Where Did Cheney Get His Saddam/Al-Queda Intelligence Info?

From Doug Feith using the Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon feeding this bullshit to Cheney and the neo-cons at the Weekly Standard.

One has to wonder how neo-con Hayes is taking the latest Senate intelligence report which basically means his "Case Closed" article is so much toilet paper.....

Case Closed
From the November 24, 2003 issue: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
by Stephen F. Hayes

Editor's Note, 1/27/04: In today's Washington Post, Dana Milbank reported that "Vice President Cheney . . . in an interview this month with the Rocky Mountain News, recommended as the 'best source of information' an article in The Weekly Standard magazine detailing a relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda based on leaked classified information."

Here's the Stephen F. Hayes article to which the vice president was referring...

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.


:eyes:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

Edit: This is pretty funny, I had to look through their disgusting site to seem how the Senate report was handled. Here it is....

Denial, Denial, Denial....

Rules of Evidence
A new Senate report on Iraq and al Qaeda ignores everything which gets in the way of its conclusions.

by Thomas Joscelyn
09/08/2006 5:30:00 PM


ONCE AGAIN headlines from media outlets around the country declare "No Saddam, al-Qaeda link." This time the news cycle is being fed by the release of two reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee, both of which purport to investigate the uses of prewar intelligence. The first of these two reports, titled "Postwar Findings about Iraq's WMD Programs and Links to Terrorism and How They Compare with Prewar Assessments," has pleased Democrats.

Senator Carl Levin says that the report is "a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading, and deceptive attempts" to connect Saddam's regime to bin Laden's al Qaeda. Senator Jay Rockefeller agrees with Senator Levin's assessment, saying the report will confirm that "the Bush administration's case for war in Iraq was fundamentally misleading."

But beyond the obvious political gamesmanship, there is little merit to this posturing because there is little serious analysis in the Senate report: Far from providing the definitive word on Saddam's ties to al Qaeda, the report is almost worthless.

If they got 100% all bad info as they claim.......from 20 or 30 different sources, were they gullible, stupid or just plain liars? There is no other alternative to these 3 choices, gullible, liars or stupid, which is it?

I wish they would investigate his ass.

to use that word when referring to that guy) to send this country into an unjustified war is treason. His own work convicts his worthless, traitorous ass.

complete fiction.

that got us into a GD WAR! :grr:

a few other key players.

This is an old thread from `04, to connect dots and so forth. I think that if BushCo try to make a case against Iran the same key players and their "intelligence" will be sited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1675445

Richard Clarke, former counterterrorism chief of the national-security staff, tells Newsweek that at an April 2001 top-level meeting to discuss terrorism, his effort to focus on Al Qaeda was rebuffed by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. According to Clarke, Wolfowitz said, "Who cares about a little terrorist in Afghanistan?" The real threat, Wolfowitz insisted, was state-sponsored terrorism orchestrated by Saddam Hussein.

In the meeting, says Clarke, Wolfowitz cited the writings of Laurie Mylroie, a controversial academic who had written a book advancing an elaborate conspiracy theory that Saddam was behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Clarke says he tried to refute Wolfowitz. "We've investigated that five ways to Friday, and nobody believes that," Clarke recalls saying. "It was Al Qaeda. It wasn't Saddam." A spokesman for Wolfowitz describes Clarke's account as a "fabrication." Wolfowitz always regarded Al Qaeda as "a major threat," says this official.

Clarke tells Newsweek that the day after 9/11, President Bush wanted the FBI and CIA to hunt for any evidence that pointed to Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein. Clarke recalls that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was also looking for a justification to bomb Iraq.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2105926&mesg_id=2105926

Yes indeed she LOVED Saddam before Gulf War I! In the New book Hubris, David Corn and Mike Isikoff take a look at one of the chief a-Q/Saddam "intelligence" sources....

This really would make even a bad movie. :( .....

<snip>

An obscure academic, derided as a virtual crackpot by U.S. law enforcement and the intelligence community, greatly influenced top Bush administration officials, who adopted her farfetched theory that Saddam was the source of most of the terrorism in the world, including the 9/11 attacks. But, oddly, this researcher, Laurie Mylroie, had once been a Saddam apologist and had engaged in secret, back-door diplomacy aimed at brokering a peace accord between Israel and Iraq. After Saddam invaded Kuwait, Mylroie developed bizarre allegations about Saddam and terrorism. Her theories were debunked by the CIA and FBI, yet Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz embraced them, cited them in official meetings, and repeatedly pressed the agency and bureau to come up with evidence to substantiate Mylroie's work.


http://www.davidcorn.com/

she kind of looks like wolfie too.... :puke:


http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/Pictures/Persons/016254/016254-184916-03.jpg

A female conspiracy theorist took America to war
8/31/2005 1:00:00 AM GMT



Laurie Mylroie is a conspiracy theorist whose political views have consistently been proved wrong. However, Bush and his aides decided to swallow her theories on Saddam’s alleged weapons of mass destruction and launch Iraq war.

<snip>

It was the attack on the World Trade Centre in 1993 that launched Mylroie's quixotic quest to prove that Saddam's regime was the chief source of "anti-U.S. terrorism".

She stated her argument in a 2000 book titled “Study of Revenge: Saddam Hussein's Unfinished War Against America”. Perle described the book as "splendid and wholly convincing", and Wolfowitz "provided crucial support", according to Mylroie.

In her book, Mylroie said that the Iraqi leader was behind every anti-American terrorist incident in the past decade, from Oklahoma bombing in 1995 to September 11 attacks.

Mylroie’s neoconservative friends supported her theories, and she became a terrorism consultant for the Pentagon.

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/conspiracy_theory/fullstory.asp?id=256