Skip to comments.Exploring Iraq link to pre-Sept. 11 acts
Posted on 09/07/2002 4:46:24 AM PDT by OldeconomybuyerEdited on 05/07/2004 6:26:33 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Our position is: Congress should hold hearings on evidence of previous Iraqi connections to terror.
Astatement by former CIA Director James Woolsey has given new credibility to suspicions of Iraqi involvement in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the World Trade Center bombing of 1993 -- enough to merit congressional hearings.
(Excerpt) Read more at indystar.com ...
In this document was a section about ME involvement in OKC. And if I remember correctly, this was just above or just below the highlighted area.
Unfortunately, they didn't stay on this screen long enough to read much of what was said about the ME involvement, but what I did read seemed to imply that there HAD been ME involvement. I can't even remember who narrated the show.
Since they often rerun these shows, I'll have to try to watch for anything that might have been it, but I found that paper mentioning ME involvement VERY interesting!
We have a meeting in Prague by Mohammad Atta as connecting Iraq to terrorism by the simple explanation of guilt by association. We pass up a far more damaging and direct linkage to Iraq in the form of these attacks because we cannot admit that there is a subversion of justice in the United States. What a tangled web we weave, when we seek to deceive!
Personal Reserach, interviews and Opinions by Author ^ | September 5, 2002 | Patrick B. Briley
Posted on 09/05/2002 3:06 PM Pacific by OKCSubmariner
Saddam Hussein of Iraq hired mercenaries from Baluchistan for his war on terror against the US even before the 1991 Gulf War.
Saddams Baluchi mercenaries have been very successful in attacking American targets and killing innocent American citizens in the 9/11, OKC and 1993 WTC Attacks.
Khalid Mohammed and his nephew Ramzi Yousef were Saddams Baluchi mercenaries who attacked America for Saddam and Iraq.
Middle East expert Lorie Mylroie has given eloquent proofs over the years of Saddams involvement in the 1993 WTC attack.
The FBI and DOJ publicly say Khalid Mohammed was a mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks and the 1993 WTC bombing.
Ramzi Yousef is in Federal prison for his bombing of the WTC in 1993.
The FBI and DOJ and Bush White House have not yet told you that Khalid Mohammed was a mastermind of the OKC bombing and behind the meetings of Terry Nichols in the Philippines to plan the OKC bombing. They have not yet told you that the Abu Sayeff cell in the Philippines run by Khalid Mohammed and Ramzi yousef was filled with Iraqi agents besides just Khalid Mohammed and Yousef. In December 1995 the Philippine police arrested nine members of the Abu Sayeff terror group. Six of the nine members arrested were identified by the Philippine authorities to the US government as Iraqi agents. So counting Khalid Mohammed and Ramzi Yousef, there were at least eight Iraqi agents involved in the Abu Sayef cell in the Philippines that helped Nichols plan and carry out the OKC bombing.
There is now a public debate about whether or not to go to war against Iraq and Saddam. The debate so far has been framed and deliberately limited by the White House and in Congress as to whether or not Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and if he will in the future use them sooner rather than later against the US.
It is possible that Congress and the American people and the world will not be adequately persuaded of the need to remove Saddam now based solely on the weapons of mass destruction arguments that may not yet be compelling and verifiable enough to enough people.
The case should be made by the White House to Congress and to the American people and to the world (UN, Europe,etc.) that the US has the right of self defense for the acts of war committed by Saddam and Iraq against Americans in the 9/11 attacks, the OKC bombing and the 1993 WTC attack. In fact these acts of war against the US are vastly more compelling and provable than weapons of mass destruction that Saddam has hidden but cannot be completely verified.
The FBI and CIA and previous administrations have many skeletons in their closet for their connivance, for their not stopping, and for their not telling the American people about the role of Iraq in the 9/11, OKC and 1993 WTC attacks against America. Please see my article FBI and DOJ Connivance Permeates, Interconnects Terror Attacks on the FreeRepublic.com dated August 15, 2002.
The White House should immediately and urgently make the strongest case possible against Saddam and Iraq, namely Saddams use of Iraqi agents in the attacks on Americans. If the White House fails to do so out of trying to protect FBI and administration failures in the past, then the White House would be performing a great disservice to America and could be held responsible for future Iraq attacks on Americans if the result should be that action is not taken against Iraq and Saddam soon enough.
The White House should first worry about saving Americans from Iraq and Saddam before the White House worries about saving political careers and failed FBI and DOJ officials. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a Sept. 5 article on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Woolsey was quoted saying that "when the full stories of these two incidents are finally told, those who permitted the investigations to stop short will owe big explanations" to two women. He was referring specifically to former Oklahoma City TV reporter Jayna Davis and Middle East expert Laurie Mylroie, who have independently unearthed evidence of a Baghdad connection to domestic terrorism prior to Sept. 11, 2001.
From a PBS interview with James Woolsey aired last October:
There have been press reports that you've been to the United Kingdom recently.
I've been to the United Kingdom twice this year.
Where did you stay?
Did you go for pleasure or did you go for business?
I went for my own reasons.
It's reported that this is related to your passion about the idea that there might be state involvement, particularly Iraqi involvement, in what's been happening.
You'll have to find out about that from somebody other than me.
But the press reports are true? Untrue?
I'm not going to comment on them one way or the other.
OK. Is that because there's a secrecy rule about talking about this stuff?
Because if I do anything to help me advise the U.S. government, I'm not going to talk about it. ...
Inasmuch as Woolsey was CIA Director at the time of the first WTC bombing and the Oklahoma City bombing, he must have detailed knowledge of both of these events.
From his willingness to make such a public assertion that "the investigations were stopped short", I infer that his information is incredibly damaging -- even nuclear.
Why, I wonder, is there no apparent interest in Mr. Woolsey's information -- on the part of the Congress or the media.
In intelligence matters, information is shared on the basis of "need to know". I believe it can now be said that the American people "need to know".
Moreover, I suppose, we can probably guess who it is we "need to know" about. Along with what it is we "need to know" about them...
The administration is playing this very close to the chest, but something is in the works.
I quite agree; we're in the run-up to revelations.
But I wonder just how much is going to be revealed. All of it? Most of it? Or just enough to persuade most of the doubters? And, thus, not enough to implicate the guilty...
Despite his image popularized by Oliver Stone in "JFK," and the "Scottish Law" comment, he is a very powerful member of the Senate. He could never have remained there all these years if that wasn't the case.
That he might be "a very powerful member of the Senate" is more of a statement about the Senate than about McSpecter, methinks.
"Has THAT power decided it is time to stop forking around and let the sheeple hear the truth?"
If either of you two can ever figure out Arlen Specter,(especially in advance of him taking any particular action) please let me know.
He is probably the most enigmatic member of the Senate, and has been for a long time.
But we do know this: Bush is desperate to win Pennsylvania in '04, and has been taking many trips there.
If Specter is asking for information about the case, and a reporter managed to find out about it, there's probably a reason. Beyond that I'm not willing to speculate.
BTW, A&E typically reruns these things a lot--if you get a chance, watch this one. I recorded it for future reference (but not on videotape). It's typical liberal feel-good stuff by and large, yet small bits of truth manage to shine through. What I found most startling was the Gary Hart interview, when he was asked: what will it take to wake up the country to this threat? And he replied, the next attack, and, he added, there will be one.
Heh! For my money he's an enema wrapped in an enigma. ; )
A lot of eInk has been devoted to talking about whether the truck bomb could have brought down the Murrah building. Not much has been devoted to how the bombers selected a building with a specific structural weakness, susceptible to this kind of bomb.
Sounds to me like someone had access to construction experts.