No Saddam link to Iraq al-Qaeda

[The Duke]

Two years ago when the war was popular, the same committee issued a report that was supposed to be the definitive report on pre-war intelligence.

That report found a clear connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

Now that the war is unpopular, the same committee, which virtually identical membership, looks at a set of facts that have not changed in any significant way and finds the exact opposite of what they found just two years ago.

A cynic might say that Senators are trying to hide from their own votes and reports by issuing a self-pardon eight weeks out from the election.

My favorite about face in the report is the total turn around on Zarqawi, where the panel now finds no evidence suggesting Saddam's government knew Zarqawi was in Iraq.  This is total nonsense of course.  Zarqawi stayed in Uday's private hospital and recieved medical treatment there, of course the Iraqi government knew he was there.  It is simply not credible to say otherwise.

By the way, the author of the section on Iraq and Al Qaeda is a man named Eric Rosenbach, a Kerry campaign staffer from 2004.  He was hired by the now rabid opponent of the war Chuck Hagel specifically to re-write history on precisely this question.

[The Duke]

Two years ago when the war was popular, the same committee issued a report that was supposed to be the definitive report on pre-war intelligence.

That report found a clear connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

Now that the war is unpopular, the same committee, which virtually identical membership, looks at a set of facts that have not changed in any significant way and finds the exact opposite of what they found just two years ago.

A cynic might say that Senators are trying to hide from their own votes and reports by issuing a self-pardon eight weeks out from the election.

My favorite about face in the report is the total turn around on Zarqawi, where the panel now finds no evidence suggesting Saddam's government knew Zarqawi was in Iraq.  This is total nonsense of course.  Zarqawi stayed in Uday's private hospital and recieved medical treatment there, of course the Iraqi government knew he was there.  It is simply not credible to say otherwise.

By the way, the author of the section on Iraq and Al Qaeda is a man named Eric Rosenbach, a Kerry campaign staffer from 2004.  He was hired by the now rabid opponent of the war Chuck Hagel specifically to re-write history on precisely this question.

Absolute nonsense.  The basic difference was in this report they were allowed to do more investigating (though still blocked in many areas).  the previous report was filled with things they were blocked on investigating and had no access to.

What exactly is your explaination of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi recuperating in Uday's own personal hospital, then?

[The Duke]

Actually, I believe States was correct in saying that there were members of Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion (the most notable being Abu Musab al Zarqawi). However, they were pretty much stationed in Northern Iraq, where, at the time, Saddam Hussein had little influence thanks to a no-fly zone. However, I believe most analysts agree that Saddam considered Al Qaeda to be competition (and therefore the enemy), not an ally.

Zarqawi was not just in the North.  He was in Baghdad.  In Uday's own hospital.  Again, what is your explaination for this?

[The Duke]

Actually, I believe States was correct in saying that there were members of Al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion (the most notable being Abu Musab al Zarqawi). However, they were pretty much stationed in Northern Iraq, where, at the time, Saddam Hussein had little influence thanks to a no-fly zone. However, I believe most analysts agree that Saddam considered Al Qaeda to be competition (and therefore the enemy), not an ally.

Zarqawi was not just in the North.  He was in Baghdad.  In Uday's own hospital.  Again, what is your explaination for this?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6189795/

That whole trip is apparently under debate and its authenticy questioned. There is no conclusive evidence to suggest that Saddam Hussein harbored Abu Musab al Zarqawi, at least according to our brilliant CIA.

I would have you take note of this section in the story:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So your best evidence in support of your conclusion is a CIA report that explicitly fails to endorse your conclusion?

Boris, I didn't ask how many people agreed with your opinion or what the credentials were of people who agreed with your opinion.  I asked for your evidence.  Present it, please.  Why is Zarqawi's presence in Bagdad, in Uday's own hospital no less, so inconclusive?  And your answer better not be "Because the CIA said so."