Those “No Ties” Lies – Part 2:

[Wehrwolfen]

Only 18% of Intel Still Says There Were No Ties Between al Qaeda and Hussein​

Scott Malensek @ The New Media Journal:


The recent Phase II report released by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) has been hyped as a carte blanche dismissal of the idea that Saddam’s regime had ties to Al Qaeda. Not many people take the time to read the 400 pages of government report. In fact, not many people in the mass media bothered to read the report before reporting on it. Just as people summarize the 1000 pages of the ISG “Duelfer Report” as saying only 5 letters (“NOWMD”) this report’s 400 pages are being reported as another 5 letters (“NOTIES”). Moby Dick was roughly 700 pages, but I doubt many English professors would accept a book report that only had 5 letters (“WHALE”). Why should we?

Well, I’m one of those few people who do read these kinds of reports. In fact, I enjoy reading them. It’s strange, but it’s true. They’re packed with all kinds of information about the war on terror, al Qaeda, Saddam’s Iraq and America’s primary combatants in this war: our intelligence organizations. For me, it’s like reading spy novels that aren’t fiction…well, that is until I read this Phase II report. This one IS fiction.

Both the SSCI Phase I and Phase II reports examined “Saddam’s Ties to Al Qaeda” only in the context of:

▪ Views of the relationship between the Iraqi government and al-Qa’ida;

▪ Iraqi government contacts with al-Qa’ida;

▪ Iraqi government training of al-Qa’ida in chemical-biological weapons, poisons or terrorist tactics;

▪ Iraqi government provision of “safehaven” for al-Qa’ida;

▪ Iraqi government knowledge and/or support for the attacks of September 11,and;

▪ Iraqi government use of al-Qa’ida terrorists as a response to threat of invasion by the United States.​

Evaluations regarding all of those areas are clearly important but it seems the Bush Administration’s case for war and the expectations of Americans – as well as the world – would define “Saddam’s Ties to Al Qaeda” differently.


Read more:
The New Media Journal | Those "No Ties" Lies Part 2: Only 18% of Intel Still Says There Were No Ties Between al Qaeda and Hussein by Scott Malensek

Part I here:
Those ?No Ties? Lies ? Part 1: Bush Lied | Flopping Aces

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Is Saddam a Liar?​

Scott Malensek @ The New Media Journal:


The long-awaited and recently released Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Phase II report has spawned headlines declaring that there were never any ties between Saddam’s regime and al Qaeda. This is a grossly inaccurate representation of the report’s 400 pages and of historical reality. In fact, the report is little more than a rehash of the phase I report’s findings.

The difference is that the issue of regime ties to al Qaeda in the 2004 Phase I report is described in the Phase II report:

“The analysis was detailed, did not make definitive statements, and left the issue open for the consumer to decide what constituted a “relationship.”

The Phase II report differs in that its conclusions seem more final – though the report and the additional comments at the end make it very clear that the report’s conclusions are not final and that those who produced it are concerned that they will be viewed as such.

Another difference is that the Phase I report was based largely on 2002 and earlier intelligence reports. Those reports were inherently flawed as there wasn’t a single CIA human asset in Iraq for 4 years when they were produced. They were based almost entirely on outdated intelligence, satellite intelligence, foreign intelligence and open source mass media reports. As such, the Phase I report repeatedly stated that the comments stating a lack of evidence demonstrating ties between Saddam’s Regime and al Qaeda was due mostly to a lack of intelligence gathering rather than a lack of material and that the question of ties needed further investigation. 9/11 Commissioners said the same thing when their report was released and as recently as mid 2006.

The forms of intelligence gathered are described by both the Phase I and Phase II reports as detainees, foreign intelligence reporting, open source reporting (such as media reports) and post invasion human intelligence reports. Of those four sources, foreign intelligence reporting is largely ignored in the Phase II report, open source reporting is almost completely ignored by the Phase II report and post invasion human intelligence reporting is limited at best (almost half of the key personnel who would be involved in connections between the regime and al Qaeda either remain at large or have been killed).

Instead of open source reporting, the Phase II report focuses a great deal on the captured documents recovered from Saddam’s regime but only 18% of those documents have been translated and evaluated. The report then goes on to contradict itself by saying first that even though 1/5 of the documents have only been glanced at (at best) they’re confident that the other 82% of the documents will be of little input to the conclusions. Then the report says that it doesn’t put any serious value on any of the documents or the testimony of detainees. That contradiction is further exacerbated by the reliance on FBI interrogations of detainees.


Read more:
The New Media Journal | Those "No Ties" Lies Part 3: Is Saddam a Liar? by Scott Malensek