Not to get into a "facts and logic" debate or anything, but what Michael asked for was evidence of Saddam supporting Ansar Al-Islam, not Al Qaeda connections. I don't see any evidence of that in your links, either. One random snippet from foxnews.com :
A U.S.-led assault on a compound controlled by an extremist Islamic group turned up a list of names of suspected militants living in the United States and what may be the strongest evidence yet linking the group to Al Qaeda, coalition commanders said Monday.
The cache of documents at the Ansar al-Islam compound, including computer discs and foreign passports belonging to Arab fighters from around the Middle East, could bolster the Bush administration's claims that the two groups are connected, although there was no indication any of the evidence tied Ansar to Saddam Hussein as Washington has maintained.
There were indications, however, that the group has been getting help from inside neighboring Iran.
That leaves you with the last story, which is post-war and quite vague, and can hardly be used as a war justification. On the conventional reality level, my understanding is that the Ansar Al-Islam bases were far into Kurd-controlled territory, where Saddam wasn't in much of a position to give aid even if he wanted to. Being deep in the no-fly zone, those bases could have been attacked any time. That it suited the war marketeering effort to leave them standing till the war started didn't make them more or less of a threat. |
