Well, it makes for good disinformation, at the very least...
Posted on 06/17/2006 5:33:39 PM PDT by FARS
Thanks for the update in the saga of who killed Zarqawi.
Reminds me of Murder on the Orient Express.
Sounds like an attempt to tarnish the victory of getting Zarq. The theme here is that the US Military is too stupid to do anything right unless it's handed to them on a silver platter by somebody else. It's no different than the liberal propaganda that the US Military is poorly trained, incompetent, and sadistic.
GIS is a restricted news source (established over 20-years ago) which is provided to intel organization subscribers. You need a password as this is not an "open" site for the public.
Once again FR has perhaps decided, from insufficient information, and posted the GIS article as a Bloggers etc. when the source is a highly respected one within the top echelons of the intel community.
And you do not have to believe anything EVER.
Though unless your sources are better then perhaps you might listen to GIS, Alan Peters and even me from time to time with less skepticisms and less unbiased mindsets. Certainly on Iran and the Middle East.
As to Alan Peter's credibility, GIS has printed some of his analyses as has the Pentagon Daily Newsletter.
Have you made a similar contribution with your opinions? Were they also thus "respected" and published?
It's true, Rumsfield and king Saud aren't on my rolodex but
I just don't see this information traveling through four different entities and being that timely.
What the heck do I know?
I went to the link associated with the article:
http://128.121.186.46/gis/online/Daily/Archives/DailyJun0906.htm
and it required me to log in.
What are you using as a log in to read the article?
Sorry Cindy, it's a restricted, professionals only site, not open to the public. See my previous post. That's where the article originated so I put the link to conform to FR regulations to post news but once again it was rejected.
The operation/project took several weeks of fairly co-ordinated activity and only became timely when it actually happened. Could have gone on longer or happened sooner.
Moreover, there is little question but that Tehran (and for that matter, the Osama bin Laden movement) would not have betrayed Zarqawi unless it had alternative plans for the leadership and operations of their terrorist and militant networks in Iraq, North Africa, and Europe.
I'll buy that possibility.
By giving up Abu Al, what does Iran expect in return?
That we won't blow them off the face of the earth ?
I think you pretty much nailed it.
The Iranians also may have been motivated by more than Zarqawi's killing of the Shia, and the bombing of Shia mosques. The USA and Iraq are attempting a difficult raproachment on nuclear issues, and this might have been an offer made in good faith to ease the dialogue forward.
We will have to see what developes. The Iranians could have assasinated Zarqawi themselves without relying on US military power to do it.
It shows that at times everybody can get along.
And its very good news.
I hope the same net turns over more intel for even more roll ups.
Well, it makes for good disinformation, at the very least...
Only one thing I know:
Mistah Zarqawi, he daid.
Interesting. I have been saying for quite some time that AQ and Iran were natural enemies: AQ's stated goal of establishing a Caliphate is anathema to the Shia.
Not buying what your selling Hezbala/Iran. This is Iran trying to take credit for our success.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Ok Fars, I'll have to pass on this thread as I am not a professional and can't verify anything in that original post.
I do appreciate your feedback, though.
Yeah, it kind of had a funny smell to me, too.
Rule 109.
Hear everything.
Believe nothing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.