Posted on 01/11/2012 2:55:30 PM PST by Ben Barrack
Terrorist welcomed in the Oval Office and the Real Truth about 9/11
Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack
If the government has Ten Commandments, the game of politics, not homeland security, would be at the top of the list. Eager to play the game, the Obama Administration pulled out of Iraq in time for Christmas as it welcomed Iran’s puppets into the Oval Office. The Iraqi delegation, headed by Nouri al-Maliki, included a conspirator in Iran’s terror campaigns—the Iraqi Minister of Transportation, Hadi al-Ameri.
To quash the voices of survivors and victims’ families who linked al-Ameri to American deaths in the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, the Obama administration replied, “There is no evidence of Hadi al-Ameri’s involvement in any act of violence against U.S. Citizens.”
However, when dots are connected, they point to al-Ameri being an Iranian agent—a first-class terrorist. Ten days after al-Ameri’s visit to the White House, US District Judge George B. Daniels signed a 53 page document in Havlish v. Iran that included 276 Statements of Fact and 35 Conclusions of Law in his ruling that the 9/11 attacks were the result of an “Iran-Hezbollah-al Qaeda alliance.” The document showed one Abolghasem Mesbahi—who had defected years earlier after receiving a tip from a colleague that he was on the regime’s kill list while working for Iran’s Ministry of Information and Security (MOIS)—testified that MOIS gave material support to Hezbollah. His credible testimony included three coded messages he received in the weeks leading up to the 9/11 attacks from contacts he had inside Iran.
The case revealed that Imad Mughniyah, once Iran’s notorious Hezbollah leader, was involved in coordinating and facilitating the 9/11 attacks and committed “numerous terrorist operations against American citizens.” He cracked the FBI’s “Most Wanted” list for twenty-one years but al-Ameri’s terrorist rap sheet...
(Excerpt) Read more at shoebat.com ...
I fail to grasp why my opinion of a closed matter is of any consequence at all. We’re no longer in Iraq, what’s done is done, and regardless of anyone’s opinion it shall not be undone.
You said “even if there were not WMDs”. Didn’t Saddam possess WMDs, as was stated? (Yes, I know “non compliance” was the key).
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.