| "They have given us their deaths. Let us give them their meaning, their meaning of peace and freedom, of reconciliation and love, of service, endurance, and hope. After all they have given us, we must give them their meaning."
To those who attacked them we say: you will not find a safe harbor. We will find you,
and justice will prevail.
October 20, 2000
Terrorism is a manifestation of hatred and when it is well planned, it is purposefully
executed. CNN recently reported that Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh hints that
bin Laden is tied to the USS Cole bombing, but Louis Freeh would not confirm or deny a
possible bin Laden link. Why not? Louis Freeh claims that he is a junior partner in what is
called “a joint effort being led by Yemen”. Shouldn’t Louis Freeh at least acknowledge
the fact that bin Laden is a suspect? If this doesn’t smell like a cover up, we live by
different standards. If Louis Freeh has the interest or the intention to get to the bottom of
the USS Cole blast, he has to demonstrate it. Osama bin Laden is an indicted, criminal
terrorist, and if the Director of the FBI does not express any anxiety over the fact, it is
probably because bin Laden is a controversial terrorist/freedom fighter with American
contacts. And so, FBI Director Louis Freeh may go to Yemen and pretend to be a junior
partner, but he is a senior propaganda agent, if he wishes to focus attention away from the
potential responsibility of terrorists like Osama bin Laden. Louis Freeh claims that the
determination of responsibility "will be governed by facts and forensics," but he ignores
the fact that Osama bin Laden is a well known international terrorist. Nobody is telling
Louis Freeh to rush to judgment, but the possibilities that he is ignoring strongly suggest
that the truth about the USS Cole blast is being covered up rather than adequately
pursued. A narrow focus on forensics is the best way to focus attention away from an
operation which was clearly well planned and purposefully executed, to one that is
constrained by the absence of thorough, intelligent analysis. Is anybody recognizing the
possibility that the operations of Osama bin Laden and American “freedom fighters” are
too blurred to recognize distinction? In the face of a cover up, an outrageous possibility
becomes a probability, and the domestic implications of an act of overseas terror are being
ignored. The following message posted in our guestbook on October 17, 2000, reflects the
possibilities that are being deliberately ignored. Appropriately titled October No
Surprise, it reads:
George Bush betrayed his dangerously narrow-minded view of foreign
policy issues during the second presidential debate, when he said:
"Maybe I'm missing something here, I mean we're going to have some kind of a nation
building corp from America? -Absolutely not, our military is meant to fight and win war
-that's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops."
George Bush further reinforced his view during the closing statement of the second
presidential debate, when he identified what he called the "warning signs" or the need to
have a commander-in-chief who thinks and talks the way George Bush does. These
'talking points' that spoke of a demoralized American military that should be doing
anything but taking overextended risk, provided people like Trent Lott the opportunity to
ask questions like:
"Do we have failed policies of the Clinton-Gore administration? What kind of leader do
we want for the future?"
If the slaughter of 17 sailors has the power to prove that the United States needs a
commander-in-chief like George Bush, then he should obviously be the next President of
the United States.
The ideology and the politically motivated rhetoric of elected officials stands in the
way of a reasonable investigation to expose the people who are in fact responsible for the
well organized and well supplied blast that ripped a massive hole in the USS Cole. Clearly,
this was not a typical, unexpected, terrorist act, this was a time-bomb waiting to explode.
CNN has been talking about a potential, Osama bin Laden terrorist attack on American
assets for longer than memory serves.
The assault was clearly predicted, predictable and avoidable, but the intelligence that is
required to stop it is buried in the secrecy maintained by a Bush administration that
pardons Iran Contragate criminals and treats "freedom fighters" like Osama bin Laden, like
heroes. This is clearly one act of terror that is entirely the responsibility of American
citizens. When the state department in exile is desperately seeking to prove that the
Clinton-Gore state department is inept, the terrorism that is repeatedly and vaguely
alluded to is precisely delivered, and American citizens are directly responsible.
We do not lay blame, we demand responsibility. Clearly, when people like Dr. Rush
Goebbels and Dr. Oliver Goebbels deliver a steady diet of propaganda to prove the
ineptitude of the President of the United States, the source of a well organized and a well
supplied act of senseless terror is anything but an October Surprise.
This intriguing thought was posted on October 15:
In my opinion, the terrorist attack on American personnel was planned by the terrorist
network that Oliver North and Bill Casey worked with and it probably includes allies like
bin Laden. Hey, if good old Ollie isn't telling us who did it, it's probably because he
shredded the truth.
Interestingly enough, Oliver North calls the USS Cole terrorist assault an “act of war” and claims that Osama bin Laden is linked to Sadam Hussein. North conveniently ignores the fact that
he has declared war against President Clinton as well as Sadam Hussein. And now, it
appears Clinton is fighting back. In his own words: "To those who attacked them we say:
you will not find a safe harbor. We will find you, and justice will prevail." Perhaps Ollie
should seek asylum in Baghdad.
But he certainly has nothing to worry about as long as
law enforcement is controlled by people like Louis Freeh. The following post placed in our
guestbook on October 18, identifies the problem:
“How convenient that Louis Hoover
Freeh is taking charge of the USS Cole investigation. Why doesn't this guy stay home and
solve debategate, before he joins the big leagues? The stench of this cover-up is a mile
thick and an eternity long. This is the same politically motivated wacko who wanted to
appoint another Ken Starr to destroy Al Gore. Anybody who thinks that this guy is going
to solve this case is exhaustively deluded”.
It is not very eloquant and it is even mean-spirited, but the point is well taken. The abuse
that Ken Starr practiced killed the Independent Counsel Statute and made reasonable
people condemn the appointment of another Ken Starr Inquisitor, yet the Director of the
FBI somehow missed the message. In the process, Director Louis Freeh raised serious
questions about his independence and about the integrity of his judgment. Perhaps, it was
just a matter of being manipulated by the sustained Republican pressure to appoint an
Independent Counsel, but whatever it was, law enforcement officials need to demonstrate
their independence, not the willingness to cave in to political pressure. It is consequently
very difficult to believe that the judgment of Louis Freeh is what is required, to get to
the bottom of the USS Cole, terrorist attack.