Officials: White House Holding Back Report Detailing Iran's Meddling in Iraq

fox ^ | 1/30/07 | fox

[Flavius]

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A plan by the Bush administration to release detailed and possibly damning specific evidence linking the Iranian government to efforts to destabilize Iraq have been put on hold, U.S. officials told FOX News.

Officials had said a "dossier" against Iran compiled by the U.S. likely would be made public at a press conference this week in Baghdad, and that the evidence would contain specifics including shipping documents, serial numbers, maps and other evidence which officials say would irrefutably link Iran to weapons shipments to Iraq.

[armymarinemom]

I have mine on speed dial but it doesn't do a darn bit of good. I's Maine for crying out loud.

[Mo1]

WHY THE HELL NOT!!!

I don't have the answers .... I don't know what they are thinking

[CyberAnt]

Hmmmmm ..?? I wonder if the report is being withheld while we beat Iran over the head with it.

Good idea.

[FreedomNeocon]

Well thats the thing, the plan with Iran isn't to invade.

Hell at this point it isn't to bomb them.

Its just to take the gloves TOTALLY off within Iraq. Including 'embassies' that are safehouses for terrorists, including 'diplomats', including local people (like Sadr and his guys), like the 250+ goons in Najef just the other day.

The information will be used to gain support for Iranian isolation which some Euros need convincing of. I'd think they are holding it because even the announcement has created a FLURRY of activity that is deemed productive some question weather it is worth 'showing our cards' when even the threat (with the hand to back it up) already exceeded our phase1 goal (get iraqi troops in and holding the positions while the support structure is away)

[Zack Nguyen]

Thank you very much!

[Southack]

I find it odd that Iran is sneaking into Iraq to assasinate U.S. officers in Najaf.

I find it odd that Iranian weapons are turning up in the hands of dead insurgents.

Throughout history, Iranians have been smarter than that. Why provoke President Bush *now*, when he's only going to be in Office for 2 more years?

He's not running for re-election. He doesn't have to do the "popular" thing. If he wants to bomb Iran, then Iran will be bombed, bombed again, and bombed hard a few more times all from a single sentence of our CiC.

So what's Iran's motive?


...and then I think back to the documents that we captured in Zarqawi's safe house (not so "safe" after all) in Iraq. Those documents detailed a plan to kidnap Iranians, kill them, and leave their bodies at the scene of a large insurgent attack inside Iraq in order to implicate Iran...thus drawing Iran into the war against the U.S. and thereby creating a defacto ally of Al Qaeda.

[FreeReign]

...and then I think back to the documents that we captured in Zarqawi's safe house (not so "safe" after all) in Iraq. Those documents detailed a plan to kidnap Iranians, kill them, and leave their bodies at the scene of a large insurgent attack inside Iraq in order to implicate Iran...thus drawing Iran into the war against the U.S. and thereby creating a defacto ally of Al Qaeda.

Do you actually think that we don't have enough legitimate intelligence that implicates the Iranians? That all we have is some dirty trick safe house documents?

Did you hear the SOTU. The President implicated the Iranians four times.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Well the Karaf attack was setup by Al-Queda...pretty well structured...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

The US Fifth Fleet, which is based in Bahrain, will be overseeing around 50 warships in the Mideast after the arrival of the Bataan and an American aircraft carrier group in February, said US Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charlie Brown.

Well.....hmmmm....

Pentagon investingating Iran's Qods Force role in Karbala attack

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

From the Blogosphere:

We Are At War With Iran

************************AN EXCERPT*************************

Based on reporting by Rick Moran and Bill Roggio it is clear the recent attack on a US outpost in Iraq by attackers disguised as Americans was actually an act of war by Iran:

[Southack]

Why would Iran provoke Bush *now*, with U.S. carriers arriving in the med and GWB having a mere 2 years left in Office?

This is not a rhetorical question. I don't understand their motive for behaving badly right now, as opposed to laying low for 2 years and then acting up when some wuss is in Office.

It's to our benefit that they act up now, however, in the sense that they are giving us the right to finally correct the 1979 mess while we still have a warrior in the White House...

...but it strikes me as *odd* that they would hand us such an excuse on a silver platter.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Isn't that the Karbala operation?

[FreeReign]

Why would Iran provoke Bush *now*, with U.S. carriers arriving in the med and GWB having a mere 2 years left in Office? This is not a rhetorical question. I don't understand their motive for behaving badly right now, as opposed to laying low for 2 years and then acting up when some wuss is in Office. It's to our benefit that they act up now, however, in the sense that they are giving us the right to finally correct the 1979 mess while we still have a warrior in the White House... ...but it strikes me as *odd* that they would hand us such an excuse on a silver platter.

Your question is legitimate. It certainly would be the rational thing for Ahmadinejad to wait until some Democrat became President.

Maybe Ahmadinejad isn't rational.

Maybe Ahmadinejad thinks with our emboldened Democrats and our out-to-lunch electorate that he can get away with it.

I do know that the President in the SOTU cited for cases based on what I would think would be rock-solid intelligence of the Iranians supporting insurgents in both Iraq and elsewhere.

Given the hubbub over what happened with the Iraqi intelligence I'd be willing to bet that the President has substantial information.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Some discussion of Iran in the Senate hearing for Fallon....from Michelle Malkin's Blog:

Adm. Fallon: "The urgent need to make progress is obvious"
By Michelle Malkin · January 30, 2007 10:32 AM

******************************AN EXCERPT *********************************

1130am update on the hearing and questions about Iran:

Several Senators asked Fallon his views on Iran, which the Bush administration accuses of meddling in Iraq's internal affairs and supplying weapons for use by insurgents against American and Iraqi soldiers.

Sen.
Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., asked what he thinks are the intentions of the Iranian government, with regard to security in the Gulf region.

"They are posturing themselves with the capability to attempt to deny us the ability to operate in this vicinity," Fallon said, adding that there is room for diplomatic efforts with Iran because it also has an economic stake in keeping open the commercial shipping lanes of the Gulf.

"They are aware of our strike capabilities," he added, and are looking for ways to either neutralize those U.S. capabilities or to keep U.S. forces at bay.

Fallon said he has not been ordered to update the Pentagon's contingency plans for war with Iran.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

One of my Senators is Boxer....Dumb as a Brick....Feinstein ...might be approachable after Frisco takes a hit....

[FreeReign]

Adm. Fallon: "The urgent need to make progress is obvious"

Fallon:They are aware of our strike capabilities...

:)

[cowdog77]

If the gloves don't come off now, pull the troops, there is no reason to keep subjecting them to fighting a war with their hands tied."
_____________________________
Agreed !

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

BBC report on the hearing:

US chief seeks new tack on Iraq

******************EXCERPT****************************

Countering Iranian influence in Iraq would also be an important priority if he was confirmed in his post, he said.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Last Updated: Wednesday, 31 January 2007, 02:07 GMT

E-mail this to a friend

Printable version

US chief seeks new tack on Iraq

Thousands more US troops are being sent to Iraq

President George W Bush's nominee to be the new commander of US military forces in the Middle East has called for a "new and different" approach in Iraq.

Admiral William Fallon told a Senate confirmation hearing that "time is short" for the US to turn Iraq around.

Countering Iranian influence in Iraq would also be an important priority if he was confirmed in his post, he said.

His comments came on another day of bloodshed, in which about 40 people died in attacks across Iraq.

More than 100 were also injured in the bomb and mortar attacks as Shia Muslims celebrated the Ashura festival.

'Sensitive time'

In Washington, Adm Fallon told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the previous US strategy in Iraq was "not working".

We need candid assessments, and you'll get them from me Adm William Fallon Profile: William Fallon Call for containment

"I believe the situation in Iraq can be turned around but time is short," he said.

"What we have been doing has not been working. [What] we have got to be doing, it seems to me, is something different."

Adm Fallon, who currently heads the military in the Pacific, is poised to become the first US navy officer to head Central Command, or Centcom.

He is replacing Gen John Abizaid, who is retiring after nearly four years as Centcom chief and if confirmed would become the immediate boss of Gen David Petraeus, who was recently confirmed as the commander of US forces in Iraq.

The commander's reputation as an able diplomat is being seen as an important asset at a very sensitive time for US policy in Iraq, says the BBC's James Coomarasamy, in Washington.

'No guarantees'

If confirmed, the admiral will have to oversee the deployment of more than 20,000 US troops in a "surge" operation in Iraq.

"There are no guarantees but you can depend on me for my best effort," Adm Fallon said.

We don't believe that [Iran's] behaviour, such as supporting Shia extremists in Iraq, should go unchallenged John Negroponte Nominee for deputy secretary of state

Adm Fallon also said he would seek support for efforts to counter Iranian influence in the region.

However, he said he was unaware of any contingency plans for war with Iran.

He believed Iran wanted to be able to prevent the US from operating freely in the strategically important waters off the Arabian Gulf, he added.

Separately, John Negroponte, the first US director of intelligence and a former ambassador to Iraq and to the UN, now nominee for the post of deputy secretary of state, answered questions from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

He backed recent tough talk towards Iran, saying Tehran was meddling in Iraq, and insisted that a diplomatic channel was already open with Syria.

"I would characterise our policy as desirous of resolving any issues we have with Iran by peaceful means," he said.

"But at the same time, we don't believe that their behaviour, such as supporting Shia extremists in Iraq, should go unchallenged."

His comments came as Democrat Senator Barack Obama expressed fears that the US would inadvertently stumble into active hostilities with Iran.

[nw_arizona_granny]

I would think that any tiny secret, that some of the elected fools get their hands on, goes to Iran, before it goes to the American public.

President Bush, I think, has to keep the tinest detail a secret, he dare not release it for the left to distort.