[DEBATE] : CNN: Seymour Hersh 'vindicated' by new Iran intel estimate

[Devan Pillay]

testing

------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Prof Devan Pillay
Associate Professor
Dept of Sociology
University of the Witwatersrand
Pvt Bag 3, Wits 2050
Johannesburg, South Africa
+27 11 7174425 (T)
+27 11 7174459 (F)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Riaz K Tayob [mailto:riazt at iafrica.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 11:31 AM
> To: Debate List (ZA)
> Subject: [DEBATE] : CNN: Seymour Hersh 'vindicated' by new Iran intel
> estimate
>
>
>     CNN: Seymour Hersh 'vindicated' by new Iran intel estimate
>
>
>         12/05/2007 @ 7:42 am
>
> Filed by David Edwards and Muriel Kane
>
>
>       Reporter believes Cheney 'kept his foot on the neck of' report
>
> Advertisement
>
> A new National Intelligence Estimate
>
<http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071203/ts_nm/iran_usa_dc;_ylt=Aou9o1tPqOoU
nC
> c3FbdKu7us0NUE>
> released on Monday indicates that 16 US intelligence agencies have
> concluded with a high level of confidence that Iran has not had an
> active nuclear weapons program since 2003 and that even if it resumed
> weapons development, it would be unlikely to obtain a nuclear bomb in
> less than 5 to 10 years.
>
> The NIE apparently came as a surprise to President Bush, who insisted
>
<http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20071204-0927-bush-text.html>
at
> a news conference the next day that "I was made aware of the NIE last
> week. In August, I think it was, John - Mike McConnell - came in and
> said, 'We have some new information.' He didn't tell me what the
> information was. He did tell me it was going to take a while to
analyze."
>
> However, the NIE was no surprise to veteran investigative reporter
> Seymour Hersh, who has been writing about it since November 2006.
Hersh
> told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Tuesday that he believes the White House
> deliberately kept the NIE bottled up for over a year because the vice
> president was dissatisfied with its conclusions.
>
> "At the time I wrote that, there was a tremendous fight about it
because
> Cheney ... did not want to hear this," Hersh recalled. "I think the
> vice-president has kept his foot on the neck of that report. ... The
> intelligence we learned about yesterday has been circulating inside
this
> government at the highest levels for the last year -- and probably
> longer."
>
> As early as July 2006, Hersh had reported
> <http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/10/060710fa_fact> that the
US
> military was resisting administration pressure for a bombing campaign
in
> Iran, because "American and European intelligence agencies have not
> found specific evidence of clandestine activities or hidden
facilities."
>
> By November 2006, Hersh's sources had told him
> <http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/66/23964> of "a
> highly classified draft assessment by the C.I.A.," which concluded
that
> satellite monitoring and sophisticated radiation-detection devices
> planted near Iranian facilities had turned up absolutely no evidence
of
> a nuclear weapons program. However, Bush and Cheney were expected to
try
> to keep those conclusions out of the forthcoming NIE on Iran's nuclear
> capabilities.
>
> As Hersh explained to
> <http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/19/hersh-iran-agent/> Wolf Blitzer
at
> the time, the White House was attempting to counter the CIA assessment
> with an Israeli claim, based on a "reliable agent," that Iran was
> working on a trigger for a nuclear device. "The CIA isn't getting a
good
> look at the Israeli intelligence." Hersh explained. "It's the old
word,
> stovepiping. It's the President and the Vice President, it's pretty
much
> being kept in the White House."
>
> RAW STORY's Larisa Alexandrovna further reported
>
<http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Intelligence_officials_believe_White_
Ho
> use_chose_0108.html>
> in January 2007 that the NIE on Iran was intended to be released later
> that month, but that John Negroponte's was being replaced as Director
of
> National Intelligence because he had refused to tailor the NIE to Vice
> President Cheney's specificiations.
>
> Despite feeling vindicated by the latest developments, Hersh warned
> Blitzer that the White House push for war with Iran is "still not
over.
> ... There's always Israel." He explained that "the Israelis were very
> upset about the report. They think we're naive."
>
> However, Hersh was confident that there was very little chance the NIE
> could be mistaken, because "It's been four years since we've had any
> positive evidence of a parallel secret program to build a bomb -- and
> we've been all over the country."
>
> Hersh and Blitzer then recalled Hersh's past appearances on CNN --
> including several long interviews discussing the Abu Ghraib scandal --
> and how the White House would regularly accuse him of using "anonymous
> sorces" or just "throwing crap against the wall."
>
> Hersh concluded by emphasizing what a serious problem the NIE poses
for
> Bush. "It's a lose-lose for them," he stated. "The fight I'm talking
> about began /last year./ ... This is going to pose a serious
credibility
> problem. ... That's not what we pay the guy to do."
>
> However, Hersh's sources tell him that despite the NIE, Bush's
> negotiating position is still that the Iranians "have to stop
everything
> ... destroy it. ... Inspectors have to come in that we pick. ... He's
> not saying that publicly, but that's the private standard."
>
> http://rawstory.com//printstory.php?story=8468
>
>
> This video is from CNN's /Situation Room/, broadcast on December 4,
2007.


<html><body><font face = "verdana" size = "0.8" color = "navy">This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the permission of the University. Only authorized signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the contrary.</font></body></html>