bodypilot90 0 #1 March 13, 2003 http://www.observer.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,591439,00.html Unlike the other parts of Salman Pak, Zeinab said the foreigners' camp was controlled directly by Saddam Hussein. In a telephone interview with The Observer, Zeinab described the culture clash which took place when secular Baathists tried to train fundamentalists: 'It was a nightmare! A very strange experience. These guys would stop and insist on praying to Allah five times a day when we had training to do. The instructors wouldn't get home till late at night, just because of all this praying.' Asked whether he believed the foreigners' camp had trained members of al-Qaeda, Zeinab said: 'All I can say is that we had no structure to take on these people inside the regime. The camp was for organisations based abroad.' One of the highlights of the six-month curriculum was training to hijack aircraft using only knives or bare hands. According to Zeinab, women were also trained in these techniques. Like the 11 September hijackers, the students worked in groups of four or five. In Ankara, Zeinab was debriefed by the FBI and CIA for four days. Meanwhile he told the INC that if they wished to corroborate his story, they should speak to a man who had political asylum in Texas - Captain Sabah Khodad, who had worked at Salman Pak in 1994-5. He too has now told his story to US investigators. In an interiew with The Observer, he echoed Zeinab's claims: 'The foreigners' training includes assassinations, kidnapping, hijacking. They were strictly separated from the rest of us. To hijack planes they were taught to use small knives. The method used on 11 September perfectly coincides with the training I saw at the camp. When I saw the twin towers attack, the first thought that came into my head was, "this has been done by graduates of Salman Pak".' Zeinab and Khodad said the Salman Pak students practised their techniques in a Boeing 707 fuselage parked in the foreigners' part of the camp. Yesterday their story received important corroboration from Charles Duelfer, former vice chairman of Unscom, the UN weapons inspection team. ok what do you think? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #2 March 13, 2003 Interesting. I noted the date of the article - Sunday November 11, 2001. I wonder why our administration hasn't mentioned this link for a year and a half, if it's a valid one? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #3 March 13, 2003 Not sure Bill, but I have heard that sat photo's has confirmed both the jet and the training center. I have more stuff coming on it..... If this proves true what will you say to going in tonight for the safety of the USA? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #4 March 13, 2003 Interesting indeed.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blewaway5 0 #5 March 13, 2003 interesting read and here's another one. I just thought I'd put up one more recent reference and then the second is more about the Saddam-al Qaeda link. Hope they at least make you all think a bit.edit to fix clicky Truman Sparks for President Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mountainman 0 #6 March 13, 2003 QuoteInteresting. I noted the date of the article - Sunday November 11, 2001. I wonder why our administration hasn't mentioned this link for a year and a half, if it's a valid one? Personally, I dont hear them quoting websites very often. How would they have "mention" this link, if you don't mind me asking ?http://www.brandonandlaura.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,447 #7 March 14, 2003 The links don't work. Try: interesting read and another one Interesting reading. Need to think about it. Why weren't these used as evidence for the UN, instead of 12-year-old information? As far as quoting websites, MM, these are links to British newspapers' websites. I think the administration could quote them safely. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blewaway5 0 #8 March 14, 2003 *mutter, mutter, kick the " because it's easier than kicking myself, mustter some more* Thanks, Wendy Truman Sparks for President Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mountainman 0 #9 March 14, 2003 QuoteThe links don't work. Try: interesting read and another one Interesting reading. Need to think about it. Why weren't these used as evidence for the UN, instead of 12-year-old information? As far as quoting websites, MM, these are links to British newspapers' websites. I think the administration could quote them safely. Wendy W. I am just saying that I don't hear Ari Fleishner saying, "Check out www.foxnews.com/saddamisaterrorist/ for all the information linking them together." What do mean they could "quote them safely"?http://www.brandonandlaura.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #10 March 14, 2003 Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The links don't work. Try: interesting read and another one Interesting reading. Need to think about it. Why weren't these used as evidence for the UN, instead of 12-year-old information? As far as quoting websites, MM, these are links to British newspapers' websites. I think the administration could quote them safely. Wendy W. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am just saying that I don't hear Ari Fleishner saying, "Check out www.foxnews.com/saddamisaterrorist/ for all the information linking them together." What do mean they could "quote them safely"? Probaby because he doesn't know how to use the internet yet.. lol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #11 March 14, 2003 >I am just saying that I don't hear Ari Fleishner saying, "Check out > www.foxnews.com/saddamisaterrorist/ for all the information linking > them together." Ari: "We have evidence linking Zeinab, an Iraqi official, to the 9/11 hijackers." Reporter: "Where did you get this information?" Ari: "Zeinab defected to Turkey, where he spoke to British journalists, and a few parts of his story have been verified by the UN inspection team." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #12 March 14, 2003 PBS's Frontline and Salman Pak... http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html And remember Ramsi Youssef? He is connected to OBL, right? Bill, you know who he is...Project Bojinka, etc?....? He's also connected to Iraq. So is Mohammed Salameh. Musab Yasin. Adbul Rahman Yasin. OH! and I almost forgot. Remember that arrest about 10 days ago? The number 3 guy? The "mastermind" Khalil Sheikh Mohammed? The one who lived with Mohammed Atta in Hamburg? The one who designed and likely coordinated the 9/11 plot? That's Ramzi Youssef's uncle. And who can forget the MEK, (aka) Mujahadin-e Khalq Organiazation (aka) MKO originating in France, and moving to Iraq when France got tired of them. And you really can't forget that Jaques Chirac and Hussein are long time friends.... It's there (and there's quite a bit more...), should one bother to actually "trust but verify".... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #13 March 14, 2003 I am absolutely amazed! If this interview was conducted in 2001, why did it not get any media attention? After reading this interview, I am further sure that all along from the very beginning Bush has known more than he let on. If that is the case, my hat is off to him. This would be a prime example of not letting the media ruin all intelligence by broadcasting it to the world. Is it far fetched to believe that Bush and his cabinet were aware that OBL might not be the 'big fish,' and were very selectively planning their steps with quiet intel? If that is the case...brilliant!-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #14 March 14, 2003 Quote Probaby because he doesn't know how to use the internet yet.. lol Or doesn't want to give credit to something that Al Gore invented.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #15 March 14, 2003 Quotefrom the very beginning Bush has known more than he let on. lol Umm.... Precisely... There is a reason he is sticking to his guns.. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #16 March 14, 2003 QuoteI am absolutely amazed! If this interview was conducted in 2001, why did it not get any media attention? After reading this interview, I am further sure that all along from the very beginning Bush has known more than he let on. If that is the case, my hat is off to him. This would be a prime example of not letting the media ruin all intelligence by broadcasting it to the world. Is it far fetched to believe that Bush and his cabinet were aware that OBL might not be the 'big fish,' and were very selectively planning their steps with quiet intel? If that is the case...brilliant! Ummm - it was published in the media over a year ago. Oh - sorry, I forgot... it was a British newspaper, they don't count.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #17 March 14, 2003 I have been watching the debates in the House of Commons.. They kick ass... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #18 March 14, 2003 Perhaps, I should have said 'wide-spread' media attention. Would like me to go back and edit? Besides the post which I responded to linked the pbs interview. Seriously, how many of you get your news from pbs? My point was it did not receive widespread attention. And perhaps there is very good reason for it? Could it be that the media, but not actually uncover news, but simply concentrates on what the inflammatory topic of the week is? Perhaps, the administration deliberately chose to focus on other things. Rhino knows what I am saying.-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #19 March 14, 2003 QuoteI have been watching the debates in the House of Commons.. They kick ass... Don't they just. Wonder how "W" would get along if he had to undergo something like Prime Minister's Question Time?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #20 March 14, 2003 Tony can hold his own.. That MF is bad ass!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #21 March 14, 2003 QuotePerhaps, I should have said 'wide-spread' media attention. Would like me to go back and edit? Besides the post which I responded to linked the pbs interview. Seriously, how many of you get your news from pbs? My point was it did not receive widespread attention. And perhaps there is very good reason for it? Could it be that the media, but not actually uncover news, but simply concentrates on what the inflammatory topic of the week is? Perhaps, the administration deliberately chose to focus on other things. Rhino knows what I am saying. So being published in Britain doesn't constitute an intelligence leak? Have you any idea how many fundamentalist muslims live in Britain and what the circulation of the Guardian/Observer is. I suggest you apply Occam's razor to figure out the most likely reason this story died.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #22 March 14, 2003 I was not talking about leaks, I was talking about focusing on news, misdirection, etc. Never mind, I need sleep more than explaining stuff. Ask Rhino, he knows what I was getting at.-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #23 March 14, 2003 QuoteCould it be that the media, but not actually uncover news, but simply concentrates on what the inflammatory topic of the week is? Perhaps, the administration deliberately chose to focus on other things. Rhino knows what I am saying. You are 200% correct!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #24 March 14, 2003 QuoteQuote Probaby because he doesn't know how to use the internet yet.. lol Or doesn't want to give credit to something that Al Gore invented. The only thing Al Gore has ever invented is Al Gore. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallRate 0 #25 March 14, 2003 The application of Ockham's Razor can be quite subjective, so you might want to actually offer an opinion on this subject. Otherwise, by utilizing the principle of Ockham's Razor, I am left to conclude that you have no valid refutation to the premise of this post. FallRate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
