With No Apologies, Let’s Move Out

Indeed, where’s the outrage?

With David Kay’s resignation, press interviews and Senate testimony, and the report issued earlier this month from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, disapproving of the decision to invade Iraq, we ve seen a renewed Democrat outrage and a seeming injection of credibility into their candidates issue-starved campaigns. (By the way what does Dean’s constant rant, “Take back the flag,” mean?) But the anti-war/anti-Bush coalition (for brevity, the AWAB’s) attacks on this administration s decision to wage what arguably is one of the most benevolent wars of liberation ever is really rage over Bush’s semantics and is amplified by an obsequious media ruse which has excerpted Kay’s statements to suit its agenda. And the press has largely omitted many of Kay’s statements such as, “I actually think what we learned during the inspection(s) is that Iraq was a more dangerous place, potentially, than, in fact, we thought it was before the war.”

Director Tenet’s Senate testimony corroborates Kay’s in that he referred to Iraqi programs aimed at developing nuclear, biologic, chemical weapons and moreover Hussein’s desire to deceive the first Gulf War victors as to how mature these programs were. Ultimately, the danger that this president had to confront was a surprise in the form of a more lethal attack than was 9/11. Based on the intelligence provided by the CIA and our allied intelligence agencies, together with the homicidal character of the Iraqi Dictator, the risk associated with leaving him in power was one this president was not willing to take.

The nature of intelligence gathering is that it is nearly always imperfect. As will any post-9/11 president, Bush is forced to use what information he has in waging a war that is far different and, in some ways, where our position is far more precarious than in any previous conflict. He has no certain road map in this campaign to stop an unknown number of stateless suicidal terrorists who have pronounced that they seek to deliver to our homeland the high-tech weapons that will destroy us. And what the AWAB’s won’t acknowledge is that, while prosecuting this war, Bush is also endeavoring to free a vast portion of the Islamic world from bondage. Plane loads of centrifuges and related nuclear weapons equipment are arriving this week from Libya, making good on Qadaffi’s promise to relinquish his WMD programs and opening the way for freer social and economic exchange for his citizens. What we may be witnessing is the unfolding of an epoch win/win, masterminded by the Bush Neocons. Will the continued prosecution of this enormous project be easy? Of course it won’t.

However, it seems very unlikely that history will smile upon today’s AWAB’s. They, for many reasons, have much to account for. One example is the simple fact that Bush s stewardship of the anti-terror program over these last two years since 9/11 has prevented the eventuation of a single new attack. With the arrest of Jose Padilla, we know that an attempt to detonate a dirty nuke inside a major U.S. city was thwarted. Undoubtedly, the many other attacks by militant Islamicists that have been prevented are still classified secrets and unknown to the general public. But rumors abound. It s disgraceful that the AWAB’s are so ungrateful. Partnering with Democrat candidates (other than Joe Liberman) AWAB editorialists across the country used the Carnegie condemnation and Kay’s inability to find the stockpiles of WMD’s as a validation for their renewed sense of outrage over the Iraq war.

An opposing outrage is also rising among those who understand the threat and have to suffer this fake, manufactured, perfidious anger continuously issued by not only large portions of the media, but Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, Madonna, and most of the Hollywood elite like Hussein’s shill, Sean Penn. Kay s statements and the Carnegie foundation’s assessment that the Bush Administration systematically misrepresented the stage of development of the Iraqi WMD programs both require careful and thorough reading. Carnegie has staked out the latest AWAB position where the coalition is now relegated to parsing words, decrying Bush lies that misrepresented the difference between an immediate versus a long-range threat. This new position apparently has replaced their former position that averred that there was no evidence of a Hussein link to terror. But where was their outrage with the Clinton administration officials, who in 1998 told us that Iraq s WMD programs necessitated four days of cruise missile attacks on Baghdad? And where was their outrage with the U.N. which issued 16 resolutions condemning Iraq for its WMD violations? Where is their outrage with the British, French, German, Russian intelligence services that all concurred that Hussein had his WMD programs in place up to the start of the war. Or with numerous Democrat luminaries like John Kerry who voted to cut our intelligence service budgets many times over the last twenty years? Or for that matter, Ron Dellums who vowed to take the CIA apart brick by brick? Or their outrage over the massive grave recently discovered in Southern Iraq where a significant portion of 180,000 murdered Kurds, men and boys, were rounded up and bused from their northern villages, shot and buried? And let me guess, the bulk of the anti-war crowd wasn’t all that outraged when the Clinton Administration and Wesley Clarke headed up NATO s bombing of Belgrade which killed 2,000 innocent Serbian civilians?

The reason the AWAB’s and those who re apparently running the Carnegie Endowment inspire equal and opposing outrage is that bin Laden has said that it is the duty of the true believers to acquire and use WMD’s against the infidel. And with their preoccupation with semantics, these partisan leftists are still trying to tell us we should be worried about the timing of WMD development!! Just what is an imminent threat, two years, three years out? Kay has repeatedly said there were WMD programs in Iraq that could have been easily restarted once the threat of inspections had been lifted. Bush s term was gathering threat, by the way. Who gives a damn anyway when we stop an enemy’s WMD programs, given that we’re talking about an unstable dangerous dictator and homicidal maniac who tried to assassinate a former U.S. president, murdered hundreds of thousands, gassed his own people, and is a known harborer of terrorist?! Does anyone recall the infamous terrorist Abu Nidal was found murdered in Baghdad? Afghan based al Qaeda operatives killed three thousand people with box cutters. Imagine the damage just a few Iraqi financed terrorist could do inside the U.S. with just 100 lbs of ricin poison gas? The AWAB’s are not worried about such trivia. Let’s be accurate. The anti-war crowd is really just anti-Bush and willing to do their part to undermine the war effort against terror until one of their own is running the country which is a chilling thought for hopefully a plurality of voters.

Much of the anti-war crowd has made clear they think Bush, the liar, is also a dumb frat boy. But, it’s becoming apparent that they and their allies have already been had and they don’t even know it yet. There is a memo, dated October 27, 2003, leaked to Fox News from the Defense Department’s Undersecretary, Douglas, Feith, and sent to the embattled Senate Intelligence Committee, the same committee where Democrats were exposed as falsifying secret war-related intelligence in an effort to hurt the president. The leaked memo contains 50 bullet points and runs to 16 pages but is a distillation of thousands of pages of documents uncovered in Iraqi intelligence service offices and compiled from the testimony of captured Afghan, Iraqi, and other foreign combatants. It not only links Hussein to Bin Laden abundantly but it expands that connection to include scary deadly weapons (SDW) procurement. Among the massively damning evidence against the anti-war/anti-Bush media and the Democrat presidential hopefuls is the following, “Ibn al Shaykh al Libi, a senior al Qaeda operative, said he was tasked to travel to Iraq in 1998 to establish a relationship with Iraqi Intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training—after the USS Cole bombing (in 2000), chemical and biological weapons training,all corroborated, verifiable, and usable in the 04 presidential campaign.

For the naïve AWAB’s, it gets worse. The investigation of an event like 9/11 will never be complete in our era. They cannot stop history from being written. Already, the massive evidence behind the above memo has connected 9/11 leader, Mohammed Atta, with the Prague-based Iraqi intelligence service. And more will be learned. Based now on highly corroborated evidence from numerous sources, Atta went to Prague four times, the last time in April of 2001. The only doubt that can be sown regarding these meetings is that the CIA and FBI cannot confirm or deny the final two meetings. Czech Interior Minister, Stanislav Gross, continues to stand by his information. (Even today, we have to rely on allied intelligence services because Church committee constraints put in place since the 70s have hobbled CIA capabilities.) The CIA will confirm that Atta s contacts in Prague were with Iraqi Intelligence Service and its station chief, Ahmed al Ani. It has confirmed that on his last visit in May of 2000, Atta s forged passport caused him to be denied entry to Czechoslovakia. Instead of flying back to the U.S., he flew to Germany and gained entry to the country by bus. A day after his last visit, Czech banking records prove that al Ani requested a transfer of $200,000 from Iraqi Intelligence to an account controlled by Atta in the U.S. Clinton s own CIA Director, James Woolsey who has looked at all this evidence has said publicly, Anyone who doesn t see the Hussein link to al Qaeda is delusional.

And speaking of hyped or faulty intelligence about which the AWAB s and Carnegie Endowment are so outraged, it was the Clinton Administration that told us that, if we didn’t remove the Serbian dictator, we would find mass graves throughout the southern Balkans. But those mass graves never materialized in the Balkans. But it was fine by the Bush haters for the U.S. to effect regime change in Serbia. The problem for AWAB’s is that Milosevic murdered far fewer of his own citizens than did Hussein and moreover, the Iraqi Butcher s liaison with terror, those who desire weapons of our mass destruction, will continue to be made public despite a good portion of the media s efforts to under report it. The AWAB’s and the sycophantic media s pronouncements, past and present, rather sadly reflect a shallow seditious hatred of the current administration, and serve only to divide the country, dampening our resolve and impugning our security, our military strength and our ability to preempt future attacks from our mortal enemy, militant Islam.

NOTE: An edited version of this article appeared on page D – 5 of the San Francisco Chronicle