TA-ANALYSIS: 9/11 States No Link Between Iraq and al Qaeda

Ok, for those people with short and long range memory problems here are a few links....again...

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
of the
REPORT
of the
COMMISSION TO ASSESS
THE BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT
TO THE UNITED STATES

July 15, 1998

...........

Once UN-imposed controls are lifted, Iraq could mount a determined effort to acquire needed plant and equipment, whether directly or indirectly. Such an effort would allow Iraq to pose an ICBM threat to the United States within 10 years. Iraq could develop a shorter range, covert, ship-launched missile threat that could threaten the United States in a very short time.

Excerpted from.
www.house.gov...

Here is a link to a thread by Phoenix, in which he/she presents information about a Russian link with terrorism and also Iraq and Al Qaeda. It is not the first time that this kind of information has been presented. Even Russian defectors, Ion Mihai Pacepa, former acting chief of Communist Romania�s espionage service and including the highest ranking Russian defector to say that Russia has a plan which started in the 1950s in which they would use terrorist states to attack the US, to weaken us and to bring fear and mistrust in the United States....China is not far behind helping the Russians and some terrorist cells. Russia and China do have some terrorist problems but there are many different terrorist cells out there. Many of them having a different agenda than the others. There have been other members who have also posted the links between Al Qaeda and Saddam. Agent47 and Seekeroff are some of the members I can think of who have shared evidence to this link.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The above post has a lot of evidence and information that links Al Qaeda, Saddam, Russia, China and terrorism all together. I excerpted the below paragraph to show some of the evidence that links Saddam and Al Qaeda as well as the Taliban.

The other tie between Oil-for-Food and al Qaeda, noted by Perelman, ran through another of Saddam's handpicked, Oil-for-Food oil buyers, Swiss-based Delta Services � which bought oil from Saddam in 2000 and 2001, at the height of Saddam's scam for grafting money out of Oil-for-Food by way of under-priced oil contracts. Now shut down, Delta Services was a subsidiary of a Saudi Arabian firm, Delta Oil, which had close ties to the Taliban during Osama bin Laden's heyday in Afghanistan in the late 1990s.

Excerpted from.
www.nationalreview.com...


[edit on 16-6-2004 by Muaddib]

As someone already said, Bush keeps getting caught in lies. If Al-Qaeda did indeed carry out the 9-11 attacks ALONE, Maybe going to war in Iraq was just an excuse to move the "Battlefield" off the United States. We know for a fact that Saddam has killed too many Iraqi civilians. We know for a fact he had chemical weapons. We know for a fact he was Dangerous (invasion of Kuwait, chemical attacks on Iraqi's), so what better of a place to move the "Battlefield".

I think we all know their was an alterior motive behind the "Liberation" of Iraq, but the general reason was under FALSE Pre-tenses.

Post links to these lies that supposedly Bush has said. Previous to the war in Iraq every nation in the world was saying that Saddam had WMD.....where exactly did he lie?

Every nation in the world is now forgetting what they themselves have said in the past...where they all lying as to this information?


Pacepa: Contemporary political memory seems to be conveniently afflicted with some kind of Alzheimer's disease. Not long ago, every Western leader, starting with President Clinton, fumed against Saddam�s WMD. Now almost no one remembers that after General Hussein Kamel, Saddam�s son-in-law, defected to Jordan in 1995, he helped us find �more than one hundred metal trunks and boxes� containing documentation �dealing with all categories of weapons, including nuclear.� He also aided UNSCOM to fish out of the Tigris River high-grade missile components prohibited to Iraq. That was exactly what my old Soviet-made �S�rindar� plan stated he should do in case of emergency: destroy the weapons, hide the equipment, and preserve the documentation. No wonder Saddam hastened to lure Kamel back to Iraq, where three days later he was killed together with over 40 of his relatives in what the Baghdad official press described as a �spontaneous administration of tribal justice.� Once that was done, Saddam slammed the door shut to any UNSCOM inspection.

Excerpted from.
www.frontpagemag.com...



[edit on 16-6-2004 by Muaddib]

3. "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." And, "[Saddam Hussein is] a threat because he is dealing with al Qaeda." These two Bush remarks go hand in hand, even though the first was said on March 17, 2003, two days before Bush launched the invasion of Iraq, and the other came during a November 7, 2002, press conference. Together they represented his argument for war: Hussein possessed actual weapons of mass destruction and at any moment could hand them to his supposed partners in al Qaeda. That is why Hussein was an immediate threat to the United States and had to be taken out quickly. But neither of these assertions were truthful. There has been much media debate over all this. But the postwar statements of Richard Kerr, a former deputy director of the CIA, provide the most compelling proof. He has been conducting a review of the prewar intelligence, and he has told reporters that the intelligence on Hussein�s WMDs was full of caveats and qualifiers and based mostly on inferential or circumstantial evidence. In other words, it was not no-doubt material. He also has said that prewar intelligence reports did not contain evidence of links between Hussein and al Qaeda. The best information to date indicates that the prewar intelligence did not leave "no doubt" about WMDs and did not support Bush�s claim that Hussein was in cahoots with al Qaeda. Bush�s primary reason for war was founded on falsehoods

2. "We found the weapons of mass destruction." Bush issued this triumphant remark in late May 2003, while being interviewed by a Polish television reporter. He was referring to two tractor-trailers obtained by U.S. forces in Iraq. The CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency had concluded these vehicles were mobile bio-weapons plants. Yet they had found not a trace of biological agents on either. (And no bio-weapon facility could be scrubbed completely clean.) In subsequent weeks, it turned out that State Department analysts and even DIA engineering experts�as well as outside experts�did not accept the CIA and DIA conclusion, and some of these doubters believed the explanation of Iraqis who claimed the trucks were built to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. Whichever side might be ultimately right about the trailers, this all-important piece of evidence was hotly contested. It was hardly solid enough to support Bush�s we-found-them declaration or to justify a war.

Bush Lies


We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
- White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, press briefing, Jan. 9, 2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons - the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
- George W. Bush, radio address, Feb. 8, 2003

ntelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
- George W. Bush, address to the U.S., March 17, 2003

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly�..All this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
- White House spokesman Ari Fleisher, press briefing, March 21, 2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And�.as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.
- Gen. Tommy Franks, press conference, March 22, 2003

One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.
- Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clark, press briefing, March 22, 2003

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.
- Donald Rumsfeld, ABC interview, March 30, 2003

We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
- George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 3, 2003

I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
- Colin Powell, remarks to reporters, May 4, 2003

We said what we said because we meant it�..We continue to have confidence that WMD will be found.
- White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, press briefing, May 7, 2003

I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons [SEE NEXT QUOTE].
- Donald Rumsfeld, Senate appropriations subcommittee on defense hearing, May 14, 2003

We believe [Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
- Dick Cheney, NBC's Meet the Press, March 16, 2003

Intelligence �analysts never said there was an imminent threat" from Iraq before the war.
- CIA Director George Tenet, speech, Feb. 5, 2004
Kucinich Watch


More



Powells Speech at UN

Nobody can keep a story straight, the 9-11 commission, which GW put together, I believe (could be wrong), said there is no credible link to Al-Qaeda and Iraq. Where are all these stockpiles of WMD at? They have all this surveilance and all of a sudden it's gone? Kofi Anin has staed that Iraq was not in possesion of WMD's. The UN inspectors failed to find anything. If they were moved out, I believe they would have been under heavy surveilance and caught. Things like this just do not dissappear. Over a year later and still nothing.

Don't try to tell me that Iraq was a bigger threat than Iran and North Korea These two have Publicily Claimed their intrest in WMD's. Saddam has not done Shizzle since the end of the Gulf War I.

Show me where all these WMD's are. You can't because there isn't any. With "Al-Qaeda" now operating in Iraq, wouldn't the urge to find them before they do seem un-questionable? Look, The Admin. claimed they had them, produced 'figures' on what they had, had photos of where they were, and They can not seem to find them. I'm going by what "They" told us, and so far it does not add up in my mind.

Your source of info comes from an Anti-Democrat site, IMO. I have posted some from Anti-Bush sites. So please do not pick at sources, just information that is contained perpurtuating towards "Truth".

I do not claim any Side as far as politics, To Quote Chris Rock: "There are some things I'm Liberal about, there are some things I'm Conservative about."

Do I think Bush is an Idiot? YES
I do not care what Party People run with, I want someone who will make it better.
I do give GW credit for sticking to his "Guns". Wether I believe in his principals behind it.

[edit on 16-6-2004 by TrickmastertricK]

Originally posted by Muaddib

The above post has a lot of evidence and information that links Al Qaeda, Saddam, Russia, China and terrorism all together. I excerpted the below paragraph to show some of the evidence that links Saddam and Al Qaeda as well as the Taliban.

There has also been info posted to the idea that MOSSAD was behind it.
This will just keep going in circles.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Once again...you keep saying Bush lied. He said that our government and others have intelligence that said Saddam had WMD. Was this a lie? no, every country in the world was saying Saddam did have WMD before the war...

Did we find any evidence of any kind of WMD? yes we did find some evidence. There have been several threads where other members, and I included, post this evidence. Do a search on ATS. I remember one post which was started by Agent47, but I don't remember the name, but its there.

There are Russian defectors that even say that Russia had sold things which were not milk and nutrients and were weapons to Saddam in 2002. If you search the forums you will find these links too.

Every country in the world was screaming that Saddam had WMD, but when finally Bush decided to do something rather than agree with more UN sanctions which would kill another 500,000 children, everyone that had some form of interest invested with Saddam's regime was claiming the US was making an injustice...

As for more evidence of WMD. We have waited this far and have been finding evidence here and there. What are you going to say when they finally bring forth more evidence of WMD that the US planted the evidence there?....

How exactly is the information i posted anti-democrat? The link I gave on some of the Russian defectors were speaking against their own government not against the democratic party in the US.... You were the one to post a site that hates Bush and republicans it seems. I haven't even mentioned the things that democrats have said and done in this thread.....at least not yet, but this is not the mud pit so I won't resort to the same attacks you did.

BTW, the link that you are saying that Mossad was behind this.... Mossad agents were given orders to kill terrorists and help out against terrorism, not to kill innocent Americans....


[edit on 17-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Muaddib, it's been pretty clearly established that there is a group of members here (albeit a shrinking one) that will present "proof" blaming Mossad for 9/11, the bad economy, the weather, diseases, and their own bad moods. I wouldn't bother touching on that issue or we'll lose the focus of this thread.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I'll just blindly follow the rest of the sheep, would that make you feel better...

This term, "sheep", intrigues me. Why do you use it?

Is it supposed to be a personal insult?
Is it supposed to embarass me into disagreeing with everything this administration stands for?

And what does "sheep" stand for?

Someone who blindly follows everything espoused by a political party?

Nobody can possibly agree with everything that someone else says.

But I do agree with a lot of what Bush does and says. Not everything, but a lot.
Does that make me a "sheep"?

Or, is the true meaning of"sheep" someone that dares to not share your total hatred of Bush and his administration?

Yes, I think that is what "sheep" means to you. Either I hate Bush as much as you do, or I am a "sheep". There is no middle ground, no compromise.

Good luck to you. Be careful that your hatred does not consume you from within.
:shk:

Muadib you keep repeating the fact that bush never lied, he did he lied about the 'facts' iraq had wmds and were linked to al-qaeda. Sure most other nations were convinced that Iraq had WMD's but they wanted to send the inspectors back to prove they did... bush on the other hand decided to charge in, destroy everything then ask questions.... thats the difference the other countries leading polititians wanted to use 'politics' to resolve it... bush decided that being a president 'politics' are beneath him and his only option was to attack. Other countries may have had mis-info and 'lied' but their ideas for the resolution would have made the world a better and more secure place now, not to mention making Iraq a better and more secure place

Originally posted by Muaddib
Did we find any evidence of any kind of WMD? yes we did find some evidence.

We know He Had Some in the Past. I am not denying that.

As for more evidence of WMD. We have waited this far and have been finding evidence here and there. What are you going to say when they finally bring forth more evidence of WMD that the US planted the evidence there?....

The way Bush and his administration had described to "Me" the "Reason" and "Proof" For going to War with Iraq has turned up Nadda, Nothing, Zilch. If They can take over the country in two weeks,, but can not find the WMD Stash Saddam was so claimed to have. As far as the "Planting" Comment, I can not comment on that, because No information has been provided to me to evaluate and come to any kind of conclusions. With this admins track record, they are already in the red.

How exactly is the information i posted anti-democrat?

I said THE SITE your info came from was.

Your source of info comes from an Anti-Democrat site, IMO. I have posted some from Anti-Bush sites. So please do not pick at sources, just information that is contained perpurtuating towards "Truth".

at least not yet, but this is not the mud pit so I won't resort to the same attacks you did.

An How in God's creation did I attack You?

BTW, the link that you are saying that Mossad was behind this.... Mossad agents were given orders to kill terrorists and help out against terrorism, not to kill innocent Americans....

Which Link? I posted more than one.
I personally did not claim this.

I don't feel the urge to defend my statements here mainly becuase it is a news forum. I have expressed my views on other threads, which would enable a person to accurately establish my personage. But this...

Yes, I think that is what "sheep" means to you. Either I hate Bush as much as you do, or I am a "sheep". There is no middle ground, no compromise.

Sheep means to me someone who believes everything you are told, and relies solely on second-hand information for what the believe. So yes, in a way I am a sheep and so you are you, but I don't want to be. I want to see the intelligence reports, I want to see the FIRST HAND INFORMATION.

When I made my comment about sheep I was referring to the statements you made about the partisan nature of the 9/11 commission. Do you just expect me to lie down and except that without seeing any documentation, just as Bush expects me to believe everything he says? And now we have different government versions of events just as Tony Blair and George Bush are now saying different things in response to the recent 9/11 commission allegations. What they don't want to say is that they are both speculating, just as I admit I am.

So, recently I have decided to rely less on the second-hand news, and rely more on what the general themes appear to be, this started with the live coverage of 9/11 that now conflicts with the consensus of what happened. I am justifying something I knew all along. But anyway...

I don't hate Bush, I don't hate anyone, if you thought I did you are sorely confused. For you see it is not that I hate Bush, it is that I LOVE MY AND HUMANITY'S FREEDOMS IN THE BROADEST SENSE. Obviously we are both passionate about what we speak of, that is certain. But there is a thin line between love and hate as they say.

I merely ask you as I have asked other people so many times in this discussion board to show me your evidence, I do not understand where you are getting your information. Don't expect to roll over and let you tickle me with either your or Bush's second-hand information. If I see the first-hand information then I will entertain the idea.

But anyway, someone wanted to know when Bush lied. How about recently when he said (pseudo-quote) "I only met Chalabai once shortly at the State of the Union address." Earlier he said that he met with Chalabai along with others at the Oval Office. Clearly he was trying to brush off his relationship with the now disfavored Chalabai. I'd also refer you to statements he made earlier today on CNN:

Bush reiterated that the administration never said that "the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated" between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. "We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda," he said.

and

"[Saddam Hussein is] a threat because he is dealing with al Qaeda."

YEA, MAYBE HE SHOULD HAVE CLARIFIED THIS BEFORE THE WAR INSTEAD OF NOW TIPTOEING AROUND HIS WORDS. Please I would like a Bush supporter to put a spin on this. His earlier statement implies they had a business relationship, but that was never established. Also, jsobecky, I would like to point out that even Bush is acknowledging the findings of the commission.

In the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, Bush had made stronger statements alleging cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda. In a October 2002 speech, he said, "Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."

Oh boy....Trickmaster....you mentioned in your previous post that there is information that Mossad was in on 9/11, or at least you seem to be hinting at that......I clarified that the information points that "unoficially" Mossad agents were told to help out against terrorism and killing terrorists....The information does not say anything about being in on 9/11....

What I mentioned about you attacking, was the republican party....not me. I said I was not going to follow your lead to start a "mud pit" cat fight argument about politics.....

Oh BTW, there is some more information about the WMD in Iraq...

" UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before war and after

SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Friday, June 11, 2004

The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.

The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission briefed the Security Council on new findings that could help trace the whereabouts of Saddam's missile and WMD program.

Excerpted from.
www.worldtribune.com...

Humm, the UN is saying even in June 2004 that Saddam had WMD....Did Bush lie? No, case closed.....

Unless the shepperd wannabes, and others who doubted that saddam had WMD, are going to start saying now that all the countries that are part of the UN were in on 9/11 also.....


Oh btw Trickmaster.... Are you saying that all the Russians and Chinese defectors are lying? I don't see the Russian defectors saying anything agains the democrats in that information I posted....

I don't know why is it that democratic sites are not making interviews with Russian and Chinese defectors. But does that make these defectors liers? IMHO no.


[edit on 17-6-2004 by Muaddib]

There is no link between the two groups. Saddam did nothing, and we invaded for his oil because Bush is a dumbass who cares about his oil more than innocent peoples lives. Saddam did ABSOLUTELY nothing too us, and we should not of captured him, nor tried to control his country. Im not saying I agree with Saddams ways, i mean, he's a messed up guy. But to go into someones country for no good reason, and capture someone when he did not do anything to us? BUSH IS A JOKE FOR A PRESIDENT!

either love me or leave me alone

Hova, you sure are ignoring, with a few others, that many nations are now saying that they have found proof that Saddam did have wmd and that he, with his loyalists shipped them to other countries, before, during and after the war. What is it with you people, everybody who bashes Bush always seem to side with the UN but now that the UN is saying they have proof for Saddam's WMD you are not believing the UN either?

I have been searching for the UN report and finaly found it. It cannot be found yet in the official UN web page, as they only have posted the meetings until June 8th and have not posted yet the June 9th meeting, but I was able to find the report which I am posting in response to one thread of mine. I will put a link in here when I finally post the information in the other thread.

In this link i posted an excerpt from the UNMOVIC report on what they have found about wmd from Iraq. Scroll down to my last post. In the link to the report some pictures can be seen of missile engines and other parts which were in possesion of Iraq in March 2003. There are also satellite pictures that show sites which were under monitoring by UNMOVIC and were removed of equipment, materials and in some cases the whole buildings were completly removed and which existed until 28th May 2003 but were missing in pictures taken in 2004.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 22-6-2004 by Muaddib]