A combination of videos and photos showing the Democrat
& Media position on the war in Iraq as our troops become
the victims of their politics.

Includes quotes from a mother of 3 troops who served 

in Iraq.


"I can believe it. All three of my sons have had to deal 

some being embedded. They tried their best not to talk to them. 

The comments I posted are just a small sample. 

You can't put into words to look of disgust on their face 

when they talk about reporters.

It's really an odd situation. When they find out that I have 

sons serving we usually trade stories about dealing with the 

media down range and on the home front. 

A lot of them have asked how hard it has been dealing with 

stories about Cindy Sheehan during the last few months. 

A lot have asked how bad listening to the news really upset us.

It seems as if they are getting a pulse on family responses 

before they spend time with their own families when they get 

home.

I have openly asked them how the media seeks out a negative 

response from a Marine, or Soldier. I have also asked them if 

they felt more at risk with a reporter near them. The answers 

to those questions are just what you would expect. The media 

looks for troops having a bad day and they feel more at risk 

with a reporter near them."



"A few opinions shared by the troops both going over and coming 

home."

• I have asked my Mom not to watch any news while I am gone; Moms worry enough without having to listen to that garbage.
• I try to avoid reporters. If you don't talk to them they can't twist your words.
• They only use the quotes from someone having a bad day or the one guy with a bad attitude.
• We can be at a scene and return to base only to hear CNN multiply the numbers of injured in initial reports.
• I worry just as much about my family hearing only media spin as I do my own safety while I'm downrange.
• What? A reporter here? I need to go outside for a smoke.
• They are as much fun as the wacky professors on campus.

Al Qaeda Document: Zarqawi Came to Iraq Before The War To Prepare The Fight Against U.S

This is a FReeper made video based off the Al Qaeda document found and posted at Free Republic by Jveritas.

On February 17 2008, Al-Ekhlaas which is the largest terrorist forum on the internet published an Al Qaeda document that talks about the life of Abou Musaab Al Zarqawi and indicates that Zarqawi came to Iraq before the war to prepare the terrorist insurgency against the US troops. According to the document Zarqawi arrived to the Sunni areas in central Iraq. This document was written by one of Al Qaeda top leaders called “Saif Al Adel”.

There were many accounts about Zarqawi presence in Iraq before the war in particular in Northern Iraq with “Ansar Al Islam” an active Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group that was present in the Kurdish areas of Iraq long before the war started. The document also proves that Ansar Al Islam helped Al Qaeda members establish themselves in Iraq before the war started.

The author of the document wrote that there were no relations between Saddam regime and Al Qaeda but this does not negate at all the most important fact that Al Qaeda was in Iraq before the war for the sole purpose of preparing for its most important front to fight the U.S and it is now in Iraq where Al Qaeda is suffering its most crushing defeat since its existence.

It is very important to note that despite the author of the document denial of a relationship between Saddam regime and Al Qaeda it does not mean that Saddam regime was not aware of Al Qaeda presence in Iraq. In fact the documents clearly points out that Zarqawi went to the Sunni areas in Central Iraq before the war and these areas were totally controlled and loyal to Saddam regime and it very hard to imagine that Zarqawi stayed and prepared his terrorist sleepers cells in these Sunni areas without the approval of Saddam regime.

El-Ekhlaas terrorist forum is a password protected so you cannot access the document unless you are registered there as a member.

The Liberal media has been focused on a so called Gaffe John McCain has made recently in the press.

Example is this IPS news story

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41693


POLITICS-US: McCain's Gaffes Reflect Bush's Iran-Qaeda Myth
Analysis by Gareth Porter*

WASHINGTON, Mar 21 (IPS) - Sen. John McCain's confusion in recent allegations of Iranian training of al Qaeda fighters in Iraq is the result of a drumbeat of official propaganda about close Iran-al Qaeda ties that the George W. Bush administration and neoconservatives have promoted ever since early 2002.

Funny how the left-wing press is eager to point out a McCain Gaffe when their ratings and newspaper subscriptions are quickly heading south.  Could that be due to their incompetence and inability to fact check? 


I would like to post some information from articles here and let people decide for themselves if Al Qaeda has links with Iran.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/ARTICLES/Printable.aspx?GUID={9E091170-6A9D-48CA-BC7B-02FF7F84A443



"That same month, Jordan’s prime minister announced that al-Qaeda operative Fazel Inzal al-Khalayleh (a.k.a. Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi) had sought refuge with Ansar. Khalayleh had ordered the spring 2002 attack on Salih as well as the October 2002 murder of U.S. Agency for International Development officer Laurence Foley in Amman. Khalayleh’s deputy, Nur ad-Din ash-Shami (a.k.a. Abu Abdullah), was killed in a battle with Kurdish fighters less than two weeks ago. Currently, more than thirty Ansar militants (about twenty of whom are Arab) are incarcerated in Sulaymaniyah. Their testimony has provided clues about the group’s ties to Saddam Husayn, al-Qaeda, Iran, and weapons of mass destruction."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/12/mil-051216-mnfi01.htm

Arrest warrant issued for Iraqi terrorist leader with ties to Zarqawi

Multi-National Force-Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- On Dec. 4, The Iraqi Central Investigating Court in Baghdad issued an arrest warrant for Mullah Halgurd Al-Khabir, a “Jihadist” terrorist commander, suspected of leading the insurgency against Coalition and Iraqi forces. The arrest warrant states that Al-Khabir is wanted for violation of Iraqi Penal Code 194, committing terrorist acts.

Al-Khabir is the senior leader in Baghdad for the Iraqi based terrorist organization Ansar al-Sunna, and has historical ties to al Qaeda terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Khabir replaced the previous commander of Ansar al-Suna, Abdallah Al-Shafi’i, after Shafi’i was killed in December, 2002, in a gun battle with local law enforcement.

Ansar al-Sunna, a terrorist organization with links to terrorists in Syria and Iran, have committed multiple suicide bomb attacks in Iraq that have resulted in the deaths of Coalition Forces, Iraqi Army Soldiers, Iraqi policemen and Iraqi citizens. The majority of these attacks have taken place in Baghdad, Kirkuk and Mosul.

Interesting enough Joseph Shahda has found an Al Qaeda document that links Al Qaeda to Ansar Al Islam recently

Al Qaeda Document: Zarqawi Came to Iraq Before The War To Prepare The Fight Against U.S
Al Qaeda document | March 16 2008 | jveritas

Posted on 03/16/2008 5:49:59 PM EDT by jveritas

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1986706/posts

This document discovered by Joseph off the El-Ekhlaas terrorist forum written by Saif Al Adel who is an Al Qaeda leader.

From translation

"The Americans noticed that the Iranians were having a blind eye against our activities in Iran so they began a media attack against Iran accusing them of helping Al Qaeda and international terrorism."

Maybe our press doesn't have enough common sense to figure out that Iran turning a blind eye means giving a tacit approval for Al Qaeda to conduct terrorism. "Lets see about that?"

Joseph states

"There were many accounts about Zarqawi presence in Iraq before the war in particular in Northern Iraq with “Ansar Al Islam” an active Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group that was present in the Kurdish areas of Iraq long before the war started. The document also proves that Ansar Al Islam helped Al Qaeda members establish themselves in Iraq before the war started."

Who is Abdullah Shafi’i ?

Newspapers had been reporting the leader of Ansar Al Islam Abdullah Shafi’i was killed in a gunfight without much confirmation including this quote from an article at globalsecurity.org

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/12/mil-051216-mnfi01.htm

“Al-Khabir is the senior leader in Baghdad for the Iraqi based terrorist organization Ansar al-Sunna, and has historical ties to al Qaeda terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Khabir replaced the previous commander of Ansar al-Suna, Abdallah Al-Shafi’i, after Shafi’i was killed in December, 2002, in a gun battle with local law enforcement.”

Question is why was there still a $50000 reward for his capture

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2005/06/50000_reward_announced_for_ans.php

$50,000 Reward Announced for Ansar al-Sunnah Commander in Iraq
By Evan Kohlmann

This from the Government Communications Directorate of the Republic of Iraq:

(Click to view photo of Abu Abdullah al-Shafi’i, c/o Globalterroralert.com)

“$50,000 Dollar Reward Announced For Ansar al Sunna Terrorist Leader Abu Abdullah Al-Shafi?i”

“The Iraqi government announced a reward of $50,000 U.S. dollars for information leading to the arrest of Abu Abdullah Al Shafi?i, widely believed to be the leader of the terrorist group Ansar al Sunna (AAS). The group has taken credit for numerous bombings, assassinations and other terrorist acts in Mosul, Kirkuk, Irbil and Baghdad. Al Shafi?i played a direct role in organizing and directing attacks that resulted in hundreds of deaths of Iraqi civilians and Iraqi Security Forces. Intelligence sources believe that foreign Arabs under the direct control of Al Shafi?i actively recruit and train terrorists, as well as provide weapons and financial support for terrorist attacks.”

“Purportedly Abu Abdullah al Shafi?i received his terrorist training in Afghanistan at a camp run by terrorist Osama Bin Laden. Al Shafi?I gained control of AAS in early 2003. AAS is an offshoot of the terrorist group, Ansar al-Islam (AAI).? The Origins of AAS date back to 2001 when several militant Islamist groups merged to form the AAI and established a terrorist base near the village of Khurmal, located in the mountains of northern Iraq along the Iranian border. Reports referred that the AAI base was destroyed in 2003 during the last war against Saddam’s Regime. Evidence suggests that prior to its destruction, Al Qaeda terrorists used the Khurmal AAI base for sanctuary.”

Also including this article

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/6/A9667FC0-69A5-4CE3-B1E7-C15FC62F60DE.html

Afghanistan/Iraq: Al-Zarqawi, Al-Qaeda, And The New Islamist Front

Al-Zarqawi has established a vast network of fighters in Iraq and Iraqi authorities have indicated that the network includes Arab nationals as well as Afghan and Pakistani fighters. His Tanzim Qa’idat Al-Jihad fi Bilad Al-Rafidayn allegedly has close ties to the Ansar Al-Sunnah Army, an outgrowth of Ansar Al-Islam. U.S. and Iraqi authorities claim that successes have been made through a string of recent military operations targeting the groups. A Mosul operation on 28 May led to the capture of al-Zarqawi aide Mutlaq Muhammad Mutlaq Abdullah (aka Abu Ra’d). Iraqi Major General Khalil al-Ubaydi announced on 4 June the arrest of an Ansar Al-Sunnah member identified as Mullah Mahdi; al-Ubaydi contended that Mahdi carried out attacks at the direction of al-Zarqawi. Iraqi authorities this week announced a $50,000 reward for information leading to the capture of Ansar Al-Sunnah leader Abu Abdullah al-Shafi’i.

Why was the AP aware of an Al Qaeda linked group in Northern Iraq in 2002 but suddenly now have amnesia?

13 September 2002, Volume 5, Number 29

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2002/29-130902.htm

By the beginning of 2002 it was announced that the Jund al-Islam had changed its name to the Supporters of Islam and, in the Arabic nomenclature that has become more common in subsequent reports, Ansar al-Islam. At the same time, they held conciliation talks with the PUK. One result of the change to a less militant name was that the PUK might recognize them as a legal political party, reported “Hawlati” on 14 January 2002. One consequence of the talks between the two groups was that a number of the Afghan-Arabs had left for Baghdad, reported KurdishMedia.com on 1 February 2002. The former Jund admits that it is close to Osama bin Laden. Its Leader, Abu Abdullah al-Shaf’i, explained that the Jund believes in the necessity of retaliation, punishment of those who deviate from Islam, cutting off the hands of thieves, punishing single adulterers with 80 lashes and married adulterers by stoning to death. On the other hand, the PUK is trying to build a modern, civil society in Kurdistan. It is difficult to see any hopes for reconciliation between the parties.

By 3 March, AP reported that the U.S. admitted its awareness that a possible Al-Qaeda-linked group was operating in northern Iraq. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher is quoted as saying that he could not comment on Ansar al-Islam because official information on the matter is based on intelligence and therefore cannot be discussed publicly.

The AP dispatch also cites a recent article in the “New Yorker” suggesting that Al-Qaeda and Baghdad are jointly running the Ansar al-Islam. In addition, the “Kurdistan Observer” of 28 March 2002 cites a Kurdish military commander in Halabcha who expressed the belief that Iraq is funding the group. A “Daily Telegraph” report quotes Carole O’Leary, a professor of Middle Eastern Studies at American University in Washington, who maintains that “Saddam’s supporting Ansar al-Islam would be consistent with his desire to destabilize the Kurdistan Regional Government.”

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:8NkMPLjW5nsJ:www.investigativeproject.org/documents/testimony/35.pdf+state.gov+Abdallah+Al-Shafi%E2%80%99i&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=16&gl=us&client=firefox-a

FFI RAPPORT

JIHAD IN EUROPE - A survey of the
motivations for Sunni Islamist terrorism in
post-millennium Europe

NESSER Petter

FFI/RAPPORT-2004/01146

11.4.6 Ansar al-Islam
Ansar al-Islam (Followers of Islam) was established in September 2001, by Mullah Krekar
(currently under investigation in Norway suspected of being involved in attempted suicide
operations in Northern Iraq), and Abu Abdallah al-Shafi (former leader of Jund al-Islam that merged with Krekar’s splinter group from the Kurdish Islamic Movement into Ansar al-Islam).
Mullah Krekar was granted asylum in Norway in 1991. Since then he has traveled extensively
to the Kurdish controlled areas in Iraq. The question of whether Krekar is an operational leader
or a religious guide for Ansar is for the moment highly unclear. There have been various
statements released on Islamist web pages claiming that Krekar no longer is the movement’s
leader, but such statements might have been issued to take some of the pressure off the
Norway-based mullah. Some statements claim he has been replaced with Muhammad Hasan,
former leader of the Islamist group Soran Forces, while others claim Abdallah al-Shafi is the
current leader of the movement. Al-Shafi was however reportedly killed in unconfirmed press
reports in December 2002.323

Interesting how he was reported killed (unconfirmed) with that 50000 dollar reward for his capture?

The real question is how much more evidence does our media need to see or how much do they already know about but refuse to report about pre-war evidence of showing relationships between terrorist groups in Iraq and Al Qaeda?

Will the Left Ever Support the War on Terrorism?

Written August 9, 2006

Why are American liberals convinced that there’s no connections between Saddam and Al Qaeda?

Why is it said “We had no reason to invade Iraq”?
 

With the 5th year anniversary of 9/11 nearing, I reflect on a letter I wrote to my family in the first few days following the attacks explaining how proud I was of my country. Like most Americans, we were angry, perhaps moreso because my brother-in-law, who is an NYPD Emergency Service Unit officer, had to dig through the rubble at Ground Zero for days on end trying to find the remains of his three ESU partners who were murdered by the terror

Patriotism in America after 9/11 was rekindled by this terrible act, symbolized in many ways by the countless American flags flying throughout the country, including many attached to cars or storefront windows.

So five years later, I wonder what happened to the saying “United we stand, divided we fall”? Why does the Left in our country show such disdainful vitriol toward our president and our troops’ efforts?

Are there any connections between Saddam and terrorism? You don’t have to look very hard to find them. Frontline PBS ran a show titled “Gunning For Saddam,” covering a story about Salman Pak, which was described by Sabah Khodada--a captain in the Iraqi army from 1982 to 1992--as a “training camp on the Tigris River some 15 miles southeast of Iraq’s capital. Training was majorly on terrorism. They would be trained on assassinations, kidnapping, hijacking of airplanes, hijacking of buses, public buses, hijacking of trains and all other kinds of operations related to terrorism.”

People can say what they want of Ann Coulter denigrating the Jersey Girls, but it is clear these women were used to advance a political agenda including manipulating the 9-11 Commission. Ironic how the Left was eager to expose Enron executives but ignored the suspicion that head 9-11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick benefited financially from the $10.8 billion scandal involving accounting irregularities and outrageous bonuses at Fannie Mae. The Business & Media Institute’s Web site (www.freemarketproject.org) had a story titled “Media Ignore Democratic Ties to Fannie Mae Scandal,” which asserted: “The Business & Media Institute previously documented how much the media overlooked about Democratic connections to Fannie Mae. According to that April 2005 report: ‘Former Chief Executive Officer Franklin Raines and former Vice Chairman Jamie Gorelick were both instrumental figures in the Clinton administration.’ ” Not a word mentioned during the 9-11 hearing about that news or the fact that as No. 2 in the Clinton Justice Department as Deputy Attorney General, in 1995 Gorelick was a key architect of an information "wall" causing intelligence lapses leading to 9-11. Gorelick’s participation on the 9-11 Commission clearly was a conflict of interest. A 2004 Washington Times article titled “Memos show Gorelick involvement in 'wall'” noted: “Newly released Justice Department memos show that September 11 panel commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick was more intimately involved than previously thought with hampering communications between U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies fighting terrorism. As the No. 2 person in the Clinton Justice Department, Ms. Gorelick rejected advice from the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who warned against placing more limits on communications between law-enforcement officials and prosecutors pursuing counterterrorism cases, according to several internal documents written in summer 1995.”
 

I am in agreement with syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin on her blog entry titled “9/11 Commission Ignored Key Facts On Hijackers,” In which she said: “The 9/11 Commission was supposed to give the American people a complete, unbiased story of the government failures that led up to the September 11 terrorist attacks. But the Commission now admits its acclaimed Final Report ignored key information provided by a U.S. Army data mining project, Able Danger, which identified Mohammed Atta and several other hijackers as potential terrorists prior to the September 11 attacks. The Able Danger team recommended that Atta and the other suspected terrorists be deported. That recommendation, however, was not shared with law enforcement officials, presumably because of the ‘wall’ between intelligence activities and domestic law enforcement. According to the New York Times, the 9/11 Commission officials said that Able Danger had not been included in their report because some of the information sounded inconsistent with what they thought they knew about Atta. In other words, the Commission staffers were told about the project but ignored it because it didn't fit their pre-conceived conclusions.”

This same info had been confirmed by Laurie Mylroie and Mansoor Ijaz, who were both President Clinton’s advisors on the Middle East. In a CNN article titled “Laurie Mylroie: Is Iraq involved with U.S. terror attacks?” Mylroie said: “Iraq is a difficult problem, and has been since the Gulf War. Many mistakes have been made, because it's inevitable that in human endeavor there are mistakes. Under the Clinton administration, specifically in February 1993 with the first attack on the Trade Center, Clinton dealt with the issue dishonestly. New York FBI believed in 1993 that Iraq was behind the Trade Center bombing. That was accepted by the White House, that New York FBI might well be right. In June, 1993, Clinton attacked Iraqi intelligence headquarters. He said that that was punishment for Saddam's attempt to kill George Bush when Bush visited Kuwait in April, but Clinton also believed that it would deter Saddam from all future attacks of terrorism, and that it would address the WTC bombing, too, so that Saddam would not think to carry out further attacks against the U.S.”

The Left insisted that we solve the Saddam and Iraq problems with other world leaders via the United Nations. Yes that is the same organization involved in the Oil for Food scandal.What exactly did the U.N. do to stop Saddam in the past? Reference.com defines Resolution 1441: “United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a resolution by the UN Security Council, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284), notably to provide "an accurate full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by Resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programs to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles". Resolution 1441 threatens "serious consequences" if these are not met. It reasserted demands that UN weapons inspectors should have "immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access" to sites of their choosing, in order to ascertain compliance.”

While the left was hoping to cash in on America’s ADD and ADHD problems, they neglect to point out Operation Desert Fox. Described by Reference.com: “Operation Desert Fox was the military codename for a major three-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets from December 16-December 18, 1998 by the United States and United Kingdom. It was a major flare-up in the Iraq disarmament crisis. The stated goal of the cruise missile and bombing attacks was to "degrade" Saddam Hussein's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction. In reaction to the attack, three of five permanent members of the UN Security Council (Russia, France, and the People's Republic of China) called for lifting of the eight-year oil embargo on Iraq, recasting or disbanding UNSCOM, and firing its chairman, Australian diplomat Richard Butler. The strikes came at a particularly difficult time for US President Bill Clinton, as he was impeached on December 19.”

There have been many documents found in Iraq showing links. These documents have been described as the Harmony Database. Many are studied at the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. They are also referred to as Docex Project. Millions of documents that sat deep within a warehouse in Doha, Qatar, may shed some light on links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Recently they have been released by National Intelligence Director John Negroponte to the general public. Why would the Left be so convinced there are no connections when we still have intelligence information in the process of being translated?

Recently Fox News published an article on their Web site titled “Iraq How-to Manual Directed Arab Military Operatives In Afghanistan.” The article said, “The document, apparently written before the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, could bolster the Bush administration's contention that Saddam Hussein was providing support for Islamic extremists who were plotting against America.”

Why is the New York Times printing our intelligence secrets? According to Snopes.com, “After the September 11 terrorist attacks on America, Stephen Jukes, Reuters' head of global news, directed his staff to avoid the using word ‘terrorist’ in their news reports to describe the perpetrators of those attacks.” Are they trying to be competitive with Al Jazeera in aiding the enemy? We captured Saddam when the liberals said it could not be done and we killed his murderous sons Uday and Qusay. We killed Zarqawi when the liberals said it could not be done, and now members of the United States Senate report weapons of mass destruction when the Left said there were none. There seems to be a media blackout on many of these connections, and I want to know why. Is American liberals’ perception so faulty and anger so strong that they are willing for us to lose the war on terrorism? We can’t hold hands with radical Islamic terrorists or Al Qaeda and sing Kumbaya.

Video written and directed by JVeritas (Joseph Shahda) and created by chris Donohoe

“It was clear that there is another branch committee from the Industrial Committee headed by Dr. Mahdi Shakr Ghali that currently evaluates the Researches That Cannot Be Declared, Researches with relation to the previous Prohibited Programs... This is an important subject and it is dangerous in case this information is leaked one way or another.” That was a quote General Housam Ahmad Amin, one of Saddam regime top officials on September/16/1998 talking about secret programs related to WMD according to Iraqi document CMPC-2003-002284.”

On the 5th year anniversary of “Operation Iraqi Freedom” and the Liberation of Iraq, no stockpiles of WMD were yet to be found in Iraq however this does not mean that Saddam regime stopped working on WMD programs, in fact we believe that the regime continued to work on WMD in particular the Chemical Weapons program. In this short video we will show you that Saddam regime Saddam regime strategy in building their Chemical Weapons program from 1998-2003. Based on captured Iraqi documents we strongly believe that Saddam regime opted to produce all the Precursors (or base Materials) required for making Chemical Weapons rather than building the final Chemical Weapon products. Once the Precursors are available it would be very easy and quick to build the final chemical weapons, in most cases it only take weeks if not days to build it. There are two main reasons why Saddam regime chose to build the Precursors for the chemical weapons rather than the final product. The first one is that those Precursors are classified under what is called “dual use materials” where it can be used both in civilian and WMD industries, and Saddam regime can always claim that these precursors were produced for civilian industry. The second reason is that the Precursors have longer shelf life than the final chemical weapons program which means it can be stored for a much longer of time and assembled.

Saddam regime produced the “Chemical Weapons Precursors” for the “Chemical Weapons” under the cover of a project the Iraqis called “The Pharmaceutical and Pesticides Project” that effectively started somewhere in the year 1999. The Iraqis always gave industrial names as a deceptive mean to cover their WMD projects. For example their previous Nuclear Weapons Program prior to the 1991 Gulf War was called “Petrochemical 3 Project”. The Iraqis were very careful in camouflaging their WMD programs and productions even prior to the 1991 Gulf War. They rarely used the expression “Chemical Weapons” and even when they were using Chemical Weapons against the Iranians and the Kurds in the 1980’s and they called it “Special Ammunition” according to captured Iraqi document CMPC 2004-002219

There are many documents pertaining to “The Pharmaceutical and Pesticides Projects” and in these documents we find the plans, and the production projects for the “Chemical Precursors” to build “Chemical Weapons”. Under the United Nations sanctions, the Iraqi were totally prohibited to locally produce these “Chemical Precursors” but rather they may import it in very limited quantities and under strict UN importing regulations.

Under “The Pharmaceutical and Pesticides Projects” are the productions and research of materials like Potassium Cyanide and Sodium Cyanide which is used to make TABUN Nerve Gas. Also DICYLOHEXYLDIACARBODIIMIDE and Phosphorus Pentasulfide which are used to make VX Nerve Gas. Other materials in this project include Phosphorus oxychloride, Thiophosphoryl Chloride and Thionyl Chloride that are used to make different types of Chemical Weapons. These Chemical Weapons precursors are listed in Iraqi documents ISGQ-2003-00044424, CMPC-2003-013956, ISGQ-2005-00023243.

From 1998 to 2001 Saddam regime produced a lot of prohibited “Chemical Defensive Equipments” such as “Nerve Gas Detectors” and “Chemical Decontamination Vehicles” as per Iraqi documents CMPC-2003-016083 and ISGQ-2004-00220151. Though these equipments sound defensive in nature, the UN did not allow Saddam regime to produce it because they are also required when conducting a Chemical Weapon attack or transferring Chemical Weapons. In fact the document that talks about producing “Nerve Gas Detector” had a clear admission from the Iraqis that it was prohibited to produce it but never the less they were producing it. Moreover a large number of documents talks in details about the extensive Chemical Warfare exercises that the Iraqi conducted for different branches of their military, these exercises increased in frequency and scale in the years 1999-2002 to the point of obsession. In addition according to the documents the Iraqis were always looking to purchase and store tens of thousands of Chemical protection gears and anti-Chemical Weapons medicine such Atropine injections.

It is very important to understand the extremely paranoid nature of Saddam regime and why it was extremely important for them to possess the ability to produce “Chemical Weapons” very quickly. It was the “Chemical Weapons” that saved Saddam regime during the Iraq-Iran war from 1980-1988. It was the “Chemical Weapons” that crushed the Kurds rebellion in 1987-1988 when Saddam savagely massacred tens of thousands of Kurdish civilians. Saddam regime was totally paranoid that Iran will attack them at anytime and the only way for them to resist and stop the Iranians who are superior in numbers is to use “Chemical Weapons” against them, therefore the Baghdad regime cannot afford not to have the capability of producing these weapons. They simply cannot be in “defensive mode” against a Chemical attack from Iran but they need to have the capability of attacking back and decisively with Chemical Weapons of their own.

Where are the “Chemical Weapons Precursors” located?

Based on some captured documents we have great suspicions that Saddam regime buried the “Chemical Weapons Precursors” in the Western Desert, in particular in the Anbar province. These documents give a strong hint about the possible locations where these “Chemical Weapons Precursors” can be buried and all these locations are in one particular district in the remote area of the Anbar province. According to the documents that were written in 1999-2003 Saddam regime was looking for location in the Western desert to bury what they call “Chemical Materials” and in some instances they call it “Chemical Waste Materials”. Saddam himself was directly involved in this issue according to the documents and he gave high priority orders for his top officials to come up with these burial sites. Some may say that these were only “chemical waste burial sites” however I find it is very odd that the Iraqis never thought about locations to bury their chemical waste until the year 1999! Why suddenly the Iraqis were so interested in finding burial sites for their chemical products and why Saddam himself was giving high priority orders for such a trivial matter if in fact the sites were only to bury Chemical Waste. The oddity of the issue leads to believe that these were no Chemical Waste burial sites but rather the burial sites of much more important materials such as “Chemical Weapons Precursors” and other equipments related to the production of “Chemical Weapons”.

Many of us remember the reporting about satellite pictures prior to the Iraq war that showed a convoy of suspect trucks that can be carrying Chemical Weapons moving toward the West and it was thought by many analysts that they were going to Syria. However in our opinion these trucks were going to the remote areas of the Anbar province in Western Iraq to bury the “Chemical Weapons Precursors” and the equipments required to make it.

The documents mentioned by name the few towns and one district in the Anbar province where Saddam regime wanted the Chemical materials burial sites. However we will not mention these documents or the name of the towns in a public forum for security concerns.

My Youtube video of Hillary's past. Not very pretty.

A Little Hillary History

Salman Pak: The Saddam/Iraq-Al Qaeda connection

Why won't the Bush administration tell us the truth about terrorism? That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo."

Bill O'Reilly Wednesday, May 26, 2004

President Bush continues to believe that the fight in Iraq will eventually make Americans safer. And I think he's right, but I also think he doesn't make a strong enough case. Let's keep it real simple so even the far left fanatics can understand it.

Does any clear thinking person believe that Usama bin Laden would not use a nuclear weapon to kill millions of Americans if he could? Does anyone say he would not do that? If you know someone who doesn't believe that, get away from them fast. Bin Laden would use anything he could to kill as many American civilians as possible.

Here's another question for you. How much do you know about Salman Pak (search)? Today on NPR Radio (search), the host of a New York morning program didn't seem to know much about it. Do you?

Salman Pak is located 15 miles southwest of Baghdad. It was here that Saddam Hussein trained terrorists. Both Iraqi and non-Iraqi Arabs learned how to hijack airlines, make and plant bombs, and stage assassinations, among other things. According to Saba Khodada (ph), a terrorist instructor at Salman Pak who worked for Saddam, the camp was run by an international terrorist called "the ghost", who has yet to be identified. When the Marines raided the camp last spring, they found vats of industrial chemicals, manuals on how to fool U.N. weapons inspectors, and mass graves. They also found a passenger jet.

Bill our youtube video shows that there always was plenty of info out on Salman pak including from the White House. Salman Pak has been the pink elephant in the room.

Lt. Col. Robert "Buzz" Patterson

Mark Eichenlaub interview with LT Buzz Patterson

“al-Qaeda #2 Ayman al-Zawahiri’s trip to Baghdad in 1998 (in which he received $300,000, possibly from Saddam Hussein himself), Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s medical trip to Baghdad in 2002 and the terrorist training that took place in the Salman Pak camp.”

Dr. Mylroie received her Ph.D. in Political Science from Harvard University and her B.A. from Cornell. She was an Assistant Professor in Harvard's Political Science Department, before becoming an Associate Professor in the Strategy Department at the U.S. Naval War College. Subsequently, she was a member of the staff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. She also served as advisor on Iraq to the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign and has worked as a consultant on terrorism to the Departments of Defense and Energy; ABC News, the BBC, and Newsweek; as well as several law offices. She is presently an adjunct fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and publisher of Iraq News.

911 commission

Statement of Laurie Mylroie to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States July 9, 2003

"Following the 9/11 attacks, there was much speculation about Iraq's possible role. I won't address those points, although some information, like the claim of two Iraqi defectors that Iraqi intelligence trained non-Iraqi Arab militants to hijack airplanes at Salman Pak deserves more attention than it has received. That is particularly so, because when U.S. Marines took Salman Pak, they captured such individuals and learned from the interrogations that they were training as terrorists."

Mansoor Ijaz

Mansoor appears regularly on a variety of financial and political news programs for CNN, CNNI, Fox News, BBC, Germany’s ARD TV, Japan’s NHK, ABC and NBC. He has commented for PBS’ Newshour with Jim Lehrer and ABC News Nightline with Ted Koppel. Ijaz has been featured twice in BARRON'S Currency Roundtable discussions. He has also contributed to the editorial pages of London’s Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The International Herald Tribune, Newsweek International, The Christian Science Monitor, The Weekly Standard, National Review, USA Today and the Times of India.

As a private American citizen, Ijaz negotiated Sudan's counterterrorism offer to the Clinton administration in April 1997 which was an attempt to broker a hand-over of Osama bin Laden from the government of the Sudan to the U.S.

Mansoor Ijaz on Fox News

Fox News Special Report with Brit Hume The Connection Between 9/11 and Iraq Thursday, September 11, 2003

HUME: Well, certainly that makes pretty good circumstantial evidence on the attacks on those embassies. And it does suggest from what you have said that there have been contacts at a high level, important level, between al Qaeda and the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein. But what about something that would suggest a connection to 9-11, is there evidence there of any consequence?

IJAZ: Absolutely, and now let's take it a step further after the 1998 bombings. We then know there was a training camp called Salman Pak, which we've been able to identify the aircraft that they trained, the hijackers on. We've been able to identify other contacts between Iraqi intelligence services and directly with the 9-11 hijackers.

People would love to shove that evidence under the carpet, but the fact of the matter is that the meetings did take place, planning was going on. The Iraqi diplomatic pouch was the tool of choice to pass al Qaeda's messages around the world in different parts of the world.

PBS Gunning for Saddam

PBS Gunning for Saddam Sabah Khodada interview

A captain in the Iraqi army from 1982 to 1992, he worked at what he describes as a highly secret terrorist training camp at Salman Pak, an area south of Baghdad.

So did you find out what kind of training was going on?

I don't necessarily know what kind of training they do, but they were trained exactly at the same locations, and they were trained by the same teachers who were training ... [the fighters for] Saddam. Training includes hijacking and kidnapping of airplanes, trains, public buses, and planting explosives in cities, sabotaging villages, sabotaging houses, assassinations.

And the training also included how to prepare for suicidal operations. For example, they will train them how to belt themselves around with explosives, and jump in a place and explode themselves out as part of the suicidal training. I think the trainings of the Arabs was much harsher, and much stricter, than the training of the Iraqis.

Crude Drawing from Sabah Khodada

Here is the Satalite photo of Salman Pak

Who was eager to debunk Salman Pak?

The answer is Saddam loving Scott Ritter

In a BBC article Monday, 9 September, 2002, 23:23 GMT 00:23 UK titled

Reporters visit suspect Iraqi sites

“He said there was obviously no terrorism training taking place there - a site he said the US was ready to go to war for.

"If there is a time and a place to go to war I will be there," he said.

"But I am not going to go to war based on a fabrication, especially from politically motivated Iraqi defectors who intend to misuse the tragedy of 11 September by saying somehow those who perpetrated that crime were trained here."

The former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter accompanied the journalists to Salman Pak.

Let us not forget Scott Ritter who produced the now infamous "documentary" favorable to Saddam.

He was funded by $ 400,000 from a Detroit area arab businessman who was the recipient of some of Saddam's OFF siphon money. U.N. Oil For Food

U.S. Army Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks

April 7, 2003, 12:48AM

Marines find site of terror training

U.S. forces earlier had captured Syrians, Egyptians and Sudanese who said they had trained in the Salman Pak camp southeast of Baghdad.

Brig.-Gen. Vincent Brooks said Marines raided the empty complex using information obtained from captured foreign fighters. It "reinforces the likelihood of links between this regime and external terrorist organizations,"

Iraq Survey Group

Iraq Survey Group final report M14, Directorate of Special Operations

Richard O. Spertzel member of the Iraq Survey Group

“HAVE WAR CRITICS EVEN READ THE DUELFER REPORT?”

“It is asserted that Iraq was not supporting terrorists. Really? Documentation indicates that Iraq was training non-Iraqis at Salman Pak in terrorist techniques, including assassination and suicide bombing. In addition to Iraqis, trainees included Palestinians, Yemenis, Saudis, Lebanese, Egyptians and Sudanese.”

CIA Director George Tenet

CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Intelligence Committee: "Iraq has in the past provided training in document-forgery and bomb-making to al Qaeda. It also provided training in poisons and gasses to two al Qaeda associates; one of these [al Qaeda] associates characterized the relationship as successful. . . . This information is based on a solid foundation of intelligence. It comes to us from credible and reliable sources. Much of it is corroborated by multiple sources."

U.S. Department of State website

The Iraqi regime has also long conducted an active program of terrorist training and organization — much of it based around an area known as Salman Pak. Moreover, strong evidence suggests that al Qaeda terrorists escaping from Afghanistan have found refuge inside Iraq.

Question to Vice President Dick Cheney about Salman Pak during an interview with NBC's Meet the Press Tim Russert, December 9, 2001

“And this from James Woolsey, former CIA director: 'We know that at Salman Pak, on the southern edge of Baghdad, five different eyewitnesses -- three Iraqi defectors and two American U.N. inspectors have said, and now there are aerial photographs to show it -- a Boeing 707 that was used for training of hijackers, including non-Iraqi hijackers trained very secretly to take over airplanes with knives.' And we have photographs. As you can see that little white speck -- and there it is, the plane on the ground in Iraq used to train non-Iraqi hijackers. Do you still believe there's no evidence that Iraq was involved in September 11?"

White House website

“Former Iraqi military officers have described a highly secret terrorist training facility in Iraq known as Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations.”

Joseph Shahda Patriotic translator that worked on the Docex project

Docex Project- millions of captured documents that had sat deep within a warehouse. These documents have shed light on links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. They were originally headquartered in Doha, Qatar. Released by John Negroponte for volunteers to translate.

Page 3 Translation from captured Iraqi document ISGZ-2004-031613.pdf

In The Name of God the Most Merciful The Most Compassionate

Directory of General Security

Directory of Security Ninevah Province

No: 10106

Directory of General Security/ Director Section 1

Subject: Information

Date: 24/8/2002

The confident (1253) declared the following:

1.On 21/8/2002 an American delegation who is visiting the Northern Region has paid a visit to the headquarters of the Iraqi communist party in Shaklawa. The representative of the communist party made presentation accusing the Iraqi government of hiding members of Al Qaeda organization in the region of Salman Pak in addition to members of the Turkish Workers party and the Iranian Moujahidee Khlak and that they are trained to use chemical weapons and that Iraq will use them in case there is military strike directed against it.

End of translation.

The confident means the agent source that the Iraqi intelligence is using and his is identified only by his number 1253.

My Video at Youtube

Salman Pak: Saddam's Al Qaeda Connection (more details)

Understanding left-Wing Fecal Spoons and Iraq

The Left has been trying hard for years to interfere with the dissemination of any information that could help the American public understand Saddam's links to Al Qaeda or terrorism. By doing so, it has provided aid to our enemy.

The most notorious example of this was when the NY Times actively acted to destroy the Docex Project.

What is the Docex Project?

The Docex Project consists of millions of captured pre-war documents that had resided deep within a warehouse. These documents have shed light on links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. They were originally headquartered in Doha, Qatar, and were released by John Negroponte for volunteers to translate.

What did The NY Times do?

The newspaper used ideological-driven so-called experts to destroy the program. The focus of their activism was to point out nuclear fears in order to destroy any evidence that could bolster our reasons for being in Iraq.

Please visit the links at the end of this article provided by Joseph Shahda, a translator who worked on the Docex Project. He provided me with two letters to descibe how he felt when the program was terminated.

Let's examine the NY Times article titled,

U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Primer

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5090&en=ba99ceafb0f67900&ex=1320210000

The article mentions three so-called experts. I could only find information on two.

First, expert Peter D. Zimmerman worked for the Clinton Administration at the State Department's  ACDA.

He wrote an article published on Thursday, August 14, 2003, by the Washington Post titled  "The Bush Deceit."

He states,

"How can one conjure up a benign explanation for the president's assertions?

The claim that Niger was selling uranium was based on disputed intelligence, since retracted by the White House and CIA. The National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction carried prominent warnings that knowledgeable agencies and analysts dissented from its conclusions. It is hard to believe that national security adviser Condoleezza Rice or her deputy, Stephen J. Hadley, missed or forgot about the red flags.

If the Bush administration had been wrong only about the Niger purchase, it would have indicated carelessness. But the references to nuclear weapons, taken as a whole, indicate dissatisfaction with the truth of the matter and a disregard for inconvenient facts."

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0814-04.htm

I guess it's easy to say that Peter is a big fan of Valerie Plame and her husband.

The second expert is another lefty named Thomas S. Blanton, a big wig who worked, ironically, for the ACLU on the Freedom of Information Act.

Check out the bio of him appearing on SourceWatch.org, which makes him look like a hit man for the Left.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Thomas_S._Blanton

I find it interesting that many of these members of government were in a position to be chummy with the monolithic press and remain in a position to manipulate and influence policy.

Interesting that Jamie Gorelic, our notorious 9/11 Commissioner, was in the position to create the famous (information wall). She coveniently became immune from her actions leaving America more vulnerable to terrorism. I can't help but wonder if she knew Peter D. Zimmerman at the State Department while she worked at the Justice Dept setting up administrative protocols.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WENDSDAY, JANUARY 15, 1997       



GORELICK TO LEAVE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT



"One of Ms. Gorelick's principal priorities was to help

prepare the Justice Department to be able to respond effectively

to the new challenges of transnational crime and terrorism.  To

do this, she forged new relationships and administrative

protocols with the Departments of State, Treasury and Defense,

and with the intelligence community."

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1997/January97/018dag.htm

The timing of the NY Times story fell, ironically, around the same time Scott Ritter became the favorite source for notable left-wing media giants. Did he have any influence on the NY Times?

Examples:

Rick MacArthur and Scott Ritter On The Lies of Our Times

John R. (Rick) MacArthur, president and publisher of Harper's Magazine

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/01/142200

Scott Ritter played a big role in the documentary "Bill Moyers Journal: Buying the War."

Transcript: Excerpts from Producer Kathleen Hughes' interview with Scott Ritter

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/transcript2.html

Scott Ritter and Seyour Hersh spoke together after working on their book.

Scott Ritter and Seymour Hersh: Iraq Confidential

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051114/ritter

“Al-Khafaji first came to public notice after revelations that he gave former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter $400,000 to produce a film that criticized the United States for its role in the inspection process. Al-Khafaji, who is listed as a “senior executive producer” of the film, arranged meetings for Ritter with high-level officials in Saddam’s government, a feat New York Times magazine writer Barry Bearak found “impressive.” Ritter had previously been an outspoken critic of Saddam Hussein, and issued dire warnings about the status of the Iraqi dictator’s weapons of mass destruction. His sudden flip—he is now a leading apologist for Saddam’s regime—and revelations about Ritter’s 2001 arrest for soliciting sex with minors have fueled speculation about the nature of his relationship with al-Khafaji.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/605fgcob.asp

That's right. The same Scott Ritter mentioned in the Weekly Standard article here:

Look at what Scott Ritter's former boss, Richard Butler,
said about him at the time:

“His turnaround has caused consternation, to say the least, among many of his former colleagues and current critics. “I have no idea what has overtaken him,” his former boss Richard Butler said. On another occasion, Butler said, “I’ll say this about Scott, either he’s misleading the public now, or he misled me then.” Ritter, however, insists he has been saying the same thing all along — people just paid attention to what fit their political agendas.”

http://dir.salon.com/story/people/feature/2002/03/19/ritter/index_np.html

While the Left and NY Times were focused on ignoring evidence, I hear from Lt. Buzz Patterson that Henry Waxman was helping Code Pink bring cash and supplies to terrorists in Faluja.

Waxman alleged to have helped Iraqi insurgents

http://insight-report.com/2007/070724/waxman.html

I also recently learned this from the Captains Quarters, a conservative blog:

HuffPo Calls For Military Coup In USA

The Huffington Post published a plea to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs today to arrest George Bush for "conduct unbecoming" -- essentially, a military coup against the elected government of the United States. Martin Lewis claims that the military can arrest a President while not conducting a coup d'etat by focusing only on his role as Commander in Chief of the military:

General Pace - you have the power to fulfill your responsibility to protect the troops under your command. Indeed you have an obligation to do so.

You can relieve the President of his command.

Not of his Presidency. But of his military role as Commander-In-Chief. ...

In addition to relieving him of his command as Commander-In-Chief, you also have authority to place the President under MILITARY arrest.

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/012106.php

U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

Peter Hoekstra Statement on DOCEX 

“These documents also raise several additional issues of interest. First, it is extraordinary that the New  York Times now acknowledges that the captured documents demonstrate that ‘[Saddam] Hussein’s  scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.’ This only reinforces  the value of these documents in understanding the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s regime. Only 1  percent of the estimated 120 million pages of captured documents have been reviewed, and we must  continue working to promptly understand these materials. If there is concern about Saddam’s nuclear  program, there should be similar concern about potential connections between Saddam and al-Qaeda  suggested in the documents. 

http://fas.org/sgp/news/2006/11/index.html

I would like to complete this informational exercise by adding two letters that Joseph Shahda sent me. He is truly a patriot for translating work on the Docex Project. They describe how he felt when the program was shut down.

Chris

"I wrote the thread below on November 2nd and 3rd as a respond to the New York Times article on Saddam nuclear program that lead to the shut down of the DOCEX project."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1731259/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1731668/posts

Written June 1st, 2007

America, turn your hearing aid back on

I’m getting tired of America’s limited patience with the war in Iraq. There are lots of opinions as to why we need to end the war, but what information are those opinions based on? I hear people state that the majority of Americans wants us out of there. OK, but the majority of Americans can’t even tell you who the Secretary of State is during man-on-the-street interviews.

America’s lack of understanding in Iraq becomes more clear when you examine the media coverage. An example is this exchnge between NBC News Chief White House Correspondent David Gregory and conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham on the Today Show on March 21, 2006:

Gregory: "Laura what's your take on [coverage in Iraq] because obviously the White House has made a determination that speaking about the war candidly as they can is what's important now, and yet it's clear that the President's having a hard time being heard."

Ingraham: "Well here, here's what I think David. I think with all the resources of networks like NBC, The Today show spends all this money to send people to the Olympics, which is great; it was great programming. All this money for Where In The World Is Matt Lauer? Bring the Today show to Iraq. Bring the Today show to Tal Afar. Do the show from the 4th ID at Camp Victory and then when you talk to those soldiers on the ground, when you go out with the Iraqi military, when you talk to the villagers, when you see the children, then I want NBC to report on only the IEDs, only the killings, only, only the reprisals. When people are on the ground whether it's recently, David Ignatius of the Washington Post, whether it's recently..."

Gregory: "Okay but, but Laura let's be, hold on, let's be..."

Ingraham: "Let me finish, David, because you got, you guys are, no, no, let me finish, let me finish..."

Gregory: "Wait a minute Laura! Wait a second! If you want to be fair. First of all the Today show went to Iraq. Matt Lauer was there; he reported there."

Ingraham: "Did he do a show, did you do a show from Iraq?"

Gregory: "Okay and we, and we've got a bureau there so..."

Ingraham: "Yeah. David, David, to do a show from Iraq means to talk to the Iraqi military, to go out with the Iraqi military, to actually have a conversation with the people instead of reporting from hotel balconies about the latest IEDs going off. It is very difficult in Iraq. People are struggling..."

Laura is right. America could be tuning out any good work our troops have performed while mostly absorbing the if-it-bleeds-it-leads stories they have been saturated with from the mainstream media.

I work at a hospital with clients who have hearing impairments and sometimes they neglect to turn their hearing aids on. When they go without their hearing, a pattern seems develop where they miss key components of information. The same can be said about America and Iraq.
 

I often wonder if America is so interested in the results of popular TV shows such as “Dancing with the Stars” or “American Idol” that they depend on the mainstream media to do their thinking on current affairs in Iraq.

My sister-in-law’s brother plays in a band called the Groove Alliance, from New England. They were invited to play in the Green Zone for the troops and Iraqi workers. He told me at a family function that they went over to Iraq not knowing what to expect. They came back with a message: The morale was high and troops were pleading with them to tell people back home not to have their mission cut out from underneath them.

These perceptions have even influenced our government committees formed to investigate the war on terrorism. Can the final reports from the 911 Commission, Senate Select Intelligence Committee and Iraq Study group be trusted when they all have been targets of left-wing activist groups?
 

A column by David Swanson in the Atlantic Free Press titled “New Senate Report Is Worst Betrayal Yet” exemplifies the views of the left that have been bleeding throughout the entire mainstream media across our nation. Swanson said: "The report does not even summarize and give its stamp of approval to the existing and overwhelming body of evidence that the pre-war claims about weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda were known at the time to be false. THAT is the report everyone's waiting to see. And we don't want just a boring report."

The documents that were captured in Iraq titled the Docex Project, along with the documents captured in Afghanistan titled the Harmony Database, tell a very different story than the Democrats and the media. The Harmony Database Web site has a captured Al Qaeda document from Afghanistan that shows without any doubt that Aymen Al Zawahiri, who is Bin Laden’s deputy and the “Al Qaeda Brain,” had visited Iraq and Iran. The document, #:AFGP-2002-601693 located at Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, does not indicate which year those visits took place but it was definitely after 1995, based on the context of the document. This information confirms irrefutably a terrorist relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Other reporting from different sources said that there is an indication that Zawahiri visited Iraq in 1998.

A patriotic volunteer who identifies himself as Jveritas at FreeRepublic.com and who has worked translating the Docex Project documents captured in Iraq has told me: “There is no doubt that the Intelligence Reports by the Senate and in many cases by the Intelligence agencies have been greatly impacted by the anti-war crowd. Those reports are much more political than just about ‘intelligence assessment.’ Look at the style used in this latest report by the Senate Intelligence Committee; did moveon.org or the Democratic underground left-wingers write the text? It is just incredibly biased and full of lies.”

An opinion piece dated Friday, June 18, 2004 from the Wall Street Journal’s OpinionJournal.com, titled “Spinning 9/11,” said: “Yet nearly all of the media coverage has focused on what the 9/11 panel claims it didn't find--namely, smoking-gun proof that al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were working together. The country has traveled a long way psychologically from the trauma of September 11 if we are now focusing on the threats that allegedly don't exist instead of those that certainly do. Or, to be more precise, we're further from 9/11 but very close to an election. The ‘no Saddam link’ story is getting so much play because it fits the broader antiwar, anti-Bush narrative that Iraq was a ‘distraction’ from the broader war on terror. So once again the 9/11 Commission is being used to tarnish the Iraqi effort and damage President Bush's credibility in fighting terror.”

An article dated june 1st 2007 in South Africa’s Sunday Times newspaper, by Ammar Karim and Nafia Abdul Jabbar, titled “Sunnis take on Al-Qaeda” reported: “Many of these Sunni militants are former insurgents once hostile to the U.S. military and Baghdad’s Shiite-led government but, angered by Al-Qaeda’s attacks on civilians and tribal leaders, they have changed sides.” I am seeing a lot of new reports of Iraqis chasing Al Qaeda out of their country.

America, please, it’s time to turn your hearing aids back on.

PBS, NY Times & Scott Ritter promoted false history in Iraq

Have you seen this CNS news report posted at Laurie Mylroie's website?  If you haven't yet its time you should

http://www.lauriemylroie.com/

http://www.cnsnews.com/SpecialReports/archive/200410/SPE20041013a.html

CNSNews Report:
Saddam Had WMD,
Extensive Terror Ties
By Scott Wheeler

"The senior government official and source of the Iraqi intelligence memos, explained that the reason the documents have not been made public before now is that the government has ‘thousands and thousands of documents waiting to be translated"

Quote from the article

“M14 is a reference to Iraqi intelligence directorate of special operations. The Iraqi documents obtained by CNSNews.com show a list of 92 individuals of various national origins who were described in the documents as having “finished the course at M14.”

According to Richard O. Spertzel M14 is in fact "Salman Pak" and who would know better than a member of the Iraq Survey Group?

“HAVE WAR CRITICS EVEN READ THE DUELFER REPORT?”

"It is asserted that Iraq was not supporting terrorists. Really? Documentation indicates that Iraq was training non-Iraqis at Salman Pak in terrorist techniques, including assassination and suicide bombing. In addition to Iraqis, trainees included Palestinians, Yemenis, Saudis, Lebanese, Egyptians and Sudanese."

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/8195

Page 8 of this report a former UNSCOM inspector Jonathan B. Tucker includes Saddams stalling tactics specifically at Salman Pak

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:yiFiR4ECvhEJ:cns.miis.edu/pubs/npr/vol03/33/tucker33.pdf+documents+and+photographs+salman+pak&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=18&gl=us

MONITORING AND VERIFICATION IN A
NONCOOPERATIVE ENVIRONMENT: LESSONS
FROM THE U.N. EXPERIENCE IN IRAQ

by Jonathan B. Tucker

"The systematic destruction of evidence also took place at sites involved in the Iraqi BW program.Two weeks before the first UNSCOM biological inspection team visited the research laboratory at Salman Pak in August 1991, the Iraqis tore down several structures at the site that had survived the Coalition bombing campaign unscathed, including buildings housing fermenters, an aerosol inhalation test chamber, and a small incinerator. The steel aerosol chamber was crushed and deposited at a dump several kilometers away. The Iraqis then bulldozed the site and covered it with fresh dirt to erase any remaining evidence. They also burned reams of documents, leaving melted looseleaf binders and piles of ashes scattered around the site. According to a member of the UNSCOM team that visited Salman Pak: Although the Iraqis were able to produce some original research papers and hand-drawn sketches of the layout of the buildings now reduced to rubble, they were unable to produce any documentary evidence to support their assertions, claiming that everything was destroyed by the bombing. Although none of us wanted to admit it, one thing became painfully clear: the only thing we were going to get from the Iraqis was what they wanted to give us.

24 Impeding Inspections During no-notice inspections of sensitive sites, the Iraqi minders have found excuses ranging from transportation bottlenecks to bad weather to delay the U.N. team’s arrival and buy time to remove incriminating evidence. Since inspections of undeclared sites far from Baghdad require the use of a helicopter to transport the inspection team, the Iraqi authorities insist on 15 hours’ notice to “stand down” their air defenses so that the U.N. helicopters can fly safely. Although inspection teams try to avoid revealing the location of the target site by declaring a large block of airspace for the helicopter to fly through, the Iraqis still derive useful clues from the advance notice, particularly if they are concerned about a particular clandestine facility within the declared zone.

25 On a few occasions, the Iraqis have also threatened to open fire on UNSCOM helicopters if they approach secure areas such as presidential palaces. Once the inspectors arrive on-site, plant managers sometimes refuse to provide requested documents or give answers that are inappropriate to the questions asked. Another common delaying tactic is for Iraqi officials to feign incomprehension and request the services of an interpreter even though they are capable of speaking fluent English in other situations.U.N. inspection teams are generally not allowed to interview more than a few senior engineers and technicians employed at an inspected facility, regardless of the type of site visited. During plant walk-throughs, minders from the National Monitoring Directorate may prevent plant workers from responding to inspector pressure the few individuals who speak some English to work through an interpreter. In addition, the fact that the minders videotape all interviews has a chilling effect on the willingness of plant workers to speak freely. At times, Iraqi stalling tactics have