Saddam's connection to Al Qaida

[TitanTiger 20,519]

I just over heard him talking about a paper that's just come to light that gives some sort of proof of Saddam's connection to Al Qaida? Unfortunately, I wasn't here for the whole piece and just caught the end of it. Anyone else hear what he said?

[rexbo 104]

He was probably refering to the same report mentioned in this article. This would be the nail in the coffin for Howard Dean and TigerAl's argument that we had no business toppling Saddam...

Iraq Rocked

Saddam's capture has overshadowed Con Coughlin's potentially debate-ending piece in today's Sunday Telegraph. Here's the top:

"Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta, the al-Qaeda mastermind of the September 11 attacks against the US, was trained in Baghdad by Abu Nidal, the notorious Palestinian terrorist.

"Details of Atta's visit to the Iraqi capital in the summer of 2001, just weeks before he launched the most devastating terrorist attack in US history, are contained in a top secret memo written to Saddam Hussein, the then Iraqi president, by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service.

"The handwritten memo, a copy of which has been obtained exclusively by the Telegraph, is dated July 1, 2001 and provides a short resume of a three-day 'work programme' Atta had undertaken at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad.

"In the memo, Habbush reports that Atta 'displayed extraordinary effort' and demonstrated his ability to lead the team that would be 'responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy'."

[Tiger Al 0]

Oh...the Feith memo again. :roll:

[AUloggerhead 2,255]

... This would be the nail in the coffin for Howard Dean and TigerAl's argument that we had no business toppling Saddam...

But, ... but, ... but, .... Bush LIED! On PURPOSE, even! There was NO Niger uranium! He knowingly used FALSE PRETENSES to get us into a war!

rexbo, you forgot to add this little gem from that article:

... And there's even this: "The second part of the memo, which is headed 'Niger Shipment', contains a report about an unspecified shipment — believed to be uranium — that it says has been transported to Iraq via Libya and Syria."

Perhaps Saddam himself will soon have something to say about all this.

Hmm ... Syria & Libya. What a surprise?

[Tiger Al 0]

But according to several published reports, the Feith memo contains much old information that was unverified. Some of it, according to Newsweek, was contradicted by other information not mentioned in the memo.

"If you don't understand how intelligence works, you could look at this memo and say, 'Aha, there was an operational connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda,'" a Pentagon official told The Times. "But intelligence is about sorting what is credible from what isn't, and I think the best judgment about Iraq and al Qaeda is that the jury is still out."

LINK

But, who knows, maybe they can get Lt. Col. Allen West to beat the truth out of him.

[TitanTiger 20,519]

So in other words, "the jury is still out"...which would mean Bush wasn't exactly lying about this whole terrorist connection thing, huh?

[Tiger Al 0]

So in other words, "the jury is still out"...which would mean Bush wasn't exactly lying about this whole terrorist connection thing, huh?

I suppose that if you're an eternal optimist who views the glass as not only half-full, but, with a rising water level, then the "jury is still out." Or if the glass had some Conservative Kool Aid in it and its' effects have fully kicked in, then maybe "the jury is still out."

But, you must remember, we weren't told that, in theory, there MIGHT be ties to al Quaeda. We weren't told that the evidence was weak and conflicted and merely suggested that there COULD be ties. We weren't even told that it was 50/50.

No, we were told, both explicitly and implicitly, that there were strong connections to al Quaeda. There was no doubt. When Bush makes statements like, "Saddam Hussein has WMD's and in the hands of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 the results could be catastrophic," over and over it gives the impression that the two are in cahoots. For months the administration was linking the two as being partners in the attacks on us here and abroad.

Bush wanted Iraq and he cherry picked evidence that could be manipulated to support his theory that they were involved in things they weren't.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

i'm an optimist.