Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Condi Calling al-Zarqawi A Connection Between Saddam And Osama

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:33 PM
Original message
Condi Calling al-Zarqawi A Connection Between Saddam And Osama
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US administration restated its case that Iraq had strong links to Al-Qaeda following Vice President Dick Cheney's latest statement that Saddam Hussein's regime had given sanctuary to Osama bin Laden's group.

The administration has persisted in saying there were close links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda even though the official investigation into the September 11, 2001 attacks said in its final report there was "no collaborative operational relationship between Iraq and Al-Qaeda."

"You don't have to have a collaborative operational control in order to aid terrorists," national security advisor Condoleezza Rice told NBC television when questioned about Cheney's remarks.

She said it was a publicly known that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, who Rice described as "the face of terror in Iraq today" had "operated freely in Baghdad" and probably ordered the assassination of a US government aid advisor in Jordan last year.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1514&e=19&u=/afp/us_iraq_attacks_rice

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

“Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. It depends on what the meaning of "Collaborative Operational Control" is
Edited on Fri Sep-10-04 03:40 PM by hatrack
Can anyone explain why this biped is NSA? Anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swami Love Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Why this biped is NSA
Because this biped is an African American women,

and thus it is not very "PC" to criticize her too roundly.

Thus she can be a more effective mouthpiece for the Machievellian machinations of the 'cons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. A Soviet specialist - maybe a Holy Roman Empire expert would work
I'm sure whoever it was certainly couldn't do any worse than Condi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enki23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. then rumsfeld is the connection in a collaborative link btwn...
Edited on Fri Sep-10-04 03:36 PM by enki23
saddam and bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BayouBengal07 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. Get that MSNBC article out.
"In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide."

Yes, Northern Iraq- the Kurdish controlled no-fly-zone area!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A_Possum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Details details!
why should we bother with a little detail like that when we're connecting SADDAM with AL-QAEDA!?:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. OK, so what does that say about your Saudi buddies, Condi? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chemenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. I see Ms. Godzilla has reappeared
after falling off of the radar screen for awhile.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. Re-Read This Great WP Article About Rice - Reveals So Much Of The BS
Rice was one of the most outspoken administration voices arguing that Saddam Hussein posed a nuclear danger to the world. As administration hard-liners worked to build support for war throughout the fall and winter, Rice often mentioned the fear that Hussein would develop a nuclear weapon, saying on CNN on Sept. 8: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

Rice claimed publicly that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, or INR, did not take issue with other intelligence agencies' view that Iraq was rebuilding its nuclear program. "What INR did not take a footnote to is the consensus view that the Iraqis were actively trying to pursue a nuclear weapons program, reconstituting and so forth," she said on July 11, referring to the National Intelligence Estimate.

Speaking broadly about the nuclear allegations in the NIE, she said: "Now, if there were doubts about the underlying intelligence to that NIE, those doubts were not communicated to the president, to the vice president, or to me."

In fact, the INR objected strongly. In a section referred to in the first paragraph of the NIE's key judgments, the INR said there was not "a compelling case" and said the government was "lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A51224-2003Jul26?language=printer



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
6. Scum fucking traitors!
"Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam."

That's right, folks I remember posting this awhile ago. Bush let the terrorists go on being terrorists so he would have a reason for war. With enemies like these who needs enemies huh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maine_raptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
10. The Plot Sickens
Note the last part of this sentence;

"Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam."

Someone before me posted that al-Zarqawi's camp was in Northern No-Fly Zone, ie Kurdish Iraq.

Could it be that the REAL reason Bush did not attack those camps was that he did not want to piss off the Kurds before the invasion. This would make more sense than any "undercutting". Bush's thrust for War in Iraq shows that he did not care about the "case", he was going in anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. Ah yes, northern Iraq.
Edited on Fri Sep-10-04 04:24 PM by Buzzz
IIRC it was widely reported that Saddam had no control over what was going on up there.

"Baghdad has no jurisdiction in the ethnic Kurd controlled region of Northern Iraq. In fact, the region is in the US sphere of influence. 'But the picture is neither complete nor conclusive. Ansar al-Islam has its bases in the Kurdish-controlled area of Iraq, beyond the control of Saddam Hussein.'" (NYT, 14 Febrauary 2003)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO302B.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. that photo creeps me out
but sums things up:

Smirky neocons in the corner, and Colin pushed over to the side there . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. But Still Standing There
You nailed it exactly why I picked that photo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
14. Well aren't they happy happy happy in that photo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
15. the guy needed medical care after afghanistan and got it
in iraq. the terrorist though as stated was northern iraq out of saddams comtrol. they had opportunity three times to get this man, but the highest up (bush?) chose not to because that would interfer with their quest with war against saddam. so they allowed this man to be free for their wants. they could have taken down that terrorist org in the north anytime and chose not to. the people got away by the time the soldiers got to that area. so as much as they want to argue this, they are all stinky with it.

there is another connection. once saddam felt he was going to be attack, he sided with palestine. in past had never cared for their plight but seeing an opportunity to get jihad and support from the area. he started paying suicider bombers family money. again this dipping hand towards terrorist was purely created from bush aggression to saddam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyhuskyfan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
17. I'm pretty sure he's connected with neither...
His organization was separate from Al Qaeda and operated in areas of Iraq that Saddam didn't control. So both ends of that link are pretty much bunk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
18. Americans have been given so many reasons to vote this guy out of office
Edited on Fri Sep-10-04 04:35 PM by npincus
it they elect him, they truly deserve him. However, the REST of us have to suffer, as well as the planet.

I personally don't know how I'll manage if it comes to that. It is too surreal that these immoral, unprincipled TRAITORS have so much support from the public. Do these people know how to read?

Anyway, forgive the rant, but I'm only human! I will fight like hell to get Bush & co.OUT!

Rant over (till next time).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC