"Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi is a largely fictitious bogeyman"

Terrorist Chief is US "Spin"

TERROR mastermind Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi is a largely fictitious bogeyman invented to help an American propaganda war in Iraq, it was claimed last night.

Senior US military and intelligence officers admitted they have "overstated" the importance of the Jordanian-born al-Qaeda chief.

Evidence has emerged that spin doctors also bombarded the "home audience" with exaggerated stories about al-Zarqawi, who is rumoured to have personally decapitated British hostage Ken Bigley in 2004.

At a meeting at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas Colonel Derek Harvey, a former military intelligence officer, said foreign rebels were "a very small part of the "numbers". "

Well there's a surprise....

[edit on 13-4-2006 by uknumpty]

Anyone with an ounce of sense could see through this propaganda a long time ago. Does not stop them trying though.
Last I heard was that after being ousted from the top-dog position in Iraq, he is heading down to Gaza to help the Palestinians.... according to other "intelligence" units They really don't seem to realise when to stop flogging that dead horse

There is a difference between a boogeyman and overstating a person. This article is messing it up, contradicting itself.

He said: "Our focus on al-Zarqawi has enlarged his caricature - made him more important than he really is. The long-term threat is not al-Zarqawi or religious extremists, but former regime types and their friends."

London Daily Telegraph

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist leader believed to be responsible for the abduction of Kenneth Bigley, is 'more myth than man', according to American military intelligence agents in Iraq.

Several sources said the importance of Zarqawi, blamed for many of the most spectacular acts of violence in Iraq, has been exaggerated by flawed intelligence and the Bush administration's desire to find "a villain" for the post-invasion mayhem.

US military intelligence agents in Iraq have revealed a series of botched and often tawdry dealings with unreliable sources who, in the words of one source, "told us what we wanted to hear".

"We were basically paying up to $10,000 a time to opportunists, criminals and chancers who passed off fiction and supposition about Zarqawi as cast-iron fact, making him out as the linchpin of just about every attack in Iraq," the agent said.

"Back home this stuff was gratefully received and formed the basis of policy decisions. We needed a villain, someone identifiable for the public to latch on to, and we got one."

This just can't be true. I find it hard to understand how so many people would go along with something like this. It would be just despicable to even think about it if its true.


Pie

People say hes real others say hes a myth. People say he is just one man and don't have much influence, others say he is commander of all Al Qaeda operations in Iraq. Take your pick.

If I was Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi I would shoot myself here's why...
1. Thanks to him many Iraqis do not want to join the insurgency, they dislike people who kill their own people. He gives Resistance a bad name because he is more about terrorism than fighting the occupation.
2. If the U.S ever caught me they could get so much propaganda out of saying how "this is an enormous milestone in making Iraq a safer place".
3. Nearly everything Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi has done has been to the benerfit of the occupation. Killing Ken Bigley really turned British public opinion against the insurgency, it almost certainly boasted support for the occupation on the grounds of wiping out this enemy.

If Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi has been exaggerated a little bit by the Pentagon then the credit all belongs to him. There is nothing he is not to stupid to do and the fact he hasn’t killed himself in a dignified way is surely proof of that.
Bad terrorist! You are bad for terrorism, resistance and humanity!!! (Kind of reminds of some of our own leaders!) (bad for terrorism but somehow even worse for humanity).

1. How do you know what you are talking about it? One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.
2. I think any "freedom fighter" cares more about actually doing something than worrying about what might happen if he is captured.
3. If he still has a following than the third argument doesnt apply. If he exists he is obvious more concerned with his main objective, removing the US presence, who knows though sometimes having an "enemy" assists in legitimizing a fallacious war. (Think cold war and Communism)

How do we know that zarqawi was behind any of the beheadings? Should we believe the propaganda, Malcom X had it most right - "The Chickens have come home to roost" - meaning 911, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bush's BS Foreign Policy, its all based on the corrupt a$$ nature of American foreign interests, and its collonial nature.

Question - what do we really know about Iraq, that hasnt been been made spittle in to our mouths by paid advertising.

[edit on 18-4-2006 by pcxmac]