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.