Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Resistance
See other Resistance Articles

Title: Flashback: Bob Gates, Iran Contra
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/09/1444242
Published: Nov 9, 2006
Author: Transcript Excerpt
Post Date: 2006-11-14 09:10:45 by angle
Keywords: None
Views: 4680
Comments: 55

Excerpt: Defense Secretary Nominee Robert Gates Tied to Iran-Contra Scandal and the Secret Arming of Saddam Hussein...

ROBERT PARRY: Well, in a synopsis, the Iran-Contra scandal was an effort by the Reagan administration to circumvent various restrictions on carrying out their foreign policy, both in the Middle East and also in Central America.

The Contra part related to the Nicaraguan Contras who were put in place to fight the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. And when Congress tried to cut off that support from the CIA, the Reagan administration went around Congress by having Oliver North of the National Security Council, in essence, sort of oversee this operation of getting weapons and money to the Contras. But it still involved many people in the CIA, even when they were denying they were involved. We now know, based on the investigations, that CIA Director William Casey, who was Bob Gates’s direct supervisor, was deeply involved, as were people lower down the chain, including some of the station chiefs in the field.

In the case of the Middle East, the Reagan administration was carrying out secret policies to arm basically both sides of the Iran-Iraq War. This started, we now know, back in the very early part of the 1980s. By 1981, there were shipments of weapons that had been approved by the Reagan administration that went through Israel to Iran, and that continued on through to the mid-1980s. And at times when the Iranians would get the upper hand in the war with Iraq, the United States would tilt back and start helping the Iraqis, the government of Saddam Hussein. So there were efforts to move weapons through third countries that would help Saddam Hussein in his fight. There was military intelligence that was provided to assist him and even advice on how to use his air force. So there was this whole secret policy that was operating behind the scenes, and the Reagan administration essentially was trying to go around Congress, keep the intelligence committees as much in the dark as possible, and Bob Gates was in the center of almost all of that.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 18.

#1. To: All (#0)

more...

...And let me just add one thing to what Bob said, because there’s an intelligence aspect that Bob Gates was responsible for in the 1980s that I am aware of. In order to have arms sales to Iran and secret deliveries from Israel to Iran, you had to change the intelligence analysis on Iran, and Bob Gates was part of that. He worked very closely, again, with Howard Teicher over at the National Security Council and Graham Fuller, his National Intelligence officer for the Middle East, to rewrite the intelligence record to say that Iran was no longer interested in terrorism, Iran was now looking to open up dialogue with the United States, that the Soviet Union was about to move into Iran. And this became the intelligence justification for Iran-Contra and why this operational policy had to be put into play.

There was no truth to any of these three charges, but Graham Fuller managed to get them into a National Intelligence Estimate...

angle  posted on  2006-11-14   9:19:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: angle, burkeman1 (#1)

No one cares. If no one cared to bring up Rumsfeld meetings with Saddam (I mean the Kerry camp NEVER mentioned that! That is insane) why should they care about Iran-Contra?

Wise up.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   9:40:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Destro (#2)

fuck off. no one flagged you, shill.

angle  posted on  2006-11-14   9:43:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: angle (#3)

fuck off. no one flagged you, shill.

C'mon. You aren't on Free Republic or Liberty Post. A little civility wouldn't hurt you. I'm sure you meant, "nobody pinged you to this post so why don't you just ignore it, you shill."

Let's try to elevate the tone.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-14   10:00:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: bluedogtxn (#5)

blue dog...no offense to you. I don't care to take any more time to elevate my response to a disruptor/shill.

angle  posted on  2006-11-14   10:07:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: angle, bluedogtxn (#6) (Edited)

blue dog...no offense to you. I don't care to take any more time to elevate my response to a disruptor/shill.

I dare angle to show how what I stated is disruptive or shilling?

A dare the fool.

I just stated that not even candidate Kerry brought up the fact that Rumsfeld had high level meetings with Saddam back in the 80s so why does anyone think Gates' oblique role in Iran-Contra will amount to anything?

Is that being distruptive? A shill? I just damned both power establishments with the above statement - for those not bright enough to figure that out.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   10:24:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Destro (#7)

I dare angle to show how what I stated is disruptive or shilling?

A dare the fool.

Why don't you just explain it to him, then. Without the "fool" nonsense.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-14   11:00:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: bluedogtxn, angle (#10)

Why don't you just explain it to him, then. Without the "fool" nonsense.

I have to do no such thing.

It's up to that fool angle to explain why he calls me a shill based on the above post of mine - shill for who? What?

I know I scare some people - they feel threatened by my posts - Good - Let them be afraid.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   11:09:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 18.

#22. To: Destro (#18)

I have to do no such thing.

You are absolutely right. Courtesy is not in any way obligatory.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-14 11:14:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 18.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest