please explain to me

[MrCoffee]

What Iraq has to do with 911? If you can answer that, you win a million dollas!

[Sandman]

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by MrCoffee
What Iraq has to do with 911? If you can answer that, you win a million dollas!

One occurs there annually.

Email me and let me know how to pick up my prize.

[lazs2]

It's like trying to explain what a gay little pony tail and living in aptos have in common.   We know the tie in exists it's just hard to explain.

lazs

[eagl]

See, here's how it goes.

We've known for a long time that the islamists are going to have to be dealt with eventually.  We wait and wait, and then they come to the US and blow up some buildings and kill a lot of people.  This gives us an excuse to go kill them OUTSIDE the US.  See, that's the important part.  They are a problem because they have no desire to co-exist with us and the only way to convince them to stop killing us is to kill them first.  But US taxpayers and voters get queasy at the sight of blood, so it's better to go kill them somewhere else, and 911 clued us in that if we don't go kill them "over there", they'll come here and kill us.

So.  We go "over there" to Afghanistan and wipe out the islamists who helped the islamists who came here to kill us, but we realize rather quickly that it's a fairly long walk to get to Afghanistan (or any 'stan for that matter), so our long-term dollar per dead islamist cost is going to be high.  In fact, the only really easy targets in Afghanistan are the farmers who return to making opium.  And although the war on drugs has seniority over the war on terrorism, congress didn't authorize the army to go hunting poppy farmers.

Where was I?  Oh yea.  Finding a good place "over there" to kill islamists before they organize and come here to kill us.

So, what's a good place to attract the densest population of islamists to keep them too busy to come to the US to kill us?  Remember the goal is to keep taxpayer voters from getting queasy.  Oh yea, there's Iraq.  Nobody likes Iraq.  The Saudis and Iranians don't like them because they're not religious enough, and everyone else in the region has some reason to either covet or hate Iraq.  So while they may not help us, they won't really do anything to stop us if we go into Iraq.  So we do.  We depose Saddam Hussein who was a rather moderate secular leader compared to historical ruthless dictators, and immediately the islamists start to flood into Iraq to further their own goals.  Some come to kill other Arabs because they don't follow the exact same radical islamist directives, some come as a show of support to Hussein, some come to try to influence the future of Iraq, but an awful lot of them come to fight Americans.

See how that goes?  Instead of coming to the US to fight Americans, we've tricked them into coming to Iraq to fight us.  And in Iraq, we can generally shoot back without the average taxpayer/voter getting queasy.  Plus no American civilians get killed except for those stupid enough to travel to Iraq for fun and/or profit.

American troops realize that we're probably going to have to fight these people sooner or later, so given a choice it's preferrable to shoot them somewhere other than in the US because the ROE is easier to comply with "over there".

So you see, it's all part of a logical plan, and Mr/Mrs Smith down the street don't get blown up and don't have to see fighting inside US borders.

Next up, the United States turns it's eye towards Mexico.  It starts with speeches about how we either have to deal with this problem within our borders or deal with the problem BEFORE it gets in the country...

[lazs2]

eagl....you are of course right but mine was more amusing.

lazs

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by MrCoffee
What Iraq has to do with 911? If you can answer that, you win a million dollas!

Most 911s use fuel that may or may not come from Iraq


Do i win?

[Hangtime]

well done, gentlemen!

Now, when do we get to play with the Iranians? And; can we play with the BIG toys this time?

[Ripsnort]

The Saddam Dossiers are being translated as we type.  THe press has chose to ignore these (Stored at the National War Archieves) because it could mean that they were wrong about this war.

Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
Friday, June 16, 2006
By Ray Robison
 PHOTOS
   
Click image to enlarge
STORIES  ARCHIVE
•Documenting Saddam's Link to Terror•Full-page "Saddam Dossier" Archive
Prologue | Translation | Analysis

Prologue:

Did Saddam Hussein's inner circle and the Taliban rulers in Afghanistan actively court each other in hopes of forging an anti-American alliance in the region?

Ray Robison, a former member of the CIA-directed Iraq Survey Group (ISG), examined efforts by Saddam Hussein to build and hide weapons of mass destruction, and supervised a group of linguists to analyze, archive and exploit documents and materials of Saddam's regime.

Click here for more on Ray Robison and the Saddam Dossier

In this second of a three-part examination of a newly-released document captured in Iraq, Robison offers further evidence that in 1999 the Taliban welcomed "Islamic relations with Iraq" to mediate among the Taliban, the Northern Alliance and Russia, and that the Taliban reciprocated with an invitation to Iraqi officials to visit Afghanistan.

The document appears to be a notebook kept by an Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) agent, and apparently captured in 2003. The translation is provided by Robison's associate, known here as “Sammi.” The notebook deals extensively with the meetings between a prominent Taliban supporter and former Saddam regime officials.

 
It is highly probable that the man in this meeting is Fazlur Rahman, a Pakistani cleric described in an article from the BBC Profile: Maulana Fazlur Rahman as “A pro-Taliban cleric in Pakistan... one of the two main contenders for the post of the country's prime minister.” The BBC also said “Maulana Fazlur Rahman… is known for his close ties to Afghanistan's ousted Taliban regime.”

Part One of the Saddam Dossier appeared to chronicle Rahman's meeting with Taha Yassin Ramadan, the then-vice president of Iraq and Saddam's chief enforcer. Part Two describes a meeting with an unidentified Iraqi official referred to as “M.O.M.,” who possibly is Tahir Jalil Habbush al Tikriti, the director of the IIS. This translation refers to the previous meeting of Maulana Fazlur Rahman and Ramadan. It also mentions a future meeting between the Maulana and Saddam Hussein. A second document captured in Afghanistan seems to confirm that a relationship existed between Saddam and the Maulana. The document is posted under the identifying Harmony number AFGP-2002-601693 at the West Point Terrorism Center.

Part One's translation from this notebook indicated that the Taliban under the leadership of Mullah Omar was seeking Iraq's support in mediating with Russia and the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. This translation reveals that the Saddam regime had expectations of assistance from the Taliban, and that the two agreed to a secret intelligence relationship. The Iraqi official tells the Maulana that they want the Taliban to support Iraq against U.S. actions. They also discuss their common enemy: the United States.

Also mentioned in the notebook is Fazlur Rahman Khalil, a Pakistani Taliban leader and Al Qaeda associate, who does not appear to be present at this meeting. The notebook mentions Rahman Khalil on page 72, at the bottom of a list of Islamic clerics coming to Iraq: “Very important: Fazlur Rahman Khalil: Leader of the Ansar Movement. Does not have a position inside Pakistan but inside Afghanistan and Kashmir.” Khalil was a co-signatory of the infamous Usama bin Laden 1998 fatwa against the U.S.

Sammi adds notes for clarity in parenthesis.

▪ Translator’s notes: The notebook is 76 pages. The notebook belongs to someone called Khaled Abd El Majid, and covers events taking place in 1999.

▪ The second meeting occurs on Nov. 28, 1999. This is the translation of the second meeting.

Translation:

Translation for ISGP-2003-0001412 follows (PDF):

Meeting of Mr. M.O.M. with Sheikh Maulana Fazlur Rahman on Sunday, 11/28, 7:45 PM

Words of welcoming.

Probably M.O.M.: We are aiming to arrange a meeting between you and Mr. President Leader (translator’s note: this is how Iraqi officials refer to Saddam). But in the beginning we were instructed that Mr. Vice-President will meet you. I personally met Hekmatyar (translator’s note: an Afghani warlord fighting the Taliban) and he asked us to interfere for the possibility of closer relations with the Taliban. And he sent us emissaries concerning this issue.

Fazlur Rahman: I am the one who started with this issue, the relation between Taliban and Iraq, and it is our idea. The brothers in Afghanistan are facing the pressure of America, and are struggling against America and aim to have some connections between Afghanistan and Iraq, and it is a good start to establish the relations with Iraq and Libya and our association has taken this responsibility upon her. I already met with Mr. the Vice-President and the previous head of the directorate, may God rest his soul (translator’s note: apparently the head of the directorate passed away) and both proposed that Hekmatyar and the Taliban should get to an agreement. I spoke with the Taliban about this issue and they started meeting with delegations from the Islamic Party, and I met Mullah Omar and his reply was positive.

As a party, our stand is that there should be an agreement between the Taliban and the rest of the opposition, Shah Ahmad Massoud and Rabbani. And Mullah Omar said that we are looking towards this and that (not clear) and (not clear) and Ahmad Al Kilani and Jalal Al Din Hakkani do not oppose us. Therefore, Hekmatyar is on the positive way but we are in a war situation and that needs a lot of trust, and there are hurdles to this because he fought us and killed us and he has problems with the opposition in the North and with us. After repeated contacts we will reach an agreement, but in the form of steps. Concerning the relations with Iraq, he said that they are our brothers and Muslims and are facing pressures from America, like us and like Sudan and Libya. And he (Mullah Omar) desires to get closer relations with Iraq and that Iraq may help us in reducing our problems. Now we are facing America and Russia. He requested the possibility of Iraq intervening to build a friendship with Russia since Russia is no more the number one enemy. And we request Iraq’s help from a brotherly point of view. They are ready for this matter and they prefer that the relation between Iraq and Taliban be an independent relation from Hekmatyar’s relation with the Taliban. We want practical steps concerning this issue and especially the relationship with the Taliban and (not clear, but could be Iraq).

cont.

[Ripsnort]

An Iraqi, most probably M.O.M.: I want to discuss three points.

The first is the relation with Taliban. It should be understood that this issue is completely independent from the mediation requested by Hekmatyar to get to an agreement with the Taliban. Developing the relation with Taliban is essential and this development requires meetings to create a common ground of understanding. We already believe that there are no points of disagreement between us and the Taliban because we are both in one trench facing the world’s oppression. But the details of the relation and its management are linked to the facts of the international situation. I find that by simply meeting with you (Fazlur Rahman) is a step forward in the relation with Taliban because we know well how much they trust you and what you represent for them. And when you relay our point of view for them they will understand it. For the future we think that we will arrange relations between us, as an intelligence service, and them in a secret way to establish the strong base of this relation. In the meeting (translator’s note: future meeting) and after reviewing the Taliban’s point of view, we would discuss the possibility of us making an effort to stabilize the situation between Taliban and Russia. We could discuss the subject through the intelligence channel. We look forward to security and stability in Afghanistan, the control of the Taliban and the construction of a political system according to the political and ideological choices of the Taliban. We look forward to assure the Russians that Afghanistan does not constitute a threat to Russia. Afghanistan is a country that wants to live in independence and by dialogue it is possible to reach common grounds to finally get to the result hoped for.

The second point is the subject of the agreement between Hekmatyar and the Taliban.

We proposed it for a single reason related to our psychological stand concerning Taliban. We hope that they will win and control. We felt that Hekmatyar hopes that Taliban will control the situation and his intentions are true. Because when he sees the different political and military parties in Afghanistan he knows that the best choice is Taliban.

(translator’s note: the Iraqi continues to expand his view on how all parties should come together through trust and negotiations.)

The third point which is important for us is outside Afghanistan. It is the spiritual relation which ties us with the Association of Islamic Scholars and we know your role in supporting the Iraqi cause and the effect you have on the Pakistani street. In the coming two weeks we are going to a confrontation with America because the U.S. has put all its weight in the Security Council to publish the Dutch-British resolution. We refuse this resolution and view it as a life-long embargo. We look to our Muslim brothers in particular to support us and especially our brothers in the Association of Islamic Scholars to organize protests in Pakistan against the resolution when it is made official. We ask our Muslim brothers in Pakistan to do this effort. We are trying and we have contacts with Muslims all over Asia and especially in Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh and India. We hope that during the two coming weeks you will ask our friends in those associations to demonstrate.

Fazlur Rahman: Concerning the relations between the Taliban and Iraq I was informed that they are going to start those relations in a secret manner and they are waiting for the answer and I will inform them that you will answer them through the embassy (translator’s note: could be through the Iraqi embassy of Kabul, if they had one, or Islamabad in Pakistan). Concerning the agreement with Hekmatyar, we are going to proceed with this issue. Concerning the third point, the Association of Islamic Scholars has a popular voice in Pakistan and we will always side with Iraq and we hope that the new government will have a positive stand with Iraq.

Last July we received information that America wants to attack Afghanistan because of Usama bin Laden so we did a (not clear) and agreed to contact the Taliban to be sure and they said it was true. We received information about CIA and U.S. commandos reaching the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and they started dropping bombs on Afghanistan and they used the Pakistani airfields to bomb important positions in Kandahar. We as a Muslim people do not accept the American presence on our soil. A representative from the U.S. embassy came and told me, “You said that America was your enemy, how can you say that we are your enemy and the enemy of Islam?” So I told them that you took Russia’s role in bombing Afghanistan and you are bombing Muslims. Then they said that they wanted Usama so I told them that Usama is in Sudan and that he was in Afghanistan during the rule of Rabbani and I added that they do not have a treaty to hand over criminals, as they pretend, with Afghanistan.

End Translation

Analysis:

Note the Iraqi official says, “We hope that they will win and control,” referring to the Taliban. According to this notebook, Iraq has clearly thrown its support to the Taliban, the epicenter of Islamic Jihad. This is a clear indication that Saddam had no problem working with Jihadists outside of Iraq.

According to the notebook, the Iraqi official also tells the Maulana: “The third point which is important for us is outside Afghanistan. It is the spiritual relation which ties us with the Association of Islamic Scholars and we know your role in supporting the Iraqi cause and the effect you have on the Pakistani street.” This statement may indicate that a previous relationship was in place before this meeting between the Saddam Regime and the Maulana.

This excerpt from the notebook indicates that both the Taliban and Saddam Regime agreed to a secret relationship involving intelligence services. We do not know the scope or extent of that operational relationship, but this notebook and other documents give us further clues. It might well be noted that if Saddam Hussein was merely looking for an Islamic voice to take up his cause, there are plenty of Arab and Muslim organizations that do not depend on violence and terrorism directed at the United States. This point is illustrated in the BBC article Anger and Dismay in South Asia:

"Saddam Hussein is a hero of Muslims," a protester cried at a rally in the northwestern city of Peshawar, AFP reports."We want the government to give us permission to go to Iraq to fight against the U.S. forces," another protester told hundreds of supporters.Supporters of the Islamic Jamaat-i-Islami party assembled in the eastern city of Lahore, chanting "Bush is a dog," and "Save Iraqi children," AFP reports."America has signed its own death warrant," Islamist leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman said.

[Ripsnort]

Since the Iraqi official in this meeting is not named, we can not be certain with whom the Maulana is meeting. But there are clues. First, it is clear Rahman has high level access and would most likely be meeting with a senior member of the government, a department head. This official talks about an intelligence based relationship indicating this might be the chief of the IIS, the former Iraq Intelligence Service. The Maulana says, “I already met with Mr. the Vice President and the previous head of the directorate, may God rest his soul”. This may indicate he is speaking to the current head of the directorate. An excerpt from the website Global Security provides insight:

One killing believed to be politically motivated included that of Intelligence Chief Rafa Daham Mujawwal Al-Tikriti, Saddam Hussein's second cousin and the former Iraqi ambassador to Turkey. Rafa died Oct. 11, 1999, three days after he was removed from his post. Government explanations for his death included both that he had died in a car crash and that he had suffered a heart attack

So it seems possible the IIS Chief died just prior to this meeting and the Maulana is meeting with the new IIS chief. The new IIS chief would have been Tahir Jalil Habbush al Tikriti, who according to the Multi-National Forces' Iraq Web site as of January, 2006 is still listed as “at large.” Of course, if he has not been captured, it is reasonable to assume he has not been interrogated.

Tahir Jalil Habbush al Tikriti came to public attention in December, 2003 when the Telegraph UK reported Terrorist Behind September 11th Strike was Trained by Saddam.

Details of Atta's visit to the Iraqi capital in the summer of 2001, just weeks before he launched the most devastating terrorist attack in U.S. history, are contained in a top secret memo written to Saddam Hussein, the then Iraqi president, by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service.

The handwritten memo, a copy of which has been obtained exclusively by the Telegraph, is dated July 1, 2001 and provides a short resume of a three-day "work programme" Atta had undertaken at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad.

In the memo, Habbush reports that Atta "displayed extraordinary effort" and demonstrated his ability to lead the team that would be "responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy".

Atta, of course, led the 9/11 attacks. It is interesting to note in this new context of an intelligence based relationship between the Taliban and Saddam regime, orchestrated by Pakistani contacts, specifically Maulana Rahman, that the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a Pakistani passport holder arrested in Pakistan in 2003. It also is worth noting that Mustapha Ahmed al-Hawsawi, who officials say sent cash to lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta, also was arrested in Pakistan with Khalid. Both of these men were arrested in the home of or a member of Pakistan's largest religious political party, Jamaat Islami, of which Maulana Fazlur Rahman is a leader. A further translation from this notebook indicates that in another meeting, again believed to be with the Maulana, joint military training between the Taliban and the Iraqi military is proposed.
Due to the information provided in this notebook, we see a possible secret, intelligence based, operational relationship between the Taliban and the Saddam regime via Maulana Fazlur Rahman. We can discern that the Maulana most likely is meeting with Habbush al Tikriti, implicated in documents published by the Telegraph newspaper in reference to the training of Atta in Iraq. We also have an annotation that indicates Pakistani Fazlur Rahman Khalil, a known bin Laden associate, Al Qaeda terrorist and a 1998 fatwa co-signatory, also was traveling to Iraq in 1999. A further translation from this notebook indicates that in another meeting, again with the Maulana, the Taliban proposes joint military training with the Iraqi military.

source

[Stringer]

Forget the Press, why hasn't the Admin put this out in a big way?

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Stringer
Forget the Press, why hasn't the Admin put this out in a big way?

Because Americans are infactuated with unfound WMD, never mind that it was a brilliant idea to bring the war on terror to their house...

[Airscrew]

My Dad sent me this the other day and I havent really checked any of it out or hit up Snopes yet but it sounds logical to me

Email starts here:
Although this article states that  USN Capt Ouinette gave this speech "last month" I think it was given about 4-5 years ago since I had a copy of it received in about those years except for the comments, below, preceding it.  It nevertheless still rings quite true today.  I checked on this and the speech was given in 2002 and 2003.

WW-III Started in 1979

This is not very long, but very informative You have to read the catalogue of events in this brief piece. Then, ask yourself how anyone can take the position that all we have to do is bring our troops home from Iraq, sit back, reset the snooze alarm, go back to sleep, and no one will ever bother us again. In case you missed it, World War III began in November 1979... That alarm has been ringing for years US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida. Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so necessary.

 AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September  2001 (When more than 3,000 Americans were killed) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.
It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign U. S. Embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 25 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism.

America's military had been decimated and down sized/right sized since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.
Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil continued.

In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut When it explodes, it kills 63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.

Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.

Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait , and America continues her slumber.

 The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.

 Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid.

 Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually attacked.
Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed.

 The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in1988, killing 259.

Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war.

The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder.
The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America . In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

 The following month, February 1993 , a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.
Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.

 A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively.

They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.. These attacks were planned with precision. They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.
The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000 , when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.

And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this was the first attack against US or in America . How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.

 In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every high officials in government over what they knew and what they didn't know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979.
I think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has been changed forever.. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to keep hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back to sleep.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said "... it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.

This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year. This is an AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come.
If you believe in this please forward it to as many people as you can especially to the young people and all those who dozed off in history class and who seem so quick to protest such a necessary military action. If you don't believe it, just delete it  --  and go back to sleep.

[Debonair]

i think 'the press' assisinated kennedy & covered it up too.
its a much more likely explanation that is almost entirely overlooked.
zOMG!!!! probably 'teh press' kills anyone who writes about it