Spectrum Weã¢â‚¬â„¢re Sorry Something Didnã¢â‚¬â„¢t Work Quite Right Please Try Again Later

When did the question of Saddam's Ties to Al Queda become debunked?  Politicians on the left and right take all kinds of buzzwords and talking points on the matter, merely what's the divergence between "ties," "a relationship," "a collaborative operational human relationship," "operational ties," "a cooperational relationship," "an alliance," an "understanding"?  What does information technology all mean?

As far as I can tell, the debunking of the idea that Saddam and Al Queda would ever piece of work together to attack the United States stems first from the 911 Commission report which said,

"Co-ordinate to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Republic of iraq. Bin Ladin declined, evidently judging that his circumstances in Transitional islamic state of afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. 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 before contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen prove indicating that Republic of iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks confronting the The states.76"

"Collaborative Operational Human relationship" seems to be the words that started the idea that Saddam and Al Queda would never work together to attack the Us, just those three words are cherry-picked from the comment as a whole-a comment that hinges on the precursory words, "we have seen no evidence."  These are repeated once more in the very next sentence, "Nor have we seen show…."

At first glance it sounds like the commission members are saying that no bear witness exists, just that's not it at all every bit some of the 911 Commission members later elaborated.

"John Lehman, a 9/11 commissioner, spoke to The Weekly Standard at the time the report was released."There may well be–and probably will be–additional intelligence coming in from interrogations and from analysis of captured records then along which will fill out the intelligence picture. This is non phrased every bit–nor meant to exist–the definitive give-and-take on Iraqi Intelligence activities.""

Upon seeing just a glimpse of the 18% of the millions of documents and thousands of hours of tapes captured from Saddam'southward government, 911 Committee member, Sen. Bob Kerrey (D) said,

"This is a very significant ready of facts," sometime nine/11 commissioner, Mr. Kerry said yesterday. "I personally and strongly believe you don't have to evidence that Iraq was collaborating against Osama bin Laden on the September xi attacks to prove he was an enemy and that he would collaborate with people who would do our state harm. This presents facts should not be used to tie Saddam to attacks on September eleven. It does necktie him into a circumvolve that meant to damage the United States."

Other 911 Commission members have spoken out also and made clear that the lack of evidence cited in their written report was a reference to a lack of bear witness gathered.  That word, "gathered" come directly from the CIA reports and other intelligence agency reports regarding Saddam'southward Ties upon which the 911 Commission was using to make its assessments.

President's Daily Cursory (PDB)

• Sept, 21, 2001
• Merely 10 days after the 911 attacks this summary assessment clearly suffered from lack of intelligence gathering and analysis since at the time it still wasn't 100% clear that Al Queda was behind the 911 attacks.

NESA Report on Republic of iraq'south Ties to Terrorism (terrorism in general/not specific to Al Queda).

• This was basically a preliminary typhoon of the CIA's "Iraqi Support for Terrorism 2002" and "Iraqi Back up for Terrorism 2003" reports.
• October 2001
• Formed no conclusions
• lack of bear witness gathered

"Republic of iraq and al-Qa'ida: Interpreting a Murky Relationship"

• 6/12/02
• Formed no conclusions
• specifically cited a lack of prove gathered

"Iraqi Support for Terrorism 2002"

• ix/18/02
• Formed no conclusions
• specifically cited a lack of evidence gathered

Letter from DCI Tenet, head of the CIA, to Sen. Bob Graham, caput of the Senate Intelligence Committee

• 10/seven/02
• Formed no conclusions, but reiterated closed door testimony from CIA officials to the Senate Intelligence Commission that the more than time passes, the more than probable it is that Saddam would make WMD and use Al Queda to covertly and deniably set on the United states of america
• Lists several examples of Saddam'southward support for terrorism, Al Queda, and its proxy terror affiliates

"Report of the Articulation Inquiry Into the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001-By the Firm Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence  and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence"

• December 2002
• Reiterated the comments from the 9/21/01 PDB and the x/7/02 Tenet Letter
• Added more reports of possible Iraqi involvement in the 911 attacks
• Cited a lack of evidence gathered as a problem that prevented forming any conclusions

"Iraqi Back up for Terrorism 2003"

• January 2003
• This was basically a rehash of the 2002 version with a little new info since the CIA finally got a spy dorsum into Iraq but a few weeks prior to its release
• Formed no conclusions
• specifically cited a lack of testify gathered

"Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Investigation Into Pre-War Intelligence on Republic of iraq (Phase I report)"

• July 7, 2004
• confirmed the various reports of ties between Saddam's regime and Al Queda every bit presented in other reports (including confirmation of almost of the comments fabricated by Feith and his role), and repeatedly stated that the Bush-league Administration'due south claims were "reasonable" as well as often accurate reflections of the intelligence reporting at the time.
• "Due to the limited amount and questionable quality of reporting on the leadership intentions of Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Ladin, the CIA was unable to make conclusive assessments in Iraqi Support for Terrorism regarding Iraq's relationship with al-Qaida. The CIA stated in the Telescopic Notation: 'Our knowledge of Republic of iraq's ties to terrorism is evolving DELETED. . . . '"

"911 Commission Final Report"

• July 22, 2004
• Formed no conclusions regarding regime ties to Al Queda
• members subsequently specifically cited a lack of evidence gathered and asked that the question of government ties to Al Queda be examined further-not dismissed or otherwise closed.

"Iraqi Perspective Project Report" (DoD)

• March 2006
• Confirmed many of the previously reported ties between the regime and Al Queda
• Found many more examples of ties and further demonstrated that there was in fact a human relationship between the two, that information technology was dangerous, and that it was growing faster than expected
• Cited a lack of intelligence gathered before the war, and an even larger, more deliberate, and more unexplained refusal to investigate the human relationship after the invasion given the wealth of captured intelligence and detained authorities members.

"REPORT OF THE SELECT Committee ON INTELLIGENCE ON POSTWAR FINDINGS ABOUT Iraq'Southward WMD PROGRAMS AND LINKS TO TERRORISM AND HOW THEY COMPARE WITH PREWAR ASSESSMENTS (Phase II report)"

• September 9, 2006
• Cited the postal service-war refusal of whatsoever and all intelligence agencies to investigate the depth and threat of the human relationship between Saddam's regime and Al Queda
• Used the refusal of intelligence agencies to investigate pre-state of war intelligence and the causes for the lack thereof, the Senate Intelligence Committee openly, freely, and admittedly took information technology upon itself to act every bit an intelligence agency and grade an intelligence assessment on its own.

(U) The CIA has non published a "fully researched, coordinated and approved position" on the postwar reporting on the sometime authorities'southward links to al-Qa'ida, but has published such a paper on the postwar reporting on Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi and the former Iraqi regime. The CIA told the Committee that regarding Iraq's links to terrorism, "the research the Counterterrorist Centre has done on this outcome has called into question some of the reports of contacts and preparation . . . revealed other contacts of which we were unaware, and shed new low-cal on some contacts that appeared in prewar reporting. On balance, this enquiry suggests that the prewar judgment remains valid."
2004 SSCI Report Page 62
(Remember that previous investigations had adamant that pre-state of war judgments as presented by the Bush Administration were "accurate" and "reasonable.")

At that place are some consistencies in all these investigations and their reports.

They all refuse to course a conclusion

They all say there was a relationship, but the depth of it is debated inside the intelligence community

They all say the affair should exist looked into rather than dismissed, closed, or perpetuated as a resolved indicate of discussion.

With all that consistency in listen, why hasn't Congress demanded an investigation into the relationship?  This relationship is cadre to the strategy and approach in both of the wars that America has been fighting for years now:

A war in Iraq where Saddam once ruled,

and a war in Afghanistan, where Osama Bin Laden ruled.

Republicans seem afraid to enquire that simple, vital question, and Democrats seem all likewise eager to ignore the only 3 consistencies between all of the previous investigations that take been conducted so to engagement.  Members of Congress routinely demand investigations into anything and everything on Capitol Hill, and so, why not examine the depth of the relationship betwixt America'due south enemies; enemies who have killed their constituents, and seek right now to kill fifty-fifty more than?  One would retrieve that'due south a little more of import than raising the minimum wage for tuna fishermen in American Samoa, but evidently not.  In direct contradiction to every investigation and so far (both pre-state of war and post-state of war) the Democrats who command Congress seem fifty-fifty more agape than Republicans to finally conclude this thing.  Instead, they've chosen to deed in denial of not ane, not two, non three, but in denial of every single investigation and so far that said there was a lack of evidence, and so a lack of assay, and that the question remains open up-not closed.  Speaker Pelosi's mind is closed-lest some CIA analyst indicate out that everything she's been feeding her lobbyists, political action committees, and other supporters has been based on goose egg but political pandering.

We the American people must need that an investigation into the depth of the relationship between Saddam's regime and Bin Laden'south terrorist network be conducted and conclusions that should have been made before the war finally be fabricated.  At a fourth dimension of war with the remnants of both enemies, how can responsible legislators and a defended intelligence community keep to refuse to investigate this?  The answer is elementary, the legislators who deny the three commonalities listed before and who dismiss the human relationship are simply not responsible legislators.

The absolute deprival of politicians who proceed to falsely claim that there was no relationship at all betwixt Al Queda and Saddam's regime are either inept beyond acceptability if they accept not read the reports listed above, or they are flat out liars if they take read those reports and are dismissing the nature of those who seek to kill Americans; our enemies in Republic of iraq and Afghanistan.  Politicians who claim the war in Iraq is "split up from the war on terror" (where every single soldier and Marine killed or wounded since 5/one/03 has been killed in an attack using terrorist tactics) are either completely uninformed past the US military (ignoring or turning down military briefings and intelligence reports), or they are acting in direct and deliberate misrepresentation of the conduct of this war for trivial more penciled in circles on ballots every other yr.

Additionally, an intelligence community that continues to accept a lackadaisical approach to the affair is not properly defended at all levels, just rather as politicized and ideologically divided as Congress.  The events of 911, the intelligence failures of the Republic of iraq War, the surprise collapse of the Soviet Marriage, loftier level spies infiltrating the CIA and FBI, and so much more all serve as examples to the American people of an intelligence community packed with people who are more concerned about maxim the politically right thing in the political capital of the world than they are well-nigh forming a conclusion on who the enemy of the Usa is and has been.

Saddam is dead.  He was a criminal.  He was a mass murderer.  He was a tyrant, and he was a liar.  Why accept his discussion?  Americans spend $40 billion to $100billion a year for sixteen different intelligence agencies, and yet rather than get a conclusion based on the intelligence collection and analysis from those any of those fifteen agencies, the American people are told to believe Saddam because they are afraid of presenting unpleasant conclusions on a affair that is at least 4 yrs old, and more accurately 15years old.

That's not acceptable.  America didn't pay $160 billion dollars to go told but accept Saddam's discussion for it.  It's fourth dimension to conduct a real investigation, and a form a real conclusion-a determination from intelligence agencies not political committees acting every bit intelligence agencies.

brannonjohispent.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.floppingaces.net/2007/04/18/saddams-ties-to-al-quedadebunk/

Share this post