Saddam Linked to Al Qaeda(NE take a look)

[wolvie20m]

Possible Saddam-Al Qaeda Link Seen in U.N. Oil-for-Food Program

Monday, September 20, 2004

By Claudia Rosett and George Russell



LUGANO, Switzerland — Did Saddam Hussein use any of his ill-gotten billions filched from the United Nations Oil-for-Food program to help fund Al Qaeda?

Investigations have shown that the former Iraqi dictator grafted and smuggled more than $10 billion from the program that for seven years prior to Saddam's overthrow was meant to bring humanitarian aid to ordinary Iraqis. And the Sept. 11 Commission has shown a tracery of contacts between Saddam and Al Qaeda (search) that continued after billions of Oil-for-Food dollars began pouring into Saddam's coffers and Usama bin Laden (search) declared his infamous war on the U.S.

Now, buried in some of the United Nation's own confidential documents, clues can be seen that underscore the possibility of just such a Saddam-Al Qaeda link — clues leading to a locked door in this Swiss lakeside resort. (To review a series of documents, audits and other stories related to Oil-for-Food, click here.)

Next to that door, a festive sign spells out in gold letters under a green flag that this is the office of MIGA, the Malaysian Swiss Gulf and African Chamber (search). Registered here 20 years ago as a society to promote business between the Gulf States and Asia, Europe and Africa, MIGA is a company that the United Nations and the U.S. government says has served as a hub of Al Qaeda finance: A terrorist chamber of commerce.

Fox News - http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,132682,00.html

Now there's a bit of proof for you Naked, I couldn't find anything now but now I got something for you. No longer a illogical conculsion! Told you I couldn't prove it but it was known Saddam supported Anti-Americanism groups. Why wouldn't he support Al Qaeda.

 

[nakedemperor]

Evil-- glad to see you've changed by to the truly evil avatar!

Wolfie-- nothing new here man

 

[wolvie20m]

Damn you Naked Emperor!!! Oh well I just wanted to show you my link to Saddam is no longer unfounded. Oh well I feel better whether you want to believe it or not. Oh yea it's wolVie with a V, damn everyone says wolfie WTF!?! Anyways Naked is it that you ask for facts and facts alone to make a decision?

 

[Kentucky]

Claudia would win this year hands down. Her reporting on this issue has been superb. I look forward to her book.

 

[Merlin1047]

Wolfie-- nothing new here man

I agree there's nothing new here - you're still the same old you. You steadfastly cling to your oblivious attitude. You remain in denial and you don't want to hear the truth so you dismiss it as irrelevant.

So you're right. Nothing new here at all.

 

[nakedemperor]

I agree there's nothing new here - you're still the same old you. You steadfastly cling to your oblivious attitude. You remain in denial and you don't want to hear the truth so you dismiss it as irrelevant.

So you're right. Nothing new here at all.

My oblivious attitude continues to be that a colloborative relationship between Al Qaeda and Baghdad remains a falsehood. As long as the relationship did not necessarily imply that Saddam would give his non-existant WMDs to terrorists, an absurd implication, it remains a moot point in the argument for why we went to war. Some people are in favor of unilateral aggression against sovereign nations; those people include George Bush, and Saddam Hussein.

 

[wolvie20m]

Then your ignorance is bliss NE, and I'm glad your candidate or anyone like him isn't anywhere near that office. That office is there to protect and make decision calls. It seems your decisions would take as long as the UN's and have the same effect. Also if you'd like to ignore the millions Saddam gave to terrorist go right ahead continue to believe he wasn't going to harm us, and no intentions of doing anything to help anyone that would. Fortunately your opinion is like mine it doesn't count anywhere important(with the exception of this board, which is important to us).

 

[wade]

Now there's a bit of proof for you Naked, I couldn't find anything now but now I got something for you. No longer a illogical conculsion! Told you I couldn't prove it but it was known Saddam supported Anti-Americanism groups. Why wouldn't he support Al Qaeda.

Ummm... because the basis of Al-Queda is almost as opposed to a regime such as Saddam's as it is to the West?

 

[wade]

NE - Anyway you slice it this was a necessary step in the fight on terror! Call Bush a liar, say it was all bogus but the bottom line it had to be done. Anyone Who thinks that Saddam would not of graciously sold weaponry of any kind to hurt the U.S in anyway has more than a political agaenda in mind, or perhaps no mind! I don't care what reason was stated. Saddam needed to be brought down, and I feel better everyday knowing that he is accounted for!

And on the basis of that argument are we to now invade another dozen or so nations?

 

[jimnyc]

And on the basis of that argument are we to now invade another dozen or so nations?

If we enter into negotiations with them and/or the UN steps in with reolutions, and they ignore them for over 12 years - YES.

 

[wolvie20m]

If we enter into negotiations with them and/or the UN steps in with reolutions, and they ignore them for over 12 years - YES.

No one realizes this we've been messing with Saddam for 12 years to just chill and stop violating countless sanctions. He didn't so he had to be dealt with yes. Also if you want another reason to invade Iraq here is a previous post for you: http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14565

The reason of mass killing fields is a good reason too. So condemn the invasion all you want, it was necessary and long over due.

 

[tim_duncan2000]

Ummm... because the basis of Al-Queda is almost as opposed to a regime such as Saddam's as it is to the West?

Right, because Saddam is secular and they are not. How do you explain the Muslims who supported Saddam? I have heard people say this often, but I don't think there is any proof that they would be almost as opposed.

 

[wade]

The reason of mass killing fields is a good reason too. So condemn the invasion all you want, it was necessary and long over due.

When those killing fields were being planted in the 80's the Reagan and Bush Sr. Admininstrations continued to support Saddam. That's not a reason we went to war in Iraq.

 

[wade]

Right, because Saddam is secular and they are not. How do you explain the Muslims who supported Saddam? I have heard people say this often, but I don't think there is any proof that they would be almost as opposed.

Part of Al-Queda's position is that secular leaders of the Arab world need to be replaced with religious leadership ala Iran. Therefore, Saddam had every reason to oppose Al-Queda, and every reason to desire they not become popular with the Arab people. If anything, Saddam was more endangered by Al-Queda than the USA, an Arab uprising against his regime was one of his biggest fears.

 

[tim_duncan2000]

If anything, Saddam was more endangered by Al-Queda than the USA, an Arab uprising against his regime was one of his biggest fears.

I doubt that. The Shi'ites tried that after Desert Storm, and were crushed. Also, they hate America much more than Saddam.

 

[wolvie20m]

When those killing fields were being planted in the 80's the Reagan and Bush Sr. Admininstrations continued to support Saddam. That's not a reason we went to war in Iraq.

There was also many recent killing fields, so what kind of death do we wait for till he starts matching Hitler's numbers?

 

[manu1959]

When those killing fields were being planted in the 80's the Reagan and Bush Sr. Admininstrations continued to support Saddam. That's not a reason we went to war in Iraq.

W-during clintons 8 years of blow jobs explain how he addressed the gathering threat of sadam + sons and osama's crusaders?

 

[manu1959]

Part of Al-Queda's position is that secular leaders of the Arab world need to be replaced with religious leadership ala Iran. Therefore, Saddam had every reason to oppose Al-Queda, and every reason to desire they not become popular with the Arab people. If anything, Saddam was more endangered by Al-Queda than the USA, an Arab uprising against his regime was one of his biggest fears.

interesting conclusion....any proof of sadam + sons killing off al queda?

funny how al queda and tally band members took refuge in iraq after the afgan invasion and funny how sadam did not turn anyone over to the US.....pakistan, syria, etc turned over members of both groups....yet not one terrorist was in iraq according to sadam + sons

 

[wade]

W-during clintons 8 years of blow jobs explain how he addressed the gathering threat of sadam + sons and osama's crusaders?

He bombed Iraq. He had intelligence following Bin-Ladin/Al-Queda.

Bush/Ashcroft were warned that "Bin-Ladin is standing right behind you" by various members of the intelligence community in the months and even days immeadiately prior to 911 and they basically said "do not bother me with that", their eyes were transfixed on Iraq. Had they listened, 911 probably would have been a complete failure.