Saddam links to 911

[Epidemic]

I have heard rumblings of ties being less than vague.

History channel did a piece on navy seals hunt for a terrorist group and during the chase they identified an iraqi general in libiya. I can not remember the name of the piece.

but I did stumble on this link to OBL

I just wonder if their are any other such pieces out there. I do not know anything about CBC news so I cant vouch for their reliability.

[willy_ph]

CBC = Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. They are the Canadian equivalent to the BBC in the UK.

[Fagin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by willy_ph

CBC = Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. They are the Canadian equivalent to the BBC in the UK.

Its good to see your still active Epidemic.

[crouse]

The Al Qaeda Connection
From the May 12, 2003 issue: Saddam's links to Osama were no secret.
by Stephen F. Hayes
05/12/2003, Volume 008, Issue 34
http://weeklystandard.com/Utilities/...28&R=798B34988


SADDAM IN 'TERROR TAPE'
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...986177,00.html

No Saddam link to al-Qaeda?
http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/005727.html

Al-Qaeda fighting with Iraqis, British claim
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...653833092.html

Case Closed
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...3/378fmxyz.asp

Link found between Saddam and 9/11?
http://www.worldmagblog.com/archives/005030.html

Iraq-al-Qaida link revealed
Saddam part of 'money-laundering operation' for Islamic terror group
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=34841

No Question About It - Saddam and the Terrorists
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/985569/posts

Saddam Running Training Camps for Terrorists, Say Defectors
http://www.intelmessages.org/Message...sages/838.html




http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=10848
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
n Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal (real name Sabri al-Banna), given sanctuary by Saddam in Iraq, was reportedly murdered on Hussein’s order because he refused to help train a group of al Qaeda terrorists in the country. This suggests that al Qaeda terrorists were being trained in Iraq with official approval and help.

n Iraq reportedly paid $300,000 to al Qaeda’s #2 Ayman al-Zawahiri in 1998..

n In addition to its affiliated group Ansar al Islam and its 600 to 700 fighters, at least “two dozen” al Qaeda agents were recently in Iraq. That, anyway, is the number captured in Iraq by U.S. forces, according to Ambassador Paul Bremer at a September 26 press briefing.

n Saddam’s son Uday’s own Babil, the Babylon Daily Political Newspaper, on November 14, 2002, reportedly published a “List of Honor” that included “Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, intelligence officer responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group at the Iraqi embassy in Pakistan.” This was easily done because Aswod was Iraq’s Ambassador to Pakistan at the time. When this revelation of sensitive information was noticed, copies of the newspaper at every newsstand and subscriber home were rounded up.

n Islamists arrested in London with the deadly poison ricin had links to both al Qaeda and Iraq.

n Two of the 9-11 skyjackers, Marwan Al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah, reportedly met months earlier in 2001 in the United Arab Emirates with officers of the Iraqi secret police agency Mukhabarat.

---------- ok.... tired of looking......

[MTAtech]

One needs to sort out speculation from fantasy from reality. The Bush administration claimed that a meeting between the lead hijacker of the 11 September attacks and a senior Iraqi intelligence officer proved a connection between al-Qa'ida and Saddam Hussein. But there is no evidence such a meeting took place.

What the article is suggesting from a message that said "to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden, and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden" was that Iraq was linked to al Qaeda. Sorry, this doesn't show that. I beleive this was also mentioned in Richard Clarke's book and Clarke said that Iraq and al Qaeda met but Iraq wouldn't align itself with al Qaeda. In other words, al Qaeda may have met with people in Iraq but nothing else happened. These are attempts to find something that isn't there.

Nobody is arguing that al Qaeda is in Iraq now. Iraq is the recruitment headquarters of al Qaeda now. But one can't blame Saddam for that. That's GWB's fault. What's at issue is al Qaeda in Iraq before the war.

On the other hand, if one wants to look at al Qaeda operatives, look in Iran. Iran gives cooperation to al Qaeda.

See http://slate.msn.com/?id=2070410

[cyphen]

Iran would seem to be next on the list, albeit not necessarily in military fashion. If democracy is accepted in Iraq (the sooner the better) then it will help to embolden Iranian civilians who are already on the brink of rising up against their opressive government. This, of course, is the reason there is so much trouble in Iraq - because the powers-that-be in Iran want to maintain the status-quo.

Evidence would indicate that Mr. Clarke is wrong on links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. There were many meetings confirmed, Al Qaeda put a moratorium on any action taken against Iraq, and of course the aiding and abetting, not to mention training. So it would seem that there was indeed an operational relationship between the two.

MTA, you state that Iraq is a recruitment center for Al Qaeda - yet where do you get this idea? From Clarke? From the fact that there are Al Qaeda terrorists there right now? It would seem, rather, that Iraq is more of a terrorist magnet right now than anything else, which is in fact somewhat helpful and somewhat a hinderance to our war on terrorism.

It's a hinderance in the sense that we are trying to show that democracy is an option in the middle east, and the terrorists are trying very hard to keep that from happening. Yet this shows the people of the middle east where the loyalties of the terrorists lie - not with the people, but with the opressive governments. It would behoove the people of Iraq to live under a democracy. So their actions, intended to hinder, truly help in a way, so long as we are successful.

Another way that the terrorism magnet is helpful, is that it draws them to a place where we can actively combat them. We continue to garner the support of the people of Iraq, so we extend our intel as we earn their trust. For each terrorist there, it's one less that's here, or in another civilian population. And who is better equipped to handle an influx of terrorists than the military? What's more, it has been suggested that many of the terrorist organizations have tried to unite, which i believe to be another benefit to the fight on terror. Each has their own agenda, and there will be much disagreement between the factions the more they try to work together. This may even lead to violence between them. More importantly, however, if they open lines of communication to each other, they make themselves more vulnerable to discovery.

That's how i see it.

[MTAtech]

First, terrorists are not a finite resource. More are made by the hour.

Second, from the Arab perspective the Iraq occupation does not look like the U.S. motive is to bring democracy. It looks like a major consumer of oil grabbing an oil producing nation (imperialism), evident that the U.S. is signing long term contracts with U.S. companies. Ask yourself whether the U.S. would allow a democracy in Iraq that was hostile to the U.S.?

[cyphen]

Is it viewed that way because it's the case, or is it viewed that way because it's reported that way? This ties in to my "playing devil's advocate vs. being devil's advocate" argument. But from what i can tell, most Iraqis don't see it the way you are describing.

Would the US allow a democracy in Iraq that was hostile to the US? Sure. It wouldn't be preferable, but it would beat a totalitarian regime hands down. Because as the quality of life improved, it would become apparent that it was all thanks to the US. That they would still be living under the thumb of Hussein were it not for us. So they wouldn't be hostile in that regard. Is Kuwait hostile to us? They're oil-rich.

Terrorists are not a finite resource so long as we allow terrorism to propogate. If we do not fight it, then it's resources are abundant. If we fight it with tools like democracy rather than tyranny, and military operations against training camps and actions against rogue governments, then terrorists will find recruiting and carrying out operations rather difficult. Terrorists are losing in Iraq. And that means terrorism itself will take a huge loss in PR. Not only that, but the more we show them that there tactics only serve to strengthen our resolve, the harder it will be for them to convince people to strap bombs to themselves.

[Epidemic]

Quote:

Not only that, but the more we show them that there tactics only serve to strengthen our resolve, the harder it will be for them to convince people to strap bombs to themselves.

I am not sure I agree with that. a statement like that implies rationalization. I am not sure I buy that someone who would blow themselves up as being rational. Nor would I see it as rational for a muslim to take the teachings of the Koran to mean comit suicide and kill babies and fellow arabs. My take on it is that they are brainwashed by people with an agenda. Brainwashed people can have their logic twisted to ignore the facts.



but of course this is not the main idea of this thread.

The question remains did saddam have links to al-qaeda. It seems like ties are building so I am looking for confirmation or denial of new facts.

[Fagin]

Error