Bush: Iraq Linked With Al Qaeda

Thread regarding Rumsfeld's statements at the Pentagon:

Rumsfeld Pentagon briefing - taking on the Media on "torture" Live thread

REMARKS BY PRESIDENT BUSH

WHITE HOUSE

October 14, 2002

Excerpts

THE PRESIDENT:

. . .

And the war on terror is just not al Qaeda. There are other terrorists around. There are other threats to our country with which we must deal. And that means -- and one place is Iraq. I want to -- let me share with you some thoughts, a serious, serious, subject. It's one that's got a lot of folks debating in the coffee shops or in the homes about Iraq. I want to remind you of a couple of things.

First of all, 11 years ago this leader of Iraq, the dictator of Iraq, made a pledge that he would not have weapons of mass destruction, he promised the world after he got whipped that he wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction. And the Security Council of the United Nations passed a resolution which said, you wont have weapons of mass destruction. Since that time, he has lied, he has deceived, he has not listened to the U.N. Security Council resolutions. Since that time we now recognize as a country that oceans no longer protect us like they used to. A new reality set in, in America. It used to be we could kind of sit back and look at a threat from afar and say, well, that may affect somebody else, but it doesn't affect us.

Prior to September the 11th, we had the comfort of realizing or looking back in history and saying that we're pretty safe here in America. Others may be threatened -- after all, he attacked two in his neighborhood, he gassed his own people -- but not us. September the 11th changed the equation, changed our thinking. It also changed our thinking when we began to realize that one of the most dangerous things that can happen in the modern era is for a deceiving dictator who has gassed his own people, who has weapons of mass destruction to team up with an organization like al Qaeda.

As I said -- I was a little more diplomatic in my speech, but we need to -- we need to think about Saddam Hussein using al Qaeda to do his dirty work, to not leave fingerprints behind. I went to the United Nations. I did so because I wanted to challenge that body. Sixteen resolutions, sixteen defiances. They passed resolution after resolution after resolution, and 16 times Saddam Hussein has defied those resolutions. For the sake of keeping peace, it's important that there be an international body that has backbone, that can work to keep the peace in this new era we're in. And now is the time for choice. The United Nations can decide whether it's the League of Nations or whether or not it is a United Nations capable of keeping the peace. (Applause.)

There is universal agreement that Saddam Hussein poses a serious threat. He's a threat to the neighborhood, he's a threat to our allies. There is universal understanding that right after the Gulf War he was close to having a nuclear weapon. He still wants to have a nuclear weapon. For the sake of peace, for the sake of our security, now is the time to make sure that Saddam says what he said he would do. He must disarm. It's his choice to make. He said he would disarm. He must disarm. The U.N. said he must disarm. They can disarm him.

But for the sake of security of our country, their choice to make. I hope it's done peacefully. I hope we never use a military -- one military troop in Iraq. But for the sake of the peace and security of the United States, Saddam Hussein must disarm, or the United States, with friends and allies, will disarm him.

BRIEFING BY ARI FLEISCHER
PRESS SECRETARY

WHITE HOUSE

September 25, 2002

Excerpts

. . .

Q: We can go back to that in a minute. I have another question. Yesterday in the briefing, you said that the information you have has said al Qaeda is operating in Iraq. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was asked about linkages between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein this morning. He said very definitively that, yes, he believes there are. And then the President said, talking about al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, the danger is that they work in concert. Is the President saying that they are working in concert, that there is a relationship? Do you have evidence that supports that?

MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President is saying that's the danger. The President has repeatedly said that the worst thing that could happen is for people -- the world's worst dictators with the world's worst weapons of mass destruction to work in concert with terrorists such as al Qaeda, who have shown an ability to attack the United States. And that's what the President has said.

Q: So why -- when Rumsfeld was saying, yes, there is a linkage between the two, what is he talking about?

MR. FLEISCHER: Clearly, al Qaeda is operating inside Iraq. And the point is, in the shadowy world of terrorism, sometimes there is no precise way to have definitive information until it is too late. And we've seen that in the past. And so the risk is that al Qaeda operating in Iraq does present a security threat, and it's cause for concern. And I think it's very understandably so.

If you're searching, Campbell, again, for the smoking gun, again I say what Secretary Rumsfeld said -- the problem with smoking guns is they only smoke after they're fired.

Q: I'm not looking for a smoking gun. I'm just trying to figure out how you make that conclusion, because the British, the Russians, people on the Hill that you all have briefed about all this stuff say that there isn't a linkage, that they don't believe that al Qaeda is there working in conjunction in any way with Saddam Hussein. And there is a mountain of comments, both public and private statements that Osama bin Laden has made about Saddam, calling him a bad Muslim, suggesting that there would be no way that the two would ever connect. So I just -- if there's something, if you have some evidence that supports this, I'm just wondering why --

MR. FLEISCHER: What supports what I just said is that the President fears that the two can get together. That's what the President has said, and that's one of the reasons that he feels so strongly about the importance of fighting the war on terror.

Q: So does Rumsfeld have some information that the President doesn't, that they are, in fact, working together now?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I'm going to take a little more detailed look at anything that you've got there. I haven't seen a verbatim quote, so I'll take a look at that.

Q: It seems that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is ignoring the recently passed Security Council resolution, and he is maintaining his siege around Yasser Arafat's headquarters. Why does the President continue to support Israel, even though tacitly saying that he condemns Israel, but in short, on the bottom line, he continues to support Israel -- why does he continue to support him when Iraq is being blamed by the President for doing exactly the same thing, for violating the Security Council resolutions?

MR. FLEISCHER: I think you have to be very careful when you equate Iraq with any other nation, and say Israel and Iraq are the same, when they are not. If you look at Resolutions 242 and 338, Resolution 242 and 338 explicitly call for a political settlement, a political dialogue as the underpinning of all the resolutions that subsequently followed that refer back to 242 and 338. Not the case in Iraq. In Iraq's decade of defiance of the U.N. resolutions which explicitly called on Iraq not to have a political settlement with their weapons of mass destruction, but disarm and destroy them. You cannot equate the two.

The President does feel strongly, however, about the need for Israel to listen and to heed the call and to make certain that its efforts don't hurt the cause of reform in Palestinian Authority. The President has spoken out about that, directly in opposition to Israel on that matter.

. . .

Q: Senator Inouye and Senator Byrd also responded to these remarks today. Senator Inouye said he was saddened by them, and Senator Byrd said he was disgusted and accused the President of making a bumper-sticker slogan out of the war on Iraq. Did they misunderstand, as well, or is this political opportunism --

MR. FLEISCHER: Again, the President's remarks were not about the Democratic Senate, as people may have been led to believe. The President's remarks were not even about the war in Iraq. The President's remarks were about homeland security. So, again, the President urges everybody to take a deep breath and remember why we're here, and that's to work together.

Q: Could I follow, sir? Both of these men suggested -- Byrd said there are a lot of serious questions out there that haven't been answered. "We here in the Senate have an obligation to investigate those questions before we vote on the resolution." Inouye said just as much. He said it's American to question the President, it's American to raise these questions. Does the President think there's something wrong with the Senate asking questions about this policy?

MR. FLEISCHER: That's why the President invited leaders of the House and the Senate down to the White House in early September, as soon as the Senate returned from its recess, as soon as the House returned from its recess, to meet with them, to talk to them, to get their ideas and thoughts and to say that he was going to work with them on this. And the process has been a very productive one and the resolution is moving along and we'll see what the language says. But it's been a very collaborative process.

. . .

Thank you for posting this...The spin meisters are in full attack mode.

Excellent !!!

Thanks so much!

The media is intentionally distorting the 9/11 commission report. I am certain they are following DNC faxes "explaining" their point of view, and being sympathetic, that's how they are reporting it.

For example, I heard Peter Jennings and Terry Moran on ABC radio news at 2pm my time (5pm eastern) start off the news with the lie that the commission says Iraq and Al Qaeda had no connection. I listened carefully for them to differentiate between a "connection" or Iraq having a role in 9/11--which this administration has never said they have evidence of and the commission did not find (I'll add a "yet", but that's my own expectation of what may be found in time), but Peter and Terry clearly said the commission found no relationship at all between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

And then full circle I see the fruits of this deceit, John Kerry, video clip shown on Fox, denouncing this administration for "lying" about the connection. Of course Kerry bases his comments on the media reports that are, at best, misleading.

Exactly.

From below:

>>>>We know from credible sources that Osama Bin Laden was a frequent visitor to the Iraqi embassy in Khartoum when Bin Laden was a resident of the Sudanese capital until 1996. It is no coincidence that Khartoum is one of the Iraqi Intelligence Service’s largest foreign stations.

It has also been confirmed that the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey, Farouk Hijazi, traveled to Afghanistan and met Bin Laden in December 1998. It is revealing to note that prior to being appointed ambassador in Ankara, Hijazi was head of foreign operations for the Iraqi Intelligence Service. Incidentally, this same Hijazi, who was hurriedly pulled out of Ankara on September 29, 2001, has recently resurfaced as Iraq’s ambassador in Tunisia.

There have been several confirmed sightings of Islamic fundamentalists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states being trained in terror tactics at the Iraqi intelligence camp at Salman Pak, 20 miles south of Baghdad on the Tigris River. Thee former intelligence officers have reported that they were surprised to find non-Iraqi fundamentalists undergoing training at the facility. The training involved assassination, explosions, and hijacking. All three reported that there is a fuselage of an old Tupolev 154 airliner used for hijack training. This was later confirmed by satellite photographs.
<<<<<

PREPARED TESTIMONY BY

KHIDIR HAMZA

Senate Foreign Relations Committee

July 31, 2002

The Iraqi Threat

1- Failing to obtain concessions in return for allowing the inspectors back, the Iraqi government turned the argument around by claiming that the inspectors’ job is to disarm Iraq and leave it defenseless against an American strike. Since the inspectors are charged only with dismantling weapons of mass destruction and their facilities, this was an admission that Iraq may possess these weapons and also an implied threat that facing an invasion it might use them.

Iraq is currently the country with the most extensive experience in the use of chemical weapons (CW). Its extensive use of these weapons and biological toxins during the war with Iran and against its own Kurdish population provided the Iraqi government with a huge database of information about the effectiveness and strategy of use of each of these agents. The two tests of dirty bombs carried in Mohammediyat in 1988, though were inconclusive as to their effectiveness in a war setting, provided Iraq with extensive design and testing experience in this area, probably the only Middle East country to do so in the last two decades. This provides Iraq with another tool for possible use in a terrorism setting. The recent defector reports of purchases of Russian radioactive materials through an African country re-enforces Iraq’s intents in this direction.

It is understood that CBW use is mainly intended to create a terror situation in the targeted area. Any lethality that can be achieved using CBW can be surpassed by conventional means. But the effects are not the same. The Iranian attackers who showed no hesitancy in facing all the fire Iraq can muster were terrified of the limited CBW Iraq used at the time. The Iraqi port of al-Fao was occupied by Iranian forces that repelled many conventional attacks, but collapsed easily under the continuous flow of CW that was thrown at them in the closing days of the war with Iran. The same goes for the Kurds who fought with incredible bravery against the Iraqi armed forces but ran away in terror to Turkey and Iran when the Iraqi armed forces approached after the Gulf war fearing the use of CW after the Halbja massacre.

2- Iraq’s use of these weapons included also the threat of use to prevent an attack. Thus Saddam’s government firmly believe that it thwarted a second Israeli strike against its nuclear installations in 1990 when Saddam threatened to “burn half of Israel using the binary” (chemical weapon.) Thus a firm belief in the utility and effectiveness of these weapons by Saddam’s government emerged to present an option that the regime believe that it cannot survive without. The WMD option is firmly believed to be the reason behind not losing the war with Iran and preventing further strikes by Israel, and if the Americans have not interfered would have helped in quelling the Kurdish uprising.

3- Iraq built its own WMD technologies indigenously with some foreign help. Saddam understood that his main assets were not the equipment but his scientists and engineers. Thus Saddam’s government kept a tight lid on its science and engineering military teams at the same time it allowed UNSCOM and the IAEA to demolish most of its weapons production sites. That these science and engineering teams were capable was made manifestly clear in the aftermath of the Gulf war. Within less than a year these teams rebuilt successfully most of Iraq’s services infrastructure. These included rebuilding the destroyed control rooms of the power stations, the major telephone exchanges and oil refineries. Elated by their success Saddam kept these teams as contracting entities to the government for the civilian sector with a much reduced load and assigned them the rebuilding of the needed facilities for the WMD program. This provided them with a cover of civilian contractors with actual work to prove it but at the same time their WMD work continued unhindered. Thus the computer we used for the nuclear weapon design is now located in a hospital in Saddam city at the outskirts of Baghdad. If an inspector should arrive at the site he or she will be shown contracts for the civilian sector. The only indication that things are not what they seem is that it is headed by a man who worked extensively on the Iraqi NW design and that most of his staff are former workers in Group Four the Iraqi nuclear weapon team. Legally and according to the current mandate of UNMOVIC, the new UN inspection body, the burden is on the inspectors to prove otherwise. Thus Saddam has managed from the experience of the last eleven years to create the perfect cover. In effect it turns the whole Iraqi science and engineering enterprise into a giant weapon making body. And since they do actually accomplish civilian tasks, the economic burden on the government is minimized. Thus Saddam not only used the international markets to import dual use items under false pretenses, he created for the first time in the third world dual use engineering teams.

4- Unlike the UN, Saddam valued his people more than the equipment. And while initially the UN teams concentrated on destroying equipment and facilities Saddam kept tight control over his scientists and engineers. Thus defections were kept to a minimum. This was helped by well publicized cases of defectors seeking help and were turned down. One of them got killed in Jordan by Iraqi agents while waiting for the US Embassy to grant him an entry visa. Not a single high level defector left the regime since the botched defection of Hussein Kamel, Saddam’s son in law, to Jordan in 1995. This kept the information flow out of Iraq to a minimum increasing the opacity of the WMD programs.

5- German Intelligence (the BND) has been the only major Western intelligence service to provide assessments of the Iraqi WMD programs openly. Though flowed in some minor details it provides a broad outline of the clandestine Iraqi activities in the WMD and missiles areas. As a minimum it generated a large database on Iraqi purchases from Germany and other countries that when put together with defector and other information can present a credible assessment of the current and future threats of the Iraqi programs. These may be summarized as follows:

a) Iraq is well into CW production and may well be in the process of BW production.

b) With the more than 10 tons of uranium and more than one ton of slightly enriched uranium in its possession Iraq has enough to generate the needed bomb grade uranium for three nuclear weapons by 2005.

c) Iraq is using corporations in India and other countries to import the needed equipment for its programs, then channel them through countries like Malaysia for shipment to Iraq. Germany already blacklisted some of these corporations for violating the sanctions imposed on Iraq.

d) Iraq is importing directional control instruments for its missiles of much higher precision than those needed for the allowed 150km missiles under UN sanctions. Thus Iraq is gearing to extend the range of its missiles to easily reach Israel.

e) The type of equipment imported indicate that Iraq is in the process of creating its own foundation for the production of needed materials thus avoiding detection if these materials are on the watch list of the exporting countries. Following this logic Iraq is or will be able to produce its own growth media for the biological weapons program and many of precursors for its CW program. The same can be said for local uranium production from phosphates. This removes many limitations on production and allows Iraq to accelerate its output.

5- Iraq realized that CBWs are more instruments of terror than they are of war. A real deterrence is the nuclear weapon option. Realising that a few nuclear weapons are not a serious deterrence because of the need for testing, it configured its program to generate its own materials for the nuclear core. Thus the plan that was set in 1982 targeted a 100 kg (220 lb) of bomb grade uranium a year. This is equivalent to 6 implosion or two gun type bombs a year. With a worked out design for the implosion option Iraq planned on being a major power in the region through its nuclear arsenal. Thus under this program Iraq was not much interested in purchasing the materials needed for the nuclear core through its extensive black market network. However under threat the situation did change. After the invasion of Kuwait Iraq embarked on a crash program to make one nuclear bomb using the French supplied fuel at its disposal. This option, now declared by the Iraqi government was dropped only after it was made clear that the uranium extraction capabilities were not good enough to achieve enough materials for one bomb. Recent defections indicate that Iraq is seeking actively all kinds of nuclear materials. It is also active in seeking the needed components to accelerate its uranium enrichment program.

6-With the a workable design and most of the needed components for a nuclear weapon already tested and in working order, Iraq is in the final stages of putting together its enrichment program to enrich enough uranium for the final component needed in the nuclear core. Thus Iraq’s nuclear achievement when it happens, together with its history of use of its available WMD will turn it into a serious threat to US interests in the region. Serious punishment (regime change) will be largely discounted. Iraq’s posturing, aggressiveness and harassment of unfriendly regimes will increase considerably. The window of opportunity to abort this option before it happen is closing down possibly within the next two to three years, after that a change of regime will be a much costlier prospect.

7-The inspection regime in Iraq had a mixed history. The International Atomic energy Agency (IAEA), the UN body charged with ensuring that nuclear facilities are not used for nuclear weapons production failed completely in its task with regards to Iraq before the Gulf war. The IAEA remains basically a weak organization beset by its international composition and the multiple loyalties of its workers. Within its sphere it is quite successful in accounting for and keeping tab on the essential components of the nuclear fuel cycle and its utilization over the globe. But it has limited latitude with the states and works best in a cooperative and amiable environment. Against determined states such as Iraq it is at a great disadvantage. Thus it failed again after the Gulf war when it declared early that it took care of basically all of Iraq’s nuclear program. It took the defection of Kamel, Saddam’s son in law to force the Iraqi government to declare the actual scope of its nuclear weapons program and forced the inspectors to start all over again in unraveling what has not been declared before. Thus while it managed to dismantle a large part of the Iraqi nuclear program it was at a loss by the time the inspectors left in 1998 as to the whereabouts of many of the important figures in the program. The new Iraqi policy of giving up some of the equipment but keeping the working teams intact was beyond the inspectors mandate. There was nothing they could do to prevent the Iraqi teams from rebuilding what was destroyed.

Iraq is actually quite open about its intents and goals. It refused to promulgate laws that make it illegal for its citizens to work in the area of WMD as was required by UN resolutions. It also refuses to accept the limitations imposed by sanctions declaring them to be illegal. Thus as stated by the former Iraqi ambassador to the UN, Nizar Hamdoun, Iraq is not going to impose sanctions on itself. This is forced on Iraq and as such the Iraqi government is not bound by its terms. Policing what Iraq imports is a problem for the UN and not the Iraqi government.

8- If the inspectors go back now there is very little human intelligence that will help them locate the new weapons sites. Spread widely among the government infrastructure in smaller hard to detect units, the inspectors will have a hard time locating all the programs components. A recent defector with credible information asserted that all units are built with a backup. If one is detected or is in danger of discovery all activity is immediately transferred to the back-up facility.

9- The new UNMOVIC inspection body do not have the support and free hand UNSCOM enjoyed. With Russia and other states that favor removing sanctions keeping the pressure, the onus is now on the inspectors to prove that Iraq is in violation. Not finding a smoking gun after a series of inspections is all that the Russians and the French need to declare that the US has no case and sanctions must be lifted. The US case will be considerably weakened and more voices will rise against the US Iraqi policy as baseless. This is a danger that must be carefully examined before inspection terms are allowed back in possibly to divert an invasion.

10-The claim that the US needs a smoking gun to prove that Iraq is in violation of its commitments regarding WMD discounts all the past experience in dealing with Iraq. Many voices declared that Iraq was not pursuing nuclear weapons before the Gulf war. This included the IAEA that declared Iraq clean in many statements. This happened even after the German publication Der Spiegel reported Iraq’s successful attempts to acquire classified uranium centrifuge enrichment technology from Germany. However the US knew better and used the Gulf war setting as a way to dismantle Iraq’s nuclear weapons program. But the dismantling process ignored the knowledge base acquired over the years that can be used easily to rebuild what was destroyed. A similar insistence on proof before taking serious action will be allowing Saddam to achieve his goals unchallenged.

11- With no large easily distinguishable nuclear sites and little or no human intelligence it is difficult to see how any measure short of a regime change will be effective. Saddam is totally indifferent to the human suffering of his people, and with his threats of reprisals against the families of WMD workers has managed to stop defections among its personnel despite the fact that a large number of Iraqis from other walks of life managed to escape. With a Soviet style economy that is basically geared toward war and its requirements, Iraq is currently the only Arab state that all the Arab extremists look at as the future challenger to Israel and US interests in the region. Thus if Saddam makes it in the nuclear arena he will be the region’s undisputed leader in Arab eyes. It will then be much harder to agree on the needed concessions for a peace process and a viable peace will be impossible to achieve under any terms. Saddam has used and will continue to use the Palestinian issue to rally the Arabs around him as he did when he used the Arab leaders meeting in Baghdad to challenge the peace treaty of Egypt with Israel that president Sadat agreed to.

12- Limiting Iraq’s access to technology is bound to fail in the end. The US cannot police the transfer of technology in the age of the internet and the widening of the science base all over the globe. Perversely, limiting sales of high technology equipment created financial difficulties for many high tech companies and scientists and made them an easy target for countries like Iraq. Lawyer Michael Rietz who represented three of the main German exporters of technology and know-how to Iraq tell a sobering tale. One of his clients, Karl Schaab sold the blue prints for the uranium enrichment centrifuge to Iraq for a mere forty thousand dollars. He also provided more than a hundred classified reports in the deal. He provided 36 high tech carbon fiber rotors for the centrifuges for a million dollars. Iraq’s investment to buy technology this way was much cheaper than developing it themselves. Dietrich Hinze provided flow forming machinery to make missile shells and gave away half ownership of his company to Iraq all for less than 20 million dollars. He also taught the Iraqis how to use the equipment. Locally he was so much admired for bringing business to his small town in Germany that he was honored with a statue in a main location in town. All those represented by Rietz were more or less sentenced for time served and released though they all pleaded guilty. Actually according to Rietz, one of the men working for the German Federal export Agency, Dr Welzien, opened a consulting business charging very high rates to German companies for advising them on how to use loopholes in the German export laws to expedite making some questionable exports, and it is legal. With Europe no longer in accommodating mood Iraq shifted its purchasing bases to India and Malaysia among others. Thus technology transfer restrictions, which failed in the past to limit advances in the Soviet Union’s weapons programs are failing again in limiting access to weapons technology as was demonstrated by India, Pakistan and now Iraq and possibly Iran. Another failure for the policy of containment.

13- Iraq and terrorism

Saddam Hussein has a long history of involvement in international terrorism. From assassinations of Iraqis abroad in the seventies and eighties, to support for radical anti-western groups in the eighties and nineties, to links with Islamic fundamentalists today, his track record speaks for itself.

Always the opportunist, he has used the biannual Islamic Conferences held in Baghdad since the 1980s as a recruiting ground for Islamic radicals from around the Muslim world. A former Iraqi intelligence officer now in Europe has described how he would dress as a cleric and approach Islamists from key countries to put on the Iraqi payroll for ‘special operations’. He was tasked to recruit Pakistanis, Indonesians and Malaysians while other officers concentrated on Palestinians and Arabs.

We know from credible sources that Osama Bin Laden was a frequent visitor to the Iraqi embassy in Khartoum when Bin Laden was a resident of the Sudanese capital until 1996. It is no coincidence that Khartoum is one of the Iraqi Intelligence Service’s largest foreign stations.

It has also been confirmed that the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey, Farouk Hijazi, traveled to Afghanistan and met Bin Laden in December 1998. It is revealing to note that prior to being appointed ambassador in Ankara, Hijazi was head of foreign operations for the Iraqi Intelligence Service. Incidentally, this same Hijazi, who was hurriedly pulled out of Ankara on September 29, 2001, has recently resurfaced as Iraq’s ambassador in Tunisia.

There have been several confirmed sightings of Islamic fundamentalists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states being trained in terror tactics at the Iraqi intelligence camp at Salman Pak, 20 miles south of Baghdad on the Tigris River. Thee former intelligence officers have reported that they were surprised to find non-Iraqi fundamentalists undergoing training at the facility. The training involved assassination, explosions, and hijacking. All three reported that there is a fuselage of an old Tupolev 154 airliner used for hijack training. This was later confirmed by satellite photographs.

14-Iraq’s conventional military capability has been considerably degraded since the Gulf war. Part of the drive to build larger WMD stockpiles is to make up for this depletion in military capability. Iraq now has practically no airforce, a much degraded air defense system and practically no new tanks, heavy artillery or armored vehicles. What is left functioning from the Gulf war arsenal is basically in the hands of the Special Republican Guards and the rest of armed forces are basically armed with light weaponry. With a highly corrupt officers corps the Iraqi army suffers from a large number of absenteeism, poor or nonexistent medical care, pilfered rations and little or no pay to the conscripts. Pay and rations are usually split among the officers and party members. It is estimated that Iraq has no more than a quarter of the firepower it possessed at the onset of the Gulf war. With the original Baath party members mostly murdered or in jail, Saddam’s government now is purely a personal dictatorship of Saddam and his clan. The original rhetoric of the Baath party no longer carry any weight with the population. Thus the army that surrendered to the American forces in droves in Gulf war is now in an even worse shape and would regard an American invasion as a welcome liberation army. American inspectors and media personnel who visited Iraq were surprised by the friendliness and lack of rancor of the population toward Americans. This is in contrast to the image of the Americans as evildoers that Saddam was trying to project in all his speeches.

15- Iraq’s WMD are under the control of the Special Security Organization (SSO). This is the same group that are charged with Saddam’s Security. This feared and ruthless organization is mainly composed of conscripts from Saddam’s hometown and very loyal tribes in adjacent areas. They have an observer in all major military meetings and they are present at the headquarters of all division commanders and they report directly to Saddam’s younger son Qussey. Any operation to disrupt the central authority of the Iraqi command structure and specially the handling and deployment of weapons of mass destruction must target this organization. Precision bombing and strict enforcement of a no drive zones should eliminate most of if not all the dangers of Saddam possibly using his CBW. Past defections from this pampered group indicate that it is not as tightly controlled as was earlier thought and defection rate may increase considerably when faced with an imminent invasion.

16- Iraq is now in one of the lowest points in its history. Saddam managed to destroy its middle class and its hope in a viable future. Millions of Iraqis are believed to have left the country since the Gulf war taking with them most of its professional class. With no future to look forward to Iraqis will welcome an American invasion with open arms. With a long history in government and a large bureaucracy it will not revert to the situation in Afghanistan now. The Kurds promised to rejoin the rest of Iraq under a coalition government. And above all if a democracy is established and nurtured in Iraq it will be a turning point in the region’s history.

#4 is interesting..an old press briefing stating the President's views.

Fox roundtable just played a clip of Lee Hamilton from today--after the commission adjourned they took some press questions and I had not seen this portion:

Lee Hamilton said (and this would have been before the ABC report I cited hearing on the radio) very plainly and clearly that from what he's heard of Dick Cheney's comments, he is in complete agreement with the commission.

Hamilton said he is at a loss at why the media is reporting that the Bush administration is at odds with the commission report, then the clip showed Hamilton briefly outline the commission position and what he understands Dick Cheney to have said. He concluded that he did not understand the media tone and attitude.

Just now Fred Barnes noted that the commission report on Mohammad Atta's Prague visit is not conclusive, contrary to media reports saying they had debunked it.

Well, I must say I was pleased to hear Hamilton. I wonder if there's a transcript of that q & a.

Correlation here:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Saddam Hussein´s Philanthropy of Terror

"Many critics of the war in Iraq belittle claims of Saddam Hussein´s ties to terrorism. In fact, for years, he was militant Islam´s Benefactor-in-Chief."

Fall 2003

by Deroy Murdock

“I never believed in the link between Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and Islamist terrorism,’ former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright flatly declared in an October 21 essay published in Australia´s Melbourne Herald Sun.[1]

“Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorism. Our invasion has made it one,’ said Senator Ted Kennedy (D–Massachusetts) on October 16. “We were told Iraq was attracting terrorists from al Qaeda. It was not.’[2]

As President Bush continues to lead America´s involvement in Iraq, he increasingly is being forced to confront those who dismiss Saddam Hussein´s ties to terrorism and, thus, belittle a key rationale for Operation Iraqi Freedom. Bush´s critics wield a flimsy and disingenuous argument that nonetheless enjoys growing appeal among a largely hostile press corps. Hussein did not personally order the September 11 attacks, the fuzzy logic goes, hence he has no significant ties to terrorists, especially al Qaeda. Consequently, the Iraq war was launched under bogus assumptions, and, therefore, Bush should be defeated in November 2004.

West Virginia´s Jay Rockefeller, the Senate Intelligence Committee´s ranking Democrat, exemplified this thinking recently when he told the Los Angeles Times that Iraq´s alleged al Qaeda ties were “tenuous at best and not compelling.’[3] In a September 16 editorial, the L.A. Times slammed Vice President Dick Cheney for making “sweeping, unproven claims about Saddam Hussein´s connections to terrorism.’ On August 7, former vice president Albert Gore stated flatly, “The evidence now shows clearly that Saddam did not want to work with Osama bin Laden at all.’[4]

All of these claims about a lack of ties between Hussein and terrorists, however, are untrue, and it is important that debate on this vital issue be informed by facts. The president and his national security team should devote entire speeches and publications—complete with names, documents, and visuals, including the faces of terrorists and their innocent victims—to remind Americans and the world that Baathist Iraq was a general store for terrorists, complete with cash, training, lodging, and medical attention. Indeed, this magazine article could serve as a model for the kinds of communications that the administration regularly should generate to set the record straight about Hussein and terrorism and reassert the reasons behind the Iraq mission.

Such an effort to reinvigorate U.S. public diplomacy on Iraq should be easy. After all, the evidence of Hussein´s cooperation with and support for global terrorists is abundant and increasing, to wit:

Saddam Hussein´s Habitual Support for Terrorists

Both supporters and opponents of Islamic terror have provided abundant evidence of Hussein´s support for a wide array of terrorists. Consider the following.

· Hussein paid bonuses of up to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers.

“President Saddam Hussein has recently told the head of the Palestinian political office, Faroq al Kaddoumi, his decision to raise the sum granted to each family of the martyrs of the Palestinian uprising to $25,000 instead of $10,000,’ Iraq´s former deputy prime minister, Tariq Aziz, announced at a Baghdad meeting of Arab politicians and businessmen on March 11, 2002, Reuters reported two days later.[5]

Mahmoud Besharat, who the White House says disbursed these funds across the West Bank, gratefully said, “You would have to ask President Saddam why he is being so generous. But he is a revolutionary and he wants this distinguished struggle, the intifada, to continue.’[6]

Such largesse poured forth until the eve of the Iraq war.

As Knight-Ridder´s Carol Rosenberg reported from Gaza City last March 13: In a graduation-style ceremony Wednesday, the families of 22 Palestinians killed fighting Israelis received checks for $10,000 or more, certificates of appreciation, and a kiss on each cheek—compliments of Iraq´s Saddam Hussein.’ She added: “The certificates declared the gift from President Saddam Hussein; the checks were cut at a branch of the Cairo-Amman bank.’

This festivity, attended by some 400 people and organized by the then-Baghdad-backed Arab Liberation Front, occurred March 12, just eight days before American-led troops crossed the Iraqi frontier.[7]

Hussein´s patronage of Palestinian terror proved fatally fruitful. Between the March 11, 2002, increase in cash incentives to $25,000 and the March 20, 2003, launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom, 28 homicide bombers injured 1,209 people and killed 223 more, including 12 Americans.[8]

· According to the U.S. State Department´s May 21, 2002, report on Patterns of Global Terrorism,[9] the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), the Arab Liberation Front, Hamas, the Kurdistan Workers´ Party, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization, and the Palestine Liberation Front all operated offices or bases in Hussein´s Iraq. Hussein´s hospitality toward these mass murderers directly violated United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, which prohibited him from giving safe haven to or otherwise sponsoring terrorists.

· Key terrorists enjoyed Hussein´s warmth, some so recently that Coalition forces subsequently found them alive and well and living in Iraq. Among them:

o U.S. Special Forces nabbed Abu Abbas last April 14 just outside Baghdad. Abbas masterminded the October 7–9, 1985, Achille Lauro cruise ship hijacking in which Abbas´s men shot passenger Leon Klinghoffer, a 69-year old Manhattan retiree, then rolled him, wheelchair and all, into the Mediterranean. Abbas briefly was in Italian custody at the time, but was released that October 12 because he possessed an Iraqi diplomatic passport. Since 2000, Abbas resided in Baghdad, still under Saddam Hussein´s protection.[10]

o Khala Khadr al Salahat, a member of the ANO, surrendered to the First Marine Division in Baghdad on April 18. As the Sunday Times of London reported on August 25, 2002, a Palestinian source said that al Salahat and Nidal had furnished Libyan agents the Semtex bomb that destroyed Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, on December 21, 1988, killing 259 on board and 11 on the ground. The 189 Americans murdered on the sabotaged Boeing 747 included 35 Syracuse University students who had spent the fall semester in Scotland and were heading home for the holidays.[11]

o Before fatally shooting himself in the head with four bullets on August 16, 2002, as straight-faced Baathist officials claimed, Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal (born Sabri al Banna) had lived in Iraq since at least 1999. As the Associated Press´s Sameer N. Yacoub reported on August 21, 2002, the Beirut office of the ANO said that he entered Iraq “with the full knowledge and preparations of the Iraqi authorities.’[12] Nidal´s attacks in 20 countries killed at least 275 people and wounded some 625 more. Among other atrocities, an ANO-planted bomb exploded on a TWA airliner as it flew from Israel to Greece on September 8, 1974. The jet was destroyed over the Ionian Sea, killing all 88 people on board.[13]

· Coalition troops have shut down at least three terrorist training camps in Iraq, including a base approximately 15 miles southeast of Baghdad, called Salman Pak.[14] Before the war, numerous Iraqi defectors had said that the camp featured a passenger jet on which terrorists sharpened their air piracy skills.[15]

“There have been several confirmed sightings of Islamic fundamentalists from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Gulf states being trained in terror tactics at the Iraqi intelligence camp at Salman Pak,’ said Khidir Hamza, Iraq´s former nuclear-weapons chief, in sworn testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 31, 2002. “The training involved assassination, explosions, and hijacking.’[16]

“This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world,’ former Iraqi army captain Sabah Khodada told PBS´s Frontline TV program in an October 14, 2001 interview.[17] Khodada, who worked at Salman Pak, said, “Training includes hijacking and kidnapping of airplanes, trains, public buses, and planting explosives in cities . . . how to prepare for suicidal operations.’ Khodada added, “We saw people getting trained to hijack airplanes. . . . They are even trained how to use utensils for food, like forks and knives provided in the plane.’ A map of the camp that Khodada drew from memory for Frontline closely matches satellite photos of Salman Pak, further bolstering his credibility.[18]

These facts clearly disprove the above-quoted statements by Senator Kennedy and the Los Angeles Times and similar claims made by others. The Bush administration could advance American interests by busing a few dozen foreign correspondents and their camera crews from the bar of Baghdad´s Palestine Hotel to Salman Pak for a guided tour. Network news footage of that might open a few eyes.

Saddam Hussein´s al Qaeda Connections

As for Hussein´s supposedly imaginary ties to al Qaeda, consider these disturbing facts:

· The Philippine government expelled Hisham al Hussein, the second secretary at Iraq´s Manila embassy, on February 13, 2003. Cell phone records indicate that the Iraqi diplomat had spoken with Abu Madja and Hamsiraji Sali, leaders of Abu Sayyaf, just before and just after their al Qaeda-allied Islamic militant group conducted an attack in Zamboanga City. Abu Sayyaf´s nail-filled bomb exploded on October 2, 2002, injuring 23 individuals and killing two Filipinos and U.S. Special Forces Sergeant First Class Mark Wayne Jackson, age 40. As Dan Murphy wrote in the Christian Science Monitor last February 26, those phone records bolster Sali´s claim in a November 2002 TV interview that the Iraqi diplomat had offered these Muslim extremists Baghdad´s help with joint missions.[19]

· The Weekly Standard´s intrepid reporter Stephen F. Hayes noted in the magazine´s July 11, 2003, issue that the official Babylon Daily Political Newspaper published by Hussein´s eldest son, Uday, had revealed a terrorist connection in what it called a “List of Honor’ published a few months earlier.[20] The paper´s November 14, 2002, edition gave the names and titles of 600 leading Iraqis and included the following passage: “Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, intelligence officer responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group at the Iraqi embassy in Pakistan.’ That name, Hayes wrote, “matches that of Iraq´s then-ambassador to Islamabad.’

Carter-appointed federal appeals judge Gilbert S. Merritt discovered this document in Baghdad while helping rebuild Iraq´s legal system. He wrote in the June 25 issue of the Tennessean that two of his Iraqi colleagues remember secret police agents removing that embarrassing edition from newsstands and confiscating copies of it from private homes.[21] The paper was not published for the next 10 days. Judge Merritt theorized that the “impulsive and somewhat unbalanced’ Uday may have showcased these dedicated Baathists to “make them more loyal and supportive of the regime’ as war loomed.

· Abu Musab al Zarqawi, formerly the director of an al Qaeda training base in Afghanistan, fled to Iraq after being injured as the Taliban fell. He received medical care and convalesced for two months in Baghdad. He then opened an Ansar al Islam terrorist training camp in northern Iraq and arranged the October 2002 assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman, Jordan.

· Although Iraqi Ramzi Yousef, ringleader of the February 26, 1993, World Trade Center (WTC) bombing plot, fled the United States on a Pakistani passport, he came to America on an Iraqi passport.

· As Richard Miniter, author of this year´s bestseller Losing bin Laden, reported on September 25, 2003, on the Tech Central Station webpage, “U.S. forces recently discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddam´s hometown, which shows Iraq gave [al Qaeda member] Mr. [Abdul Rahman] Yasin both a house and a monthly salary.’ The Indiana-born, Iraqi-reared Yasin had been charged in August 1993 for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that exploded beneath One World Trade Center, killing six and injuring 1,042 individuals.[22] Indicted by federal prosecutors as a conspirator in the WTC bomb plot, Yasin is on the FBI´s Most-Wanted Terrorists list.[23] ABC News confirmed, on July 27, 1994, that Yasin had returned to Baghdad, where he traveled freely and visited his father´s home almost daily.[24]

· Near Iraq´s border with Syria last April 25, U.S. troops captured Farouk Hijazi, Hussein´s former ambassador to Turkey and suspected liaison between Iraq and al Qaeda. Under interrogation, Stephen Hayes reports, Hijazi “admitted meeting with senior al Qaeda leaders at Saddam´s behest in 1994.’[25]

· While sifting through the Mukhabarat´s bombed ruins last April 26, the Toronto Star´s Mitch Potter, the London Daily Telegraph´s Inigo Gilmore, and their translator discovered a memo in the intelligence service´s accounting department. Dated February 19, 1998, and marked “Top Secret and Urgent,’ the document said that the agency would pay “all the travel and hotel expenses inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden, the Saudi opposition leader, about the future of our relationship with him, and to achieve a direct meeting with him.’ The memo´s three references to bin Laden were obscured crudely with correction fluid.[26]

These facts directly refute the claims of Senator Rockefeller and Secretary Albright mentioned at the top of this article. The ties between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda are clear and compelling.

Saddam Hussein´s Ties to the September 11 Conspiracy

Despite the White House´s inexplicable insistence to the contrary, tantalizing clues suggest that Saddam Hussein´s jaw might not have dropped to the floor when fireballs erupted from the Twin Towers two years ago.

· His Salman Pak terror camp taught terrorists how to hijack passenger jets with cutlery, as noted earlier.

· On January 5, 2000, Ahmad Hikmat Shakir—an Iraqi VIP facilitator reportedly dispatched from Baghdad´s embassy in Malaysia—greeted Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi at Kuala Lampur´s airport, where he worked. He then escorted them to a local hotel, where these September 11 hijackers met with 9-11 conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash. Five days later, according to Stephen Hayes, Shakir disappeared. He was arrested in Qatar on September 17, 2001, six days after al Midhar and al Hamzi slammed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon, killing 216 people. Soon after he was apprehended, authorities discovered documents on Shakir´s person and in his apartment connecting him to the 1993 WTC bomb plot and “Operation Bojinka,’ al Qaeda´s 1995 plan to blow up 12 jets simultaneously over the Pacific.[27]

· Although the Bush administration has expressed doubts, the Czech government stands by its claim that September 11 leader Mohamed Atta met in Prague in April 2001 with Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim al Ani, an Iraqi diplomat/intelligence agent. In a February 24 letter to James Beasley Jr., a Philadelphia lawyer who represents the families of two Twin Towers casualties, Czech UN Ambassador Hynek Kmonicek embraced an October 26, 2001, statement by Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross: “In this moment we can confirm, that during the next stay of Mr. Muhammad [sic] Atta in the Czech Republic, there was the contact with the official of the Iraqi intelligence, Mr. Al Ani, Ahmed Khalin Ibrahim Samir, who was on 22nd April 2001 expelled from the Czech Republic on the basis of activities which were not compatible with the diplomatic status.’[28] Al Ani was expelled two weeks after the suspected meeting with Atta for apparently hostile surveillance of Radio Free Europe´s Prague headquarters. That building also happened to house America´s anti-Baathist station, Radio Free Iraq. The Czech government continues to claim, in short, that the 9-11 mastermind Atta met with at least one Iraqi intelligence official in the months during which the attacks were orchestrated.

· A Clinton-appointed Manhattan federal judge, Harold Baer, ordered Hussein, his ousted regime, Osama bin Laden, and others to pay $104 million in damages to the families of George Eric Smith and Timothy Soulas (clients of Beasley, the aforementioned attorney), both of whom were killed in the Twin Towers along with 2,750 others. “I conclude that plaintiffs have shown, albeit barely, ‘by evidence satisfactory to the court´ that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al Qaeda,’ Baer ruled. An airtight case? Perhaps not, but the court found that there was sufficient evidence to tie Saddam Hussein to the September 11 attacks and secure a May 7 federal judgment against him.[29]

If one takes the time to connect these dots—as is the professional duty of journalists and politicians who address this matter—a clear portrait emerges of Saddam Hussein as a sugar daddy to global terrorists including al Qaeda and even the 9-11 conspirators. As Americans grow increasingly restless about Washington´s continuing military presence in Iraq, to say nothing of what people think overseas, the administration ought to paint this picture. So why won´t they?

Bush Administration Needs to Educate the World on Hussein and Terror

One Bush administration communications specialist told me that the government is bashful about all of this because these links are difficult to prove. And indeed they are. But prosecuting the informational battle in the War on Terrorism is not like prosecuting a Mafia don, which typically requires rock-solid exhibits such as wiretap intercepts, hidden-camera footage, DNA samples, and the testimony of deep-cover “Mob rats.’ On the contrary, it is important to emphasize, as strongly as possible, that the United States need not—and in fact should not—hold itself to courtroom standards of evidence except when appearing before domestic or international judges. The administration merely has to demonstrate its claims and refute those of its opponents, not convict Saddam Hussein before a jury of his peers.

Moreover, those who argue that Hussein was no terror master do not hold themselves to such lofty standards of proof, as the examples noted earlier demonstrate. The appropriate standard of evidence, then, to be entirely fair to both sides in this controversy, is not that of a trial, but rather that of a hearing on whether a criminal suspect should be indicted. In this respect, the “prosecution’ definitely has a prima facie case that Hussein´s Iraq indeed was a haven for terrorists until the moment U.S. troops invaded.

Terrorist attacks, of course, are meant to be at least as shadowy as Cosa Nostra hit jobs. Although this makes metaphysical proof elusive, it is possible to reach reliable conclusions about such matters, even conclusions solid enough to justify military intervention. Hence, the White House and its relevant agencies owe it to the American people to highlight what they know about Saddam Hussein and terrorism, even if some (though not all) of this damning evidence is only circumstantial.

Assuming that he wishes to influence domestic and global opinion, President Bush and his administration immediately should guide Americans and the world through these sometimes-murky specifics and identify the patterns and conclusions that have arisen. Although the former Iraqi dictator never may endure a courtroom cross-examination, plenty of evidence clearly exists in the public record (and more should be declassified) to confirm that Saddam Hussein´s ouster, Iraq´s liberation, and its current rehabilitation were and are vital phases of the continuing War on Terrorism. An American failure in Iraq, conversely, could reinstate the ancien regime and restore Iraq´s status as Terror Central Station.

President Bush and his top advisors urgently need to present this case, not haphazardly, but systematically and in as comprehensive, well-documented, and well-illustrated a fashion as their vast resources will allow.

[1] Madeleine Albright, “How we tackled the wrong tiger.’ Melbourne Herald Sun, October 21, 2003, page 19.

[2] Anne E. Kornblut, “Kennedy to assail Bush over Iraq war.’ Boston Globe online, October16, 2003,.

[3] Greg Miller, “No Proof Connects Iraq to 9/11, Bush says.’ Los Angeles Times, September 18, 2003, part 1, page 1.

[4] CBS 2 homepage, “Gore Takes Aim At Bush: Former Veep Addresses New York Audience.’ August 7, 2003,.

[5] Reuters, “Hussein vows cash for martyrs.’ March 12, 2002. Published in The Australian, March 13, 2002, page 9.

[6] The White House, “Saddam Hussein´s Support for International Terrorism.’

[7] Carol Rosenberg, “Families of slain Palestinians receive checks from Saddam.’ Knight-Ridder News Service, March 13, 2003. Published in Salt Lake City Tribune, March, 13, 2003.

[8] Facts of Israel.com, “Chronology of Palestinian Homicide Bombings.’

[9] U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism. May 21, 2002,.

[10] Saud Abu Ramadan, “Call for Abbas release, also extradition.’ United Press International, April 16, 2003.

[11] Marie Colvin and Sonya Murad, “Executed.’ Sunday Times of London, August 25, 2002, page 13. See als Republican Study Committee, “American Citizens Killed or Injured by Palestinian Terrorists: September 1993 – October 2003.’ October 17, 2003.

[12] Sameer N. Yacoub, “Iraq claims terrorist leader committed suicide.’ August 21, 2002 Associated Press dispatch published in Portsmouth Herald, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, August 22, 2002,.

[13] Associated Press, “Palestinian officials say Abu Nidal is dead.’ Posted on USAToday.com, week of August 19, 2002,.

[14] Ravi Nessman, “Marines capture camp suspected as Iraqi training base for terrorists.’ Associated Press, April 6, 2003, 4:14 p.m. EST. Posted by St. Paul Pioneer Press on April 7, 2003,.

[15] Deroy Murdock, “The 9/11 Connection: What Salman Pak Could Reveal.’ National Review Online, April 3, 2003,.

[16] Khidhir Hamza, “The Iraqi Threat.’ Statement before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, July 31, 2002,.

[17] PBS online, “Gunning for Saddam: Should Saddam Hussein Be America´s Next Target in the War on Terrorism?’ November 8, 2001,.

[18] Deroy Murdock, “At Salman Pak: Iraq´s Terror Ties.’ National Review Online, April 7, 2003,.

[19] Stephen F. Hayes, "Saddam's al Qaeda Connection: The evidence mounts, but the administration says surprisingly little" The Weekly Standard, September 1, 2003, volume 008, issue 48,.

[20] Stephen F. Hayes, "The Al Qaeda Connection, cont: More reason to suspect that bin Laden and Saddam may have been in league." The Daily Standard July 11, 2003,.

[21] Gilbert S. Merritt, “Document Links Saddam, bin Laden.’ The Tennessean, June 25, 2003,.

[22] Richard Miniter, “The Iraq-Al Qaeda Connections.’ Tech Central Station, September 25, 2003,.

[23] Federal Bureau of Investigation, profile of Abdul Rahman Yasin on FBI´s Most-Wanted Terrorists list.

[24] Sheila MacVicar, “‘America´s Most Wanted´ – Fugitive Terrorists.’ ABC News´ “Day One,’ July 27, 1994.

[25] Stephen F. Hayes, "The Al Qaeda Connection: Saddam's links to Osama were no secret." The Weekly Standard, May 12, 2003,.

[26] Inigo Gilmore, “The Proof that Saddam worked with bin Laden.’ London Daily Telegraph, April 27, 2003,.

[27] Stephen F. Hayes, “Dick Cheney Was Right: ‘We don´t know´ about Saddam and 9/11.’ The Weekly Standard, October 20, 2003,.

[28] Hynek Kmonicek, letter to James Beasley Jr., February 24, 2003. In author´s possession. A scanned image of the letter is available on the Hudson Institute´s website.

[29] CBS News, “Court Rules: Al Qaida, Iraq Linked.’ May 7, 2003,.

(PDF Format)

Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a Senior Fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Fairfax, Virginia

Venasty said contact, yes...but no partnership , no collaboration of any kind...then I switched channels.

So Venasty is the pipeline for the dem talking points.

Why am I not surprised.

Maybe Foxnews will do something about a transcript.

Looks like they may have upgraded what they put on their website.

Gentle now, he is just doing his job! .......

BUMP for later!

It's about friggin' time!

What the article does NOT state is that comment of the overblown gas-bag and limousine liberal Chairman, alleged Republican Tom Kean, that the Commission wouldn't "quibble" with the President's language.

Mr. Kean, long time RINO, is, I believe, angling for a Judgeship in the Kerry Administration.

Imagine this joker on the Supreme Court!!

His e-mail at Drew University - the College where he is President and where he invited his "old friend" Bill Clinton to speak during the campaign with Bush I, is

tomkean@drew.edu

Friend of Bill Clinton? BARF!!!