# Cheney 9/9/2004 : "\[Saddam\] provided safe harbor and sanctuary as well for al Qaeda." **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 10, 2004, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849 "2004-09-10T00:27:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/1 "2004-09-10T00:27:07Z")
[http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=3&u=/nm/20040909/pl\_nm/campaign\_cheney\_dc](http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=3&u=/nm/20040909/pl_nm/campaign_cheney_dc) > [@](#): > > At a town-hall style forum in the swing state of Ohio, Cheney described Saddam as a “man who provided safe harbor and sanctuary to terrorists for years” and a man who “provided safe harbor and sanctuary as well for al Qaeda.” > > The commission that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks has said it had not discovered any evidence of a “collaborative” relationship" between the fallen Iraqi government and al Qaeda. > > The Bush administration in the past has cited reports that Jordanian-born militant Abu Musab al Zarqawi had been treated at a Baghdad hospital as evidence of the links between Saddam and al Qaeda. Are the Bush admin’s claims about Abu Musab al Zarqawi true? And if so, how strong does it support the claim that Saddam had links to al Qaeda? ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/2 "2004-09-10T00:38:59Z")
I must give Cheney some credit: He makes G.W. almost look honest by comparison…which is no easy feat! ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/3 "2004-09-10T00:51:35Z")
> [@](#): > > Are the Bush admin’s claims about Abu Musab al Zarqawi true? And if so, how strong does it support the claim that Saddam had links to al Qaeda? al Zarqawi has been friends with some members of al Qaeda, but he has never been a member. Aside from receiving some medical treatment in Iraq, al Zarqawi never received any financial or hardware support from Hussein. There _was_ an al Qaeda training camp being set up in the north of Iraq–in the region protected from the Iraqi army by U.S. bombers. Cheney continues to repeat the same tired lie that has been debunked over and over since November of 2002 so that Bush does not have to accept blame for being the liar (on this point) and so that those who only follow the headlines without reading the news will continue to believe the lie that Iraq was associated with the WTC/Pentagon attacks. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/4 "2004-09-10T02:01:20Z")
Zarqawi was also one of the ‘al Qaeda’ guys held by Iran. At one time there was a deal in the works for Iran to turn him over to us, but Larry Franklin at the pentagon managed to torpedo the plan. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/5 "2004-09-10T17:05:51Z")
So, nobody will defend Cheney’s statement? ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/6 "2004-09-10T17:20:00Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Zarqawi was also one of the ‘al Qaeda’ guys held by Iran. At one time there was a deal in the works for Iran to turn him over to us, but Larry Franklin at the pentagon managed to torpedo the plan. I know the gist of the Larry Franklin thing, but how did he torpedo the Zarqawi turnover? I thought the Iran scandal (with renegade intelligence officers) occurred really recently. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/7 "2004-09-10T17:46:55Z")
> [@](#): > > […described Saddam as a] man who provided safe harbor and sanctuary to terrorists for years" and a man who “provided safe harbor and sanctuary as well for al Qaeda.” Saddam did provide safe havens for terrorists and did actively supported terrorists abroad. Now he does neither. What difference does it make whether they called themselves Al Qaeda or Islamic Jihad or whatever? You think they’re only a threat to America if they tattoo Al Qaeda on their forehead? The whole meaning of Al Qaeda is holed like an old sieve anyway. One day Mohammed is Al Qaeda, the next he’s The Mujahadeen Islamic Front (of Judea) and on Friday it’s Hitzbolla or Hamas. There’s noting special or magic about Al Qaeda, it’s just one amongst a whole slate of terrorists organisations festering in the Middle East. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/8 "2004-09-10T18:06:32Z")
**Rune** , if it makes do difference, then would Cheney bother to link Saddam to al Qaeda when there’s no support for that allegation? Obviously, it makes a difference, and obviously because of al Qaeda’s rather successful attack on the US a few years back. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/9 "2004-09-10T18:56:53Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > What difference does it make whether they called themselves Al Qaeda or Islamic Jihad or whatever? You think they’re only a threat to America if they tattoo Al Qaeda on their forehead? ``` If you start fighting every single terrorist group you soon must attack the IRA too ? You'll of course answer... islamic ones only... but that includes all sorts of groups ! Are you going to defend the US or start hitting every islamic wierdo on the planet ? Especially since some of these groups do keep within certain geographical areas. Hamas and Hezbollah for example that act only in Israel and Lebanon. If the US starts going after them they certainly aren't using resources to hunt down AQ and international menaces. Either you focus and do the job properly or you just piss off arabs all over the place even more than Bush does now (since the US would be interfering in all sorts of political situations). Labeling everyone as a general brand "terrorist" doesn't help fight terrorism. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/10 "2004-09-10T18:59:51Z")
… forgot one nice analogy. When your fighting crime you shouldn’t be shooting and hunting down small time drug dealers. Go for the dangerous sorts. Same with terrorists. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/11 "2004-09-10T19:50:14Z")
> [@Rashak Mani](#): > > You’ll of course answer… islamic ones only No of course not. We go after the Amish and Quaker terrorist organisations with equal vigour. And the Buddhist extremists. And Methodist suicide bombers and lets not forget those damn militant Pentecostals, mean sonsabithces! IRA hasn’t planted any bombs for some time, but if they had you bet I’d want to go after them. Still for all their awfulness they never descended to the level of horror as done by Islamic inspired terror organisations. Hezbollah has killed more American soldiers than any other terrorist organisation, and Hamas has killed several Americans and repeatedly called for attacks on the US. In any case, I’m not solely preoccupied with attacks on the US. This is a worldwide problem, and I think the latest attack in Russia is at least on par with 9/11. > [@Rashak Mani](#): > > … but that includes all sorts of groups ! Yes it does. Revtim, it seems to me you need to define more precisely what you think Al Qaeda is and what Al Qaeda members are. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/12 "2004-09-10T20:11:47Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Revtim, it seems to me you need to define more precisely what you think Al Qaeda is and what Al Qaeda members are. I use the standard definition, the terrorist group founded approximately in 1989 by bin Laden and Muhammad Atef. Are there other definitions? ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/13 "2004-09-10T20:35:09Z")
So we agree the first part of Cheney’s statement “provided safe harbor and sanctuary to terrorists for years “ is correct. If you ask me then Al Qaeda is a chimera and it is a grave mistake to concentrate unduly on it. Al Qaeda as an organisation has ceased to exist in any meaningful way, if it ever did. It is an idea, a dream, a way of life or a belief. One is a member of Al Qaeda if one subscribes more or less to the creeds of the extremists version of Islam that Osama and the boys believe in and if one work to fulfil the dreams by way of terror and violence. IANC (I’m not Cheney) but I suspect he used the moniker Al Qaeda (as Putin does now) because it pushes some buttons. I don’t agree but he’s a politician. He bullshits. So what, I’ve heard worse. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/14 "2004-09-10T20:57:48Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > So we agree the first part of Cheney’s statement “provided safe harbor and sanctuary to terrorists for years “ is correct. To be honest, I do not know enough about his support of other terrorists to agree or disagree. My question is whether his statement about al Qaeda is true. > [@Rune](#): > > If you ask me then Al Qaeda is a chimera and it is a grave mistake to concentrate unduly on it. Al Qaeda as an organisation has ceased to exist in any meaningful way, if it ever did. Perhaps, but nevertheless if Cheney is lying about enemies giving them support he should be called on it. > [@Rune](#): > > It is an idea, a dream, a way of life or a belief. One is a member of Al Qaeda if one subscribes more or less to the creeds of the extremists version of Islam that Osama and the boys believe in and if one work to fulfil the dreams by way of terror and violence. I’m no expert, but I would think that by most people’s definitions to truthfully call someone a member of an organization they would have to not only share its ideals but also have contact with it and take orders from its leaders. > [@Rune](#): > > IANC (I’m not Cheney) but I suspect he used the moniker Al Qaeda (as Putin does now) because it pushes some buttons. I don’t agree but he’s a politician. He bullshits. So what, I’ve heard worse. Yes, there’s worse, but nevertheless he should be called on it if it’s a lie. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/15 "2004-09-10T21:45:49Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > IANC (I’m not Cheney) but I suspect he used the moniker Al Qaeda (as Putin does now) because it pushes some buttons. I don’t agree but he’s a politician. He bullshits. So what, I’ve heard worse. Because Cheney is perpetuating a deliberate lie concerning 9/11 as a reason to get re-elected. Unfortunately, too many voters accept the lie at face value, even though the 9/11 report _that Bush and Cheney support_ says otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/16 "2004-09-10T22:02:45Z")
> [@](#): > > So we agree the first part of Cheney’s statement “provided safe harbor and sanctuary to terrorists for years “ is correct. Well, those of us who actually read the State Department and intelligence reports that were written before the Bush administration began ordering them to be puffed up do not agree with that distortion. From the [State Department’s Overview of State-Sponsored Terrorism](http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2001/html/10249.htm) > [@](#): > > Iraq provided bases to several terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), and the Abu Nidal organization (ANO). In 2001, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) raised its profile in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by carrying out successful terrorist attacks against Israeli targets. In recognition of the PFLP’s growing role, an Iraqi Vice President met with former PFLP Secretary General Habbash in Baghdad in January 2001 and expressed continued Iraqi support for the intifadah. Also, in mid-September, a senior delegation from the PFLP met with an Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister. Baghdad also continued to host other Palestinian rejectionist groups, including the Arab Liberation Front, and the 15 May Organization. Now let’s examine this list of “support.” The MEK was/is a group that was directed at destabilizing Iran. They were mostly inactive, but what activity they performed was limited to anti-Iran operations. They were such terrible terrorists, that the U.S. signed them up as allies as soon as we had secured Iraq. The PKK is one of several groups engaged in long-term power struggles over who will fight Iraq and Turkey to establish a new Kurdish state; they are not active in “international terrorism.” (In fact, U.S. agencies have reported that they foreswore violence, resorting to “diplomatic” channels in 2000, although I would not be surprised that they have been caught up in the current violence). It seems unlikely that they were being supported by Hussein, who would be as threatened by the Kurdish independence movement as Turkey is. The support of the PLF is not given a date, but then they go on to _insinuate_ a direct connection by discussing activities of the slightly different PLFP. Meanwhile, the most recent attack directly connected to the PLF seems to have occurred in the 1980s. There is no established connection between the PLPF and the pre-invasion Iraq. The insinuation by State is clearly one intended to mislead by insinuation. Including the Abu Nidal Organization is a bad joke. Prior to 2001, Iraq appears to have allowed Abu Nidal, himself, to retire to Iraq–eleven years after his last terrorist activity, which was, itself, an attack on a PLO officer in a bit of internecine warfare. al Zarqawi had some surgery or other medical attention and left the country without any connection with the Ba’ath regime. Beyond that, we have only the sporadic donation of money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. However, Hussein never announced that he would reward the families of all such bombers, (and, in fact, he gave out only a few such donations–much as a few of our Saudi “allies” have done). With his hit-or-miss approach to donations and the fact that he always made the award after the fact, it was clearly a PR move on his part to garner favor with the Arab community that basically hatred and feared him and there is no evidence that his donations actually influenced the decision of any suicide bomber. So the “support” for terrorism amounts to allowing a couple of people to retire from terrorism, completely, or get medical attention, a failure to attack some groups that were operating within his own borders, and some lip service with no material aid in support of a few Palestinian groups for the purposes of bolstering his own image without actually extending any assistance. That simply does not rise to the level of “provid[ing] safe harbor and sanctuary to terrorists for years,“ (particularly when the “years” were pretty much all several years _prior_ to our invasion (and, in fact, prior to thw WTC/Pentagon attacks). ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/17 "2004-09-10T22:12:39Z")
Someone’s lying. Because the 9-11 Commission Report said quite clearly that NO “Collaborative Operational Relationship” existed between Iraq and Al Qaeda: > [@](#): > > \*\*“We have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.” \*\* Then again, perchance Cheney never got the memo. After all, he is only the Vice-President. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/18 "2004-09-10T23:30:33Z")
Um, weren’t al Qaeda traveling in Kurdish lands? The lands that the Allies controlled with their no-fly zones? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2004, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/19 "2004-09-10T23:48:05Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Then again, perchance Cheney never got the memo. After all, he is only the Vice-President. Are you saying he was out of the loop? 😉 > [@Rune](#): > > Saddam did provide safe havens for terrorists and did actively supported terrorists abroad. Now he does neither. What difference does it make whether they called themselves Al Qaeda or Islamic Jihad or whatever? You think they’re only a threat to America if they tattoo Al Qaeda on their forehead? Actually, yes, it does make a difference. Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad have never attacked the United States, and don’t seem interested in doing anything other than terrorizing Israel. While this is certainly not a good thing, it’s something for Israel to deal with, not us. Al Qaeda leadership in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the surrounding areas, not to mention operatives that are inside America, are a much bigger problem. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2004, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849/20 "2004-09-14T05:26:38Z")
I ask again: did al-Qaida travel in Kurdish lands, which were not in Sadaam’s control at the time? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cheney-9-9-2004-saddam-provided-safe-harbor-and-sanctuary-as-well-for-al-qaeda/263849.md?page=2)