------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 9, 2003

Captives Deny Qaeda Worked With Baghdad

By JAMES RISEN

ASHINGTON, June 8 — Two of the highest-ranking leaders of Al Qaeda in American custody have told the C.I.A. in separate interrogations that the terrorist organization did not work jointly with the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein, according to several intelligence officials.

Abu Zubaydah, a Qaeda planner and recruiter until his capture in March 2002, told his questioners last year that the idea of working with Mr. Hussein's government had been discussed among Qaeda leaders, but that Osama bin Laden had rejected such proposals, according to an official who has read the Central Intelligence Agency's classified report on the interrogation.

In his debriefing, Mr. Zubaydah said Mr. bin Laden had vetoed the idea because he did not want to be beholden to Mr. Hussein, the official said.

Separately, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Qaeda chief of operations until his capture on March 1 in Pakistan, has also told interrogators that the group did not work with Mr. Hussein, officials said.

The Bush administration has not made these statements public, though it frequently highlighted intelligence reports that supported its assertions of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda as it made its case for war against Iraq.

Since the war ended, and because the administration has yet to uncover evidence of prohibited weapons in Iraq, the quality of American intelligence has come under scrutiny amid contentions that the administration selectively disclosed only those intelligence reports that supported its case for war.

Bill Harlow, a spokesman for the Central Intelligence Agency, declined to comment on what the two Qaeda leaders had told their questioners. A senior intelligence official played down the significance of their debriefings, explaining that everything Qaeda detainees say must be regarded with great skepticism.

Other intelligence and military officials added that evidence of possible links between Mr. Hussein's government and Al Qaeda had been discovered — both before the war and since — and that American forces were searching Iraq for more in Iraq.

Still, no conclusive evidence of joint terrorist operations by Iraq and Al Qaeda has been found, several intelligence officials acknowledged, nor have ties been discovered between Baghdad and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on Washington and New York.

Between the time of the attacks and the start of the war in Iraq in March, senior Bush administration officials spoke frequently about intelligence on two fronts — the possibility of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda, and Baghdad's drive to develop prohibited weapons. President Bush described the war against Iraq as part of the larger war on terrorism, and argued that the possibility that Mr. Hussein might hand over illicit weapons to terrorists posed a threat to the United States.

Several officials said Mr. Zubaydah's debriefing report was circulated by the C.I.A. within the American intelligence community last year, but his statements were not included in public discussions by administration officials about the evidence concerning Iraq-Qaeda ties.

Those officials said the statements by Mr. Zubaydah and Mr. Mohammed were examples of the type of intelligence reports that ran counter to the administration's public case.

"I remember reading the Abu Zubaydah debriefing last year, while the administration was talking about all of these other reports, and thinking that they were only putting out what they wanted," one official said.

Spokesmen at the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon declined to comment on why Mr. Zubaydah's debriefing report was not publicly disclosed by the administration last year.

In recent weeks, the director of central intelligence, George J. Tenet, and other officials have defended the information and analysis by the C.I.A. and other intelligence agencies in the months before the war. They said reports were not suppressed, and were properly handled and distributed among the intelligence agencies.

The issue of the public presentation of the evidence is different from whether the intelligence itself was valid, and some officials said they believed that the former might ultimately prove to be more significant, since the Bush administration relied heavily on the release of intelligence reports to build its case, both with the American people and abroad.

"This gets to the serious question of to what extent did they try to align the facts with the conclusions that they wanted," an intelligence official said. "Things pointing in one direction were given a lot of weight, and other things were discounted."

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

Of course anyone who was paying attention, and thinking, long ago figured out that the Bush Junta was lying through their teeth. Of course their loyal Sycophants will deny it. At this point I think Bush could Bugger a 6 year old on the South Lawn and Bush Admirer would applaud it as being necessary for "National Security".

Here's what Michael Rivero over at WhatReallyHappened.com had to say:

"This was one of those lies that the mainstream media should have checked and did not. Al Qaeda's overall objective was establishing religious rule throughout the middle east. Saddam's government was secular, the very antithesis of Al Qaeda's agenda. Had Saddam actually given weapons of mass destruction to Al Qaeda, it is likely Al Qaeda would have used them on Saddam himself! Even without the advantage of hindsite in knowing that Saddam didn;t have WMDs with which to defend his country from invasion, let alone to hand out to anyone else, the mainstream media could have and should have shown more skepticism towards the Bush claim that Saddam and Al Qaeda were linked."

"Here's what Michael Rivero over at WhatReallyHappened.com had to say: "

irrelevant blathering, and you know it.

They flew airplanes into buildings people, dont you get it? Your babies are going to be drinking wmds in their enfamil if we dont get these arabs. While you anti war hippies are tryin to keep the enemy in power, were doing whats right, fighting for our nation, our freedom. Why dont you all go to Cuba and try living over there a couple of months, Or maybe a country that does'nt have any food like Hungry or China. And most of the country feels this way too, so you guys might as well go rally to save the whales or a tree. And leave the big things to us adults, ok?

It looks as though you need to borrow my copy of "Grammar for Dummies."

Bush Asskisser and his "merry" band are back to their usual Fruit Loop Reasoning and tactics.

If you can't refute the argument say something nasty and inflammatory and hope you can divert people from thinking about the significance of the information presented.

Repeat the ongoing lies e.g., Bush Asskisser's four pseudo points - which have been refuted or called into question many times over. Like the wacko "Conspiracy Theory" about the 19 Super Arabs who somehow, despite being awful Pilots who could not competently fly a Cessna 180 Single Engine Propeller Driven Plane, were able to sneak weapons past security, without showing up on Surveillance Cameras, and then perform Aerobatics in Jumbo Jets. It's not even funny any more BA just stupid.

Afghanistan is now back to Tribal Wars and Opium Production is at record levels. I'll bet you're really proud of that great accomplishment eh BA? Particularly Opium. Is that one of your Products? And don't forget Osama Bin Forgotten who Bush almost never mentions - you know that C.I.A. contract Agent that was pegged as the fevered mastermind working from a Cave in Tora Bora who was able to totally befuddle the entire Security Apparatus of the United States whose Super Pilots were able to shut down NORAD and leave the most sophisticated Air Defense System in the World holding onto their ass with both hands.

Your point 3 is so riduculous as to parody itself. Saddam was a tinhorn Dictator installed by a U.S. Sponsored Coup. The war was not to free the Iraqi People but to Conquer the Oil Fields for Bush's Cronies - and Wolfoshitz slipped up and admitted it. I hear it is one big Love Carnival over their as the newly "liberated" Iraqi's demonstrate their love of their new overlords with AK-47s. And of course Childred are still dying, Baghdad is still without power, and their is essentially no Law left other than from the Barrel of a Gun. What an accomplishment.

And the Loyal American Patriots who opposed the illegal War in Iraq are to be commended for their courage and humanity. They were right.

Bush lied and thousands of People died. It is really that simple.

911 - What Really Happened?

"And the Loyal American Patriots who opposed the illegal War in Iraq are to be commended for their courage and humanity. They were right. "



Now there's some fine backwards ass crazy talkin' if ever there was some. HA!

Bush lied and thousands of People died. It is really that simple.

It's been months and we're still waiting for an example of one of these lies.



911 - What Really Happened?

Muslims hit us. What part is confusing you?

If the United States was really interested in removing "tyrants" from power, why would it be supporting the King of Saudi Arabia, the Emir of Kuwait, Mobarek of Egypt, and the notorious land thief, ethnic cleanser and murderer Ariel Sharon? And why would it have a past history of supporting the Shah of Iran, Ky and Thieu in Vietnam, Francisco Franco in Spain, General Pinochet in Chile, and various thuggish dictators in Greece, Turkey and South Korea? It couldn't be that all these boys played ball with US corporations and cracked down on labor unions and socialist movements of all types, could it?

Wise up old man.

You're actually right about most of what you posted.

So what?

Is your assertion that since we don't annihilate ALL dictators (fine with me) that we shouldn't get rid of any of them.

I personally have never thought the war was about ending tyranny. But you know what, THAT was the result and I'm happy with it.

"For example, Pinochet was cruel but he put Chile on a sound economic course and avoided the major disaster that Allende represented."

Yeah, it's great to have a murderous dictator in power, as long as the economy is good.