And yet another response in the Forums of US Politics:
George © wrote:
Stupendous Man wrote:
Saddam, Al Qaeda Did Collaborate, Documents Show
What a lovely and misleading title this is....
"News did not prove Saddam Hussein played a role in any way in plotting the attacks of September 11, 2001."
"One of these was a handwritten account of a February 19, 1995, meeting between an official representative of Iraq and Mr. bin Laden himself, where Mr. bin Laden broached the idea of "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. The document, which has no official stamps or markers, reports that when Saddam was informed of the meeting on March 4, 1995 he agreed to broadcast sermons of a radical imam, Suleiman al Ouda, requested by Mr. bin Laden."
So what it says is someone from Iraq met with someone representing Bin Laden...yet the official paper is not signed, stamped or anything....yeah, that is great proof that Saddam was working wth Al Qaeda.
Combined with the
Intelligence that Clinton Administration had through the CIA, it shows why we had to invade Iraq:
One of the most dramatic moments in the 12 hours of recordings comes when Saddam predicts - during a meeting in the mid 1990s - a terrorist attack on the United States. "Terrorism is coming. I told the Americans a long time before August 2 and told the British as well . that in the future there will be terrorism with weapons of mass destruction." Saddam goes on to say such attacks would be difficult to stop. "In the future, what would prevent a booby-trapped car causing a nuclear explosion in Washington or a germ or a chemical one?"
and
Also at the meeting was Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, who said Iraq was being wrongly accused of terrorism. "Sir, the biological is very easy to make. It's so simple that any biologist can make a bottle of germs and drop it into a water tower and kill 100, 000. This is not done by a state. No need to accuse a state. An individual can do it."
and
The tapes also reveal Iraq's persistent efforts to hide information about weapons of mass destruction programs from U.N. inspectors well into the 1990s. In one pivotal tape-recorded meeting, which occurred in late April or May of 1995, Saddam and his senior aides discuss the fact that U.N. inspectors had uncovered evidence of Iraq's biological weapons program-a program whose existence Iraq had previously denied.
At one point Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law and the man who was in charge of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction efforts can be heard on the tapes, speaking openly about hiding information from the U.N.
"We did not reveal all that we have, " Kamel says in the meeting. "Not the type of weapons, not the volume of the materials we imported, not the volume of the production we told them about, not the volume of use. None of this
was correct."
Did you seriously want to wait around for them to work together and then try to connect the dots? Plus it is still safe to bet that Saddam was behind the Anthrax attacks in Washington, since this specialized anthrax was Teflon coated to keep it from clumping together as it naturally does. Only two countries in the world had the ability to make quality and level of Anthrax outside the US were -
Russia, and Iraq:
On Oct. 25, 2001, an article in The Washington Post said only the U.S., Russia and Iraq were capable of weaponizing anthrax in the form found in the letters to the senators. And as we have seen, the FBI has been unable to duplicate it.
The Washington Post's editor Bob Woodward wrote in his book, "Bush at War, " that CIA Director George Tenet believed the anthrax attacks were made by al Qaeda, with the backing of a state. Vice President Dick Cheney agreed, but said it was important not to talk about state sponsorship, "because we're not ready to do anything about it."
Miss Mylroie deftly summarizes evidence linking 9/11 hijackers to the anthrax letters. Mr. Woodward quotes Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Mr. Cheney's chief of staff, in explaining why the administration did not acknowledge an al Qaeda link, even though it thought there was one: "If we say it's al Qaeda, a state sponsor may feel safe and then hit us, thinking they will have a bye, because we'll blame it on al Qaeda."
Plus as you can see, it wasn't hard for Bush & Co. to connect the dots, but the Liberal Media never has, and never will air this in mass for the public to see - they're too interested in putting Democrats not just in control of the Congress as they have, but the White House in 2008, and they don't care how much lying and covering up they have to do! They'll risk your life and mine to do it, just so they can have their power! And to think, until now, you thought there was no possible connection between Saddam and al Qaeda!
And when in doubt they try to hide the evidence through comittees:
M Harnden wrote:
Those articles are outdated because the senate intel report more recently concluded there was no connection. The report said Saddam though people like Bin Laden were out of their minds and needed to be removed. The two also had serious religious differences. Read the report sometime. Also even more recetly a house subcommittee reported no link could be made between the OKC bombings and foreign involvement. However the report did say that perhaps McVaigh did take a lot to the grave with him that we will probably never know.
Don't know about McVaigh, however, the senate intel report couldn't conclude there was a connection any more than they could conclude there wasn't one, and for the reasons, I said. Only the US, Russia, and Iraq had the expertise to manufacture the Teflon coated Anthrax so it wouldn't clump together, and yet the FBI couldn't duplicate the stuff in their own lab.
Plus, I put no stock in anything on the senate intel committee that is based upon the 9/11 Commission because of Jamie Gorelick's involvement and blatant conflict of interest!