Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Iraq Connection - Was Saddam involved in OK City and the 1st WTC bombing? ~ Micah Morrison
The Wall Street Journal. editorial page ^ | September 5, 2002 | Micah Morrison, WSJ. Senior Editorial Page Writer

Posted on 09/05/2002 4:11:09 AM PDT by Elle Bee

Edited on 04/23/2004 12:04:47 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Was Saddam involved in Oklahoma City and the first WTC bombing?

OKLAHOMA CITY -- With the Sept. 11 anniversary upon us and President Bush talking about a "regime change" in Iraq, it's an apt time to look at two investigators who connect Baghdad to two notorious incidents of domestic terrorism. Jayna Davis, a former television reporter in Oklahoma City, believes an Iraqi cell was involved in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building here. Middle East expert Laurie Mylroie links Iraq to the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, and has published a book on the subject.


(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 1stwtcbombing; iraq; okcbombing; oklahomacity; saddam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-157 next last
To: LS
I read the note McVeigh penned in his cell that the article refers to fairly recently. I was completely stunned by McVeighs defence of Iraq - it was eerie. I don't know what or why this is so, but if he had some bizarre fascination with Iraq, then it explains why he would go to his grave before revealing this connection.
81 posted on 09/05/2002 11:36:55 PM PDT by Earn Your Vote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Earn Your Vote

An Essay on Hypocrisy
By Timothy McVeigh
Reprinted with permission from Media Bypass. Parthenocarpy is interested in any existing or future rebuttals of this essay.
Please contact us here to contribute.


Media Bypass / Alternative Media, Inc. Editor's note: Timothy McVeigh, sentenced to death for his role in the April 19, 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City, penned the following essay, dated "March 1998," from his cell in the administrative maximum section of the federal prison in Florence, Colo. In a preface, McVeigh wrote "I have chosen Media Bypass as a possible forum for this piece because, frankly, I realize that it is quite provocative -- and I rather doubt that any mainstream media would touch it. [Note that although the enclosed is very provocative, it was written to provoke thought -- and was not written with malevolent intent.]"

McVeigh appologized for the essay being handwritten, but noted his "current (unique) environment does not provide access to a typewriter, a word processor or a copier. (hell, I'm lucky they let me have a pen!), so I hope you understand why this is being submitted handwritten -- and I hope you can overcome this shortcoming."

McVeigh, whose interview with Media Bypass [February 1996] was picked up and dissected by the New York Times and major media outlets across the nation, also expressed concerns that reporting subsequent to this essay might be "printed out of context... but at least the original can be accurate."

A decorated U.S. Army veteran of the Persian Gulf War, McVeigh hereby offers his contribution to the debate over U.S. policy toward Iraq, a policy that McVeigh says is marked by a "deep hypocrisy."


The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons ("weapons of mass destruction") -- mainly because they have used them in the past.

Well, if that's the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.Sl is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims that this was done for deterent purposes during the "Cold War" with the Soviet Union. Why, then is it invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterence) -- with respect to Iraq's (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?

The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We've all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen these pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other "regional conflicts" that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of "weapons of mass destruction."

Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones-- Hiroshima and Nagasaki? (At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants -- mostly women and children -- in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks, or months to die.)

If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of "mass destruction" -- like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?

The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction.

Hypocrisy when it comes to death of children? In Oklahoma City, it was family convenience that explained the presence of a day-care center placed between street level and the law enforcement agencies which occupied the upper floors of the building. Yet when discussion shifts to Iraq, any day-care center in a government building instantly becomes "a shield." Think about that.

(Actually, there is a difference here. The administration has admitted to knowledge of the presence of children in or near Iraqi government buildings, yet they still proceed with their plans to bomb -- saying that they cannot be held responsible if children die. There is no such proof, however, that knowledge of the presence of children existed in relation to the Oklahoma City bombing.)

When considering morality and mens rea [criminal intent] in light of these facts, I ask: Who are the true barbarians?

Yet another example of this nation's blatant hypocrisy is revealed by the polls which suggest that this nation is greatly in favor of bombing Iraq.

In this instance, the people of the nation approve of bombing government employees because they are "guilty by association" -- they are Iraqi government employees. In regard to the bombing in Oklahoma City, however, such logic is condemned.

What motivates these seemingly contradictory positions? Do people think that government workers in Iraq are any less human than those in Oklahoma City? Do they think that Iraqis don't have families who will grieve and mourn the loss of their loved ones? In this context, do people come to believe that the killing of foreigners is somehow different than the killing of Americans?

I recently read of an arrest in New York City where possession of a mere pipe bomb was charged as possession of a "weapon of mass destruction." If a two pound pipe bomb is a "weapon of mass destruction," then what do people think that a 2,000-pound steel-encased bomb is?

I find it ironic, to say the least, that one of the aircraft that could be used to drop such a bomb on Iraq is dubbed "The Spirit of Oklahoma."

When a U.S. plane or cruise missile is used to bring destruction to a foreign people, this nation rewards the bombers with applause and praise. What a convenient way to absolve these killers of any responsibility for the destruction they leave in their wake.

Unfortunately, the morality of killing is not so superficial. The truth is, the use of a truck, a plane, or a missile for the delivery of a weapon of mass destruction does not alter the nature of the act itself.

These are weapons of mass destruction -- and the method of delivery matters little to those on the receiving end of such weapons.

Whether you wish to admit it or not, when you approve, morally, of the bombing of foreign tartgets by the U.S. military, you are approving of acts morally equivilent to the bombing in Oklahoma City. The only difference is that this nation is not going to see any foreign casualties appear on the cover of Newsweek magazine.

It seems ironic and hypocritical that an act viciously condemned in Oklahoma City is now a "justified" response to a problem in a foreign land. Then again, the history of United States policy over the last century, when examined fully, tends to exemplify hypocrisy.

When considering the use of weapons of mass destruction against Iraq as a means to an end, it would be wise to reflect on the words of the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis. His words are as true in the context of Olmstead as they are when they stand alone:
"Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example."

Sincerely


Timothy J. McVeigh

Copyright (c) 1998, Media Bypass / Alternative Media, Inc.

82 posted on 09/05/2002 11:42:42 PM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Whoops, there it is! Thanks for posting that.
83 posted on 09/05/2002 11:48:28 PM PDT by Earn Your Vote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Elle Bee
We can speculate and ruminate and theorize to our heart's delight. 2,000 plus Iraqis relocating to Oklahoma after the '91 war - and we don't know how many were Saddamites. The good news is, we're the USA. And if/when we decide that someone is enough of a pest, threat, and vexatious burden, we can, should, and in this case probaly will, "terminate with prejudice."
84 posted on 09/05/2002 11:54:59 PM PDT by 185JHP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the crow; Alamo-Girl; Gary Aldrich; amom; archy; aristeides; AtticusX; backhoe; Betty Jo; ...
Backatcha.

Also, Micah Morrisonis on CNBC tonight, at 9 pm EDT, for anyone who's interested.

Details here.

85 posted on 09/06/2002 1:52:05 AM PDT by glorygirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: twigs
I DO remember Iraqis beig moved to OKLA and Nbraska after the Gulf War....Does anyne else? Anyone have a link to news stories?? W was that done??
86 posted on 09/06/2002 2:16:44 AM PDT by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: glorygirl
Funny how a story in the Wall St. Journal can make all the difference in the world.

...... and how often the WSJ. has been there to do just that .... kudos to the wisdom of Bob Bartley and the talent he has brought together for an amazingly all too often underappreciated body of work ..... and a daily journalistic treasure

.

87 posted on 09/06/2002 4:23:43 AM PDT by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: independentmind
thought you had fallen off the world.
88 posted on 09/06/2002 4:38:59 AM PDT by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Lizard_King
Liz, maybe since the Civil War, but in the Mexican War we were badly outnumbered; in WW I, it's a hard call because the French were finished and no one knew what the Germans had left.

In the Pacific, we were usually outnumbered.

But any good commander wants numbers on his side, and it is common sense to wish to have a 3:1 advantage when attacking a defender.

89 posted on 09/06/2002 4:43:53 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
Well, surely you know that Saddam is not, nor ever has been, a "Islamic fundamentalist." He is a secular dictator, which is one of the reasons that he doesn't have the support of his people.

The "chip in the brain" thing is kookie, to be sure. But still, the concensus was that when McVeigh went to his death, he was in control, seemed to know exactly what was happening and especially had no regrets. But, if you have access to the published psych reports, put 'em up.

90 posted on 09/06/2002 4:46:26 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Plummz
When?
91 posted on 09/06/2002 4:47:50 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
ping for later
92 posted on 09/06/2002 5:43:26 AM PDT by Clovis_Skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
I DO remember Iraqis beig moved to OKLA and Nbraska after the Gulf War.

I knew nothing about that. Wow!

93 posted on 09/06/2002 5:43:51 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: glorygirl
At any rate, kids, this is a major editorial in a major paper. I hope others follow suit.

To be hypertechnical, this is a column by a senior editorial page writer at the WSJ (Morrison). However, it is endorsed by the editorial "Making the Iraq Case" that appeared on the same editorial page of yesterday's WSJ.

94 posted on 09/06/2002 6:25:26 AM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: glorygirl
Thank you glorygirl very much for the heads up for Micah's appearance on CNBC tonight. More to come!
95 posted on 09/06/2002 8:30:41 AM PDT by OKCSubmariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: glorygirl
Thank you glorygirl very much for the heads up for Micah's appearance on CNBC tonight. More to come!
96 posted on 09/06/2002 8:30:53 AM PDT by OKCSubmariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: twigs
I DO remember Iraqis beig moved to OKLA and Nbraska after the Gulf War.

I knew nothing about that.

http://www.oneworld.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi?root=129&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Erefugees%2Eorg

Link

Iraqi Refugees In the aftermath of the Gulf War, 37,768 Iraqi refugees fled to Saudi Arabia and were housed in two camps, Rafha, for families, and Artewiyah, for single men.

The original group of refugees included roughly 10,000 Shi'ite rebel fighters who rose in rebellion against Saddam Hussein and another 4,000 or so former soldiers who defected, deserted, or were captured during Operation Desert Storm, and who refused to repatriate at the end of the war based on a fear of persecution if returned.

By the end of 1996, 19,797 refugees had been resettled in third countries. The United States had resettled about half of the total, admitting 10,046 between June 1991 and the end of 1996

97 posted on 09/06/2002 8:32:04 AM PDT by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: twigs; All
As we approach another war with Iraq, the resettlement of thousands of former Iraqi soldiers in the U.S. is one of the most important under reported stories of the last ten years. The FBI has established in court that some of these resettled Iraqi soldiers remained loyal to Saddam Hussein. The only unknown is how many.

For more information on the U.S. government's program to resettle former Iraqi soldiers in the U.S please see the following thread, in particular replies 66,68,70,73,75,82,84,85,92,95.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/726050/posts?q=1&&page=51

Another FBI Agent Blows the WhistleNew evidence FBI quashed another terror probe before 9/11

98 posted on 09/06/2002 8:41:46 AM PDT by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Elle Bee
Bump
99 posted on 09/06/2002 9:17:59 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: honway
Many, many thanks for the information. You are certainly correct that this is a major unreported story!
100 posted on 09/06/2002 9:45:53 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-157 next 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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