When we left off, Davis had just explained that some "defectors" from the Iraqi Army were living in Oklahoma City, and that when they heard of the Oklahoma City bombing, they "cheered deliriously, exuberantly pledging their allegiance to the now deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, vowing they would 'die for Saddam.'"
We then recapped how President Clinton had stated in the immediate aftermath of the bombing, "God, I hope there's no Middle Eastern connection to this."
We now continue with the Davis interview:
Nearly two dozen Oklahomans have signed sworn affidavits in which they accuse these ardent Saddam supporters and ex-enemy combatants of aiding and abetting McVeigh and Nichols.
The most incriminating testimony centered around one man – Hussain Hashem Al-Hussaini. Al-Hussaini not only fit the FBI's physical description in the official arrest warrant for John Doe 2, but according to veteran law enforcement officials, was a dead ringer for the government's profile sketch of the elusive suspect.
Witnesses identified this Iraqi immigrant socializing with McVeigh at an Oklahoma City nightclub prior to the bombing. An Oklahoma City gas station attendant also fingered Al-Hussaini as the customer who paid one hundred dollars cash to fill up a large Ryder truck with diesel fuel (key chemical component used in Ryder truck bomb) on eve of the bombing - April 18, 1995. The next morning, a maintenance working at the motel located adjacent to the service station observed what was very likely the same Ryder truck emanating an odorous stench of diesel, yet according to the witness, the gas cap bore a warning sticker which read: "Unleaded Fuel Only."
Two witnesses named the Iraqi soldier as the dark-haired, olive-skinned male they observed timing his run at a breathless pace from the Murrah Building one block east shortly before daybreak on April 19. Moreover, several Oklahoma City residents claimed to have seen Al-Hussaini climbing into the cab of a Ryder truck that reeked of diesel fuel at a local motel an hour before the explosion. The witnesses indicated that Timothy McVeigh was seated behind the wheel of that moving van as it pulled off the lot and headed toward downtown.
Furthermore, the Iraqi soldier was positively identified sitting in the passenger seat of the Ryder truck next to McVeigh a few blocks north of the Murrah Building at 8:30 a.m., stepping out of that truck at ground zero directly in front of the ill-fated federal complex moments before the massive fertilizer/fuel oil bomb detonated, and speeding away from downtown in the driver's seat of a brown Chevrolet pickup targeted by the FBI in an official teletype for foreign suspects.
Five witnesses independently fingered Al-Hussaini and several of his Middle Eastern associates as frequent visitors at an Oklahoma City motel in the months, weeks, days, and hours leading up to 9:02 a.m. on April 19. On numerous occasions the Arab subjects were seen in the company of Timothy McVeigh, and during a few rare instances, associating with Terry Nichols. More significantly, detailed interviews with key witnesses proved conclusively that the man whom witnesses named as the nefarious "third terrorist" had no provable alibi for the critical hours of April 19.
Colonel Patrick Lang, a Middle East expert who formerly served as the chief of human intelligence for the Defense Intelligence Agency, determined that the Iraqi soldier’s military tattoo and immigration file indicated that he was likely a trusted member of Saddam Hussein's Republican Guard before being recruited into the elite Unit 999 of the Estikhabarat, more commonly known as the Iraqi Military Intelligence Service. Before the 2003 Iraq War, Unit 999 was headquartered in Salman Pak, southeast of Baghdad, and was tasked with clandestine operations at home and overseas. Several defense and intelligence analysts, with whom I consulted, concurred with Colonel Lang's conclusions.
Basically, it sounds like these guys were sent out on a Trojan Horse-type operation.
How, though, do we reconcile this with President Clinton's comment ("God, I hope there's no Middle Eastern connection to this.")?
Why would President Clinton have said something like that?
And then, the federal investigation narrows its focus on McVeigh and Nichols, with no foreign involvement.
Why was this information, easily obtainable by the FBI, not used to indict these Iraqi "defectors"?
Indeed, if the FBI had done a marginally competent investigation, they already had this information, n'est-ce pas?
But, why would we want to cover up Saddam Hussein's involvement in a terrorist act?
Okay, so President Clinton wanted to protect Hussein (why is anybody's guess), but why would President Bush, spoiling for war with Iraq, have continued the cover-up? Why could Bush not simply have re-opened the case, prosecuted these Iraqi defectors, then used that as ample justification for war to topple Hussein's regime?
Perhaps this didn't stop with Iraq.
From Cracking the Case: An Interview With Sibel Edmonds by Scott Horton, August 22, 2005:
SE: [snip] The most important issue is: What were these criminal activities, and why instead of pursuing these our government chooses to cover it up and actually issue classification and gag orders so the American public will not know about what is going on within these agencies within their government -- and even within the Congress? [snip] I'm saying, "I came forward because criminal activities are taking place -- have been taking place -- some of them since 1997." Some of these activities are 100 percent related to the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States, and they are giving this illusion that they are pursuing these cases, but they are not. If the case touches upon certain countries or certain high level people, certain sensitive relations, then they don't. But, on the other hand, they go and talk about lower-level criminal activity that boils down to people like Atta and Hamdi.
Sibel Edmonds is aware of information showing that these connections go back to 1997.
Do you suppose such corruption might go back a little farther -- say, to the time of the Oklahoma City bombing, and perhaps before?
From 'The Stakes Are Too High for Us to Stop Fighting Now' An interview with FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds by Christopher Deliso August 15, 2005:
CD: So you're saying that the whole process of sorting through the intelligence you received, executing investigations, and getting information where it needed to go was prevented by the State Department?
SE: Several times, yes.
CD: And again, because of the "sensitive foreign relations" excuse?
SE: Well, yes, obviously all of these high-level criminal operations involve working with foreign people, foreign countries, the outside world -- and to a certain extent these relations do depend on the continuation of criminal activities.
Do you suppose we couldn't get these Iraqi "defectors" indicted for the same reason we can't get straight answers about 9/11?
From 'The Stakes Are Too High for Us to Stop Fighting Now' An interview with FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds by Christopher Deliso August 15, 2005:
SE: The fact that there are no investigations -- I will give you an analogy, okay? Say if we decided to have a "war on drugs," but said in the beginning, "right, we're only going to go after the young black guys on the street level." Hey, we already have tens of thousands of them in our jails anyway, why not a few more? But we decided never to go after the middle levels, let alone the top levels...
It's like this with the so-called war on terror. We go for the Attas and Hamdis -- but never touch the guys on the top.
CD: You think they [the government] know who they are, the top guys, and where?
SE: Oh yeah, they know.
CD: So why don't they get them?
SE: It's like I told you before -- this would upset "certain foreign relations." But it would also expose certain of our elected officials, who have significant connections with high-level drugs- and weapons-smuggling -- and thus with the criminal underground, even with the terrorists themselves.
From An Interview with Sibel Edmonds, Page Three by Chris Deliso, July 1, 2004:
CD: What are they so afraid of?
SE: They're afraid of information, of the truth coming out, and accountability -- the whole accountability issue that will arise. But it's not as complicated as it might seem. If they were to allow the whole picture to emerge, it would just boil down to a whole lot of money and illegal activities.
CD: Hmm, well I know you can't name names, but can you tell me if any specific officials will suffer if your testimony comes out?
SE: Yes. Certain elected officials will stand trial and go to prison.
Perhaps Presidents Clinton and Bush among them?
Stay tuned to Stop Islamic Conquest as Out of Context continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment