Friday, March 14, 2008

Bush lied

goes the familiar refrain of the anti-war Left, and like the also bad joke, that has been their story and they have stuck to it. I have never cared one way or another. Iraq under Saddam's rule was a snake pit that needed cleaning. Not just because it violated every rule of modern civilization, because I knew, as any reasonable person would that if Saddam had no WMD's he was, as David Kay reported to Congress, very busy attempting to get back into the business. Plus:

With regard to delivery systems, the ISG team has discovered sufficient evidence to date to conclude that the Iraqi regime was committed to delivery system improvements that would have, if OIF had not occurred, dramatically breached UN restrictions placed on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War.
Detainees and co-operative sources indicate that beginning in 2000 Saddam ordered the development of ballistic missiles with ranges of at least 400km and up to 1000km and that measures to conceal these projects from UNMOVIC were initiated in late-2002, ahead of the arrival of inspectors. Work was also underway for a clustered engine liquid propellant missile, and it appears the work had progressed to a point to support initial prototype production of some parts and assemblies.


Why would you want a delivery system if you aren't going to have something to deliver?

Common sense also told me that Saddam hated the US because we had stopped his move to take over the Arabian Peninsula. This made him a perfect example of doing business with any variety of terrorist under the "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" rule. For further examples see WWII and the US-Soviet-English cooperation.

And I wasn't unique in that belief. Let's see what Fitzgerald (yes THE Fitzgerald) told the 9/11 Commission.

FITZGERALD: And the question of relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda is an interesting one. I don't have information post-2001 when I got involved in a trial, and I don't have information post-September 11th. I can tell you what led to that inclusion in that sealed indictment in May and then when we superseded, which meant we broadened the charges in the Fall, we dropped that language.

We understood there was a very, very intimate relationship between al Qaeda and the Sudan. They worked hand in hand. We understood there was a working relationship with Iran and Hezbollah, and they shared training. We also understood that there had been antipathy between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein because Saddam Hussein was not viewed as being religious.

We did understand from people, including al-Fadl -- and my recollection is that he would have described this most likely in public at the trial that we had, but I can't tell you that for sure; that was a few years ago -- that at a certain point they decided that they wouldn't work against each other and that we believed a fellow in al Qaeda named Mondu Saleem (ph), Abu Harzai (ph) the Iraqi, tried to reach a, sort of, understanding where they wouldn't work against each other. Sort of, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.


Now we have more proof:

An Iraqi of that name, Carney knew, had been present at an al Qaeda summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on January 5-8, 2000. U.S. intelligence officials believe this was a chief planning meeting for the September 11 attacks


And then we have the inclusion of Iraqi's Foreign Service.

More curious, Shakir's Iraqi embassy contact controlled his schedule, telling him when to show up for work and when to take a day off.

A greeter typically meets VIPs upon arrival and accompanies them through the sometimes onerous procedures of foreign travel. Shakir was instructed to work on January 5, 2000, and on that day, he escorted one Khalid al Mihdhar from his plane to a waiting car. Rather than bid his guest farewell at that point, as a greeter typically would have, Shakir climbed into the car with al Mihdhar and accompanied him to the Kuala Lumpur condominium of Yazid Sufaat, the American-born al Qaeda terrorist who hosted the planning meeting.

So why was he there if Iraq wasn't involved?

Of course none of this will satisfy the Left. Dedicated to the principle that all problems atre caused by the US, and with special hatred of Bush, they wouldn't believe a video take of Hussein signing a treaty with al-Qaida while proclaiming eternal love and support, even though, in their heart of hearts, have to know that Hussein was cooperating, but was far too smart to sign a treaty or make proclamations.

That's just who they are.

No comments:

Post a Comment