I know we've all had enough of the political arguments but I said I was
compiling evidence (at the request of a couple of wreckers who
disagreed with me but wanted to have a rational discussion -- I know,
not the "Norm" around here) and this tidbit just arrived courtesy of
the Washington Post...
<http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm>
"Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam"
Excerpts...
"In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were
at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between
Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's
defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the
bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan. "
and
"The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department
indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the
bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
ÊÊÊÊThe indictment disclosed a close relationship between al Qaeda and
Saddam's regime, which included specialists on chemical weapons and all
types of bombs, including truck bombs, a favorite weapon of terrorists.
ÊÊÊÊThe 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with
the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran
and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working
together against their perceived 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."
and
"He said that if the plant had been allowed to produce VX that was used
to kill thousands of Americans, people would have asked him, "Ê'You had
a manager that went to Baghdad; you had Osama bin Laden, who had
funded, at least the corporation, and you had traces of [VX precursor]
and you did what? And you did nothing?' Is that a responsible activity
on the part of the secretary of defense?"
But hey... Bush lied, right?
More to come, but not here on the wreck. I'll post a link that people
can follow when I've finished. But what with work, golf and SWMBOs
coffee table, it's taking a bit longer than expected.
djb
Lee wrote:
> Don't you and the other rec'ers have friends over for dinner to have these
> discussion.
> BTW I've heard the tapes of Clinton discussing the Saudi's offer of Osama
> being offered up so we could of had him them
>
All the Federales say they could have had him any day
they only let him slip away out of kindness, I suppose.
kudos to Pancho and Lefty
That's fine. Clinton was wrong too. The more starting link is between the
Bush family and the Bin Laden family anyhow.
Brian.
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:250620041948151808%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> I know we've all had enough of the political arguments but I said I was
> compiling evidence (at the request of a couple of wreckers who
> disagreed with me but wanted to have a rational discussion -- I know,
> not the "Norm" around here) and this tidbit just arrived courtesy of
> the Washington Post...
>
> <http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm>
>
> "Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam"
>
> Excerpts...
>
> "In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were
> at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between
> Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's
> defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the
> bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan. "
>
> and
>
> "The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department
> indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the
> bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
> The indictment disclosed a close relationship between al Qaeda and
> Saddam's regime, which included specialists on chemical weapons and all
> types of bombs, including truck bombs, a favorite weapon of terrorists.
>
> The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with
> the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran
> and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working
> together against their perceived 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."
>
> and
>
> "He said that if the plant had been allowed to produce VX that was used
> to kill thousands of Americans, people would have asked him, " 'You had
> a manager that went to Baghdad; you had Osama bin Laden, who had
> funded, at least the corporation, and you had traces of [VX precursor]
> and you did what? And you did nothing?' Is that a responsible activity
> on the part of the secretary of defense?"
>
> But hey... Bush lied, right?
>
> More to come, but not here on the wreck. I'll post a link that people
> can follow when I've finished. But what with work, golf and SWMBOs
> coffee table, it's taking a bit longer than expected.
>
> djb
Oops... here's another, and if you can't believe the NYT...
<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/25/politics/25TERR.html?ex=1088740800&en
=ffec5d72643beac1&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE>
Iraqis, Seeking Foes of Saudis, Contacted bin Laden, File Says
By THOM SHANKER
Published: June 25, 2004
WASHINGTON, June 24 Ñ Contacts between Iraqi intelligence agents and
Osama bin Laden when he was in Sudan in the mid-1990's were part of a
broad effort by Baghdad to work with organizations opposing the Saudi
ruling family, according to a newly disclosed document obtained by the
Americans in Iraq.
Dave, Dave, Dave.
Haven't you got it by now. No one who gripes about what is going
on with the current administration cares if St. Bill Clinton said or
did the same things.
Hate Bush. Hate Cheney is all that matters to them.
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:250620041948151808%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> I know we've all had enough of the political arguments but I said I was
> compiling evidence (at the request of a couple of wreckers who
> disagreed with me but wanted to have a rational discussion -- I know,
> not the "Norm" around here) and this tidbit just arrived courtesy of
> the Washington Post...
>
> <http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm>
>
> "Clinton first linked al Qaeda to Saddam"
>
> Excerpts...
>
> "In fact, during President Clinton's eight years in office, there were
> at least two official pronouncements of an alarming alliance between
> Baghdad and al Qaeda. One came from William S. Cohen, Mr. Clinton's
> defense secretary. He cited an al Qaeda-Baghdad link to justify the
> bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan. "
>
> and
>
> "The other pronouncement is contained in a Justice Department
> indictment on Nov. 4, 1998, charging bin Laden with murder in the
> bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
> The indictment disclosed a close relationship between al Qaeda and
> Saddam's regime, which included specialists on chemical weapons and all
> types of bombs, including truck bombs, a favorite weapon of terrorists.
>
> The 1998 indictment said: "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with
> the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran
> and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working
> together against their perceived 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."
>
> and
>
> "He said that if the plant had been allowed to produce VX that was used
> to kill thousands of Americans, people would have asked him, " 'You had
> a manager that went to Baghdad; you had Osama bin Laden, who had
> funded, at least the corporation, and you had traces of [VX precursor]
> and you did what? And you did nothing?' Is that a responsible activity
> on the part of the secretary of defense?"
>
> But hey... Bush lied, right?
>
> More to come, but not here on the wreck. I'll post a link that people
> can follow when I've finished. But what with work, golf and SWMBOs
> coffee table, it's taking a bit longer than expected.
>
> djb
Don't you and the other rec'ers have friends over for dinner to have these
discussion.
BTW I've heard the tapes of Clinton discussing the Saudi's offer of Osama
being offered up so we could of had him them
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:250620041952214310%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> Oops... here's another, and if you can't believe the NYT...
>
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/25/politics/25TERR.html?ex=1088740800&en
> =ffec5d72643beac1&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE>
>
> Iraqis, Seeking Foes of Saudis, Contacted bin Laden, File Says
> By THOM SHANKER
>
> Published: June 25, 2004
>
> WASHINGTON, June 24 Ñ Contacts between Iraqi intelligence agents and
> Osama bin Laden when he was in Sudan in the mid-1990's were part of a
> broad effort by Baghdad to work with organizations opposing the Saudi
> ruling family, according to a newly disclosed document obtained by the
> Americans in Iraq.