World War III Started In 1979 - Speech by U.S. Navy Captain Ouimette

DISCLAIMER: I receive numerous e-mails on a daily basis from ex-military friends from around the world. I normally HATE to read things as I just don't have the time. The subject matter of this one, however, did interest me and my immediate thought, after reading it, was that it was a PERFECT TOPIC for my ATS FAMILY. I am posting it here simply for discussion by the ATS community. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of myself or ATS. It is POSTED just as I RECEIVED IT. I would LOVE to hear PRO or CON about whether YOU think the Navy Captain is RIGHT or WRONG and WHY!

Dave

This is very informative. You have to read the catalog of events in this brief piece. Then, ask yourself how anyone can take the position that all we have to do is bring our troops home from Iraq, sit back, reset the snooze alarm, go back to sleep, and no one will ever bother us again. In case you missed it, World War III began in November 1979... that alarm has been ringing for years

US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so necessary.

Comments By Author Unknown

AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE-UP
By U. S. Navy Captain Ouimette

usaattacked.com...

usaattacked.com...

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When more than 3,000 Americans were killed -AD) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.

It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 25 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism.

America's military had been decimated and down sized/right sized since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.

Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil continued.

In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut When it explodes, it kills 63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.

Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.

Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait, and America continues her slumber.

The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.

Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.

Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually attacked.

Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed.

The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259.

Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war.

The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder.

The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.

Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.

A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively.

They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.. These attacks were planned with precision. They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.

The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.

And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America. How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.

In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from very high officials in government over what they knew and what they didn't know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979.

I think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has been changed forever.. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to keep hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back to sleep.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said "... it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.

This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year this is an AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come.

If you believe in this please forward it to as many people as you can especially to the young people and all those who dozed off in history class and who seem so quick to protest such a necessary military action. If you don't believe it, just delete it and go back to sleep.

[edit on 6/6/2006 by Dave Rabbit]

Interesting. I guess now that they think they could do it to Americans the rest of the free world is game as well.

Hey Dave, could you provide a link source if at all possable. That fits into an Omega Agency connection, and I would be very interested in knowing more.

I have read some thing very simular to what is above, and this post of yours gave me a De ja vu feeling. Now I'm off to search for a transcript of that speach, see ya round.

Yeah.... sorry about that. Shortcuts are now UP!

Dave

It seems an epidemic among the 'Western" and maybe all the world. We see something that is terrible, we look the other way. It simply won't do to have our perfect little worlds disturbed by something we didn't plan on. We pay good money to live in a clean and secure neighborhood. The electric gate at the only entrance to the development should be more than just a symbol of blockade to those who don't belong!

Humanity has been on a road to collision between the "haves and have nots" for centuries. The difference I see today vs say, 100 years ago, is the have nots can GET.

They can get fertilizer and rent a truck. They can get cell phones, they can get attention.

Alot, if not MOST of the turmoil is cloaked or couched in religious ideology and dogma. I call BS. I believe it's have and have not. Look at the vast majority of the third world. What is the religion they practice? That's a convenient and emotion firing rally data point and nothing more.

I had an Iranian friend out in LA who was in Tehran during the kidnapping in 1979. He told me the PEOPLE, the regular folk of Iran couldn't care less about the political crap the "Jihadis" were spewing. The "Leaders" were handing out $10.00 bills (US no less, oh the irony) to anybody who would promise to be on the street waving a sign when the 6 O'clock news cameras rolled. Back then we only had NBC, CBS and ABC... CNN was a dream, FOX News hadn't even been thought of.

The selling point to the man on the street was "we will take our oil fields away form American Oil Companies we will ALL be rich!"

When you have to get up at 5AM, go work your tush off in 105 degree heat for someone else and you are still BROKE every Friday morning that sounds pretty good. This is how it was described to me by my friend. The "leaders" played upon the fact these countries are RICH with oil and it's the American's fault NOT the native leaders who KEEPING ALL THE MONEY's fault.

That's pretty easy to believe when you live in a society that dictates everything down to what your wife is allowed to where in public. dogma has been keeping the "Have Nots" in line for centuries... All the elite, and they are the same in EVERY SOCIETY, EVERY RELIGION, EVERY COUNTRY, have to do is stir up the have nots against the new enemy and bang, they stay in control and keep all the money.

Springer...

[edit on 6-6-2006 by Springer]

Pro, they are right... there is a despicable plot to harm America/ns by extremist islamists (wahhabists, according to Bush)

Con.... this report seems to be painted with the same broad brush that propagandists use... and is just as generallized when they describe the various attacks over the years,
as if they were all by ONE group, instead of various unconnected groups, various reasons, only some of which were religious.

I also note that they seem to blaim all these attacks on Iran..
so which is it? first it was afghanistan, then it was Iraqs fault... and now its Iran...

how bout we go take care of the actual perpetrators of this religious jihad first...
ones that the islamic leaders also want us to take care of.

I speak of the false religion of Wahhabi islam... and its MAIN BENEFACTOR Saudi Arabia (whos only state religion is- you guessed it- wahhabi islam.)
I like my SUV as much as the next guy... but enough is enough...
we are paying blackmail prices for oil, from the same guys that attacked us on 9-11, and our government keeps pointing fingers at other countries...

I agree with the articles base, but not at their blame...

Originally posted by Dave Rabbit
It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 25 years.

Gosh! Okay, this has always been a turning point for me, though not anywhere near what this thread suggests. But the Iranian hostage situation has always stuck with me and I will share why. Who knows, perhaps my memories will serve to bring more to light, perhaps not.

I was 19 years old, in college where they had a lot of foreign students studying ELS (English as a Second Language) there at the time. I had friends from all over the world, but I was young, naive and just a silly girl at the time. I remember being at an Iranian friend's apartment with some others and the news was showing protests in Iran while the newscasters were reporting it was in support of the US. The Iranians (who could understand what was being said and read the signs) laughed and told us the news was lying. We were like - WHAT? In fact the Iranians were protesting against the US and in support of the hostage situation. I think this was the first time I heard the alarm go off. I never trusted the news again.

A few years later I was told a story about that failed "rescue attempt". Has anyone else ever heard that the actual mission was not a rescue attempt at all but had another purpose? If it had succeeded I don't know what they would have said or if we ever would have heard anything, but after the copters crashed they had to make up a rescue attempt to cover what they were really over there for. Does anyone know what I am talking about?

Well, that could be, but I might suggest that Captain Quimette got his date wrong. He might want to consider tearing a few pages off his Navy Issue calendar and checking out 1953. That's probably when the WW3 he's describing really started, when the CIA and British intelligence orchestrated a coup d’etat that toppled the democratically elected government of Iran. The government of Mohammad Mossadegh. Could just be that disposing of Mossadegh and restoring the Shah to the Peacock Throne ruffled more than a few feathers in that part of the world.

Hey, I'm not saying we were wrong in initiating a regime change in a foreign country. Heck, the Shah was friendly to our oil companies. But them damn foreigners seem to object to our interference, even if we do know better than them.

One of the big problems in this world is the inability of foreign types to understand our point of view or see the good in what we do for them. And it's just not us. The English, the French, the Spanish, the Dutch, and other like-minded imperalists have run into the same difficulties time and again. That's probably why they're foreigners and we aren't - because of their short-sightedness.

As I have said more than once... the debate that goes on with ATS topics is WHAT I really love about this place. The RESPECT of others opinions without slamming each other. That is what makes this place UNIQUE & FUN and that is what makes this place (forgive me Springer & Skeptic) a "Disneyland For Nuts"

I FIT right in!

Just one opinion.

Dave

Well, what begets a good conspiracy theory without some speculation and good dose of scepticism anyway?

I just found the whole thing interesting, because of the story I was told about the rescue mission not actually being a rescue mission.

If the whole thing did start with the hostage crisis back then, I just wonder, had the mystery mission been successful, what may have been averted? Would we be where we are today?

If the whole thing did start with the hostage crisis back then, I just wonder, had the mystery mission been successful, what may have been averted? Would we be where we are today?

Relentless.... I couldn't agree with you MORE. Unfortunately for You, Me and the rest of us.... WE will really NEVER KNOW. Don't you find it amazing that after all of this time.... there has NEVER been really any FACTUAL ACCOUNTING of what the investigation REALLY FOUND?

Just one opinion.

Dave

Yes, I find it even more amazing that I have never seen conspiracy even suggesting that the "rescue mission" was not a rescue mission at all.

Don't you WONDER WHY?

Talk about a CAN OF WORMS.... if WE only KNEW!

Dave

Well, let's start with this.

Suppossedly the reason the helicopters crashed into each other was actually because the pilots had no training landing in a desert and were not prepared for the resulting sand kick up. The discrepancy is that the official report says they were hampered by sand storms on their way to the refueling site and that the helicopers actually crashed taking off, not landing. Though the official details reported differ somewhat beyond that point, I see this may support my initial impression:

www.globalsecurity.org...

Unfortunately, the pilots trained with different type/model/series aircraft than those used for the mission. The mission aircraft were placed on the USS Kitty Hawk and then on the USS Nimitz four months before the mission commenced. The crews were unfamiliar with the flight characteristics and maintenance records of the mission aircraft. This limited time for maintenance crews and pilots to become familiar. They flew the helicopters only once before launching on the mission.

In addition it was my understanding that the men on the flights had no idea what they were about to do until they were in the air and at which point they opened their orders.

Because of security concerns, a full scale rehearsal of the entire rescue package was not accomplished. Several partial rehearsals were executed with a large portion of the assets, but never a final exercise with the entire package. In addition, briefs and debriefs for the air packages were never conducted.

I wonder if since the "official story" has been out there so long now if the actual orders may be available for a FOIL?

The only conspiracy I am finding about this mission is that it was directly sabotaged by Reagan and the CIA. Oh, there is also the one about the Russians shooting down the helicopters cause they were in on it too.

I'm not buying this one at the moment because it it totally incompatible with my theory. Still, if it were a rescue mission (or another mission entirely) and had succeeded, Carter might have made a second term, and then, there you go again - would we be where we are now?

Wow... great research.

Relentless is YOUR NAME.... digging up great stuff is YOUR GAME!

NICE JOB! Keep 'em coming!

Dave

One glaring discrepancy I have noticed reading what I can find regards a busload of Iranians that appeared on the scene just prior to the landing at Desert One.

I have seen reports that:

1) The bus appeared and was engaged resulting in the blowing up of it which actually helped the pilots find the landing spot.

2) They were just a busload of poor Iranians travelling and happening to cross the airfield at an in-opportune time and therefore caused the ground personnel distraction, trying to control the situtation - that the bus was not blown up at all, but did interfere with the plan.

3) No mention of the bus at all.

Edit: Oh - thanks Mr. Rabbit, I will add what I can as I find things, but I am not coming anywhere close to what I am looking for unfortunately. Hopefully some other people will take an interest and lend a hand. IF your initial post has anything to it, it would be good to confirm more about the initial incident for a better understanding of how we got into this mess.

Edit 2: P.S. It is now common knowledge that the Iranians were supporting the students at the time, but does anyone else remember the news showing the protests and saying they were demanding the release of the hostages initially? I remember this so vividly.

[edit on 6/10/2006 by Relentless]

[edit on 6/10/2006 by Relentless]

Okay, I have finally found something that hints at what I am looking for. It definately gives a lot more detail about what else was going on in the situation (in the background), although it is filled with a scathing depiction of some of the key players. It's long, but worth the read.

www.jamesbancroft.net...

Now this is what I don't understand.

No one blames the pilots for leaving that material behind; the heat from the
burning C-130 was intense, and ammunition was beginning to explode. But the
pictures and documents were highly classified, and on his way out of Iran,
Beckwith urged Vaught to call in a carrier air strike to destroy the
choppers that had been left behind. That proposal was rejected by Washington
in an effort to preserve the fiction that the rescue attempt was intended to
be a bloodless humanitarian mission.

Apparently they are claiming that extremely sensitive documents were left behind in the crashed helicopters. I do find this questionable after seeing pictures of the burned helicopter and a body that was in it that any doucuments would have survived, but doesn't that last line in the quoted paragraph raise an eyebrow?

For the record I was was trying to find reference to sensitive documents, but I was not expecting to see the concern was the location specified in this article. I somewhat consider this a red herring at the moment.

Edit: Interesting - the link to the original article off that page is no longer available.





[edit on 6/10/2006 by Relentless]

[edit on 6/10/2006 by Relentless]

You are AMAZING! FOUR THUMBS UP!

Thanks for the research.... will make for some GREAT READING by those that TAKE THE TIME!

Dave

Ah - the documents were suppossedly left behind in abandoned intact helicopters according to this source:

www.absoluteastronomy.com...

During the ensuing evacuation, five RH-53D helicopters were left behind, intact, containing plans which identified CIA agents within Iran.

Now I am really confused. We left the remaining working helicopters behind? This isn't making sense. How did the troops in them leave? Now I have to go back and re-read all the other reports.

Edit: Okay - yes I missed it in the previous link - that is what they are saying. It still makes no sense to me though why the intact helicopters were left behind. I am not finding any clear explanation for why they weren't just flown back out.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by Relentless]

[edit on 6/11/2006 by Relentless]

Edit: Does anyone know how these documents are suppossed to be handled? You get your orders, they are obviously sensitive. Are they left lying around your transport, on your person, - what. What is suppossed to happen to them after they are read? I can't imagine they should be lying around at all, but then again, keeping them on your person seems to be a risk if captured.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by Relentless]