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

Skip to comments.

Mylroie: Clintonized CIA Blocking Iraq-9/11 Evidence
NewsMax.com ^ | Thursday Jan. 30, 2003

Posted on 01/30/2003 9:32:30 AM PST by honway

The CIA is blocking critical intelligence that links Saddam Hussein to the 9/11 attacks, a former top terrorism advisor to President Clinton is contending, and by doing so, she says, the agency is weakening President Bush's case for war against Iraq.

Asked about Salman Pak, the terrorist training camp near Baghdad where, according to a number of Iraqi defectors, al Qaeda terrorists have practiced for years hijacking American airliners using the same methods employed on 9/11, Clinton Iraqi expert Laurie Mylroie told WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg:

"There's a huge debate within the (Bush) administration. The Defense Department wants to bring out information like that. The CIA, which is responsible for dealing with terrorism, accommodated Clinton's desire not to hear about Iraq and terrorism, does not want that information to come out. It acts as Saddam's lawyer."

Mylroie served as President Clinton's top advisor on Iraq during the 1992 campaign, and she has lectured on Middle Eastern terrorism and its origins at the Naval War College and Harvard University. Mylroie is also author of the book, "The War Against America," which details Baghdad's role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Just minutes before Bush's State of the Union address Tuesday night, Mylroie told Malzberg, "For any official statement to be made by the government, there is an interagency review process and the CIA blocks (the Salman Pak) information. Their response is to say, the defectors are not reliable - because they oppose Saddam you can't believe them."

What about satellite photos backing up accounts from Salman Pak defectors who describe a Boeing 707 parked on the ground, which they say serves as a classroom for Saddam's hijack trainees?

According to Mylroie, the CIA offers the bizarre alibi that the plane "could have been used by the Iraqis for counter-hijacking."

The Clinton terrorism expert says the White House is partly to blame for not forcing U.S. intelligence services to be more forthright about the information they have on Salman Pak, complaining, "Bush has failed to discipline the bureaucracy. And they have put their careers above Bush's career."

Asked to detail the precise role of Iraq in al Qaeda operations directed against the U.S., Mylroie told WABC, "Al Qaeda acts as a front for Iraqi intelligence. Al Qaeda provides the ideology, the foot soldiers and the cover. And Iraqi intelligence provides the direction, training and expertise."

Commenting on reports that the White House would use the State of the Union address to reinforce the argument that Saddam has been working with al Qaeda for years, Mylroie noted, "I'm glad (President Bush) is going to talk about Iraq and al Qaeda. (But) I have some concern that because powerful individuals and institutions are even now unwilling to acknowledge their error, the case is going to be a lot weaker than it could be."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; jihadinamerica; salmanpak; warlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-136 next last
To: NJJ
There aren't many retired gunfighters around that have seen a smoking gun.

True!

81 posted on 01/30/2003 1:15:06 PM PST by hillsborofox (I stand by my President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
Goodpoints. But if you do wargame it out, from my perspective, letting the American people know there are links between Saddam, 9/11 and the anthrax is the best policy. Its the only way may be able to handle Saddams Real Deterrent. Lets say within the next few days a more efficient demonstration is made. And its made with a notice to the presstitues that dont invade Iraq or else. If the American people discover this truth out the hard way, Bush et. al. will lose control of the initiative. If they come clean and our honest with the American people, Saddams Real Deterrent wont come as a shock and will create a vengence that is incalculatable.

Truth is always the best policy. Thats what this country is all about. If we can handle thousands of nuclear ICBM's pointed at us, we can handle biological madness.

82 posted on 01/30/2003 1:17:05 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mitchbert; Alberta's Child
My theory is that it was requested as part of legitimate research (agricultural) and then diverted. Once it showed up in the U.S. and analyzed, they realized, I'd imagine by some type of chemical "flag", that it was derived from the samples provided for the "research." Hence, the knowledge that Iraq was in this up to their necks

That is more than just a theory...you are correct. A unclassified version of a classified 1992 GAO report spells out all the details of military shipments to Iraq during the 1980's...anthrax would be no different, as it would be considered a dual use product. Go to the following link:

Iraq: U.S. Military Items Exported or Transferred to Iraq in the 1980s

One of the more important points is that Iraq was removed from State's list of terrorist-supporting countries in 1982 and was therefore able to acquire many things during the 1980's that it cannot get now. I will try to get a specific link to the 1980 anthrax shipments for you from that site, but it may take awhile.

83 posted on 01/30/2003 1:20:42 PM PST by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: carton253
I don't even know of any books that have been written about Kosovo -- it's almost as if the whole topic simply disappeared.

Everything I've posted, mind you, is based on informal anecdotal conversations I had at the time. I give a lot of credence to them because my source is one of the most honest and upright people I know.

84 posted on 01/30/2003 1:39:34 PM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
By retaining Talent as head of the CIA GWB just about guaranteed that the politicized incompetents who came to the fore under WJC remain in positions of power and are able to restrain those who view the security of the USA as their first priority IMHO. In the FBI Mueller mnay be doing something to restrain the politically correct crowd but we have yet to see evidence of that with the possible exception that at least now they can count the number of Mosques in an area .
85 posted on 01/30/2003 1:39:48 PM PST by harpseal (Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Thanks for that. Good background info I hadn't seen.
86 posted on 01/30/2003 1:45:37 PM PST by mitchbert (Facts are stubborn things)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: mitchbert; Alberta's Child
So far this is all I have been able to find and I have to head home here in a few minutes...

U.S. bioinformatics firms in the 1980s received requests from a wide variety of Iraqi agencies, all claiming the materials were intended for civilian research purposes.

Freedom of Information Center

ATCC officials said that in the 1980s, their practice was to sell so-called Class III pathogens -- those that pose substantial risk to public health or crops -- to customers who met a few rudimentary requirements. They had to send a written request on stationery from a credible institution. They had to assume written responsibility for "the receipt, handling, storage and use of the material." They had to pay a fee averaging $78. And they had to demonstrate in a brief telephone conversation that they were scientifically literate. ATCC officials typically did not ask how the germs were to be used.

The country's success emboldened it to take a plunge into the most sensitive end of the bacterial pool with a 1986 order for 24 pathogens, including 13 more bacteria designated Class III. That shipment, which like the others received rapid approval from the U.S. Commerce Department, included the specific strains of anthrax, chlostridium botulinum, and chlostridium perfringens that Iraq later selected for mass production as germ weapons. All were sent to the University of Baghdad, but secretly paid for by the military, according to Iraqi records turned over to the United Nations.

Washington Post

Will try again tommorrow as this is a question for some that needs to be answered.

87 posted on 01/30/2003 2:38:30 PM PST by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
How does this apply to Iraq and Saddam Hussein? He has never acknowledged his defeat in the Gulf War.

Unfortunately, if anybody is in denial about the outcome of the Gulf War, it is us, not Saddam Hussein. For the real story, go here: The Continuing Storm.

88 posted on 01/30/2003 3:36:37 PM PST by The Great Satan (Revenge, Terror and Extortion: A Guide for the Perplexed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
Truth is always the best policy.

That's why governments always tell the truth during war time. They know it's the best policy.

89 posted on 01/30/2003 3:38:08 PM PST by The Great Satan (Revenge, Terror and Extortion: A Guide for the Perplexed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The depleted uranium risks were out there, part of the possible causes of Gulf War Syndrome. The Italians and Germans acted indiscretely. True, the official US Military line was "DU is safe", but hey, that was a shallow thing in comparison to the many other reports calling safety into question.
90 posted on 01/30/2003 3:43:51 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
It's not at all a bad thing that foreign governments come to the conclusion that the US can't be trusted in long-term formal agreements and treaties. I don't think in our history that has ever been so. It has a number of very important effects.

One, it really helps prevents our statesmen and legislators from selling a franchises. Two, it forces the foreign nations to develop stronger broad informal relationships -- people to people -- rather than leader to leader. Three, it gives us a freer hand in action. Four -- it creates fear, confusion and awe in our enemies, who would otherwise conspire and plot against us.

91 posted on 01/30/2003 3:50:17 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: bvw
I wasn't clear about the DU issue in Kosovo. At the time, the U.S. line was not "DU is safe," but "DU? What DU?"
92 posted on 01/30/2003 3:53:55 PM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: honway
Bump for later.
93 posted on 01/30/2003 3:59:56 PM PST by Springman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The NATO allies know what are armaments are, just as we know theirs. In a region where we were taking out tanks, it would be expected to find DU. If their officers are goldbrickers, that's their own problem. Everybody knew we had a liar for President and he had his folks in the chain of command. I'm not suggesting excuses -- just that anyone responsible for other people under him can-not have blinders on and be called competent, much less compassionate -- the Euro's seem weak when it comes to compassion down the line.
94 posted on 01/30/2003 6:09:00 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
Touche. War lies to the populace by 'righteous' governance are generally meant to rally the populace when the odds dont look very good. As of right now, we can nuke the entire muslim world in 30 minutes. The odds are still vastly in our favor. Other types of War Lies are told for the enemies sake. Now why would Saddam be comforted with Bush et. al. lieing about his involvement in the Anthrax blackmailings ? Is he expecting a golden parachute ? Is he only going to use the Anthrax 'get out of jail free' card if Bush shows the world the truth about him ? What I find hard to believe is that Saddam potentially has the capability to kill thousands of americans on our home soil right now, and he is not doing it. But according to your theories, these capabilities will be used if Saddam is killed and Iraq is invaded. Why would Saddam get his revenge after his death ?
95 posted on 01/30/2003 6:37:20 PM PST by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
Thanks.
96 posted on 01/30/2003 7:32:18 PM PST by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: harpseal
I like GWB, but the "decent interval" is long over, and it is long past time to unload the anchors.
97 posted on 01/30/2003 9:54:49 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan; bonfire; Fred Mertz; Wolfstar; carton253; ravingnutter; swarthyguy; aristeides; ...
One needs to step back and ask oneself the question: Would it be a good thing if by lunchtime today, say, everybody in America and the whole world understood that Saddam whacked us on 9/11 and is successfully deterring retaliation by holding the American people hostage to his biological WMD?

Let's take your theory back a bit in time. Let's consider the possibility that the first anthrax threat came in 1995 immediately after the OKC bombing. That could certainly explain why everyone's first reaction was that it was the work of ME terrorists, and why the the FBI put out BOLOS for them--and why within a couple of hours, all that was retracted and their participation was covered up.

Consider a broad timeline. I think Hussein was genuinely shocked at how rapidly his troops were defeated in '91--and he realized he could lose it all at our whim. In '92, Toon ran on PRC money--once elected, he began returning favors by opening doors for the PRC--especially into areas of our scientific expertise. By '93, Hussein attacked the WTC. This attempt was still amateurish. IIRC, I believe I read that they actually tried to use some kind of chemical weapon in the bomb, but it was destroyed by the bomb itself. By '95, he attacked OKC--this time much more professionally. What happened in those 2 years to take his people from amateurs to pros?

I can't prove it yet, but I think he and Zemin came to terms in some kind of agreement centered around the anthrax--which I think was developed in China. By that time, the PRC had learned enough knowledge from us and refined the stuff in a formula of their own. (Spertzel said a few days ago that the anthrax letters contained anthrax that had been refined far beyond anything he'd ever seen in the US or Russia.)

Hussein would have been looking for something to keep the US from attacking his regime, and China would have been looking for a way to keep the Clinton administration cooperating in the ongoing theft of our technology.

If this threat is what occurred immediately after the OKC bombing, it would also explain why the republicans did not expose Clinton's treason and remove him from office. It would explain why the Bush administration never exposed him or really cleaned house--and why they cooperated in sweeping everything under the rug. And it would explain why Bush let the PRC get away with taking our EP3.

Is this theory correct? I don't know--but I am keeping it in the back of my mind.

ravingnutter-
Thanks for all your info in #13.

For those that interested, honway and all have done a great job of beginning to expose the threads of al-Qaeda running from OKC to the WTC on this thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/792592/posts

98 posted on 01/30/2003 11:21:07 PM PST by Lion's Cub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
bump to the top!!
99 posted on 01/30/2003 11:27:17 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Republic
ping
100 posted on 01/30/2003 11:28:00 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-136 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