Need some facts on Iran's involvement (or lack thereof) in Iraq for anti-Lieberman letter

This is in response to one of Lieberman's spokespeople sending a letter into the Hartford Courant today. I know there have been other sources that have said there is no conclusive evidence, but I can't find them. Thanks!!

This is the letter I am attempting to rebut:

>>>
The June 13 editorial "Mr. Lieberman's Rash Rhetoric" did a disservice to readers by misrepresenting a critical fact about Iranian involvement in the murder of American troops in Iraq. The editorial claims that U.S. officials "can't corroborate" evidence that Iranians are training and equipping terrorists inside Iraq. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Here is Maj. Gen. Caldwell in Baghdad in January: "What we do know is that the Iranian intelligence services, the Quds force, is in fact training, equipping and funding Shia extremist groups ... both in Iraq and also in Iran."

Here is Gen. David Petraeus, commander of our forces in Iraq, in April: "The Iranian involvement has really become much clearer to us. ... were provided substantial funding, training on Iranian soil, advanced explosive munitions and technologies as well as run-of-the-mill arms and ammunition, in some cases even a degree of direction."

Here is Zalmay Khalilzad, our former ambassador to Iraq: "We can say with certainty that support groups that are attacking coalition troops. These groups are using the same ammunition to destroy vehicles that the Iranians are supplying to Hezbollah in Lebanon. They pay money to Shiite militias and they train some of the groups."

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/letters/hc-lets0614.artjun14,0,4552195.story?coll=hc-headlines-letters

<<<<

Can't remember the last Iraqi PM's name.
But if Iraq has defense treaties with Iran than Iran has a legal right to help them. The Iraqi government is controlled by the largest Shiite block with the largest militia and they are close to Iran.

Ambassador to Iraq, my foot. The guy has had his fingers in every pie for decades

A sunni speaking out against shiite!

I guess that's just like a cubs fan speaking out against a cardinal fan...

at least not normally....

insurgents and has been training and supporting both Shiites and Sunnis for the last 4 years. And since the USA is the largest supplier of military weapons in the world and we've funded all types of 'militia' groups worldwide, it's the pot calling the kettle black.

As long as the Bush Administration is actively working to bring about the downfall of Iran's system of government, they have every incentive on Earth to want the United States tied down with endless blood letting inside Iraq. I would do a little research on how the U.S. is attempting to destabalize Iran and point to the absolute hypocricy of Bush complaining about any Iranian activities in their own neighborhood while the United States is interfering inside Iran, threatening attacks on Iran while Iran does nothing to directly threaten the U.S., all the while with 160,000 U.S. troops stationed by Iran's border inside Iraq with a couple of fleets sitting off shore.

You can read this piece I wrote for evidence on how Bush never wanted peace with Iran:

Peace Averted; George Bush vs. Iran
http://www.aleftturnforclark.com/2007/05/peace_averted_george_bush_vs_i.html#more

Or amazingly enough, check out the information in this usually very dependably right wing source about U.S. efforts to destabalize Iran:

With Friends Like These (MEK, Iran & USA)
FOREIGN POLICY Via einnews.com ^ | By Erik Sass | September 2005


Posted on 10/01/2005 4:56:56 PM PDT by F14 Pilot


An Iranian group has killed American civilians, allied itself with Saddam Hussein, and holds a spot on the State Department’s terrorist watch list. So why might it become America’s newest friend in the Middle East? Hint: Tehran.

In August 2002, intelligence reports revealed secret nuclear facilities in the Iranian cities of Natanz and Arak. The revelation left officials in Tehran speechless, in large part because the evidence was not gathered by the United States or any of its allies. Rather, the courier of such sensitive intelligence was the Mujahedin e-Khalq (MEK), a decades-old Iranian dissident group. In most cases, dissident groups who could work so effectively within rogue states would be natural friends with Washington. But in the case of the MEK, it’s more complicated: The U.S. State Department lists the MEK as a terrorist organization....

...That presence on the ground, and its clear opposition to Iran, is winning the MEK support in Washington. President Bush recently called the MEK a “dissident group,” a clear hat tip, and several U.S. legislators want the MEK removed from the terrorist list, which would allow it to raise money in the United States. MEK fundraisers have challenged the group’s terrorist status in court, so far without success. The Iran Freedom Support Act, a House bill clearly intended to help the group, was introduced in April by longtime MEK backer Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. It remains tied up in committee. MEK supporters on Capitol Hill are likely waiting on the State Department’s official revocation (or reaffirmation) of the group’s terrorist status, expected to take place in early October."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1495002/posts

I don't have all of my research on this handy right now, but Bush signed a version of that legislation into law.