Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Congress 'agreed to covert operations against Iran'

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 30 June 2008
US CONGRESSIONAL leaders agreed late last year to President George Bush's funding request for a major escalation of covert operations against Iran aimed at destabilising its leadership, according to a report in the New Yorker magazine yesterday.
The article centres on a highly classified Presidential Finding signed by Mr Bush which, by US 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 cites a person familiar with the Finding as saying, and involved "working with opposition groups and passing money".

Reporter Seymour Hersh has written previously about possible administration plans to go to war to stop Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons, including an April 2006 article that suggested regime change in Iran, whether by diplomatic or military means, was Mr Bush's ultimate goal. Funding for the covert escalation, for which Mr Bush requested up to £205 million ($400 million), was approved by congressional leaders, according to the article.





The full article contains 186 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 29 June 2008 9:53 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

,

30/06/2008 03:01:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

,

30/06/2008 07:09:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

postmark55,

Chongqing, China 30/06/2008 07:45:07
A good friend of mine, Bugsy, just called me and said that Vehm Gericht did the same to him.
4

,

30/06/2008 08:05:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

,

30/06/2008 09:08:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Number 6,

Germany 30/06/2008 09:11:35
Regime change in Iran ? yes , in your dreams America. Still trying to cling on to what they thought they had won in Iraq while diverting attention towards Iran .Thank god the joint chiefs of staff have told them to come back when they have a "WHAT HAPPENS NEXT" STRATEGY, unlike Iraq's continuing, shambolic , murderous nightmare. Laughable in their ignorant arrogance.
7

,

30/06/2008 09:16:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

James Donald,

Newbridge 30/06/2008 09:51:57
#2 postmark55,Chongqing, Red China - "Hi, I'm back...." - But you have never been away just using different IDs. It is only the editors of the Scotsman that can ban posters, so if you were banned for being an offensive troll, it is your own fault. Certainly there is no change in your attitude so I can't see it being long before you have to change to postmark56.
Maybe you should consider commenting on the story rather that continuing with your ridiculous disinformation campaign. Just a suggestion.
9

Guga II,

Rockall 30/06/2008 10:10:20
No doubt the septics will have as much success with trying to undermine Iran as they did with their peurile attempts at assassinating Fidel Castro.

The septics don't seem to realise that they have an inverse Midas touch. Everything they touch turns to sh1t.
10

Horrible Cankers at the Cyber Shebeen,

30/06/2008 10:28:30
The USA has already felt the repercussions of messing around with other countries...they just create an endless cycle of hate against America...
11

,

30/06/2008 12:27:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

Finnking,

Lempäälä 30/06/2008 15:19:16
US Government: "major escalation of covert operations against Iran aimed at destabilising its leadership, "

Definition of Terrorism at UN: "criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other nature that may be invoked to justify them". (wiki)

So, proof, if further proof were required, that the US is a terrorist state.
13

mike - across the pond,

ahh finnking 30/06/2008 15:42:00
can you read... or is your problem comprehension...

from your own post:
"criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of TERROR in the general public"

lets just LOOK at that statement for a moment...

what W may be doing MAY be construed as "ceriminal"... especially with current laws within the borders of Iran...

but PLEASE do point out to me (and the rest of us) the acts US covert forces are doing within the borders of Iran that are creating "a state of terror in the general public"... I am not aware of public markets being blown up in Iran... I am not aware of rockets being launched into schools in Iran... I am not aware of IED's blowing up busloads of children in Iran... wouldnt THOSE be classified as creating "a state of terror in the general public"...

and please show us all how "destabilizing" the current regime in Iran equates to creating "a state of terror in the general public"... inciting general dissatisfaction and unrest in the public would not be "terror"... unless somehow in your little mind you have equated the current regime with "the general public"...

so I guess that would be "proof, if further proof were required," that you are.... well... a legend in your own mind???
14

James Donald,

Newbridge 30/06/2008 15:51:49
#11 postmark55,Chongqing, Red China - Imoderate language such as this is what will get you banned should the editors of the Scotsman decide to do so, not anything I do.
Frankly, I do not think you could outwit a paper bag as all you post is ridiculous nonsense that only "useful idiots" could take seriously. Your posts I take as seriously as the problems page in "The Sun".
Look forward to hearing from you as postmark56 (unless you calm down to a frenzy).
15

,

30/06/2008 22:48:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

,

30/06/2008 23:23:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Wally,

By THe Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 30/06/2008 23:58:06
the US started funding violent opposition inside Iran at least 1-2 years ago. This article by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker is only the latest confirmation of this. They fund & arm groups that want to break away from Iran. It results in a sort of a geurrilla war against the regime. They kill Iranian soldiers/police/political leaders. If someone did this to the US it would be terrorism, but since it is done by the US the Americans do not consider it terrorism. I remember reading a story 1-2 years ago about a government convoy in Iran being attacked and some people killed, the attack was funded by the US. All this time that the US has accused Iran of funding violence in Iraq the US has done so in Iran. not my opinion - siimple fact. and lets not forget either that some of the accusations against Iran of sending weaponsry into Iraq were later withdrawn by the US military itself. In other words the mass media engaged in propaganda asserting that Iran was sending weaponry into Iraq and then it later turned out to be a false accustation.

Here's a link on the latest Sy Hersh story.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/29/late-edition-sy-hersh-says-attacks-on-iran-happening-now/

For some reason Sy Hersh is thought to have very good sources inside the government not available to other journalists.


18

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 01/07/2008 00:40:00
EMK..no surprises there! Thanks for the info and the confirmation.
19

57Nomad,

california 01/07/2008 01:13:18
#17 Wally

Wally said:

"For some reason Sy Hersh is thought to have very good sources inside the government not available to other journalists."`

No, Sy Hersh is not thought to have sources inside the government not available to other journalists. When the Russians shot down KAL flight 007, Sy Hersh claimed that the plane was routed over Kamchatka by the CIA to test Russian responses and that even though it was a Korean 747 and it was shot down by a Russian fighter, that the fault lay with the American CIA. Naturally, this was nonsense.

Then, during the days leading up to the liberation of Afghanistan Sy Hersh, quoting 'his sources within the government' as per Wally, said that senior military people he spoke to told him that General Franks 'didn't know what he was doing.' General Franks expelled the Taliban with 100 special forces guys. He then executed one of the most startling displays of military prowess ever when, under his command, 2 divisions, one army and one Marine destroyed the entire Iraqi army in a couple of weeks. Once again Mr. Hersh got his story from "unnamed sources" high up in the chain of command. He is not to be taken seriously.
20

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 01/07/2008 02:45:20
Seymour Hersh is used as a conduit by the government to feed us information. His particular role is such that he frequently gets info not released to others. I don't doubt that sometimes they feed him false info. Thats the nature of how they operate. He was way ahead on the torture scandals. They make it look like he & he alone can get these big scoops.

If you look at the link I put up in 17 and see the transcript & video clips of Hersh on tv recently, then you'll see him say flat-out that we have US forces on the ground in Iran now. he contradicts government officials in this assertion. Thats not new either, there's been other reports that we've sent people in on special missions the last couple of years. The only thing new is that its an escalation and he says the Democrats in congress approved of it.

Here's a related link from Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN29358834



21

,

01/07/2008 10:52:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 01/07/2008 13:27:32
nowhere in our mass media is there serious discussion about the moral aspects of the US' historical aggression towards Iran. Remember in mid 1950's US & UK engaged in strong effort to overthrow Iran's government. That effort was successful and its result was disastrous. They had a democracy that we overthrew and then they had a dictator for 20+ years that they hated, then the influence of the religious radicals was made large. Then in 1980 the US instigated Iraq to start a war with Iran and 600,000 Iranians as well as 400,000 Iraqis died in that war. As the war ended the US sunk several small Iranian naval vessels in a completely unprovoked manner. As well as shot down a civilian passenger jet. Following is an article about how a rebel group attacked the presidential motorcade in 2005.

http://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-general-/iran-president-s-bodyguard-dies-in-ambush.html

It is believed this rebel group has received funds from the US. Now we have a top US journalist claiming the US is spending $400 million to undermine the Iranian government (which is elected). and we speak of pre-emptive war against them. But where is it that we discuss the history and whether we're doing the right thing? This is only done on obscure comments like this and in a few blogs read by very few. Why has the mass media not made our people aware? Why is there no discussion of whether we are right in pursuing all this violence? Did the Iranians attack us? Did they attack anyone? Did the Poles really attack Germany in 1939? And if so, then did this justify Germany invading Russia, France & others?
23

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 01/07/2008 18:47:48
It seems that some of this US taxpayer money has likely been used to try to get retribution for the arrest of the 15 UK sailors last year. Read this.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=62165§ionid=351020101

This is the type of activity that gets funded. If you're willing to pay, then you can always find people willing to do what you want. and following is a disturbing article about similar tactics used in Iraq.

http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1549/135/

24

57Nomad,

california 02/07/2008 11:47:14
#20 Wally

Wally said:

"Seymour Hersh is used as a conduit by the government to feed us information. His particular role is such that he frequently gets info not released to others. I don't doubt that sometimes they feed him false info."


And:

"If you look at the link I put up in 17 and see the transcript & video clips of Hersh on tv recently, then you'll see him say flat-out that we have US forces on the ground in Iran now."


Wally, did you say Seymour Hersh is a conduit thru which the government feeds us information. Wally, this is a far from the truth as it is possible to get. Would you care to document this claim? Wally, they don't feed him false information and they don't feed him true information, they don't feed him any information whatsoever.

Then you say: "see the transcript & video clips of Hersh on tv recently, then you'll see him say flat-out that we have US forces on the ground in Iran now"

So what? Who cares what Sy Hersh has to say about anything? Sheeesh! By the way, if he did say that and we did have soldiers there then he would be traitor for giving the enemy information like that. A filthy, vile, stinking traitor. Sy Hersh, indeed!
25

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 02/07/2008 11:53:19
Nomad...it would not be the first time Seymore Hersh gave up classified information. He should be brought up on charges.
26

57Nomad,

california 03/07/2008 08:24:58
#25 Lynne

I think Sy Hersh should be required to spend a year in semi-solitary confinement. Now, the shrewd reader may say, 'hold on there, Nomad the Assassin, solitary is an absolute, you can't be semi-solitary.'

While that is true, it's beside the point because I think Sy's cell mate should be Wally. After one year, Wally will still not have ever shut up and Sy will Renfield'd for the rest of his life. Beautiful.
27

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 04/07/2008 03:32:23
Nomad..nope Pelosi should be his cell mate..Wally should be next cell over..and they can talk and see other thru hand held mirrors!!

On second thought, maybe you're right...let Pelosi have the next cell over. She needs room to roam..as far as Syria.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.