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: 4733
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 # 29.

#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  


#11. To: Destro (#2)

The Kerry camp didn't do the obvious that a serious candidate for President would have done:

He didn't run ads asking where the biggest mass murderer in US was and why hadn't he been captured- Osama Bin Laden.

He didn't run ads showing Bush landing on the aircraft carrier proclaiming victory in his little boy flight suit and then list the number of Americans killed since that day.

And those are just the things he could have done and stayed with the fraud parameters of beltway "debate".

I suspect more and more that he was a putupjob.

Burkeman1  posted on  2006-11-14   11:01:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Burkeman1, angle, bluedogtxn (#11)

Oh, you must be a shill and disruptor as well. The reason Kerry never mentioned any of the above or do them is he would have followed the exact same Bush policy the cryptocracy makes Bush follow - the appearance of the cryptocracy fronted by Baker-Hamilton commission plus the shift to the Democrats in a slight way indicates the masters of this nation are changing course.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   11:06:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Destro (#14)

plus the shift to the Democrats in a slight way indicates the masters of this nation are changing course.

Well, let's hope they change course in a good way.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-14   11:11:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: bluedogtxn, burkeman1, angle, diana (#19)

plus the shift to the Democrats in a slight way indicates the masters of this nation are changing course. Well, let's hope they change course in a good way.

They cryptocracy or more accuratly the powers behind the throne is not a well understood phenomenon. It is really a coalition of interests that shift around and reform up again. People still don't get how power works in DC. You have factions. These factions have different agendas but when they overlap they form alliances to carry out the policy.

I can illustrate the point best with what happened when Clinton was in office and we went to war over Kosovo:

In Kosovo/Balkans you had a perfect storm of special interests.

NATO generals and war industry wanting to give the alliance a new mission to keep their cushy jobs.

Humanitarian lefty do gooders wanting to use the end of the cold war for their plans to reform the world along internationalist/globalist lines.

Neocons who wanted to force America into an overseas empire by breaking her cherry in the Balkans.

Some Zionists (Labour) who wanted to show the world the USA defends Muslims (just not the ones Israel does not like) to get the heat off of Israel (Likud did not like the idea - Zionists are not always on the same page in terms of strategy).

The 24hour cabal news cycle which came to its own in the 90s and needed the stories - so was eager to push the Clinton lies.

The pipeline builders - the ones that would pay for this all. All the above is fine but you need money to justify wars - no matter how a humanitarian a mission - it is always about profit and potential profit - especially with the end of the Cold War.

They all partnered up and then got the president to do the deed or to be more accurate - front the deed.

That is why sometimes when a group seems pro war in one case they are not so much in another. Clearly the Iraq war was disapproved by some intrests but they were outvoted.

Sometimes this shadow govt coalition partner is a minor partner like the Neocons were minor partners in the Kosovo war and then the form their own power coalitions and lead the next consortium like the Neocons did after 9/11.

That is what throws people off when they try and figure out who is in charge in DC - it is an ever shifting group of power brokers - some come - some go - some are always there. All are too weak to act on themselves most of the time.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   11:56:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Destro (#24)

That is what throws people off when they try and figure out who is in charge in DC - it is an ever shifting group of power brokers - some come - some go - some are always there. All are too weak to act on themselves most of the time.

Pretty much sums it up. And the two party fraud is the Kabuki theater that blocks most of this shadow government from view and what most people get caught up in.

The fall of Nixon was another "perfect storm" where the intersts of DC's permanent bureaucracies, MIC corporate parasites, lefties, and the media converged to make him essentially the fall guy for a botched war and almost a cathartic end to the "60's".

Burkeman1  posted on  2006-11-14   12:03:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Burkeman1, bluedogtxn, angle, diana (#25) (Edited)

Pretty much sums it up.

I bring up Kosovo because it woke me up. My readings about why Kosovo was happening made me stumble onto this.

Kosovo is the best example one can use to expose how DC works because they overreached and got sloppy there and failed in their full objectives which allowed more truth to come out - as well as the appearance of the Internet which got around official news sources.

So Kosovo serves as the best example I can autopsy and illustrate the point in a few short sentences.

PS: I want to emphasize the power of money in this coalition building - money as in profit.

If a profit is to be made the war effort will be sustained even if it looks like the war is already lost. See Vietnam and Iraq.

In some cases there is no profit involved but politics/ideology like in Korea or Isreal's recent invasion of Lebanon. Case in point, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon was a political act - there was no money to be made for America there. When the Israelis failed to win their war aims the USA shut the war down. In Iraq there is still money to be made so the urge to end that disaster is resisted.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   12:19:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Destro (#27)

I bring up Kosovo because it woke me up.

That was the start of my awakening as well. I remember being attacked on Freakerland by the then growing ranks of Neowhore posters over this issue- wondering what the hell these people were doing on a "conservative" sight.

Burkeman1  posted on  2006-11-14   12:28:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Burkeman1 (#28)

That was the start of my awakening as well. I remember being attacked on Freakerland by the then growing ranks of Neowhore posters over this issue- wondering what the hell these people were doing on a "conservative" sight.

We Balkan posters hanged around long enough to win some converts on freekland - even before 9/11 turned the site into a Muslim hate fest.

Destro  posted on  2006-11-14   12:32:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 29.

#30. To: Destro (#29)

Freakerland is indeed the heart and soul of the "conservative" movement in this country . . . vicious, hateful, paranoid, afraid of innumberable boogeymen that for all intent and purpose DON'T EXIST, proudly ignorant of anything beyond the borders of America, utterly incapable of seeing anything from any other standpoint but of "America's", puffed up with the cheapest of patriotism that really is little more than worshipping the Federal standing military, war memorials, and Washington DC in general, cowardly but yet bloodthirsty, approving of indiscriminate warfare against civilians- indeed, believes anything less than such is "appeasement" and running a "PC war" . . .

In short- it is utterly bankrupt and evil- a movement controlled and coralled by DC itself and used to serve its ends.

Burkeman1  posted on  2006-11-14 12:41:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 29.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest