I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping.

by **stickdog99** » Mon May 01, 2006 4:39 am

<a href="http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-allowed-zarqawi-to-escape/2006/04/30/1146335608444.html">www.theage.com.au/news/wo...08444.html</a> US 'allowed Zarqawi to escape' By Chris Evans May 1, 2006 The United States deliberately passed up repeated opportunities to kill the head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Jordanian-born terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, before the March 2003 US-led invasion of that country. The claim, by former US spy Mike Scheuer, was made in an interview to be shown on ABC TV's Four Corners tonight. Zarqawi is often described as a lieutenant of Osama bin Laden, whose supporters masterminded the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington. Mr Scheuer was a CIA agent for 22 years - six of them as head of the agency's Osama bin Laden unit - until he resigned in 2004. He told Four Corners that during 2002, the Bush Administration received detailed intelligence about Zarqawi's training camp in Iraqi Kurdistan. Mr Scheuer claims that a July 2002 plan to destroy the camp lapsed because "it was more important not to give the Europeans the impression we were gunslingers". more ...

by **starroute** » Mon May 01, 2006 11:49 am

I haven't figured out what that agenda is, but he's clearly not a disinterested party. <blockquote>Quote:<hr><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Scheuer">www.sourcewatch.org/index...el_Scheuer</a> Michael Scheuer was a CIA employee for 22 years, whose duties included being head of the Osama bin Laden unit, from its inception in 1996 until 1999. He also authored two books anonymously, until being identified by the media in the summer of 2004. His second book, Imperial Hubris was extremely critical of the War on Iraq, and the policies of GW Bush, which Sheuler viewed as being a plus for Al Qaida. Scheuer quit the CIA in late 2004, and has been on many news programs offering his analysis that at times seem contradictory, as does his claim of being a lifelong Republican because he is a strict constitutional constructionist. Despite this he ardently advocates intense covert intelligence operations in the war on Terror, and assents to the practice of renditons. One of the reasons for his leaving was that Porter Goss, the GW Bush appointee who replaced George J. Tenet as CIA head, sent out a memo just after the November 2004 elections stating that the CIA's job was to support the president, which caused consternation within the agency.<hr></blockquote> Scheuer is associated with the Jamestown Foundation (<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jamestown_Foundation),">www.sourcewatch.org/index...undation),</a> which is closely connected to the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya and Freedom House. The board of directors at Jamestown includes Zbigniew Brzezinski and Alfred Regnery. The American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Committee_for_Peace_in_Chechnya)">www.sourcewatch.org/index..._Chechnya)</a> is chaired by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Alexander Haig, and Stephen Solarz and includes a whole slew of leading Neocons among its members. Freedom House (<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Freedom_House)">www.sourcewatch.org/index...dom_House)</a> has many of the same names plus a few others of note, like Dan Quayle. So it looks like Scheuer is attacking Bush from the right, as not being tough enough in the war on terror. But it's also possible that what's going on here is part of the push for war with Iran. Or it might even be directed towards making Bush look like a moderate so he can then proceed to shoot from the hip. Frankly, I have no idea what's going on -- I just know that Scheuer is no innocent.

by **stickdog99** » Tue May 02, 2006 2:52 am

IMHO, this revelation is more planted disinfo that is meant to prop up the Pentagon's Zarqawi myth by having a supposed "renegade" CIA guy blow the whistle on his unnamed bosses' incompetence. It "hurts" the Bush Administration a tiny bit in that it is mild and largely undirected criticism, but it props up the bs Zarqawi myth to those who might otherwise see the PSYOP for what it is when Bush haters disseminate this "evidence" to hammer Bush.

by **Gouda** » Wed May 03, 2006 10:45 am

Scheuer's partially (but greatly) misleading narrative, taken together with the last two bits from Robert Fisk regarding Zarqawi's role and the role of the "unknown Americans" triangulate into an interesting picture, and maybe a warning about "911 truth". First, Fisk's: 'Unknown Americans' are provoking civil war in Iraq, which Jeff just posted. Here, he publishes extremely damning info from a trusted source which further reinforces testimonial proof of US/UK orchestration of false flag attacks to incite civil war in order to partition Iraq, which happens to be the officially-stated position of the Democratic (Biden) / Foreign Policy elite (CFR-Gelb). Fisk published that just a few days after going on record stating that the Zarqawi tape proves he is alive. In the interview (below), Fisk stumbles around trying to reconcile the re-reality of Zarqawi and the reality of American propagandizing which overhypes his "terrorist threat" status; Fisk then kind of takes the progressive liberal "blowback" stance on the significance of Zarqawi's resurrection from the dead, that is: Zarqawis are a creation of our unjust foreign policy & we feed their very real ill-intent. True enough, to an extent, but a little bit confusing, which is understandable since interviews are not always easy or the best way to clearly convey one's thoughts. Perhaps too, Fisk was (intended to be) caught off guard by the release of the video - knowing that he had been on the record before building a case that Zarqawi was probably dead and/or a fabrication of US propaganda. <a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12855.htm">www.informationclearingho...e12855.htm</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Zarqawi tape authentic, says Fisk -snip- TONY JONES: You also thought he was a creature invented to fill the narrative gaps. In other words, a creature created, in a sense, by American propaganda. He's much more than that; isn't that evident from this video? ROBERT FISK: Yeah. It is pretty clear. He does exist. He is still alive and that was him on the video. I don't think there's any doubt about that. I watched it several times over and am clearly of the mind that this is the man. What we do need to know, of course, is whether he has actually any real status over and above being a name al-Zarqawi. In other words, does he actually have any real status as a militant, as a resistant, as a rebel, whatever you like to use the word, terrorist, other than just being a person who is to be hated and to be bestialised in front of the television screens. The issue really is, I think, is this a person who is seriously an enemy of the "West" or is this just another person who is popping up on our screens to say this is the latest mad lunatic, the latest fanatic, the latest terrorist whom we have to be concerned about? That is the real issue, you see. ... TONY JONES: So, what do you conclude from that and in fact what do you conclude from whether this man has any influence within the insurgency? ROBERT FISK: Look, look, look, look. Here 's what I conclude. I think these people are bad guys. OK, they are. There's no doubt about it. They are bad guys. But I also think that they register in the Arab world, in the Muslim world, they register a line that says, in effect, there is injustice in the Muslim world and I am speaking about that injustice and as long as we, the West, go along with that injustice, so these people will have a claim on the ideas and the minds of the people who listen to them. In other words, we, as Westerners, give them some credibility by not being fair in the Middle East and that is the problem. We're not fair, we are not just in the Middle East and as long as we're not going to be just, as long as we're not going to be fair, so unfortunately will these people have a say and a mind in the Middle Eastern people. <hr></blockquote> But Fisk had his Syrian connection ready to go in response to the release of the Zarqawi video. Nice comeback against the reality constructions of the Scheuers, Gelbs, Bidens, Rumsfelds, Neocons, and McMedias. Back to Mr. Scheuer, who is going all anti-Bush, right in line with the waves of thought which would have us get rid of Bush to save the nation and the world. I find this claim by Mr. Scheuer an keen bit of deception: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Mr Scheuer claims that a July 2002 plan to destroy the camp lapsed because "it was more important not to give the Europeans the impression we were gunslingers"... "Mr Bush had Zarqawi in his sights almost every day for a year before the invasion of Iraq and he didn't shoot because they were wining and dining the French in an effort to get them to assist us in the invasion of Iraq," he told Four Corners.<hr></blockquote> Right. Though it is probably true the Bushistas had big Z in their sights but let him go, it is laughable to assert they did this because they needed to keep their image pure so as to seduce the Europeans, especially the French, in an attempt to get them into the war. Everyone knew the game at that so-called dinner table. Right, the French and Germans had noooooooo idea that Bush/Cheney were trigger happy and were going into Iraq one way or another. The US, the French and the Germans all knew damn well about the other's incriminating involvement in pre-war preps, the role of their war-enabling spy agencies and under-the-table dealings with Saddam. No need for flowers and perfume when the rotweilers were all there under the dinner table. "Missed opportunity" due to diplomatic sensitivities, my ass. Anyway, Scheuer let's us know that bad, bad, clumsy Bush let Zarqawi get away (which is different, mind you, from allowing him to exist for a specific purpose), and Fisk shows us that he's got a few cards up his sleeve in response this ongoing Zarqawi psyop battle. 911 truth? Beware those government confiscated cameras, tapes, voice and video recordings lest the physical proof pop up some day and catch you off guard - kind of like your wife's widely published restraining order against you - that is unless you, like Fisk, have got an ace up your sleeve.

by **stickdog99** » Wed May 03, 2006 7:58 pm

Nice analysis, Gouda. As for Zarqawi, who knows for certain: 1) if it's really and truly Zarqawi on the videotape, 2) exactly when, why and by whom the videotape was made, 3) whose payroll our putative videotaped Zarqawi has been and currently is on, or 4) whose purposes our putative Zarqawi made this videotape to serve, or 5) if our putative videotaped Zarqawi was acting freely or under compulsion when he was taped? Finally, why does our putative Zarqawi suddenly feel free to show his face when he (and all of his cronies) felt compelled to cover themselves from head to toe in the Nick Berg beheading video? Doesn't this imply at minimum that one or the other of these videotapes (both supposedly confirmed by "experts" to be Zarqawi) were wholly invented PSYOPS?

by **nomo** » Thu May 04, 2006 12:55 pm

I wonder where this fits in? <hr /> <a href="http://www.ktre.com/Global/story.asp?S=4859743&nav=2FH5">www.ktre.com/Global/story...3&nav=2FH5</a> U-S Command unveils unflattering video snippet of al-Qaida in Iraq leader BAGHDAD, Iraq Newly released video of the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq shows Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (AH'-boo MOO'-sahb ahl-zahr-KOW'-ee) decked out in American tennis shoes and fumbling with a machine gun. The U-S military command says the footage was found during a series of raids in April on purported terror cell safe houses southwest of Baghdad. Major General Rick Lynch says al-Zarqawi chose not to show the world this piece of video in which he's wearing "his New Balance tennis shoes," and in which his associates "do things like grab the hot barrel of the machine gun and burn themselves." In the version that appeared on the Internet last month, al-Zarqawi swore allegiance to Osama bin Laden and said any government formed in Iraq would be just a "stooge." The U-S military says 161 leaders of al-Qaida in Iraq have been killed or captured since January. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=nomo@rigorousintuition>nomo</A> at: 5/4/06 11:02 am

by **Gouda** » Thu May 04, 2006 1:37 pm

No wonder his numerous associates and lieutenants are always getting busted and he always gets away. He's got the New Balance! (From the Px at one of the US bases?) Wait a second...that would be ONE tennis shoe, no? As in one per leg? What gives with the plural, "tennis shoes"?

by **Qutb** » Thu May 04, 2006 3:45 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>in which his associates "do things like grab the hot barrel of the machine gun and burn themselves."<hr></blockquote> Wow... these are supposed to be hardened guerrilla fighters? These people may well be for real, but their capabilities and the threat they pose appear to have been somewhat exaggarated.

by **nomo** » Thu May 04, 2006 3:52 pm

They're ace pilots though. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/indifferent.gif ALT=":|">

by **StarmanSkye** » Thu May 04, 2006 4:32 pm

Yeah, nice analysis Gouda; It might appear that one of the biggest dupes of all may be Zarqawi himself -- I can just about imagine: Zarqawi preens himself, watching CNN media news reports of his sayings and doings, saying to himself, 'Man, I AM a big wheel ... I did all that? Oh, yeah, I musta forgot ... Must watch to find-out what am I going to do next? What a clever, handsome, heroic devil I am! Discovery/Times channel programming (right outta the CIA-Psyops shop) sure isn't ignoring Zarqawi, giving him top-billing in their classic propaganda schtick 'explaining' the US's White-Hat role defeating the bad-guys in the west's exciting War on Terror latest drama ... Starman

by **Gouda** » Thu May 04, 2006 4:42 pm

More extensive and revealing bit here from CNN on Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch's analysis. Has Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch gone off message here? Is Gen Lynch not on Rumsfeld's page either? Is this HIS pre-retirement touche? Do we have dueling propaganda offices? Or is this all so neatly orchestrated somewheres? Perhaps we'll see in the coming days... (Still what's with Z walking around on two legs? Am I missing something I thought Zarqawi was missing?) <blockquote>Quote:<hr> U.S.: Outtakes show al-Zarqawi as poor gunman Thursday, May 4, 2006 Posted: 1754 GMT (0154 HKT) BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is seen as a less-than-accomplished gunman on a "complete" version of last week's Web video, according to a U.S. military commander. Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch on Thursday showed excerpts of the full video, found in a raid in Yusufiya south of Baghdad, that depict al-Zarqawi, leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, and his aides appearing all-thumbs with firearms. In the version posted on the Web, al-Zarqawi spoke directly to viewers, mocking the United States and the Iraqi government and exhorting his supporters to fight the U.S.-led operation. The video also showed the militant, dressed in black fighter's garb, standing in an open field and firing a machine gun. ( Watch the video of al-Zarqawi released last week -- 2:57) Lynch showed parts of the "complete video" that pictured the militant leader and what he called "supposedly competent" aides after al-Zarqawi was seen firing the machine gun. Al-Zarqawi is seen walking toward a white pickup truck in "New Balance tennis shoes" with associates around him, called "his trusted advisers" by Lynch. They "do things like grab the hot barrel of a machine gun and burn themselves," Lynch said, narrating the video to reporters. In another portion, Lynch said, "Here's Zarqawi, the ultimate warrior, trying to shoot his machine gun. "It's supposed to be automatic fire. He's shooting single shots one at a time. Something's wrong with his machine gun. He looks down, can't figure it out. He calls his friend to unblock the stoppage and get the weapon firing again." CNN reviewed the tapes later. After the shooting scene, al-Zarqawi heads toward a white truck and hands his gun to someone else, suggesting that the video might have been staged strictly for the camera. At one point after the shooting scene, al-Zarqawi looks straight at the camera and says something, but the audio is muted. At least one masked man behind him appears to be cheering him on. Lynch said that what was seen on the Web last week was what al-Zarqawi "wanted the world to see." "Look at me," he said al-Zarqawi was trying to impart, "I'm a capable leader of a capable organization and we are indeed declaring war against democracy in Iraq and we're going to establish an Islamic caliphate." "What he didn't show you were the clips that I showed you," he said, adding, "it makes you wonder." Lynch was asked how al-Zarqawi can be a "terror mastermind" if he can't handle a firearm. "You'll probably need to defer that question to his followers," Lynch said, noting that they have allowed him to be established as a leader. Lynch said the images he showed indicate that al-Zarqawi "tends to have a problem" with mastering his own weapons system and with finding capable and competent aides. "Why he's their leader, I don't know." When asked about the al-Zarqawi video, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said he hadn't seen the clips, but said the terrorist leader was "trying to engage in desperate attempts to derail the transition to democracy in Iraq. "Here's another al Qaeda leader that is under a lot of pressure," McClellan said. "Zarqawi and his terrorist allies were dealt a real blow in Iraq by the formation of a unity government that represents all of Iraq's communities. "Now we know that they're determined and they want to continue to carry out attacks and that's why we're partnering with Iraqi security forces ... and we will continue to do so."<hr></blockquote>

by **Ike Broflovski** » Thu May 04, 2006 5:50 pm

A few years ago reports came out that "Zarqawi" does have both legs after all. Maybe the "one leg" story was just an excuse to place him in Baghdad. Maybe there really was a one-legged Zarqawi, now dead, and the ringer they're using now said he loved his job but not THAT much. Who knows? For what it's worth, Imperial Hubris is perhaps the best mainstream "war on terror" book I've read. Of course Scheuer is no babe in the woods, but I wouldn't automatically dismiss everything he says as disinformation. I have heard similar claims that we had Zarqawi in our sights before the Iraq invasion but declined to take him out for whatever reason. This certainly fits with the pattern of passing up "shots" at bin Laden several times in the late '90s. I find it ironic that everyone thinks Scheuer is disinfo, but seems to trust Fisk's Syrian intelligence source (who also says Ghazi Kenaan really did kill himself at work). Fisk's reaction to the Zarqawi video seems strange. If he previously thought the Zarqawi myth was untrue, what difference would it make that a video appeared with some guy making a speech and holding a gun? Does Fisk not think military intelligence is capable of producing a video? His interpretation -- that there's a real guy named Zarqawi but that he's not a big terror mastermind -- seems reasonable, but I don't know what difference the video makes either way.

by **Gouda** » Fri May 05, 2006 7:35 am

One should always be cautious in evaluating info from those anon intelligence sources as well as those formerly anon intelligence sources, but I think that despite his (I agree) strange interview re: Zarqawi's living video, Fisk has relative credibility - and together with other information and reports (see the Nicolas J S Davies <a href="http://globalresearch.ca/index.p...cleId=2127">article</a>, which starman posted) confirming that the "Salvador Option" and worse is in effect, they substantiate what his Syrian source is saying. Whereas Scheuer, in my opinion, is too obviously misdirecting substantial info toward the 'get rid of the Bush regime yet keep the military-intelligence complex empowered to save the world' agenda. Imperial Hubris - more like Imperial Nudity - Scheuer (and his allies) want the US to cover it's bared ass - an ass they worked so hard to cover during their own clandestine careers. They are trying to show middle-america and sycophantic DC that Bush/Cheney/Neocon "hubris" has led to a dangerous bungling of pax americana. Pax Americana is of course Corporate Imperial Order by another name, and I have my doubts anything was bungled, unless it was bungled on purpose, for show. I am sure no one in this game is really offended by being accused of Hubris. Clinton's neoliberal humanitarian pax americana (which Scheuer would have us re-enter, revised perhaps, with dozens of new military bases worldwide a wonderful side-benefit of the Bush-Cheney rampage) and Bush's naked neocon kill humanity / spread 'democracy' plunder are two faces of the same treasury note. The post-Reagan neocon game was needed to, in a short time, expand the empire by brute force in order to follow up with the relief of a kinder, gentler neoliberal regime that finds itself with consolidated & jacked-up intelligence powers and military infrastructure. Hillary will go quail hunting too. The neolibs and neocons go hand in hand, man, all the way back to, at least, Truman's presiding over the birth of the corporate National Security State. That seems to have been the plan anyway, not sure it will work, especially if we can (patiently, but energetically, creatively) muster what the migrant worker movement and the Zapatistas and the Bolivarians have mustered. *** I was also thinking more about the timely follow-up release of "bungling Zarqawi" footage. Might serve a double purpose, depending on the perspective of the audience. One, to further embarrass Bush and Rummy; two, to signal a transition: Zarqawi is on the wane, if he ever was a threat, and so all the violence and chaos we see now in Iraq is clearly all crazy IRAQI vs. IRAQI sectarian slaughter! No more need for an antagonistic outsider boogeyman to get this civil war rolling on its own. On edit:Our good general may well have been anxious, a result of general corps frustration, to embarrass Zarqawi, to show he ain't all that, who-ahh! -- Done either as a morale-booster to the troops (and Fox/CNN citizens) who will be needed as cannon fodder a good while longer - or he posted this in genuine faith in the military's own psyops. Does not matter if the general "knows" or is a useful idiot - the effect is the same. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=gouda@rigorousintuition>Gouda</A> at: 5/5/06 6:13 am

I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping.

I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping.

Michael Scheuer has his own agenda

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Zarqawi makes a fool of himself?

Re: Zarqawi makes a fool of himself?

Re: Zarqawi

Re: Zarqawi

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Re: I Guess the Zarqawi Myth Needed Some Heavy Duty Propping

Who is online