Saddam Warned Against Jihadists

| 2 Comments | 1 TrackBack
A document found with Saddam Hussein in his "spider hole" warned his followers against allying themselves with foreign fighters and jihadists, cautioning that their agenda didn't mesh well with the Ba'athists'.
The document appears to be a directive, written after he lost power, from Mr. Hussein to leaders of the Iraqi resistance, counseling caution against getting too close to Islamic jihadists and other foreign Arabs coming into occupied Iraq, according to American officials. ... Officials said Mr. Hussein apparently believed that the foreign Arabs, eager for a holy war against the West, had a different agenda from the Baathists, who were eager for their own return to power in Baghdad. As a result, he wanted his supporters to be careful about becoming close allies with the jihadists, officials familiar with the document said. A new, classified intelligence report circulating within the United States government describes the document and its contents, according to administration officials who asked not to be identified. The officials said they had no evidence that the document found with Mr. Hussein was a fabrication.
This is the second blow to the White House's charge that Iraq and al Qaeda had found common cause against the United States, either before the war or after it. The CIA earlier had said that interrogation of top al Qaeda figures in custody revealed that Osama bin Laden had rejected plans to ally with Iraq. But what's really interesting is that this leak sounds like it came from the CIA, which is still furious over _L'Affair Plame,_ the outing of Valerie Plame, Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife and an undercover operative working on WMD, by the White House. To wit:
As President Bush sought to build a case for war with Iraq, one of the most hotly debated issues was whether Mr. Hussein was in league with Mr. bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Senior officials at the Pentagon who were certain that the evidence of connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda were strong and compelling found themselves at war with analysts at the C.I.A. who believed that the evidence showed some contacts between Baghdad and the terrorist organization, but not an operational alliance. At the Pentagon, several officials believed that Iraq and Al Qaeda had found common ground in their hatred of the United States, while at the C.I.A., many analysts believed that Mr. bin Laden saw Mr. Hussein as one of the corrupt secular Arab leaders who should be toppled.
So now we have former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's charges that Iraq was target No. 1 from the earliest days of this administration, the War College's report blasting Operation Iraqi Freedom as a distraction at best and now a leak -- likely from the CIA -- that Saddam specifically avoided alliances with Islamists. All of these keep adding up to one, or possibly two conclusions: That President George W. Bush either a) willfully lied (I refuse to use the anodyne term, "misreprepresented") about Iraq and the threat it posed, or b) the intelligence the White House received was about as bad as it could be. In the latter case, the incompetence is criminal. In the case of the former, the president is. I believe there are still a few patriots in the CIA hoping to reign in Bush so the harm his minions at the Department of Defense have done won't be repeated in another term and another war. Some will say what these leakers are doing is treasonous. I say to stay silent is treason. To stand by and do nothing while intelligence is manipulated and plans are drawn up against who knows what other countries -- Syria is looking nervously over its shoulder at the "Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003":http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000468.php#000468 -- would be to betray their oaths to the Constitution and to the agency they serve. There will be more revelations, possibly more damaging. In April, former National Security Council member Richard Clarke's book, Against All Enemies: Inside the White House's War on Terror -- What Really Happened hits the shelves. *Housekeeping* At the moment, it appears the premium listserv for donors is inoperative. I'm working on fixing this. Thanks for your patience.

1 TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://www.back-to-iraq.com/blog-mt/mt-tb.cgi/2718

What really happened and how? from When Johnny Comes Marching Home on January 27, 2004 10:20 AM

Iraqi aftermath While it seemed like a good thing for the US military to kill Uday and Qusay, considering that the Shi'ites had tried to kill Uday first, and that there was little love lost even among Sunnis for the... Read More

2 Comments

I hope the “Saddam memo” helps encourage Saddam-loyalists to start rebuilding their country.

RE: “I hope …”

Hoping for positive results from a negative or seemingly hopeless situation certainly betrays a positive, optimistic attitude; I like it! And I hope more Americans see it as additional proof we have been bamboozled and tricked far too long by our current regime and decide to put an end to it.

Among mideasterners, tho, I’m wondering if the Saddam memo might reinforce their resistance to outside forces of every kind and strengthen the Ba’athists’ will to prevail?

It seems unlikely to me that it would inspire them to help stop the cycle of violence that is all-pervasive in the region, at any rate. Perhaps I have missed important clues in the situation? Has anyone shown that Saddam’s capture has disheartened his followers to the point they would start ignoring his teachings? I haven’t heard much about that angle.

Leave a comment

About me


Hi there! Thanks for stopping in. I'm Christopher Allbritton, former AP and New York Daily News reporter. In 2002, I went stumbling around Iraqi Kurdistan, the northern part of Iraq outside Saddam's direct control, looking for stories. (Some might call it "looking for trouble.") In March 2003, I made it back in time for the war, becoming the Web's first fully reader-funded journalist-blogger. With the support of thousands of readers, we raised almost $15,000. You can read my dispatches here. It was one of the moments in journalism when everything worked. It was a grand -- and successful -- experiment in independent journalism. In 2004, I moved to Iraq, where I would spend the next two years. It was a raucous, scary and exciting place with a lot of news going on. But I've since moved on to Beirut and the wider region. I now report for a variety of outlets.

Clips
Résumé
Email
AOL IM me

Donate

Won't you consider donating to support reportage from the Middle East? Your generosity directly feeds reporting costs such as visas, travel, fees and other expenses. I already have a bullet-proof vest, so no need to fund that.

Media Availability

If you'd like to book me for radio or TV appearances -- I'm experienced in both -- please contact my agency, Global Radio News, at + (0) 44 20 7976 5335. Thank you.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Christopher published on January 15, 2004 12:09 PM.

Iraqi women protest changing family laws was the previous entry in this blog.

More on the Rights of Women is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Subscribe to Blog

Powered by MT-Notifier

July 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

Archives

Creative Commons License
This blog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by Movable Type 4.2rc3-en