Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago,
today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. People remembered 12/7 longer. Just a thought. Steve |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
SteveB wrote:
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. People remembered 12/7 longer. Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention 9/11. What's the connection? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
"PhysicsGenius" wrote in message ... SteveB wrote: "Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. People remembered 12/7 longer. Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention 9/11. What's the connection? And you claim to be a genius! (?) Figure it out. HAH! Steve |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Who mentioned Iraq?
It is no wonder that you are confused. You assume that only countries can do damage to others. The war that we are in isn't with any particular country but rather with a religion (Islam) that seems to think that you have to either be a Muslim or dead. The worst part of that religion is that they haven't even settled down to what the religion really means to the people and how to interpet the teachings of that religion. -- Bob May Losing weight is easy! If you ever want to lose weight, eat and drink less. Works evevery time it is tried! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:15:08 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote: SteveB wrote: "Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. People remembered 12/7 longer. Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention 9/11. What's the connection? To answer your transparently facetious question - Radical Islamic terrorists who wish to kill as many non-Islamists in general and American citizens in particular as possible in order to contribute to a general global effort to impose Islamic theocracies. Mike Patterson Please remove the spamtrap to email me. The question isn't "are there weapons of mass destruction?", the question is "who has them now?" http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/...ny/default.asp http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/iraqweaponsgap.asp |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article nkKAb.69717$kl6.25804@fed1read03, SteveB wrote:
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. how many? under 3000 was the final 9/11 count. the Arizona alone was 1200. i seem to remember 2xxx total at Pearl --Loren |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:15:08 GMT, PhysicsGenius wrote: SteveB wrote: "Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. People remembered 12/7 longer. Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention 9/11. What's the connection? To answer your transparently facetious question - Radical Islamic terrorists who wish to kill as many non-Islamists in general and American citizens in particular as possible in order to contribute to a general global effort to impose Islamic theocracies. And these people were located in Iraq somewhere? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article nkKAb.69717$kl6.25804@fed1read03, SteveB says...
People remembered 12/7 longer. Not to change the topic, but I'm willing to go out on a limb here and bet a coke that in 65 years, they're still gonna remember the WTC disaster. But even then, the above statement about pearl harbor will still be true. Folks will always remember that longer than the WTC thing, because pearl harbor happened first. Jim ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
"Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ...
Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Which part should we reflect upon first, the failure of our government to protect us from either attack or the blame and coverups that followed? Before 9/11 there was clear indication that we were under attack whether it was the Cole, the Embassies, the first attempt on the WTC or the Barracks. As for Pearl Harbor the coverup and blame game that sent Admiral Kimmel and General Short to be relieved of command and demoted when the government had decoded messages in advance indicating there would be a Japanese attack yet withheld that information from the commands it blamed. It's time to reflect and question every thing our government does so we don't have more 9/11 and 12/7 surprises, or more misplaced blame to protect the political interests of those in office. We pay dearly in lives and in resources to defend this country but are we getting what we paid for? USN (ss) retired |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article , Beecrofter says...
It's time to reflect and question every thing our government does so we don't have more 9/11 and 12/7 surprises, or more misplaced blame to protect the political interests of those in office. Well put. But oddly, it is getting tougher and tougher to pose those questions - Patriot Act and all.... Jim ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Walt LeRoy wrote: Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Food for thought, Walt; Pearl Harbor is being used to sell video games. -- Mark N.E. Ohio Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens, A.K.A. Mark Twain) When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the suspense. (Gaz, r.moto) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:08:43 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote: Mike Patterson wrote: On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:15:08 GMT, PhysicsGenius wrote: SteveB wrote: "Walt LeRoy" wrote in message ... Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 Take time to reflect on the difference following 12/7 and 9/11 for a moment, too. Pearl Harbor united the country against an outside agressor. More people were killed on 9/11 than on 12/7. A lot more. People remembered 12/7 longer. Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention 9/11. What's the connection? To answer your transparently facetious question - Radical Islamic terrorists who wish to kill as many non-Islamists in general and American citizens in particular as possible in order to contribute to a general global effort to impose Islamic theocracies. And these people were located in Iraq somewhere? Many were. Many others were receiving financial support from the former Iraqi regime. Do you wish to contest this? The man who planned the Achille Lauro attack was arrested in Iraq in April of this year. http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...bbas.arrested/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...937781,00.html I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Is this the case? If so, is your mind open to facts? Mine is. If you can present facts (not rhetoric) to prove your theory, I'm listening. So far I've not seen anything on this subject from such theorists other than semi-coherent ranting that always degenerates into name-calling and assertions that GWB is a son of Satan, or else the person just plain stops communicating, which I am forced to assume means they cannot or will not continue a logical discussion based on fact. Care to break the record? BTW, I despise GWB and his ilk on the grounds that they are using this to radically erode individual rights in the USA. Mike Patterson Please remove the spamtrap to email me. The question isn't "are there weapons of mass destruction?", the question is "who has them now?" http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/...ny/default.asp http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/iraqweaponsgap.asp |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Mike Patterson wrote:
I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote: Mike Patterson wrote: I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you. After the first Gulf war Iraq submitted documents inventorying their biological and chemical weapons and delivery systems to the UN. Most of those were never relinquished, which was the point of the YEARS of attempts at inspections by the UN, which were blocked and evaded by the government of Iraq. As I said before, you got facts, I'm listening, but you look more like either a politically motivated ignoramus or a troll right now. As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's "where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London? Israel? New York harbor? Mike Patterson Please remove the spamtrap to email me. The question isn't "are there weapons of mass destruction?", the question is "who has them now?" http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/...ny/default.asp http://www.strategypage.com/iraqwar/iraqweaponsgap.asp |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius wrote: Mike Patterson wrote: I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you. As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's "where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London? Israel? New York harbor? They weren't anywhere where they posed an immediate threat. Nobody used one, not the fedyin, not the republican guards, they didn't have them on the front lines to be found when we over-ran their positions, none were released as we shelled them, no resistance fighter has had any access to them, Uday and Qusay didn't have any. Prior to the war, we knew where much of saddam's nuclear ( or nukular if you prefer) material was. The IAEA had secured it near Baghdad. We also knew of a facility where Saddam conducted nuclear exposure experiments. At the conclusion of the war, we secured the offices of the OIL ministry before we attempted to stop the looting of the Dirty bomb components at the IAEA site. Much of that is now missing or dumped on the ground so people could steal the barrels. By the time we got around to visiting the exposure facility, Cobalt sources were missing! And even now at least 50 known ammo dumps are unsecured, allowing anybody to waltz in and pick up a dozen RPG's and missiles and walk away with them...Supposedly we have enough troops there? This is where the bombs that kill half a dozen Americans a week are coming from! And as for your suggestion that Militant Islam is our enemy. Saddam's regime was a very secular Islamic regime, in all probability the final government in Iraq will be a shiite dominated Islamic theo-democracy more like Iran than like Turkey. Boy that improves things! And, one last question, why was the state department guy who had spent a year doing post war planning removed from the Iraq team against the will of the commanding general? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
PhysicsGenius wrote in message .. .
Sorry, I'm confused. The OP seems to be talking about Iraq, you mention 9/11. What's the connection? Man, you must get your news from Dan Rather or something. Get your head out of your fool butt: Usama bin Laden (search) and Saddam Hussein (search) had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, Al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for Al Qaeda - perhaps even for Mohamed Atta - according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum. The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith (search) to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level Al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies. According to the memo, which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points, Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which in some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis. The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent "emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to meet with Iraqi government officials." At some unspecified point in 1991, according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to establish links to Al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the memo, "bin Laden wanted to expand his organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq." The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese strongman Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the Al Qaeda-affiliated National Islamic Front (search). Numerous sources have confirmed this. One defector reported that "al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging the Iraqi-Al Qaeda relationship. The defector said Iraq sought Al Qaeda influence through its connections with Afghanistan, to facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and equipment to Iraq. In return, Iraq provided Al Qaeda with training and instructors." One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam Hussein's henchmen. As the memo details: 4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad , and later with Al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and Al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior Al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting - the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and Al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of Al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with Al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9/11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes. A decisive moment in the budding relationship came in 1993, when bin Laden faced internal resistance to his cooperation with Saddam. 5. A CIA report from a contact with good access, some of whose reporting has been corroborated, said that certain elements in the "Islamic Army" of bin Laden were against the secular regime of Saddam. Overriding the internal factional strife that was developing, bin Laden came to an "understanding" with Saddam that the Islamic Army would no longer support anti-Saddam activities. According to sensitive reporting released in U.S. court documents during the African Embassy trial, in 1993 bin Laden reached an "understanding" with Saddam under which he (bin Laden) forbade Al Qaeda operations to be mounted against the Iraqi leader. Another facilitator of the relationship during the mid-1990s was Mahmdouh Mahmud Salim (a.k.a. Abu Hajer al-Iraqi). Abu Hajer, now in a New York prison, was described in court proceedings related to the August 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania as bin Ladenąs "best friend." According to CIA reporting dating back to the Clinton administration, bin Laden trusted him to serve as a liaison with Saddam's regime and tasked him with procurement of weapons of mass destruction for Al Qaeda. FBI reporting in the memo reveals that Abu Hajer "visited Iraq in early 1995" and "had a good relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Sometime before mid-1995 he went on an Al Qaeda mission to discuss unspecified cooperation with the Iraqi government." Some of the reporting about the relationship throughout the mid-1990s comes from a source who had intimate knowledge of bin Laden and his dealings. This source, according to CIA analysis, offered "the most credible information" on cooperation between bin Laden and Iraq. This source's reports read almost like a diary. Specific dates of when bin Laden flew to various cities are included, as well as names of individuals he met. The source did not offer information on the substantive talks during the meetings. . . . There are not a great many reports in general on the relationship between bin Laden and Iraq because of the secrecy surrounding it. But when this source with close access provided a "window" into bin Laden's activities, bin Laden is seen as heavily involved with Iraq (and Iran). Reporting from the early 1990s remains somewhat sketchy, though multiple sources place Hassan al-Turabi and Ayman al Zawahiri (search), bin Laden's current No. 2, at the center of the relationship. The reporting gets much more specific in the mid-1990s: 8. Reporting from a well placed source disclosed that bin Laden was receiving training on bomb making from the IIS's [Iraqi Intelligence Service] principal technical expert on making sophisticated explosives, Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed. Brigadier Salim was observed at bin Laden's farm in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July 1996, in the company of the Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti. 9 . . . Bin Laden visited Doha, Qatar (17-19 Jan. 1996), staying at the residence of a member of the Qatari ruling family. He discussed the successful movement of explosives into Saudi Arabia, and operations targeted against U.S. and U.K. interests in Dammam, Dharan, and Khobar, using clandestine Al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia. Upon his return, bin Laden met with Hijazi and Turabi, among others. And later more reporting, from the same "well placed" source: 10. The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti, met privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996. Tikriti used an Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss bilateral cooperation as his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to meet with bin Laden and Hassan al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief and two other IIS officers met at bin Ladenąs farm and discussed bin Ladenąs request for IIS technical assistance in: a) making letter and parcel bombs; b) making bombs which could be placed on aircraft and detonated by changes in barometric pressure; and c) making false passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that [Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives maker‹especially skilled in making car bombs‹remain with him in Sudan. The Iraqi intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden as long as required. The analysis of those events follows: The time of the visit from the IIS director was a few weeks after the Khobar Towers bombing. The bombing came on the third anniversary of a U.S. [Tomahawk missile] strike on IIS HQ (retaliation for the attempted assassination of former President Bush in Kuwait) for which Iraqi officials explicitly threatened retaliation. In addition to the contacts clustered in the mid-1990s, intelligence reports detail a flurry of activities in early 1998 and again in December 1998. A "former senior Iraqi intelligence officer" reported that "the Iraqi intelligence service station in Pakistan was Baghdad's point of contact with Al Qaeda. He also said bin Laden visited Baghdad in Jan. 1998 and met with Tariq Aziz." 11. According to sensitive reporting, Saddam personally sent Faruq Hijazi, IIS deputy director and later Iraqi ambassador to Turkey, to meet with bin Laden at least twice, first in Sudan and later in Afghanistan in 1999. . . . 14. According to a sensitive reporting [from] a "regular and reliable source," [Ayman al] Zawahiri, a senior Al Qaeda operative, visited Baghdad and met with the Iraqi Vice President on 3 February 1998. The goal of the visit was to arrange for coordination between Iraq and bin Laden and establish camps in an-Nasiriyah and Iraqi Kurdistan under the leadership of Abdul Aziz. That visit came as the Iraqis intensified their defiance of the U.N. inspection regime, known as UNSCOM, created by the cease-fire agreement following the Gulf War. UNSCOM (search) demanded access to Saddam's presidential palaces that he refused to provide. As the tensions mounted, President Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on February 18, 1998, and prepared the nation for war. He warned of "an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers, and organized international criminals" and said "there is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein." The day after this speech, according to documents unearthed in April 2003 in the Iraqi Intelligence headquarters by journalists Mitch Potter and Inigo Gilmore, Saddam's intelligence service wrote a memo detailing coming meetings with a bin Laden representative traveling to Baghdad. Each reference to bin Laden had been covered by liquid paper that, when revealed, exposed a plan to increase cooperation between Iraq and Al Qaeda. According to that memo, the IIS agreed to pay for "all the travel and hotel costs inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden." The document set as the goal for the meeting a discussion of "the future of our relationship with him, bin Laden, and to achieve a direct meeting with him." The Al Qaeda representative, the document went on to suggest, might provide "a way to maintain contacts with bin Laden." Four days later, on February 23, 1998, bin Laden issued his now-famous fatwa on the plight of Iraq, published in the Arabic-language daily, al Quds al-Arabi: "For over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples." Bin Laden urged his followers to act: "The ruling to kill all Americans and their allies‹civilians and military‹is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it." Although war was temporarily averted by a last-minute deal brokered by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, tensions soon rose again. The standoff with Iraq came to a head in December 1998, when President Clinton launched Operation Desert Fox (search), a 70-hour bombing campaign that began on December 16 and ended three days later, on December 19, 1998. According to press reports at the time, Faruq Hijazi, deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met with bin Laden in Afghanistan on December 21, 1998, to offer bin Laden safe haven in Iraq. CIA reporting in the memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee seems to confirm this meeting and relates two others. 15. A foreign government service reported that an Iraqi delegation, including at least two Iraqi intelligence officers formerly assigned to the Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan, met in late 1998 with bin Laden in Afghanistan. 16. According to CIA reporting, bin Laden and Zawahiri met with two Iraqi intelligence officers in Afghanistan in Dec. 1998. 17. . . . Iraq sent an intelligence officer to Afghanistan to seek closer ties to bin Laden and the Taliban in late 1998. The source reported that the Iraqi regime was trying to broaden its cooperation with Al Qaeda. Iraq was looking to recruit Muslim "elements" to sabotage U.S. and U.K. interests. After a senior Iraqi intelligence officer met with Taliban leader [Mullah] Omar, arrangements were made for a series of meetings between the Iraqi intelligence officer and bin Laden in Pakistan. The source noted Faruq Hijazi was in Afghanistan in late 1998. 18. . . . Faruq Hijazi went to Afghanistan in 1999 along with several other Iraqi officials to meet with bin Laden. The source claimed that Hijazi would have met bin Laden only at Saddamąs explicit direction. An analysis that follows No. 18 provides additional context and an explanation of these reports: Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between Al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations. Information about connections between Al Qaeda and Iraq was so widespread by early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream press. A January 11, 1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline: "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The story cited an "Arab intelligence source" with knowledge of contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda. "According to this source, Saddam expected last month's American and British bombing campaign to go on much onger than it did. The dictator believed that as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in the Muslim world, making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and more effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to support Washington. Saddam's long-term strategy, according to several sources, is to bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the embargo against Iraq, without waiting for the United Nations to lift if formally." Intelligence reports about the nature of the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda from mid-1999 through 2003 are conflicting. One senior Iraqi intelligence officer in U.S. custody, Khalil Ibrahim Abdallah, "said that the last contact between the IIS and Al Qaeda was in July 1999. Bin Laden wanted to meet with Saddam, he said. The guidance sent back from Saddamąs office reportedly ordered Iraqi intelligence to refrain from any further contact with bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The source opined that Saddam wanted to distance himself from Al Qaeda." The bulk of reporting on the relationship contradicts this claim. One report states that "in late 1999" Al Qaeda set up a training camp in northern Iraq that "was operational as of 1999." Other reports suggest that the Iraqi regime contemplated several offers of safe haven to bin Laden throughout 1999. 23. . . . Iraqi officials were carefully considering offering safe haven to bin Laden and his closest collaborators in Nov. 1999. The source indicated the idea was put forward by the presumed head of Iraqi intelligence in Islamabad (Khalid Janaby) who in turn was in frequent contact and had good relations with bin Laden. Some of the most intriguing intelligence concerns an Iraqi named Ahmed Hikmat Shakir: 24. According to sensitive reporting, a Malaysia-based Iraqi national (Shakir) facilitated the arrival of one of the Sept 11 hijackers for an operational meeting in Kuala Lumpur (Jan 2000). Sensitive reporting indicates Shakirąs travel and contacts link him to a worldwide network of terrorists, including Al Qaeda. Shakir worked at the Kuala Lumpur airport‹a job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy employee. One of the men at that Al Qaeda operational meeting in the Kuala Lumpur Hotel was Tawfiz al Atash, a top bin Laden lieutenant later identified as the mastermind of the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole. 25. Investigation into the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000 by Al Qaeda revealed no specific Iraqi connections but according to the CIA, "fragmentary evidence points to possible Iraqi involvement." 26. During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior Al Qaeda operative] said he was told by an Al Qaeda associate that he was tasked to travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training. After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, two Al Qaeda operatives were sent to Iraq for CBW-related [Chemical and Biological Weapons] training beginning in Dec 2000. Iraqi intelligence was "encouraged" after the embassy and USS Cole bombings to provide this training. The analysis of this report follows. CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons." Additional reporting also calls into question the claim that relations between Iraq and Al Qaeda cooled after mid-1999: 27. According to sensitive CIA reporting, . . . the Saudi National Guard went on a kingdom-wide state of alert in late Dec 2000 after learning Saddam agreed to assist Al Qaeda in attacking U.S./U.K. interests in Saudi Arabia. And then there is the alleged contact between lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague. The reporting on those links suggests not one meeting, but as many as four. Whatąs more, the memo reveals potential financing of Atta's activities by Iraqi intelligence. The Czech counterintelligence service reported that the Sept. 11 hijacker [Mohamed] Atta met with the former Iraqi intelligence chief in Prague, [Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir] al Ani, on several occasions. During one of these meetings, al Ani ordered the IIS finance officer to issue Atta funds from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office. And the commentary: CIA can confirm two Atta visits to Prague‹in Dec. 1994 and in June 2000; data surrounding the other two, on 26 Oct 1999 and 9 April 2001, is complicated and sometimes contradictory and CIA and FBI cannot confirm Atta met with the IIS. Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross continues to stand by his information. It's not just Gross who stands by the information. Five high-ranking members of the Czech government have publicly confirmed meetings between Atta and al Ani. The meeting that has gotten the most press attention ,April 9, 2001, is also the most widely disputed. Even some of the most hawkish Bush administration officials are privately skeptical that Atta met al Ani on that occasion. They believe that reports of the alleged meeting, said to have taken place in public, outside the headquarters of the U.S.-financed Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, suggest a level of sloppiness that doesnąt fit the pattern of previous high-level Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts. Whether or not that specific meeting occurred, the report by Czech counterintelligence that al Ani ordered the Iraqi Intelligence Service officer to provide IIS funds to Atta might help explain the lead hijacker's determination to reach Prague, despite significant obstacles, in the spring of 2000. (Note that the report stops short of confirming that the funds were transferred. It claims only that the IIS officer requested the transfer.) Recall that Atta flew to Prague from Germany on May 30, 2000, but was denied entry because he did not have a valid visa. Rather than simply return to Germany and fly directly to the United States, his ultimate destination, Atta took pains to get to Prague. After he was refused entry the first time, he traveled back to Germany, obtained the proper paperwork, and caught a bus back to Prague. He left for the United States the day after arriving in Prague for the second time. Several reports indicate that the relationship between Saddam and bin Laden continued, even after the September 11 attacks: 31. An Oct. 2002 . . . report said Al Qaeda and Iraq reached a secret agreement whereby Iraq would provide safe haven to Al Qaeda members and provide them with money and weapons. The agreement reportedly prompted a large number of Al Qaeda members to head to Iraq. The report also said that Al Qaeda members involved in a fraudulent passport network for Al Qaeda had been directed to procure 90 Iraqi and Syrian passports for Al Qaeda personnel. The analysis that accompanies that report indicates that the report fits the pattern of Iraq-Al Qaeda collaboration: References to procurement of false passports from Iraq and offers of safe haven previously have surfaced in CIA source reporting considered reliable. Intelligence reports to date have maintained that Iraqi support for Al Qaeda usually involved providing training, obtaining passports, and offers of refuge. This report adds to that list by including weapons and money. This assistance would make sense in the aftermath of 9-11. Colin Powell, in his February 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N. Security Council, revealed the activities of Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Reporting in the memo expands on Powell's case and might help explain some of the resistance the U.S. military is currently facing in Iraq. 37. Sensitive reporting indicates senior terrorist planner and close Al Qaeda associate al Zarqawi has had an operational alliance with Iraqi officials. As of Oct. 2002, al Zarqawi maintained contacts with the IIS to procure weapons and explosives, including surface-to-air missiles from an IIS officer in Baghdad. According to sensitive reporting, al Zarqawi was setting up sleeper cells in Baghdad to be activated in case of a U.S. occupation of the city, suggesting his operational cooperation with the Iraqis may have deepened in recent months. Such cooperation could include IIS provision of a secure operating bases [sic] and steady access to arms and explosives in preparation for a possible U.S. invasion. Al Zarqawiąs procurements from the Iraqis also could support Al Qaeda operations against the U.S. or its allies elsewhere. 38. According to sensitive reporting, a contact with good access who does not have an established reporting record: An Iraqi intelligence service officer said that as of mid-March the IIS was providing weapons to Al Qaeda members located in northern Iraq, including rocket propelled grenade (RPG)-18 launchers. According to IIS information, northern Iraq-based Al Qaeda members believed that the U.S. intended to strike Al Qaeda targets during an anticipated assault against Ansar al-Islam positions. The memo further reported pre-war intelligence which "claimed that an Iraqi intelligence official, praising Ansar al-Islam, provided it with $100,000 and agreed to continue to give assistance." Critics of the Bush administration have complained that Iraq-Al Qaeda connections are a fantasy, trumped up by the warmongers at the White House to fit their preconceived notions about international terror; that links between Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden have been routinely "exaggerated" for political purposes; that hawks "cherry-picked" bits of intelligence and tendentiously presented these to the American public. Carl Levin, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made those points as recently as November 9, in an appearance on Fox News Sunday. Republicans on the committee, he complained, refuse to look at the administrationąs "exaggeration of intelligence." Said Levin: "The question is whether or not they exaggerated intelligence in order to carry out their purpose, which was to make the case for going to war. Did we know, for instance, with certainty that there was any relationship between the Iraqis and the terrorists that were in Afghanistan, bin Laden? The administration said that there's a connection between those terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq. Was there a basis for that?" There was, as shown in the memo to the committee on which Levin serves. And much of the reporting comes from Clinton-era intelligence. Not that you would know this from Al Goreąs recent public statements. Indeed, the former vice president claims to be privy to new "evidence" that the administration lied. In an August speech at New York University, Gore claimed: "The evidence now shows clearly that Saddam did not want to work with Usama bin Laden at all, much less give him weapons of mass destruction." Really? One of the most interesting things to note about the 16-page memo is that it covers only a fraction of the evidence that will eventually be available to document the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. For one thing, both Saddam and bin Laden were desperate to keep their cooperation secret. (Remember, Iraqi intelligence used liquid paper on an internal intelligence document to conceal bin Laden's name.) For another, few people in the U.S. government are expressly looking for such links. There is no Iraq-Al Qaeda equivalent of the CIA's 1,400-person Iraq Survey Group currently searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction. Instead, CIA and FBI officials are methodically reviewing Iraqi intelligence files that survived the three-week war last spring. These documents would cover several miles if laid end-to-end. And they are in Arabic. They include not only connections between bin Laden and Saddam, but also revolting details of the regime's long history of brutality. It will be a slow process. So Feith's memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee is best viewed as sort of a "Cliffąs Notes" version of the relationship. It contains the highlights, but it is far from exhaustive. One example. The memo contains only one paragraph on Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, the Iraqi facilitator who escorted two September 11 hijackers through customs in Kuala Lumpur. U.S. intelligence agencies have extensive reporting on his activities before and after the September 11 hijacking. That they would include only this brief overview suggests the 16-page memo, extensive as it is, just skims the surface of the reporting on Iraq-Al Qaeda connections. Other intelligence reports indicate that Shakir whisked not one but two September 11 hijackers - Khalid al Midhar and Nawaq al Hamzi - through the passport and customs process upon their arrival in Kuala Lumpur on January 5, 2000. Shakir then traveled with the hijackers to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel where they met with Ramzi bin al Shibh, one of the masterminds of the September 11 plot. The meeting lasted three days. Shakir returned to work on January 9 and January 10, and never again. Shakir got his airport job through a contact at the Iraqi Embassy. (Iraq routinely used its embassies as staging grounds for its intelligence operations; in some cases, more than half of the alleged "diplomats" were intelligence operatives.) The Iraqi embassy, not his employer, controlled Shakirąs schedule. He was detained in Qatar on September 17, 2001. Authorities found in his possession contact information for terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1998 embassy bombings, the 2000 `ck on the USS Cole, and the September 11 hijackings. The CIA had previous reporting that Shakir had received a phone call from the safe house where the 1993 World Trade Center attacks had been plotted. The Qataris released Shakir shortly after his arrest. On October 21, 2001, he flew to Amman, Jordan, where he was to change planes to a flight to Baghdad. He didnąt make that flight. Shakir was detained in Jordan for three months, where the CIA interrogated him. His interrogators concluded that Shakir had received extensive training in counter-interrogation techniques. Not long after he was detained, according to an official familiar with the intelligence, the Iraqi regime began to "pressure" Jordanian intelligence to release him. At the same time, Amnesty International complained that Shakir was being held without charge. The Jordanians released him on January 28, 2002, at which point he is believed to have fled back to Iraq. Was Shakir an Iraqi agent? Does he provide a connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11? We donąt know. We may someday find out. But there can no longer be any serious argument about whether Saddam Hussein's Iraq worked with Usama bin Laden and Al Qaeda to plot against Americans. (November 15, 2003) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Mike Patterson wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius wrote: Mike Patterson wrote: I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you. After the first Gulf war Iraq submitted documents inventorying their biological and chemical weapons and delivery systems to the UN. Most of those were never relinquished, which was the point of the YEARS of attempts at inspections by the UN, which were blocked and evaded by the government of Iraq. As I said before, you got facts, I'm listening, but you look more like either a politically motivated ignoramus or a troll right now. As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's "where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London? Israel? New York harbor? The CIA and Bush were 100% sure where they were before the war began, right? So that leaves us with 3 possibilities: 1) The bombs are still right where they were. Likelihood: Impossible. After all, they looked and the bombs aren't there now. 2) The bombs moved. Likelihood: Improbable. How does one move a presumably massive arsenal (you mentioned "delivery systems") in such a way as to be hidden from the most advanced satellite recon in the world while simultaneously fighting a losing war? And even if you moved it, how would you keep it hidden from same? Neighbor countries would probably less than enthusiastic about taking the hot potato after what happened in Iraq. 3) They lied. (Or possibly worse: They are so imcompetent that they really did think there were bombs there.) Likelihood: It's happened many times before. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
"PhysicsGenius" wrote in message ... Mike Patterson wrote: I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. Then the gas weapons they (the Iraqis) used to kill hundreds of thousands of Kurds weren't WMDs? What is YOUR definition of a WMD? Steve |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Mark wrote:
Walt LeRoy wrote: Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Food for thought, Walt; Pearl Harbor is being used to sell video games. -- The war in Iraq is being used to sell action figures of GWB (complete in flight suit), Ann Coulter, Tony Blair, Donald Rumsfeld and Baghdad Bob (the last four as seen in the Dec. 8 issue of Times) Abrasha http://www.abrasha.com |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Regarding Pearl - May all of them rest in peace.
Been to Punch Bowl to visit lost ones. Today I backed up a video tape onto a DVD and created a cover with pictures of the Harbor map, Arizona exploding, Arizona resting under the white bridge, The Utah on her side, and the Oklahoma on her stacks. Details of text on the DVD cover included some vitals. Some of which are : PERSONNEL KILLED Navy 2001 Marine Corps 109 Army 231 Civilian 54 PERSONNEL WOUNDED Navy 710 Marine Corps 69 Army 364 Civilian 35 SHIPS Sunk or beached 12 Damaged 9 AIRCRAFT Destroyed 164 Damaged 159 Martin [ who has a resting Great Grandfather who used to steer those boats as his ] -- Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn @ home at Lion's Lair with our computer NRA LOH, NRA Life NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder Walt LeRoy wrote: Time to take a moment and reflect on what happened to us 62 years ago, today, and stop all the bickering and get behind our leaders and fighting forces in our present struggle. S/Sgt. Walt LeRoy Co.A, 361st S S Regiment 1943--1946 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:49:23 -0800, "SteveB" wrote:
"PhysicsGenius" wrote in message .. . Mike Patterson wrote: I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. Then the gas weapons they (the Iraqis) used to kill hundreds of thousands of Kurds weren't WMDs? No and no. First of all, Iraq hasn't gassed "hundreds of thousands of Kurds". The only documented case caused casualties of under 5,000, and that was because the Kurds were in the path of the advancing Iranian army, which was the actual target. It isn't even clear whether it was Iraqi gas or Iranian gas which did them in, since both sides were using gas (mustard gas) in that battle. Such collateral damage is common in war. There have been some other unconfirmed claims, but none so large. Second, gas is at best a tactical battlefield weapon, and a tricky one to employ effectively at that, as Europeans learned in WWI. Note well two other things. First, the US supplied Iran with the materials to make the gas used in the Iraq-Iran war. Second, there is little or no evidence (16 empty gas shell casings) that Iraq maintained a stockpile of poison gas after the 1991 Gulf War in contravention of the ceasefire accords. The UN didn't find any, the 1400 man US task force searching for WMD haven't found any, even though Bush claimed in his State of the Union address that Iraq still had 29,234 shells loaded with gas. Makes one wonder, how Bush knew such an exact number, and why he hasn't clued his task force as to where he did the count. What is YOUR definition of a WMD? Strategic weapons. Example, a 300 kT or larger city buster nuke. Gas doesn't qualify as a city buster, since the quantities required would be huge. Biological weapons might, though we have to go back to the Black Death to actually see an example, which had more to do with lack of sanitation and medical services than the actual plague agent. Ordinary bombs aren't traditionally considered WMD, but when applied in sufficient numbers, as with the firebombing of Dresden in WWII, the effects are much the same, 135,000 civilian dead in a single raid. Meanwhile, Bush proclaimed that Iraq had 45,000 liters of biological weaponry, but not so much as a microliter has been found by his 1,400 man task force. He also claimed the Iraqis had mobile biological warfare laboratories, but the claims to have found the trailers so proudly hawked at the start of the war have been quietly withdrawn, after the British manufacturer came forward and confirmed that they were actually barrage balloon inflation trailers as the Iraqis had maintained. The Big Lie can be an effective propaganda technique, but only as long as the pesky truth doesn't insist on surfacing. Gary |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:09:33 -0500, Stuart Wheaton
wrote: They weren't anywhere where they posed an immediate threat. Nobody used one, not the fedyin, not the republican guards, they didn't have them on the front lines to be found when we over-ran their positions, none were released as we shelled them, no resistance fighter has had any access to them, Uday and Qusay didn't have any. This was on CBS News last night, with an interview by al-Dabbagh http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in541815.shtml (CBS/AP) An Iraqi officer has identified himself as the source for a British claim about Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction that sparked a controversy marked by the death of a British government arms expert, a newspaper reported Sunday. Prime Minister Tony Blair's office declined to comment on the newspaper report, except to urge anyone with information about the so-far elusive weapons to contact the military. The Sunday Telegraph reports Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh identified himself as the source for the British government's assertion that Iraq could have deployed chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes of a decision to do so. The paper gave the officer's surname only, citing fears for his safety if he was fully identified. “We're not prepared to comment but we urge all those involved to provide the Iraq Survey Group with whatever information they believe they have,” a spokeswoman for Blair's office said on customary condition of anonymity. The ISG is the coalition body searching for Saddam's alleged chemical or biological weapons. The 45-minute claim was in a government dossier published in September 2002. A British Broadcasting Corp. report later accused the government of “sexing up” the dossier to make a more convincing case for military action. Government weapons adviser David Kelly apparently committed suicide in July after being identified as the source for the BBC report. Kelly's death prompted a judicial inquiry that scrutinized the workings of Blair's government and its use of intelligence in the buildup to the U.S.-led war. A report from the inquiry is expected early next year. The Sunday Telegraph reported that al-Dabbagh was the former head of an Iraqi air defense unit in the country's western desert. It said he had spied for the Iraqi National Accord, a London-based exile group, and provided reports to British intelligence from early 2002 on Saddam's plans to deploy weapons of mass destruction. Al-Dabbagh said cases containing chemical or biological warheads were delivered to front-line units, including his own, in late 2002, the paper reported. He said they were designed to be launched by hand-held rocket-propelled grenades, and did not know what exactly the warheads contained. The Blair government's September dossier said that “Iraq's military forces are able to use chemical and biological weapons, with command, control and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are able to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do so.” The head of the MI6 spy agency, Sir Richard Dearlove, told the inquiry into Kelly's death that the 45-minute warning in the dossier came from an “established and reliable source,” quoting a senior Iraqi military officer who was in a position to know the information. The Sunday Telegraph said al-Dabbagh believed he was the source for that claim. “I am the one responsible for providing this information,” he was quoted as saying. “It is 100 percent accurate. “Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour,” al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam. The newspaper said al-Dabbagh works as an adviser to the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council and said he has received death threats from Saddam loyalists. It reported that Iyad Allawi, the head of the Iraqi National Accord and a prominent council member, confirmed that he had passed information from al-Dabbagh on Saddam's weapons to British and American intelligence officials in the spring and summer of 2002. No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 03:37:41 GMT, PhysicsGenius
wrote: Mike Patterson wrote: On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 23:42:02 GMT, PhysicsGenius wrote: Mike Patterson wrote: I have the impression that you are one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi complicity in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. No, I'm one of the folks who believe that the invasion of Iraq was based on a false claim of Iraqi ownership of WMDs. Oy. You're either a troll or oblivious to the world around you. After the first Gulf war Iraq submitted documents inventorying their biological and chemical weapons and delivery systems to the UN. Most of those were never relinquished, which was the point of the YEARS of attempts at inspections by the UN, which were blocked and evaded by the government of Iraq. As I said before, you got facts, I'm listening, but you look more like either a politically motivated ignoramus or a troll right now. As my sig indicates, the questions isn't "were there Iraqi WMD?", it's "where ARE they?". Are they still in Iraq? In Iran? Jordan? London? Israel? New York harbor? The CIA and Bush were 100% sure where they were before the war began, right? So that leaves us with 3 possibilities: 1) The bombs are still right where they were. Likelihood: Impossible. After all, they looked and the bombs aren't there now. 2) The bombs moved. Likelihood: Improbable. How does one move a presumably massive arsenal (you mentioned "delivery systems") in such a way as to be hidden from the most advanced satellite recon in the world while simultaneously fighting a losing war? And even if you moved it, how would you keep it hidden from same? Neighbor countries would probably less than enthusiastic about taking the hot potato after what happened in Iraq. 3) They lied. (Or possibly worse: They are so imcompetent that they really did think there were bombs there.) Likelihood: It's happened many times before. Or..#2 is likely Posted on Sun, Dec. 07, 2003 Report: Source of Iraq Arms Claim Emerges MICHAEL McDONOUGH Associated Press LONDON - An Iraqi officer has identified himself as the source for a British claim about Saddam Hussein's weapons that sparked a controversy marked by the death of a British government arms expert, a newspaper reported Sunday. The Sunday Telegraph said Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh identified himself as the source for the British government's assertion that Iraq could have deployed chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes of a decision to do so. The paper gave the officer's surname only, citing fears for his safety if he was fully identified. Prime Minister Tony Blair's office declined to comment on the newspaper report, which was featured in early editions published late Saturday. "We're not prepared to comment but we urge all those involved to provide the Iraq Survey Group with whatever information they believe they have," a spokeswoman for Blair's office said on customary condition of anonymity. The ISG is the coalition body searching for Saddam's alleged chemical or biological weapons. The 45-minute claim was in a government dossier published in September 2002. A British Broadcasting Corp. report later accused the government of "sexing up" the dossier to make a more convincing case for military action. Government weapons adviser David Kelly apparently committed suicide in July after being identified as the source for the BBC report. Kelly's death prompted a judicial inquiry that scrutinized the workings of Blair's government and its use of intelligence in the buildup to the U.S.-led war. A report from the inquiry is expected early next year. The Sunday Telegraph reported that al-Dabbagh was the former head of an Iraqi air defense unit in the country's western desert. It said he had spied for the Iraqi National Accord, a London-based exile group, and provided reports to British intelligence from early 2002 on Saddam's plans to deploy weapons of mass destruction. Al-Dabbagh said cases containing chemical or biological warheads were delivered to front-line units, including his own, in late 2002, the paper reported. He said they were designed to be launched by hand-held rocket-propelled grenades, and did not know what exactly the warheads contained. The government's September dossier said that "Iraq's military forces are able to use chemical and biological weapons, with command, control and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are able to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do so." The head of the MI6 spy agency, Sir Richard Dearlove, told the inquiry into Kelly's death that the 45-minute warning in the dossier came from an "established and reliable source," quoting a senior Iraqi military officer who was in a position to know the information. The Sunday Telegraph said al-Dabbagh believed he was the source for that claim. "I am the one responsible for providing this information," he was quoted as saying. "It is 100 percent accurate. "Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour," al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam. The newspaper said al-Dabbagh works as an adviser to the Iraqi Governing Council and said he has received death threats from Saddam loyalists. It reported that Iyad Allawi, the head of the Iraqi National Accord and a prominent council member, confirmed that he had passed information from al-Dabbagh on Saddam's weapons to British and American intelligence officials in the spring and summer of 2002. No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
SteveB wrote: What is YOUR definition of a WMD? Steve I've always had a problem with the phrase "Weapons of Mass Destruction". First time I heard the term WMD years ago the talking head had me full attention because there is only one thing that causes mass destruction and it involves a mushroom cloud and fire ball. I was scared ****less till I figured they were talking only Chem and Bio weapons. Lets face it, chemical and biological weapons don't destroy anything. They only murder and kill. WMD, nifty catch phrase used to create an emotive response in the populace. Now a WMD is an envelope with white powder. On a side note, when this Anthrax scare first happened I heard a talking head stating how the machinery for reducing anthrax to weapons grade size was highly specialized and difficult to come by so there was little to worry about. Just a little propaganda to make the populace feel better ? as at the time I was employed for a firm specializing in milling machines. We had three or four small batch mills sitting there, on display, waiting for someone to buy them. Not that we would sell the machines knowing they would be used for the milling of murderous potions, the purchaser would only have to have a good lie. -- -- Mark N.E. Ohio Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens, A.K.A. Mark Twain) When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the suspense. (Gaz, r.moto) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Gunner wrote in message . ..
Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc. I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones rights. If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem. I think that you need a broader view, we could have more security as a totalitarian nation. It worked for years for other dictators and despots but we have a constitution which our leaders are sworn to defend as the basis for our society. Their oath makes the point of defending our constitution from enemies foriegn and domestic. I am of the belief that the patriot act and John Ashcroft are both threats to our way of life and the constitution. Not to worry, it really isn't in our economic interest to have peace in the world as we are the largest arms merchant. We manage to sell more arms in the world marketplace than Russia, China, Great Britain , France, and Germany added together. Our leaders won't suffer as the death and dying and destruction will be mostly among the masses while they grow profits and power. If your only solution is the end of our constitution and a shift towarrds totalitarianism then I have to choose between staying in the battle or an exit visa. Your solutions are the problem. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
What is YOUR definition of a WMD? Steve It appears to me that the W of Mass Destruction inhabits the oval office. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Abrasha wrote: The war in Iraq is being used to sell action figures of GWB (complete in flight suit), Ann Coulter, Tony Blair, Donald Rumsfeld and Baghdad Bob (the last four as seen in the Dec. 8 issue of Times) I've seen some of these 'action figures', other than the humor of Dubya being in a flight suit it didn't surprise me. Fact I don't have any feelings on it. These figures seem to be a logical step in someone making money which, after all, isn't that what it's all about anyway. Truth is, I'm more bothered by my not having feelings about these figures than the figures themselves. Have I become that cynical. What bothers me about EA Games using Pearl Harbor in a video game is ti diminishes the people and lessens Pearl Harbors meaning. What's next? The Grassy Knoll Sniper Game? How about Two Towers Flight Simulator? -- Mark N.E. Ohio Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens, A.K.A. Mark Twain) When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the suspense. (Gaz, r.moto) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article , Gunner says...
again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc. Now could you please explain exactly why your view of the BOR is a single, unitary amemdment - the second, of course. And you will move heaven and earth to see to it that the second is upheld verbatim, and stamp and holler if anyone who supports it is denigrated. Yet the adminstration can **** all over the rest of the BOR and you seem to jump for joy. Part of me wants to see Ashcroft do something that would drive you nuts, something crazy like calling in all private weapons in the US, under the guise of the patriot act. *Then* you might take off the blinders and see that those guys are not your friends. If they **** on part of the BOR, they **** on the WHOLE THING. Including the second. Jim ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Gunner wrote: Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc. I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones rights. If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem. Here's something it seems most people (at least the Dubya Dogmatics) have missed: Pre 911 there were rules and procedures already in place but the rules were not being followed and procedures were not being done. Wife works for the local University. They were suppose to track foreign students. Did they? Sort of but not really. Since 911 their suppose to track these foreign students. Are they? Sort of but not really. Pre 911 I suspect they didn't force compliance because it may have caused these students to take their money to a more friendly institution. Post 911, at last report, the software wasn't working properly. There may be other reasons. Another problem lies in Government Agencies. Agencies have their piece of the pie and their intent on keeping as much of their territory as they can. Worse, each department within each agency has it's own piece of the pie and their intent on holding onto as much as they can. As long as all these people work at getting and keeping as much power as each of them possibly can we don't stand a chance. Please don't insult us by saying these people are here for our good, these people in positions of power are there for their own good, and any good that comes out of it for us is incidental. Creation of the Patriot act and it's accompanying agency only created more beaurocracy where people could vie for more power and in the process reduced our rights. What really bothers me is the way people want their illusions, they prefer form over substance. And the people in office are more than happy to create illusion. I find this all very distressing. -- Mark N.E. Ohio Never argue with a fool, a bystander can't tell you apart. (S. Clemens, A.K.A. Mark Twain) When in doubt hit the throttle. It may not help but it sure ends the suspense. (Gaz, r.moto) |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article , Beecrofter says...
If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem. I think that you need a broader view, ... This is in the running for 'understatement of the year.' Jim ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On 8 Dec 2003 08:03:26 -0800, jim rozen
wrote: In article , Gunner says... again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc. Now could you please explain exactly why your view of the BOR is a single, unitary amemdment - the second, of course. And you will move heaven and earth to see to it that the second is upheld verbatim, and stamp and holler if anyone who supports it is denigrated. Cites? We have the ACLU watching over the rest of them (their ignoring the 2nd is notable btw) Yet the adminstration can **** all over the rest of the BOR and you seem to jump for joy. Part of me wants to see Ashcroft do something that would drive you nuts, something crazy like calling in all private weapons in the US, under the guise of the patriot act. *Then* you might take off the blinders and see that those guys are not your friends. If they **** on part of the BOR, they **** on the WHOLE THING. Including the second. Jim Jim, once again, you failed to answer the question or read/think particularly deeply. The comment was made, that we should/could have prevented 9/11 etc. The only way we could, particularly in the face of the cutting of funding for HUMINT (human intelligence sources) would be to tighten the screws and set up a police state. The Lefties and the ignorant weep and wail about the failure, never realizing the alternative IS a police state. When they DO get part of their wish, the Patriot Act etc...suddenly they start wailing about the result. Sorry guys...this is an either/or situation. There is NO way to prevent terrorism, or acts of terrorism, without stepping on peoples toes, or their Rights. Period. Full stop, end program. I of all people, a libertarian, and activist, am fully aware of the issues. I don't live in the warm comfortable Cave of Apathy. Hence my request of alternative suggestions. So far..all I see are knee jerk responses with no value to the situation at hand. Again I ask..how would YOU handle the situation. What means would you use to ferret out whom is a Tango, whom is funding them, where the money comes from, whom belongs to a sleeper cell, whom funnels money to unfriendly groups whose goals are death and destruction to both the US and our allies? Remember..you cannot take any steps that will restrict or harm anothers rights, no matter if they are a Citizen or not. Im waiting Gunner ================================================= = please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================= = No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 16:40:10 GMT, Mark
wrote: Gunner wrote: Then when we tighten up security and make sure it doesnt happen again..the actions are demonized as violations of the Constitution and Civil Rights..witness Patriot Act, Gitmo etc etc. I wish you folks would come up with a counter proposal to ensure the security of the US, all the while taking money from the HUMINT side of the equation, and solutions that do not violate (allegedly) someones rights. If you dont have any solutions..then you are part of the problem. Here's something it seems most people (at least the Dubya Dogmatics) have missed: Pre 911 there were rules and procedures already in place but the rules were not being followed and procedures were not being done. No ****..and who was in charge of this during the 8 yrs prior to 9/11? Whom refused to fund HUMINT sources both foreign and domestic? It sure wasn't Dubya. Wife works for the local University. They were suppose to track foreign students. Did they? Sort of but not really. Since 911 their suppose to track these foreign students. Are they? Sort of but not really. Pre 911 I suspect they didn't force compliance because it may have caused these students to take their money to a more friendly institution. Post 911, at last report, the software wasn't working properly. There may be other reasons. I strongly suggest you take a look at the Administrations of those Universities..and ask them what their take on the matter was. Those bastions of Liberal thinking were refusing to follow those steps as being harmful to the rights of those students. Want the cites Another problem lies in Government Agencies. Agencies have their piece of the pie and their intent on keeping as much of their territory as they can. Worse, each department within each agency has it's own piece of the pie and their intent on holding onto as much as they can. Absolutely correct. I notice that most of them are still run by Clinton appointees. However..since Homeland Security was formed to address this issue..the Left is Still screaming. As long as all these people work at getting and keeping as much power as each of them possibly can we don't stand a chance. Of course..politicians are politicians. Please don't insult us by saying these people are here for our good, these people in positions of power are there for their own good, and any good that comes out of it for us is incidental. Some are, some arnt. 9/11 changed our outlook and the playing field. Creation of the Patriot act and it's accompanying agency only created more beaurocracy where people could vie for more power and in the process reduced our rights. And your suggestions are? What really bothers me is the way people want their illusions, they prefer form over substance. And the people in office are more than happy to create illusion. Budda Bing! Good call. Sorta like 'what the meaning of "is" is, huh? The alternative is cold harsh reality..and then folks really start to wail. See my previous post. I find this all very distressing. No ****, ya think? So how would YOU handle it? Gunner No 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out. Is that evil? Is that wrong? People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for the rule of brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically "right". Guns end that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work. - L. Neil Smith |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article , Gunner says...
Jim, once again, you failed to answer the question No. That was your question and it's the wrong question. My *statement* is the EXACT same statement that you made in another thread about two weeks ago, namely that I get very unhappy when the constitiution gets a screwing. And I will continue to stand by that statement. Jim ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
In article , Gunner says...
Now could you please explain exactly why your view of the BOR is a single, unitary amemdment - the second, of course. And you will move heaven and earth to see to it that the second is upheld verbatim, and stamp and holler if anyone who supports it is denigrated. Cites? We have the ACLU watching over the rest of them (their ignoring the 2nd is notable btw) A CITE? I don't need a cite for my opinion. This is what you look like, to me. There is NO way to prevent terrorism, or acts of terrorism, without stepping on peoples toes, or their Rights. Period. Full stop, end program. This is what ashcroft would have you believe. I had hoped you were wiser than that. If you are willing to destroy the constitition to save it, then I guess this part of the discussion comes to a close. Jim ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
Gunner wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:09:33 -0500, Stuart Wheaton wrote: They weren't anywhere where they posed an immediate threat. Nobody used one, not the fedyin, not the republican guards, they didn't have them on the front lines to be found when we over-ran their positions, none were released as we shelled them, no resistance fighter has had any access to them, Uday and Qusay didn't have any. This was on CBS News last night, with an interview by al-Dabbagh Al-Dabbagh said cases containing chemical or biological warheads were delivered to front-line units, including his own, in late 2002, the paper reported. He said they were designed to be launched by hand-held rocket-propelled grenades, and did not know what exactly the warheads contained. Snip “Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour,” al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam. Yes, they didn't want to fight for Saddam, but it seems nobody wanted to ingratiate themselves with the invaders by saying "Here, see what I have, here's those nasty chemical weapons you are looking for!!!" And not one person in all those front line units was fanatical enough to use one? And nobody has found any of these weapons that were dispersed into the forward areas...To me this exceeds believability. A former Iraqi commander, probably a Baathist, no physical evidence, making incredible statements not supported by logic. Why should I trust him? If you bought this line of BS I can't say that your reasoning skills impress me. Can't you see the holes in this story? If you were the interviewer are there other questions you would have asked? And the big question still remains, where are the weapons? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor
If you all remember in the early or first day - I think second or third
- the train of tanks heading in to 'town' came across an ammo dump that had rockets. They showed some on the TV - and the bodies were hollow - e.g. nothing to explode with. In my opinion, those were gas canister holders. Slide in this cylinder, screw on the bottom - shoot and slam it into something - and the G's on impact outgas the lot. It was even pointed out in a later TV shot. Just no gas was found. I suspect a different hole that wasn't found. Martin -- Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn @ home at Lion's Lair with our computer NRA LOH, NRA Life NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor Historical details witin
PERSONNEL KILLED
Navy 2001 Marine Corps 109 Army 231 Civilian 54 PERSONNEL WOUNDED Navy 710 Marine Corps 69 Army 364 Civilian 35 SHIPS Sunk or beached 12 Damaged 9 AIRCRAFT Destroyed 164 Damaged 159 Pearl Harbor, on the Island of O'ahu, Hawaii, (then a territory of the United States) was attacked by the Japanese Imperial Navy, at approximately 8:00 A.M., Sunday morning, December 7, 1941. The surprise attack had been conceived by Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. The strking force of 353 Japanese aircraft was led by Commander Mitsuo Fuchida. There had been no formal declaration of war. Approximately 100 ships of the U.S. Navy were present that morning, consisting of battleships, destroyers, cruisers and various support ships. USS Arizona (BB39) Battleship USS West Virginia (BB48) Battleship USS California (BB44)Battleship USS Oklahoma (BB37) Battleship USS Nevada (BB36) Battleship USS Pennsylvania (BB38) Battleship (in dry dock #1) USS Tennessee (BB43) Battleship USS Maryland (BB46) Battleship USS Vestal (AR4) Repair ship USS Neosho (AO23) Oiler USS Detroit (CL8) Light cruiser USS Raleigh (CL7) Light cruiser USS Utah (AG16) Target Ship USS Tangier (AV8) Seaplane Tender Two destroyers, the USS Cassin (DD372) and the USS Downes (DD375) were in dry dock #1 (with the USS Pennsylvania) and the destroyer USS Shaw (DD373) was in floating dry dock #2, approximately two hundred yards to the west. The USS Ogala (CM-4) was moored next to the USS Helena (CL50) near the "1010" dock, Naval Ship yard. Two heavy cruisers, the USS New Orleans (CA32) and the San Francisco (CA38) were in the Navy Yard Repair Basin Over half the U.S. Pacific fleet was out to sea, including the carriers. Simultaneously, nearby Hickam Field was also the victim of the surprise attack by the Japanese. 18 Army Aircorps aircraft including bombers and fighters and attack bombers were destroyed or damaged on the ground. A few U.S. fighters struggled into the air against the invaders and gave a good account of themselves. Time line Pearl Harbor 59 Years Ago December 7, 1996 Anniversary Remembrance 0342 Minesweeper CONDOR sights periscope off Honolulu Harbor ....notifies patrol destroyer WARD to investigate. 0458 Minesweeper CROSSBILL and CONDOR enter Pearl Harbor... defective submarine net remains open. 0600 - 200 miles south of Oahu carrier ENTERPRISE launches 18 aircraft to scout ahead...then to land at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor...ETA 0800. 0610 - 220 miles north of Oahu Admiral Nagumo orders launching of 1st wave of 183 aircraft off three carriers...2 are lost during takeoff. 0630 Destroyer WARD again notified of submarine sighting this time by supply ship ANTARES off Pearl Harbor entrance... Navy patrol plane (PBY) dispatched to the scene. 0645 WARD opens fire on target hitting conning tower...as she closes in drops depth charges..air attack by PBY follows. 0653 WARD'S commander Captain Outerbridge sends message to Commandant 14th Naval District: "We have attacked, fired upon and dropped depth charges upon submarine operating in defensive sea area". 0700 Commander Fuchida flying towards Oahu directs his pilots to home in on local radio station. 0702 Private's Lockhard and Elliott of Opana Radar Station pick up what appears to be a flight of unidentified aircraft bearing in 132 miles north of Oahu... discussion follows. 0706 Private Elliott phones switchboard operator Joseph McDonald at Information Center, Ft. Shafter, telling of a large formation of aircraft approaching the Island. 0715 Capt. Outerbridge's attack message, delayed in decoding is delivered to duty officer, 14th Naval District, and to Admiral Kimmel's duty officer... Japanese launch 2nd wave of 168 assault aircraft... 0720 Joseph McDonald finding Lt. Tyler in Information Center, calls Opana and patches Lt. Tyler thru to Private Lockard who describes the large flight picked up on radar and is told, "Well don't worry about it." ( see Pvt.Joseph McDonald's account under the Survivor Rememberances "An Army Private is one of the 1st to know of the coming attack)" 0733 Important message from Gen Marshall from Washington to Short received via RCA in Honolulu...cablegram has no indication of priority... messenger Tadao Fuchikami proceeds on normal route... 0735 Reconnaissance plane from cruiser CHIKUMA reports main fleet in Pearl Harbor... 0739 Opana Station loses aircraft on radar 20 miles off coast of Oahu due to "dead zone" caused by surrounding hills... 0740 1st wave sights North Shore of Oahu...deployment for attack begins... 0749 Commander Fuchida orders attack...all pilots to begin assault on military bases on Oahu... 0753 Fuchida radios code to entire Japanese Navy "TORA TORA TORA" indicating success...maximum strategic surprise... Pearl Harbor caught unaware... 0755 Island wide attack begins...Japanese dive bombers to strike airfields Kaneohe, Ford Island, Hickam, Bellows, Wheeler, Ewa... Aerial torpedo planes begin their run on ships in Pearl Harbor... ** ATTACK ERUPTS AT PEARL HARBOR** Along Battleship Row, battlewagons feel the sting of the newly perfected torpedoes specifically designed for the shallow waters of Pearl Harbor At 1010 dock violent explosions rock light cruiser HELENA on her starboard side crippling both her and minelayer OGLALA moored beside her.. On the other side of Battleship row, Ford Island, target ship UTAH also feels the sting of the torpedoes...and like the battleship OKLAHOMA begins to capsize... Light cruiser RALEIGH moored ahead of the UTAH takes measures to prevent capsizing... Commander Logan Ramsey of Ford Island Command Center sends out message for all radiomen on duty to send out in plain English "AIR RAID PEARL HARBOR THIS IS NO DRILL"... 2nd dispatch orders all patrol planes to seek out enemy... Simultaneously the call for General Quarters echos throughout Pearl Harbor... each ship and their personnel in turn swing into action against the attacking Japanese... one quarter of all guns respond to the enemy... 0800 B-17's from the mainland reach Oahu after 14 hour flight...Aircraft from carrier ENTERPRISE arrive Ford Island...both caught between enemy and friendly fire... 0802 Machine guns on battleship NEVADA open fire on torpedo planes approaching her port beam...two planes hit... however one missile tears huge hole in ship's port bow... 0805 Repair ship VESTAL moored outboard of battleship ARIZONA opens fire... Admiral Kimmel arrives CINCPAC headquarters... Battleship CALIFORNIA receives second torpedo "portside at frame 110"... prompt action directed by Ensign Edgar M. Fain prevents ship from capsizing... High level bombers begin their run "on both bows" of battleship row... 0808 KGMB radio interrupts music calling for: "All Army, Navy, and Marine personnel to report to duty"... High level bombers unleash armour piercing, delayed action bombs from altitude of 10,000 feet scoring hits on battleships... 0810 Forward magazines on battleship ARIZONA suddenly ignite resulting in a tremendous explosion and huge fireball sinking the battleship within nine minutes... concussion of explosion blows men off repair ship VESTAL... 0812 General Short advises entire Pacific Fleet and Washington, "Hostilities with Japan commenced with air raid on Pearl Harbor" 0815 KGMB interrupts music with 2nd call ordering all military personnel to report for duty... 0817 USS HELM first of several destroyers to clear Pearl Harbor spots a midget submarine struggling to enter harbor... shots fired misses target...sub frees itself from reef and submerges... 0825 Using a Browning Automatic Rifle Lt. Stephen Saltzman and Sgt. Lowell Klatt shot down enemy plane making strafing run on Schofield Barracks... 0826 Honolulu Fire Department responds to call for assistance from Hickam Field...3 firemen killed...6 wounded... 0830 3rd call out for military via local radio stations... 0835 Tanker NEOSHO half loaded with high octane aviation fuel moves clear of Battleship Row and oil tanks on Ford Island... Damage reported in city...Police warn civilians to leave streets and return to their homes... 0839 Seaplane tender CURTISS sights midget sub in harbor and commences to fire..Destroyer MONAGHAN heads for intruder at ramming speed... 0840 Submarine surfaces after sustaining damage...MONAGHAN hits sub and drops depth charges as she passes... 1st explanation over local radio stations. "A sporadic air attack...rising sun sighted on wing tips"... 0850 Lt. Commander Shimazaki orders deployment of 2nd wave over military bases on Oahu... 0854 Attack run begins...54 high-level bombers hit Naval air stations, 78 dive bombers hit ships in Pearl, 36 fighters circle over harbor to maintain air control... 0900 Crew of the Dutch liner JAGERSFONTEIN opens up with her guns, the first Allies to join the fight... Radios throughout the island crack out urgent messages "Get off roads and stay off.. Don't block traffic...Stay at home...This is the real McCoy"... 0930 Tremendous explosions rocks destroyer SHAW sending debris everywhere... bomb falls near Governor's home... 1000 First wave arrives back on carriers, 190 miles north of Oahu... 1005 Governor Poindexter calls local papers announcing state of emergency for entire territory of Hawaii 1030 Mayor's Major Disaster Council meets at city hall...Reports from local hospitals pour in listing civilian casualties... 1100 Commander Fuchida circles over Pearl Harbor...assesses damage then returns to carrier task force...All schools on Oahu ordered to close... 1115 State of emergency announced over radio by Governor Poindexter... 1142 As per orders by Army local stations go off the air...General short confers with Governor regarding martial law... 1146 First report of many false sightings of enemy troops landing on Oahu... 1210 American planes fly north in search for enemy with negative results... 1230 Honolulu police raid Japanese embassy...find them burning documents...Blackout to begin at night ordered by Army... 1240 Governor confers with President Roosevelt regarding martial law...both agree it necessary that the military take over the civilian government... 1300 Commander Fuchida lands on board carrier AKAGI...discussion follows with Admiral Nagumo and staff concerning feasibility of launching 3rd wave... 1330 Signal flags on carrier AKAGI orders Japanese task force to withdraw... Territorial director of civil defense orders blackout every night until further notice... 1458 Tadao Fuchikami delivers message from Washington... message decoded and given to General Short regarding ultimatum from Japan to be given at 1300 Washington time... "Just what significance the hour set may have we do not know, but be on the alert accordingly"... 1625 Governor signs Proclamation...martial law put into effect... Time line courtesy of Tri-City Chapter 31, Pearl Harbor Survivors Association For those still on the bottom, and those who made it to Punch Bowl and home. Martin -- Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn @ home at Lion's Lair with our computer NRA LOH, NRA Life NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Harbor freight tools | Metalworking | |||
4 or 4 1/2 in. angle grinder from Harbor Freight | Metalworking | |||
Harbor freight has sale on Friday, day after thanksgiving | Metalworking | |||
Harbor Freight Catalogs -- So many! | Metalworking | |||
Harbor Freight # 39743-1VGA, looking for inexpensive basic shop | Metalworking |