March 23, 2006
Iraq - al Qaeda
- 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. Bin Laden asked that Iraq broadcast the lectures of Suleiman al Ouda, a radical Saudi preacher, and suggested "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. According to the document, Saddam's presidency was informed of the details of the meeting on March 4, 1995 and Saddam agreed to dedicate a program for them on the radio. The document states that further "development of the relationship and cooperation between the two parties to be left according to what's open (in the future) based on dialogue and agreement on other ways of cooperation." The Sudanese were informed about the agreement to dedicate the program on the radio.
The report then states that "Saudi opposition figure" bin Laden had to leave Sudan in July 1996 after it was accused of harboring terrorists. It says information indicated he was in Afghanistan. "The relationship with him is still through the Sudanese. We're currently working on activating this relationship through a new channel in light of his current location," it states.
Come again? War on Terror Posted by AlexC at March 23, 2006 6:17 PM
While I do not deny the truth of this report, I prefer not to dwell on the past. Let's move forward. For instance, have you heard about my new development deal with the FOX Network?
http://www.osamasplace.com/?p=27
Posted by: Osama at March 23, 2006 7:07 PMI've been seeing this report over the past day or so, but I'm wondering if there's any more to it than what happened in 1995, as in something more recent.
While I don't dispute the evil nature of Saddam Hussein, if you go back a little further, you can link OBL to the U.S. government.
Posted by: howard at March 24, 2006 7:05 AMAnd if you go back further you'll see that we shipped tanks and armaments to Stalin.
Posted by: AlexC at March 24, 2006 9:49 AMI hear we were pretty cozy relationship with the Nazis and Napoleon as well.
Posted by: mdmhvonpa at March 24, 2006 9:56 AM"And if you go back further you'll see that we shipped tanks and armaments to Stalin."
-yeah, that's kind of my point.
I'm not one who believes our government is overtly evil, but the fact is all governments deal with undesirables for their own practical reasons (even those whose practical aims are to destroy us, I suppose).
So in the scope of that reality, don't we need a little more substance to the report on Iraq -- something beyond having past dealings with bin Laden (considering that's a pretty large club)?
Posted by: howard at March 24, 2006 1:55 PMI'm not accusing anybody around here, mind you, but I am used to hearing these comments from my lefty friends -- always used in a very anti-American context "Saddam was bad but we propped him up. Castro is bad but we supported Batista and created the context for him, how can we lecture anybody when we propped up Somoza, Marcos and Pinochet?..."
It is right to be critical, but we fought and won a fifty-year cold war against communism, liberating well over 50 million. I am prepared to forgive some distasteful alliances along the way.
Somehow Senator Dodd never has to account for his support of the Sandinistas, nor any of the chattering classes atone for allegiance to Castro or Stalin, but that's another tale. Too little credit goes to the George Orwells, Edna St. Vincent Millays (and today's Christopher Hitchenses) who stand up to the glitterati.
Posted by: jk at March 24, 2006 8:26 PM | What do you think? [6]