Saddam Regime Document: Iraqi Intelligence met with Bin Laden in 1995 (Translation)

Indeed. Great catch! Thanks for the ping!

Everyone knows that Iraq under Saddam was secular and therefore OBL and Saddam could not possibly work together.

This was always my favorite...we were expected to base our security on the religious integrity of a madman.

The first time I saw mention of these docs was on 3/10/06 (I will post the article below the 3/15 link)*(Also note there was a date error on the article. It was posted on the 10th, not the 20th) I've changed the date to reflect the accurate date. It had to have been a typo..as it wasn't the 20th yet! It was posted on the 10th!

Then on 3/15/06 it was announced that the docs were declassified. In fact you can go see the declassified docs at this link:

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.milproducts-docex.htm

I will post that article too "after" I post the 3/10 article.

Here is the first article regarding Negroponte releasing the docs and President Bush's desiring him do so. You can see that Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, was pursuing the release of them at the time and was extremely instrumental in pressuring Negroponte in getting this done!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Who'll Let the Docs Out?

Bush wants to release the Saddam files but his intelligence chief stalls.
by Stephen F. Hayes
03/10/2006, Volume 011, Issue 25

On February 16, President George W. Bush assembled a small group of congressional Republicans for a briefing on Iraq. Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley were there, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad participated via teleconference from Baghdad. As the meeting was beginning, Mike Pence spoke up. The Indiana Republican, a leader of conservatives in the House, was seated next to Bush.

"Yesterday, Mr. President, the war had its best night on the network news since the war ended," Pence said.

"Is this the tapes thing?" Bush asked, referring to two ABC News reports that included excerpts of recordings Saddam Hussein made of meetings with his war cabinet in the years before the U.S. invasion.

Bush had not seen the newscasts but had been briefed on them.

Pence framed his response as a question, quoting Abraham Lincoln: "One of your Republican predecessors said, 'Give the people the facts and the Republic will be saved.' There are 3,000 hours of Saddam tapes and millions of pages of other documents that we captured after the war. When will the American public get to see this information?"

Bush replied that he wanted the documents released. He turned to Hadley and asked for an update. Hadley explained that John Negroponte, Bush's Director of National Intelligence, "owns the documents" and that DNI lawyers were deciding how they might be handled.

Bush extended his arms in exasperation and worried aloud that people who see the documents in 10 years will wonder why they weren't released sooner. "If I knew then what I know now," Bush said in the voice of a war skeptic, "I would have been more supportive of the war."

Bush told Hadley to expedite the release of the Iraq documents. "This stuff ought to be out. Put this stuff out." The president would reiterate this point before the meeting adjourned. And as the briefing ended, he approached Pence, poked a finger in the congressman's chest, and thanked him for raising the issue. When Pence began to restate his view that the documents should be released, Bush put his hand up, as if to say, "I hear you. It will be taken care of."

It was not the first time Bush has made clear his desire to see the Iraq documents released. On November 30, 2005, he gave a speech at the U.S. Naval Academy. Four members of Congress attended: Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee; Sen. John Warner, the Virginia Republican who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee; Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona; and Pence. After his speech, Bush visited with the lawmakers for 10 minutes in a holding room to the side of the stage. Hoekstra asked Bush about the documents and the president said he was pressing to have them released.

Says Pence: "I left both meetings with the unambiguous impression that the president of the United States wants these documents to reach the American people."

Negroponte never got the message. Or he is choosing to ignore it. He has done nothing to expedite the exploitation of the documents. And he continues to block the growing congressional effort, led by Hoekstra, to have the documents released.

For months, Negroponte has argued privately that while the documents may be of historical interest, they are not particularly valuable as intelligence product. A statement by his office in response to the recordings aired by ABC said, "Analysts from the CIA and the DIA reviewed the translations and found that, while fascinating from a historical perspective, the tapes do not reveal anything that changes their postwar analysis of Iraq's weapons programs."

Left unanswered was what the analysts made of the Iraqi official who reported to Saddam that components of the regime's nuclear program had been "transported out of Iraq." Who gave this report to Saddam and when did he give it? How were the materials "transported out of Iraq"? Where did they go? Where are they now? And what, if anything, does this tell us about Saddam's nuclear program? It may be that the intelligence community has answers to these questions. If so, they have not shared them. If not, the tapes are far more than "fascinating from a historical perspective."

Officials involved with DOCEX--as the U.S. government's document exploitation project is known to insiders--tell The Weekly Standard that only some 3 percent of the 2 million captured documents have been fully translated and analyzed. No one familiar with the project argues that exploiting these documents has been a priority of the U.S. intelligence community.

Negroponte's argument rests on the assumption that the history captured in these documents would not be important to those officials--elected and unelected, executive branch and legislative--whose job it is to
craft U.S. foreign and national security policy. He's mistaken.

An example: On April 13, 2003, the San Francisco Chronicle published an exhaustive article based on documents reporter Robert Collier unearthed in an Iraqi Intelligence safehouse in Baghdad. The claims were stunning.

The documents found Thursday and Friday in a Baghdad office of the Mukhabarat, the Iraqi secret police, indicate that at least five agents graduated Sept. 15 from a two--week course in surveillance and eavesdropping techniques, according to certificates issued to the Iraqi agents by the "Special Training Center" in Moscow . . .

Details about the Mukhabarat's Russian spy training emerged from some Iraqi agents' personnel folders, hidden in a back closet in a center for electronic surveillance located in a four-story mansion in the Mesbah district, Baghdad's wealthiest neighborhood. . . .

Three of the five Iraqi agents graduated late last year from a two-week course in "Phototechnical and Optical Means," given by the Special Training Center in Moscow, while two graduated from the center's two-week course in "Acoustic Surveillance Means."

One of the graduating officers, identified in his personnel file as Sami Rakhi Mohammad Jasim al-Mansouri, 46, is described as being connected to "the general management of counterintelligence" in the south of the country. . . .

His certificate, which bears the double-eagle symbol of the Russian Federation and a stylized star symbol that resembles the seal of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, uses a shortened version of al-Mansouri's name.

It says he entered the Moscow-based Special Training Center's "advanced" course in "acoustic surveillance means" on Sept. 2, 2002, and graduated on Sept. 15.

Four days later, the Chronicle reported that the "Moscow-based Special Training Center," was the Russian foreign intelligence service, known as SVR, and the SVR confirmed the training:

A spokesman for the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), Boris Labusov, acknowledged that Iraqi secret police agents had been trained by his agency but said the training was for nonmilitary purposes, such as fighting crime and terrorism.

Yet documents discovered in Baghdad by The Chronicle last week suggest that the spying techniques the Iraqi agents learned in Russia may have been used against foreign diplomats and civilians, raising doubt about the accuracy of Labusov's characterization.

Labusov, the press officer for the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, confirmed that the certificates discovered by The Chronicle were genuine and that the Iraqis had received the training the documents described.

The Russians declared early in the U.N. process that they preferred inspections to war. Perhaps we now know why. Still, it is notable that at precisely the same time Russian intelligence was training Iraqi operatives, senior Russian government officials were touting their alliance with the United States. Russian foreign minister Boris Malakhov proclaimed that the two countries were "partners in the anti-terror coalition" and Putin spokesman Sergei Prikhodko declared, "Russia and the United States have a common goal regarding the Iraqi issue." (Of course, these men may have been in the dark on what their intelligence service was up to.) On November 8, 2002, six weeks after the Iraqis completed their Russian training, Russia voted in favor of U.N. Resolution 1441, which hreatened "serious consequences" for continued Iraqi defiance on its weapons programs.

Maybe this is mere history to Negroponte. But it has practical implications for policymakers assessing Russia's role as go-between in the ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran.

Perhaps anticipating the weakness of his "mere history" argument, Negroponte abruptly shifted his position last week. He still opposes releasing the documents, only now he claims that the information in these documents is so valuable that it cannot be made public. Negroponte gave a statement to Fox News responding to Hoekstra's call to release the captured documents. "These documents have provided, and continue to provide, actionable intelligence to ongoing operations. . . . It would be ill-advised to release these materials without careful screening because the material includes sensitive and potentially harmful information."

This new position raises two obvious questions: If the documents have provided actionable intelligence, why has the intelligence community exploited so few of them? And why hasn't Negroponte demanded more money and manpower for the DOCEX program?

Sadly, these obvious questions have an obvious answer. The intelligence community is not interested in releasing documents captured in postwar Afghanistan and Iraq. Why this is we can't be sure. But Pete Hoekstra offers one distinct possibility.

"They are State Department people who want to make no waves and don't want to do anything that would upset anyone," he says.

This is not idle speculation. In meetings with Hoekstra, Negroponte and his staff have repeatedly expressed concern that releasing this information might embarrass our allies. Who does Negroponte have in mind?

Allies like Russia?

Hoekstra says Negroponte's intransigence is forcing him to get the documents out "the hard way." The House Intelligence chairman has introduced a bill (H.R. 4869) that would require the DNI to begin releasing the captured documents. Although Negroponte continues to argue against releasing the documents in internal discussions, on March 9, he approached Hoekstra with a counterproposal.

Negroponte offered to release some documents labeled "No Intelligence Value," and indicated his willingness to review other documents for potential release, subject to a scrub for sensitive material.

And there, of course, is the potential problem. Negroponte could have been releasing this information all along, but chose not to. So, in a way, nothing really changes. Still, for Hoekstra, this is the first sign of any willingness to release the documents.

"I'm encouraged that John is taking another look at it," Hoekstra said last Thursday. "But I want a system that is biased in favor of declassification. I want some assurance that they aren't just picking the stuff that's garbage and releasing that. If we're only declassifying maps of Baghdad, I'm not going to be happy."

He continued: "There may be many documents that relate to Iraqi WMD programs. Those should be released. Same thing with documents that show links to terrorism. They have to release documents on topics of interest to the American people and they have to give me some kind of schedule. What's the time frame? I don't have any idea."

Hoekstra is not going away. "We're going to ride herd on this. This is a step in the right direction, but I am in no way claiming victory. I want these documents out."

So does President Bush. You'd think that would settle it.

Stephen F. Hayes is a senior writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1st Declassified Iraq Documents Released

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration Wednesday night released the first declassified documents collected by U.S. intelligence during the Iraq war, showing among other things that Saddam Hussein's regime was monitoring reports that Iraqis and Saudis were heading to Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks to fight U.S. troops.

The documents, the first of thousands expected to be declassified over the next several months, were released via a Pentagon Web site at the direction of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte.

Many were in Arabic — with no English translation — including one the administration said showed that Iraqi intelligence officials suspected al-Qaida members were inside Iraq in 2002.

The Pentagon Web site described that document this way: "2002 Iraqi Intelligence Correspondence concerning the presence of al-Qaida Members in Iraq.

Correspondence between IRS members on a suspicion, later confirmed, of the presence of an Al-Qaeda terrorist group. Moreover, it includes photos and names."

The release of the documents, expected to continue for months, is designed to allow lawmakers and the public to investigate what documents from Saddam's regime claimed about such controversial issues as weapons of mass destruction and al-Qaida in the period before the United States invaded Iraq in March 2003.

The Web site cautioned that the U.S. government "has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available."

A handful of prewar Iraq government documents released Wednesday had been translated into English.

They included one Iraqi intelligence document indicating Saddam's feared Fedayeen paramilitary forces were investigating rumors in the fall of 2001 that as many as 3,000 Iraqis and Saudis were going to fight in Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion.

"In the report on the status of rumors for November of 2001 regarding Fedayeen Saddam in al-Anbar, there is an entry that indicates that there is a group of Iraqi and Saudi Arabians numbering around 3,000 who have gone in an unofficial capacity to Afghanistan and have joined the mujahidin (mujahedeen, or holy warriors) to fight with and aid them in defeating the American Zionist Imperialist attack," the translated document stated.

"After presenting the matter to the Supervisor of Fedayeen Saddam, he ordered that the matter should be looked into for verification of the truth of the rumor," the translation said.

House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., requested the release of millions pages of documents and audio recordings captured during current and previous U.S. military operations in Iraq. Most have sat untranslated for years.

Last weekend, Negroponte agreed to set aside money and establish a system to make the documents available to the media, academics and other researchers.

In a statement, Hoekstra welcomed the chance to answer questions about prewar Iraq. "Whether Saddam Hussein destroyed Iraq's weapons of mass destruction or hid or transferred them, the most important thing is we discover the truth of what was happening in the country prior to the war," he said.
___
On the Net:

The declassified documents can be accessed at:

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.milproducts-docex.htm

Hmmmmm....it looks like the link doesn't work anymore! Interesting! Too many lookee loo's I guess!

Sorry! VH&W

I see what the problem was. The article forgot to add a forward slash. But jveritas, your post had this link in it! Thanks and I hope one or both of these articles were of interest to you. FRegards, VH&W

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm

BUMP

bttt

I do not think that there is software yet to translate handwritten Arabic document into English unless the CIA or the Pentagon have developed something like this and kept it a top secret project. However I still believe that it is an extremely difficult thing to develop such software.

In regards to translators with basic language skills doing the translation, it is possible that they can translate a large % of the documents but it will take them much more time to do so than a person with native Arabic language and good English language skills.

Great catch, x.

You are doing a great job, but since you are translating the documents, does the government have a centralized place to post the translations?

If not, we need to find some place to post the translations and have a way to post any comments on those translations.

I do not think that there is software yet to translate handwritten Arabic document into English unless the CIA or the Pentagon have developed something like this and kept it a top secret project.

Since there clearly is software to do the translation part, the problem is recognizing the handwritten Arabic characters. As I said before, it appears that it should be easier to do that than to recognize handwritten, as opposed to hand printed, English. Probably at least as easy as recognizing hand printed English (or any other Latin alphabet language).

The translation part is a whole separate challenge, but one that appears to be mostly accomplished, at least with regards to Arabic to English translation.

As an aside. I didn't realize until just now that the repository and presumably the translations are being handled by the Joint Reserve Intelligence Center. I think that's really cool, since once upon a time, back in the Dark Ages of the Reagan years, I was a member of the Air Reserve Intelligence Force.

Impossible! Everyone knows that Iraq under Saddam was secular and therefore OBL and Saddam could not possibly work together.

You'll also have notice the many references to God in this document written by what would presumably be the most secular of organizations within that secular government headed by the secular "Mr. President the Leader God protect him", Saddam Hussein.

Hmmm.

Of course even if he really was secular, the phrase "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" holds true in the middle east more so that in most anywhere else.

In regards to translators with basic language skills doing the translation, it is possible that they can translate a large % of the documents but it will take them much more time to do so than a person with native Arabic language and good English language skills.

Undoubtedly, which is why I suggested they only screen them, not provide detailed translations. Another possibility would be to have such people type up the handwritten text, in Arabic, and then let the existing software translate the resulting machine readable text. The people doing the typing would not even need to be able to actually read Arabic, but would need to be trained in recognizing the Arabic letters and word structure, and in typing on an Arabic keyboard. Shouldn't be much harder to train such people than to train people to understand Morse code and type up "code groups" which in themselves are meaningless, until they are decrypted that is. That is the way things worked in during WW-II. Machines or people with code books, did the decrypting part, people did the translation from "Morse" to the English characters.

People, unlike machines, are very good at the character recognition part of the overall task. It could be done. I don't doubt is being done in a somewhat similar fashion. Heck I'd volunteer to do it myself, were I still part of the Air Reserve Intelligence "community".

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.milproducts-docex.htm

Bad link.

Probably should be

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm

also try:

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/index.htm

or

http://70.169.163.24/

(Interestingly, that second link is where one is sent when clicking over from the first link. However it goes through another link and gets redirected, the other URL flashes by too quickly to copy, but it is the corrected link above, that is:

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm

la, la, la, la, I can't here you! la, la, la, la, la,!

MSM with hands over ears.

What you are looking for is an Arabic <-> English translation program (some exist, but most are about as 'accurate' as Babblefish), combined with OCR (Optical Character Resolution) where a computer acts like an 'eye' and can read handwritten (or typed) characters and convert into ASCII or whatever.

IF there is that component, you just integrate the two.

HOWEVER, if someone has it, it will be SOLD as an application or service, since it would take alot of development time to do properly.

ping

I think the Leavenworth site posts translations, however not sure how they get there.

"The MSM and others of influence do use FR as an information outlet."

Yes, even now the MSM have their own people interpreting this so as to show that Saddam was working to cut and/or block any ties with OBL.

Seriously, the more of this that trickles out the more hysterical the MSM reports will be. Mark my word.

In going thru my daily visits to various blogs I just came upon this and ....said to myself...I know a GUY THAT CAN HELP!!!!!

*****************************

From the Powerline Blog:

March 22, 2006
What Does This Say?

***********************************

If you speak Arabic, please take a look a this document, which was released on Monday. A Synopsis of the document, which is dated some time in 2002, has now been posted on the Foreign Military Studies Office site:

IIS [Iraqi intelligence] report on Kurdish activities, mention of Kurdish reporting on Al Qaida, reference to Al Qaida presence in Salman Pak.

The English summary that is part of the PDF document itself reads:

They are talking about American came from the North. Also they informed about Al Qaida groups and about foreign man (Malkrikav) in Norway he is one of the Al Qaida.

Salman Pak is a town near Baghdad; it is best known as the site of an Iraqi military facility that reportedly was used to train terrorists before the war. We'd like to hear from anyone who can translate the document.

Posted by John at 11:32 AM

********************************************************

This seems to me to be very important since it is another document showing actual ties and support between SADDAM and Bin Laden....