Did Iraq(Saddam) give funding to Al-Qaeda to aid in terrosit operations?

This may seem like a dumb question to some of you. To me aswell. But, I got into a huge argument with a dickhead conservative co-worker who insisted that Saddam gave money to Ossamma and Al-Qaeda to help them out. And that connection was enough for us to attack Iraq. I have been following up on as much as I could about this war and specifically the connection(or lack thereof) between Saddam and Ossama.

Can someone clarify for me just to be sure?

nt

he gave money to the families of suicide bombers who had their homes destroyed by the Israelis, AFTER the terrorist committed the act. He was not funding the acts themselves.

If the Israelis stopped blowing up the homes of the suicide bomber's family, Saddam probably would have stopped sending the money.

As a case for attacking Iraq it doesn't stand up when you consider that the Saudis actually conducted telethons to raise money for the Palestinians, yet the US does nothing about it.

sure sounds like some sort of support of the bombers to me.

http://msnbc.com/news/190144.asp?cp1=1

RC

saving, bookmarking

It absolutely did NOT happen. Tell your co-worker to stop making shit up and spreading it around.

OBL opposed the secular regime of SH..as OBL is a fundamentalist Islamic..SH did send money to families of suicide bombers in palestine..however US support of israeli terror far outwieghs this..

for the dittoheads...

SADDAM = Secular Infedel Dictator who liked to torture & kill people, especially religious fundementalist who threatened his power.

OSAMA = Religious fundementalist who wants to kill secular infedels, especially secular infedels who threaten the fundementalist.

SADDAM + OSAMA = Bloodbath.

What would Saddam love for a birthday present? Osama's head on a pike.

What would Osama love for a birthday present? Saddam's head on a pike.

So, there ya go...these two working together would be like Jesse Jackson wanting to join the KKK....aint gonna happen!

good one bro..

is how their is proff that Saddam had funded Al-Qaeda ops. Thank you all for the info.

I've said it before here and don't want to bore people, but the media must be called on this every time they do it. Not all of them do it all the time, but most papers do it enough that it sticks. Here's how they do it. Bush, Blair, Cheney, and especially Powell, or a "spokesman" for their administrations claim a link and the link is subsequently debunked. But the press presents the link in the headline and opening paragraph, debunking it only further down in the article, knowing that only a tiny percentage of readers get past the headline and opening paragraph. Here's an example:

Iraq sheltering al-Qaeda says UK
There is evidence al-Qaeda "operatives" are being sheltered in Iraq, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's spokesman has said.

Only in the 3rd paragraph do we read:

Last week the prime minister said that there were some links between al-Qaeda and people in Iraq, but stressed that there was no evidence of a link between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi regime.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2703335.stm

As it turns out, the alleged alqaeda operatives were being sheltered in the area controlled by the US and UK. Hmmmm.

Colin Powell was the worst one for this. At one point he said he had read a transcript of a message sent by Bin Laden to Al-Jazeera linking Al-qaeda to Iraq. Trouble is, Al-Jazeera didn't get the tape until later that day, AFTER Powell had made his announcement, saying he had seen the transcript. Now do you wonder why some of us here think Al-quada is spook-generated myth?


Anyway, here are some fair headlines:

Efforts to show Iraq-Qaeda link cause friction within FBI and CIA
James Risen and David Johnston The New York Times

The Bush administration?s efforts to build a case for war against Iraq using intelligence to link it to Al Qaeda and the development of prohibited weapons have created friction within U.S. intelligence agencies, government officials say.

Some analysts at the CIA have complained that senior administration officials have exaggerated the significance of some intelligence reports about Iraq, particularly about its possible links to terrorism, in order to strengthen their political argument for war, government officials said.

At the FBI, some investigators said they were baffled by the Bush adminis tration?s insistence on a solid link between Iraq and Osama bin Laden?s network. ??We?ve been looking at this hard for more than a year, and you know what, we just don?t think it?s there,?? a government official said.

http://www.iht.com/articles/85354.html

Despite these denials by both the FBI and CIA, Mr Tenet, the head of the CIA said on Feb 12, 2003: "We see disturbing signs that al-Qaeda has established a presence in both Iran and Iraq"

http://world.scmp.com/worldnews/ZZZ72RB5XBD.html


Allies Find No Links Between Iraq, Al Qaeda
Evidence isn't there, officials in Europe say, adding that an attack on Hussein would worsen the threat of terrorism by Islamic radicals.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-noqaeda4nov04.story


Spies force retreat on 'al-Qa'eda link'

"The intelligence is practically non-existent," one exasperated American intelligence source said. Most of the intelligence being used to support the idea of a link between al-Qa'eda and Saddam Hussein comes from Kurdish groups who are the bitter enemies of Ansar al-Islam, he said.

"It is impossible to support the bald conclusions being made by the White House and the Pentagon given the poor quantity and quality of the intelligence available. There is uproar within the intelligence community on all of these points, but the Bush White House has quashed dissent."

This could all be dismissed as a turf war between rival intelligence agencies were it not for the near unanimity across the British and American intelligence communities, including the Defence Intelligence Agency analysts whose bosses produced the line the White House wanted to hear.

On Feb 3, the FBI, DIA and CIA were saying there was no link between al-queda and Iraq -- "NEAR UNANIMITY across the British and American Intelligence communities", yet on Feb 12, 9 days later, Mr Tenet of the CIA says:

"We see disturbing signs that al-Qaeda has established a presence in both Iran and Iraq"

Now, we in the anti-war community knew these were lies, simply by reading the major newsmedia carefully, so we cannot accept any excuses from any politicians or anyone else that they were mislead. The truth was out there. It was just a matter of sorting the truth from the lies. And it wasn't hard.

may as well believe that Saddam would've paid Osama to fire mortar rockets at his palaces, since that would be the result.

Osama petitioned the Saudi royals for permission to send a mujahadeen force into Kuwait to drive out Saddam. It was their refusal and the subsequent stationing of American troops in the kingdom that turned him into an international terrorist, a monstrous pain in everyone's ass.

the negative can never be proved, only the positive.

of Bush saying

"we have no evidence that Saddam was involved in september the 11th"
http://www.greenmanstudio.com/noevid.mov

Please download.
anyone that likes to do mixes, lets do a dance
mix with this and
get it out on the internet, so that the
meme finally takes hold. I've sent
it to several young creatives to get this
started, but please pass along

Bush: No Proof of Saddam Role in 9-11
The Associated Press
Wednesday 17 September 2003
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 ? disputing an impression that critics say the administration tried to foster to justify the war against Iraq.
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-17-bush-saddam_x.htm
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/091903C.shtml

So you had the CIA, FBI, DIA, along with British, Spanish and French intelligence agencies unanimously agreeing that there was no evidence of a link, yet Bush and Blair said there was no question there were links. Why weren't the press calling them LIARS in huge front page headlines? Instead they turn their lies into headlines that made people think it was true....over and over and over.