Meet the Facts:

On this recent Sunday's Meet the Press (30 May), the roundtable consisted of:

• Stephen Hayes, Weekly Standard, Author, "The Connection: How al-Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein Has Endangered America";
• Joe Klein,Time Magazine;
• Andrea Mitchell, NBC News;
• Roger Simon, U.S. News & World Report

Now, of those listed above, which one is from a politically oriented organ? Stephen Hayes of the conservative (and currenty very anti-Kerry Weekly Standard). And what did he write? A book claiming there were connections between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda - just the sort of thing to keep the "Iraq War is revenge for 9/11" theme alive.

Viewers wondering if Hayes would bring up the alleged connection during the round table on MtP were not disappointed. Here is the key exchange:

MR. RUSSERT: You have written a book called "The Connection: How al-Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein Has Endangered America." The president has gone out of his way to say there's no evidence of Saddam Hussein linked to September 11. What's your thesis?

MR. HAYES: A agree. I don't think--I think it's too strong to say there's no evidence, but at the same time I think that one has to consider the fact that he may have had something to do with it on even a marginal scale. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that a man named Ahmed Hickma Shakir, who, it looks like, was a Saddam Fedayeen lieutenant colonel, was present at the January 2000 planning meeting for September 11 in Kuala Lumpur. Is that definitive? It's not. But is it interesting? It certainly is. And I think the 9-11 Commission really needs to look carefully into who Ahmed Hickma Shakir was, and what, if any, was his role.

Now it happens that two days before MtP, Hayes had posted a story over on the Weekly Standard's website, The Connection. Here is a summary of what he wrote:

[WARNING: Even Hayes concedes at the beginning of the story that the claimed identity of this single man has problems because of discrepancies in spelling. There might actually be two people (terrorist and Iraqi agent) with similar names which would render the whole argument invalid.]

"This conventional wisdom--that our two most determined enemies were not in league, now or ever--is comforting. It is also wrong."

• Lieutenant Colonel Ahmed Hikmat Shakir was a member of Saddam Hussein's security force.
• An Iraqi of that name had been present at an al Qaeda summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on January 5-8, 2000.
• U.S. intelligence officials believe this was a chief planning meeting for the September 11 attacks.
• Yazid Sufaat, an American-born al Qaeda terrorist, hosted the planning meeting.
• Shakir had been nominally employed as a "greeter" by Malaysian Airlines. Shakir was instructed to work on January 5, 2000, and on that day, he escorted one Khalid al Mihdhar from his plane to a waiting car. Shakir climbed into the car with al Mihdhar and accompanied him to the Kuala Lumpur condominium of Yazid Sufaat.
• Khalid al Mihdhar was aboard American Airlines Flight 77 when it plunged into the Pentagon at 9:38 A.M. on September 11.
• Six days after September 11, Shakir was captured in Doha, Qatar. He had in his possession contact information for several senior al Qaeda terrorists. Shakir was released on October 21, 2001.
• Soon afterwards, Shakir was detained by Jordanian intelligence. CIA officials who interviewed Shakir in Jordan reported that he was generally uncooperative. The interrogators concluded that his evasive answers reflected counterinterrogation techniques so sophisticated that he had probably learned them from a government intelligence service.
• The Jordanians proposed to the CIA to "flip" him - allow Shakir to return to Iraq on condition that he agree to report back on the activities of Iraqi intelligence. The CIA agreed to Shakir's release. He posted a modest bail and returned to Iraq.
• He hasn't been heard from since.

"The Shakir story is perhaps the government's strongest indication that Saddam and al Qaeda may have worked together on September 11. It is far from conclusive; conceivably there were two Ahmed Hikmat Shakirs. And in itself, the evidence does not show that Saddam Hussein personally had foreknowledge of the attacks. Still--like the long, on-again-off-again relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda--it cannot be dismissed."

Well, it's far from conclusive. Hayes peddles, in print and on Meet the Press, the "interesting" notion that there is a connection between Hussein and al Qaeda. Also, Hayes repeats claims (or speculation) that this Shakir fellow was at the three day al Qaeda summit. That appears not to be the case - otherwise why is Hayes spending so much time telling us about Sakir's activities as a greeter and ride-along companion of al Mihdhar?

Unsubstantiated claims of contacts tied to speculation about what happened even if the contacts took place are the stock-in-trade of Hayes. It's a real shame that he was invited by Russert to be on Meet the Press.



posted by Quiddity at 5/31/2004 08:00:00 PM