| Submit your comments on this article |
| Terror Networks |
| Possible Link Between the Saddam Regime and Al Qaeda |
| 2004-05-27 |
| From The Wall Street Journal One striking bit of new evidence is that the name Ahmed Hikmat Shakir appears on three captured rosters of officers in Saddam Fedayeen, the elite paramilitary group run by Saddam’s son Uday and entrusted with doing much of the regime’s dirty work. Our government sources, who have seen translations of the documents, say Shakir is listed with the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel. This matters because if Shakir was an officer in the Fedayeen, it would establish a direct link between Iraq and the al Qaeda operatives who planned 9/11. Shakir was present at the January 2000 al Qaeda "summit" in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, at which the 9/11 attacks were planned. The U.S. has never been sure whether he was there on behalf of the Iraqi regime or whether he was an Iraqi Islamicist who hooked up with al Qaeda on his own. It is possible that the Ahmed Hikmat Shakir listed on the Fedayeen rosters is a different man from the Iraqi of the same name with the proven al Qaeda connections. His identity awaits confirmation by al Qaeda operatives in U.S. custody or perhaps by other captured documents. But our sources tell us there is no questioning the authenticity of the three Fedayeen rosters. The chain of control is impeccable. The documents were captured by the U.S. military and have been in U.S. hands ever since. As others have reported, at the time of the summit Shakir was working at the Kuala Lumpur airport, having obtained the job through an Iraqi intelligence agent at the Iraqi embassy. The four-day al Qaeda meeting was attended by Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi, who were at the controls of American Airlines Flight 77 when it crashed into the Pentagon. Also on hand were Ramzi bin al Shibh, the operational planner of the 9/11 attacks, and Tawfiz al Atash, a high-ranking Osama bin Laden lieutenant and mastermind of the USS Cole bombing. Shakir left Malaysia on January 13, four days after the summit concluded. That’s not the only connection between Shakir and al Qaeda. The Iraqi next turned up in Qatar, where he was arrested on September 17, 2001, four days after the attacks in the U.S. A search of his pockets and apartment uncovered such information as the phone numbers of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers’ safe houses and contacts. Also found was information pertaining to a 1995 al Qaeda plot to blow up a dozen commercial airliners over the Pacific. After a brief detention, our friends the Qataris inexplicably released Shakir, and on October 21 he flew to Amman, Jordan. The Jordanians promptly arrested him, but under pressure from the Iraqis (and Amnesty International, which questioned his detention) and with the acquiescence of the CIA, they let him go after three months. He was last seen heading home to Baghdad. |
| Posted by:Mike Sylwester |
| #6 oh, LH - CBS is above using anonymous sources- ROFLMAO - at least my comment was sarcasm! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-05-27 7:38:47 PM |
| #5 I have always been amazed how so many "intelligent" people refuse to even consider a link between Sammy and the Islamofascists. It is obviously true because it was in his (Sammy) interest to have a link. 1. Sammy wasn't really Secular as he used Islam almost from the moment he gained power. True, the 'Baath Party' was a Pan-'Arab Unity' party and not overly based on Islam, but Islam is THE central aspect of arab lives. Sammy used it to his advantage, when it was to his advantage. 2.Sammy is a meglomaniac and believed he was the next Saladin (Salah al-Din) to unite the arab world. You think he wouldn't use Islam to do that? Sammy the Caliph. 3. Sammy understood that some actions were too provacative for him to do. Why wouldn't he create a back-channel hook-up to a Sunni jihadi group to do some 'wet work' without attribution? We know he hosted the most notorious paleo terrorist, Abu Nidal for years. One must assume that this happened because it was to Sammy benefit. 4. Even worse, Sammy had close links to the phrench, those back-stabbing cowards of the continent. In any case, even if there were no known links, post-9/11, the USA can't risk it. As they say, Simplisme. |
| Posted by: Brett_the_Quarkian 2004-05-27 7:19:56 PM |
| #4 Heh, good one, Frank! |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-05-27 12:56:28 PM |
| #3 it wont be on CBS based on a WSJ report attributed to anonymous sources. If the admin isnt going public with it, the networks and NYT wont go for it. WaPo might mention it, but not on the front page, for sure. Look, when the admin is ready to make their case, let them make it. Maybe the case isnt as strong as I think it is. Maybe its an internal/external political problem - implicating Iraq in AQ also implicates others, like the Saudis, that State isnt comfortably implicating. Maybe its still a sources and methods question. Or maybe theyre still gathering pieces and dont want to release anything yet. Or maybe they have an October surprise up their sleeve. I dont know. But you can hardly blame the press for not focusing on what the admin isnt willing to support, yet. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-05-27 12:20:20 PM |
| #2 I'd settle for it being mentioned on FoxNews and bounced around the blogosphere. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2004-05-27 12:14:04 PM |
| #1 Of course, this Iraq/Al-Qaeda link will be the lead item on Dan Rather's CBS tonight right? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-05-27 11:12:12 AM |