No Link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda -- none

In the United States, AP was first out of the gate with: "A senate intelligence committee report says there's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or his al-Qaida associates before the Iraq war." CBS and AP quote US Senator John D. Rockefeller stating of the report: "Ultimately, I think you will find that administration officials made repeated prewar statements that were not supported by underlying intelligence" and that it shows "the administration pursued a deceptive strategy abusing intelligence reporting that the intelligence community had already warned was uncorroborated, unreliable and in some critical circumstances fabricated."
Reuters notes that US Senator Carl Levin has pointed to the Bully Boy's statement on August 21st and attempted (yet again) to make an unfounded link. Levin: "The president's statement, made just two weeks ago, is flat-out false."
Though the press wants to play Levin's statement as an allegation, public record shows Bully Boy stated: "I square it because imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein, who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who had relations with Zarqawi." As Levin pointed out, that "is flat-out false."

The above is from The Common Ills and it ran Friday. In a Saturday New York Times article, Mark Mazzetti pinned the moment of the well publicized link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda false as being in 2005 (from a 2005 CIA report). Here's Mazzetti slapping some whitewash on the fence:

But one report did contradict the administration's assertion made before the war and since, that ties between Mr. Zarqawi and Mr. Hussein's government provided evidence of a close relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda.As recently as Aug. 21 Presdeint Bush said at a news conference that Mr. Hussein "had relations with Zarqawi." But a C.I.A. report completed in October 2005 concluded instead that Mr. Hussein's government "did not have a relationship, harbor or even turn a blind eye toward Zarqwi and his associates," according to the new Senate findings.

In the land of the real, Jonathan Weisman's "Iraq's Alleged Al-Qaeda Ties Were Disputed Before War" (Washington Post):

But, as [Olympia] Snowe emphasized in her statement, the report concluded that information provided by an INC source was cited in that estimate and in Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's February 2003 speech to the United Nations as corroborating evidence about Iraq's mobile biological weapons program. Those citations came despite two April 2002 CIA assessments, a May 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency fabrication notice and a July 2002 National Intelligence Council warning -- all saying the INC source may have been coached by the exile group into fabricating the information.

Yes, Mazzetti, the 2005 CIA report did contradict the lies of the administration but so did "two April 2002 CIA assessments, a May 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency fabrication notice and a July 2002 National Intelligence Council warning". It does make a difference when the lie was refuted and it was refuted as early as 2002. It makes a difference (and Pat Roberts' claim that it's information 'everyone' already knows reminds us of a pseudo-liberals same excuse for not covering the Downing Street Memos). Colin Powell admits to a "blot" on his record but it wasn't his fault. He did the best he could, he told America. From Ava & C.I.'s "TV Review: Barbara and Colin remake The Way We Were:"

Has a less convincing scene ever been performed?Possibly. Such as when Powell informs Walters that the fault lies with the intelligence community -- with those who knew but didn't come forward. Unfortunately for Powell, FAIR'sSteven R. Weisman (in "Powell Calls His U.N. Speech a Lasting Blot on His Record ") steered everyone to a Los Angels Times' article from July 15, 2004 which reported:
Days before Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was to present the case for war with Iraq to the United Nations, State Department analysts found dozens of factual problems in drafts of his speech, according to new documents contained in the Senate report on intelligence failures released last week.Two memos included with the Senate report listed objections that State Department experts lodged as they reviewed successive drafts of the Powell speech. Although many of the claims considered inflated or unsupported were removed through painstaking debate by Powell and intelligence officials, the speech he ultimately presented contained material that was in dispute among State Department experts.

It does matter when the truth was known. That's when the lie begins. It's very generous of Mazzetti to cover for Colin Powell (and others) by focusing on the 2005 CIA report. It's not reality but who expects much reality from The New York Times? There was no link. The administration lied and that includes Saint Blotty Colin Powell. Ignoring reality may be a hobby of the paper of no record's, but that's no way to inform the people.

The CBS Evening News managed to note Colin Powell, even if The Times can't:

Its statements like this one, made Feb. 5, 2003, by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell that have become so controversial, implying Iraq was linked to terror attacks.
"Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associated collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants," Powell said.
But after 2 1/2 years of reviewing pre-war intelligence behind closed doors, the lead Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, Sen. John Rockefeller of West Virginia, who voted for the Iraq War, says the Bush administration pulled the wool over everyone's eyes.

That's truth. Colin Powell told Barbara Walters that he'd like to be remembered as "A good public servant somebody who truly believes in his country. . . . Somebody who cared, somebody who served." Ava and C.I. replied:

Yeah well, Nixon wanted to be remembered a certain way as well. Liar's the way many remember him now. Liar's the way many will remember Colin Powell. Belief in your country doesn't allow you to lie to your country. Belief in your Bully Boy does. That's something this adminstration fails to grasp. They all think they're working for the Bully Boy. Powell makes statements to that effect. He's full of many things including his "service" to the Bully Boy.The administration is supposed to be working for the country. Presidents come and go. The nation is what is supposed to matter. Belief in your country would mean you tell the peoplethe truth.
Somebody who served?
He didn't serve the country. He betrayed it. He didn't live up to his office. He didn't live up to the public trust. He didn't live up to the principles of democracy. He lied. He lied. He lied.
We won't put the glossy spin on it that Walters did. We're not looking at Powell through the blind eyes of love.

There was no link. The "blot" is a "stain" (a blood stain) and the lie was a lie. No link.