The Iraq Documents: More Evidence Of An Iraq – Al Qaeda Connection
At some point, critics of the war and of President Bush are going to have to get serious about the treasure trove of new information becoming available through the seized Iraqi document dump. How’s this for provocative?
A. During the visit of the Sudanese Dr. Abrahim Al Sanoosi to the country and his meeting with Mr. Uday Saddam Hussein on 13/12/1994 and with the presence of the respectful Sir the Director of the Apparatus he indicated that the opposition person Osama Bin Laden who is staying in Sudan and who was cautious and fears that he will be accused by his opponents that he became an agent for Iraq, is ready to meet with him in Sudan (The results of the meeting were written to the Honorable Presidency according to our letter 872 on 17/12/1994).
B. The approval of the Honorable Presidency was granted to meet with the opposition person Osama Bin Laden by the Apparatus according to letter 128 on 11/1/1995 (attachment 6) and the meting with him was completed by Mr. M.A ex-4th Directory in Sudan and with the presence of the Sudanese Dr. Abrahim AL Sanoosi on 19/2/1995 and a discussion occurred about his organization, and he requested the broadcasting of Sheikh Sleiman AL Awada (who has influence in Saudia and outside since he is a known and influential religious personality) and dedicate a program for them through the station directed inside the country and make joint operations against the forces of infidels in the land of Hijaz ( the Honorable Presidency has been notified with the details of the meeting according to our letter 370 in 4/3/1995 attachment 7).
Plain English translation: an Iraqi intelligence asset met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan in 1995 (at least that’s what the document says – and Pajamas got a second opinion on the translation).
It’s not enough to just vaguely wave one’s hands and dismiss the documents as not worthy of study – a true critique would give REASONS to doubt the veracity of the documents, or to provide an alternate translation. I have not seen such a reasoned critique yet – if anyone from the right or left can point me to one, I’ll gladly update this post…
I don’t think that anybody’s realistically tried to argue that there was no contact between bin Laden and Hussein, but this is 1994 and 1995. We’d known that there was contact between them up through the late ’90s. But where’s the proof of strategic cooperation in these documents?
Fargus, I don’t claim it’s conclusive proof, but the allegation is in the excerpt I provided:
…he requested the broadcasting of Sheikh Sleiman AL Awada (who has influence in Saudia and outside since he is a known and influential religious personality) and dedicate a program for them through the station directed inside the country and make joint operations against the forces of infidels in the land of Hijaz.
re: Saddam and Osama – surely you jest – most of the left (not all, but most) has made a cottage industry of claiming Saddam would never give the time of day to Osama, since Saddam was so secular and bin Laden so religious (or so the story went)…I think that the documents are, at the very least, instructive, and the cavalier dismissal of them smells of partisanship…
It would matter not a whit if the true smoking gun comes out of these files – the tired but true meme of “BUSH LIED” will never be retired from the opposition’s talking points.
They’re too heavily invested in this pattern of rhetoric, which means the old adage of “who ya gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?,” will be much in evidence over the ensuing weeks.
BTW, did you happen to see the amazing turnout for the peace marches last weekend? (cough, cough). I can’t decide which of the many incoherent signs displayed were more appealing: the Che Guevera ones or the F-CK BUSH! posters. Charming – and as always, quite convincing.
Other than the fog of war, I don’t know why anyone is sketchy about Saddam’s anti-US terror pedigree. Who is Ramzi Yousef? Well, no one knows really except that the name is false, from a Kuwaiti passport, the gent in question is a veteran of Saddam’s secret police and he was one of the planners and executors with “Sheik” Abdul Raman of the truck bombing of the WTC during the Clinton years.
Not enough? M’kay. Well, with the war and all it’s not too surprising that few civil cases have been brought on terror related grounds but the WTC attacks have been adjudicated if only once. Look for a decison by Harold Baer in NYDC that found Iraqi assets liable for WTC damages. Why? Plaintiffs demonstrated prior knowledge of the attacks through the Iraqi state controlled press. Saddam knew it was coming, knew it would hit New York and WDC and that planes were involved.
Not enough? There’s still my fave… Salman Pak. Are there really any readers here that don’t know that Saddam trained international terrorists to hijack planes armed only with small knives at this facility?
Saddam is all over 9-11. In five years you won’t be able to find anyone outside an asylum (or a Democrat primary) to say otherwise.
The Translations Continue and Curious Finds Abound
Osama is considered a member of the Saudi opposition – which is an accurate assessment given that Osama’s earliest grievances were against the Saudi rulers who let the infidels into the Kingdom and defiled the Holy places by their presence. Consideri…
[...] Decision ‘08 [...]