emails to Congressman Curt Weldon (R-PA)

A very interesting article from Gaubatz on WMD's in Iraq now, and how these Congressmen have burried the story for political reasons.

I know it's been a busy news day with the termination of al-z, but this is a good read and it once again brings up the speculation on the WMD story in Iraq.

If this turns out to be true and these congressmen have covered up the wmd search, then they need to be investigated and or kicked out of office.

From NEIN Posted by Sean Osborne on 2006/6/7 22:04:06

From Special Agent Paul “Dave” GAUBATZ (RETIRED), Civilian Federal Agent, Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI)

to Congressman Hoekstra, Congressman Weldon,

Based on my intelligence gathering the following was substantiated:

1. WMD (chemical/biological) was and still is in Iraq.

2. Suspected WMD sites (4) in Iraq have never been exploited/searched by U.S. personnel.

3. Russians were involved in the transfer of WMD out of Iraq and assisted the Iraqi’s in hiding/moving WMD materials during United Nations Inspections.

4. Iranian Intelligence activities were ongoing in Iraq before and during the war, and Iranians were flooding the southern region of Iraq. Their goal was to thwart the goals of the U.S., and to help establish Shiite political and religious domination in Iraq.

5. Hezbollah was active in Iraq at the start of the war and conducted terrorist operations against U.S. units/personnel.

6. Al-Qaeda had been active in Iraq for many years before the war.

The intelligence activity obtained by myself and other U.S. Agents I worked with and the details of our missions/operations were submitted to the AFOSI Regional Headquarters in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. They in
turn disseminated through all levels of DOD, DOJ, CIA, ISG, etc… during the period April through July 2003.

www.homelandsecurityus.com...

Mod Edit: No Quote – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 8/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]

This looks to be related to the bad info that was used to support the war...

From you source

The intelligence activity obtained by myself and other U.S. Agents I worked with and the details of our missions/operations were submitted to the AFOSI Regional Headquarters in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. They in turn disseminated through all levels of DOD, DOJ, CIA, ISG, etc… during the period April through July 2003.

So this would appear to be old news, since the entire military and administration was updated to these facts... and since they never changed the result, it was probably the same "evidence" that has reemerged periodically, whenever the propaganda does good...

So what does this have to do with congressman covering up these very obviously public reports?

After reading the report... I see the gist...
How interesting...
this guy suggests that finding these "known" WMD sites would embarrass the president... that is funny... I would think it would crown him king...

they are playing a funny little game here... and funny that it is around election time...

they are dragging out an old unproven report (or a newly created one) and after we have had several years to plant the evidence in the places that the report suggests we will go over and "find' them...
and damn the bush torpedoes... let him be embarrassed... HA

They really must think we are stupid... to fall for such a lame tactic... of course some of america will...

WMDs found in Iraq, right before the election... and wow... suprise suprise... AQ was working with Iraq also... and hezzbollah...
like a frikin republican wet dream...
and the angle of the story is that this honorable Republican Congressman, will out this "embarrassment" of Bush, regardless of the cost personally...
and wow... there seems to be a conspiracy of republicans working to hide these embarrassing revelations...

Not in their wettest dreams my friends... WMD's found now, are planted, and nothing can say otherwise...

Can anyone beleive that any republican would actually hide this, or that if it was proveable at all, before now, that heaven and earth would have been moved to find it?

[edit on 8-6-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

After googling just Special Agent Paul “Dave” GAUBATZ and skimming, I wasn't impressed as to validity of informant information. Mr. G's only contention is that someone should have gone to check out these sites. Mr. G was a Pentagon civilian, as Rumsfeld. Someone higher up made the decision that info was probably baseless. After Mr. Chalabai's most excellent (sarcastic here) info to Judy Miller, I'ld be suspicious, too. Also, could the British have been in control of area after start of war, as it was in southern Iraq? Southern I was in no-fly zone prewar.
This homeland security site is not .gov Only Mr. G is talking about this "find" What does he mean by "substantiated"--that someone spoke Arabic to him and he interpreted it?

Anyway, ditto what Lazarus said.

What, they are not civilians, both have been employed by the DoD and have served as active duty personel.

Just had to clarify that.

Interesting article posted today here on ATS.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Reports are starting to come out of Iraq of WMD stockpiles located in the country.

After all of the finger pointing from the Democrats and the UN Weapons Inspectors saying Iraq had no WMD's,

And we went to war over a lie !

And we were tricked into thinking that Saddam had bio weapons !

And the PBS Frontline story this week on how Cheney lied about WMD's in Iraq.

It could quite possibly be that GWB had good intel on WMD's in Iraq prior to the war?

Maybe it was the mainstream media and the Democrats who have been providing false information about the WMD's to us the whole time !

It will be interesting on how the mainstream media plays out this story, most likley they will say the WMD's were old and outdated or unusable.

A bioweapon is still a WMD, in the wrong hands it could kill 1000's.

One highlight that jumped out to me reading the article were the cooperative news organizations vs. uncooperative news channels. Coincidence? Hardly. The reasons become clearing after watching them all, comparing and seeing what their agenda is. They all have an agenda. Some are more truth based, others know how to get viewers or sway politics. I'm not going to say which is which, then encourage the reader to dig in and take a hard look if not previously done.

I really appreciate the information posted in the article. Very interesting to say the least.

[edit on 23-6-2006 by saint4God]

Originally posted by SIRR1


After all of the finger pointing from the Democrats and the UN Weapons Inspectors saying Iraq had no WMD's,

And we went to war over a lie !

And we were tricked into thinking that Saddam had bio weapons !

And the PBS Frontline story this week on how Cheney lied about WMD's in Iraq.

It could quite possibly be that GWB had good intel on WMD's in Iraq prior to the war?

Maybe it was the mainstream media and the Democrats who have been providing false information about the WMD's to us the whole time !

FOR PETE'S SAKE...this is not a democrat versus republican issue. EVERYBODY IS COMPLICIT.

George W. Bush wanted to go into Iraq from the day he walked in the White House. Don't believe me? READ THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT. Louis Freeh was trying to tell the new administration about the bin Laden threat as soon as they got there and Bush didn't want to talk about it...HE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IRAQ.

The WMD issue is a NON-issue related to the invasion of Iraq because Bush was going to find some reason - come hell or high water - to invade Iraq.

STOP TRYING TO MAKE THIS POLITICAL. The whole system is broken, it's a sucking chest wound and NOBODY is representing the U.S. citizen anymore. Stick to the important matters of this.

1. They didn't secure sites that were possible WMD caches.
2. They lie at every opportunity.
3. Their first line of defense CONTINUES to be our rights, freedoms and privacies.
4. Right now there is evidence on the table of unsecured sites that might contain WMDs and no politician of EITHER PARTY is willing to perform their duty because of the same banal politicizing exhibited in your post.

YAY!

And we will all go down together! Yes, we will all go down TOGETHER!

Looks like this thread has a high level of emotion considering all this gentleman wants us to do is search the four sites. Does anyone feel it is not a good idea to do this?

I'm not sure how this turns into a Democrat/Republican issue just yet. Naturally if there is a change in results then sure, there will probably be a Republican "I told you so" and a Democrat "Why didn't you do this before?" kinda thing. If I recall the president's 2003 pre-Iraq war speech directly, it was not one reason why he wanted to do this, but a few. The resistance to inspectors being the straw that broke the camel's back (no pun intended). I thought the reasons why we were there from that address was not only for WMD's, but also the harbouring of terrorists and governmental ties with Al Qaeda/Taliban . There's a very good case that provides more context around why we did/should've gone into that country here: Iraq, a master stroke of military strategy.

I'm just an observer, not knowing if it was right or not. I know that the president sees more than I do. I know that I have not been divinely directed to pull a trigger on someone, nor would do so unless I was. But, the situation is what it is, why would we not explore the country that now seems amiable to our presence especially if (according to Dave Gaubatz) the Iraqi's want us to check out these places? When you go into a new hood, listen to the locals. They know their town better than any outsider.

[edit on 23-6-2006 by saint4God]

Val I think you are right on, this has been turned into a partisan issue the second the MSM refused to report it any other way.

That should be a red flag, but alas partisans don't get it, they are scared they could be proven wrong. Ironic, because that is exactly what the politicans fear as well.