posted on May, 15 2004 @ 07:24 AM
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 –
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".
"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
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.