No Evidence of Meeting With Iraqi (Atta in Prague)

New York Times ^ | June 16, 2004 | James Risen

[Shermy]

WASHINGTON, June 16 - A report of a clandestine meeting in Prague between Mohammed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer first surfaced shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks. And even though serious doubt was cast on the report, it was repeatedly cited by some Bush administration officials and others as evidence of a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

But on Wednesday, the Sept. 11 commission said its investigation had found that the meeting never took place.

In its report on the Sept. 11 plot, the commission staff disclosed for the first time F.B.I. evidence that strongly suggested that Mr. Atta was in the United States at the time of the supposed Prague meeting.

The report cited a photograph taken by a bank surveillance camera in Virginia showing Mr. Atta withdrawing money on April 4, 2001, a few days before the supposed Prague meeting on April 9, and records showing his cell phone was used on April 6, 9, 10 and 11 in Florida.

The supposed meeting in Prague by Mr. Atta, who flew one of the hijacked jets on Sept. 11, was a centerpiece of early efforts by the Bush administration and its conservative allies to link Iraq with the attacks as the administration sought to justify a war to topple Saddam Hussein.

The Sept. 11 commission report also forcefully dismissed the broader notion that there was a terrorist alliance between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

The report said there might have been contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda after Osama bin Laden moved to Afghanistan in 1996, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship."

In effect, the commission report endorsed the views of officials at the C.I.A. and F.B.I., who have long been dismissive of a supposed Prague meeting and of the administration's broader assertions concerning an Iraq-Qaeda alliance.

The panel's findings effectively rebuke the Pentagon's civilian leadership, which set up a small intelligence unit after the Sept. 11 attacks to hunt for links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. This team briefed senior policy makers at the Pentagon and the White House, saying that the C.I.A. had ignored evidence of such connections.

The C.I.A.'s evidence of contacts between Al Qaeda and Iraqi dates to the early 1990's, when Mr. bin Laden was living in Sudan. The debate within the government was over their meaning.

The C.I.A. concluded that the contacts never translated into joint operational activity on terrorist plots; the Pentagon believed the C.I.A. was understating the likelihood of a deeper relationship.

The staff report cited evidence that Mr. bin Laden explored the possibility of cooperation with Iraq in the early and mid-1990's, despite a deep antipathy for Saddam Hussein's secular regime.

The report said Sudanese officials, who at the time had close ties with Iraq, tried to persuade Mr. bin Laden to end his support for anti-Hussein Islamic militants operating in the Kurdish-controlled region of northern Iraq, and sought to arrange contacts between Al Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence.

A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly visited Sudan three times and met Mr. bin Laden there in 1994. Mr. bin Laden reportedly requested space in Iraq to establish terrorist training camps as well as assistance in acquiring weapons, "but Iraq apparently never responded," the commission report stated.

The staff report added that two senior Qaeda operatives, previously identified as Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, "adamantly denied that any ties existed between Al Qaeda and Iraq."

Soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, Czech officials said they had received reports that Mr. Atta had met in April 2001 with Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim al-Ani, an Iraqi intelligence officer stationed in Prague.

But the C.I.A. and F.B.I., and some top Czech officials, quickly began to cast doubt on the story, and Czech security officials were never able to corroborate the initial report, which was based on a single source. That source made the report after the Sept. 11 attacks, when Mr. Atta's photograph was published worldwide, and after it had already been reported that Czech border records showed Mr. Atta had visited Prague a year earlier, in 2000.

The evidence concerning Mr. Atta's whereabouts in Virginia and Florida in early April 2001, at the time of the purported Prague meeting, severely weakens the case for it.

The staff report's findings on the Prague meeting were also based in part on reporting from unidentified detainees in United States custody. One is Mr. Ani, who was captured and taken into American custody after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Under questioning, he has denied that the meeting ever happened, American officials have said.

[Shermy]

That Prague Post article is ridiculous. It assumes that the "9/11 Commission's" judgment is solid. Shouldn't this writer know that George Tenet said something different?

It's not the first time I've seen undue respect to American sources...the first was the Czechs amazement when the NYPost or WashPost challenged them - they seemed to think, for a moment at least, that they must be wrong merely for this fact.

[Shermy]

"The information must have come from the intelligence services, and the prime minister is in charge of coordination of intelligence services rather than the interior minister," she said.

The information came from the intelligence service? Like, where else should it come from?

Political analysts accused Zeman of exaggerating information from the intelligence services. "No doubt it's a scandal that the former prime minister misinterpreted information from intelligence sources," said Ivan Gabal, a private defense and security consultant. "Zeman was out of control and overstated the case.

Is Gabal a US State Department contractee? Why was this guy on the reporter's list? Who supplied this talking head - he absolutely knows nothing. What is "overstated his case?" How was it "misinterpreted?"

Heavy bs environment.

[Shermy]

Look for Ivan Gabal here:

http://www.gac.cz/files/igac/staff_en.html

Sociologist, I've seen on the web things he's written about defense, so he's the guy.

[IonInsights]

What I find interesting here, is that with the volumes of information showing a Saddam-al-Qaeda connection, that the Left is so quick to take the position that there is no connection.

It's like they know there's a connection (which there obviously is), but they want to somehow innoculate themselves from these facts because it will support their worldview and the worldview of the candidate.

A strange and interesting pathology.

[Shermy]

Peter Kononczuk sounds like their country's version of Michael Isikoff.

C'mon, don't be so mean. He names names for his sources! They can be contacted.

And he is just reacting like most people would - they assume this high-falutin' commission is truthful and judicious.

[Shermy]

A strange and interesting pathology.

It's a gotcha game focusing on the minor points pretending to be substantive.

[pepsionice]

Tri-bands work anywhere in Europe or the US...but 98 percent of the population don't buy tri-bands because they cost too much.

[piasa]

Here's another Atta-associated individual who is seldom covered in the news and who has also reportedly met Atta in Prague:

JULY 2001 : (ITALY : IRAQI INTELLIGENCE AGENT AL-MAMOURI DISAPPEARS FROM HIS JOB, SHORTLY AFTER HE MET 9/11 HIJACKER MOHAMMAD ATTA; BOTH HAD BEEN SEEN TOGETHER IN HAMBURG GERMANY & PRAGUE, CZECHOSLAVAKIA BEFORE) One of Saddam’s intelligence agents, Habib Faris Abdullah al-Mamouri, was sent to be the new headmaster of a school for Iraqi diplomats in Italy. The bogus headmaster has not been seen in Rome since July, shortly after he also met Atta. The pair are also said to have been together in Hamburg and Prague. There is no proof the men were in direct contact, but as one intelligence source in Madrid said [later in the year] : “They chose a strange time and place to take a holiday.” The Rome daily Il Messaggero, quoting Western intelligence sources, said of Mr al-Mamouri that “he spent more time pursuing contacts helpful to the Iraqi regime among fundamentalist Islamic groups than he had on his supposed teaching duties”. Italian officials say that Mr al-Mamouri held the rank of general in the Iraqi secret service, and from 1982 to 1990 worked in the Special Operations Branch forging Baghdad’s links with Islamic fundamentalist groups in Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Gulf and Sudan. He was transferred to his “teaching duties” in 1998, although all the Iraqi Embassy will say of his sudden departure is that “he had money problems”. - "Hijacker 'given anthrax flask by Iraqi agent'," by DANIEL MCGRORY, The London Times, SATURDAY OCTOBER 27 2001

[piasa]

see post above

[vaudine]

Wasn't this so-called evidence leaked by staff of the 911 Comm? And didn't The Times backtrack a couple of days later when the Iraqui document stating meetings were planned at the highest level, meaning Hussein or sons?

vaudine

[piasa]

fyi

[Cindy]

Thank you Piasa.


GOOGLE Search Term: "AL-MAMOURI "
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22AL-MAMOURI%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&filter=0

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the information!

[piasa]

Here's yet another report on an Atta-associated person who was known to be in Prague- though on what dates it's not entirely clear, maybe this means in 1997 or later after his 'escape.' :

To: CDHart

From Washington Times article this morning: Former CIA officer Robert Baer said [Khalid Shaikh] Mohammed was known as a key terrorist since the late 1990s. The FBI nearly captured him when he was offered up by authorities in Qatar in 1997, only to be thwarted by a Qatari government minister who helped Mohammed escape. He then was traced to Prague, Mr. Baer said.

15 posted on 03/02/2003 4:39 AM PST by aristeides

[piasa]

Notice that the above info on his stay in Qatar came from the Washington Times while this one below comes from the Post and in this one the escape is blamed partly on people within the US government, not just Qatar:

The object of a U.S manhunt for years, [Khalid shaikh Mohammed] Mohammed narrowly escaped captured in 1996. At that time, he was staying with a member of the Qatari royal family at a farm outside Doha. The FBI wanted to snatch him, but others in the U.S. government balked. The Qatari government was notified instead, and by the time an agreement to turn him over was reached, Mohammed was gone. -- "Mohammed 'the Brain' in Al Qaeda," by Susan Schmidt, Washington Post, March 2, 2003

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Shermy]

From June 25, the "Federal News Service" - interview of Wolfowitz.

"...ANCHOR: Real quick. We're almost out of time. But do you believe that Mohammed Atta -- the meeting between hijacker Mohammed Atta and an Iraqi official took place in Prague, as has been mentioned?

WOLFOWITZ: Have I stopped -- no. I have -- I don't -- I have never believed it. I believe it's an open issue. I don't think it's ever been decided one way or the other. But look...

ANCHOR: Even though the CIA and FBI say he was in Florida at the time.

WOLFOWITZ: No, they don't. They say his cell -- no, they don't. They say his cell phone was in use in that particular window. Everyone seems to agree that he made an unusual trip to Prague on his way to the United States in June of 2000. Look, the -- we could argue that one to the end of kingdom come, but the issue isn't whether Saddam was intimately involved in planning 9/11. It seems to me that's a little bit like saying if you breed Rottweilers but you don't specifically tell them to attack your neighbor, you're not responsible when they attack your neighbor. You do not consort with Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda for any purpose other than improving their capacity to attack the United States.

[Shermy]

I've noticed a "gotcha" type response to Cheney's statements, here's the source.
__________________

Wash Post

June 21, 2004 IN THE LOOP Al Kamen

"...June 17, 2004. Vice President Cheney talking to CNBC's Gloria Borger.

Borger: "Well, let's go to Mohamed Atta for a minute, because you mentioned him as well. You have said in the past that it was, quote, 'pretty well confirmed.' "

Cheney: "No, I never said that."

Borger: "Okay."

Cheney: "Never said that."

Borger: "I think that is . . . "

Cheney: "Absolutely not. What I said was the Czech intelligence service reported after 9/11 that Atta had been in Prague on April 9th of 2001, where he allegedly met with an Iraqi intelligence official. We have never been able to confirm that nor have we been able to knock it down."

On Dec. 9, 2001. Cheney talking to NBC's Tim Russert.

Cheney: "Well, what we now have that's developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that -- it's been pretty well confirmed that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack. Now, what the purpose of that was, what transpired between them, we simply don't know at this point, but that's clearly an avenue that we want to pursue."

_________________________
Usually reported only as "pretty well confirmed". though old, and new info might have come to light, this will the standard by which Cheney is judged for every other statement he makes. Given the 9/11 Commission trumping of the CIA, and The CIA's decline to correct them, the "didn't happen" line will prevail, hence Cheney lied.

His PR people are just awful. Though Bush's must be the worst - reacting too fast to Wilson's article to needlessly cover Bush's rear - and just confusing matters more.

[guitfiddlist]

The report cited a photograph taken by a bank surveillance camera in Virginia showing Mr. Atta withdrawing money on April 4, 2001, a few days before the supposed Prague meeting on April 9, and records showing his cell phone was used on April 6, 9, 10 and 11 in Florida.

So if I go to the bank to withdraw money for a trip to Costa Rica, a few days before I go, this is incontrovertible proof that I did NOT go to Costa Rica. If this is the FBI/CIA's conclusion - they need remedial logic courses.

And, of course, NOBODY in a tight terrorist group would ever use someone else's cell phone. It just wouldn't be polite for fellow "cell" members to do so. I really hope the morons who presented these "proofs" someday have their own lives depend on their "intelligence" conclusions.

[Shermy]

Remember Newsweek's "not in prague" comment, that it's "corroborated?"

Here's something interesting
______________________________________________

The Boston Globe

August 3, 2003,

Michael Kranish, Anne E. Kornblut, and Robert Schlesinger of the Globe staff contributed to this report.;
QUESTIONS GROW OVER IRAQ LINKS TO QAEDA

BYLINE: By Peter S. Canellos, Globe Staff, and Bryan Bender, Globe Correspondent

BODY:
WASHINGTON - Shortly after his now-discredited report that Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy uranium in Africa, President Bush asserted in his State of the Union address that "evidence from intelligence sources, secret conversations, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda."
....

Unconfirmed reports - such as a Czech assertion of a meeting in Prague between Sept. 11 terrorist Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi agent, as well as a captured Al Qaeda member's assertion that Iraq had provided chemical weapons training to Al Qaeda members - were presented as facts at various points by Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

"I know this," Cheney said on Nov. 14, 2001, when asked on the television news show "60 Minutes II" about the alleged Atta meeting with a Hussein aide. "In Prague in April of this year, as well as earlier . . ."

The following March, Cheney acknowledged the White House was still working to "nail down" the Atta connection, although national security adviser Condoleezza Rice depicted it last September as part of "a picture that is emerging that there may well have been contacts between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's regime."

Last week, congressional investigators declared in their major report on the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that after tracing Atta's movements for two years, including trips made under all known aliases, there was no evidence of the Prague meeting. A former intelligence official in the Bush administration told the Globe the CIA obtained evidence soon after the Czech report that the Iraqi agent was elsewhere at the time of the purported meeting.

"The CIA had proof that Iraqi guy was not in Prague at the time," said the official, who asked not to be named. "The mystery here is why did the CIA allow that story to live when it could disprove it with hard information." ...
________________________________

So the "not in Prague" angle is old - Maybe Newsweek got it from the same source as the Globe.

But again, it's lack of specificity is strange. If this "fact" is so certain, why did Tenet in 2004 say he still couldn't prove the meeting one way or another? Why didn't the 9/11 Commission even mention it? The question should be, ok, why don't you tell us where he was? This lack of specificity is, IMO, another semantic game. I suspect the alleged meeting occured in the "outskirts" of Prague, as EJE reported, and the disinformationists are, still, playing games - relating a small truth (if true) to obscure a bigger truth.

Why they're doing it is a good question. But the fact is Tenet and the 9/11 Commission didn't mention it.

Last point - this "corroboration" nonsense. Someone here called a criminal lawyer's typical trick. Naturally it is just as "uncorroborated" that Atta used the cell phone.