Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Senate Committee Report: No Saddam-Al Qaeda ties before war

by Josh K / September 8, 2006 2:56 AM PDT
Senators: CIA dismissed Saddam-al Qaeda ties before war

WASHINGTON (AP) -- There's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his al Qaeda associates, according to a Senate report on prewar intelligence on Iraq. Democrats said the report undercuts President Bush's justification for going to war.

The declassified document being released Friday by the Senate Intelligence Committee also explores the role that inaccurate information supplied by the anti-Saddam exile group the Iraqi National Congress had in the march to war.

It discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates."

Bush and other administration officials have said that the presence of Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a connection between Saddam's government and al Qaeda. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in June this year.
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Senate Committee Report: No Saddam-Al Qaeda ties before war
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Senate Committee Report: No Saddam-Al Qaeda ties before war
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Think that'll make Cheney stop claiming it constantly?
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) No chance
by Josh K / September 8, 2006 4:31 AM PDT
Collapse -
Richard Clarke
by duckman / September 8, 2006 5:42 AM PDT

"Bin Laden would boogie to Bagdhad"

Collapse -
Clinton believed it too...
by EdH / September 8, 2006 7:00 AM PDT

you could look it up.

And Zarqawi WAS in Iraq organizing terrorist attacks before the invasion. And he did get medical treatment at Uday's hospital.

The notion that there were no terrorists in Iraq befpore the invasion is totally incorrect.

Do you think deposing Saddam was not justified? This is a minor quibble over details.

Collapse -
Hmmmm
by duckman / September 8, 2006 7:36 AM PDT

"Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. . . . ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief named Faruq Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad." Source - ABC News reported that three intelligence agencies believed that Saddam had offered asylum to bin Laden - January 15, 1999

Collapse -
The report states that Iraq did not turn a blind eye to
by dirtyrich / September 8, 2006 7:13 AM PDT

Al Queda, but as far as I know, there has been no official debunking of reports of Al Queda operatives working in Iraq and even of some small training camps.
I don't see how if they are there and Iraq does nothing to stop them, how they did not turn a blind eye.
Also, I have not seen any offical debunking of the reports of Al Queda operatives meeting with Iraqi intelligence operatives.
True, these "debunkings" might not have been publicized and the intelligence report reflects this, but I do not know why these issues would not have been corrected publicly.

Collapse -
From what I remember....
by Josh K / September 8, 2006 7:32 AM PDT

....the only training camps that were found were in a portion of northern Iraq that Saddam did not control. So saying "there were Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq" without specifying where in Iraq they were or whether Saddam had anything to do with their being there is misleading.

Collapse -
Flies in the face of what 9/11 commission found...
by Edward ODaniel / September 9, 2006 1:44 AM PDT

but that can be answered easily enough as it appears different specific persons connections were "investigated".

The al-Qaeda connections were shown between Saddam's admin and various KNOWN al-Qaeda figures (including Mohammed Atta) and knowledge that Zarqawi was treated in Baghdad for a leg wound received in Afghanistan. Zarqawi was pretty much a low level member of al-Qaeda and first appeared on the intelligence radar as an al-Qaeda leader during the Millennium Plot ( http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/12/04/millennium.suspect.02/ ) under his real name.

Other info on him can be found here and verified by copious resources - http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/003681.php

The Democrats are spinning the report per their usual and refraining from mentioning that the other al-Qaeda connections have been shown repeatedly to be true.

"Debunking" connections between Saddam and Zarqawi to "prove" no al-Qaeda connection is kind of like saying "John Hinkley shot President Reagan. Reagan later died." Both statements are true although despite appearances are unrelated cause and effect. (Note - Anne C. used that first and it aptly demonstrates the lies of the left)

Collapse -
What I don't understand is that this is
by duckman / September 9, 2006 2:42 AM PDT

a 100% losing theme for the Liberals.

Collapse -
Did they consider only pre-war intelligence?
by Evie / September 9, 2006 2:56 AM PDT

How about all of the post-war intelligence indicating far stronger ties than were ever claimed by the Administration or DEMOCRATS who had the SAME pre-war intel.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?