| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iran |
| Pentagon presses for regime change in Iran |
| 2003-08-09 |
| Pentagon hardliners pressing for regime change in Iran have held secret and unauthorized meetings in Paris with a controversial arms dealer who was a major figure in the Iran-contra scandal. Pentagon officials said at least two people working for Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith have held "several" meetings with Manucher Ghorbanifar, the Iranian middleman in U.S. arms-for-hostage shipments to Iran in the mid-1980s. Where’s Ollie? The administration officials who disclosed the secret meetings to Newsday said the talks with Ghorbanifar were not authorized by the White House and appeared to be aimed at undercutting current sensitive back channel negotiations with the Iranian regime. Who in this administration still thinks there are moderates in Iran that we should negotiate with? "They [the Pentagon officials] were talking to him [Ghorbanifar] about stuff which they weren’t officially authorized to do," said a senior administration official. "It was only accidentally that certain parts of our government learned about it." Accidental intelligence. Great. The official would not identify those "parts" of the government, but a former intelligence official confirmed they are the State Department, the CIA and the White House, itself. Finger-pointin’ time. Ghorbanifar, the Pentagon’s next choice for Ayatolla? Maybe Ollie can arrange for the Iranian officials involved to take another tour of White House. Or Poindexter, after he is done shredding his incriminating docs over at at DARPA. returningsoldiers.us |
| Posted by:fullwood |
| #8 I don't really see why meeting with Ghorbanifar is a problem, considering we're waging a war on genocidal enemies. What can an outlaw Iranian arms dealer tell us about anything with any relability? Who should trust anything the creep Ghorbanifar would tell us? Our interventionists are so smart. They've been around since Nixon. What's takin' em so long? Here's something from the past: Sheep Eyes |
| Posted by: fullwood 2003-8-10 1:31:10 AM |
| #7 I guess this means fullwood is a Sandinista supporter. Check out his website at the bottom of the article for a better idea as to what he's all about. There are items about how the war on terror is costing us a bundle, how we should spend the whole defense budget on veteran's benefits and why military recruitment in high schools and on college campuses should be banned. The thing I value about my site is the wealth of access to info that can butress any argument. It's possible to draw the conclusions that Zhang Fei has about the defense budget and recruitment as represented on my page. You might also conclude, as many others have, that I'm doing a small part to represent the soldiers as I feel is necessary. And I provide resources to connect them with the benefits that were promised when they joined. Even considering whatever ideology you believe I expouse Zhang Fei, there is still value in a site where our soldiers can link to Health, Housing, resources for career enhancement, in and out of the military, and contact info for their elected representatives and govt. and private agencies and more. Without regard to any views I may have. I've chosen to advocate for the soldiers and I regret an offense or hurt that my site might cause any soldier or their family. There is a cynicism towards the military and government leadership that is no doubt evident in the articles and info I provide. But, hey. There's a link on each page for comments and response. Perhaps this is not the best forum to debate my site. I must add that one dimensional representations of my views may serve to belittle, but do little to amplify your own views on a given issue. I guess this means fullwood is a Sandinista supporter Don't tell me that I have to salute the secret govt. enterprise that traitor North and that clown Poindexter set up with taxpayer monies to do what?: Set one worthless party against the other to, I guess, reduce the Soviet influence...blah, blah. Have the Russians gone? Is there anything in that country that benefits America in the least? I'm not convinced. Spend our money here at home. Leave these two-bit crumbling empires to fall and keep our soldiers out of the way of these idiots who are bent on killing each other any way. No apologies for wanting more money for veterans. Talk all you want. Just give our soldiers what they were promised. I'll shut the page down if that ever comes about. In the meantime, I anxiously await your web efforts on their behalf. |
| Posted by: fullwood 2003-8-10 12:25:22 AM |
| #6 Yeah Charles--it's the VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY--and watch out for our Black Helicopters coming to take your GUNZ |
| Posted by: Not Mike Moore 2003-8-9 11:10:46 PM |
| #5 We get a lot of "accidental intelligence" because we're too politically-correct to actively recruit the kinds of evil slimebags we need to penetrate our enemies' organizations That's because in 1993, the Clinton Administration( Democrats also held the House and Senate ) signed a bill into law banning the CIA, Pentagon, FBI and Department of Defense from using 'unsavory' sources for intelligence. Basically, Clinton banned us from using most of our old Intelligence contacts from the Cold War, and forbid us from finding new sources. ( AKA Traitors, spies, informants, ect. ) It's funny how the things done under that Administration seems to come back and bomb us in the ass. |
| Posted by: Charles 2003-8-9 4:33:36 PM |
| #4 Hee, hee, hee--I love it when our government starts talking about "regime change"! I'm beginning to like this global hyperpower role... I don't much give a damn whether other countries like us or not. If they do, great. If they don't, then they can fear us. "Heather, my love, there's a new sheriff in town." |
| Posted by: Dar 2003-8-9 4:25:08 PM |
| #3 Here's a telling passage from the Weekly Standard on how CIA incompetence led to all of the security services having to fish for information from various sources. The Pentagon is getting involved only because the CIA is falling down on the job. Meeting with Ghorbanifar was the CIA's job. It stands to reason that he would want to meet with Pentagon staffers rather than the bunglers at the CIA. From the Weekly Standard: CIA MIA When Congress released the unclassified version of its report on the terrorist attacks of September 11, the headline stories were all about "missed opportunities" and Saudi complicity. The only hero in the story, it seemed, was George Tenet, the CIA director, who, as early as 1998, had "declared war" on al Qaeda but whose efforts were frustrated by an administration and bureaucracy that didn't take the threat posed by bin Laden seriously. Or so we're told. Yet buried in the 858-page report are two notable findings that call into question just how serious Tenet himself was about waging that war. On page 59 of the report, for example, the congressional investigators conclude that intelligence analysts assigned to work on the issue were "inexperienced, unqualified, under-trained, and without access to critical information." And then, on page 388, the report notes that CIA's counterterrorism officers told the Joint Inquiry that "before September 11 the CIA had no penetrations of al Qaeda's leadership, and the Agency never got actionable intelligence." So, let's see--the analysts were second rate and our spymasters had not recruited a single important source within the ranks of the terrorists. What war was Tenet waging, anyway? Given those facts, it's easy to understand why the Pentagon wanted to set up an office to review and query what the CIA was feeding it. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-8-9 2:41:54 PM |
| #2 Maybe Ollie can arrange for the Iranian officials involved to take another tour of White House. Or Poindexter, after he is done shredding his incriminating docs over at at DARPA. I guess this means fullwood is a Sandinista supporter. Check out his website at the bottom of the article for a better idea as to what he's all about. There are items about how the war on terror is costing us a bundle, how we should spend the whole defense budget on veteran's benefits and why military recruitment in high schools and on college campuses should be banned. Accidental intelligence. Great. We get a lot of "accidental intelligence" because we're too politically-correct to actively recruit the kinds of evil slimebags we need to penetrate our enemies' organizations. We rely way too much on walk-ins who provide one-time slugs of information for our human intelligence. After 9/11 every country in the Middle East volunteered information to avoid being targeted by a vengeful Uncle Sam. As it became clear we would not nuke our enemies, this cooperation tapered off. Besides, I don't really see why meeting with Ghorbanifar is a problem, considering we're waging a war on genocidal enemies. If we could deal with Stalin and Mao, both of which are mass murderers, we can deal with Ghorbanifar. Actually, if we can deal with the murderous Sandinistas, we can deal with Ghorbanifar. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-8-9 1:31:40 PM |
| #1 Why do they always put amatuers in charge of teh Iran desk?? Gawd, the way things are simmering over there, all that is needed is some money, some bullets and some patience. Iran is a house of cards waiting to fall. We originally got into our troubles in Iran by interfering prematurely back in 1953. If the "brains" of this operation would just take a careful view of the Iranian political landscape, he would realize that Iran's mullahs are set for a fall and internal social forces will do the work and we will have a more open and sympathetic government in Iran. The vast majority of the Iranians are very familiar with "islamic republics" that are all the vogue in the middle east. The unraveling of Iran and the fall of the mullahs is an inevitability. That fall would lead to a lot of bad press for the fundementalists. AND if we keep our mitts off and our help to the insurgents, low profile, the bad press for the wacko islamofascists can not be twisted by our buddies on AJ into "American Propoganda". The Carter administration screwed this one up and it seems like they have dusted off the after action report on that fiasco and are doing what they should have done 25 years ago. Now however, less assertion by the US will get us exactly what we want in Iran, discredited mullahs, a western friendly government and a secular government. |
| Posted by: SOG475 2003-8-9 12:22:08 PM |