[lit-ideas] Tipping Point of Truth
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 09:53:44 -0800
As the evidence from the Saddam tapes and corroborating witnesses such as
General Sada mount, many of us are asking the question, when will the Major
Media acknowledge this new evidence? I've also wondered why the
administration hasn't acknowledged this evidence supporting their earlier
beliefs. I had begun to wonder whether the Republicans were waiting until
some crucial point prior to the 2006 elections to hammer the democrats with
this stuff, but Cucullu has a different idea.
Lawrence
The Tipping Point of Truth
By <http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/authors.asp?ID=2535> Lt. Col.
Gordon Cucullu
<http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=21792>
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 27, 2006
Despite the terrible attacks of September 11, 2001 leftists here and in
Europe almost immediately turned on America as a villain and opposed
subsequent military responses to Islamofascist terrorism. They used guilt
("why do they hate us?"), foreign policy ("support for the occupiers of
Palestine"), and anti-capitalism ("no blood for oil") to excuse the
terrorists and validate their motivation. Perversely, these same people
ginned up a new blame-George W. Bush campaign building on their
irreconcilable hatred from a close, hotly-contested 2000 election that they
refuse to concede to this day. Themes of "Bush lied" along with "no WMD" and
"no al Qaeda-Iraq" ties were useful in undermining the war effort and
smearing the president and his administration.
Many editorialists, columnists, and talking heads in the media, backed by
like-minded management and production staff, picked up these themes and ran
with them. Consequently even people who know better seem willing to concede
the left's foreign policy talking points. But how much longer will this
travesty persist in the face of overwhelming counter-evidence?
Reams of documents - ultimately numbering in the millions of pages by the
time CDs, hard drives, and computer memories are downloaded and printed -
are slowly beginning to be translated and released for analysis. These
documents - though only 2% or so are translated and available - substantiate
without doubt the following allegations: Saddam Hussein and bin Laden, the
Baathist regime and al Qaeda had extensive, wide reaching ties. Saddam was,
at a minimum, a supporter of the 911 attacks if not a sponsor of them.
Saddam's intelligence services trained more than 8,000 al Qaeda terrorists,
primarily from Somalia and Sudan, at camps such as Salman Pak and Ansar
al-Islam within Iraq. And Saddam helped finance al Qaeda and similar
terrorist groups.
Further, the documents substantiate a broad, on-going program Iraq had to
develop nuclear weapons. Indeed, Saddam had instructed his minions to begin
preparing to re-energize the program after UN sanctions were lifted, a hope
he had reinforced by French, Russian, and German diplomats, and traitors
like British Parliamentarian George Galloway, all of whom convinced him that
delay and obfuscation of the UN would get him off the hook.
We also know, thanks to the work of former Iraqi Air Force General Georges
Sada, that Saddam had several civilian aircraft - one Boeing 747 and a
"group" of 727s - stripped of passenger equipment and converted into cargo
planes. The aircraft flew 56 sorties between Iraq and Syria, delivering
drums of the chemical weapon Sarin along with other chemical and biological
weapons. The deal with concocted on Saddam's orders by "Chemical Ali" his
general in charge of special weapons, and Bashar Assad's cousin, General Abu
Ali. It was a rare occasion for cooperation between the rival Baathist
states, but as Sada notes, "there was complete agreement between them."
In addition to the air sorties an uncounted amount of WMD were transported
to Syria by commercial trucks - familiar 18-wheelers - and other civilian
vehicles, including ambulances. "Saddam was convinced," according to Sada,
"that commercial trucks could pass right through security checkpoints.and
they did." American CIA overhead assets - spy satellites - were on the
lookout for military trucks and ignored "routine" commercial traffic.
General Sada is not a lone voice in this matter. The Mossad, Israeli
intelligence service, has long claimed that the weapons were transferred out
of Iraq. American generals Paul Vallely and Thomas McInnerny noted in their
2004 book, Endgame, that extensive stockpiles of WMD were hidden in three
locations within Syria and in the Syrian-controlled terrorist camps of the
Bekka Valley in Lebanon. Included in the stocks were nerve agents like
Tabun, Sarin 1, and Sarin 2. They did not remain hidden for long.
Up to 20 tons of these chemical agents were intended for use by al Qaeda
terrorists in attacking three targets in Amman, Jordan in 2004 - the
Jordanian Ministry of Defense and Intelligence Service buildings, and the
American Embassy. These were to be simultaneous truck bomb attacks that were
thwarted by good counter-intelligence work. The trucks were large 15-ton
capacity powerful vehicles that could power through barriers and obstacles
to crash into the buildings. At that time the homicide drivers would
detonate the ammonium nitrate load triggered by plastic explosives -
probably C-4. Resting atop the explosive load were Saddam's chemicals,
sufficient to kill upwards to 100,000 people in downtown Amman, by
conservative.
Supporting these allegations are details from post-war weapons inspectors
Kay and Duelfer Reports that speak extensively to plans for continuing
special weapons programs that they uncovered along with scientists who
testified that they were told to memorize their research and destroy
documents with the intention of reconstituting their nuclear programs "after
the crisis passed." Shockingly, the mainstream media has intentionally
overlooked these data, preferring to advance its own agenda.
What is stunning is that intelligence officials in the Bush Administration
has been so circumspect about releasing this information and that the
president and his Cabinet members seem reluctant to discuss it publicly.
After all, don't these revelations fully vindicate the decision to liberate
Iraq? One plausible reason for such counterintuitive behavior is that the
entrenched bureaucratic intelligence agencies, particularly in CIA and State
Department, so staked their reputations on their flawed analysis of both the
WMD issue and the Iraq-al Qaeda ties (the "secular" Baathists would never
work with the religious fanatics) that they refuse to admit error.
Another serious consideration is that mid- and high-level professionals in
both organizations are highly partisan. Most lean strongly leftward. They
openly oppose the president (walk through the State corridors and look at
the anti-Bush cartoons, many quite virulent, pinned on office doors) and
consciously disregard policy directives in favor of business as usual - they
way they want to conduct it. This aberrant behavior has been characteristic
of both organizations for decades and persists.
This combination of recalcitrance and embarrassment stifles administration
counteroffensives to the mass denial that characterizes reporting from Iraq.
Unable to get "clearance" at the staff levels, high level officials are
reluctant to trumpet these revelations knowing full well that calculated
"leaks" by career anti-Bush bureaucrats to friendly media will torpedo their
efforts. Thus it has been left to the alternative media to assume expose the
truth and the motivations of those so willing to suppress it for career or
political reasons.
Talented individuals like author/analyst Laura Mansfield and former UNSCOM
weapons inspector Bill Tierney have taken on the task to translate and
release some of the avalanche of captured Iraqi documents grudgingly let go
by the Director of National Intelligence, and under pressure from Congress.
These brave citizens are being fought every step of the way. Next watch for
personal attack and slander, the last resort tools the left employs when it
want to avoid fact.
When will honest journalists in the print and TV media - there must be some
out there -bow under the weight of this mounting evidence and concede their
errors? We have passed the tipping point in the weight of evidence that
vindicates the allegations of al Qaeda ties, WMD, and hostile intentions.
Continued denial of the truth is unacceptable.
Other related posts:
