Jun 21 2008
al-Qaeda’s Zawahiri And Saddam Hussein Were Planning Attacks After 9-11
The SurrenderMedia recently misreported (there’s a surprise) that Saddam Hussein had no ties to al-Qaeda, when in fact the report the SurrenderMedia was trying to cover said just the opposite. As I noted at the time the analysis showed Saddam Hussein had long time ties with Ayman Zawahiri, who at the time ran the Egyptian Islamic Jihad terrorist group. A group that was integrated into al-Qaeda when Zawahiri joined forces with Bin Laden in the 1990’s.
Gateway Pundit has a link to a recent news article out of Iraq showing evidence that Saddam Hussein continued his ties with Zawahiri after Egyptian Islamic Jihad had been integrated into al-Qaeda. In fact, the evidence points to Saddam attempting to coordinate terrorist attacks with al-Qaed AFTER 9-11!
The Kurdish daily Kurdistani Nwe has published a 2002 letter from the Iraqi presidency that it says proves that there was cooperation between the regime of Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda.Â
The letter, which appeared on the paper’s front page, was published by the intelligence apparatus of the Iraqi presidency and discussed an intention to meet with Ayman Al-Zawahiri in order to examine a plan drawn up by the Iraqi presidency to carry out a “revenge operation” in Saudi Arabia.
Unlike the previous evidence which did not show communication between Saddam and his ol’ buddy Zawahiri after 9-11, this evidence clearly shows Saddam knew who to go to in al-Qaeda to execute attacks on American allies after 9-11. Â So much for the “Bush Lied” crap from the SurrenderMedia and Surrendercrats in Congress.
Even more than that, Saddam’s was a notoriously reckless and power hungry brute. Â His invasion of Iran and Kuwait demonstrated how insane the man could be. Â His obsession with WMDs was proven out when his son-in-law exposed his undetected nuclear weapons program. Â Now we learn this unstable nutcase was attempting to coordinate an attack with al-Qaeda after 9-11, when he knew such contact could bring the wrath of America to his doorstep.
As usual, Bush was right and the libs were making things up to garner votes. Why would the liberal BS in 2008 be any less false than the BS they have promulgated for 7 long years? Â Clearly it isn’t.
Â
Saddam was a state sponsor of terrorism. That means he put diplomatic pouches, finances, weapons, passports, and a host of material support to terror groups. The idea that he has no connection is a left wing talking point. Basicly to the left its become a litums test of ideological purity wether its supported by the facts or not.
So I guess he could be considered a “grave and gathering threat”.
AJ,
This is Mark Eichenlaub. You previously linked a National Review article I wrote on this subject. Awesome find on this story. I have a folder on Saddam’s links to Zawahiri that I still haven’t posted at my site http://www.regimeofterror.com. The site is all about Saddam’s links to to terrorism. Can you please shoot me an email? I’d like to talk to you about this.
Mark: Has Front Page Mag ever done a story on /about/by you?
On my website, the bottom-most video is a story ABC News did in 1999 about connections between Osama and Hussien
Vince,
Yes, I’ve done a few pieces for FrontPage in the past.
Thanks Vince, that video is good. ABC has done a few good pieces on Saddam/terror that I have on video but then Charles Gibson had the nerve in an interview with Bush to ask “now that we KNOW Saddam had no links to al Qaeda….” then something about regretting the war. It was utter arrogance and I sent a number of faxes, email and phone calls over to people at ABC who, not surprisingly, didn’t see the problem with it. That is, until I sent them footage of their own reporting.
Isn’t it amazing how they somehow “forget” all thier pre 2001 reporting.
Are they really that stupid? Or is it malicious? I think it’s on purpose.
Vince, It pains me to say it, it really does, but I’ve spent literally hundreds of hours talking to these people in the press. More than a few of them too and they really are just shallow, closed minded herd mentality people so often and many are as partisan, if not more partisan, than you can imagine. It’s really infuriating.
Well, I wonder if Mark’s comments will shut up some of the conservatives who are mad at Bush for not “standing up for himself.” THEY (those who would report)WON’T LISTEN! THEY ARE STUCK AT 6 YRS OLD.
Sorry for the shouting, it just makes me so mad how maligned this great President has been. I will enjoy so many having to eat their words….sooner than later.
Thank you, George! You are loved by many more than the media will report!
ive: NOthing Mark said has vindicated Bush for being a crappy communicator.
I have never understood why Bush was perceived as a crappy communicator and that somehow oratory skills is an essential and sometimes the only requirement for a US president.
I dont mean communicator in terms of articulation. I mean communication as in talking to the American people regularly…letting them what the F is going on.. what our goals are etc.. countering lies… that stuff
I thought this was interesting…..at FREEREPUBLIC.
Syria, NKorea helped Iran develop nuclear programme: German report (Der Spiegel)
06/21/2008 7:20:29 PM PDT · by TigerLikesRooster · 4 replies · 35+ views
AFP ^ | 06/21/08
Syria, NKorea helped Iran develop nuclear programme: German report Sat Jun 21, 1:57 PM ET Damascus and Pyongyang helped Iran to develop its nuclear programme through the construction of a suspected nuclear site in Syria that Israel destroyed last September, Der Spiegel reported. But the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is considering withdrawing his support for the Iranian programme, added the German newsweekly in its next edition out Monday, quoting German secret service reports. According to those intelligence reports, it said, a joint plan by Syria, North Korea and Iran for a nuclear reactor for military use was to have been…
Vince,
Except that with a media so hostile, FDR’s fireside chats and Churchill’s oratory would only get on one network and the reporters would sneer.
I blame congressional Republicans for not backing him. He can’t do it alone.
I blame the attack dog portion of the most left of center of the Dem party that criminalized political difference all for accumulation of power.
Look at all they have attempted to do with little information to work with except their half baked and made up ideas and any additional information would be twisted to fit the framing.
To me talking about some of certain topics in the open to prove if you are right or wrong would be detrimental to our ability to gather intelligence on our most pressing enemys and I will take the hit on communication of sources and methods rather than weaken that ability.
Agreed, Macker, Vince, and Merlin.
Take a look at the speeches given by Bush and Cheney that are available at the official White House website before the sane and rational (non-violent MSM) audience, such as “The Heritage Foundation”.
Take a look at the articles regarding their positions that are available at the same website.
Take a look at the SOTU’s given by Bush.
He and Cheney said all of those things. They articulated and communicated. They stood by those words. They challenged the lies coming from the MSM.
But the MSM continued and continues to lie and cover up.
Compare what the Dems said BEFORE and AFTER 9/11 AND years after 9/11 as an effort to DESTROY and WEAKEN Bush and Cheney.
They have done a good job convincing the MSM that Bush committed war crimes of the century, violated our civil rights and liberties, and so on.
Even some of the conservative bloggers continue with the mentality that Bush is a crappy communicator. The MSM just won’t let Bush talk, to begin with.
Damascus and Pyongyang helped Iran to develop its nuclear programme through the construction of a suspected nuclear site in Syria that Israel destroyed last September, Der Spiegel reported.
Where do you suppose Syria got their nuke knowledge and were able to build their nuke so fast? I think this is part of Saddam’s nukes that were shipped to Syria with the Russians’ help. If this this is true, then Saddam did have nukes or close to them and was a danger to the region. I feel just having him alive and in power was a danger to the whole world.
[…] And:  al-Qaeda’s Zawahiri And Saddam Hussein Were Planning Attacks After 9-11 […]
There will be more on Zawahiri and Saddam in the future. I failed to mention this document
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1831093/posts
There are a number of sources who have said Zawahiri took funds from Iraq and visited Iraqi leadership repeatedly.