more emails from a peace activist

[wrbones]

Remember Karen? She interceded for her friend.....her 'boss' in their local organization.


---- Original Message -----
From: "Karen Pease"
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 11:09 PM
Subject: To a military guy...


Hello WR (I never learned your name; if you wouldn't mind, it would be best
if I could refer to you by it :) ). My name is Karen Pease; I'm a friend
of Yelena (she runs Iowans For Peace With Iraq). I had written to you
previously (through her).

First off, you should try not to be too hard on her. She's felt
uncomfortable talking to you, because she feels you'll think she has no
right
to talk to you because she wasn't born in the US. But it's not her fault.
People like her family were part of the reason why we became enemies with
the
Soviet Union under Stalin in the first place (concerning human rights), in
that her family before her was one of the millions shipped off to the Gulag
in Siberia by Stalin. She doesn't like to talk about it. She grew up in
Siberia, and eventually managed to come to the US. Please don't think any
less of her just because of her place of origin.

You had forwarded to her a posting from Sgt. Grit's forum. I tracked down
the URL, and did an investigation. It's an Urban Legend. There are a
number
of things that should have clued you in; that it was a "friend of a friend
who shall remain nameless" story; that the airline supposedly did nothing to
a loud, angry, drunken, boisterous, disruptive couple during an entire
flight
from Philadelphia to Des Moines. That in both cases, the exact same kinds
of
slurs were used. And many other things. Regardless, the story is a myth;
you can call camp Pendleton yourself - here's their main switchboard:
(760)-725-5617.

Just so you know, if you buy into a legend and find out that it's not true,
etiquite requires that you let everyone who you forward it to know that it
isn't true; otherwise it continues to spread.

We deal with defamation like this all of the type. We're not upset; it
happens, and we takes it. We're used to being considered unpatriotic, and
thus, taking the blame for such things. Part of this reputation is our
fault, or at least, our predecessor's fault. During the Vietnam war, a
number of people took out their anger about what was going on on the troops.
It was a source of shame to many in the movement afterwards (and even
during)
- the people who did that - because it made us all look bad, and in the
future as well. We all know that the troops have no choice over there as to
where they went and what they had to do. I have a friend who's son was a
pacifist and was sent over. He refused to load his gun; he was killed
without firing a single shot.

I have never met a *single* person this time around who blames the troops
(many do blame Bush soley, though). Are such troop-blamers out there? Of
course; there are 280 million people in this country who can and do speak
their mind. And of course the cameras seek out those people for photos.
But, I'll say it again: out of all of the thousands of antiwar Americans
I've
talked to, not a single one has placed an ounce of blame on the troops.

At our rallies, I see it every time. "Patriots For Peace". "Support Our
Troops: Bring Them Home!". "Keep Our Troops Out Of Harm's Way". "Peace Is
Patrotic". I myself sometimes even wear a red white and blue shirt to
protests just to show that I love my country. It is because I love my
country that I don't want it doing things that make the world hate it.
Because I love my country, I want it to follow international law. Because I
love my country, I don't want it bombing civilian infrastructure and making
a
new generation of terrorists. Because I love my country, I oppose the war.

I hope you understand. Thank you for putting your life on the line for us;
I
deeply respect your bravery, as I do all of the peace activists who are
veterans that I know (of which there are many). I pray you won't put it on
the line in vain, nor will any of the several hundred thousand staged in the
middle east ten thousand miles from home. Sacrifice is truly noble, but
sacrifice for nothing is a wasted life.

- Karen Pease
Iowans For Peace
daystar_setting@myself.com



Karen,

I appreciate your contacting me concerning the ' urban legend'. I will
forward your warning to others concerning this.Camp Pendleton's official
point of view concerning such incidents will never see the light of day,
i.e. publicity. If ,indeed, such an incident has occured, they will be
performing their own internal investigation.Once, again, any results of such
an investigation may or may not be publicly revealed by them. The other
incidents that I forwarded are true and at least one has been reported as a
news item on national tv and cable in addition to local media reports.The
Bangor, Maine news media report efforts by those who are teachers who
espouse peace who have been verbally abusing their students, the children of
United States military service members. It is a statewide phenomena there,
currently under invstigation by the media, the school system, the US
military and the law in that state. Many of the peace organisations I've
researched have active memberships and even 'clubs' that are based in the
public school system across the United States. In Chicago, there have been
reports in the media concerning physical attacks of military family members
who have done nothing other than wear a shirt or carry a coffee cup with a
military logo on it. These attacks have been by those who proclaim peace.

I have little problem with who came from where or endured what. People are
people.We each reveal our own character to be seen by others as we interact
socially or privately. Defamation is not a factor when friends of MINE were
attacked by the peace protesters at 8th and I in D.C. on the 28th of
January. That is a fact attested to by men of honor with whom I will trust
my life at any time in any place. A number of news articles reported by the
national media have addressed the increasing violence in recent weeks by
many who espouse peace. The financing of many of these peace protests have
been called into question as well.....in national media oulets. There is
some question as to why many labor unions have spent funds on peace protests
without the union members knowledge or consent. In additon, much of the
money required for such activities has come from organisations that have
questionable goals for the United States. Some news media outlets have
described those organisations as being of neo-communist in origin. My own
investigations have also identified them as such. Others are actively
attempting, in public, to encourage the men and women of the armed forces of
the United States to desert their posts. Peace protesters don't have much
concern for the nation or for those who defend it.

Many people are sincere in their beliefs. My interaction with many peace
activists to this point has proven to me that most have no idea of any facts
in relation to Iraq or terrorism. Others have been antagonistic and even
threatening, including members of the organisation to which you belong. This
is not defamation. It is fact. Men I knew died in Beruit, Lebanon. On a
peace mission. Under UN authority. Their deaths meant nothing. Others that I
knew and have friends who knew them have since died...on peace
missions...under UN authority. Other men of honor have died at US embassies
in a number of places around the globe....legally on US soil. Legally under
the protection of the nations to which they were posted. All of these
attacks were by terrorists...funded by men like Saddam Hussein. While other
nations have agreed to bring terroists to justice, Iraq has not and
continues to fund and promote and offer training for those who use
terrorisim.

My time of active service was over some time ago. I do not wish you to be
misled in that. I had thought I signed my last note with the years of my
service.

There is much in addition that I could say, to include dates and times and
references concerning many things that have been espoused by those who
advocate peace with Iraq, but I am afraid that I would un-necessarily bore
you and others with whom you fellowship.

Defamation is an attack that used to destory others without the use of
factual evidence. A lie. I offer you the truth.The actions of those whom you
claim to be in unity with through your organisation and the organisations of
others. Actions reported in the national news media and by the men and women
of the armed forces of the United States.

Actions speak louder than words. I've served my country. How have you served
yours?


s.
Warren Bonesteel
Sgt USMC 1976-1983



The URL to Sgt Grit's forum that she was speaking of.

http://www.grunt.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1187

[wrbones]

read that one^ bottom to top. Sorry.

[wrbones]

> The other
> incidents that I forwarded are true and at least one has been reported as a
> news item on national tv and cable in addition to local media reports.The
> Bangor, Maine news media report efforts by those who are teachers who
> espouse peace who have been verbally abusing their students, the children of
> United States military service members.

http://boston.com/dailynews/062/region/National_guard_downplays_teach:.shtml

"AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) The flap over teachers in Maine schools making inappropriate remarks
to children with military parents has been blown out of proportion, the head of the Maine
Army National Guard said."

The article goes into a lot of detail about the situation, quoting military sources.

Meanwhile, just today I witnessed - personally, right here - someone in the peace
community first get screamed at for five minutes - very vile words, then physically
shoved to the ground. The person didn't say a word. This isn't an urban legend, this
just happened in front of me. If you want, there's film of it, it was during a reading
of Lysistrata (an antiwar play; the play waited for him to leave). When the person left,
he turned to the other people in the room, and all he said was "Violence sucks..."

I've seen this all the time. And not once have I seen anything in the other direction.
As I said - does it exist? Probably, somewhere. But the proportion is so unbelievably
skewered in the opposite direction, and as someone who's been in the crowds - both on the
outnumbered and outnumbering side - I've seen a lot.

> In Chicago, there have been
> reports in the media concerning physical attacks of military family members
> who have done nothing other than wear a shirt or carry a coffee cup with a
> military logo on it. These attacks have been by those who proclaim peace.

News article or more details, please? I'm unable to locate such an incident via a
Nexis-Lexis search.

> I have little problem with who came from where or endured what. People are
> people.We each reveal our own character to be seen by others as we interact
> socially or privately. Defamation is not a factor when friends of MINE were
> attacked by the peace protesters at 8th and I in D.C. on the 28th of
> January. That is a fact attested to by men of honor with whom I will trust
> my life at any time in any place. A number of news articles reported by the
> national media have addressed the increasing violence in recent weeks by
> many who espouse peace.

Articles about an increase in violence, please?
In the last New York rally, which had (Police estimate: ~100,000; organizer estimate:
400,000) people, there were only 295 arrests, most of which were so minor that the
participants were only given a ticket that they didn't even have to show up in court for.
In a rally of that magnitude, this is almost an unheard of low level of arrests, despite
a gigantic police presence. To quote police commissioner Kelly, "I think it went well.
For the number of people here, it was orderly. The vast majority of people were
cooperative.". (would you like articles?)

I'll have to take your word about your friends, although I would expect that there is an
article or at least a description of the attack? What DC protest was there on the 28th?
I'm not a DC resident, but generally at *least* one local group has such a protest on
their website.

> The financing of many of these peace protests have
> been called into question as well.....in national media oulets. There is
> some question as to why many labor unions have spent funds on peace protests
> without the union members knowledge or consent.

The local service labor federation and IFP coordinate rallies and speaking events
together (there's a huge degree of overlap between our interests; labor has been very
dissatisfied with the current administration's economic policies, they like us oppose US
sponsorship of labor-repressing South American regimes and militias, etc). I can only
speak from local experience, but in our experience, we've only been criticised for not
taking money enough (we have no bank account, and only raise what we need for each
event).

Around the world, organized labor has been a major sponsor of the peace movement. In
Britain, a rail union supported members who refused to transport British goods to Iraq,
and refused to force them to work. In Italy, one of their unions gave train schedules to
protesters so they could interrupt train shipments.

I can't speak for all groups, of course. Perhaps you can provide an article? I would
love to see evidence that this is some endemic problem. As coordinator of a peace
coalition for eastern iowa, and a member of the state planning committee (IFP-State),
I've not heard a single allegation of problems.

> In additon, much of the
> money required for such activities has come from organisations that have
> questionable goals for the United States.

You're mostly just referencing ANSWER. This is a valid criticism, because most of the
peace community don't like ANSWER either. However, the *money* hasn't come from ANSWER;
the organization of the rallies has come from ANSWER. Here in Iowa, virtually all of our
money comes from "passing the hat" sort of situations. We have donation jars at lectures
for various causes, sell tickets to fundraising events, and the like. It's about as
"grassroots" as grassroots can get.

> Others are actively
> attempting, in public, to encourage the men and women of the armed forces of
> the United States to desert their posts. Peace protesters don't have much
> concern for the nation or for those who defend it.

The US is attempting to get Iraqis to desert their posts. Should that be condemned? Of
course not. The only issue here is the justice of a cause. Have you heard the term
"under a black flag" (I know the Israeli army uses that term; I'm not sure if the
American military does, I'd have to ask some friends)? Treaties signed by the US bear
the weight of law in the US. The United Nations charter is one such treaty that the US
has signed. The UN charter itself - not just UN resolutions, but the very charter -
expressly prohibits a preemptive attack without express UN support. Taking part in an
attack on Iraq without UN support is not only, thus, a violation of international law,
but US law as well. To make it legal in the US, the US would have to repeal the signing
of the UN charter.

> Many people are sincere in their beliefs. My interaction with many peace
> activists to this point has proven to me that most have no idea of any facts
> in relation to Iraq or terrorism.

Do you wish to discuss the issue? I write a weekly news review, spend a minimum of 10
hours per week reading various respected newspapers worldwide, have read through a good
portion the UNSCOM/IAEA documents pertaining to Iraq, and much more. I've written
dossiers on the subject. Please, by all means, tell me why you support a war on Iraq.

> Others have been antagonistic and even
> threatening, including members of the organisation to which you belong.

Please - name one and I'll reproach them for it.

> Men I knew died in Beruit, Lebanon. On a
> peace mission. Under UN authority. Their deaths meant nothing.

Their deaths meant nothing?

I'll disagree. Of course, how much detail do you know about the involvement of US troops
in Lebanon? We never should have gone over there if we didn't plan to remain impartial
in our involvement. At least we started out that way... :P

> Others that I
> knew and have friends who knew them have since died...on peace
> missions...under UN authority. Other men of honor have died at US embassies
> in a number of places around the globe....legally on US soil. Legally under
> the protection of the nations to which they were posted. All of these
> attacks were by terrorists...funded by men like Saddam Hussein.

The only place you gave a specific on was Lebanon. These groups were not funded by Iraq;
they were Shiites with close ties to Iran - Iraq's mortal enemy at the time. And,
contrary to popular misconception, they were not "Hizbullah". Hizbullah didn't exist at
the time, it came together shortly after the conflict. At the time, there were a number
of splinter cells that called themselves various things; a few called themselves
"Hizbullah" (btw, please pardon my transliteration of Arabic words; unfortunately, there
is no good standard like there is with languages like Japanese).

As an aside, on everything I mention, I'll gladly provide references - often from US
government sources. We publish a surprising bit of declassified information (thank you,
Freedom Of Information Act!!!)

> While other
> nations have agreed to bring terroists to justice, Iraq has not and
> continues to fund and promote and offer training for those who use
> terrorisim.

Such as....?

Iraq has targetted hundreds of groups. Like the US, they target groups that oppose their
interests, and ignore those who support it. For example, the US has routinely ignored
the atrocities committed by the forces of men like Dostum, Sayyef, Qadir, etc. Please,
explain to me how sealing prisoners inside metal shipping containers in the sun so that
they'll bake alive is not terror.

( Continued )

[wrbones]

If you're going to mention the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, please be prepared for a
lengthy discussion on the issue, BTW.

The vast majority of the independent groups Iraq offered aid to were during the Iran-Iraq
war, groups such as the Iranian rebel group Mujahedin-E-Khalq (MEK). While indeed
brutal, MEK was attacking Iran, our enemy, and so of course there wasn't the slightest
condemnation.

> Actions speak louder than words. I've served my country. How have you served
> yours?

I give of virtually all of my free time (time not spent doing work that props up the US
economy), and often get very little sleep, to help promote peace. Whether you think that
is a worthwhile cause, I see it as the absolute best thing I could ever do for my
country. I don't want Americans to be hated. I don't want America to be seen as the
"enemy". And above all, I don't want to see America do things that we must be ashamed to
talk about... and far too many of those things have happened already. I love my country,
and want to see it prosper, and to have others love it as well. I want the American
Dream to be truth, not a mythical ideal.

There are ways to help your country other than by shooting people. I do appreciate the
nobility of offering up the risk of your life. But there are many other ways.

Thank you for writing, though - I really appreciate the response.

- Karen Pease
Coordinator, Iowans For Peace

P.S. - It goes without saying that there are likewise many completely uneducated
people concerning a war with Iraq (a recent Gallup poll found that just over 20% of
Americans knew that none of the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqis. The biggest tragedy -
atrocity! - in American history, and just over a fifth know this basic fact??? Over 40%
thought that they knew the answer - that there were some. Thus, twice as many people
were wrong as right, the rest saying that they were "unsure"). No wonder it's so easy
for Bush to rally up anti-Iraq support, with so many people uneducated on the basic
facts). As you undoubtably know, 15 of the hijackers were Saudis (an enemy of Iraq), the
ringleader was Egyptian, etc.

However, I would be the last person to deny equally that uneducated members exist in the
peace community. I cringe every time I see a "No Blood For Oil" sign. Wars are fought
for many reasons, and all too often, for little reason at all. They are never simplistic
concepts. Almost no American who supports the war would say they do so for oil. There
are many reasons to oppose the war (for example, the World Health organization is
predicting 500,000 severe injuries, over 3 million people needing therapeutic feeding, 1
million refugees, 2 million IDPs, disease breakouts in epidemic if not pandemic
proportions... (the list goes on)). The war being "Blood For Oil" is not one of them.

--

[marinemom]

To Ms. Karen Pease - a quote from George Orwell, who was known to be anti-war - "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf".

Your answer was superb Bones - but one can only hear the truth when one ready to accept the truth.

[wrbones]

Thanks, Mom. You may have noticed that I kinda like tiltin' at windmills.

Anybody wanna ride a donkey?


I'm 6'6" 240 pounds of hell and damnation. I carry death in both fists. The Ba$tards knock me down and try to bury me, I get back up, fighting every inch of the way. I've beaten, crippled or killed five and six assailants who thought to whip me. I've done it more than once. I never lost a fight. I stood for right when no one stood beside me. I STILL do. I've learned the Black and White of right and wrong is more often colored with shades of Grey. I've called billionaires, celebrities and drug addicts and *****s on the carpet. I've held their hands and carried them when they needed it. I've learned that not all ladies in distress wish to be rescued. I've carried my Brotheres on my back, and dragged them out of trouble, as they have done for me. When they were wrong, I've told them so. When they were right, I risked my career and even my life for them. I call my superiors on the carpet when they are wrong and offer them all respect and dignity when they are right. My armor is dented and rusty and I am proud to wear it thus. I am a Marine.

[NamGrunt68]

What really pizzes me off is that a huge number of these so called anti war mofo's are not anti war. They are ANTI AMERICAN..
When the sh!t goes down in this Country, and one o these terrorist or ragheads are running thru their yards firing their AK's at them, I hope they reach for the phone and call one of their "Anti War" brothers or sisters......there's a good chance that the one they call will come over to their house and help the terrorist kill her or him. Because some of the people that march with these so called activists are terrorist them selves.....BUT WAIT A MINUTE......WAIT ONE.....I FORGOT.....these activists will probably expect the Military or Veterans to protect them....after all they are taxpayers. Don't matter if they are demoralizing the hell out of the troops with their left wing liberal garbage.....they expect to be protected.....I guess the best thing for them to do is to run out in their yard with their "GIVE PEACE A CHANCE" signs and hold them up in the air !! I don't think that will stop the rounds......maybe their second chance should be to run outside and HUG THEIR TREE !!! FVCK EM !! They deserve what they get !!! I for one am tired of listening to their BULLSH!T and wish they would get the hell out of my Country !!!! I'll be glad to chip in and help pay for one of em's tickets !!! Mild rant over !!

[Barndog]

We have a winner!! Dane gets the big prize!! 1 cold beer. LOL

Thats exactly right - NOBODY wants to step up to the plate anymore - they just want someone to do it FOR THEM, and especially and more so - if they have large amounts of money in the bank.
In my experience, the vast majority of Draft dodgers, war mongers, and general do-nothings - are the one's who hide behind their money and/or power and influence. I have short of de-nu**ed war mongers, draft dodgers, and the general morons who comprise these people of our Nation today. I don't actively seek out these opportunities, they are presented often enough.

I look at my own situation - a month or 2 shy of 15 years of Honorable and Faithful Service to the People of this Country and the Military. I'm going back in. Marine Reserve or Army National Guard. One or the other. Why? My Honor requires it.
These di*kheads aren't!!!!!!!! And, the retirement after 20, isn't such a bad thing, maybe even for an E-4 or 5. Better than a kick in the bag with a golf shoe....
What the hell do I care what the rank says? I'm here to protect and serve and bring people home alive through proper training and leadership. I got the 'cool uniform' - in fact 2 of them. Never used the college. Paid for it myself, and STILL AM!!!!!!!!

Job hell. If the prospect of dying in defense of the Constitution is a job, I don't know sh*t from buttermilk!!!! (borrowed quote)
Go ahead. Protest. Hey, I sacrificed 15 years of my life SO FAR.... and am willing to do the other 5 - so you can spew your vile crap - calling us 'baby killers' - when the only shots fired so far are on US! WE'RE THE ONES DEAD SO FAR MORONS!!

The same offer i gave a few weeks back still stands for the protesters who approach TREASON - pack up on yer next protest march, and head to France, China or Iraq.
They're accepting applications for citizenship. I'd be happy to help you on your way OUT!

Semper Fidelis

Tony 'Barndog' Barnhart
USMC 1978-1983
MI ARNG 1984-1992 (and possibly forthcoming AGAIN)

[USMC0311]

Peace my ass. It's all about "Rock 'n' Roll. "Get Sum", "Do It", "Yer Place or Mine";) . I live too be Free. I am The Most Anti-ALL of wtf ever EXCEPT WAR. War is a part of Life. these people that don't want to face the facts have no other alternative, than too try and change their own minds by wandering around in a flock talkin grab-ass crap too appease their fears of the possibility they might be called on to Protect Freedom. They are SIMPLY...Cowards.
I live in a Society of semi-politically correct, spineless. "I got mine. You get yours" selfish leaches.

AMERICA
Love it or LEAVE it. :evilgrin:

[eddief]

You know what we need ? We need to have detention camps for anyone who has a bad thing to say about our government. Gulags worked in the Soviet Union, and they can work here in America too. Wait a minute! What am I saying? Don't we have a certain document called the U.S Constitution that guarantees those peaceniks the right to state their unpopular views? Damn, our hands are being tied by our forefathers. Maybe Congress can pass a law against thought crimes. Yea, that's the ticket.

[USMC0311]

Originally posted by eddief
You know what we need ? We need to have detention camps for anyone who has a bad thing to say about our government. Gulags worked in the Soviet Union, and they can work here in America too. Wait a minute! What am I saying? Don't we have a certain document called the U.S Constitution that guarantees those peaceniks the right to state their unpopular views? Damn, our hands are being tied by our forefathers. Maybe Congress can pass a law against thought crimes. Yea, that's the ticket.

Ain't no OUR hands tied Marine. Just gotta be a bit more cautious, deceptive and ruthless. lessin You one them "doves":bunny: <---- wingless leggless "dove":D

[wrbones]

Here's a thought.

First look up sedition and treason. Some of the leaders of these people are walking a fine line or have already crossed it. There are provisions for that in our system of government.

Second, peace protests should logically and rationally decry the postions of ALL parties preparing for war, not just one or the other.
Peace activists worldwide attempt to decry the actions of the United States when a peaceful resolution to problems is ideally a position to be taken by both parties. The U.S spent twelve years working for a peaceful solution. We've paid for it.

Third. Peace activists currently are only a very smll fraction of a single percentage point of the population of the United States or of any nation. The few should not be allowed to dictate the actions of the many or we will have left behind the system of government that we have come to enjoy.

Having said that, the 'human condition' currently , and for some time to come, does not allow for peace as some would like to believe in it. Good men must therefore always be ready for war.
However much one party desires peace for all, another will attempt to destroy them. When peace is seen by all to be a position of strength, then war will cease to exist. Until such a time we must always prepare for war...or prepare for destruction.

Any who do not recognize the reality in those statements have deluded themselves and are therefore not rational nor sane in their words or their actions.

My personal opinion, where were the protesters when Saddam was starving and killing his own people. Where were the peace protesters when Marines were being blown to kingdom come at this embassie or on that UN 'peace' mission. Where were the peace protesters when a small boat tootled up to a US warship and blew up killing sailors and destroying property paid for by out tax dollars. On and on...where were the protesters when Pol Pot was killing untold thousands of his own people. Where were the peae protesters when Idi Amin was doing the same? If a system of thought is not applied rationally and equally to all, it is not a rational system but invokes insanity in place of reality. On and on we can go with such examples. This has been my point all along.

Peace protesters have attacked, intimidated and vandalised the property of those who have stood in opposition to them. Where is the logic in that? Peace through violence?

I and others have posted amny examples of what I am talking about on these voards during the last few months in particular.

Oh. Just one thing. The Iraq/ U.S. thing. It's actually the Iraq/ U.N thing. Protests should be held in front of or on U.N properties if at all possible. Protests should decry U.N involvement in a war with Iraq. One other thing. Iraq has been proven to be the one single nation who has backed trained and succored those who attacked the WTC in New York, the nationalities of the perpetrators not with standing.

[Barndog]

(quote)

"I always make it a rule to get there first with the most men".

- Nathanel Bedford Forrest

[eddief]

"I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted not just in financing-although that was part of it-by a sovereign foreign government...It will become public at some point when it's turned over to the archives, but that's 20 or 30 years from now."
-Senator Bob Graham (Chairman of Senate Select Committe on Intelligence) on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer (PBS) on December 11, 2002

When I read this quote I didn't come to the conclusion that Iraq is the foreign government being alluded to. If it were Iraq the Bush administration would have trumpeted it to the four corners of the world. Therefore I come to the conclusion that it's a government that we are on good terms with.

[wrbones]

Home
Contact Me | Webrings: Links to Hundreds of Patriotic, Memorial and Tribute Sites. | American Way: A Nativist Viewpoint | Saddam's Terror State | The Iraqi Connection to 1st WTC and Oklahoma City Bombings | Continually updated List of Islamic terror attacks on Christians and Western Civilization | A Time for War by Cal Thomas

Total Victory for the Homeland
The Iraqi Connection to 1st WTC and Oklahoma City Bombings


Enter subhead content here



The Iraq Connection (Was Saddam involved in Oklahoma City and the first WTC bombing?)
Wall St. Journal ^ | Sept 5, 2002 | MICAH MORRIS


OKLAHOMA CITY -- With the Sept. 11 anniversary upon us and President Bush talking about a "regime change" in Iraq, it's an apt time to look at two investigators who connect Baghdad to two notorious incidents of domestic terrorism. Jayna Davis, a former television reporter in Oklahoma City, believes an Iraqi cell was involved in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building here. Middle East expert Laurie Mylroie links Iraq to the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, and has published a book on the subject.

Both cases are closed, of course -- in the public mind if not quite officially. Timothy McVeigh was convicted of murder in the Oklahoma City bombing and executed in June 2001; Terry Nichols was sentenced to life in prison for conspiracy and manslaughter, and faces a further trial on murder charges. In the World Trade Center bombing, prosecutors convicted six men of Middle Eastern origin on the theory that they operated in a "loose network." One suspect remains at large, but the apparent ringleader, known as Ramzi Yousef, was captured in Pakistan and is now in federal prison in the U.S.

The prosecutors in both episodes believe they got their men, and of course conspiracy theories have shadowed many prominent cases. Still, the long investigative work by Ms. Davis and Ms. Mylroie, coming to parallel conclusions though working largely independently of each other, has gained some prominent supporters. Former CIA Director James Woolsey, for example, recently told the Journal that "when the full stories of these two incidents are finally told, those who permitted the investigations to stop short will owe big explanations to these two brave women. And the nation will owe them a debt of gratitude."

The Vanishing John Doe No. 2

Ms. Davis, for example, has a copy of a bulletin put out by the Oklahoma Highway Patrol immediately after the Murrah bombing. It specifies a blue car occupied by "Middle Eastern male subject or subjects." According to police radio traffic at the time, also obtained by Ms. Davis, a search was on as well for a brown Chevrolet pickup "occupied by Middle Eastern subjects." When an officer radioed in asking if "this is good information or do we really not know," a dispatcher responded "authorization FBI." Law-enforcement sources tell Ms. Davis that the FBI bulletin was quickly and mysteriously withdrawn.

The next day, the federal government issued arrest warrants and sketches of two men seen together, John Doe No. 1 and No. 2. John Doe 1 turned out to be McVeigh, who was quickly picked up on an unrelated charge. Following the arrest of McVeigh and Nichols, the Justice Department changed course, saying the witnesses were confused and there was no John Doe 2 with McVeigh.

But Ms. Davis, who was covering the case at the time for KFOR-TV in Oklahoma City, says in fact there was a John Doe No. 2, and that she has identified him. The original warrant for John Doe No. 2 described a man about 5 feet 10 inches, average weight, with brown hair and a tattoo on his left arm. She says the man matching this description is an Iraqi political refugee named Hussain al-Hussaini, an itinerant restaurant worker who entered the country in 1994 from a Saudi Arabian refugee camp and soon found his way to Oklahoma City. She says she has more than 20 witnesses who can place him near the Murrah Building on the day of the bombing or finger him in parts of the conspiracy.

Seven weeks after the bombing, Ms. Davis's KFOR television station began broadcasting a series of reports on a possible Middle East connection. It did not name Mr. al-Hussaini, but did include photographs of him that digitally obscured his face. Mr. al-Hussaini sued for libel and defamation, denying any association with the bombing. In November 1999, U.S. District Court Judge Tim Leonard dismissed the lawsuit.

Citing defense contentions Mr. al-Hussaini's counsel failed to dispute, the judge ruled that Ms. Davis had proved that Mr. al-Hussaini "bears a strong resemblance to the composite sketch of John Doe #2," including a tattoo on his left arm, that he was born and raised in Iraq, that he had served in the Iraqi army, and that his Oklahoma City employer had once been suspected by the federal government of having "connections with the Palestine Liberation Organization."

Mr. al-Hussaini appealed Judge Leonard's decision to the 10th Circuit Court, where a ruling is pending. He is represented by Gary Richardson, a well-known Oklahoma lawyer who currently is an independent candidate for governor. In an interview, Mr. Richardson denounced the treatment of Mr. al-Hussaini as anathema to American values, saying he had been singled out because he was an Arab. "There is no evidence that Hussain al-Hussaini is John Doe No. 2," Mr. Richardson said. "He was grossly mistreated by the media in Oklahoma."

In 1996, Mr. al-Hussaini returned to Boston, where he had first entered the U.S. He found work as a cook at Logan Airport. According to his medical records, he was haunted by the Oklahoma City episode and the publicity surrounding his libel suit. He began drinking heavily and in 1997 was admitted to a psychiatric clinic for a depressive disorder and suicidal thoughts. Mr. al-Hussaini's lawyer says his client has since moved to another part of the country and is "trying to put his life back together."

According to notes taken by a nurse at the psychiatric clinic, Mr. al-Hussaini quit his job at Logan Airport in November 1997, nearly four years before planes from there were hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001. Her notes say he stated, "If anything happens there, I'll be a suspect."

Evidence supporting Ms. Davis's suspicions surfaced during discovery for the McVeigh trial. An FBI report, for example, records a call a few hours after the bombing from Vincent Cannistraro, a retired CIA official who had once been chief of operations for the agency's counter-terrorism center. He told Kevin Foust, a FBI counter-terror investigator, that he'd been called by a top counter-terror adviser to the Saudi royal family. Mr. Foust reported that the Saudi told Mr. Cannistraro about "information that there was a 'squad' of people currently in the United States, very possibly Iraqis, who have been tasked with carrying out terrorist attacks against the United States. The Saudi claimed that he had seen a list of 'targets,' and that the first on the list was the federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma."

Stephen Jones, McVeigh's lead lawyer, discusses the FBI report in his book, "Others Unknown: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing Conspiracy." Mr. Cannistraro later told Mr. Jones that he didn't know if the caller "was credible or not." But Mr. Foust's memo says Mr. Cannistraro described the Saudi official as "responsible for developing intelligence to help prevent the royal family from becoming victims of terrorist attacks," and someone he'd known "for the past 10 or 15 years."

Ms. Davis's evidence was examined by Patrick Lang, a Middle East expert and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency's human intelligence collection section. In a memo to Ms. Davis, Mr. Lang concluded that Mr. al-Hussaini likely is a member of Unit 999 of the Iraqi Military Intelligence Service, or Estikhabarat. He wrote that this unit is headquartered at Salman Pak southeast of Baghdad, and "deals with clandestine operations at home and abroad."

Larry Johnson, a former deputy director of the State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism, also has examined Ms. Davis's voluminous research. "Looking at the Jayna Davis material," Mr. Johnson says, "what's clear is that more than Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols were involved. Without a doubt, there's a Middle Eastern tie to the Oklahoma City bombing."

Mr. al-Hussaini and other former Iraqi soldiers colluded with McVeigh and Nichols in the attack, Ms. Davis charges. "There is a Middle Eastern terrorist cell operating in Oklahoma City. They were operating prior to the Oklahoma City bombing and they are still operating today."

The popular stereotype of McVeigh is of a twisted "patriot" out to avenge government actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge. But in March 1998 he penned a prison-cell "Essay on Hypocrisy" obsessed with Iraq. "We've all seen pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But have you ever seen these pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?" With calls for war crimes trials of Saddam Hussein, "why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of 'mass destruction?'"

In dismissing the al-Hussaini libel suit, Judge Leonard pointedly noted the indictment of McVeigh and Nichols included a charge of conspiracy "with others unknown." In sentencing Nichols, U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch remarked, "It would be disappointing to me if the law enforcement agencies of the United States government have quit looking for answers."

[wrbones]

World Trade Center

The Sept. 11 airline crashes were not the first attempt to topple the World Trade Center towers. In February 1993, a bomb blast in a public parking garage below the North Tower of the World Trade Center killed six people and left a crater six stories deep. It could have been much worse. In her book, "The War Against America: Saddam Hussein and the World Trade Center Attacks," Laurie Mylroie says that the bomb was designed to topple the North Tower into the South Tower and envelop the scene in a cloud of cyanide gas. Hearing the case, Judge Kevin Duffy agreed, saying that if the plan had worked, "we would have been dealing with tens of thousands of deaths." After the bombing, the FBI rounded up four Muslims who moved in extremist circles in the New York area. Three others escaped overseas: a Palestinian, an Iraqi named Abdul Yasin, and Ramzi Yousef.

Ms. Mylroie's book argues that Iraq was complicit in this attack. At the very least, she notes, Saddam Hussein is harboring a wanted terrorist: Abdul Yasin. He came to the U.S. six months before the Trade Center attack and is charged with helping mix chemicals for the bomb. Picked up in an early sweep after the bombing, he talked his way out of an FBI interrogation and turned up back in Baghdad.

Beyond this, Ms. Mylroie contends that the bombing was "an Iraqi intelligence operation with the Moslem extremists as dupes." She says that the original lead FBI official on the case, Jim Fox, concluded that "Iraq was behind the World Trade Center bombing." In late 1993, shortly before his retirement, Mr. Fox was suspended by FBI Director Louis Freeh for speaking to the media about the case; he died in 1997. Ms. Mylroie says that Mr. Fox indicated to her that he did not continue to pursue the Iraq connection because Justice Department officials "did not want state sponsorship addressed."

According to phone records analyzed by Ms. Mylroie, Abdul Yasin appeared in the orbit of one of U.S. conspirators, Muhammed Salameh, some weeks after Mr. Salameh made a series of phone calls to relatives in Iraq, including to his uncle, Kadri Abu Bakr. Mr. Bakr is a senior figure in the PLO's "Western Sector" terrorist unit; at the very least, his phone calls would be monitored by Iraqi intelligence.

Ramzi Yousef also showed up after the calls to Mr. Bakr, according to Ms. Mylroie's analysis. His arrival "transformed the conspiracy from a pipe bombing plot to an audacious attack on the World Trade Center." Yousef was "the individual most responsible for building the World Trade Center bomb" -- 1,200 pounds of urea nitrate with a nitroglycerine trigger, booster chemicals, sulfuric acid and sodium cyanide.

After the bombing, Yousef vanished; he had entered with an Iraqi passport, and exited with a Pakistani passport. Yousef's Pakistani passport was in the name of Abdul Basit. He obtained it from the Pakistani consulate in New York shortly before the bombing, saying he had lost his passport and presenting photocopied pages from Abdul Basit's 1984 and 1988 passports.

Ms. Mylroie says her evidence suggests that Abdul Basit and his family were among two dozen Pakistani nationals working in Kuwait who vanished at the time of the Iraqi invasion. Law enforcement authorities believe she overplays this possibility, that Yousef is indeed Basit, and that the original Iraqi passport is the only firm link to Iraq.

After fleeing in the wake of the 1993 bombing, Yousef/Basit made his way to the Philippines, where he planted a bomb that killed the passenger taking his seat after he disembarked from a plane on the island of Cebu. Police investigating a fire in a Manila apartment he occupied found a laptop computer with plans to bomb 12 U.S. jets simultaneously. Yousef escaped but was later apprehended in Pakistan and turned over to U.S. authorities. He was convicted in both the Trade Center attack and the plane-bombing plot.

One of Yousef's confederates, Abdul Hakin Murad, was arrested at the Manila apartment and later convicted in the U.S. in the plane plot. While in custody in the Philippines, he told investigators that he and Yousef had discussed hijacking a jet and crashing it into CIA headquarters. According to a January 1995 Manila police report, Murad said "he will board any American commercial aircraft pretending to be an ordinary passenger. Then he will hijack said aircraft, control its cockpit and dive it at the CIA headquarters. There will be no bomb or any explosive that he will use in its execution. It is simply a suicidal mission that he is very much willing to execute."

The Philippine Connection

Astonishingly, the Murrah bombing and the first WTC attack share a connection. Yousef and Terry Nichols were in the Philippines simultaneously. Nichols's trips there are undisputed; his wife's relatives lived in Cebu City. Cebu is also the territory of the Islamic terrorist group Abu Sayyaf. McVeigh lawyers sought to substantiate an "others unknown" defense theory, and made extensive filings concerning Nichols's activities there.

These filings show that he was often in Cebu without his wife, and that he was in frequent contact with Ernesto Malaluan, a relative of his wife who had once lived in Saudi Arabia and owned a boarding house in Cebu City. The filing asserted that his boarding house "shelters students from a university well known for its Islamic militancy."

A defense examination of phone records found that Nichols had repeatedly called the Cebu boarding house in the weeks preceding the bombing. Some of the calls were billed to a prepaid phone card to which McVeigh also had access. The calls were often made from pay phones at truck stops and the like, and sometimes followed mysterious patterns. In one instance, for example, the same number was dialed nine times in nine minutes before someone answered and spoke for 14 minutes.

The McVeigh defense also produced two witnesses, Nichols's father-in-law and a resort worker, who said that while in the Philippines, Nichols had asked them if they knew anyone who knew "how to make bombs."

The defense team also obtained a statement from Philippines law-enforcement officials about a meeting of Nichols and Yousef. The statement was given by a putative Abu Sayyaf leader, Edward Angeles. Angeles is a murky figure. Born Ibrahim Yakub and said to be one of the founders of Abu Sayyaf, he surrendered to the Philippine Army in 1995, claiming he had been all the time a deep penetration agent for the government. Angeles was assassinated in 1999 by unknown gunmen.

The McVeigh defense filings portray the Nichols link to the Cebu City boarding house, Ramzi Yousef and Abu Sayyaf as grounds for believing that bomb-making expertise may have been passed to Nichols through "Iraqi intelligence based in the Philippines." McVeigh attorney Stephen Jones told Insight magazine recently that six months before the Oklahoma City bombing, "Tim couldn't blow up a rock. Then Terry goes to the Philippines," and their bomb-making skills take a great leap forward. The court did not grant Mr. Jones's request to comb through U.S. intelligence files in search of an Iraq connection to the Oklahoma City bombing.

[wrbones]

Sept. 11 Footnotes

The principal reason for suspecting an Iraqi role in the Sept. 11 attacks is of course the much-discussed report of a meeting in Prague on April 8, 2001, between apparent hijacking leader Mohamed Atta and Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, an Iraqi diplomat expelled as a spy shortly thereafter. Press reports have repeatedly cast doubt on these reports, apparently because the FBI located Atta in Virginia and Florida shortly before and after the meeting and found no record of his leaving the U.S. But the latest report, in the Aug. 2 edition of the Los Angeles Times, quotes a high Bush administration official as saying evidence of the meeting "holds up." In the face of doubts and denials, Czech officials have repeatedly maintained that they're sure the meeting took place. Atta also passed through Prague on his way to the U.S. in June of 2000, returning a second time after being refused entry for lack of a visa.

There are also reports of various contacts between Iraqis and the al Qaeda terrorist network, notably a 1998 visit to Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan by Saddam Hussein's deputy head of military intelligence at the time, Faruq al-Hijazi. In congressional testimony in March, CIA Director George Tenet noted that Iraq has "had contacts with al Qaeda," adding that "the two sides mutual antipathy toward the United States and the Saudi royal family suggest that tactical cooperation between them is possible."

Espionage writer Edward Jay Epstein has pointed out that of the eight pilots and co-pilots of hijacked planes on Sept. 11, none got off a distress call. What we know of the incidents came from stewardesses and flyers with cell phones. Commercial satellite photos show the body of an airliner at Salman Pak, where the Iraqis are thought to maintain terrorist training camps. One Iraqi defector, Sabah Khalifa Alami, has stated that Iraqi intelligence trained groups at Salman Pak on how to hijack planes without weapons. Mr. Epstein details these connections at his Web site, www.edwardjayepstein.com.

None of this is "hard evidence," let alone "conclusive evidence," that Saddam Hussein was complicit in Sept. 11 or any of the other domestic terrorist attacks. But there is quite a bit of smoke curling up from various routes to Baghdad, and it's not clear that anyone except Jayna Davis and Laurie Mylroie has looked very hard for fire. We do know that Saddam Hussein plotted to assassinate former President George Bush during a visit to Kuwait in April 1993. Could he have been waging a terror offensive against the U.S. ever since the end of the Gulf War? This remains a speculative possibility, but a possibility that needs to be put on the table in a serious way.

Mr. Morrison is a senior editorial page writer at the Journal.





Enter supporting content here