Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saddam’s Files-Hussein’s secret documents reveal new information about “missing” WMDs.
Frontpagemag ^ | 12-5-07 | Jamie Glazov

Posted on 12/05/2007 5:12:35 AM PST by SJackson

Symposium: Saddam’s Files  
By Jamie Glazov | Wednesday, December 05, 2007

Experts examining Saddam Hussein’s secret files have made numerous startling discoveries about the mystery of the “missing” WMDs. Today Frontpage Symposium has assembled a distinguished panel to discuss these documents and what they have revealed. Our guests are:

John Loftus, President of, which is entirely free of government funding and depends solely upon private contributions for its support. Visit his website at

Dave Gaubatz, the first Federal Agent (civilian) to enter Iraq in 2003. Currently the Director of the Mapping Shari'a project and owner of Wahhabi Counter-terrorism publications providing first-hand intelligence for law enforcement and CT professionals.


Ryan Mauro, a volunteer analyst for the Northeast Intelligence Network. He is the author of Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq, the founder of, and a speaker for the Intelligence Summit. He was originally hired at age 16 in 2002 as a geopolitical analyst for Tactical Defense Concepts. He is currently working on a potential TV show pilot and can be contacted at

FP: John Loftus, Dave Gaubatz and Ryan Mauro, welcome to Frontpage Symposium.

John Loftus, let us begin with you.

Your volunteers at the have been examining the secret documents captured from Saddam -- and it appears that they have solved a large part of the mystery of Saddam’s missing WMDs. Correct?

Loftus: Yes, now the truth is beginning to emerge. Saddam's own secret files show that he was lying to the UN, year after year. He told the UN that Iraq had no more WMD after 1991, and would never start those WMD programs again. But his own secret records show that in 2001, 2002, and 2003, Saddam was repeatedly purchasing banned chemicals, covering up radiation leaks, and generally orchestrating a cover-up.

Are the records genuine? We had NSA check the audiotapes to make sure it was Saddam's own voiceprint. It is. Now, why would Saddam and his top aides record all those tapes year after year and hide the forgeries in secret vaults? There are three shelf miles of paper records. What is the point? These are secret internal records, it is not as if he was using them in public to fool the Iranians into thinking he had WMD. These records almost did not even make it onto the light of day. They were buried amid a forest of documents that might not have been reviewed for decades, if ever. I cannot think of any explanation but these are genuine secret archives of Saddam's innermost feelings at his innermost meetings.

Moreover, at the time people like Dave Gaubatz and John Shaw were putting their statements on the record about how the WMD ended up in Syria, they did not know that we would get circumstantial corroboration from Saddam's own files. Statistically, this is beyond the realm of possibility of fabrication.

Gaubatz: Thanks Jamie. My friend Mr. Loftus is the person who has inspired me to continue requesting our political leaders and the American public demand the truth about WMD be brought forward. There was a point in time when I had raised the flag indicating I surrender and can no longer fight the WMD cause further. Then I thought of the innocent children who would suffer the most during a terrorist attack in which WMD was used. I have obtained a second wind and want to inform everyone based on many years of working counter-intelligence, I left Iraq knowing WMD had indeed been buried, some had been transported out of Iraq directly before the war, and some has now been looted by our enemies.

Are the records genuine as Mr. Loftus stated? The documents are genuine. In the last year I was informed by Federal Agents on the ground in Iraq, that many Iraqi sources who provided WMD intelligence to us in 2003, were subsequently kidnapped and killed for helping Americans.

I want people to realize the war in Iraq is unlike any that our country has ever faced. There was chaos in 2003, and there is chaos in 2007. I do not mean to put fault on any one person for the failure to locate the WMD when we had the opportunity. Our leaders had the best intentions, but failed to properly review intelligence reports in a timely manner, and most were not acted upon. We are now suffering the consequences of not listening to the counter-intelligence officers on the ground and who was obtaining first-hand intelligence. In 2003 we reported the pending civil war between the Sunni and Shia Muslims. In pure Islam the Sunni Muslims consider Shia Muslims to be non-believers and apostates. The punishment for apostasy is death as described in Fiqh Us Sunnah. Fiqh Us Sunnah is in virtually every Sunni mosque in America. Our mapping team just left Florida. A prominent Islamic Scholar (Sunni) advised that all Shia people need to be
killed in the U.S.

The best way to solve the WMD mystery is to have all witnesses involved in either the search or excavations come before Congress and testify. This is when I will release names and contact information of the Iraqis who know first-hand about WMD and the Al Qaeda presence in Iraq well before 2003. Military agents will then be called forward.

This issue is very easy to prove. Put all players before Congress, under oath. The truth will be revealed. Some will be hurt politically or their military careers will be damaged, but America will know the truth. The truth is the only thing that may have a remote chance of preventing another attack against our great country.

Mauro: In 2006, particularly after pressure from the Intelligence Summit, the Bush Administration began declassifying some of the millions of documents that have been found in Iraq. Many of them were not translated due to the sheer volume of documents the U.S. possessed and how few reliable Arabic translators we have. These documents, as they were declassified, were put on the Internet where concerned citizens, fluent in Arabic, began translating them. Joseph Shahda and Ray Robison are two individuals who played a critical role in this. My only role was organizing and presenting them at the 2007 Intelligence Summit, and coupling it with the extensive open-source research I've done.

However, this web site where the declassified documents were placed has been taken down. An Iraqi document with critical details on how to build a nuclear weapon was posted, and the government decided it was best to end this practice. As a result, millions of documents are not translated and analyzed, leaving a big gaping hole in our intelligence collection. Though the picture is incomplete, we have clear indications that Iraq, at the least, had the capabilities to produce WMD and was actively researching and expanding that capability. There is also evidence that WMD went to Syria.

We learn about an Iraqi dissident who reported to us that he was in contact with drivers who confessed to transporting WMD into Syria. Apparently, 50 trucks arrived in Deir al-Zour, Syria, on March 10, 2003. One driver told the informant that an earlier shipment occurred on March 1st. Another document describes how Chinese intelligence picked up information about a WMD transfer to Syria, and asked the Germans for verification. The Germans said they didn't have information on such a transfer, and then someone in the German government leaked this discussion to the Iraqis.

We also know that Iraq was in bed with foreign terrorists, and although no smoking gun exists to prove a collaborative relationship with Al-Qaeda, we do know from a document from 1997 that Iraqi intelligence met with Osama Bin Laden on February 19, 1995, where Bin Laden requested that Iraqi radio broadcast the speeches of a radical sheikh. Bin Laden also "requested joint operations against the forces of infidels in the land of Hijaz," which is Saudi Arabia. Those who argued for so long that Bin Laden was unwilling to work with a so-called secular dictator like Saddam are proven wrong, as Bin Laden, not the Iraqis, initiated the request for collaboration.

It is worthy to note that on November 13, 1995, only months after this meeting, Al-Qaeda bombed the Saudi National Guards headquarters in Riyadh, killing five Americans. It's circumstantial evidence, but other documents clearly point to Iraq as a committed state sponsor of terrorism.

FP: So what does all of this mean? What do we carry away from these discoveries?

And where is the apology from the liberal Left?

Moreover, the U.S. clearly failed in securing and searching key sites after it defeated Saddam. If it failed in this context, how can we be hopeful that the U.S. will succeed in dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran?

Loftus: I think what we carry away from Saddam's secret files is that the average citizen today does not have a clue about world history because so much of it is classified. This is a theme that dates back to my congressional testimony in the 1980's about Nazis in America. Russian double agent Kim Philby of British Intelligence dumped hundreds (if not thousands) of former Nazi war criminals in America, disguised as anti-communist freedom fighters. When US intelligence found out how badly they had been tricked, they covered it up for a half century, until I exposed it on 60 Minutes.

It is the cover-up that kills America, not the mistakes. The American people are forgiving, they know that all government agencies make mistakes from time to time. The American attitude is let’s fix it and move on. But the liars that cover up their mistakes are traitors to America, because they prevent their mistakes from ever getting fixed. One of my favorite old spies, George Orwell wrote: "The omission is the most powerful form of lie, and it is the duty of historians to ensure that those lies do not creep into the history books." He was writing about the evils of communism and nazism, but he could just as easily have been writing about Saddam Hussein.

It wasn’t just the liberal press that was utterly wrong about Saddam Hussein having WMD, it was almost the entire mainstream press, and a good chunk of the conservative press went along with it. Heck, even all of the experts in the State Department drank Saddam's cool aid. Truth be told, just about everyone bought into Saddam's lie that he had no plans for making any more WMD. Right up to the end of his life, Saddam was even lying to his own jailer. He told this FBI Special Agent that he had no WMD, and was only lying about having WMD to intimidate the Iranians. The FBI Agent actually took Saddam's word for it, and is publishing a book about him this week. The author is a wonderful agent, but he has been completely conned, as Saddam's records show repeatedly. I am watching right now as the press praises the conventional wisdom, and tries to bury my report on what Saddam really said about WMD to his closest aides. If the press covers up the Saddam files, they have truly betrayed America.

An alumni of my high school (Boston Latin) once wrote that those who fail to learn the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat them. Iran tells us they have no WMD, but the truth is that they and their Syrian puppets are exploiting every hellish program that Saddam bequeathed to them. This is not over, Saddam may yet have his revenge: the Iranian are finishing the nuclear project that he started. Thank God for the Israelis, who twice now have blown up Saddam''s nuclear facilities: once in Osirak, Iraq, and now in Deir al Zour, Syria. The more things change, they more they stay the same. For once, can't the press just admit they were wrong and move on? The only thing that matters is the truth, and the truth does not belong to the liberals or conservatives. It belongs to all of us.

Gaubatz: Mr. Loftus hit on a very important issue. The FBI Agent who spent months with Saddam was simply provided disinformation by Saddam. What benefit did Saddam have to provide honest details about the WMD? None. We knew he was going to hang and he knew he was going to hang. Saddam had played this game with the world for several years, yet many people continue to fall for the deception.

It is important we learn from our mistakes. In April 2003 we (agents) began reporting Iranian activity throughout Iraq. The Iranians were paying Iraqis to disrupt the U.S. mission. The power plants, water systems, and construction efforts were being sabotaged. Enemy prisoners of war were reporting (as well as many Iraqis civilians) that Iranian intelligence were in Iraq and did not want the U.S. mission to succeed. This was not a surprise to any counter-intelligent officer who had even remotely studied the tactics of Iranian intelligence. The U.S. installations were trying to construct roads, upgrade the aircraft runways, and build living facilities for coalition forces. CI agents knew in April 2003 Iranians were trying to hamper the progress. The following is from my handwritten notes on 7 May 2003, Nasiriyah, Iraq:

"EPW (enemy prisoner of war) stated Iranian Intelligence told him to attack Americans and collect information for future attacks. EPW had been working for Iranian Intelligence since 1996 and had been paid $100.00 per month."

The EPW provided more detailed intelligence, but the point being is the Iranian situation was ignored in 2003, as well as the WMD. America is now beginning to see evidence that what was reported in 2003 was not acted upon and we are on a verge of war with Iran. Our leaders and the news organizations must begin acting on intelligence and putting the political correctness issues to the side. Of course there were mistakes made in 2003, but at some point we must stop making the same mistakes over and over. In a nuclear, chemical, and biological world there is not room for the same historical mistakes.

The Iranians like Saddam have one common goal. They want to destroy America and everything America stands for. The only way to prevent Iran from becoming another Iraq is for America to stand strong. We must unite as Americans (left, right, and center). We must clearly inform Iran what we expect. If they ignore or reject our warnings we must attack them strongly. They respect strength, but see political correctness as a sign of weakness. They will exploit this weakness as they have done for years. Subsequently they will acquire nuclear weapons, and we will be subject to nuclear terrorism. The time to act is now, not ten years from now. This is a historical lesson we should have learned.

Mauro: Mr. Loftus earlier mentioned Dr. Jack Shaw, who as deputy undersecretary for international technology security, tracked the WMD with some help from Ukrainian intelligence to Syria and Lebanon. The Ukrainians even had the names of the Russian Spetsnaz officers involved in the transfers. The Russian element shouldn't be surprising. The documents show that Russia passed on key details of the U.S. war plan to Iraq, and that Iraq was working to bring countries like Russia, France and China to their side using "economical agreements." Others previously published show that Russia even spied on Tony Blair for Iraq.

James Clapper from the National Imagery Agency also saw the convoys leaving Iraq traveling through al-Qaim to Syria. I can confirm this element of Shaw's testimony, as I have communicated with a military source who spoke to an Iraqi who used to be an Iraqi Intelligence Service captain, and had ten joined the National Guard. He spoke of seeing guarded convoys travel through al-Qaim avoiding the populated areas in the months before the invasion, and why he believed they contained WMD. The Iraq Survey Group report wasn't able to complete its investigation of whether the WMD went into Syria due to the insurgency, so it is foolish for anyone to conclude that WMD did not exist.

In regards to Saddam's testimony, we must be very careful with what he says. He, and other high-level Iraqi officials, had no incentive to cooperate. The conclusion that there was no WMD results from three pieces of observation. One, that no stockpiles have been found. The intelligence about the movement of them to Syria explains this. The "Saddam Files" also rebut this. For example, one document describes how Turkish and Russian scientists were successfully hidden from UN inspectors visiting the Badr nuclear site in 2002. Numerous other documents talk of producing and buying materials used in making chemical and biological weapons, and explicitly say that certain research programs cannot be discovered.

Second, no one has found a smoking gun document. But now we know that millions of documents haven't been translated, and the Duelfer Report explained how a lot of the looting was a cover for the Iraqis to cleanse the country of incriminating material. Many, many documents were destroyed.

Thirdly, the Iraq Survey Group didn't find a credible person with first-hand knowledge of the WMD. However, the Duelfer Report admitted that detainees had no reason to cooperate, and feared retaliation by insurgents. The interviewing process is harshly criticized in the report.

They key question is why elements of the State Department and the intelligence community have used their allies in the media to try to discredit the work on the "Saddam files" and the WMD transfer to Syria. And more importantly, why the Bush Administration is unable to control the "shadow warriors," as Ken Timmerman describes them, in the government bureaucracies.

FP: Mr. Loftus, can you touch on this "key question"?

Loftus: Listen, I am an old fashioned Scoop Jackson Democrat. Please do not get me to try and explain what the Republicans are doing.

I was afraid the GOP would take our research showing that Saddam had WMD after all, and ram it down the Democrat's throat. Instead, a cone of silence has fallen over the issue. No news about WMD, even if it’s helpful to the President, will ever be accepted inside the beltway. The truth we found in the Saddam files is that most of the bureaucrats in Washington really messed up on the whole WMD debate, and they do not want to be asked about their errors. The press has a similarly dismal record in discounting even the possibility that Saddam had WMD, and is now confronted with the uncomfortable raw evil emerging from the Iraqi intelligence records.

So while our WMD research is being written about in Israel and in the Philippines, not a single US newspaper, news magazine, or news channel has even made an inquiry. This is astonishing. One of the more important stories this year is simply disappearing from the public view, solely because the press and politicians want it to go away.

What about the President? When did he lose the power to control his own employees? When we first raised the issue of the untranslated Saddam documents at the Intelligence Summit, the President agreed with us and explicitly overruled his intelligence advisor, John Negroponte.

A year ago, President Bush acted like a commander in chief, and ordered an expedited translation of the documents we captured at the beginning of the war. One year later, instead of celebrating victory that the WMD files were found, the President seems to be meekly submitting to his advisers. The explosive WMD revelation has ended not with a bang, but with a whimper.

It is being openly said that the Israelis are keeping quiet about their Syrian raid on Saddam's stockpile so as to avoid embarrassing the Americans. Since when have Americans been embarrassed about the truth?

There is a biblical quote on the walls of the CIA: "Ye shall know the truth , and the truth shall set you free." Perhaps we should amend the quote to read "When an intelligence bureaucrat gets hit in the face with the truth, he should turn the other cheek and pretend it never happened."

But you know, the truth has a funny way of forcing its way out. No one can ever say that Saddam was willing to get rid of his WMD programs. The files we read show the exact opposite. Saddam made fools of us all, and maybe that is the real reason that this has become the story that never was.

FP: Mr. Gaubatz, some further thoughts on the story that never was?

Gaubatz: I feel the best way to help followers of FPM to best determine if WMD did actually exist in Iraq, is for me to begin providing more specific details. After reviewing the following, readers can also determine if they have been provided the truth from our leaders.

"Agent Gaubatz generated over 60 counterintelligence products during Operations Southern Watch and Iraqi Freedom. His dedication to duty was evident through his relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and intelligence data collected while putting himself in harms way". This unclassified award was signed after I departed Iraq in July 2003, by Robert Broeking, Colonel, USAF, in July 2003.

On 3 June 2003, I wrote one particular report pertaining to WMD. An Iraqi source provided documentation with the names and addresses of 20 Iraqis who knew first-hand about WMD being moved around in tractor-trailer trucks during UN Inspections only two months before the war began. In the Suk Ash Shuyak area (southern Iraq) drivers had rotated the WMD using four trucks. The WMD had been hidden near the mosque in the town center and in a house near the mosque (exact home identified in intelligence report). These trucks had chemical weapons. One of the drivers lived in Suk Ash Shuyak. We were provided the name of the driver. This information was also in the report. The grid coordinates as well. The 20 Iraqis (Baath Party officials in southern Iraq) identified in this report had been confirmed to have executed many innocent Iraqi civilians and had been involved in attacks on the 507th and other attacks against U.S. forces. The meeting we had with this source was in Suk Ash Shuyuk at 1000 hours, 3 June 2003.

On 27 April 2003, another report began with, "60 weapons with chemical and/or nuclear warheads were hidden in Nasiriyah". The exact locations are identifed in my reports. We met two former Iraqi Intelligence members on this day. Their Iraqi intelligence numbers were obtained and verified. We met both former Iraqi intelligence officers again on 29 April 2003, at 0900 hours. Locations were identifed. The former Iraqi intelligence officers are 'Kadeh Fahed XXXXXX, and Kareem XXXXXX'. The last names were provided in the intelligence reports.

ISG was provided all of the details in regards to this report. ISG never followed up on the intelligence. The mosque nor the home identified were ever inspected. The two Iraqi intelligence officers were never followed up with interviews as we had requested ISG do. HQ AFOSI can release the reports.

I believe it is very critical to again mention that many politicians, military leaders, ISG leaders, and CI officers on the ground (to include myself) made mistakes. America was facing an enemy like we had ever encountered before. There was chaos. We were not prepared for what we were facing. We did not have enough people nor resources to do the job in Iraq. This is not to put blame on our President or any leader. I believe our President did the right thing by going into Iraq, but we made a huge mistake by believing we can win the hearts and minds of people without first securing them.

Mothers and fathers in Iraq in 2003 did not care about elections or democracy when their children could not obtain medical care, safely attend school, had no jobs, and were afraid of being executed by extremists. When we can't secure our own borders we should have never thought we could secure their borders from Iranians, or insurgents from other countries. From the time I went public in late 2004, I have always stated there is nothing I have ever said about the WMD in Iraq that I can't prove. During 'Congressional Hearings' I will provide all details and will swear under oath to all information. Will others?

Mauro: Mr. Gaubatz is correct in saying that we didn't win the war for the hearts and minds by failing to provide security to the Iraqi population. This occurred because we didn't have a serious counter-insurgency strategy and the forces to implement it. We failed to fight the ideological war by supporting alternative media sources to those of the extremists. We didn't support the Iraqi opposition before the war as much as we should have. We didn't hand over power to the Iraqis in the beginning, instead choosing to put an American, Paul Bremer, in charge. Many mistakes were made, but with things improving, and most of those mistakes rectified, we shouldn't cite those mistakes as evidence that we can't win. If we withdraw prematurely, we'll have to look at every Iraqi who risked their lives fighting the extremists; every woman who is beaten for showing her face; every homosexual who is persecuted for their relationships; every political prisoner who is tortured for speaking his or her mind, and tell them that we won't be around to support their struggle.

I suggest that you ask Mr. Gaubatz about his experience with Republican congressmen. It appears no one is willing to stand tough on this issue. The State Department, whose very existence aims to promote good and stable relationships with foreign countries, obviously won't support it. The DIA dismissed Shaw's information as being Israeli propaganda, despite the fact that while Israel reached a similar conclusion, Shaw's information did not come from them. The CIA tried to discredit Shaw's contacts, which isn't surprising given the politically-calculated leaks coming from some in that agency. Mr. Loftus told you about the problems with Negroponte at the Intelligence Summit. President Bush has to realize that as Commander-in-Chief, you can't just make a command and expect it to occur. People in the bureaucracies have agendas, and the huge nature of these bureaucracies makes it difficult to enforce change.

There are numerous reasons that the Administration isn't acting on this information. Why go back a fight a political battle that the American public and media has already decided upon, particularly when those who oppose you in various areas of the government will use calculated leaks to win the argument? Secondly, the WMD revelations have significant international ramifications, and will severely hurt relations with Russia. It will hurt relations with Syria, who the State Department is trying to win over as we speak. Thirdly, are we prepared to do anything about the WMDs in Syria? Fourthly, there obviously isn't a 100% consensus on the issue, so given the past intelligence failures, it's questionable whether the Administration would want to make a public statement based on conclusions that are highly controversial and debatable.

Finally, we live in an age of 30-second sound-bytes. With the public so skeptical of anything the Administration claims, there has to be a smoking gun presented that can convince the public within a minute. After that, the channel changes to reality TV. With so much information classified, I'm not sure it's fair to make a judgement as to why the Administration isn't presenting this evidence publicly, and whether it should do so. But the evidence does exist.

Loftus: For too many government agencies, the evidence is the problem. It is the 8000 pound elephant sitting on the dining room table that everyone tries very hard not to notice. The UN staked its reputation on the assertion that the WMD elephant did not exist, so did the State Department, and the CIA's Iraq Survey Group.

Now out comes the elephant, in the form of Saddam's own secret files. In the last few months before the war, Saddam's thugs were ordering every chemical weapon precursor they could get their hands on, even though some of these chemicals had been outright banned by the UN for sale to Iraq. Saddam's men were running around cleaning up radiation leaks ahead of the UN inspectors. When the State Department was telling the world that Iraq had no nuclear weapons program at all, Saddam was getting detailed briefings on exactly how to build nuclear weapons, and how to conceal his nuclear program under civilian research.

This is an elephant-sized pile of evidence. On the one hand, the bureaucrats have banned further public access to the Saddam files because too much genuine information was emerging on how to build an A-Bomb. At the same time, Negroponte has been telling people that there is no evidence of any WMD programs in the Iraqi files. They can’t have it both ways. They can’t re-classify the Saddam files because they give out too much info on WMD, and then deny that the Saddam files have any WMD evidence. It is just a dumb cover-up: as stupid as throwing a blanket over the elephant on the dining room table and calling it a centerpiece.

The press are even more outrageous in their refusal to see the WMD elephant. Like the fable of the eight blind men, one reporter grabs the elephant's leg, and says "that’s not an elephant, it’s a tree." Another grabs the tail and says "that's not an elephant, it’s a snake." Meanwhile, the evidence elephant keeps growing and growing under the classification blanket in the middle of the table.

Some reporters have suggested that perhaps, maybe, wishfully, the Saddam files were forgeries planted for some kind of clever deception. Yeah, that’s the ticket. Forgeries. Sure, but why would Saddam and his buddies go to the expense of creating three shelf miles of forgeries, but then bury them where no one would read them for years, if ever. You would also have to believe that Saddam built hugely expensive underwater warehouses just for fun because he really had no WMD to put in them. To completely buy the forgery theory, you would also have to believe that Saddam and his top aides took years off their lives to sit around and tape record secret meetings about WMD that never existed. You believe all that, and I have shares in the Euphrates bridge to sell you.

No, we do not have one giant smoking gun photo of the elephant because most of it is covered up (again) by the national security blanket of classification. But we do have enough snapshots from the Saddam files to make a reliable outline of the giant beast that was the Iraqi WMD program. At some point, we have to throw away all the denial arguments as ridiculous, and admit that the size of the evidence elephant is too overwhelming to ignore.

Gaubatz: Mr. Mauro and Mr. Loftus are again outstanding in getting straight to the point and as always they have done their homework and people should listen to them. Yes I had a nightmare in dealing with a Congressman, but now I am focused on being proactive in doing what I can to insure potential terrorists are identified in the U.S.

This week our research team will visit California, Tennessee, North Carolina, New Jersey and Michigan. The project I am involved in (Mapping Sharia) does not mean I have given up on the WMD issue. The two are hand in hand. Most people realize we do have 'sleeper cells' in the U.S. We have come across such people. Information is being provided to law enforcement and I believe more information is going to be obtained directly from some of these people about chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons. Future terrorist attacks will use these type weapons against innocent people and Americans should not begin to feel comfortable that 'terrorists' are all 'overseas'.

Recently in Brooklyn, NY, our team obtained audio of a by a well known Islamic scholar. This scholar who travels throughout the U.S. said it was justified to hijack and destroy U.S. military aircraft. It is time we listen and start to believe Islamic leaders who make these type of remarks. They are instigating young people to commit crimes. It is time our leaders insist this type behavior is not covered (which it is not) under the First Amendment and religious speech.

I recently attended a CAIR lecture. The Revolutionary Communist Party leaders (who were in attendance) were being praised by CAIR officials and allowed to hand out their material. This did not surprise me, but young American college students and their professors were at this event and also praised the Communist Party, but when I asked a question during the lecture about an Imam in Brooklyn calling for armed violence (on audio) against non-Muslims in the U.S., I was asked to leave. Again that was expected. Our team had another member at the event obtaining direct evidence.

Mauro: To further educate the reader as to the significance of the Iraqi documents, allow me to just review some more.

As far back as the early 1990s, Iraq was working with terrorists. For example, one file describes Bin Laden as a "collaborator" that had "good relations" with Iraqi intelligence operating out of Syria. There are key indications that Iraq even had a role in the 1993 ambush in Somalia.

Iraq's determination to sponsor terrorism continues into the late 1990s. A 1999 memo from the Fedayeen to Uday Hussein describes plans for a campaign of sabotage, bombing, and assassination in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq, in Iran, and in London. The document describes how 50 "fedayeen martyrs" were given death capsules to swallow if they were captured.

The Iraqi Air Force, we now know, was training terrorists. A letter from a commander from an Iraqi air base dated March 11, 2001, states, "...we ask to provide that Division with the names of those who desire to volunteer for suicide missions to liberate Palestine and strike American interests." An intelligence document from this same month describes a "call to strike the presence and interests of America." Another describes training Iraqi operatives in "terror techniques" for operations of assassination and sabotage abroad.

A top-secret memo from March 28, 2003 describes training "Arab fedayeens" in the use of bombs using various methods such as cars, motorcycles, and even camels. The Iraqis give these Arab fedayeen militants the same benefits as an Iraqi special forces operate, according to another file.

As for the Iraqi nuclear program, we know from audio tapes released at the 2006 Intelligence Summit that Saddam Hussein had a secret team of nuclear scientists working on a plasma enrichment program. Two of these scientists, heard on the tapes, had names not previously known, which almost certainly means these scientists have not been located or interviewed. A secret memo from November 1999 describes how some equipment was not declared in the Iraqi Atomic Energy Organization's archives because it was "shrouded in secrecy." Another document from 1998, signed by the heads of Iraqi intelligence and the Atomic Energy Organization describes "the researches that cannot be declared and that is related with the previous prohibited programs of WMD and how to make sure that information about these researches will not leak to the outside." There is also a document that describes how on August 23, 2002, the Iraqis burned various documents related to the AEO.

As for the chemical and biological programs, numerous documents refer to "prohibited materials," "prohibited equipment" and "prohibited programs," including illegally produced precursor chemicals. Many documents refer to actions being taken to eliminate traces of WMD programs by destroying documents, cleaning up labs, and wiping computers clean.

The documents are also embarrassing for other countries. We learn that the Russians provided key elements of our war plan to the Iraqis, and that Saddam looked to Russia for help in the UN. A 2001 document describes using "economical agreements" with Russia, France, China and Japan to undermine sanctions.

If such incriminating material can be found in just a small, small fraction of the documents, what other revelations are we missing out on?

FP: John Loftus, Dave Gaubatz and Ryan Mauro, thank you for joining Frontpage Symposium.

TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: wmd; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last
To: melancholy

Was It a Baby Milk Factory?

When CNN’s Peter Arnett reported on the seventh day of Desert Storm that an infant formula plant in the Abu Ghraib suburb of Baghdad had been bombed, Washington was categorical in its dismissal. “It is not an infant formula factory,” Gen. Colin Powell said, “... It was a biological weapons facility, of that we are sure. ...”

Intelligence analysts had identified the eight-year-old plant as one of 13 biological weapons sites. The four-acre compound had a pronounced military appearance, particularly buildings painted in camouflage colors, surrounded by fence and guard posts.

The Iraqi regime said the baby milk factory had been camouflaged since the war with Iran.

The Iraqis said the baby milk factory had been camouflaged since the eight year war with Iran in the 1980s.

War planners took no chances and bombed any facility that might be hiding germ agents.

U.N. inspectors and U.S. intelligence concluded that the Abu Ghraib bombing was in error after Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law Hussein Kamel defected in 1995. Kamel said Iraqi biological-agent research was centered at Al Hakam, 60 miles southwest of Baghdad, and three other facilities, not including the baby milk factory.

Iraq rebuilt the factory by 1993 as a showcase for anti-U.S. propaganda. The Iraqis displayed milk cans and debris, painted murals and brought school children for field trips and pep rallies.

41 posted on 12/05/2007 3:48:47 PM PST by sdcraigo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Excellent read, thanks for the ping.

42 posted on 12/05/2007 5:04:57 PM PST by nw_arizona_granny (This is "Be an Angel Day", do something nice for someone today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sdcraigo

Thank you for the explanation and the link.

I’m not going to say consider the source because it may very well be correct. Klintoon hit an aspirin factory in Sudan and lobbed about $200 mil worth of cruise missiles in the Afghani desert, all in the name of Monica Lewinsky.

I was mentioning the baby milk factory in the context of the enemy claims, echoed by the MSM. Anytime we hit a target and people are killed it’s a wedding party or a house full of civilians.

The Washington Compost is one of the MSM biggies.

43 posted on 12/05/2007 5:57:51 PM PST by melancholy (Beware of Ho Chi Minh's offspring, Ho She Marx , invading the WH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia; 1stbn27; 2111USMC; 2nd Bn, 11th Mar; 68 grunt; A.A. Cunningham; ASOC; AirForceBrat23; ...

Thanks for the ping, I’m bookmarking for tomorrow.

44 posted on 12/05/2007 8:18:14 PM PST by freema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia; jveritas


45 posted on 12/05/2007 8:21:57 PM PST by Jet Jaguar (Who would the terrorists vote for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freema
I have to hit the rack to. So much has been held in limbo regarding Iraq's WMD programs it is enough to *iss one off.
The world is being deceived to think they where not going to do whatever it took to restore all the programs they had in place over a number of years, once conditions showed a green light to do so.
46 posted on 12/05/2007 8:25:38 PM PST by Marine_Uncle (Duncan Hunter for POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
It is being openly said that the Israelis are keeping quiet about their Syrian raid on Saddam's stockpile

This is the first I heard that that the raid on Syria was to destroy Saddam's stockpile. Why am I always the last to know ?

What troubles the time Saddam moved his WMD's to Syria via convoy, the U.S. had already decided it was going to attack.

It seems to me that satellite photos should have covered Iraq and surrounding states 24/7.

Should we have seen these convoys ?
47 posted on 12/05/2007 9:11:30 PM PST by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freema

Thanks for the ping! Perhaps will get the entire scoop on Jan. 21, 2009.

48 posted on 12/05/2007 9:18:13 PM PST by Just A Nobody (PISSANT for President '08 - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
On the one hand, the bureaucrats have banned further public access to the Saddam files because too much genuine information was emerging on how to build an A-Bomb. At the same time, Negroponte has been telling people that there is no evidence of any WMD programs in the Iraqi files. They can’t have it both ways. They can’t re-classify the Saddam files because they give out too much info on WMD, and then deny that the Saddam files have any WMD evidence.

Marxists are all about having it both ways. After all their entire theory is based on withering away the large state by making it even larger. If you can con anarchists into accepting communism, you can con people into accepting that proof of evidence is lack of evidence.

49 posted on 12/05/2007 10:28:35 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

Actually it’s thought the movement, facilitated by Russia, was after our attack. There are photos, the most significant 40 or 50 trucks leaving what was thought to be a weapons facility in a convoy to Syria on day 9 or 10. Of course there’s no way of knowing what was in them. Could have been nothing more than cash.

50 posted on 12/06/2007 5:54:21 AM PST by SJackson (I really wish the Jews in Judea an independent nation, John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Former Military Chick


51 posted on 12/06/2007 11:10:40 PM PST by TruthNtegrity (Praying for Tony Snow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

bump for later read

52 posted on 12/06/2007 11:14:09 PM PST by Captain Beyond (The Hammer of the gods! (Just a cool line from a Led Zep song))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Bump for later studies!

53 posted on 12/06/2007 11:29:05 PM PST by Randy Larsen (I'M WITH FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson