Tuesday, February 21

So There WERE WMD in Iraq After All!

Speech ceases to be free when it becomes a lie. The American media has lied to us again.

What we have learned from the Ukrainians:

In December 2002, former Russian intelligence chief Yevgeni Primakov, a KGB general with long-standing ties to Saddam, came to Iraq and stayed until just before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

Primakov supervised the execution of long-standing secret agreements, signed between Iraqi intelligence and the Russian GRU (military intelligence), that provided for clean-up operations to be conducted by Russian and Iraqi military personnel to remove WMDs, production materials and technical documentation from Iraq, so the regime could announce that Iraq was "WMD free."

Shaw said that this type GRU operation, known as "Sarandar," or "emergency exit," has long been familiar to U.S. intelligence officials from Soviet-bloc defectors as standard GRU practice.

In addition to the truck convoys, which carried Iraqi WMD to Syria and Lebanon in February and March 2003 two Russian ships set sail from the port of Umm Qasr headed for the Indian Ocean, where they hid additional stockpiles of Iraqi WMD from flooded bunkers in southern Iraq that were later discovered by U.S. military intelligence personnel.

The Russian clean-up operation was entrusted to a combination of GRU and Spetsnaz troops and Russian military and civilian personnel in Iraq under the command of two experienced ex-Soviet generals, Colonel-General Vladislav Achatov and Colonel-General Igor Maltsev, both retired and posing as civilian commercial consultants.

And the American media knew all this!Deputy Undersecretary of Defense John A. Shaw told an audience Saturday at a privately sponsored Intelligence Summit in Alexandria, Va. (www.intelligencesummit.org),"They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units out of uniform, that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence."

Furthermore, Shaw says he leaked the information about the two Russian generals and the clean-up operation to Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz (who reported on Oct. 30, 2004, that Achatov and Maltsev had been photographed receiving medals from Iraqi Defense Minister Sultan Hashim Ahmed in a Baghdad building bombed by U.S. cruise missiles during the first U.S. air raids in early March 2003) in October 2004 in an effort to "push back" against claims by Democrats that were orchestrated with CBS News to embarrass President Bush just one week before the November 2004 presidential election.

At that time the press reported bogus claims that 377 tons of high explosives of use to Iraq's nuclear weapons program had vanished after the U.S.-led liberation of Iraq, while ignoring intelligence of the Russian-orchestrated evacuation of Iraqi WMDs.

There's more to all this, of course, but the upshot of it all is the hatred of the American media for the current administration. We just can't believe what we read in the press!

The latest brouhaha about the administration "selling" the security of American ports to the Arabs is a classic example of misinformation. The truth is that an Arabian company is trying to buy a British company that owns a single terminal in each of six American ports -- terminals used by cruise ships. The way it's reported in the press, you'd think the Bush administration was selling the ports to the Arabs. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Somehow, someway we MUST make the American media responsible for their reporting. Speech ceases to be free when it becomes a lie.


J. Kellam said...

Your argument is thought provoking, however, I disagree with your assumption that just because we now know Saddam Hussein had WMD means that they were intended for the U.S. I understand the idea of a nuclear attack is terrifying, which is exactly why the Bush administration used it as a basis for this war. No person in their right mind is going to say, “No, don’t go to war. Let Iraq nuke us”. However, just because Iraq had WMD did not make them an immediate threat. When you think of all the countries that have nuclear weapons, or some form of biological warfare, including America, does it really make sense to go to war on just that basis? Would we feel North Korea was justified if they invaded America because we have WMD, and they felt we were a threat to them? No! So, why is America, in all its glory and wisdom, doing this to Iraq?

Now, according to one of Saddam's generals, the WMD they had were not even intended for the U.S. They had been planning to use them against Israel. If this is true, then America should not be at war today. America should be, at the most, part of a coalition force supporting Israel's war with Iraq, if they decided to engage in one.

If we are to be completely honest, though, we must admit that this war was never about WMD. It has always been about money. Let’s say your father is an invested member of a private-equity firm. This firm is known as the Carlyle Group, and they own a company called United Defense. Now, United Defense is a defense contractor, which means that they would make millions of dollars off of this war. Well, as it turns out, this is not a hypothetical situation and Bush Jr., our President, will one day inherit the money his father George Bush Sr. is earning through his relationship with the Carlyle Group.

I am sorry, but I cannot support a war I know in my heart to be wrong, nor the President who advocates it.

Sunnye T said...

Rather than postulate over the imaginings of the ignorant, let's say my son-in-law is a retired Army Colonel who is serving in Bagdad as we speak, helping to train Iraqi soldiers and police. (Truth always serves an argument better than story-telling.) Staying with the truth, let's say that the Col. (who has not been recalled to duty)is putting his life on the line because he knows what is happening there and he believes (as most thinking people do) that establishing a democratic-style government in the Middle East is crucial to the defense of the United States.

History shows us that free people, living under democratic-style governments do not war against each other. History has also shown us that certain Muslim fanatics are intend on destroying America and will continue their efforts until they are destroyed. The best way to destroy them is to help the non-fanatic Muslims live in freedom.

That's what the war in Iraq is about.

So what do you and your ilk want? You want to pull out and leave the Iraquis to the fanatics. You want to do to them what we did so South Vietnam -- leave them to the killing fields of extremism. South Vietnam is not a free country today; Iraq will never be free unless it happens now.

pie said...

where exactly did you get this from?

pie said...

do you realize that iran is a republic (a theocratic republic that is, which i fear we're becoming)?

Anonymous said...

The seeds of the Private equity firms were planted in 1946 when the American Research and Development Corporation (ARD) decided to encourage private sector institutions to help provide funding for soldiers