Mohammed Atta met Saddam prior to September 11: US official

Agence France-Presse | September 8, 2002

[HAL9000]

MILAN, Sept 8 (AFP) - Mohammed Atta consulted Saddam Hussein prior to leading the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, according to Richard Perle, an advisor to the US defense secretary.

"Mohammed Atta met Saddam Hussein in Baghdad prior to September 11. We have proof of that, and we are sure he wasn't just there for a holiday," Perle told Italy's business daily "Il Sole 24 Ore".

"The meeting is one of the motives for an American attack on Iraq," added Perle, who is chairman of the Defense Policy Board and consultant to US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a leading advocate of an attack on Iraq.

"The main objective of the American administration is to avoid weapons of mass destruction falling into the wrong hands," said Perle.

[elfman2]

"This is bull$h!t. If it were so they would have been milking it in public for all it's worth."

No, up to now we need misdirection more than more public support. A few months ago the world community, perhaps even Saddam, was not convinced that we were committed to invasion.

We have the legal authority to invade right now. And we still have a narrow majority of public support.

We weren't ready to invade until now, needing satellite guided weapons replenishment, Afghan wrap up, special training, forward deployments of equipment, airstrip construction, vaccine restocking and the fall climate change. But we didn't want to over-forecast our intentions, certainly not almost a year in advance. One year of firm notice would have given Saddam more time to commit to more elaborate counter attacks, justifying them by our overt threats, and would have allowed international opposition time to ferment, more so than now.

At some point we will need to shift over and trade operational ambiguity for public support. Perhaps that time is now, to coincide with the 9/11 memorials.

[elfman2]

"Everyone knows what Bush intends to do (aside from specifics)!"

But they didn't know if we were going to go through with it or be talked into some kind of compromise if the evidence against Iraq didn't materialize and opposition hardened. That's worth at least a forward deployed division and air-wing in operational effectiveness.

[AAABEST]

LOL. You have a good tactical mind but you ignore human nature and politics.

The fact remains that if there was any known meeting between Atta and Saddam the administration would be screaming this in the face of any reporter or potential coalition member they could find. Do you actually think they wouldn't have mentioned the small detail of Atta meets Saddam to the delegation from congress the other day? If it was mentioned do you think there would be one single member leaving that meeting with even the slightest reservation in regard to invading Iraq?

Somebody somewhere is hoping we're stupid, "leaking" this propagandic horseflop is beyond insulting.

[Musket]

Hey Hal, do you have a source link for this? I looked on the AFP site and their Yahoo compilation page and couldn't find it.

[HAL9000]

Hey Hal, do you have a source link for this? I looked on the AFP site and their Yahoo compilation page and couldn't find it.

Yahoo's AFP site is not very good - it is heavily censored. There are several better places to get AFP news available here

Sometimes, when I find an especially good news source, I don't publish the links to articles because those sites tend to cut off access when they attract too much attention. This has happened on some sites that carried Reuters and DPA - those are no longer available.

But I'm finding this particular AFP story on some Australian sites now - try here or here. On these sites, they list the source as the Australian Associated Press, but they are simply republishing the original AFP story.

[jwalsh07]

Somebody somewhere is hoping we're stupid, "leaking" this propagandic horseflop is beyond insulting

Atta met al Ani in Prague. Hussein trains hijackers at Salman Pak. Atta was a hijacker.

Don't bet the house that Atta didn't travel to Baghdad.

[Musket]

Very good. Thank you Sir.

[VOA]

This is bull$h!t. If it were so they would have been milking it in public for all it's worth.

Stupid Dubya strikes again!
He let the Democrats blather for a couple of weeks...during this week (including
the speech to the UN on Thursday), he'll roll out all the smoking guns, connect the dots,
and support to splat Sadaam will gain momentum.

I just pray the Democrats keep on underestimating Dubya.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

I>Tom Daschole will be stunned.

Either that, or "deeply disappointed".

[Contra]

Here's what the liberals will say - first of all, you can't prove the meeting ever took place. Second of all, so what if they met, that doesn't prove that Saddam was behind 9/11. And even if he was, is that justification enough to topple a government, create chaos, and leave a vacuum in the leadership of Iraq, etc., etc. Liberals will defend Saddam like Johnny Cochran defended O.J. Atta supposedly met with an Iraqi agent too and the liberals dismissed that as proof of nothing. Liberals would not support any war unless it is a Bill Clinton Bosnia-type thing (which was the U.S. coming down on the side of muslims). Liberals would sooner lay down and accomodate their conquerers and be vanquished lap dogs. Once conquered, they would gladly welcome their new conquerers and do anything to save their a**. This mentality exists all over Europe and actually most of the world. There still seems to be a mentality of most Americans wanting to kick a** but the liberals control so much of government and the news media that their wimpy views get a disproportionate amount of attention. This makes you realize that Joe McCarthy was right. We have people, like Jane Fonda, who not only hate America and are against everything it stands for, but who also openly embrace the enemy. There are people (Americans) that hate America and what it stands for and they are among us. They claim they love America and are just are exercising their freedom of speech. But make no mistake they are treasonous scum.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

MAJOR if true.

Indeed. Prior statements had Atta meeting with Iraqi Intelligence personnel in Europe. This is the first I have heard of a meeting in Iraq. But with Saddam?!! Wow!

I am reminded, however, that the earlier reports of Atta meeting with Iraqi agents were refuted, then downplayed, then re-stated. The whole thing was very murky. Could be problems with the confidence of intel. Very difficult to verify accounts, many axes to grind in that region, weakened intel structure during the Clinton administration.

Leads me to be hesitant to accept this revelation.

[The Great Satan]

My guess is that Perle actually spoke of Atta's meeting with Saddam's agent in Prague, and this report is a sloppy, garbled version of that. I would be most surprised if Saddam Hussein met with Mohammed Atta personally, or that, if he did, we would have proof of it or, that if we had proof of it, the first person to hear about it would be an Italian reporter for a business daily. The administration gave the LA Times a heads up a few weeks ago that the Atta-al-Ani meeting did take place and would form part of the case for taking out Saddam: White House says Sept. 11 skyjacker had met Iraqi agent.

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

Thank you for using common sense...I agree wholeheartedly.

[AM2000]

A whole lot of people are going to have a very hard time believing this.

[AM2000]

My guess is that Perle actually spoke of Atta's meeting with Saddam's agent in Prague, and this report is a sloppy, garbled version of that.

Now that I can believe!

[HAL9000]

Some links -

Spain - abc.es

Netherlands - Telegraaf.nl

Australia - The Mercury

Australia - Courier-Mail

Australia - The Australian

Australia - Herald-Sun

Australia - Daily Telegraph

Australia - Sunday Times

[aristeides]

I wonder if this could have happened while Atta was getting hijacking training at Salman Pak.

[elfman2]

"LOL. You have a good tactical mind but you ignore human nature and politics…"

You assume too much. Perhaps "yes" on both of your questions, too dynamic to review with this kind of contention.

[HardStarboard]

>>>Tom Daschole will be stunned. <<<

I doubt it. No evidence of Iraqi deceit to date has convinced Daschele. His blind eye is the result of total dedication to partisan politics - any action against Iraq would redound to Bush's and the Republician's advantage - Daschle would sell the country down the river to prevent that happening.