Rewriting history
WASHINGTON (AFP) – A detailed Pentagon study confirms there was no direct link between Iraqi ex-leader Saddam Hussein and the Al Qaeda network, debunking a claim President George W. Bush’s administration used to justify invading Iraq.
Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and top aides have insisted there were links between Saddam and Al-Qaeda, citing the alleged ties as a rationale for going to war in Iraq.
“The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al-Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda,” he told reporters in June 2004.
The 9/11 Commission highlighted those links. They were not operational, just simply things such as meetings. At one point, intelligence showed that Osama Bin Laden had inquired into using Iraq as a home base after Somalia.
Furthermore, neither Bush nor any in his administration used Al Qaeda as a rationale for the Iraq War, except in terms of going after terrorists and the nations that support them. There is 100% proof positive that Iraq was, in fact, supporting regional terrorism in the Middle East, mostly against Israel.
But, this is an old, regurgitated discussion, so, let’s play “Who Wrote This”
“Iraq’s increasing support to extremist Palestinians, coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al Qaeda, suggests that Baghdad’s links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action…We have solid reporting of senior-level contacts betwenn Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade…We have credible reporting that al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities.”
Any guesses?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The person would be Central Intelligence Agency director George Tenet, in a 2002 letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Guess which Party was the majority party in 2002?
Teach said: Furthermore, neither Bush nor any in his administration used Al Qaeda as a rationale for the Iraq War, except in terms of going after terrorists and the nations that support them.
But the issue was whether Iraq was directly supporting al-Qaeda. Why would President Bush say this a month before the war unless he was trying to make that case?…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50679-2004Jun17.html
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report on Iraq from 8 September, 2006, refuted this claim. It is believed to have come from Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a Libyan paramilitary trainer for al-Qaeda. After being captured and interrogated by American and Egyptian forces, it is believed he provided this false information under torture.
Don’t get me wrong. I do not believe this administration lied to us. I think President Bush and much of the intelligence community honestly believed Saddam Hussein had WMDs and there was a good chance he supported al-Qaeda. Both claims turned out to be wrong but that is a very different thing from deliberately lying.
You may wish to read the report and nix the cherry picked headlines. First off the report is available in full, requested by and received with no problems, by ABC News. This despite liberal blog and media claims that it was being hidden and forbidden by the government. Ooops…
http://blogs.abcnews.com/rapidreport/2008/03/report-shows-no.html
Secondly and most important, Saddam was supporting Egyptian Islamic Jihad since 1993. Zawahiri led the EIJ from 1993 until he orchestrated it’s merger with AQ in 1998. Saddam’s support of Zawahiri, tho under a different group name initially.. and no doubt continued after his AQ merger… is a direct link to AQ.
Add to that Mullah Omar of the Afghan Taliban sent his Defense Minister (Maulana Fazlur Rahman) to Iraq to request and receive aid for the Taliban in 1999. Note that AQ headquarters were moved from Sudan to Afghanistan in 1996. Support for the Taliban benefitted their alliance with AQ, and is indirect support.
Another instance of “too close for comfort” is documented Iraqi terror training for Sudanese jihadists in early 90s, plus orders to go after Americans in Somalia. Coincidental that AQ was headquartered in Sudan from 1991 to 1996, and also going after Somalia? AQ trained and equipped the local militants who attacked our “Black Hawk Down” soldiers. Was Iraq responsible for funding and training the very AQ fighters, who then trained the Somalians?
Last, but not least. Final words in the conclusion, conveniently ignored by liberal media:
“Evidence that was uncovered and analyzed attests to the existence of a terrorist capability and a willingness to use it until the day Saddam was forced to flee Baghdad by Coalition forces.”
Not all bad guys carry an AQ badge. However all share the desire to create Shariah/Islamic law states by violence. To play a name game and say we can only pay attention to ties with AQ, and not their affiliates in terror, is utterly absurd. For those operating under the AQ umbrella morph in and out at will, as it suits there purposes. They still remain, however, enemies of the west.