United States Hands Over Green Zone
by Mark Noonan on January 2nd, 2009 at 12:01am
Thank goodness Obama doesn’t take office for another 19 days - had he his way on this, we would have left 9 months ago, in disgrace:
The U.S. formally transferred control of the Green Zone in Baghdad to Iraqi authorities Thursday in a pair of ceremonies that also handed back Saddam Hussein’s former palace.
Iraq’s prime minister said he will propose making Jan. 1 a holiday marking the restoration of sovereignty.
Under the security agreement between Washington and Baghdad to replace a U.N. mandate for foreign troops in Iraq, the Iraqi government also now has control of American troops’ actions and of the country’s airspace.
The moves came amid a dramatic fall in violence over the past year.
Think about that MSM bias - “a dramatic fall in violence”…how about, “due to the Iraqi-American victory”? Or is that just too hard to admit?
Click here to create an account on Blogs For Victory and post comments!
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:13 am
Col. Steve Ferrari, commander of the Joint Area Support Group, which is in charge of the 5.6-square-mile Green Zone said that U.S. troops will follow Iraqi orders. “If they tell us to go, we will go. If they tell us to stay, we will stay.”
VICTORY!
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:00 am
Was there any other option, Mark?
You wouldn’t have wanted to overstay your welcome now, would you?
The Iraqi people loved having you around, I’m sure, but all good visits must come to an end and it was time for y’all to leave. Say goodnight, Gracie.
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:48 am
sticker shock;
A year ago, the mere thought of forces withdrawing from Iraq was considered a dream,” Mr. Maliki told reporters. “The dream that no one had the right to think about became true.”
we have been invited to stay…its more than what we can say about canadians that lie and spin the truth into more lies..
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:52 am
c.o. writes:
“The Iraqi people loved having you around, I’m sure, but all good visits must come to an end and it was time for y’all to leave.”
You really don’t get it, do you? Free elections, Al Queda fought to a stand-still and defeated, no “war for oil”, and now we hand the keys back to to the Iraqi government and prepare to pick up sticks.
..but what would one expect from a dumb Canuck, eh, hoser?
January 2nd, 2009 at 10:54 am
No worries. The stories about how great the USA did in Iraq will start on Jan 21, and give all kudos to Barry.
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:23 am
Al Queda fought to a stand-still and defeated
4. boyskapbo | January 2nd, 2009 at 10:52 am
—————————————
I guess you are talking about the terrorists the ’shock & awe’ invasion brought to Iraq, are you not, boyskapbo?
While it is true that Iraq now has free elections and is no longer ruled by the monster Saddam, you neglect to mention the number of innocent Iraqi citizens who, through no fault of their own, were sacrificed to bring this about. You don’t want to talk about the hundreds of thousands injured or misplaced
individuals for which the U.S. invasion holds responsibility.
Why is that?
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:37 am
Saddam didn’t support Islamist terrorists. You never will understand that. Saddam was a SECULAR LEADER. He would NOT support a group BASED IN RELIGION! Al Qaeda was NOT supported by Saddam! The Taliban was NOT supported by Saddam! Hamas, Hezbollah, NEITHER were supported by SADDAM!!
January 2nd, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Saddam WAS a terrorist…he ruled Iraq through TERROR…wake up moron…
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_mass_graves.pdf
January 2nd, 2009 at 1:20 pm
“You don’t want to talk about the hundreds of thousands injured or misplaced
individuals for which the U.S. invasion holds responsibility.”
why is it that trash talk like this goes unchallenged?
why dont you name 1 american who targeted an iraq civilian…or displaced hundreds of thousands of them…dont say bush…dont tell us about our generals…they did what should have been done long before they hit the ground…mix up some more lies to prove your worth…
what a freekin half wit you must be to bring your trash here…
January 2nd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Saddam was a terrorist to his own people, not to us. So’s Kim Jong Il, Robert Mugabe, an many others. Why didn’t we go after them?
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:00 pm
why dont you name 1 american who targeted an iraq civilian
10. js02 | January 2nd, 2009 at 1:20 pm
————————————–
I doubt very much that Iraqi civilians were targeted by American troops, js02.
They just happened to be in the way. Tough luck for them, I guess. They should have had the foresight to get out of the line of fire.
When your country is invaded by a foreign power, survival is your own responsibility. War is hell and bullets and bombs do not make a distinction who is foe or friend, right?
January 2nd, 2009 at 3:03 pm
atheistmule, step back from the MoveOn kool aid. Saddam paid Islamic jihadis families $25k to have their kids go blow themselves up in Israel. The Coalition forces found numerous Islamic jihad training camps, abandoned right before the war started, in Iraq.
If Saddam would have nothing to do with Al Qaeda, what was Zarqawi doing in Iraq?
Apparently, atheistputz wants to revisit the entire Iraq war debate yet again.
January 2nd, 2009 at 7:52 pm
If Saddam would have nothing to do with Al Qaeda, what was Zarqawi doing in Iraq?
Next thing you know you’ll be blaming Bush for harboring the hijackers while they trained in Florida.
Send in the clowns… don’t bother, they’re here.
January 2nd, 2009 at 8:33 pm
William, there is no proof of that. Saddam was secular. Zarqawi was in Iraq AFTER we invaded, because we created a vaccum for terrorists. WE made the Iraqi situation WORSE!
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Mark,
Baghdad held its first-ever public Christmas celebration, complete with a poster of Jesus and Muslims in attendance!
Story Here Click the Photos button above the text for photos.
Yep, it was a mistake and complete failure. ;)
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:21 pm
are you two bozo’s that stupid? dont you know how to google the information…
obviously not…
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:24 pm
OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda–perhaps even for Mohamed Atta–according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America’s most determined and dangerous enemies.
According to the memo–which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points–Iraq-al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.
The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent “emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to meet with Iraqi government officials.” At some unspecified point in 1991, according to a CIA analysis, “Iraq sought Sudan’s assistance to establish links to al Qaeda.” The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the memo, “bin Laden wanted to expand his organization’s capabilities through ties with Iraq.”
The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese strongman Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the al Qaeda-affiliated National Islamic Front. Numerous sources have confirmed this. One defector reported that “al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging the Iraqi-al Qaeda relationship. The defector said Iraq sought al Qaeda influence through its connections with Afghanistan, to facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and equipment to Iraq. In return, Iraq provided al Qaeda with training and instructors.”
One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam Hussein’s henchmen. As the memo details:
4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting–the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9-11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes.
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:25 pm
Saddam, Al Qaeda Did Collaborate, Documents Show
By ELI LAKE, Staff Reporter of the Sun | March 24, 2006
SHARE | PRINT | EMAIL Add to del.icio.us
Add to Digg
Add to Facebook
Add to Newsvine
CAIRO, Egypt - A former Democratic senator and 9/11 commissioner says a recently declassified Iraqi account of a 1995 meeting between Osama bin Laden and a senior Iraqi envoy presents a “significant set of facts,” and shows a more detailed collaboration between Iraq and Al Qaeda.
In an interview yesterday, the current president of the New School University, Bob Kerrey, was careful to say that new documents translated last night by ABC News did not prove Saddam Hussein played a role in any way in plotting the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Nonetheless, the former senator from Nebraska said that the new document shows that “Saddam was a significant enemy of the United States.” Mr. Kerrey said he believed America’s understanding of the deposed tyrant’s relationship with Al Qaeda would become much deeper as more captured Iraqi documents and audiotapes are disclosed.
Last night ABC News reported on five recently declassified documents captured in Iraq. One of these was a handwritten account of a February 19, 1995, meeting between an official representative of Iraq and Mr. bin Laden himself, where Mr. bin Laden broached the idea of “carrying out joint operations against foreign forces” in Saudi Arabia. The document, which has no official stamps or markers, reports that when Saddam was informed of the meeting on March 4, 1995 he agreed to broadcast sermons of a radical imam, Suleiman al Ouda, requested by Mr. bin Laden.
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/saddam-al-qaeda-did-collaborate-documents-show/29746/
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Claims that there were no links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda are wrong. Documents just released by the Pentagon prove it.
In March 2008, the Pentagon released a document that details some of the classified documents from Saddam’s regime. This document called the Iraqi Perspectives Project Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents Volume 1 (Redacted) is an overview of “more than 600,000 original captured documents and several thousand hours of audio and video footage archived in a US Department of Defense (DOD) database. As of August 2006, only 15 percent of the captured documents have English translations.”[1] This document provides insight into how Saddam operated his regime and his ties to terrorism.
al-Qaeda
Al-Qaeda is not a top-down hierarchical organization, but a mesh of organizations that work together to the same ends - destroying Zionists and Israelis by whatever means necessary. As described by Neil Patrick, a Middle East specialist, al-Qaeda is “a loose confederation with various assignments given to various groups.”[2] Osama bin Ladin is at the helm of this loose confederation.
The Council on Foreign Relations states that al-Qaeda is affiliated with the following terrorist organizations:
Egyptian Islamic Jihad
The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
Islamic Army of Aden (Yemen)
Jama’at al-Tawhid wal Jihad (Iraq)
Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad (Kashmir)
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Salafist Group for Call and Combat and the Armed Islamic Group (Algeria)
Abu Sayyaf Group (Malaysia, Philippines)
Jemaah Islamiya (Southeast Asia)”[3]
These groups are interconnected; the Council on Foreign Relations states:
“bin Laden’s terror network grew out of Egyptian extremist groups, and many of al-Qaeda’s leaders are Egyptians. In recent years, bin Laden brought two leaders of Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), Ayman al-Zawahiri and the late Muhammad Atef, into the top echelons of al-Qaeda. In addition, some members of Jamaat al-Islamiyya have reportedly joined al-Qaeda. Overall, dozens of Egyptian militants passed through al-Qaeda training camps in Taliban-run Afghanistan.”
Who is the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ)?
The EIJ “assassinated president Anwar Sadat in 1981 and later teamed up with Osama Bin Laden in the Afghan war against the Soviet occupation.”[4] In 1998, the EIJ merged with al-Qaeda and “is now a wholly owned subsidiary of al-Qaeda,” says Steven Cook, a Middle East expert and the Douglas A. Dillon fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. The group’s leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is widely regarded as Osama bin Laden’s chief deputy.”[5]
Now let’s look closely at what the Pentagon papers state on Saddam and terrorism.
“Saddam’s interest in, and support for, non-Iraqi non-state actors was spread across a wide variety of revolutionary, liberation, nationalist, and Islamic terrorist organizations. For years, Saddam maintained training camps for foreign ‘fighters’ drawn from these diverse groups. In some cases, particularly for Palestinians, Saddam was also a strong financial supporter. Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al-Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al-Qaeda’s stated goals and objectives.”[6]
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/saddam_and_alqaeda_1.html
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:34 pm
In February 2003, CIA Director George Tenet Testified That Iraq Had Links To Al Qaeda. TENET: “Iraq is harboring senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a close associate of al Qaeda. … Iraq has in the past provided training in document forgery and bomb-making to al Qaeda. It has also provided training in poisons and gases to two al Qaeda associates. One of these associates characterized the relationship he forged with Iraqi officials as successful. … I know that part of this - and part of this Zarqawi network in Baghdad are two dozen Egyptian Islamic jihad which is indistinguishable from al Qaeda - operatives who are aiding the Zarqawi network, and two senior planners who have been in Baghdad since last May. Now, whether there is a base or whether there is not a base, they are operating freely, supporting the Zarqawi network that is supporting the poisons network in Europe and around the world. So these people have been operating there. And, as you know - I don’t want to recount everything that Secretary Powell said, but as you know a foreign service went to the Iraqis twice to talk to them about Zarqawi and were rebuffed. So there is a presence in Baghdad that is beyond Zarqawi.” (George Tenet, Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 2/11/03)
Tenet Testified That Iraq Was Providing Safe Haven To Al Qaeda. SEN. CARL LEVIN (D-MI): “Would you say, Mr. Tenet, that the Zarqawi terrorist network is under the control or sponsorship of the Iraqi government?” TENET: “I don’t know that, sir, but I know that there’s a safe haven that’s been provided to this network in Baghdad.” LEVIN: “So you’re not - well, you’re saying that you don’t know if they’re under the support - that they are under the control or direction?” TENET: “Yes, sir. We have said - what we’ve said is Zarqawi and this large number of operatives are in Baghdad. They say the environment is good. And it is inconceivable to us that the Iraqi intelligence service doesn’t know that they live there or what they’re doing.” (George Tenet, Select Committee On Intelligence, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 2/11/03)
In March 2002, Tenet Testified On Iraq’s Links To Al Qaeda. TENET: “We continue to watch Iraq’s involvement in terrorists’ activities. Baghdad has a long history of supporting terrorism, altering its targets to reflect changing priorities and goals. It is also had contacts with Al Qaeda.” (George Tenet, Committee On Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 3/19/02)
January 2nd, 2009 at 11:44 pm
ny sun: Biased.
post#20: No lin between AQ and Saddam.
George Tenet wasn’t so credible when he said in front of congress that Bush Let the People down, huh?
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:49 am
“why dont you name 1 american who targeted an iraq civilian”
10. js02 | January 2nd, 2009 at 1:20 pm
I’ll sadly give you several:
Spc. James Barker
Sgt. Paul E. Cortez
Pfc. Jesse V. Spielman
Their target was Abeer Hamza, she was 14 years old. They raped and murdered her after killing her parents and five year old sister on 12 March 2006.
January 3rd, 2009 at 9:03 am
I see the liberals are sticking with their debunked talking points on Saddam and Al Qaeda.
I also see atheist ass trying to pass off “Saddam did not support terrorism” BS. Saddam openly stated that he supports the “human bombs” in Israel and also paid cash to the bomb’s surviving families.
When will they stop the talking points? Never.
Deja….
don’t be an ass. It was never US policy to purposely target civilians. You are trying to pass off a random act of violence by some common criminals to the tactic of the entire armed forces. That type of violence happens here in this country. So, do blame the war. Saddam’s sons were notoriously known for that type of violence. But according to you, they never should have been removed from power nor stopped from doing that via the war.
You people are pathetic.
January 3rd, 2009 at 12:41 pm
tired, do you know why they’re called talking points? BECAUSE THEY MAKE A POINT!!!
January 3rd, 2009 at 4:10 pm
we have been invited to stay…its more than what we can say about canadians that lie and spin the truth into more lies..
js, Canadians don’t have great courage or big guns…just big mouths. Or, in CO’s case, a big keyboard to hide behind.
If it weren’t for the U.S., Canadiens wouldn’t have anywhere to go for quality healthcare. Just ask some of the moms who had to go south of the border to give birth…
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:10 pm
“If it weren’t for the U.S., Canadiens wouldn’t have anywhere to go for quality healthcare. Just ask some of the moms who had to go south of the border to give birth…”
Life expectancy is longer in Canada. In Canada, an infant born into a hospital has a better chance of survivng than one in the U.S
January 3rd, 2009 at 5:15 pm
The War in Iraq really wasn’t about Iraq. It was an imperial gesture by an increasingly arrogant country. In Europe, as much as 80 of people say that America is the biggest threat to global security. Not AQ, not Iran, but us. Do you think that the averge Hans six-pack in Germany gives a damn who rules in Baghdad? They care about how the global superpower weilds its power.
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Canadians don’t have great courage
26. 1luv2h8lib5 | January 3rd, 2009 at 4:10 pm
————————————–
Does your ignorance know no bounds, keefer?
Are you not aware of the Canadian troops currently fighting in Afghanistan and that Canada fought in the 1st. and 2nd. World Wars?
Atheistmule is correct when he says Canada has a better life expectancy than the U.S.
Perhaps next time you should check your facts more thoroughly, eh, before you put your foot into it.
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:44 pm
In Canada, an infant born into a hospital has a better chance of survivng than one in the U.S
They would here too… if they wouldn’t butcher them up before they’re born. They murder them faster than they can be born.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:08 pm
atheistass,
They make a point in the carefully scripted liberal propaganda, which are always taken out of context and are meant to be repeated ad-nauseum until the poor suckers who spew them begin to believe them as the gospel truth.
Way to go lemming.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:29 pm
atheistmule,
“The War in Iraq really wasn’t about Iraq. It was an imperial gesture by an increasingly arrogant country.”
I really don’t believe that. While I think the war was a mistake, I think Bush truly thought he could change the Middle East for the better with this invasion. Maybe that’s arrogance, but I do think his motives were good.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Perhaps, but don’t tell me that the idea didn’t cross his mind that maybe he’d come across as too imperial.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:54 pm
atheistmule,
“Perhaps, but don’t tell me that the idea didn’t cross his mind that maybe he’d come across as too imperial.”
I would be the last person to tell you what has crossed Bush’s mind. I can make guesses based on a lot of reading that I’ve done over the last few years, but there is a good chance I would be wrong. Personally, I think he’s a nice guy that is in way over his head. He has done some good things,
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/opinion/03sat1.html?_r=1&hp
but he has also messed up in a lot of areas. Of course, I have BDS so what do I know.
January 3rd, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Hey, he wasn’t 100% bad. I’d put it more at 90%.
But that’s just me. History will judge.
January 4th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
athiestASS
The War in Iraq really wasn’t about Iraq. It was an imperial gesture by an increasingly arrogant country. In Europe, as much as 80 of people say that America is the biggest threat to global security.
TOTAL BU!! S#!T from a TOTAL MORON!
January 4th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
caspuke
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/middle_east_pol_2003.jpg
It was a STRATEGIC move to insure the safety of the oil fields, and the state of Isreal.
January 4th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
there were no nukes.
iraqi used chems vs the iranians in the 80’s.
there was no 9/11 connection.
our senior leaders either were mistaked or lied.
malfeasence or criminal
January 4th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Fmr, next time please provide reasons for why my FACTS are “total bullshit.” You act like my six year old, whenever he is defeated he gets angry.