OT: I hat to stir this up, but here's a progress report

I know we've all had enough of the political arguments but I said I was compiling evidence (at the request of a couple of wreckers who disagreed with me but wanted to have a rational discussion -- I know, not the "Norm" around here) and this tidbit just arrived courtesy of the Washington Post...

"Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam"

Excerpts...

"In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan. "

and

"The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. ÊÊÊÊThe indictment disclosed a close relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam's regime, which included specialists on chemical weapons and all types of bombs, including truck bombs, a favorite weapon of terrorists.

ÊÊÊÊThe 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

and

"He said that if the plant had been allowed to produce VX that was used to kill thousands of Americans, people would have asked him, "Ê'You had a manager that went to Baghdad; you had Osama bin Laden, who had funded, at least the corporation, and you had traces of [VX precursor] and you did what? And you did nothing?' Is that a responsible activity on the part of the secretary of defense?"

But hey... Bush lied, right?

More to come, but not here on the wreck. I'll post a link that people can follow when I've finished. But what with work, golf and SWMBOs coffee table, it's taking a bit longer than expected.

djb

Reply to
Dave Balderstone
Loading thread data ...

Oops... here's another, and if you can't believe the NYT...

Iraqis, Seeking Foes of Saudis, Contacted bin Laden, File Says By THOM SHANKER Published: June 25, 2004

WASHINGTON, June 24 Ñ Contacts between Iraqi intelligence agents and Osama bin Laden when he was in Sudan in the mid-1990's were part of a broad effort by Baghdad to work with organizations opposing the Saudi ruling family, according to a newly disclosed document obtained by the Americans in Iraq.

Reply to
Dave Balderstone

Don't you and the other rec'ers have friends over for dinner to have these discussion. BTW I've heard the tapes of Clinton discussing the Saudi's offer of Osama being offered up so we could of had him them

Reply to
Lee

Reply to
Joseph Smith

All the Federales say they could have had him any day they only let him slip away out of kindness, I suppose.

kudos to Pancho and Lefty

Reply to
jo4hn

That's fine. Clinton was wrong too. The more starting link is between the Bush family and the Bin Laden family anyhow.

Brian.

Reply to
Brian

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.