View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Alias

Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:16 pm Post subject: Saddam, al-Qaeda not linked: U.S. Senate |
|
|
Quote: |
There was no evidence of a link between former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, according to a report released Friday by the U.S. Senate.
The Senate Intelligence Committee released the findings based on an October 2005 CIA report, one that seemingly undermines many of the tenets that President George W. Bush and his officials have used to justify the Iraqi war.
As recently as August, Bush has publicly stated that Hussein "had relations with Zarqawi."
"The report is a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein was linked with al-Qaeda," said Michigan Senator Carl Levin, a member of the committee.
After he was captured, Hussein acknowledged that government officials had met with Iraqi al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, but the report concluded there was no ongoing relationship.
"Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support," the report said.
The report also contended that Hussein tried at various times to locate and capture al-Zarqawi.
The suggestion that al-Zarqawi was at the very least tolerated by Hussein was a theme of then-secretary of state Colin Powell's 2003 speech at the United Nations Security Council advocating the war in Iraq.
The CIA report also said that its own former director George Tenet, initially cool to the idea of a connection, changed his position at the request of administration officials. |
To quote the infamous Downing Street Memo, "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
dulouz
Joined: 04 Feb 2003 Location: Uranus
|
Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They said this too..
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Remember the Kuwaiti babies supposedly being thrown out of incubators by Iraqi soldiers, a story which swayed public opinion in the states in favor of an invasion? What about the invasion of the Bay of Tonkin? And then there's the US forces being pulled out of South Korea, which encouraged Kim Il Sung to send his troups over the border. Oh, and let's also not forget the invasion of Panama (supposedly to free Panama from its drugdealing dictator, but it was really an attempt to take control of the cannal). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Saddam did gas the Kurds.
Besides the 9-11 commission says there were contacts
Invasion of Panama was not about trying to control the Canal it was Bush senior punching out a personel enemy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Alias

Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No links Joo. Sorry.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Besides the 9-11 commission says there were contacts
|
There were also contacts and deals between the Reagan admin and Saddam.
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
huffdaddy wrote: |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Besides the 9-11 commission says there were contacts
|
There were also contacts and deals between the Reagan admin and Saddam.
 |
Yes but there was a good reason for that.
The US supported Stalin too . So what?

Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:42 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alias wrote: |
No links Joo. Sorry.  |
Yes there in fact were.
9-11 commision report.
explain that.
the report is about Iraq and Zawqari not all about Saddam and Al Qaeda . Just wait a few weeks and see the reaction to the report. You will see. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005 Location: Next to a River
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joo,
There was never a relation between the two. The USA had been attacked and needed to make a point. The point couldn't be made in Afghanistan as it was already seen as a failed state.
Irag was seen as an open nation that could be seen as a victory. The result has been anything but the above. We are now in the position of being in a tight spot. What do we do now?
No one is really sure, but the loss would be greater than the status quo, but how bad we are not sure. So we muddle on and hope it isn't too bad.
Anyway, Keep well Joo and support freedom over opression aㅁ the terrorists will never give freedom so we must defend ourselves.
It is interesting that 1000 years ago Islam battled non Islam and now we are repeating ourselves. I hope it isn't the same as they won and we still live with the consequences. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Besides the 9-11 commission says there were contacts
|
So what? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003 Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Alias wrote: |
No links Joo. Sorry.  |
Yes there in fact were.
9-11 commision report.
explain that.
the report is about Iraq and Zawqari not all about Saddam and Al Qaeda . Just wait a few weeks and see the reaction to the report. You will see. |
Explain this:
Quote: |
"Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qaeda to provide material or operational support," the report said.
The report also contended that Hussein tried at various times to locate and capture al-Zarqawi. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
so the Senate as finally found out what most of us knew all along. Good job. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nazis and Stalin distrusted each other yet they worked together for a time.
So they found no evidence that Saddam and Al Zaquari worked together.
There were still other contacts. Now tell us why were there those contacts.
Quote: |
Commission confirms links
By Stephen J. Hadley
A 9/11 commission staff report is being cited to argue that the administration was wrong about there being suspicious ties and contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda. In fact, just the opposite is true. The staff report documents such links.
The staff report concludes that:
�Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan."
�"A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Laden in 1994."
�"Contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan."
Chairman Thomas Kean has confirmed: "There were contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda, a number of them, some of them a little shadowy. They were definitely there."
Following news stories, Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton said he did not understand the media flap over this issue and that the commission does not disagree with the administration's assertion that there were connections between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government.
President Bush and members of his administration have said all along that there were contacts and that those contacts raised troubling questions.
For instance, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is the leader of a terrorist group that is responsible for a number of deadly attacks throughout Iraq. He and his men trained and fought with al-Qaeda for years. Zarqawi's network helped establish and operate an explosives and poisons facility in northeast Iraq. Zarqawi and nearly two-dozen al-Qaeda associates were in Baghdad before the fall of Saddam's regime. In 2002, one al-Qaeda associate bragged that the situation in Iraq was "good" and that Baghdad could be transited quickly.
It may be that all of the contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda never resulted in joint terrorist attacks. But considering all that we knew, no responsible leader could take for granted that such a collaboration would never happen.
Saddam had threatened American interests for more than a decade, harbored and assisted other terrorists, and possessed and used weapons of mass destruction. Al-Qaeda had declared war on America, and bin Laden had called the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction to attack Americans a "religious duty."
The president did not order the liberation of Iraq in retaliation for 9/11. He sent American troops to Iraq to remove a grave and gathering threat to America's security. Because he acted, Iraq is free, and America and the world are safer.
Stephen J. Hadley is deputy national security adviser to President Bush. |
So tell us does you article say this is not so? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
huffdaddy wrote: |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Besides the 9-11 commission says there were contacts
|
So what? |
why did Iraq have those contracts. To go to the movies together? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
huffdaddy wrote: |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Besides the 9-11 commission says there were contacts
|
So what? |
why did Iraq have those contracts. To go to the movies together? |
I don't know. I wasn't there. I imagine it was for much of the same underlying reasons that the US made contact with Saddam. How is one situation an implication of complicity and the other no big deal? If contact is significant, the guilt of association cuts both ways. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|