U.S. Senate Says: No prewar Saddam-al-Qaida ties

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Hardrock69
    DIAMOND STATUS
    • Feb 2005
    • 21888

    U.S. Senate Says: No prewar Saddam-al-Qaida ties

    By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 11 minutes ago

    WASHINGTON - There's no evidence
    Saddam Hussein had ties with al-Qaida, according to a Senate report on prewar intelligence that Democrats say undercuts
    President Bush's justification for invading
    Iraq.


    Bush administration officials have insisted on a link between the Iraqi regime and terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Intelligence agencies, however, concluded there was none.

    Republicans countered that there was little new in the report and Democrats were trying to score election-year points with it.

    The declassified document released Friday by the intelligence committee also explores the role that inaccurate information supplied by the anti-Saddam exile group the Iraqi National Congress had in the march to war.

    It concludes that postwar findings do not support a 2002 intelligence community report that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, possessed biological weapons or ever developed mobile facilities for producing biological warfare agents.

    The 400-page report comes at a time when Bush is emphasizing the need to prevail in Iraq to win the war on terrorism while Democrats are seeking to make that policy an issue in the midterm elections.

    It discloses for the first time an October 2005
    CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates."

    Bush and other administration officials have said that the presence of Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a connection between Saddam's government and al-Qaida. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in June this year.

    White House press secretary Tony Snow said the report was "nothing new."

    "In 2002 and 2003, members of both parties got a good look at the intelligence we had and they came to the very same conclusions about what was going on," Snow said. That was "one of the reasons you had overwhelming majorities in the United States Senate and the House for taking action against Saddam Hussein," he said.

    Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich., a member of the committee, said the long-awaited report was "a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts" to link Saddam to al-Qaida.

    The administration, said Sen. John D. Rockefeller (news, bio, voting record), D-W.Va., top Democrat on the committee, "exploited the deep sense of insecurity among Americans in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, leading a large majority of Americans to believe — contrary to the intelligence assessments at the time — that Iraq had a role in the 9/11 attacks."

    The chairman of the committee, Sen. Pat Roberts (news, bio, voting record), R-Kan., said it has long been known that prewar assessments of Iraq "were a tragic intelligence failure."

    But he said the Democratic interpretations expressed in the report "are little more than a vehicle to advance election-year political charges." He said Democrats "continue to use the committee to try and rewrite history, insisting that they were deliberately duped into supporting the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime."

    The panel report is Phase II of an analysis of prewar intelligence on Iraq. The first phase, issued in July 2004, focused on the CIA's failings in its estimates of Iraq's weapons program.

    The second phase has been delayed as Republicans and Democrats fought over what information should be declassified and how much the committee should delve into the question of how policymakers may have manipulated intelligence to make the case for war.

    The committee is still considering three other issues as part of its Phase II analysis, including statements of policymakers in the run up to the war.


  • Warham
    DIAMOND STATUS
    • Mar 2004
    • 14589

    #2
    This news is two years old.

    The 9/11 Commission said the same thing in 2004.

    Comment

    • blueturk
      Veteran
      • Jul 2004
      • 1883

      #3
      Originally posted by Warham
      This news is two years old.

      The 9/11 Commission said the same thing in 2004.
      Yep. Old news. Who needs a real reason to start a war anyway? Forget about it!

      Comment

      • Warham
        DIAMOND STATUS
        • Mar 2004
        • 14589

        #4
        Originally posted by blueturk
        Yep. Old news. Who needs a real reason to start a war anyway? Forget about it!
        The main reason for the war was Iraq disregarding multiple UN resolutions dating back to 1991.

        Comment

        • LoungeMachine
          DIAMOND STATUS
          • Jul 2004
          • 32576

          #5
          Originally posted by Warham
          The main reason for the war was Iraq disregarding multiple UN resolutions dating back to 1991.

          Bullshit

          Don't be such a fucking moron for Christ's sake.

          You don't invade, overthrow, bomb, imprison, and occupy a country for YEARS over "disregarding UN resolutions, dumbass.
          Originally posted by Kristy
          Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
          Originally posted by cadaverdog
          I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

          Comment

          • Warham
            DIAMOND STATUS
            • Mar 2004
            • 14589

            #6
            Originally posted by LoungeMachine
            Bullshit

            Don't be such a fucking moron for Christ's sake.

            You don't invade, overthrow, bomb, imprison, and occupy a country for YEARS over "disregarding UN resolutions, dumbass.
            Sure ya can.

            Comment

            • LoungeMachine
              DIAMOND STATUS
              • Jul 2004
              • 32576

              #7
              Originally posted by Warham
              Sure ya can.

              See, that right there is why people in here think you're so stupid.
              Originally posted by Kristy
              Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
              Originally posted by cadaverdog
              I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

              Comment

              • Nickdfresh
                SUPER MODERATOR

                • Oct 2004
                • 49203

                #8
                Senate: Saddam Saw al-Qaida As Threat
                Friday, September 8, 2006 6:23 PM EDT
                The Associated Press
                By JIM ABRAMS

                WASHINGTON (AP) — Saddam Hussein regarded al-Qaida as a threat rather than a possible ally, a Senate report says, contradicting assertions President Bush has used to build support for the war in Iraq.

                Released Friday, the report discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that before the war, Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor or turn a blind eye toward" al-Qaida operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or his associates.

                Saddam told U.S. officials after his capture that he had not cooperated with Osama bin Laden even though he acknowledged that officials in his government had met with the al-Qaida leader, according to FBI summaries cited in the Senate report.

                "Saddam only expressed negative sentiments about bin Laden," Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi leader's top aide, told the FBI.

                The report also faults intelligence gathering in the lead-up to the 2003 invasion.

                As recently as an Aug. 21 news conference, Bush said people should "imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein" with the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction and "who had relations with Zarqawi."

                Democrats contended that the administration continues to use faulty intelligence, including assertions of a link between Saddam's government and the recently killed al-Zarqawi, to justify the war in Iraq.

                They also said, in remarks attached to Friday's Senate Intelligence Committee document, that former CIA Director George Tenet had modified his position on the terrorist link at the request of administration policymakers.

                Republicans said the document, which compares prewar intelligence with post-invasion findings on Iraq's weapons and on terrorist groups, broke little new ground. And they said Democrats were distorting it for political purposes.

                A previous report in 2004 made clear the intelligence agencies' "massive failures," said Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., a member of the committee. "Yet to make a giant leap in logic to claim that the Bush administration intentionally misled the nation or manipulated intelligence is simply not warranted."

                White House press secretary Tony Snow said the report was "nothing new."

                A second part of the report concluded that false information from the Iraqi National Congress, an anti-Saddam group led by then-exile Ahmed Chalabi, was used to support key U.S. intelligence assessments on Iraq.

                It said U.S. intelligence agents put out numerous red flags about the reliability of INC sources but the intelligence community made a "serious error" and used one source who concocted a story that Iraq was building mobile biological weapons laboratories.

                The report also said that in 2002 the National Security Council directed that funding for the INC should continue "despite warnings from both the CIA, which terminated its relationship with the INC in December 1996, and the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), that the INC was penetrated by hostile intelligence services, including the Iranians."

                According to the report, postwar findings indicate that Saddam "was distrustful of al-Qaida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime."

                It said al-Zarqawi was in Baghdad from May until late November 2002. But "postwar information indicates that Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and that the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi."

                In June 2004, Bush defended Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that Saddam had "long-established ties" with al-Qaida. "Zarqawi is the best evidence of connection to al-Qaida affiliates and al-Qaida," the president said.

                The report concludes that postwar findings do not support a 2002 intelligence report that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, possessed biological weapons or had ever developed mobile facilities for producing biological warfare agents.

                "The report is a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein was linked with al-Qaida," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., a member of the committee.

                Levin and Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the panel, said Tenet told the committee last July that in 2002 he had complied with an administration request "to say something about not being inconsistent with what the president had said" about the Saddam-terrorist link.

                They said that on Oct. 7, 2002, the same day Bush gave a speech speaking of such a link, the CIA had sent a declassified letter to the committee saying it would be an "extreme step" for Saddam to assist Islamist terrorists in attacking the United States.

                They said Tenet acknowledged to the committee that subsequently issuing a statement that there was no inconsistency between the president's speech and the CIA viewpoint was "the wrong thing to do."

                Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said the mistakes of prewar intelligence have long been known and "the additional views of the committee's Democrats are little more than a rehashing of the same unfounded allegations they've used for over three years."

                The panel report is Phase II of an analysis of prewar intelligence on Iraq. The first phase, issued in July 2004, focused on the CIA's failings in its estimates of Iraq's weapons program.

                The second phase had been delayed as Republicans and Democrats fought over what information should be declassified and how far the committee should delve into the question of whether policymakers may have manipulated intelligence to make the case for war.

                Committee member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said he planned to ask for an investigation into the amount of information remaining classified. He said, "I am particularly concerned it appears that information may have been classified to shield individuals from accountability."

                ———

                On the Net:

                Senate Intelligence Committee: www.intelligence.senate.gov
                Last edited by Nickdfresh; 09-08-2006, 07:08 PM.

                Comment

                • Warham
                  DIAMOND STATUS
                  • Mar 2004
                  • 14589

                  #9
                  Originally posted by LoungeMachine
                  See, that right there is why people in here think you're so stupid.
                  Gee, Lounge.

                  Are you referring to the multitudes of political geniuses that frequent this forum, or are you referring to yourself, a man who claims that a certain member who posts pics of gay asses and feces is one of the most 'brilliant posters' here.

                  Call me dismissive, but I reject your premise.

                  Comment

                  • EAT MY ASSHOLE
                    Veteran
                    • Feb 2006
                    • 1887

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Warham
                    Gee, Lounge.

                    Are you referring to the multitudes of political geniuses that frequent this forum, or are you referring to yourself, a man who claims that a certain member who posts pics of gay asses and feces is one of the most 'brilliant posters' here.

                    Call me dismissive, but I reject your premise.
                    Say what you will, this is one BRILLIANT comeback.
                    RIM ME!!!!!!!!!!!!

                    Comment

                    • LoungeMachine
                      DIAMOND STATUS
                      • Jul 2004
                      • 32576

                      #11
                      Originally posted by EAT MY ASSHOLE
                      Say what you will, this is one BRILLIANT comeback.

                      Coming from someone known as EAT MY ASSHOLE, I feel a whole lot better now.

                      Why are all of the closet fags Republicans?

                      Rove
                      Mehlman
                      Gannon
                      Brian

                      The list is endless
                      Originally posted by Kristy
                      Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
                      Originally posted by cadaverdog
                      I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

                      Comment

                      • Warham
                        DIAMOND STATUS
                        • Mar 2004
                        • 14589

                        #12
                        Originally posted by LoungeMachine
                        Coming from someone known as EAT MY ASSHOLE, I feel a whole lot better now.

                        Why are all of the closet fags Republicans?

                        Rove
                        Mehlman
                        Gannon
                        Brian

                        The list is endless
                        They probably feel they'll be attacked by liberals who say they support gay marriage, but in reality loathe gays.

                        Comment

                        • Warham
                          DIAMOND STATUS
                          • Mar 2004
                          • 14589

                          #13
                          Originally posted by EAT MY ASSHOLE
                          Say what you will, this is one BRILLIANT comeback.
                          You've only seen one of my weaker ones.

                          I've gotten him on too many occasions to list.

                          Comment

                          • LoungeMachine
                            DIAMOND STATUS
                            • Jul 2004
                            • 32576

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Warham
                            They probably feel they'll be attacked by liberals who say they support gay marriage, but in reality loathe gays.
                            probably.

                            But I'm sure your church will embrace them
                            Originally posted by Kristy
                            Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
                            Originally posted by cadaverdog
                            I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

                            Comment

                            • LoungeMachine
                              DIAMOND STATUS
                              • Jul 2004
                              • 32576

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Warham
                              You've only seen one of my weaker ones.

                              I've gotten him on too many occasions to list.

                              You really need this, don't you?


                              I'll make sure to check back in around Election Time.


                              Enjoy your many boards, WarOT

                              LMAO
                              Originally posted by Kristy
                              Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
                              Originally posted by cadaverdog
                              I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

                              Comment

                              Working...