The Iran War

'We are already at war,' the UN official told RAW STORY.

And we start off with a treasonous bang. A year ago mind you, they'll tell you about it once we get enough support for it.

This article covers insider information on , once again, the American use, aiding, training, of KNOWN TERRORISTS, to provoke war with Iran, while bombarding US (and world) citizens with BLATANT LIES about Iranian nuclear capabilities.

See this thread for details on Iran's nuclear capabilities.
http://www.captaincynic.com/thread/31026/9/is_america_playing_with_fire_
.htm#63909

Aren't people tired of the Government CRYING NUKE? To get us to jump through hoops and get in line with their political agenda, did you know that's called terrorism?

And for those who would argue that its only terrorism if bombs are going off, hey, they are, just not here, yet.

On Cheney, Rumsfeld order, US outsourcing special ops, intelligence to Iraq terror group, intelligence officials say Larisa Alexandrovna / Raw Story | April 14 2006

The Pentagon is bypassing official US intelligence channels and turning to a dangerous and unruly cast of characters in order to create strife in Iran in preparation for any possible attack, former and current intelligence officials say.

One of the operational assets being used by the Defense Department is a right-wing terrorist organization known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK), which is being 'run' in two southern regional areas of Iran. They are Baluchistan, a Sunni stronghold, and Khuzestan, a Shia region where a series of recent attacks has left many dead and hundreds injured in the last three months.

One former counterintelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the information, describes the Pentagon as pushing MEK shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The drive to use the insurgent group was said to have been advanced by the Pentagon under the influence of the Vice President's office and opposed by the State Department, National Security Council and then-National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice.

'The MEK is run by a brother and sister who were given bases in northern Baghdad by Saddam,' the intelligence official told RAW STORY. 'The US army secured a key MEK facility 60 miles northwest of Baghdad shortly after the 2003 invasion, but they did not secure the MEK and let them basically be because [then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz was thinking ahead to Iran.'

Another former intelligence official added that the US military had detained as many as 3,500 members of MEK at Iraq's Camp Ashraf since the start of the war, including the highest level ranking MEK leaders. Ashraf is about 60 miles west of the Iranian border.

This intelligence official, wishing to remain anonymous, confirmed the policy tensions and also described them as most departments on one side and the Pentegon on the other.

'We disarmed [the MEK] of major weapons but not small arms. [Secretary of Defense Donald] Rumsfeld was pushing to use them as a military special ops team, but policy infighting between their camp and Condi, but she was able to fight them off for a while,' said the intelligence official. According to still another intelligence source, the policy infighting ended last year when Donald Rumsfeld, under pressure from Vice President Cheney, came up with a plan to 'convert' the MEK by having them simply quit their organization.

'These guys are nuts,' this intelligence source said. 'Cambone and those guys made MEK members swear an oath to Democracy and resign from the MEK and then our guys incorporated them into their unit and trained them.'

Stephen Cambone is the Undersecretary of Defense Intelligence. His office did not return calls for comment.


According to all three intelligence sources, military and intelligence officials alike were alarmed that instead of securing a known terrorist organization, which has been responsible for acts of terror against Iranian targets and individuals all over the world – including US civilian and military casualties – Rumsfeld under instructions from Cheney, began using the group on special ops missions into Iran to pave the way for a potential Iran strike.
'They are doing whatever they want, no oversight at all,' one intelligence source said.

Indeed, Saddam Hussein himself had used the MEK for acts of terror against non-Sunni Muslims and had assigned domestic security detail to the MEK as a way of policing dissent among his own people. It was under the guidance of MEK 'policing' that Iraqi citizens who were not Sunni were routinely tortured, attacked and arrested.

Although the specifics of what the MEK is being used for remain unclear, a UN official close to the Security Council explained that the newly renamed MEK soldiers are being run instead of military advance teams, committing acts of violence in hopes of staging an insurgency of the Iranian Sunni population.
'We are already at war,' the UN official told RAW STORY.

Asked how long the MEK agents have been active in the region under the guidance of the US military civilian leadership, the UN official explained that the clandestine war had been going on for roughly a year and included unmanned drones run jointly by several agencies.

In a stunning repeat of pre-war Iraq activities, the Bush administration continues to publicly call for action and pursue diplomatic solutions to allegations that Iran is bomb-ready. Behind the scenes, however, the administration is already well underway and engaged in ground operations in Iran.

The British, however, are less enthused about a strike in Iran. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has called an American strike on Iran 'inconceivable,' while Prime Minister Tony Blair has said he's keeping all his options open. Asked about the MEK, a senior British intelligence official said that the Brits are not yet sure of what the situation on Iran's southern border is, but vehemently condemned any joint activity with the terrorist organization.

'We don't know who precisely is carrying out those attacks in the south but we believe it is MEK,' the British official said.

When asked if the US military is running the MEK, the source was careful to indicate that while there is a US unit in Iran gathering information, it's difficult to say if they are in any way involved with MEK.

'The people who are inside Iran are from a US Special mission unit,' the source explained. 'They are called by codenames, but would not be involved in the bomb blasts. They want to get in, get the intelligence and go out with anyone knowing they have been there. But the bomb blasts might be diversions away from the operations by this US special mission unit. The British are definitely not involved in any of this.'

Moreover, the British official expressed that any operations with MEK would violate their own military code and would absolutely not be tolerated.

'We have very strict rules and can't go consorting with terrorists," the official added. "We did it in Northern Ireland. No more.'

#
Editor's note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified the geographic position of Khuzestan Province. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/140406outsourcing.htm

And just a friendly reminder, there are people who doubt still that this is all part of the same routine of politically motivated illegal acts of aggression that took place pre Iraq, Afghanistan even.

So now you can see it happening first hand and maybe gain some perspective.

Symour Hersh was on "Late Edition", and talked about his new article in the New Yorker with Wolf Blitzer about serious war plans being drawn up against Iran-that includes nukes-which is causing military leaders to say they'll resign.

(Poster comment: Seymour also specifically points out that Iran is the one attempting diplomatic talks, and WE are ignoring them. While of course full speed ahead on military action. And while also, of course, all you actually hear from Bush himself is a need for diplomacy but the will to use force to thwart threats against Israel, while Condi Rice speaks often of our need, and as she stated to the UN, the need for all to consider military options.)

For perspective, here is a Fox News segment speaking on Hersh's article and the military option on Iran.

What I would like to know, is what they would have to say about the article's point at the top of this thread, about us using KNOWN TERRORISTS to bomb southern Iran, perhaps as both a diversion for intell gathering, as well as a blatant destabilization of the Iran situation, so we can have a reason, any reason, for military action, by provoking a reaction.

Not to mention, and maybe I can find it, but I just recently saw Rumsfeld, and O'Reilly backing him up, bitching about journalists smearing people on air with rhetoric and slanderous terminology as is done here against Hersh. Though I have to admit it is nothing compared to the campaign to discredit Walter Kronkite in his views on the Iraq war and the current administration and its policies.

Its funny to see what they consider controversial, an investigative reporters reporting, but not what is reported.

Good lord, it never ends.

Retired colonel claims U.S. military operations are already 'underway' in Iran

Raw Story/Ron Brynaert | April 16 2006

During an interview on CNN Friday night, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner claimed that U.S. military operations are already 'underway' inside Iran, RAW STORY has found.

"I would say -- and this may shock some -- I think the decision has been made and military operations are under way," Col. Gardiner told CNN International anchor Jim Clancy (as noted by Digby at the blog Hullabaloo).

(Crooks and Liars has a video clip of the interview)

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/15.html#a7928

Gardiner, who designed a war game in November of 2004 for Atlantic Magazine ("Will Iran be next? " ) which simulated "preparations for a U.S. assault on Iran," also claimed that Aliasghar Soltaniyeh, the Iranian ambassador to the United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told him a few weeks ago that units who had attacked the Revolutionary Guard had been captured and confessed to working with Americans.

"The secretary point is, the Iranians have been saying American military troops are in there, have been saying it for almost a year," Gardiner said. "I was in Berlin two weeks ago, sat next to the ambassador, the Iranian ambassador to the IAEA. And I said, 'Hey, I hear you're accusing Americans of being in there operating with some of the units that have shot up revolution guard units.'"

"He said, quite frankly, 'Yes, we know they are. We've captured some of the units, and they've confessed to working with the Americans,'" said the retired Air Force colonel.

Last Thursday, Raw Story's Larisa Alexandrovna reported (On Cheney, Rumsfeld order, US outsourcing special ops, intelligence to Iraq terror group, intelligence officials say) that, according to former and current intelligence officials, the Pentagon has been using a right-wing terrorist organization known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) as an operational asset "to create strife in Iran in preparation for any possible attack."

"[I]nstead of securing a known terrorist organization, which has been responsible for acts of terror against Iranian targets and individuals all over the world – including US civilian and military casualties – Rumsfeld under instructions from Cheney, began using the group on special ops missions into Iran to pave the way for a potential Iran strike," Larisa reported.

"They are doing whatever they want, no oversight at all,' an intelligence source told Larisa.

Larisa reported that the MEK soldiers were told to "quit" their organization and were "renamed" in accordance with a plan conceived by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld so that they could be "converted" into a military special ops team.

According to a UN official close to the Security Council whom Larisa interviewed, the "newly renamed MEK soldiers" were being employed in the place of U.S. military advance teams to commit "acts of violence in hopes of staging an insurgency of the Iranian Sunni population."

'We are already at war,' the UN official told RAW STORY.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/160406retiredcolonel.htm

Finally found one of this Daily Show Clip.

Poster Comment: (For second clip)

Jon Stewart posted two clips that were of the most importance regarding Iran last night. Bush is trying to stir the pot and say Iran is supplying parts for IED's. While Pace and Rumsfeld can't verify his words.
The segment went on to show how "Stepford-like" the talk heads are as each cable news station repeats the same meme as if they received their talking points from Rove's office simultaneously.

I can't get neither one to play, I'm guessing there is to much traffic, the internet still needs work.

Thanks for keeping us informed. I hope that I don't soon here on the news that we just nuked Iran, I'm sure then we would really impeach him, but why wait, hasn't he already proven that he can't be trusted.

Later

US military, intelligence officials raise concern about possible preparations for Iran strike

Larisa Alexandrovna / Raw Story | May 12 2006

Concern is building among the military and the intelligence community that the US may be preparing for a military strike on Iran, as military assets in key positions are approaching readiness, RAW STORY has learned.

According to military and intelligence sources, an air strike on Iran could be doable in June of this year, with military assets in key positions ready to go and a possible plan already on the table.

Speculation has been growing on a possible air strike against Iran. But with the failure of the Bush administration to present a convincing case to the UN Security Council and to secure political backing domestically, some experts say the march toward war with Iran is on pause barring an "immediate need."

"In March/April of this year [the US] was pushing for quick closure, a thirty day window," says a source close to the UN Security Council, describing efforts by the Administration to "shore up enough support" to get a UN Chapter 7 resolution.

A UN Chapter 7 resolution makes it possible for sanctions to be imposed against an uncooperative nation and leaves the door open to military action.

The UN source also says that a military analysis suggests that no military action should be undertaken in Iran until spring of 2007, but that things remain volatile given this administration's penchant for having "their own way."

Strike could come earlier than thought

Other military and intelligence sources are expressing concern both privately and publicly that air strikes on Iran could come earlier than believed.

Retired Air Force Colonel and former faculty member at the National War College Sam Gardiner has heard some military suggestions of a possible air campaign in the near future, and although he has no intimate knowledge of such plans, he says recent aircraft carrier activity and current operations on the ground in Iran have raised red flags.

Gardiner says his concerns have kept him busy attempting to create the most likely scenario should such an attack occur.

"I would expect two or three aircraft carriers would be moved into the area," Gardner said, describing what he thinks is the best way air strikes could be carried out without disengaging assets from US fronts in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Two air-craft carriers are already en route to the region, RAW STORY has found. The USS Abraham Lincoln, which recently made a port call in Singapore, and the USS Enterprise which left Norfolk, Virginia earlier this month, are headed for the Western Pacific and Middle East. The USS Ronald Reagan is already operating in the Gulf.

In addition to aircraft carrier activity, Gardiner says, B-2 bombers would be critical.

"I would expect the B-2's, the main firepower asset, to be flown on missions directly from the United States," Gardiner explained. "I would expect B-52's to be flown in strikes from the UK and Diego Garcia."

"Finally," he added, "a large number of cruise missiles would be fired from the carrier support ships."

Steven Aftergood, senior research analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, says that the B-2 bomber is capable of such long range activity.

"The B2 bomber was designed, with the Soviet Union in mind, for intercontinental operations," Aftergood said. "With aerial refueling, it has a range of up to 10,000 miles."

Like Gardiner, Aftergood has heard similar claims with regard to a June strike, but has not been able to confirm them independently.

Intelligence sources confirm hearing the allegations of a June attack, but have been unable to fully confirm that such an attack is in the works. Both the New Yorker and the Washington Post have previously reported that the Pentagon is studying military options on Iran.

All sources, however, agree that given the administration's interest in regime change, an attack on Iran is likely, regardless of international support or UN backing. Furthermore, all sources agree that Gardiner's scenario is the most probable, including an estimated duration and "pause" assessment.

Gardiner believes that the entire initial operation could run quickly, roughly 24-72 hours. "Most of the strikes would be at night," he said. "The Iranian nuclear facilities will be targeted; more important however, a major effort would focus on Iran's capability to retaliate. The US will target missile facilities, air bases and naval assets."

"After the initial effort, there will be a pause during which time the Iranians will be told that if they retaliate, the air strikes would continue," he added.

The Pentagon did not return calls for comment.

Advance teams under way; Congress 'bypassed'

As previously reported by Raw Story, a terrorist organization known as Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) is being used on the ground in Iran by the Pentegon, bypassing US intelligence channels. The report was subsequently covered by the Asia Times (Article).

Military and intelligence sources now say no Presidential finding exists on MEK ops. Without a presidential finding, the operation circumvents the oversight of the House and Senate Intelligence committees.

Congressional aides for the relevant oversight committees would not confirm or deny allegations that no Presidential finding had been done. One Democratic aide, however, wishing to remain anonymous for this article, did say that any use of the MEK would be illegal.

In addition, sources say that a March attack that killed 22 Iranian officials in the province of Sistan va Baluchistan was carried out by the MEK.

According to a report by Iran Focus filed Mar. 23, the twenty-two people killed in the ambush included high ranking officials, including the governor of Zahedan.

"Hours after the attack took place, Ahmadi-Moqaddam announced there was evidence the assailants had held meetings with British intelligence officers," the Iranian news service reported.

"Radical Shiite cleric Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi also claimed the people behind the attack were the same as those behind a spate of bombings in Iran's south-western province of Khuzestan earlier this year and in 2005," it added.

Military and intelligence sources say that MEK assets were responsible for this attack, but did not know if the US military was involved or if US military assets were part of the ambush.

One former high ranking US intelligence official described the use of MEK as more of a "Cambone" operation than a "Department of Defense operation."

Undersecretary of Defense Intelligence Stephen Cambone, a stalwart neo-conservative, is considered by many to be Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's right-hand man.

During a White House briefing in early May, outgoing press secretary Scott McClellan denied that the administration was using MEK, among several other terrorist organizations named, for ground activity in Iran.

"There are numerous reports about low-intensity operations ongoing in Iran from three different places -- PKK going over the border into Iraq, the MEK southern border of Iraq into Iran, and also certain operations from Balochistan involving also the Pakistanis," a reporter asked. "Does the U.S. have a policy, given also reports which I know you won't comment on, on possible special forces operations in Iran?"

"Our policies haven't changed on those organizations," McClellan said. "They remain the same. And you're bringing up organizations that we view as terrorist organizations."

"We would never cooperate with them, in terms of-" the questioner continued.

"Our policy hasn't changed," McClellan replied.

Military, intelligence community alarmed

According to a New Yorker article by veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, other activities aimed at intimidating and agitating Iranian leadership are also underway.

"One military planner told me that White House criticisms of Iran and the high tempo of planning and clandestine activities amount to a campaign of 'coercion' aimed at Iran," Hersh wrote.

The increase in violence on the southern border of Iran, the movement of aircraft carriers into the region, the insistence of Iran's leadership that they intend to be a player on the nuclear stage and the Bush Administration's focus on regime change make military and intelligence sources nervous.

"[President] Bush thinks that history will judge him as a great leader, not unlike Winston Churchill," one former high-ranking military intelligence official remarked.

For now, Gardiner and others remain on the sidelines as the Administration plots their next move.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/US_military_seen_ready_for_Iran_0511.h
tml

This clip is rather disturbing.

They mention things about the political benefits of Bush attacking other countries, for his popularity, as well as mentioning how all he needs is a terrorist attack to regain support.

Chris even describes a fast attack as a Blitzkrieg. Blitzkrieg was first used on any serious scale by the German Wehrmacht in World War II. That would be Hitler.

So, are we all enjoying being the cause of WWIII?

I read that rawstory article yesterday and posted it on my blog, it gave me an upset stomach.

A lot of truth in that clip, reminds me of this I found:

quote:

---

Imagine If You Could If Bush Was Killing Babies

TownOnline.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
Letter: A vote to impeach Bush

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

A snippet of conversation I overheard at the YMCA recently, "If George Bush were killing babies live on Fox News Channel..."

What if? Imagine!


The major news networks would feature respectful and serious debates about whether the Commander-in-Chief has the right to kill babies;

One third of the Democrats would withhold comment pending a congressional investigation;


Fox News would accuse liberals of treason for waffling in their support of the President in this time of great threats to the nation.


Fox News would congratulate the President for taking strong action while others carry on debates; and


The vast majority of Republicans in Congress would support the President no matter how many babies he has murdered.

The fact is that George Bush is killing babies (and adults) because of his horrendous and illegal assault on the people of Iraq. Even Republican Donald Trump, on CNN, said that the war is a disaster and it is likely that whoever takes over the country in the future could be worse than Sadaam Hussein.

I call on our elected Representative in Congress, Barney Frank, as well as Senators Kennedy and Kerry to support vigorously any censures as well as impeachment efforts against President Bush; though we know the Republican majority in a show of "family values" will vote down anything which might hold the President accountable for his crimes against humanity.

William Dain
Newtonville

---

From "The Secret Government" PBS special with Bill Moyers.

This will help explain some of the history of the US and Iran. Further explaining why what we are in the middle of doing is so wrong and full of propaganda and lies.

For people like Jim Colyer who are so deluded that they actually think we should nuke these people. Insanity.

I remember when the shaw of Iran was taken down and the Iranians hated us because we put him there to control their oil. We created the threats against our country.

This is all about oil and nothing about justice, freedom and the security of our nation.

I caught a program (advertisement) just the other day. It was previewing how the women in Afganastan were making strides returning to their rights previously held by them. Then I started thinking before that they were under communist control (Russian?) Gee, I guess it is better to be a commie pinko than muslim (sp)?
Ya, after Nam I really started to see that we wren't (fighting) supporting democracy but rather US interest (capitalistic enterprise). But then Marines were the President's own => we went to war (police actions) at his direct call.
They have a long history of military actions protecting US intereest aboard.

Excerpt: Group Says Iran Is 'Not a Crisis'
Former generals and officials seek to prevent an attack on suspected nuclear sites and to overhaul policies toward Tehran and Baghdad.

LA Times | August 16, 2006

WASHINGTON - Seeking to counter the White House's depiction of its Middle East policies as crucial to the prevention of terrorist attacks at home, 21 former generals, diplomats and national security officials will release an open letter tomorrow arguing that the administration's "hard line" has actually undermined U.S. security

http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/160806_generals_iran.html

Its the lies of Iraq all over again. And people in America are going to sit back and kill more arabs while sending their kids of to the slaughter. They aren't even trying to be original, my god, arabs with nukes.

Excerpt: US Iran report branded dishonest

BBC | September 14 2006

The UN nuclear watchdog has protested to the US government over a report on Iran's nuclear programme, calling it "erroneous" and "misleading".

In a leaked letter, the IAEA said a congressional report contained serious distortions of the agency's own findings on Iran's nuclear activity.

The IAEA also took "strong exception" to claims made over the removal of a senior safeguards inspector.

There was no immediate comment from Washington over the letter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5346524.stm

It is good to find these things out before the fact.

There is more good news, on NPR today, some high ranking officials visited Iran, its been in the news, I can't remember the details. But they said Iran would not develop Nuclear weapons or fire them, its against their religion.

If that was on NPR, a lot of people heard it, that will make it more difficult for Bush to go to war with Iran in October.

Now again they are saying we will take the house and the senate in November.

I've noticed something different about these elections, so far I haven't seen a whole lot of crack down arrests like they have in the past before an elecion.

There are two other great lights that have been lit, but those are different subjects - I'm starting to have some confidence. Ofcourse I always do and so far I have been dissapointed, but we'll see.