Posted on 03/16/2006 7:44:29 AM PST by jveritas
BTTT!
Outstanding!
The scope and depth of talent at FreeRepublic nevers ceases to amaze...
With folks like you, this forum has become a force to be reckoned with......and impossible to fool for very long....
Semper Fi
The FORCE is with Free Republic.
The administration was very clear about the US being aware of the pre-911 relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda- they brought up Zarqawi's presence in Iraq numerous times, they brought up Iraq's aid and comfort to terrorists in the form of providing identity documents and training, and also made comments on Iraq's use of the Sudanese strongman - I think it was Turabi- as an intermediary between the IIS and with bin Laden and his agents. They also mentioned meetings held between various Iraqi intelligence figures and bin Laden [and his surrogates] in Iraq, Afghanistan and even Pakistan. They only downplayed knowledge of a "direct operational relationship with Iraq and al Qaeda on the planning of the 911 event specifically, though even there they brought up the presence of the Iraqi Hikmat Shakir at the Malaysia meeting where the bombing of the USS Cole was planned and possibly where much of 911 was also planned. To the press, evidence of a "direct operational" relationship means we have a memo signed by Hussein himself using his own blood, which ordered al Qaida to attack the WTC with civilian aircraft- that's something we don't have and likely never will and the administration simply couldn't make that claim.
The MSM was just so sufficiently effective at keeping the knowledge of intel on Iraq's relationship with al Qaeda and al Qaeda figures low-key that no one heard much of what the administration was saying.
Your post got a great mention on NRO:
MORE ON THE RELEASED DOCUMENTS [Jim Robbins]
Good post on Free Republic on one of the documents posted without a translation. It is an Iraqi intelligence report from September 15, 2001. It states:
"1. That Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan are in contact with Iraq and it that previously a group from Taliban and Osama Bin Laden group visited Iraq.
2. That America has proof that the government of Iraq and Osama Bin Laden group have shown cooperation to hit target within America."
Why wasn't this posted with a translation? Wouldn't that qualify as salient information people should know about? Sometimes I really have to wonder if all the components of the government are in this war to win it.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/
I just noticed this on NRO too.
Thanks for letting me know.
... Lehman said the information, contained in "captured documents," was obtained after the commission report was written that stated there was no evidence of a "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda. "Some of these documents indicate that (there was) at least one officer of Saddam's Fedayeen, a lieutenant colonel, who was a very prominent member of al Qaeda," Lehman said. "That still has to be confirmed, but the vice president (Dick Cheney) was right when he said that he may have things that we don't yet have," said Lehman, a former Navy secretary. Cheney and President Bush continued to insist that Iraq had ties to al Qaeda after the commission report issued last week found no evidence that Iraq collaborated with al Qaeda. ...----- "Iraq Officer Tied to Al-Qadea," by Peter Kaplan, Reuters, 6/20/2004
OCTOBER 27, 2003 : (FEITH MEMO IS SENT TO SENATORS ROBERTS & ROCKEFELLER) The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith (search) to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level Al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.
According to the memo, which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points, Iraq-Al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which in some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis. - The Weekly Standard, Nov. 24, 2003
JANUARY 27, 2004 : (FEITH MEMO TO SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE : CHENEY REFERS TO A STEPHEN F. HAYES ARTICLE "THE US GOVERNMENT'S SECRET MEMO DETAILING COOPERATION BETWEEN SADDAM HUSSEIN AND OSAMA BIN LADEN " IN THE NOVEMBER 24, 2003 ISSUE OF THE WEEKLY STANDARD, WHICH CONTAINED LEAKED CLASSIFIED INFORMATION, AS THE 'BEST SOURCE OF INFORMATION' ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IRAQI LEADER HUSSEIN & AL QAEDA) In today's Washington Post, Dana Milbank reported that "Vice President Cheney . . . in an interview this month with the Rocky Mountain News, recommended as the 'best source of information' an article in The Weekly Standard magazine detailing a relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda based on leaked classified information."
(The leaked info would be memo by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy douglas J. Feith to senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller of the Senate intelligence Committee - see above) - Dana Milbank of the Washington Post, January 27, 2004
Thank you for translating and posting this!
1991 : (IRAQ SEEKS SUDAN'S AID IN ESTABLISHING LINKS TO AL QAEDA) At some unspecified point in 1991, according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to establish links to al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the [Feith] memo, "bin Laden wanted to expand his organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq." - "Case Closed: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden," by Stephen F. Hayes, Weekly Standard , November 24, 2003 issue, Volume 009, Issue 11
SEPTEMBER - OCTOBER 1995 : (SUDAN : IRAQI BRIGADIER GENERAL AL-AHMED IS SIGHTED AT BIN LADEN'S FARM )Brigadier Salim was observed at bin Laden's farm in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July 1996, in the company of the Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti. ---------------- "Case Closed: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden," by Stephen F. Hayes, Weekly Standard , November 24, 2003 issue, Volume 009, Issue 11
JULY 1996 : (SUDAN : IRAQI BRIGADIER GENERAL AL-AHMED & THE DIRECTOR OF IRAQI INTELLIGENCE AL TIKRITI IS SIGHTED AT BIN LADEN'S FARM) The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti, met privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996. Tikriti used an Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss bilateral cooperation as his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to meet with bin Laden and Hassan al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief and two other IIS officers met at bin Laden's farm and discussed bin Laden's request for IIS technical assistance in: a) making letter and parcel bombs; b) making bombs which could be placed on aircraft and detonated by changes in barometric pressure; and c) making false passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that [Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives maker--especially skilled in making car bombs--remain with him in Sudan. The Iraqi intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden as long as required.---------------- "Case Closed: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden," by Stephen F. Hayes, Weekly Standard , November 24, 2003 issue, Volume 009, Issue 11
FEBRUARY 23, 1998 : (BIN LADEN FATWA ON IRAQ'S "PLIGHT") Four days later, on February 23, 1998, bin Laden issued his now-famous fatwa on the plight of Iraq, published in the Arabic-language daily, al Quds al-Arabi: "For over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples." Bin Laden urged his followers to act: "The ruling to kill all Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it." .---------------- "Case Closed: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden," by Stephen F. Hayes, Weekly Standard , November 24, 2003 issue, Volume 009, Issue 11
...they are too stupid to know what PR means... What are the odds of this being the case? ;)
"...they are too stupid to know what PR means... What are the odds of this being the case? ;)"
Of course, they know: PR stands for Puerto Rico.
BTTT
Someone has already told you that FMSO means Foreign Military Studies Office, where I thought the article came from that you translated. All I know about this site is what I got from clicking on to it from this thread. Maybe someone else knows more: i.e., how to send them your translation for posting in English.
anyone wanna bet CBS calls these fakes?
Ha, you kidding? I've called local talk radio about this issue at least five or six times. Two or three within the past week to the liberal host who keeps letting her callers slip by and say "Bush lied."
The Republicans and the President are taking this idea of not caring about the polls too far. First, not all the polls are skewed. The media is constantly hammering the Bush administration and conservative policy and principles in general, day in and day out, it's all anti-Republican all the time, 24/7. What they don't realize is the power of perception. The public will think that the public is against Bush simply because the media tells them that the public is against Bush!
Plus, the administration isn't working on the PR. They need to capitalize on the WMD, the terror ties, etc. They need to drive it home, counteract the spin. THEY'RE NOT.
I understand not letting skewed polls get in the way of The Right Thing. But The Right Thing often takes public opinion to translate into action in Congress. It takes that political capital that you need to spend to get things done. That's what they lose in the sake of not letting the polls get to them. They need to hustle up a PR counter-offensive. Freepers and talk radio won't do it all for them.
You know, the Democrats (and a lot of Repubicans) were really quick to sink the UAE Dubai Ports deal for Taliban/Al Qaeda links far far more tenous than this.
Boy, I agree with every single word of your post. We j ust have to keep hammering away and trying to make sure the Republicans understand the importance of this because so far, they're tone deaf.
Indeed.
The MSM will be saddened to learn that Freepers are doing their work (better than they are), again.
bttt
Let me get this straight -
Our military and intellegence communities have been sitting on these documents. Despite all the bad press and fierce accusations they never played this hand. They had proof positive in of an Iraq - Al Qaeda allience and for some reason never made it public despite all the obvious need for some hard evidence?
Does that make any sense to you at all? How? Why wouldnt Bush have trumpeted this evidence if it were credible?
So now here we are, public support for Bush and Iraq are at all time lows and an election is looming. In a completely unrelated move two purple state Republicans throw a pile of stale documents to the "blogosphere" in a search for the "truth". As if all that wasnt enough theres that big "we cant vouch for any of these documents" caveat. Sorry folks, you will hear what you want to hear and validate what you already believed but if the truth was in "there" the Whitehouse would have jumped on it.
ping
A huge amount of the available documentation has not yet been translated, but it does seem like a quick scan and search could be done for key elements.
bump
I agree...
Thanx for the work...
Infortunately the Mainstream Media will stick thier fingers in thier ears and scream "La,La,La,!" as usual.....
How do we get this stuff out above the din of the hate-Bush crowd that has never offered a single FACT to back them up???
People, its right there on the fmso.leavenworth page, first thing in a highlighted box
"The US Government has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available."
You are wasting your time unless your goal is self gratification, that quote alone means these documents arent worth the bandwidth as far as proving anything goes.
Thank you. Hey, Peachy .. speaking of keywords .. do you know what happened when the change in format on the Forum front page? It's driving me bonkers .. especially the loss of CIA Leak and NSA.
Could you please add me to your ping list for prewardocs. Thanks a lot.
Actually, they did make it public. Note my earlier comments.
Just because no one listened, doesn't mean it wasn't said.
Someone needs to explain this to Chris Matthews. /sarcasm
must read!!!!!
Thank you for the ping RaceBannon.
Does this mean we're actually fighting a war against an organized, fiendish enemy...instead of arresting half a dozen shoplifters?
I am not seeking self gratification here and I do not think anyone here is doing so. All what I did is to translate a document from Arabic to English that was posted on FMSO website. You seem very upset about this. What do you expect us to do when we find a document from the Iraqi intelligence files talking about a relation between Iraq and Bin Laden? Do you expect to just ignore it and say “move on nothing to see here”? I think you have the full right to doubt the document but do not dismiss us as self gratifying people because we are not.
Drudge just picked up a muted ABC story on this. Bastards didn't give you any credit.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1734490&page=1
Thanks for your translation work. Keep it up, your a good man.
"You are wasting your time unless your goal is self gratification, that quote alone means these documents arent worth the bandwidth as far as proving anything goes."
I have not studied this site in detail, but it appears that these documents were found in Iraq during/after our recent occupation. That in itself is a strong argument in favor of their genuineness. It is, of course possible that some/all of the documents may be plants, but if that were true, there should be some supporting evidence. If you want someone to accept your argument, it behooves you to produce an alternate plausable explanation for the source of these documents.
I would suggest that everyone that can, closely monitor the FMSO site for important information. The media certaily isn't going to do it for us.
Well I don't know about anyone else but I think that what you're doing is great, JVeritas.
There are not many of us who can translate from Arabic to English. Please don't let the bashing make you stop.
There is a lot of very valuable information in those docs - and a lot of it is going to be released untranslated. If we wait for Uncle Sam to translate the docs, we may be waiting a long time.
Keep up the good work, JVeritas.
Good job, keep up the good work. :)
I dont know if this is people being naive or just wishful thinking but take a step back and consider what you're looking at with these docs. For all their other faults our intel and military services have been busting their butts for past 3 years to vindicate the pre-war claims. Do you really think they couldnt find the gold nugget and you guys hit it on the first try? You're being played, its just a matter of them dumping a load of fuzzy, unsourced junk on a breathless throng. A quick and cheap way to re-sell the war argument to those most predisposed to believing it. Of course, of course the CIA, the Whitehouse and the DOD are leaving it to freepers to determine this crucial piece of the Iraq puzzle. Nothing doing, its just chum for the faithful with pre-amble that says "We cant vouch for this". Good luck re-writing history with that.
Pardon my ignorance here - - haven't had a chance to see all these threads here.... Anyone know why FMSO has not posted the translations right on it's site? I'd like some good ammo for liberal knuckleheads I happen to know...
Just in case you didn't see the ABC News translation ( Thread on Free Republic) ....I enclose the Editors notes on this document:
********************************
(Editor's Note: The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable — i.e. an unnamed Afghan "informant" reporting on a conversation with another Afghan "consul." The date of the document — four days after 9/11 — is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value.)
Since Saddam is currently on trial, can any of these docs be entered into evidence for confirmation of authenticity?
From what planet did you just arrive....there has been a lot of pressure to get these documents out .....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1594534/posts
Bush wants to release the Saddam files but his intelligence chief stalls
Andrew Marcus Interviews Congressman Hoekstra
*****************************
ndrew Marcus for PJ Media
February 19, 2006 8:00 AM 
Andrew Marcus interviews Congressman Hoekstra, chairman of the Select House Intelligence Committee, on the new intelligence information being released this weekend about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.
 |
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.