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

Skip to comments.

Saddam's Al Qaeda Connection
The Weekly Standard ^ | 09/01/03 | Stephen F. Hayes

Posted on 08/22/2003 9:15:44 PM PDT by Pokey78

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: Consort
32+8=3522435
61 posted on 08/23/2003 6:47:24 PM PDT by MatthewViti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

BTTT!
62 posted on 08/23/2003 7:01:17 PM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Excellent article -- thanks for posting it.

I scanned, will read it in detail later.
63 posted on 08/23/2003 8:33:23 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Bookmarked
64 posted on 08/23/2003 8:56:58 PM PDT by Brad’s Gramma (Have YOU had your Logan Fix today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
Where is the quote where Tenet said he "doubted" the meeting?

Last time I heard he said he had no conclusive independent evidence at he time- which is most likely true- that's a far cry from doubt. The allegation came solely from Czech intel, and the Czechs had to have been keeping a lid on the details since they had a live person inside the groups involved. (A leak later exposed the individual according to one report. These leaks may have been part of the initial denials, as agencies tried to protect their sources.) Tenet had no CIA intel on this meeting and had to say as much. He cannot vouch for foreign intel without having some of his own to back it up.

This is what I have from Tenet on this and the related subject of al-Qaeda and Iraq :

In March 2002, CIA Director George Tenet told a Senate committee that it would be a mistake to dismiss Hussein as a possible sponsor of the (anthrax) attacks. Tenet said that although Hussein and Osama bin Laden had clear religious and ideological differences, they shared "mutual antipathy" to the United States and Saudi Arabia. "Tactical cooperation between them is possible," he said.
- "White House Backs Report of Link Between Iraq, September 11 Suspect" , Kansas City Star

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.
- "Still Whitewashing Saddam," The Washington Times, March 25, 2002

As for the CIA, Director George Tenet testified June 18 before the Joint Inquiry Into Terrorists Attacks: "Atta allegedly traveled outside the U.S. in early April 2001 to meet with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague; we are still working to confirm or deny this allegation. It is possible that Atta traveled under an unknown alias since we have been unable to establish that Atta left the U.S. or entered Europe in April 2001 under his true name or any known aliases." That is hardly a denial: It is a report of an investigation in progress, and, as you know from the botched investigation of the first World Trade Center attack, such determinations take time. I suggest that before rushing to judgment based on flawed media reports, you might wait until the CIA completes its investigation, even if that requires interviewing Consul al-Ani in Baghdad.
- Edward Jay Epstein , on "Al-Qaida, Pawn of Nations ," Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 11:00 AM PT , http://slate.msn.com/id/2080850/entry/0/

65 posted on 08/23/2003 9:41:05 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
Where is the quote where Tenet said he "doubted" the meeting?

Last time I heard he said he had no conclusive independent evidence at he time- which is most likely true- that's a far cry from doubt. The allegation came solely from Czech intel, and the Czechs had to have been keeping a lid on the details since they had a live person inside the groups involved. (A leak later exposed the individual according to one report. These leaks may have been part of the initial denials, as agencies tried to protect their sources.) Tenet had no CIA intel on this meeting and had to say as much. He cannot vouch for foreign intel without having some of his own to back it up.

This is what I have from Tenet on this and the related subject of al-Qaeda and Iraq :

In March 2002, CIA Director George Tenet told a Senate committee that it would be a mistake to dismiss Hussein as a possible sponsor of the (anthrax) attacks. Tenet said that although Hussein and Osama bin Laden had clear religious and ideological differences, they shared "mutual antipathy" to the United States and Saudi Arabia. "Tactical cooperation between them is possible," he said.
- "White House Backs Report of Link Between Iraq, September 11 Suspect" , Kansas City Star

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.
- "Still Whitewashing Saddam," The Washington Times, March 25, 2002

As for the CIA, Director George Tenet testified June 18 before the Joint Inquiry Into Terrorists Attacks: "Atta allegedly traveled outside the U.S. in early April 2001 to meet with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague; we are still working to confirm or deny this allegation. It is possible that Atta traveled under an unknown alias since we have been unable to establish that Atta left the U.S. or entered Europe in April 2001 under his true name or any known aliases." That is hardly a denial: It is a report of an investigation in progress, and, as you know from the botched investigation of the first World Trade Center attack, such determinations take time. I suggest that before rushing to judgment based on flawed media reports, you might wait until the CIA completes its investigation, even if that requires interviewing Consul al-Ani in Baghdad.
- Edward Jay Epstein , on "Al-Qaida, Pawn of Nations ," Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 11:00 AM PT , http://slate.msn.com/id/2080850/entry/0/

66 posted on 08/23/2003 9:48:24 PM PDT by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Thanks. Bump for later.
67 posted on 08/23/2003 9:50:36 PM PDT by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Now I did read the article Cites a lot of facts.

And I totally agree with his conclusion:

"This impulse is understandable. It is also dangerous. Some administration officials argue privately that the case for linkage is so devastating that when they eventually unveil it, the critics will be embarrassed and their arguments will collapse. But to rely on this assumption is to run a terrible risk. Already, the absence of linkage is the conventional wisdom in many quarters. Once "everybody knows" that Saddam and bin Laden had nothing to do with each other, it becomes extremely difficult for any release of information by the U.S. government to change people's minds."

It's the kind of thing that when newspapers run vicious accuastions and lies as facts for weeks and months, then the truth comes out, which is printed on page 39 once, and people only remember the headlines.

Just think of the museum looting, which never was -- I bet most people don't even know that it was eventually debunked and turned out that most treasures were never stolen, but were hidden by museum workers months before the war.

The thing about WMD-s and terror connection is much more important and the Bush administration should be refuting the Dem lies all along -- Bush's dropping in approval rating even to the point that now a majority would not vote for him for a second term is a direct result of the Dems constant, relentless lies and accusations, which are not being immediately refuted by the Bush administration.


68 posted on 08/23/2003 10:05:02 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
^
69 posted on 08/24/2003 2:30:20 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
bump for later
70 posted on 08/24/2003 6:01:33 AM PDT by 11th Earl of Mar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01
What it amounts to is Bush is a very good POKER player and Gore and the rest of the dummycraps (and the media) are sitting at the table with Old Maid, Rook, and UNO cards in their hands, yelling out "GO FISH" like they have him pinned to the wall!
71 posted on 08/24/2003 6:55:47 AM PDT by Wondervixen (Ask for her by name--Accept no substitutes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
A young relative this past week said that thanks to the Internet, we can document all of the lies and half truths spread by the Rats in charge of the DNC and their butt buddies, the mediots about Iraq, before, during and after the war.

Then, when the truth and realities of Iraq are documented, we can bring these lies out into the public light again and again.

This exposure will not change the mentally ill of the lunatic left who hate President Bush and adore the $oddomites. However, it will convince a large percentage of the moderates that the Rats are not be trusted as long as there is a potential problem with Islamofascist terrorists. Also, it will reaffirm those of us who believe in our President and what he has accomplished since 9/11/01.

That will ensure his relection in 2004.
72 posted on 08/24/2003 7:29:20 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (Remember what really happened to America and Americans on 9/11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Wondervixen
"What it amounts to is Bush is a very good POKER player"

I think what we have here is a game of Texas Hold'em,and Bush has 2 aces in the whole and the Dem's have a pair of 8s.Another Ace and a 8 comes out on the flop.The dems raise the bet and Bush checks them keeping them in the game.the turn card is nothing and Bush keeps checking the Dem's increasing bet. The River card is an ACE!Bush has 4 aces and the Dem's have a full house.I think Bush is waiting for the Dem's to go "All In" before Bush Checks That bet and turns over His 2 aces!!

73 posted on 08/24/2003 7:55:15 AM PDT by painter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
The left and their willing accomplices in the media take much more flimsy evidence to condemn the United States and Republicans. Will the hypocricy ever end?
74 posted on 08/24/2003 9:40:56 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

Innocent Iraq-How Ramzi Yousef, leader of the first WTC bombing got into the country

ON SEPTEMBER 1, 1992, Ramzi Yousef arrived at JFK airport. He presented an Iraqi passport without a U.S. visa, was briefly detained (and fingerprinted) for illegal entry, and granted asylum pending a hearing. Yousef went to stay at the apartment of Musab Yasin, an Iraqi living in Jersey City. So too did Abdul Rahman Yasin, Musab's younger brother, who arrived in America from Iraq soon after Yousef.

75 posted on 08/24/2003 9:08:30 PM PDT by metalboy (Slinky, it makes a clickety sound and it goes downstairs, it is a marvelous spring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
I'm going to wait to get my "hard copy" of TWS to read this, but suffice to say "ping". Bush & Co. are playing this very well, imo. This is a great modus operandi: let the liberals rant for MONTHS about the inefficiency of the President. Then, in a lull, BANG: Give the American people the overwhelming evidence. I love it.
76 posted on 08/25/2003 12:45:09 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: metalboy
That's right....and we haven't heard ole Ramzis name mentioned have we?!?!?!?!?!?
77 posted on 08/25/2003 6:47:35 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Thanks!
78 posted on 08/25/2003 7:25:43 AM PDT by Frank_Discussion (May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Bump!
79 posted on 08/25/2003 6:30:02 PM PDT by windchime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
9-11 Bump.

BTW, a 'Rat on the Senate Armed Services committee tried to slip the "no al Qaeda connection" theme into a recent hearing on the WOT budget supplemental Bush will be requesting, but couldn't get it by Wolfowitz:

REED: Mr. Secretary, my recollection is hostilities began -- active offensive operations -- on or about March 19th. Is that correct in your recollection?


WOLFOWITZ: My recollection is March 20th.


REED: March 20th. Those passports you indicated, the first date was March 24th.


WOLFOWITZ: Right.


REED: Do you have any evidence of significant terrorist presence in Baghdad before those dates, since the secretary maintained he had bullet-proof evidence of the terrorist link in Baghdad prior to initiation of hostilities?


WOLFOWITZ: Well, yes, we do. I mean there are some things that are publicly known from before. They are things that Director Tenet described in his unclassified letter to this committee back in October, I believe. There is the well-known fact that for some 10 years the one bomber from the 1993 World Trade Center that was still at large was harbored in Iraq. There is the evidence that Secretary Powell discussed...


REED: These are Al Qaida elements or...


WOLFOWITZ: Well, you know, who did the 1993 World Trade Center bombing is a -- using intelligence community's word -- a murky question, but it was masterminded by the nephew of the same man who masterminded 9/11, and we went after the same target.


REED: But you had -- subsequent to our operations in Iraq, you have no further evidence other than that was revealed?


WOLFOWITZ: If you let me finish. Secretary Powell talked in his presentation to the U.N. Security Council at some length about a senior Al Qaida, or some people say he's not quite Al Qaida, he's affiliated -- he's clearly in the same world -- named Abu Musab Zarqawi, who has connections both to the poison lab that was operating in northern Iraq and to some plots that were broken up in London and Paris and in Italy. I'm not familiar with everything we've learned since we got to Baghdad, but I can say this, that what we have learned only deepens the conclusions that were there on an unclassified basis before.


REED: So you would disagree with the opinion...


WOLFOWITZ: And in fact -- one last thing, if I might: The group that Zarqawi is associated with, Ansar al-Islam, was established in Iraq in 2001. And it is, I think, in the judgment of the military and the intelligence people, the single most serious terrorist threat we face today.


REED: And they were aided and abetted by the Saddam Hussein regime?


WOLFOWITZ: You know, these people went to very great lengths to bury and hide the links that they had with one another. So you have to recognize, we'll probably see only the tip of the iceberg, but we certainly see links.


REED: So you would disagree with the statement by Vincent Cannistraro, the former director of counterterrorism operations and analysis, the CIA today, who said, "There was no substantive intelligence information linking Saddam to international terrorism before the war. Now we've created the conditions that have made Iraq the place to come to attack Americans."


WOLFOWITZ: I think Director Tenet's statement last year disagrees with it. I think Secretary Powell's statement to the U.N. disagree with it. I think the Palestinian terrorists that we've captured in Iraq disagree with it. I think the money that Saddam offered for Palestinian homicide bombers disagree with it. I don't know the statement you're quoting, but it doesn't stand with what I've been told from the intelligence world.

Here's the bit in Wolfowitz's opening remarks where he mentioned the passports Senator Reed refers to:

I'd like to conclude by mentioning something that General Mattis said to me when I visited Iraq in July. He said the people that presented the fiercest opposition to them as they drove north in that phase of major combat operations were the Fedayeen Saddam, group of thugs with a kind of cult-like dedication to Saddam Hussein, who, though their numbers are reduced, are still a problem, and foreign terrorists. And I asked him, "How did you know that foreigners were fighting?" And he said, "Well we found a lot of foreign passports on the battlefield," and he was good enough to bring a few of these that he found back with him.

This is one: a foreigner who came into Iraq on March 24th through Syria -- not a Syrian, but through Syria. The entry permit on his passport said he came to, quote, "volunteer for jihad." Here's another one, came into Iraq through Syria -- same crossing point. The entry permit said, "to join the Arab volunteers." And here's a third one that came in on April 7th.

In other words, from the very early stages of the war foreign terrorists were coming into Iraq, obviously with the full knowledge and cooperation of the Iraqi government, and sent to the front lines to fight Americans.

They're still there. Others are coming. Getting better border controls is one of our important objectives. But I think it is a strong illustration of the major threat that we face today. As the intelligence briefings put it, it's the combination of former regime loyalists and foreign terrorists. The level of cooperation between them is something that's hard to determine. There is some we know. There's probably a lot more that we don't know.

And the foreign terrorists, Mr. Chairman, who go to Iraq to kill Americans understand this. If killing Americans leads to defeat and the restoration of the old regime or any kind of new tyranny, they would score an enormous strategic victory for terrorism and for the forces of repression and intolerance, rage and despair, hatred and revenge.

Transcript of 9/9/03 hearing:
http://www.dod.gov/speeches/2003/sp20030909-depsecdef0443.html

80 posted on 09/11/2003 11:57:55 AM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 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