President George W Bush has given the CIA approval to launch covert "black" operations to achieve regime change in Iran, intelligence sources have revealed.By Tim Shipman in Washington
Published: 12:01AM BST 27 May 2007
Mr Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilise, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.
Under the plan, pressure will be brought to bear on the Iranian economy by manipulating the country's currency and international financial transactions.
Details have also emerged of a covert scheme to sabotage the Iranian nuclear programme, which United Nations nuclear watchdogs said last week could lead to a bomb within three years.
The CIA will also be allowed to supply communications equipment which would enable opposition groups in Iran to work together and bypass internet censorship by the clerical regime.
The plans, which significantly increase American pressure on Iran, were leaked just days before a meeting in Iraq tomorrow between the US ambassador, Ryan Crocker, and his Iranian counterpart.
Tensions have been raised by Iran's seizure of what the US regards as a series of "hostages" in recent weeks. Three academics who hold dual Iranian-American citizenship are being held, accused of working to undermine the Iranian government or of spying.
Bruce Riedel, until six months ago the senior CIA official who dealt with Iran, said: "Vice-President [Dick] Cheney helped to lead the side favouring a military strike, but I think they have concluded that a military strike has more downsides than upsides."
However, the CIA is giving arms-length support, supplying money and weapons, to an Iranian militant group, Jundullah, which has conducted raids into Iran from bases in Pakistan.
31 comments:
The eyes... Watch her eyes...
what do her eyes tell you?
That she's looking right at the camera...
Her eyes are deviated toward the right Clowndaddy.
MOTI,
Since you are entertainment for me, and I usually enjoy a good laugh in the morning, could you do me the honor and explain to me why you believe this was somehow a "black-op"?
If you are not inclined, maybe Clowndaddy can explain why he believes she's looking for a camera (extra points if you can connect this to the abortion debate in less than 3 steps).
Farst and DV ya'll some fucking heartless mofos.
"Since you are entertainment for me, and I usually enjoy a good laugh in the morning, could you do me the honor and explain to me why you believe this was somehow a "black-op"?
Plantation Negro MD,
Why, I'd be glad to explain yet another concept to you.
Destabilizing Iran via Black Ops IS WRITTEN DIRECTLY IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION BUDGET FOR 2007.
They authorized a couple hundred million dollars for exactly this type of thing. Check it out. It's public record. Look it up.
How exactly do you think Cheney planned to destabilize oil rich Iran? With Vote or Die T Shirts?
Now you know, I am fascinated by the Plantation Negro mind.
I'm amazed at it's inability to discern reality without Plantation approval.
Perhaps you can share with us 1 reason why you DON'T think the videotaped murder of a young attractive Iranian woman, that was broadcast worldwide via Twitter before her body even went cold, - WAS NOT a Black Ops?
Considering the fact that this particular event threatens to destabilize Iran more than a US / Israeli missile strike would.
MOTI,
I just woke up, right on time. Thank you. I enjoyed the laugh. Man you should charge a fee, because this is better than some of the stuff on basic cable.
I don't doubt Bush & Co had a plan. Hell, Obama might have one too. I asked you to explain how killing some random girl was an organized Black Op. With all of protesters with mobile phones and other devices armed with video cameras, plus all of the the Basij Militia running around in crowds and sitting in windows with rifles, not to mention the large number of pretty Persian women running around in crowds, why would the U.S. risk an asset? This was almost inevitable. No black op needed.
Don't confuse your paranoia with analysis. I think the murder of this girl Neda is being used by opportunistic people. It was graphic, and the picture was clear. I've said previously you have your eyes in the wrong place. Ask yourself if Mousavi is a reformed hardliner who now claims to be a reformer, or if he's an opportunist making a grab for power. Perhaps a little bit of his history might help. Again, you might have to actually READ something. Your problem is that you believe in too many conspiracy theories and that EVERYTHING is orchestrated.
How exactly do you think Cheney planned to destabilize oil rich Iran? With Vote or Die T Shirts?
wait, "oil riches" figure into this spiritual world war some how now?
come on magne - what it be DV?
global manichean conflict, or, hardcore, old-school gangsterism among killer-apes vying for control of the world's last ocean of sweet, light crude oil?
LOL.
How cute. Doc still frontin'.
Negro, You Jumped Up. And Checked In. Because This Is School For You.
Your learning more than you learned in years. Your asking questions about things you never considered.
Since you've been here you've gotten STRONGER BETTER FASTER.
Quit frontin.
Now to answer your little question.
How do explain things that speak for themselves?
The Government. Announced. Publicly.
That It Was. Going To.
DESTABILIZE IRAN.
Via Covert Operations.
AND DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGNS.
Doc, before we go any further, I need to know you understand that.
We cool? Same page?
OK. Good.
Guvmint said it. So you can accept it.
Now.
Notice the "random" bullet didn't hit some "random" Iranian. It didn't hit some mullah looking cab driver.
Didn't hit a pro-Ahmadinejad supporter.
Random bullet didn't randomly hit a random Iranian ugly bitch.
Nahhhhh. The random bullet hits Iran's version of Katie Holmes.
Iran's version of Stephen Soddenberg happens to be standing near by armed with the new iPhone GS
In 90 minutes this recording is Twittered worldwide and the Plantation Media is showing it in slow motion replay like the Kennedy Assassination.
All perfectly coordinated to coincide with the MTV ready Benetton Green revolution.
The government of Iran is officially destabilized.
It's voting discrepancies are better covered by the Plantation media than our nation's own voting discrepancies in 04.
You can get somebody shot in the middle east for $100.
What can you get for a $100 Million?
wait, "oil riches" figure into this spiritual world war some how now?
come on magne - what it be DV?
Be honest wit you CNu. I just slipped that in there to make it easier for the slower cats to appreciate the motive to sponsor a Made-For-TV revolution in Iran.
Confronted with ideological motivations, Plantation Negros are programmed to think: "conspiracy theory" and they shut down.
I used oil to bride two larger concepts.
Apparently it worked on you.
It may be school, but you ain't the teacher. Now, if you keep putting your ignorance on display I'm going to start charging tuition.
Yes, I've asked you questions...as a teacher asks one of his slower students.
Ummm grasshopper, how covert would an op be if it were announced publicly?
And a bit off topic, I've known alot of FINE ass Persian girls. But, how do you know some of the "ugly bitches" and cabbies didn't get hit? This is nothing more than opportunism. Not conspiracy.
If you quit woofing for a moment, and quit looking in the wrong direction maybe you'd realize what was going down. Have a peak at Mousavi. I don't know how many more hints I need to toss your way.
LOL. Aghhhhhhhhh!!!!
Ahhhhhhhh. Doc. You must have been the class clown in medical school.
That was good.
"Since you are entertainment for me, and I usually enjoy a good laugh in the morning, could you do me the honor and explain to me why you believe this was somehow a "black-op"?"
She was sniped. One shot, one kill..
I don't see why she's a martyr for "freedom" there when it hasn't even been proved who shot her?
Which was most likely a C1A spook...
Anon,
Are you saying only CIA types are trained in marksmanship? I have several times hit head/neck sized targets back in the day even with an M-16A2 while in the standing position at 300m. Once 10 in a row. Nothing but head and neck. No scope, just iron sights. It ain't that hard. She wasn't moving very fast.
Was she even shot?
I saw a video that showed a woman on her back with an apparent ballistic injury. It is unknown if it was an entrance or exit wound. There is inadequate information to assess where and from how far this weapons fire came. Actually, it's unknown if this was even from small arms fire, as we do not see or hear a shot in the video. For all we know she could have been hit from high velocity shrapnel from a explosive device some distance away. Or, shot from behind. Stabbed, etc.
Blame the CIA. Of course, this does go with the theme. Fear of things unknown (to you). Biochemistry, medicine, CIA. It's all the same.
What we think we know is what is seen in the video: a woman who appears to have penetrating chest trauma. From location of bleeding, and her reactions on camera she appears to have suffered severe intrathoracic trauma. She has what appears to be blood exiting her mouth then nose. Her eyes appear to be deviated to the right. She appears to have succumbed to her wounds. Her reactions appear authentic.
"I don't see why she's a martyr for "freedom" there when it hasn't even been proved who shot her?"
But you are right. It hasn't been proved who provided her mortal wounds. Type of weapon, motive, direction, distance, shooter are unknown. Militia men were known to be in the area.
She was not the first casualty, but appears to be the first we witness actively dying. Watching death elicits a very strong emotional response.
If I were a foreign entity paying you to analyze the video and you came up with "most likely a C1A spook..." without any corroborating evidence I'd hand you your last paycheck. And if you had a good idea that it were the CIA, I'd want better analysis than what you provided.
The problem with chronic conspiracy theorists is that when something REALLY happens, you've already spent your credibility at chasing every shadow. So what are you going to do when a real threat is at your door?
This thing is really smelly. Go back to the very beginning and you will see two men "laying" the woman down while the one in the white t-shirt looks directly BACK at the camera.
How did they catch her? How were they aware of the camera?
Who needs American CIA when the cut-throats in Iran are vying for power?
DMG
You raise some good point.
I think it's just speculation to try to determine exactly how this woman was wounded and by whom. Or, if she was truly wounded.
However, what's not speculation is the argument that we are purposely being showing this graphic video for some ulterior motive.
Remember, there was video of Sadaam dying that never made it on to the mainstream news shows. Saddaam Hussein, a man we blamed for the Iraq War, and the videos were all over the interent. And they were never shown like this Iranian chicks video. When hostages were getting their heads chopped off, that wasn't shown in full detail on the news either.
I think there is something strange about the media's willingness to say this woman was killed by Iranian forces with no real proof, and then show the public her death over and over again.
I don't think any rational person can come to another conclusion.
Something is wrong here. Whether DV is right or not, something is not right with this whole situation.
"However, what's not speculation is the argument that we are purposely being showing this graphic video for some ulterior motive"
Um, Big Man, suggesting that there is an ulterior motive is speculation.
What is so crazy and out of sorts of a random girl dying in the streets during a protest march?
What's strange about her being killed by Iranian forces? She lives in IRAN. She's protesting in IRAN, against what is thought to be a fraudulent election in IRAN.
I don't think anything is wrong other than this girl got killed.
You guys are over thinking this. Period.
Protests are going on in a foreign country and somehow you Negroes think it's all for the benefit of manipulating Americans. I learned the world didn't revolve around me when I was 3.
"In international conflicts, the truth is hard to come by because most nations are deceived about themselves." ML King, Jr.
"However, the CIA is giving arms-length support, supplying money and weapons, to an Iranian militant group, Jundullah, which has conducted raids into Iran from bases in Pakistan."
No doubt, because they must be more clandestine than they were in 1953.
http://futurefastforward.com/feature-articles/1936
Nevertheless, the objective has to be the same—undermine another democratically elected Iranian government, while the real goal is the overthrow of the Iranian Islamic Revolution.
Without any evidence, many US politicians and “Iran experts” have dismissed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s re-election on Friday, with 62.6 per cent of the vote, as fraud.
They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 per cent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 per cent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The shock of the “Iran experts” over Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking.
Although Iran’s elections are not free by Western standards, the Islamic Republic has a 30-year history of highly contested and competitive elections at the presidential, parliamentary and local levels. Manipulation has always been there, as it is in many other countries. But upsets occur — as, most notably, with Mohammed Khatami’s surprise victory in the 1997 presidential election. Moreover, “blowouts” also occur — as in Khatami’s re-election in 2001, Ahmadinejad’s first victory in 2005 and, we would argue, this year.
Like much of the Western media, most American “Iran experts” overstated Mirhossein Mousavi’s “surge” over the campaign’s final weeks. More important, they were oblivious — as in 2005 — to Ahmadinejad’s effectiveness as a populist politician and campaigner.
American “Iran experts” missed how Ahmadinejad was perceived by most Iranians as having won the nationally televised debates with his three opponents — especially his debate with Mousavi.
The one poll conducted before Friday’s election by a Western organisation that was transparent about its methodology — a telephone poll carried out by the Washington-based Terror-Free Tomorrow from May 11 to 20 — found Ahmadinejad running 20 points ahead of Mousavi. This poll was conducted before the televised debates in which, as noted above, Ahmadinejad was perceived to have done well while Mousavi did poorly. ---
By Flynt Leverett who directs The New America Foundation’s Iran Project and teaches international affairs at Pennsylvania State University, and Hillary Mann Leverett who is CEO of STRATEGA, a political risk consultancy. Both worked for many years on Middle East issues for the US government, including as members of the National Security Council staff.
DMG
You are a doctor. You know infinitely more than I do about science. You have practical experience in medicine.
If you laid out a case for me about exactly how something was happening in the medical profession, I would pay attention because you have credentials that say you have some knowledge. I wouldn't automatically agree with you, but I wouldn't assume you have the mindest of a child.
I work in the media. I have studied the media extensively. I understand how news decisions are made, and I understand that while sometime things are simple, sometimes they are more complex.
A violent riot is news. People getting shot in the streets is news. There is nothing weird about that.
However, the way news is presented is what is really key. The way this issue has been presented follows the narrative that the current regime in Iran is bad, the people there want to be rid of it and the current regime is willing to cheat to stay power. That's what the TV news has reported, while also showing the world graphic videos including one showing a woman actually die.
Ask yourself DMG, when was the last time I saw somebody die on the news? Not a body, but actually watched a closeup video of somebody die.
Why has this wall been broken?
Now, I want you to consider the current news coverage in the context of the U.S. history with Iran and our feelings about its current president.
Consiering all of thse things, can you honestly say you don't see an ulterior motive in the stories being fed to the public? It's obvious to me.
The Iran president is bad. The people want him gone. Maybe we should do something about it.
That's the message. Now, I don't know who is pushing that message, but that's the message.
Big Man.
You are absolutely right.
The reality of Neda's death pales in comparison to the media event of Neda's death.
The media image force fed Plantation Negros and Plantation Crackas right now is one designed to garner empathy for the soulless "Green Revolution" which looks like it was born in a Kinkos.
Reverse engineering the media diet spoon fed by the plantation gives one excellent insight into the policies of the Plantation and probable reality of ones future.
Hell, reverse engineering the food diet spoon fed by the plantation also gives one excellent insight into the policies of the Plantation and probable reality of ones future.
Just as reverse engineering the vaccines spoon fed by the plantation gives one excellent insight into the policies of the Plantation and probable reality of ones future.
Failure to reverse engineer what is put in ones mouth is the same relationship a dog has with his master.
Why is the Plantation imprinting the death of Neda into the minds of the world?
Also, I believe the Wash Post did a story showing that margin the Iranian president won by, was backed up by pre-election polls showing him with decent support.
Let me see if I can find that article.
Big Man,
Want to know something funny. I agree with alot of you wrote. I try to approach things by making the fewest assumptions possible. I construct the picture of what is going on by being skeptical of the source of information. I like to cross reference my information, and if I can read foreign newspapers in the language it's printed (I read decently in French and German, and sometimes make out some Swedish if I'm really interested), and I know alot of folks from different countries.
"Ask yourself DMG, when was the last time I saw somebody die on the news?...Why has this wall been broken?"
I think one reason this wall has been broken is that network news and reporting is dying a slow death, because of small portable cameras and video recorders connected almost seamlessly to the internet. The media is changing. Anybody can post a story now. I expect more of this in the future, as traditional networks try to keep pace.
"Considering all of these things, can you honestly say you don't see an ulterior motive in the stories being fed to the public? It's obvious to me."
Saying there is an ulterior motive IS speculation, whether it's true or not. There's nothing wrong with being skeptical of an entities motives, if you think they might be ulterior be cautious, however recognize that you could be wrong about their motives.
"The Iran president is bad. The people want him gone. Maybe we should do something about it."
I've been asking you guys to look at this for a few days now. Of course I see this. Americans can't even find Iran on a map, and are used to having things simplified for them as good or bad. Ahmandinejad=crazy=hates Israel=bad. Anybody else=good, without ever questioning who this Mousavi fellow is. Instead of focusing on whether the CIA had Neda killed, maybe you should focus your attention on why Mousavi (who had to be approved the the Ruling Council to even participate in the election) is challenging the results. How different is he from Ahmandinejad? Mousavi was part of the '79 Revolution, he held high positions until he fell out of favor. Has he really changed so much during his retirement? It appears that Mousavi is being hailed as hero. Why? Does the United States favor him? Why? Was he offered any inducements to run? Haven't heard any of that here.
Why you all are focusing on who shot this girl and why is beyond me, when more intriguing questions should be asked.
DMG
I agree with you. My comment was speculation. My original comment was incorrect.
Also, I haven't focused on who killed. I have not mentioned the CIA or snipers or anything of the sort. Not because I believe that would be impossible, but because that would be pure speculation on a subject I'm not that informed about.
I've just pointed out how strange the presentation of her death has been, and wondered why these decision were made.
We share a similar mindset on this, I'm just much more cynical about the media since I work with these folks.
Also, I think DV wants people to agree that the girl's death was staged, because it makes his larger arguments about the NWO and Illuminati stronger.
So, I think that if you agreed with him on the staging of the death, then he would move on to his next argument.
Personally, I'm not sure who is pushing this Iran thing. But, I feel sure that somebody is pushing.
"It is unknown if it was an entrance or exit wound. There is inadequate information to assess where and from how far this weapons fire came. Actually, it's unknown if this was even from small arms fire, as we do not see or hear a shot in the video. For all we know she could have been hit from high velocity shrapnel from a explosive device some distance away."
That's my whole point. There's hundreds of people violently killed everyday. Probably in Detroit or DC alone.
Just because she's attractive and in Iran though - her death has been exploited as a "martyr" for a political agenda.
Despite the fact that she wasn't even protesting, just standing around. And there is no proof that she was shot for any of her beliefs, that she wasn't even expressing. Much less who shot her.
Let's face it - a spook probably just sighted the best-looking, random woman in the crowd who'd make the best global posterbabe for anti-Muslim sentiment and pulled zee trigger. Operation Posterbabe.
DV,
The problem with your take is the idea that there is no agency amongst those cut-throat jihadists in Iran.
So America has interest in toppling the regime in Iran...
But fools in Iran have interest in toppling the regime in Iran, too!
Why would you put it past cut-throats in Iran to murder a Westernized "Neda" and then release on the Internet?
Why would you put it past cut-throats in Iran to stage a "murder" of a Westernized "Neda" specifically for Westernized fools?
It looks to as though there is a real and violent contesting of power between Iranians.
America doesn't have to be friends with either.
"So America has interest in toppling the regime in Iran..."
Wrong.
Americans have no more of an interest in "toppling the regime in Iran" ... than Americans had an interest in "toppling the regime in Iraq".
Insane secular ideologues in control of the American apparatus of government have an interest in toppling Islamic governments because their particular mythology requires a "clash of civilizations".
Which, when extrapolated is a Hegelian clash between East and West, Christianity and Islam, Secularism and God - however you choose to look at it.
What I think you and cats like DMG are overlooking is not the event of Neda's murder but the use of her murder.
I submit that those ideological forces profiting from Neda's death, are most likely behind it.
Insane secular ideologues in control of the American apparatus of government have an interest in toppling Islamic governments because their particular mythology requires a "clash of civilizations".
If "their particular mythology" = "our utterly gluttonous and unsustainable way of life".
Correct.
Iran has the geopolitical misfortune of being situated on top of the other half of the empire's 240 Billion barrel, proven reserves ocean of sweet, light, crude oil - the other half of which is situated beneath Iraq.
Period.
Americans are more addicted to that utterly unsustainable and completely oil-dependent way of life than Michael Jackson was addicted to the multimillion dollar appurtenances and opiates masking his inner maladjustments..,
CNu
If they want the oil, why not buy it?
If not to fat, hamburger eating, SUV driving Americans - to whom are the Iranians to sell this oil?
There are a lot cheaper ways to acquire oil than regime change and the perpetual threat of nuclear terror.
If they want the oil, why not buy it?
Iran is not Saudi Arabia DV.
Iran supplies its nationalized oil exclusively on its own terms.
If not to fat, hamburger eating, SUV driving Americans - to whom are the Iranians to sell this oil?
To 80 million, wannabe Hummer driving Chinese....,
There are a lot cheaper ways to acquire oil than regime change and the perpetual threat of nuclear terror.
Wrong.
Nuclear war is cheap.
The U.S. simply utilizes costly to maintain elements of an oversized, old, existing arsenal.
This whole "threat" issue can be resolved overnight right along with the overpopulation problems plaguing continuity of the non-negotiable American "way of life".
The efforts at regime change and narrative reconstruction won't last much longer now. Pretty soon, all bedtime story bets will be off and then the nuke-slinging will begin in earnest.
There's no other plausible ending to this story that's been 70 years in the making now.
Frankly, I don't believe Iran's Mahdi-craving Ayatollah leadership would have it end any other way either....,
Whether bible-thumping or turban-wearing - empowered bibtards are the most dangerous muhfuggahs on the face of the earth.
Post a Comment