Share with: Everybody. Sharing is caring, ya know.

And don’t forget: Saddam used WMD.
**9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey on the Iraq-Al Qaeda Connections. Bob Kerrey had to have known about this meeting that already had been disclosed. It’s notable, but not terribly surprising, that Saddam gave permission for this meeting which is what this latest document dump revealed. Stephen Hayes has reported about this meeting in his book, “The Connection,” and subsequent articles in the Weekly Standard. If Bob Kerrey is surprised at the extent of the connections between these two people and groups then I want a 9/11 Commission do-over because these people DIDN’T DO THEIR JOBS!

“I personally and strongly believe you don’t have to prove that Iraq was collaborating against Osama bin Laden on the September 11 attacks to prove he was an enemy [of the U.S.] and that he would collaborate with people who would do our country harm,” the Nebraska Democrat explained.

Here’s the latest on the exploited docs found in post Saddam/war Iraq from ABC news:

A newly released pre-war Iraqi document indicates that an official representative of Saddam Hussein’s government met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan on February 19, 1995 after approval by Saddam Hussein.

That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq [1995].
That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and “bin Laden’s group” agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America.
That in case the Taliban and bin Laden’s group turn out to be involved in “these destructive operations,” the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan [2001].
That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq’s relationship with “bin Laden’s group” while he was in Iran.

The last line in Stephen Hayes latest article in the Weekly Standard [see previous posts here and here.]about captured Iraqi documents in post war Iraq that connect Abu Sayyaf, the Phillippine terror group headed by Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law with Iraqi officials and specifically Saddam’s right hand man. He quotes from the latest Foreign Affairs whose reporters have seen even more of the captured docs:

The Saddam Fedayeen also took part in the regime’s domestic terrorism operations and planned for attacks throughout Europe and the Middle East. IN a document dated May 1999, Saddam’s older son, Uday, ordered preparations for “special operations, assassinations, and bombings, for the centers and traitor symbols in London, Iran and the self ruled areas [Kurdistan].” Preparations for “Blessed July” a regime directed wave of “martyrdom” operations against targets in the West, were well under way at the time of the coalition invasion.

So…are we to divine that Saddam, in addition to funding the terrorists in the Phillippines, Hamas, and Al Qaeda, also funded the July Londistan attacks?
Hitchens, meantime, in the latest Opinion Journal piece, claims that “Iraq is no ‘distraction’ from al Qaeda. ***NEW*** Here’s Hitchens on Hugh Hewitt’s show on how the media *of course* have an impact on the war effort! Quoting from a letter the Kurds intercepted in February 2004 from Zarqawi to bin Laden on his plan to start sectarian strife in Iraq :

“These [Shiites] in our opinion are the key to change. I mean that targeting and hitting them in their religious, political and military depth will provoke them to show the Sunnis their rabies…and bare the teeth of the hidden rancor working in their breasts. If we succeed in dragging them into the arena of sectarian war, it will become possible to awaken the inattentive Sunnis as they feel imminent danger.”

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://

Share with: Everybody. Sharing is caring, ya know.


  1. Saddam is linked conclusively to another group–this one fronted by Osama bin Laden’s brother in law and there NO COMMENTS in the COMMENTS SECTION? Are you people kidding me?
    Check out the last line in Hayes’ piece about the bloody July? Gee, do you suppose that could be about the LONDON BOMBINGS???!!!! AND AL QAEDA????? AND SADDAM??????
    This is a war. Saddam was training, funding, conspiring. This war is just. National security. Do you see our National Security NOW?

  2. victoria,

    I agree that it is a war that some seem unable or unwill to recognize as such. We have taken several unanswered blows before 9/11 with no response.

    I find it supprising that some people do not think we should have done anything in response to 9/11. That 9/11 is just the price of being free.

    A friend of mine told me the other day that the war in iraq is about oil and that we would have to give Saddam a big pot of money for Iraqi oil. His conclusion was that giving Saddam a big pot of money was not a good idea.

    The Iraqi documents just released shows that Saddam did have ties to Al Qaeda. That alone is reason enough to oust Saddam.

    Is that enough for the libs – no. There is never a good enough resaon to to use our military to protect the USA. Our lives in their way of figuring are not worth protecting. Just ask Cindy.

  3. Jan 3, 2003

    US President George W Bush rallied US troops on Friday, telling them that a war in Iraq would be “not to conquer but to liberate”.

    Now now, don’t want to get yourself banned for resorting to name calling…

  4. suomynona the sound bite king!

    You seem to have some difficulty in grasping the big picture here.

    Try not to focus on sound bites alone.

  5. What’s to grasp?

    3 years into an attack to protect our security(?) – topple a dictator(?) – liberate the Iraqi people(?) – [add your own reason here], you are all on the defensive everyday trying to find new bits and pieces to justify it.

    If it is such a great success, and in everyone’s best interest, why do you have to continue to defend it each and every day? Shouldn’t everyone agree with you since it’s so great?

    Sorry, hard to agree on that when almost NOTHING has really been done here at home to really “protect” us.

  6. Echoing a sound bite alone does not exhibit breath of knowledge and grasp of an issue.

    Accually I am not defensive. Saddam was a festering problem throughout the 1990’s and resolution was needed.

    It is in the process of becoming a great success, there are some who wish to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

    OK what should we be doing that is not already being done here at home.

  7. What is there to rebutt. I agree that we need security in all of these areas.

    That aside does not mean we cannot also pursue the terrorist and states that support them abroad at the same time.

  8. fascinating that backwards anon cites a lack of “border security, transportation security,” etc., but calls any attempts at securing our borders against actual ILLEGAL aliens and PROPER I.D. as racist!!! What leftist nonsense. Anon, do you even read your own stuff? Your non-sequitors are stunning.

  9. All you have to do, ALL of you, is make a public statement, that when the time would come to perform your citizenship litmus test, EVERYONE, with NO EXCEPTIONS, will be subject.

    Do that, and just maybe I’ll “shut my pie hole.”

  10. suomynona,
    Wake up even a rock knows that “Real ID” will need to be presented when getting a DL or registering to vote. Depending on the Rocket Scientists (RS) in the legislature decide upon. That will apply to everyone. If the RS do not tighten up the DL process then Oregon Residents will eed to get passports to meet Real ID requirements in federal law.

    Why do I bother you will still not shut your pie hole.

  11. Kodiak, Do you and Victoria, too, get the feeling that you are talking to a solid concrete wall when you are talking to Suomynona about anything? The man has absolutely no clue about anything, from the illegal alien problem to Bear’s nationality and citizenship and anything in between.

  12. I’ve asked and asked and asked, what would you expect as credible “proof” of citizenship from anyone. I’ve heard some general answers, but no one single item you have all agreed upon in your great “citizenship test.”

    So, your letters do no more than my campaign attacking bear to prove he is legal. I’ve given him nothing as to what I expect he has, as neither have any of you. So he couldn’t prove he is legal, as I couldn’t prove he is not. Additionally, other than being annoying starting most of his posts with name calling, I picked him out because he “seemed” the most likely to be illegal.

    If it’s “assumed” that EVERYONE will be held to your strict standards, then why talk about any nationality of immigrants at all? Why focus in particular on the mexican population?

    I’ll say it’s because if you didn’t have the “filthy” poor, “criminal” mexican element to demonize and focus your efforts on, and if rich white folks out there realized that they too would have to go under the same microscope to prove their status, guess how much support you would get?

    Think about that the next time you are driving in North Ptld, see a couple of Mexican teens walking down the sidwalk and wonder to yourself if they might be illegal….

  13. suomynona,
    Please Do not fault someone because they are passionate about a subject. There are immigration protests all over this country today. Victoria and all the others are not alone in the feeling there needs to tighter border security.

    The special interest groups are along with guess… democratic politians against tighter border and immigration legislation.

  14. kodiak says: You are not the “citizenship god”.

    kodiak says: Please Do not fault someone because they are passionate about a subject.

    I think you forgot to add “as long as it’s a conservative standpoint I agree with” to your second statement…other wise a “do as I say not as I do..?”

    Victoria and all the others are not alone in the feeling there needs to tighter border security.

    Um, Victoria is claiming a law that doesn’t exisit isn’t being enforced in Oregon and that illegals are getting everything…not protesting lack of border security…

    A few posts ago I named border security as an item that is getting little attention…and I was likened to concrete.

    The special interest groups are along with guess… democratic politians against tighter border and immigration legislation.

    Eh? I believe you will find legislation on the table currently is bi-partisan, and your biggest politian for “amnesty” would be Bush himself…whether you want to call him “republican” is up to you..

  15. suomynona,
    My statement concerning passion about any topic does not apply to any particular standpoint. So I did not forget any qualifing statement. My issue with you was acknowledgement of an answer to your questions w/o regard to the expected answer.

    Now are you claiming that no law exists regarding eligibility to vote, receive services or obtain a driver license? Or are you claiming that there is no law concerning verification of eligibility.

    No you were not likened to concrete just that in answering your questions and your apparent lack of an acknowledgement of an answer. You do not have to agree and I encourage you do voice that disagreement. Just expect that if you continue to ask the same question over and over people will get the impression that they are talking to concrete.

    Well he does not call it that, however it will probably end up that way. That legislation is not necessarily good for the country even if it is bi-partisan. What pops out of congress may not be this particular bill.

  16. “Now are you claiming that no law exists regarding eligibility to vote, receive services or obtain a driver license? Or are you claiming that there is no law concerning verification of eligibility.”

    I am calling it out (and have before with agreement from Victoria herself), that there is no law that REQUIRES the state to validate a person’s citizenship.

    Everyone keeps repeating the law isn’t being enforced or being broken – but no such law exisits. Yes, federal law mandiates that you must be a citizen to do all these things..but just because they don’t ask for (specific document?) of everyone when liable trust is already in place (i.e. your checkbox on a voter registration card that you are a citizzen) – does not mean they are refusing to uphold federal immigration law.

    I keep asking a question until I get an answer. Would it be to illustrate that there is no answer? Or that it hasn’t been discussed or thought out? Or maybe, it’s not your job to come up with the solution, only gandize the “problem?”

    Why can’t any one just say –

    “There is a growing problem in Oregon, and the United States, in which illegal immigrants may be voting in elections, receiving state and federal benefits that are not due to them, and making untaxed income from local employment.

    We feel that the state should be checking to see that EVERY person who submits a ballot in ANY election or submits application for state services provides a legal birth certificate OR certified passport before they are allowed to cast a ballot or recieve said services.

    Additionally, we ask that state law be created to require that EVERYONE in the state be re-certified as a legal citizen with said documentation on a bi-annual basis, with no exception.”

    Think I would be able to sell that without making a villan out of one group of people, degrating people and feeling good about it because they are “criminals,” demonizing anyone who doesn’t agree with me and casting them as a lefty, or comparing others to concrete?

    So now that I have answered the questions you all can’t seem to grasp…which are really quite simple…tell me, is that what you agree should happen?

  17. suomynona,

    Now we are getting somewhere.

    Look try saying I hear what you say but that does not answer my question. That way comparisons to concrete would not be necessary.

    What you are saying that we are being victemized by the honor system. While I believe that there is a law somewhere on the books it is probably buried.

    Smartalike. Again I would say valid Driver License provided it complies with the federal Real ID act could be added to your list.

    Gee why did you not suggest this in the first place. Go back and count the total number of comments and threads before we got to this point.

    I believe that everyone else will agree that your statement could be agreed to.

  18. One more point. DMV is required to obtain everone’s SSN when applying or renewing a driver license. They are not verifying the number with SSA. I believe this is the main problem with using the DL as ID and will not be valid for Airline travel starting in 2008 if DMV and the state do not get with the problem. So we’ll probably need to get that ‘certified” passport to sue as ID.

  19. All I’m saying is the tact around here is to make accusations, focus on a group of people, villify them, tell everyone it’s ok to feel good about tearing them apart because they are criminals, grandize an issue, and tell everyone who doesn’t agree or asks for some clairification how stupid they are.

    I’ve only asked questions that should have been easily answered. They weren’t and there was a reason…

    I’ll submit it’s because Victoria picked a fringe issue having to do with a much larger problem, something she didn’t really have to know anything about, made it even simpler for her audience, and made no bones about having to layout a guideline to what she wanted done, more than just “demand that they check that illegals are illegals.” Send out some letters with advertisments on them, get some folks on a bus to go to the capital, maybe get a news metion here and there…ratings – whalah!

    Seriously, I ask for numbers of illegal voters..I ask for numbers of illegal voters who voted democrat…I ask if how they would vote would make a difference…I ask what would be the definitive form of citizenship proof…I ask if EVERYONE will be subject to these checks…

    ….crickets..that what I got.

    I get that this is just a shock political (hack) radio show, on a rather small station/listenership, but I can’t ignore any promotion of “pick the people out by race and guess if they are illegal or not.”

    It’s not a lesson in she nearly came to tears over’s a lesson in hate. And it’s sick.

  20. go on the illegal immigration comments section. This one is for the war. How about that Al Qaeda/Saddam connection, huh? seem to get stronger every day.

  21. That connection was far less than credible when we attacked Iraq, so what’s the point of trying to find more and more “possible” connections?

  22. suomynona,
    Gee doesn’t a search for the truth interest you.

    Finding out exactly what connections existed is important in tracking down the rest of the Al Qaeda network and putting them out of business for good.

    Or would you at sometime down the road want more American civilians to die?

  23. The point is, of course, that it was credible at the time the 9/11 commission was considering evidence about events leading up to 9/11. That Saddam approved the meeting in 1995 was obvious. Clearly if his #2 was in Sudan to do this meeting at the behest of all parties and overseen by the sudanese war lord, Saddam knew.

  24. kodiak, you are reaching far beyond what I am addressing in my statement.

    I realize I was too vague, and must point out when I say “connections,” I merely mean that in the manner of “This is further proof Iraq was connected with Bin Laden, so see, you must know now for sure we were right all along, even if we weren’t totally sure ourselves when we attacked..better safe than sorry.”

    Victoria, I can see you now…wearing your little red shoes, clicking the heels three times over and over and over “this war is just, this war is just, this war is just.”

    You’re like a car salesman that rides along with you for years after you made your purchase, telling you over and over and over all the great features of the car that made the sale in the first place – except there is no longer that “new car smell.”

  25. suomynona, I’ll bet that as the facts continue to trickle out in Iraq that you and yours will contrive a way to blame President Bush for Al Qaeda and Saddam’s relationship. I’ll be waiting to see how you do it. 😉

  26. 15/19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi Nationals. None were Iraqi. THe US led Quagmire in Iraq is the greatest Recruitment Drive on Earth for Al Qaeda. Wake up & smell the coffee!

    A Liberal from “Old Europe”

Comments are closed.