Monday, September 04, 2006

But.. but... but.. how can that be possible? 
How can this be?

After his arrest, al-Saeedi said Al Qaeda in Iraq was cooperating with supporters of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein "in the fields of exchanging information and logistic support," the security adviser said.

But Saddam's was a secular regime! I thought it was ontologically impossible for Saddam to find common cause with jihadists! The dumbest, most gullible people on the left promised me so!

I'll buy a beer for the first MSM journo who calls Richard Clarke for a comment.

Splash, out


Did he say this before, during or after he was tortured?
He said it after seeing the Southpark film, but before watching Geena Davis' cancelled "First Womyn President" series. So it was really in the middle of an excruciating torture session.
Or maybe he said it in the middle of a waterboarding session. Or while being stuffed headfirst into a sleeping bag and being suffocated. Or after being beaten and crucified on the bars of his cell. Or while being fucked with a chemlight.

See, that's the problem when you use torture. Nothing is believable.
No matter what he was watching during the "interrogation", he said it in the present, about a present day cooperation.

He did not say it before the invasion. So it can not in all honesty be used as proof positive for an Al Qaeda/Saddam link or justification for an invasion.

To suggest that present cooperations between Al-Qaeda and former Ba'athist is an indication of the past would be like using the fact that we trained the Muhajadeen in the first place, or the KGB's use of terrorism as proof that we and the Russions are responsbile for our own world in the present. And that would just be wrong wouldn't it.

Do I believe that there is a real creditable link? Probably. Do I consider it holy grail? Of course not. That is how the big boys play. That is how we played the game in the 80's and 90's. That is how the Soviets played the game in the '70's and '80's. And that is how Iraq played the game...and how Iran plays the game. Proxies. Making deals with what ever group you can use to further your own ends...for for the cheapest price.

In the end...the "cooperation" Al-Qaeda in Iraq and former Ba'athist fighters is a present reality of multiple groups all sharing the same goals in regards to our strategic mission in Iraq, not an indication of anything prior to our invasion of the country.
A close reading will reveal that I am in no way claiming that the notion that jihadists and Saddam loyalists are now making common cause is "proof positive" of an Al Qaeda/Saddam link. There is ample evidence that Al Qaeda and Saddam had a number of contacts going back years prior to the war, and that evidence stands or falls on its own merits and does not rely on this guy's statements.

It does, however, soundly discredit the oft-cited impossibility that Al Qaeda radical jihadists would ever cooperate with a secular muslim dictator.

Now, one would have to take as a postulate that what we are hearing from the source is reasonably accurate. So far I'm not seeing any reason to believe it's not, and it dovetails with what we know about Izzat Ibrahim Al-Duri's activities, both before and after Saddam's fall.

But the argument that AQ and Saddam could never have cooperated crumbles upon any examination.
If there is to be "close examination," how about the idea that the U.S. went to war not because of WMD or "human rights," or even oil, but because of the influence of a fifth column of neo-cons in the U.S. who were bent on using American might to protect Israel's borders?

That's a thesis that will never be discussed in either the U.S. media or in Congress, both of which are AIPAC territory.
Oh, and Jason you lyin' fucktard bastard (words from your website) how about this from your wingnut Congress's own Intelligence Committee? I mean, if they couldn't find a way to rubber-stamp Bush's lie, it must be a problem.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 — The Senate Intelligence Committee said today that there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein had prewar ties to Al Qaeda and one of the terror organization’s most notorious members, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

The report, sure to intensify the debates over terrorism and the Iraq war before the November elections, contains dozens of pages of findings about the former Baghdad dictator and the terrorists who plotted and carried out the Sept. 11 attacks, and finds that they had little in common.

“Saddam only expressed negative sentiments about bin Laden,” the former Iraqi foreign minister, Tariq Aziz, told the Federal Bureau of Investigation when he was asked about Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda’s leader.

As for the cliché that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” Saddam Hussein has told interrogators since his capture in December 2003 that his government had not cooperated with Mr. bin Laden. “He specified that if he wanted to cooperate with the enemies of the U.S., he would have allied with North Korea or China,” says a passage in the nearly 400-page report.

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Meter

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!