Mylroie doesn't go far enough

Submitted by mitchell porter (Australia), May 10, 2008 at 08:55

Laurie Mylroie's thesis is that Iraq was al Qaeda's state sponsor, but that American intelligence failed to deduce this, but by good fortune there was a war to depose Saddam anyway. I would like to suggest an alternative view: Iraq was al Qaeda's state sponsor, and both the Clinton and Bush White Houses knew this, but it's a state secret. You're not supposed to know; just as you're not supposed to know that North Korea sponsored Aum Shinrikyo. Secrecy permits tactical flexibility in responding. In the case of North Korea, that secrecy has not had any major consequences, but in the case of Iraq, after 9/11 it required whole new levels of doublethink.

It's just a hypothesis. :-)

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".