Game Fishing Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter #1
Found this on Yahoo news.

Boy.....who'd of thought of that :roll:


Exhaustive review finds no link between Saddam, al Qaida
By Warren P. Strobel, McClatchy Newspapers
Mon Mar 10, 7:08 PM ET

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 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 . However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.

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.

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 September 11, 2001 , terrorist attacks.

Then-Defense Secretary Donald H. 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.

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

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," he said.

The new study, entitled "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.

Spokesmen for the Joint Forces Command declined to comment until the report is released. One of the report's authors, Kevin Woods , also declined to comment.

The issue of al Qaida in Iraq already has played a role in the 2008 presidential campaign.

Sen. John McCain , the presumptive GOP nominee, mocked Sen. Barack Obama , D-Ill, recently for saying that he'd keep some U.S. troops in Iraq if al Qaida established a base there.

"I have some news. Al Qaida is in Iraq ," McCain told supporters. Obama retorted that, "There was no such thing as al Qaida in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade." (In fact, al Qaida in Iraq didn't emerge until 2004, a year after the invasion.)

The new study appears destined to be used by both critics and supporters of Bush's decision to invade Iraq to advance their own familiar arguments.

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.

However, the U.S. intelligence official, who's 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 .

According to the State Department's annual report on global terrorism for 2002— the last before the Iraq invasion— Saddam supported the militant Islamic group Hamas in Gaza , Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command , a radical, Syrian-based terrorist group.

Saddam also hosted Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal , although the Abu Nidal Organization was more active when he lived in Libya and he was murdered in Baghdad in August 2002 , possibly on Saddam's orders.

An earlier study based on the captured Iraqi documents, released by the Joint Forces Command in March 2006 , found that a militia Saddam formed after the 1991 Persian Gulf war, the Fedayeen Saddam, planned assassinations and bombings against his enemies. Those included Iraqi exiles and opponents in Iraq's Kurdish and Shiite communities.

Other documents indicate that the Fedayeen Saddam opened paramilitary training camps that, starting in 1998, hosted "Arab volunteers" from outside of Iraq . What happened to the non-Iraqi volunteers is unknown, however, according to the earlier study.

The new Pentagon study isn't the first to refute earlier administration contentions about Saddam and al Qaida.

A September 2006 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that Saddam was "distrustful of al Qaida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al Qaida to provide material or operational support."

The Senate report, citing an FBI debriefing of a senior Iraqi spy, Faruq Hijazi , said that Saddam turned down a request for assistance by bin Laden which he made at a 1995 meeting in Sudan with an Iraqi operative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
A September 2006 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that Saddam was "distrustful of al Qaida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al Qaida to provide material or operational support."
You can take that statement to the bank. It's been my contention all along that Saddam was not about to let that al Qaida crap take hold in Iraq. It would have put his control in serious jeopardy. Saddam was a lot of things, but stupid wasn't one of them.

Rather than invade and kill him, we needed to learn how to use and manipulate him. Oops, I mean use diplomacy on him. :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,118 Posts
Good grief! clown: Still digg'n up bones... conf:

Here's a test of your reading comprehension skills..... :roll:

What is the operative word in that article, the word that any discerning fair minded and genuinely astute reader should examine? Here's a hint..

If you fail to acknowledge it the entire article is meaningless unless you're a rebid liberal. If you comprehend it, it shall lead you down the road of reality.. Tup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,057 Posts
I thought we were doing that fs. When he was pointed at Iran he was getting some help from DC. Trouble is he had head problems and started thrashing around like an untended firehose. And the guy that quarterbacked the first Trade Tower bombing was an intel officer in his employ. That in itself should have gotten him an A-team tea party.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
Skorzeny said:
I thought we were doing that fs. When he was pointed at Iran he was getting some help from DC. Trouble is he had head problems and started thrashing around like an untended firehose. And the guy that quarterbacked the first Trade Tower bombing was an intel officer in his employ. That in itself should have gotten him an A-team tea party.
We've traded one probably manageable situation for a far worse one. We had a failure of diplomacy. Our strong arm tactics should have made it clear to Saddam. He did not understand that what the US giveth, they can take away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,460 Posts
No one with the sense that God gave a p*ssant can doubt that the reasons we were given for going to Iraq were specious (at best). No one with the sense that God gave a p*ssant can come to any other conclusion that our reasons for going in are moot now that we have been there for almost 5 years.

However, I shall not forget the "leaders" that have got us to this point. I may not have much, but my vote will not go to reward the SOB's that have cost us so much in lives and treasure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,118 Posts
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq... as required by U.N. resolutions...

...Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

I suppose you still have some choices left Eddie... Tup: :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,057 Posts
Ahhh How fragile memory is. I suspect it is subject to the gut gas of the dementia case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,685 Posts
"cost us so much in lives and treasure."

Right out of the liberal handbook. Notice how lives are as important as treasure. Have another drink wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,749 Posts
WASHINGTON â€" 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.
So let me get this right. They have spent 4+ years going through this documentation to prove something we already knew? That's the government for ya. Will we have an exhaustive review of the lack of WMD's in Iraq as well? Oh, I'm sorry...Is that scab still healing? :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,149 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,749 Posts
I had to click a link just to see your post. I like how that works! Tup:

FOX is not news, it's spin. Learn to diversify or continue being a puppet of the right wing propaganda machine. DAMN! Too Late! wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,149 Posts
MCA,

Please take your sniping partisan goggles off for just a minute and just read the link.

FYI--That quote was from another article---the link isn't a Fox New story it's a PDF file. wink:

Open up the link and scroll down and read it MCA---It's a signed copy of a de-classified document from the U.S. Congress Intelligence report. There's no reporting or commentray at all in the link I provided---just a signed official document--that says as a matter of fact that the united States has discovered over 500 chemical weapons with Sarin and Mustard gas in Iraq since 2003. nuke: These are considered WMD's and Saddam's posession of them are a clear violation of multiple UN resultions.

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Ira ... sified.pdf nuke:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
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 . However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.
Hmmm. Believe Congress or believe the Pentagon? That's a tough one, but I think I'll pick the Pentagon. :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,749 Posts
Birch Barlow said:
MCA,

Take your childish petty sniping partisan goggles off for just a minute.

FYI--that quote was from another article---I don't know how to C&P from a PDF file or I would have.

Open up the link and scroll down and read it MCA---It's a signed copy of a de-classified document from the U.S. Congress Intelligence report. There's no reporting or commentray at all in the link I provided---just a signed official document--that says as a matter of fact that the united States has discovered over 500 chemical weapons with Sarin and Mustard gas in Iraq since 2003. nuke: These are considered WMD's and Saddam's posession of them are a clear violation of multiple UN resultions.
Nice edit job! Why so sensitive?

Why don't you show me something new? These findings did not constitute what the U.S. (and the world) was sold as a reason to go to war. A false bill of goods that to this day has not been proven. Sad thing is, most of us believed it hook, line and sinker.

I've been down this road before, you seem to feel justified...good for you. I knew this was a touchy subject. :shock: Go back to your cut and paste and I'll go back to ignoring you Tup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,688 Posts
Its amazing to me how often this "beaten, dead horse" can escape the glue factory.

If Saddam was as smart as some think, maybe he shouldn't have been listening to the French and Russians who were telling him to sit tight and just ride out the mostly toothless sactions. If he had done what he was supposed to, he would still be building palaces, starving his own people, and chasing the Kurds around the north on weekends to his own content.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
DBAppraiser said:
Its amazing to me how often this "beaten, dead horse" can escape the glue factory.

If Saddam was as smart as some think, maybe he shouldn't have been listening to the French and Russians who were telling him to sit tight and just ride out the mostly toothless sactions. If he had done what he was supposed to, he would still be building palaces, starving his own people, and chasing the Kurds around the north on weekends to his own content.
And who let the French and the Russians get a leg up on us in the first place? Must have been a failure of DIPLOMACY. If we had done what we were supposed to do, it never would have gotten out of hand.
wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,270 Posts
You are absolutely right DB. Tup:

Now, the Iraqi's get to kill each other at a pace even Saddam would have been astounded by. AND... they get to do it without water, electricity or most of the other basic necessities of life they at least used to enjoy when Saddam was runnin' the show.

Yup, Iraq is WAAYYYY better off now than it was in 2002. You just wait, that's what historians are gonna say 40 years from now too. ff knows! clown:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,688 Posts
I know FS, its our own fault for trying to work within the UN and actually play by the rules. We should know better by now that the big boys in Europe won't back us up on most things.

Europe eventually will need us again when the Russians cut off their natural gas supply. I just hope they don't call at 3am. wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
DBAppraiser said:
I know FS, its our own fault for trying to work within the UN and actually play by the rules. We should know better by now that the big boys in Europe won't back us up on most things.

Europe eventually will need us again when the Russians cut off their natural gas supply. I just hope they don't call at 3am. wink:
Let them go back to burning peat moss to stay warm and living in hollowed out trees. Tup:
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top