Posted on 10/21/2001 9:26:21 PM PDT by Pokey78
In case Safire hasn't noticed, the NY Times slept through most of the "great" events during the Clinton administration.
For years, U.S. officials kept mum about the duplicity of Saudi Arabia in financing anti-U.S. incitement while professing to be a U.S. ally. But because The New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, the oldest investigative reporter alive, held his ear trumpet to our ultra-secret Big Ear,
The NY Times has an ultra-secret big ear! LOL [sorry]
we now have telephone intercepts between Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to Washington, and his father, the defense minister. The Saudis never have been on our side in the war on terror which our leaders have long known but most Americans did not.
I don't believe for a second that the NY Times is just now finding out that the Saudi's aren't on our side in the war on terror. They only report what they want to report, when its convenient to them.
That wearing of blinders by our intelligence agents was recently revealed by The Washington Post's columnist and editor Jim Hoagland, who is dry behind the ears, to say the least.
First super-secret ears, now dry behind the ears...
"One war at a time" goes the coalitionaries' mantra, which our spymasters take to mean "Don't follow leads to Iraq." Journageezers ignore such government manipulation. Nobody has come close to my Times colleagues in covering the cataclysm and the war it triggered, but it would be good to see a new wave of reporters beat the old media bigfeet in advancing this story.
Iraq may be next in line for the bombing, but will we have the guts to take out Saddam? Want to wager??
Folks, if we don't take-out Saddam this time, the Israelis will use their war-chest!
There won't be a 'Palestinian-Problem' anymore in Israel, and several Capital cities in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudia Arabia, Lebanon, Yemen, and others, will glow-in-the-dark!
Actually, after reading that, I think it's a good idea!
These people have stated that they will kill us, and destroy our Country, at every opportunity, and 9/11 has occurred. Just getting antsy, I guess. Stay well and vigilant....FRegards
I asked my neighbor, Red Dullknife, that very question.
Please excuse his diction, by the way, Red has a problem
with his "L" and "R."
"We won't be taking out Saddam. The Wussians have
too much money invested in Iwaq to wet us mess up
Saddam's abiwity to expoht. Putin's pwan is to
sidwe up to Bush and be fwiendwy and pwomise
to agwee to misswe weductions and joining NATO.
Then he wiw ask Bush to not attack Saddam.
After the waw is ovah, Wussia wiw say,
"We foowed you!" And that's the twuth.
But it wiw be too wittwe, too wate.
By then, the Muswims wiw be in Honowuwu."
Tell me this isn't true?
Faruq Hijazi, in 1994 Saddam's secret service director and now his ambassador to Turkey, has had a series of meetings with bin Laden. These began in Sudan, arranged by Hassan al-Tourabi, the Sudanese Muslim leader, and continued in Afghanistan.
The conspiracy was furthered in Baghdad in 1998 between bin Laden's No. 2 man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Saddam's vice president, Taha Yasin Ramadan.
"To strengthen Saddam's position in the Arab world during his 1998 crisis with the U.N., bin Laden established the "World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and the Crusaders." The Muslim-in-name Iraqi dictator reciprocated by promising secure refuge in Iraq for bin Laden and his key lieutenants if they were forced to flee Afghanistan.
Bin Laden sent a delegation of his top Al Qaeda terrorists to Baghdad on April 25, 1998, to attend the grand ...."
Dodder on , Safire, completely ignore who was President & Commander-in-Chief & his failings. Like succumbing to Monica instead of Saddam and the inspections in Iraq.
Sequence: do the deed, a day's drive up the coast from Yemn to Jeddah (if memory serves correctly on the city name), get on a plane and the nation covers itself by calling it a hijacking, the terrorists deplane in Iraq, they disappear from view and from media reports.
Actually they were feted by Saddam and then sent back to their boss, Bin Laden, where they received a big reception for a mission accomplished.
This is taking "connect the dots" to an extreme. I have seen no evidence that the Bush W Administration is trying to dodge the bullet on possible Iraq involvement. On the contrary, Bush the Elder is very likely to argue in the opposite direction. Having messed it up himself due to pressure from the Saudis and others, the elder Bush should be very pleased to have the opportunity to watch his son finish the job that he started. And I believe that W is listening.
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.