Link between Saddam and Al Qaeda confirmed

fintstone · fintstone's Garage

Looks like all those untranslated documents were the key as predicted. Looks as if a clear link has been established beyond a reasonable doubt. I know, I know....the article is posted on fox...so Bush must have written it himself.......
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200908,00.html

Mulhollanddose · 06-26-2006, 11:07 PM

4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting--the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9-11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes.

Weekly Standard

dd74 · 06-27-2006, 12:02 AM

And how does this solve the mess Iraq and the U.S. is in now, aside from a distant hope this might save some Bush Administration face?

Mulhollanddose · 06-27-2006, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dd74
And how does this solve the mess Iraq and the U.S. is in now, aside from a distant hope this might save some Bush Administration face?

What mess?...How should it have gone?...28 minutes, a couple of commercial breaks and a nice tidy closing scene where everyone hugs and sings kumbaya?

fintstone · fintstone's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by dd74
And how does this solve the mess Iraq and the U.S. is in now, aside from a distant hope this might save some Bush Administration face?

I think it is going quite well. Things are actually ahead of schedule.

tabs · 06-27-2006, 03:34 AM

The USA has had talks with N Korea, does that mean we are allys of N Korea to?

Tim Hancock · 06-27-2006, 03:46 AM

Careful there tabs, it sounds like you might be starting to use coolchicky logic.

TerryBPP · 06-27-2006, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tabs
The USA has had talks with N Korea, does that mean we are allys of N Korea to?

What about the time when Bush had talks with Bin Ladin in the 80's? The Dems still use that as connection to the invasion for oil.

fastpat · 06-27-2006, 03:51 AM

It's pretty obvious that the Bush'ists have saved these revelations for the elections in a year where Bush's popularity is threatening to drop into the 20% range if it hasn't already.

This crap is nothing new, it is outright fabrications by the Bush'ist regime, handed to cooperative outlets and their talking heads.

Nothing to see here, move along.

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

When did WWII end? 1945? Did the US pull out of Europe in 1945? When did the US stop giving out WWII occupation forces decorations and insignia? The 1970's? How long did the US occupy Japan after WWII?

This is not a war, it is an occupation. The war ended in April of 2003. 3 years is a very short time to get a country like Iraq under control. I wouldn't doubt that we will still have troops on the ground in 3-5 years.

fastpat · 06-27-2006, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by red-beard
When did WWII end? 1945? Did the US pull out of Europe in 1945? When did the US stop giving out WWII occupation forces decorations and insignia? The 1970's? How long did the US occupy Japan after WWII?

This is not a war, it is an occupation. The war ended in April of 2003. 3 years is a very short time to get a country like Iraq under control. I wouldn't doubt that we will still have troops on the ground in 3-5 years.

Since the invasion and attempted occupation of Iraq was and continues to be illegal, the troops must be withdrawn immediately.

There cannot be any further occupation.

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Funny how the administration conveniently de-classifies certain docs which it can use for positive spin, but still maintains a death grip on other stuff - like Cheney's "Energy Task Force" meetings with the heads of the oil companies.

Joeaksa · 06-27-2006, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dd74
And how does this solve the mess Iraq and the U.S. is in now, aside from a distant hope this might save some Bush Administration face?

It solves nothing and is not intended to. It does show that without a doubt we needed to go in there and clean this mess up and for good reason.

fastpat · 06-27-2006, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by widebody911
Funny how the administration conveniently de-classifies certain docs which it can use for positive spin, but still maintains a death grip on other stuff - like Cheney's "Energy Task Force" meetings with the heads of the oil companies.

Indeed, this regime is so security conscious that it has reclassified documents that were previously available in the Library of Congress for 20-30 years.

They make the Nixon administration look positively open in comparison.

fastpat · 06-27-2006, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
It solves nothing and is not intended to. It does show that without a doubt we needed to go in there and clean this mess up and for good reason.

No, it wouldn't show that even if it were true.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Grasping at straws guys. . . Straws. You can do better than that (or maybe you can't!)

Joeaksa · 06-27-2006, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Grasping at straws guys. . . Straws. You can do better than that (or maybe you can't!)

If you are not interested in the truth then keep your head in the sand like slopat.

If the newly translated intel shows that Saddam and the terrorists were working together and you do not care, then eventually you will wake up. That smell you will have will not be BS but the area you are in burning after the bomb. Hope its not a dirty nuke style bomb for your sake.

dd74 · 06-27-2006, 08:03 AM

So they're ahead of schedule in resolving Iraq? What schedule was that? Iraq is resolved? Does it have a functioning government and military/security? Have there been any terrorist bombings today intended to kill Iraqi citizens?

Again, ass-covering, Bush style. If in the least, this news about some Saddam-al Queda connection does not mitigate the fact the U.S. is involved in a Vietnam-style quagmire, from which if we do pull out without security established within Iraq, this Bush-influenced effort will look even more like Vietnam.

techweenie · techweenie's Garage

Hilarious.

The Bushistas want to give control of our ports to Dubai but wanted to kill or depose Saddam. In the case of the former, their recognition of the Taliban as the rightful government of Afghanistan was irrelevant. But in the latter, it's a big deal.

Only on Fox would this kind of transparent propaganda pass as news.

Moneyguy1 · 06-27-2006, 08:39 AM

Anything posted from FOX is suspect, as is anything posted by any of the "newsmaking sites".

Whatever happened to simple "reporting?"

"Everything is going great, we are ahead of schedule, there are WMDs out there somewhere, SH was preparing to invade the US, it is possible to develop democracy in the ME, the evil ones are on the run, we are safer today than we were five years ago, there have been no major attacks on American soil since 2001, There is a big difference between the Dems plan for redeployment and Gen. Casey's plan, It is all the fault of liberal thinking and interference, there is no comparison between Vietnam and Iraq, The current situation is winnable in military terms...."

Did I miss anything?