Key Bush Official ( Wolfowitz ) Backs Off al-Qaida, Iraq Claim

Drift3r

Guest
Jun 3, 2003
3,572
0
0
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=16&u=/ap/20030913/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_wolfowitz

Official Backs Off al-Qaida, Iraq Claim
Sat Sep 13, 7:33 AM ET


By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon's No. 2 official is backtracking from a public claim that associates of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden are trying to link up with Saddam Hussein loyalists to attack Americans.

"We know it had a great deal to do with terrorism in general and with al-Qaida in particular, and we know a great many of bin Laden's key lieutenants are now trying to organize in cooperation with old loyalists from the Saddam regime to attack in Iraq," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said Thursday on ABC's "Good Morning America." But Wolfowitz ? a key architect of U.S. policy in Iraq ? said Friday in an interview with The Associated Press that he had misspoken.

He said he was referring to only one man ? bin Laden supporter Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, one of the few names that Bush administration officials previously have cited to assert pre-war links between al-Qaida and Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi allegedly helped train Iraqis in the use of poisonous chemicals and once received medical care in Baghdad, U.S. officials have said.

"Zarqawi is actually the guy I was referring to ? should have been more precise," Wolfowitz said Friday. "It's not a great many ? it's one of bin Laden's key associates ? probably better referred to that way than a key lieutenant."

"On the specific issue of cooperation (between al-Qaida and insurgents), I have to emphasize this is a very hard target to penetrate," Wolfowitz said in the AP interview. "Our highest priority in Iraq is to get better intelligence on these people."

"There are some indications that they work together and they certainly work at common purpose," he said, declining to say what the indications are.

Wolfowitz's original claim had suggested a dangerous new development for the U.S.-led forces trying to stabilize the country.

Wolfowitz made the bin Laden deputy assertion Thursday after an ABC interviewer asked why the administration had put resources into the campaign in Iraq, which the interviewer said had nothing to do with the Sept. 11 attacks, while bin Laden was still at large.

"I appreciate the chance to say it a little more carefully because this was sort of unanticipated," Wolfowitz told the AP in retracting his statements. "I went ... to talk about Sept. 11."

In a Sept. 11 anniversary interview with the British Broadcasting Corp., Wolfowitz said al-Qaida members have always been present in Iraq.

"They've been in Iraq before the war, they were there during the war, they're there now and they see any opportunity to kill Americans, to defeat Americans, as part of their war," he said.

In a Sept. 6 interview with The Washington Post, he also said hundreds of fighters from al-Qaida and other groups were now in Iraq.

"There are some thousands of former Baathists (members of Saddam's Baath Party) and some hundreds of al-Qaida and other foreign terrorists who are ... killing Americans and Iraqis and U.N. officials and moderate Shiite leaders in order to destabilize Iraq," Wolfowitz said in that interview.

On Friday he said he couldn't say how many of the foreigners might be al-Qaida because U.S. military forces were still trying to identify them.

The Bush administration has outlined only limited evidence of Iraqi-al-Qaida contacts before the war, and no conclusive evidence that Iraq and al-Qaida plotted joint terror operations.

Likewise, U.S. officials have said they have a poor picture of who is arrayed against U.S. forces in Iraq now, and how coordinated their activities are.



Even though weeks have passed, it remains unknown who carried out the three large terror bombings in Iraq since the war ended ? at the Jordanian Embassy, the U.N. headquarters and a mosque in Najaf.

Commanders on the ground in Iraq said they are still pressing efforts to determine whether there was a link between insurgents attacking coalition forces and any particular terrorist organization.

The administration argued long before the war against Iraq that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, which he would sooner or later share with al-Qaida or other terrorists bent on targeting America. No such weapons have been found.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,405
6,079
126
Too late now. We're already pouring our treasury down the rat hole with on way graceful way out because the two were intentionally conflated. Clarifications are a bit late when they've already screwed the country. I would expect hari kira instead. We are dealing, no, with men of honor?
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Wolfowitz should definitely resign. Since shocking everyone in the first Bush administration (with the exception of Cheney) with his 1992 Defence Planning Guidance he's been a loose cannon. His ideas of world conquest and American imperialism are not what our country is about. Contrary to popular belief of some on this forum.

Wolfowitz has got to go. He is dangerous. This is just another example of Wolfowitz saying ANYTHING to advance his psycho agenda. Although that could be said about the entire Bush administration.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
The pre-war assessment of Iraq were the administration's worst-case-scenario and reality has shown us something completely different. Terrorism in Iraq has become a self-fulfilling prophesy. Now that the U.S. is there, jihadists are drawn to Iraq like moths to a flame, just like when the USSR occupied Afghanistan. Our invasion of Iraq has become the cause celebre for militant Islamists.

What? All they got is Al-Zarqawi getting some medical attention in Baghdad? That's IT? That and links between Al Qaeda and the Ansar al Islam camps in the northern Iraqi Kurdistan region. Hell, we could have bombed those camps anytime we wanted. And if Al-Zarqawi was so important, why didn't we just track him and pick him up at the border during one of his many crossings?

This administration needs better intel in the worst way. I'm completely surprised whenever they produce accurate information these days...
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
The pre-war assessment of Iraq were the administration's worst-case-scenario and reality has shown us something completely different. Terrorism in Iraq has become a self-fulfilling prophesy. Now that the U.S. is there, jihadists are drawn to Iraq like moths to a flame, just like when the USSR occupied Afghanistan. Our invasion of Iraq has become the cause celebre for militant Islamists.

What? All they got is Al-Zarqawi getting some medical attention in Baghdad? That's IT? That and links between Al Qaeda and the Ansar al Islam camps in the northern Iraqi Kurdistan region. Hell, we could have bombed those camps anytime we wanted. And if Al-Zarqawi was so important, why didn't we just track him and pick him up at the border during one of his many crossings?

This administration needs better intel in the worst way. I'm completely surprised whenever they produce accurate information these days...

I don't really think this has anything to do with good or bad intel. The Bush administration chose their agenda then made the intel fit. No matter what they have, good or bad, they make it fit their agenda.
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
This is symbolic of the Bush Regime: stick their dvcks (false claims) out, yet pull them back when they might actually be held accountable for something.

And people wonder why the hell we're mad as hell with the Bush Regime.
 

adlep

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2001
5,287
6
81
Hye I wonder where all of the Pro-Bush people are....?
rolleye.gif

 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Either jumping ship before it sinks, or readying their concession speeches. Hopefully!