|
Posted on 06/20/2004 10:21:42 AM PDT by kattracks
State Department and CIA officials have quietly told reporters they accept Saddam Hussein's explanation that radical Islamists who trained in Iraq before 9/11 to hijack airplanes using small knives were engaged in counter-terrorism training.Speaking on condition of anonymity to the Knight Ridder news service, the officials challenged the credibility of two White House reports issued last year, which had raised questions about whether activities at the notorious terrorist training camp Salman Pak were linked to the 9/11 attacks. One unnamed U.S. official cited a CIA assessment first supplied to the White House in January 2003 in response to the reports, more than a year after two Iraqi defectors told the FBI that they trained radical Muslims at Salman Pak in hijacking techniques never used before the 9/11 attacks.
"The probability that the training provided at such centers, e.g. Salman Pak, was similar to that al Qaida could offer at its own camps in Afghanistan, combined with the sourcing difficulties, leads us to conclude that we need additional corroboration before we can validate that this low level basic terrorist training for al Qaida occurred in Iraq," the CIA concluded.
Said Knight Ridder: "U.S. intelligence officials have concluded that the base was most probably used to train Iraqi counter-terrorism units in anti-hijacking tactics."
The conclusion that training at Salman Pak was innocuous is not shared by Charles Duelfer, who replaced David Kay as head of the U.S. Iraq Survey Group earlier this year.
In Nov. 2001, Duelfer - then an UNSCOM weapons inspector - said the Iraqi government made the same claim to him - that hijacking drills at Salman Pak were actually counter-terrorism exercises.
"Of course we automatically took out the word 'counter'," Duelfer said, dismissing the alibi as an obvious fraud.
"I'm surprised that people seem to be shocked that there should be terror camps in Iraq. "I mean, what, actually, do you expect?" he added.
But Duelfer's corroboration - along with satellite photos confirming the defectors' contention that the drills took place aboard an actual Boeing 707 fuselage parked nowhere near an airstrip - failed to persuade the CIA and the State Department, which continued to question their credibility.
The State Department, in particular, worked strenuously to block publication of the two White House reports, describing the Salman Pak hijack drills, Knight Ridder said.
One of those reports, dubbed "A Decade of Deception and Defiance" was released as a background paper in conjunction with Bush's Sept. 12, 2002, U.N. address, but was ignored by the press.
The second publication, "Iraq: From Fear to Freedom," was distributed abroad. It cited claims by Iraqi defector Sabah Khodada, who said he trained radical Islamists at Salman Pak to hijack U.S. airliners.
Earlier Khodada had told the London Observer that he believed the 9/11 attacks were carried out "by graduates of Salman Pak."
The Bush administration booklet reported:
"Khodada ... confirmed numerous press reports that Salman Pak had an entire Boeing 707 jetliner that was used for training in hijacking techniques - from smuggling weapons on board to methods for overpowering the crew and terrorizing passengers into cowed submission."
A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Knight Ridder that the White House ordered the State Department to publish the two reports over the objections of some State Department officials.
Is this a serious question? It's been obvious for years that the lifelong bureaucrats at state do NOT have America's best interests at heart.
I'll have to look it up later, but I'm positive the evidence at Salman Pak indicated foreigners--not Iraqi nationalists--were trained there.
How on God's green earth do we have people working for our own government whose focus, movitivation and intent is to contradict and bring down a sitting U.S. president, over their stated mission of the security of our country??!
According to a liberal website post I have seen, there is a rebel CIA effort ongoing now to impeach Bush over the "Plame incident".
Senator Kennedy just signed on to the whole "Plame incident" investigation thing that is being investigated by Fitzgerald.
Really it should be called the "Joseph Wilson is a blabbermouth, but who can we blame? investigation".
Saw the liberal post on this on Thursday, and it was on Fox news on Friday.
They are aiming for any and/or all of getting Bush, Cheney, Rice, and/or Rumsfeld out of office.
The liberal post claims that this will be led by CIA operatives disgruntled with the Bush administration's policies, who are fighting back.
Goes with the above .
. . . failed to persuade the CIA and the State Department, which continued to question their credibility.
The State Department, in particular, worked strenuously to block publication of the two White House reports, describing the Salman Pak hijack drills, Knight Ridder said.
I note this author's life was from 1891-1937....I wonder whether (I hope) his untimely demise was courtesy of Mr. Mussollini?
I see the CIA is now working for the KGB just as the STate Department.
I agree with you, if they want two brooklyn bridges then lets sell them the swampland too. You were right, that's my opinion.
And for the next six months it might be good to keep in mind that one John Flipflop Kerry's father was a career diplomat. I wonder if any of these silly claims are being made by someone whether in State or the CIA who got an early boost in his career by the senior Kerry?
Clearly, left-over Clintonites and Democrat partisans are desparate to debunk an ever solidifying Saddam/Al Quaida/911 connection. Salman Pak and the Mohammed Atta Prague meeting are powerful evidence of same. Those who MUST somehow disconnect Iraq from terrorism to attach Bush, seemingly wiil go to any lengths to somehow forstall the inevitable, the realization that Saddam Hussein was involved in terrorism.
Think about it. We have important officials that are willing to cover-up links to Saddam, if it means that Bush will be proved justified in attacking Iraq. They know that a solid link between Saddam and 9/11 is the end of them, as they have a history of covering up for Saddam, since early on in the Clinton administration. Clinton could not face the reality that Iraq was a dire threat, one that HAD to be dealt with, by ourselves. Leaving it to the corrupted, bribed, impossibly incompetent UN was his only solution. Now, as the people who brought you 9/11 reach the end of their rope, they figure they can blindfold us with with it. Insane.
Are you saying that is an oxymoron?
"Speaking on condition of anonymity"... Speaking on condition of anonymity, two of Sen Kerry's campaign advisors, masquerading as CIA agents, said...
Jus whose side is the US State Deparment on, exactly?
Remember the liberals believe we came from monkeys who came from type of amebas in water, although the link has never been proven...so what they believe about this does not surprise me at all. Talking to most libs is like banging your head against the wall, all you get is a headache!
If we add the IQ's of everyone in the State Department, except for Sec. Powell, does anyone think we'd get a total score above 50. What a bunch of air heads.
As Jonathan Winters snaps to Richard Dreyfus in "Moon Over Parador,"
"...and don't listen to those faggots in the State Department!"
It was the old "REFERRER=http://www.freerepublic.com" perl script at the other end.
The NYT can't claim ignorance as the excuse for their treasonous statements of late.
We now have the U.S. Constitution protecting both murderous religions and treasonous newspapers (but not innocent citizens).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.