New York Times Article on Document Linking Iraq and 9-11 & Saddam...

[Jimblast]

Apparently, a New York Times article outlines an official document proven authentic which reveals communications between Iraq and Osama. It was a discussion about cooridinating an effort to destabilize Saudi Arabia. I believe it was done through Ude and agents linking with Osama. I do not belong to the New York Times archived websight. If anyone can get access to it I would love to see it posted. I'm curious....if we first of all tie Iraq to Al Quaeda...will that change any Bush basher's opinions on reasons for us going to war with Iraq? And supposing we find undisputed proof of WMD's....will the Bush haters in here apologize or say they were wrong? Just wondering! :rolleyes:

[Cosmo_ac]

IN a word Jim, no. I belive the 9/11 commity had stated that Iraq and Bin ladden officials had met, but that there had been no indication of the colaberating. Also, could you state the timefraim of that report?

[qjakal]

I'd be surprised if that was a NY Times article Jim. They have a bias but NOT towards the current administrations position. Perhaps someone is referring to an editorial, since all papers of any journalistic integrity do print those from both sides of major issues...


Q

[Jimblast]

If you go to Foxnews.com, there is a video clip of it if you scroll toward the bottom of their home news page. I believe it was either today or yesterday. Naturally, with the NYTimes it will be back page news. You should hear about it on National News this evening. It is authentic and even the NY Times reported on it as well. In fact, in the clip I saw, it actually showed the paragraphs of the article but you couldn't read it. But it should be on the news this evening. It would be a major discovery I do believe!

[Mephistopheles]

Uhm, your thread title may be kind of wrong, as far as I know the link between Saddam and Iraq is something easily proven :D

It's always been said that although there was some contact between Saddam and Osama, Osama didn't like the way Saddam ran his business so there was no "business"-relationship as you're implying.

And if it's such big news, WHY is it not on the mayor headlines on the Fox website?

[Ghost2004]

WASHINGTON, June 24 — Contacts between Iraqi intelligence agents and Osama bin
Laden when he was in Sudan in the mid-1990's were part of a broad effort by
Baghdad to work with organizations opposing the Saudi ruling family, according
to a newly disclosed document obtained by the Americans in Iraq.

American officials described the document as an internal report by the Iraqi
intelligence service detailing efforts to seek cooperation with several Saudi
opposition groups, including Mr. bin Laden's organization, before Al Qaeda had
become a full-fledged terrorist organization. He was based in Sudan from 1992 to
1996, when that country forced him to leave and he took refuge in Afghanistan.

The document states that Iraq agreed to rebroadcast anti-Saudi propaganda, and
that a request from Mr. bin Laden to begin joint operations against foreign
forces in Saudi Arabia went unanswered. There is no further indication of
collaboration.

Last week, the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks
addressed the known contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda, which have been cited by
the White House as evidence of a close relationship between the two.

The commission concluded that the contacts had not demonstrated "a collaborative
relationship" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. The Bush administration responded that
there was considerable evidence of ties.

The new document, which appears to have circulated only since April, was
provided to The New York Times several weeks ago, before the commission's report
was released. Since obtaining the document, The Times has interviewed several
military, intelligence and United States government officials in Washington and
Baghdad to determine that the government considered it authentic.

The Americans confirmed that they had obtained the document from the Iraqi
National Congress, as part of a trove that the group gathered after the fall of
Saddam Hussein's government last year. The Defense Intelligence Agency paid the
Iraqi National Congress for documents and other information until recently, when
the group and its leader, Ahmad Chalabi, fell out of favor in Washington.

Some of the intelligence provided by the group is now wholly discredited,
although officials have called some of the documents it helped to obtain useful.

A translation of the new Iraqi document was reviewed by a Pentagon working group
in the spring, officials said. It included senior analysts from the military's
Joint Staff, the Defense Intelligence Agency and a joint intelligence task force
that specialized in counterterrorism issues, they said.

The task force concluded that the document "appeared authentic," and that it
"corroborates and expands on previous reporting" about contacts between Iraqi
intelligence and Mr. bin Laden in Sudan, according to the task force's analysis.

It is not known whether some on the task force held dissenting opinions about
the document's veracity.

At the time of the contacts described in the Iraqi document, Mr. bin Laden was
little known beyond the world of national security experts. It is now thought
that his associates bombed a hotel in Yemen used by American troops bound for
Somalia in 1992. Intelligence officials also believe he played a role in
training Somali fighters who battled Army Rangers and Special Operations forces
in Mogadishu during the "Black Hawk Down" battle of 1993.

Iraq during that period was struggling with its defeat by American-led forces in
the Persian Gulf war of 1991, when American troops used Saudi Arabia as the base
for expelling Iraqi invaders from Kuwait.

The document details a time before any of the spectacular anti-American
terrorist strikes attributed to Al Qaeda: the two American Embassy bombings in
East Africa in 1998, the strike on the destroyer Cole in Yemeni waters in 2000,
and the Sept. 11 attacks.

The document, which asserts that Mr. bin Laden "was approached by our side,"
states that Mr. bin Laden previously "had some reservations about being labeled
an Iraqi operative," but was now willing to meet in Sudan, and that
"presidential approval" was granted to the Iraqi security service to proceed.

At the meeting, Mr. bin Laden requested that sermons of an anti-Saudi cleric be
rebroadcast in Iraq. That request, the document states, was approved by Baghdad.

Mr. bin Laden "also requested joint operations against foreign forces" based in
Saudi Arabia, where the American presence has been a rallying cry for Islamic
militants who oppose American troops in the land of the Muslim pilgrimage sites
of Mecca and Medina.

But the document contains no statement of response by the Iraqi leadership under
Mr. Hussein to the request for joint operations, and there is no indication of
discussions about attacks on the United States or the use of unconventional
weapons.

The document is of interest to American officials as a detailed, if limited,
snapshot of communications between Iraqi intelligence and Mr. bin Laden, but
this view ends with Mr. bin Laden's departure from Sudan. At that point, Iraqi
intelligence officers began "seeking other channels through which to handle the
relationship, in light of his current location," the document states.

Members of the Pentagon task force that reviewed the document said it described
no formal alliance being reached between Mr. bin Laden and Iraqi intelligence.
The Iraqi document itself states that "cooperation between the two organizations
should be allowed to develop freely through discussion and agreement."

The heated public debate over links between Mr. bin Laden and the Hussein
government fall basically into three categories: the extent of communications
and contacts between the two, the level of actual cooperation, and any specific
collaboration in the Sept. 11 attacks.

The document provides evidence of communications between Mr. bin Laden and Iraqi
intelligence, similar to that described in the Sept. 11 staff report released
last week.

"Bin Laden also explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in
Sudan, despite his opposition to Hussein's secular regime," the Sept. 11
commission report stated.

The Sudanese government, the commission report added, "arranged for contacts
between Iraq and Al Qaeda."

"A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan," it
said, "finally meeting bin Laden in 1994. Bin Laden is said to have requested
space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons,
but Iraq apparently never responded."

The Sept. 11 commission statement said there were reports of further contacts
with Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan after Mr. bin Laden's departure from
Sudan, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative
relationship," it added.

After the Sept. 11 commission released its staff reports last week, President
Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney said they remained convinced that Mr.
Hussein's government had a long history of ties to Al Qaeda.

"This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between
Saddam and Al Qaeda," Mr. Bush said. "We did say there were numerous contacts
between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. For example, Iraqi intelligence officers
met with bin Laden, the head of Al Qaeda, in the Sudan. There's numerous
contacts between the two."

It is not clear whether the commission knew of this document. After its report
was released, Mr. Cheney said he might have been privy to more information than
the commission had; it is not known whether any further information has changed
hands.

A spokesman for the Sept. 11 commission declined to say whether it had seen the
Iraqi document, saying its policy was not to discuss its sources.

The Iraqi document states that Mr. bin Laden's organization in Sudan was called
"The Advice and Reform Commission." The Iraqis were cued to make their approach
to Mr. bin Laden in 1994 after a Sudanese official visited Uday Hussein, the
leader's son, as well as the director of Iraqi intelligence, and indicated that
Mr. bin Laden was willing to meet in Sudan.

A former director of operations for Iraqi intelligence Directorate 4 met with
Mr. bin Laden on Feb. 19, 1995, the document states.



Ghostie

[Cosmo_ac]

hmm....i don't think thats' really condeming evidence Jim. Lot's of old information is part of what the Iraq invasion was based on. Hell, they used 11 year old documents to base there intel on.

[Jimblast]

...I have heard over and over again that there is absolutely no connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq. Here's just one tie. This is merely the first document. I'm sure before it's over there will be others. The message being sent is if you were even suspected of ties to Al Qaeda, we would do something about it. I think it's sending the right message to countries that harbor these terrorists. Iraq certainly would not have cooperated under Saddam with us in any fashion. There were many reasons for us going in. It's been about a year, give it time. Other things will surface. I prefer us going in with suspicion after 9/11 as opposed to waiting to sort it all out. Hey, if we were wrong...which I don't think we were, the Iraqis have their country back, and Iran is going to be smothered on both sides.

[BigJim]

Well for your sake JB, I hope there's better evidence than this! I had more reliable evidence in my conspiracy threads, and you know how many laughed at that! And besides, even Fox didn't use the entire thing, just a selectively edited one...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123757,00.html


It doesn't really say anything we didn't already know; it supports the 9/11 commision findings of "contacts but NO working links", and if broadcasting propaganda is a "If you're happy and you know it bomb Iraq" offense, then surely the O'Reily Factor should earn Fox Central a MOAB or two? (Without any radioactivity of course.)

[Cosmo_ac]

Anybody with ties? Shouldn't that mean saudi arabia? Somehow, they didn't get investigated and infact got a quick one way ticket out of the US when 9/11 happened. Curious, no?

[venray]

Just to show you that you can find anything on the internet, I have found a site that proves the link between Saddam and Osama.....

http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s3i4906


THis is what we DONT mean by reputable site....LOL


Ray

[august spies]

this just in: history proves a stronger link between reagan, rumsfeld, and their cronies to bin laden and saddam as well than saddam ever had with bin laden

[Jimblast]

Reagan, Rumsfeld, Bush, and their socalled 'cronies' had ties to the Muja Hadin freedom fighters during the Russian invasion of Afganistan during the early 80's. Osama was a leader during that time of the Muja Hadin. That same group fought against Saddam with the coalition forces during Desert Storm. Again...taken out of context.... :sowrong:

[Mephistopheles]

uhm, has nobody noticed that the thread title is quite obvious?

[Jimblast]

I was WONDERING when someone would notice the title of this thread! Mind you, I didn't do it purposely but when I realized my mistake, I figured very quickly someone would point it out and wanted to see how long the arguing would go on. But then again, there might be those who WOULD argue that Saddam and Iraq at no ties just for the sake of arguing and somehow use it to bash Bush.

[BigJim]

JB, seriously, I don't look for arguments, or actively seek opportunities to critiscise world leaders. It isn't a hobby of mine, yanno. I just call things that happen as I see them. By your reckoning, I'm cross-eyed, and that's fine. But just remember that: I don't do it for the sake of it.

[BigJim]

You can change the title of the thread, by editing the original post. Personally though I'd leave it as it is. Humour's nice when it crops up occasionally.

Now I see you've replied to the other post I made. Let's go and chuck the humour out the window for ten minutes, while I go off and read it. :D :cry1: ;)

[ticklebutton]

Originally posted by Ghost2004
WASHINGTON, June 24 — ...American officials described the document as an internal report by the Iraqi intelligence service detailing efforts to seek cooperation with several Saudi opposition groups...

There is no further indication of collaboration.

Ghostie
Thank you for posting this, Ghostie. You're another calm, reasonable voice in the wilderness.

Button :bubble:

[BigJim]

A rare thing to be sure. They do exist though, on BOTH sides of the political divide. "Conservative" doesn't mean unreasonable or ignorant, any more than "liberal" does.

[ticklebutton]

Originally posted by BigJim
A rare thing to be sure. They do exist though, on BOTH sides of the political divide.
Yes indeed, sir, well said; as are all your posts.

Button :bubble:

[MrMacphisto]

Last time I heard... Osama and Saddam didn't like each other... They both hated us, but they both were once funded by us too... Ironic, eh? Maybe, we'll figure out one day that the more we fuck with the world, the more it fucks us back. If we're gonna clean up this terrorism mess, we better stop creating our own worst enemies.

Anyway, the mutual hatred between Osama and Saddam shows that the enemy of my enemy still isn't my friend....

[BigJim]

Osama and Saddam don't just hate each other, they loathe each other. Just because Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley are both bloodthirsty bastards of a Christian persuasion, doesn't mean they would unite against someone they both disliked.