Following are excerpts from a public address by Libyan Leader Mu’ammar Al-Qaddafi marking the anniversary of the U.S. air raid on Libya. The address aired on Al-Jazeera TV on June 11, 2008. Middle East Media Research Center
QADDAFI: "There are elections in America now. Along came a black citizen of Kenyan African origins, a Muslim, who had studied in an Islamic school in Indonesia. His name is Obama.
"All the people in the Arab and Islamic world and in Africa applauded this man. They welcomed him and prayed for him and for his success, and they may have even been involved in legitimate contribution campaigns to enable him to win the American presidency."
"Our African Kenyan Brother [Obama]… Made Statements [About Jerusalem] That Shocked All His Supporters In The Arab World, In Africa, And In The Islamic World"
"But we were taken by surprise when our African Kenyan brother [Obama], who is an American national, made statements that shocked all his supporters in the Arab world, in Africa, and in the Islamic world.
"We hope that this is merely an elections 'clearance sale,' as they say in Egypt - in other words, merely an elections lie. As you know, this is the farce of elections - a person lies and lies to people, just so that they will vote for him, and afterwards, when they say to him, 'You promised this and that,' he says: 'No, this was just elections propaganda.' This is the farce of democracy for you. He says: 'This was propaganda, and you thought I was being serious. I was fooling you to get your votes.'
"Allah willing, it will turn out that this was merely elections propaganda. Obama said he would turn Jerusalem into the eternal capital of the Israelis. This indicates that our brother Obama is ignorant of international politics, and is not familiar with the Middle East conflict."
Now that the race is down to Obama vs. McCain we can start analyzing the important issues that will decide the election. Those issues are plain for everyone to see they include oil prices, the war on terror, health-care and that candidates age/experience. I will get to them in a future article, for now I want to focus on one issue that will not be mentioned in this campaign even though the American voters are very passionate about it: Illegal Immigration.
Not long ago illegal immigration looked like it would be one of the key issues in this election cycle. The American people are fed up with the effects of illegal immigration and they have shown their displeasure by passing tough local laws, by forming citizen groups to patrol the borders and by rejecting the McCain-Kennedy comprehensive immigration reform act.
Polls consistanly show that between 65%and 81% of Americans want something done to reduce illegal immigration. A border fence is wildly popular among Republican voters.
Even though this issue is important to the American voter it will not be addressed in this campaign. The issue died the day McCain won the Republican nomination. Obama is horribly weak on the issue. He favors amnesty, a position violently opposed by the majority of the country.
McCain cannot exploit this weakness because of his past support for comprehensive immigration reform. He worked with Ted Kennedy to come up with bill. Now McCain says that he favors enforcement first, but he knows that if he attacks Obama’s position he will come across as a hypocrite.
Republican analysts keep telling us that McCain is the only Republican that could win this year, yet he is the only one that was running for president that voted against the will of the people on this issue. On illegal immigration the choice this year is between a pro-amnesty candidate and a flip-flopper.
The U.N.’s chief nuclear watchdog, Mohamed El Baradei (not exactly a guy in the tank for Bush), in an interview with Al-Arabiya TV, said, quite explicitly, that Iran will be able to produce a nuclear weapon in six months to a year. Via lgf.
Muhammad Al-Baradei: If Iran wants to turn to the production of nuclear weapons, it must leave the NPT, expel the IAEA inspectors, and then it would need at least… Considering the number of centrifuges and the quantity of uranium Iran has…
Interviewer: How much time would it need?
Muhammad Al-Baradei: It would need at least six months to one year. Therefore, Iran will not be able to reach the point where we would wake up one morning to an Iran with a nuclear weapon.
Interviewer: Excuse me, I would like to clarify this for our viewers. If Iran decides today to expel the IAEA from the country, it will need six months…
Muhammad Al-Baradei: Or one year, at least…
Interviewer:… to produce [nuclear] weapons?
Muhammad Al-Baradei: It would need this period to produce a weapon, and to obtain highly-enriched uranium in sufficient quantities for a single nuclear weapon.
With such a near-term threat looming, Bill Kristol suggests that Bush, thinking a President Obama may not have the stones to take on Iran, may decide to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities before he leaves office. Via Ace.
Then John Bolton, another guy with some connections in the White House, echoes Kristol and says Israel will do the deed after the election.
Israel, however, still had a determination to prevent a nuclear Iran, he argued. The “optimal window” for strikes would be between the November 4 election and the inauguration on January 20, 2009.
“The Israelis have one eye on the calendar because of the pace at which the Iranians are proceeding both to develop their nuclear weapons capability and to do things like increase their defences by buying new Russian anti-aircraft systems and further harden the nuclear installations .
“They’re also obviously looking at the American election calendar. My judgement is they would not want to do anything before our election because there’s no telling what impact it could have on the election.”
But waiting for either Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate, or his Republican opponent John McCain to be installed in the White House could preclude military action happening for the next four years or at least delay it.
Note that the Bolton piece also references Bill Kristol’s comments and the fact that Israel is polishing the guns.
Israel carried out a major military exercise earlier this month that American officials say appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Several American officials said the Israeli exercise appeared to be an effort to develop the military’s capacity to carry out long-range strikes and to demonstrate the seriousness with which Israel views Iran’s nuclear program.
More than 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters participated in the maneuvers, which were carried out over the eastern Mediterranean and over Greece during the first week of June, American officials said.
Sure seems to be some orchestrated leaking going on. My guess is that Bush would have Israel go in before the election, so that when Iran flips its lid and all hell (actual and potential) breaks loose, voters will choose the tested McCain and Obama will be sunk.
Barack Obama says he backtracked on a pledge to take public financing for the general election partly because he needs funds to counter those 527 committees that may attack him from the right. And he argues John McCain will do nothing to “stop the smears.”
But Cybercast News Service reports that Democratic 527s have raised three times as much as their Republican counterparts: $87 million to $24 million.
The director of the nonpartisan Campaign Finance Institute says that Obama “wasn’t complaining when he went to the American Federation of State and Municipal Employees Union this week, which ran an ad paid for by its 527 to attack John McCain.”
As one Obamaton apologist said “so what?” Who cares if Obama lied in his pledge to accept public financing? Who cares if he lied in justifying his actions by pointing to GOP oriented 527s?
Who cares if Obama is a liar who will do or say anything to gain power?
Now, let’s face it…Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews aren’t gonna change their minds and suddenly face the reality that Saddam’s regime was willing to work with AQ groups, did work with AQ groups and leaders, and the threat of the so-called “Nexus of Evil” connection even existed.
Captured members of Al Queda groups from this same camp claim that they were assisted, trained, supplied, and funded by Saddam’s IIS as well as taking orders from Saddam’s IIS.
Captured documents confirm their claims.
Captured regime members confirm their claims.
Now even highly anti-war/pro-Democrat MSNBC confirms the claim itself.
Al Queda leaders confirm the claims (Zawahiri and Zarqawi specifically).
Why believe “Bush Lied”? Because it’s easier to believe that the solution to today’s problems can be solved by changing a circle to a dot on a ballot than it is to face the real and scary threat as well as own up to the failures of the past.
Yet AGAIN there’s another document showing that Saddam’s regime was not only willing to work with Al Queda groups, but in fact did so. This time, it’s a 2002 memo from Saddam’s regime to Al Queda’s strategic planner (often described as the real brains of the terror group alliance).
The “no ties” myth gets another shovel of dirt on its grave
…Another investigation finds that the Bush Administration didn’t lie, fabricate, or deliberately mislead people about the threat posed from Saddam Hussein’s regime. STILL, the average Joe seems to believe that President Bush is an evil mastermind capable of fooling 535 members of Congress, all the national and international media, and successfully cover up a myriad of lies about “Saddam’s wmd” in almost a dozen independent, bi-partisan, often international investigations. Amazing.
The report on the prewar statements about Iraq found that on some key issues — most notably Iraq's purported nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs — the public statements from Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and other senior officials were generally "substantiated" by the best estimates at the time from American intelligence agencies.
Why does it matter, at this late date? The Rockefeller report will not cause a spike in “Bush Lied” mug sales, and the Bond dissent will not lead anyone to scrape the “Bush Lied” bumper sticker off his or her car. But the phony “Bush lied” story line distracts from the biggest prewar failure: the fact that so much of the intelligence upon which Bush and Rockefeller and everyone else relied turned out to be tragically, catastrophically wrong.
Rockefeller’s highly partisan report does not substantiate its most explosive claims. Rockefeller, for instance, charges that “top administration officials made repeated statements that falsely linked Iraq and Al Qaeda as a single threat and insinuated that Iraq played a role in 9/11.” Yet what did his report actually find? That Iraq-Al Qaeda links were “substantiated by intelligence information.” The same goes for claims about Hussein’s possession of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his alleged operation of a nuclear weapons program. Four years on from the first Senate Intelligence Committee report, war critics, old and newfangled, still don’t get that a lie is an act of deliberate, not unwitting, deception. If Democrats wish to contend they were “misled” into war, they should vent their spleen at the CIA.
Quoth Senator Rockefeller: “Sadly, the Bush administration led the nation into war under false pretenses.” Well not exactly. On many key judgments before the war, the report itself found that statements on Iraq’s biological weapons capacity, its nuclear and chemical weapons programs, the president and his cabinet secretaries generally followed the intelligence assessments of the spy services.
The Senate report, however, found that intelligence supported most of the administration’s statements about Iraq before the war.
No doubt Congressional Democrats want us all to believe that they’re idiots who were duped by a brilliant mastermind like George W Bush, or that somehow or another “they didn’t see the same intelligence” (let’s ignore that people like Sen Kerry, Edwards, Rockefeller, and others all had dozens of closed door meetings w intel agency leaders for 5 months before the invasion) Certainly they don’t want us to remember how even President Clinton was promoting the invasion of Iraq.
Face it, the intelligence was weak (because the intelligence agencies’ budgets had been scrapped after the fall of the Soviet Union, and their leadership replaced by political appointees and bureaucrats. Democrats and Republicans, Bush Administration officials, and former Clinton Administration officals, the Executive branch and Congress all believed that while there was dissent (as there always is) regarding the limited intelligence on Saddam’s regime the preponderance of intel demonstrated a threat, and Saddam’s refusal to fully, immediately, and unconditionally comply with the UN after 12yrs made the matter due for resolution. Lastly, the threat posed by Saddam’s regime and its history of working with Al Queda groups made the question of “unaccounted for weapons of mass destruction” far too dangerous to continue addressing with a foreign policy of national denial, procrastination, and/or laissez faire.
That is the document that led the United States to enter World War I. It was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Prior to the discovery of the German effort to give away American territory in exchange for an alliance with Mexico, there had been other incidents that by themselves were not sufficient to warrant a declaration of war, but with the Zimmerman Telegram…the sum of the threats and offenses combined to equal a casus belli. One can blame the war on the Lusitania, the sinking of US freighters by German submarines, interdiction of trade, human rights violations by Germany and her allies, or a host of other reasons, but this decoded piece of paper was the last straw. National Archives story of Zimmerman Telegram
ISGP-2003-00300189 Page 14 The Republic of Iraq Office of the Presidency The Secretary Comrade Ali AI-Rih AI-Sheik National Command Member Subject: Directive Memo No: 425/K Date: 18 Jan 1993 Top Secret Personal Very Urgent Follow up to our memo 7184/K on 20 Dec 1992, the Party has decided to snipe (TC: or hunt) Americans that are present on Arab soil, particularly in Somalia, utilizing Arab, Asian Muslims or friendly elements. To do the necessary And may you continue for the strive (struggle)
Secretary to the President 18 Jan 1993
Copy to: the Director of IIS/ for the same purpose above, as per your function, with appreciation. * An unidentified individual wrote at the bottom of this memo (TC: it seems to be (Ali AI-Rih AI-Sheik) . To: The Deputy and Director of M4 (Foreign Intel) should meet to study the method of performing the said directive and to notify me of your opinion as soon as possible. Signed and dated 18 Jan .
Office of the Presidency The Secretary Top Secret Personal Very Urgent To: Director of lIS Subject: Execution of Directive Memo No: 828/K Date: 8 Feb 1993 Mr. President “May God Keep Him” has reviewed the contents of your memo 110/2/43 dated 25 Jan 1993, and has ordered the following: 1. Clause 2-A: “We did not instruct to move against the regime in Egypt.” 2. Clause 2-B: “Yes and to focus on Somalia.” 3. Approval has been granted from his Excellency to assign the Afghani Islamic Party with the aforementioned mission.
To take the necessary with respect [signed] Secretary to the President 8 Feb 1993 (TC: Written on the right side of the memo is conferring with the Director of M4 [signed])
Unlike the Zimmerman Telegram, we don’t know specifically what “support” the Iraqi government promised Al Queda leaders in 1993, but the captured (and authenticated) documents from Saddam’s intelligence services confirm that Al Queda was asked by Saddam’s regime to attack American forces in Somalia. This state-sponsored attack…this example of Al Queda attacking Americans at Iraq’s request…was also confirmed: -in the original 1998 indictment of Osama Bin Laden -in 1998 court docs from African Embassy bomber trials -NYT -New Yorker -at least 4 books that I’ve got notes on -and at least one of the British govt reports (this one from 10/04)
More quotes available upon request, but readers are encouraged to read those on their own so as to grab the full context.
It is a incontestable fact that the people who attacked the US forces in Iraq were trained by Iraq’s intelligence services, and that the Al Queda attack proves Saddam’s regime would and in fact DID sponsor Al Queda attacks against Americans. Saddam and Bin Laden didn’t have to love or admire or cherish each other anymore than racist Hitler did Asian Tojo. They didn’t have to respect each others “religion” (faux Muslim vs Islamic death cult leader).
…But they could, did, and were willing to work together to kill Americans. It’s a matter of historical record, not a political point of rhetoric or even debatable anymore. There’s just too much intel and evidence.
The myth that Saddam and AQ would never work together is dead; inconsistent with the historical record.
0 comments:
Post a Comment