Pentagon Propagandist General Calls for US to Sponsor Terrorism Against Iran
By Bill W. Wednesday May 14, 2008 11:50am
Last month on Fox News, Ret. Gen. Thomas McInerney, one of the Pentagon's propaganda team of military analysts exposed by David Barstow in the NYT, openly called for the US to begin committing "tit-for-tat" terrorist attacks by proxy inside Iran.
Download | play 
Download | play
McInerney: Here's what I would suggest to you. Number one, we take the National Council for Resistance to Iran off the terrorist list that the Clinton Administration put them on as well as the Mujahedin-e Khalq at the Camp Ashraf in Iraq. Then I would start a tit-for-tat strategy which I wrote up in the Wall Street Journal a year ago: For every EFP that goes off and kills Americans, two go off in Iran. No questions asked. People don't have to know how it was done. It's a covert action. They become the most unlucky country in the world. ...
Media Matters' exhaustive research into the NYT story shows that McInerney appeared on Fox News 144 times since Jan 2002, and according to this bio from last year's "Intelligence Summit," McInerney is on the Board of Directors for several companies with defense-related contracts that would seem to benefit from his pro-war propaganda. For example, Alloy Surfaces Company (ASC), whose contracts for "ammunition and explosives" with the Department of Defense appear to have grown from $15 million in 2002 to more than $169 million in 2006. A conflict of interest, perhaps?
The tactic that McInerney advocates of using Iranian opposition terrorist groups to carry out acts of terrorism inside Iran is not new, nor far-fetched. A little digging turned up numerous articles alleging that the pentagon had already been using the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and other groups in cross-border operations into Iran, at least until shortly after Sec Gates took over (Some news reports of attacks in Iran here, here, here, here, here. Iranian news video here).
The MEK (aka MKO, NLA, PMOI, NCRI) is a terrorist group, as designated still by the State Dept, that has killed US troops and civilians before back in the 1970s. Even Bush's first deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, said of the MEK, "I lived there [in Iran] for a year, and it was during that time that our people were killed by the MEK, assassinated. ... So from my point of view they were terrorists." David Ignatius wrote in the WaPo that back in 2003 the US actually rejected a deal with Iran to exchange MEK captives for several top al-Qaeda leaders.
The White House apparently doesn't want you to know about the MEK.
In Dec 2006, just days after Rumsfeld was forced to step down, the NYT published a heavily redacted op-ed by Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann. Though none of the info was classified, all of which had previously "been extensively reported in the news media," much of their article was blacked out because the "White House intervened" before it went to print. In response, Leverett and Mann followed up with an accompanying piece "What We Wanted to Tell You About Iran" where they provided citations to previously reported sources for all of the redacted info. Raw Story compiled those sources in their "The redacted Iran op-ed revealed" and, surprise, many of the articles refer directly to the MEK terrorist group, but there had been nary a mention in the portions the White House allowed.
So, to recap: One of the Pentagon's propaganda TV analysts who has clear ties to defense industries that would likely stand to benefit from any increased hostilities is advocating that the US ought to use a terrorist organization to commit acts of terrorism against Iran in response to alleged Iranian involvement in attacks against US forces in Iraq, which might be true, or maybe not. And if that wasn't outrageous enough, it seems that Bush may have been authorizing such tactics already.
Login or Register to post comments.
Sickening.
General Confusion.
General Stupidity.
General Incompetence.
General Hypocrisy.
My, my, Uncle Sam is hypocritical once again.
God, how I loathe American exceptionalism. This is one of the reasons why I emphasize with the Iranians, particularly when we bully them. The Mullahs aren't cute and cuddly, but to outright provoke them is just idiotic. Iran has multiple groups to squeeze against us. Only a fool would imagine that they wouldn't. And a fool is sitting in the White House and three more are running to succeed the incumbent fool.
Ah... so much like torture, terrorism is only ok when WE do it.
I'm just SO fucking proud to be an American right now I could spit!
Excuse me...uh General, sir....ummm...could i have a blueprint of your brain. I'm building an idiot.
Great moniker, "Pentagon Propagandist General". Like a warning label.
Nothing puts out a fire like more fire.
Gosh, is that what we've come to as a nation?
Heart of Darkness?
We have to descend to the same level of inhumanity to somehow "defend" ourselves?
Salute the Vaterland and Eternal War!
(but not necessarily in that order)
Please Digg this.
there's just no leaving crazy town is there?
Any moron-American who endorses such a batshit crazy idea as this has absolutely no fucking right to whine about 9/11 and what a tragedy it was.
Bush's regime can't afford an Iran war. The costs of occupying a country 4 times as large as Iraq with 3 times the population and mostly hilly terrain would equal the entire budget for the military for this year. Damn that man in the White House for his idiocy.
Anybody see the current headline on the corporate news channel CNN?
McCain predicts Iraq war won by 2013
What an interesting year to pick! So here's the deal. You elect me once and in 2012, when I'm up for re-election, you elect me again, and I'll deliver Iraq in the first year of my second term.
It's a "Wag the Dog" scenario. You don't see Jaws til the 3rd reel.
Ahhh... the never-ending cycle of the only U.S. foreign policy we know.
Support terrorists until they milk us dry, wonder why they turned on us, find another terrorist group to support...
anger rising.
mister war criminal over here seems to be proposing operation TPAJAX, part deux.
and, note how well TPAJAX played out... (hint: we created the conditions that allowed the theocratic regime to take over iran)
more information on this traitor: http://www.netstarsys.com/family/mcinerney.html
These idiots get more and more bizzare as time goes by. I wish we could ship all of them over there and bring back all our troops that want to get out of this assine war.
If I had a time machine I would love to go back to the 2000 election year and make sure the Supreme Court didn't make chimpy our president. It's been nothing but bad things since then.
No surprise there.
US sponsoring terrorism in NATO - Gladio Operations
US sponsored terrorism in Iran in 1953 coup
US sponsored terrorism in Guatemala
US sponsored terrorism in Chile
US sponsored terrorism in Indonesia/East Timor
US sponsored war with Iraq v Iran
US sponsored terrorism in lead-up to Vietnam war
But the US government is a government that supports "democracy."
Forget tat
Just show me the tits.
ysbaddaden @ 19:
roflmao
Rebel Patriot @ 18:
Support democracy? Our government? They've never supported democracy. The US policy was "he's our bastard, so we'll support him." Then they wondered why people ran to the USSR...>.>
How's that old saying go?
An eye for an eye ...
... until the whole world is blind.
geneHUSSEIN214 @ 12:
Any moron-American who endorses this batshit crazy idea better be enlisting, or be prepared to be drafted or see their children drafted. And best keep their complaints to themselves.
The biggest problem with this nation of children called America, is that the people want to have it both ways. They want cheap gas, but don't want to conserve, they bitch about lost American jobs but are not willing to pay a premium to buy American, they want to fight a "war on terror" but don't want to make the real sacrifices for it, they want they want they want...without dealing with the fact that wanting has costs tied to it.
Gawwd this country really makes me ill.
This stinking SOB is a WAR PROFITEER plain and simple [Please. Do not suggest acts of violence on our site-Sitemonitor].
Oh by all means ! I mean it's not like the US doesn't have enough wars or enemies already. Nothing says "We want peace" like publicly mooning your enemy and daring them to respond.
edgecity @ 14:
Heh, even Grandpa knows he probably won't be alive by then. Typical politican...talking shit knowing he won't have to suffer the repercussions.
General_Rennenkampf @ 21:
This country cannot support democracy, because it is no longer one itself. It is an oligarchy at best, a concealed dictatorship at worst. The process in America known as an election is not a honest election. It is a confirmation of preselected elite appointees/sock-puppets.
IRAN, Hasn't attacked a neighbor in over 300 years. Doesn't have a substantial Navy. Been fucked over by the the CIA. for years. And we call them the bad guys. sickening.
Should we put ourselves on the state sponsored terrorism list now?
Tim @ 28:
The formal term is stawman.
Rebel Patriot @ 27:
The US always was an oligarchy. The Founders did not imagine that the government they created would extend the franchise to black men (as it did in 1865) and then to women (as it did in 1920.) Our nation wasn't a full tyranny, not like Francisco Lopez's Paraguay, but it certainly was a partial one until the 1960s.
Tim @ 28:
and people think that the "civilians" taken hostage in the Iranian uprising were innocent bystanders too.
nah, nothing bad ever happened to the Iranians from the US diplomatic bag. Nah the CIA didn't help the Savak in its reign of terror and murder...
You could ask a relevant question about the sources for the Bush admininstrations intelligence on Iran over at Marcy Wheelers salon in regard to spying and intelligence at 3 p.m today at firedoglake
Rebel Patriot @ 32:
Supporting the Shah was one of the worst things the US did. The Shah was one of the most brutal rulers on the planet. Khomeini was hardly an improvement, but then he was their bastard, not ours. Iran has been invaded multiple times, including WWII. Damn the idiots who think that actions can occur without consequences...
How the GOP plans to win:
6. Fan the fear: Ignore the critics, Republican wise men say — there is still no better way to win than to stir up concerns about Democratic patriotism and their commitment to national security and killing terrorists. It often remains the best call in the GOP playbook, especially with McCain atop the ticket.
Republican officials privately urge lawmakers to whack their opponents whenever they can for worrying more about coddling terrorist suspects than condemning them, failing to support U.S. troops, exhibiting weakness in dealing with dictators, and rushing to a quick Iraq exit that could put U.S. servicemen and women at risk. Polls still show GOP strength on national security and fighting terrorism — at least when compared with their lousy numbers on domestic issues.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10370_Page2.html
oh great. now we can be terrorists too. in addition to our being torturers. this pervert needs to be arrested.
Thank you Bill W. Naming these thugs (propogandist) based on their actions is imperative. It doesnt always happen.
Bush openly admits to actions that are criminal - he is therefore a confessed criminal and should be called as much for example. He isnt dumb or mistaken of silly - he is a self confessed criminal.
Keep it up.
Zero Diplomacy.
That verifies what many have been saying.
Fox News is terrorism propaganda.
Analize the "analysts.." and the propaganda campaigns..
If research is correct.. He was also connected to the program that was launched in early 2002 by then-Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Victoria Clarke. .....Covert propaganda ... Psyops
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Thomas_McInerney
Victoria Clarke was nominated by President George W. Bush to be the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs on April 5, 2001.
In the position, Clarke was responsible for U.S. Department of Defense public information, internal information, community relations, information training, and audiovisual matters.
--> In September 2003 Clarke joined CNN TV network as a political and policy analyst.
--> In December 2003, Comcast Corporation announced that it had hired Clarke as their new Senior Advisor for Communications and Government Affairs. [3]
--> Since 2007 and into April, 2008, Clarke was an on-air consultant and news analyst for the ABC TV network.
General_Rennenkampf @ 34:
Agreed, but remember that these actions are descriptive of those that take them. Meaning - they were monsters that took actions that produced results that suited them. Dont give them credit for simply committing an error. (you may not be doing that) They were bad guys. (They also created the Savak - that was by intent)
Sounds like Pre - COLD WAR tactics I guess Reagan did the wrong thing, we should still be at war with the Russian Communists, forget Dialogue………….
Get Healthy and educate yourselves … Stop Buying CORPORATE water!
America needs to Get Off The Bottle. Turn your tap water into a Himalayan Stream Re-Use and Refill www.ReverseAgingWater.com
He's been on Fux 144 times since '02?
I must not have been watching that half decade plus...
Wouldn't that be against the Ford agreement not to assasinate foreign heads of state?
Additionally, isn't it the "Cold War" equivalent to arming Saddam Hussein to fight the Ayatollah Khomeini?
Or even arming and supporting the warlords of Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, who then splintered afterwards, some became the Taliban and some Al Qaeda?
anon @ 39:
Yeah, and it all was to prevent the spread of Communism, or so the excuse was. Even taking Stalin's evil into account, much good would have been done had the USA and the USSR decided to work together instead of always being about to go to war and developing arsenals of horrors that they hoped never to use.
This guy is a bloodthirsty murderous traitor.
He should be hung, after a fair trial of course. What state could do that I wonder?
ysbaddaden @ 42:
Yes, it would be. And it's pretty much old Cold War politics.
One irony that I see in this scenario is that Ahmadinejad is as popular as Bush is. Both want this war because they think it'll enhance their popularity. But where would Bush or McPapen magic troops that aren't there to attack? We don't even have the armed forces for this farce to happen!
For every missile that goes off in Palestine, 2 should go off in Kentucky, then? or what?
What an effing dick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So in other words, in order to fight terrorists the US has to become terrorists, not that the administration isn't already there. Arsehole.
Here's an idea using your own logic pinhead. To make the middle east free and democratic why don't you make the US free and democratic. Stop rigging elections, stop lying to the citizens via Fox, stop eavesdropping on communications.
It's funny how this administration finds the activities of certain middle eastern governments to be so offensive despite the fact this administration allows itself to commit the same crimes and more. I have no respect for the Burmese junta right now with what's going on there but I certainly have less for the Bush Crime Syndicate. When the hell are these goddam crooks going to prison? Is there a more corrupt organization in the entire world? I doubt it.
Obviously it's General Fucktard speaking again... Please, can't someone put us out of our misery?!
Can someone photoshop a bin laden turban and beard on this asshat?
This general suppossedly served under sworn duty to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies foreign and domestic. And now...he's pimping for the corporations who would be the fascist, totalitarian rulers of the Nation, who are dedicated to the destruction of our Constitution.
He should be stripped of his pension.
What a disgusting idea. Too bad it is one that has been used before.
We now know, Bush used $$
to lure retired generals with ties to the Pentagon and to military contractors to deceive the U.S. public.
That would be treason.
Our Founding Fathers Understood all of this. This Union, our Contract with each other, is bigger than any Contractor, Wall Street, Lobbyist. or White House.
Thanks to patriot Army Sgt. Adrienne Kinne, ...we may be closer to finding out who killed journalists.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080514_army_whistle_blower_palesti...
We will defeat terrorism by creating more terrorists and engaging in terrorism. I'm surprised that Bush wasn't the first to announce this idea.
General_Rennenkampf @ 34:
the shah had to be threatened and blackmailed, even, to play the role in TPAJAX (the name of the operation to overthrow the democratically elected govt of mohammed mossadeq)
we not only supported the shah, we put the shah in power. Not only did we put him in power, we had to ‘convince’ him to take power.
and, like so many other times with our foreign policy in the middle east, oil was a large part of our decision to overthrow mossadeq and install the shah and general zahedi. thanks to the lies and deceptions of eisenhower, the dulles-headed-monster, the AIOC (now, BP), the SIS, and the CIA
In other words, SINK TO THEIR LEVEL ... What a jackass.
So we should turn from a Nations of people who want to be better than the norm, to people who torture and now KILL and MAIM?
what an asshole
lives dont matter
ideologies do
It appears there has been so much deception and black mailing for many years.
I wonder what was really happening behind the scenes
when Eisenhower delivered his Military Industrial Complex speech.
Samson- @ 54:
dont forget kermit roosevelt and general schwarzkopf (where have I heard that name before??) in that list.
Samson- @ 54:
Yup. Mossadeqh, even if he had turned out to be a dictator, probably would have been a milder one than Pahlevi or Khomeini.
The overthrow of Mossadeqh was criminal. So was our interference in the Italian elections in 1946, and a whole list of things just to keep Stalin from expanding.
Rebel Patriot @ 58:
Yeah, and as to where you heard the name before, his son led Desert Storm.
Aren't these kind of back dealings with Arab revolutionaries, and committing acts of terrorism by proxy, what got us into trouble in the first place?
General_Rennenkampf @ 60:
you guys nailed it.
and, actually, papa schwarzkopf was brought in to convince the rightfully-paranoid shah. without schwarzkopf talking to shah mohammed reza pahlevi there is a small chance that the CIA would not have been able to convince him to be our sock puppet.
yeah, kim roosevelt. oy. although he did turn down overthrowing arbenz's democratically elected govt in guatemala in '54...
after the eisenhower administration, for the benefit of the oil consortium, overthrew the mossadeq govt, eisenhower said the following (for a lesson on hypocrisy) on january 5, 1957:
there is a general recognition in the Middle East, as elsewhere, that the united states does not seek either political or economic domination over any other people. Our desire is a world environment of freedom, not servitude.
the occasion has come for us to manifest again our national unity in support of freedom and to show out deep respect for the rights and independence of every nation—however great, however small. we seek, not violence, but peace. to this purpose we must now devote our energies, our determination, ourselves.
fucking liar.
Is he insane...? Yes, I know that's a rhetorical question (especially here) but have these fools learned nothing from their mistakes? Pogo was right...we have become the enemy...
Samson- @ 62:
However, lest we forget, the US's excuse for overthrowing Mossadeqh was that the big bad USSR would take over. It was flimsy at the time, as Iran had just gotten over an invasion by the UK and the USSR and had no desire to repeat the experience. We manufactured a flimsy situation to create a long-term clusterfuck. That's exactly what Dubya did in 2003.
We tried this exact same strategy in Afghanistan and see where it brought us.
Addiction specialists the world over define insanity as doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results every time.
War Inc. indeed.
Don't these fucking assholes have anything better to do?
General_Rennenkampf @ 64:
I would suggest that the Commie fear is what was played up, and it certainly helped that fear by paying Iranians to poses as Communists to stir up and agitate. But it is largely the Seven Sisters that brought this to a head, just as United Fruit, through the CIA, brought the coup to Guatemala. As for Bush, the manufactured pretext was in 2001, not 2003. Although the forged yellow-cake receipt was manufactured around that time.
Dan-in-PA @ 65:
Not just in Afghanistan, we also tried it in China. The result was Mao Zedong. We also, I believe, tried to meddle in Latin America with a guy named Allende. I believe the result was Pinochet. The Cold War was madness.
Christian terrorism is already a world-wide problem, far greater than Islamic terrorism. These insane Christian terrorists hate everything the United States stand for. They're all traitors against America.
Vendetta. I don't pay taxes to encourage creation and nurturing of vendettas.
General_Rennenkampf @ 64:
what is interesting is to read the CIA cables, the state dept memos, the letters btwn truman and mossadeq and eisenhower and mossadeq to see the shifting rationale for the overthrow.
you are right, the 'fear of communism' was at the root of the operation, but even that rationale varied. in one breathe the US admin claimed that mossadeq was a tool of the tudeh party, which was being controlled by moscow (which was false). then, at the same time, oblivious to the irony, they claimed that the mossadeq govt was not in league with the tudeh, but was weak enough to be overthrown by the tudeh.
again: they argued 2 things. 1) mossadeq was a tool of communists 2) mossadeq govt was in danger of being overthrown and replaced by communists.
again, in reading the recently declassified documents it is obvious that this was all hyped and the intelligence services didn't agree with this at all.
the real aim? well that is spelled out by the CIA: "specifically, the aim [of the coup] was to bring to power a government which would reach an equitable oil settlement…” dr. donald wilber, CIA planner of operation TPAJAX
National Security Council memo, March 20, 1953
…the possibility that a communist seizure of power in Iran may take place imperceptibly over a considerable period of time. Under this contingency, it would be extremely difficult to identify and demonstrate to our allies that specific countermeasures were required to prevent communist infiltration from reaching the point where it would be able to significantly influence the policies of the Iranian Government. In such circumstances, it might be desirable to implement certain of the plans discussed in the attached Report, prior to identifiable attempted or actual communist seizure of power
this top-secret memo was an attempt to lower the bar for American action in Iran. it gave a green light to conduct actions before there is even proof positive of communist infiltration.
Rebel Patriot @ 66:
Yeah, I disagree with what you're referring to, but it would be against site monitoring policy to discuss it. Needless to say, I can see why people think that way.
However, the Commie fear was indeed played up. Remember, Joe McCarthy was leading the Second Red Scare at the time. It was fairly simple to extrapolate from the hysteria there to assuming that Mossadeqh was in service to Moscow, in that climate of fear. The parallels between McCarthyism and this anti-Muslim bigotry on the Right are revealing...
Guys......Um ...... The U.S. is already sponsoring terrorist acts Against Iran....
http://www.usatoday.com/news/w