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

Skip to comments.

The Butcher with the Terror Ties - The evidence mounts. (Newsweek reports on Atta in Prague, 2001)
NRO ^ | January 13, 2006 | Deroy Murdock

Posted on 01/13/2006 9:11:24 AM PST by neverdem

E-mail Author

Author Archive

Send

to a Friend

Version

8:11 a.m.

The Butcher with the Terror Ties

The evidence mounts.

Drip, drip, drip.

Drop by drop, isolated news stories and emerging documents are eroding the popular myth that Saddam Hussein had no connections to Islamofascist terrorists. These revelations undermine war critics’ efforts to whitewash Baghdad’s ancien regime — such as when Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid declared: “There was [sic] no terrorists in Iraq.” Likewise, Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.) describes a “nonexistent relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.”

Reid, Levin, and others who dismiss the Baathist-terrorist nexus would struggle to do so if the Bush administration unveiled the evidence tying Hussein to Osama bin Laden and other extremists. President Bush immediately should release papers discussed in the January 9 Newsweek and the January 16 Weekly Standard.

A declassified 2002 Pentagon presentation attained by Newsweek’s Mark Hosenball offers fresh details on a suspected April 8-9, 2001, meeting in Prague between September 11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) station chief Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani. “No other intelligence reporting contradicts that [deleted] report,” the heavily redacted document states. It adds: “During one visit, al-Ani ordered IIS finance officer to issue funds to Atta.” According to one slide, “Atta also reportedly met with Iraqi Charge d’Affaires Hussein Kanaan.” Also: “Several workers at Prague airport identified Atta following 9/11 and remember him traveling with his brother Farhan Atta.” (For excerpts go here.)

A slide headlined “High-Level Contacts, 1990 – 2002” lists numerous meetings and communications among bin Laden, his deputies, and top Iraqi officials. In 1999, the presentation says, “al-Qaida established operational training camp in northern Iraq; also reports of Iraq training terrorists at Salman Pak,” a military base 20 miles south of Baghdad. In 2000, “According to CIA ‘fragmentary reporting points to possible Iraqi involvement’ in bombing USS Cole in October.”

Among the document’s “Findings”: “Some indications of possible Iraqi coordination with al Qaida specifically related to 9/11.”

Is this all fabricated? How much of this presentation is true? Releasing all 60 or so slides for public inspection would help sort this out.

The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes talked to 11 federal officials before concluding that documents U.S. troops captured in Iraq prove that “the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion.” Hayes reports, “Secret training took place primarily at three camps — in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak — and was directed by elite Iraqi military units.” Al-Qaeda-affiliated Muslim fanatics, such as Algeria’s GSPC and the Sudanese Islamic Army, were among the 8,000 or so murderers instructed between 1999 and 2002.

Handwritten notes, typed forms, computer discs, videos, and other “exploitable items” confirm Hussein’s philanthropy of terror, Hayes says. But America has translated only some 2.5 percent of this huge cache. Federal officials barely discuss what they have learned. Even unclassified papers remain unavailable. Absurd. Having studied some of these artifacts, one intelligence expert says: “As much as we overestimated WMD, it appears we underestimated [Hussein’s] support for transregional terrorists.”

Asked by Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R., Mich.) to release some texts, National Intelligence Director John Negroponte reportedly told the House Intelligence chairman: “I’m giving this as much attention as anything else on my plate to make this work.”

Earlier this month, Hayes writes, federal immigration judge Anthony Rogers decided to deport Ahmad Mohammed Barodi, a 41-year-old Arlington, Tex., convenience-store owner. Barodi testified in a January 4-5 hearing that he entered America in 1989 on a phony Syrian passport furnished by the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood (SMB), an Islamic terror group. He admitted to smuggling bogus passports into Saudi Arabia for SMB. According to Justice Department records cited by KTVT, CBS’s Dallas station, the SMB sent Barodi to a “21-day guerrilla warfare training camp” in Iraq in 1982, “with the approval of Saddam Hussein.” The document adds: “Barodi advised that the Iraqi government provided all of the training aids consisting of RPG’s (rocket propelled grenades), firearms and the facility.”

But, skeptics sputter, secular Saddam Hussein never would work with Osama bin Laden or other Islamic zealots. This argument foolishly ignores popularly elected Franklin Roosevelt’s alliance with genocidal dictator Josef Stalin to smash Adolf Hitler. Similarly, republican revolutionary George Washington and super-monarch Louis XVI collaborated to defeat Britain’s King George III. Why wouldn’t Hussein and bin Laden similarly conspire to foil the Great Satan?

Moreover, the Butcher of Baghdad was not as secular as the “no-connection” crowd insists. He added “Allahu Akbar” (“God is Great”) to the Iraqi flag just before the 1991 Persian Gulf War. He also began to pray publicly to bolster his “mosque-cred.” Hayes cites a “SENSITIVE” August 22, 1995, UNSCOM interview with Hussein Kamel, the tyrant’s son-in-law who defected to Jordan that year. Kamel told U.N. weapons inspector Rolf Ekeus, “The Government of Iraq is instigating fundamentalism in the country . . . Now Baath Party members have to pass a religious exam.” He added: “They even stopped party meetings for prayers.”

Meanwhile, Dick Cheney gave Hayes a boost Wednesday. As the vice president told radio host Tony Snow: “Steve Hayes is of the view — and I think he’s correct — that a lot of those documents that were captured over there that have not yet been evaluated offer additional evidence that, in fact, there was a relationship that stretched over many years between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda organization.”

To its enormous detriment, Cheney’s comments notwithstanding, the administration has been nearly silent about Hussein’s decades of collusion with Islamic terrorists. The worry, White House aides tell me, is that revealing these ties would generate media criticism and anti-war catcalls. Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita told Hayes that some reporters might discover exculpatory material among these papers, then “we’d spend a lot of time chasing around after it.”

That risk does not excuse paralysis. If the president wrote MoveOn.org a $10,000 check, they would denounce his penmanship. Bush’s detractors never stop complaining, so the administration simply should make its case. If handed the keys to Fort Knox, don’t worry that someone might whine about the wallpaper. Grab the gold.

Administration officials also should remember that the United Nations Oil-for-Food scandal resembled an eccentric one-woman show when reporter Claudia Rosett began exposing it. Then the documents tumbled out. Rosett was vindicated — and how! Worldwide probes, resignations, and criminal arrests followed as the contours of this $21 billion shakedown became clear.

Stephen Hayes similarly remains among the few journalists excavating this huge, deliberately concealed story. Now Newsweek has nibbled at the Iraq-terror connection. Other journalists should stop napping and demand that the White House finally document everything it can about Saddam Hussein’s multifarious links to terrorism.

Deroy Murdock is a New York-based a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a senior fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Arlington, Va.. His research on Saddam Hussein’s support for Islamofascism appears at HUSSEINandTERROR.com.



 

 
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200601130811.asp
     



TOPICS: Breaking News; Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911; 911hijackers; ahmadbarodi; alani; algeria; alqaedaandiraq; alqaedairaq; arlington; atta; barodi; binladen; carllevin; carllevinlied; cheney; czechrepublic; deroymurdock; dickcheney; farhanatta; gspc; harryreid; harryreidlied; hayes; hoekstra; hosenball; hussein; husseinalkanaan; husseinkamel; husseinkanaan; husseinkanan; husseinpayments; ia; iis; iraq; iraqalqaeda; islamicarmy; jihadinamerica; kamel; kanaan; kanan; levinlied; markhosenball; mohamedatta; mohammedbarodi; murdock; muslimbrotherhood; petehoekstra; prague; pragueairport; praguemeeting; ramadi; reidlied; rpg; rpgs; saddamhussein; salmanpak; samarra; samiralani; sept11; sia; sic; smb; stephenhayes; sudan; terrorcamps; terrorist; texas; trainingcamp; trainingcamps; tx; usscole; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 last
To: Cicero
The man who did the most to publicly deny and obfuscate these connections between Saddam and Atta was none other than George Tenet, Bush's former director of the CIA.

Oh really?

MARCH 19, 2002 Tuesday : (TENET TESTIFIES BEFORE CONGRESS, DOES NOT RULE OUT STATE SPONSORSHIP OF 9/11 ATTACKS) CIA Director George J. Tenet, testifying before Congress last week, pointedly refused to rule out the possibility that Iraq or Iran may have been involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks on America. "There is no doubt that there may have been contacts and linkages to the al Qaeda organization," Mr. Tenet said when asked about Iraqi ties with Osama bin Laden's terror network. It "would be a mistake to dismiss the possibility of state sponsorship, whether Iranian or Iraqi" in connection with the attacks, the CIA director told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday. "The distinctions between Sunni and Shia [Islamic denominations] that have traditionally divided terrorist groups are not distinctions you should make anymore, because there is a common interest against the United States and its allies in this region, and they will seek capability wherever they can get it," Mr. Tenet said. ---- "Still whitewashing Saddam , " The Washington Times, EDITORIAL , March 25, 2002

OCTOBER 7, 2002 : (CI A DIRECTOR TENET'S LETTER TO BOB GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE) Regarding Senator Bayh's Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana question of Iraqi links to al-Qa'ida. Senators could draw from the following points for unclassified discussions:
Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and al-Qa'ida 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-Qa'ida going back a decade.
Credible information indicates that Iraq and al-Qa'ida have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.
Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qa'ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad.
We have credible reporting that al-Qa'ida 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-Qa'ida members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs. Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al-Qa'ida, suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action."
- Source : letter from CIA director Tenet to Bob Graham, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Oct 7, 2002 via 34 posted on 03/23/2004 10:30:34 PM PST by kcvl

FEBRUARY 11, 2003 : (WASHINGTON, DC : SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE HEARING : CIA DIRECTOR GEORGE TENET ON THE LINKAGE BETWEEN IRAQ AND AL QAEDA, INCLUDING IRAQ'S TRAINING OF AL QAEDA PERSONNEL IN DOCUMENT FORGERY, POISONS, GASSES & IN BOMBMAKING; TENET ALSO DISCUSSES THE DECISION OF RAISING OF THE TERROR THREAT LEVEL TO ORANGE AND THE PRESENCE OF AL QAEDA IN IRAQ AND IRAN) Senior Bush administration officials intensified the effort to make the case for military action against Saddam Hussein today, with testimony by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and the director of central intelligence, George J. Tenet, linking Iraq and Al Qaeda. ...The hearing, an annual assessment of global threats, centered on Al Qaeda, Iraq and North Korea.... ...The administration's attempt to tie Iraq to Al Qaeda also included the most explicit public statement yet by Mr. Tenet, who told the Senate intelligence committee that intelligence officials had unearthed powerful evidence showing a connection.
Mr. Tenet's testimony was especially noteworthy because some Pentagon and White House officials had privately [* My note as in the usual "anonymous" way the press likes] complained that the C.I.A. was too reluctant to conclude there was an Iraq-Qaeda link.
Today Mr. Tenet said Iraq is "harboring" senior members of the Qaeda network like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who, Mr. Tenet said, assembled a terror cell last year from a base of operations in Baghdad.....
For Mr. Tenet, who sat silently behind Mr. Powell on Feb. 5 when the secretary presented the Bush administration's case against Iraq to the United Nations Security Council, the hearing today presented the country's intelligence chief with his first opportunity to publicly assess the intelligence on Saddam Hussein's leadership.
Mr. Tenet said the C.I.A. had carefully worded its accusations about Iraq, but he strongly supported the Bush administration's conclusion that an Iraq-Qaeda link had been firmly established even as some European officials, and some intelligence analysts within his own agency, have expressed skepticism about whether the information showed a direct Iraqi tie to Al Qaeda.
"Iraq has in the past provided training in document forgery and bombmaking to Al Qaeda," Mr. Tenet said. "It has also provided training in poisons and gases to two Al Qaeda associates. One of these associates characterized the relationship he forged with Iraqi officials as successful."
Mr. Tenet seemed to be trying to rebut skeptics among the allies and within his own agency. "This information is based on a solid foundation of intelligence," he said. "It comes to us from credible and reliable sources. Much of it is corroborated by multiple sources, and it is consistent with the pattern of denial and deception exhibited by Saddam Hussein over the past 12 years."...
Mr. Tenet said Mr. bin Laden's followers appeared to focus their terror planning on specific regions. "The information we have points to plots aimed at targets on two fronts — in the United States and on the Arabian peninsula," he said. "It points to plots timed to occur as early as the end of the hajj, which occurs late this week."
"And it points to plots that could include the use of a radiological dispersion device as well as poisons and chemicals," Mr. Tenet added, referring to devices like a "dirty bomb" that detonates with a conventional explosive, throwing radioactive material into the air. ... In his testimony, Mr. Tenet seemed to agree, defending the decision last Friday by the Bush administration to ratchet up the official threat level to Code Orange, saying it was based "not on idle chatter on the part of terrorists and their associates."
"It is the most specific we have seen, and it is consistent with both our knowledge of Qaeda doctrine and our knowledge of plots this network — and particularly its senior leadership — has been working on for years," Mr. Tenet said. "The intelligence community is working directly, and in real time, with friendly services overseas and with our law enforcement colleagues here at home to disrupt and capture specific individuals who may be part of this plot."
Mr. Tenet offered no further specifics about the plot, but his testimony reflected the rapidly rising tensions around the world in a period when the United States continues preparations for possible military action in Iraq, North Korea has threatened to resume its nuclear program and Iran has disclosed that it is nearly ready to enrich uranium to fuel its nuclear energy program.
"We see disturbing signs that Al Qaeda has established a presence in both Iran and Iraq," Mr. Tenet said. "In addition, we are concerned that Al Qaeda continues to find refuge in the hinterlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan." - "Top U.S. Officials Tell Lawmakers of Iraq-Qaeda Ties," By DAVID JOHNSTON, February 12, 2003 , http://iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/bfeb/12_ties.html

Fall victim to the MSM's dynamic duo, did you?

MARCH 20, 2002 Wednesday : (MAJOR PRESS OUTLETS NY TIMES & WASHINGTON POST DOWNPLAY CIA DIRECTOR TENET'S COMMENTS ON POSSIBLE STATE SPONSORSHIP OF 9/11 ATTACKS BY EXCLUDING THEM IN REPORTING OF HIS TESTIMONY) The CIA director's [Tuesday ] comments on possible state sponsorship of the September 11 attacks, reported in a separate story on the front page of this newspaper on Wednesday, didn't make it into accounts of his testimony published in The Washington Post or the New York Times that same day. It isn't difficult to see why this happens; many people in the mainstream media don't want to face the reality that Iraq or Iran may have had a hand in the butchery which took place on September 11. If it turns out that either of these regimes were involved, it would virtually ensure a vigorous U.S. military response against Tehran or Baghdad. That's a reality that many folks on the political left (and a few on the right) want to avoid at just about any cost. ---- "Still whitewashing Saddam , " The Washington Times, EDITORIAL , March 25, 2002

51 posted on 01/13/2006 8:41:42 PM PST by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,180123,00.html

Secret Al Qaeda Papers?

Thursday, December 29, 2005



This is a partial transcript from "Hannity & Colmes," December 28, 2005, that has been edited for clarity.

MIKE GALLAGHER, GUEST CO-HOST: The Department of Defense has denied repeated requests from The Weekly Standard magazine to release unclassified documents recovered in post-war Iraq. The documents may offer new details about Saddam Hussein and his regime in the years before the war. The Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes has been leading the charge to get the documents. And he joins us now live.

Good evening, Stephen. Nice to have you with us.

STEPHEN HAYES, THE WEEKLY STANDARD: Hey, Mike. How are you?

GALLAGHER: I'm doing great. You know, you've been criticized a lot for your determined efforts to try to get these documents released. You maintain that these documents would establish a link and, in fact, would show that Saddam Hussein supported Al Qaeda. Why in the world wouldn't the Bush administration want those documents to be revealed, too?

HAYES: Well, and why would anybody criticize an effort to expose the world to documents that Saddam Hussein's regime created, that could tell us exactly what the regime was up to in the days and years leading up to the Iraq War in March of 203? It's like arguing against motherhood or something. It just doesn't make any sense.

GALLAGHER: So why wouldn't the Bush administration be first in line to say, "Heck, yes, we're going to give Stephen the documents so we can continue to make our case that this war is justified"?

HAYES: Well, I think two reasons. One was bureaucratic ineptitude. I don't think people had any sense, people at the senior levels of the Bush administration, really had a sense of what it was that was potentially in these documents.

You'll remember, you know, in March of 2003, April of 2003, we saw numerous stories about how documents were systematically destroyed. And I think there was this sense that there wasn't an urgency about exploiting these documents and releasing them to the public because perhaps all of the valuable information had been destroyed. Now, that turns out not to have been the case, at least from the people that I've spoken with who are familiar with the substance of the documents.

And I think the second reason is, sadly, the Bush administration was unwilling to have a fight with the CIA and other intelligence agencies about the contents of these documents. If Saddam was supporting trans-regional terrorists in a significant way, something that the CIA and the DIA had been skeptical about for more than a decade, do they want to have this fight on the front pages of The New York Times and The Washington Post?

ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: Hey, Stephen, it's Alan Colmes.

HAYES: And the answer for a long time was no.

COLMES: You know, there are some great questions about the authenticity of lots of these documents. You yourself have acknowledged that in The Weekly Standard. So we don't know whether these documents are accurate.

You know the administration, if it could prove links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, they'd get it out there in a second if they knew they had the proof.

HAYES: Yes, actually, I disagree with your premise, as somebody who's been reporting on Iraq and Al Qaeda for quite some time. The administration seems not that eager to put out its best information...

COLMES: Well, then what are they covering up? Why wouldn't they want something out which buttressed the argument they've been trying to make about this war that they've been unable to prove?

HAYES: Well, as I say, I think, for a long time, it was this reluctance to engage in a front-page, you know, back-and-forth with the intelligence agencies. When you have the Bush administration on the one hand making arguments, you have unnamed intelligence officials on the other hand, "The Washington Post" and "The New York Times" tend to give credence to...

COLMES: Well, they've already said...

HAYES: ... these intelligence, unnamed intelligence officials.

COLMES: Bush has said the intelligence was flawed. He's already acknowledged that. The 9/11 commission said no operational link. There may have been contact between Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden or representatives of each. That may have happened. But no operational link has ever been proven. The 9/11 commission showed that to be true.

HAYES: Well, let me ask you, Alan. I mean how credible is the 9/11 commission's conclusion when they haven't seen some six million pages of documents that were created by the Iraqi regime?

COLMES: Well, how...

HAYES: Not very, in my view.

COLMES: You talk about documents that haven't been released. You talk about documents that some maybe forged or may not be accurate. You're talking about a situation where — between, I think — what years was it — '98 and '04, 26 Arabic or Farsi translators were fired simply because they were gay, didn't even have — and that's whey they fired them. They didn't even have enough translators to even know what's in these documents.

HAYES: Well, I don't disagree with you. Let's talk about what we actually know. The Defense Intelligence Agency has authenticated a document from 1992 in which the Iraqi intelligence service lists Usama bin Laden as an Iraqi intelligence asset.

Now, what does that tell us? Certainly nothing conclusive. But it seems to me that our intelligence community and journalists, certainly, should want to know more about why the Iraqi intelligence service considered bin Laden...

COLMES: Well, let's talk about that CIA assessment. Carl Levin, for example, as you yourself have pointed out, has released two short excerpts from that February of 2002 assessment by the DIA raising questions about the credibility of Al Qaeda senior officials who claimed that Iraq trained Al Qaeda in chemical and biological warfare. And you know that that's subject to dispute.

HAYES: Well, sure, some of this stuff is subject to dispute. My question is a very simple one. Why are we debating what the DIA said in 2002 when we could be debating what the Iraqi regime tells us from their own internal documents going back decades?

COLMES: Big if.

HAYES: It doesn't make any sense.

GALLAGHER: It seems to me, Stephen Hayes, you're doing just what a good journalist is supposed to do, keep fighting the fight. We'll see what happens. Maybe you'll be vindicated one day. Appreciate you joining us tonight.

HAYES: Thanks.

GALLAGHER: Thank you.


52 posted on 01/13/2006 9:30:17 PM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH ....comin up very soon . President BUSH has been steadily building up the reasons , decisions , and concequences and non-concequences , of us taking the offencive , in the war on terrorist ( abroad and at home ).....I THINK HE IS GOING TO LAY SOME HEAVY DUTY STUFF OUT TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE .....by-pass all the media , and blowhards , and TELL IT LIKE IT IS !.....hope i'm correct , have to wait and see.


53 posted on 01/13/2006 9:45:43 PM PST by saxxa (FIRE-FIGHTER FOR PRESIDENT BUSH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Bush Understated Saddam's Threat
Front Page Magazine ^ | 12 January 2006 | Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu



http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1556591/posts


54 posted on 01/13/2006 9:46:22 PM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard; demlosers

Mohammed Atta in Prague FAQ



By Richard M. Smith of www.ComputerBytesMan.com
Updated June 19, 2002 (Original version June 16, 2002)

Introduction

The Czech government claims it has evidence that on April 8, 2001, Mohammed Atta, the ring-leader of the 9/11 hijackers, met in Prague with Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, an Iraqi government official. Mr. Al-Ani worked in the Iraqi embassy in Prague. This meeting is controversial because the Czech and U.S. governments now disagree if this meeting ever occured or not. This FAQ attempts to look at all sides of this complex issue.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. Why is Mohammed Atta's alleged visit in the Spring of 2001 to Prague considered so important?

    If this meeting did occur, then it would be a strong indication of possible Iraqi government involvment in the 9/11 attacks, especially considering that Mohammed Atta would have had to make a special trip from the United States to Prague to attend this meeting. [1] This meeting would have also been Mohammed Atta's second visit to Prague in less than a year. [13]

  2. Why is the meeting between Mohammed Atta and Mr. Al-Ani in dispute?

    The meeting is in dispute because the CIA and FBI do not believe that Mohammed Atta ever left the United States during April 2001. [8]

  3. What evidence does the Czech Government have that Mohammed Atta was in Prague on April 8, 2001?

    The Czech government is unwilling to release any details about the information that they have about the disputed meeting other then to say Mr. Al-Ani was being observed by the BIS, the Czech intelligence service, because he was suspected of being a spy. The Czech government position has been made public by Hynek Kmonicek, a former deputy foreign minister, and interior minister Stanislav Gross. [1]

  4. What evidence does the U.S. government have that Mohammed Atta was in the United States on April 8, 2001?

    The US governement has no record of Mohammed Atta leaving and re-entering the US in April 2001. They also were unable to locate a plane ticket that would have been used Mr. Atta to fly between the US and the Czech Republic. Finally, the U.S. Government has tracked Mr. Atta's movements before 9/11 via phone records, cellphone bills, and credit card receipts as part of the investigation of the 9/11 attacks. [8] [3]

  5. How closely have the Czech and U.S. governments worked on the investigation of the disputed meeting?

    Presumably the BIS, CIA, and FBI have shared data on the April 8th meeting and Mohammed Atta's travels during the month of April.

  6. Has The US government officially stated its position publically on the disputed Prague meeting?

    No. The U.S. position has only been "leaked" to major media outlets (Newsweek, Washington Post, New York Times, etc.) by an unnamed source. Presumably this unnamed source is someone from the CIA. However, Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S. Secetary of Defense, more or less confirmed these leaks when he said he was no longer sure if Mohammed Atta ever met with Mr. Al-Ani or not when asked by Robert Novak, a Chicago Sun-Times columnist in May 2002. [2]

  7. Why has the dispute Prague meeting become such a political hot potato?

    Various "Iraqi hawks" in the United States want to use the meeting as a pretext for attacking Iraq as part of President Bush's war against terrorism. Some well-known "Iraqi Hawks" include Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Secretary of Defense), William Safire (columnist for the New York Times), James Woolsey (former CIA director), and Laurie Mylroie (journalist).

    Skeptics of the Prague meeting point out that the evidence is skimpy at best that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks. [2] [3] [8]

  8. How can the controversy over the Prague meeting be clearly up?

    The simplest solution is for both the Czech and U.S. governments come forward with the information that have about the Prague meeting and where Mohammed Atta was during the month of April 2001. For various security and political reasons, neither country is willing to take this step at the present time. Because of possible future military actions against Iraq, the U.S. government in particular wants to keep its options open. [17] On the other side, the Czech government seems reluctant to reveal its surveillance methods which can then be scrutinitized by indepedent investigators as well as foes. [19] Of course, new evidence can be developed by either country which can also end the dispute.

  9. If the meeting really did occur, what did Mohammed Atta and Mr. Al-Ani talked about?

    No one except for Mr. Al-Ani knows for sure. The BIS apparently was not able to listen in on the meeting. [19]

  10. What are some of the rumors that have been reported about Mohammed Atta's Meeting with Mr. Al-Ani?

    • Mr. Al-Ani is a high-level spymaster. [15]
    • The meeting was part of the planning process for the 9/11 attacks.
    • Mohammed Atta recevied money from Iraq to carry out the 9/11 attacks.
    • Mr. Al-Ani gave a vial of anthrax to Mohammed Atta which was used in the anthrax attacks of the fall 2001. [16]
    • Mohammed Atta was helping Mr. Al-Ani to disrupt Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty transmitters located in Prague. [12]

  11. Why was Mr. Al-Ani expelled from the Czech Republic in April 2001?

    The Czech government expelled Mr. Al-Ani from the Czech Republic on April 22, 2001 because he was "engaging in activities beyond his diplomatic duties". This is diplomatic speak for "spying." The Czech government in particular was concerned that Mr. Al-Ani was involved in a plot to disrupt the operations of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty transmitters in Prague which now regularly broadcast to Iraq. [14]

  12. Was Mr. Al-Ani is expulsion related to his meeting with Mohammed Atta?

    The Czech government says no. [15]

  13. What was Mr. Al-Ani is role at the Iraqi embassy in Prague?

    Mr. Al-Ani was a consul at the Iraqi embassy. His job seemed to be arranging business deals between European and Iraqi companies. He was also known to harass Iraqi citizens living in the Czech Republic to return to Iraq. [7] Given his explusion by the Czech Republic by the Czech government, Mr. Al-Ani job also likely involved spying.

  14. Has the Czech government ever changed its story about the disputed meeting?

    Yes. The Czech Prime Minister Milos Zeman told CNN in October, 2001 that the Mohammed Atta and Mr. Al-Ani were planning to destroy the headquarters of U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty which now broadcasts to Iraq. [12]

  15. Has the U.S. government ever changed its story about the disputed meeting?

    Yes. During the fall of 2001, U.S. government officials supported the Czech government view that the Prague meeting had taken place. They even indicated that Mohammed Atta had left the U.S. right before April 8th and return to the U.S. right after April 8th. [14]

  16. When did the Czech government alert the US government about their information about the Mohammed Atta's meeting with Mr. Al-Ani?

    According to press reports, not until after the 9/11 attacks when someone at the BIS recognized either Mohammed Atta's name or picture. [11]

  17. Why didn't the Czech government alert the US government about the meeting in the April 2001?

    Before 9/11, the Czech government did not consider the meeting important enough to notify the U.S. government. [11]

  18. What has Iraq said about the alleged meeting between Mohammed Atta and Mr. Al-Ani in April 2001?

    The Iraqi government said that the meeting never occurred. [18]

  19. Where is Mr. Al-Ani today?

    The Prague Post reported that Mr. Al-Ani now works for the Foreign Ministry in Baghdad. [7]

  20. Did Mohammed Atta ever make any other visits to Prague?

    Yes. Before coming to the United States in June 2000, he spent approximately 24 hours in Prague. He travel to Prague by bus from Hamburg, Germany where he was a college student. From Prague he flew to Newark, New Jersey. This trip has been well documented. [13]

  21. What did Mohammed Atta do on his June 2000 visit in Prague?

    No one has any idea. Even the Czech government says they don't know what Mohammed Atta did on the his June 2000 trip. Some people have speculated that he could have met with Iraqi government officials, but no evidence has been provided for such a meeting. This trip to Prague does look suspicous because Mohammed Atta seemed to a make big effort to go to Prague before coming to the U.S. for the first time. [13]

  22. Did any other meetings occur between the 9/11 hijackers and members of the Iraqi government?

    No other meetings have been publically reported.

  23. Did any of the 9/11 hijackers make any overseas trips between when they arrived in the United States and the 9/11 attacks?

    Yes, the following trips have been documented by U.S. government investigators: [20] [21]

    Mohammed Atta   1/4/2001   Madrid, Spain
    Mohammed Atta 7/7/2001   Zurich, Switzerland
    Alshehhi 1/11/2001   Casablanca, Morocco
    Alshehhi 4/18/2001   Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Ziad Jarrah 7/25/2001   Germany


Links

[1] UN envoy confirms terrorist meeting 
Prague Post, June 5, 2002

http://www.praguepost.com/P02/2002/20605/news1a.php

[2] On Atta, Prague and Iraq 	
Chicago Sun-Times, May 13, 2002 

http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak13.html

[3] The Phantom Link to Iraq
Newsweek, April 28, 2002
http://www.msnbc.com/news/744626.asp

[4] Atta, Prague, Iraq
Edward Jay Epstein, May 9, 2002
http://edwardjayepstein.com/2002question/prague.htm

[5] Mr. Atta Goes to Prague
New York Times, May 9, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/09/opinion/09SAFI.html

[6] Protecting Saddam
New York Times, March 18, 2002
http://www.nci.org/02/03f/18-07.htm

[7] Iraqi leads opposition movement from Prague 
Prague Post, April 3, 2002
http://www.praguepost.com/P02/2002/20403/news7.php

[8] No Link Between Hijacker, Iraq Found, U.S. Says 
Washington Post, May 1, 2002
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11966-2002Apr30.html

[9] New Clue Fails to Explain Iraq Role in Sept. 11 Attack
New York Times, December 16, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/16/international/middleeast/16IRAQ.html

[10] Czech PM: Atta considered Prague attack
CNN, November 9, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/11/09/inv.czech.atta/index.html

[11] Czech government didn't tell U.S. about hijacker's Iraqi connection until after attacks 
AP, October 28, 2001 

[12] Czech PM: Atta considered Prague attack
CNN, November 9, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/11/09/inv.czech.atta/index.html

[13] No Evidence Suspect Met Iraqi in Prague
New York Times, October 20, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/20/international/europe/20PRAG.html

[14] Czechs Confirm Iraqi Agent Met With Terror Ringleader
New York Times, October 27, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/27/international/middleeast/27IRAQ.html?pagewanted=all

[15] New Clue Fails to Explain Iraq Role in Sept. 11 Attack
New York Times, December 16, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/16/international/middleeast/16IRAQ.html

[16] Hijacker 'Given Anthrax Flask by Iraqi Agent'
The Times of London, October 27, 2001 

[17] How Bush Decided That Hussein Must Be Ousted From Atop Iraq
Wall Street Journal, June 14, 2002
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1024014383232040120-search,00.html

[18] Gunning for Saddam; Interview with Mohammed Aldouri
Frontline, November 8, 2001
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/aldouri.html

[19] Czechs: Hijacker met with Iraqi spy 
Prague Post, May 8, 2002
http://www.praguepost.com/P02/2002/20508/news3.php

[20] The Immigration and Naturalization Service's Contacts With Two September 11 Terrorists
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, May 20, 2002

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/2002_05/fullreport.pdf

[21] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -v- ZACARIAS MOUSSAOUI
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/speeches/mous.pdf


55 posted on 01/13/2006 10:14:05 PM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Bumpity bump bump


56 posted on 01/13/2006 10:16:06 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cgk

bttt


57 posted on 01/13/2006 10:16:28 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Fall victim to the MSM's dynamic duo, did you?


58 posted on 01/13/2006 10:16:42 PM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000

The lights in the brains of Reid & Levin blinked out a long time ago. Their minds are made up. They can't cope with new information.


59 posted on 01/13/2006 10:25:04 PM PST by cookcounty (Army Vet, Army Dad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cgk
A good compilation you have there.

Where is Mr. Al-Ani today?

The Prague Post reported that Mr. Al-Ani now works for the Foreign Ministry in Baghdad. [7]

And this guy still works for the Iraqi government?

60 posted on 01/13/2006 10:47:26 PM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

AttaBump!


61 posted on 01/13/2006 10:51:01 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

I'd say it's likely that we're still protecting the identity of a mole in Saddam's regime, and for good reason. The reason is so we can do this kind of operation again in the future. It's a tough job being the Prez; that's why we have a tough man in that job right now.


62 posted on 01/13/2006 10:54:12 PM PST by defenderSD ( In a battle of wits against a FReeper, the typical liberal is unarmed. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

Notice how you never hear a word from the MSM that Iraq probably was involved in a terrorist attack against the US before the invasion (besides the first WTC attack that we know was sponsored by Iraq). We may have learned about this from an informant in Saddam's regime or through some high-tech communication intercepts. Now if Clinton had invaded Iraq, do you think we would have heard about likely Iraqi involvement in terrorism against the US, even if Clinton decided to keep this information classified? I think we would have heard a lot about it from the MSM and Dems in congress. But with Bush in the WH, you hear absolute silence.


63 posted on 01/13/2006 10:59:50 PM PST by defenderSD ( In a battle of wits against a FReeper, the typical liberal is unarmed. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
Curveball

Txsleuth calls him Hairball, which cracks me up all thru the day, every day, recalling it, from shower to tuck-in.

64 posted on 01/13/2006 11:09:51 PM PST by txhurl (Gingrich/North '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
A good compilation you have there.

(wink...) Yes - a nice compilation, and I was certain to ping the original poster as well. :)

Is this a Picture of Mohammed Atta in Prague?

65 posted on 01/13/2006 11:18:51 PM PST by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: cgk

LoL!


66 posted on 01/13/2006 11:44:44 PM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

bookmark


67 posted on 01/14/2006 2:54:47 AM PST by Squeako (ACLU: "Only Christians, Boy Scouts and War Memorials are too vile to defend.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

mark


68 posted on 01/14/2006 7:48:00 AM PST by sauropod ("Here Lies Joe Biden, Buried Under His Own Words.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All

Great thread. Thanks for the ping. Thanks to all FReesearchers.


69 posted on 01/14/2006 8:35:53 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

FYI: From Powerline (http://www.powerlineblog.com/)scroll down: Starting at noon today (again, central time) we'll be interviewing Steve Hayes of the Weekly Standard, who has done more than anyone else to explore the many relationships between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Among other things, we'll be talking about Steve's efforts to get access to the unclassified documents that contain a treasure trove of information on the Saddam-al Qaeda connection.

Vice-President Dick Cheney praised Steve's efforts on this topic just a few days ago; if you want to get the latest, inside dope, tune in tomorrow. I'm going to ask Steve why, if President Bush, Vice-President Cheney and Secretary Rumsfeld are all enthusiastic about his work, they can't make the Defense Department turn over the documents.

You can pick up the show anywhere in the world, off the web. Click on the Northern Alliance logo on our right sidebar, or go to the Patriot site linked above. We've had calls from as far away as China; don't hesitate to call if you have a question for Steve Hayes, or the rest of the gang.

It will be on the Northern Alliance Network
Here's the feed:

http://www.am1280thepatriot.com/programguide.asp


70 posted on 01/14/2006 9:58:46 AM PST by sono (You can't convert people in pink dresses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sono

Thanks for the links.


71 posted on 01/14/2006 10:18:06 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: okie01
"not in Iraq"

Yes he does maintain that A-Q was not in Iraq. I've already gone around with him on this subject, but he doesn't want to believe what's in front of his nose. He's one of those people who hates Bush so much, he can't stand the prospect that Bush was right about Hussein.

And I have other friends and co-workers just like him (as I'm sure you do). They could have argued that Hussein was contained (he obviously wasn't), and no severe threat. Arguing as they do that he had no ties to Islamist terrorists just makes them look stupid. My friend is no dunce, but never underestimate the power of Bush-Rage.

72 posted on 01/14/2006 11:26:39 AM PST by driftless ( For life-long happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: driftless
My friend is no dunce, but never underestimate the power of Bush-Rage.

I've seen it referred to as "BDS" -- Bush Derangement Syndrome.

And, yes, I've seen and heard its symptoms displayed -- within my own family.

A decade ago, I was known as a "Clinton-hater", of course. But, at bottom, I was able to rationally explain my profound distaste for Der Schlickmeister. There was no disputing the fact that he was "an untrustworthy liar". Indeed, to my leftist relatives, that was part of his "charm"...

But the animus toward Bush is simply visceral, unreasoning. And absolutely bulletproof. It can't be explained, nor can it be addressed.

Very puzzling...

73 posted on 01/14/2006 1:33:50 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000
and all I got back as a response was a string of expletives about how GWB engineered the war for profit.

Yes, Kennedy stated that GWB dreamed up the Iraq war while down in Texas. BOSTON - The case for going to war against Iraq was a fraud ``made up in Texas" to give Republicans a political boost, Sen. Edward Kennedy said Thursday.

Kennedy Says Iraq War Case a 'Fraud'

74 posted on 01/14/2006 9:19:54 PM PST by p23185 (Why isn't attempting to take down a sitting Pres & his Admin considered Sedition?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: okie01
"BDS"

I have another old friend with whom I had a conversation more than a year ago. We were talking sports and suddenly my friend went into a LOUD rant about what an evil, stupid person Bush was. I was taken aback for a second because politics was not even being discussed. I tried to delve into my friends train of thought, but all I could get were leftist talking points. Incidentally he voted for Nader. He's one of my friends who can never define exactly what he believes in, but only what he hates.

He thinks life is unfair to him (a lot of my Dem friends think that), and corporations, Republicans, and the undefined "they" are responsible for his misery.

Oh, I should add that my friend has more wealth than me, and I'm doing alright thank you very much. In fact many of the Bush-haters I know are doing extremely well. And most of them are socially conservative. I can't figure it out.

75 posted on 01/15/2006 9:47:06 AM PST by driftless ( For life-long happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: driftless
He thinks life is unfair to him (a lot of my Dem friends think that), and corporations, Republicans, and the undefined "they" are responsible for his misery.

Life is so unfair!

It's the kind of complaint you hear from your juvenile and adolescent children.

I've noticed the same thing. Most of my Dem friends think the same thing -- and it's not necessarily about what life is doing to them, often it's about the "injustices" delivered on other people. The "poor", the "minorities", etc.

The left's concept of "fairness" has all the intellectual depth of an twelve-year old. Leads me to a belief that liberalism is a sign of immaturity...

76 posted on 01/15/2006 11:01:48 AM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Bump.


77 posted on 01/15/2006 8:35:52 PM PST by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The Libs "BIG LIE" is falling apart...
It's unfortunate that unless you can boil all that down into a single, easily shouted slogan, it's beyond the attention span of today's average Liberal...


78 posted on 01/16/2006 12:08:48 PM PST by tcrlaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
In Washington, the FBI moved to quiet the Prague connection by telling journalists that it had car rentals and records that put Atta in Virginia Beach, Va., and Florida close to, if not during, the period when he was supposed to be in Prague. The New York Times , citing information provided by "federal law enforcement officials," reported that Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 2, 2001, and by April 11, "Atta was back in Florida, renting a car."

All these reports attributed to the FBI were, as it turns out, erroneous. There were no car rental records in Virginia, Florida, or anywhere else in April 2001 for Mohamed Atta, since he had not yet obtained his Florida license.

His international license was at his father's home in Cairo, Egypt (where his roommate Marwan al-Shehhi picked it up in late April). Nor were there other records in the hands of the FBI that put Atta in the United States at the time. Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet testified to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in June 2002, "It is possible that Atta traveled under an unknown alias" to "meet with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague." Clearly, it was not beyond the capabilities of the 9/11 hijackers to use aliases.

Source

The only dispute over Atta's whereabouts is whether he was in Prague on April 9, 2001, to meet with Samir al Ani, an Iraqi intelligence officer. Czech intelligence insists he was. Able Danger, apparently, had information supporting the Czechs.

Source

79 posted on 01/17/2006 10:43:20 AM PST by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000
But I pointed all of this out, plus the new evidence of terror training camps in Iraq, to a Democrat/Liberal - and all I got back as a response was a string of expletives about how GWB engineered the war for profit.

Don't worry about how the Moonbats react. As long as there's even one ordinary American witnessing the behavior -- their insane, delusional rants in response to hard evidence -- keep it up. Their denials and hatred just help make the case.

80 posted on 01/18/2006 6:03:27 PM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: petercooper

The left claims this is an airline training facility.


81 posted on 01/18/2006 8:51:37 PM PST by satchmodog9 (Most people stand on the tracks and never even hear the train coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

bttt


82 posted on 05/23/2006 12:39:33 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fedora; Cindy; Alamo-Girl; Shermy; Howlin
Blast from the past

Hussein Kanaan & Mohammed Atta Prague ping

Farhan Atta... brother of Mohammed Atta [wonder where Farhan is now] ping

83 posted on 05/23/2006 12:46:45 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piasa

Thanks for the ping!


84 posted on 05/23/2006 9:32:44 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-84 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