You could have saved a lot of trouble by simply typing "everyone who disagrees with my take on it is lying or mistaken."
Christian Science Monitor articles on terror links with Iraq can be found here, and here. I don't know if these are the specific articles referred to, but it seems likely. It makes a case for Iraqi links to terrorism in general, but not IMO to Al Qaeda specifically.
I'm frankly stumped as to what would constitute "evidence" to you. Written documents, photos, all these sorts of things would have to be filtered through the CIA or other intelligence sources. They could be forged, right? Even if they were delivered to you personally, how would you know they were real?
I do notice you've raised the bar to "active collaboration." I suppose that's progress of a sort.