Obviously, the White House really wants us to believe that there was a meaningful connection between Saddam Hussein and al Queda. It’s not only a key justification for the war in Iraq; it’s an argument that has put the president’s credibility on the line. So far, the debate hasn’t gone well for Bush.<\/p>\n
There have been repeated calls for some kind of proof to bolster the White House’s claims. Every story that’s been offered has been proven false.<\/p>\n
First, there was the notion that Mohammed Atta met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before 9\/11. This story, pushed by Dick Cheney<\/a> among others, has since been thoroughly debunked. Atta wasn’t in Prague at the time of the alleged meeting and the 9\/11 Commission has concluded<\/a>, “We do not believe that such a meeting occurred.”<\/p>\n With that claim discredited, the president started emphasizing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as the evidence he needs. Bush said<\/a> last week:<\/p>\n “Zarqawi is the best evidence of connection to al Qaeda affiliates and al Qaeda. He’s the person who’s still killing. He’s the person — and remember the email exchange between al Qaeda leadership and he, himself, about how to disrupt the progress toward freedom?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This is, of course, the same Zarqawi the military drafted plans (three times) to kill before the war began, but Bush rejected the attack<\/a>, concerned that it “could undercut its case for war against Saddam.” Regardless, the Zarqawi link — which Bush insists is the “best evidence” — has also been discredited<\/a>.<\/p>\n Which leads us to the third piece of evidence: Ahmad Hikmat Shakir Azzawi. Unfortunately, this one — you guessed it — isn’t true either. “[S]ome of these documents indicate that there is at least one officer of Saddam’s Fedayeen, a lieutenant colonel, who was a very prominent member of al-Qaeda.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n So, is this finally a significant piece of evidence? No, it’s confusion over similar names to two different people<\/a>.<\/p>\n An allegation that a high-ranking al Qaeda member was an officer in Saddam Hussein’s private militia may have resulted from confusion over Iraqi names, a senior administration official said yesterday.<\/p>\n Former Navy secretary John Lehman, a Republican member of the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said Sunday that documents found in Iraq “indicate that there is at least one officer of Saddam’s Fedayeen, a lieutenant colonel, who was a very prominent member of al Qaeda.” Although he said the identity “still has to be confirmed,” Lehman introduced the information on NBC’s “Meet the Press” to counter a commission staff report that said there were contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda but no “collaborative relationship.”<\/p>\n Yesterday, the senior administration official said Lehman had probably confused two people who have similar-sounding names.<\/p>\n One of them is Ahmad Hikmat Shakir Azzawi, identified as an al Qaeda “fixer” in Malaysia. Officials say he served as an airport greeter for al Qaeda in January 2000 in Kuala Lumpur, at a gathering for members who were to be involved in the attacks on the USS Cole, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.<\/p>\n Iraqi military documents, found last year, listed a similar name, Lt. Col. Hikmat Shakir Ahmad, on a roster of Hussein’s militia, Saddam’s Fedayeen.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This doesn’t exactly instill confidence in Lehman. It’s one thing to confuse two people with similar names; it’s something else to go on national television, defend the administration, and allege a connection with mistaken information.<\/p>\n As it turns out, this isn’t even particularly new. Newsday reported<\/a> this morning:<\/p>\n The CIA concluded “a long time ago” that an al-Qaida associate who met with two of the Sept. 11 hijackers in Malaysia was not an officer in Saddam Hussein’s army, as alleged Sunday by a Republican member of the 9\/11 commission.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
\nOver the weekend, this new connection was all the rage. On Meet the Press, Former Navy secretary John Lehman, a GOP member of the commission, pointed to the new tidbit<\/a> of information:<\/p>\n