A GREAT call on Rush Limbaugh's Radio Show

Fuel for the fire.


1994 -- Sudan -- Farouk Hijazi, then head of Iraqi Secret Service, meets with bin Laden in Sudan

1994 -- Baghdad -- Abdul Rahman Yasin, one of the bombers in the first WTC attack, flees to Iraq where he is provided with a residence and a monthly stipend by the regime (

1995, September -- Sudan -- Brigadier Salim al Ahmed, top explosives expert of the Iraqi Intelligence Service, meets with bin Laden in Sudan; a second meeting at which Mani-abd-al-Rashid-al-Tikriti, director of the IIS, is also present, takes place in July 1996

1995 -- Salman Pak, Iraq -- hundreds of foreign terrorists are trained in airplane hijacking techniques "without weapons" using a real airplane (variously reported as a Boeing 707 and a Tupolev 154) as a prop at the Salman Pak camp just south of Baghdad, between 1995 to 2000; the training is run by Saddam's Mukhabharat

1995, circa -- Iraq -- Abu Abdullah al-Iraqi (an alias), an Al Qaeda operative, requests help in chemical weapons training from Saddam. The request is approved and trainers from Unit 999, an Iraqi secret-police organization organized by Uday Hussein, are dispatched to camps in Afghanistan.

1997 -- Afghanistan -- Armad Jan, Taliban minister, tells Karl Inderfurth, Assistant US Secretary of State, that the Taliban "had frustrated Iranian and Iraqi efforts to contact" bin Laden

1998 -- Baghdad -- Ayman al Zawahiri, Al-Qaeda second-in-command, meets Taha Yasin Ramadan, Iraqi vice-president

1998, February -- Baghdad -- the Mukhabharat arranges for an envoy from bin Laden to travel from Sudan to Baghdad to meet with Iraqi officials; the meeting is extended by a full week
1998, December 18 -- Afghanistan -- Farouk Hijazi, Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, meets with bin Laden in Afghanistan

2000 -- Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -- Ahmad Hikmat Shakir al-Azzawi, an Iraqi national with connections to the Iraqi embassy and possibly a leutenant-colonel in Saddam's Fedayyeen, helps arrange top-level Al-Qaeda meeting attended by Khalid al Midhar and Nawar al Hazmi, two of the 9/11 hijackers, and Tawfiz al Atash, responsible for the USS Cole bombing

2001, April 8 -- Prague, Czechoslovakia -- Mohammed Atta, 9/11 hijacker, meets with Ahmad Samir al-Ani, an Iraqi diplomat, in a cafe in Prague; Atta had visited Prague on two previous occasions, on May 30 and June 2, 2000 (

2001, summer -- United Arab Emirates -- Marwan al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah, two of the 9/11 hijackers, meet with unidentified Mukhabharat officer

2001, summer -- Saadan Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Aani, colonel in the Mukhabharat (alias "Abu Wael"), serving as the secret liaison to the Ansar al Islam Group, works with Al-Qaeda members from Afghanistan to set up a backup base in northern Iraq

2001, July -- Rome, Italy -- Habib Faris Abdullah al-Mamouri, general in the Iraqi intelligence, meets with Mohammed Atta, 9/11 hijacker

2001, Septempber 5 -- Spain -- Abu Zubayr, an officer in Saddam's secret police and al-Qaeda cell leader in Morocco, meets with Ramzi Bin-al-Shibh, 9/11 financier

2001, September 11 -- World Trade Center and Pentagon attacked.

2002, October 3 -- Phillipines -- Hamsiraji Sali, leader of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Abu Sayyaf terrorist group, contacts Husham Hussain, deputy secretary of the Iraqi embassy immediately after a successful bombing; for years Abu Sayyaf has received steady financing from Iraq for bomb-making materials

2002, November 14 -- Baghdad -- Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, officer at the Iraqi embassy in Pakistan, is identified as "responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group" in a memo signed by Uday Hussein (


UPDATED 2004/10/05: added Salman Pak, UAE meeting, Abu Wael, brigadier Salim, corrected role of Al-Azzawi

 

Double post

 

Iraq is needed as a continual base for
the war against terror. When all terrorists
are dead and gone, we need to stay in Iraq
JUST IN CASE.

The day we pull all American and coalition
troops out of Iraq is the day America surrenders
to Terrorism.

 

What is your source for this information?

 

What is your source for this information? </font>[/QUOTE]http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/889jldct.asp

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-09-17-iraq-wtc_x.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/06/20/do2001.xml

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/1855357

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030210fa_fact

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030912-012437-3992r.htm

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030912-012437-3992r.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F04%2F27%2Fwalq27.xml

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,314700,00.html

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscia223863038jun22,0,6059318.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines

http://slate.msn.com/id/2091354/

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0212/03/cct.00.html

http://www.post-gazette.com/forum/col/20021215edkelly15p2.asp

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/16/32

http://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins091903.asp

http://www.newsflash.org/2003/02/hl/hl017506.htm

http://tennessean.com/nation-world/archives/03/06/34908297.shtml?Element_ID=34908297

 

Seems to include a wide spectrum of news organizations and I've seen no evidence to refute these connections, therefore I would think this is clear evidence.

And given classified information, I would suggest there are many more known connections.

 

Clear evidence?
did you actually read the news stories

filled with the word.."suspected" "inconclusive"

if those stories are so important to people
they should have congress hold investigations

oh wait! they already have and a Republican
controlled Congress to boot.

if it so clear why isn't the Republican congress
re opening it up ..is it perhaps the counter
evidence is clear..duh!

But President Bush, in contrast with comments Sunday by Vice President Cheney, said Wednesday,"We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved."

hey I am open to new congressional hearings but
bush is going to have to retract the above
statement...don't ya think.


as for Cheney he is in his last throes of credibility.

1.You need to write your congressman to re open
hearings in a Republican controlled Congress
2.Bush needs to retract his statement...which he
can easily do..until then you get the black
helicopter award for conspiracy theory going
no where.

 

APAL doesn't have much tolerance for opposing views when backed up by facts.

Instead uses the old tried and true method of using a quote out of context and trying to make it support his laughable position.

 

Deroy Murdock does a great job showing Sadam's rather generous contribution to terror.

We all need a reminder sonce in a while.

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

 

Rush Limbaugh uses too many cuss words on the air. Other than that, he's one of the greatest Republican propagandists I've ever listened to. Interesting and humorous, quick and intuitive.

Cheers, Bluefalcon

 

Carpro..if they are such overwhelming facts
why isn't bush and the congress re opening
hearings...is it because they cannot make a case?

this is a fact and bush said it now if you
can get him to retract it you may have a case
until then enjoy your helicoptor ride.

"We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved."

If you beleive so strongly in your theory get
the ball rolling istead of whining carpro ..I am
just saying bush has not helped your cause with
his statement...and the Republicans control the
committees they can open up an investigation..can't they?

Carpro alot of suggestive and inconclusive stuff
and you are not getting much support from bush.



You are pretending this is some kind of smoking gun and it is not...just like this able danger
fiasco ..rove is trying to make something stick
to take the heat off. imho

 

What would be the point of congressional hearings? What good have they ever done us before? I don’t see anything good that could come out of it. While some may argue that Sadam had only limited ties to the 911 terrorists I don’t see how anyone could argue that he did not have ties to other terrorists. The war in Iraq is not about 911, it is about defeating terrorists and those who would support them where they live before they come after us.

 

Same quote taken out of context again to prove a point that's not there.

 

Saddam Hussein was not directly involved in 9/11.

Saddam Hussein had ties with Middle Eastern Extreme Muslim Terrorists before 9/11.

Understand now Alanspal?

 

Saddam Hussein DID NOT attack the US on September 11th. OBL did, and he was very clear regarding what he thought about Saddam Hussein.

Secondly, where are those WMD's? One more time, to borrow from the radio personality Lionel, this is not a case of "they didn't have anywhere near the amount of WMD's we thought," - this is a case of "they didn't have anything at all!"

Understand now, hardsheller?


BTW, Rush Limbaugh said last week that you cannot support the troops without supporting the cause. Perhaps he has forgotten what he used to say when former President Clinton was in the White House......


Regards to all of you,
BiR

 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/889jldct.asp

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-09-17-iraq-wtc_x.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/06/20/do2001.xml

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/iraq/1855357

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030210fa_fact

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030912-012437-3992r.htm

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030912-012437-3992r.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F04%2F27%2Fwalq27.xml

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,314700,00.html

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscia223863038jun22,0,6059318.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines

http://slate.msn.com/id/2091354/

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0212/03/cct.00.html

http://www.post-gazette.com/forum/col/20021215edkelly15p2.asp

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/16/32

http://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins091903.asp

http://www.newsflash.org/2003/02/hl/hl017506.htm

http://tennessean.com/nation-world/archives/03/06/34908297.shtml?Element_ID=34908297 </font>[/QUOTE]Wow: I am impressed, Carpro.
You did all this research, visited all these sources, and created this timeline?

Kudos to you!


Regards,
BiR

 

Saddam Hussein DID NOT attack the US on September 11th. OBL did, and he was very clear regarding what he thought about Saddam Hussein

Secondly, where are those WMD's? One more time, to borrow from the radio personality Lionel, this is not a case of "they didn't have anywhere near the amount of WMD's we thought," - this is a case of "they didn't have anything at all!"

Understand now, hardsheller?


BTW, Rush Limbaugh said last week that you cannot support the troops without supporting the cause. Perhaps he has forgotten what he used to say when former President Clinton was in the White House......


Regards to all of you,
BiR </font>[/QUOTE]Yes I understand clearly BIR...

It's your position that We should not be in Iraq.
It's your position that Saddam should still be free.
It's your position that George Bush is a liar.
It's your position that Osama would have never used Saddam and vice versa.

I hear you loud and clear.

And I disagree with you completely.

 

Yes.

NO, and please show me where I made this statement.

Please show me where I made this statement.

No, this is not my position. I simply said that Saddam DID NOT attack us.

Apparently, I must have made these statement you have attributed to me. Please show me where I made these claims.

Best regards (and waiting for you to show me),
BiR

 

BIR,

Do you deny that your present sentiment is that we should not be in Iraq?

Do you believe George Bush told the truth about Iraq before invading?

Very simple questions. A Yes or No will suffice.

 

Please get back on topic or the thread will be closed. Also please remember, each American is entitled to his/her own opinion about the war in Iraq. History will ultimately be the judge as to whether it was the right or wrong thing to do.

Thanks,
Lady Eagle,
Moderator