Skip to comments.Is Saddam a Liar?; pt3/5 "Those NO TIES Lies"
Posted on 09/28/2006 6:41:51 AM PDT by Blackrain4xmas
Many of the quasi-conclusions are based largely on claims of innocence from Saddam Hussein, a top official in Saddams government, Abid Hamid Mahmoud al-Kattab al-Tikriti, Tariq Aziz and Faruq Hijazi. These are 4/7 of the primary players in any involvement or potential involvement between Saddams regime and al Qaeda. The other 3 primary players are Mohammed al-Douri (He is Saddams VP/muscle man/Thug-In-Charge who remains at large. He is also suspected of being the primary source for most of a large portion of the insurgency and most reports place him as directing operations from inside Syria). The last 2 primary players in any involvement or potential involvement between the regime and al Qaeda are Uday and Qusay Hussein, but both chose to die fighting Coalition forces rather than be taken alive. If there ever was or was going to be any covert involvement between the regime and al Qaeda these are the 7 people who would have lead the effort. Now that theyre in custody and facing death sentences, do you think theyd tell the truth or are prisons truly filled with innocent men?
Apparently the lead DIA analyst does and the SSCI section on Saddams ties is based mostly on his comments. The rest of us might take Saddam to be a bit more of a liar. The rest of the world might view his claims of innocence as thinly veiled attempts to try and save his skin perhaps even only admitting to things that he cannot deny.
(Excerpt) Read more at therant.us ...
I'm certain that one day we will find that Saddam provided the anthrax for the weeks following the 9-11 attack.
There's a 5pt series at New Media Journal
This is part 3
Really? I think Saddam was a menace and we needed to invade since he was threatening his neighbors (Iran included), but his only association with bin Laden is that both grew up in the area we call the Middle East.
These were two different threats - both needed to be taken care of to bring about peace in the Middle East. But Saddam was, previously, a mainly secular figure. One that bin Laden would have opposed.
Saddam used UBL
UBL used Saddam
...and there is TONS of evidence to that effect. Rather than accept that (which means accepting that the Dems only catalyst for getting voters to polls is incorrect or even a deliberate series of deliberate lies; ie Iraq), politicians have chosen to tell us the sky is blue at night and black in the day. MSM editors and producers have been telling us that the war in Iraq isn't part of the war with AQ, but today alone AQ announced that it had lost 4000 fighters in Iraq (and no one believes that number is exaggerated, but rather grossly understated).
That I buy - to a limited degree. I haven't seen tons of evidence - but I would imagine it was all under the guise of "The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend".
However, there is no question that TODAY al Qaeda is involved in Iraq. But under an authoritorian secular regime, I don't think al Qaeda was entirely welcome. Especially since it was calling for the overthrow of governments like Saddam's.
Not entirely welcome I agree, but for UBL to use Saddam they didn't need to be snuggle buggle bedtime buddies, and vice versa. Lest we forget that Saddam harbored other uber-terrorists like Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Carlos the Jackal, and all agree his regime knew Zarqawi was in N Iraq (all agree because Saddam had his intel people in the same terrorist camp).
Also, don't be lured into thinking that Saddam was all secular etc. After 91 he wasn't the same. Further, if the idea that UBL would work with the US to fight the Afghans is acceptable to many, then why wouldn't UBL work with a Muslim to attack the Great Satan?
I think Saddam's Islamic stance in his later days was an attempt to solidfy popular support in an time when people, such as bin Laden, were gaining support and calling for the overthrow of secular dictatorships and authoritarian regimes in the area.
Wasn't Northern Iraq under the control of the Kurds at the time?
Point taken about bin Laden working with any enemy of the US. Similar to use working with the Soviet Union in WW2 to oppose a common threat.
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.