Posted on 08/25/2002 12:42:53 AM PDT by efnwriter
efreedomnews http://www.efreedomnews.com
War on Iraq: Operations Begin COMMON CAUSE Jonathan Rhodes August 24, 2002 Even in this time of war, there are media and political forces in this country that have no moral balance, that have only their own quest for power guiding their actions. Brent Scowcroft, in the Wall Street Journal, essentially reiterated his failed policy advice employed at the end of Gulf War I in 1991. That policy is cautious and narrow, a policy that strives for balance of power in the old European mold of realpolitik.
This led the New York Times to blast headlines like "Top Republicans Break With Bush On Iraq Strategy," "Warning Shots on Iraq," and "The Waco Road to Baghdad." The Times' trumpeted a concocted attack on President Bush's foreign policy, following their agenda of discrediting Bush above all other priority, even the national interest of the United States. We could dismiss their obvious liberal playbook methods as trite, if they weren't so dangerous. The New York Times did not report news, they propagandized.
The real news - Scowcroft had facts wrong.
"But there is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11 attacks. Indeed Saddam's goals have little in common with the terrorists who threaten us, and there is little incentive for him to make common cause with them." Brent Scowcroft, August 15, 2002 Wall Street Journal Palestinian born Director of External Operations for Iraqi Intelligence, the new Ambassador to Turkey, Farouk Hijazi, traveled to Kandahar, Afghanistan in December, 1998 and met with Osama Bin Laden.1,2,3,4,7
"Terrorist cells belonging to the network organized by Osama bin Laden...are ready go into action in the countries of the Persian Gulf and Europe...The list of targets is ready. It was agreed in Kandahar 21 December by Osama himself and Farouk Hijazi... The new recruits, together with the veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Bosnia, form the secret army that is expected to use its weapons against all those who oppose the rais of Baghdad. In order to make them even more dangerous, traditional training has been supplemented with training in the use of chemical weapons, toxins and viruses."3 [Corriere della Sera, February 1, 1999 (Italia)]
Baghdad had even grander designs for Osama. Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal had visited Mullah Omar twice in 1998, trying to get to Osama for his intended overthrow of the House of Saud. He had been twice rejected. Saudi financing of the Taliban had then been severely reduced and the Taliban were reconsidering the value of protecting Osama. Pressure from the US and Saudi Arabia had secured the expulsion of Osama from Sudan to Yemen in the early 1990's, and just as they had offered then, Iraq invited Osama to asylum and refuge in Baghdad.3 [This meeting was confirmed by Vincent Cannistraro, Director of NSC Intelligence from 1984 to 1987, then chief of operations for the CIA's Counterterrorism Center.]3 Mamoun Fandy, professor of Middle East Politics at Georgetown University, with personal Saudi Royal Family connections, said in 1999, the Saudi monarchy told him they ended diplomatic relations and funding of the Taliban. The Saudi's felt this would compel the Taliban to force Osama out of Afghanistan. Islamic fundamentalist bin Laden would have an ideological aversion to accepting the secularist Iraqi offer, as he did in the early 1990's, but Osama might have little choice but to accept. [obviously, Osama secured other arrangements.]
The New York Post reported February 1, 1999, "Saddam Hussein - battered, humiliated and increasingly isolated - plans to resort to terrorism in revenge for U.S. airstrikes against his country" "Earlier this month, Saddam appeared to move even further ideologically toward Bin Laden when he lashed out at the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments.
"Saudi rulers have caused great calamities to the Arab nation and committed aggression against its rights ever since they became a bridge for the foreigner," Saddam said in a written statement.
Terrorism is the Iraqi ruler's new strategy, said Kenneth Katzman, a former CIA analyst now with the Congressional Research Service.
"Saddam hasn't been much of a player on the terrorism scene lately. But now he's clearly trying to advertise himself in the Arab world as a victim of American aggression in hopes of attracting Bin Laden's supporters and others to his cause," Katzman said. 4 Ahmed Allawi, a senior INC official, advised, that it is not new, "There is a long history of contacts between the Mukhabarat [Iraqi secret service] and Osama bin Ladin."2 Saddam stockpiles terrorists as weapons to use for his own." [end NY Post] ------------------------------
Iraq provides safehaven to terrorist and rejectionist groups and continues its efforts to rebuild its intelligence network, which it used previously to support international terrorism. 5 The Abu Nidal Organization (Fatah Revolutionary Council, Arab Revolutionary Brigades, Black September, Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims) split from the PLO in 1974. carried out terrorist attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring almost 900 persons. Targets include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, moderate Palestinians, the PLO, and various Arab countries. The leader, Abu Nidal, relocated to Baghdad in late 1998. Iraq had never admitted Abu Nidal was in the country until reports of his death in Baghdad emerged this week.
Iraq supports and supplies the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, known to be completely controlled by Iraqi intelligence within Iraq's borders. They are primarily an anti-Iranian terror group who killed several U.S. soldiers and civilians working on defense projects in Iran prior to the fall of the Shah of Iran. 6
The Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), led by Abu Abbas, is one of three factions of the original PFLP that split up in 1977. They reject the middle east peace process and use terrorism in their quest to establish an independent Palestinian. Following the attack against the Achille Lauro ship in October 1985, Abu Abbas was expelled by the Tunisian authorities and established his headquarters in Baghdad.
On October 14, 2000, A London-bound Saudi airliner was hijacked. They landed in Baghdad where the passengers were released. Saddam granted the hijackers asylum. The Iraqi regime rebuffed a request from Riyadh for the extradition of two Saudi hijackers. Disregarding its obligations under international law, the regime granted political asylum to the hijackers and time on Iraqi television to vent their criticisms of alleged abuses by the Saudi Arabian Government, echoing an Iraqi propaganda theme.8
Iraq has a long record of supporting terrorist groups and resorting to terrorism as an adjunct of foreign policy. During the 1991 Gulf War I, Saddam planned a series of worldwide terrorist attacks. Most were foiled by US and international counterterrorism efforts.7
In November 2001, two defectors from the Iraqi intelligence services said that Iraq had used Salman Pak, a camp south of Baghdad, to train Islamist radicals in the techniques of terrorism.
In 1993, Saddam attempted to assassinate President George H. Bush (43).
Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the WTC bombing in 1993 entered the US on an Iraqi passport, originating his flight from Iraq. His intelligence file in Kuwait was altered by Iraqi officials during the occupation of Kuwait. Abdul Yasin, also involved in the bombing returned to Iraq and is living in Baghdad.7
Salman Pak: An Iraqi Lt. general and Captain Sabah Khodada defected from Iraq and emigrated to the US in May, 2001. In separate New York Times interviews, they described Salman Pak, a highly secret terrorist training camp south of Baghdad. The trainees were Iraqi, and non-Iraqi Arabs.9
Saddam has openly and vigorously supported Palestinian suicide bombers, paying families of suicide bombers $25,000 and building a Baghdad memorial to the first woman suicide bomber.
Ansar al-Islam, a Kurdish Islamic extremist group, has terrorized the northern Iraq Kurd safe-haven over the past fourteen months. The group has had al-Qaeda associations since 1989. The Iraqi government provided cash and training to Ansar, in a bid to destabilize the safe haven and weaken armed Kurdish opponents. Qassem Hussein Mohamed who is being held in a Kurdish prison, was a Mukhabarat intelligence officer for 20 years. In an interview by the Christian Science Monitor in Sulaymaniyah, Iraq, he said that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has supported Ansar al-Islam for several years. "Mohamed compared Baghdad's role to the overt help Iraq given the anti-Iran Mujahideen-e-Khalq forces, which are known to be completely controlled by Iraqi intelligence within Iraq's borders." "Ansar and Al Qaeda groups were trained by graduates of the Mukhabarat's School 999 -- military intelligence," says Mr. Mohamed." "My information is that the Iraqi government was directly supporting [Al Qaeda] with weapons and explosives," he says. "[Ansar] was part of Al Qaeda, and given support with training and money."
Indeed, Mr. Scowcroft, there is a great deal of evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations; Saddam's goals have much in common with the terrorists who threaten us, and there is certain incentive for him to make common cause with them.
Epilogue:
William Jefferson Clinton said in an interview on the Jim Lehrer News Hour, Jan 21, 1998: "Think how many can be killed by just a tiny bit of anthrax, and think about how it's not just that Saddam Hussein might put it on a Scud missile, an anthrax head, and send it on to some city he wants to destroy. Think about all the other terrorists and other bad actors who could just parade through Baghdad and pick up their stores...This is a serious thing with me, this is a very serious thing. You imagine the capacity of these tiny amounts of biological agents to cause great harm; it's something we need to get after."
Having failed to effectively "get after...this serious thing," Clinton has left President George W. Bush with the problem. "Let's Roll" *
Between Iraq and Saudi Arabia, I am not sure who goes first.While I would put them at #2 and #3, my opinion is only a wild a$$ed guess. I am trusting my life, and that of my child on Bush,Rumsfield and Powell having a pretty good handle on the strategy and tactics that will lower this country's body count.Both at home and abroad.
The alternative is to trust overt enemy propaganda and various usefull idiots, such as the NYTs.We can work our way out of debt. We can't do so while dead at the hands of our self avowed enemies.
I think I understand your concerns, but I think that any money pot in a government has a life span of a sneeze. So perhaps the question is do we go into hundreds of billions of dollars in dept funding a military deterrent to our enemies, or in expanding social programs. Reagan chose the former.
I have to disagree with you. We appear to be in the wrap-up stage of the Afghanistan mission. If we take on Iraq NOW, it will help further disrupt/dismantle terrorists world-wide. I'm not a military guy, but I imaging the assets that are still in Afghanistan, are different assets that will be used to take down Saddam (with the exception of special ops personnel).
We should go after Iraq as soon as our game plan is finalized, and the resourses and assets are in place. The more we wait, the more time Al Quaeda and Sadaam have to get their ducks in a row.
That is so funny, that reminds me of a time as a kid when my Grandfather told me to slow down, and stalk the flies slowly, because you would kill more if you took your time instead of swinging the flyswatter around everywhere. We argued about this for awhile (I was all of 4 or 5).
Then my Grandmother came through with a can of Raid and gassed them all in one sweep. Kind of ended it anticlimactically. LOL!
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.