Hersh decided not to tell the entire story and report on the politics in the House and how this bill came pass, but I'm not surprised, Arthur Schlesinger summed it much better than I ever could when he refereed to Mr Hersh as, "the most gullible investigative reporter I've ever encountere­d."

[Mike169]

Seymour Hersch has been reporting on this for well over two years and since he began much of what he has written has come to pass. With regard to Schlesinger's quaote about Hersh, with an eye to Arthur Schlesinger Jackie Kennedy considered historians "bitter, old men."

[BlueStateMan]

Perhaps he was getting the PROOF?

[apduncan1]

Huh?

[MikeDu]

Hersh's motives? You sound like you're blaming the messenger. More than blaming, defaming.

[speakingtruth2power]

I call on the frogs in the pot

who say the water's not hot,

'Denialists'.

[Joedlh]

“The [Presidential] Finding was focussed on undermining Iran’s nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change,” a person familiar with its contents said, and involved “working with opposition groups and passing money.”

Let's see: an armed group, funded by a foreign power, with the goal of overthrowing a duly-elected government. I'm trying to remember the word to which this refers. Perhaps it will come to me if I try to imagine such a group operating against the U.S. Government out of Hackensack. Oh yeah, now I remember: Terrorists.

[StephenJK]

You MISremember.

Try OPEC, pal. Wake up and smell the 21st century threat.

[BlueStateMan]

Are you a neocon?

[apduncan1]

The OPEC is modeled after the Texas Railroad Commision; despite its name it is the State entity that controls oil and gas production in Texas.

What argument do you have against the OPEC if it follows the same guidelines of a State goverment in the USA?

[thatsitfortheotherone]

Enlist yet SJK?

[tommybones]

By any definition of terrorism (including all the official U.S. government definitions), the United States is, by far, the most accomplished state sponsor of terror on the planet earth.

[neoconscums]

Oh, sure. like the Iranians are not privy to what is going on in their own country. This is not the 18th century folks. There are just too many smart people in the 2nd and 3rd world who can best us at every level. Better find out in whose pockets the 400 million dollars ended because somebody somewhere is living high on the hog with taxpayers dough!

[1differentdrummer]

Second and third world. Hmm. Iran existed as a nation I think around 4,000 years ago. Now that the US has become a second world nation, thanks to republican efforts, we should feel kinship for our second and third world brothers and sisters and leave their governments alone.

[Deeg]

I think you misunderstand what the whole 1st, 2nd, 3rd world means. Post WWII:

1st World - US and western democracies and developed nations (Now referred to as Developed)
2nd World - USSR and its communist allies and vassal states. (No longer exists)
3rd World - Neutral / under developed (Now referred to as developing).

[tommybones]

One merely has to look at the egregious United States use of its United Nations veto in regards to WMD initiatives to see the hypocrisy and convenience of our case against the WMD “threats” formerly of Saddam Hussein and presently in Iran:

1979 - disarmament and cessation nuclear arms (the vote is 120 to 3)
1980 - non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. (110 to 2); cessation of all nuclear test explosions (110 to 2)
1981 - Middle East nuclear weapon free zone (107 to 2); cessation of all nuclear test explosions (118 to 2); measures to prevent nuclear war, curb the arms race and promote disarmament (78 to 3). Prohibition of chemical and biological weapons (109 to 1)
1982 - nuclear test ban treaty (111 to 1); Request to USA and USSR to make public their nuclear arms negotiations (114 to 1); Prevention of arms race in space (138 to 1); Prohibition of chemical and bacteriological weapons (95 to 1)
1983 - Prevention of an arms race in space (147 to 1); Prohibition of new WMD's (116 to 1); Reversing the arms race (133 to 1), Prohibition of chemical and bacteriological weapons (98 to 1); a study on the naval arms race (113 to 1); Disarmament and security (132 to 1)
1984 - Prohibition of new WMD's (125 to 1)
1987 - comprehensive test ban (143 to 2); halt to all nuclear explosions (137 to 3)
2004 - Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (or Fissban) (147 to 1)
2005

[BlueStateMan]

Except for the 1979 initiative, ALL under Reagan, Bush 1 & Bush 2.

[tommybones]

2005 was a repeat on the Fissban vote... 147 to 2, with the mighty nation of Palau joining the U.S. as the only nations to vote against it.

[YellowPanties]

Good post. I'm just waiting for the first troll to comment on your post with a "but but but...Clin­ton" excuse.

[tommybones]

You think this list is bad, you should see the U.S. use of the U.N. veto in votes concerning Israel and Palestine. You want to know why everyone hates us in the Middle East? Just check out THAT voting record. It's PAGES long, and the votes are usually 113 or so to 2 (U.S. & Israel).

[Caddisfly]

We as a nation are exhibiting all the symptoms of a junkie that needs a fix. Oil being the drug. We allow our leaders to pull us into never endings conflicts, we let them tell us we must drill for more "drugs" in our own backyard, they tell us we can keep up the destructive behavior with out any real repercussions. Wake up folks, it's time to own up to our addiction and begin to look for a way out. We must begin to force our leaders in the government and the corporate world to look for another way to meet our needs. Even if we have to drag them by the scruff of their necks. As usual our leaders are behind the curve on this. Franklin Roosevelt used to tell people "that's a great idea, now make me do it" . Well time for us to make them do it.

[StephenJK]

We cannot change the fact (at this very moment and for the foreseeable future) that we depend on nations like Iran, Venezuela and other OPEC entities for our energy resources.

Plain and simple: OPEC wishes to completely destabilize our economy in order to sufficiently weaken our macro-economic infrastructure and this administration wants to play that ballgame. Tax cuts for the rich, M.E. wars and the endless (another one) war on terror. How much of our GDP is dedicated to these endless (pyrhhic) wars on drugs and terror? Not to mention the tangible wars in the M.E.? Keep your eyes on the ball people. OPEC isn't playing nice and they don't plan to play nice anytime, let alone soon.

[BlueStateMan]

You just can't WAIT to be wrong, can you?

[apduncan1]

The OPEC is modeled after the Texas Railroad Commision; despite its name it is the State entity that controls oil and gas production in Texas.

What argument do you have against the OPEC if it follows the same guidelines of a State goverment in the USA?

The ones profiting from high oil prices are also the owners of marginal oil fields in TX, and other States, having their oil paid hansomely now.

[peacekitten]

please see my post below.

it isn't OPEC trying to destabilize our economy, it's our own government.

we spend more on military expenditures than any other nation in the world, and yet despite years of shoveling money into that sinkhole, our troops can't get health care, help with an education, body armor, properly armored vehicles and in some cases, even enough ammunition to know that they won't run out any time soon.

all this while mercenaries are making piles of money, the companies contracted by the administration have failed miserably to accomplish their tasks, and everyone involved seems to be filthy stinking rich off this whole thing while those doing the dying, fighting, bleeding and coping with this mess get a broomstick up the a$$.

it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where the money's gone.

wouldn't we all, btw, like to be able to run 25% of our bills, or mortgages or car payments, "off the books."

this idiotic war has cost nearly a trillion dollars "off the books." that's about 25% of our total GDP for an entire year that just went poof! and disappeared.

THAT'S the ball we should be watching.

[DexGor]

Really? how does destabilizing out economy help OPEC??

Oh, that's right...it lowers there revenues (destabilizing their own economies and thus their grip on power in their countries) and pushes us towards alternative energy sources. How stupid of me that I didn't see that.

OPEC learned in the 70's that using oil as a political weapon is counterproductive to their long term interests.

Truth is that most OPEC members at producing at capacity right now. There is nothing they could do to lower the price of oil. The only country that isn't at capacity is Saudi Arabia which likes to have a little wiggle room in case there is a major, short-term shock to supply.

[MikeDu]

I'd change just one word in your post - change the word 'oil' to 'power'. The U.S. is a 'superpower' junkie. It needs to be seen as the bully on the block much much more than it needs oil. Hell, Iraq shows that it will actively work against its own economic interests to get its 'superpower' high. The only reason why we're so dead-set against Iran (and Cuba and Venezuela) is because Iran dares to show some spine when confronted by us. A quick look at our regional 'allies' shows it certainly isn't because these states are any more repressive.

[StephenJK]

I think that OPEC acts MUCH MUCH more in the bully sense. They act as if they are the closest thing to God in modern times.

"We control your ultimate economic fate." This is their attitude these days.

[tommybones]

It seems we are split into two groups. No, it's not right and left, but more accurately the ignorant and the educated. The ignorant actually believe Iran is a threat to us. They buy into the propaganda that Iran is actually our enemy and not the other way around.

Let's logically look at the Iranian "threat". What would happen to Iran if they attacked either Israel or the United States with a "nucular" weapon, either directly or through a secondary agent? The answer is simple; they would be annihilated within a few hours. Israel could do this all by themselves with their own enormous (illegal) nuclear arsenal. So, an attack by Iran would essentially be a call for mass suicide by the Iranian government. Not to mention an Iranian nuclear attack in the region would lead to perhaps millions of Palestinian & Arab deaths (hardly a result one would assume they would applaud). That makes little sense. As nasty as the Iranian government can be to its own population, they haven’t given the slightest hint that they are in fact a suicidal nation (not to mention, they haven't attacked another nation in over 250 years!). What makes a lot of sense is the concept that Iran is only our "enemy" because they refuse to cater to U.S. and Israeli hegemony in the region. They have the oil and are not under Washington's thumb... and our corporate overlords can't have that!

[SaulGood]

well, there you go - bringing reason and rationale into the discussion. jeesh!

[apduncan1]

Amen to that.

This sable rattling will get GWB nowhere as the rest of the world can see through the propaganda that is being dished out everyday by the MSM.

We are pathetic, really.

[tommybones]

Iran has maintained the right to produce nuclear power, which is in fact their right under the existing Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaties (In fact, the Iranian nuclear power program first began in the 1970’s under the guidance of none other than Dick Cheney, serving as Chief-of-Staff to President Ford). No independent monitor has found any proof that Iran have moved in the direction of nuclear weaponry, yet the U.N. still has been bullied into sanctioning them. As recently as early 2008, Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said there is no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear-related activities in Iran.

That assessment has been reaffirmed in an official IAEA report in November 2007. And in the most recent development, the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear weapons program has finally been released, after over a year of Bush administration delays. The document, released publicly on December 3rd, 2007, declares with “high confidence” that a military-run Iranian program intended to transform enriched material into a nuclear weapon has been shut down since 2003. Rather than painting Iran as a rogue, irrational nation determined to join the club of nations with the bomb, the estimate states Iran’s “decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs.” The assessment, once again, stands in stark contrast to the rhetoric put forth by the usual neo-con suspects.

[BlueStateMan]

How hard does one have to shake a sable to make it rattle?

[StephenJK]

How do you rattle a fish?

It's OPEC STUPID!

[GZLives]

What fun it is to apply our western values and percepts to Iran's ruling Mullahs as if by doing that you can conclude anything real ... alas, its laughable to even bother.

Scenario #1 is Iran hands off suitcase nukes to Hezbollah proxy who in turn takes out large Israeli city killing hundreds of thousands.
But Iran denies having anything to do with it. blaming it on some trumped up Israeli act.
And many right here would immediately begin to join with Tehran to sell their line. Israel would of course be somehow to blame as always.

[flipbiscut24]

Your scenario is bogus.

Iran is not suicidal.
Iran is a signatory member of the NPT (Nuclear Proliferation Treaty).

Israel is not.
I'll say it again...Is­rael is not.

Iran is ....Israel isn't.

All of the talking heads in the USA media instigating hatred of every country in the Middle East (but Israel), are pro-Israeli.
Coincidence?

[ProudNeoCon]

Let me guess: you are "the educated" one...

Suicide bombers do not make sense to us either, yet they keep blowing themselves up. You keep looking at the world through your own (Western) perspective. the world is not that simple...

[DexGor]

No, it's even simpler. The Iranian leadership, like all politicians, has one overriding goal - to stay in power. Committing mass suicide would be a really stupid way to do that.

It's a really big difference from a single suicide bomber. If you can't see that difference, than I know which of the categories you belong in.

[MajorKong]

It's a very weak analogy to jump from suicide bombers to a "suicide country". Most regimes, be they Western, Eastern or in between want one thing about all else and that's to stay in power. Committing national suicide and staying in power are mutually exclusive.

[BlueStateMan]

The world IS that simple if you're a neocon.

[telebob59]

And what, praytell may your perspective be? That of someone who chooses to be a contrarian in order to support the "thinking" of the simpletons who proffer hegemony and hubris all in the name of "American Exceptionalism?" And I thought trolling was something my father did in his fishing boat. Nice how you can multi-task, though.

[tommybones]

Huh? Oh, I see... why bother using logic when trying to understand the motives of those "savage" brown people "over there," right? It couldn't be quite that "simple" that our constant meddling in their lives would cause them to want to harm us. Our systematic repression and murder in order to steal and control their petrol resources couldn't possibly be a motivation for hatred. In the "real world," where it's "not that simple," Muslims are devoid of the "normal" emotional responses found here in the "civilized WEST. It couldn't possibly be that some people, like in Palestine, have been driven to such desperation and hopelessness against the overwhelming military forces of Israel and the U.S., that they choose to become suicide bombers. Nope. It's just "not that simple."

Racism is the spine of the neo-con propaganda machine. Much like the Nazi's found it easier to throw Jews into ovens if they saw them as less than human, so too the neo-con justifies mass murder and repression behind this racist veil.

[StephenJK]

We are this || close to WWIII for OIL. OPEC vs. the gouged. Speculators be damned. I don't know about everyone else but, I believe OPEC is completely out of control. Using speculator's to artificially inflate the price of oil beyond any reasonable measure is out of control and they are aiming to completely destabilize our economy. OPEC needs to be reigned in somehow. They are an entity which operates under their own set of rules with no oversight whatsoever. When will it end?

[BlueStateMan]

It ISN'T OPEC..... it's the big 5 conglomerates.

[StephenJK]

Who is that? Bechtel, Halliburton, GE and who else?

[peacekitten]

it isn't OPEC that's out of control.

the kingdom of saudi arabia announced recently that it will increase its production as much as it has to in order to bring prices down, because these inflated prices are detrimental to the long term financial health of the kingdom.

the object of these "wars" for oil was the destruction of OPEC, to be replaced by the "benevolent hegemony" of the united states. read the PNAC agenda. it's all there.

it will end when the shrub is out of the white house, and somebody gives his evil sidekick a tie clasp with a magnet in it.

[StephenJK]

It's OPEC whether you agree with that or not. They are out of control and need to be reigned in or totally dissolved. If that is part of the PNAC agenda then I am all for it. FIST YOU OPEC!

[CFAmick]

If I made near unlimited amounts of money selling oil, like Saudi Arabia, for example, I would risk a small percentage of it to artificially boost the price. For all we know, they might make an extra $50 bill for every $1 bill they risk speculating.

[Deeg]

I'm not one to defend OPEC, but the Saudi's are boosting production to ease global tensions about oil and have even said rampant speculation has, in some significant part, artificially inflated prices. Yes, they make a ton of money off oil, but don't forget, most of the speculation occurs in the NYME which we deceided to deregulate for those poor commodity traders.

The Saudis do not want volatility in the oil market, it hurts them politically.

Also, don't forget we only get about 1/4 of our oil from the middle east.

[apduncan1]

That has a simple solution: Do what the Europeans are doing; nuclear power, solar power, wind power and a massive rail network.

That is the dialogue we need to be involved in... not how many more people we have to slaughter for oil.

Grow up.

[BlueStateMan]

Can we store the nuclear waste at YOUR house?

[StephenJK]

Grow up? Do you know how many years if not DECADES it will take to build all of that infrastructure you're talking about? Not to mention it takes capital, dummy. How and where do we get the capital to do all of that? We need to address the short term and stabilize our economy which is decidely UNstable at this point. We won't be able to accomplish much if we don't do something in the short term.

[1differentdrummer]

And the House of Saud is related to the house of Bush, how?

[comacoma]

Via the swapping of spit....

[JTyroler]

Oooh, maybe they'll spray Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with something to make his facial hair fall off...

I swear, Bush is really hoping to start Armageddon. I think my late friend was right - George Bush is the Anti-Christ.

[StephenJK]

Bush can't be the anti-christ. No one likes the guy.

[meme13]

oh, i beg to differ from the lone start state.

[Ramirez]

Seymour Hersh has been predicting an Iran attack for years.

Jan 24, 2005
"The Coming Wars"
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/01/24/050124fa_fact

April 2006
"The Iran Plans"
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/04/17/060417fa_fact

Nov 2006
"The Next Act"
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/11/27/061127fa_fact

Mar 2007
"The Redirection"
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh

While the Iranian attack is usually predicted for the spring (as in 2006, 2007, & 2008), this season it is being predicted for the fall due to the US election.
__________­__________­__________­______

Links taken from the excellent "American Future" blog.
http://americanfuture.net/?p=2817

[BlueStateMan]

You post4ed the same thing verbatim a few pages back..... it was CRAP then & it's CRAP now.

He's ALWAYS right.... & I'm afraid he's right this time, too (unless we do something about it).

[Ramirez]

Of course it's crap. It's a link to his predictions.

[BlueStateMan]

He's always been right....

YOU'VE always been WRONG.

Funny how that works, yes?

[MajorKong]

There is one constant truth about the Middle East. You can always screw it up worse than it already is.