"Ansar was not in Saddam-controlled Iraq. "
excuse me for butting in, but Saddam supported several terrorist groups outside his country in places he didnt 'control'. NFLP for example.
Right now, we have evidence Iran is bankrolling al-Sadr in Iraq. Of course nobody would say Iran is 'controlling' Iraqi territory.
So my Q: How does this assertion/argument prove anything dispositive?
WOSG, you have it backwards. I am not claiming that "Ansar was not in Saddam-controlled Iraq" proves that Saddam was not tied to Ansar. I am claiming that the fact that Ansar was in Iraq, in an area NOT controlled by Saddam, is NOT "proof positive" of the Saddam-AQ connection.
Look at the headline. The only evidence in the article is that the Jordan terrorist had hooked up with Ansar. Ansar was not in an area controlled by Saddam. This is not proof of any connection between Saddam and AQ. As you said, Saddam was involved with terror groups in other states where he did not exercise control. But the existence of those groups in those areas, alone, does not operate as proof of the Saddam connection. Same with this one.