Ex-Congressional Aide: Karl Rove Personally Received (And Ignored) Iranian Peace Offer in 2003

[ck4829]

While the Bush administration continues to insist it has no plans to go to war with Iran, the New Yorker magazine is reporting the Pentagon has created a special panel to plan a bombing attack on Iran that could be implemented within 24 hours of getting the go-ahead from President Bush. According to investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, the planning group was established within the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in recent months.

In response to the report, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman denied the US was planning to go to war with Iran and said "To suggest anything to the contrary is simply wrong, misleading and mischievous." Whitman went on to say the White House is continuing to address concerns in the region through diplomatic efforts.

This comes against the backdrop of last week's allegation that Bush's chief advisor Karl Rove personally received a copy of a secret offer from the Iranian government to hold negotiations four years ago. The Bush administration decided to ignore the grand bargain offer. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice recently claimed she had never even seen the document. At the time Iran said it would consider far-reaching compromises on its nuclear program, relations with Hezbollah and Hamas and support for a Palestinian peace agreement with Israel.

Rove's involvement was revealed by an aide to former Republican congressman Bob Ney. The aide, Trita Parsi, said Ney was chosen by the Swiss Ambassador in Tehran to carry the Iranian proposal to the White House because he knew the Ohio Congressman to be the only Farsi-speaking member of Congress and particularly interested in Iran.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/26/157241

[EFerrari]

1. Go, Amy!

K&R

[Norquist Nemesis]

2. That's patent Bush for you...

Absolutely EVERYTHING this administration has done was put through the political filter a la Karl Rove. Everything from the NCLB (without funding), to the 'You're either with us, or against us' foreign policy and the Katrina domestic policy.

[Felinity]

3. K&R

I want to know whether the Sec of State and Nat Sec Advisor ever saw that offer. If Rove deep-sixed it, would that not be incredibly serious? Illegal?

[blm]

4. Horrifying. This is what comes from government being closed to its citizens

and being used to protect secrecy and privilege.

[Straight Shooter]

5. How the hell does Rove's position qualify him to receive such information?

It certainly makes a stronger case that Rice never saw the document.

What a bunch of infighting bastards those people are.

[ck4829]

7. Rove has security clearance and can access anything he wants

Or so I've heard.

[Straight Shooter]

8. He does now, perhaps (?) But did he have that clearance 4 years ago?

Even if he had security clearance, his position does not supersede that of the NSA.

[Bitwit1234]

6. I still think that congress should investigate rove.

I think that congress should investigate rove and why he had so much authority over everything. He still does. But bush knows rove is along side cheney in approval or digust and he keeps him in the shadows.

[mod mom]

9. "Congressman Ney, who has been a longtime advocate for negotiations & dialogue between the US + Iran

OK folks, I'm confused here. Ney was rumored to be a CIA NOC, spoke Farsi and spent time in Iran. He was also an architect of HAVA which lead to e-voting (Diebold's lobbyist was no other than Jack Abramoff)

So was this guy bad OR was he working on something that could block *'s Iran agenda (like Plame and Brewster Jennings) and was neutralized by the Administration? (BTW I heard from someone I regard as a reliable source that Ney was indeed CIA)

[mod mom]

10. NEY NEEDS TO BE SUBPOENAED NOW! (before * can attack IRAN!)

"basically offering significant policy modifications in the hope that this would be able to open up a new chapter in the relationship with the United States"

TRITA PARSI: Well, I can't speak for him, but I think there may be some indications from him in which he will come out with his side of the story, as well.

But let me say one thing about the impact that this has had on the Iranians, because I was in Iran back in 2004, doing interviews for my book, which has a lot of details about this proposal. And what was really interesting is that when the Iranians put this on the table and they were basically offering significant policy modifications in the hope that this would be able to open up a new chapter in the relationship with the United States, when the United States, when the Bush administration did not even respond to it, that left Tehran with the impression that the US does not necessarily have problems with Iranian policies. What the US’s problem lies is with Iran's power. So if you can’t give any concessions to the Bush administration that would be able to change the nature of this relationship, then why give concessions to begin with? And that is part of the reason why Iran's position has strengthened and hardened so much over the last couple of years. It’s mainly because of the failure of the Iranian government to be able to reach an understanding with the United States by offering concessions. So now they’re trying to do the same by playing it very, very tough.

from DEMOCRACYNOW link

[mod mom]

11. Flynt Leverett Interview: Bush Administration ‘Not Serious’ About Dealing With Iran

"neo-cons in the * Admin wanted regime change ¬hing else and didn’t want to talk to the Iranians? I think you’re right."



Leverett: Bush Administration ‘Not Serious’ About Dealing With Iran

Interviewer:
Bernard Gwertzman, Consulting Editor
Interviewee:
Flynt Leverett

March 31, 2006

-snip

I see. So this document pops up on Secretary of State Colin Powell’s desk. It was a very top-secret document, I suppose.

It wasn’t a classified document. What’s so remarkable about it, it was sent over by the Swiss embassy as an unclassified fax.

I see. That’s why you can talk about it so easily.

Yes, the document was never classified.

So the United States had to make a decision on what it wanted to do. Was there a big debate about this?

By this point I am out of government and I don’t really know how this played out within the bowels of the administration. What I do know happened is that the formal response of the administration to this was to complain to the Swiss foreign ministry that the Swiss ambassador in Tehran was exceeding his brief by talking with Iranians about a paper like this and passing it on.

Let’s then go to the essence. Is this one of these clichés that the neo-cons in the Bush administration wanted regime change and nothing else and didn’t want to talk to the Iranians?

I think you’re right. That’s the basic motivation, that you had a bunch of neo-cons, and even the president himself , it’s not just the neo-cons who wanted regime change and nothing else. Ultimately the president is, on this issue, very, very resistant to the idea of doing a deal, even a deal that would solve the nuclear problem. You don’t do a deal that would effectively legitimate this regime that he considers fundamentally illegitimate. I think that’s the real issue.

-snip
http://www.cfr.org/publication/10326/

[Richard Steele]

12. K&R

[Skidmore]

13. In another day and age, Karl Rove would have been

strung up for the traitor to this nation he is. A one-man train wreck.

[kansasblue]

14. "psssst.... pass it to Condi when your done"

"sorry...I forgot!"