Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Hersh reports on a secret Congress-approved plan for activities ranging from supporting dissident groups to spying on Iran's nuclear program.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Sy Hersh: Congress Is Funding Major Escalation in Secret Operations Against Iran

By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!. Posted July 1, 2008.


Hersh reports on a secret Congress-approved plan for activities ranging from supporting dissident groups to spying on Iran's nuclear program.
Advertisement

Congressional leaders agreed to a request from President Bush last year to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran aimed at destabilizing Iran's leadership. This according to a new article by veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker magazine.

The operations were set out in a highly classified Presidential Finding signed by Bush which, by law, must be made known to Democratic and Republican House and Senate leaders and ranking members of the intelligence committees. The plan allowed up to $400 million in covert spending for activities ranging from supporting dissident groups to spying on Iran's nuclear program.

According to Hersh, US Special Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq since last year. These have included seizing members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of so-called "high-value targets" who may be captured or killed.

While covert operations against Iran are not new, Hersh writes that the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command, have now been significantly expanded.

Seymour Hersh is a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist. He joined Democracy Now! from Washington DC.

Amy Goodman: Start off by talking about how you learned this information.

Seymour Hersh: Well, that stops me for a second. Here's the problem with that question: the problem is this is all very classified, and let's just say that in general, there are a lot of people that are very loyal to the United States -- military people, people in special operations, people elsewhere in the Congress offices people in the Executive -- who are increasingly being made anxious (and I think frightened is a fairly good word, too) about what this president and the vice-president may do in Iran. And so, it was from that quarter, I was able to learn that, The problem, the problem with the finding, and the problem with the whole story, and the complication is, that almost the last people it seems to me to know exactly what our special forces are doing, particularly the Joint Special Operations Command, which is a very elite unit whose mission essentially is -- this is a separate unit of the Special Operations Command called JSOC -- their unit is to go find and kill and capture if possible high-value targets anywhere in the world. The whole world's a free fire zone for them. When they get into a place like Iran, where they are, the Congress isn't told. So, Congress did approve -- and the words were very careful: "up to" because the president wanted as much as that (we just don't know how much he's taken at this point) -- four hundred million dollars for operations. And then they discover that the operations they approved may go way beyond what they think they were approving. It's sort of like the end of democracy in a way. We don't know what the government is doing. People on the inside don't know what the government is doing. It was from this sort of collective angst that people began to talk to me about the operations.

Goodman: Can you talk about the Democratic-controlled Congress and what exactly it approved late last year?

Hersh: Late last year, at the time of the -- as many in the audience will remember -- the National Intelligence Estimate was made public, in late November/early December. And that was a document that -- I don't know why, but it's been totally devalued by everybody, including all of the candidates. Both the two Democratic candidates during the primary and McCain kept on talking about Iran as if it were on the edge of being nuclear. What the NIE said, and it was a really very carefully done document, it said that since 2003, the evidence is clear that Iran has not pushed a weapons program. There is no evidence they're actually seeking weapons, as they've been saying. And that's what the NIE said at this same time as we all know this president, and the vice-president, and the Secretary of Defense, and the National Security Advisor, and the Secretary of State, they've all disavowed it just as if it didn't exist.

At that time, Bush went to Congress with a finding that said "I need this huge chunk of money to continue operations." He has the right as president to ask that only a few members of Congress -- it's know in the laws sort of informally as the Gang of Eight. And that would be the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, her counterpart, the leading Republican in the House, the Majority Leader in the Senate, Harry Reid of Nevada, his counterpart, and all the Democrat and Republican chairmans of the House and Senate. Intelligence Committee, in the case of the Democrats, it's Rockefeller in the Senate and Reyes from Texas in the House. So you have those four Democrats got a chop at this. The finding was given to them, particularly the Intelligence Committee's lawyers look at it, and did nothing. And the money was, eventually the money was appropriated by both the House and Senate Defense Appropriations Sub-Committee, just as a line item.

Congress -- the rest of the Congress knows nothing about these kind of operations. When it gets to highly classified operations, the money is promulgated through the highly-classified Defense Appropriations Sub-Committee. And the rest of the people in the business -- on the floor, in various committees -- it could be the other side of the moon as far as they're concerned. But those eight people, the four Democrats: Reid, Pelosi, Rockefeller, and Reyes, did nothing. And it's complicated because I can't tell you officially … there's the answer everybody gives, is "We can't talk about this kind of stuff." That's the amazing, that's sort of the Catch 22.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: congress, iran, seymour hersh

Amy Goodman is the host of the nationally syndicated radio news program, Democracy Now!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
'show me who you walk with and I'll tell you what you are..'
Posted by: weathered on Jul 1, 2008 2:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please free us from the remarkable arrogance and manipulating deceit that is Israel.

Its not a relationship, its extortion and it has come at our immense expense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Agreed... Posted by: Democratic Socialist
Wow
Posted by: Dboy on Jul 1, 2008 3:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great interview Amy. Very interesting stuff in there. Thanks a lot. Confirmed my suspicions about Israel not doing it, confirmed my suspicions on what the hold-up has been, confirmed that McCain is Bush's third term (McCain's gotta hate that accusation, especially after this interview since it's obviously true). I had been wondering about the political ramifications on doing the Iran operation after the election...I had assumed that it just wouldn't be possible; guess I was wrong. Let's hope somebody can talk some sense into these people or keep them occupied with crossword puzzles or something until 09. It's a real shame that the democrats lacked the backbone to impeach. Even if the impeachment wasn't a success it could possibly have damaged the administration enough so that Iran would not be possible.

dboy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not too late Posted by: chrysalis124812
» RE: Not too late Posted by: Dboy
So a Progress Check on How Our Human Elites Have Been Performing
Posted by: opmoc on Jul 1, 2008 3:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last century they provoked Two World Wars, and then armed the World with Nuclear weapons so that we could kill each other 10 times over - even just by a mistake.

They allowed religious and cultural divisions to promote mass human breeding resulting in totally unsustainable population growth.

Whilst there was great technical progress - this really only benefited a small fraction of the human population - and devastated the quality of life of most of the poorest in the World.

More recently the financial elite have conspired to produce an enormous financial collapse potentially impoverishing everyone except a tiny elite

And they have allowed the World's strongest Military Power to be controlled by a bunch of crazed religious neocon fanatics who "believe" that Iran poses a danager to the rest of the World - despite all the evidence that it is they themsleves that are the problem.

Lets face it guys - you've done a completely appalling job.

Its time for the lot of you to give it up, stop trying and spend your money on something useful that will benefit both the planet and the human race.

You couldn't run a piss-up in a brewery - so stop trying to control the human race.

You are totally incompetent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

nothing new, other than magnitude
Posted by: kiel on Jul 1, 2008 6:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure anything is new here, other than the dangerous scale of US-funded anti-Iranian interference. People like Noam Chmsky have been talking for years about several different groups internal and external to Iran that the US has been funding in order to try to destabilize/overthrow the Iranian gov't. It's been going on since 1979. Heck, we funded Saddam Hussein's war against Iran...Remember? Compared to that murderous campaign, what, if anything, Iran is doing in Iraq now is like flies on dung.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pelosi is up for re-election every two years
Posted by: rjgwood on Jul 1, 2008 6:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She needs to be tossed out on her ass and replaced with a progressive. Is anyone challenging her?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Right--Cindy Sheehan for Congress Posted by: socialpsych
LOL
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Jul 1, 2008 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With Dictator Bush and his Global Domination efforts at hand, it wouldnt surprise me in the least.

JT
Is your ISP watching?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BETWEEN HIRSH AND SCOTT RITTER - I WONDER
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jul 1, 2008 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why these two men are just blown off? I just read an interview with Ritter and he's just as convinced that Iran is not the threat or the problem. Joe Biden has stated that If there's any military action against Iran without Congressional apporoval he will begin impeachment proceedings. He's a decent guy and I believe him. I DON'T believe that everything begins and ends with Nancy Pelosi. Sounds like another way to pass the buck. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Undeclared War.
Posted by: itchyvet on Jul 1, 2008 9:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excuse me, how can this be news, when it's been common knowledge for the past thirty years and more recently the renewed efforts to infiltrate Iran, kidnap Iranians, sow disent and even blow up their Mosques all paid for by the U.S. of A.

If it were another country doing the same to the U.S. what would be the response of the American people ?

So why is it OK for Americans to wage an undeclared war against another country that has done them no wrong ?
Why is such aggression SUPPORTED by the majority of Americans ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Undeclared War. Posted by: Dboy
what else is new.......
Posted by: blueapples26 on Jul 1, 2008 9:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
how to stop this shite. strangle the funding of all war by not working in the cystem, stop paying your taxes to the cystem. doing this alone will dry up the cystem into dust. growing your own food is a revolutionary act against the cystem. use the endowed creativity within to break the shackles of fear that has been imbued in ourselves since time was created.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iran is a very definite threat but more intelligence is needed
Posted by: Libertarian Paternalist on Jul 1, 2008 9:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The response to beef up surveillance both regular and clandestine is a very good thing. Had the US had had the eye on the ball they would not have been caught of guard by the Taliban or by Saddam.

If you have bad information, you make bad decisions. If you have good information, intelligence you can make informed decisions without speculation.

Personally I would go to any length to keep nuclear weapons out of Iranian hand, short of a full scale invasion. but the threat must always be implied, the Ayatollahs and Ahmadinejad must always fear the risk and invasion.

I would probably support an air strike if things got that far, as far as i can understand the point of no return will come early 2010. At that time th Iranians have full capability of building nuclear bombs.

It is a shame that Iran has such an totalitarian and emphasized regime. Many of my best friends in Sweden are Iranian liberals and they assure me that the Iranian people hate the ayatollahs and Ahmadinejad with a vengeance, in particular the young under 25, some 50 % of the population. The love America, its values and its free market society.

Ahmadinejad share many post-structural left liberals hate in general for modernity, the free market and liberal democracy and the hate for the US in particular.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ahmadinejad is a certified fanatic and a lunatic Posted by: Libertarian Paternalist
» RE: Why are you talking about Bush? Posted by: Ydotheyhateus
» News flash Posted by: Dboy
Gracie
Posted by: skynk on Jul 1, 2008 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a question. Will we ,the American people, finally take to the streets BEFORE an attack on Iran ? It seems to be it could be our only recourse. Gracie

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gracie Posted by: Dboy
Your views are of the imperialist interventionist wing ofthe Libertarians eh?
Posted by: nightgaunt on Jul 1, 2008 10:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How were we "caught off guard by the Taliban and Saddam"? Saddam was on our payroll from 1983 to 1990 when he became persona non grata to the Bush #41 regime. Taliban was helped in to control Afghanistan by the USA after the hated Northern Alliance* was defeated. *{Called the other Taliban.} That is before the Taliban didn't react fast enough and in the proper deferential way to the power of the USA and was driven out. Though now resurgent. Curiously Iraq was one of the most western of countries in the area but now since the destruction, mass murder and war crimes of the USA it has become just as bad as Iran and Saudi Arabia but without the amenties of the 20th century.

One thing about Iran that differs from the USA is that they haven't invaded and/or occupied anybody for 287 years. Also the Iranians are very nationalistic and don't have the divisions found in Iraq so an attack would just unite them. Also Achmadinajad is just the titular president which has no power, it is the Supreme Ayatolla Kameni who gave the fatwa in 2003 that said the Koran supports nuclear energy but not nuclear weapons. Notice in the corporate press how that fact is never mentioned in this important relation.

Unlike you I am against any kind of gov't intervention in any other country. However if you wanted to do that yourself it would be fine by me. That is now illegal. Same with financial dealings everyone is on the same page of worker rights etc.

Because they are down wind it would be dangerous for Isreal to attack Iran's 'nuclear' sites. Also with some 1 million men under arms Iran could make things very bad for Isreal. It would also be bad all around if the "Sampson Option" was used by Isreal in fear of defeat. This would mean world war three is full on instead of the low simmer in occupied Iraq and Afghanistan that it is now. The tenth crusade to become the next global atrocity--worse than last century for many more can die than the 1914-1991 period.

I consider myself an anarchist-socialist with limited gov't but much greater freedom for individuals. No national army but national military training and in morality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Iran need to be contained, not intervened in Posted by: Libertarian Paternalist
NIE : iran had a program for a bomb??
Posted by: nap on Jul 1, 2008 11:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hersh makes an interesting comment on how the NIE was worded. They assert that there was no nuclear program after 2003. He points out that one shouldn't conclude that there was a program before that. To me that sounds a lot more accurate than the conclusion out of the blue that Iran ever had such a program.

What they do have is projects that are deliberately ambiguous, but I think that is as far as they're willing to go. These are bargain chips, and guess what, before starting negotiations, they have to give up those bargain chips.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Question for Seymour
Posted by: nap on Jul 1, 2008 11:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you take in account that

- the military had far too few people to control the area
- This Bremer guy arrives and starts taking destabilising decisions that bewilder the generals
- a huge secret and or private army was able to do things that the army had no right to know about
- and a few thinktanks proposing to break up the country
- and a few other things

could it be that Cheney decided to break up Iraq in 3 separate regions and could arrange for internal battles to break out(black flag stuff), without even having to tell anyone? There is always incompetence of course. But that can be an alibi. Cheney isn't incompetent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And GOD CONTINUES TO PUNISH AMERICA IN WAYS NEVER BEFORE WITNESSED IN AMERICAN HISTORY !!!!
Posted by: maxpayne on Jul 1, 2008 12:14 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alrighty then. So do you want to keep letting both the Democrats and Republicans ABUSE your votes or are you all ready to SHUT UP AND VOTE 3rd Party for a change ?!?!?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

meanwhile, at the Counterpunch place...
Posted by: nap on Jul 1, 2008 12:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alexander Cockburn strains to point out they were first.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sy Hersh and Iran.
Posted by: soccess on Jul 2, 2008 3:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sending in SF teams into sovereign territory to kidnap armed forces members? How is this not an act of war?
I seem to remember from a previous Hersh article that the US is financing "rebel" groups who are committing car bombings and other attacks within Iran.
The congress has been utterly gutless in dealing with the Bush administration on Iraq and it is now laying the groundwork an even more disastrous adventure in Iran.
It seems clear that Bush and Cheney are determined to start a war with Iran before they leave office, either acting directly or more likely through their Israeli proxies.
If congress does not act in a determined, moral manner to rein in this lunacy then they will be as responsible as Bushco for the whole region going up in flames.
I honestly believe at this point that there is no real alternative to a draft in the US. It would focus everyone's minds wonderfully if their own children stood to be endangered by foreign adventures and it would lighten the hideous load now being borne by the patriots who didn't "have other priorities" a la Cheney.
The cloud - rednecks will have to push their pickups to mcdonalds to get their freedom fries. The silver lining - a chance to clean up investing in Halliburton and Blackwter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sy Hersh and Iran. Posted by: Dboy
David Eccles
Posted by: deccles on Jul 3, 2008 4:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey folks. Lets give credit where credit is due. It took Sy Hersch and the NewYorker 2 full months to publish a story first discussed in far better detail by Patrick Cockburn and the folks at Counterpunch.org. Hersch even admits to it in the New Yorker article.

Here's the link to both stories.

Orginal Coverage

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: David Eccles Posted by: deccles
» RE: David Eccles Posted by: nap
Why
Posted by: oxheadone on Jul 3, 2008 10:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
with all this concern about the price of oil and gasoline, does no one say that the end of the Iraq war and stopping the speculation about attacking Iran could go a long and quick way to stopping the speculation driving oil and gas prices?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]