Al Qaeda-Iraqi relationship proven beyond any doubt.

ABC World News Now | 4/27/2004

[MizSterious]

I doubt they sent men and women to war on the basis of SP alone. Evidence does add up, however. After the war, some of what Chalabi told us has been proven to be true--such as SP. Often even a very good liar will pepper the lies with a little truth in the interests of believability.

Are you denying the existence of Salman Pak?

[LexBaird]

ANYONE care to deal with the fact that before the war, Zarqawi's operations were in the Kurdish territory in the north of Iraq that was indisputably not under the control of Saddam's government?

I'll dispute it. The northern Kurdish area was under a "no-fly" interdict for Saddam's air power, but to think that severly limited his ground force movement, or even his operation of AA batteries in the north of Iraq is silly. AQ camps were located in the north for reasons of plausible deniability and quick cross-border access to Iran, but to think they were there without Saddam's approval, and logistical support, is naive.

[An.American.Expatriate]

ANYONE care to deal with the fact that before the war, Zarqawi's operations were in the Kurdish territory in the north of Iraq that was indisputably not under the control of Saddam's government?

IIRC, the Kurdish Territory in the north was not autonomous and Iraqi Troops were stationed there.

[MEG33]

Just who are the traitors?

[lugsoul]

Didn't know about it? You care to point out where I said that, or are you just going to admit you made it up?

Does it really matter what Saddam "knew" about activities that are not within his control - where the haven used by the terrorists is not HIS haven? I'm sure Saddam "knew" that AQ was operating in Iran, but that doesn't create ties between him and AQ.

This is real simple. At the beginning of this thread, many claim that the "confession" about these terrorists being involved with Zarqawi in Iraq shows a connection between AQ and Iraq, i.e. the Iraqi government that we deposed by force. The FACT is that Zarqawi and his bunch were not operating in any area where one can assume that they had the support and/or protection of Saddam's gov't. Saddam held no sway in the Kurdish area of the northern no-fly zone. If the allegations in this article establish the claimed connection, why aren't you claiming this as justification for attacking the Kurdish authorities? They had far more influence in this region than Saddam.

[Peach]

That was a good answer. I gave one as well, although not as good as yours.

The naysayers never have an answer for Salmon Pak, I notice.

They just change the goalposts.

[JohnGalt]

Powell is a loyal soldier to Bush; sometimes you need to read between the lines. Just keep in mind, you pinged me to this thread and I suspect its you looking for validation of your own opinion, as I am quite comfortable with mine.

I got an e-mail from a college buddy in Mosul. He is more or less protecting a tribe that Kurds, our "allies", kicked out of their homes when Saddam fell a year ago. Its such a sad mess over there, I can only reasoned people with make reasoned decisions on what to do next. However, justifying the death of your fellow countrymen with tinfoil hat conspiracy theories spun from Mssr. Chalabi is not living up to your duties at a citizen of this Republic, IMO.

Good Day All, and God Bless.

[quant5]

Yeah - and 9 of the plotters of this Jordanian attack were Syrian. They MUST be next on the take out list or at least send a gigantic secret opps message to cut this proxy war crap out.

[Peach]

ANYONE care to deal with the fact that before the war, Zarqawi's operations were in the Kurdish territory in the north of Iraq that was indisputably not under the control of Saddam's government?

Sure sounds to me like you think Saddam didn't know about terrorist activities in Kurdish territory because it wasn't "under his control". And to think that Saddam didn't control Iraq in all territories is rather naive, isn't it?

You seem so committed to the fact that Saddam didn't support and work with AQ. Where's your proof he didn't?

I'm sure Saddam "knew" that AQ was operating in Iran, but that doesn't create ties between him and AQ.

Do you mean Iraq?

Oh, so you don't think he had ties with AQ but he knew in advance about 9/11 and he let them train there and just didn't interfere. Is that your position? It is certainly contrary to everything that has been written about his control of his own country.

[JohnGalt]

It would take a proper investigation to find out but I have my suspicions.

[MEG33]

Google Kurd,Ansar al Islam...they were enemies They were a threat to the Kurds and pro Al Queda.When we went into the north ,we and the Kurds fought this group together..they would fade into Iran.

[MizSterious]

"...sometimes you need to read between the lines..."

READ BETWEEN THE LINES? So, someone came up with an exact quote, and you choose to insist it means something the person never said, because you read between the lines.

Since when is "reading between the lines" considered valid proof for anyone's point? I can "read between the lines" of any article, and state, emphatically, that in so doing, I know there are little green men walking on the Moon who are directing Earth's affairs via special mental rays. I would know this is true because I read between the lines."

Sorry, JG, this most recent argument is really one of your silliest. Ever.

[lugsoul]

From Fox News:

The Kurdish autonomous region, established after the 1991 Gulf War, is protected by U.S.-British air patrols. It is governed by The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan in the east, and the Kurdistan Democratic Party in the west.

Based upon everything I've seen, your assertions are false. If you can point to any evidence that Saddam's forces held territory anywhere near the Ansar enclave, I'd love to see it.

[lugsoul]

But they were operating in Kurdish territory. The whole premise of the article and this thread is that AQ operating in Iraq shows the connection. If it doesn't show a connection with Kurds - in whose territory they were based - how does it possibly establish a connection with Iraq, which held no sway in the area where Ansar was based?

[LexBaird]

I wrote a liitle essay on this a couple of weeks ago: Why are we in Iraq?

[Peach]

I'm reading that the smell of vindication in the morning will make the naysayers vanish for a while before their foolishness is enough to start its own thread.

[JohnGalt]

Again, the CIA has known about Salman Pak since the 1980s. It was Chalabi's scoundrels that created the since discredited story you are offering here.

[MEG33]

I thought surely there must be absolute proof for you to keep posting the traitor bit.

[uglybiker]

... any link available to this ABC report? I know a few liberals who I'd love to see strangle on this bit of information.

The liberals I know will dismiss it because they think ABC is a mouthpiece for the Republican party, just like the NY Times.

[Shryke]

Just keep in mind, you pinged me to this thread and I suspect its you looking for validation of your own opinion, as I am quite comfortable with mine.

I do not need validation. I wanted your opinion on the newest evidence that came to light - which you gave me. Thank you.

However, justifying the death of your fellow countrymen with tinfoil hat conspiracy theories spun from Mssr. Chalabi is not living up to your duties at a citizen of this Republic, IMO.

John, when you don't believe that any threat exists against the U.S. at all, what am I to say to you? If I recall correctly, you don't support a standing military, much less our fight with terrorists. I would offer that those who fail to recognize real threats to the U.S., and act on them (or even worse, pillory those that do!), are failing in their duties as citizens.