Those non-existent Saddam/al Qaeda links

Those non-existent Saddam/al Qaeda links

Stephen Hayes, whose book The Connection detailed the links that are said not to have taken place between Saddam and al Qaeda, returns to the fray. Marvelling at the bare-faced lies of CNN which has been stating that there were no links – and that the 9/11 Commission said so, when it said explicitly that there were – he adds a few more examples of the contacts:
**
'In 1992 the Iraqi Intelligence services compiled a list of its assets. On page 14 of the document, marked “Top Secret” and dated March 28, 1992, is the name of Osama bin Laden, who is reported to have a “good relationship” with the Iraqi intelligence section in Syria. The Defense Intelligence Agency has possession of the document and has assessed that it is accurate. In 1993, Saddam Hussein and bin Laden reached an “understanding” that Islamic radicals would refrain from attacking the Iraqi regime in exchange for unspecified assistance, including weapons development.

'This understanding, which was included in the Clinton administration’s indictment of bin Laden in the spring of 1998, has been corroborated by numerous Iraqis and al Qaeda terrorists now in U.S. custody. In 1994, Faruq Hijazi, then deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met face-to-face with bin Laden. Bin Laden requested anti-ship limpet mines and training camps in Iraq. Hijazi has detailed the meeting in a custodial interview with U.S. interrogators. In 1995, according to internal Iraqi intelligence documents first reported by the New York Times on June 25, 2004, a “former director of operations for Iraqi Intelligence Directorate 4 met with Mr. bin Laden on Feb. 19.” When bin Laden left Sudan in 1996, the document states, Iraqi intelligence sough “other channels through which to handle the relationship, in light of his current location.” That same year, Hussein agreed to a request from bin Laden to broadcast anti-Saudi propaganda on Iraqi state television. In 1997, al Qaeda sent an emissary with the nom de guerre Abdullah al Iraqi to Iraq for training on weapons of mass destruction. Colin Powell cited this evidence in his presentation at the UN on February 5, 2003. The Senate Intelligence Committee has concluded that Powell’s presentation on Iraq and terrorism was “reasonable.”

'In 1998, according to documents unearthed in Iraq’s Intelligence headquarters in April 2003, al Qaeda sent a “trusted confidante” of bin Laden to Baghdad for 16 days of meetings beginning March 5. Iraqi intelligence paid for his stay in Room 414 of the Mansur al Melia hotel and expressed hope that the envoy would serve as the liaison between Iraqi intelligence and bin Laden. The DIA has assessed those documents as authentic. In 1999, a CIA Counterterrorism Center analysis reported on April 13 that four intelligence reports indicate Saddam Hussein has given bin Laden a standing offer of safe haven in Iraq. The CTC report is included in the Senate Intelligence Committee’s review on prewar intelligence.

‘In 2000, Saudi Arabia went on kingdom-wide alert after learning that Iraq had agreed to help al Qaeda attack U.S. and British interests on the peninsula. In 2001, satellite images show large numbers of al Qaeda terrorists displaced after the war in Afghanistan relocating to camps in northern Iraq financed, in part, by the Hussein regime. In 2002, a report from the National Security Agency in October reveals that Iraq agreed to provide safe haven, financing and weapons to al Qaeda members relocating in northern Iraq. In 2003, on February 14, the Philippine government ousted Hisham Hussein, the second secretary of the Iraqi embassy in Manila, for his involvement in al Qaeda-related terrorist activites. Andrea Domingo, head of Immigration for the Philippine government, told reporters that “studying the movements and activities” of Iraqi intelligence assets in the country, including radical Islamists, revealed an “established network” of terrorists headed by Hussein.’ **

It is simply astounding that virtually none of this has ever been reported in Britain. Isn’t there anyone in the British mainstream media, not one single proper journalist or editor who is prepared to start putting this material into the public domain?

melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001300.html

There are some pretty good examples of Saddam’s terrorist connectios on this web site as well:Saddam Hussein’s Philanthropy of Terror

http://www.goodolddogs2.com/iraqi-9-11.jpg

In the fall of 1994, Baghdad’s official press, in essence, threatened that Saddam might use his remaining unconventional agents, biological and chemical, for terrorism in America, or in missiles delivered against his enemies in the region if and when he became fed up with sanctions.

Al-Quds al-Arabi, a London paper financed by Baghdad and close to the Iraqi regime, cautioned: “Iraq still has options. But they are all destructive options. Yet if the Americans continue to humiliate them, they will have no option **but to bring the temple down on everyone’s head.” **

General Wafiq Samarrai, former head of Iraqi military intelligence, predicted that Iraq would not give up any more unconventional agents. Instead, Saddam would probably employ them for blackmail and brinkmanship to get sanctions lifted. And failing that, he would use them.

“Tell the allies that they have to destroy Iraq’s biological agents before Saddam can use them.” Iraq could attack its neighbors by missile, or America through terrorism. The United Stares might retaliate with nuclear weapons, but by then “the disaster will already have happened”, Samarrai warned in a 1995 telephone interview with Laurie Mylroie.Hat Tip

People need to remember that after 9/11 we had anthrax attacks that terrorized the population. We were terrified that even if it wasn’t Saddam, that he was one of the few that had the ability and motivation to attack us chemically or biologically.

[quote=qmvsimp]People need to remember that after 9/11 we had anthrax attacks that terrorized the population. We were terrified that even if it wasn’t Saddam, that he was one of the few that had the ability and motivation to attack us chemically or biologically.
[/quote]

We don’t know who did the anthrax attacks.

See related thread:

forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=62955&highlight=rogues

[quote=gilliam]We don’t know who did the anthrax attacks.
[/quote]

Positing that Saddam Hussein had something to do with them isn’t that far-fetched.

German investigators link Iraq to anthrax attack.
October 26, 2001. Anova.
freerepublic.com/focus/news/780782/posts

Hijacker given anthrax by Iraq
October 27, 2001. The Times.
freerepublic.com/focus/news/557446/posts

Report linking anthrax and 9/11 hijackers is probed.
March 23, 2002. The New York Times.
freerepublic.com/focus/news/652000/posts

Saddam behind anthrax attacks?
January 1, 2004. Accuracy in Media.
freerepublic.com/focus/news/…1/posts?page=33

The silica used in the anthrax attacks traced to Iraq.
October 28, 2002. The Washington Post.
washingtonpost.com/ac2/w…7&notFound=true

Evidence Iraq behind anthrax attacks.
January 1, 2004. Accuracy in Media
aim.org/publications/med…2004/01/01.html

– Mark L. Chance.

Mark,

your last link doesn’t work

[quote=gilliam]Mark,

your last link doesn’t work
[/quote]

In best Rambo voice: Nooooooo!

:smiley:

Oh well. It worked once upon a time. Everyone, please ignore that last link. Use this one instead: aim.org/publications/media_monitor/2004/01/01.html

– Mark L. Chance.

Body of Evidence

Stephen Hayes wrote a book about the links between the Saddam Hussein regime and Al Qaeda terrorists, and today he blasts the mainstream media—who are almost universally deceiving the American public about this important issue: Body of Evidence.

“THERE IS NO EVIDENCE that Saddam Hussein was connected in any way to al Qaeda.”

So declared CNN Anchor Carol Costello in an interview yesterday with Representative Robin Hayes (no relation) from North Carolina.

Hayes politely challenged her claim. “Ma’am, I’m sorry, but you’re mistaken. There’s evidence everywhere. We get access to it. Unfortunately, others don’t.”

CNN played the exchange throughout the day. At one point, anchor Daryn Kagan even seemed to correct Rep. Hayes after replaying the clip. “And according to the record, the 9/11 Commission in its final report found no connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.”

The CNN claims are wrong. Not a matter of nuance. Not a matter of interpretation. Just plain incorrect. They are so mistaken, in fact, that viewers should demand an on-air correction.

But such claims are, sadly, representative of the broad media misunderstanding of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. Richard Cohen, columnist for the Washington Post, regularly chides the Bush administration for presenting what he calls fabricated or “fictive” links between Iraq and al Qaeda. The editor of the Los Angeles Times scolded the Bush administration for perpetuating the “myth” of such links. “Sixty Minutes” anchor Lesley Stahl put it bluntly: “There was no connection.”

Conveniently, such analyses ignore statements like this one from Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission. “There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.” Hard to believe reporters just missed it—he made the comments at the press conference held to release the commission’s final report. And that report detailed several “friendly contacts” between Iraq and al Qaeda, and concluded only that there was no proof of Iraqi involvement in al Qaeda terrorist attacks against American interests. Details, details.

UPDATE at 7/1/05 9:51:53 am:

A great post from Melanie Phillips on the Big Lie highlights this report from the Sunday Telegraph:

The Sunday Telegraph’s Con Coughlin, Saddam’s biographer, got hold of a top secret memo made available by Iraq’s interim government which explicitly linked Saddam’s regime to Mohammed Atta, the terrorist mastermind behind 9/11, and the Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal. Written to Saddam by the former head of Iraq’s intelligence service, it contained the following incendiary passage:

’Mohammed Atta, an Egyptian national, came with Abu Ammer (an Arabic nom-de-guerre - his real identity is unknown) and we hosted him in Abu Nidal’s house at al-Dora under our direct supervision. We arranged a work programme for him for three days with a team dedicated to working with him . . . He displayed extraordinary effort and showed a firm commitment to lead the team which will be responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy’.

littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=16456_Body_of_Evidence&only

CNN report from 1999:

Bin Laden reportedly leaves Afghanistan, whereabouts unknown

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers. The Guardian said in 1999

Saddam Hussein’s regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden, bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials.
The key meeting took place in the Afghan mountains near Kandahar in late December. The Iraqi delegation was led by Farouk Hijazi, Baghdad’s ambassador in Turkey and one of Saddam’s most powerful secret policemen, who is thought to have offered Bin Laden asylum in Iraq. News of the negotiations emerged in a week when the US attorney general, Janet Reno, warned the Senate that a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction was a growing concern. “There’s a threat, and it’s real,” Ms Reno said, adding that such weapons “are being considered for use.”

“There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.”–Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission

The issue has been clouded by the anti-Bush element that exists to criticize the president’s every word and suggestion, while this element offers nothing in the form of answers to issues.

Bush was adamant about the fact that Hussein was NOT responsible for the attacks on 911. What the president DID say was that there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda. That connection has been proven time and again.

For those who remember the first attack on the Trade Centers, an Al Qaeda terrorist named Ramsey Yuossef drove a van filled with explosives in the parking garage of the WTC. He was trying to bring them down back in 1993. The interesting thing about Youssef is that he is not only a member of Al Qaeda, he was also a former Iraqi intelligence agent. The connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda was shown to the world 12 years ago.

I wonder why people are always trying to establish the Al-Qieda/Sadam link. Every now and again the same rhetoric is trumpeted, the same links are displayed, the same arguments rolled out.

To quote the great bard:

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

:rolleyes:

[quote=walstan]I wonder why people are always trying to establish the Al-Qieda/Sadam link. Every now and again the same rhetoric is trumpeted, the same links are displayed, the same arguments rolled out.

To quote the great bard:

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

:rolleyes:
[/quote]

Quote the bard all you like but you could say the same for why do so many people tell people that wearing seat belts saves lives? Every now and again the same rhetoric is trumpeted, the same links are displayed, the same arguments rolled out… MAYBE BECAUSE IT IS THE TRUTH but people discount the truth because of political bigotry.

By the way some of the evidence is new, so don’t let. people who want you to side with the terrorists tell you differently.

:wink:

[quote=gilliam]Quote the bard all you like but you could say the same for why do so many people tell people that wearing seat belts saves lives? Every now and again the same rhetoric is trumpeted, the same links are displayed, the same arguments rolled out… MAYBE BECAUSE IT IS THE TRUTH but people discount the truth because of political bigotry.

By the way some of the evidence is new, so don’t let. people who want you to side with the terrorists tell you differently.

:wink:
[/quote]

I don’t think the question is “Did Saddam have links w/ Al Qaeda,?” but “Who in the middle east, besides Israel, don’t have connections with Al Qaeda?”

[quote=walstan]I wonder why people are always trying to establish the Al-Qieda/Sadam link. Every now and again the same rhetoric is trumpeted, the same links are displayed, the same arguments rolled out.

To quote the great bard:

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

:rolleyes:
[/quote]

It’s not that people are trying to establish the link. The link is fact and has been proven time and again. The reason that people are still confirming the link is because the anti-Bush element is trying to refute it, all the while conveniently ignoring the proof that has been “trumpeted” time and time again.
Unfortunately, the left has politicized the Iraq war. Their misrepresentation of the facts, and their constant attempts to make the Bush administration look like war criminals (lies about Koran abuse, lies about prisoner abuse at Gitmo, etc…), is undermining the war effort and the need to win the war. The left in this country is not only siding with the enemy, they are providing weaponry for them in the form of propaganda and verbal support.

[quote=wabrams]I don’t think the question is “Did Saddam have links w/ Al Qaeda,?” but “Who in the middle east, besides Israel, don’t have connections with Al Qaeda?”
[/quote]

Well one group is the vast majority of the Iraqi people.

If you are really interested in this topic, read: Profiles of Saudi Terrorists. 55% of the al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are from Saudi Arabia.

[quote=wabrams]I don’t think the question is “Did Saddam have links w/ Al Qaeda,?” but “Who in the middle east, besides Israel, don’t have connections with Al Qaeda?”
[/quote]

Exactly.

[quote=Jersey Jeepster]lies about Koran abuse,
[/quote]

Not one incident happened. Right.

lies about prisoner abuse at Gitmo

Not one prisoner was abused. Right.

All are lies. Right.

[quote=Richardols]Exactly.
[/quote]

It is too easy to throw out phrases like this but if one thinks for a minute before writing, one would realize how silly the statement is. The vast majority of the populations of all nations in the mid-East do not have al-Qaeda links and many of the governments in the mid-East are the sworn enemy of al-Qaeda.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.