Slashdot Mirror

Only partially true, try a google news search for "9-11 false passport". Their passports may have been in their names but they were still fraudulent. Try reading the complete 9-11 commission report. Specifically, page 563, note 32 claims that two of the hijackers had fraudulently manipulated their passports and that it is believed that up to 11 others did as well.

Besides, at the time, the US was not actively looking for specific terrorists trying to enter the country. Today, the US is looking for specific known terrorists who might try to enter the country. I seriously doubt that any wanted, would-be terrorist would be brazen enough to use their real passport and try to enter at an official point of entry. Much more likely, they would sneak across a border like this woman, a suspected Al-qaeda member, recently did.... but why?

You [probably] paid for it.

Get it here.

Whether Iraq actually had a hand in 9/11 or not doesn't matter one damn to me.

I think it's worth giving a damn about, especially if our troops are being put at risk in Iraq. I think it's something many of the troops would give a damn about.

Of course, there is that troubling matter of the Iraqi Military Intelligence operative and member of the Fedayeen Saddam who escorted two of the 9/11 hijackers to their meeting in KL. What do you make of that?

Wait -- I thought you didn't give a damn? It's an interesting story, but I don't think it's too likely in the wake of the commisson's report. Got a (credible) link for me?

You're grossly oversimplifying the Commission's statement... and besides which, it seems pretty clear that the Commission itself jumped to conclusions.

To be fair, the commission did say that Bin Laden approached Saddam (in the 1990s), and was turned down. This supports their statement that Saddam was not involved in 9/11, via bankrolling or otherwise.

Why do you say the commission is jumping to conclusions? They've had twelve public hearing over two years -- it's not just an off the cuff statement. Check out their website: http://www.9-11commission.gov/

Yes, as are the people who supported them, bankrolled them, gave them safe harbor.

Sure.

But we're not seeking retribution for 9/11. We're not exacting punishment for a single act.

That may be your interpretation, but one of the ever-shifting reasons that Bush gave for attacking Iraq was a link with 9/11. The others being WMD and human rights abuses, both accusations that could be more meaningfully laid elsewhere (Nth Korea, Pakistan).

We're in a war against an ideology. Wherever a person commits an act of terrorism, we have an enemy. Wherever a person finances an act of terrorism, no matter who the target, we have an enemy.

Noble and quixotic words, but in practice, though, the actual fighting has been limited to Afghanistan and Iraq, and while Afghanistan may have financially supported and physically harboured Al-Qaeda, Iraq appears not to have done so.

Saddam personally bankrolled terrorism. He wrote checks to the families of murderers.

I've had a look at your link, and it claims that payments were made to familes of dead Palestinian suicide bombers. Unless this was some sort of magical time travelling money, the bombers in question were dead at the time and therefore unbankrollable. The only semi-credible reference I can find to this is at the BBC, and it attributes the accusation to Donald Rumsfeld. It's a fact that Arafat has funded militants, but it seems to only be Rumsfeld's speculation that Saddam ever funded Arafat.

Saddam planned assassinations of high-level US officials, including a former President.

This was after the first Gulf War, when Bush 1 attempted to kill Saddam. There was retaliation for the planned attempt on Bush at the time, as I recall -- Clinton got UN authorisation for a sustained cruise missile barrage on Iraqi intelligence HQ.

Saddam attacked our allies in the region, Qatar and Bahrain and Kuwait and the UAW and Israel.

Kuwait I'll give you, and perhaps Israel, but Qatar, Bahrain, UAE have not been attacked. If attacking Israel is an excuse for war, then why is the US not attacking Egypt, Syria etc?

Saddam provided aid and safe harbor to members of al-Qaida after the fall of the Taliban.

This is something that seems to be an allegation rather than a fact. Credible link welcome.

Saddam stockpiled weapons of mass destruction in contravention of US and UN surrender terms.

Really? Then why can't we find any? And why aren't we attacking

I fully agree that violent fanatics need to be stopped, be they Muslim suicide bombers or Christian crusaders in the guise of American patriots.