Saddam and Terrorism: Bush Co. Rolls Over, Plays Dead

Where is the Bush and co? Why aren't they lamblasting the media's inaccurate portrayal of the Pentagon review of 600,000 Iraqi documents. Steve Hayes' report is important - and shocking. (at NRO)

Here's the important part:

Throughout the early and mid-1990s, Saddam Hussein actively supported an influential terrorist group headed by the man who is now al Qaeda's second-in-command, according to an exhaustive study issued last week by the Pentagon. "Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al Qaeda's stated goals and objectives." According to the Pentagon study, Egyptian Islamic Jihad was one of many jihadist groups that Iraq's former dictator funded, trained, equipped, and armed.

Now the shocking part. Hayes notes that the Pentagon study confirming Saddam's terrorist links has been widely reported as if it said exactly the opposite - as if it refuted those terrorist links. How can that be?

All it took was a leak to a gullible reporter, one misleading line in the study's executive summary, a boneheaded Pentagon press office, an incompetent White House, and widespread journalistic negligence.

On Monday, March 10, 2008, Warren P. Strobel, a reporter from the McClatchy News Service first reported that the new Pentagon study was coming. "An exhaustive review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaida terrorist network." McClatchy is a newspaper chain that serves many of America's largest cities. The national security reporters in its Washington bureau have earned a reputation as reliable outlets for anti-Bush administration spin on intelligence. Strobel quoted a "U.S. official familiar with the report" who told him that the search of Iraqi documents yielded no evidence of a "direct operational link" between Iraq and al Qaeda. Strobel used the rest of the article to attempt to demonstrate that this undermined the Bush administration's prewar claims with regard to Iraq and terrorism.

With the study not scheduled for release for two more days, this article shaped subsequent coverage, which was no doubt the leaker's purpose. Stories from other media outlets tracked McClatchy very closely but began to incorporate a highly misleading phrase taken from the executive summary: "This study found no 'smoking gun' (i.e. direct connection) between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda." This is how the Washington Post wrote it up:

An examination of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents, audio and video records collected by U.S. forces since the March 2003 invasion has concluded that there is 'no smoking gun' supporting the Bush administration's prewar assertion of an 'operational relationship' between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorist network, sources familiar with the study said."

Much of the confusion might have been avoided if the Bush administration had done anything to promote the study. An early version of the Pentagon study was provided to National Security Adviser Steve Hadley more than a year ago, before November 2006. In recent weeks, as the Pentagon handled the rollout of the study, Hadley was tasked with briefing President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. It's unclear whether he shared the study with President Bush, and NSC officials did not respond to repeated requests for comment. But sources close to Cheney say the vice president was blindsided.

Bill Kristol has a strong editorial in today's Weekly Standard

 

If you talk to people in the Bush administration, they know the truth about the report. They know that it makes the case convincingly for Saddam's terror connections. But they'll tell you (off the record) it's too hard to try to set the record straight. Any reengagement on the case for war is a loser, they'll say. Furthermore, once the first wave of coverage is bad, you can never catch up: You give the misleading stories more life and your opponents further chances to beat you up in the media. And as for trying to prevent misleading summaries and press leaks in the first place—that's hopeless. Someone will tell the media you're behaving like Scooter Libby, and God knows what might happen next.

David Frum, who of late,  I have disagreed with more than not, goes even further;

But it doesn't go far enough!

This is a psychologically broken administration: exhausted, passive, prematurely aged, self-defeated.

It is lying on the mat moaning as its opponents kick it, unwilling/unable to block a blow or raise a hand in self-defense.

The indifference to quality of personnel - always a problem - has now become the defining characteristic of the administration. The president continues to imagine he is pursuing one set of policies. But because he allows retiring principals to be succeeded by their deputies, and then those deputies to be followed by their deputies, he has passively acquiesced in allowing his administration to be staffed by people who regard his policies as at best impossible, at worst actively wrong. And then he is surprised when his administration does the opposite of what he wished! Of course it does! If you won't steer the car, it won't go where you want!

Where did things go wrong?

My own personal belief is that the first and most decisive error was the choice of Condoleezza Rice as National Security Adviser

I agree for vastly different reasons. Frun goes off an a divergent tear.....

Check out: Media swings and misses on IDA's Saddam report

UPDATE: A Jacksonian weighs in:

What is even more fun is tha Saddam had started prepping the way for this in... 1968. He had spent his time while not in power starting up a system of paper front companies and accounts, supported by picked individuals which would include Nadhmi Auchi. The merging of that system with the Muslim Brotherhood/al Qaeda Al Taqwa banking system would create one of the largest fraudulent money laundinger systems the world had ever seen. The systems that got entangled in that include the Bank of New York penetration by the Red Mafia and the Clearstream compromise for assured funds transfers to Europe. Add to that the Al Taqwa system and the Al Mahdi system of Saddam, and yo u then have a money laundering system stretching from China to San Francisco going the long way around the planet. The scandals embroiled in that, beyond BoNY and the multiple Clearstream scandals, includes such things as OFF, Yukos, and Angolagate. The names of those politicians who are 'one removed' from this is horrifically long in the US, Canada, almost all of Europe, the Middle East, Africa and S. America. Even with Saddam taken out, the obvious outlets of Al Taqwa stopped up and the ongoing investigation into BoNY (its only been going on for 7 or so years, I am sure they will figure it out some day), this basic system of banks and money institutions has shifted to other banks while previous ones, including BNP-Paribas, Citibank, Republic bank, amongst a few, still have not properly straightened out their accounting if they even know it has gone awry in the first place. This stuff makes BCCI, BNL and the S&L scandal to be tiny in comparison.

Comments

[reliapundit - the astute blogger]

Let's face it Pam - Dubya stands for WIMP!

He fought HALF-ASSED in Afghan and Iraq (until recently)

and wimped out on going after Assad.

Rice equates Israel and the PNA, and blames both equally.

Bush SUKS. Bigtime.

But he was LIGHT YEARS better than Gore and Kerry.

McCain is the same thing - maybe softer on some issues and tougher on others.

But on balance, McCain is a lib hawk, too - one MEGA light years better than the Shrill-da-beast and Obamessiah.

SIGH...

[tazzerman2000]

reliapundit, it's hard to add anything to what you've said here other than this:

Let's NOT forget the damage that was done in so many ways and places by the previous administration.

From decimating the military to completely derailing our intelligence and state depts and allowing the growth of this cancer to spread worldwide..

[Pamela Geller]

sigh

[Adam Stanhope]

*If* this story is even true, we invaded in 2003 - not in the early 1990s. Nations don't invade NOW because of what happened THEN.

Was Saddam an imminent threat to the well-being of the United States or our allies through the use of weapons of Mass Destruction in 2003?

Every single one of us knows that the answer is NO - Saddam was NOT a threat to us in 2003.

[Shy Guy]

Every single one of us knows that the answer is NO - Saddam was NOT a threat to us in 2003.

Posted by: Adam Stanhope | Sunday, March 16, 2008 at 03:55 PM

Who is "we"? :)

[ajacksonian]

What is even more fun is tha Saddam had started prepping the way for this in... 1968. He had spent his time while not in power starting up a system of paper front companies and accounts, supported by picked individuals which would include Nadhmi Auchi. The merging of that system with the Muslim Brotherhood/al Qaeda Al Taqwa banking system would create one of the largest fraudulent money laundinger systems the world had ever seen. The systems that got entangled in that include the Bank of New York penetration by the Red Mafia and the Clearstream compromise for assured funds transfers to Europe. Add to that the Al Taqwa system and the Al Mahdi system of Saddam, and you then have a money laundering system stretching from China to San Francisco going the long way around the planet.

The scandals embroiled in that, beyond BoNY and the multiple Clearstream scandals, includes such things as OFF, Yukos, and Angolagate.

The names of those politicians who are 'one removed' from this is horrifically long in the US, Canada, almost all of Europe, the Middle East, Africa and S. America. Even with Saddam taken out, the obvious outlets of Al Taqwa stopped up and the ongoing investigation into BoNY (its only been going on for 7 or so years, I am sure they will figure it out some day), this basic system of banks and money institutions has shifted to other banks while previous ones, including BNP-Paribas, Citibank, Republic bank, amongst a few, still have not properly straightened out their accounting if they even know it has gone awry in the first place. This stuff makes BCCI, BNL and the S&L scandal to be tiny in comparison.

[dbl action]

For those paying attention Jayna Davis' book 'The Third Terrorist' was undeniably convincing. Of course this info got wrapped into another cover-up of mammoth proportions, easy when McVey & Nichols were so expertly pawned. For those of you who need to know check out jaynadavis.com and then read the book.

Oh ya baby, we're at war with an enemy we haven't really even identified yet; hopefully the 'patriots' in our gov't and military are still there. Our time is running out to wake up and get to business.