Pre-war CIA report questioned al Qaeda-Iraq ties (Dems + CIA Conspiring and Colluding)

CNN ^

[indianrightwinger]

Pre-war CIA report questioned al Qaeda-Iraq ties

Thursday, November 10, 2005; Posted: 11:06 p.m. EST (04:06 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A January 2003 CIA report raised doubts about claims that al Qaeda sent operatives to Iraq to acquire chemical and biological weapons -- dramatic assertions that were repeated weeks later by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations in making the case for the invasion of Iraq.

CNN on Thursday obtained a CIA document that outlined the history of the claim, which originated in 2002 with a captured al Qaeda operative who recanted two years later.

The CIA report appears to support a recently declassified document that revealed the Defense Intelligence Agency thought in February 2002 that the source, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, was lying to interrogators.

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, this week released the DIA report in alleging the administration cited faulty intelligence to argue for the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

In February 2003, al-Libi, a senior military trainer for al Qaeda in Afghanistan, claimed the terrorist network "sent operatives to Iraq" to acquire weapons. His claim was reported in a CIA paper seven months later entitled, "Iraqi Support for Terrorism."

The January 2003 updated version of the report added a key point: "That the detainee was not in a position to know if any training had taken place."

The document obtained by CNN was provided recently to Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, who have been pressing for an investigation into the ways in which the Bush administration used intelligence on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the war.

[indianrightwinger]

Leaks are coming at the same pace they did before the 2004 election. What gives? Looks like some of the Dem sympathizers at the CIA woke up and realized that the story is back in the news again and started leaking.

[No Longer Free State]

STOP THE SENATE!!! I WANT AN INVESTIGATION!!!

[Jeff Chandler]

What gives?

They can get away with it, that's what gives. Bush's refusal to hold rats accountable is his, and perhaps our downfall.

[ncountylee]

Hope Gross has the "box" smoking from use.

[piasa]

JANUARY 1999 : (LEAKS & THE DRIPS WHO MAKE THEM : BETRAYING THE COX COMMITTEE'S TRUST, SANDY BERGER ISSUES SPINNED STATEMENT ON WHAT WAS STILL A CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT CONCERNING THE TRANSFER OF HIGH TECH SECRETS TO CHINA - See PROLIFERATION) As a member of the Cox Committee charged with investigating the transfer of high-tech secrets to China during the Clinton administration, in January 1999 Rep. Weldon sent an advance copy of the committee's report to Mr. Berger for his review. After seven months of closed-door, bipartisan hearings with no leaks to the press, the committee of five Republicans and four Democrats had unanimously recommended some three dozen steps that should be taken to protect America's national security. Within days, however, "Sandy Berger issued a statement to selected members of the media putting the White House spin on what was still a classified document," congressman Weldon recalled. "He did that without asking any member of the committee. Before the CIA director could even read our report, Berger was already spinning. That sets the pattern for what may have occurred" in the Archives case, Rep. Weldon believes. --------- via 396 posted on 01/12/2005 6:51:18 PM PST by hoosiermama

[Manic_Episode]

Bookmark

[Roberts]

bump

[zarf]

These coincidental leaks really open one's eyes as to how manipulated we were by the MSM and the gubmint back in the day.

The Net has really blown the lid of the entire orchestrated gubmint/media game to manipulate public opinion.

[CyberAnt]

"Dems + CIA Conspiring and Colluding + "document obtained by CNN was provided recently to Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee"


So we have the dems, the CIA and the media colluding and conspiring to bring down a SITTING PRESIDENT.

These dems are way out of line, and overboard. The repubs better get their act together and find out who in the Senate is leaking to the media.

[Wolfhound777]

Call me crazy but this CNN article makes no sense at all. Apparently CNN gets hold of a CIA report of a claim that originated in 2002 with a captured AQ operative. Key here is 2002. CNN goes on to report that DIA doubted the sources credibility in 2002 (well gee, why would they do that. We all know that muslims are sworn to uphold and tell the truth at all times. The Koran says so). Again, 2002. The Rat senator Levin, claims the administration used faulty intelligence as prerequisite for the Iraq invasion in March 2003. On this particular piece of intelligence, in hind sight, Levin has a point but how was the administration to know that? The source didn't recant until 2004 according to this CNN article! Then it get's even weirder. CNN writes "In February 2003, al-Libi, a senior military trainer for al Qaeda in Afghanistan, claimed the terrorist network "sent operatives to Iraq" to acquire weapons. So this source reports this intelligence in February 2003. His claim was reported in a CIA paper seven months later entitled, "Iraqi Support for Terrorism." Now they are saying the AQ source reported this claim in February 2003. 2003? What happened to 2002? But even better, if the source claimed this piece of intelligence in February of 2003 and the CIA paper titled "Iraqi Support for Terrorism" came out seven months later to make that September 2003, then just how could the administration have used this intelligence for justification to invade Iraq in March 2003? In the next paragraph, CNN writes: "The January 2003 updated version of the report added a key point: "That the detainee was not in a position to know if any training had taken place." What???? How can a report released seven months after Feb 2003 have a January 2003 updated version? Either I am confused or I really need sleep. This article just makes no sense to me.

[parthian shot]

STOP THE SENATE!!! I WANT AN INVESTIGATION!!!

Hey....If Babs can call for impeachment proceeding against President Bush, then you should have every right to start a measly Senate investigation....

Go for it!!!!

Oh yeah, sorry, just remembered only the libs can do that.

[No Longer Free State]

Well just damn.

[ruschpa]

Yeah... I read the article as well and they've got their dates messed up. Read the article in the NY Times.

[Wolfhound777]

Too funny...I guess in their haste to print anything damaging to the President, they failed to even do a rudimentary proof read. And they wonder why they are becoming irrelevant.

[DTogo]

But, Senator Global Test is on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and he supported regime change... before he was against it.

[indianrightwinger]

No, you don't need sleep because you are exactly right.

What you need though is schooling in the liberal MSM zoo.

MSM gets away with a whole lot of misleading reporting and bad leaks because most Americans don't care to dig deeper than the headline.

I am in the business of writing press releases for a company, and the internal joke is that re-write the first few sentences each time.

[Canard]

The sentance "In February 2003, al-Libi, a senior military trainer for al Qaeda in Afghanistan, claimed the terrorist network "sent operatives to Iraq" to acquire weapons. His claim was reported in a CIA paper seven months later entitled, "Iraqi Support for Terrorism.""

Should read 'in February 2002...' Now it makes sense.

[Just mythoughts]

This is the very month that old Joe Wilson went to Niger, Feb. 2002.

[OldFriend]

So when it comes to chemical or biological attacks on the United States, it's always best to do nothing and wait and see?

I suspect the left is just sick that we haven't been attacked again.

[raybbr]

How can a report released seven months after Feb 2003 have a January 2003 updated version? Either I am confused or I really need sleep. This article just makes no sense to me.

That's because you are not a left-wing nut-job liberal. It's the mere fact that he racanted (under what duress, I can't say) that confirms what they all held privately: It was all a setup.

Despite the fact that everyone on earth was sure Iraq had WMD's all these liberals were convinced that Hussain was innocent. They just didn't tell us that. Now it turns out from the recantation of one source they were proven right.

We should have listened to their thoughts instead of their words when they were all privately thinking that Hussain would not have WMD's because it would be a violation of UN sanctions.

Clearer now?