Posted on 04/18/2006 3:38:54 PM PDT by april15Bendovr
Posted on 04/18/2006 3:29:16 PM PDT by april15Bendovr
Iraq Documents Prove Saddam-Osama Relationship, Meanwhile Congress Bans Use of Jewish Bullets April 18, 2006
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: I got a note today from a friend who wanted to alert me to an interview given by Thomas Joscelyn, who is a blogger to FrontPageMagazine, David Horowitz's place, about the Iraqi intelligence documents now being combed through. It's all worth reading, but especially this part. "One document which describes Iraqi contacts with bin Laden himself also shows that Iraq was in contact with Dr. Muhammad al-Massari, the head of the Committee for Defense of Legitimate Rights." That's the CDLR. It's a known Al-Qaeda propaganda organ based in London. There's no dispute about it.
"The document indicates that the IIS was seeking to 'establish a nucleus of Saudi opposition in Iraq' and to 'use our relationship with [al-Massari] to serve our intelligence goals.' The document also notes that Iraq was attempting to arrange a visit for the al Qaeda ideologue to Baghdad. Again, we can’t be certain what came of these contacts. Just recently, however, al-Massari confirmed that Saddam had joined forces with al Qaeda prior to the war. Al-Massari says that Saddam established contact with the 'Arab Afghans' who fled Afghanistan to northern Iraq in 2001 and that he funded their relocation to Iraq under the condition that they would not seek to undermine his regime. Upon their arrival, these Al-Qaeda terrorists were put in contact with Iraqi army personnel, who armed and funded them.
"Obviously, this paints a very different picture of prewar Iraq than many would like to see. Interestingly enough, the existence of this document was first reported by The New York Times in the summer of 2004, several weeks after the 9-11 Commission proclaimed that there was no operational relationship between Saddam’s Iraq and al Qaeda. For some reason, the Times decided to sit on the document while splashing the 9-11 Commission’s conclusion on the front page." So now we wonder, do they give Pulitzers for deciding when all the news is fit to print as well?
Did you see those Pulitzer Prize winners? I'm not even going to go through it. Anybody who got a Pulitzer Prize for their Katrina coverage just mocks the whole Pulitzer Prize. Do you know how the Pulitzers came to be? Joseph Pulitzer was a yellow journalist. He was in the mold of William Randolph Hearst. The guy was not respected at all. He had one paper that was respected, St. Louis Post-Dispatch. He was maligned, he was impugned, he was thought to be very unprofessional. He established the Pulitzers as a way of reestablishing his reputation and bringing his reputation up from where it was, and so now, not that that's relevant to anything today; it's just a little history lesson. By the way, I mentioned this Iraq story only because at the center of the get Rumsfeld and get Bush movement is that weapons of mass destruction weren't there and the prewar intelligence was all wrong, that we shouldn't even be in Iraq, we should be in Afghanistan bombing Tora Bora again à la John Kerry and therefore Bush squandered the opportunity to go after the war on terror and so forth. You go through these documents that we have found and the administration finally released, and there's eye dropping, jaw dropping evidence that there was all kinds of contacts, operational and otherwise, between Al-Qaeda and Saddam as far back as the mid-nineties. So you see the 9/11 Commission is the Bible on this, and the drive-by media has its action line, and whatever contradicts the action line is going to be purposefully ignored -- because we're not interested in facts or truth.
We've got an action line here and the action line is Bush gotta go, Bush started the war, Bush created terrorism, we're all in danger, we're all imperiled, and Bush is irresponsible, messianic complex, you can say whatever you want about it, you've heard it all and that's why we are in the process of going through all of this rigmarole. It's all based on lies, it's all based on a giant trap and we'll see how far they get with it. (story) "Israeli-made bullets bought by the U.S. Army to plug a shortfall should be used for training only, not to fight Muslim guerrillas in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. lawmakers told Army generals on Thursday. Since the Army has other stockpiled ammunition, 'by no means, under any circumstances should a round (from Israel) be utilized,' said Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, the top Democrat on a House of Representatives Armed Services subcommittee with jurisdiction over land forces.
"The Army contracted with Israel Military Industries Ltd. in December for $70 million in small-caliber ammunition. The Israeli firm was one of only two worldwide that could meet U.S. technical specifications and delivery needs, said Brig. Gen. Paul Izzo, the Army's program executive officer for ammunition. The other was East Alton, Illinois-based Winchester Ammunition, which also received a $70 million contract. Although the Army should not have to worry about "political correctness," Abercrombie was making a valid point about the propaganda pitfalls of using Israeli rounds in the U.S.-declared war on terror, said Rep. Curt Weldon. 'There's a sensitivity that I think all of us recognize,' Weldon told the Army witnesses, including Maj. Gen. Buford Blount, who led the U.S. Third Infantry Division that captured Baghdad in April 2003. Blount, now the Army's assistant deputy chief of staff, said the Army had sufficient small caliber ammunition to conduct current operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. But taken together with training needs, the United States had strained its production facilities." So the bottom line here is that we are indeed imposing politically correct requirements on the fighting of a war. We cannot use -- what are these, Jewish bullets? We can't use small caliber ammo manufactured by an Israeli company because it's politically incorrect.
That will really make 'em mad out there. It might make the people that are trying to kill us, that blew us up on 9/11, yep, it might make 'em really mad and they're shooting back at us and what do you bet if they've got an Israeli bullet they'd use it, they didn't care as long as they could have it. So we can't use -- (Laughing.) The interesting thing here, folks, is understand how this happened. Congress tells the military what it can and can't do. So the next time something controversial comes up like Abu Ghraib or whatever, and the next time a bunch of congressional committees start grandstanding and act like they have nothing to do with it and they didn't know what was going on, understand they can micromanage all they want even to the extent of ordering commanders not to use Israeli, slash, I guess Jewish bullets against the Muslims because it would present a propaganda problem. For crying out loud. END TRANSCRIPT
You posted the same article twice because?
God I love Rush.
Rush needs to spend more time on the Docex project. There is not enough people invested in how important these documents are. I would bet half the people at Free Republic are clueless about what these documents contain. There probably more concerned about the news out of Aruba.
If I provided rifle ammo to the U.S. Army in Iraq, the bullets would be lubed with bacon grease.
Yep, I saw that. You can send a post to the admin mod and ask them to correct the title on an active post instead of reposting.
pingable?
Or the Duke Lacrosse team.
Neil Abercrombie is Senator Inouye's water boy and still a 60s anti-war hippie. His role as Inouye's waterboy is even more revealed now that Time magazine has named Hawaii's junior Senator - Senator aKAKA - as one of the 5 worse Senators. aKAKA, elected to office by the people of Hawaii for 30 years and as a Senator for the past 16 years, is a nice, loveable guy but a lousy Senator.
Abercrombie can say anything and do anything without fear of not being reelected.
Jeez louise, talk about micromanaging.
What do you do just put Moderator in the send to box? then ask for the correction?
Put admin moderator in the box then ask them to correct whatever needs correcting. They usually get to it pretty quick.
That's pathetic. I guess we don't want to "offend" Islamic terrorists by shooting them with bullets made in Israel.
Fill the little, hollow points with lard.
Okay, fine, but who is Thomas Joscelyn and how does he know?
I would say the more activism there is on providing knowledge to this topic including 20 million listeners I say "all the better."
If we are going to win the war on terrorism we need to take away any propaganda assistance the drive by media happens to be giving to our enemy. We need to make relevant information of connections between Saddam and Al Qaeda supersede lowbrow news that even we as Republicans and Conservatives tend to generate even here. We as well as our liberal counterparts can improperly prioritize our news.
Yes, but what I'm asking is how Joscelyn gets the information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.