Maddow and Wilkerson operate under the premise that there was no evidence linking the fallen Iraqi regime to al Qaeda. We can debate the extent of the relationship and what should have been done about it. But the claim that there was no evidence of a relationship at all and, therefore, it needed to be generated exclusively through torture is false.
The fact of the matter is that the U.S. Intelligence Community had collected evidence of a relationship for years. For example, former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet has written that there was “more than enough evidence” of a relationship. The relationship was even mentioned in the Clinton administration’s original indictment of al Qaeda in 1998. Foreign and American press outlets reported on the relationship years before the Bush administration made the case. Most importantly, the Iraqi regime’s own documents illustrate that it had a noteworthy relationship with al Qaeda and al Qaeda’s affiliates.
There are, quite simply, dozens upon dozens of pieces of evidence. And I’m sure that high-value detainees were asked about these pieces of evidence. It would have been negligent not to have done so.
It helps to remind people of this. I know much of the Left only hears "Saddam had no role in 9/11, how dare you say that!" But I've never said that, and saying they had contacts does not mean that Saddam had a role in 9/11.
Saddam was evil. He dealt with evil people--al Qaeda included. Why is this so hard to digest?
