Sunday, November 06, 2005
The New York Times Warps Space and Time
Douglas Jehl breathlessly reports that the Bush Administration knew that Al Qaeda operative Ibn Sheikh al Libi was lying about Iraqi support for Al Qaeda months before we went to war, and used that information anyway in building the case for war.
But according to the Times' own timeline, the CIA did not see fit to retract intelligence reports based on his testimony until January 2004.
I guess Time runs backwards in New York.
The Times story does not mention , Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, illegal missile technology, yellowcake, unnaccounted for WMD stockpiles, aluminum tubes, 10,000 dollar checks to families of Palestinian terrorists, chemical factories in Sudan, the fact that Hussein offered support and succor to Zarqawi prior to the war, nor the fact that Saddam was harboring one of the prime suspects in the Al Qaeda-linked 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. The Times article also makes no mention of the fact that Ansar al Islam was able to operate unmolested in brigade strength in Northern Iraq, making it the largest Al Qaeda formation in the world in early 2003 - each one of these items corroborates the hypothesis that there were a number of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Indeed, the 9/11 commissioners upheld that very notion. "There were all kinds of ties, all kinds of connections," said one commissioner on national TV.
From the article:
Well, unless the agreement came as part of a non-aggression pact between Saddam and Al Qaeda. The fact that Al Qaeda actually targeted nearly every other secular regime in the region except Saddam's would lend circumstantial support to that argument.
Why would Al Qaeda attack Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Morrocco, the Northern Alliance, Pakistan, Indonesia, Tanzania, and Bali, and miraculously give Hussein a free pass?
If you can't smell a deal, you need to take the cotton balls out of your nose.
The bottom line: Even if the New York Times was able to reveal al-Libi as the frigging Orthodox Pope, there is still a good deal of evidence linking Al Qaeda and Iraq, and the Times fails to put any of this in perspective.
Splash, out
Jason
But according to the Times' own timeline, the CIA did not see fit to retract intelligence reports based on his testimony until January 2004.
I guess Time runs backwards in New York.
The Times story does not mention , Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, illegal missile technology, yellowcake, unnaccounted for WMD stockpiles, aluminum tubes, 10,000 dollar checks to families of Palestinian terrorists, chemical factories in Sudan, the fact that Hussein offered support and succor to Zarqawi prior to the war, nor the fact that Saddam was harboring one of the prime suspects in the Al Qaeda-linked 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. The Times article also makes no mention of the fact that Ansar al Islam was able to operate unmolested in brigade strength in Northern Iraq, making it the largest Al Qaeda formation in the world in early 2003 - each one of these items corroborates the hypothesis that there were a number of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Indeed, the 9/11 commissioners upheld that very notion. "There were all kinds of ties, all kinds of connections," said one commissioner on national TV.
From the article:
“Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements,’’ the D.I.A. report said in one of two declassified paragraphs. “Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.’’
Well, unless the agreement came as part of a non-aggression pact between Saddam and Al Qaeda. The fact that Al Qaeda actually targeted nearly every other secular regime in the region except Saddam's would lend circumstantial support to that argument.
Why would Al Qaeda attack Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Morrocco, the Northern Alliance, Pakistan, Indonesia, Tanzania, and Bali, and miraculously give Hussein a free pass?
If you can't smell a deal, you need to take the cotton balls out of your nose.
The bottom line: Even if the New York Times was able to reveal al-Libi as the frigging Orthodox Pope, there is still a good deal of evidence linking Al Qaeda and Iraq, and the Times fails to put any of this in perspective.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
Post a Comment
