Reports Wednesday morning that the 9/11 Commission has determined there was no cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida are completely false - and are undoubtedly driven by the media's determination to contradict the Bush administration's claims that such a link exists.

"9/11 Panel Says Iraq Rebuffed Bin Laden" reads the headline on the Associated Press report on today's Commission staff statement.

But that's not what the Commission staff report actually said.

The below passage, for instance, does more to confirm the Bush administration's claims of an Iraq-al Qaida link than it does to contradict them.

"The Sudanese, to protect their own ties with Iraq, reportedly persuaded Bin Ladin* to cease [support for anti-Saddam Islamists in Northern Iraq] and arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda*.

"A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting Bin Ladin in 1994. Bin Ladin is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded." [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 5]

Apparently never responded? How, pray tell, does the AP derive from those words the conclusive claim that Iraq "rebuffed" bin Laden?

The Commission statement continues:

"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after Bin Ladin had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship."

What's the evidence for this less-than-conclusive surmise?

"Two senior Bin Ladin associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq," says the Commission.

Such a statement begs the question: Why does the Commission, let alone the press, take the word of two senior bin Laden associates over, say, Iraq's new prime minister, Iyad Allawi.

Last December he told the London Telegraph, "We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda."

Reacting to the discovery of an Iraqi intelligence document placing 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta in Baghdad two months before the attacks, he continued:

"This is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with al-Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks."

In fact, nowhere does the Commission make the claim that Iraq and al-Qaida never cooperated. What it does say is "We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." [NewsMax italics]

Apparently Dr. Allawi's asssement counts for nothing.

Even so, it's worth noting that elsewhere in today's staff statement, the 9/11 Commission asserts:

"With al Qaeda at its foundation, Bin Ladin sought to build a broader Islamic Army that included terrorist groups from Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Oman, Tunisia, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Somalia, and Eritrea. Not all [terrorist] groups from these states agreed to join, but at least one from each did." [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 3]

In other words, at least one terror group from Iraq did form an alliance with bin Laden.

Another problem: If the press is going to take today's staff statement as gospel, certain long-held media assumptions will need to be drastically revised, such as the widely accepted notion that al-Qaida was involved in the first World Trade Center bombing.

Not true, says the Commission.

"Whether Bin Ladin and his organization had roles in the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center ... remains a matter of substantial uncertainty," the staff statement says, before insisting, "We have no conclusive evidence" of a bin Laden link. [Staff Statement No. 15, Page 6]

The same goes for "Operation Bojinka," the 1995 plot to hijack 12 airliners hatched by Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that experts say was the blueprint for the 9/11 attacks.

"[Mohammed] was not, however, an al Qaeda member at the time of the Manilla [Bojinka] plot," Commission staffers say, even though they acknowledge that he went on to mastermind the 9/11 attacks.

The press is furiously spinning the 9/11 Commission staff statement in a bid to discredit the Bush administration. Americans should go to the Sept. 11 Commission Web site and read the conclusions for themselves: http://www.9-11commission.gov/

__________________
www.typeyourmind.com
Let your Fingers do the Talking!

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

Exactly right, Johnny. The "headlines dujour" aren't matching up to what is really in the 911 commissions. That's the liberal press just trying to spin a bit. YOU are right: there's more in there that CONFIRMS what Bush and the administrationsaid than disputes it.

^5. Great points, Senax. And you're correct....their job is supposed to be about 911.

__________________
The last time this country mixed politics with religion, people got burned at the stake.

Question: Do you actually read what you post, or do you just copy and paste off of the Sludge Report?

Ok, they contacted them. We've contacted North Korea, but that doesn't mean we're allies. Also, it says that al Qaeda supported anti-Saddam extremists.

See Saddam snubbed bin Laden! They hate each other! And also, who reported the Iraqi officer meeting bin Laden?

Again, contact proves nothing.

Looks like NewsMaxis putting their own little spin on this one.

If this proves anything, it proves there's no connection. It was most likely a Shi'ite terrorist group, which Saddam hated.

Your post is almost Jaw-droppingly dishonest. Nowhere in it did it say that the connection was proven, like your title stated. Almost all of the evidence was circumstantial, and not even GOOD circumstantial evidence, as I just proved. Come on.

__________________
"The only thing we have to fear is four more years of George W. Bush." -Teddy Kennedy

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

I find their spinning very amusing... lol. I love to see Neocons squirm when they get caught in a lie.

__________________
"What does a former president's son know about the Iraq war anyway?"
-- GW Bush when asked about Ron Reagan's negative comments, 6/25/2004.
www.BushZombie.com

New York -- A U.S. Federal Grand Jury in New York on Nov. 5 issued an
indictment against Usama Bin Laden alleging that he and others engaged
in a long-term conspiracy to attack U.S. facilities overseas and to
kill American citizens.


The indictment noted that Al Qaeda, Bin Laden's international
terrorist group, forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in
Sudan and with the government of Iran and with its associated group
Hezballah to "work together against their perceived common enemies in
the West, particularly the United States."


Additionally, the indictment states that Al Qaeda reached an agreement
with Iraq not to work against the regime of Saddam Hussein and that
they would work cooperatively with Iraq, particularly in weapons
development.


According to the indictment, Bin Laden's group also tried to recruit
Americans to travel through the United States and the West to deliver
messages and to conduct financial transactions to aid their terrorist
activities. The indictment also states that Al Qaeda used humanitarian
work as a conduit for transmitting funds to affiliate terrorist
groups.


The indictment also claims that Bin Laden's supporters purchased land
for terrorist training camps; bought warehouses where explosives were
stored; transferred bank accounts using various aliases; purchased
sophisticated telecommunications equipment; and transferred money and
weapons to Al Qaeda and affiliated terrorist organizations.


The indictment also states that beginning in 1993, Al Qaeda began
training Somali tribes to oppose the United Nation's humanitarian
effort in Somalia. In October, members of Al Qaeda participated in an
attack on U.S. military personnel where 18 soldiers were killed and 73
others wounded in Mogadishu. In another reference, the indictment
noted that an unnamed "co-conspirator" transported weapons and
explosives from Khartoum to Port Sudan for transshipment to the Saudi
Arabian peninsula.


The Grand Jury document, which usually does not provide a great amount
of details in advance of a prosecution, also stated that Bin Laden and
"others" tried to develop chemical weapons and attempted to obtain
nuclear weapons components in 1993.


The indictment noted that Bin Laden issued his Declaration of Jihad
with the aim of recruiting others to "kill Americans and encouraged
other persons to join the jihad against the American enemy."

AND HERES A LINK for the actual indictment
http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html

Keep in mind this was in 1998 ... so dont blame Bush

__________________
www.typeyourmind.com
Let your Fingers do the Talking!

So lets just throw out some more fundamental American beliefs right? Guilty til proven innocent? Are you kidding? You guys really do want to open Pandora's box don't you? If we allow the Gov't to throw out ideas like "innocent til proven guilty" or allow the use of torture for teh sake of national security, then where does it stop? It doesn't, more and more rights will be gradually taken away from us. And while circumstantial evidence can be used, it is not supposed to be enough to get you convicted. There are Al Qaeda cells in America, does that mean Bush supports terrorists? No. The fact that a cell may have existed in Iraq does not mean that Saddam supported them. The report says loud and clear "No credible link". This means that no clear cut eviden has been found. They are not saying it doesn't exist, just that there is none to date. It means that the evidence is not solid or credible. But what they do have is proof that Saddam did not allow training camps in his country, and OBL supported anti-saddam groups. If you have clear cut proof that there is a direct link proving Saddam supported Al Qaeda, then please post it. I hope it's not form newsmax though. And please forward this Clear cut, undeniable proof to the 9/11 commission, I'm sure they would be interested as well.

And before you say it, yes I did read the actual commission report thanks to JP5. I posted a rather lengthy reply to the report on the other 9/11 comission thread that pointed out arguments for both sides of this debate.

-Demosthenes

__________________
"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower