Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The collaboration of Iraq and al Qaeda.
Weekly Standard ^ | June 7, 2004 issue | Stephen Hayes

Posted on 05/28/2004 11:09:32 PM PDT by Grampa Dave

The Connection, The collaboration of Iraq and al Qaeda.

From the June 7, 2004 issue: by Stephen F. Hayes 06/07/2004, Volume 009, Issue 37

Buy The Connection: How al Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein has Endangered America by Stephen F. Hayes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"THE PRESIDENT CONVINCED the country with a mixture of documents that turned out to be forged and blatantly false assertions that Saddam was in league with al Qaeda," claimed former Vice President Al Gore last Wednesday.

"There's absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda, ever," declared Richard Clarke, former counterterrorism official under George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, in an interview on March 21, 2004.

The editor of the Los Angeles Times labeled as "myth" the claim that links between Iraq and al Qaeda had been proved. A recent dispatch from Reuters simply asserted, "There is no link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda." 60 Minutes anchor Lesley Stahl was equally certain: "There was no connection."

And on it goes. This conventional wisdom--that our two most determined enemies were not in league, now or ever--is comforting. It is also wrong.

In late February 2004, Christopher Carney made an astonishing discovery. Carney, a political science professor from Pennsylvania on leave to work at the Pentagon, was poring over a list of officers in Saddam Hussein's much-feared security force, the Fedayeen Saddam. One name stood out: Lieutenant Colonel Ahmed Hikmat Shakir. The name was not spelled exactly as Carney had seen it before, but such discrepancies are common. Having studied the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda for 18 months, he immediately recognized the potential significance of his find. According to a report last week in the Wall Street Journal, Shakir appears on three different lists of Fedayeen officers.

An Iraqi of that name, Carney knew, had been present at an al Qaeda summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on January 5-8, 2000. U.S. intelligence officials believe this was a chief planning meeting for the September 11 attacks. Shakir had been nominally employed as a "greeter" by Malaysian Airlines, a job he told associates he had gotten through a contact at the Iraqi embassy. More curious, Shakir's Iraqi embassy contact controlled his schedule, telling him when to show up for work and when to take a day off.

A greeter typically meets VIPs upon arrival and accompanies them through the sometimes onerous procedures of foreign travel. Shakir was instructed to work on January 5, 2000, and on that day, he escorted one Khalid al Mihdhar from his plane to a waiting car. Rather than bid his guest farewell at that point, as a greeter typically would have, Shakir climbed into the car with al Mihdhar and accompanied him to the Kuala Lumpur condominium of Yazid Sufaat, the American-born al Qaeda terrorist who hosted the planning meeting.

The meeting lasted for three days. Khalid al Mihdhar departed Kuala Lumpur for Bangkok and eventually Los Angeles. Twenty months later, he was aboard American Airlines Flight 77 when it plunged into the Pentagon at 9:38 A.M. on September 11. So were Nawaf al Hazmi and his younger brother, Salem, both of whom were also present at the Kuala Lumpur meeting.

Six days after September 11, Shakir was captured in Doha, Qatar. He had in his possession contact information for several senior al Qaeda terrorists: Zahid Sheikh Mohammed, brother of September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed; Musab Yasin, brother of Abdul Rahman Yasin, the Iraqi who helped mix the chemicals for the first World Trade Center attack and was given safe haven upon his return to Baghdad; and Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, otherwise known as Abu Hajer al Iraqi, described by one top al Qaeda detainee as Osama bin Laden's "best friend."

Despite all of this, Shakir was released. On October 21, 2001, he boarded a plane for Baghdad, via Amman, Jordan. He never made the connection. Shakir was detained by Jordanian intelligence. Immediately following his capture, according to U.S. officials familiar with the intelligence on Shakir, the Iraqi government began exerting pressure on the Jordanians to release him. Some U.S. intelligence officials--primarily at the CIA--believed that Iraq's demand for Shakir's release was pro forma, no different from the requests governments regularly make on behalf of citizens detained by foreign nationals. But others, pointing to the flurry of phone calls and personal appeals from the Iraqi government to the Jordanians, disagreed. This panicked reaction, they say, reflected an interest in Shakir at the highest levels of Saddam Hussein's regime.

CIA officials who interviewed Shakir in Jordan reported that he was generally uncooperative. But even in refusing to talk, he provided some important information: The interrogators concluded that his evasive answers reflected counterinterrogation techniques so sophisticated that he had probably learned them from a government intelligence service. Shakir's nationality, his contacts with the Iraqi embassy in Malaysia, the keen interest of Baghdad in his case, and now the appearance of his name on the rolls of Fedayeen officers--all this makes the Iraqi intelligence service the most likely source of his training.

The Jordanians, convinced that Shakir worked for Iraqi intelligence, went to the CIA with a bold proposal: Let's flip him. That is, the Jordanians would allow Shakir to return to Iraq on the condition that he agree to report back on the activities of Iraqi intelligence. And, in one of the most egregious mistakes by the U.S. intelligence community after September 11, the CIA agreed to Shakir's release. He posted a modest bail and returned to Iraq.

He hasn't been heard from since.

The Shakir story is perhaps the government's strongest indication that Saddam and al Qaeda may have worked together on September 11. But it is far from conclusive; conceivably there were two Ahmed Hikmat Shakirs. And in itself, the evidence does not show that Saddam Hussein personally had foreknowledge of the attacks. Still--like the long, on-again-off-again relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda--it cannot be dismissed.

THERE WAS A TIME not long ago when the conventional wisdom skewed heavily toward a Saddam-al Qaeda collaboration. In 1998 and early 1999, the Iraq-al Qaeda connection was widely reported in the American and international media. Former intelligence officers and government officials speculated about the relationship and its dangerous implications for the world. The information in the news reports came from foreign and domestic intelligence services. It was featured in mainstream media outlets including international wire services, prominent newsweeklies, network radio and television broadcasts.

Newsweek magazine ran an article in its January 11, 1999, issue headed "Saddam + Bin Laden?" "Here's what is known so far," it read:

Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas--assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer.

Four days later, on January 15, 1999, ABC News reported that three intelligence agencies believed that Saddam had offered asylum to bin Laden.

Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. . . . ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief named Faruq Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.

NPR reporter Mike Shuster interviewed Vincent Cannistraro, former head of the CIA's counterterrorism center, and offered this report.

Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. . . . Some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA Director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee when he said bin Laden was planning additional attacks on American targets.

By mid-February 1999, journalists did not even feel the need to qualify these claims of an Iraq-al Qaeda relationship. An Associated Press dispatch that ran in the Washington Post ended this way: "The Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against Western powers."

Where did journalists get the idea that Saddam and bin Laden might be coordinating efforts? Among other places, from high-ranking Clinton administration officials.

In the spring of 1998--well before the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa--the Clinton administration indicted Osama bin Laden. The indictment, unsealed a few months later, prominently cited al Qaeda's agreement to collaborate with Iraq on weapons of mass destruction. The Clinton Justice Department had been concerned about negative public reaction to its potentially capturing bin Laden without "a vehicle for extradition," official paperwork charging him with a crime. It was "not an afterthought" to include the al Qaeda-Iraq connection in the indictment, says an official familiar with the deliberations. "It couldn't have gotten into the indictment unless someone was willing to testify to it under oath." The Clinton administration's indictment read unequivocally:

Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.

On August 7, 1998, al Qaeda terrorists struck almost simultaneously at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The blasts killed 257 people--including 12 Americans--and wounded nearly 5,000. The Clinton administration determined within five days that al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks and moved swiftly to retaliate. One of the targets would be in Afghanistan. But the Clinton national security team wanted to strike hard simultaneously, much as the terrorists had. "The decision to go to [Sudan] was an add-on," says a senior intelligence officer involved in the targeting. "They wanted a dual strike."

A small group of Clinton administration officials, led by CIA director George Tenet and national security adviser Sandy Berger, reviewed a number of al Qaeda-linked targets in Sudan. Although bin Laden had left the African nation two years earlier, U.S. officials believed that he was still deeply involved in the Sudanese government-run Military Industrial Corporation (MIC).

The United States retaliated on August 20, 1998, striking al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan and the al Shifa pharmaceutical plant outside Khartoum. "Let me be very clear about this," said President Bill Clinton, addressing the nation after the strikes. "There is no question in my mind that the Sudanese factory was producing chemicals that are used--and can be used--in VX gas. This was a plant that was producing chemical warfare-related weapons and we have physical evidence of that."

The physical evidence was a soil sample containing EMPTA, a precursor for VX nerve gas. Almost immediately, the decision to strike at al Shifa aroused controversy. U.S. officials had expressed skepticism that the plant produced pharmaceuticals at all, but reporters on the ground in Sudan found aspirin bottles and a variety of other indications that the plant had, in fact, manufactured drugs. For journalists and many at the CIA, the case was hardly clear cut. For one thing, the soil sample was collected from outside the plant's front gate, not within the grounds, and an internal CIA memo issued a month before the attacks had recommended gathering additional soil samples from the site before reaching any conclusions. "It caused a lot of heartburn at the agency," recalls a former top intelligence official.

The Clinton administration sought to dispel doubts about the targeting and, on August 24, 1998, made available a "senior intelligence official" to brief reporters on background. The briefer cited "strong ties between the plant and Iraq" as one of the justifications for attacking it. The next day, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering briefed reporters at the National Press Club. Pickering explained that the intelligence community had been monitoring the plant for "at least two years," and that the evidence was "quite clear on contacts between Sudan and Iraq." In all, at least six top Clinton administration officials have defended on the record the strikes in Sudan by citing a link to Iraq.

The Iraqis, of course, denied any involvement. "The Clinton government has fabricated yet another lie to the effect that Iraq had helped Sudan produce this chemical weapon," declared the political editor of Radio Iraq. Still, even as Iraq denied helping Sudan and al Qaeda with weapons of mass destruction, the regime lauded Osama bin Laden. On August 27, 1998, twenty days after al Qaeda attacked the U.S. embassies in Africa, Babel, the government newspaper run by Saddam's son Uday Hussein, published a startling editorial proclaiming bin Laden "an Arab and Islamic hero."

Five months later, the same Richard Clarke who would one day claim that there was "absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda, ever," told the Washington Post that the U.S. government was "sure" that Iraq was behind the production of the chemical weapons precursor at the al Shifa plant. "Clarke said U.S. intelligence does not know how much of the substance was produced at al Shifa or what happened to it," wrote Post reporter Vernon Loeb, in an article published January 23, 1999. "But he said that intelligence exists linking bin Laden to al Shifa's current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts, and the National Islamic Front in Sudan."

Later in 1999, the Congressional Research Service published a report on the psychology of terrorism. That report created a stir in May 2002 when critics of President Bush cited it to suggest that his administration should have given more thought to suicide hijackings. On page 7 of the 178-page report was a passage about a possible al Qaeda attack on Washington, D.C., that "could take several forms." In one scenario, the report suggested "suicide bombers belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency, or the White House."

A network anchor wondered if it was possible that the White House had somehow missed the report. A senator cited it in calling for an investigation into the 9/11 attacks. A journalist read excerpts to the secretary of defense and raised a familiar question: "What did you know and when did you know it?"

But another passage of the same report has gone strangely unnoticed. Two paragraphs before, also on page 7, is this: "If Iraq's Saddam Hussein decide[s] to use terrorists to attack the continental United States [he] would likely turn to bin Laden's al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is among the Islamic groups recruiting increasingly skilled professionals," including "Iraqi chemical weapons experts and others capable of helping to develop WMD. Al Qaeda poses the most serious terrorist threat to U.S. security interests, for al Qaeda's well-trained terrorists are engaged in a terrorist jihad against U.S. interests worldwide."

CIA director George Tenet echoed these sentiments in a letter to Congress on October 7, 2002.

-- Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.

--We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade.

--Credible information indicates that Iraq and Al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.

--Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.

--We have credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire W.M.D. capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.

--Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.

Tenet has never backed away from these assessments. Senator Mark Dayton, a Democrat from Minnesota, challenged him on the Iraq-al Qaeda connection in an exchange before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 9, 2004. Tenet reiterated his judgment that there had been numerous "contacts" between Iraq and al Qaeda, and that in the days before the war the Iraqi regime had provided "training and safe haven" to al Qaeda associates, including Abu Musab al Zarqawi. What the U.S. intelligence community could not claim was that the Iraqi regime had "command and control" over al Qaeda terrorists. Still, said Tenet, "it was inconceivable to me that Zarqawi and two dozen [Egyptian Islamic Jihad] operatives could be operating in Baghdad without Iraq knowing."

SO WHAT should Washington do now? The first thing the Bush administration should do is create a team of intelligence experts--or preferably, competing teams, each composed of terrorism experts and forensic investigators--to explore the connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. For more than a year, the 1,400-member Iraq Survey Group has investigated the nature and scope of Iraq's program to manufacture weapons of mass destruction. At various times in its brief history, a small subgroup of ISG investigators (never more than 15 people) has looked into Iraqi connections with al Qaeda. This is not enough.

Despite the lack of resources devoted to Iraq-al Qaeda connections, the Iraq Survey Group has obtained some interesting new information. In the spring of 1992, according to Iraqi Intelligence documents obtained by the ISG after the war, Osama bin Laden met with Iraqi Intelligence officials in Syria. A second document, this one captured by the Iraqi National Congress and authenticated by the Defense Intelligence Agency, then listed bin Laden as an Iraqi Intelligence "asset" who "is in good relationship with our section in Syria." A third Iraqi Intelligence document, this one an undated internal memo, discusses strategy for an upcoming meeting between Iraqi Intelligence, bin Laden, and a representative of the Taliban. On the agenda: "attacking American targets." This seems significant.

A second critical step would be to declassify as much of the Iraq-al Qaeda intelligence as possible. Those skeptical of any connection claim that any evidence of a relationship must have been "cherry picked" from much larger piles of existing intelligence that makes these Iraq-al Qaeda links less compelling. Let's see it all, or as much of it as can be disclosed without compromising sources and methods.

Among the most important items to be declassified: the Iraq Survey Group documents discussed above; any and all reporting and documentation--including photographs--pertaining to Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, the Iraqi and alleged Saddam Fedayeen officer present at the September 11 planning meeting; interview transcripts with top Iraqi intelligence officers, al Qaeda terrorists, and leaders of al Qaeda affiliate Ansar al Islam; documents recovered in postwar Iraq indicating that Abdul Rahman Yasin, the Iraqi who has admitted mixing the chemicals for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was given safe haven and financial support by the Iraqi regime upon returning to Baghdad two weeks after the attack; any and all reporting and documentation--including photographs--related to Mohammed Atta's visits to Prague; portions of the debriefings of Faruq Hijazi, former deputy director of Iraqi intelligence, who met personally with bin Laden at least twice, and an evaluation of his credibility.

It is of course important for the Bush administration and CIA director George Tenet to back up their assertions of an Iraq-al Qaeda connection. Similarly, declassifying intelligence from the 1990s might shed light on why top Clinton officials were adamant about an Iraq-al Qaeda connection in the Sudan and why the Clinton Justice Department included the Iraq-al Qaeda relationship in its 1998 indictment of Osama bin Laden. More specifically, what intelligence did Richard Clarke see that allowed him to tell the Washington Post that the U.S. government was "sure" Iraq had provided a chemical weapons precursor to the al Qaeda-linked al Shifa facility in Sudan? What would compel former secretary of defense William Cohen to tell the September 11 Commission, under oath, that an executive from the al Qaeda-linked plant "traveled to Baghdad to meet with the father of the VX [nerve gas] program"? And why did Thomas Pickering, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, tell reporters, "We see evidence that we think is quite clear on contacts between Sudan and Iraq. In fact, al Shifa officials, early in the company's history, we believe were in touch with Iraqi individuals associated with Iraq's VX program"? Other Clinton administration figures, including a "senior intelligence official" who briefed reporters on background, cited telephone intercepts between a plant manager and Emad al Ani, the father of Iraq's chemical weapons program.

We have seen important elements of the pre-September 11 intelligence available to the Bush administration; it's time for the American public to see more of the intelligence on Iraq and al Qaeda from the 1990s, especially the reporting about the August 1998 attacks in Kenya and Tanzania and the U.S. counterstrikes two weeks later.

Until this material is declassified, there will be gaps in our knowledge. Indeed, even after the full record is made public, some uncertainties will no doubt remain.

The connection between Saddam and al Qaeda isn't one of them.

Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard. Parts of this article are drawn from his new book, The Connection: How al Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein has Endangered America (HarperCollins).


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911; alqaedaandiraq; alreadyposted; bookexcerpt; iraqandalqaeda; posted99999999times; stephenfhayes; theconnection
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last
No, I didn't do time travel. This is in the newest magazine.
1 posted on 05/28/2004 11:09:32 PM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

BTTT


2 posted on 05/28/2004 11:13:56 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; PhiKapMom; Miss Marple

Excellent documentation of the linkage between al Qaeda and $oddomite's thugs before the regime change in Iraq.


3 posted on 05/28/2004 11:14:58 PM PDT by Grampa Dave ( WHAT DID MICHAEL MOORE KNOW ABOUT NICK BERG? WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Newsweek magazine ran an article in its January 11, 1999, issue headed "Saddam + Bin Laden?" "Here's what is known so far," it read:

Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas--assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer.

Four days later, on January 15, 1999, ABC News reported that three intelligence agencies believed that Saddam had offered asylum to bin Laden.

Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. . . . ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief named Faruq Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad.

My, what short memories the presstitutes have.

4 posted on 05/28/2004 11:17:45 PM PDT by Choose Ye This Day (Dem Enthusiasm, 2004: "As long as John Kerry doesn't become a Michael Ducks, he's fine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Well unless GW takes the bull by the horns and gets this out to the public by any means necessary then it will not see the light of day on anything other than Fox news.


5 posted on 05/28/2004 11:22:11 PM PDT by Texasforever (When Kerry was asked what kind of tree he would like to be he answered…. Al Gore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
And it's in NEWSWEEK?

Are the lefties going to believe this...finally?

6 posted on 05/28/2004 11:24:36 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

ooopppppppppppppps...WEEKLY STANDARD...my eyes are glazing over,but my query still stands.


7 posted on 05/28/2004 11:25:41 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Are the lefties going to believe this...finally?

No.

8 posted on 05/28/2004 11:28:20 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NutCrackerBoy
Of course they won't...it was a rhetorical question. :-)
9 posted on 05/28/2004 11:44:03 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

No ... everybody knows that there was no connection between Al Queda and Iraq. None whatsoever; don't bother them with facts, their biased, evil, treasonous minds are made up.


10 posted on 05/29/2004 12:02:02 AM PDT by TexasGreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TexasGreg

Unfortunately,true of Dems and a few FREEPERS as well.


11 posted on 05/29/2004 12:04:04 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Al Gore's administration, the US Justice department under J. Reno explcitly stated in official US documents that Iraq and al Qaeda were cooperating.

04 November 1998 BIN LADEN, ATEF INDICTED IN U.S. FEDERAL COURT FOR AFRICAN BOMBINGS

Gore is such a low life.

12 posted on 05/29/2004 12:10:53 AM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Choose Ye This Day

Truth bump! ;-)


13 posted on 05/29/2004 12:17:20 AM PDT by Tunehead54 (Have a nice day or else!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Nothing to see here folks. Just move along.


14 posted on 05/29/2004 12:17:47 AM PDT by 10mm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

bump


15 posted on 05/29/2004 1:39:48 AM PDT by TheOldRepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Choose Ye This Day
My, what short memories the presstitutes have.

Not only are they wrong in their claims that there were no ties or working relationship between Al Queda and Saddam's Iraq, they actually know such a relationship existed and are lieing about it. So they have information that our two greatest enemies were collaborating about attacking our homeland, but insist on lying about what they know and continue to cover up the connection. They should at least have their citizenship revoked.

16 posted on 05/29/2004 1:42:23 AM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

bttt


17 posted on 05/29/2004 1:45:41 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian

ping


18 posted on 05/29/2004 3:27:15 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

That's a really interesting link. Even with that 3rd-to-last paragraph, and many others like it, you couldn't get Lefties to admit a Saddam-AlQ connection.

But really, all we're looking for are the swing voters in the middle.


19 posted on 05/29/2004 5:11:09 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (hoplophobia is a mental aberration rather than a mere attitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Travis McGee; Vigilantcitizen

Ping; we're starting to see information come out. I expect this to build over the coming months, until it is plain to see (even for the willfully blind) and impossible to ignore.


20 posted on 05/29/2004 5:12:46 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (hoplophobia is a mental aberration rather than a mere attitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Response from the libs/dems/libmedia:




"What link? We don't see a link. No link exists."
21 posted on 05/29/2004 5:54:09 AM PDT by TomGuy (Clintonites have such good hind-sight because they had their heads up their hind-ends 8 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Great post, thanks


22 posted on 05/29/2004 6:05:17 AM PDT by Gothmog (The 2004 election won't be about what one did in the military, but on how one would use it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 10mm

Great picture. That needs to be posted whenever the Slimes or whatever has an article/lie about no connection between $oddomite and al Qaeda.


23 posted on 05/29/2004 6:43:12 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( WHAT DID MICHAEL MOORE KNOW ABOUT NICK BERG? WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
This is the key to victory this November, what you posted below:

All we're looking for are the swing voters in the middle.

The lunatic left of America has hated America since the cold war was started, and they will never vote for what is good for America. It is the moderate/middle voter, who makes the difference.

24 posted on 05/29/2004 6:45:58 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( WHAT DID MICHAEL MOORE KNOW ABOUT NICK BERG? WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

Great reply re the lunatic left's response to data like this.


25 posted on 05/29/2004 6:47:01 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( WHAT DID MICHAEL MOORE KNOW ABOUT NICK BERG? WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Actually that Newsweak quote came in 1999, when you know who was their president.

Newsweek magazine ran an article in its January 11, 1999, issue headed "Saddam + Bin Laden?" "Here's what is known so far," it read: Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas--assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer.

Four days later, on January 15, 1999, ABC News reported that three intelligence agencies believed that Saddam had offered asylum to bin Laden.

Isn't it amazing the minute that GW was sworn in, any linkage between the liberals's Uncle $oddomite and al Qaeda just disappeared in the past, the present then and of course now.

26 posted on 05/29/2004 6:50:41 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( WHAT DID MICHAEL MOORE KNOW ABOUT NICK BERG? WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Let me suggest something.

That picture with the two GI's holding a Saddam/WTC poster is as powerful a statement as any I have seen to make the ties between Iraq and Terrorists. And assuming its genuine, it should be sent to as many people as possible. No,not the media/press. They have a different agenda.

But getting this out to as many people as possible certainly should remind people of why we are in Iraq, and what the stakes are.

27 posted on 05/29/2004 7:03:07 AM PDT by CT (God Bless the USMC on this Sacred Weekend - Memorial Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Yeh. Just like the WMD's which existed during the Clinton years, but vaporized into an ethereal existence when GWB took office.
28 posted on 05/29/2004 7:16:05 AM PDT by TomGuy (Clintonites have such good hind-sight because they had their heads up their hind-ends 8 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CT
That picture with the two GI's holding a Saddam/WTC poster

IIRC, there were at least two different version of posters/paintings of the Twin Towers being hit that GI's found in the early days of the Iraqi war. One was found in a city other than Bagdad. Pix of each have circulated on the net.
29 posted on 05/29/2004 7:20:13 AM PDT by TomGuy (Clintonites have such good hind-sight because they had their heads up their hind-ends 8 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CT

This is an excellent suggestion. I will send that photo out to my email list this weekend.

"That picture with the two GI's holding a Saddam/WTC poster is as powerful a statement as any I have seen to make the ties between Iraq and Terrorists. And assuming its genuine, it should be sent to as many people as possible. No,not the media/press. They have a different agenda."

A marine friend, my age has heard from Marine Reservists who were in Phase I of this Iraqi war, that pictures and tile works showing that picture were all over Iraq.


30 posted on 05/29/2004 7:36:17 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( WHAT DID MICHAEL MOORE KNOW ABOUT NICK BERG? WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

If you find any other such pictures, please Freepmail me the link.

Thanks


31 posted on 05/29/2004 7:58:33 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( With close to 300 million Americans, why did Moore interview Berg in December 2003?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Dammit...the frustrating part is getting what we here at FR know into the mainstream media.


32 posted on 05/29/2004 8:16:07 AM PDT by treeclimber (still waiting for a liberal to logically explain their viewpoints)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: treeclimber

The major mainstream mediots will never run the reality news. Go to this thread on Free Republic that is active right now. It shows that the NY Slimes editors have run 28 days of front page prison abuse stories/spins/lies while burying the real news.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1143835/posts

Confirmed! The New York Times is ACTUALLY Plotting to Oust Bush! (actual, first-hand source)
5-18-04


Posted on 05/28/2004 7:14:34 AM PDT by jmstein7



Confirmed! The New York Times is ACTUALLY Plotting to Oust Bush!

Where to begin? I just got an interesting call from a buddy (a listening post) who works at the Times -- I will keep the name out of this, because I don't to be responsible for someone losing their job.

Anyway, the person is a lurker on FR, and, this morning,

read this activism item I posted last night. We spoke for a few minutes this morning.

Apparently, Bill O'Reilly had a segment on his show last night where he accused the New York Times of having an agenda to oust Bush -- for example, they have had the Prisoner Abuse story on the front page of the Times for 28 days in a row, even though there has been no news for 10 days (even to the point of relegating the story about the seven terror suspects to the middle pages of the paper).

There was an editors' meeting at the Times this morning. The O'Reilly piece was a subject of conversation. But, during the discussion, one of the editors actually said that they would have to alter their "strategy" to be less overt and draw less public criticism from the likes of O'Reilly!

The editor didn't say specifically that there was a "strategy" to oust Bush, but the editor did imply that there is some sort of strategy "at play" in the Editorial board at the Times. This is the first time I've heard actual proof of a coordinated effort there to actually campaign against the President and damage him.

So, there you have it -- the New York Times is actually at war with the Bush administration.

I will post more info as I get it.


33 posted on 05/29/2004 8:21:22 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( With close to 300 million Americans, why did Moore interview Berg in December 2003?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster; Grampa Dave
And there is this:

Report Details Saddam's Support for Terrorists Who Killed Americans

The above link is the FreeRepublic discussion thread.

The actual article is :

"Saddam Hussein’s Philanthropy of Terror"

It is a pdf document with substantial footnotes and put together by Dewey Murdock of the Hudson Institute.

34 posted on 05/29/2004 8:32:45 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Thanks.

The liberals will say so what? There are no WMDs and no connection between $oddomite and al Qaeda.

When those connections become common knowledge, they will just move to their next attempt to electronically lynch GW.

Like the NY Slimes for 28 straight days making the so called prison abuse front page news while burying the real news.


35 posted on 05/29/2004 8:36:33 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( With close to 300 million Americans, why did Moore interview Berg in December 2003?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
I have read on another thread that Steven Hayes will be on Russert's Meet The Press tomorrow to discuss "The Connection".
36 posted on 05/29/2004 9:00:08 AM PDT by Republican Red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 10mm

Thanks for posting this again. As I remember, it was originally posted in July of 2003. Do you, or does anybody else here, have an exact cititation for its original source? Can it be authenticated as an actual picture from Iraq, instead of a Photoshop job? Does anybody have a translation? If it can be properly authenticated and translated, it could be devastating.

I copied it when it was originally posted. Then my computer got badly infected by viruses, recieved a computer cancer cure and a new operating system, and I lost the picture.


37 posted on 05/29/2004 10:01:37 AM PDT by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever

Indeed, where is the dreaded Rove spin machine that the RAT bastards talk about? Let's go, W --- get this info out now and often in the press. We are losing the battle even though truth is on our side.


38 posted on 05/29/2004 10:03:24 AM PDT by doug from upland (Don't wait until it is too late to stop Hillary -- do something today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red

Thanks for the info.

If you watch it, would you please take a few notes and put them on this thread with a ping to me.

I will not be able to watch it due to medical advise. When Russert smirks, I want to choke him and my bp rises too much.


39 posted on 05/29/2004 10:10:52 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( With close to 300 million Americans, why did Moore interview Berg in December 2003?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
After reading the posted article twice, the following stands out as the most telling portion and the most damning of the current media whoring for the dnc seditious attack machine:

In the spring of 1998--well before the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa--the Clinton administration indicted Osama bin Laden. The indictment, unsealed a few months later, prominently cited al Qaeda's agreement to collaborate with Iraq on weapons of mass destruction. The Clinton Justice Department had been concerned about negative public reaction to its potentially capturing bin Laden without "a vehicle for extradition," official paperwork charging him with a crime. It was "not an afterthought" to include the al Qaeda-Iraq connection in the indictment, says an official familiar with the deliberations. "It couldn't have gotten into the indictment unless someone was willing to testify to it under oath." The Clinton administration's indictment read unequivocally:
Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.

40 posted on 05/29/2004 10:15:29 AM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

doesn't matter - they'll just "move the goalposts" ever farther back.

I swear, even high-quality filmed documentation of Osama and Saddam sharing an intimate homosexual moment wouldn't be enough to make American Leftists admit that yes, indeed, Saddam was "in bed" with Osama and, consequently, the conquest and reformation of Iraq is a valid part of the WoT.


41 posted on 05/29/2004 11:46:56 AM PDT by King Prout (the difference between "trained intellect" and "indoctrinated intellectual" is an Abyssal gulf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Welcome to Orwell's "1984". The news depends upon who's president and facts don't seem to matter at all.


42 posted on 05/29/2004 2:57:27 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Thanks for posting this, Gramps. I needed some "ammo" for a liberal relative who just sent me the most vile, distored piece of junk (he thought it was humorous) about Bush, etc. I'm just shaking mad about it. Pretty soon I'm not gonna have any family left!! LOL! Recently I've done a bunch of family history research. What an amazing bunch of ancestors I had! They fought in the Revolution and the Civil War, WWI & WWII.

Have a good Memorial weekend, Gramps,I'm outta here for a while.


43 posted on 05/29/2004 3:19:51 PM PDT by AuntB (Lawschools are Americas Madrassas (aculeus))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

nopardons asked: Are the lefties going to believe this...finally?

I'm afraid not. They're getting their news from Moveon.org, ANSWER and emails like this piece of crappola I just got sent to me.....grab a barf bag!! Sadly, it originated in England and was sent to me by an XXXXXX-liberal relative. I can't post what I wrote to him! This is our enemy and I'm not real sure how we fight it, other than doing what we're doing.



The following is the "first final" list of events for the Republican National Convention in New York City, August
30 to September 2.

AUGUST 30
6 p.m.-- OPENING PRAYER read by Mel Gibson, while being flogged with a spiked leather strap wielded by Ann Coulter, who will enjoy it a little too much.

*TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level to RED.

* LEST WE FORGET -- HONORARY ROLL CALL of All Members of (and Friends of) Bush Administration Who Might Very Well Have Been Killed In Vietnam If It Hadn't Been For Nasty Trick Knees, Anal Cysts, Recurrent Headaches, and Highly-Placed, Overly-Protective Parents.
(Sponsored by Tyson Chicken)

* ANTONIN SCALIA speaks -- "SLAVERY - THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR FOREFATHERS, AND GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" (Sponsored by Wal-Mart)

* DICK CHENEY hosts AMBASSADORSHIP RAFFLE - Opening Bid $1,000,000 (cash, non-sequential bills 20's or less)

* CLIMAX OF THE EVENING -- FILM - "BRING IT ON!" Stirring fictionalized re-creation of Mr. Bush's actual dental appointment in Alabama in
1972, where he showed the incredible courage to allow "deep cleaning"
of gums without anesthetic. (Sponsored by Sinclair Broadcasting)

* SUGGESTED AFTER-EVENT -- "GET BAKED WITH RUSH 'Crankster' LIMBAUGH!" (Location TBD) (Sponsored by Pfizer)

AUGUST 31
6 p.m. OPENING PRAYER read by Our Lord (The Passion Of) Jesus H. Christ, as channeled by Lt. General William G. "Jerry" Boykin, the man who first revealed that Mr. Bush was chosen by God to lead this country into war against the heathens. Mr. Boykin will then give a short, upbeat presentation on Islam called, "My God can Beat Up Your God."

*TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level to FLASHING RED.

* WAYNE LAPIERRE will pry Davy Crockett's Kentucky Long Rifle out of Charlton Heston's cold dead fingers (subject to Heston's death)
(Sponsored by Smith & Wesson)

* DESIGNATED BROWN PERSON (Hispanic or Muslim, or possibly a Hispanic Muslim, if we can find one) will speak on how being a brown person doesn't automatically disqualify you from being a Republican (subject to finding a brown person capable of being bribed to do this - may need professional actor, possibly brought in from third world country)

* CLIMAX OF THE EVENING -- PAUL WOLFOWITZ announces American plans to invade Iran, strip them of nuclear weapons, and turn over entire country to Bechtel to be run as a subsidiary. (Wolfowitz will tell anxious voters that the operation will involve 200 out-sourced "consultants," will take one week, and will be entirely funded by pocket change found in a White House couch.)
(Sponsored by Halliburton)

* SUGGESTED AFTER-EVENT -- "RIDE THE WAVE WITH RUSH 'Big Oxy' LIMBAUGH!" (Do a couple of 'ringers' with Big Pharma - sponsored by ROBITUSSIN)

SEPTEMBER 1
* 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER by the REVEREND JERRY FALWELL who will demonstrate the spirit of Compassionate Conservatism(tm) and the eternal mercy of God by wishing a horrible fiery death and an eternity in the pit of hell for all non-white, non-male, non-Christian non-heterosexual non-Republicans.

*TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level to PULSATING RED

* THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF INSANELY RICH PERSONS (AAIRP)
will present LAURA BUSH with A PLATINUM CHAINSAW in thanks for the Bush Administration tax cuts (Sponsored by Gulfstream)

* ANN COULTER, BILL O'REILLY and SEAN HANNITY will lead a special TWO-MINUTE HATE aimed at photo of John Kerry.

* CLIMAX OF THE EVENING -- DIEBOLD CORPORATION WILL ANNOUNCE ELECTION RETURNS - BUSH WINS RE-ELECTION WITH 51% OF VOTE (YET TO BE CAST). JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA will certify vote results; Diebold Board member Wilbur H. Grafton will deny fraud, announce his retirement, and be named the new Ambassador to Jamaica. (Sponsored by Diebold)

* SUGGESTED AFTER-EVENT -- GET WRECKED WITH RUSH "Kicker"
LIMBAUGH (sponsored by Eli Lilly)

SEPTEMBER 2 (nomination night)
* 6 p.m. -- OPENING PRAYER by ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN ASHCROFT, who will then sing "Let the Eagle Soar" and light the ceremonial "TORCH OF FREEDOM(tm) with the (actual) Bill of Rights.

*TOM RIDGE raises National Alert Level to Fire Engine Red, and ANNOUNCES CAPTURE OF OSAMA BIN LADEN.

* CONVENTION SHIFTS TO "GROUND ZERO" - DICK CHENEY will introduce and personally re-nominate PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, who WILL IMPALE OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH DAVY CROCKETT'S KENTUCKY LONG RIFLE donated by Wayne LaPierre. (Sponsored by NRA)

* PRESIDENT BUSH WILL GIVE ACCEPTANCE SPEECH, standing on Osama's dead body.

FIRST PEEK - Here is the proposed text for President Bush's speech:

"Hey,Freedom-Lovers! 9-11 Democracy Freedom Stay The Course Evil-doers trust my gut 9-11 Freedom Evil-doers Stay The Course Democracy 9-11 Evil-doers trust my gut 9-11 Democracy Freedom Stay the course Trust my gut Tax cuts Who cares what you think Evil-doers Things are great Jesus speaks to me 9-11 Democracy Freedom Stay The Course Evil-doers 9-11 Freedom Evil-doers Stay The Course Democracy 9-11 Evil-doers trust my gut 9-11 Democracy Freedom Stay the course Trust my gut Tax cuts Who cares what you think Evil-doers Things are great Jesus speaks to me. G'night everybody!"

POST CEREMONY CLOSING NIGHT PARTY OPPORTUNITIES:
* "GET MAXED with RUSH "ROCKET CAP" LIMBAUGH!" (Sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline)

* RICK SANTORUM 'DOG ON DOG' PETTING ZOO (adults only, please)

* BILL O'REILLY SHOWS OFF PULITZER PRIZE, ACADEMY AWARD, AND NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.

* SPECIAL BUFFET - JOHN ASHCROFT will PERSONALLY EXORCISE A KINDLE OF CALICO KITTENS, BARBECUE THEM, AND SERVE THEM ON CANAPES. (sponsored by KRAFT "Thick 'N' Spicy" BBQ Sauce)


44 posted on 05/29/2004 3:25:37 PM PDT by AuntB (Lawschools are Americas Madrassas (aculeus))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

^


45 posted on 05/29/2004 3:32:09 PM PDT by jla (http://johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: AuntB
* THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF INSANELY RICH PERSONS (AAIRP) will present LAURA BUSH with A PLATINUM CHAINSAW in thanks for the Bush Administration tax cuts (Sponsored by Gulfstream)

Hmmmmmm. Don't John and Te-ray-za already have a Gulfstream of their very own...???

46 posted on 05/29/2004 3:41:18 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Bump


47 posted on 05/29/2004 7:33:06 PM PDT by AnimalLover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

Your relative is vile. Every family has at least one black sheep and I guess this one is yours.You have my sympathy.


48 posted on 05/29/2004 9:39:15 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Bump to the top


49 posted on 05/30/2004 7:13:40 AM PDT by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong

Good morning and thanks for the bump.


50 posted on 05/30/2004 7:15:45 AM PDT by Grampa Dave ( With close to 300 million Americans, why did Moore interview Berg in December 2003?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson