WAR: Top Saudi Al-Qaeda Leader says Al-Qaeda is helping Anti US Fighters in Iraq

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on May, 14 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   
A top Al-Qaeda leader in Saudi Arabia, stated in an online statement on an Extreme Islamic website that Al-Qaeda is assisting the Resistance Fighters in Iraq. Abdul-Mohsin al-Moqrin also called for all Saudis and Muslims to take part in militant operations against the US and Coalition forces to drive them out of Arab lands.
 

Al-Qaida Helping Anti-U.S. Fighters in Iraq, Top Leader Says in Internet Statement

"By our jihad in the Arab peninsula, we are serving Iraq's cause and helping the mujahedeen (fighters) there, whom we are in close contact with," he said. "There is mutual support between the two of us and we are working on confusing the American enemy."

"Muslims should realize that jihad in this country - to apply sharia (Islamic law) and expel occupying Crusaders - is a duty for all able ones," the statement said.

He said al-Qaida relies on independent cells who function without "organizational cohesion" to carry out its goals, following the group's example and books and periodicals on how to carry out militant operations.

As an example, he praised one cell for a May 1 attack in the western Saudi city of Yanbu that killed five Westerners and a Saudi.

"The Yanbu Cell that implemented the heroic successful operation this month is one of the best examples of what is required," the statement said.


[Edited on 5-14-2004 by worldwatcher]




posted on May, 14 2004 @ 04:38 PM
link   
You know, I don't believe Bush ever said he wanted to turn Iraq into a Christian or Jewish country or help install a Christian or Jewish government.

Why is democracy so threatening to the Muslim religion? Does it say somewhere in their holy book that democracy and freedom are against their religous principles? With democracy the Iraqi's could vote in those people that share their faith and values.

America, the "Crusaders?" Let's get real here.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I recommend reading this article by the U.S Department of State to answer your question.

Islam and Democracy: Possibilities, Challenges, and Risks of Bringing Democracy to Islamic Nations, Government, and People



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 06:09 PM
link   
If I've heard ten times I've heard it a thousand times on this board.

"There is no connection between Al- Qaida and Iraq!"

Yeah right, I guess the next excuse is going to be "but they only got involved after Bush invaded Iraq", today while surfing some news items I came upon an article in Slate that said the following,

" Now comes a document from the files of the Iraqi secret police, or Mukhabarat, dated March 28, 1992, and headed routinely, "In the Name of Allah, the Merciful and Compassionate." It is a straightforward listing of contacts and "assets," quite unsensational until it comes to the "Saudi front," where we find the name "Osama bin Ladin/he is well-known Saudi businessman, founder of Saudi opposition in Afghanistan, had connection with Syrian division."

Slate MSN.Com

Unfortunately the author did not provide further links in his article however I see no reason to dispute what he said was found.

No connections - Sheesh



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 06:18 PM
link   
I simply draw your attention to the following remark

It was not immediately possible to verify the statement's authenticity



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I knew someone was going to sally forth and demand more,

From an article written by Laurie Mylroie an adviser on Iraq to the 1992 campaign of Bill Clinton,

"That is exactly what the Czechs had been saying since shortly after 9/11: Atta, a long-time student at Germany’s Hamburg-Harburg Technical University, met with al-Ani on April 8, 2001. Indeed, when Atta earlier applied for a visa to visit the Czech Republic, he identified himself as a “Hamburg student.” The discovery of the notation in al-Ani’s appointment calendar about a meeting with a “Hamburg student” provides critical corroboration of the Czech claim".

Further evidence for a Saddam/ 9/11 Link

"Iraq was indeed involved in those assaults. There is considerable information to that effect, described in this piece and elsewhere. They include Iraqi documents discovered by U.S. forces in Baghdad that U.S. officials have not made public".

Maybe even including the one referenced earlier about Bin Laden in 1992 regarding him as an asset to the Iraqi intelligence.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 07:06 PM
link   
As disgusted as I am would someone direct me to this video as I have not seen it.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 09:39 PM
link   
"I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection," Mr. Powell said, in response to a question at a news conference. "But I think the possibility of such connections did exist, and it was prudent to consider them at the time that we did."

Saddam didn't tolerate any kind of religous fanaticism. He put people in prison just for praying. Remember when we liberated Iraq, and all of those people openly practiced their religion, since they weren't allowed to for decades? Don't get me wrong, al queda is there now, but to still try to find a link is just sad. In your "Further evidence for a Saddam/ 9/11 Link" article, it's source is
Edward Jay Epstein, not the most reputable source around. If you read where that article originated, The Slate and read the responses, you may have a greater understanding of it.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Curme I have an understanding that as long as something benefits your view the smallest shred of circumstantial evidence is all that is required. On the otherhand if it does not agree with your rather partisan viewpoint then heaven and earth must move before you have enough proof to agree.

BTW Slate may not be the Wallstreet Journal but it sure as heck ain't Rense - besides it is not in any sense of the word known as a conservative site - so whats your beef or are you just towing the party line like a good little sheep.





[Edited on 14-5-2004 by Phoenix]



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 11:29 PM
link   
I'm sorry if it came out wrong. What I meant was the source,
Edward Jay Epstein, was questionable. And the Slate had responses to the article which were interesting. Baah!



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixFurther evidence for a Saddam/ 9/11 Link

"Iraq was indeed involved in those assaults. There is considerable information to that effect, described in this piece and elsewhere. They include Iraqi documents discovered by U.S. forces in Baghdad that U.S. officials have not made public".


Rumsfeld and the president have stated that Iraq was not involved in the planning of 911.


MATTHEWS: But in terms of 9/11, there’s no connection, or is there – between Iraq and 9/11?

RUMSFELD: It’s too complex a subject for me to answer yes or no. The – George Tenet has testified publicly and privately on that subject before Congress and that is the official position of the United States.

MATTHEWS: Which way? There’s no connection?

RUMSFELD: No. You have to go back and read it because it is a complex set of issues and imperfect intelligence scraps.

MATTHEWS: But the president said recently when he was asked – and he was with Tony Blair that time – the prime minister of Great Britain – and he said there’s no connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

RUMSFELD: If you’re asking were they Iraqis who were 18 people –

MATTHEWS: Right.

RUMSFELD: – engaged in 9/11, the answer is no.

MATTHEWS: Do you believe there’s still a possibility that the Iraqi government had something to do with planning the attack on us 9/11?

RUMSFELD: Not to my knowledge.

Rumsfeld / Matthews

[Edited on 15-5-2004 by AceOfBase]



posted on May, 15 2004 @ 07:24 AM
link   
By this question and the following answer one can see that Rumsfeld was saying there was no DIRECT participation by the Iraqis,

MATTHEWS: But the president said recently when he was asked – and he was with Tony Blair that time – the prime minister of Great Britain – and he said there’s no connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

RUMSFELD: If you’re asking were they Iraqis who were 18 people –

MATTHEWS: Right.

RUMSFELD: – engaged in 9/11, the answer is no.



Later in the interview Rumsfeld alluded to the CONNECTIONS by this statement,

MATTHEWS: Is it justice?

RUMSFELD: – asking is it a direct link between 9/11 and Iraq, I – the answer is no. If you’re asking is the United – the threat to the United States from terrorists that exists and it was demonstrated on 9/11 in its – in one manifestation but exists in a variety of manifestations and is what we’re doing in Iraq today a part of that effort against terrorists, most certainly it is.



Now then there is a big difference between direct or overt participation in 9/11 and having intelligence connections with Al-Qaida that appear to show prior knowledge demonstrating a covert level of support.

So by giving use of training bases, technical support and possibly financial backing Saddam certainly helped in his way to make Al-Qaide successful in their attacks on the west in the prelude leading up to 9/11. The link I provided in my earlier post aptly addresses an attack on Radio Free Europe - a thorn in Saddams side,

"Prior to the 9/11 attacks, the Czechs were closely watching the Iraqi embassy. Al-Ani’s predecessor had defected to Britain in late 1998, and the Czechs (along with the British and Americans) learned that Baghdad had instructed him to bomb Radio Free Europe, headquartered in Prague, after RFE had begun a Radio Free Iraq service earlier that year".

Further,

"Following the 9/11 attacks, the Czech informant who had observed the meeting saw Mohammed Atta’s picture in the papers and told the BIS he believed that Atta was the man he had seen meeting with al-Ani. On September 14, BIS informed its CIA liaison that they had tentatively identified Atta as al-Ani’s contact".

Accepting all this as true and factual it supports a position that says Saddam had knowledge of the impending attack on the U.S. - his sworn arch enemy, all he had to do was sit back and watch events unfold.

What this does not say or claim is any DIRECT action on Iraqs part in the 9/11 operation by Al-Qaida. However I think there is enough parts and pieces of evidence to show that there is a strong possibility of backround support for Al-Qaida in pre 9/11 operations as well as tacit support for 9/11 itself - If you were in Saddams shoes it would be nothing but a pleasure to sit back and watch the fanatics carry out this attack, with what he believed was no chance that he could ever be connected to it.





top topics
 
0

log in

join