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

Skip to comments.

Al Qaeda Document: Zarqawi Came to Iraq Before The War To Prepare The Fight Against U.S
Al Qaeda document | March 16 2008 | jveritas

Posted on 03/16/2008 2:49:59 PM PDT by jveritas

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-254 next last
To: holdonnow

ping


101 posted on 03/16/2008 6:40:30 PM PDT by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: ikez78; jveritas; All

Thanks for the ping, jveritas.

Special@foxnews.com (Brit Hume)
Hannity@foxnews.com
Oreilly@foxnews.com
Studiob@foxnews.com (Shep Smith)
e.d.hill@foxnews.com
Beltway@foxnews.com (Barnes & Kondracke)
Friends@foxnews.com
Drudge@drudgereport.com
writemalkin@gmail.com
hhewitt@hughhewitt.com
rush@eibnet.com
captain@captainsquartersblog.com
humanevents@humaneventsonline.com (Ann Coulter)
pundit@instapundit.com
powerlinefeedback@gmail.com
CNN@cnn.com
CNN.onair@cnn.com
joe@msnbc.com
Viewerservices@msnbc.com
Letters@Newsweek.com
Letters@NYT.com
Editor@USAToday.com
Webeditor@Washingtontimes.com
Letterstoed@washpost.com


102 posted on 03/16/2008 6:40:56 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Thank you jveritas for the translation.

Can you please post the url or url of the document which is partly translated for archival purposes?

Thank you.


103 posted on 03/16/2008 6:49:51 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
I’m still not convinced that there wasn’t a Saddam connection to the 1993 WTC bombing. I know Laurie Mylroe argues this, and Stephen Hayes argues against it. But Yousef had Iraqi passports and had been in Iraq.

Maybe not directly, but I am sure the attack had his blessings

104 posted on 03/16/2008 6:51:12 PM PDT by Kaslin (Peace is the aftermath of victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: txflake

The first three, go to their websites and contact them there.


105 posted on 03/16/2008 6:51:19 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
Here you go Cindy: http://ekhlaas.info/forum/showthread.php?t=124250. If you wish I can e-mail a copy of the document in Arabic.
106 posted on 03/16/2008 6:59:24 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Thank you jveritas.

No email necessary and that is fine.
I thank you.


107 posted on 03/16/2008 7:01:22 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

What do you expect from a career diplomat in the state department?


108 posted on 03/16/2008 7:02:14 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Thank you very much Jaz :)


109 posted on 03/16/2008 7:02:55 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
Have you read this article, Saddam's friends
110 posted on 03/16/2008 7:03:24 PM PDT by Eva (Benedict Arnold was a war hero, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

The guy is Mark Moyer, and he teaches at the Marine Corps University in Quantico.


111 posted on 03/16/2008 7:04:18 PM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Cindy

You are welcome.


112 posted on 03/16/2008 7:04:25 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Eva

I’ll post that too on the Threat Matrix.

Thanks Eva.


113 posted on 03/16/2008 7:06:11 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
In spite of the thanks I get for the things I do, you my FRiend are doing more for America and the war against these evil scum than anyone I can think of.
I am truly honored to be a part of the same team.
Thank You for taking the time to inform us about the important things.
114 posted on 03/16/2008 7:15:25 PM PDT by concretebob (If liberals aren't traitors, their only defense at this point is they are incredibly stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concretebob

Thank you very much FRiend, just doing my little duty.


115 posted on 03/16/2008 7:17:22 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: LS

Right, thanks. I haven’t had time to read it, but I have looked over the impressive reviews.


116 posted on 03/16/2008 7:17:55 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

You said that you wished that there were some way to let the rest of the country know about these documents.

There is, someone needs to contact the McCain campaign and explain to them that if John McCain makes this report the basis of his campaign, the conservatives will vote for him, no matter what he says on other issues.


117 posted on 03/16/2008 7:23:10 PM PDT by Eva (Benedict Arnold was a war hero, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: jveritas; concretebob

Thank you, both.


118 posted on 03/16/2008 7:27:56 PM PDT by freema (Proud Marine Niece, Daughter, Wife, Friend, Sister, Cousin, Mom and FRiend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Drain the swamp.


119 posted on 03/16/2008 7:36:05 PM PDT by nuf said (I am, therefore I think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas; rodguy911; Southack; backhoe; Lancey Howard; Enchante; SE Mom; Laverne; Bahbah; ...

Thank you SO much for all your devoted
work in uncovering all the “secrets.”
God bless you.


120 posted on 03/16/2008 7:52:45 PM PDT by STARWISE (They (Dims) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

working on it now...

I am so far behind on stuff it’s embarassing. I have a folder of news stories I need to get up still.


121 posted on 03/16/2008 7:54:36 PM PDT by ikez78 (http://www.regimeofterror.com - Saddam Hussein and terrorism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

You are welcome Starwise, God bless you too.


122 posted on 03/16/2008 7:58:15 PM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: ikez78; jveritas

Meet the Press Meet the Press mailbox: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6872152/ (web page for comments)

Face the Nation: ftn@cbsnews.com

Fox News Sunday: FNS@foxnews.com

ABC This Week thisweek@abc.com

CNN Late Edition CNN Late Edition: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?21 (web page for comments)

Fox News Channel show emails:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77538,00.html

Rush Limbaugh:
elrushbo@eibnet.com


123 posted on 03/16/2008 8:12:53 PM PDT by STARWISE (They (Dims) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war-RichardMiniter, respected OBL author)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

I eagerly await the publication of this on the front page of the NY Times. Above the fold.

/sarc


124 posted on 03/16/2008 8:20:03 PM PDT by Forgiven_Sinner (For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son that whosoever believes in Him should not die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

I eagerly await the publication of this on the front page of the NY Times. Above the fold.

/sarc


125 posted on 03/16/2008 8:20:03 PM PDT by Forgiven_Sinner (For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son that whosoever believes in Him should not die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Is this a vanity? The Pentagon study group had findings last week after 5 years of document analyses ,900,000, captured documents that this was not true. What is the published souce for this “article”? “BEFORE” the war is not accurate.


126 posted on 03/16/2008 8:31:04 PM PDT by sammyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr; jveritas
Not to be mean or condescending but I have a hard time understanding how anyone could be a FReeper Post 9/11 and still not be aware of the connections made that have been logged in here at Free Republic showing irrefutable evidence showing Saddam's Al Qaeda and terrorism connections including WMD’s.

Read the second part of the headline which says "....To Prepare The Fight Against U.S".

This document is about the organized resistance our troops faced when they went into Iraq. It was Al Qaeda organized.

127 posted on 03/16/2008 8:43:05 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: sammyjo

Ah, Newbie...the source is a jihadi website (but you’d actually have to read the article to know that fact).

It’s the terrorists themselves admitting Zarqawi’s whereabouts.


128 posted on 03/16/2008 8:44:30 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Joseph,

Is there a date on this document?

Thank you.


129 posted on 03/16/2008 9:25:11 PM PDT by mjaneangels@aolcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
J,

We have discussed this before that al-Zarqawi and al-Qaeda had come to Iraq after Afghanistan fell to the coalition. From Iraq they planned the assassination of US diplomat Foley in Jordan and carried it out and fled back to Iraq. This was October 2002 before the Iraq War.

130 posted on 03/16/2008 9:49:53 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
Your right about Dr. Mylroie

That connection has been written about including KSM’s financing & relationship with Saddam's intelligence via the Baluch.

If you haven't read Doctor Laurie Mylroie’s article titled “How Little We Know,” The American Spectator, October 2006

check it out at http://www.lauriemylroie.com/

131 posted on 03/16/2008 9:57:18 PM PDT by april15Bendovr (Free Republic & Ron Paul Cult = oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: ikez78

List of email for Conservative radio

http://www.conservativeusa.org/megalink.htm#talkshows


132 posted on 03/16/2008 10:15:39 PM PDT by april15Bendovr (Free Republic & Ron Paul Cult = oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

“Negropante who was Director of National Intelligence at that time did want the documents published from the beginning because he believed, wrongly of course, that there were nothing in these documents. The President and Republicans in Congress twisted his hand to put the documents in public domain. However when the UN complained about what they called a “sensitive” document regarding Saddam regime nuclear program published on the Iraqi documents website, Negropante took the opportunity to shut the website down.”

Ok. I have a question to ask here. Did the website get shut down because the Iraqi documents were misleading on how to create a bomb? If so, why shut the website down?

I agree that we do not want the enemy knowing how to create a bomb.

On the other hand, maybe to documents DID show, accurately, how to create a bomb. If this was the case, then Saddam knew how to create a bomb and the documents proved that. Is it good that the Saddam knew how to create a bomb?

I think we should think about this shutdown of the website a little more completely.


133 posted on 03/16/2008 10:23:01 PM PDT by mjaneangels@aolcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheLeftCoast

Who’s to say the NY Times will exist in 20 years?


134 posted on 03/16/2008 10:31:11 PM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
"Who’s to say the NY Times will exist in 20 years?"

Now that's optimism!
135 posted on 03/16/2008 10:41:24 PM PDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast ([Fred Thompson/Clarence Thomas 2008!])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: sammyjo
Well....now that is interesting...perhaps you should see this:

Pentagon Report Confirms Saddam’s Regime Supported al Qaida

***********************EXCERPT*************************

This week opponents of the war were given a treat. They were told-in a single article-based on a single anonymous source-that a report which hadn’t been released said there was never any ties between Saddam Hussein’s regime and the al-Qaida network of terrorist groups. Millions of the war’s opponents were instantly elated with glee at the idea that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with the war against the al-Qaida terrorist network; that the invasion was completely disconnected from any threat to the United States.

Disregarding the misplaced glee for a moment, let’s face some facts. The report described in the article was finally released to the public, and its contents are almost completely contrary to the leaked “article” that described it beforehand.

In fact, if anything this new study should finally put to rest the false perception that Saddam’s regime was too secular to work with radical Islamic holy warriors, and it should be a genuine wake up call for people who continue to ignore the threat posed by state-sponsors of terror like Saddam Hussein once was.

Let’s take a closer look at this “article.”

“Study: Iraq had no link to al-Qaida
Pentagon finds the ‘bulletproof’ prewar evidence turned out bogus”
By WARREN P. STROBEL
McClatchy-Tribune
March 10, 2008, 11:46PM
WASHINGTON — An exhaustive review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein’s regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida terrorist network.

-The opening line is false for two reasons. First it describes it as “exhaustive” which typically means complete, and it’s not. In fact the report itself says in every single area of study that more research is needed; i.e. the intelligence has not been exhausted. Second, it claims that there is no evidence of “operational links with Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida terrorist network,” but in fact the report itself is packed with evidence of operational ties between Saddam’s regime and various groups that are components/participants/elements/members of the network. For example the report confirms that Egyptian Islamic Jihad was supported by Saddam’s regime at a time when 2/3 of the al-Qaida network’s leadership (2/3 of the leadership prior to 2003 was comprised of members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad. The report is also packed with examples of Saddam’s regime recognizing, supporting, and working with Egyptian Islamic Jihad; i.e. with 2/3 of al-Qaida leadership.

The Pentagon-sponsored study, scheduled for release later this week, did confirm that Saddam’s regime provided some support to other terrorist groups, particularly in the Middle East, U.S. officials told McClatchy Newspapers. However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.

-The problem with this statement is that the “other terrorist groups” mentioned were al-Qaida affiliates (or elements of the al-Qaida network) at the time that documents show Saddam’s regime supported them. The “article” goes on to suggest that the operations primarily targeted “Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.” That’s a convenient way of saying that Saddam’s Intelligence Service (the IIS) and the Saddam Fedeyeen (Martyrs of Saddam terrorist group) worked with al-Qaida affiliates in Northern and Southern Iraq to maintain control in areas where his conventional forces lacked such ability. It’s also a very deceitful to say “others he considered enemies of his regime” rather than what the report actually says: targets in France, London, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, UN targets, and Americans.

The new study of the Iraqi regime’s archives found no documents indicating a “direct operational link” between Hussein’s Iraq and al-Qaida before the invasion, according to a U.S. official familiar with the report. He and others spoke to McClatchy on condition of anonymity because the study isn’t due to be shared with Congress and released before Wednesday.

-Earlier the “article” mentioned that the report being described hasn’t been released at the time of writing the “article.” That means that the entire declaration-false declaration [that Saddam’s regime had no substantive ties to Osama Bin Laden] is based on a single, anonymous, U.S. official. There is no corroboration, just the word of a single anonymous source.

President Bush and his aides used Saddam’s alleged relationship with al-Qaida, along with Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction, as arguments for invading Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claimed in September 2002 that the United States had “bulletproof” evidence of cooperation between the radical Islamist terror group and Saddam’s secular dictatorship.

-In complete and total contrast to the “article” which claimed. “ Pentagon finds the ‘bulletproof’ prewar evidence turned out bogus” the reality is that the report itself is in fact packed with captured documents supporting the idea that in many cases with many examples and many different groups, Saddam’s regime did cooperate with radical Islamist terror groups, and often those groups were in fact al-Qaida affiliates.

Then-Secretary of State Colin Powell cited multiple linkages between Saddam and al-Qaida in a watershed February 2003 speech to the United Nations Security Council to build international support for the invasion.

-This is true, but (perhaps due to space and word limit constraints) the “article” fails to mention that almost all of the statements Secretary of State Powell made were repeated from the 1998 Clinton Administration indictment of Osama Bin Laden, and they were later repeated again by the bi-partisan and independent 911 Commission.

Almost every one of the examples Powell cited turned out to be based on bogus or misinterpreted intelligence.

-This is not true, and it is in fact quite the opposite again. Most of Secretary Powell’s statements regarding regime ties to al-Qaida were true, and only a few were found to be incorrect.

As recently as last July, Bush tried to tie al-Qaida to the ongoing violence in Iraq.
“The same people that attacked us on September the 11th is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims,” the president said.

-This statement has absolutely nothing to do with the report that is the “article’s” subject. The report in question looks at the pre-war relationship between Saddam’s regime and the al-Qaida network NOT the presence of al-Qaida groups inside Iraq four years after the invasion. However, it should be noted that the groups currently in Iraq that are typically referred to as, “al-Qaida in Iraq” are actually a collection of groups that were inside Iraq before the invasion, worked with both Saddam’s regime, and worked with the al-Qaida hierarchy before the invasion. The people who are today’s “al Qaida in Iraq” were radical Islamic terrorists working inside Iraq before the invasion. They just have a common name now.

The new study, titled “Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents,” was essentially completed last year and has been undergoing what one U.S. intelligence official described as a “painful” declassification review. It was produced by a federally funded think tank, the Institute for Defense Analyses, under contract to the Norfolk, Va.-based U.S. Joint Forces Command.
While the documents reveal no Saddam-al-Qaida links, they do show that Saddam and his underlings were willing to use terrorism against enemies of the regime and had ties to regional and global terrorist groups, the officials said.

-While the “article” claims the captured documents “reveal no Saddam-al-Qaida links” they clearly do in many places according to the report itself rather than the word of the one anonymous U.S. official.

However, the U.S. intelligence official, who has read the full report, played down the prospect of any major new revelations, saying, “I don’t think there’s any surprises there.”
Saddam, whose regime was relentlessly secular, was wary of Islamic extremist groups such as al-Qaida, although like many other Arab leaders, he gave some financial support to Palestinian groups that sponsored terrorism against Israel.

-It’s interesting that immediately after the “article” says, “Saddam and his underlings were willing to use terrorism against enemies of the regime and had ties to regional and global terrorist groups,” the “article” then tries to fawn off the very fact it previously stated by dismissing Saddam’s secularism as if it prevented his regime from working with Islamic extremists (which the report says the documents show did in fact happen on many occasions).

There’s no reason to believe that the “article” deliberately sought to mislead anyone which was almost completely false. Put simply, now that the report itself is out, and one no longer needs to rely on a wannabe Deepthroat, secret U.S. official as a source. We can all see what the real findings are, and those findings are simple:

No ties to al-qaida? That mantra-based in every case on half quotes from various investigations-is now debunked. Yes, there were ties, and they were significant.

However, given the immense-near total disparity between the claims put forth describing the latest volume of the Iraqi Perspectives Project report and the actual contents of that report, it seems that a RETRACTION OF THE ARTICLE IS NECESSARY lest one try to stand on falsehoods so clearly eclipsed by facts that can be found by so simply by just reading the actual report rather than an anonymous U.S. official’s whispers.

More specific details of the report can be found here:

Hot Air
New York Sun
The Corner
The Weekly Standard

Oddly enough, opponents of the war don’t seem interested in reading the actual article and commenting on its specifics (certainly not with entire quotes, but perhaps with half quotes)

:)

[?]
Share This

Similar Posts

Print This Post Print This Post
This entry was posted on Saturday, March 15th, 2008 at 5:05 am and is filed under Bush Derangement Syndrome, Iraq/Al-Qaeda Connection, MSM Bias, Moonbats, Politics, Pre-Invasion, Saddam Documents, The Iraqi War, The Shadow Party, War On Terror. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks


136 posted on 03/16/2008 11:33:45 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: All; jveritas; sammyjo
Further comments from Flopping Aces:

No Ties Between Saddam and Al Queda Network of Terrorist Groups...Not True

**********************EXCERPT*********************

Mark Eichenlaub has an outstanding overview of the recent Old Media reporting on the latest investigation into the depth of ties between Saddam Hussein’s regime and the Al Queda network of terrorist groups. His article highlights in perfectly plain sight just how a single, biased writer will bite on a rumor from a single anonymous source about a report that hadn’t even been revealed, and then a total falsehood becomes propagated by the Old Media. When the actual report came out, anyone and everyone reading it could see that it listed innumerable documented and confirmed connections between Saddam’s regime and the network of terror groups called, Al Queda.

“Media swings and misses on IDA’s Saddam report”

The storm began (as noted in Stephen Hayes must read piece) with a McClatchy news piece titled “Exhaustive review finds no link between Saddam, al Qaida.” The leak-based story essentially summarizes a 94 page report down to a single, unrepresentative phrase. For the record it should be noted that once the report was made available to the public it was revealed that its author’s actually say on page ES-3 that their report is not exhaustive (contrary to the early news report) stating that the list of Hussein era documents are “not an exhaustive list” beause some were in the possession of other U.S. government agencies.

This story was followed by headlines of a similar bent. Steve Schippert’s sample of some of the more prominent headlines provides readers with what the story’s narrative looked like a few days ago:

ABC: Report Shows No Link Between Saddam and al Qaeda
New York Times: Study Finds No Qaeda-Hussein Tie
CNN: Hussein’s Iraq and al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon says
Washington Post: Study Discounts Hussein, Al-Qaeda Link
AFP: No link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda: Pentagon study

And within hours the (mainstream media) die had been cast. Saddam was not linked to al Qaeda went the theme.

This one is definitely worth the read. Think about what it shows: NO ONE in the McLatchy Newspaper chain of editors, no one at ABC, no one at the New York Times, no one at CNN, no one at the Washington Post, no one at AFP, and no one at any of the blogosphere sites that posted the original article actually read the report. NONE. Old Media/traditional media outlets are supposed to be special because they have armies of fact checkers yet no one in any of these armies ever saw the actual report. The actual report contradicts the original article at almost every turn.

Is there a fact checker anywhere, or have these outlets collapsed into rumor parrots? Were it not for spellcheck, I wouldn’t have been surprised if a spelling error from the original made it to all the outlets. Would yuo?


137 posted on 03/16/2008 11:39:12 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: sammyjo
The document was posted on Ekhlaas terrorist forum. It is written by Saif Al Adel a senior Al Qaeda leader. Ekhlaas terrorist forum did not publish a date for the document but it was written after the war as the text indicates.

This document should be among the Al Qaeda captured document and not the Iraq captured document.

138 posted on 03/17/2008 1:15:54 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: mjaneangels@aolcom

It is the latter scenario but this particular document that caused the shut down did not contain enough information to fully build the bomb.


139 posted on 03/17/2008 1:17:56 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: avacado
From Iraq they planned the assassination of US diplomat Foley in Jordan and carried it out and fled back to Iraq. This was October 2002 before the Iraq War.

100% correct.

140 posted on 03/17/2008 1:18:52 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: mjaneangels@aolcom
The Ekhlaas terrorist forum did not show a date on this document because they did not publish the full document. From the text it indicates that it was written by Saif Al Adel after the war in Iraq began. The document is a biography of Zarqawi by Al Adel.
141 posted on 03/17/2008 1:20:25 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

That Zarqawi- then of the al Tawhid group- and Mullah Krekar’s Ansar al Islam group are connected is old news.


142 posted on 03/17/2008 1:34:07 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
If this is true then why isn’t CNN stating that this is proof Al Qaeda was in Iraq before the invasion?

Though Zarqawi's own terrorist group was in the region before the US invasion and Krekar's Ansar al Islam was as well, and though Zarqawi had long standing ties to AQ and crew with same, Zarqawi didn't formally swear the oath to Bin Laden until well after the invasion of Iraq. If you are a liberal you can try to CYA by noting he wasn't "real" AQ until he swore the oath, I suppose.

143 posted on 03/17/2008 1:40:29 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ikez78
What a guy:

* Mohammed Atef : 24 Pakistani Peacekeepers in Somalia are ambushed, shot to death, skinned, and their remains paraded through the streets by a mob. [Author's note: in 1994/95 it is revealed by the Sudanese govt that an Al Queda operative based in The Sudan, and several other Al Queda operatives including #3 man Mohammed Atef, had gone to Somalia, trained Somalis in tactics that had been learned during the fight against Soviets in Afghanistan, and had they themselves taken part in this attack.] ---------- "PRE-BUSH timeline/list of Iraq's Ties To Al Queda," by Sam Pender-author of Iraq's Smoking Gun and other books on the matter , 6/12/04

144 posted on 03/17/2008 1:53:29 AM PDT by piasa (Attitude Adjustments Offered Here Free of Charge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Zarqawi was an Al Qaeda member since 1999. I have a captured Al Qaeda document that shows Zarqawi as one of Al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan.
145 posted on 03/17/2008 3:30:43 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Zarqawi was an Al Qaeda member since 1999. I have a captured Al Qaeda document that shows Zarqawi as one of Al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan.

You need to scan or copy that document and post it, or repost it.

146 posted on 03/17/2008 3:36:46 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Who would the terrorists vote for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

The Demoncrats and the main-lining media need to be held accountable for the LIES that they have perpetuated against the WOT, but they won’t. The economy, after today, will supplant that. A shame, for the WOT is NOT won. Iran will continue on their quest for the BOMB unabated and will succeed, then the price we shall pay will be exponentially greater than any price paid by us - US before.


147 posted on 03/17/2008 3:38:32 AM PDT by Shady (The Fairness Doctrine is ANYTHING but fair!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

I will.


148 posted on 03/17/2008 3:39:07 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

Thanks.


149 posted on 03/17/2008 3:43:56 AM PDT by Jet Jaguar (Who would the terrorists vote for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

And of course, no one from the Bush administration will be out pounding the drums about this.


150 posted on 03/17/2008 4:21:08 AM PDT by toddlintown (On Obama's moral compass, "N" doesn't stand for "North.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-254 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