BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian
Beliefs
- Buddhist
- Catholic
- Contemplative
- Evangelical
- General Christian
- Hindu
- Jewish
- Latter-day Saint
- More Voices
- Muslim
- New Visions
- Pagan
- Progressive Christian
Topics
- Religion News
- Food and Religion
- Sports and Religion
- Religious Art
- Religious Music and Entertainment
- Religious Events
- History and Religion
- Style and Religion
- Politics and Religion
- Women in Religion
- Recreation Outdoors and Religion
- Business Finance and Religion
- Careers Workplace and Religion
- Education and Religion
- Family Parenting and Religion
- Health Fitness and Religion
- Home and Religion
- Relationships and Religion
- Technology and Religion
- Travel and Religion
Columnists
- Buddhist Columnists
- Business Finance and Religion Columnists
- Careers Workplace and Religion Columnists
- Catholic Columnists
- Contemplative Columnists
- Education and Religion Columnists
- Evangelists Columnists
- Family Parenting and Religion Columnists
- General Christian Columnists
- Health Fitness and Religion Columnists
- Hindu Columnists
- History and Religion Columnists
- Home and Religion Columnists
- Jewish Columnists
- More Voices Columnists
- Latter Day Columnists
- Muslim Columnists
- New Visions Columnists
- Nonreligious Columnists
- Pagan Columnists
- Politics and Religion Columnists
- Progressive Columnists
- Recreation Outdoors and Religion Columnists
- Relationships and Religion Columnists
- Religion News Columnists
- Religious Art Columnists
- Religious Events Columnists
- Religious Music and Entertainment Columnists
- Sports and Religion Columnists
- Style and Religion Columnists
- Technology and Religion Columnists
- Travel and Religion Columnists
- Women in Religion Columnists
Resource Library
- 2026 Calendar
- Library of World Religions
- The 100 Most Holy Places on Earth
- Patheos Answers
- Podcasts
- Videos
- Faith Leaders Database
- Anglican Episcopalian
- Bahai
- Baptist
- Buddhism
- Christianity
- Confucianism
- Eastern Orthodoxy
- Hinduism
- Holiness and Pentecostal
- ISKCON
- Islam
- Judaism
- Lutheran
- Methodist
- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
- New Age
- Paganism
- Presbytarian and Reformed
- Protestantism
- Religion Behind the Scenes
- Roman Catholic
- Scientology
- Shia Islam
- Sikhism
- Sufism
- Sunni Islam
- Taoism
- Zen
- See all religions
Research Tools
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support
- Trending:
- Forgiveness
- |
- Marriage
- |
- Consciousness
- |
- Death Penalty
- |
- Election
- |
- Halloween
Eve Tushnet
- Home
- Catholic
- Religious Music & Entertainment
Last updated on: November 17, 2003 at 7:11 pm by Eve Tushnet
2003-11-17T19:11:00-04:00 Eve Tushnet
Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.
MISSING LINKS? Here’s a roundup on the weekend’s Iraq/Al Qaeda opining.
The Weekly Standard piece, based on a memo from Douglas Feith, laying out the case that Saddam cuddled Osama like a five-year-old girl with a kitten (stuff in italics is from the Feith memo): “Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations.
“Information about connections between al Qaeda and Iraq was so widespread by early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream press. A January 11, 1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline: ‘Saddam + Bin Laden?’ The story cited an ‘Arab intelligence source’ with knowledge of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. ‘According to this source, Saddam expected last month’s American and British bombing campaign to go on much longer than it did. The dictator believed that as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in the Muslim world, making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and more effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to support Washington. Saddam’s long-term strategy, according to several sources, is to bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the embargo against Iraq, without waiting for the United Nations to lift if formally.’ [Eve adds: This bit is important because many people asked why a secular Ba’athist freakshow would ally himself with an Islamist freakshow–what was in it for Saddam?]
“Intelligence reports about the nature of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda from mid-1999 through 2003 are conflicting….”
Rebuttal from the Washington Monthly, calling the Iraq/Al Q claim “The Weakest Link“: “When it comes to international terrorism directed at the United States, however, there is mounting evidence of Saudi complicity, but virtually none on Saddam.
“… Far from being ‘harbored’ by Saddam, Ansar al Islam operated out of northeastern Iraq, an area under Kurdish control that was being protected from Saddam’s incursions by U.S. warplanes. Indeed, some of its members fought against Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. …
“…The contacts were not, as Tenet’s language suggested, ongoing for the past 10 years. Most had occurred during the mid-1990s, in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum. At that time, Sudan’s Islamism had sent so many spies and terrorists flooding into Khartoum that the city resembled a jihadist version of the bar scene from Star Wars. There, some of the world’s most infamous terrorists, such as Hezbollah mastermind Imad Mugniyah, frequently crossed paths with foreign intelligence agents, including, Tenet claimed, Iraq’s. But even if Iraqi agents had had contact with al Qaeda operatives, notes one former intelligence official, ‘that’s what all intelligence officers do. They try to get in touch with the bad guys, the enemies, and co-opt them in some way, with money or something else’–which is quite different from forging a working relationship. …
“…First, as far as we know, there were no significant contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after 1998. Second, these Iraqi overtures do not appear to have been reciprocated.”
Reactions from Matthew Yglesias : “Second, much of the alleged link seems to pertain to al-Qaeda way back in its Sudan days when it was a pretty different organization. Links from then are much less significant than links from the era between the ’98 embassy bombing and 9-11, and way less significant than evidence of post-9/11 links. …Note that the information becomes much sketchier after 1998. In particular, there are several uses of the tactic employed by Powell at the UN where one extremely slender thread (i.e., a guy who ‘claimed’ to have gotten a job in Malaysia ‘through the Iraqi embassy’ was at a meeting) is used as an excuse to provide an extended discourse on the bad acts of some al-Qaeda members. I have no doubt that the folks involved in that Malaysia meeting were bad people, but the question was the link to Iraq. The only evidence of such a link is the say-so of one man that he got the job through the embassy, and even if he did get the job through the embassy that hardly proves he was given it in order to collaborate with al-Qaeda….” more
Oxblog:
Parsing the DOD memo: I don’t speak bureaucratese, but I have to say it sounds like Josh (who is undecided on the memo’s salience) is stretching–hard not to read the memo as a disavowal of the WS‘s interpretation. (Which doesn’t mean the WS is wrong!)
David Adesnik asks the political questions; Josh replies.
David’s most compelling question, to me, is this one: “Why has the information turned up now? Why would the White House sit on information that would vindicate its decision to invade Iraq? The Standard article says the information was compiled in response to a request by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Why the heck would the administration wait until the Senate showed an interest before doing some serious research on the Saddam-Osama connection?”
Mark Shea: “So while it will be a very fine thing if, in fact, a support of Al-Quaeda is out of the way. But it will be a very bad thing if, in tradeoff for that, we transform ourselves into a nation which says the ends justify the means. The question that still needs to be attended to is the justice of the war as it was when we launched in it in March when Bush said there was no connection between Saddam and Al-Qaeda.”
You can use this handy search results page at GlobalSecurity.org to find multiple statements by George Tenet on this question. Link via one of Yglesias’s commenters.
Me? Still confused. Sorry….
Previous Post

November 17, 2003
Browse Our Archives
Select a Category Art Best-Of Gay Catholic Whatnot Mackerel-Snapping self-obsessed Too much is never enough Uncategorized
Select a Month November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 August 2022 July 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002 January 2002
Follow Us!
TAKE THE
Religious Wisdom Quiz
True or False: John's Gospel identifies Jesus as 'the Lamb of God' in the first chapter.
Select your answer to see how you score.
TRUE FALSE
Related posts from Eve Tushnet
When the Lights Go Out (Everybody Starts to...
"What Have Fungi to Do with Athens?": I'm...
Punch Drunk Love: I watch "Bottoms"
TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
Why Mercy, Not Condemnation, Leads Sinners Home
Christ was accused of being a sinner, not only because of his...
Desert Fathers And Mothers On Anger And Community
The desert fathers and mothers often reminded each other against the dangers...
Is Faith Really Blind? What Skeptics Get Wrong
Faith is belief without evidence and reason. So saith the famous (infamous?)...
Creation, Preservation, and Teleology in Catholic Theology
As I write this, it is very early Monday morning. Like millions...
Why I Choose the Eucharist Over the Sermon
Choose the Eucharist, Not the Sermon What are we supposed to get...
5 Design Elements Found in Spiritually Rooted Homes
Putting Spirituality Into Home Decor Our homes are more than our living...
view all Catholic blogs
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support
- About Us
- 2026 Calendar
- Videos
- Podcasts
- Library of World Religions
- Faith In Media Tracker
- Advertise With Us
- Write for Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms of Service
- Do Not Sell My Data
- Contact Us
- Radiant Digital
- Manage Newsletter Subscriptions
- Unsubscribe From Notifications
- Sitemap
Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.
Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In










