...'allowed Zarqawi to escape' ???

[SHRED]

Very revealing here.
In Bush's zeal and rush to war, Zarqawi was not taken out, on purpose. Even after Pentagon targeting.
Was this an "oversight", a "mistake", or what?

I am willing to look into the evidence that there was some WMD and Al Qaeda activity in Iraq.
In no way do I yet believe the case can be made that it was at the level to warrant Bush's ill conceived debacle, that is currently taking place in Iraq.
I believe the 'No-Fly Zones' gave Zarqawi cover or Saddam would have nailed him. Saddam hated fundamentalist, radical Islamists.

Zarqawi, Saddam. Osama...that's 3 bullets.
Instead our USA Military, under the leadership of GWB (he is the 'decider' after all), bombed and murdered thousands of civilians.

I submit that we could have spent a fraction of these billions and nailed these fuckers.
But Halliburton and the rest of the military/corporate/complex wouldn't get their war profits...now would they.

---

Avoiding attacking suspected terrorist mastermind
Abu Musab Zarqawi blamed for more than 700 killings in Iraq
By Jim Miklaszewski
Pentagon Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 4:14 p.m. PT March 2, 2004


With Tuesday’s attacks, Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq.
But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger.
In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

-snip-

‘People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of pre-emption against terrorists.’

CONTINUED with video:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

---------

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.

CONTINUED:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-allowed-zarqawi-to-escape/2006/04/30/1146335608444.html#

[Kagemusha]

1. This isn't news, or in dispute.

The Decider thought it was in the US' national interests to keep Zarqawi alive as an example of the need to take out Iraq so that more Zarqawis were not allowed to use it as a place of refuge. 'course, only took 3 years and a lot of killing to get him after that.

[SHRED]

2. Oh I think RW'ers would dispute...

...that GWB kept Zarqawi alive on purpose.
They cannot see this 'man of God' doing that.
They are FAUX fed lost sheep after all.

[Kagemusha]

5. Uh, whatever.

It's well known and denial won't change that. The administration never made any pretense of blaming Saddam for Zarqawi and saying that it's not the US' fault. If Saddam wanted him so bad, after all, he could've just invaded the Kurdish areas and been bombed to smitherines.

[pretzel4gore]

3. if you remember, WE are the ONLY enemy

then the entire thing makes sense, all of it, going back to regan.....

[SHRED]

4. In addition:

The claim was that Saddam's Iraq had WMDs, and that Saddam was working with Al Qaeda.
Not that a terrorist was hiding in semi-autonomous Kurdish Iraq, protected from Saddam by the US military's protection of Kurdish Iraq.

A terrorist making ricin for his personal attacks, launched from a portion of Iraq that is protected against Saddam by the US military, doesn't support the case that "Saddam has WMDs".

A terrorist hiding in US-protected northern Iraq where Saddam can't touch him doesn't support the case that "Saddam is working with Al Qaeda". --ghodaza

The above quote rings true.
Their bogus arguments are still bogus.

[acmejack]

7. I still have deep reservations about the entire legend of this person.

The jewelery really bothered several people far more knowledgeable in these matters than I. From my limited experience with members of the Arabic world, which was training some Saudi and later some Egyptian students, the very devout Islamic individuals eschewed jewelery. Check out the attire in the Nick Berg videos.

[Notoverit]

6. We fight them there so we don't have to ..." - we needed a "there" there.