Again, There was no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq before the war.
[QUOTE] Bin Laden, who views the rigid Saudi theocracy as insufficiently Islamic, has long considered Saddam Hussein an infidel enemy. Before Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, Bin Laden warned publicly that the Iraqi dictator had designs on conquering Saudi Arabia. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, Bin Laden offered to assemble his mujahedeen to battle Hussein and protect the Arabian peninsula.
Last summer, when CNN acquired a cache of internal Al Qaeda training videotapes, they discovered a Qaeda documentary that was highly critical of Hussein. Peter Bergen, the CNN terrorism expert who interviewed Bin Laden in 1998, noted that Bin Laden indicted Hussein, as "a bad Muslim."
That theme continues in the latest "Bin Laden" audiotape, released to Al Jazeera. In it, Bin Laden (or someone claiming to be him) urges Muslims to fight the American "crusaders" bent on invading Iraq. But even while urging assistance to Hussein's "socialist" regime, "Bin Laden" can't resist condemning that regime: "The jurisdiction of the socialists and those rulers has fallen a long time ago. Socialists are infidels wherever they are, whether they are in Baghdad or Aden."[/QUOTE][url]http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3017[/url]
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2751019.stm[/url]
The Baath party, which Saddam Hussein was the leader, was a secular socialist party. They where hated by Al Qaeda. They did not promote religion. Within the government there where Christians, Sunni and Shia. For example Deputy Prime Minister Tareq Aziz was Christian.
[QUOTE] “For example, of the eight top Iraqi leaders who in early 1988 sat with Husayn on the Revolutionary Command Council--Iraq's highest governing body-- three were Arab Shias (of whom one had served as Minister of Interior), three were Arab Sunnis, one was an Arab Christian, and one a Kurd. On the Regional Command Council--the ruling body of the party--Shias actually predominated. During the war, a number of highly competent Shia officers have been promoted to corps commanders. The general who turned back the initial Iranian invasions of Iraq in 1982 was a Shia.” [/QUOTE]
From [url]http://countrystudies.us/iraq/38.htm[/url]
The Baath Party was Secular, and was fearful of religious extremist.
Even The Joint Forces Command could not find a link, after a big investigation.
[QUOTE]
The report released by the Joint Forces Command five years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq said it found no "smoking gun" after reviewing about 600,000 Iraqi documents captured in the invasion and looking at interviews of key Iraqi leadership held by the United States, Pentagon officials said.
The assessment of the al Qaeda connection and the insistence that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction were two primary elements in the Bush administration's arguments in favor of going to war with Iraq.
The Pentagon's report also contradicts then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who said in September 2002 that the CIA provided "bulletproof" evidence demonstrating "that there are, in fact, al Qaeda in Iraq."
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/[/url]
Bush on youtube admits no link with 9-11
BUSH: The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.
QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with it?
BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
QUESTION: The attack on the World Trade Center.
BUSH: Nothing. Except it’s part of — and nobody has suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody’s ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdlEcFfYZ2k[/url]
I don't understand why people keep say that Iraq was involved with the September 11 attack, or with Al Qaeda. Saddam distrusted religious extremist, and even when he was captured, he had with him order to his people, to work with the mujahedeen, but not to trust them. So when he was on the run, and needed help, he still feared the religious extremist.
What shall it be Food for thought or fuel for the fire?
You decide,
[I][b]“So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.
When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in.
When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed.
When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said 'Praise the Lord.'
And when the young leader said, 'I will be for change and I'll bring you change,' everyone yelled, 'Viva Fidel!' But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner's guns went silent the people's guns had been taken away.
By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed.
By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him.
By the time the change was finally implemented Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status.
By the time the change was over more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the MOST fortunate Cubans.
Luckily, we would never fall in America for a young leader who promised change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America?
Would we...?”[/i][/b]
