On Tuesday’s "World News," reporter Brian Ross exposed a CIA sponsored plan to enact covert action against Iran’s economic structure. On Wednesday’s "Good Morning America," the ABC program attempted to portray the plan in as hyperbolic a manner as possible. This is the graphic that accompanied Mr. Ross’ report for the May 23 GMA: "America’s Hidden War With Iran? CIA’s Secret Operation"
Include an introduction by co-host Chris Cuomo that described the operation as "covert actions aimed at destabilizing the regime," and one might think that some sort of military action was imminent. Finally, Ross described the specifics of the operation, some 30 seconds into the report:
Brian Ross: "Intelligence officials describe the CIA’s Iranian plan as non-lethal, involving a coordinated campaign of propaganda broadcasts, placement of negative newspaper articles, and the manipulation of Iran's currency and international banking transactions..."
Non-lethal? Placement of negative newspaper articles? Does this warrant a graphic warning about America’s "hidden war?"
During Tuesday’s "World News," Ross reported the story in a similar, expanded style, although the segment was free from any mention of a "hidden war."
Several conservative blogs, including NewsBusters, have already made the point that ABC may have undermined America’s a prime opportunity at stopping Iran in a non-military operation:
Ross and ABC News have purposefully undermined the non-military removal of a government that is a proud state sponsor of terrorism. If Ross and ABC News are successful in derailing covert non-military attempts to replace the Iranian government, then a military option may very well end up being our last remaining option.
Update 2007-05-23 17:23 -0400:
Brian Ross has actually done this sort of thing before. As the MRC's Brent Baker noted on April 3, he exposed a "secret war" to stop extremist Iranian leaders from using nuclear weapons:
A night after leading with an "exclusive" about the more imminent than thought horrific threat posed by Iran's nuclear weapons capability, ABC's World News began Tuesday with another Brian Ross "exclusive" in which he exposed a clandestine "secret war" inside Iran, a revelation that seemingly could undermine U.S. efforts to prevent Iran's extremist leaders from using those weapons of mass destruction. "Tonight," anchor Charles Gibson announced at the top of Monday's World News, "an alarming acceleration of Iran's nuclear program. Iran could have material for a bomb in two years. A Brian Ross exclusive."
A transcript of the GMA segment, which aired at 7:05am on May 23 follows:
ABC Graphic: America’s Hidden War With Iran? CIA’s Secret Operation
Chris Cuomo: "We have an ABC News exclusive for you. We’ve learned President Bush has authorized the CIA to carry out covert operations against Iran aimed at destabilizing the regime there. Our chief investigative correspondent Brian Ross is here with the details. Brian?"
Brian Ross: "Good morning, Chris. Current and former intelligence officials tell ABC News that Mr. Bush has signed an official presidential finding authorizing the CIA to carry out what is known as a black or covert operation against Iran. Intelligence officials describe the CIA’s Iranian plan as non-lethal, involving a coordinated campaign of propaganda broadcasts, placement of negative newspaper articles, and the manipulation of Iran's currency and international banking transactions, all playing to perceived vulnerabilities in Iran, according to former Assistant Secretary of Defense Peter Rodman."
Peter Rodman (Former Asst. Secretary of Defense): "I think it's economically vulnerable. I think there is ferment in the country. I suspect there are a lot of people among intellectuals, among students, even in political life, who really don't like this clerical regime."
Ross: "Officials say the CIA plan takes the place of proposed U.S. military action against Iran, reportedly advocated by Vice President Cheney."
Bruce Riedel (Former CIA official): "I think they've come to the conclusion a military strike has more down sides than up sides."
Ross: "Officials in Iran have already accused the CIA of running a secret operation to bring down the regime. As ABC News reported last month, the U.S. has been secretly encouraging a Pakistan-based militant group which has carried out a series of attacks on Iranian military units. For the record, the White House and CIA say they do not, as a matter of course, comment on matters involving national security or alleged covert action. Chris?"
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Hidden war? What the <bl
May 23, 2007 - 11:37 ET by mattmHidden war? What the <blank> do they think is going on here?
Iran to Buy Russian Air Defense System Via Syria
I think it's well past time f
May 23, 2007 - 11:47 ET by MentalrushI think it's well past time for some folks to be prosecuted. Dissent is one thing, a proper thing, a neccessary thing; actively undermining your country and aiding the enemy is another. How much longer are we suppose to sit around and take this crap?
prosecution is in order
May 23, 2007 - 19:19 ET by LionKingAll it takes is just ONCE!!! If we just prosecute one of the news outlets just once, then the back-stabbing MSM will start acting responsibly.
LK... I agree completely...un
May 23, 2007 - 19:33 ET by bigtimerLK...
I agree completely...until there is accountability they will continue on destroying this country if possible.
"Ross and ABC News have
May 23, 2007 - 11:50 ET by Agnostic front"Ross and ABC News have purposefully undermined the non-military removal of a government that is a proud state sponsor of terrorism." - That's just silly. Doesd anyone really believe that if ABC and Ross found out about the CIA's campaign that Iran didn't already know what was going on? That's akin to saying that our government finds out about terrorist plots from Al Jazeera.
Af...Silly you say?Pathetic.
May 23, 2007 - 11:54 ET by bigtimerAf...
Silly you say?
Pathetic.
Agnostic Front...It's not lik
May 23, 2007 - 11:56 ET by jpatchAgnostic Front...
It's not like ABC just gave the Iranians our battlefield positions, but they are OBVIOUSLY functioning with an agenda here, and they are putting our soldiers lives at risk, not to mention jeopardizing our chances of success in the region.
But the bottom line remains: the MSM is already framing this issue to be anti-American, anti-Bush, and as just another "war" that W. is trying to start.
"Heads up," they say, "George Bush and his gang of thugs is about to start another war with Iran...God this man is a war monger!! Our country would be saved if only Al Gore or Barack Obama were President...and speaking of Barack Obama, we have his beautiful, loving, strong, intelligent, generous, worldy and charasmatic wife here to talk with us about Barack's favorite foods, his penchant for handing out $100 bills to homeless people, and his new Prius that he bought with his modest $160,000 salary."
A news organization that fin
May 23, 2007 - 12:05 ET by Agnostic frontA news organization that finds out about our government's overseas activity has an obligation to inform us about that activity. We have to know what's going on, if that info doesn't harm national security. This info obviously does not harm national security. As I said above, Iran most certainly already knew of the activities that we were taking. Iran just cannot do anything about it.
Af...We have to know what's g
May 23, 2007 - 12:12 ET by bigtimerAf...
We have to know what's going on, if that info doesn't harm national security. This info obviously does not harm national security.
Like I said before...
Pathetic.
"an obligation to inform us"
May 23, 2007 - 12:17 ET by RJ"an obligation to inform us"
Pathetic indeed. Agnostic Front sounds like he would have enjoyed being a member of the fifth column during the Second World War.
So the media gets wind of inf
May 23, 2007 - 12:25 ET by Agnostic frontSo the media gets wind of info regarding our government's activities and it is supposed to sit on it? Just let the government do what it wants? I thought the right was for limiting government activity. Who'd thunk the rightwingers trusted the government that much?
You are absolutely wrong! A
May 23, 2007 - 12:31 ET by Gat New YorkYou are absolutely wrong!
A media organization's obligation is to use its discretion when it comes to (1) the safety of U.S. citizens and (2) the security interests of the United States in a time of war. We are at war and Iran has been conducting a proxy war and intentionally killing our soldiers. There are likely U.S. operatives in Iran involved in this and it risks their lives. Brian Ross and ABC should be investigated for treason and let that send some chills into the irresponsible and reckless actions of partisan media.
"loose lips sink ships&q
May 23, 2007 - 14:01 ET by TruthMonger"loose lips sink ships"
What you're referring to is t
May 23, 2007 - 12:31 ET by jpatchWhat you're referring to is the 1st ammendment, and it was not created to act as a check or balance against the government...that's what the three branches are for, in case you've forgotten, the Judicial, the Executive, and the Legislative branches.
And you think because we're condemming this behavior from the MSM, that we just lap-up everything that the Govt. throws down? Quite the contrary, we just happen to have brains of our own, so we don't need some liberal, lying talking-head to feed us our news...we read everything, and make our INFORMED opinions from that information. You should give it a try.
Spoken like a true fifth columnist, AF
May 23, 2007 - 12:36 ET by RJUnbelievable. Do you really think that ALL information gathered must be published? No thought of potential harm to the U.S.?
Spoken like a true fifth columnist, AF....or a truly simplistic individual.
Yeah AF the media should shut
May 23, 2007 - 12:40 ET by bigtimerYeah AF the media should shut their freakin' leftist enemy within mouths during a time of war...putting anyone in danger is outrageous...do you not understand this...our military doesn't need this...in the long run you and your family do not need this...the filthy swine we are fighting are the ENEMY...they want us dead!
If you do not understand and see this as plain as the nose on your face you are either stupid, blind or just another enemy within in my opinion.
Little dramatic and over the
May 23, 2007 - 12:51 ET by Agnostic frontLittle dramatic and over the top, there, bigtimer. As I asked previously, do you really think that Iran did not already know of the reported activities?
BTW, with the current adminstration's never ending "war on terror," I guess the media should just permantly keep it's mouth shut.
What ABC has done is tantamou
May 23, 2007 - 12:59 ET by Gat New YorkWhat ABC has done is tantamount to treason in a time of war. This type of reporting was not even done during the Vietnam War. It is called discretion when American lives are at risk. Iran is conducting a proxy war against the U.S. and has been killing American soldiers. And Yes during a war to a degree the media has a tradition and responsilbility to keep its mouth shut.
Dramatic, yes. Wars tend to
May 23, 2007 - 12:59 ET by i was just thinkingDramatic, yes. Wars tend to be so. Over the top? Hardly.
When Clinton bombed an aspirin factory. If the press had known about that airstrike before hand, should they have announced it?
BTW, it's not the administration's war on terror (nice use of quotation marks, incidentally), it everyone's. Unless, of course, only Republicans were killed on 9/11.
To answer your last question. Yes.
Af...Snap out of it!
May 23, 2007 - 13:28 ET by bigtimerwith the current administration's never ending "war on terror,"
President Bush said it was going to take years...a very long time...what part of his speeches did you not listen to Af.
Al Qaeda was already in 64 countries before the President took office Af....I knew that much ahead of time by reading...they have plenty of splinter groups... the different dictators from different countries, especially Iran... that are aiding and abetting them in different ways, (including the wonderful UN) that want to see our defeat is unbelievable because the media does not report much if any of this.
Dramatic and over the top...you are the one that is over the top in my opinion.
By the way how the heck do you know if Iran already knew this information anyway Af ....huh?
Snap out of it Af....the enemy within wants this administrations defeat along with the conservative party for their own power...in other words...this is an agenda with the leftist media working arm in arm with your side of the aisle.
It isn't going to make a lick of difference if a lot of us are dead now is it Af?
Weren't you one of those dsio
May 23, 2007 - 12:46 ET by NL207Weren't you one of those displaying great umbrage over the risks to US Intelligence personnel and operatives alleged over the outing of Valerie Plame?
Unlike the Plame case, this disclosure has compromised an ongoing operation involving actual covert agents. As such, this is actually a far more serious breach of secrecy than the disclosure of Valerie Plame's ID. Don't you think it hypocritical to remain silent or condone this disclosure?
Let's go back to the myriad threads here on the Plame case and see exactly where it is you stood on this issue!
Unlike the Plame case, this d
May 23, 2007 - 13:05 ET by InsufficientContextUnlike the Plame case, this disclosure has compromised an ongoing operation involving actual covert agents. I'm curious as to what might happen to any civilian reporters, editors, bankers, etc. that the Iranian government suspects of being involved. The Iranians aren't even close to having a rational regime and simply suspecting that someone has ties to someone supsected to be a CIA agent or operative could result in imprisonment or death. This is a lot worse than the whole Plame thing, because this has potential to affect dozens of people(depending on how elaborate the plan was and how insane the response will be).
You are missing the main poin
May 23, 2007 - 13:12 ET by Agnostic frontYou are missing the main point here: Iran already knew! ABC informed them of nothing.
how do you know???
May 23, 2007 - 13:15 ET by misterbillhow do you know??? Are you on an intelligence committee that monitors these things?
(Not meant in a sarcastic sense, quite serious.)
Iranian officials have *accus
May 23, 2007 - 13:30 ET by InsufficientContextIranian officials have *accused* the CIA of running secret operations, that doesn't mean they knew anything about what those operations might have included. Any sort of confirmation from our media gives the Iranian govt evidence(flimsy, but this is Iran we're talking about) that they could use to confront and prosecute someone that they had previously only 'suspected'. As I said earlier, we are not dealing with rational people.
Predictable. Duck and cover
May 23, 2007 - 13:44 ET by NL207Predictable. Duck and cover.
YOU are missing the point here. Everybody with half a brain who knew the Wilsons as well as the Intelligence services of both Russia and Cuba at the least knew exactly where Valerie Plame worked as well, but her disclosure was still a big deal amongst the knucklehead set.
By implication, the leftists upset about Plame were being disingenuous. They were misrepresenting their motives as concern for the security of this country. This is intellectually dishonest. If they were actually concerned about that, this disclosure would bother them. But no, they are cheering this disclosure. They are despicable. If you are one of these as I think you are, then you are despicable as well.
So I understand you correct
May 23, 2007 - 12:21 ET by Troika37So I understand you correctly:
The left says we can't military attack Iran because the world hates us too much over Iraq and our forces are spread too thinly as it is. In addition, they say Iran's nuclear program must be dealt with, provided our 'dealing' doesn't involve weapons.
Now, the CIA finds ways to covertly destablize Ahmalamadingdong's regime internally, and (most importantly to the left) non-lethaly and the leftist media outs the plan, rendering it ineffective.
Wow...
First of all, news organizati
May 23, 2007 - 12:25 ET by jpatchFirst of all, news organizations and journalists in this country have no idea what their obligations are. They are supposed to be obliged to professionalism, i.e. checking sources, checking facts, editing their work before it's printed/aired, being OBJECTIVE.
Secondly, the American public is not on a need to know basis concerning military action. Do people understand that? The United States is trying to fight a war, this is not a d*mn game. We don't need to know the secrets of CIA operations...this is one of the biggest problems with journalists and people like you...you think this is good work...and you're right, if you're Iranian!!!!
WAKE UP!!!! We are being attacked from within every single day...
"We have to know what's going
May 23, 2007 - 12:34 ET by i was just thinking"We have to know what's going on..."
Why? I'm so fed up with the MSM splashing governmental security secrets all over the world headlines, and then hiding behind the phrase "the people's right to know." It's been awhile since I read the Bill of Rights, but I don't recall that one being in there.
Should the press have revealed the U-2 flights in the 1950's if they found out about it? After all, following your logic, "Russia most certainly knew (and actually DID know) of the activities that we were taking. Russia just [could not] do anything about it."
"This info obviously does not harm national security."
I strongly disagree with that. I'm working in Saudi Arabia right now. How do you think that the Middle East will react when they read this headline? Don't you that it might - just might - give the more radical elements here even more reason to hate America? Sounds to me like it has the greatest potential to harm national security.
It's bad enough that I turned on my TV this morning in Riyadh and had to see one of the movie channels running "Fahrenheit 911". Riyadh also gets to watch the "ER" episode that has been discussed in another thread. (That will be on tonight.) Now I read about this. And to make matters worse, the MSM has people like you and their friends on the left to support them in this outrageous disclosure.
"A news organization that finds out about our government's overseas activity has an obligation to inform us about that activity."
Where did you find that? Who says so? The more I think about this disclosure from the media and remarks like yours, the more infuriated I am. If people in the Middle East were ever unsure about America before, the MSM and liberal elements of our country seem hell-bent on making sure that we are portrayed to this region in the worst light possible.
Like it or not, we are at war - both declared and undeclared. Keep your damn mouth SHUT!
The transparency of our gover
May 23, 2007 - 12:59 ET by Agnostic frontThe transparency of our government is paramount to a functional society. Without knowing what our government is up to, we can't take steps necessary to correct it. This is our government. We elected them. They have to answer to us, not the other way around. If we have no idea what they are doing, how can force them to be accountable? They only way to find out what the government is doing is via the press, because the government, especially this administration, certainly won't tell us. I sounds to me like you would have preferred to have lived in the Soviet Union, where there was no media.
Which is it, AF?
May 23, 2007 - 13:02 ET by RJEverything must be published without regard to whether or not it harms the U.S.? What a an incredibly stupid position.
Which is it, AF? Fifth Columnist or stupid? You're one or the other.....
Af...WE ARE AT WAR YOU IMBECI
May 23, 2007 - 13:03 ET by bigtimerAf...
WE ARE AT WAR YOU IMBECILE!
Relegated to name calling aga
May 23, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Agnostic frontRelegated to name calling again, a**clown. You still refuse to accept the basic premise that Iran most certainly already knew of our government's activities. If Iran knew, who did ABC tell about our plans that harms our interests? I'll answer that one for you - no one.
"You still refuse to accept t
May 23, 2007 - 13:17 ET by i was just thinking"You still refuse to accept the basic premise that Iran most certainly already knew of our government's activities."
This time, try READING what I wrote to you earlier. If the Germans already KNEW were going to invade Europe, why shouldn't the press have announced it? (They did know, after all.) If the Russians KNEW about our U-2 flights, why didn't we go ahead and publish the details in the press? If Casto KNEW about the Bay of Pigs invasion, which he did, why didn't the press publish it in the headlines? If the press KNEW about JFK's womanizing in the White House Pool, which they did, why didn't they publish that?
Incidentally,... "Name calling"? Wasn't that you who (indirectly, albeit) called me a communist?
AF...your entire assertion
May 23, 2007 - 13:17 ET by The Wicked ConservativeAF...your entire assertion hinges on "Iran knew what we were doing."
Please provide even one shred of evidence that your not just waxing idiotic!
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
Agnostic front - of course Ir
May 23, 2007 - 13:23 ET by ding7777Agnostic front - of course Iran knows all about the secret(sic) "covert actions aimed at destabilizing the regime," - this American-Iranian women has been under house arrest for 4 months and is now charged.
"Tehran's state-controlled te
May 23, 2007 - 13:43 ET by i was just thinking"Tehran's state-controlled television reported yesterday"
Well, that certainly clears it up for me!
The Germans also said that they were attacked by Poland in 1939, and that the Reich acted in self-defense.
Thank you for your moonbat contributions to this discussion.
i was just thinking - The di
May 23, 2007 - 14:39 ET by ding7777i was just thinking - The discussuion is Bush's secret(sic) signing to allow the CIA to conduct covert operations against Iran - and whether Iran was aware of it before ABC news published it.
By arresting Haleh Esfandiari, an American citizen, for "toppling the government", Iran is telling the world that they are aware of Bush's secret(sic) covert operations.
I recall your umbrage and out
May 23, 2007 - 15:19 ET by NL207I recall your umbrage and outrage over the "outing" of Valerie Plame. Depsite Plame's identity as a CIA employee was widely known on the Washington cocktail circuit, not to mention both Russian and Cunban Intelligence services and whoever else any of these people may have told, you were one of those decrying this as a compromise of the safety of American operatives and were defending Patrick Fitzgerald's witch hunt which neiher aprehended the self-confessed leaker nor established that the leak was even a crime.
Now here, we see you excusing a similar event. Why, Ding? These events are essentially the same in content. Why no umbrage here? Is this because you are intellectually dishonest and a hypocrite? I'd say so!
NL207 - I hope you still
May 23, 2007 - 15:41 ET by ding7777NL207 - I hope you still will have outrage if/when you find out that this is another deliberate leak by the Bush administration - might even be Cheney leaking again.
feckless fool.
May 23, 2007 - 15:50 ET by Gat New Yorkfeckless fool.
If it was Cheney, that would
May 24, 2007 - 08:33 ET by NL207If it was Cheney, that would be grounds for impeachment. Why aren't you, who would greatly desire the impeachment of Cheney, not calling for an invesigation. special prosecutor, etc. as you cheered on the Fitzgerald witch hunt?
Could the reason be that you don't actually believe for one second that this leak was anything other than one of the Democratic moles in the CIA talking out-of-turn to the press?
The burden of the proof is on you, Ding. Everyone here remembers your noisy defense of the Plame case and Libby prosecution. In that case no one could point to a single American operative who was harmed by that leak, yet you postured behind the shield of national security like all of the hypocrital libs did. In this case, we have an American citizen, possibly an agent as well, who has been arrested for a capital offense by Iran. He may be executed. Your blatant hypocrisy we all see. Your intellectual integrity is nowhere to be found.
This is fun. Right now, I OWN you, Ding.
NL207 - Cheney Attempting t
May 24, 2007 - 19:48 ET by ding7777NL207 - Cheney Attempting to Constrain Bush's Choices on Iran Conflict: Staff Engaged in Insubordination Against President Bush
Do you have any ideas of your
May 26, 2007 - 05:22 ET by UnsaneDo you have any ideas of your own as to what the government should be doing, in general? Or are you so bereft of ideas that all you are left with is being anti-everything?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Haleh Esfandiari was hardly l
May 23, 2007 - 13:45 ET by InsufficientContextHaleh Esfandiari was hardly liked by the Iranian Government to begin with . She is a former member of a royal patronage society started by the Shah's sister, exiled herself after the revolution, is an American citizen, and lectures on women's issues and democratic developments. Oh yeah, and she's married to a Jew. She was already considered an enemy of the state. Ever consider the possibility that the charges against her are false? You used Tehran's state-controlled television as a friggin' source!
"You used Tehran's sta
May 23, 2007 - 13:50 ET by MightyMouth"You used Tehran's state-controlled television as a friggin' source!"
Of course! With Ding and his BDS afflicted buddies these sources are much more reliable than the United States Government. You see, the US Goverment is out to "get" them, whereas the Iranian government isn't. Make sense?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
IC..Here is the latest abou
May 23, 2007 - 14:09 ET by bigtimerIC..
Here is the latest about the professor arrested as of an hour ago....http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0523/p99s01-duts.html
Af...you may want to read this and learn something....they have even arrested someone affiliated with a Soros group.
Af...by the way here is the latest from the IAEA http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/05/atomic_watchdog.html
Af...yeah we aren't worried about Iran, we aren't at war with these people who are funding and aiding the enemy all over the place to kill our soldiers in Iraq and cause havoc and death elsewhere.....have you paid any attention to what is going on in Lebanon?
The media should keep their treasonous traps shut or face charges.....
John Edwards is giving a spee
May 23, 2007 - 14:14 ET by Gat New YorkJohn Edwards is giving a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations stating that there is no war. That there is no clash of civilizations. This guy makes Jimmy Carter look competent.
They both make me think about
May 23, 2007 - 14:23 ET by InsufficientContextThey both make me think about what Mr. Rogers might have been like if you cut his balls off. I guess Edwards went for the 'banana-split' as well.
From the first link: "Th
May 23, 2007 - 14:21 ET by InsufficientContextFrom the first link: "The broadcast said Esfandiari confirmed during interrogations that her center "invited Iranians to attend conferences, offered them research projects, scholarships ... and tried to lure influential elements and link them to decision-making centers in America."
That B*tch! I guess maybe someone should stone her...conferences and scholarships...who the hell does she think she is!? The fact that the United States is involved in such disgusting things as education and the free exchange of ideas should not surprise me.
Hey, ding and af, can we be buds now?
IC...Where did ding and Af ru
May 23, 2007 - 14:30 ET by bigtimerIC...
Where did ding and Af run off to...you get them links....poof...just like that.
You ask them a simple question or confront them and ask them for links...poof...just like that.
LMAO.......tells ya all ya need to know.
bigtimer - wrong again!
May 23, 2007 - 14:50 ET by ding7777bigtimer - wrong again!
bigtimer - from your CSM sour
May 23, 2007 - 15:02 ET by ding7777bigtimer - from your CSM source The charges were leveled in by an Iranian Information Ministry statement read on state television.
Oh, boy, InsufficientContext, MightyMouth, and i was just thinking are going to be mad at you for using Iran's state-operated tv station as a source.
On KCNA
May 26, 2007 - 05:23 ET by UnsaneWhat, is KCNA not available? I understand they are a Leftist's favorite...
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
InsuffcientContext - I used
May 23, 2007 - 14:47 ET by ding7777InsuffcientContext - I used WaPo as a source. WaPo used the AP as its source. And the AP use Terhran's tv to report Haleh Esfandiari's arrest. Do you think Tehran should use FoxNews to broadcast the arrest of an American citizen?
Oh, and the discussion is whether Iran was aware of Bush's secret(sic) signing before ABC published it - not if Haleh Esfandiari is guilty or not.
By arresting Haleh Esfandiari
May 23, 2007 - 15:55 ET by InsufficientContextBy arresting Haleh Esfandiari, an American citizen, for "toppling the government", Iran is telling the world that they are aware of Bush's secret(sic) covert operations.
You are the one that brought up Esfandiari in order to provide evidence that Iran was aware of CIA activity. My point is that a state run tv station could easily be used to release propaganda. If the charges against her are false, that means the evidence that you provided is false. So it certainly does matter if she is guilty or not. I don't understand why you are having a hard time following this.
Apart from the 'evidence' you provided and summarily rejected, there was nothing backing up Irans claims until ABC reported it. Iran had simply made a blind accusation. In other words, they suspected CIA involvement and reported it as truth. I suspect your inability to work your brain around the things I have now had to restate has something to do with you smoking a dimebag before coming on line(entirely plausible), but that doesn't mean I know it to be fact. Understand?
InsufficientContext - the
May 23, 2007 - 19:52 ET by ding7777InsufficientContext - there was nothing backing up Irans claims until ABC reported it - How naive are you?
It doesn't matter if arresting Haleh Esfandiari was a push-back or propaganda or whether she's guilty or not.
Iran declared to the world that they are going to arrest American citizens in retaliation for covert CIA action (soft toppling) of Iranian affairs.
If anything, the leak of Bush's secret(sic) signing after Iran announced her arrest should make you suspect that there's more to the ABC "leak" than just condemning ABC
Ding, I'm confused. The lin
May 26, 2007 - 02:47 ET by thefightinggopDing, I'm confused by your post of May 23, 2007 - 14:23. The link you used (to bolster Af's argument that Iran already knew what ABC had reported) said the woman under house arrest "identified the representative in Iran who had set up a network for philanthropist George Soros's Open Society Institute."
Are you suggesting that Soros and Bush are in cahoots with the CIA to bring down Iran? THE same George Soros who has personally spent tens of millions of his own money to smear Bush? The same George Soros who "is famously known for 'breaking the Bank of England'?" And the same George Soros who (according to your own link says), "The long-term and final goal of such centers (referring to Open Society) is to try to enable this network . . . to confront the ruling powers."
You might want to read your links before you post them.
Sounds to me like the only thing Iran knew before ABC's report was that George Soros was the threat, not the CIA.
To take your last statement f
May 23, 2007 - 13:08 ET by i was just thinkingTo take your last statement first. It was completely gratuitous, lacking in reason and logic.
So, by revealing this covert operation... how have held the government accountable? You now know what's going on. The world now knows what's going on. What "steps will you take to correct it"?
In your earlier post, you said that the press should tell us what's going on, as long as it doesn't endanger our national security. Now you're saying that we should be told everything. Which is it going to be?
While you took time to express your views, you said little in the way of a solid counterargument to any of my major points. Simply calling me a fan of the USSR isn't a though-out, reasoned response.
We elected our government to do a job. Now get out of the way and let them do it!
I completely disagree with yo
May 23, 2007 - 13:19 ET by Agnostic frontI completely disagree with your point that once an official is elected he is to be carte blanche authority to do whatever he or she sees fit. How do we correct it? The ways that citizens always try to effect change - vote, contact your congressman, etc.
LOL...what exactly do you t
May 23, 2007 - 13:23 ET by The Wicked ConservativeLOL...what exactly do you think we can do now that we know? A majority of americans are against the immigration reforms blowing through congress yet we can do nothing about it.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
You amaze me. I'm almost at
May 23, 2007 - 13:31 ET by i was just thinkingYou amaze me. I'm almost at a complete loss as to how to respond to you. You have rebutted virtually none of the content of my previous posts. You make one statement...
"I completely disagree with your point that once an official is elected he is to be carte blanche authority to do whatever he or she sees fit."...
that I can't find in any of my previous posts. (Perhaps I'm reading hurriedly - I am somewhat charged up right now.) I NEVER said that the government should be given carte blanche.
What I can't figure out from you is this: when exactly does it cross the line? The conclusion that could be drawn from your statement is that there is no such thing as treason.
Fine. You want accountability. The press found out about the covert operation. What have they "corrected" by publicizing it? What was wrong with the operation in the first place? Why did it NEED to be publically disclosed?
The problem is that press seems to no longer have the ability to view things objectively. They think that if they know, everyone should know. The phrase "responsible journalism" seems to have very little meaning anymore.
Also, if you're going to continue this "discussion" with me, then let's talk about everything I've said to you. You grab one word or phrase, hold on for dear life, throw out your little nuggets of wisdom, but never seriously address any or my major contentions.
Finally, as many others have said, just because YOU think that Iran knew about it doesn't actually mean that they did.
You would be more concerned w
May 23, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Gat New YorkYou would be more concerned with a government that allegedly outed an administrative CIA agent (Valerie Plame) than a media outlet that intentionally outs a secret government operation in Iran and risk the lives of Americans involved and actually undercover. Does that about cover it?
NEWSFLASHDO ALLIES HAVE A SEC
May 24, 2007 - 01:25 ET by gordonNEWSFLASH
DO ALLIES HAVE A SECRET PLAN TO INVADE EUROPE?
Unnamed sources confirmed the existence of Operation Overlord today. Some say the invasion point could be Normandy beach and the President is lying about landing at Pas de Calis. Hundreds of thousands of our soldiers could be killed if the operation goes wrong. People inside the operation speaking off the record expressed doubts that the plan is worth the number of lives it might cost and said that more negotiations with the Nazi regime might stave off such a costly disaster.
(just the kind of story that some here think would not only be ok to write but actually necessary for defending the first amendment.)
insanity must be contagious
On HAVE BLUE
May 26, 2007 - 05:19 ET by UnsaneSo we should have announced the successes of HAVE BLUE to the world in August 1981?
Should we also have invited a delegation from the German and Japanese government to take a tour of the Los Alamos facility during World War II, and explained in minute detail to the American public what the "Manhattan Project" was?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
What?
May 23, 2007 - 20:19 ET by Mr. BishopWhat in the world are you talking about? Any actions taken by the CIA directly affect National Security, at all times. I'd like to see where you claim that a news organization's obligation, is to inform us about the actions of the CIA. Where do you make that claim from?
If homosexuality is genetic, then it must be a birth defect. If it is a birth defect, then stem cell research might provide a cure.
AF that is just a guess--
May 23, 2007 - 13:04 ET by misterbillAF that is just a guess--on your part. Let us just for a moment guess the other way--now they have infiormation that will cause them to escalate their alert level. Someone may be arrested that is a vital source of information to us. On that basis alone. it is treason.
For you to defend it on the basis of "maybe, yeah but" or any other guess is deliberate ignorance on your part.
This is treason. We are in
May 23, 2007 - 11:50 ET by jpatchThis is treason.
We are in the middle of a GLOBAL WAR, and people in this country think this is a game. How much more of this are we supposed to take? I'm ready to start protesting. Will that do any good? What can we do? Anyone else feel like we've reached a critical mass with the INSANE MSM in this country?? How many more secrets are we going to reveal, how many more times is our media going to try and paint our administration as the enemy? How many more times are they going to call our soldiers terrorists? I really can't take this anymore.
Who else has the guts?
May 23, 2007 - 11:51 ET by Six String SpiffI've had it with this MSSM in our country. Treason is punishable by DEATH. You hear me? DEATH Wake up, Bush! The law is the law is the .. oh right. Bush isn't FOR the law.
Islam should have it's religious status revoked until it can prove it's not a hate group.
SSS- rather than death-- Ross should
May 23, 2007 - 13:08 ET by misterbillSSS- rather than death-- Ross should be made the towel boy in the Muslim footbath in the KC airport for 10 years.
As usual the enemy within via
May 23, 2007 - 11:53 ET by bigtimerAs usual the enemy within via the press/television are working hard to attempt to thwart any plans we have to defeat the biggest enemy we have that are aiding and abetting the terrorists world-wide....IRAN....
I am furious, I am disgusted, I want to know when something is going to be done about these leaks from wherever they came from...it cannot be that hard to track down, it cannot be that hard to throw some people in jail for treason, it cannot be that hard to find a lot of traitors that are leaking this material time after time and prosecute them during a time of war...along with the media whether it is the papers or television or radio or anything else....
Something must be done...and NOW!
If the President does not demand this via the Justice Dept. and make a speech, show his outrage...well I just give up.
Here is a link to another ominous warnings that we may be just getting ready....as we should be.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274955,00.html
Anyone down for starting a sh
May 23, 2007 - 12:01 ET by jpatchAnyone down for starting a show that would take on the format of Realtime, or the View, but with an intelligent host that has discussions with intelligent, informed guests? Anyone realize that we dont' have this outlet...think about that...we could have a whole on-air segment devoted to calling all of these traitors out and demanding that they be held accountable. We need a TV form of this website...
Anyone have any ideas? We're reaching a point in this country, I believe, that is a tipping point, and we need to do something.
I agree with you jpatch...Pau
May 23, 2007 - 12:09 ET by bigtimerI agree with you jpatch...
Paul Weyrich (sp) had a station he started up years ago now that would of and did cover that type of coverage...I miss it today....it was called N.E.T.
Money problems...it is always money. (plus he injured his back terribly, in fact I think he is still in a wheel-chair)
We need something like that again desperately!
"CIA to carry out covert
May 23, 2007 - 12:02 ET by general company"CIA to carry out covert operations against Iran aimed at destabilizing the regime there."
I am more dissapointed that it has taken this long to act.
For the record, the White House and CIA say hey do not, as a matter of course, comment on matters involving national security or alleged covert action."
But for some reason they dont mind if everyone else does?
"Intelligence officials
May 23, 2007 - 12:03 ET by InsufficientContext"Intelligence officials describe the CIA’s Iranian plan as non-lethal, involving a coordinated campaign of propaganda broadcasts, placement of negative newspaper articles, and the manipulation of Iran's currency and international banking transactions". If this amounts to a hidden war, did this a**hat just admit to being at war with OUR government?
Treason or not?
May 23, 2007 - 12:46 ET by JABMaybe, just maybe the release of this information is phase one in the over all scheme of the CIA's grand plan. Just playing the Devil's advocate here and attempting to remain optimistic.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful..."
Intelligence officials descri
May 23, 2007 - 12:49 ET by MidAmericaIntelligence officials describe the CIA’s Iranian plan as non-lethal, involving a coordinated campaign of propaganda broadcasts, placement of negative newspaper articles,.........
Hey, that's the MSM plan to topple a democratically elected government in the USA.
Unfortunately, you're exactly
May 23, 2007 - 12:59 ET by jpatchUnfortunately, you're exactly right.
But we won't let that happen...unless Al Gore decides to dis-invent the internet.
Hosea 5:2 The revolters have
May 23, 2007 - 13:48 ET by Ten7sSorry but I don't see what
May 23, 2007 - 14:00 ET by balboaSorry but I don't see what this has to do with ABC.
ABC Alerts Ayatollahs of CI
May 23, 2007 - 14:17 ET by MightyMouthABC Alerts Ayatollahs of CIA’s 'Secret' ‘Hidden War’ Against Iran!!!!
ABC Alerts... ABC Balboa! A-B-C.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
I get that, but what does t
May 23, 2007 - 14:20 ET by balboaI get that, but what does that have to do with dealing "treacherously against the LORD" or illegitimate children?
Opps, damn indented posts.
May 23, 2007 - 14:23 ET by MightyMouthOpps, damn indented posts. Nevermind... :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Oh, but it explains it quite
May 23, 2007 - 14:22 ET by Ten7sOh, but it explains it quite well. God's Judgement on Ephraim (removing His Hand from them) for their depravity was to come in two phases: first "like a moth" creating "rotteness" and then "like a young lion" to "tear to pieces" leaving "none to deliver". But giving them a solution to their problems:
Hosea 5:15 I will go away and return to My place
Until they acknowledge their guilt and seek My face;
In their affliction they will earnestly seek Me
I am suggesting that the depraved (e.g. ABC and many others) are acting like the "moth" creating "rotteness" in the country, making us unable to defend ourselves and setting the stage for the "lion" phase of the Judgement. Which will come unless we all seek God.
Balboa...I see you are back t
May 23, 2007 - 14:43 ET by jpatchBalboa...
I see you are back to playing games, I really thought that you and I had a breakthrough last time...
You don't have a problem with this? Don't you think that the open discussion of military and covert plans is a detriment to the proposed plan. and a huge national security risk? Moreover, do you feel as though these "journalists" are doing their jobs, or do they seem to be actively working to expose important and at times confidential information in order to either catapult their careers, or to further promote an agenda?
You always just jump in these conversations and make some nonchalant comment...you're telling me that you're happy to read this stuff all over the news? Do you think that Iran is running a proxy war against the U.S. in Iraq?
I know that's a lot of questions, but we've got time...
I definitely see the problem,
May 23, 2007 - 14:50 ET by balboaI definitely see the problem, I just don't know what quoting scripture has to do with it.
My fweelings are hurt
May 23, 2007 - 14:24 ET by TruthMattersMy fweelings are hurt
I'M SO PISSED OFF AT THESE
May 23, 2007 - 15:01 ET by charlietexasI'M SO PISSED OFF AT THESE IDIOTS AT ABC...I CAN'T SEE STRAIGHT. WE HAVE A DAUGHTER ON THE USS STENNIS AND I DON'T APPREACIATE THEM PUTTTING HER LIFE IN DANGER ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHER KIDS ON ALL THE SHIPS OUT THERE. IF I HAD BRIAN BOY IN FRONT OF ME, I'D KICK HIS ASS. INSTEAD OR REPORTING ABOUT WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE IS DOING, ABC SHOULD BE REPORTING THE LEAKING AT THE CIA. THATS THE STORY. STUPID FOOLS..........THE MOTHER OF THE SAILOR
I'm more worried about the fa
May 23, 2007 - 18:47 ET by ferrarimanf355I'm more worried about the fact that this comes out after word of Bush meeting with James Dobson on Iran. War with Iran would be disasterous at best, and I wish Bush was smart enough to realise that...
Uzumaki/Ayanami '08. Because a ninja and an Eva pilot can govern the nation better that what we have now...
"War with Iran would b
May 23, 2007 - 20:31 ET by MightyMouth"War with Iran would be disasterous at best.."
Ok, how about something like what Israel did to Iraq?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Actually
May 23, 2007 - 20:54 ET by Mr. BishopAt best, we would use tactical nuclear weapons to simply glass the place... Therefor, at best, we would have no casualties, and we wouldn't have to worry about an insurgency in Iran.
_______________________________________________________________
If homosexuality is genetic, then it must be a birth defect. If it is a birth defect, then stem cell research might provide a cure.
Do nukes release CO2 ?Supreme
May 23, 2007 - 20:56 ET byDo nukes release CO2 ?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
No
May 23, 2007 - 21:12 ET by Mr. BishopAccording to my father, who has a Master's Degree in the Effects of Nuclear Weapons from the Navy, by design -- no, nuclear weapons do not release CO2. I only post his degree, so there can be no argument from some Global Warming alarmist, that he is wrong. I just got off the phone with him, which is why I mention him.
__________________________________________________________
If homosexuality is genetic, then it must be a birth defect. If it is a birth defect, then stem cell research might provide a cure.
Whew! Over the first hurdle
May 23, 2007 - 21:17 ET byWhew! Over the first hurdle, second if the plan is to glass the place why 'tactical'?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Sorry, was away a bit
May 24, 2007 - 19:55 ET by Mr. BishopTactical nukes have substantially less decay times. Instead of radioactive decay lasting months, even years... it's over in a matter of weeks at the most. Strategic nuclear weapons are for massive scaled nuclear warfare. Tactical nukes are smaller output, but still greater then those dropped in Japan.
__________________________________________________________
If homosexuality is genetic, then it must be a birth defect. If it is a birth defect, then stem cell research might provide a cure.
Mightn't detonating one nea
May 24, 2007 - 07:26 ET by sarcasmoMightn't detonating one near anything flammable cause the release of CO2, whether or not the weapon itself released any gas at all the moment it exploded? I'm not a global warming alarmist, and IMO CO2 release would be minor to the point of unimportance if compared to things like blast effects and radiation released, but I do think your dad might want to think this one through a bit more, regardless of his credentials...
JMR
Not at all
May 24, 2007 - 19:58 ET by Mr. BishopI actually share something of your concern...
I asked him which ones specifically... he mentioned tactical nukes, as opposed to strategic nukes based upon decay time. The radiation output in tactical nukes is smaller then in strategic nukes, and they decay faster. As such, as oppose to the radiation cloud lasting months to years, it's gone within weeks.
Believe me sarcasmo -- I rarely agree with him on the subject of nuke usage... I'm a front lines infantryman with a mortar tube... he's a nuclear weapons officer on a submarine. It's obvious to note which one supports which weapon and tactic, I would think. I call him a chickensh*t pansy for always wanting to use a nuke. :)
__________________________________________________________
If homosexuality is genetic, then it must be a birth defect. If it is a birth defect, then stem cell research might provide a cure.
FYI
May 24, 2007 - 20:04 ET by Mr. BishopThe only reason I posted the credentials, is so that no one comes in to this and says, "Well... I read here... that X," or things of that nature. I know I mentioned it in the original post that I am replying to now... but I just wanted to mention it again.
__________________________________________________________
If homosexuality is genetic, then it must be a birth defect. If it is a birth defect, then stem cell research might provide a cure.
Just pull a Clinton in Iran
May 23, 2007 - 21:04 ET by RJJust pretend there's an aspirin factory there that needs to be taken out...
So what's your solution?
May 24, 2007 - 07:16 ET by c5thenAllow them to create enough super-enriched U238 to make an atomic bomb? Or how 'bout this scenario...Enriched uranium shows up in a suicide bombing or an IED in Iraq?
War with Iran is not required in the conventional sense of the term. We do not need to replace the government as we did in Iraq. All we need to do is destroy the uranium enrichment facilities or render them uninhabitable.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
So let's just give up having
May 26, 2007 - 05:26 ET by UnsaneSo let's just give up having a military and make America as whiny and toothless as possible! And let's make government a Big Nanny, there to pamper and spoil us all from cradle to grave!!!
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
It's treasonous. Plain and simple.
May 24, 2007 - 07:11 ET by c5thenABC News should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, along with whomever leaked them the info in the first place.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
Isn't this treason? Dilvulgin
May 24, 2007 - 07:13 ET by Senior ChiefIsn't this treason? Dilvulging classified information so our enemies know our moves. Wether true or not, the UCMJ punishes military people for disclosing such secret information. As a military man, I'll be in jail for life if I did so. So, why "journalists" are able to exploit the system in the name of journalism???
Funny that there was such an
May 24, 2007 - 07:18 ET by Sergeant ROCKFunny that there was such an outcry over Valerie Plame, but here, where we have abject treasonous behavior - deafening silence.
How much do you want to bet t
May 24, 2007 - 07:36 ET by Sergeant ROCKHow much do you want to bet that the 'leaker' is a Klinton hold-over still lurking in the Pentagon?
Back in 1996, the media repor
May 24, 2007 - 09:31 ET by FAQsBack in 1996, the media reported that the CIA had provided $100 million (an average of $20 million a year since 1991) to anti-Saddam forces in Iraq. Hillary's husband was President and the nutroots beloved Al Gore was Vice President back then. Interestingly, 11 years later Gore would write a book about how it was wrong for the United States to remove Saddam from power.
Ding, I'm confused by your
May 26, 2007 - 02:58 ET by thefightinggopDing, I'm confused by your post of May 23, 2007 - 14:23. The link you used (to bolster Af's argument that Iran already knew what ABC had reported) said the woman under house arrest "identified the representative in Iran who had set up a network for philanthropist George Soros's Open Society Institute."
Are you suggesting that Soros and Bush are in cahoots with the CIA to bring down Iran? THE same George Soros who has personally spent tens of millions of his own money to smear Bush? The same George Soros who "is famously known for 'breaking the Bank of England'?" And the same George Soros who (according to your own link says), "The long-term and final goal of such centers (referring to Open Society) is to try to enable this network . . . to confront the ruling powers."
You might want to read your links before you post them.
Sounds to me like the only thing Iran knew before ABC's report was that George Soros was the threat, not the CIA.