INDC Journal

« This is Very Bad News | Main | Happy Anniversary, Captain Ed »

October 04, 2004
Iraqi Terror Ties and WMD Evidence

Posted by Bill

If true, this is a legitimate bombshell (or at least it should be):

Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.

One of the Iraqi memos contains an order from Saddam for his intelligence service to support terrorist attacks against Americans in Somalia. The memo was written nine months before U.S. Army Rangers were ambushed in Mogadishu by forces loyal to a warlord with alleged ties to al Qaeda.

(Emphasis mine)

Assuming that the documents are real, of course.

Posted by Bill at October 4, 2004 04:19 PM | TrackBack (2)

Comments

I wonder who

"A senior government official who is not a political appointee" is.

Posted by: SarahW at October 4, 2004 04:36 PM

The source is probably a frustrated member of the Iraq Survey Group. My source who has contacts with the ISG has heard a bunch of complaints about the truth not getting out. Things just get buried in the classified report.

If this proves to be true, the leak was truly ingenious. If the documents were yet to be translated then they wouldn't have been classified yet!

Posted by: Rich at October 4, 2004 05:11 PM

The author of this article is going to be on my show tomorrow (I'll let Bill plug the website if he wants to). I'll admit to being suspicious for a few reasons, not the least of which is "why leak this to CNSnews.com instead of a bigger organization?"

I also notice that the MSM (or Drudge for that matter) hasn't exactly jumped on the story.

At the same time, I know several of the CNSnews.com guys, and they've always been straightforward with me about stories. I've no reason to doubt the source (CNSnews.com), but reason to be skeptical of the story.

Posted by: Cam at October 4, 2004 05:22 PM

Cam -

I'd like to plug, but your site is coming up blank.

Posted by: Bill from INDC Journal at October 4, 2004 05:25 PM

Someone should follow up with the contact at CNS News (Thibault?) to see if anyone from the MSM has expressed interest in examining the documents in person. This ought to be done on a daily basis.

Posted by: DrSteve at October 4, 2004 05:59 PM

I think we can trust Dr. Mylroie to play it straight. This looks, smells and feels like the real deal. How ironic that rathergate will likely be used to smear presumptions of this story's authenticity. If it gets any MSM traction at all, it will make for one hell of a Kabuki dance. These very unhelpful facts will be welcomed by few talking heads.

Posted by: willem at October 4, 2004 06:03 PM

it's not a bombshell until they slap copies of the actual documents online. that's what they need to do in order to give this story legs.

Posted by: AB at October 4, 2004 06:26 PM

Yeah, I'm waiting on this one. While I'd love it to have some reality, I'm skeptical of everything nowadays. Come to think of it, I'm doubting you're really Bill....

Posted by: Sharp as a Marble at October 4, 2004 06:59 PM

This Dr. Mylroie? Talk about the fevered swamps.

Posted by: Oliver at October 4, 2004 07:53 PM

Whether the documents are real or not, only time will tell. Either way, the Dems will say the timing of the release was politically motivated by the administration in order to sway voters.

Posted by: Pete at October 4, 2004 07:57 PM

The document scans are up now.

Posted by: Bryan at October 4, 2004 09:19 PM

"The document scans are up now." -Bryan

Where? I see only one page, and the scan is tiny.

Posted by: Z at October 4, 2004 09:37 PM

Oh it is just the first page I misread it.

Posted by: Bryan at October 4, 2004 09:39 PM

Laurie Mylroie is rock-solid; a non-partisan with impeccable academic and professional credentials. More so, by all appearances, she is clearly a decent and thoughtful human being. Peter Bergen's hack-job is hardly an academic rebuke. Mylroie was a dedicated career expert on Iraq/Iran long before it was popular. She's faithfully served Democratic and Republican Presidents. Her testimony to the 9/11 Commission was spot-on. Interesting that MSM-wannabe Peter Bergen and the Progressive sycophants at the Washington Monthly would find her such a threat they were compelled to spend that much time and treasure to destroy her and erase the contributions and respect earned in her life's work. Mylroie is a star whose only crime is to shine too bright in a shark-infested universe.

Posted by: willem at October 4, 2004 10:03 PM

I don't understand why things like this and the fact Putin said publicly he warned Iraq was planning terrorist attacks against the U.S. are never covered much.

It's like there's, I don't know, some kind of bias in the media or something.

Posted by: TallDave at October 4, 2004 11:08 PM