Spain links Iraq to 9-11 attacks

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | March 16, 2003 , 1:00 AM Eastern Time

[Henry_winkler]

An alleged terrorist accused of helping the Sept. 11 conspirators was invited to a party by the Iraqi ambassador to Spain under his al-Qaida pseudonym, according to documents seized by Spanish investigators and turned over to U.S. authorities, the London Observer reports.

Yusuf Galan, who was photographed being trained at a camp run by Osama bin Laden, is now in jail, awaiting trial in Madrid. The indictment against him, drawn up by investigating judge Baltasar Garzon, claims he was "directly involved with the preparation and carrying out of the attacks ... by the suicide pilots on 11 September."

Evidence of Galan's links with Iraqi government officials came to light only recently, as investigators pored through more than 40,000 pages of documents seized in raids at the homes of Galan and seven alleged co-conspirators. The Spanish authorities have supplied copies to lawyers in America, and this week the documents will form part of a dossier to be filed in a federal court in Washington, claiming damages of approximately $100 billion on behalf of more than 2,500 Sept. 11 victims, according to the Observer report.

[fortress]

Maybe GW is holding back all this proof of Iraq-El Quaida connections, to see who our real friends are.
I think we have much a clearer picture of the world now then say 6 months ago.

[dinok]

There is a tendency by the GW administration to hold back on Information that is not confirmed by more sources. They have good reason.
A report on Iraqi nuclear plans passed to them from Italy was apparently a plant and false. It was done so that we would go public with it and then be discredited. (I smell France on this one.)

[fortress]

Good point, but this tendency has had an interesting side effect none the less

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

So, peaceniks, is this proof enough or does this have to be notarized by God before you'll accept it? I'm sure they'll just dismiss it with a handwave, nothing to see here. The muslims will continue to bury their heads in the sand and claim it's a fabrication.

[dinok]

There have been many times I have asked myself why the GW administration is silent on the Iraq connection between Mohamad Atta and the Iraqis In the Chech Republic. That, along with this new information, and the link of the former Iraqi Republican Guard officer identified by witnesses as "John Doe # 2" in the Ok. City bombing, would have placed a good argument on the Iraq-terrorism link against the US.
Saddly the decision has been made to not press the point.

[Enduring Freedom]

It seems the simplest task to link Iraq to terrorism, Al Qaeda, and 9/11.

But the inept team of Tenet & Powell, aka Dumb & Dumber, prevailed in keeping this option in check.

The Public Relations team of Bush Inc. have evaporated, and news cycle after news cycle Bush has been ambushed by every two-bit celebrity and chump, without rebuttal.

This Rope-A-Dope strategy is a sure-fail method to lose America's support.

[dinok]

I think all the dancing around the issue is about over.

By this time next week, Saddam will be either on the run or dead.

[Republican_Strategist]

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Freeper Resource: Sleuthing The Iraq-Bin Laden Connection, click below:
	click here >>>	Freeper Resource: Sleuthing The Iraq-Bin Laden Connection	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[gcruse]

By this time next week, Saddam will be either on the run or dead.

That's the point now, isn't it?  Whether there was ever any connection between
9/11 and Iraq is moot after we have invaded Iraq.  It reminds me a photo processing
company I worked for.  We were required to report the number of lost orders to
corporate once a month.  The customer service department always reported zero
because the orders we couldn't find might not be lost--some of them would turn up at
the wrong store or be brought back by a customer who got one in error.  So we never
stopped waiting for the wayward orders to turn up and couldn't say if they were really
lost or not.  

I suppose when the company finally closed its doors in 1998 that the boxes full of hundreds
of orders that could not be placed were listed as lost.  But I doubt it.  

We will never stop looking for an Iraq-9/11 link.  Who knows but that in fifty years one
can be found.  And if one isn't, well, there's always another fifty years.

[dinok]

For those who have the gutts to connect the dots, the link is already there.

[gcruse]

Connecting dots doesn't require guts. It requires enough dots to have confidence one isn't etch-a-sketching looney tunes.

[dinok]

I think we have the dots connected.
What do you think mOhamad Atta and the Iraqi intel officer talked about in 2001? The price of dates in the Baghdad market?
What do you think Saddam's son Oday was refering to in his Op-ed piece that Bin laden was going to make Americans hate Frank Sinatra's songs, this on late July 2001?

[gcruse]

Good lord. I can imagine what you must find in the works of Nostredamus.

[dinok]

sPARE ME WITH THE NOSTRADAMUS CRAP.

The case has been made.

[F.J. Mitchell]

We know for a fact that Saddam is rewarding the families of Palistinean homocide bombers, for the deaths of innocent Israelis. His connection to those terrorists is well documented. Pretending that Saddam's connection to all other terrorists on earth, including those who flew the planes loaded with passengers into the WTC and the Pentigon, is not obvious to rational people, is a desperate attempt to ignore reality by the cowardly illusionists.

Actually, the point is on the heads of the idiots who are pretending that diplomacy hasn't already been tried to the point that Saddam, is convinced that he is dealing with beguiled fools. The pointy heads have emboldended the butcher of Bagdad to the point that only war will cure this cancerous growth.

[gcruse]

Who said anything about trying diplomacy? Saddam has violated strictures of the UN. Let the UN deal with him. Comparing the great effort we make to tie Saddam to 9/11 with the indisputable fact that 15 of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia should ring bells. Why is Iraq number one on the 9/11 hit list when SA sticks out like a sore thumb?

[wayoverontheright]

There need not be any connection between Iraq and 9-11 for there to be complete justification for the disarming of Iraq and the ouster of Saddam Hussein.

All enemies of the US, with or without missiles, with or without weapons of mass destruction, without any reason other than to inflict pain, may now strike us on our own soil, and if they are careful, with complete anonymity.

We are at war with terror, and its defeat requires that the consequences of using it against us exceed any possible gains from its implementation. Saddam Hussein may not have been part of 9-11, it matters not, because no war against terror can be said to have been won which doesn't effect his exit from the world. The question is not DID HE but given the lesson of how to strike us in our homeland, WOULD HE.We should not apologize for the fact that we fear another attack, made even the more terrible by the use of his WMD.

Iraq should be taken out with dispatch, in a punitive manner. The "Arab street" will then recognize uncomfortably its new neighbor, this time unafraid to assume the role of keeper of the peace, this time no longer kneeling at the feet of the Saudi princes for a presence in the region, and this time remaining there to protect its own people instead of to protect the Arabs from each other.

[gcruse]

That is reasonably put. I think the reason many feel the need to connect 9/11 to Iraq is that America does not have a history of pre-emptive attack and are uncomfortable with it. Tying 9/11 to Iraq lets them avoid thinking about what other reasons there may be.

Are we doing it for oil? Doubtful. Mideast reorganization? As a result, maybe, but as a cause? Because 'Saddam tried to kill my father'? Inasmuch as he didn't, doubtful. For Israel? Remote chance at best. To save the world from what Saddam might do? That seems to be what we are falling back on. Nothing else fits right now.

[wayoverontheright]

Are we doing it for oil? Doubtful. Mideast reorganization? As a result, maybe, but as a cause? Because 'Saddam tried to kill my father'? Inasmuch as he didn't, doubtful. For Israel? Remote chance at best. To save the world from what Saddam might do? That seems to be what we are falling back on. Nothing else fits right now.

Exactly

We were not attacked because of an abundance of anger, but because of a deficiency of respect on the part of the entire Arab-Islamic world. Unfortunately, you do not get from disrespect to respect without an element of fear. The region's biggest and baddest must be annihilated, summarily defeated, yes humiliated, the same conditions which eliminated Japanese terror in WWII.

To save the world from what Saddam might do?

Think about it, all he has to do is provide WMD to those who would willingly bring them to our shores, he doesn't have to DO anything, and he knows it. Why can't the left understand this?