Fourth of all, they will need to counter-balance the long and short term reaction in some way 'in the best interest of the State'.

We have been warned repeatedly by various sources of an impending attack on US soil. Stories have surfaced in the media to suggest that there are 3,000 "missing Iraqis" that Federal Agents are presently hunting for.[1] There is absolutely no press coverage of how they got here and what their immediate political standing may or may not be.

Please take the following links and random hypertext into account when we assess the damage from our next "inevitable" terrorist attack.

(08/24/93) - The United States has begun resettling in this country up to4,000 Iraqi soldiers who surrendered during the Persian Gulf War, an effort that has drawn criticism from a coalition of congressmen who believe the prisoners are receiving special treatment never awarded returning American soldiers. The U.S. government is paying between $4,000 and $7,000 to relocate each of the enemy prisoners -- and in some cases their family members. They have been classified as refugees who would be harmed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein if returned home. [2]

(08/25/93) Nearly 1,000 Iraqi soldiers captured by U.S. forces during the 1991 Persian Gulf War have been resettled at public expense in cities across the United States. They are among nearly 3,000 Iraqi refugees -- the majority of them civilians -- who have been resettled in the United States from internment camps in Saudi Arabia...

...More than 80 members of Congress have asked President Clinton to end what they called the "potentially dangerous and unfair policy" of resettling captured Iraqi soldiers in the United States along with deserving civilian Iraqi refugees. [3]

Why did FBI agents, who were actually serving their country, arrest five members of the Iraqi Republican Guard involved in the Oklahoma City bombing only for their release to be ordered by Bill Clinton? Why were these Iraqis, who were initially trained in the US in the eighties, brought back in by George Bush senior in the early nineties?

Why did the FBI declare national security to prevent the release of the surveillance tapes that showed Iraqis crawling all over the OKC bomb scene?

Because they were saving it until they were ready to move in and take out Iraq. They could have done it back in 1991 but the terrorism/police state system had to be erected beforehand. They weren't ready. They're ready now. [4]

Like I said, I hope I am wrong. However there is an interesting quote from the BBC story:

"Most Iraqi immigrants are believed to be opposed to Saddam Hussein, but security chiefs are worried about those who cannot be traced, The Washington Post reported on Monday."

One must take into consideration a lot of variables, but I am quite sure that there will be plenty of Iraqis in Iraq and in the US who oppose Saddam Hussein and his regime, but equally oppose being bombed and/or watching their friends and family killed and (ex) country destroyed.

One has to accept that any competent intelligence organization would not let that many members of a foreign army loose in the US without having a certain percentage of them be either monitored or employed.

From that, I advise you to draw your own conclusions in light of the propaganda that will soon consume the datasphere.




Enter recipient's e-mail:

Visit Wade's fine website at Wade can be reached at:
Permission to reprint this article is granted providing the original author is cited and a link to
PRISON is included. The views expressed in this article may not necessarily be those of Alex Jones or Paul Joseph Watson.
Search For The Missing Iraqis: Ask Daddy Bush And Clinton

By Wade Inganamort

First of all, I would like to pre-emp this post by saying that I hope I am wrong.

Second of all, what the Bush Administration has proposed for its blitzkrieg of Iraq, under the Geneva Convention, could be considered genocide.

Third of all, The Administration is well aware that public objection will be much more intense than Desert Storm 1.