• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. ignored reports of Iraqi abuse: documents

Link and prove it has any reason to trust it. As I recall, most of those documents were meaningless.


So wait, what you say is gold, what I post, needs to be proven. Thanks boo for showing exactly why I don't take you seriously.... That was faster than I expected. :thumbs:
 
Or are you talking about made up claims. I need a link.
 
So wait, what you say is gold, what I post, needs to be proven. Thanks boo for showing exactly why I don't take you seriously.... That was faster than I expected. :thumbs:

No, you need a link. I'm not sure if you're using intel we know came from unreliable sources (curveball or the heros in error), or documents that didn't really hold up. Before I can reply, I need to knwo which one you're using. So, link.
 
No, you need a link. I'm not sure if you're using intel we know came from unreliable sources (curveball or the heros in error), or documents that didn't really hold up. Before I can reply, I need to knwo which one you're using. So, link.



I have links, I will gladly post mine as soon as you post yours. :shrug:
 
Right, you make crap up, provide no link, then you expect me to give you a link and what now? Please..... you first, by all means.

I've made up knowing. Ask for any link you need. I didn't realize you were unfamilar with the past. If you don't knwo about the slam dunk comment, ask and I'll link you. If you're not famailar with Bush moving his goal posts from wmds to wmd programs to wmd program related activies to spreading freedom, ask. You seem to have problem knowing the difference between discussing what is known and making new claims. We have facts now. So we can make judgments.
 
I've made up knowing. Ask for any link you need. I didn't realize you were unfamilar with the past. If you don't knwo about the slam dunk comment, ask and I'll link you. If you're not famailar with Bush moving his goal posts from wmds to wmd programs to wmd program related activies to spreading freedom, ask. You seem to have problem knowing the difference between discussing what is known and making new claims. We have facts now. So we can make judgments.




Boo I didn't realize you were ignorant of the past. I wasn't aware you didn't realize that Hussein violated the 91 cease fire on numerous occasions.


see I can play your dumb game as well. It's so transparent bro, and it's lame.
 
I want you to like you asked me to provide links and prove what you claimed. To ask me to do so before you have, tips your hand that you have nothing, as usual.

Repeat for what I've claimed. Do you think Iraq attacked us? Do you think the slam dunk comment wasn't about selling the war? Be specific. right now, you're just being silly because you have to know better at some level.
 
Boo I didn't realize you were ignorant of the past. I wasn't aware you didn't realize that Hussein violated the 91 cease fire on numerous occasions.


see I can play your dumb game as well. It's so transparent bro, and it's lame.

Fully aware. And that cease fire was with the UN, not the US alone. So, only the UN had the authority to enforce that. I don't need a link to the 91, because I know this to be true. And you shouldn't need a link to it being with the UN as you shold know this to be true. But I can link both.

Now, you can play games, or you can discuss this honestly.
 
Repeat for what I've claimed. Do you think Iraq attacked us? Do you think the slam dunk comment wasn't about selling the war? Be specific. right now, you're just being silly because you have to know better at some level.




Like i said, you are not worth my time.


I've listed the 6 reasons we went to war, officially, the fact you choose to remain ignorant means, this conversation has ran its course.
 
Like i said, you are not worth my time.


I've listed the 6 reasons we went to war, officially, the fact you choose to remain ignorant means, this conversation has ran its course.

Here's the problem. Just because they are on a list doesn't make them valid. Don't you understand this? We can say anything, put anything on a list, but doing so isn't equal to them being honest, valid or a deserving reason or rationale. Just putting them out there doesn't mean whoever you're talkign to should shut up and move along. You have to explain how they matter, why they are valid, and deal with evidence to the contrary. between the two of us, I'm the only willing to move foward. ;)
 
Here's the problem. Just because they are on a list doesn't make them valid. Don't you understand this? We can say anything, put anything on a list, but doing so isn't equal to them being honest, valid or a deserving reason or rationale. Just putting them out there doesn't mean whoever you're talkign to should shut up and move along. You have to explain how they matter, why they are valid, and deal with evidence to the contrary. between the two of us, I'm the only willing to move foward. ;)



the onus is on you to support your claims, you haven't been able to "move foward" since bush first got elected. Later bro,.
 
Here's the problem. Just because they are on a list doesn't make them valid. Don't you understand this? We can say anything, put anything on a list, but doing so isn't equal to them being honest, valid or a deserving reason or rationale. Just putting them out there doesn't mean whoever you're talkign to should shut up and move along. You have to explain how they matter, why they are valid, and deal with evidence to the contrary. between the two of us, I'm the only willing to move foward. ;)

Perhaps this will help.

http://www.c-span.org/Content/PDF/hjres114.pdf
 

No that doesn't help. None of that is in dispute. Having them so listed doesn't make them valid. As the cease fire was a UN concern and not soley a US concern, they play no role in a US decision to invade. As we were not being attacked, as Saddam was not working with al Qaeda, as there were no stockpiles of wmds, that document is merely a symptom of the problem. No one argues this document wasn't produced. The argument is next to none of it held up or actually justified an invasion.
 
No that doesn't help. None of that is in dispute. Having them so listed doesn't make them valid. As the cease fire was a UN concern and not soley a US concern, they play no role in a US decision to invade. As we were not being attacked, as Saddam was not working with al Qaeda, as there were no stockpiles of wmds, that document is merely a symptom of the problem. No one argues this document wasn't produced. The argument is next to none of it held up or actually justified an invasion.

You are really off base here in trying to decide what is valid, and you appear to have no knowledge of Al Qaeda either. If you choose not to believe then that is your alternative, but it's impossible to debate your personal, and invalid, beliefs.
 
You are really off base here in trying to decide what is valid, and you appear to have no knowledge of Al Qaeda either. If you choose not to believe then that is your alternative, but it's impossible to debate your personal, and invalid, beliefs.



Nail, head. You hit it expect a boo shuffle in response.
 
You are really off base here in trying to decide what is valid, and you appear to have no knowledge of Al Qaeda either. If you choose not to believe then that is your alternative, but it's impossible to debate your personal, and invalid, beliefs.

Yes, I know. You disagree, so I'm off base. Understood. But the fact remains, Saddam was not working with al Qeada. He simply wasn't. He was not attacking us, was not behind 9/11 and wasn't a threat to us. Only the UN could enforce their ceasefire. We used intel inapproropriately. I'm sorry some are too willing to accept anything, but you have presented nothing that would convince me otherwise. You can address these points, or you can use rev's tactic of being insulting. The choice is yours.
 
Yes, I know. You disagree, so I'm off base. Understood. But the fact remains, Saddam was not working with al Qeada. He simply wasn't. He was not attacking us, was not behind 9/11 and wasn't a threat to us. Only the UN could enforce their ceasefire. We used intel inapproropriately. I'm sorry some are too willing to accept anything, but you have presented nothing that would convince me otherwise. You can address these points, or you can use rev's tactic of being insulting. The choice is yours.




On August 20, 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack against a chemical weapons factory in Sudan. The cruise missle strike was in retaliation for the August 7, 1998 truck bomb attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya which killed more than 200 people and wounded more than 5,000 others. The chemical weapons factory in Sudan was funded, in part, by Osama bin Laden who the U.S. believed responsible for the embassy bombings. Richard Clarke, a national security advisor to President Clinton, told the Washington Post in a January 23, 1999 article that the U.S. government was "sure" that Iraqi nerve gas experts had produced a powdered substance at that plant for use in making VX nerve gas.

On August 25, 1998 the Fort Worth Star-telegram reported a link between Iraq and the Sudanese chemical weapons factory destroyed by the United States in a cruise missile attack. The chemical weapons factory was hit because of links to Osama bin Laden who the U.S. believed responsible for the recent embassy bombings. A senior intelligence official said one of the leaders of Iraq's chemical weapons program, Emad al-Ani, had close ties with senior Sudanese officials at the factory. The intelligence official also said a number of Iraqi scientists working with al-Ani attended the grand opening of the factory two years earlier. Emad Husayn Abdullah al-Ani surrendered to U.S. military forces on April 18, 2003.

On November 5, 1998 a Federal grand jury in Manhattan returned a 238-count indictment charging Osama bin Laden in the bombings of two United States Embassies in Africa and with conspiring to commit other acts of terrorism against Americans abroad. The grand jury indictment also charged that Al-Qaeda had reached an arrangement with President Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq whereby the group said that it would not work against Iraq, and that the two parties agreed to cooperate in the development of weapons.

On January 11, 1999, Newsweek magazine ran the headline "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The subheadline declared, "It would be a marriage made in hell. And America's two enemies are courting." The article points out that Saddam has a long history of supporting terrorism. The article also mentions that, in the prior week, several surface-to-air missiles were fired at U.S. and British planes patrolling the no-fly zones and that Saddam is now fighting for his life now that the United States has made his removal from office a national objective.

On January 14, 1999, ABC News reported, "Saddam Hussein has a long history of harboring terrorists. Carlos the Jackal, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, the most notorious terrorists of their era, all found shelter and support at one time in Baghdad. Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction."

On February 13, 1999, CNN reported, "Osama bin Laden, the Saudi millionaire accused by the United States of plotting bomb attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa, has left Afghanistan, Afghan sources said Saturday. Bin Laden's whereabouts were not known....." The article reports, "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden....."

On February 18, 1999, National Public Radio (NPR) reported, "There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi, sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq." NPR reported that Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when Farouk Hijazi met with bin Laden when he lived in Sudan.

On February 14, 1999, an article appeared in the San Jose Mercury News claiming that U.S. intelligence officials are worried about an alliance between Osama bin Laden and Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. The article states that bin Laden had met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official near Qandahar, Afghanistan in late December 1998 and that "there has been increasing evidence that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks against American and British targets around the world." According to this article, Saddam has offered asylum to bin Laden in Iraq. The article said that in addition to Abu Nidal, another Palestinian terrorist by the name of Mohammed Amri (a.k.a. Abu Ibrahim) is also believed to be in Iraq.

On February 28, 1999, an article was written in The Kansas City Star which said, "He [bin Laden] has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United States....."

On December 28, 1999, an article appeared in The Herald (Glasgow, Scotland) titled, "Iraq tempts bin Laden to attack West." The article starts, "The world's most wanted man, Osama bin Laden, has been offered sanctuary in Iraq....." The article quotes a U.S. counter-terrorism source who said, "Now we are also facing the prospect of an unholy alliance between bin Laden and Saddam. The implications are terrifying."

On April 8, 2001, an informant for Czech counter-intelligence observed an Iraqi intelligence official named al-Ani meeting with an Arab man in his 20s at a restaurant outside Prague. Following the 9/11 attacks, the Czech informant who observed the meeting saw Mohammed Atta’s picture in the papers and identified Mohammed Atta as the man who met with the Iraqi intelligence official.

On July 21, 2001 [less than two months prior to 911] the Iraqi state-controlled newspaper "Al-Nasiriya" predicted that bin Laden would attack the U.S. "with the seriousness of the Bedouin of the desert about the way he will try to bomb the Pentagon after he destroys the White House." The same state-approved column also insisted that bin Laden "will strike America on the arm that is already hurting," and that the U.S. "will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs" - an apparent reference to the Sinatra classic, "New York, New York."

After the 9/11 attacks, Saddam became the only world leader to offer praise for bin Laden, even as other terrorist leaders, like Yassir Arafat, went out of their way to make a show of sympathy to the U.S. by donating blood to 9/11 victims on camera. Saddam later pays tribute to 9/11 by having a mural painted depicting the World Trade Center attack at an Iraqi military base in Nasariyah.


On December 3, 2001 USA Today reported that the CIA had convincing evidence from the mid-1990s Saddam Hussein's regime was funneling money through Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network to the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) in Algeria and other terrorist organizations. Stanley Bedlington, a senior analyst in the CIA's counterterrorism center until his retirement in 1994, said "We were convinced that money from Iraq was going to bin Laden, who was then sending it to places that Iraq wanted it to go."

On March 15, 2002 the Christian Science Monitor reported that a Taliban-style group known as Ansar al-Islam was threatening stability in the Kurdish northern region of Iraq. Prior to the start of the Iraq War in 2003, Colin Powell addressed the United Nations and pointed out that both Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida had links with the Ansar al-Islam terrorist group. Saddam had provided arms and funding for this terrorist group waging a jihadist war against the Kurds. One month prior to the formation of Ansar al-Islam, leaders from several Kurdish Islamist factions had visited the al-Qaida leadership in Afghanistan. Ansar al-Islam announced their formation on September 1, 2001 just days prior to the September 11 attacks in the United States.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a director of an al Qaeda training base in Afghanistan, fled to Iraq after being injured as the Taliban fell (prior to the U.S./Iraq war). He received medical care and convalesced for two months in Baghdad. He then opened a terrorist training camp in northern Iraq and arranged the October 2002 assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in Amman, Jordan.

CIA director George Tenet (appointed by President Bill Clinton July 11, 1997) wrote in a letter to Senator Bob Graham dated October 7, 2002. "We have solid reporting of senior level contact between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade. Credible information exists that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression. . . . We have credible reporting that al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities."

On October 16, 2002, the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was signed into law. The authorization (Public law 107-243) had passed the House by a vote of 296-133, and the Senate by a vote of 77-23. This resolution stated, "Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;" and "Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens."

Babil, an official newspaper of Saddam Hussein's government, run by his oldest son Uday, published information that appeared to confirm U.S. allegations of the links between the Iraqi regime and al Qaeda. In its November 16, 2002 edition, Babil identified one Abd-al-Karim Muhammad Aswad as an "intelligence officer," describing him as the "official in charge of regime's contacts with Osama bin Laden's group and currently the regime's representative in Pakistan."

In December 2002 the House and Senate intelligence committees issued a report on the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. CIA director George Tenet testified (page 137) that, “Atta may also have traveled outside of the U.S. in early April 2001 to meet an Iraqi intelligence officer, although we are still working to corroborate this.” This report also noted (page 211) that, "In February 1999, the Intelligence Community obtained information that Iraq had formed a suicide pilot unit that it planned to use against British and U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf. The CIA commented that this was highly unlikely and probably disinformation."

On April 25, 2003 CNN reported that Farouk Hijazi had been captured by U.S. forces. Farouk Hijazi was a former intelligence official who may have plotted the attempted assassination of George H.W. Bush in 1993. He was also a contact between Saddam Hussein's regime and Osama bin Laden. Farouk met with bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998 and is also believed to have met with bin Laden in Sudan in the early 1990's.














and.......................
 
........................

While sifting through the Iraqi Intelligence Service's [Mukhabarat] bombed ruins on April 26, 2003 the Toronto Star's Mitch Potter, the London Daily Telegraph's Inigo Gilmore and their translator discovered a memo in the intelligence service's accounting department. Dated February 19, 1998 and marked "Top Secret and Urgent," it said the agency would pay "all the travel and hotel expenses inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden, the Saudi opposition leader, about the future of our relationship with him, and to achieve a direct meeting with him."

On May 7, 2003, a federal judge in New York awarded damages against the government of Iraq after ruling that the families of two victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, suicide hijackings had shown that Iraq had provided material support to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. Judge Harold Baer ruled that the two families were entitled to $104 million compensation from Iraq, bin Laden, al-Qaida, the Taliban movement and their government of Afghanistan. "Plaintiffs have shown, albeit barely, 'by evidence satisfactory to the court' that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al-Qaida."

The 9/11 Commission Report (pages 228 - 229) provides details of what is known about Mohamed Atta's alleged April 9, 2001 11:00 A.M. meeting with an Iraqi Intelligence agent in Prague. According to the FBI, Mohamed Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 4 and in Florida on April 11. Atta's cell phone records indicate calls were made from Florida during this period but they cannot confirm whether he placed those calls. The report mentions, however, that Czech intelligence has stated publicly they believe there was a 70 percent probability that the meeting took place. The Czech Interior Minister made several statements to the press about his belief that the meeting had occurred. Atta is known to have been in Prague on at least two occasions: once in December 1994 and again in June 2000.

On September 13, 2006, a deputy prime minister of Iraq by the name of Barham Salih gave a speech in which he said, "The alliance between the Baathists and jihadists which sustains Al Qaeda in Iraq is not new, contrary to what you may have been told." He went on to say, "I know this at first hand. Some of my friends were murdered by jihadists, by Al Qaeda-affiliated operatives who had been sheltered and assisted by Saddam's regime."

On March 20, 2008 the Pentagon declassified results of their investigation into captured Iraqi documents. The report entitled "Iraqi Perspectives Project -- Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents" stated, "While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist–operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam’s security organizations and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."

In June 2008 the Senate released their report "Whether Public Statements Regarding Iraq By U.S. Government Officials Were Substantiated By Intelligence Information." Among the conclusions (page 71), it reported that public statements by government officials that Iraq (prior to the war) provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other al-Qaida related terrorist members was substantiated by intelligence assessments.

On June 18, 2008 the Iraqi newspaper Kurdistani Nwe published a 2002 letter from the Iraqi presidency that it said proved there was cooperation between Saddam Hussein's regime and Al-Qaeda. The letter, which appeared on the paper's front page, was written by Iraqi intelligence and discussed an intention to meet with Ayman Al-Zawahiri in order to examine a plan drawn up by the Iraqi presidency to carry out a "revenge operation" in Saudi Arabia.
 
... He was not attacking us, was not behind 9/11 and wasn't a threat to us.


Really?

WASHINGTON, Dec. 28— American fighter jets patrolling northern Iraq attacked an Iraqi antiaircraft missile battery today after coming under fire themselves, the Clinton Administration said. The skirmish appeared to mark an Iraqi attempt to provoke a new confrontation with the United States.

U.S. JETS ATTACK IRAQ MISSILE POST - NYTimes.com

So, Saddam firing on Jets in the no fly zone is perfectly fine with you is it?


j-mac
 
Back
Top Bottom