Evidence That Saddam Intended To Attack The US and Iraq connections to Osama

[conjur]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Here try to explain this one away

February 1999 CNN article
The good part

Saddam Hussein offered asylum

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers.

Of course we all know that CNN is just a front for the republican party. And this was planted by Rove two years before Bush even took power... damn they are so good.

oops forgot link
CNN link showing that Saddam offered Osama asylum

9/11 Commission Report:

Bin Ladin was also willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq,
even though Iraq?s dictator, Saddam Hussein, had never had an Islamist
agenda?save for his opportunistic pose as a defender of the faithful against
?Crusaders? during the Gulf War of 1991. Moreover, Bin Ladin had in fact
been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract
them into his Islamic army.53
To protect his own ties with Iraq,Turabi reportedly brokered an agreement
that Bin Ladin would stop supporting activities against Saddam. Bin Ladin
apparently honored this pledge, at least for a time, although he continued to
aid a group of Islamist extremists operating in part of Iraq (Kurdistan) outside
of Baghdad?s control. In the late 1990s, these extremist groups suffered major
defeats by Kurdish forces. In 2001, with Bin Ladin?s help they re-formed into
an organization called Ansar al Islam.There are indications that by then the Iraqi
regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common
Kurdish enemy.54
With the Sudanese regime acting as intermediary, Bin Ladin himself met
with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995.
Bin Ladin is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as
assistance in procuring weapons, but there is no evidence that Iraq responded
to this request.55 As described below, the ensuing years saw additional efforts to
establish connections.

There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number
of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported
to have received a significant response.According to one report, Saddam Hussein?s
efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle
Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.74
In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative.
In March 1998, after Bin Ladin?s public fatwa against the United States,
two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence.
In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with
the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps
both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin?s Egyptian
deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was
under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air
attacks in December.75
Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have
occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban.
According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq.
Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan
remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe
friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides? hatred of
the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier
contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor
have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing
or carrying out any attacks against the United States.76
Bin Ladin eventually enjoyed a strong financial position in Afghanistan,
thanks to Saudi and other financiers associated with the Golden Chain.
Through his relationship with Mullah Omar?and the monetary and other
benefits that it brought the Taliban?Bin Ladin was able to circumvent restrictions;
Mullah Omar would stand by him even when other Taliban leaders raised
objections. Bin Ladin appeared to have in Afghanistan a freedom of movement
that he had lacked in Sudan.Al Qaeda members could travel freely within
the country, enter and exit it without visas or any immigration procedures, purchase
and import vehicles and weapons, and enjoy the use of official Afghan
Ministry of Defense license plates.Al Qaeda also used the Afghan state-owned
Ariana Airlines to courier money into the country.77

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: LunarRay
IF I recall that story was posted two years ago and debunked then...

That it appears again is not surprising but a waste, IMO..

It was debunked because it was based on the fact that Russia could not provide any evidence whatsoever and was based primarly on Putin's word if it's worth anything these days. Also if you look at all the nations in the Middle-East everyone of them have supported "terrorists" groups knownly or unknownly in one form or another. Our to biggests "allies" Saudia Arabia and Pakistan have many sections of their goverment who support Al qaida in one form or another even if it's just sideline cheerleading.

It is amazing that we are buddy buddy with what ever nation fits our needs regardless of ANY other consideration.. Heck we even had Saddam's Iraq as our good buddy for the longest time.. all the while we supplied him with what he used to commit the very crimes he's being charged with.. sorta make the US complicit is some manner..

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: LunarRay
IF I recall that story was posted two years ago and debunked then...

That it appears again is not surprising but a waste, IMO..

Yep, if you look at the date of the Washington Post article, it was wayyy back in June '04.

I just did that... hehehehehehhe Guess some folks don't look see the giant rock rolling down the hill about to swamp their credibility.. again..

 

[ProfJohn]

One more post on Saddam and Osama for tonight.
I have been trying like heck to find a 1999 article from Newsweek that links Saddam's attempts to reach out to Osama linked terror groups. All I can find is a partial reprint on Free republic. (If you Google "Newsweek 1 11 Contreras " you will see this site in the list. Contreras was the writer and 1-11 was the date it was published.
Here is the part reprinted on the site Saddam + Bin Laden

Here's what is known so far: Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas -- assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer. U.S. intelligence has had reports of contacts between low-level agents. Saddam and bin Laden have interests -- and enemies -- in common.

and

The idea of an alliance between Iraq and bin Laden is alarming to the West (what if Baghdad gave the terrorists highly portable biological weapons?)Saddam may think he's too good for such an association. Jerold Post, a political psychologist and government consultant who has profiled Saddam, says he thinks of himself as a world leader like Castro or Tito, not a thug. "I'm skeptical that Saddam would resort to terrorism," says a well informed administration official. "He can do a lot of other things to screw with us." But Saddam is famous for doing whatever it takes to stay in power. Now that the United States has made his removal from office a national objective, he knows he is fighting for his life. "The worst thing you can do is to wound him, let him know you meant to kill him, and then let him survive," says an Iraqi Shiite leader in London. As his own people know only too well, Saddam is quite capable of fighting dirty.

Look at the date this was printed. Bill Clinton was still President and even then they were worried about a link between Osama and Saddam. Please explain this away.

And one more source showing ties between Saddam and Osama.
A 1998 New York Times piece about Osama being indicted.
New York Times abstract

A Federal grand jury in Manhattan returned a 238-count indictment yesterday charging the Saudi exile Osama bin Laden in the bombings of two United States Embassies in Africa in August and with conspiring to commit other acts of terrorism against Americans abroad.

Government officials immediately announced that they were offering two rewards of $5 million each for information leading to the arrest or conviction of Mr. bin Laden and another man charged yesterday, Muhammad Atef, who was described as Mr. bin Laden's chief military commander.

Mr. bin Laden is believed to be living in Afghanistan under the protection of the Taliban, the Islamic fundamentalist movement that rules that country.

Mr. Atef's whereabouts are unknown.

It is uncertain whether Mr. bin Laden will ever stand trial in the United States. But if he does, prosecutors said, he could face life in prison or the death penalty if he is convicted.
Prosecutors also unsealed an earlier indictment, issued in June, that included similar but less detailed charges against Mr. bin Laden.

That indictment was returned before the embassy bombings and resulted from a two-year grand jury investigation of his activities in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, as well as reports that he had connections to a circle of Islamic militants in Brooklyn.

The new indictment, which supersedes the June action, accuses Mr. bin Laden of leading a vast terrorist conspiracy from 1989 to the present, in which he is said to have been working in concert with governments, including those of Sudan, Iraq and Iran, and terrorist groups to build weapons and attack American military installations. Excerpts, page A8.

But the indictment gives few details of Mr. bin Laden's alleged involvement in the embassy attacks. The indictment does not, for example, specify whether prosecutors have evidence that Mr. bin Laden gave direct orders to those who carried out the attacks.

Nothing in the document indicates why the original indictment was kept secret for months. But the secret charges were returned about the time that American officials were plotting a possible military attack into Afghanistan to arrest Mr. bin Laden.

Mary Jo White, the United States Attorney in Manhattan, said, "It's very common to have sealed indictments when you're trying to apprehend those who are indicted."

Both indictments offer new information about Mr. bin Laden's operations, including one deal he is said to have struck with Iraq to cooperate in the development of weapons in return for Mr. bin Laden's agreeing not to work against that country.

Free Republic also reprints this article and another here Link
Again this was when Clinton was still President. So Bill Clinton offered up an indictment that mentioned Osama working with Iraq. This would explain why Clinton supported us going after Saddam huh?

It is amazing how the New York Times has forgot everything they reported about Osama and Saddam having ties now that Bush is President.

But we all know the New York Times is not biased at all :roll:

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: LunarRay
IF I recall that story was posted two years ago and debunked then...

That it appears again is not surprising but a waste, IMO..

Yep, if you look at the date of the Washington Post article, it was wayyy back in June '04.

Yes, it's essentially a repost. The story was discussed here at the time. For example.

One really interesting note from that thread, the story behind the story if you will, is that Fox News reported that Russian intelligence also warned the Bush administration that there were terrorists training to fly airplanes for attacks on the U.S. That would certainly help explain why Rumsfeld stopped flying commercial in July, 2001. It might even offer insight into why so many Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled their commercial flights the day before 9/11. Why do you suppose the OP ignored that part of this story?

That is a very interesting point you bring up about the canceled flying patterns of the insiders... that it was ignored is consistent with the posting methodology used by the OP.. (Quick like a bunny but always misses a bit that serves to completely undermine the focus presented)
It reminds me of someone who did that alot.. can't put my finger on a name.. not that it matters.. just that it 'feels' familiar.. Don't ya think?

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aisengard
ProfJohn, I think you would be most comfortable in the year 2003, when Bush's approval ratings were still relatively high, Iraq was in first flush, and people still believed the BS you push.

My advice would be to invent a time machine to keep going back to that year. Although you seem convinced you're already there.

Hey I am just trying to prove that Saddam had ties to terror groups. A fact that MANY on here seem to deny.
Now look at the two posts above yours. One of them by CNN claims Saddam even offered Osama asylum. And yet people claim there was NO link between them...

It would be helpful if the US Intelligence Community supported this.. but from my reading they balked at a link between Iraq and OBL's group..
That aside... I'd not be surprised if Iraq entertained a notion to have OBL in its camp.. but don't really think that fits OBL's style.. he'd be foolish to align with Iraq.. (before it became the 51st State)... It would be ok for OBL to support Iraq against the US .. but not as a part of Iraqi interests other wise.. remember Iran... etc.. OBL is closer to Afghanistan and Iran and Pakistan

 

[ProfJohn]

Ray, I am not trying to establish that Saddam and Osama were working together or that Saddam had anything to do with 9-11.
What I am trying to establish is that without a doubt Saddam had ties to terrorism and that at ONE point he was working with or thinking about working with Osama.

I can quote post after post on here by people who swear there was NO connection at ALL. And the evidence doesn't back that up.

Here are examples of what I mean

Originally posted by: Lemon law
there were no AL-Quida in Iraq with Saddam.

Originally posted by: techs
SADDAM had no ties with Al-Qaeda. Saddam and Al-Qaeda hated each other.

Originally posted by: halik
Saddam was/is a fake muslim (especially in the early 90s when he was trying to re-cast his image as god fearing man, I guess mostly because he was afraid of the theocratic revolutions next door) and bin Laden was disgusted by this. There are NO TIES between al'quaeda and Hussein what so ever, that point has been debunked over and over by the international intelligence comitee. Just google for saddam alquade ties and see what you get.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Brackis
ProfJohn, you cannot steer the discussion away from WMD's if your first sentence ends in a clause that includes "attacking the US before we invaded."

It said he planned to attack using terrorism, not WMDs. WMDs have absolutely nothing to do with this story. Fact of the matter is that before the war, every country on Earth that mattered believed Iraq had WMDs.

Yeah esp, the USA after all those 100 page reports knee deep from top US weapons expert said that there were no WMD's. Get a clue.... Or a brain... ? Or can you even remember that far back? Maybe every country bought into it since the USA is the super power and it must be true, your boy let you down again and lied to go to Iraq. Can't cut and dry it any better then that. Also, I knew Iraq didn't have any WMD's ... Was it really that hard to figure out?

Can't really attack with out WMD's, what is he gonna send a buch of woodden row boats over to attack us?

Yep, be very afraid sheeple....

 

[M00T]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ray, I am not trying to establish that Saddam and Osama were working together or that Saddam had anything to do with 9-11.
What I am trying to establish is that without a doubt Saddam had ties to terrorism and that at ONE point he was working with or thinking about working with Osama.

I can quote post after post on here by people who swear there was NO connection at ALL. And the evidence doesn't back that up.

You could be right. However, it doesn't freakin matter.

 

[Aisengard]

Saddam ONCE had chemical weapons too. He didn't have either at the time, so whatever you are trying to do is absolutely pointless. You are wrong, Bush was wrong, the Iraq war was wrong. Get over it.

 

[Pens1566]

"Prof", we too at ONE point had ties to OSAMA. When do we invade D.C.????? Rumsfeld was buddy buddy with Saddam, when do we take him out? Reagan gave Saddam chemical weapons to fight the Iranians, when do we dig up his corpse and hang it in the town square. You're more of a joke every day.

 

[DealMonkey]

Why don't you just read the damned 9/11 Commission Report, "Prof" John?!? Saddam's ties to terrorism were tenuous at best.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Why don't you just read the damned 9/11 Commission Report, "Prof" John?!? Saddam's ties to terrorism were tenuous at best.

Because that would confuse him with facts and belittle his solid founded freeper links.. Why/how can an intelligent person stand behind this administration and applaud their every move, without actually being on the payroll in one way or another (read oil companies, chem co's etc).
All will change in November, despite his dubious sig. All polls point to a change, sorry to pee in your repug punchbowl johnny.

 

[techs]

THERE IS NO "NEW" INFO. THIS IS JUST A TROLL BY A DELUDED NEO-CON WHO IS DESPERATE TO JUSTIFY THE INVASION OF IRAQ HE WILL POST ANYTHING FOUND ON THE NET, NO MATTER HOW UNTRUE, AS "PROOF" OF HIS DELUDED THINKING.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ray, I am not trying to establish that Saddam and Osama were working together or that Saddam had anything to do with 9-11.
What I am trying to establish is that without a doubt Saddam had ties to terrorism and that at ONE point he was working with or thinking about working with Osama.

I can quote post after post on here by people who swear there was NO connection at ALL. And the evidence doesn't back that up.

Here are examples of what I mean

Originally posted by: Lemon law
there were no AL-Quida in Iraq with Saddam.

Originally posted by: techs
SADDAM had no ties with Al-Qaeda. Saddam and Al-Qaeda hated each other.

Originally posted by: halik
Saddam was/is a fake muslim (especially in the early 90s when he was trying to re-cast his image as god fearing man, I guess mostly because he was afraid of the theocratic revolutions next door) and bin Laden was disgusted by this. There are NO TIES between al'quaeda and Hussein what so ever, that point has been debunked over and over by the international intelligence comitee. Just google for saddam alquade ties and see what you get.

I think there are links bounding about that indicated Intel had placed OBL in Iraq a few times but that there was no reason to believe that OBL or his group accepted an alliance with Iraq.. IIRC Iraq and the vast majority of OBL's support nations despised each other.. BUT in a we (Muslim) vs them (Anyone else) OBL's boys would have aligned with Iraq for that purpose, no doubt in my mind.

 

[techs]

THERE IS NO "NEW" INFO. THIS IS JUST A TROLL BY A DELUDED NEO-CON WHO IS DESPERATE TO JUSTIFY THE INVASION OF IRAQ.
HE WILL POST ANYTHING FOUND ON THE NET, NO MATTER HOW UNTRUE, AS "PROOF" OF HIS DELUDED THINKING.

 

[jjzelinski]

Whatever happened to CKG? This would be right up his alley...

 

[Lemon law]

I ask Prof John,

Have you ever listened to a Ossama or Al-Quida tape that is featured on the news?---well by your reasoning you are now linked to AL-Quida.
Was Saddam a very bad leader who abused the human rights of his people?---I certainly agree he was---but right now GWB is busily allying himself with
many world leaders who are far worse than Saddam.

Was Saddam a threat to the USA?---------a very very very dubious contention---he was a paper tiger effectively hamstrung by Gulf War 1 a dozen years before.
GWB decided he would make the world better in an optional war---and instead made everything far worse.

ANOTHER BOTTOM LINE UNDISPUTABLE CONCLUSION-----------we just don't know exactly how much worse YET---but I have a nasty feeling we have not seen anything yet.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Pens1566
"Prof", we too at ONE point had ties to OSAMA. When do we invade D.C.????? Rumsfeld was buddy buddy with Saddam, when do we take him out? Reagan gave Saddam chemical weapons to fight the Iranians, when do we dig up his corpse and hang it in the town square. You're more of a joke every day.

When did we have "ties" to Osama? If you are referring to our indirect support of the Muj in Afghanistan between 1979 and 1989, then I suggest you read the actual history of our support there. At no time did we meet with Osama or finance any of his Muj troops. In fact, we had Pakistani's ISI distribute our money to the Muj, and they gave none whatsoever to Osama. OBL had his own financiers from Arab lands, and his personal interests did not align with many of the other Muj leaders.

OBL was never directly supported by the U.S. That is a myth that the unlearned amongst us love to perpetuate. Believing otherwise is just as ignorant as claiming Saddam has ties to 9/11... So you see, both sides have their fair share of ignorant followers.

Just thought you should know...now you do. I suggest that you start by reading "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll.

GL!

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Pens1566
"Prof", we too at ONE point had ties to OSAMA. When do we invade D.C.????? Rumsfeld was buddy buddy with Saddam, when do we take him out? Reagan gave Saddam chemical weapons to fight the Iranians, when do we dig up his corpse and hang it in the town square. You're more of a joke every day.

When did we have "ties" to Osama? If you are referring to our indirect support of the Muj in Afghanistan between 1979 and 1989, then I suggest you read the actual history of our support there. At no time did we meet with Osama or finance any of his Muj troops. In fact, we had Pakistani's ISI distribute our money to the Muj, and they gave none whatsoever to Osama. OBL had his own financiers from Arab lands, and his personal interests did not align with many of the other Muj leaders.

OBL was never directly supported by the U.S. That is a myth that the unlearned amongst us love to perpetuate. Believing otherwise is just as ignorant as claiming Saddam has ties to 9/11... So you see, both sides have their fair share of ignorant followers.

Just thought you should know...now you do. I suggest that you start by reading "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll.

GL!

We funded those fighting the soviets in afghanistan. We gave them weapons. OBL was a fairly important leader of those fighters. Whether it went through ISI, or we fedex'ed to O. Bin Laden Cave 3d Tora Bora doesn't matter. Do you think that he was fighting completely without any of our assistance? We knew who he was, his background, that he was there fighting at the time. Don't be so naive.

Care to address the other points?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Pens1566
"Prof", we too at ONE point had ties to OSAMA. When do we invade D.C.????? Rumsfeld was buddy buddy with Saddam, when do we take him out? Reagan gave Saddam chemical weapons to fight the Iranians, when do we dig up his corpse and hang it in the town square. You're more of a joke every day.

When did we have "ties" to Osama? If you are referring to our indirect support of the Muj in Afghanistan between 1979 and 1989, then I suggest you read the actual history of our support there. At no time did we meet with Osama or finance any of his Muj troops. In fact, we had Pakistani's ISI distribute our money to the Muj, and they gave none whatsoever to Osama. OBL had his own financiers from Arab lands, and his personal interests did not align with many of the other Muj leaders.

OBL was never directly supported by the U.S. That is a myth that the unlearned amongst us love to perpetuate. Believing otherwise is just as ignorant as claiming Saddam has ties to 9/11... So you see, both sides have their fair share of ignorant followers.

Just thought you should know...now you do. I suggest that you start by reading "Ghost Wars" by Steve Coll.

GL!

We funded those fighting the soviets in afghanistan. We gave them weapons. OBL was a fairly important leader of those fighters. Whether it went through ISI, or we fedex'ed to O. Bin Laden Cave 3d Tora Bora doesn't matter. Do you think that he was fighting completely without any of our assistance? We knew who he was, his background, that he was there fighting at the time. Don't be so naive.

Care to address the other points?

From CNN

The story about bin Laden and the CIA -- that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden -- is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently.
The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.

Bergen: Bin Laden, CIA links hogwash
Care to spread anymore lies and half truths?

I love this part of the CNN post
How is it the richest country with the most powerful military machine ever to walk this Earth cannot locate and eliminate a single man?
Steven Harper, Arlington, Washington

BERGEN: A good response to that is Eric Rudolph, the Atlanta Centennial Olympic Park bomber, evaded capture for five years and he was captured about five miles from where he was living in the first place -- meaning if you have somebody who is motivated and you have a support network and you don't make stupid mistakes, you can evade capture anywhere inside the United States.

Bin Laden, of course, isn't in the United States. He's most likely in Pakistan, where the U.S. military isn't even allowed to go in. So, the problem of finding one person is much harder than you might imagine.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Here try to explain this one away

February 1999 CNN article
The good part

Saddam Hussein offered asylum

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers.

Of course we all know that CNN is just a front for the republican party. And this was planted by Rove two years before Bush even took power... damn they are so good.

oops forgot link
CNN link showing that Saddam offered Osama asylum

9/11 Commission Report:

Bin Ladin was also willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq,
even though Iraq?s dictator, Saddam Hussein, had never had an Islamist
agenda?save for his opportunistic pose as a defender of the faithful against
?Crusaders? during the Gulf War of 1991. Moreover, Bin Ladin had in fact
been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract
them into his Islamic army.53
To protect his own ties with Iraq,Turabi reportedly brokered an agreement
that Bin Ladin would stop supporting activities against Saddam. Bin Ladin
apparently honored this pledge, at least for a time, although he continued to
aid a group of Islamist extremists operating in part of Iraq (Kurdistan) outside
of Baghdad?s control. In the late 1990s, these extremist groups suffered major
defeats by Kurdish forces. In 2001, with Bin Ladin?s help they re-formed into
an organization called Ansar al Islam.There are indications that by then the Iraqi
regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common
Kurdish enemy.54
With the Sudanese regime acting as intermediary, Bin Ladin himself met
with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995.
Bin Ladin is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as
assistance in procuring weapons, but there is no evidence that Iraq responded
to this request.55 As described below, the ensuing years saw additional efforts to
establish connections.

There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number
of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported
to have received a significant response.According to one report, Saddam Hussein?s
efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle
Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.74
In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative.
In March 1998, after Bin Ladin?s public fatwa against the United States,
two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence.
In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with
the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps
both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin?s Egyptian
deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was
under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air
attacks in December.75
Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have
occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban.
According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq.
Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan
remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe
friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides? hatred of
the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier
contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor
have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing
or carrying out any attacks against the United States.76
Bin Ladin eventually enjoyed a strong financial position in Afghanistan,
thanks to Saudi and other financiers associated with the Golden Chain.
Through his relationship with Mullah Omar?and the monetary and other
benefits that it brought the Taliban?Bin Ladin was able to circumvent restrictions;
Mullah Omar would stand by him even when other Taliban leaders raised
objections. Bin Ladin appeared to have in Afghanistan a freedom of movement
that he had lacked in Sudan.Al Qaeda members could travel freely within
the country, enter and exit it without visas or any immigration procedures, purchase
and import vehicles and weapons, and enjoy the use of official Afghan
Ministry of Defense license plates.Al Qaeda also used the Afghan state-owned
Ariana Airlines to courier money into the country.77

 

[conjur]

Got awfully quiet in here.


Hmmmmmm....

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: conjur
Got awfully quiet in here.

Hmmmmmm....

No other liars coming in to help their fellow liar? What's up with that???

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: conjur
Got awfully quiet in here.


Hmmmmmm....

"Prof" likes to go away and start another thread on some other topic.