Iraq Archive Document Describes Bin Laden Meeting

 

March 22, 2006 Following are the ABC News Investigative Unit's summaries of five documents from Saddam Hussein's government, which have been released by the U.S. government.

 

The documents discuss Osama bin Laden, weapons of mass destruction, al Qaeda and more.

 

The full documents can be found on the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Office Web site: http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm.

 

Note: Document titles were added by ABC News.

 

"Osama Bin Laden Contact With Iraq"

 

A newly released pre-war Iraqi document indicates that an official representative of Saddam Hussein's government met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan on February 19, 1995 after approval by Saddam Hussein. Bin Laden asked that Iraq broadcast the lectures of Suleiman al Ouda, a radical Saudi preacher, and suggested "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. According to the document, Saddam's presidency was informed of the details of the meeting on March 4, 1995 and Saddam agreed to dedicate a program for them on the radio. The document states that further "development of the relationship and cooperation between the two parties to be left according to what's open (in the future) based on dialogue and agreement on other ways of cooperation." The Sudanese were informed about the agreement to dedicate the program on the radio.

 

The report then states that "Saudi opposition figure" bin Laden had to leave Sudan in July 1996 after it was accused of harboring terrorists. It says information indicated he was in Afghanistan. "The relationship with him is still through the Sudanese. We're currently working on activating this relationship through a new channel in light of his current location," it states.

 

(Editor's Note: This document is handwritten and has no official seal. Although contacts between bin Laden and the Iraqis have been reported in the 9/11 Commission report and elsewhere, (e.g. the 9/11 report states "Bin Ladn himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995) this document indicates the contacts were approved personally by Saddam Hussein.

 

It also indicates the discussions were substantive, in particular that bin Laden was proposing an operational relationship, and that the Iraqis were, at a minimum, interested in exploring a potential relationship and prepared to show good faith by broadcasting the speeches of al Ouda, the radical cleric who was also a bin Laden mentor.

 

The document does not establish that the two parties did in fact enter into an operational relationship. Given that the document claims bin Laden was proposing to the Iraqis that they conduct "joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia, it is interesting to note that eight months after the meeting on November 13, 1995 terrorists attacked Saudi National Guard Headquarters in Riyadh, killing 5 U.S. military advisors. The militants later confessed on Saudi TV to having been trained by Osama bin Laden.)

 

"Osama bin Laden and the Taliban"

 

Document dated Sept. 15, 2001

 

An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghani informant, who's only identified by a number, told them that the Afghani Consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him:

 

That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq.

That the U.S. has proof the Iraqi government and "bin Laden's group" agreed to cooperate to attack targets inside America.

That in case the Taliban and bin Laden's group turn out to be involved in "these destructive operations," the U.S. may strike Iraq and Afghanistan.

That the Afghani consul heard about the issue of Iraq's relationship with "bin Laden's group" while he was in Iran.

 

At the end, the writer recommends informing "the committee of intentions" about the above-mentioned items. The signature on the document is unclear.

 

(Editor's Note: The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable i.e. an unnamed Afghan "informant" reporting on a conversation with another Afghan "consul." The date of the document four days after 9/11 is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value.)

 

"Election Campaign Laws in France"

 

Documents dated July-August 1999

 

Correspondence regarding election campaigns in France. This includes a document from the Iraqi intelligence service classified as "secret," ordering the translation of important parts of a 1997 report about campaign financing laws in France. It also includes a document from the foreign minister's office indicating the report was attached. The attached translated report included very detailed information about all the regulations regarding financing of election campaigns in France. Translation was done by someone called "Salam Abdul Karim Mohammed."

 

(Editor's Note: This is an intriguing document which suggests Saddam Hussein's regime had a strong interest in the mechanics and legalities of financial contributions to French politicians. Several former French politicians are implicated in receiving oil vouchers from Iraq under the U.N. Oil for Food program.)

 

"Hiding Docs from the U.N. Team"

 

Document dated March 23, 1997

 

A letter from the Iraqi intelligence service to directors and managers advising them to follow certain procedures in case of a search by the U.N. team, including:

Removing correspondence with the atomic energy and military industry departments concerning the prohibited weapons (proposals, research, studies, catalogs, etc.).

Removing prohibited materials and equipment, including documents and catalogs and making sure to clear labs and storages of any traces of chemical or biological materials that were previously used or stored.

Doing so through a committee which will decide whether to destroy the documents.

Removing files from computers.

 

The letter also advises them on how they should answer questions by U.N. team members. It says the intelligence service should be informed within one week about the progress made in discarding the documents.

 

(Editor's Note: This document is consistent with the Report of the Special Advisor to the Director of Central Intelligence, which described a pattern of deception and concealment on the part of Saddam Hussein's government towards the U.N. inspectors in the mid to late 90's. Hussein halted all cooperation with those inspectors and expelled them in October 1998.)

 

"Al Qaeda Presence in Iraq"

 

Document dated August 2002

 

A number of correspondences to check rumors that some members of al Qaeda organization have entered Iraq. Three letters say this information cannot be confirmed. The letter on page seven, however, says that information coming from "a trustworthy source" indicates that subjects who are interested in dealing with al Qaeda are in Iraq and have several passports.

 

The letter seems to be coming from or going to Trebil, a town on the Iraqi-Jordanian border. Follow up on the presence of those subjects is ordered, as well as comparison of their pictures with those of Jordanian subjects living in Iraq. (This may be referring to pictures of Abu Musaab al Zarqawi and another man on pages 4-6) The letter also says tourist areas, including hotels and rented apartments, should be searched.

 

(Editor's note: This document indicates that the Iraqis were aware of and interested in reports that members of al Qaeda were present in Iraq in 2002. The document does not support allegations that Iraq was colluding with al Qaeda.)

 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCo...=1734490&page=1

It's pretty stupid of a lot of citizens to rule things like this out.

Especially given the volume of Iraqi documents that were seized that have yet to be translated.

Wow.

Has Bin Laden ever mentioned these meetings once? I mean, that guy has nothing to fear and will say anything at this point. I was wondering if he even hinted at this?

pretty amazing they all of a sudden show up now when bush has the worst numbers in history..

pretty amazing they all of a sudden show up now when bush has the worst numbers in history..

 

 

:lol

1st: As a precursor: No, Im not a hyper-leftist, uber-liberal, unpatriotic, kill the troops and then cut and run person.

 

2nd: The problem has always been that people were convinced, and Bush strongly implied if not asserted, that there definitley is a link between Hussien and OBL and that there is proof BEFORE HE INVADED. Now I know Bush and others have mind reading ability and actually heard Osama and Saddam thinking about how cool the other one is in their minds, but the rest of us wanted actual evidence. And that was never provided.

 

3rd: Minus Bush's telepathy, there was not even a shred of basis to invade a country and sacrifice so many American and innocent Iraqi lives for the ferociously unestablished contention of a link. Of course the thinking must be we must invade so we can find the evidence to back up our invasion.

 

4th: Most of the people and Bush believed not just that there was a link between the two, but that Saddam played a role in 9-11. Maybe Bush will telepathically tell us when this evidence will be available?

 

5th: I see nothing about how this proves Saddam had WMDs or that he talked to OBL about it. Can you point that out to me?

 

6th: You liberally(not the baby eating liberal you think) misuse the word prove. Actually read the article and read the editor's notes. Here is one:

 

Editor's Note: The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable ? i.e. an unnamed Afghan "informant" reporting on a conversation with another Afghan "consul." The date of the document ? four days after 9/11 ? is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value

 

7th-Even the 9-11 commision has stated that OBL had contacts in Iraq. But so did Rumsfeild. And the CIA met with OBL. So we orchestrated 9-11? Should we invade ourselves?

 

8th-Of course not everything can be disproved. But most people dont act on what cant be disproved(or invade countries). Ill try this on Heidi Klum: "Hey Heidi, you cant disprove that if you leave Seal and marry me, you wont experience the most amazing universal experience of your life..so please leave him."

 

9th-This typical flip flopping on justification. When it isnt WMDs its the poor people of Iraq. When it isnt them, its 9-11. We havent heard this one in a while though.

 

10th-It's amazing that evidence like this is being drawn out to defend an enormous event like invading Iraq 3 years after the invasion. How much leeway do these guys get?

Hey whatever justification works this month.

Two scumbags who hate America and everything we stand for met? How can that be? The press who knows all and see's all said there was no connection between OBL and Saddam. I'm noticing how the left continues to 'move the goal'... first we were assured with 100% certainty that whereas Al Qaeda was in every OTHER nation on earth, they definately had absolutely zero contact with Iraq and Saddam Hussein and now we're being told "aw shucks, it wasn't an OPERATIONAL RELATIONSHIP." Right.

 

Tell me again, what sort of "operational relationship" did Hitler have with Imperial Japan?

They had an explicit treaty. Where is the treaty here?

 

And nice attempt to reframe. But who invaded based on faulty premises? The left or Bush? Most on the left said there was no connection between Hussein and 9-11.

 

But who is moving the goal? The "right" says that they were buddies and that they plotted 9-11 together and that we need to invade Iraq because of 9-11. And now it's "they talked." Nice job!

 

I guess the more important and vital issue is not the justification for Iraq and the absolute belief of the link, but how the left is critical of Bush. :lol Youre well on your way to being the next Bill OReilly accord.

They had an explicit treaty. Where is the treaty here?

 

And nice attempt to reframe. But who invaded based on faulty premises? The left or Bush? Most on the left said there was no connection between Hussein and 9-11.

 

But who is moving the goal? The "right" says that they were buddies and that they plotted 9-11 together and that we need to invade Iraq because of 9-11. And now it's "they talked." Nice job!

 

I guess the more important and vital issue is not the justification for Iraq and the absolute belief of the link, but how the left is critical of Bush. :lol Youre well on your way to being the next Bill OReilly accord.

 

 

OK Ms.Helen Thomas

I don't know why you posted this, I think the editor's notes on each subject pretty much discredit most of the information. Almost all of this material was taken from unknown sources, and certainly doesn't prove much of anything.

 

It certainly doesn't justify the occupation of a foreign country, 2300+ U.S. deaths, and countless tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths. Not to mention the billions of dollars that could have been used at home.

Umm yeah, regurgigated info. As if the rest of the world did not know that Osama did speak to the Iraqi's years before 9/11.

 

 

And the first rule about reporting is to check your sources from at least 3 places (or was it 2?). And reporting unsubstantiated claims coming from unknown sources is a big no-no.

Much like the evidence that Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs, I suppose.