SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Road Walker who wrote (181944)1/31/2004 11:17:17 AM
From: hmaly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575421
 
John Re...How much was spent by SH in total? How much do you think the Saudis, the Iranians, even the Egyptians spend to support the Palestinians? Then, why attack Iraq?

According to that article, Saddam paid out $500,000 at that meeting, and more than 10 mln at the time of the article. Other later reports put it at over 20 mln. Why saddam over Iran or SA. Saddam has a long history of using terror, and terrorist groups to obtain his goals, one of which was to strike back at the US for the Gulf war. Saddam was also the brashest about it, at one time had a WMD program, and has shown the ability to use them at will. It was also known that Al Qaeda was seeking WMD, and in a video, we have seen experiments on dogs; plus several Al Qaeda operatives were known to operate in Iraq. Saddam also used terror, and mass murder to control his people, so even his fellow arabs wanted to see him go; which wasn't the case for either Iran's or SA leaders. Saddam had 15 UN resolutions against him, and to contain him, an expensive sanctions program was instituted, which Clark and OBL blamed for millions of Iraqi deaths. Neither SA or Iran had sanctions imposed against them. Both SA and Turkey wanted the US to stop using their bases, for the overflights, which kept the Kurds and Shias safe. All these reasons came to a head after 9/11, forcing GW to take the action Bill, wanted to do, but couldn't or wouldn't

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/congress/1990_cr/h900911-iraq.htm

However, American, French and Israeli sources familiar with intelligence on the subject say Saddam Hussein took a number of key steps earlier this year to build up his terrorist capabilities. The various spy services don't agree on all the details, but all are convinced that the terrorist pattern is real. Among the actions by Saddam Hussein they cite are these:

He began reinstalling the notorious Abu Nidal Organization in Baghdad this spring. It had been exiled for years to Libya, where it suffered a debilitating internal split. By some estimates, there now are hundreds of Abu Nidal operatives training in and around Baghdad in case they are ordered to repeat the group's earlier exploits, such as machine-gunning airports and synagogues. Abu Nidal himself may now be in Baghdad.

He gave haven to his longtime terrorist protege Abu Abbas, after Mr. Abbas publicly took responsibility for an aborted attack on an Israeli beach that forced the U.S. to end talks with the Palestine Liberation Organization. Mr. Abbas's Palestine Liberation Front is also responsible for the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship in the Mediterranean, in which a wheelchair-bound American was shot and thrown into the sea.

He permitted Yasser Arafat and the rest of the PLO leadership to move key parts of their headquarters to Baghdad from Tunis. While many PLO leaders play no direct role in terrorism, Western experts claim that Abu Iyad, an Arafat deputy who is suspected of directing the killing of a U.S. diplomat in the Sudan, is in Baghdad, along with elements of Force 17, a PLO military arm that has engaged in terrorism.

He opened contact with Ahmad Jibril, leader of the group that is believed to have blown up Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988. According to French sources, Mr. Jibril was invited to open an office in Baghdad for his Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine--General Command, even though his patrons are Iraq's worst Moslem enemies: Syria and Iran. Mr. Jibril is thought to have declined, but has changed patrons before.

He may have gained a lever over another bloody group that is an unlikely ally: Lebanon's pro-Iranian Shiite Hezbollah, or Party of God. By seizing Kuwait, Saddam Hussein won control over 15 Shiite terrorists in prison there, including the brother-in-law of one of Hezbollah's most brutal operatives, Imad Mugniyah. French intelligence sources say the prisoners are now in Baghdad, and Saddam is offering to free Mr. Mugniyah's brother-in-law if Hezbollah plays ball with him. If true, that could be ominous for the six American hostages the group holds, including two controlled by Mr. Mugniyah.

worldthreats.com;

The second link, is a more detailed study, or chronical of links reported in newspapers, and books.

http://www.idf.il/iraq/english/info13.stm

The Iraqis have mechanisms in place, that work in conjunction with the Palestinian Authority, to pay the families of suicide attackers US$25,000. Families of terrorists who are killed while carrying out their attacks receive US$10,000. These funds serve as an incentive for families to sacrifice their loved ones, as well as provide them with financial stability which they fail to enjoy during this time of conflict.

It has been estimated in the media that Iraq has thus far transferred more than US$20 million to families of Palestinian terrorists. This is done with the full cooperation of the Palestinian Authority.

The “Arab Liberation Front,” as well as the Iraqi Ba’ath party operating in PA areas serve as the “payment contractors” within the framework of this terrorism encouragement policy.