Replies to post #67 on FREEBIRD (FREEb)

[ergo sum]

Hey I think we made Phil's day.

We should eatch for it to see if it comes back up.

[BullNBear52]

Ask Condi's deputy. He keeps popping up in the news lately.

Shortly after the Bush Administration took office in January 2001, the National Security Council undertook a review of existing policy for dealing with Al Qaeda. In response to written Joint Inquiry questions, Deputy National Security Adviser Steve Hadley explained: "The Administration took the Al Qaeda threat seriously and, from the outset, began considering a major shift in United States counterterrorism policy." From the first days of the Bush Administration through September 2001, it conducted a senior-level review of policy for dealing with Al Qaeda. The goal was to move beyond the policy of containment, criminal prosecution, and limited retaliation for specific attacks, toward attempting to "roll back" Al Qaeda. The new goal was to eliminate completely the ability of Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups of global reach to conduct terrorist attacks against the United States. . . . Between May and the end of July 2001, four Deputies Committee meetings were held directly related to the regional issues which had to be resolved in order to adopt a more aggressive strategy for dealing with Al Qaeda. These meetings focused on [ ]. This new policy might have produced a coordinated government response to the bin Laden threat or put the nation on more of a war footing with Al Qaeda before Sept. 11. However, as Mr. Hadley noted, "The administration finalized its review of policy on Al Qaeda at an N.S.C. Principals Committee meeting on Sept. 4, 2001." President Bush had not reviewed the draft policy before Sept. 11.

Hmmm, from July to Sept. Must be nice to take the summer off.

Hello Condi? Did you enjoy your vacation?

[ergo sum]

IRAQ
Bush: Mission will be long
President warns that U.S. role will be 'massive and long-term'
Tom Bowman
The Baltimore Sun
http://www.thesunlink.com/redesign/2003-07-02/nationworld/191426.shtml
"Among these terrorists are members of the Ansar al-Islam, which operated in Iraq before the war and now is active in the Sunni heartland of the country," Bush said. "We suspect that the remnants of a group tied to al-Qaida associate (Abu Musab) al-Zarqawi are still in Iraq, waiting for an opportunity to strike."

No solid proof yet linking Saddam Hussein to Al-Qaeda Agence France-Presse
Washington, July 25
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_319143,00050001.htm


Ansar prisoners interviewed in Tawela, northern Iraq by AFP soon after the attack, insisted their group had no links to Saddam.
"I am a Kurd, all Kurds hate Saddam Hussein, he destroyed my family," said one of the prisoners. He and another survivor had been forced to join Ansar, which established rigid Islamic rules in its area. The prisoners also said they had seen no Arabs or other foreign Islamist fighters in their ranks.
US officials have yet to release evidence that the camp was used for building chemical weapons.
Meanwhile an alleged associate of Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi standing trial in Germany has denied any connection with Al-Qaeda.
Shadi Mohd Mustafa Abdellah told a court in Duesseldorf, Germany on July 2 that he belonged to a group called al-Tawhid, which was "on its own and had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda."
The alleged terrorist, a 26-year-old Jordanian, is charged with plotting attacks against Jewish and Israeli targets in Germany.
Hundreds of pages of German police interrogations suggest the al-Tawhid organization had "its own goals and may even have been a jealous rival of Al-Qaeda," Newsweek magazine reported in late June.
Shadi Abdallah told his interrogators that al-Tawid "was one of several Islamist groups that acted 'in opposition' to bin Laden's Al-Qaeda," according to Newsweek.
Perhaps more important, two imprisoned top Al-Qaeda operatives, including Abu Zubaydah, captured in March 2002, have consistently denied any links with Saddam.
Zubaydah told CIA interrogators that bin Laden explicitly rejected working with Saddam because he did not want to be beholden to him, according to the New York Times.
The results of the interrogations have not been made public.

[BullNBear52]

I wonder why it was pulled?

Check the dateline on the original article.

9/11 REPORT: JOINT CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY

REPORT OF THE JOINT INQUIRY INTO THE TERRORIST ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 –
BY THE HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE AND THE
SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

July 24, 2003

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/911rpt/index.html

UPI obviously could not stand behind a story a day earlier than when the report was to be released.