Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate: No Prewar Saddam-al-Qaida Ties (MSM Alert)
My Way News ^ | Sep 8, 2006 | Jim Abrams

Posted on 09/08/2006 3:11:07 PM PDT by Jacob Kell

WASHINGTON (AP) - There's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his Al-Qaida associates, according to a Senate report on prewar intelligence on Iraq. Democrats said the report undercuts President Bush's justification for going to war.

The declassified document being released Friday by the Senate Intelligence Committee also explores the role that inaccurate information supplied by the anti-Saddam exile group the Iraqi National Congress had in the march to war.

It discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates."

Bush and other administration officials have said that the presence of Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a connection between Saddam's government and al-Qaida. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in June this year.

The long-awaited report, said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., a member of the committee, is "a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts" to link Saddam to al-Qaida.

The report, two years in the making, comes out amid a series of Bush speeches stressing that pursuing the military effort in Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terrorism, and two months before that policy will be tested in midterm elections.

"Based on the characterizations we've seen, it's nothing new," White House press secretary Tony Snow said of the report.

"In 2002 and 2003, members of both parties got a good look at the intelligence we had and they came to the very same conclusions about what was going on," Snow said. That was "one of the reasons you had overwhelming majorities in the United States Senate and the House for taking action against Saddam Hussein," he said.

The report deals with two aspects of prewar intelligence - the role of the Iraqi National Congress and its exile leader Ahmed Chalabi and a comparison of prewar intelligence assessments and postwar findings on weapons of mass destruction and Saddam's links to terrorist groups.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; alqaedaandiraq; alqaida; carllevin; democrats; demoncats; fifthanniversary; iraq; levinisacommunist; msm; opiraqifreedom; prequel; prewarintelligence; senate; tenpeat; waronterror; warwithiraq; wob
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
To: stm

Hope you're on our side!!! :) Really, thanks for your service.


21 posted on 09/08/2006 3:59:20 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy ("When Cabals Go Kabooms"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf

I suggest you read the link I provided and the book I sourced. Also, take a look at the extensive links provided in post #2. Yes, no direct evidence exists to suggest Bin Laden worked with Saddam on 9-11. But the evidence is substantial and undeniable they worked together in other ways to support one anothers anti-American, anti-Saudi, anti-Western efforts. You simply cannot look at the mountain of evidence I have and claim only a "vague and indirect" relationship. I'm sorry, but that's just not honest.

I have no need to believe these things anymore than I have a need to believe the sky is blue. I am simply responding to and forming a belief out of volumes of evidence available to any who will bother to look into it.

Finally, I would suggest you Freep mail Jveritas to receive his translations of Saddam's internal intelligence documents showing that indeed he did cultivate ties with Al Qaeda. This is not a figment of our imagination or something we conjoured out of a "need" to believe. It simply is what is.

I will pink JVeritas on this communication so he might provide you with some of the documents he has translated and articles from national publication pointing out Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda.

The fact is, the Senate was VERY sloppy to draw this conclusion. I can only conclude this was another silly attempt by Republicans to mollify their extremist Democratic colleaques out of some false notion of "Senate collegiality." No doubt the Democrats on the intelligence committee refused to vote out a concluding report until it was agreed to say Saddam had no ties to Al Qaeda and of course the spineless Republicans went along.

Certainly the committee did not have access to Saddam's intelligence files indicating his ties to Al Qaeda, files only now being released and translated in 2006. The committee concluded its work before the DoD released the documents. Frankly, I think the Democrats on the committee and their pre-conceived conclusions about Al Qaeda and Iraq's ties would have ignored the documents even if they had them.

Read Stephen HAyes' book to see that you're quite wrong about Ansar Al Islam having no common ties to both Al Qaeda and Saddam's regime.


22 posted on 09/08/2006 4:00:29 PM PDT by MikeA (Not voting out of anger in November is a vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Peach
"Saddam told U.S. officials after his capture that he had not cooperated with Osama bin Laden even though he acknowledged that officials in his government had met with the al-Qaida leader, according to FBI summaries cited in the Senate report."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060908/ap_on_go_co/iraq_report
23 posted on 09/08/2006 4:05:37 PM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Here are some more summaries from today's report:

. 62: Research suggests prewar judgment remains valid that Iraq had links to terrorism. Few indications of relationship between AQ and Saddam before 9/11/01.

p. 63: The DIA has examined/translated 34 million pages recovered in Iraq and the lead DIA analyst believes there was no partnership between the two organization. Ties between Saddam and OBL appear like those between rival intel services, each trying to exploit the other

p 64: Iraq's interaction with AQ is impelled by mutual antipathy toward the US and the Saudi royal family and by OBL's interest in unconventional weapons and relocations sites (Relocation Sites???). Discussion that there's no evidence that AQ and Iraq participate din join terrorism ventures.

p 67: According to debriefings with Saddam and other captured Iraqi prisoners, Saddam didn't trust AQ and didn't want to cooperative with them.
The FBI provided 2 summary statements made by Saddam regarding his regime's relationship with AQ. The summary said there was clear evidence that the Iraqi government had previously met with OBL and Saddam confirmed that but said he didn't cooperate with OBL.

p 68: Abid Hamid Mahmoud al-Kattab al-Tikriti admitted the existence of a weak connection between Iraqi Intelligence Service and Al Qaeda for the purpose of the IIS collecting intelligence on AQ. Our intel community analyzed reports of meetings and contacts between AQ and Hussein's regime; reports of contacts began in the early 90's and continued throughout the decade.

p 70: At least 8 direct meetings took place between Iraqi officials and top AQ operatives. Dozens of additional meetings are reported by less reliable clandestine sources.

p 71: Ansar al-Islam is located in northern Iraq and has direct ties to AQ but the report downplays what this means with regard to Iraq. LOL

p 73: Saddam did agree to dedicate programs for targeted broadcasting on behalf of OBL and to "leave the door open to further develop the relationship and cooperation between both sides."


p 74:In June 98 a senior AQ official, Abu-Hafs, visited Iraq at least once. He also possibly visited in March 98.

p. 75: Details on training from both good reports and second hand sources - emerges a pattern of AQ's enduring interest in acquiring CBW expertise from Iraq.

p 76: CIA debriefed detainee Ibn al-Shaykb al-Libi, a senior AQ operational planner, to access Iraq's potential CBW training of AQ - Iraq agreed to provide chemical or biological weapons training for 2 AQ associates beginning in 12/00. The 2 people departed for Iraq and didn't return (to where, I don't know) so al-Libi was not in a position to know if any training had taken place.

The reliability of al-Libi is uncertain.

p 78: The DCI testified to the Committee on February 11, 2003 and stated that "Iraq has provided training in poisons and gases to two AQ associates. One of these associates characterized the relationship he forged with Iraqi operatives as successful."

p 79: Much later, after the war started, in July 2004, it was discovered that al-Libi recanted his claim that AQ members traveled to Iraq for chemical and biological weapons training. The Committee noted that no other reporting found in Iraq after the war began had corroborated the CBW training reports.

p 82: Detainees said that AQ and non-Iraqis trained at Salman Pak but then later recanted. No AQ associate detained since 9/11 has said they trained at Salman Pak.

p. 83: The DIA said there is no credible reporting that AQ trained at Salman Pak or anywhere else in Iraq. He said there is fragmentary reporting that Iraq trained foreign Islamic extremists in terrorist tactics but that's not been definitely established. A November 2002 Special Analysis said "While there has been some recent unconventional training activity detected at Salman Pak in early September, it is unclear whether AQ or other Islamic extremists have been involved."

There is no question (says the report) that Iraq continues, as of 9/02, to provide safe have and an operational base for groups and individuals who direct violence against the US, Israel and other allies. (Want to bet it was Democrats pounded this home that we just couldn't, could NOT put AQ in there?)

p 86:After 9/11/01, more than a dozen AQ affiliated extremists converged on Baghdad in the spring and summer of 02 and found a secure operating environment there. (I thought there was no operational anything between Iraq and AQ?)

p 87: Senior planner Abu Masab al-Zarqawi and other AQ fighters were in northern Iraq as of 5/02. Iraqi regime was aware of his presence, at a minimum, because a foreign government service gave Baghdad identifying information.

The CIA concluded that Zarqawi was overseeing the operations of AQ members in Iraq which included poison production, terrorist training and op erational support for terrorist attack abroad. The CIA assessed that AQ's presence in northeastern Iraq was estimated at 100-200 members and began to increase after the US military campaign began in Afghanistan and an unknown number of individuals have arrived in other regions of the country including Baghdad.

p 88: A variety of reporting led CIA analysts to believe that AQ maintained a toxins laboratory in Sargat and Abu Taisir was preparing contact poisons and ingestible compounds consistent with cyanide and possibly ricin.

INR warned that AQ working with Ansar al-Islam, l ocated in Iraq near the Iranian border prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom appeared to be preparing for an attack.

P 89: CIA said they were uncertain what extent Baghdad is actively complicit in the use of this territory by AQ operatives for safehaven and transit but given the pervasive presence of Iraq's security apparatus it would be difficult for AQ to maintain an active, long-term presence in Iraq without alerting the authorities or without at least their acquiescence.

Discussion about Zarqawi's role in the assassination of USAID official Laurence Foley in Jordan in 10/02. A detainee with knowledge of the operation said that Zarqawi directed and financed the assassination cell before, during and after the time Zarqawi spent in Baghdad.

p 90: Intelligence indicated Zarqawi had differences with OBL and probably didn't work closely with him but he contracts out his work in return for materials and financial assistance from AQ facilitators. (Sure.)

p 92: Oh this is rich - in 2005, the CIA assessed that prior to the war, the regime did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates.

A 5/02 IIS document found by US forces in IRaq indicates that the regime was concerned that the US would use the presence of Ansar al-Islam in northern Iraq to support claims of links between the regime and AQ. The IIS director said these claims showed the US would continue to fabricate information to prove links between Iraq and AQ.

p 93:The Iraqi regime considered AQ and Ansar al-Islam a threat and tried to collect intelligence on them and remove them. (Sure)

The DIA reported that the exploitation of the Sargat site revealed the presence of cyanide salts which confirmed suspicions of work on a cyanide-based poison which DIA analysts noted wasn't surprising given Ansar al-Islams continued efforts to develop chemical weapons capabilities.

p 94/95: In the fall of 2001, the Czech intelligence service provided the CIA with reporting based on a single source who stated that the 9/11 hijacker Muhammed Atta met with the Prague-based IIS Chief in 4/02.

A year or so ago the CIA noted that various reports put Atta in Prague on at least 4 occasions but the CIA could confirm only 2 of the visits in 12/94 and 6/00 but neither of the trips matched the meeting between al-Ani and Atta alleged by the Czechs.

The June 02 CIA paper regarding the 4/01 meeting said they couldn't verify his travels.

This section goes on for some time and goes back and forth between whether Atta met in Prague in 4/01 or not.

All the papers the CIA have produced on this matter concludes that "while the above reporting does not conclusively contradict the occurrence of a meeting, it calls into question some aspects of the reporting."

p 98: Then there's discussion about Almed Hikmat Shakir al-Azzawi, an Iraqi national, meeting with 9/11 hijacker Khalid al-Mihdhar in Malaysia in 1/00.

Some reports suggest extremist contacts but a foreign government service working in partnership with the CIA reports that Shakir was not affiliated with AQ and has no connection to the IIS.



24 posted on 09/08/2006 4:08:51 PM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: stm

Hey - great post!


25 posted on 09/08/2006 4:09:45 PM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy

PING for great links on Saddam an AQ.


26 posted on 09/08/2006 4:11:39 PM PDT by WOSG (Broken-glass time, Republicans! Save the Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy

I have a bunch of posts to catch up on but not that the administration has deemed this not worthy to defend, I'm not sure I'll bother.


27 posted on 09/08/2006 4:11:49 PM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Ping


28 posted on 09/08/2006 4:12:59 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Peach

OMG Peach...now that is what I call a document dump!
And I thought you were simply transcriber extraordinare.
But also a master researcher??..LOL
Seriously though, that is great information and this post is as much of a placemarker as it is a Thank you!
We'll win the war of ideas because we are smarter than those who spout the lib propaganda.


29 posted on 09/08/2006 4:15:44 PM PDT by JerseyDvl ("If you attack Americans, we'll defend your right to do it."- The Democrat Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MikeA
I'm very familiar with the issue, as it were, and I've been to Iraq once or twice myself. I know there's a very strong tendency on the part of some commanders and analysts to label things as 'al-Qa'ida', because they equate the word with 'terrorist'. There are plenty of terrorists, murderers, and thugs that aren't AQ. There's plenty of people that trained at AQ camps that go back and start their own non-AQ movements.

AMZ would be a prime example. He was a fanatical nutjob who dreamed of genocide and conquest. He didn't become worse by swearing alligence to AQ, and in fact the AQ senior leadership tried to get him to stop his attacks on Shi'ites. Some people just aren't comfortable dealing with terrorists unless they are brand name al-Qa'ida. AMZ helped us out in that regard by renaming his outfit, but he and his crew needed to die regardless. Same goes for any other terrorist in Iraq.

I know it's easier to pull the trigger or drop a 500lb JDAM on someone you know is AQ. Believe me, I know. But we get carried away with that title and apply it more liberally than it should. It gives the impression that people are actually taking orders from Bin Laden and his organization, when they may in fact just be inspired by him or trained earlier in one of his camps. If you don't see the difference, then consider the point of our disagreement moot.

30 posted on 09/08/2006 4:18:37 PM PDT by Steel Wolf (- Islam will never survive being laughed at. -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bushinohio
Note to the GOP: Take this and RUN with it

Note to bushinohio: It ain't gonna happen.

The best we'll get from a feckless GOP which never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity is abject wringing of hands and stuttering objections about the information not being "completely correct"!

I've seen little girls fight better than most Republicans. Even baldfaced lies don't rise to the level of significant objection.

31 posted on 09/08/2006 4:25:00 PM PDT by Gritty (Sorry, but not even the Democrats can redeploy from the whole planet - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jacob Kell

Fred Barnes stated that this was NOT the Senate Report, but a 400 page adendum to the Senate report from the dims... a dim inspired version that they say is the truth, not the actual 1200 page Senate Report. Disgusting rats!

msm is lying as they misrepresent this as the actual BI-PARTISAN REPORT! BURN IN HELL msm... BURN IN HELL!

LLS


32 posted on 09/08/2006 4:32:18 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf

This is not a simple problem of labelling. These were instances of Saddam's people meeting with top Bin Laden deputies. This isn't just saying because some terrorists were in Iraq they're all Al Qaeda. I have studied Al Qaeda extensively and I understand not all jihadists are Al Qaeda. The fact that Zarqawi was a top associate of Bin Laden's, that Ansar swore allegiance to Al Qaeda and that later Zarqawi as the leader of the terror movement in post-invasion Iraq swore allegiance to Al qaeda and re-named themselves Al qaeda in Iraq are all pretty strong indicators of his allegiances. Certainly Al Qaeda's top leaders including Bin Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri have been all too glad to own Zarqawi as their own.


33 posted on 09/08/2006 4:33:15 PM PDT by MikeA (Not voting out of anger in November is a vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Peach
You expect me to believe all that information over a few senators?? Pfft! /s

Great post, Peach.

34 posted on 09/08/2006 4:55:56 PM PDT by lysie ("Lowering the price to be paid by aggressors virtually guarantees more aggression." Dr. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf
It has become a distraction from more important things to try to prove a working relationship between al Qaida and Saddam, but this is the case mostly because of who it is we're arguing against. Liberals have been successful in framing this topic in their usual, fallacious, 'all-or-nothing' way, with any connection short of a direct link between Saddam and the 9/11 attacks being dismissed as insignificant.

(And here I thought liberals were the champions of 'nuance.')

35 posted on 09/08/2006 5:08:32 PM PDT by MitchellC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

I suspected as much. Link?


36 posted on 09/08/2006 5:10:38 PM PDT by MitchellC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Thank you Peach for the information ... but as we all know this will never be looked at by the majority of "Americans" and will be ignored.

It is already set in stone that "Bush Lied" as far as a majority of Americans and so it will be written in history.

Facts no longer matter (and haven't mattered for a long time). Americans are too stupid to do a little research.
Most people have turned against Bush and the Repubs (even a bunch of of folks at my gun club!!!). Its sad and extremely discouraging.

Only another American civil war will set things straight so our grandchildren and future generations might enjoy the concept of freedom and liberty.
37 posted on 09/08/2006 5:25:18 PM PDT by MaDeuce (Do it to them, before they do it to you! (MaDuce = M2HB .50 BMG))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Peach

The MSM likes to talk about how this administration cherry picked intelligence but it appears more like they're cherry picking part of a report, the part that supports their script.


38 posted on 09/08/2006 5:47:13 PM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jacob Kell
"...a Senate report..."

ROTFLMAO! What would the buffoons in the Senate know about anything! The MSM might find this as being an orgasmic revelation but to me it's just another DNC yawner.

39 posted on 09/08/2006 5:48:52 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (The "Peace sign" is the DemocRATS' last act of defiance before they cut 'n' run from the WOT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jacob Kell
an October 2005 CIA assessment

Oh those CIA guys are such great kidders.

40 posted on 09/08/2006 5:52:17 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson