Wolfowitz Bombshell: Saddam Behind 9/11 Attacks and OKC Bombing

[Free ThinkerNY]

Wolfowitz Bombshell: Saddam Behind 9/11 Attacks and OKC Bombing

Sunday, June 1, 2003

Newsmax.com

Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, said by some to be the architect of America's war on Iraq, reportedly suspects that Saddam Hussein played a significant role in the three worst terrorist attacks ever on the U.S. - the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Discussing his soon-to-be-released Vanity Fair interview with the top Pentagon official, Sam Tanenhaus told WABC Radio's Monica Crowley on Saturday: "Wolfowitz states that there's a very strong connection, he's convinced, between Saddam and the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. This is a very controversial idea and yet Wolfowitz embraces it and has for quite some time."

The Vanity Fair writer added, "Also I was told by a source very close to him that Wolfowitz entertains the possibility that Saddam was involved in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995."

While a media firestorm has erupted over Wolfowitz's comments suggesting that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction played a smaller role in the decision to go to war than previously thought, Tanenhaus said the press has missed the real news in his report.

"[There are] allegations he made or that others close to him have made that, to me, are much more startling," the author told WABC's Crowley. "That's what I thought was going to be the news [coming out of this interview]."

In a transcript on the interview released by the Pentagon, Wolfowitz also indicates that he suspects Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Asked why Iraq was at the top of the U.S.'s list when it came to taking action in the war on terror, Wolfowitz told Tanenhaus that Saddam's weapons of mass destruction played a role, but then added:

"Plus the fact, which seems to go unremarked in most places, that Saddam Hussein was the only international figure other than Osama bin Laden who praised the attacks of September 11."

Discussing the secretary's comments on MSNBC on Friday, Tanenhaus said that the reason Saddam's role in 9/11 never became the centerpiece of the Bush administration's rationale for war was because there was no consensus on the issue.

"The secretary himself has said both in his interview with me and at other times, particularly in the interview with me, that there were sharp disagreement[s] about, for instance, Saddam's involvement in other acts of terrorism," Tanenhaus explained. He cited the "World Trade Center in '93 and in 2001, September 11, and other connections with al Qaeda."

President Bush's supporters have been mystified over why the administration never spotlighted the claims of two Iraqi defectors, who, two months after the 9/11 attacks, detailed to U.S. intelligence evidence linking Saddam to training in 9/11-style airline hijacking operations.

Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Harold Baer awarded the families of two World Trade Center victims $104 million based on evidence linking the 9/11 attacks to Salman Pak, a terrorist training camp located 25 miles south of Baghdad.

[TEXOKIE]

Thanks for the instruction on finding my flag page, Joe!

[Fred Mertz]

Thanks for pinging me. That's a serious statement about OKC.

[ladyinred]

So did I. I have heard interviews with others who also say he was involved in these things. This is not just some newbie nutcase making things up as implied here by some.

[Stopislamnow]

I've believed the same thing. Iraq was knee deep in alot more than WMD.

If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd start looking at the French and Germans also. Thier huge push for a european superstate to "counter" the US is a little too convienent. Let's see, the US takes a massive attack on a major financial center causing much havoc and putting us into crisis mode demanding all our attention. Don't forget that billions were reportedly moved all around the markets just prior to 9/11.

Then, the we have to use more resources and and turn our attention from domestic issues/economy to the War on Terror.

The weasels complete refusal and active opposition to make things go easy in the UN again ties us up for months. Euro keeps gaining on dollar. Big push made to change oil "dollars" to "euros". Canada and Mexico, who border the US and just really can't compete with us in any way are also on board the weasel ship. Our two closest neighbors who should be with us just because they are our two closest neighbors.

Things were going well with Russia too, Pootie was loved here. Why the big switcharoo? Not only about oil, Russia has nice reserves of thier own, maybe Cold war era debt, but a free Iraq with a market economy would be much better equipped to pay off that debt. So whats with Pootie?

I'd think the whole world hates us, our success, our freedom and our way of life. And IF I was a conspiracist, I'd say a massive campaign to just put the screws to the US was organized behind the scenes, and we could be in the beginning stages of WW4 as well as the War on Terror. WW4 using and manipulating markets, manipulation of opinion by anti-american press, world leaders cutting deals just to screw the americans and try to take us down.

Glad I'm not a conspiracist.

[RobbyS]

The English papers have completely distorted what he said in this interview. Did Vanity Fair do much better?

[EERinOK]

tis why things that start at newsmax, die at newsmax.

newsmax does have some good columnists now and then, micheal reagan comes to mind, amoung others, but their "news" links on the left side and down center of site is too often sucker bait.

[thinden]

strange.

The Vanity Fair writer added, "Also I was told by a source very close to him that Wolfowitz entertains the possibility that Saddam was involved in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995."

27 posted on 06/01/2003 5:55 PM CDT by aristeides

if that was there ace in the hole, why didn't they play it years ago?

[randita]

I left few out.

-Admission by Iraqi scientists that they were instructed to lie to UN weapons inspectors.

-Refusal of SH to account for banned arms materiel we knew he had obtained after the Gulf War and refusal of SH to prove that materiel that was supposed to be destroyed was destroyed.

-Willingness of SH to be deposed (and die) rather than be forthcoming to the UN. This is the most baffling of all. If he had nothing to hide, why would he sacrifice everything? Had he been forthcoming, he'd still be tyrannizing his subjects at this hour. Why did he sacrifice everything just to be defiant? He might have been maniacal, but he was no fool or he wouldn't have remained in power for 3 decades.

[aristeides]

Discredit Clinton too much, and you risk destabilizing the two-party system. The Republicans' funders may not like that idea too much.

[randita]

Said if we didn't find WMD then we were wrong to go to war. No evidence of Saddam being part of 9/11.

Unfortunately, there was/is still little discussion of Iraq's violation of dozens of UN Resolutions during the past decade and what the UN should do to hold member nations accountable for abiding by the resolutions.

If the UN nations had enforced the resolution passed last fall when push came to shove, we wouldn't have had to peddle the WMD angle so hard.

There was plenty of rationale for going into Iraq, the WMD being just one. The other reasons were contained in the dozens of UN Resolutions defied by SH.

Perhaps you could ask your friend who does not support Bush any longer what the UN should do when a country so openly defies its resolutions.

[PGalt]

Bump.

[Peach]

Oh, boy. What a post to wake up to. I'm not a conspiracy theorist either but you sure have made me think in a different direction. All in all, I felt a lot more comfortable when I was only worried about Islamic extremists! I'll be sure to re-read your post a few times and mull all that over.

[Heuristic Hiker]

There's a great book about the Iraqi link to the 1993 attack called "The War Against America: Saddam Hussein and the World Trade Center Attacks: A Study of Revenge"
By Laurie Mylroie, R. James Woolsey

[justshutupandtakeit]

Correct on both counts.

[justshutupandtakeit]

When chasing ghosts what better could be done than call GhostBusters da, da, da, da, da, da?

[RusIvan]

Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, said by some to be the architect of America's war on Iraq, reportedly suspects that Saddam Hussein played a significant role in the three worst terrorist attacks ever on the U.S. - the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. +++

OK 95 too? Wolfowitz overdone himself:)). Does it mean that Timoty MacVeigh was wrongly executed?

[aristeides]

There certainly seemed to be quite a rush to execute McVeigh. Personally, I don't doubt his guilt, but I wish we could have had more testimony from him. I wonder if he would have talked after 9/11.

[Free ThinkerNY]

Thanks for the tip. I've seen Laurie Mylroie in interviews but didn't know about the book.