P
Pookie
Guest
Symposium: Saddam's Files
Experts examining Saddam Hussein's secret files have made numerous startling
discoveries about the mystery of the "missing" WMDs. Today Symposium has
assembled a distinguished panel to discuss these documents and what they
have revealed. Our guests are:
John Loftus, President of IntelligenceSummit.org, which is entirely free of
government funding and depends solely upon private contributions for its
support. Visit his website at www.LoftusReport.com.
Dave Gaubatz, the first Federal Agent (civilian) to enter Iraq in 2003.
Currently the Director of the Mapping Shari'a project and owner of Wahhabi
Counter-terrorism publications providing first-hand intelligence for law
enforcement and CT professionals.
and
Ryan Mauro, a volunteer analyst for the Northeast Intelligence Network. He
is the author of Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq, the
founder of WorldThreats.com, and a speaker for the Intelligence Summit. He
was originally hired at age 16 in 2002 as a geopolitical analyst for
Tactical Defense Concepts. He is currently working on a potential TV show
pilot and can be contacted at TDCAnalyst@aol.com.
FP: John Loftus, Dave Gaubatz and Ryan Mauro, welcome to Frontpage
Symposium.
John Loftus, let us begin with you.
Your volunteers at the IntelligenceSummit.org have been examining the secret
documents captured from Saddam -- and it appears that they have solved a
large part of the mystery of Saddam's missing WMDs. Correct?
Loftus: Yes, now the truth is beginning to emerge. Saddam's own secret files
show that he was lying to the UN, year after year. He told the UN that Iraq
had no more WMD after 1991, and would never start those WMD programs again.
But his own secret records show that in 2001, 2002, and 2003, Saddam was
repeatedly purchasing banned chemicals, covering up radiation leaks, and
generally orchestrating a cover-up.
Are the records genuine? We had NSA check the audiotapes to make sure it was
Saddam's own voiceprint. It is. Now, why would Saddam and his top aides
record all those tapes year after year and hide the forgeries in secret
vaults? There are three shelf miles of paper records. What is the point?
These are secret internal records, it is not as if he was using them in
public to fool the Iranians into thinking he had WMD. These records almost
did not even make it onto the light of day. They were buried amid a forest
of documents that might not have been reviewed for decades, if ever. I
cannot think of any explanation but these are genuine secret archives of
Saddam's innermost feelings at his innermost meetings.
Moreover, at the time people like Dave Gaubatz and John Shaw were putting
their statements on the record about how the WMD ended up in Syria, they did
not know that we would get circumstantial corroboration from Saddam's own
files. Statistically, this is beyond the realm of possibility of
fabrication.
Gaubatz: Thanks Jamie. My friend Mr. Loftus is the person who has inspired
me to continue requesting our political leaders and the American public
demand the truth about WMD be brought forward. There was a point in time
when I had raised the flag indicating I surrender and can no longer fight
the WMD cause further. Then I thought of the innocent children who would
suffer the most during a terrorist attack in which WMD was used. I have
obtained a second wind and want to inform everyone based on many years of
working counter-intelligence, I left Iraq knowing WMD had indeed been
buried, some had been transported out of Iraq directly before the war, and
some has now been looted by our enemies.
Are the records genuine as Mr. Loftus stated? The documents are genuine. In
the last year I was informed by Federal Agents on the ground in Iraq, that
many Iraqi sources who provided WMD intelligence to us in 2003, were
subsequently kidnapped and killed for helping Americans.
I want people to realize the war in Iraq is unlike any that our country has
ever faced. There was chaos in 2003, and there is chaos in 2007. I do not
mean to put fault on any one person for the failure to locate the WMD when
we had the opportunity. Our leaders had the best intentions, but failed to
properly review intelligence reports in a timely manner, and most were not
acted upon. We are now suffering the consequences of not listening to the
counter-intelligence officers on the ground and who was obtaining first-hand
intelligence. In 2003 we reported the pending civil war between the Sunni
and Shia Muslims. In pure Islam the Sunni Muslims consider Shia Muslims to
be non-believers and apostates. The punishment for apostasy is death as
described in Fiqh Us Sunnah. Fiqh Us Sunnah is in virtually every Sunni
mosque in America. Our mapping team just left Florida. A prominent Islamic
Scholar (Sunni) advised that all Shia people need to be
killed in the U.S.
The best way to solve the WMD mystery is to have all witnesses involved in
either the search or excavations come before Congress and testify. This is
when I will release names and contact information of the Iraqis who know
first-hand about WMD and the Al Qaeda presence in Iraq well before 2003.
Military agents will then be called forward.
This issue is very easy to prove. Put all players before Congress, under
oath. The truth will be revealed. Some will be hurt politically or their
military careers will be damaged, but America will know the truth. The truth
is the only thing that may have a remote chance of preventing another attack
against our great country.
Mauro: In 2006, particularly after pressure from the Intelligence Summit,
the Bush Administration began declassifying some of the millions of
documents that have been found in Iraq. Many of them were not translated due
to the sheer volume of documents the U.S. possessed and how few reliable
Arabic translators we have. These documents, as they were declassified, were
put on the Internet where concerned citizens, fluent in Arabic, began
translating them. Joseph Shahda and Ray Robison are two individuals who
played a critical role in this. My only role was organizing and presenting
them at the 2007 Intelligence Summit, and coupling it with the extensive
open-source research I've done.
However, this web site where the declassified documents were placed has been
taken down. An Iraqi document with critical details on how to build a
nuclear weapon was posted, and the government decided it was best to end
this practice. As a result, millions of documents are not translated and
analyzed, leaving a big gaping hole in our intelligence collection. Though
the picture is incomplete, we have clear indications that Iraq, at the
least, had the capabilities to produce WMD and was actively researching and
expanding that capability. There is also evidence that WMD went to Syria.
We learn about an Iraqi dissident who reported to us that he was in contact
with drivers who confessed to transporting WMD into Syria. Apparently, 50
trucks arrived in Deir al-Zour, Syria, on March 10, 2003. One driver told
the informant that an earlier shipment occurred on March 1st. Another
document describes how Chinese intelligence picked up information about a
WMD transfer to Syria, and asked the Germans for verification. The Germans
said they didn't have information on such a transfer, and then someone in
the German government leaked this discussion to the Iraqis.
We also know that Iraq was in bed with foreign terrorists, and although no
smoking gun exists to prove a collaborative relationship with Al-Qaeda, we
do know from a document from 1997 that Iraqi intelligence met with Osama Bin
Laden on February 19, 1995, where Bin Laden requested that Iraqi radio
broadcast the speeches of a radical sheikh. Bin Laden also "requested joint
operations against the forces of infidels in the land of Hijaz," which is
Saudi Arabia. Those who argued for so long that Bin Laden was unwilling to
work with a so-called secular dictator like Saddam are proven wrong, as Bin
Laden, not the Iraqis, initiated the request for collaboration.
It is worthy to note that on November 13, 1995, only months after this
meeting, Al-Qaeda bombed the Saudi National Guards headquarters in Riyadh,
killing five Americans. It's circumstantial evidence, but other documents
clearly point to Iraq as a committed state sponsor of terrorism.
FP: So what does all of this mean? What do we carry away from these
discoveries?
And where is the apology from the liberal Left?
Moreover, the U.S. clearly failed in securing and searching key sites after
it defeated Saddam. If it failed in this context, how can we be hopeful that
the U.S. will succeed in dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran?
Loftus: I think what we carry away from Saddam's secret files is that the
average citizen today does not have a clue about world history because so
much of it is classified. This is a theme that dates back to my
congressional testimony in the 1980's about Nazis in America. Russian double
agent Kim Philby of British Intelligence dumped hundreds (if not thousands)
of former Nazi war criminals in America, disguised as anti-communist freedom
fighters. When US intelligence found out how badly they had been tricked,
they covered it up for a half century, until I exposed it on 60 Minutes.
It is the cover-up that kills America, not the mistakes. The American people
are forgiving, they know that all government agencies make mistakes from
time to time. The American attitude is let's fix it and move on. But the
liars that cover up their mistakes are traitors to America, because they
prevent their mistakes from ever getting fixed. One of my favorite old
spies, George Orwell wrote: "The omission is the most powerful form of lie,
and it is the duty of historians to ensure that those lies do not creep into
the history books." He was writing about the evils of communism and nazism,
but he could just as easily have been writing about Saddam Hussein.
It wasn't just the liberal press that was utterly wrong about Saddam Hussein
having WMD, it was almost the entire mainstream press, and a good chunk of
the conservative press went along with it. Heck, even all of the experts in
the State Department drank Saddam's cool aid. Truth be told, just about
everyone bought into Saddam's lie that he had no plans for making any more
WMD. Right up to the end of his life, Saddam was even lying to his own
jailer. He told this FBI Special Agent that he had no WMD, and was only
lying about having WMD to intimidate the Iranians. The FBI Agent actually
took Saddam's word for it, and is publishing a book about him this week. The
author is a wonderful agent, but he has been completely conned, as Saddam's
records show repeatedly. I am watching right now as the press praises the
conventional wisdom, and tries to bury my report on what Saddam really said
about WMD to his closest aides. If the press covers up the Saddam files,
they have truly betrayed America.
An alumni of my high school (Boston Latin) once wrote that those who fail to
learn the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat them. Iran tells us
they have no WMD, but the truth is that they and their Syrian puppets are
exploiting every hellish program that Saddam bequeathed to them. This is not
over, Saddam may yet have his revenge: the Iranian are finishing the nuclear
project that he started. Thank God for the Israelis, who twice now have
blown up Saddam''s nuclear facilities: once in Osirak, Iraq, and now in Deir
al Zour, Syria. The more things change, they more they stay the same. For
once, can't the press just admit they were wrong and move on? The only thing
that matters is the truth, and the truth does not belong to the liberals or
conservatives. It belongs to all of us.
Gaubatz: Mr. Loftus hit on a very important issue. The FBI Agent who spent
months with Saddam was simply provided disinformation by Saddam. What
benefit did Saddam have to provide honest details about the WMD? None. We
knew he was going to hang and he knew he was going to hang. Saddam had
played this game with the world for several years, yet many people continue
to fall for the deception.
It is important we learn from our mistakes. In April 2003 we (agents) began
reporting Iranian activity throughout Iraq. The Iranians were paying Iraqis
to disrupt the U.S. mission. The power plants, water systems, and
construction efforts were being sabotaged. Enemy prisoners of war were
reporting (as well as many Iraqis civilians) that Iranian intelligence were
in Iraq and did not want the U.S. mission to succeed. This was not a
surprise to any counter-intelligent officer who had even remotely studied
the tactics of Iranian intelligence. The U.S. installations were trying to
construct roads, upgrade the aircraft runways, and build living facilities
for coalition forces. CI agents knew in April 2003 Iranians were trying to
hamper the progress. The following is from my handwritten notes on 7 May
2003, Nasiriyah, Iraq:
"EPW (enemy prisoner of war) stated Iranian Intelligence told him to attack
Americans and collect information for future attacks. EPW had been working
for Iranian Intelligence since 1996 and had been paid $100.00 per month."
The EPW provided more detailed intelligence, but the point being is the
Iranian situation was ignored in 2003, as well as the WMD. America is now
beginning to see evidence that what was reported in 2003 was not acted upon
and we are on a verge of war with Iran. Our leaders and the news
organizations must begin acting on intelligence and putting the political
correctness issues to the side. Of course there were mistakes made in 2003,
but at some point we must stop making the same mistakes over and over. In a
nuclear, chemical, and biological world there is not room for the same
historical mistakes.
The Iranians like Saddam have one common goal. They want to destroy America
and everything America stands for. The only way to prevent Iran from
becoming another Iraq is for America to stand strong. We must unite as
Americans (left, right, and center). We must clearly inform Iran what we
expect. If they ignore or reject our warnings we must attack them strongly.
They respect strength, but see political correctness as a sign of weakness.
They will exploit this weakness as they have done for years. Subsequently
they will acquire nuclear weapons, and we will be subject to nuclear
terrorism. The time to act is now, not ten years from now. This is a
historical lesson we should have learned.
Mauro: Mr. Loftus earlier mentioned Dr. Jack Shaw, who as deputy
undersecretary for international technology security, tracked the WMD with
some help from Ukrainian intelligence to Syria and Lebanon. The Ukrainians
even had the names of the Russian Spetsnaz officers involved in the
transfers. The Russian element shouldn't be surprising. The documents show
that Russia passed on key details of the U.S. war plan to Iraq, and that
Iraq was working to bring countries like Russia, France and China to their
side using "economical agreements." Others previously published show that
Russia even spied on Tony Blair for Iraq.
James Clapper from the National Imagery Agency also saw the convoys leaving
Iraq traveling through al-Qaim to Syria. I can confirm this element of
Shaw's testimony, as I have communicated with a military source who spoke to
an Iraqi who used to be an Iraqi Intelligence Service captain, and had ten
joined the National Guard. He spoke of seeing guarded convoys travel through
al-Qaim avoiding the populated areas in the months before the invasion, and
why he believed they contained WMD. The Iraq Survey Group report wasn't able
to complete its investigation of whether the WMD went into Syria due to the
insurgency, so it is foolish for anyone to conclude that WMD did not exist.
In regards to Saddam's testimony, we must be very careful with what he says.
He, and other high-level Iraqi officials, had no incentive to cooperate. The
conclusion that there was no WMD results from three pieces of observation.
One, that no stockpiles have been found. The intelligence about the movement
of them to Syria explains this. The "Saddam Files" also rebut this. For
example, one document describes how Turkish and Russian scientists were
successfully hidden from UN inspectors visiting the Badr nuclear site in
2002. Numerous other documents talk of producing and buying materials used
in making chemical and biological weapons, and explicitly say that certain
research programs cannot be discovered.
Second, no one has found a smoking gun document. But now we know that
millions of documents haven't been translated, and the Duelfer Report
explained how a lot of the looting was a cover for the Iraqis to cleanse the
country of incriminating material. Many, many documents were destroyed.
Thirdly, the Iraq Survey Group didn't find a credible person with first-hand
knowledge of the WMD. However, the Duelfer Report admitted that detainees
had no reason to cooperate, and feared retaliation by insurgents. The
interviewing process is harshly criticized in the report.
They key question is why elements of the State Department and the
intelligence community have used their allies in the media to try to
discredit the work on the "Saddam files" and the WMD transfer to Syria. And
more importantly, why the Bush Administration is unable to control the
"shadow warriors," as Ken Timmerman describes them, in the government
bureaucracies.
FP: Mr. Loftus, can you touch on this "key question"?
Loftus: Listen, I am an old fashioned Scoop Jackson Democrat. Please do not
get me to try and explain what the Republicans are doing.
I was afraid the GOP would take our research showing that Saddam had WMD
after all, and ram it down the Democrat's throat. Instead, a cone of silence
has fallen over the issue. No news about WMD, even if it's helpful to the
President, will ever be accepted inside the beltway. The truth we found in
the Saddam files is that most of the bureaucrats in Washington really messed
up on the whole WMD debate, and they do not want to be asked about their
errors. The press has a similarly dismal record in discounting even the
possibility that Saddam had WMD, and is now confronted with the
uncomfortable raw evil emerging from the Iraqi intelligence records.
So while our WMD research is being written about in Israel and in the
Philippines, not a single US newspaper, news magazine, or news channel has
even made an inquiry. This is astonishing. One of the more important stories
this year is simply disappearing from the public view, solely because the
press and politicians want it to go away.
What about the President? When did he lose the power to control his own
employees? When we first raised the issue of the untranslated Saddam
documents at the Intelligence Summit, the President agreed with us and
explicitly overruled his intelligence advisor, John Negroponte.
A year ago, President Bush acted like a commander in chief, and ordered an
expedited translation of the documents we captured at the beginning of the
war. One year later, instead of celebrating victory that the WMD files were
found, the President seems to be meekly submitting to his advisers. The
explosive WMD revelation has ended not with a bang, but with a whimper.
It is being openly said that the Israelis are keeping quiet about their
Syrian raid on Saddam's stockpile so as to avoid embarrassing the Americans.
Since when have Americans been embarrassed about the truth?
There is a biblical quote on the walls of the CIA: "Ye shall know the truth
, and the truth shall set you free." Perhaps we should amend the quote to
read "When an intelligence bureaucrat gets hit in the face with the truth,
he should turn the other cheek and pretend it never happened."
But you know, the truth has a funny way of forcing its way out. No one can
ever say that Saddam was willing to get rid of his WMD programs. The files
we read show the exact opposite. Saddam made fools of us all, and maybe that
is the real reason that this has become the story that never was.
FP: Mr. Gaubatz, some further thoughts on the story that never was?
Gaubatz: I feel the best way to help followers of FPM to best determine if
WMD did actually exist in Iraq, is for me to begin providing more specific
details. After reviewing the following, readers can also determine if they
have been provided the truth from our leaders.
"Agent Gaubatz generated over 60 counterintelligence products during
Operations Southern Watch and Iraqi Freedom. His dedication to duty was
evident through his relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and
intelligence data collected while putting himself in harms way". This
unclassified award was signed after I departed Iraq in July 2003, by Robert
Broeking, Colonel, USAF, in July 2003.
On 3 June 2003, I wrote one particular report pertaining to WMD. An Iraqi
source provided documentation with the names and addresses of 20 Iraqis who
knew first-hand about WMD being moved around in tractor-trailer trucks
during UN Inspections only two months before the war began. In the Suk Ash
Shuyak area (southern Iraq) drivers had rotated the WMD using four trucks.
The WMD had been hidden near the mosque in the town center and in a house
near the mosque (exact home identified in intelligence report). These trucks
had chemical weapons. One of the drivers lived in Suk Ash Shuyak. We were
provided the name of the driver. This information was also in the report.
The grid coordinates as well. The 20 Iraqis (Baath Party officials in
southern Iraq) identified in this report had been confirmed to have executed
many innocent Iraqi civilians and had been involved in attacks on the 507th
and other attacks against U.S. forces. The meeting we had with this source
was in Suk Ash Shuyuk at 1000 hours, 3 June 2003.
On 27 April 2003, another report began with, "60 weapons with chemical
and/or nuclear warheads were hidden in Nasiriyah". The exact locations are
identifed in my reports. We met two former Iraqi Intelligence members on
this day. Their Iraqi intelligence numbers were obtained and verified. We
met both former Iraqi intelligence officers again on 29 April 2003, at 0900
hours. Locations were identifed. The former Iraqi intelligence officers are
'Kadeh Fahed XXXXXX, and Kareem XXXXXX'. The last names were provided in the
intelligence reports.
ISG was provided all of the details in regards to this report. ISG never
followed up on the intelligence. The mosque nor the home identified were
ever inspected. The two Iraqi intelligence officers were never followed up
with interviews as we had requested ISG do. HQ AFOSI can release the
reports.
I believe it is very critical to again mention that many politicians,
military leaders, ISG leaders, and CI officers on the ground (to include
myself) made mistakes. America was facing an enemy like we had ever
encountered before. There was chaos. We were not prepared for what we were
facing. We did not have enough people nor resources to do the job in Iraq.
This is not to put blame on our President or any leader. I believe our
President did the right thing by going into Iraq, but we made a huge mistake
by believing we can win the hearts and minds of people without first
securing them.
Mothers and fathers in Iraq in 2003 did not care about elections or
democracy when their children could not obtain medical care, safely attend
school, had no jobs, and were afraid of being executed by extremists. When
we can't secure our own borders we should have never thought we could secure
their borders from Iranians, or insurgents from other countries. From the
time I went public in late 2004, I have always stated there is nothing I
have ever said about the WMD in Iraq that I can't prove. During
'Congressional Hearings' I will provide all details and will swear under
oath to all information. Will others?
Mauro: Mr. Gaubatz is correct in saying that we didn't win the war for the
hearts and minds by failing to provide security to the Iraqi population.
This occurred because we didn't have a serious counter-insurgency strategy
and the forces to implement it. We failed to fight the ideological war by
supporting alternative media sources to those of the extremists. We didn't
support the Iraqi opposition before the war as much as we should have. We
didn't hand over power to the Iraqis in the beginning, instead choosing to
put an American, Paul Bremer, in charge. Many mistakes were made, but with
things improving, and most of those mistakes rectified, we shouldn't cite
those mistakes as evidence that we can't win. If we withdraw prematurely,
we'll have to look at every Iraqi who risked their lives fighting the
extremists; every woman who is beaten for showing her face; every homosexual
who is persecuted for their relationships; every political prisoner who is
tortured for speaking his or her mind, and tell them that we won't be around
to support their struggle.
I suggest that you ask Mr. Gaubatz about his experience with Republican
congressmen. It appears no one is willing to stand tough on this issue. The
State Department, whose very existence aims to promote good and stable
relationships with foreign countries, obviously won't support it. The DIA
dismissed Shaw's information as being Israeli propaganda, despite the fact
that while Israel reached a similar conclusion, Shaw's information did not
come from them. The CIA tried to discredit Shaw's contacts, which isn't
surprising given the politically-calculated leaks coming from some in that
agency. Mr. Loftus told you about the problems with Negroponte at the
Intelligence Summit. President Bush has to realize that as
Commander-in-Chief, you can't just make a command and expect it to occur.
People in the bureaucracies have agendas, and the huge nature of these
bureaucracies makes it difficult to enforce change.
There are numerous reasons that the Administration isn't acting on this
information. Why go back a fight a political battle that the American public
and media has already decided upon, particularly when those who oppose you
in various areas of the government will use calculated leaks to win the
argument? Secondly, the WMD revelations have significant international
ramifications, and will severely hurt relations with Russia. It will hurt
relations with Syria, who the State Department is trying to win over as we
speak. Thirdly, are we prepared to do anything about the WMDs in Syria?
Fourthly, there obviously isn't a 100% consensus on the issue, so given the
past intelligence failures, it's questionable whether the Administration
would want to make a public statement based on conclusions that are highly
controversial and debatable.
Finally, we live in an age of 30-second sound-bytes. With the public so
skeptical of anything the Administration claims, there has to be a smoking
gun presented that can convince the public within a minute. After that, the
channel changes to reality TV. With so much information classified, I'm not
sure it's fair to make a judgement as to why the Administration isn't
presenting this evidence publicly, and whether it should do so. But the
evidence does exist.
Loftus: For too many government agencies, the evidence is the problem. It is
the 8000 pound elephant sitting on the dining room table that everyone tries
very hard not to notice. The UN staked its reputation on the assertion that
the WMD elephant did not exist, so did the State Department, and the CIA's
Iraq Survey Group.
Now out comes the elephant, in the form of Saddam's own secret files. In the
last few months before the war, Saddam's thugs were ordering every chemical
weapon precursor they could get their hands on, even though some of these
chemicals had been outright banned by the UN for sale to Iraq. Saddam's men
were running around cleaning up radiation leaks ahead of the UN inspectors.
When the State Department was telling the world that Iraq had no nuclear
weapons program at all, Saddam was getting detailed briefings on exactly how
to build nuclear weapons, and how to conceal his nuclear program under
civilian research.
This is an elephant-sized pile of evidence. On the one hand, the bureaucrats
have banned further public access to the Saddam files because too much
genuine information was emerging on how to build an A-Bomb. At the same
time, Negroponte has been telling people that there is no evidence of any
WMD programs in the Iraqi files. They can't have it both ways. They can't
re-classify the Saddam files because they give out too much info on WMD, and
then deny that the Saddam files have any WMD evidence. It is just a dumb
cover-up: as stupid as throwing a blanket over the elephant on the dining
room table and calling it a centerpiece.
The press are even more outrageous in their refusal to see the WMD elephant.
Like the fable of the eight blind men, one reporter grabs the elephant's
leg, and says "that's not an elephant, it's a tree." Another grabs the tail
and says "that's not an elephant, it's a snake." Meanwhile, the evidence
elephant keeps growing and growing under the classification blanket in the
middle of the table.
Some reporters have suggested that perhaps, maybe, wishfully, the Saddam
files were forgeries planted for some kind of clever deception. Yeah, that's
the ticket. Forgeries. Sure, but why would Saddam and his buddies go to the
expense of creating three shelf miles of forgeries, but then bury them where
no one would read them for years, if ever. You would also have to believe
that Saddam built hugely expensive underwater warehouses just for fun
because he really had no WMD to put in them. To completely buy the forgery
theory, you would also have to believe that Saddam and his top aides took
years off their lives to sit around and tape record secret meetings about
WMD that never existed. You believe all that, and I have shares in the
Euphrates bridge to sell you.
No, we do not have one giant smoking gun photo of the elephant because most
of it is covered up (again) by the national security blanket of
classification. But we do have enough snapshots from the Saddam files to
make a reliable outline of the giant beast that was the Iraqi WMD program.
At some point, we have to throw away all the denial arguments as ridiculous,
and admit that the size of the evidence elephant is too overwhelming to
ignore.
Gaubatz: Mr. Mauro and Mr. Loftus are again outstanding in getting straight
to the point and as always they have done their homework and people should
listen to them. Yes I had a nightmare in dealing with a Congressman, but now
I am focused on being proactive in doing what I can to insure potential
terrorists are identified in the U.S.
This week our research team will visit California, Tennessee, North
Carolina, New Jersey and Michigan. The project I am involved in (Mapping
Sharia) does not mean I have given up on the WMD issue. The two are hand in
hand. Most people realize we do have 'sleeper cells' in the U.S. We have
come across such people. Information is being provided to law enforcement
and I believe more information is going to be obtained directly from some of
these people about chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons. Future
terrorist attacks will use these type weapons against innocent people and
Americans should not begin to feel comfortable that 'terrorists' are all
'overseas'.
Recently in Brooklyn, NY, our team obtained audio of a by a well known
Islamic scholar. This scholar who travels throughout the U.S. said it was
justified to hijack and destroy U.S. military aircraft. It is time we listen
and start to believe Islamic leaders who make these type of remarks. They
are instigating young people to commit crimes. It is time our leaders insist
this type behavior is not covered (which it is not) under the First
Amendment and religious speech.
I recently attended a CAIR lecture. The Revolutionary Communist Party
leaders (who were in attendance) were being praised by CAIR officials and
allowed to hand out their material. This did not surprise me, but young
American college students and their professors were at this event and also
praised the Communist Party, but when I asked a question during the lecture
about an Imam in Brooklyn calling for armed violence (on audio) against
non-Muslims in the U.S., I was asked to leave. Again that was expected. Our
team had another member at the event obtaining direct evidence.
Mauro: To further educate the reader as to the significance of the Iraqi
documents, allow me to just review some more.
As far back as the early 1990s, Iraq was working with terrorists. For
example, one file describes Bin Laden as a "collaborator" that had "good
relations" with Iraqi intelligence operating out of Syria. There are key
indications that Iraq even had a role in the 1993 ambush in Somalia.
Iraq's determination to sponsor terrorism continues into the late 1990s. A
1999 memo from the Fedayeen to Uday Hussein describes plans for a campaign
of sabotage, bombing, and assassination in the Kurdish areas of northern
Iraq, in Iran, and in London. The document describes how 50 "fedayeen
martyrs" were given death capsules to swallow if they were captured.
The Iraqi Air Force, we now know, was training terrorists. A letter from a
commander from an Iraqi air base dated March 11, 2001, states, "...we ask to
provide that Division with the names of those who desire to volunteer for
suicide missions to liberate Palestine and strike American interests." An
intelligence document from this same month describes a "call to strike the
presence and interests of America." Another describes training Iraqi
operatives in "terror techniques" for operations of assassination and
sabotage abroad.
A top-secret memo from March 28, 2003 describes training "Arab fedayeens" in
the use of bombs using various methods such as cars, motorcycles, and even
camels. The Iraqis give these Arab fedayeen militants the same benefits as
an Iraqi special forces operate, according to another file.
As for the Iraqi nuclear program, we know from audio tapes released at the
2006 Intelligence Summit that Saddam Hussein had a secret team of nuclear
scientists working on a plasma enrichment program. Two of these scientists,
heard on the tapes, had names not previously known, which almost certainly
means these scientists have not been located or interviewed. A secret memo
from November 1999 describes how some equipment was not declared in the
Iraqi Atomic Energy Organization's archives because it was "shrouded in
secrecy." Another document from 1998, signed by the heads of Iraqi
intelligence and the Atomic Energy Organization describes "the researches
that cannot be declared and that is related with the previous prohibited
programs of WMD and how to make sure that information about these researches
will not leak to the outside." There is also a document that describes how
on August 23, 2002, the Iraqis burned various documents related to the AEO.
As for the chemical and biological programs, numerous documents refer to
"prohibited materials," "prohibited equipment" and "prohibited programs,"
including illegally produced precursor chemicals. Many documents refer to
actions being taken to eliminate traces of WMD programs by destroying
documents, cleaning up labs, and wiping computers clean.
The documents are also embarrassing for other countries. We learn that the
Russians provided key elements of our war plan to the Iraqis, and that
Saddam looked to Russia for help in the UN. A 2001 document describes using
"economical agreements" with Russia, France, China and Japan to undermine
sanctions.
If such incriminating material can be found in just a small, small fraction
of the documents, what other revelations are we missing out on?
FP: John Loftus, Dave Gaubatz and Ryan Mauro, thank you for joining
Frontpage Symposium.
Experts examining Saddam Hussein's secret files have made numerous startling
discoveries about the mystery of the "missing" WMDs. Today Symposium has
assembled a distinguished panel to discuss these documents and what they
have revealed. Our guests are:
John Loftus, President of IntelligenceSummit.org, which is entirely free of
government funding and depends solely upon private contributions for its
support. Visit his website at www.LoftusReport.com.
Dave Gaubatz, the first Federal Agent (civilian) to enter Iraq in 2003.
Currently the Director of the Mapping Shari'a project and owner of Wahhabi
Counter-terrorism publications providing first-hand intelligence for law
enforcement and CT professionals.
and
Ryan Mauro, a volunteer analyst for the Northeast Intelligence Network. He
is the author of Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq, the
founder of WorldThreats.com, and a speaker for the Intelligence Summit. He
was originally hired at age 16 in 2002 as a geopolitical analyst for
Tactical Defense Concepts. He is currently working on a potential TV show
pilot and can be contacted at TDCAnalyst@aol.com.
FP: John Loftus, Dave Gaubatz and Ryan Mauro, welcome to Frontpage
Symposium.
John Loftus, let us begin with you.
Your volunteers at the IntelligenceSummit.org have been examining the secret
documents captured from Saddam -- and it appears that they have solved a
large part of the mystery of Saddam's missing WMDs. Correct?
Loftus: Yes, now the truth is beginning to emerge. Saddam's own secret files
show that he was lying to the UN, year after year. He told the UN that Iraq
had no more WMD after 1991, and would never start those WMD programs again.
But his own secret records show that in 2001, 2002, and 2003, Saddam was
repeatedly purchasing banned chemicals, covering up radiation leaks, and
generally orchestrating a cover-up.
Are the records genuine? We had NSA check the audiotapes to make sure it was
Saddam's own voiceprint. It is. Now, why would Saddam and his top aides
record all those tapes year after year and hide the forgeries in secret
vaults? There are three shelf miles of paper records. What is the point?
These are secret internal records, it is not as if he was using them in
public to fool the Iranians into thinking he had WMD. These records almost
did not even make it onto the light of day. They were buried amid a forest
of documents that might not have been reviewed for decades, if ever. I
cannot think of any explanation but these are genuine secret archives of
Saddam's innermost feelings at his innermost meetings.
Moreover, at the time people like Dave Gaubatz and John Shaw were putting
their statements on the record about how the WMD ended up in Syria, they did
not know that we would get circumstantial corroboration from Saddam's own
files. Statistically, this is beyond the realm of possibility of
fabrication.
Gaubatz: Thanks Jamie. My friend Mr. Loftus is the person who has inspired
me to continue requesting our political leaders and the American public
demand the truth about WMD be brought forward. There was a point in time
when I had raised the flag indicating I surrender and can no longer fight
the WMD cause further. Then I thought of the innocent children who would
suffer the most during a terrorist attack in which WMD was used. I have
obtained a second wind and want to inform everyone based on many years of
working counter-intelligence, I left Iraq knowing WMD had indeed been
buried, some had been transported out of Iraq directly before the war, and
some has now been looted by our enemies.
Are the records genuine as Mr. Loftus stated? The documents are genuine. In
the last year I was informed by Federal Agents on the ground in Iraq, that
many Iraqi sources who provided WMD intelligence to us in 2003, were
subsequently kidnapped and killed for helping Americans.
I want people to realize the war in Iraq is unlike any that our country has
ever faced. There was chaos in 2003, and there is chaos in 2007. I do not
mean to put fault on any one person for the failure to locate the WMD when
we had the opportunity. Our leaders had the best intentions, but failed to
properly review intelligence reports in a timely manner, and most were not
acted upon. We are now suffering the consequences of not listening to the
counter-intelligence officers on the ground and who was obtaining first-hand
intelligence. In 2003 we reported the pending civil war between the Sunni
and Shia Muslims. In pure Islam the Sunni Muslims consider Shia Muslims to
be non-believers and apostates. The punishment for apostasy is death as
described in Fiqh Us Sunnah. Fiqh Us Sunnah is in virtually every Sunni
mosque in America. Our mapping team just left Florida. A prominent Islamic
Scholar (Sunni) advised that all Shia people need to be
killed in the U.S.
The best way to solve the WMD mystery is to have all witnesses involved in
either the search or excavations come before Congress and testify. This is
when I will release names and contact information of the Iraqis who know
first-hand about WMD and the Al Qaeda presence in Iraq well before 2003.
Military agents will then be called forward.
This issue is very easy to prove. Put all players before Congress, under
oath. The truth will be revealed. Some will be hurt politically or their
military careers will be damaged, but America will know the truth. The truth
is the only thing that may have a remote chance of preventing another attack
against our great country.
Mauro: In 2006, particularly after pressure from the Intelligence Summit,
the Bush Administration began declassifying some of the millions of
documents that have been found in Iraq. Many of them were not translated due
to the sheer volume of documents the U.S. possessed and how few reliable
Arabic translators we have. These documents, as they were declassified, were
put on the Internet where concerned citizens, fluent in Arabic, began
translating them. Joseph Shahda and Ray Robison are two individuals who
played a critical role in this. My only role was organizing and presenting
them at the 2007 Intelligence Summit, and coupling it with the extensive
open-source research I've done.
However, this web site where the declassified documents were placed has been
taken down. An Iraqi document with critical details on how to build a
nuclear weapon was posted, and the government decided it was best to end
this practice. As a result, millions of documents are not translated and
analyzed, leaving a big gaping hole in our intelligence collection. Though
the picture is incomplete, we have clear indications that Iraq, at the
least, had the capabilities to produce WMD and was actively researching and
expanding that capability. There is also evidence that WMD went to Syria.
We learn about an Iraqi dissident who reported to us that he was in contact
with drivers who confessed to transporting WMD into Syria. Apparently, 50
trucks arrived in Deir al-Zour, Syria, on March 10, 2003. One driver told
the informant that an earlier shipment occurred on March 1st. Another
document describes how Chinese intelligence picked up information about a
WMD transfer to Syria, and asked the Germans for verification. The Germans
said they didn't have information on such a transfer, and then someone in
the German government leaked this discussion to the Iraqis.
We also know that Iraq was in bed with foreign terrorists, and although no
smoking gun exists to prove a collaborative relationship with Al-Qaeda, we
do know from a document from 1997 that Iraqi intelligence met with Osama Bin
Laden on February 19, 1995, where Bin Laden requested that Iraqi radio
broadcast the speeches of a radical sheikh. Bin Laden also "requested joint
operations against the forces of infidels in the land of Hijaz," which is
Saudi Arabia. Those who argued for so long that Bin Laden was unwilling to
work with a so-called secular dictator like Saddam are proven wrong, as Bin
Laden, not the Iraqis, initiated the request for collaboration.
It is worthy to note that on November 13, 1995, only months after this
meeting, Al-Qaeda bombed the Saudi National Guards headquarters in Riyadh,
killing five Americans. It's circumstantial evidence, but other documents
clearly point to Iraq as a committed state sponsor of terrorism.
FP: So what does all of this mean? What do we carry away from these
discoveries?
And where is the apology from the liberal Left?
Moreover, the U.S. clearly failed in securing and searching key sites after
it defeated Saddam. If it failed in this context, how can we be hopeful that
the U.S. will succeed in dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran?
Loftus: I think what we carry away from Saddam's secret files is that the
average citizen today does not have a clue about world history because so
much of it is classified. This is a theme that dates back to my
congressional testimony in the 1980's about Nazis in America. Russian double
agent Kim Philby of British Intelligence dumped hundreds (if not thousands)
of former Nazi war criminals in America, disguised as anti-communist freedom
fighters. When US intelligence found out how badly they had been tricked,
they covered it up for a half century, until I exposed it on 60 Minutes.
It is the cover-up that kills America, not the mistakes. The American people
are forgiving, they know that all government agencies make mistakes from
time to time. The American attitude is let's fix it and move on. But the
liars that cover up their mistakes are traitors to America, because they
prevent their mistakes from ever getting fixed. One of my favorite old
spies, George Orwell wrote: "The omission is the most powerful form of lie,
and it is the duty of historians to ensure that those lies do not creep into
the history books." He was writing about the evils of communism and nazism,
but he could just as easily have been writing about Saddam Hussein.
It wasn't just the liberal press that was utterly wrong about Saddam Hussein
having WMD, it was almost the entire mainstream press, and a good chunk of
the conservative press went along with it. Heck, even all of the experts in
the State Department drank Saddam's cool aid. Truth be told, just about
everyone bought into Saddam's lie that he had no plans for making any more
WMD. Right up to the end of his life, Saddam was even lying to his own
jailer. He told this FBI Special Agent that he had no WMD, and was only
lying about having WMD to intimidate the Iranians. The FBI Agent actually
took Saddam's word for it, and is publishing a book about him this week. The
author is a wonderful agent, but he has been completely conned, as Saddam's
records show repeatedly. I am watching right now as the press praises the
conventional wisdom, and tries to bury my report on what Saddam really said
about WMD to his closest aides. If the press covers up the Saddam files,
they have truly betrayed America.
An alumni of my high school (Boston Latin) once wrote that those who fail to
learn the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat them. Iran tells us
they have no WMD, but the truth is that they and their Syrian puppets are
exploiting every hellish program that Saddam bequeathed to them. This is not
over, Saddam may yet have his revenge: the Iranian are finishing the nuclear
project that he started. Thank God for the Israelis, who twice now have
blown up Saddam''s nuclear facilities: once in Osirak, Iraq, and now in Deir
al Zour, Syria. The more things change, they more they stay the same. For
once, can't the press just admit they were wrong and move on? The only thing
that matters is the truth, and the truth does not belong to the liberals or
conservatives. It belongs to all of us.
Gaubatz: Mr. Loftus hit on a very important issue. The FBI Agent who spent
months with Saddam was simply provided disinformation by Saddam. What
benefit did Saddam have to provide honest details about the WMD? None. We
knew he was going to hang and he knew he was going to hang. Saddam had
played this game with the world for several years, yet many people continue
to fall for the deception.
It is important we learn from our mistakes. In April 2003 we (agents) began
reporting Iranian activity throughout Iraq. The Iranians were paying Iraqis
to disrupt the U.S. mission. The power plants, water systems, and
construction efforts were being sabotaged. Enemy prisoners of war were
reporting (as well as many Iraqis civilians) that Iranian intelligence were
in Iraq and did not want the U.S. mission to succeed. This was not a
surprise to any counter-intelligent officer who had even remotely studied
the tactics of Iranian intelligence. The U.S. installations were trying to
construct roads, upgrade the aircraft runways, and build living facilities
for coalition forces. CI agents knew in April 2003 Iranians were trying to
hamper the progress. The following is from my handwritten notes on 7 May
2003, Nasiriyah, Iraq:
"EPW (enemy prisoner of war) stated Iranian Intelligence told him to attack
Americans and collect information for future attacks. EPW had been working
for Iranian Intelligence since 1996 and had been paid $100.00 per month."
The EPW provided more detailed intelligence, but the point being is the
Iranian situation was ignored in 2003, as well as the WMD. America is now
beginning to see evidence that what was reported in 2003 was not acted upon
and we are on a verge of war with Iran. Our leaders and the news
organizations must begin acting on intelligence and putting the political
correctness issues to the side. Of course there were mistakes made in 2003,
but at some point we must stop making the same mistakes over and over. In a
nuclear, chemical, and biological world there is not room for the same
historical mistakes.
The Iranians like Saddam have one common goal. They want to destroy America
and everything America stands for. The only way to prevent Iran from
becoming another Iraq is for America to stand strong. We must unite as
Americans (left, right, and center). We must clearly inform Iran what we
expect. If they ignore or reject our warnings we must attack them strongly.
They respect strength, but see political correctness as a sign of weakness.
They will exploit this weakness as they have done for years. Subsequently
they will acquire nuclear weapons, and we will be subject to nuclear
terrorism. The time to act is now, not ten years from now. This is a
historical lesson we should have learned.
Mauro: Mr. Loftus earlier mentioned Dr. Jack Shaw, who as deputy
undersecretary for international technology security, tracked the WMD with
some help from Ukrainian intelligence to Syria and Lebanon. The Ukrainians
even had the names of the Russian Spetsnaz officers involved in the
transfers. The Russian element shouldn't be surprising. The documents show
that Russia passed on key details of the U.S. war plan to Iraq, and that
Iraq was working to bring countries like Russia, France and China to their
side using "economical agreements." Others previously published show that
Russia even spied on Tony Blair for Iraq.
James Clapper from the National Imagery Agency also saw the convoys leaving
Iraq traveling through al-Qaim to Syria. I can confirm this element of
Shaw's testimony, as I have communicated with a military source who spoke to
an Iraqi who used to be an Iraqi Intelligence Service captain, and had ten
joined the National Guard. He spoke of seeing guarded convoys travel through
al-Qaim avoiding the populated areas in the months before the invasion, and
why he believed they contained WMD. The Iraq Survey Group report wasn't able
to complete its investigation of whether the WMD went into Syria due to the
insurgency, so it is foolish for anyone to conclude that WMD did not exist.
In regards to Saddam's testimony, we must be very careful with what he says.
He, and other high-level Iraqi officials, had no incentive to cooperate. The
conclusion that there was no WMD results from three pieces of observation.
One, that no stockpiles have been found. The intelligence about the movement
of them to Syria explains this. The "Saddam Files" also rebut this. For
example, one document describes how Turkish and Russian scientists were
successfully hidden from UN inspectors visiting the Badr nuclear site in
2002. Numerous other documents talk of producing and buying materials used
in making chemical and biological weapons, and explicitly say that certain
research programs cannot be discovered.
Second, no one has found a smoking gun document. But now we know that
millions of documents haven't been translated, and the Duelfer Report
explained how a lot of the looting was a cover for the Iraqis to cleanse the
country of incriminating material. Many, many documents were destroyed.
Thirdly, the Iraq Survey Group didn't find a credible person with first-hand
knowledge of the WMD. However, the Duelfer Report admitted that detainees
had no reason to cooperate, and feared retaliation by insurgents. The
interviewing process is harshly criticized in the report.
They key question is why elements of the State Department and the
intelligence community have used their allies in the media to try to
discredit the work on the "Saddam files" and the WMD transfer to Syria. And
more importantly, why the Bush Administration is unable to control the
"shadow warriors," as Ken Timmerman describes them, in the government
bureaucracies.
FP: Mr. Loftus, can you touch on this "key question"?
Loftus: Listen, I am an old fashioned Scoop Jackson Democrat. Please do not
get me to try and explain what the Republicans are doing.
I was afraid the GOP would take our research showing that Saddam had WMD
after all, and ram it down the Democrat's throat. Instead, a cone of silence
has fallen over the issue. No news about WMD, even if it's helpful to the
President, will ever be accepted inside the beltway. The truth we found in
the Saddam files is that most of the bureaucrats in Washington really messed
up on the whole WMD debate, and they do not want to be asked about their
errors. The press has a similarly dismal record in discounting even the
possibility that Saddam had WMD, and is now confronted with the
uncomfortable raw evil emerging from the Iraqi intelligence records.
So while our WMD research is being written about in Israel and in the
Philippines, not a single US newspaper, news magazine, or news channel has
even made an inquiry. This is astonishing. One of the more important stories
this year is simply disappearing from the public view, solely because the
press and politicians want it to go away.
What about the President? When did he lose the power to control his own
employees? When we first raised the issue of the untranslated Saddam
documents at the Intelligence Summit, the President agreed with us and
explicitly overruled his intelligence advisor, John Negroponte.
A year ago, President Bush acted like a commander in chief, and ordered an
expedited translation of the documents we captured at the beginning of the
war. One year later, instead of celebrating victory that the WMD files were
found, the President seems to be meekly submitting to his advisers. The
explosive WMD revelation has ended not with a bang, but with a whimper.
It is being openly said that the Israelis are keeping quiet about their
Syrian raid on Saddam's stockpile so as to avoid embarrassing the Americans.
Since when have Americans been embarrassed about the truth?
There is a biblical quote on the walls of the CIA: "Ye shall know the truth
, and the truth shall set you free." Perhaps we should amend the quote to
read "When an intelligence bureaucrat gets hit in the face with the truth,
he should turn the other cheek and pretend it never happened."
But you know, the truth has a funny way of forcing its way out. No one can
ever say that Saddam was willing to get rid of his WMD programs. The files
we read show the exact opposite. Saddam made fools of us all, and maybe that
is the real reason that this has become the story that never was.
FP: Mr. Gaubatz, some further thoughts on the story that never was?
Gaubatz: I feel the best way to help followers of FPM to best determine if
WMD did actually exist in Iraq, is for me to begin providing more specific
details. After reviewing the following, readers can also determine if they
have been provided the truth from our leaders.
"Agent Gaubatz generated over 60 counterintelligence products during
Operations Southern Watch and Iraqi Freedom. His dedication to duty was
evident through his relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and
intelligence data collected while putting himself in harms way". This
unclassified award was signed after I departed Iraq in July 2003, by Robert
Broeking, Colonel, USAF, in July 2003.
On 3 June 2003, I wrote one particular report pertaining to WMD. An Iraqi
source provided documentation with the names and addresses of 20 Iraqis who
knew first-hand about WMD being moved around in tractor-trailer trucks
during UN Inspections only two months before the war began. In the Suk Ash
Shuyak area (southern Iraq) drivers had rotated the WMD using four trucks.
The WMD had been hidden near the mosque in the town center and in a house
near the mosque (exact home identified in intelligence report). These trucks
had chemical weapons. One of the drivers lived in Suk Ash Shuyak. We were
provided the name of the driver. This information was also in the report.
The grid coordinates as well. The 20 Iraqis (Baath Party officials in
southern Iraq) identified in this report had been confirmed to have executed
many innocent Iraqi civilians and had been involved in attacks on the 507th
and other attacks against U.S. forces. The meeting we had with this source
was in Suk Ash Shuyuk at 1000 hours, 3 June 2003.
On 27 April 2003, another report began with, "60 weapons with chemical
and/or nuclear warheads were hidden in Nasiriyah". The exact locations are
identifed in my reports. We met two former Iraqi Intelligence members on
this day. Their Iraqi intelligence numbers were obtained and verified. We
met both former Iraqi intelligence officers again on 29 April 2003, at 0900
hours. Locations were identifed. The former Iraqi intelligence officers are
'Kadeh Fahed XXXXXX, and Kareem XXXXXX'. The last names were provided in the
intelligence reports.
ISG was provided all of the details in regards to this report. ISG never
followed up on the intelligence. The mosque nor the home identified were
ever inspected. The two Iraqi intelligence officers were never followed up
with interviews as we had requested ISG do. HQ AFOSI can release the
reports.
I believe it is very critical to again mention that many politicians,
military leaders, ISG leaders, and CI officers on the ground (to include
myself) made mistakes. America was facing an enemy like we had ever
encountered before. There was chaos. We were not prepared for what we were
facing. We did not have enough people nor resources to do the job in Iraq.
This is not to put blame on our President or any leader. I believe our
President did the right thing by going into Iraq, but we made a huge mistake
by believing we can win the hearts and minds of people without first
securing them.
Mothers and fathers in Iraq in 2003 did not care about elections or
democracy when their children could not obtain medical care, safely attend
school, had no jobs, and were afraid of being executed by extremists. When
we can't secure our own borders we should have never thought we could secure
their borders from Iranians, or insurgents from other countries. From the
time I went public in late 2004, I have always stated there is nothing I
have ever said about the WMD in Iraq that I can't prove. During
'Congressional Hearings' I will provide all details and will swear under
oath to all information. Will others?
Mauro: Mr. Gaubatz is correct in saying that we didn't win the war for the
hearts and minds by failing to provide security to the Iraqi population.
This occurred because we didn't have a serious counter-insurgency strategy
and the forces to implement it. We failed to fight the ideological war by
supporting alternative media sources to those of the extremists. We didn't
support the Iraqi opposition before the war as much as we should have. We
didn't hand over power to the Iraqis in the beginning, instead choosing to
put an American, Paul Bremer, in charge. Many mistakes were made, but with
things improving, and most of those mistakes rectified, we shouldn't cite
those mistakes as evidence that we can't win. If we withdraw prematurely,
we'll have to look at every Iraqi who risked their lives fighting the
extremists; every woman who is beaten for showing her face; every homosexual
who is persecuted for their relationships; every political prisoner who is
tortured for speaking his or her mind, and tell them that we won't be around
to support their struggle.
I suggest that you ask Mr. Gaubatz about his experience with Republican
congressmen. It appears no one is willing to stand tough on this issue. The
State Department, whose very existence aims to promote good and stable
relationships with foreign countries, obviously won't support it. The DIA
dismissed Shaw's information as being Israeli propaganda, despite the fact
that while Israel reached a similar conclusion, Shaw's information did not
come from them. The CIA tried to discredit Shaw's contacts, which isn't
surprising given the politically-calculated leaks coming from some in that
agency. Mr. Loftus told you about the problems with Negroponte at the
Intelligence Summit. President Bush has to realize that as
Commander-in-Chief, you can't just make a command and expect it to occur.
People in the bureaucracies have agendas, and the huge nature of these
bureaucracies makes it difficult to enforce change.
There are numerous reasons that the Administration isn't acting on this
information. Why go back a fight a political battle that the American public
and media has already decided upon, particularly when those who oppose you
in various areas of the government will use calculated leaks to win the
argument? Secondly, the WMD revelations have significant international
ramifications, and will severely hurt relations with Russia. It will hurt
relations with Syria, who the State Department is trying to win over as we
speak. Thirdly, are we prepared to do anything about the WMDs in Syria?
Fourthly, there obviously isn't a 100% consensus on the issue, so given the
past intelligence failures, it's questionable whether the Administration
would want to make a public statement based on conclusions that are highly
controversial and debatable.
Finally, we live in an age of 30-second sound-bytes. With the public so
skeptical of anything the Administration claims, there has to be a smoking
gun presented that can convince the public within a minute. After that, the
channel changes to reality TV. With so much information classified, I'm not
sure it's fair to make a judgement as to why the Administration isn't
presenting this evidence publicly, and whether it should do so. But the
evidence does exist.
Loftus: For too many government agencies, the evidence is the problem. It is
the 8000 pound elephant sitting on the dining room table that everyone tries
very hard not to notice. The UN staked its reputation on the assertion that
the WMD elephant did not exist, so did the State Department, and the CIA's
Iraq Survey Group.
Now out comes the elephant, in the form of Saddam's own secret files. In the
last few months before the war, Saddam's thugs were ordering every chemical
weapon precursor they could get their hands on, even though some of these
chemicals had been outright banned by the UN for sale to Iraq. Saddam's men
were running around cleaning up radiation leaks ahead of the UN inspectors.
When the State Department was telling the world that Iraq had no nuclear
weapons program at all, Saddam was getting detailed briefings on exactly how
to build nuclear weapons, and how to conceal his nuclear program under
civilian research.
This is an elephant-sized pile of evidence. On the one hand, the bureaucrats
have banned further public access to the Saddam files because too much
genuine information was emerging on how to build an A-Bomb. At the same
time, Negroponte has been telling people that there is no evidence of any
WMD programs in the Iraqi files. They can't have it both ways. They can't
re-classify the Saddam files because they give out too much info on WMD, and
then deny that the Saddam files have any WMD evidence. It is just a dumb
cover-up: as stupid as throwing a blanket over the elephant on the dining
room table and calling it a centerpiece.
The press are even more outrageous in their refusal to see the WMD elephant.
Like the fable of the eight blind men, one reporter grabs the elephant's
leg, and says "that's not an elephant, it's a tree." Another grabs the tail
and says "that's not an elephant, it's a snake." Meanwhile, the evidence
elephant keeps growing and growing under the classification blanket in the
middle of the table.
Some reporters have suggested that perhaps, maybe, wishfully, the Saddam
files were forgeries planted for some kind of clever deception. Yeah, that's
the ticket. Forgeries. Sure, but why would Saddam and his buddies go to the
expense of creating three shelf miles of forgeries, but then bury them where
no one would read them for years, if ever. You would also have to believe
that Saddam built hugely expensive underwater warehouses just for fun
because he really had no WMD to put in them. To completely buy the forgery
theory, you would also have to believe that Saddam and his top aides took
years off their lives to sit around and tape record secret meetings about
WMD that never existed. You believe all that, and I have shares in the
Euphrates bridge to sell you.
No, we do not have one giant smoking gun photo of the elephant because most
of it is covered up (again) by the national security blanket of
classification. But we do have enough snapshots from the Saddam files to
make a reliable outline of the giant beast that was the Iraqi WMD program.
At some point, we have to throw away all the denial arguments as ridiculous,
and admit that the size of the evidence elephant is too overwhelming to
ignore.
Gaubatz: Mr. Mauro and Mr. Loftus are again outstanding in getting straight
to the point and as always they have done their homework and people should
listen to them. Yes I had a nightmare in dealing with a Congressman, but now
I am focused on being proactive in doing what I can to insure potential
terrorists are identified in the U.S.
This week our research team will visit California, Tennessee, North
Carolina, New Jersey and Michigan. The project I am involved in (Mapping
Sharia) does not mean I have given up on the WMD issue. The two are hand in
hand. Most people realize we do have 'sleeper cells' in the U.S. We have
come across such people. Information is being provided to law enforcement
and I believe more information is going to be obtained directly from some of
these people about chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons. Future
terrorist attacks will use these type weapons against innocent people and
Americans should not begin to feel comfortable that 'terrorists' are all
'overseas'.
Recently in Brooklyn, NY, our team obtained audio of a by a well known
Islamic scholar. This scholar who travels throughout the U.S. said it was
justified to hijack and destroy U.S. military aircraft. It is time we listen
and start to believe Islamic leaders who make these type of remarks. They
are instigating young people to commit crimes. It is time our leaders insist
this type behavior is not covered (which it is not) under the First
Amendment and religious speech.
I recently attended a CAIR lecture. The Revolutionary Communist Party
leaders (who were in attendance) were being praised by CAIR officials and
allowed to hand out their material. This did not surprise me, but young
American college students and their professors were at this event and also
praised the Communist Party, but when I asked a question during the lecture
about an Imam in Brooklyn calling for armed violence (on audio) against
non-Muslims in the U.S., I was asked to leave. Again that was expected. Our
team had another member at the event obtaining direct evidence.
Mauro: To further educate the reader as to the significance of the Iraqi
documents, allow me to just review some more.
As far back as the early 1990s, Iraq was working with terrorists. For
example, one file describes Bin Laden as a "collaborator" that had "good
relations" with Iraqi intelligence operating out of Syria. There are key
indications that Iraq even had a role in the 1993 ambush in Somalia.
Iraq's determination to sponsor terrorism continues into the late 1990s. A
1999 memo from the Fedayeen to Uday Hussein describes plans for a campaign
of sabotage, bombing, and assassination in the Kurdish areas of northern
Iraq, in Iran, and in London. The document describes how 50 "fedayeen
martyrs" were given death capsules to swallow if they were captured.
The Iraqi Air Force, we now know, was training terrorists. A letter from a
commander from an Iraqi air base dated March 11, 2001, states, "...we ask to
provide that Division with the names of those who desire to volunteer for
suicide missions to liberate Palestine and strike American interests." An
intelligence document from this same month describes a "call to strike the
presence and interests of America." Another describes training Iraqi
operatives in "terror techniques" for operations of assassination and
sabotage abroad.
A top-secret memo from March 28, 2003 describes training "Arab fedayeens" in
the use of bombs using various methods such as cars, motorcycles, and even
camels. The Iraqis give these Arab fedayeen militants the same benefits as
an Iraqi special forces operate, according to another file.
As for the Iraqi nuclear program, we know from audio tapes released at the
2006 Intelligence Summit that Saddam Hussein had a secret team of nuclear
scientists working on a plasma enrichment program. Two of these scientists,
heard on the tapes, had names not previously known, which almost certainly
means these scientists have not been located or interviewed. A secret memo
from November 1999 describes how some equipment was not declared in the
Iraqi Atomic Energy Organization's archives because it was "shrouded in
secrecy." Another document from 1998, signed by the heads of Iraqi
intelligence and the Atomic Energy Organization describes "the researches
that cannot be declared and that is related with the previous prohibited
programs of WMD and how to make sure that information about these researches
will not leak to the outside." There is also a document that describes how
on August 23, 2002, the Iraqis burned various documents related to the AEO.
As for the chemical and biological programs, numerous documents refer to
"prohibited materials," "prohibited equipment" and "prohibited programs,"
including illegally produced precursor chemicals. Many documents refer to
actions being taken to eliminate traces of WMD programs by destroying
documents, cleaning up labs, and wiping computers clean.
The documents are also embarrassing for other countries. We learn that the
Russians provided key elements of our war plan to the Iraqis, and that
Saddam looked to Russia for help in the UN. A 2001 document describes using
"economical agreements" with Russia, France, China and Japan to undermine
sanctions.
If such incriminating material can be found in just a small, small fraction
of the documents, what other revelations are we missing out on?
FP: John Loftus, Dave Gaubatz and Ryan Mauro, thank you for joining
Frontpage Symposium.