The Al-Qa’ida Iraq Connection

On the 20th of March 2003 one of most controversial military invasions of our times began as America backed by coalition forces invaded the sovereign state of Iraq. At the time there were mass protests on the streets of western countries and claims of war crimes against the coalition forces rolling across the Iraqi desert, little did they know at the time that since 2002 American Special Forces and CIA units had been operating in the country and their protests were futile as the decision to invade had been made months before. America was going to war and taking its allies along for the ride.

When the people of the world stood up and asked why the west was invading Iraq the governments responded, most notably with Colin Powell’s now historic address to the United Nations in February 2003 and many idiotic ramblings form George Bush. The claim was that Saddam was directly supporting the terrorists responsible for the attacks of 9/11, Osama Bin Laden’s Al-Qa’ida network and further to this that Saddam was in possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), committed human rights abuses and was in breach of binding resolutions form the UN Security Council.

When the fog of war cleared hindsight showed that the claim that there was an operational collaboration between Al-Qa’ida and Iraq was wrong. It is the intention of this thread to explore the history of Al-Qa’ida and Iraq and how this false assumption that Iraq was working with Al-Qa’ida came to pass.

Many who seek to critique this position that Saddam and Bin Laden were working together rightfully point out that the two men would were opposites in the Islamic world would never have worked together after the actions of Saddam’s Iraq during the invasion of Kuwait. During this time Bin Laden saw Saddam as attempting to conquer the Middle East and assumed that his next move was to head into Saudi Arabia and implement his secular ideas onto the kingdom. In the face of this Bin Laden offered up his assistance to the Saudi’s to defend the kingdom against Saddam. They refused instead taking up the offer of America, the impact of this period of time on the future of Bin Laden is significant however it is not the scope of this thread to examine this impact.

After the first Gulf war it is fair to assume that the two men who were also opposites in terms of ideology would never have conceded working with each other, however that is not true. Although the relationship between Al-Qa’ida and Iraq would always be strained to two did have contact although this never developed into any meaningful operational cooperation that was proposed as a justification of war.

The first real link between Iraq and Al-Qa’ida comes from when Bin Laden’s support of Anti-Saddam militants(probably supporting them because of his fear of Saddam following the first gulf war) in northern Iraq changed. This change came about at a time when Bin Laden had been expelled from his native Saudi Arabia to Sudan. The Sudanese enjoyed cordial relations with Saddam but because they were now sheltering Bin Laden who was providing support to anti-Saddam militant’s relations became strained. To circumvent an erosion in relations the Sudanese brokered a deal in between Bin Laden and Iraq to withdraw his support for the militants which involved Bin Laden himself meeting with a senior member of Iraqi intelligence in Khartoum sometime in late 1994. This appears to be the first contact directly between Al-Qa’ida and Iraq however it was not to create any operational support.

Then in 1997 when Bin Laden’s war against America and the west was really beginning to gain momentum he supposedly sent looked at the possibility of offering some level of cooperation to Iraq. However at this time Saddam was attempting to amend relations with Saudi Arabia who had expelled Bin Laden for speaking out against the ruling monarchy. So as not to put diplomatic talks between the two states Saddam initially refused.

However in the 1998 the situation changed, Iraq now saw that it had a common enemy with Al-Qa’ida, America. By 1998 Bin Laden had been in Afghanistan for two years and had recently issued his second and most damming Fatwa against America. He had then been responsible for the bombing of American embassies in Africa and America had responded with Operation Infinite Reach launching 75 cruise missiles at Al-Qa’ida targets. In December of 1998 America then turned its cruise missiles on Saddam in Operation Desert Fox and Iraq noticed that they and Al-Qa’ida now sheared the same enemy in America.

As a result of this Iraq took up Al-Qa’ida on its 1997 offer for talks with a view to the two groups cooperating together. It has been reported that even before the attacks in July of 1998 members of Al-Qa’ida and Iraqi intelligence met. However in 1999 after both groups had been attacked by America these meetings intensified. It is alleged that the conclusion of these meetings was for Iraq to offer Al-Qa’ida a home in Iraq, something that Bin Laden declined. According to the 9/11 commission

“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”

It is again made clear, that these talks never developed into anything meaningful but they did however take place.

The last contact between Al-Qa’ida and Iraq before 9/11 was alleged to have taken place in Prague during April of 2001 between Mohamed Atta (leader of the 9/11 plot) and an Iraqi intelligence officer and diplomat. This intelligence came from Czech intelligence and it was later proved to be inaccurate as it has been shown that Atta and the official he is alleged to have met was not present in Prague at the time of the alleged meeting.

This all therefore raises the question, how did American intelligence develop this believe that there was a operational cooperation between Al-Qa’ida and Iraq based on these few meetings and this historical backdrop that makes it quite clear that the two entities despite being in contact with each other throughout the 1990’s never had any operational cooperation.

The answer comes from a senior member of Al-Qa’ida captured in 2001 by Pakistani forces as he was attempting to escape Afghanistan in November.

That man was the Libyan Ibn Al-Shaykh al-Libi, and he was the basis of the intelligence regarding the connection between Al-Qa’ida and Iraq used in Powell’s infamous speech to the UN. The Americans could hardly have used a worse source.

By far the best account of the fate of al-Libi can be found in Omar Nasiri’s book “Inside the Jihad”, Nasirir was a spy who infiltrated a Al-Qa’ida training camp and was trained there by al-Libi. Al-Libi is said to have been one of Al-Qa’ida’s top trainers and his capture by Pakistani forces was a major early blow for Al-Qa’ida in the war.

Shortly after he was captured he was taken into America custody and transferred to Bagram Air Base for interrogation with the FBI who by all accounts treated him humanely and he was cooperating with them, providing information about Richard Reid the shoe bomber for example. However he was soon then handed over to the CIA who had him rendered to Egypt where he was tortured. Under torture he provided intelligence that the Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi (the soon to be leader of the Organization of the Jihad base in the country of the two rivers, aka Al-Qa’ida in Iraq) was being harboured by Iraq. He also claimed that Al-Qa’ida had sent members to Iraq to be trained in the use of WMDs.

Initially the American intelligence community assumed that they had found the smoking gun connecting Iraq and Saddam to Al-Qa’ida but there was one problem. Al-Libi’s job with Al-Qa’ida was to train the group’s members in interrogation survival and how to plant false information. And that is exactly what he done and it worked, al-Libi believed that by dragging America into a war in a Muslim country would lead to mass American casualties and a bloody war. As history has shown he was correct.

Too bad you spent your time writing your diatribe, when all along your entire premis is wrong.

There WERE WMD in Iraq. The fact that Sadam had 2 years to hide them, never seems to come into question with you "illegal war" people.

SOURCE 1

SOURCE 2

SOURCE 3

SOURCE 4

SOURCE 5

and my personal favorite, the yellow cake that even your precious MSNBC reported: YELLOW CAKE



Now why do you anti-waring, "Bush should be in jail" types always have to get my blood pressure up with your constant nonsense? Why don't you do a little research first?

Oh, and as a PS to this post, find that WMD's were in fact moved to Syria in the two years it took the USA to build its forces for invasion: SOURCE

The newspaper reveals that a 200 square-kilometer area in northwestern Syria has been photographed by satellites at the request of a Western intelligence agency at least 16 times, the most recent being taken in January. The site is near Masyaf, and it has at least five installations and hidden paths leading underneath the mountains. This supports the reporting of Nizar Nayouf, an award-winning Syrian journalist who said in 2004 that his sources confirmed that Saddam Hussein’s WMDs were in Syria.

reply to post by phantomjack


If you had actually bothered to read my thread you would know that it has almost nothing to do with WMDs and that is not my premise. I do agree with you that Iraq did have WMDs, but that is not what this thread is about so please read the whole thread before you go off ranting at me about stuff that has nothing to so with the thread

Thanks

Really no takers….

reply to post by phantomjack


no WMD's can justify the genocide

saddam was bad but USA can be way worse when they make de effort

How can I make this clear…

THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT WMDs!!!!!

reply to post by phantomjack


Just because NY post says it is true does not mean it. We need actual photographic, video and scientific evidence that they were found and that he had intention to use them. Also what connection does 9/11 have with Iraq? Did we use the 911 attacks as a pretext to attack Iraq? seems pretty obvious.

Plus who are we to tell them that they can't have WMDs even if they did?

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Thanks for the response but again, this thread is not about WMD’s or even really 9/11 its about the contention that existed between Iraq and Al-Qa’ida.

thought i would bump this

As far as the documentation is concerned this is equivalent to the Pentagon Papers. In 30-40 years down the road we may find some answers. Nothing about the lead up to the coalition invasion of Iraq will see the light of day anytime soon and, as it's framed in a declaration of war, American citizens have no legal right to sue for the release of war documents.
Atta's meeting in Prague with Iraq's intelligence minster(or whoever he was) is clouded in mystery and has been placed in a 'no go zone' for persons who must have the Governments permission to research documentation. If you push this you will simply push yourself right out the door-and in top secret cases such as this-it might be a long way down. Yes, the 9/11 commission told a huge lie here-what choice did they have? None. My experience, and that of others, leads me to believe that the whole thing was a fabrication from the start that just got out of hand. Perhaps someone thought this meeting was good fodder and it stunk so bad it got buried.

The largest Kurdish settlement outside of Kurdistan is in the general area where I live. They are wonderful people for the most part and have been so helpful with helping me learn their language and study their culture. They are the oldest known civilization and their history predates the Egyptians and Sumerians by many centuries. What was done to them by Saddam Hussein was a sadist war crime-he went out of his way to make them suffer long before they died. For them hanging was little justice for what they suffered-I agree.

Even Globocnik told his subordinates that their job was to kill Jews not to beat them, torture them and not to prolong their suffering. Saddam whole intention was to make the Kurds suffer as long as possible. It only really compares with the early United States Government treatment of the Northern American Indian tribes as far as intentional suffering. Kidnapping children of the tribes, infecting them with smallpox, then returning to the tribe to infect them with a long and slow death. Some 10,000 of one tribe died this way-it took 4 years to totally wipe them out of existence. Still, many in the US government say they got off easy.

It would be helpful if you conceive your summations in the historical context of the period -not just arbitrarily make deductions about events, whose true nature, may be decades in showing themselves-if ever.

p

p