Bush administration shows no Iraq/Al Qaeda connection

FranchiseBlade · Jun 18, 2004

Until they wanted to push the war in Iraq.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/opinion/8609339.htmPosted on Fri, May. 07, 2004

Why we’re in Iraq

By ERNEST F. HOLLINGS
Guest columnist

With 760 dead in Iraq and more than 3,000 maimed for life, folks continue to argue over why we are in Iraq — and how to get out.

Now everyone knows what was not the cause of this war. Even President Bush acknowledges that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Listing the 45 countries where al Qaeda was operating on Sept. 11 (70 cells in the United States), the State Department did not list Iraq.
Click to expand...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0803-04.htm
Last week, several prominent Democratic senators invoked the alleged link between Hussein and Al Qaeda as part of an administration pattern of inflating the case for war. Senator Barbara Boxer of California produced a government map from late 2001 on which the administration identified 45 ''countries where Al Qaeda has operated'' -- but Iraq was not among them
Click to expand...

Countries that Al Qaida operates in
According to the United States Department of State, Al Qaida has operated in the following countries.
http://www.campusprogram.com/refere...aida.html#Countries that Al Qaida operates in
* Albania
* Algeria
* Afghanistan
* Azerbaijan
* Australia
* Austria
* Bahrain
* Bangladesh
* Belgium
* Bosnia and Herzegovina
* Egypt
* Eritrea
* France
* Germany
* India
* Iran
* Ireland
* Italy
* Jordan
* Kenya
* Kosovo
* Lebanon
* Libya
* Malaysia
* Mauritania
* Netherlands
* Pakistan
* Philippines
* Qatar
* Russia
* Saudi Arabia
* Somalia
* South Africa
* Sudan
* Switzerland
* Tajikistan
* Tanzania
* Tunisia
* Turkey
* Uganda
* United Arab Emirates
* United Kingdom
* United States
* Uzbekistan
* Yemen
Click to expand...

Even our own government under President Bush and Dick Cheney didn't claim there was a connection to Iraq, until they wanted to hype that up as a reason for this war. If the threat from Iraq and a supposed Al-Qaeda connection why wasn't Iraq on the list?

Dennis2112 · Jun 18, 2004

Well I posted this in another thread but it fits here just as well.

I got the following excerpt from Newsmax.com:

Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission Lee Hamilton blasted the mainstream press yesterday for distorting the Commission's findings on links between Iraq and al Qaida before the Sept. 11 attacks, saying those findings actually support Bush administration contentions.
"The sharp differences that the press has drawn [between the White House and the Commission] are not that apparent to me," Hamilton told the Associated Press, a day after insisting that his probe uncovered "all kinds" of connections between Osama bin Laden's terror network and Iraq.
Click to expand...

Funny that this statement would be released after saying no connection. I think what was meant to be said is that there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11 however there were apparently many ties between Saddam and Osama. I am sure that Saddam had knowledge of the 9/11 attacks but most likely not involved with them specifically.

FranchiseBlade · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112
Well I posted this in another thread but it fits here just as well.

I got the following excerpt from Newsmax.com:

Funny that this statement would be released after saying no connection. I think what was meant to be said is that there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11 however there were apparently many ties between Saddam and Osama. I am sure that Saddam had knowledge of the 9/11 attacks but most likely not involved with them specifically.
Click to expand...

I saw that statement, and the way I understood the findings were that there was contact between Saddam and Al-Qaeda but no working relationship was ever established.

For the record the list of the 45 nations from this administration's state department was not a list of countries that Al-Qaeda used to stage 9/11, but a list of countries in which Al-Qaeda had operative cells in general. Again, Iraq was not on that list.

basso · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade
I saw that statement, and the way I understood the findings were that there was contact between Saddam and Al-Qaeda but no working relationship was ever established.

For the record the list of the 45 nations from this administration's state department was not a list of countries that Al-Qaeda used to stage 9/11, but a list of countries in which Al-Qaeda had operative cells in general. Again, Iraq was not on that list.
Click to expand...

so now you're quibbling over the relative strength of ties between committed mass murderers, both of whom declared war on the U.S.? and you claim to be serious about the WOT?

El_Conquistador · Jun 18, 2004

Ho ho ho! Dennis, great post. This thread sure ended quickly. The liberals have obviously been reduced to playing a semantics game here. Their argument has been shaved down to a mere nub yet they still hold on! One must ask himself: Why do the liberals *want* America to look bad? Why do they *want* American leaders to be embarrassed? Why do they *want* the global opinion of America to be negatively impacted? When you answer these questions, the thin veil that covers the liberals motivations is lifted. Their anti-Bush hatred has driven them to slander America and harm the efforts of Americans abroad (troops included).

What ever happened to being proud of America and wanting it to succeed?

What ever happened to patriotism?

Dennis2112 · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade
I saw that statement, and the way I understood the findings were that there was contact between Saddam and Al-Qaeda but no working relationship was ever established.

For the record the list of the 45 nations from this administration's state department was not a list of countries that Al-Qaeda used to stage 9/11, but a list of countries in which Al-Qaeda had operative cells in general. Again, Iraq was not on that list.
Click to expand...

Working relationship or not, there were ties with Saddam. The US military have found terrorist training camps in Iraq that were similar to the ones they found in Afganistan. They even found a training camp that had a boeing airliner that were used for training. I wonder what they training for using the airplane?

Combine that info with what Putin has released, you got a pretty good picture that there was something going on. Saddam definitely had a beef with the US general and the Bushes in particular because of the 1st gulf war. It seems to me to be fairly easy to connect the dots and see that Saddam would want to use anything he could to hurt the US and/or the Bushes.

You know the old saying," the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

As for the absence of a clear sign of cooperation between Saddam and Osama, I cannot explain that but there is clearly a "smoking gun".

basso · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112

You know the old saying," the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Click to expand...

aiding and abetting...

gwayneco · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112
I wonder what they training for using the airplane?
Click to expand...

Probably was just a Flight Attendant's School.

SamFisher · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112
Working relationship or not, there were ties with Saddam. The US military have found terrorist training camps in Iraq that were similar to the ones they found in Afganistan. They even found a training camp that had a boeing airliner that were used for training. I wonder what they training for using the airplane?

Combine that info with what Putin has released, you got a pretty good picture that there was something going on. Saddam definitely had a beef with the US general and the Bushes in particular because of the 1st gulf war. It seems to me to be fairly easy to connect the dots and see that Saddam would want to use anything he could to hurt the US and/or the Bushes.

You know the old saying," the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

As for the absence of a clear sign of cooperation between Saddam and Osama, I cannot explain that but there is clearly a "smoking gun".
Click to expand...

What about the cooperation between Saddam and Vladimir?

HIGH-TECH WEAPONS
Evidence cited of Russian arms in Iraq
By Paul Richter and Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times, 1/10/2004

WASHINGTON -- US officials have found evidence corroborating White House allegations that Russian companies sold Saddam Hussein high-tech military equipment that threatened US forces during the invasion of Iraq last March, a senior State Department official said yesterday.

The official said the United States has found proof that Russian companies exported night-vision goggles and radar-jamming equipment to Iraq, the official said. The evidence includes the equipment itself and proof that it was used during the war, according to the official. Such exports would violate the terms of United Nations sanctions against Iraq.

"We have corroborated some of that evidence," the official told a group of reporters.

While insisting that the matter is "now in the past," he said that the Bush administration "never received entirely satisfactory explanations" of its charges, and that the issue "is still a sensitive one in the relationship."

"It's an issue that, shall we say, did not do much for strengthening trust," the official added.

The issue burst into public view last March 24, just days after the war began, when President Bush called Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, to voice his concern about the goggles, jamming equipment, and advanced antitank missiles. The White House said at the time that it had "credible evidence" that the equipment came from Russian companies.

The goggles and jammers were of special concern to the United States because US forces, seeking to wage war over great distances with low casualties, rely on night-vision devices and high-tech missile and aircraft guidance systems.

The goggles use heat sensors to enable infantrymen to continue operations even in the dead of night; the jammers block signals from satellites that guide cruise missiles and "smart" bombs.

Putin staunchly denied the charges. But the allegation added friction to a relationship that was already under strain at the time because of Russia's vocal opposition to the US-led invasion.

Yevgeny V. Khorishko, press secretary for the Russian Embassy in Washington, said yesterday that though the allegations were first raised before the war, "we have never received real proof from the American side that Russian firms were involved in the delivery of this equipment."

The State Department official declined to elaborate on what the proof is.

Khorishko noted that the United States and Russia are now involved in broad talks aimed at developing new ways to halt the spread of weapons around the world. He said he could not comment, under the terms of those talks, on whether they addressed US concerns about the night-vision and jamming equipment.

In raising the issue last year, US officials contended that although the hardware was allegedly sold by private companies, the Russian government could have taken steps to oversee and interdict the traffic. They maintained at the time that the gear had been sold relatively recently, and with an understanding that it could be used in such a war.

High-tech military equipment is a top export for Russia. Though the country's military budget has shrunk dramatically, its military industry exports about $5 billion annually in tanks, planes, small arms, and other equipment, which end up -- directly or through transshipment -- in dozens of countries.

During the war, US military sources gave differing accounts on how much the Russian-made equipment affected US forces. Some military officials were quoted as blaming jamming gear for sending missiles off course and into Iran and Saudi Arabia, and as contending that Russian made Kornet antitank missiles destroyed at least two American M-1 A-1 tanks, the first time such tanks had been destroyed in battle.

But other officials contended they had little effect during the rapid sweep to Baghdad.

Some Russian arms industry executives and military analysts asserted that the charges about the jamming equipment were made only to explain away the inaccuracy of the US-made "smart bombs."
Click to expand...

http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2004/01/10/evidence_cited_of_russian_arms_in_iraq?mode=PF

Does this mean that Russia was cooperating with Al Qaeda since they were both allegedly cooperating with Saddam?

YOu said it: the enemy of my enemy is my friend....

FranchiseBlade · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by basso
so now you're quibbling over the relative strength of ties between committed mass murderers, both of whom declared war on the U.S.? and you claim to be serious about the WOT?
Click to expand...

Yes because the relative strength of ties could mean the difference between a threat and a non-threat. That difference if acted upon morally could save thousands and thousands of lives.

I think that's certainly worth quibbling about. If you look into history you see that England and Germany had communications prior to WWII. Do you mean to assume that communications and proposed agreements made those two allies?

Well the same thing is true in this case. Saddam and Bin Laden were not allies, as no agreement could be or was reached.

I'm extremely serious about the War on Terror, and I supported the action in Afghanistan whole-heartedly. I supported getting tougher with Iraq(though not an invasion at this time under these circumstances.) I still support military action against terrorists that present a real and credible threat.

I also support the truth, and freedom, and upholding our constitution. I also support humane behavior, and acting with justice, war as a last resort, etc. I believe in spreading democracy, through an example and demonstrating how well the system works even in the face of adversity. I believe that pre-emptive unnecessary wars, torture, trying to rationalize torture, etc. only hinders the spread of democracy.

mc mark · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112
Working relationship or not, there were ties with Saddam. The US military have found terrorist training camps in Iraq that were similar to the ones they found in Afganistan. They even found a training camp that had a boeing airliner that were used for training. I wonder what they training for using the airplane?

Click to expand...

Dennis can you provide a link to where these training camps were in Iraq?

thanks

El_Conquistador · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by SamFisher
What about the cooperation between Saddam and Vladimir?

Click to expand...

Look at the liberals try to change the subject! They are finally relinquishing their hold on what has proven to be a failed argument for them. Coming to grips with this reality means moving the debate to a different subject, as you see ShamFisher attempting to do here. I feel a tinge sad for these liberals, really I do. They are forced to argue from a severe position of weakness. They have no hand here, yet they must play poker with the big boys. Sorry libs, but the fifth street just turned over and you ain't got a hand.

FOLD 'EM LIBS

SamFisher · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by mc mark
Dennis can you provide a link to where these training camps were in Iraq?

thanks
Click to expand...

Get ready for a lot of stories from 2002 from since-discredited Chalabi supplied defectors.....

Dennis2112 · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by SamFisher
What about the cooperation between Saddam and Vladimir?
Click to expand...

I cannot explain why Russia was dealing with Saddam but most likely was looking to make a buck to keep the arms race going between Saddam and every other middle eastern country.

Originally posted by SamFisher
Does this mean that Russia was cooperating with Al Qaeda since they were both allegedly cooperating with Saddam?
Click to expand...

Your conclusion is a little bit silly..don't you think?

FranchiseBlade · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112
Working relationship or not, there were ties with Saddam. The US military have found terrorist training camps in Iraq that were similar to the ones they found in Afganistan. They even found a training camp that had a boeing airliner that were used for training. I wonder what they training for using the airplane?

Combine that info with what Putin has released, you got a pretty good picture that there was something going on. Saddam definitely had a beef with the US general and the Bushes in particular because of the 1st gulf war. It seems to me to be fairly easy to connect the dots and see that Saddam would want to use anything he could to hurt the US and/or the Bushes.

You know the old saying," the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

As for the absence of a clear sign of cooperation between Saddam and Osama, I cannot explain that but there is clearly a "smoking gun".
Click to expand...

The Salmon pak training camp had 707 shell of an aircraft. That's interesting indeed, and if evidence is found that it was a threat, I'm glad it's no longer in use.

However, if we use the enemy of my enemy is my friend rationale, which of Saddam or Bin Laden were our friends? They were enemies of each other. Which of those is our friend? I say neither.

basso · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by FranchiseBlade

Well the same thing is true in this case. Saddam and Bin Laden were not allies, as no agreement could be or was reached.

Click to expand...

well the U.S. government, who indicted bin laden in 1998, disagrees with you:

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq,"

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_..._U.S._Federal_Court_for_African_Bombings.html

SamFisher · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by Dennis2112

Your conclusion is a little bit silly..don't you think?
Click to expand...

Well, if Saddam and Al Qaeda are our enemies, and hence are friends, and Saddam and Russia are friends -- and if Russia is arming our enemies -- draw your own conclusion.

SamFisher · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by basso
well the U.S. government, who indicted bin laden in 1998, disagrees with you:

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq,"

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_..._U.S._Federal_Court_for_African_Bombings.html
Click to expand...

Basso, first off, the fact that you are resorting to the text of an indictment filed in 1998 when we knew far less about this is telling.

Second, I'm glad to see that you now are citing the US Attorney's office for the Southern District of New York as your intelligence source. I guess that's better than NRO or the Weekly Standard, but not by much

Third, I don't know how much you know about legal pleadings and incictments and factual bases thereof -- but it's a whole different ballgame, let's just leave it at that.

FranchiseBlade · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by basso
well the U.S. government, who indicted bin laden in 1998, disagrees with you:

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq,"

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_..._U.S._Federal_Court_for_African_Bombings.html
Click to expand...

Yes that was Clinton's government, and since then it appears that cooperation never materialized. Furthermore, our current administration realeased the information listed above in this thread showing that they believed there was no connection. It was later when they really really wanted/needed a connection that they changed their tune.

Dennis2112 · Jun 18, 2004

Originally posted by mc mark
Dennis can you provide a link to where these training camps were in Iraq?

thanks
Click to expand...

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030613-124435-6711r.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,779359,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,84291,00.html

another article from Spyglasshill.com:

It's in Iraq, but the training camp has flags from the PLO and Iraq side by side. Abut 10 acres in size with a dozen buildings, chemicals used to make bombs, artillary shells and rosters of personnel believed to have been trained there as recently as Jan 4, 2004.

According to Marine intelligence Captain Aaron Robertson, "This is what we would refer to as a sensiteve site. This is a clearly terrorist training camp, the type Iraq claimed did not exist."

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock040703.asp

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/9/17/232349.shtml

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/1948700

I hope that is enough for you...

Forums

Bush administration shows no Iraq/Al Qaeda connection

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

Dennis2112 Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

Dennis2112 Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

gwayneco Contributing Member

SamFisher Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

mc mark Member

El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

SamFisher Member

Dennis2112 Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

SamFisher Member

SamFisher Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

Dennis2112 Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

Bush administration shows no Iraq/Al Qaeda connection

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

Dennis2112 Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

basso Member Supporting Member

El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

Dennis2112 Member

basso Member Supporting Member

gwayneco Contributing Member

SamFisher Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

mc mark Member

El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

SamFisher Member

Dennis2112 Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

basso Member Supporting Member

SamFisher Member

SamFisher Member

FranchiseBlade Member Supporting Member

Dennis2112 Member

Share This Page

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member

basso Member
Supporting Member

FranchiseBlade Member
Supporting Member