Thursday, March 23, 2006

Saddam, bin Laden & The French

A new pre-war document has been released. The ABC site has five parts to talk about. I don't usually post the whole piece but I am this time. Why these documents weren't released before now I can't say, but I doubt the Left would have cared even then.
Read More
1) Osama Bin Laden Contact With Iraq
A newly released pre-war Iraqi document indicates that an official representative of Saddam Hussein's government met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan on February 19, 1995 after approval by Saddam Hussein. Bin Laden asked that Iraq broadcast the lectures of Suleiman al Ouda, a radical Saudi preacher, and suggested "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. According to the document, Saddam's presidency was informed of the details of the meeting on March 4, 1995 and Saddam agreed to dedicate a program for them on the radio. The document states that further "development of the relationship and cooperation between the two parties to be left according to what's open (in the future) based on dialogue and agreement on other ways of cooperation." The Sudanese were informed about the agreement to dedicate the program on the radio.

The report then states that "Saudi opposition figure" bin Laden had to leave Sudan in July 1996 after it was accused of harboring terrorists. It says information indicated he was in Afghanistan. "The relationship with him is still through the Sudanese. We're currently working on activating this relationship through a new channel in light of his current location," it states.


2) Osama bin Laden and the Taliban
An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghani informant, who's only identified by a number, told them that the Afghani Consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him:

That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq.
That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and "bin Laden's group" agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America.
That in case the Taliban and bin Laden's group turn out to be involved in "these destructive operations," the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan.
That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq's relationship with "bin Laden's group" while he was in Iran.

At the end, the writer recommends informing "the committee of intentions" about the above-mentioned items. The signature on the document is unclear.


3) Election Campaign Laws in France
Correspondence regarding election campaigns in France. This includes a document from the Iraqi intelligence service classified as "secret," ordering the translation of important parts of a 1997 report about campaign financing laws in France. It also includes a document from the foreign minister's office indicating the report was attached. The attached translated report included very detailed information about all the regulations regarding financing of election campaigns in France. Translation was done by someone called "Salam Abdul Karim Mohammed."

We all know Charac was bribed by Saddam. Duh.

4) Hiding Docs from the U.N. Team
A letter from the Iraqi intelligence service to directors and managers advising them to follow certain procedures in case of a search by the U.N. team, including:

Removing correspondence with the atomic energy and military industry departments concerning the prohibited weapons (proposals, research, studies, catalogs, etc.).

Removing prohibited materials and equipment, including documents and catalogs and making sure to clear labs and storages of any traces of chemical or biological materials that were previously used or stored.

Doing so through a committee which will decide whether to destroy the documents.
Removing files from computers.


The letter also advises them on how they should answer questions by U.N. team members. It says the intelligence service should be informed within one week about the progress made in discarding the documents.


Maybe Saddam wasn't cooperating with the U.N. all that much after all. Huh.

5) Al Qaeda Presence in Iraq
A number of correspondences to check rumors that some members of al Qaeda organization have entered Iraq. Three letters say this information cannot be confirmed. The letter on page seven, however, says that information coming from "a trustworthy source" indicates that subjects who are interested in dealing with al Qaeda are in Iraq and have several passports.

The letter seems to be coming from or going to Trebil, a town on the Iraqi-Jordanian border. Follow up on the presence of those subjects is ordered, as well as comparison of their pictures with those of Jordanian subjects living in Iraq. (This may be referring to pictures of Abu Musaab al Zarqawi and another man on pages 4-6) The letter also says tourist areas, including hotels and rented apartments, should be searched.


The case for going into Iraq just keeps getting stronger.

Credit: Opinionnation Times
Filed under War On Terror

9 comments:

Za said...

1) Gasp. Shock horror - Osama got a radio show to play in Iraq. I can see now that Saddam was behind 9/11 after all.
2) That second one has an Afghani stating what knowledge the US has - apparently the US has knowledge that Saddam and Bin Laden are together attacking targets in the US.
Well that's obvious (he said sarcastically), what with Bush having to run a spin campaign to make people think that Saddam was connected to 9/11, and then suddenly backtrack and claim that they never actually said such a thing (which they actually did, but anywho).

3) What exactly does "removing prohibited materials" signify? Destruction, hiding, or the sale of?

4) We already knew Al Qaeda was in Iraq, just not with Saddam's approval or knowledge.

Really a strong case there Chris. *rolls eyes*

Za said...

Actually, an interesting thing pops up from those documents as well, which your article doesn't go into.

I'll quote my article for you:
Exasperated, besieged by global pressure,
Saddam Hussein and top aides searched for ways in the 1990s to prove to the world they'd given up banned weapons.
ADVERTISEMENT

"We don't have anything hidden!" the frustrated Iraqi president interjected at one meeting, transcripts show.

At another, in 1996, Saddam wondered whether U.N. inspectors would "roam
Iraq for 50 years" in a pointless hunt for weapons of mass destruction. "When is this going to end?" he asked.

It ended in 2004, when U.S. experts, after an exhaustive investigation, confirmed what the men in those meetings were saying: that Iraq had eliminated its weapons of mass destruction long ago, a finding that discredited the Bush administration's stated rationale for invading Iraq in 2003 — to locate WMD.


Oh, and there's:
Even as the documents make clear Saddam's regime had given up banned weapons, they also attest to its continued secretiveness: A 1997 document from Iraqi intelligence instructed agencies to keep confidential files away from U.N. teams, and to remove "any forbidden equipment."

Since it's now acknowledged the Iraqis had ended the arms programs by then, the directive may have been aimed at securing stray pieces of equipment, and preserving some secrets from Iraq's 1980s work on chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.


And let's not forget:
At the same meeting, however, Saddam, who was deposed by the U.S. invasion in 2003 and is now on trial for crimes against humanity, led a discussion about converting chemical weapons factories to beneficial uses.

When a subordinate complained that U.N. inspectors had seized equipment at the plants useful for pharmaceutical and insecticide production, Saddam jumped in, saying they had "no right" to deny the Iraqis the equipment, since "they have ascertained that we have no intention to produce in this field (chemical weapons)."


Gasp. Is that the apparently reconstituted "case" for invading Iraq suddenly crumbling about your ears Chris?

Opinionnation said...

This, like many other facts, simply points out that when people say Hussein had no connections to UBL or to terrorism, they are 100% wrong. Nobody said this is the "smoking gun" proving war was necessary.

Za said...

Actually Opinion, I would like to quote the original post here:
The case for going into Iraq just keeps getting stronger.

Now apparently this is based on:
1) Osama bin Laden getting a radio show on air in Iraq.
2) The Taliban illegally (according to Saddam's law) infiltrating Iraq.
3) Al Qaeda influencing France (please remind me what this has to do with Iraq?).
4) Saddam destroying equipment that had accidentally been left behind from his already long-closed weapons programs.

Now I don't see a radio show, the Taliban working against Saddam, actions in France, OR Saddam doing what he was actually meant to do as lending ANY extra weight to the war.

But that could just be me.

Opinionnation said...

It’s true, the case is getting stronger. The case getting stronger in no way means smoking gun.

Za, if you’re up to reading detailed reporting and accounts by various articles and news agencies including Saddam's commanders and general, visit here. It’s somewhat long but it covers a lot of information you might find interesting.

The Case for WMD and AL Qaeda Connections

Indian Chris said...

Watch out there, Anthony. That's a right-wing site so it's full of lies.

Opinionnation said...

lol.

here is the site again because I think I messed up the address in my previous comment:

Case for WMD and Al Qaeda connections

Za said...

The link didn't work.

However, Opinion, as I said - neither a radio show, the Taliban working against Saddam, actions in France, OR Saddam doing what he was actually meant to do lend any extra weight to the war. Agreed?

Za said...

Found that article.

Hoekstra and others have continued to put pressure on the administration to release them, something you’d think they would want to do anyway considering the information would seem to support the administration’s position on Iraq.

You'd think. There's a reason they don't though - because it shows exactly what the intelligence community's been saying. No WMDs and only the most tenuous connection to Al Qaeda.

The "scattered reports" of Saddam's WMDs being moved to Syria are false. The released documents show that. The released documents, which are available from the government websites, in fact, show that Saddam didn't have any WMD programs since the early 90's.

Now this is quite a good indication of the way the article runs:
I have long believed that the WMDs were moved to/through Syria and that the information will come out eventually.
Despite the fact that the evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.

Oddly enough, the article's link to "CNSNews.com: Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties" doesn't work. The second article it links to "Washington Times: Syria Storing Iraq’s WMDs" is patently false, given that the intelligence community was actually REJECTING the Bush administration claims that Saddam had WMDs, not supporting them.

It keeps on going on like this... basically the article is bunk. A mass of opinions for which "evidence will probably come out soon" (despite the fact that we just got all those declassified documents, and golly gee - not in there!) and then a bunch of interviews which run directly contrary to all the gathered intelligence.

The WMD argument is well and truly dead, and the Al Qaeda argument is based on ridiculously tenuous connections and ignores the rather stronger ties Al Qaeda had with anti-Saddam movements.