"CounterProductive," I Respectfully Disagree

My good friend Jeff Huber, a retired military man and author whom I respect and who blogs here, has in his recent post compared Andrew Cockburn's piece in CounterPunch to the propaganda of Judith Miller and Michael Gordon of The New York Times. I must very respectfully disagree. Jeff writes:

At least one high profile war critic sounds alarmed by a recent revelation that Mr. Bush signed a “secret finding” against “the Iranian regime” six weeks ago.  I’m frankly less than agog about it.

In a May 2 CounterPunch article, Andrew Cockburn wrote that Bush has launched a “covert offensive” on Iran that is "unprecedented in its scope."  The “directive covers actions across a huge geographic area – from Lebanon to Afghanistan.”  The directive, according to Cockburn, also permits an expanded range of actions, “up to and including the assassination of targeted officials.

<snip>

Cockburn seems to want us to get excited that this Lebanon-to-Afghanistan offensive may involve assassination.  H.G. Wells’ bells, fellow citizens, we’re already assassinating people in Somalia with freaking cruise missiles.  We’re doing the same thing in Pakistan with Hellfire missiles fired from pilotless spy planes; the folks who pickle off the missles are dweebs sitting at consoles in an Air Force base in Nevada. "

Let's go to my reporting on Iran (which has been on hold while I have been covering selective prosecution):

Let's begin with this

Escalation of US Iran military planning part of six-year Administration push:

"The escalation of US military planning on Iran is only the latest chess move in a six-year push within the Bush Administration to attack Iran, a RAW STORY investigation has found.

While Iran was named a part of President George W. Bush’s “axis of evil” in 2002, efforts to ignite a confrontation with Iran date back long before the post-9/11 war on terror. Presently, the Administration is trumpeting claims that Iran is closer to a nuclear weapon than the CIA’s own analysis shows and positing Iranian influence in Iraq’s insurgency, but efforts to destabilize Iran have been conducted covertly for years, often using members of Congress or non-government actors in a way reminiscent of the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal.

<snip>

Late that summer , the Pentagon's Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz expanded its Northern Gulf Affairs Office, renamed it the Office of Special Plans (OSP), and placed it under the direction of Abram Shulsky, a contributor to the 2000 PNAC report.

Most know the Office of Special Plans as a rogue Administration faction determined to find intelligence to support the Iraq War. But that wasn’t its only task."

So, we know Iran was on the agenda from day one. We also know the model that is being used and we know that a secretive office was created to help coordinate this covert effort. Now let's move to this:

CIA running black propaganda operation against Iran, Syria and Lebanon, officials say:

"The Central Intelligence Agency has received approval at least twice in the last several years to conduct an “information war” against several countries in the Middle East, including Iran, Lebanon and Syria, according to current and former intelligence officials.

In addition, the Bush Administration has been running operations out of the Defense Department that are not subject to Congressional oversight, intelligence sources say. These programs appear murkier, and have included support for an alleged terrorist group in Iran.

A recent ABC News report revealed that President George W. Bush had signed a presidential finding giving the CIA the authority to conduct “non-lethal” covert operations against Iran. Former and current intelligence sources tell RAW STORY, however, that there have been “at least two” presidential findings over the past few years which have empowered the agency to run an “open-secret” information war against Iranian interests, mainly leveraging resources and assets “within the United States and France.

<snap>

Iran is being targeted by the CIA's activities with a “pro-democracy” message, sources say, and the agency is supporting overt “pro-democracy” groups.

The program’s particulars are highly classified. Intelligence sources stress, however, that the groups being used are rather mainstream and the operations are almost entirely restricted to information warfare.

Sources would not identify what mechanism was being employed to distribute the propaganda, if it included news media, individuals or organizations, or whether that information was seeping back into domestic news reports."

So we know that there have been at least two Presidential Findings authorizing the agency to use black propaganda against Iran. If there are "lethal findings," those would not see the light of day or likely be known to but a handful of people and such a finding would "authorize" assassinations.

Have there been assassinations? Yes. Were these committed by individuals or a group affiliated with Cheney's vision of the world? Yes. Is there proof that they are carrying out orders, that is, are bing used as authorized agents of assassination? No. Is there enough information to at least suspect a lethal finding? Yes. Here is what I broke about the MEK.

Cheney and Rumsfeld Outsourcing Special Ops in Iraq to Terror Group (MEK):

"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.

<snip>

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."

I go on to report that at least 22 local Iranian officials, governors and such, have allegedly been assassinated by members of the MEK. Now, consider that the MEK is on the State Department's terrorism list, yet they have a lobby in DC and ties to the Cheney arm of the GOP, despite being allegedly involved in these killings. What does that tell you? Someone is protecting them. But why?

So Jeff, I am sorry but I must disagree with your characterization of Cockbourn's reporting. Not only do I find what he is reporting to be credible, I find it highly probable.

 

 

Comments

[John B Brown]

My reading of Jeff's article had him saying that Cockburn was releasing news of the same old thing that has been going on for years and told before. In fact, that is exactly what your articles quoted above demonstrate; the government has been waging a "covert" war against many people and groups for years. DUH! It has been written about many times, and not by you alone, parts here and parts there.