EXCLUSIVE: 3-Star General reveals additional details of former regime’s ties to terror (al Qaeda)

Regime of Terror ^ | 12-4-06 | Mark

[Milligan]

From Captains Quarter...blog.


"Since any mention of Ansar al-Islam inevitably draws from the Left the claim that "they were in the Kurdish zones, and those were under US control," let's quicklyi put that claim to rest.

It turns out that some Kurds were fully prepared to cooperate with Saddam in their internal power struggles.

From PBS's Frontline:

In August 1996 Kurdish Democratic Party troops join the Iraqi Army in an attack on the Iraqi National Congress forces based in Irbil, the largest city in Kurdistan. U.S.- backed rebels request American air support but request is denied. Iraqi troops arrest and execute hundreds of rebel leaders.

1996-99 Kurdish groups strike autonomy deal with Saddam's government and remain skeptical of the extent to which the U.S. is serious about its support for the Iraqi opposition.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saddam/kurds/cron.html

Further details here:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/kdp.htm

And who were Ansar al-Islam not fighting? Why, the KDP! Oh, and they were also in support of Saddam.....

http://iraqinews.com/org_ansar_al-islam.shtml

But, in the eyes of LG and his ilk, nothing to see here. Move along, just move along....

Posted by: Sun-Tzu at March 16, 2006 08:56 AM

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006534.php

[Milligan]

I hear the USS Cole is your hot button.
Enjoy Pre-911 Articles.

ATTACK ON USS COLE: BACKGROUND
Oct 16, 2000
by B.Raman

http://www.saag.org/papers2/paper152.html

Also


Pentagon Cautious on Cole Retaliation
by Mark Thompson.
Wednesday, Oct. 25, 2000

http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,58607,00.html

[yoe]

Thanks for the music!

[Milligan]

)
El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries Company and Salah El Din Ahmed Mohammed Idris )
Plaintiffs,
v.

The United States of America,
Defendant.


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/el-shifa-cfc-2003-03-14.html

[Milligan]

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0804/081304lb.htm

More on al Shifa Pharmaceutical Plant and owner Salah Idris

"According to WorldSpace's prospectus, it has been alleged that Bin Mahfouz, Al Amoudi and another Saudi investor, Salah Idris, or charities that they've been involved with, have supported terrorism financially. All three were also named, along with some Saudi government officials, in civil lawsuits filed by families of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The men have denied the allegations, according to WorldSpace's prospectus. The biggest case in question is still in the early stages.
There's more. Idris, who has a stake in the satellite operator through Yenura, a Singapore-based company owned by Idris and WorldSpace Chairman and CEO Noah Samara, owned an interest in a Sudan-based pharmaceutical factory that was bombed by the U.S. in 1998 in retaliation for allegedly supplying chemicals to the terrorists who blew up two U.S. embassies in Africa. Ties between Idris and terrorists were never proven, according to the SEC filing.
The prospectus goes on to include this tidbit: "Mr. Idris has never appeared on the U.S. Government's designated terrorist list." (WorldSpace is in a quiet period ahead of its IPO, and has declined to comment on any of these issues.)
Keep in mind that an IPO prospectus is part sales pitch, part disclaimer. It provides investors with management's rosy take on a company's potential, as well as all the caveats. WorldSpace's registration statement accomplishes exactly that. The filing also states: "None of the Bin Mahfouzs, Mr. Al-Amoudi or Mr. Idris any longer have any direct debt or equity in our company or have any voting control rights in our company." Of course, the agreement with Stonehouse has certain strings attached, so it isn't as if some indirect influence can't be wielded.
WorldSpace's prospectus warns investors that "Allegations of ties between certain of our investors and terrorism could negatively affect our reputation and stock price." But it's impossible to determine, at this point, the extent to which such allegations or a negative legal development could reflect poorly on WorldSpace in the future. Investors must weigh the legal uncertainties against how they view WorldSpace's future prospects before buying its stock.
For all the ink devoted to the terrorism allegations, however, plenty of prominent Americans seem nonplussed, judging from WorldSpace's board of directors, which includes Jack Kemp, a former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and Republican vice presidential candidate, and Charles McCurdy Mathias, a former member of the Senate (representing Maryland) and the House (Sixth Congressional District of Maryland).

http://www.smartmoney.com/Techsmart/index.cfm?story=20050803&pgnum=2

[Milligan]

From 911 Commission Book.
page 128,

"On November 4, 1998, the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York unsealed its indictment of Bin Laden, charging him with conpiracy to attack US defense installations. The indictment also charged that al Qaeda had allied itself with Sudan, Iran, and Hezbollah. The orginal sealed indictment had added that al Qaeda had "reached an uderstanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq." 109 This passage led Clarke, who for years had read intelligence reports on Iraqi-Sudanese cooperation on chemical weapons, to speculate to Berger that a large Iraqi presence at chemical facilities in Khartoum was "probably a direct result of the Iraq-Al Qida agreement." Clarke added that VX precursor traces found near al Shifa were the "exact formula used by Iraq." 110 This language about al Qaeda's "understanding" with Iraq had been dropped, however, when a superseding indictment was filed in November 1998." 111

#109: Indictment, United States v. Usama Bin Laden, No. 98Cr. (S.D.N.Y. unsealed November 4, 1998), page 3. For the reports concerning Derunta, see NSC membo. Clarke to Berger, Roadmap, Nov 3, 1998.

#110: NSC email, Clarke to Berger, Nove, 1998, Evidence on Iraqi ties to al Qaeda is summarized in Chapter 2.


#111
Patrick Fitzgerald testimony, June 16, 2004

"...One of the hazy questions that surrounds Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda is really its relationship, if any, with Iraq and with Saddam Hussein.

We've often heard that Osama bin Laden would not have been a natural ally, for religious reasons, for the composition and nature of Saddam Hussein's regime. And our staff report, as you just heard, basically says there's no credible evidence of any cooperation between the two. However, there seems to be some indicia that there may have been.

And, Mr. Fitzgerald, I'm delighted you're here, because this first question really I wanted to ask specifically to you, because it relates to the indictment of Osama bin Laden in the spring of 1998."

Interview with Mr. Fitzgerald con't

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A46525-2004Jun16?language=printer


A press release was made on 4 November 1998 without Iraq.
"According to the Indictment, BIN LADEN and al Qaeda
forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with representatives of the government of Iran, and its associated terrorist group Hezballah, with the goal of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.


Then a superseded indictment was made on 6 November 1998 with Iraq.

Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.
In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.



http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html

[AmeriBrit]

Bump

[nopardons]

bttt

[MHGinTN]

You will note that this is dribbled out, not made a lead story at the msnbc democrap propaganda trust.

[Peach]

DeLong also said that there were enough concerns about the amount of chemicals in the area( bombing could produce a lethal chemical cloud large enough to affect numerous civilians in the region), that ground troops were used to check the place for chemical weapons early in 2003 . By the time the troops got there "most" of the chemicals had been removed and the site was more or less sanitized.

I was hoping the president would mention this in his SOTU address. Again, good work.

[PhilDragoo]

We saw the WMDs being trucked west, and the Iraqi AF general confirmed that and the use of converted airliners.

Saddam had al Qaeda members as his guests for a decade, confirmed by captured documents.

When Clinton needed pretext for bombing aspirin factories and empty tents, the fifth-column media had his six.

But with Bush, these New Soviet Men operate in full Newthink mode.

[jwalsh07]

bump

[MHGinTN]

Frankly, the evidence at Salman Pak was all I needed to feel secure that Saddam was training terrorists to export murder around the world, wherever there were any American interests. And there is most likely alot of material which has yet to be revealed about Salman Pak.

That modern jet fuselage and commuter train setup, as training facilities, were just too obvious when 9/11 and the Spanish train bombings occurred. Add the Mukhabarrat assistence to al qaeda in Afghanistan, training them on chem and bio weaponry, and you have all that's needed to take him out when the time was ripe. And the damned to hell democrats voted for war knowing those facts and having agreed he had WMDs which must not be allowed to continue ... so long as they had a democrat degenerate in the White House. You see, this 'against the surge' crap is all about empowering the democrat control over US, at any cost, sacrificing anything and any number of Americans if need be to defeat not the insurgents and al qaeda but the Republican administration! The democrats do not believe they can afford to have Bush succeed in pacifying Iraq because it will prevent them having a landslide victory in '08.

I'm sick of the seditious bastards (they even unilaterally go to Syria to 'negotiate' with the enemies, and leak secret materials to expose tactics and planning) and their media whores spewing their propaganda (they even spew lies as truth and suppress the good our soldiers are accomplishing), working to aid the enemies killing our brave soldiers!

It is my belief that the WMDs are stored now in the Bakaa Valley under Sunni/Syrian control. But there is no way my President can go after any of the terrorists bastards as should be since the democrats have all but declared openly (did you catch Webb's little instruction to the President) they will now cancel the Executive branch of this government whenever they see fit, regardless of how many are killed because of their aiding and abetting! The democrats are going to get tens-of-thousands of Americans killed just to gain complete control over US ... and if you doubt they're capable of such evil, just look at how vigorously they've championed even partial birth infanticide in their empowerment schemes! Millions have been slaughtered in abortion rites defended by democrats, to empower democrat candidates at the ballot box.

[potlatch]

I can remember when the war first started and they showed many tractor trailors heading into Syria, I believe. But that doesn't get brought up very often.

[devolve]

I never could understand why we did not take out those convoys to Syria

[bray]

But Michael Mooron and the rest of the DNC spokesmen said that was a Kite Making Camp??

Pray for W and Our Troops

[potlatch]

No, me either. That was always a puzzle to me because we sat and watched all of the beginning of the war and they didn't do anything to stop those trucks.

And you never heard it talked about that much. Remember when they were first going in and the Iraqis coming out on the roads and surrendering? It was a unique experience to sit and watch a war begin, like being there in person but safe!!

[MHGinTN]

The convoy was not bombed (and that's the only means we had at the moment to stop them) because of the horrendous cleanup which would have been necessary following our victory ... not to mention the world press reagrding 'America's use of muclear and bio dirty bombs' to massacre Iraqis and Syrians. Some realities require compromises which seem antithetical at a later date but which were the right decision at the time. We couldn't afford to kill Russian drivers and guards on the convoys either.

[potlatch]

Thanks for your input. I can see that we had to concentrate on certain things and let others pass. Hindsight is always easy.

[PhilDragoo]

New Tone. Nagging JAG. Wouldn't be prudent.

Where are the men. Who ordered these towers and walls unmanned.

Bring me the head of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Fava beans. A good Chianti.

Before Butch declares Sharia Law.