Posted on 03/16/2007 3:59:32 PM PDT by shrinkermd
War On Terror: Al-Qaida mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has confessed to being the mastermind for a lot of terrorist crimes. Old news? Hardly. His confession appears to link al-Qaida to Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
War critics argue that Saddam Hussein had little to do with terrorism, and nothing to do with al-Qaida. Since there was no Iraq-al-Qaida link, they say, the U.S. should never have invaded to get rid of Hussein, no matter how evil he was. But something interesting has come out of the interrogations of the lead al-Qaida suspects at Guantanamo.
In particular, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confirmed what was suspected all along: He was the driving force and chief planner behind 15 years of al-Qaida terrorism nearly 30 attacks and plots in all. That includes 9/11, the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl and, much earlier, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
If so, it further cements the evidence that Iraq was, at minimum, a willing partner of al-Qaida's in the decadelong burst of terrorism that culminated in 9/11. Indeed, Mohammed's Gitmo confession neatly ties the '93 WTC bombing and 9/11 to Iraq and al-Qaida. After all, Iraq had the means oil money and the motive revenge for Hussein's humiliation in the 1991 Gulf War.
Of particular interest is the revelation about Mohammed's involvement in the '93 bombing. It shows a linkage not only between the '93 WTC attack and 9/11, but also between Iraq and al-Qaida.
We already know, for instance, that Abdul Rahman Yasin, the Iraqi responsible for carrying out the '93 bombing, found a haven in Iraq for a decade after the attack. Yasin worked closely with another al-Qaida operative, Ramzi Yousef, on the '93 WTC bombing.
For the record, Yousef is Mohammed's nephew. He was described by the National Commission On Terrorism's 9/11 report as 'the mastermind' of the '93 bombing. And according to U.S. intelligence, he got funding from al-Qaida.
Intelligence documents captured in Baghdad in September 2003 show that Yasin and the others received financial aid from the Iraqi government. This raises a big question: Why would Iraq, under international scrutiny for both WMD and sanctions, support a known terrorist with ties to al-Qaida? The only reasonable answer is, it wanted to keep Yasin quiet about Iraq's involvement.
There's ample evidence of Iraq's role in 9/11 too. The lead 9/11 hijacker, Mohammed Atta, met at least twice with Iraqi intelligence in Europe before carrying out the attacks. And Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, an Iraqi intelligence operative, attended a key meeting of the 9/11 hijackers and other al-Qaida terrorists in January 2000.
Upon capture, Shakir was found to be in contact with Zahid Sheikh Mohammed, brother of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Iraqi Musab Yasin, brother of Abdul Rahman Yasin, and Ibrahim Ahmad Suleiman, a '93 WTC conspirator.
It's pretty clear that al-Qaida and Iraq, far from being enemies, were tactical allies against the U.S. As such, removing Hussein wasn't a distraction from our war on terror; it was vital to it.
Sen. Bob Graham has always been a bit "squirrely" about this whole thing, IMHO.
IOW, I think he has a lot more evidence that backs Pres. Bush up....but, as a good DEM, he has worked very hard to hid anything that he knows since Bush has gotten on the wrong side of the dems on about 9/13/01...
Peach...as you can tell...even on FR nowdays, so many people are deluded into thinking that getting the truth out doesn't matter...because THEY are mad at Bush.
I have been saying for a long time...if a POTUS gives a speech and the MSM calls him a liar, will anyone believe him or listen to him???
NO..and even some freepers have started with the company line.
I KNOW that this is more than just about Pres. Bush..this is about national security. I would just like some freepers to ponder that maybe Pres. Bush feels the same way...and so instead of getting on TV everyday to try to ARGUE with the MSM and the libs about the "truth", he is keeping the national security interest in mind, and NOT revealing classified information that MIGHT be proof...
I say MIGHT be proof because I have come to the conclusion that OBL could be captured tomorrow and confess that he and Saddam were in the 9/11 planning together...and the MSM and the libs would say HE is lying!!!!
They will never, ever admit that Pres. Bush has even been right about anything...and so many here on FR are acting like that lately.
I am not sure I have the energy to fight when so many even here would rather bitch.
Thanks...I wasn't sure...but I thought I remembered a "change" that came over Bob Graham.
Ewwwww....
Sure hope you are right. Wish we'd scare a few more of them...
I did not know that! </Sarcasm>
And risk annoying the DC circuit to the extent that cocktail party invitations cease? Horrors!
bump
Most people do not understand that when dealing with these Islamic Fundamentalists, you never have a clear connection or paper trail to document their meetings.
They do not take pictures together, they do not meet in places where others would recognize them and their money and assistance are transferred in the shadows.
I just saw your reply this morning and agree 100% about how so few people seem to be tying this together. It's very frustrating.
Thanks for that... I needed a laugh, and this is a hilarious site...
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=1094
But harder proof would be nice.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Another liberal lurker, driftless2 is.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
I been in business contracts for 35 years, and I can tell you your micheal moore six grade logic that a contact (hard proof) exists between Iraq and Al Quada is just plain silly, and show the strength of your MM skills.
Ha, ha, good one. Apparently you've never read much of posts since I've been a strong supporter of the idea that there were links between Hussein and Al-Qaeda. The sad fact is that though highly plausible, there is still no smoking-gun confirmation of Atta's ties to Iraqi agents. However let me state this to you: I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE WAR OF TERROR AND THE REMOVAL OF SADDAM HUSSEIN!!! Is that good enough for you? If not, tough toenails. And quit with the cheap insults.
bookmark
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.