according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials
'Scuse me whist I don my tinfoil hat:
A recent congressional report suggests that the Pentagon may be relying on "covert psychological operations affecting audiences within friendly nations." In a "secret amendment" to Pentagon policy, the report warns, "psyops funds might be used to publish stories favorable to American policies..."
The source of that article is Chalabi's spokesman . I don't think I can trust the Iraqi National Congress.
That Saddam's a smooth motherfucker, offering to sell bin Laden the weapons that he didn't in fact have. OH! Or maybe now there aren't any WMDs in Iraq because bin Laden has them all!!!!!!
Then we could say, "Oh God -- we were too late to stop Saddam from giving the WMDs to terrorists. All this dalliance with the UN and with Congressional approval gave them the time they needed to hatch their nefarious plot!"
Yes, the INC was trying to play America even back in Clinton's day, and apparently having some moderate success. I think the appropriate phrase here is: STFW? What is "interesting" about this at this point?
What is "interesting" about this at this point?
That believing in a possible Saddam/Al Qaeda connection was non-crazy.
Well, but even something like this (given that at the time, the source wasn't yet absolutely incredible) is pretty darn weak. It's a rumor, from an organization of expats devoted to opposing the Iraqi government, that the Iraqis offered aid (and that's minor, cheap aid -- a place to stay) to Al Qaeda and were rebuffed. And this kind of thing was the absolutely strongest support for any relationship between the two.
Non-crazy is a pretty low threshold of proof for justifying a war.
That believing in a possible Saddam/Al Qaeda connection was non-crazy.
It was, at one point (years ago) non-crazy, and also (on no doubt all of our parts) non-informed, since few people at that time fully understood the nature of the INC and Chalabi.
OTOH, during the run-up to the war, you'll probably recall that the intelligence community (and not only the CIA) leaked like mad into the public sphere about disagreements over just this issue, which in fact generated as much heat as the "WMDs" brouhaha if not more so. Believing it at that time was not entirely crazy but wins absolutely no points for judgment; it didn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this phenomenon (along with constant public reversals and contradictions in Administration pronouncements) signalled that something was seriously wrong.
Speaking of blasts from the past, I just listened to this speech from August 2002. It's like the dude had a crystal ball or something.
I would love to see some investigation into Ritter's sex offense. It's perfectly possible it was completely real -- all sorts of people turn out to be interested in committing statutory rape -- but it was so convenient for the administration to have him discredited just when he was that I can't help but wonder if it wasn't fabricated somehow.
<removes tinfoil hat>
Hijazi has been captured and has said he didn't take the second trip.
>Another recent catch, Farouk Hijazi, is an alleged link between the Iraqi government and al-Qaida. But he has denied reports that he traveled to Afghanistan in late 1998 and met with Osama bin Laden, officials familiar with his interrogation said.
>Hijazi, Iraq's ambassador to Tunisia and a former senior official in Iraqi intelligence, acknowledged meeting with al-Qaida operatives in 1994 in Sudan, but said the Iraqi government established no ties with bin Laden's network.
It would be irresponsible not to speculate, LB. Anything's possible. Some chin-pullers even theorized that the Iraqis were using the allegations to blackmail Ritter into speaking out against the war. Now that's thinking outside the box.
Incidentally, did y'all know that Bin Laden's first big enemy (after the Societ Union) was Moammar Khadaffi?
Fact.
Among the people OBL had some contact with was Saddam Hussein.
Does anyone else think Saddam looks really good with the beard? I know he's an evil dictator and everything, but good fashion sense has traditionally been a strength of evil dictatorships, and I felt that Saddam really lagged on that front, until his dethroning, ironically.
LB, as I understand, it was a misdemeanor charge which was dropped. About the minimal level of possible infraction.
Here's a search of what I've written. Hope to get back later.
That believing in a possible Saddam/Al Qaeda connection was non-crazy.
Indeed, in the same sense in which it was at one time "non-crazy" to believe that the continent of Africa was occupied by dragons and Honouyhms with mouths in their stomachs - until someone checked and found out it wasn't true.