Yet Another Bush Lie Exposed

CIA Finds No Evidence Hussein Sought to Arm Terrorists [/font size]

By Walter Pincus

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, November 16, 2003; Page A20

The CIA's search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has found no evidence that former president Saddam Hussein tried to transfer chemical or biological technology or weapons to terrorists, according to a military and intelligence expert.

Anthony Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, provided new details about the weapons search and Iraqi insurgency in a report released Friday. It was based on briefings over the past two weeks in Iraq from David Kay, the CIA representative who is directing the search for unconventional weapons in Iraq; L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civil administrator there; and military officials.

"No evidence of any Iraqi effort to transfer weapons of mass destruction or weapons to terrorists," Cordesman wrote of Kay's briefing. "Only possibility was Saddam's Fedayeen [his son's irregular terrorist force] and talk only."

One of the concerns the Bush administration cited early last year to justify the need to invade Iraq was that Hussein would provide chemical or biological agents or weapons to al Qaeda or other terrorists. Despite the disclosure that U.S. and British intelligence officials assessed that Hussein would use or distribute such weapons only if he were attacked and faced defeat, administration spokesmen have continued to defend that position.

Last Thursday, Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith defended the administration's prewar position at the Council on Foreign Relations. "The idea that we didn't have specific proof that he was planning to give a biological agent to a terrorist group," he said, "doesn't really lead you to anything, because you wouldn't expect to have that information even if it were true. And our intelligence is just not at the point where if Saddam had that intention that we would necessarily know it."

Yesterday, allegations of new evidence of connections between Iraq and al Qaeda contained in a classified annex attached to Feith's Oct. 27 letter to leaders of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence were published in the Weekly Standard. Feith had been asked to support his July 10 closed-door testimony about such connections. The classified annex summarized raw intelligence reports but did not analyze them or address their accuracy, according to a senior administration official familiar with the matter.

During the recent Baghdad briefing, Cordesman noted that Kay said Iraq "did order nuclear equipment from 1999 on, but no evidence [has turned up] of [a] new major facility to use it."

Although there was no evidence of chemical weapons production, Kay said he had located biological work "under cover of new agricultural facility" that showed "advances in developing dry storable powder forms of botulinum toxin," Cordesman wrote.

During his Nov. 1-12 trip, Cordesman visited Baghdad, Babel, Tikrit and Kirkuk, where he met combat commanders and staff in high-threat areas. Reporting on his briefing by Bremer, Cordesman said 95 percent of the threat came from former Hussein loyalists while most foreign terrorists, who entered Iraq before the war, arrived from Syria, with some from Saudi Arabia and only "a few from Iran." Bremer "felt Syrian intelligence knows [of the volunteers] but is not proactive in encouraging [them]." He also said there was "no way to seal borders with Syria, Saudi [Arabia] and Iran. Too manpower intensive."

Bremer said Hussein loyalists "still have lots of money to buy attacks [because] at least $1 billion still unaccounted for." He also said the Syrians had admitted "some $3 billion more of Iraqi money [is] in Syria."

The Coalition Joint Task Force briefers noted that the Iraq Governing Council felt "the U.S. is too soft in attacking hostile targets, arrests and use of force," while the U.S. side "feels restraint is the key to winning hearts and minds."

Hussein, according to the briefers, "is cut off, isolated, moving constantly, [and has] no real role in control." They told Cordesman that the "problem is ex-generals and colonels with no other future -- not former top officials." They also said Hussein "made officers read 'Black Hawk Down' [Mark Bowden's book about the fatal downing of U.S. helicopters in Somalia a decade ago] to try to convince them U.S. would have to leave if major casualties."

They said there will be attacks "until the day U.S. leaves" and "cannot ever get intelligence up to point where [they can] stop all attacks."

During his visit to the Polish-led international division, south of Baghdad where the Shiites predominate, Cordesman said there were 34 attacks before a Pole was killed Nov. 6.

The force there considers the holy cities "stable" but notes that Shiite leaders such as Grand Ayatollah Ali Hussein al-Sistani, Iraq's top Shiite cleric, "protect themselves with their own militias with CPA [Coalition Provisional Authority] approval. This has its advantages, but it means they cannot be given effective coalition protection," he wrote.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46460-2003Nov15.html

You have made it your life's main interest to find those items injurious to the Bush administration including saying that there was no link between Iraq and Al Quaida. Check the third from the last paragraph in the attached indictment from 1998:

United States Information Agency

04 November 1998

BIN LADEN, ATEF INDICTED IN U.S. FEDERAL COURT FOR AFRICAN BOMBINGS

(Terrorists will be tracked down, officials say) (920)

By Judy Aita

USIA Staff Writer

New York -- Usama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef were indicted November 4 in Manhattan federal court for the August 7 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and for conspiring to kill Americans outside the United States.

US Attorney Mary Jo White and Assistant director of the FBI office in New York Lewis Schiliro -- accompanied by a group of other federal, state and local officials involved in the investigation -- announced the indictments at a press conference. Ambassador David Carpenter of the US Department of State also announced rewards of up to $5 million each for information leading to the arrest or conviction of bin Laden and Atef.

"Usama bin Laden and his military commander Muhammad Atef are charged with plotting and carrying out the most heinous acts of international terrorism and murder," White said.

"Their alleged victims include the hundreds of African and American citizens who tragically lost their lives in the embassy bombings in east Africa on August 7, 1998, and the thousands more who were seriously injured. In a greater sense, all of the citizens of the world are also victims whenever and wherever the cruel and cowardly acts of international terrorism strike," she said. "It is up to the authorities of the world to respond vigorously and relentlessly to such terrorist attacks. This investigation is continuing worldwide and will continue until all of those responsible are brought to justice," White stressed.

Schiliro said that the indictment demonstrates the "resolve and determination of the entire law enforcement team to bring to justice all those who were responsible for the murder of innocent Americans, Kenyans, and Tanzanians on August 7."

"This investigation has been given the highest priority," the FBI official said. "Our investigative strategy is clear: We will identify, locate, and prosecute all those responsible right up the line from those who constructed and delivered the bombs to those who paid for them and ordered it done."

"Though far from complete, in three short months much has been accomplished due to the dedication and determination of the investigators and prosecutors and also because of the professionalism and total cooperation of the governments of Kenya, Tanzania, and the Comoros Islands," he said.

The investigation deployed the largest contingent of FBI agents abroad and included members of the multi-agency joint terrorist task force -- New York City Police Department detectives, US customs agents, US Secret Service, the New York State Police, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the US Immigration and Naturalization Service.

"The work they have done in recovering physical evidence at the crime scene and developing other leads that will assist in this investigation cannot be overstated," Schiliro said. "Their resolve and determination to identify all those involved should not be underestimated."

New York City Police Chief Howard Safir said that the indictment "sends a very clear message that terrorists will be held accountable no matter where they commit their acts."

Both White and Schiliro stressed that the investigation will not end with the current indictment and is continuing.

The 238-count indictment charges, among other things, that bin Laden and Atef along with co-defendants Wadih el Hage, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed Sadeek Odeh, and Mohamed Rashed Daoud al'Owhali, acted together with other members of "al Qaeda" -- the worldwide terrorist organization led by bin Laden -- to murder US nationals, including members of the American military stationed in Saudi Arabia following the Gulf War and in Somalia as part of UN Operation Restore Hope, as well as those employed at US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. They established front companies, provided false identity and travel documents, and provided false information to authorities in various countries.

Bin Laden's "al Qaeda" organization functioned both on its own and through other terrorist organizations, including the Al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group also known as el Gamaa Islamia led at one time by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and a number of other jihad groups in countries such as Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Somalia.

Bin Laden, White charged, engaged in business transactions on behalf of Al Qaeda, including purchasing warehouses for storage of explosives, transporting weapons, and establishing a series of companies in Sudan to provide income to al Qaeda and as a cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons, and chemicals, and for the travel of operatives.

According to the indictment, bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their 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," the indictment said.

Beginning in 1992, bin Laden allegedly issued through his "fatwah" committees a series of escalating "fatwahs" against the United States, certain military personnel, and, eventually in February 1998, a "fatwah" stating that Muslims should kill Americans -- including civilians -- anywhere in the world they can be found.

Bin Laden and Atef, both of whom are fugitives, if convicted, face maximum sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole or death, White said.

Certainly, as one of the Bush Adminstration's cheif apologists, I;d expect nothing less from you. Where's the proof? Where's the WMD?

Osama bin Laden absolutely hated Saddam Hussein because Saddam was a secular leader.

Just because it's said, doesn't make it true.

There are no WMD.

There is no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda (until Bush brought Al Qaeda to iraq)

The CIA just verified that Saddam never tried to arm terrorists.

It's just what I've said all along...Bushit.

You obviously did not read the posting. Your hero and heroine, Clinton and Reno, through the prosecutor in New York, put in the indictment:

"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," the indictment said.

You are just trying to dodge the bullet. Just because it is said does not make it true indeed. It was said in a federal indictment and a federal indictment from a democratic regime, yet you fluff it off because it would show that you were wrong.

Also in the Cordesman statement:

Although there was no evidence of chemical weapons production, Kay said he had located biological work "under cover of new agricultural facility" that showed "advances in developing dry storable powder forms of botulinum toxin," Cordesman wrote.

What is botulinum toxin if not WMD?

Another fluff off and from your own posting. You are not doing too well tonight.

The only botulism toxin that was found was in a vial in the refrigerator of an Iraqi scientist that had been left over and forgotten about since the first Bush Iraq War. You remind me of Sean Hannity. Even though there's no truth to what you say, and no hard evidence to back it up, you feel that if you keep repeating yourself, the reptition itself will become the truth.

How do you get from the statement by Cordesman that botulism toxin was discovered that was being developed in dry form to your statement that the only botulism toxin was a single vial. Nowhere in Cordesman's statement is that stated. There was a time shortly after the invasion when a single vial was found. Cordesman does not state that this is the toxin he is talking about. Unless you have access to the complete search report that Kay and his teams are developing then you cannot make that statement with any certainty at all!

>Also in the Cordesman statement:

>

>Although there was no evidence of chemical weapons production,

>Kay said he had located biological work "under cover of new

>agricultural facility" that showed "advances in developing dry

>storable powder forms of botulinum toxin," Cordesman wrote.

And THAT is why it was necessary to invade Iraq and kill thousands of people? Because Iraq had made "advances in developing dry storable powder forms of botulinum toxin"? Is that your idea of a joke?

What does that have to do with Bush's warning to the American people that we couldn't wait until we saw a "mushroom cloud"?

We all know the reason for the invasion wasn't because our Republican leaders were outraged over Saddam's human rights abuses. After Saddam used chemical weapons against Kurdish villages in Iraq in the late 80s, Kurdish leaders asked the Reagan administration to impose sanctions on Iraq. Reagan refused.

The Reagan and Bush administrations had no problem with Saddam's WMD programs, torture chambers and "rape rooms" so long as he did America's bidding in the region. They were perfectly content to turn a deaf ear to the screams of Saddam's victims in those days, so don't lie and claim otherwise. It was not until Saddam went off the reservation and imperiled our oil supply from Kuwait that Republicans suddenly discovered what an evil dictator he is. What a bunch of filthy hypocrites!

It was not until Saddam went off the reservation

>and imperiled our oil supply from Kuwait that Republicans

>suddenly discovered what an evil dictator he is. What a bunch

>of filthy hypocrites!

...not to mention what a convenient funnel Iraq could be for moving US taxpayer dollars into the pockets of Halliburton et al.

Come to think of it, couldn't North Korea use some rebuilding?

Precisely how do you know what "we all know". Are you not the spokesperson for the nation that you know what "we all know"?

You only know that because it fits conveniently into what you want to believe.

>Precisely how do you know what "we all know". Are you not

>the spokesperson for the nation that you know what "we all

>know"?

I am getting a little weary of your lies. That the Reagan and Bush administrations helped and supported Saddam during the 80s is not a matter of opinion but a matter of public record. Are you really going to lie your ass off and deny that this is true?

And are you going to deny that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have all made recent public statements claiming that one of the things that justifies the invasion is Saddam's use of chemical weapons against his own people? Are you going to deny they have said that? I saw Rumsfeld say that on Meet the Press a week ago.

And are you going to deny that this chemical attack they are now condemning occurred in the 80s, when we were supporting Saddam, and that these people did NOT advocate an end to our alliance at that time, much less an attack to topple Saddam? Are you going to deny that? Well?

>You only know that because it fits conveniently into what you

>want to believe.

What I can't believe is that you would be so dishonest as to deny the historical record. It puts you in the same category as people who deny the Holocaust.

>I am getting a little weary of your lies. . . .

>What I can't believe is that you would be so dishonest as to

>deny the historical record. It puts you in the same category

>as people who deny the Holocaust.

I just want you to know, Dick - the guy who is calling you and every other person whose political ideology is different than his a "liar" - the same one who calls all Republicans "filthy hypocrites"-the same asshole who is telling you that you are no different than Holocaust-deniers because of your political views - he's the same person who says he hates Ann Coulter and finds her rhetorical tactics objectionable.

I know. It's shocking and bewildering. But that's why I wanted to make sure you knew.

You know, I keep reading that Democrats are going to do more than anyone to re-elect George Bush because they express themsevles only in playground insults and beam nothing but anger and hatred - sure election losers. Then I came here and I just can't imagine what they're talking about.

I mean, the liberals here are so elevated in their political dialogue - Bush is a "retard" and a "moron" and everyone who doesn't think he's Satan are "filthy hyprocrites" and "liars" - why, this is exactly the kind of discussion which American voters find so inspiring and which is sure to move them to vote against Bush and to vote with these Beacons of Wisdom and Moderation.

>>I am getting a little weary of your lies. . . .

>>What I can't believe is that you would be so dishonest as to

>>deny the historical record. It puts you in the same

>category

>>as people who deny the Holocaust.

>

>I just want you to know, Dick - the guy who is calling you and

>every other person whose political ideology is different than

>his a "liar" - the same one who calls all Republicans "filthy

>hypocrites"-the same asshole who is telling you that you are

>no different than Holocaust-deniers because of your political

>views - he's the same person who says he hates Ann Coulter and

>finds her rhetorical tactics objectionable.

Yeah, Dick. Due to the filthy, reprehensible tactics used by Republican hatemongers like Coulter, Limbaugh, Liddy, O'Reilly and a whole host of others, some of us have been forced to climb down to their level and use similar graphic, angry verbiage just to be heard above their nasty snarling.

But there's one little difference that wet little shit Doug neglected to mention. Unlike them, I don't encourage hatred for people simply because of a sincere difference in political or religious views. Unlike Coulter, for example, I would never say that a political opponent should be prosecuted for treason simply because he doesn't support one of my favorite programs -- Coulter wrote that Democrats should be prosecuted for treason because they failed to support Bush's missile defense program, as you know. You probably also remember her remark after 9/11 that our country should use our military power to force Muslims to convert to Christianity and should kill them if they refuse. I'd never say something like that.

Oh, I guess there's another difference. Unlike them (and Doug and you) I don't tell lies about people in order to encourage others to hate them for political reasons or any reasons. You know the way Doug kept accusing ncm of being a pimp? And the way you just pretended it isn't common knowledge that some of the same Republican leaders who favored a policy of helping Saddam in the 80s now claim he is the world's greatest menace? Those are good examples of the lying tactics I will not stoop to.

>Yeah, Dick. Due to the filthy, reprehensible tactics used by

>Republican hatemongers like Coulter, Limbaugh, Liddy, O'Reilly

>and a whole host of others, some of us have been forced to

>climb down to their level and use similar graphic, angry

>verbiage just to be heard above their nasty snarling.

"It's not that I want to be a vulgar, screaming adolescent - it's just that those people over there are, so I feel I have to be also."

>But there's one little difference that wet little shit Doug

>neglected to mention. Unlike them, I don't encourage hatred

>for people simply because of a sincere difference in political

>or religious views.

Woodlawn calls Republicans "liars", "filthy hypocrites," and accuses them of engaging in all sorts of chicanery and mendacity in order to enrich themselves at the expense of the country - but he doesn't "encourage hatred for people" with whom he has political differences.

How can anyone say any of this with a straight face?

>Oh, I guess there's another difference. Unlike them (and Doug

>and you) I don't tell lies about people in order to encourage

>others to hate them for political reasons or any reasons.

WOODLAWN: "When I call my political opponents 'liars' and 'filthy hypocrites,' that's ok, because it's true - that's what they are. But when Ann Coulter calls me and my comrades those names, it's not ok - in fact, it's terribe - because we're not those things. In other words, it's ok for libearls to do it because we are good and pure and honest. But it's not ok for conservatives to do it because they are dishonest and corrupt."

Does anyone have a can of Raid I can borrow?

>some of us have been forced to

>>climb down to their level and use similar graphic, angry

>>verbiage just to be heard above their nasty snarling.

>"It's not that I want to be a vulgar, screaming adolescent -

>it's just that those people over there are, so I feel I have

>to be also."

Yes, Doogie, we all know you Repubs would prefer that your opponents play by the Marquess of Queensbury Rules, while you get to continue using the gutter tactics for which you are so justly renowned. But that's over. Get used to it, shitbag.

>>But there's one little difference that wet little shit Doug

>>neglected to mention. Unlike them, I don't encourage hatred

>>for people simply because of a sincere difference in

>political

>>or religious views.

>but he doesn't "encourage hatred for people" with

>whom he has political differences.

Stop the lies, Doog. Or is it just your dyslexia again? Most of us can understand the difference between encouraging hatred for people simply because of political differences and doing it because they use lies and smear tactics to win. I suspect you understand the difference too, you're just lying about what I said to make it easier to argue against it. Won't work.

>How can anyone say any of this with a straight face?

I can if I don't have to look at your face while I do it.

>>Oh, I guess there's another difference. Unlike them (and

>Doug

>>and you) I don't tell lies about people in order to

>encourage

>>others to hate them for political reasons or any reasons.

>WOODLAWN: "When I call my political opponents 'liars' and

>'filthy hypocrites,' that's ok, because it's true - that's

>what they are.

You betcha.

> But when Ann Coulter calls me and my comrades

>those names, it's not ok - in fact, it's terribe - because

>we're not those things.

You finally seem to understand. Bravo!

In other words, it's ok for libearls

>to do it because we are good and pure and honest. But it's

>not ok for conservatives to do it because they are dishonest

>and corrupt."

No, shitbag, it's not okay for anyone to tell lies about their political opponents or to encourage hatred against people due to sincere political disagreements. But you and your ilk keep doing those things anyway.

>Does anyone have a can of Raid I can borrow?

I do, but I don't know if you'll get much use out of it after I pound it up your flabby ass with a mallet.