Iraqi fighters 'grilled for evidence on Iran'
The search for any excuse to validate an attack on Iran continues. Interrogators who question Iraqi insurgents say they are being leant on by US military officials to find incriminating evidence pointing to Iran.
Micah Brose, a privately contracted interrogator working for American forces in Iraq, near the Iranian border, told The Observer that information on Iran is 'gold'.Despite a majority of Americans being firmly opposed to any action against Tehran, the Bush regime are pushing on, determined to find any excuse which will justify an attack on Iran.Brose, 30, who extracts information from detainees in Iraq, said: 'They push a lot for us to establish a link with Iran. They have pre-categories for us to go through, and by the sheer volume of categories there's clearly a lot more for Iran than there is for other stuff. Of all the recent requests I've had, I'd say 60 to 70 per cent are about Iran.
'It feels a lot like, if you get something and Iran's not involved, it's a let down.' He added: 'I've had people say to me, "They're really pushing the Iran thing. It's like, shit, you know." '
Brose said that reports about Washington's increasingly hawkish stance towards Tehran, including possible military action, chimed with his experience. 'My impression is they're just trying to get every little bit of ammunition possible. If we get something here it fits the overall picture. The engine needs impetus and they're looking for us to find the fuel - a particular type of fuel.
'It now really depends on who gets elected President in the US. If nothing changes in the current course, I'd say military action is inevitable. But we have to hope there will be a change of course.'
A military intelligence official has called the whole process "sickening" and another states that, "of all the recent requests I've had, I'd say 60 to 70 per cent are about Iran."He (Brose) denied ever being asked to fabricate evidence, adding: 'We're not asked to manufacture information, we're asked to find it. But if a detainee wants to tell me what I want to hear so he can get out of jail... you know what I'm saying.'
Other military intelligence officials in Iraq refused to comment, but one said: 'The message is, "Got to find a link with Iran, got to find a link with Iran." It's sickening.'
The obsession with labelling all Iranian behaviour as aggressive came to a head when the US stormed an Iranian government office in the northern city of Irbil in January. Five diplomats were arrested with US officials accusing them of being members of Iran's elite Quds Force.
The US have since released two of these men with no charges being brought against them.
So, what we were told by the US in January - certainly regarding two of these men - turns out not to be true, as even the US now admit. After all one could hardly imagine the US releasing two of these men if they actually were members of the Quds Force, who the US have stated are "supporters of terrorism"."From the beginning of the abduction of the five Iranian diplomats, we said they were innocent. Now the US military has confirmed it," Mohammad Ali Hosseini, the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman, told state radio in Tehran.
Mr Hosseini said that he hoped the remaining three Iranians detained in Irbil would also be released soon.
The US statement said the Iranians were released after a "careful review of individual records to determine if they posed a security threat to Iraq and if their detention was of continued intelligence value".
"All nine individuals were determined to no longer pose a security risk," it said.
What we are left with, as Brose's experience highlights, is the US desperately scrambling about trying to find any link that they possibly can to justify an attack on Iran.
God, it's an unedifying spectacle.
Click title for full article.
4 comments:
So, what we were told by the US in January - certainly regarding two of these men - turns out not to be true, as even the US now admit. After all one could hardly imagine the US releasing two of these men if they actually were members of the Quds Force, who the US have stated are "supporters of terrorism".
You draw the most bizarre conclusions. Did you ever stop to think for a moment that the impetus for their release may have been a diplomatic push, given that Iraq and Iran have been asking for just such a release for some time now?
And trying to highlight that those release were not charged with any crime is equally bizarre. Do you just not get that we are interested in people for their intelligence value? Do you just not get that we are not under any obligation to charge these people with anything? The US stated clearly that they were no longer of intelligence value (meaning we got everything out of them that we could), and that they no longer posed a threat (if they are outed, they certainly can't stay in Iraq and cause problems).
So given that the US has indicated it got all the intelligence from them it could, given the fact that they can no longer stay in Iraq and engage in illicit activities (thus no longer posing a security threat), and given that there has been a sustained diplomatic push to get these people released, your claims that they were released simply because they were innocent are just plain odd. If you can't imagine that Quds force members would be released under these circumstances, then all I can say is that you might want to work on that a bit.
You draw the most bizarre conclusions.
None quite as bizarre as yours that waterboarding might not actually be torture, but I digress.
So given that the US has indicated it got all the intelligence from them it could, given the fact that they can no longer stay in Iraq and engage in illicit activities (thus no longer posing a security threat)
Ah, so Iran's elite Quds Force are no longer a security threat as long as they are safely in Iran? Thank God you pointed that out. For a moment I thought you were clutching at straws there...
I thought the whole Guantanamo Bay thingimyjig was that these people couldn't be released in case they attacked you again. And yet these two have been released. Because obviously having told you things they simply no longer represent a threat. I mean it's unthinkable that, having confessed to Uncle Sam, they would ever again seek to harm you.
And you have the gall to call my logic bizarre? Your conclusion makes no sense. You appear to be arguing that the US are releasing members of Iraq's Quds force precisely because they have admitted their guilt.
This planet you live on where you have to give every Bush regime action a positive gloss must be a very lonely spot...
Time to get back on your meds. You may not have been keeping up with the news, but the Quds force members were not in Guantanamo, rather in a quaint little place called Iraq. The US forces in Iraq, as you are certainly not aware, only deal with security threats in Iraq. So yes, the Quds forces members not being able to operate in Iraq relieves the security threat in Iraq. One would think that this would be obvious, but Bush Derangement Syndrome clouds the vision and the obvious is usually hazy.
I know you don't understand the concept of intelligence collection. That is very clear. I am making no argument that they "admitted their guilt". What they have likely done is told the US under interrogation all that they are going to tell them, which means they no longer have intelligence value. Again, I know concepts like "intelligence collection" are probably a bit tough to grasp, but I'm sure you could find a good book on the subject. Although at a couple hundred pages, these things called "books" might be a bit long to hold the attention span.
That you don't understand how releasing prisoners could be a result of diplomacy speaks volumes and I don't think there's much else to say on the subject.
You may not have been keeping up with the news, but the Quds force members were not in Guantanamo, rather in a quaint little place called Iraq.
And where did I state that Quds were in Guantanamo?
I know you don't understand the concept of intelligence collection. That is very clear. I am making no argument that they "admitted their guilt". What they have likely done is told the US under interrogation all that they are going to tell them, which means they no longer have intelligence value. Again, I know concepts like "intelligence collection" are probably a bit tough to grasp, but I'm sure you could find a good book on the subject. Although at a couple hundred pages, these things called "books" might be a bit long to hold the attention span.
You are resorting to patronising insult again, which you often do when your argument is shown to be foolish.
I well understand "intelligence collection." Explain this to me, why have the US released persons who might attack them again?
That you don't understand how releasing prisoners could be a result of diplomacy speaks volumes and I don't think there's much else to say on the subject.
Oh please, say a lot on the subject Jason. If these people are as dangerous as we were told they were, why have they been released? And why does this administration, who have never before cared much for diplomacy, suddenly consider it such a priority that they will choose to release dangerous members of Iran's elite Quds Force?
Post a Comment