CIA: No Iraqi officer link

[Snazzy]

CIA: No Iraqi officer link
White House official denies commissioner's statement that tied Saddam's Fedayeen unit to al-QaidaBY KNUT ROYCE
NEWSDAY WASHINGTON BUREAU

June 22, 2004


WASHINGTON - The CIA concluded "a long time ago" that an al-Qaida associate who met with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers in Malaysia was not an officer in Saddam Hussein's army, as alleged Sunday by a Republican member of the 9/11 commission.

Commissioner John Lehman, who was Navy secretary under Ronald Reagan, said "new ... documents" indicated that "at least one officer of Saddam's Fedayeen," an elite army unit, "was a very prominent member of al-Qaida."

Lehman's remarks on NBC's "Meet the Press" lent support to the Bush administration's insistence that there were strong ties between Hussein and al-Qaida.

The administration official said the CIA and U.S. Army obtained the lists of members of the Fedayeen shortly after the invasion of Iraq last year. Some, he said, had names "similar to" Ahmad Hikmat Shakir. But, he said, the CIA had concluded "a long time ago" that none were the al-Qaida associate. He would not say whether the al-Qaida associate is in U.S. custody. Other sources said he was not.

....

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscia223863038jun22,0,6059318.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines

[leftchick]

1. it does not matter what the CIA says...

no tv media will show what fucking liars all of those repukes and the mis-administration are. Timmy should get this on the air on Sunday to show Lehman and Cheney are liars but he won't.

[DrBB]

2. Muddying the waters

It's Bad News Tactic #2, vying with Smear and Defame for the #1 spot.

What they do is seize upon any shred of contradictory "evidence" and promote the hell out of it in order to create the impression that the question--whatever it is--is open and "controversial." Then it becomes a matter of loyalty, and all dissent can be cast as partisan sniping: Believe The Preznit or Believe His Critics!

And the press falls willingly into line because they prefer this kind of he-said-she-said, left-right, "it's all politics" framework. Their only job is to cover "both sides" of any issue and the last thing they want to do is be responsible for actually knowing anything about anything and having to decide what's actually true.

[underpants]

3. Add in the pre-emptive undercutting of the CIA's credibility

This one was obvious from WAAaaaaaay away. They started undercutting the CIA's (and FBI's) credibility more than a year ago to:

a. blame 9/11 on them
b. blame what they knew was bad intel on Iraq
c. "overhaul" the system ;-) wonder if we will get an OSP type operation?
c. pre-empt facts and contrary opinions coming out of either organization.