Iraq & al-Qaeda: Testing The Weekly Standard's Excerpts

The Weekly Standard ^ | Nov. 24, 2003 | Stephen F. Hayes

[katman]

Dan Darling says:

"By now, I expect that just about everyone in blogosphere has heard from one source or another about the memo that was leaked to the conservative Weekly Standard that provided a considerable listing of evidence regarding a connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

What I'm now going to do is to examine the memo excerpts that were provided by The Weekly Standard re: Iraq & al-Qaeda, and endeavor to see whether or not the raw data is consistent with what we already know or can reasonably deduce from reported stories in the press. Because of the length and detail, this will be a 6-part series. Part 1 deals with The Pentagon Memo, and begins to look at the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda, in particular Zawhiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad."

The level of detail and the media sources he manages to bring into the discussion are impressive.

Dan's analysis is part of Winds of Change.NET's regular "Winds of War" features, of course, and his work is also linked in both today's Iraq Report, and the Winds of War report that covers the global war on terror.

[gaspar]

The only thing really new and specific is the 1992 meeting set up by Sudan's Hasan al-Turabi and Iraqi Intelligence Service chief Faruq Hijazi.

It has already been reported that in December 1991 Turabi set up a meeting between Saad al-Tikriti (a man close to Turabi and Saddam Hussein) and the "terrorist international" being set up in Khartoum. Turabi was also instrumental in setting up a meeting in the Sudan between General Iyad Fatayyih al-Rawi, Commander of the Iraqi Revolutionary Guard, and Iranian intelligence officers and Islamists who had begun to operate out of Sudan.

[katman]

True, and that's part of Dan's point. A lot of this stuff does square with published news reports we've been seing since 1996.

The other thing Dan adds that's new, is his knowledge of the connections between the players and what it means when certain names are mentioned.

[gaspar]

Al-Rawi, ostensibly the man who was used as intermediary between Iraq and Iran, and one who should know more about the Al-Qaida/Turabi/Sudan/Iran/Somalia relationship was number 30 in the deck of cards. He has been captured, and it would be nice if the military/CIA told us something of his disposition -- or even if they would admit that they know what a prize he is.

The problem with the intelligence agencies is that they are in the business of collecting information and not disseminating it, even though it might be in their interest to do so. Thus, we will probably never know (until an agent gets the OK to write a history) if the Agencies have focused on the Islamist ties that emerged following Gulf War I.

[Angelus Errare]

Ping

Dan Darling = Yours truly.

[Dog]

You do good work Dan..

[blam]

Excellent Dan.

[nopardons]

Hey ... good job!

[Angelus Errare]

Second half of analysis on the Weekly Standard memo by yours truly:

http://windsofchange.net/archives/004296.html

[swarthyguy]

You should be on TV instead of that flim flam man, Mansur Ijaz.

[Angelus Errare]

LOL, I appreciate the recommendation.

Who knows, I get to meet Hannity tomorrow, maybe he'll agree with you.

[Angelus Errare]

Here is Part 3:

http://windsofchange.net/archives/004297.html

And Part 4:

http://windsofchange.net/archives/004298.html

[section9]

It becomes a point of mirth to watch Atrios and the various posters at the Daily Kos (not to mention Calpundit) try to dismiss these data points.

Indeed, I expected this reaction from the Left Bloggers. What I should have anticipated, however, was Isikoff and the other liberal reporters' attempt to debunk Hayes' reporting and the meat of the Feith memo.

You have done quite well, sir. Congratulations.

What I think you are seeing is the manifestation of the Left's investment in the myth of the divide between secularist and Wahabist Islam. If that divide becomes the accepted truth, then action against secularist states such as Iraq becomes problematic. If, on the other hand, Iraq and Al Qaeda are viewed as partners of convenience in the continuum of the Jihadist International, then the casus belli against Iraq becomes clear.

Remember, if the Democrats were running this war, the Left would have no problem making the link between Saddam and al Qaeda. They are not, so they have no incentive to invest in the truth.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Angelus Errare]

Isikoff himself tried to "hype" intelligence, in particular his contention that Zarqawi was never involved in al-Qaeda (based solely on the good word of one of his associates who was captured in Germany) in order to perpetuate the "Bush lied" meme.

http://windsofchange.net/archives/004061.html

Take a look and enjoy.

[carton253]

My Adjunct Professor in International Conflict of Religion has repeatedly said that there is no link between Al Qaida and Saddam Hussein... and just last week he said that in a post 9/11 world, we need to give much understanding to the Islamic Fundamentalists because of the Crusades.

The sponges that sat around me just absorbed this ludicrious thinking.

Could you make sure I am pinged when the parts 3-6 come up. I would appreciate it.

[carton253]

Dr. Laurie Mylroie's book "War Against America..." also shows the link between Saddam and terrorists. She does link Saddam with Al Qaida. It's a book worth reading.

[JustPiper]

Excellent job you two!