Ron Suskind has released a book ("The fake letter became public in December 2003 and fueled global media speculation about an Iraq-al Qaeda link".) in which it is reported that he explains how based upon an interview or interviews with Rob Richer (I don't know how many interviews he had), Suskind has concluded that the Bush administration ordered the CIA to forge a letter showing that Mohammad Atta trained in Iraq for 9/11. Now, Suskind has tapes of his interview(s). [CORRECTION:
Tom Brokaw goes on and on on Meet the Press about it. William Safire writes about it in the New York Times. CNN—of course, O'Reilly flaunts it for four days straight. &mdash Ron Suskind
The thing is that while the Bush administration neocons were in fact saying things to mislead the general public into falsely believing that Saddam Hussein was connected with al Qaeda and 9/11, the forged letter (if there was one), was never rolled out as supporting evidence.
...a faked memorandum from then chief of Saddam's intelligence service Tahir Jalil Habbush dated July 1, 2001, and written to Hussein.
The bogus memo claimed that 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta had received training in Baghdad but also discussed the arrival of a "shipment" from Niger, which the Administration claimed had supplied Iraq with yellowcake uranium — based on yet another forged document whose source remains uncertain.
The memo subsequently was treated as fact by the British Sunday Telegraph, and cited by William Safire in his New York Times column, providing fodder for Bush's efforts to take the US to war.
Of course, if things even got so far that the neocons ordered anyone in the federal government to craft such a forgery, it would be more evidence against the neocons that has been mounding up and up.