Declassified Intelligence Says Bin Laden Wanted Iraq As Base

May 23rd, 2007
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief


Here’s a new report that coupled with President George Bush’s intent to use it in a speech is likely to spark debate — but it’s a tidbit that likely won’t transform the debate or sentiments over the war in Iraq:

President Bush on Tuesday declassified intelligence showing in 2005 Osama bin Laden planned to use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks in the United States, according to White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

Johndroe said the intelligence was declassified so the president could discuss the previously secret material on Wednesday during a commencement address at the Coast Guard Academy in Connecticut.

The speech will be aimed at defending a key part of the president’s war strategy — the contention that the United States cannot withdraw from Iraq because al Qaeda would fill the vacuum in the Middle East.

“This shows why we believe al Qaeda wants to use Iraq as a safe haven,” said Johndroe. He added the president will talk about al Qaeda’s “strong interest in using Iraq as a safe haven to plot and plan attacks on the United States and other countries.”

If the United States learned that bin Laden was toying with the idea of using Lebanon, or a country with a large Muslim population such as France, or Indonesia as a base, would that justify some kind of military action — particularly if that country had a large number of duly-elected legislators who declared they didn’t want the U.S.to be there…before leaving U.S. troops behind as they went on a two month vacation? And what about bin Laden’s clear desire, often noted in various articles, to have a greater foothold in Pakistan (where some believe he already does have a foothold)?

The decision also coincides with an ongoing push by the Democratic majority in Congress to force an end to U.S. involvement in Iraq.

Bin Laden and a top lieutenant — Abu Faraj al-Libbi — planned to form a terror cell in Iraq in order to launch those attacks, Johndroe said.

Al-Libbi was a “senior al Qaeda manager” who in 2005 suggested to bin Laden that bin Laden send Egyptian-born Hamza Rabia to Iraq to help plan attacks on American soil, Johndroe said.

Johndroe noted that bin Laden later suggested to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, that America should be his top priority. That was followed in the spring of 2005 with bin Laden’s ordering Rabia to brief al-Zarqawi on plans to attack the United States, Johndroe said.

This declassified bit of info will bolster the adminsitration’s case — among those who already are on the same page with the administration’s stated case. It is unlikely to change many minds on existing policy.

Republican talk show hosts, TV talking heads, candidates debating in the Presidential primaries and weblog writers who already support the President will cite it. Democrats and those opposed to the war will largely pooh-pooh it.

Those in the middle may be split, but it’s unlikely those unhappy with administration policy will transform their feelings on staying in Iraq because an intelligence report released by the Bush administration says bin Laden wants to be there (hasn’t there been a teeny-weenie issue with intelligence presented by the administration before?).

The larger, most difficult problem for George Bush is that arguing points, even when peppered with shakes from a spice shaker filled with declassified intelligence, are unlikely to change minds unless (a) the war shows significant notable progress and — much harder for Bush and his administration — (b) the administration is vindicated in some of the many credibility problems it is now facing.

It’s hard to say “trust me on this” when you’re proclaiming Attorney General Alberto “I Don’t Recall” Gonzales is a fine, upstanding Attorney General who is misunderstood by a bunch of partisan hacks with political motives (a group of people that also now include many members of Mr. Bush’s own party).

It’s hard to compartmentalize credibility and that’s Bush’s long-term, ongoing challenge: He’s ending his final months in office with a serious “tune him out problem” among those who don’t already agree with and staunchly support him. Even if he has something important to say, some either won’t listen or won’t believe him. It’s hubris.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 23rd, 2007 at 7:01 am and is filed under Terrorism, Al Qaeda, George W. Bush, War On Terror, Iraq, War. Both comments and pings are currently closed.


Al Gore Catch-22 »

By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.