This might pull it all together
To: codebreaker
The rush to execute McVeigh may have been another Clinton coverup. If it turns out that this is true, Clinton should be drawn and quartered!
To: codebreaker
To: codebreaker
HOLY SH** !!!
What is it going to take before someone in Congress or the Justice Department acknowledges the truth ?
Don't they see that this will provide ALL the justification we need for going after Saddam ?
4 posted on
04/27/2002 12:42:29 PM PDT by
happygrl
To: codebreaker
Well, we can't ask McVeigh now...
5 posted on
04/27/2002 12:43:39 PM PDT by
mhking
To: codebreaker
Go to the link. Note the snide tone... doesn't really come through in the annotated version posted above.
Unfortunate, and unsurprising.
To: codebreaker
I hope so. I don't care one way or another about McVeigh. But if the Arabs were involved AND the Clinton administration used this tragedy for their own cynical politics, it should be known.
7 posted on
04/27/2002 12:44:50 PM PDT by
elbucko
To: codebreaker
Did Clinton know about the Oklahoma-Bin Laden angle? Is that why he was after Bin Laden in the 90's? (Albeit ineffectively).
If Clinton knew about Al Queda being involved (and hasn't it been proven that Terry Nichols worked with their cell in the Philippines?) then why didn't he tell the American public?
We all know what a coward Clinton is. Maybe he was afraid to take the Arab problem head on as Bush has done. Perhaps he thought he could solve the problem thru secret, behind-the-scenes methods which he tried and failed to employ in the 90's.
To: codebreaker
bump
To: codebreaker
This is all very interesting, especially coming from the magazine that broke the first story on Saddam Hussein
BEFORE he invaded Kuwait (i.e., U.S. News and World Report), but I see no reason to put any faith in this angle.
Said faith in that angle simply isn't needed.
We KNOW that Iraq and Iran have aided Arafat in his Israeli uprising.
We KNOW that Arafat's Black September organization of hijackers and terrorists had the most experience in the world at commandeering commercial jet aircraft, blowing many of those jets up.
We KNOW that Arafat was involved in suicide attacks on U.S. troops in Lebanon in 1983.
Suicide attacks against America + world-authority on hijacking = Prime Suspect for the September 11 attacks.
We KNOW that Atta met with Iraqi intelligence in Prague.
Frankly, we know terrorism when we see it, and Iraq is implicated in numerous incidents.
But that's not why we are waiting. Clearly we are building a case again Iran. Let's face it, Iraq is already implicated. It's Iran that needs more evidence for our ire.
So to me, all the stories about more evidence against Iraq are merely serving as distractions from the main game, which is to likewise convict Iran before we unlease Hell in the Middle-East.
32 posted on
04/27/2002 1:11:52 PM PDT by
Southack
To: codebreaker
While there's a lot of circumstantial evidence to investigate, like an allegation that the FBI stopped an agent from looking into the Iraqi angle, the feds say it is a waste of money. Definitely, that money would be better utilized for the war on drugs, antitrust and IRS prosecutions.
To: codebreaker
If McVeigh was in league with the terrorists of 911, then we need to investigate jis other associates far more thoroughly.
To: codebreaker
Muslim radicals in a plot to blow up a Federal building? Surely not!!!
To: knighthawk
FYI
To: codebreaker
There's quite a lot of information already available, although generally ignored by the lazy and inept news media.
I have little doubt that Oklahoma City was an Iraqi operation, that the FBI and the Clinton administration knew it was going to happen, and that they covered up the fact for political reasons.
It isn't enough to say that this was merely a coverup, however. After reading nearly everything that's been written on the subject, I'm often tempted to think that Clinton supported the ME terrorists as a means by which the "revolution could be brought to America." After all, the whole Islamic fundamentalist political movement in the Middle East has along history of being involved with the Kremlin. Terror is, in fact, an essential part of Marxist Leninism.
Either that... or it was simple Clintonian blackmail.
To: codebreaker
Schippers was too busy to work for Burton on this. So, they need more staff, huh? The best staff in the country will be thousands of FReepers.
To: codebreaker
U.S. News.com May 6,2002
By Paul Bedard; David E. Kaplan; Mark Mazzetti
Your tax dollars at work: Was al Qaeda at OK City?
Rep. Dan Burton, chair of the House Government Reform Committee, is an unabashed investigator of the feds, no matter how far-fetched the charges. But even his own team thinks he has gone off the deep end with his latest project: allegations that Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh is tied to Islamic terrorists. McVeigh, the story goes, met in an Oklahoma City motel with Iraqi agents before the 1995 explosion.
Part two: unsubstantiated reports that two 9/11 hijackers holed up with the suspected 20th attacker, Zacarias Moussaoui, in the same motel last July. Coincidence? Sources say Burton sent investigators to OK City to sniff around, tasked three staffers to the probe, and asked David Schippers, who led a House panel on Bill Clinton's impeachment, to advise. But that's not all: Burton wants more staff. While there's lots of circumstantial evidence to investigate, like an allegation that the FBI stopped an agent from looking into the Iraqi angle, the feds say it's a waste of money. Ditto some in his committee. "Some attorneys here," says a staffer, "think it's wacko."
105 posted on
07/26/2002 4:21:05 PM PDT by
honway
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson