Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran (Time Magazine)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 04:49 AM
Original message
9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran (Time Magazine)
Edited on Sat Jul-17-04 04:49 AM by VolcanoJen
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,664967,00.html

Oh, great. Just watch the spin as the focus turns away from Bush/Iraq and toward Iran. "Who cares about Iraq? IT'S ON TO IRAN!" Four more wars, indeed.

I can't help but wonder if the new "informant detainees" are more reliable than Curveball...

Excerpt:

Next week's much anticipated final report by a bipartisan commission on the origins of the 9/11 attacks will contain new evidence of contacts between al-Qaeda and Iran — just weeks after the Administration has come under fire for overstating its claims of contacts between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

A senior U.S. official told TIME that the Commission has uncovered evidence suggesting that between eight and ten of the 14 "muscle" hijackers — that is, those involved in gaining control of the four 9/11 aircraft and subduing the crew and passengers—passed through Iran in the period from October 2000 to February 2001. Sources also tell TIME that Commission investigators found that Iran had a history of allowing al-Qaeda members to enter and exit Iran across the Afghan border. This practice dated back to October 2000, with Iranian officials issuing specific instructions to their border guards—in some cases not to put stamps in the passports of al-Qaeda personnel—and otherwise not harass them and to facilitate their travel across the frontier. The report does not, however, offer evidence that Iran was aware of the plans for the 9/11 attacks.

The senior official also told TIME that the report will note that Iranian officials approached the al-Qaeda leadership after the bombing of the USS Cole and proposed a collaborative relationship in future attacks on the U.S., but the offer was turned down by bin Laden because he did not want to alienate his supporters in Saudi Arabia.

The Iran-al Qaeda contacts were discovered and presented to the Commissioners near the end of the bipartisan panel's more than year-long investigation into the sources and origins of the 9/11 attacks. Much of the new information about Iran came from al-Qaeda detainees interrogated by the U.S. government, including captured Yemeni al-Qaeda operative Waleed Mohammed bin Attash, who organized the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole, and from as many as 100 separate electronic intelligence intercepts culled by analysts at the NSA. The findings were sent to the White House for review only this week. But Commission members have been hinting for weeks that their report would have some Iran surprises. As the 9/11 Commission's chairman, Thomas Kean, said in June, "We believe....that there were a lot more active contacts, frankly, with Iran and with Pakistan than there were with Iraq."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Born Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 04:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. Why is this an issue?
There is no doubt Saudi Arabia was involved yet we hear very little, are they last on the list? We need to get the bush team out of the white house, so America can be America again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shockingelk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 04:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. bad bad for bush bush bush
"What? You mean it was Iran and not Iraq!?!?" Such people are still out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 05:08 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Well, I certainly hope some people know the difference.
Edited on Sat Jul-17-04 05:08 AM by VolcanoJen
I'm confident in our numbers, but you know how this country gets when whipped up into yet another war-frenzy.

Great article here, from a religious site, via Daily Kos, about how "bored" the public seems to be with the Iraq war:

Don't Forget the Bodies

I think it puts it in perspective... and I'm terribly concerned about the bubbling Iran situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shockingelk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Doubt they'd start another war
Absent an attack it takes a year to gear up Americans for war. And I think most are war-weary. It would be too tricky to do.

That Iran may have facilitated the 9/11 attackers and Iraq did not will hit home with with people who don't follow things closely than does "We've not found and WMD ('well, yet, right?) and there's car bombs going off at least weekly."

I'd be surprised if this doesn't push some people who still support Bush's action on Iraq into the "I think the war was not a good idea" column.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 05:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Me thinks you
over estimate the intelligence of the American people. Iran & Iraq look and feel the same to those not paying attention.
Still way too many people, even though they finally realize bu$h&co is corrupt to the core, still think the war is a good thing. Gotta get rid of those terrorists, don't cha know.

We touch Iran and we will find out they are not a paper tiger. The teeth & claws will hurt. Iran has allies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shockingelk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. I think Americans don't have the right information
Had they read UNMOVIC and IAEA reports and paid attention to the foreign press, we never would have gone to war in Iraq.

Lots of Americans don't watch or read any news. It's simple as that. They get their news from friends and coworkers. That's how that Iraq/9-11 connection came about in the first place: a game of telephone.

Over the next few months, that Iran assisted the attackers - not Iraq - will filter down through the grapevine.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
45. Oh, honey. They get their news from these nauseatingly
retarded e-mails from people who are as ignorant as they are.

I'm american, but jesus, if I have to read one more page of electronic diarrhea that makes fun of Clinton spooing Lewinsky without mentioning the fact that he simultaneously balanced the budget, or that his penis didn't just kill 30,000 innocent people, I'll go off the deep end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #8
14. I totally agree w/you RC
about over estimating the intelligence of the American people, particularly *'s minions.

Iran is one of the "axis of evil" doers. They probably have had plans in the works to do Iran after Iraq since before that stupid phrase was uttered. After all, * and his minions believe he is the 'War President.' Could this be the 'October Surprise.'?

Yes, I think they are that stupid and arrogant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catt03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. I was thinking the same
I bet if Jay Leno did one of his on the street interviews about history and current affairs asking; Are we fighting a war in Iraq or Iran, most would say Iran or do not know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
31. "Iran has allies." Yep - and one of them is Russia.
No more Cold War, so we need a Hot One now?

Stop the planet, I wanna get off!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IranianDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #31
40. And China, North Korea, Pakistan and Libya.
It'll be the end of existence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #6
26. I think they're more interested in sanctions and destabilization
There's another thread going currently about the Bushies wanting to overthrow the ayatollahs by supporting opposition groups with Iran. But they don't realize to what extent *anything* to do with the US is now tainted. The Neocons still think there are people in the Middle East for whom the US represents democracy and freedom.

Iran at this point is opening up to outside influences, relaxing dress codes, getting interested in its pre-Islamic history, and so forth. It gives every sign of being prepared to become a vibrant modern society on its own. Interference by the Bush gang will only get in the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Tainted NOW? The US did this in Iran before, and look how it turned out!
History truly repeats itself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustCarbon Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
53. hahaha
I am Iranian.
Remember in 1979, the Shah? Remember?
Stop messing up my country!
Iran is a far more civilized place than it is made out to be.
And it does not need Bush's help in setting up any type of democracy.
Check the news -- there are student political protests everyday in Tehran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #53
57. Some people remember a lot farther back than that.
It was way before my time, but thanks to keeping things secret, the preservations of history stay intact. So ironic

Mohammed Mossadegh

Country: Iran.

Cause: Independence and democracy for Iran.

Background: Beginning in the 19th Century, Iran becomes subject to interference and land grabs by Britain and Russia.
(snip)
Aware that a plot is being hatched, Mossadegh breaks off diplomatic relations with Britain on 16 October. The British embassy in Iran is closed down and all British diplomats inside the country are ordered to leave. The involvement of the US now becomes essential if a coup is to succeed.

1953 - The administration in Britain and the new administration of incoming US President Dwight D. Eisenhower become increasingly alarmed by the behaviour of Mossadegh and the ongoing nationalism inside Iran. Their concerns are further heightened when Mossadegh begins to work with the communist Tudeh Party. They fear that Iran will be drawn into the Soviet sphere, although Mossadegh advocates a policy of nonalignment in foreign affairs.

Mossadegh's position also becomes destabilised by internal conflicts within the National Front, with several senior members and the religious faction defecting.

In March, the shah attempts to have Mossadegh assassinated, but Mossadegh is warned and the scheme fails. The same month an Iranian general approaches the US Embassy in Tehran seeking support for an army-led coup against Mossadegh.

On 4 April the US director of central intelligence releases US$1 million which, according to a secret history of the coup written in 1954 by the Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) chief coup strategist, Dr Donald N. Wilber, is to be used "in a way that would bring about the fall of Mossadegh".
(snip)
http://www.moreorless.au.com/heroes/mossadegh.html

http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PROGRESSIVE1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #26
38. Yes! And I would like to see us help reform Iran in a peaceful manor.
Iran is a better place for democracy to begin, not Iraq.

Again, I am for ONLY PEACEFUL MEANS OF DOING THIS!!! That mean's,
NO WAR IN IRAN!!!

NO WAR!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aidoneus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. again, a ridiculous finger is pointed
Edited on Sat Jul-17-04 05:34 AM by Aidoneus
There may be a couple particular matters they have in common, otherwise the suggestion is absurd. One cannot base a relationship on "I rule you an apostate and enemy, except for that business about the Zionists & Americans"..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #4
18. Our Air Force and Navy need something to do
people like watching bombs and missile's blowing up, it's like the 4th of July, everyone can get their flags out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 05:37 AM
Response to Original message
5. If Bush wins, it's Iran next for American "blood and treasure" nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlashHarry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #5
17. No. Iran actually has an army.
One of the reasons Iraq was such a prime target was the fact that its military was decimated by the first Gulf War and the subsequent sanctions. Iran, on the other hand, has a large, well-trained military force that would prove to be far more formidable, should we invade. The other obvious problem with this scenario is that we simply don't have enough troops to mount an invasion. It would take at least half a million or more US troops to make it even remotely viable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 05:48 AM
Response to Original message
7. TIME also said there was a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq
When are we going to stop believing the propaganda from the capitalist press?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. The propaganda will continue as long as organize crime has
control over the three cable networks and the media will stand up to this administration with the truth and not for personal gain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
agincourt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #13
19. bingo
right on the mark, they should be considered a 24-7 soft money ad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #13
43. I don't think it is propaganda.
I think it is pretty well documented that bin Laden forged ties with Shia muslims, and the CIA was transfixed on the rift between Sunni (bin Laden and Saudis) and Shia, and missed the fact that the tide had turned, i.e. the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I think this happened during Clinton, and definitely got worse and more ignored under Bush

Militarily there is no way we could take them on at this point, and the public would not support it.

Iran is actually probably right in league with these guys, yet what an utterly and ironically stupid time to figure this out.

Fighting terrorism is about intel, period. Ground troops can't do it, only the intel agencies can. But will they.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wellst0nev0ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
10. They Can Always Change That One Letter In Those Pro-Empire Signs
out with "Liberate Iraq", now it's time to "Liberate Iran" :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hang a left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
11. Is there no mention of the 15 of the 19 had been issued passports
by the US in Saudi Arabia? Not only a whitewash but a case-builder for the axis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 06:34 AM
Response to Original message
12. It's meaningless
We CAN'T invade Iran right now, it's as simple as that. We don't have the troops to do it.

First of all Iran is a tougher nut than Iraq was. It is larger, and has not been under the sanctions Iraq has. They can actually fight back in a meaningful way.

Thgen you have the issue of trying to field a sizable army in the first place. Where do they come from? It is all we can do to maintain our occupation of Iraq, invading Iran would require at least 200,000 more troops. Plus all the equipment etc. which we do NOT have available.

Forget it. Until we pull out of Iraq the United States HAS no army to project anywhere in the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Could a bombing campaign bring Iran to it's knees?
If junior is elected, the draft would loom large if Iran is to be conquered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IranianDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #15
41. Bush would have to bring the draft back...
Iran has a REAL army, not like the disgracefully weak iraqi military. Plus the sheer size, GDP, and military spending of Iran is not even comparable with that of Iraq. In Iran, state media says there are also 8 million volunteers ready to go to the front in case of another "holy defence."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kool Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #41
56. Not only do they have a real army, what do
Edited on Mon Jul-19-04 12:21 AM by Kool Kitty
you think the response would be were W to preemptively invade another Middle Eastern country? What would the rest of the world have to say about that? And I would think that another invasion would start a much broader war, as other countries in the area would be thinking that they were going to be next if no one puts a stop to W and rest of his minions. I think the simplistic phrase that would describe such a dangerous effort would be "biting off more than you can chew".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Not planning on invading, just encouraging a revolt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IranianDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #16
42. IMO that's even more insane.
1.) If they bomb the nuclear facilites, Tel Aviv will turn into rubble.

2.)If they try to encourage revolt, the mullahs will order police to open fire on the demonstrators causing deaths of thousands of young Iranians. Of course to Bush, that is nothing but necessary loss of life...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2Design Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
20. saudi link is the story....not iran
<snip>
but the offer was turned down by bin Laden because he did not want to alienate his supporters in Saudi Arabia.
<snip>

His supporters are in saudi arabia. Period. These are the people who attacked our towers. Going after everyone around them is not going after the people who attacked us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #20
44. No, it's worse.
They are in Syria, in Lebanon,in Pakistan, in Yemen, probably in Egypt and Sudan, in the UAE, etc, etc, etc.

I get your point, but the CIA failed "utterly and completely" in the words of the Jersey girls, to track the financial support network of terrorism with regards to bin Laden. And that is GLOBAL, because we are being attacked not by a country or ethnic group, but by a religious movement.

And a signicant # of his supporters are here in the U.S., smuggling cigarettes, selling pirated clothing, running coupon fraud rings (to the tune of thousands of dollars a month) and stealing and re-selling BABY FORMULA, of all things according to Doug Farah's book "Blood from Stones". It's an amazing indictment of the across the board intel failures of the CIA for the last 15 years with regards to terrorism, and one long extended "oh, shit".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
21. The 9-11 commission found ties between OUR government and
Al-Qaeda. What's the point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemBones DemBones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
23. Michael Isikoff on CNN now talking about this.

I haven't heard much yet, paused my tv (I love TiVo!) and logged on to see if there was talk about this here. DU never lets me down! Some DUers are always awake and finding the latest.

OK, is Iran Eurasia or Eastasia? I keep forgetting, what with Turkey being part of Europe now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
24. Um.. the 9/11 hijackers also passed through America..
what does that mean? Onward to Iran. I knew that PNAC wanted another country to attack, I kept thinking it was syria... If the idiots out there would read about the PNAC plans, it would all make sense. Bush started TWO wars in 2 years... that's just scary. Now it's being reported that he will make a "regime-change" in Iran if he gets re-selected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbackjon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
25. Bush must have been listening to Alan Jackson
"I watch CNN but I could not tell the differnce between Iraq and Iran"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
27. Ticking names off the list
Iraq - check
Iran - check

how long before Egypt?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasBushwhacker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. Nope, after Iran will be Kuwait
Iraq - 110 Billion Barrels of Oil (known reserves) - 90% of country is unexplored. 110 Trillion Cubic Feet of Natural Gas Reserves.

Iran - 90 Billion Barrels of Oil, 812 Trillion Cubic Feer of NG

Kuwait - 99 Billion Barrels of Oil

After those two, the Saudis' 260 Billion Barrels of Oil and 224 Trillion Cubic Feet of NG won't matter to us anymore. The House of Saud is shitting its pants as we speak.

The only thing that stands between us and PNAC style world domination is WWIII with Russia and China. It's a win/win for Shrub. If we win WWIII then his empire is built. If we lose, he gets raptured and has a front row seat to the biggest blow-em-up action movie in the universe, sitting next to Jesus and eating unlimited, choke free pretzels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DubyaSux Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
28. See?
This clearly shows the war in Iraq was not Bush's fault.

He told his staff to invade Iran, but the person who typed up the orders typed in Iraq by mistake.

So, it was a typo that led us into Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SCRUBDASHRUB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. You read my mind. "Oopsy!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigBigBear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
29. Weeeee !!!!
Can we go on the spin-you ride again, Daddy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Isn't it simply disgusting?
Are there even any troops left to fight another war? And wouldn't this one be, like, a lot worse than the Iraq "experiment," considering that Iran has not only an army, but allies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 02:07 AM
Response to Reply #30
49. Disgusting...but what they may try this time is something new...as in NU..
..CLEAR....

Yes, that's right folks, since we don't have any troops left to fight another war, and since IRAN has nukes, we are going to use ours first....

:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #49
50. Yep, that's what those brand new RNEPs are for.
Cheney and Rummy have been selling WMDs to everyone over there so we'll have an excuse to pre-emptively attack.

oi! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pachamama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. Oi Swamp Rodent.....
Yeah, as if earthquakes aren't enough for the the poor Iranian people, FUCheney, Wolfie, Rummy & Dimwit (and the rest of the neo-creeps) can't wait to use their Bunker busters, nukes and bio weapons...they will claim it was in self-defense...right...

:nuke: :nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Geo55 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
35. oh man....
"I think we should take Iraq and Iran and combine them into one country and call it Irate. All the pissed off people live in one place and get it over with. "
Denis Leary

Hey....shrub said a while back....Those that "harbor" the terrorists are dog meat.
this is just a warm-up for 2005.

If this man is elected (honest or otherwise)....we're ALL dog meat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
36. Bushista bullshit! I've never liked the mullahs but ...
Edited on Sat Jul-17-04 09:21 PM by struggle4progress
... they really have not been friends to Al-Qaeda.

Iran hands over al-Qaeda suspects to US
PM Archive - Monday, 12 August , 2002 00:00:00
Reporter: Rafael Epstein

<snip>
In an unusually conciliatory move to Washington, Iran has handed over to Saudi Arabia, 16 people it suspects of being members of Al Qaeda, in the full knowledge that they may well end up being interrogated by American officials.

To put that in context, Iran is one of the countries George W Bush has labelled as the Axis of Evil, and Iran's ayatollahs have been describing America for more than two decades as the Great Satan.

The apparent thawing of relations between Iran and the US, was announced on American breakfast television, by the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia. The Saudis themselves are trying to repair strains in their relations with the US, the world's biggest oil consumer.
<snip>

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/s646675.htm


12 August 2002
U.S. Pleased with Saudi, Iranian Cooperation Against Al Qaeda

<snip>
It is our understanding that Iran has rendered 16 al Qaeda suspects to Saudi authorities. I'd just refer you to Saudi officials and/or Iranian authorities for comments or specifics on this hand-over. I think, as we've said many times in the past, we've been very pleased with the level of Saudi cooperation in the international campaign against terrorism. When it's been in our interest to do so, we've not hesitated to also engage the Iranian government on such issues as the international efforts to bring al Qaeda terrorists to justice and to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan, as well as areas like counternarcotics and refugee relief. So we're continuing to cooperate with Iran in these mutual interests.
<snip>

http://www.usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/peace/archives/2002/august/081303.html


Is Iran Next on Washington's Hit List?
September 9, 2002
by Charles V. Peña

The major media are dominated by the debate over the United States taking military action against Iraq. Skeptics are more vocal. And the administration appears to have dug in and become more resolute in its goal of regime change. But lost in the rhetoric on both sides is an important question: What comes after Iraq?
<snip>

Recently, the administration has accused Iran of harboring top-level al Qaeda leaders. This is simply the culmination of increasingly hostile rhetoric designed to bolster the case for the administration to take action against Iran after Iraq.

It would be folly for the United States to wage another war against another Muslim nation after Afghanistan and Iraq. Such action would be interpreted as a war against Islam by the rest of the Muslim world. If anything, the United States needs to avoid turning the war on terrorism against al Qaeda into a larger holy war against Islam and the more than one billion Muslims around the world. Yet this seems to be the course the administration is steering by putting Iraq and Iran in its sights.
<snip>

There are always risks and consequences to U.S. actions. The United States ought to think twice about pursuing a policy of pre-emptive military action that might lead to even more terrorism and the creation of more enemies. That is especially pertinent when the job of taking down al Qaeda - the group responsible for killing thousands of innocent people on Sept. 11 - remains largely unfinished.
<snip>

http://www.cato.org/dailys/09-09-02.html


Iran has shown no leniency towards al-Qaeda members: Asefi
5/26/03

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in Tehran on Monday that the Islamic Republic of Iran has never shown leniency towards members of Al-Qaeda so far, IRNA reported.

Talking to reporters, he said that any Al-Qaeda member who is caught trying to enter Iranian territory will be arrested, investigated and expelled and that a number of Al-Qaeda members are currently under investigation in the country.

<snip>

http://www.payvand.com/news/03/may/1131.html


Iran not harbouring Al-Qaeda, says India
Saturday, May 31, 2003
By Amit Baruah

ST. PETERSBURG MAY 30. India today made it clear that it did not share persistent concerns being expressed by the United States that Iran was harbouring Al-Qaeda elements and interfering in Iraq by supporting Shia resurgence in the war-torn country.

"Our own reading is not quite the same," the Foreign Secretary, Kanwal Sibal, said today, adding that Teheran had told India that the Iranian model did not apply to Iraq.

His remarks come amid continuing reports in the Western press that the U.S. Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, favoured a change of regime in Iran.
<snip>

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/05/31/stories/2003053104451100.htm


Iran Reportedly Nabs Bin Laden's No. 2 Man
Saturday, June 28, 2003

WASHINGTON — Ayman al-Zawahiri, Usama bin Laden's right-hand man, was reported last night to be in custody in Iran along with several other top Al Qaeda leaders.
The Arabic news channel Al-Arabiyah said the fanatic Egyptian-born doctor is under arrest in Iran along with bin Laden's son Saad and Al Qaeda's infamous spokesman Abu Ghaith.
<snip>

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,90660,00.html


Iran holding al Qaeda leaders
Iran 'holding senior al Qaeda men'
Thursday, July 24, 2003 Posted: 1:02 AM EDT (0502 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Four top al Qaeda leaders are in custody in Iran, including the terrorist group's military leader and its spokesman, U.S. officials say.
<snip>

Iran says the United States last May provided it with a list of names of suspected al Qaeda members believed to be in Iran.

At the time, Iran said it would look into the matter but was unaware of where these individuals might be.
<snip>
http://www.peterbergen.com/clients/PeterBergen/pbergen.nsf/Web00002Show?OpenForm&ParentUNID=257C7B6DFBEB39DA85256D6D005EAA2C


from the July 28, 2003 edition
Iran holds Al Qaeda's top leaders
Tehran's custody of bin Laden's son and others is a blow to the terrorist organization.

By Faye Bowers Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON – While much of the world is focused on US soldiers closing in on Saddam Hussein in Iraq, a much less-noticed but possibly even more important roundup is taking place in Iraq's neighbor to the east, Iran.

The Tehran government is holding several top-level Al Qaeda operatives that, experts say, could lead to the biggest breakthrough in curtailing the organization since the fall of Afghanistan.

Though the Iranians haven't mentioned any names, intelligence officials and press reports indicate they've captured Saad bin Laden, Osama bin Laden's son, who has assumed a leadership role; Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, the Al Qaeda spokesman; and Saif al-Adel, the latest No. 3 who is believed to be in charge of military operations.

Even more significant, according to one Western intelligence official, Tehran is also holding Al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who is known as an Islamic fundamentalist intellectual and eloquent speaker for the organization. While some US intelligence sources have expressed doubt that Iran really has Dr. Zawahiri, the European official says Tehran "absolutely" has him.
<more>

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0728/p01s02-wome.html


Al-Qaeda-linked group wiped out
08/04/2003 23:11

Halabja - US forces have wiped out an alleged al-Qaeda-linked group in northern Iraq with help from their Kurdish allies - but also their Iranian foes who have sealed off the Islamist militants' only exit.

US special forces set out on Tuesday from this town in Iraqi Kurdistan with Kurdish fighters to track down militants of the Ansar al-Islam group who might have survived the bombing and the onslaught on their stronghold.

The US forces kept mum on the location of their hunting ground, but a Kurdish official said it was a mountainous region on the border with Iran because "they have nowhere else to go" after the Islamic Republic "closed its border."
<snip>

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_1344997,00.html


Al-Qaeda 'hates Iran as much as it hates the US'
August 14, 2003

The al-Qaeda terrorist network hates Iran as much as it hates the United States, Iranian President Mohammed Khatami said yesterday.

"Whenever we find al-Qaeda members, we arrest them and the group has as much hatred and enmity to Iran as it does to the US," Mr Khatami was quoted by the news agency IRNA as saying.

He reiterated that all al-Qaeda members whose nationality could be verified would be extradited. The others were to be tried inside Iran.
<snip>

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/13/1060588457819.html


October 27, 2003
Iran Says It Warned of Al Qaeda's 'Fanatic Nature'
By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Defending its handling of terror networks, Iran told the United Nations it had warned the world of the "fanatic nature" of the Taliban and al Qaeda networks long before anyone else, according to a report released on Monday.

Iran submitted the report to a U.N. Security Council sanctions committee on Afghanistan about a month ago. But an extensive list of suspected Taliban or al Qaeda associates accompanying the document was only delivered several days ago, said Chilean Ambassador Heraldo Munoz, chairman of the panel.
<snip>

http://www.intellnet.org/news/2003/10/27/21092-1.html



2 November (2003) Khaleej Times AFP
Newspaper prints names of 147 Al Qaeda suspects extradited by Iran

The pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat published on Sunday the names of 147 suspected members of the Al Qaeda network and the Taleban Islamic military who were extradited by Iran in October.

The Saudi-owned newspaper did not say how it obtained the list about which Iran informed the United Nations, but the article was datelined New York.

The names included 29 Saudis, 12 Jordanians, 13 Yemenis, six Moroccans, six Tunisians, one Syrian, seven Somalis, 35 Pakistanis and 24 others whose nationalities could not be established. The Pakistanis and the unknown group were handed over to Islamabad, the paper said. Three Afghans and three Lebanese were also identified.

“Iran says it handed them over to their own countries through diplomatic channels,” Al-Hayat said. Seven of the Yemenis were sent to Morocco and the Tunisians to Italy, it added without explanation.
<snip>

http://www.iranexpert.com/2003/namesofsuspects2november.htm


Foreign Minister confirms al-Qaeda bombing threats against Iran
12/22/03

Iran's Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi on Monday confirmed bombing threats made by al-Qaeda against Iran to avenge what has been rumored as Tehran having given tips to capture former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, IRNA reported from Tehran.

"Iran has always been a victim of terrorism, especially posed by al-Qaeda," he told reporters here on the fringes of an international conference on the challenges facing the Islamic world.
<snip>

http://www.payvand.com/news/03/dec/1165.html


Iran Expert Sees Need for United States and Iran to Open Dialogue Because 'We Are Now Neighbors'

Gary Sick, former director of Columbia University's Middle East Institute, forecasts a convergence of views between the United States and Iran because they "are now neighbors" and must broaden their dialogue. He says Iran seeks a stable Iraq. Concerning domestic Iranian politics, Sick says that conservatives are determined to prevail in Iran's upcoming parliamentary elections. But even if they win, he says, they are unlikely to try to restore the country's rigid social code, which has been gradually easing.

Sick, who worked on Iranian affairs for the National Security Council during the Carter administration and the early days of the Reagan administration, says there is no sign that Iran cooperated with al Qaeda. "There was no love lost between these two," he says. Sick was interviewed by Bernard Gwertzman, consulting editor for cfr.org, on January 27, 2004.

http://www.cfr.org/publication.php?id=6723



(Toronto Star Mar. 2, 2004. 02:09 PM)
Iran blames Al Qaeda for attacks
Over 20 Iranians died in attacks in Iraq, Pakistan
Shiites, not U.S., is terror group's real enemy: Iranian vice president

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - An Iranian vice president blamed Al Qaeda for today's attacks on Shiite Muslims in Iraq and Pakistan, condemning the terrorist group's rigid thinking for the bombings and shootings that killed more than 20 Iranian worshippers and wounded 69.

Mohammad Ali Abtahi, Iran's vice president for legal and parliamentary affairs, wrote in a message posted on his personal Web site that Al Qaeda considers Shiites more dangerous than their political enemy - the United States.
"The reactionary Al Qaeda terror group reached a conclusion ... that they have two enemies: the United States as the political enemy and Shiites as the ideological enemy," Abtahi wrote.
<snip>

http://research.lifeboat.com/alqaeda.htm


Iran to Put Dozen Al Qaeda Captives on Trial
Fri January 23, 2004 01:01 PM ET
By Mark Trevelyan, Security Correspondent

DAVOS, Switzerland (Reuters) - Iran, long accused by the United States of harboring al Qaeda militants, said for the first time on Friday that it would place a dozen jailed suspects on trial.

"They are currently in prison. Their relations are cut off from outside and they are going to be tried," Foreign Minister Khamal Kharrazi told Reuters at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The most important al Qaeda figure that Western intelligence agencies say may be in Iran is Egyptian Saif al-Adel, the security chief of Osama bin Laden's network.
<snip>

http://middleeastinfo.org/article3856.html


Iran News
Al-Qaeda Trials in Iran Could Take Years
AFP
Jun 29, 2004, 07:32

Cabinet Spokesman Abdollah Ramazanzadeh reiterated Iran's position that Tehran would only extradite fugitives deemed not to have acted against the state, and from countries with whom Iran has an extradition agreement. "If not, they will go on trial in Iran. However, it is a long process that could take two to three years," he said.

In 2003, Iran confirmed it was holding senior members from Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, but has refused to identify them. The identity of those still being held has been the subject of intense speculation. Diplomatic sources and Arab press reports have pointed to the possible presence in Iran of the movement's spokesman, Sulaiman Abu Gaith, and its number three, Saif al-Adel, as well as bin Laden's son and al-Qaeda heir, Saad. Washington, however, has accused Iran's regime of harbouring and not arresting members of the network.
<snip>

http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/printer_2763.shtml


Lost Chances in Iran
By David Ignatius
Friday, July 9, 2004; Page A19

<snip>
What's poignant about these wary U.S.-Iranian feelers is that just over a year ago, they yielded a plan for an "anti-terrorist" deal that both countries should have loved: Iran would hand over some senior al Qaeda operatives in its custody and the United States would transfer to Iran some prisoners it was holding from the Iraqi-backed Mujaheddin-e Khalq organization, a group America has officially branded as terrorist.

The State Department is said to have favored such a deal, but the Pentagon balked -- arguing that the Mujaheddin-e Khalq might be useful in fomenting regime change in Tehran. Sadly, this internal dispute between administration pragmatists and ideologues over Iran is similar to the feuds that have obstructed policy on North Korea and Iraq.
<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37953-2004Jul8.html


related threads:

US sets sights on toppling Iran regime
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=690885

Iran Arrests Iranian Al Qaeda Backers - State TV
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=692656
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TacticalPeek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #36
47. Also, it was reported that Iran helped US in Operation Enduring Freedom,
in Afghanistan, especially western.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
37. So the 911 Panel does Bush's dirty work. An open door to Iran war!!!
I can't wait till this investigation is repeated in the
name of real Justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-17-04 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
39. Ahem..."Despite thin intelligence reports US plans to overthrow Iranian
regime" by Jason Leopold-THIS WAS WRITTEN LAST YEAR, but it sounds exactly like LBN to me:grr:

It's all part of PNAC:grr::argh:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/LEO305C.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tight_rope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:37 AM
Response to Original message
46. Oh Boy!....Hear we go again. One war was just not enough. Hell...
let's take on North Korea while we are at it. Let's just get it all over with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Animator Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
48. The current U.S. Military doesn't have the manpower...
... to occupy two countries let alone three. If they launch another God-damned war I'm leaving the country to get ahead of the draft. Anyone know what the weather is like in New Zealand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. It may not take another American army
If the US gets it's way with the UN as a vehicle for a multi-national attack on Iran. There is also the unavoidable fact that the US has secured the countries on Iran's Southern and Western borders. Add one more factor, Ariel Sharon's scared shitless of Iran and has been spoiling for a western assault on Iran with Bush and Powell.

I'd say there's a better than even chance we'll get into a shooting war with Iran if Bush wins a second term.

Gyre
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Animator Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #52
59. Honestly, I see the U.N. uniting against us if we launch another war.
If Bush manages to steal another election, the U.N. will have no choice other than to effect a U.S. regime change. The U.N. will not be able to rely on the support of the U.S. Military (the C.I.A. perhaps)to re-establish a democratic system in the U.S., so it will have to turn to China for sheer military might. If China steps up, we are fucked, if you gave every man woman and child in the United States an A-K 47, and you gave every man in the Chinese Military a fork, we still lose... badly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. We spend as much on military as the rest of the world combined.

Nobody's going to take us on directly. And the idea that the UN would sponsor regime change in the US is ridiculous. But we still should be concerned about worldwide opinion and the long-term diplomatic effects of our current bullying posture.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-18-04 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
54. How does this fit in
Edited on Sun Jul-18-04 11:42 PM by Carolab
with the Israelis training Kurds in Iran (as well as northern Iraq, Syria and Turkey)? Will the Kurds be deployed as "allies" in a civil war in Iraq against the Sunnis and the Shiites, and will they fight on the side of the U.S. and Israel against Iranians as well?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustCarbon Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 02:07 AM
Response to Reply #54
60. read 'kiss the dust'
The kurds were persectured in Iraq for a loooooooong time

I doubt they'd be willing to move to the Iraqi side of the fence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Porcupine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
55. The US military's nut has been cracked....
and the rest of the world knows it!!! If we declare war on you, surrender quickly and then beat the shit out of the occupation forces.

Without troops on the ground we cannot extract resources. Extraction of resources is the only reason for going to war. We truly do not give a crap about either democracy or terrorism at the leadership level.

Simply bombing the shit out of a trapped and helpless population will no longer fly with the rest of the world. If you think we can go it alone go to the hardware store and see who makes all the spare parts. It ain't us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
58. (Sunday) Looks like "Al-Qaeda passed thru Iran" is the mantra
Iran 'has closer ties to al-Qa'eda than Iraq'
By Alec Russell in Washington (Filed: 19/07/2004)

Iran will be accused of having closer ties to al-Qa'eda than Iraq and of giving safe passage to many of the September 11 hijackers before the attacks in a report by the commission investigating the atrocities.
<snip>

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/19/wiran19.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/19/ixworld.html


9/11 hijackers 'transited Iran'

The CIA's acting director says eight of the 9/11 hijackers passed through Iran, but there is no evidence Tehran was connected with the attacks in 2001.

John McLaughlin told US TV the CIA had known for some time that eight of the 11 hijackers travelled through Iran.

He was speaking ahead of publication of a final report by an inquiry into the attacks on Washington and New York.

Iran acknowledges some of the hijackers may have crossed its borders, but says they would have done so illegally.
<snip>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3905509.stm


Analysis
U.S. Faces a Crossroads on Iran Policy
By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 19, 2004; Page A09

The Bush administration is under mounting pressure to take action to deal with Iran -- and end the drift that has characterized U.S. policy for more than three years.

The final report of the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, due Thursday, may further intensify the policy debate, as it says Iran let eight of the 19 hijackers transit through Iran from neighboring Afghanistan -- a claim Tehran does not deny. The issue is whether it happened with Iran's compliance or because of porous borders.

Acting CIA Director John E. McLaughlin said yesterday that the United States has known for "some time" about the al Qaeda passage through Iran, although he said there is "no evidence" of a connection between Iran and the Sept. 11 attacks.

In response, Iran's Foreign Ministry said yesterday that preventing illegal passage was difficult because of the long frontier, adding that it has since tried to tighten control. "Even more people may cross the border between Mexico and the United States," spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters in Tehran.
<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60286-2004Jul18.html


Iran dismisses US claims it gave al-Qaeda safe haven
Monday, 19th July 2004
ALI AKBAR DAREINI IN TEHRAN

IRAN admitted yesterday that some al-Qaeda operatives behind the 11 September attacks may have passed through the country from Afghanistan - but dismissed as "fabrications" reports from the United States that Tehran may have facilitated the 2001 attacks. "It’s normal that five or six people may have crossed the border within a couple of months without our knowledge ... Our borders are long and it’s not possible to fully control them," Hamid Reza Asefi, a foreign ministry spokesman, told reporters.

Mr Asefi was responding to an 11 September Commission report - expected on Thursday - that says Iran may have facilitated the 2001 attacks in the United States by providing eight to ten al-Qaeda hijackers with safe passage to and from terrorist training camps in Afghanistan.

John McLaughlin, the CIA’s acting director, said yesterday it was known for some time that hijackers passed through Iran but he would not implicate the Iranian government.

"We have no evidence that there is some sort of official connection between Iran and 9/11," he said.
<snip>

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=823102004


Iran reformists seek détente with US as tension rises over al-Qaeda claims
By Gareth Smyth
Published: July 19 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: July 19 2004 5:00

<snip>
Over the weekend Mohammed Ali Abtahi, one of Iran's vice-presidents, called for détente with Washington, while Ali Yunesi, the reformist intelligence minister, told state television that Iran had dismantled all al-Qaeda branches in the country.

Their remarks were made after media reports in the US suggested that the commission investigating the September 11 attacks would conclude that some of the hijackers passed through Iran between October 2000 and February 2001.

Some administration officials have also been briefing journalists that President George W. Bush would adopt a tougher line towards Iran if he were re-elected for a second term.

Mr Abtahi, a close ally of President Mohammed Khatami, distanced Iran from al-Qaeda, pointing out that the group's recent propaganda had targeted "two big enemies, the Shia and the US".
<snip>

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373804960


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
62. shrub pushing the meme: US probing possible Iran role in September 11...
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) said that the United States was investigating whether Iran played any role in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, amid CIA (news - web sites) skepticism of an official link.


"As to direct connections with September the 11th, we're digging into the facts to determine if there was one," Bush said as he met with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos in the Oval Office.


His comments came after the acting director of the US Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) said some of the hijackers who carried out the attacks passed through Iran but that Washington had no evidence that Tehran backed the strikes.


"Acting Director (John) McLaughlin said there was no direct connection between Iran and the attacks of September the 11th. We will continue to look and see if the Iranians were involved," said Bush.


~snip~
more:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1511&ncid=1511&e=3&u=/afp/20040719/wl_afp/us_attacks_iran_bush_040719174537
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC