[okie01]

Which raises an issue, what interests were so interested in keeping the sanctions regime on Iraq they would risk making up such falsehoods?

For one, any individual or organization with a stake in Oil For Food.

For another, any individual or organization which had a stake in Iraq's not being involved in 9/11.

[Shermy]

Could be CYA.

Which raises an interesting thing...from the Slate article

The issue re-emerged three days after the 9/11 attack when the CIA intelligence liaison was told by the BIS that the Hamburg "student" who had met with al-Ani on April 8 had been tentatively identified as the 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta. Since al-Ani was an officer of Saddam Hussein's intelligence (and diplomatic) service, this identification raised the possibility that Saddam might have had a hand in the 9/11 attack. It could also be potentially embarrassing, as Kavan pointed out, "if American intelligence had failed before 9/11 to adequately appreciate the significance of the April meeting."

http://slate.msn.com/id/2091354

Kavan seems to indicate that the Americans were told about about a meeting before 9/11...maybe like via a memo, like that Moussaoui memo that was ignored.

Hard to tell, many have axes to grind.