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

Skip to comments.

Saddam link to Bin Laden
THE GUARDIAN ^ | 2/6/1999 | Julian Borger

Posted on 03/16/2003 10:45:03 AM PST by IowaHawk

Saddam Hussein's regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden, bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials.

The key meeting took place in the Afghan mountains near Kandahar in late December. The Iraqi delegation was led by Farouk Hijazi, Baghdad's ambassador in Turkey and one of Saddam's most powerful secret policemen, who is thought to have offered Bin Laden asylum in Iraq.

The Saudi-born fundamentalist's response is unknown. He is thought to have rejected earlier Iraqi advances, disapproving of the Saddam Hussein's secular Baathist regime. But analysts believe that Bin Laden's bolthole in Afghanistan, where he has lived for the past three years, is now in doubt as a result of increasing US and Saudi government pressure.

News of the negotiations emerged in a week when the US attorney general, Janet Reno, warned the Senate that a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction was a growing concern. "There's a threat, and it's real," Ms Reno said, adding that such weapons "are being considered for use."

US embassies around the world are on heightened alert as a result of threats believed to emanate from followers of Bin Laden, who has been indicted by a US court for orchestrating the bombing last August of embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, in which 259 people died. US delegations in Africa and the Gulf have been shut down in recent weeks after credible threats were received.

In this year's budget, President Clinton called for an additional $2 billion to spend on counter-terrorist measures, including extra guards for US embassies around the world and funds for executive jets to fly rapid response investigative teams to terrorist incidents around the world.

Since RAF bombers took part in air raids on Iraq in December, Bin Laden declared that he considered British citizens to be justifiable targets. Vincent Cannistraro, former chief of CIA counter-terrorist operations, said: "Hijazi went to Afghanistan in December and met with Osama, with the knowledge of the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. We are sure about that. What is the source of some speculation is what transpired."

An acting US counter-intelligence official confirmed the report. "Our understanding over what happened matches your account, but there's no one here who is going to comment on it."

Ahmed Allawi, a senior member of the opposition Iraqi National Congress (INC), based in London, said he had heard reports of the December meeting which he believed to be accurate. "There is a long history of contacts between Mukhabarat [Iraqi secret service] and Osama bin Laden," he said. Mr Hijazi, formerly director of external operations for Iraqi intelligence, was "the perfect man to send to Afghanistan".

Analysts believe that Mr Hijazi offered Mr bin Laden asylum in Iraq, most likely in return for co-operation in launching attacks on US and Saudi targets. Iraqi agents are believed to have made a similar offer to the Saudi maverick leader in the early 1990s when he was based in Sudan.

Although he rejected the offer then, Mamoun Fandy, a professor of Middle East politics at Georgetown University, said Bin Laden's position in Afghanistan is no longer secure after the Saudi monarchy cut off diplomatic relations with, and funding for, the Taleban militia movement, which controls most of the country.

Mr Fandy said senior members of the Saudi royal family told him in recent weeks that they had received assurances from the Taleban leader, Mullah Mohamed Omar, that once the radical Islamist movement secured control over Afghan territory, Bin Laden would be forced to leave. "It's a matter of time now for Osama." He said Bin Laden would have a strong ideological aversion to accepting Iraqi hospitality, but might have little choice.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaedaandiraq; binladen; iraq
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
Breaking news from 1999: talks between Bin Laden & Saddam, reported by the house organ of the Loon-Left.
1 posted on 03/16/2003 10:45:03 AM PST by IowaHawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
1999 - During clinton, nobody gave a damn. If slick did his job instead of getting a job, things might have turned out different.....
2 posted on 03/16/2003 10:48:15 AM PST by b4its2late (Law not enforced is not law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
who is thought to have offered Bin Laden asylum in Iraq.

Under the current circumstances that would not appear to be a really mouth-watering offer.

3 posted on 03/16/2003 10:49:14 AM PST by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
Good work, Iowa.
4 posted on 03/16/2003 10:50:17 AM PST by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
This must be wrong. The liberals have been whining that there IS no connection between Saddam and Osama.
5 posted on 03/16/2003 10:52:19 AM PST by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
And according to US News Magazine 'Washington Whispers' Clinton had the shot to take OBL out in 1998 with a missile and played phone tag with the situation room.
6 posted on 03/16/2003 10:53:55 AM PST by ewing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
This must be wrong. The liberals have been whining that there IS no connection between Saddam and Osama.

Yes, but it depends on what the meaning of "IS" is.

7 posted on 03/16/2003 10:54:09 AM PST by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ewing
And Clinton had another opportunity to nab Bin Laden in 1998 when Sudan offered his head on a silver platter, but he was too busy playing grab-@$$ with Monica Lewinsky.
8 posted on 03/16/2003 10:55:55 AM PST by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
*bookmarked*
9 posted on 03/16/2003 10:56:12 AM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
Great Post...thanks
10 posted on 03/16/2003 10:57:28 AM PST by dinok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
To find all articles tagged or indexed using Freeper Resource: Sleuthing The Iraq-Bin Laden Connection, click below:
  click here >>> Freeper Resource: Sleuthing The Iraq-Bin Laden Connection <<< click here  
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

11 posted on 03/16/2003 11:14:26 AM PST by Republican_Strategist (Win the War on Terrorism - Bomb Iraq!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
Cannot be correct. Saddam is "Secular", therefore he would never work with a "Religious" person like bin Laden, no matter how identical their goals and enemies are.

Everyone knows that. ;-)

12 posted on 03/16/2003 11:31:48 AM PST by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
wow.....GOOD work.
13 posted on 03/16/2003 12:39:25 PM PST by rwfromkansas (Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
Nice catch--thanks!
14 posted on 03/16/2003 12:42:11 PM PST by NautiNurse (There's something very fishy about this story...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
But hey... there is NO PROOF Iraq was involved in 9/11.

Right? Right?!
(crickets)

15 posted on 03/16/2003 1:11:41 PM PST by Lunatic Fringe (When news breaks, we fix it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe
BTT
16 posted on 03/16/2003 1:12:52 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk; RonDog; Dog Gone
Analysts believe that Mr Hijazi offered Mr bin Laden asylum in Iraq, most likely in return for co-operation in launching attacks on US and Saudi targets.

My guess is that bin Laden was happy to cooperate and Iraq threw him a few bucks in exchange for a bit of friendly consultation on target selection.

It's pretty suspicious that bin Laden went after the WTC, since the early 1993 attack was almost certainly Iraqi-influenced. So Iraq chose another go at the WTC, and bin Laden provided troops and motivation.

That hangs together awfully well, in my view.

D

17 posted on 03/16/2003 5:09:48 PM PST by daviddennis (Visit amazing.com for protest accounts, video & more!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
BTTT ... your analysis works to my mind. Salman Pak was a training haven for nearly every terrorist group willing to come to Baghdad. Documents discovered in Afghanistan show the visits of Iraqi 'Mukbars' to train al Qaeda in production and use of bio and chem weapons. But it doesn't matter to the democrats who wouldn't accept proof if it was irrefutable. They're too bitter about being turn out of power and too involved in trying to prevent this administration from succeeding in the war against terrorism to stop and care about America's safety or the real risks facing US.
18 posted on 03/16/2003 8:40:55 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I don't think they're sitting in their offices trying to figure out how to destroy America. I think they're just trying to save their own skins. Unfortunately, that doesn't make the results of their actions much different.

I try not to descend into tinfoil hatting, but there does appear to be a connection between the 1993 attack on the WTC and both Iraq and Bin Laden. It seems weird to me that this is not used as part of the case against Saddam today. I'm sure that within the administration it's well known and a major reason he's being targeted, but it's something I'd dearly love to learn more about.

Finally, I wish I could understand the left position. It appears to be inspired by folks like Noam Chomsky, who can sound pretty impressive to the naive and impressionable. But after a little while, you get to understand that his argument simply takes everything we do as aggression, while ignoring what the opposite side does to provoke it. You don't learn about Palastinian suicide bombers from him; you just learn that Israel, with American support, has killed billions of Palastinians.

Unfortunately, the whole left seems to argue like that. Their more erudite case seems to be that we supported Saddam against Iran, so it's hypocritical for us to go back and clean up the mess now. But that means the mess will never be cleaned up. I just can't take that kind of argument seriously.

D

19 posted on 03/17/2003 7:48:50 AM PST by daviddennis (Visit amazing.com for protest accounts, video & more!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: IowaHawk
Excellent Job!!!
20 posted on 03/17/2003 9:54:50 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 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