Gay Patriot Header Image

Iraqi Documents Prove Saddam Financed Al-Qaeda

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 5:26 pm - March 20, 2006.
Filed under: War On Terror

Helllooooo 9/11 Commission??!!?? Are you there? McFly???!!!

(Hat tip: Chad @ Cake Or Death?)

Via Ace of Spades:

SADDAM HUSSEIN’S REGIME PROVIDED FINANCIAL support to Abu Sayyaf, the al Qaeda-linked jihadist group founded by Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law in the Philippines in the late 1990s, according to documents captured in postwar Iraq.

An eight-page fax dated June 6, 2001, and sent from the Iraqi ambassador in Manila to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Baghdad, provides an update on Abu Sayyaf kidnappings and indicates that the Iraqi regime was providing the group with money to purchase weapons. The Iraqi regime suspended its support–temporarily, it seems–after high-profile kidnappings, including of Americans, focused international attention on the terrorist group.

The fax comes from the vast collection of documents recovered in postwar Afghanistan and Iraq. Up to this point, those materials have been kept from the American public. Now the proverbial dam has broken. On March 16, the U.S. government posted on the web 9 documents captured in Iraq, as well as 28 al Qaeda documents that had been released in February. Earlier last week, Foreign Affairs magazine published a lengthy article based on a review of 700 Iraqi documents by analysts with the Institute for Defense Analysis and the Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Virginia.

This news, combined with this news (and much more to come) makes me ask: “Hey Democrats… do you still wanna have that special Congressional hearing about the justification for going into Iraq in a post-9/11 world?”

Why on earth the Bush Administration hasn’t declassified and/or translated these documents before now is mindboggling. I mean for heaven’s sake this material could be used in some kind of International War Tribunal to make sure Saddam meets his lover in Hell once and for all.

(UPDATERoger Simon has some disappointing news on this front…. ughhhhh!)

And, I repeat my request that the deep pocketed mainstream media outlets pay people to translate these smoking guns at a faster pace. But that would mean that the Mary Mapes crowd actually believes in discovering the truth.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)



  1. but but bush lied…………….these documents need to be plastered on a billboard in Times Square for the world to see

    Comment by nuyorker — March 20, 2006 @ 5:50 pm - March 20, 2006

  2. How much you want to bet the defenders of the CBS documents cry “fake” over these?

    Comment by just me — March 20, 2006 @ 6:31 pm - March 20, 2006

  3. Christopher Hitchens addresses this topic in Slate:

    He seems content to wait a bit until more docs are translated. It’s in the works.

    Trust but verify (that must include checking all the facts).

    Comment by Gene — March 20, 2006 @ 7:36 pm - March 20, 2006

  4. Its time for conservatives to buy info mercials, and billboards to get the truth out. Now the dems and libs have nothing to say. Except to apologize.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 20, 2006 @ 9:38 pm - March 20, 2006

  5. I predict the liberal crickets will stop their chirping.

    Sen Schumer is watching those dreams of a Democrat majority in the US Senate vaporize before his half-rim reading glasses.

    And NancyPelosi will be selecting sharp linen suits so that while her ass is relegated permanently to the BackBench, she can shine the seat with her linen suit. Destiny rides again –and the Doom-o-crats are going to have bail water very very fast. “I was just raising a question” “We didn’t mean what we said” “We were misled by the press” –here come the excuses of a band of cowards.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — March 21, 2006 @ 10:07 am - March 21, 2006

  6. Nah. The Dems can still campaign on Katrina and torture. Bush’s approval ratings have tanked (not without reason), and he just might take some of his party down with him. Since the Dems aren’t fronting a national candidate, they should have little trouble turning this election into a referendum on Bush.

    Comment by Tim Hulsey — March 21, 2006 @ 2:44 pm - March 21, 2006

  7. Yup, the GOP is in trouble. You can anoint McCain and Guliani as the saviors of the GOP middle all you want, the truth is that they are not actually running for anything this time around. So that leaves such people as Frist, DeLay etc. out in front of the public.

    It’s also why, our course, that Frist will be bringing up the Constitutional Amendment to outlaw gay marriage for a vote in June even though he knows he doesn’t have the votes. He needs to rile up the party theocrats that everyone here keeps saying isn’t in control of the Party.

    Comment by Patrick (gryph) — March 21, 2006 @ 3:18 pm - March 21, 2006

  8. Tim and Patrick have spoken. Everyone can go home now. Ha!

    Oh, the Liberals are in ascendancy, eh… heck, since they don’t have the WH, the Senate, the House, the Courts –they don’t have anywhere to go but up. That’s ascendancy! That’s progress! Let’s see if Feingold’s blood letting stunts will allow party pacisfists like HarryReid continue as leader, tho. I remember the Democrats arguing the midterms in 2002 would lead to a sweeping Democrat majority –and that was before the party had smoking guns like Downing Street Memo and the NSA wiretap-gate scandal… lol.

    Hey Patrick the bigot, you don’t think that old saw about Frist is going to work on angering gay conservatives, do you? I was thinking you’d be about ready to start raising the issue of the GOP introducing the draft if you didn’t thik you’d be laughed out of the thread.

    If Frist does bring it up, you can thank all those effective GayLeft activists who have created the perfect political conditions in a long list of states –through their singular, compeling leadership on the issue of gay marriage. If a vote happens, will your idols Kerry and Clinton and Durbin vote yes? Maybe you can have CindySheehan talk with them about building bridges into the GayLeft. Code Pink will help facilitate, Patrick.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — March 21, 2006 @ 5:25 pm - March 21, 2006

  9. #6 – “Since the Dems aren’t fronting a national candidate, they should have little trouble turning this election into a referendum on Bush.”

    Timmy, honey, there are two problems with your argument:

    1. The demoncRATS don’t have an agenda, which is why they are TRYING to turn this election into a Bush referendum. If all they are going to do is run a campaign against an incumbent (sort of like the 1996 election against Slick Willy), they’d better be ready for a big loss. The electorate will not vote for a party devoid of ideas or principles, nor for someone who stands up and says “I’m against ____.” The GOP learned that lesson the hard way in 1996. Why do you think they came up with Bob Dole, of all people?

    Also, let’s not forget that despite three disastrous hurricanes and the blatant MSM’s attempt to hang every single thing on the president’s shoulders, our economy is strong, joblessness is at its lowest point in 20 years, the Dow/NASDAQ are hitting new levels and our economic growth outdid Japan and the entire EU combined in 2005. So the “bad economy” spin won’t work either.

    2. The 2006 election has the least number of open seats in which an incumbent is either retiring or not seeking reelection. Even though all 435 seats in the House are up, the vast majority of them are in “safe” districts with only 15 or so that could be considered contestable. And considering the fact that the House reelection rate is above 90%, it is very unlikely that all 15 seats will go to the demoncRATS. At most, they win 5 seats and the House remains Republican. And of the Senate’s 35 seats up for grabs, almost all of them are in red states. The GOP keeps the Senate.

    And just to make you REALLY sick, the MSM never reported that in the March primary here in Texas, DeLay won against two other opponents with over 65% of the vote. And since his Sugar Land seat is strong GOP, he will be going back to the House. His (D) opponent, Nick Lampson, moved from Beaumont in East Texas to DeLay’s SW Houston suburb just to run against him. Carpetbagger, anyone? Care to compare him to Shrillary in NY? The Lampson campaign better brace itself for a big defeat come November.

    Bottom line: demoncRATS don’t deliver the Congress and their base goes more and more off the deep end, if at all possible. Plus, their 2008 candidate (which actually may NOT be Hitlerry) can’t run against the incumbent or veep because neither will be running again.

    You poor libs…no wonder you all are so angry and dispirited. Your whole world is crashing around you. My condolences.

    Peter Hughes

    Comment by Peter Hughes — March 21, 2006 @ 7:45 pm - March 21, 2006

  10. OK, so maybe Saddam did finance a small splinter cell of Al-Qaeda, but that is not the group that committed the 9/11 atrocities. And Bush clearly didn’t know that Saddam provided money to Al-Qaeda, so he still lied to get us into that horrible war. And isn’t it a coincidence that this turns up now just when his poll numbers are so cavernously low. Everyone knows these documents are probably fake.

    Signed: The Democratic Tinfoil Spin Machine.

    Comment by sonicfrog — March 21, 2006 @ 9:25 pm - March 21, 2006

  11. #10 There u have it, It was only a splinter group of Al Q. BTW there are another 200,000 documents to be translated, so libs, shine up the excuses for the future revelations.Question for every democrat who disagrees with liberating 40 million Afganis and Iraqis….when would you go to war? When would you use force? After 6 million Jews are slaughtered? 3000 Americans are torched? Would democrats allow Iran to have a nuke to sell to terrorists? Would they use force to prevent it? Or just talk and complain when adult men and women act in their stead.
    Was it a splinter group of the Nazi SS who gassed 10,000 a day at Treblinka? Democrats are not serious and should not be trusted with the safety of America.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 21, 2006 @ 10:34 pm - March 21, 2006

  12. One other point I’d like the Bush Lied Democrats to address. Sadaam was paying the families of Palestinian terror bombers $25,000 each. Remember? Should American and the free world have allow that to continue cause they were only killing Jews?
    “Theres no connection between Sadaam and terrorists”……the democrat losers.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 21, 2006 @ 11:19 pm - March 21, 2006

  13. Pardon me, but didn’t Byron York and Richard Miniter tell us all of this already?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 22, 2006 @ 4:31 am - March 22, 2006

  14. 9: The difference between the 2004 elections and this year, is that the Democrats aren’t fielding a national candidate this time. That’s a major advantage. If you’re making comparisons, think ’98 instead of ’96 — or for that matter, think of 1994. The party out of power always has a slight advantage during midterm elections, and if the president is unpopular or floundering, the opposition has an even better position.

    Democrats can run against a president whose policies (and policy failures) are well known, while Republicans can only invoke a nebulous “Democratic agenda” that individual congressional candidates can easily circumvent. (BTW, I don’t think Republican candidates are doing themselves any favors by distancing themselves from Bush, especially at this early stage of the campaign. You don’t win elections by taking your base for granted.) Plus, there’s always the Mae West factor: As she put it, “When I have to choose between two evils, I pick the one I haven’t tried.”

    13: Probably.

    Comment by Tim Hulsey — March 22, 2006 @ 5:27 am - March 22, 2006

  15. Just yesterday I read about this somewhere else, but you have covered the story so much better.

    And lets pray for heaven on earth!
    You may chant the following prayer:

    Dearest, greatest, holiest!
    Please give us all, the full heaven on earth!
    I thank you, and I worship you.


    Comment by picture of zoroastrianism — March 22, 2006 @ 7:19 am - March 22, 2006

  16. Tim at 14: the party out of power has a slight advantage in the midterms? Is this the first effort at reducing expectations of that huge crowd and groundswell of anti-Bush, anti-GOP sentiment that’s going to sweep the Democrats into Senate majority and the House Speakership?

    LOL. Or is this just more of defense of the party who’s best slogan is Just Do No.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — March 22, 2006 @ 9:00 am - March 22, 2006

  17. Hello to one and all! My name is Anna Stevens and I live in Ontario, and I found your site while searching Yahoo’s Search Engine. I love your blog site, and I wish you great success!

    Comment by certified financial planner — March 29, 2006 @ 1:14 pm - March 29, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.