"Pentagon acknowledges fabricating a 'Zarqawi Legend'

Originally posted by Indy
…is it not also possible that our operatives have lopped off a few heads to make it look like it was Zarqawi as well?

Anything is possible, however you’re taking a big step if you assume such based on just this information.

This whole thread is rediculous and down right false.

It does not say he was fabricated it states he was Magnified which are two different things.

Also it is impossible to sentence a fabrication not once but twice to death in the same country.

Al-Zarqawi Sentenced to Death for Plotting Chemical Attack

Jordan has sentenced Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to death, again. This time it is for a 2004 attempted chemical attack on Amman that would have involved over 20 tons of chemicals.

Some one please throw SS a life preserver

The legend was fabricated, which means the individual was magnified into a legend to begin with. THis thread has merit in that it shows that the government "exagerates" things. Which is funny, because when I ws a little kid, and would exagerate the facts, I got in the same trouble as I would had I lied.

Well another WOT thread going to slugfest because people cant speak to each other in a civil manner

You just cannot argue with these people. Even when not only is THIS admitted, but that they also put out FAKE NEWS here and in Iraq, it doesn't matter! Even if this was all over TV, I don't even think they would NEED the spin masters for these people; they will spin it for themselves. I bet Pentagon reps themselves could get up there and tell them TO THEIR FACE that they played up the uber terrorist, and it wouldn't matter.:shk:

I'll be direct this time. Jsobecky, Flyersfan, Deltaboy, and shots, what is so great about being lied to? Please tell me so I can share in the glory of the lies.

Originally posted by truthseeka

I'll be direct this time. Jsobecky, Flyersfan, Deltaboy, and shots, what is so great about being lied to? Please tell me so I can share in the glory of the lies.

I'm not certain you even read the original article which is based on a person's views and not on facts. And you seem to misinterpretate what the intelligence officer said. Its a twist of words. Let me show you what I put.

I love this part.

www.globalresearch.ca...

External Source

The "war on terrorism" rests on the creation of one or more evil bogeymen, the terror leaders, Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, et al, whose names and photos are presented ad nauseam in daily news reports. Without Zarqawi and bin Laden, the "war on terrorism" would loose its raison d'être. The main casus belli is to wage a " war on terrorism".

This is based on this person's opinion and not based on facts. Its based on what he believes in.

For example he believes this...

External Source

The suicide attacks in Iraq are indeed real, but who is behind them? There are indications that some of the suicide attacks could have been organized by the US-UK military and intelligence. (See references below pertaining to British Special Forces Soldiers caught Planting Bombs in Basra.)

Its almost like the author and Syrian Sister have the same brain.

Now to the reports about the U.S. military's role about Zarqawi...lets look at this...
Link



External Source

The Washington Post story quoted Colonel Derek Harvey, who served as a military intelligence officer in Iraq and as a top officer handling intelligence on Iraq for the Joint Staff, as saying that Zarqawi and other foreign insurgents remain "a very small part of the actual numbers."

"Our own focus on Zarqawi has enlarged his caricature, if you will -- made him more important than he really is, in some ways," Harvey said at an army meeting last summer at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, according to a transcript obtained by the Post.

Now there is a difference between making a boogeyman and overstating a person's role. You could say that for example Osama bin Laden is just one man, but who inspires people to commit martyrdom for him and his ideology. One person can be very dangerous.

which one of you deny that there is a psyops program? misinformation like COINTELPRO made? if you deny this your naive. if you don't deny it, how can you believe anything on the news anyway?

[edit on 24-4-2006 by grimreaper797]

Originally posted by deltaboy

This is based on this person's opinion and not based on facts. Its based on what he believes in.

The website disclaimer also makes that very clear. But lets not confuse the masses with Facts because we all know they only want to plant propaganda.

"Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization."

Source

Its almost like the author and Syrian Sister have the same brain.

Very astute observation

shots would you like to deny the psyops programs and cointelpro type things. the war on information? would you like to deny those exist? so out of the billions of dollars not accounted for in our government, i wonder how much went into tricking you into what you believe in now.

Deltaboy, shots, next time, read through the thread. Both the Washington Post and Newsweek reported on this.

As well, isn't the point of ATS to deny ignorance. And you have people here who are praising the government for lying to its people. It's obvious now that these people don't stand for anything but power. The only rule followed by these people is to do whatever they can get away with to get the most power. And then you have the plants over here supporting this endeavor.

lol thats a pretty good point you made, this site is about denying ignorance, yet they are promoting it as long as they believe its in their best interest. How do you even know that its in your best interests and not THEIR best interests though? how do you know anything if your sources have programs designed for misinformation/propaganda/pysops? they have the motive too, isn't that enough to be considered suspect?

Since major corporations bought america things have become worse and worse. thats where we need reform....its the new age religion pretty much. we don't need seperation from church and state anymore, we need seperation between business and state.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
As well, isn't the point of ATS to deny ignorance. And you have people here who are praising the government for lying to its people.

I can't think of one war where something like this didn't happen.
They're lying about a terrorist trying to get as many other people to hate this terrorist in the hopes of increasing the chances of someone turning in or capturing this terrorist. If their "lying" causing people like him to be captured then....was it still bad?


To SS and others...do you honestly think that the Pentagon would admit this or do you think the WP or anyone would be allowed to talk about this if Zarquawi didn't exsist?

Originally posted by Code_Burger
He probably does, but he might not. I sincerly doubt he is
anywhere near as bad as they say he is, if he does exist.

Google is your friend. News stories like this are all over
the wire. They are in the west; they are in the middle east.
Here is one. Google more (on YOUR time).

www.news24.com...

His own family acknowledges that he exists. They acknowledge
that he is responsible for the bombings and murders in Jordan.
They have DISOWNED him publically ... for all eternity. So while
you may 'sincerely doubt he is anywhere near as bad as they say'
... his own family sees him as WORSE than most people in the
west do.

Originally posted by truthseeka
Flyersfan ... what is so great about being lied to?

I don't like being lied to. I don't like being lied to by the
politicians (they ALL lie, in all countries and in all parties).
I don't like being lied to by the press - can't barely trust
any of them. I don't like being lied to by church leaders.
I don't like being lied to HERE either ... which this thread
was an attempt to do. Spin with agenda = lies.

Agenda's stink. Period.

However, the fact remains that Zarqawi is real. He is dangerous.
He always has been. The problem is that when the pentagon
brought him to the forefront to expose him, they helped make his
reputation bigger than it was. In exposing him for who he is, they
raised him in the fanatical Muslim world.

The pentagon has to tell people who the enemy is. Unfortunately
it props them up higher in the esteem of our enemies. There is
no way around it.

Same kind thing happens in presidential elections. Take an incumbant
president. He is 'the man' and is presidential. The opposing party
has to pick a person and put him up against the president. Until
that time the opposing person was 'just' a sen. or a gov. or some
other politician. But when they are standing side by side on a
debate platform, then that opposing person is raised up to
presidential level, whereas they weren't even close to that previously.

When the powers start talking about what the enemy does, or who
they are, they EMPOWER the enemy and he/they get built up. It's
an unfortunate fallout from educating the public on who they are up
against.

Originally posted by grimreaper797
we don't need seperation from church and state anymore,
we need seperation between business and state.

You have voted grimreaper797 for the Way Above Top Secret award.
You have one more vote left for this month.

If only that were possible. No more lobbiests .. no more NEA,
Planned Parenthood, NRA, (and so on) special interests buying votes ....

as much as im for guns rights, the NRA is just like the rest, lobbyist just arent worth having for the average american. thanks for the WATS but i have to say that its not about whether hes real, or if his rep is getting boosted by our government, its them making him out to be something more then what he is. If they dont believe hes dangerous enough, then why go after him? If they are willing to spend money on making him 'look' worse, what does that say? It says that hes not threat enough alone. Im not saying he isnt one, but apparently the government doesnt feel the people will get behind it at his current status.

But instead of saying, well the people wont be behind it, so i guess there isnt anything we can do until they realize that hes such a threat, they decided to cross us and trick us. They were looking out for their interests, and if they weren't, then there would be no psyops and cointelpro type programs. If the people arent behind it, yet they decide its more important to trick us, then its not for our benefit.

way i see it, you tell the people exactly what you know hes done, then what he might have done, and what he hasnt done. If they make the choice to say they dont want to go, then thats it, we dont go. (i have a whole system for this but its all just hypothetical and such) As you can tell, im not republican by any means, because to be so means other people decide whats best for you...that just doesnt work. These people are victims and helpers of lobbyists. We need a true democracy, even if that means sacrifice.

Now, back on track, if the terrorist attack again after we decided not to be there, well that was our choice. We need to start being more responsible as a nation for our actions. Too long has the american public looked for a scapegoat to blame there problems on. When in reality, they fear to look in the mirror because thats the only way the finger should really be pointed. As a superpower we pretty much had control in how the world would progress, and it was our choice to do what we did. We gave birth to a demon in the middle east, and as much as we would like to blame the iraqi government of saddam or irans president, we cant because it was our actions that led to this all. You want change? start taking responiblility, start taking the lead, start questioning, dont be afraid to say "it was my fault" because in the end we are humans, and we need to admit when WE are wrong if we ever wish to compromise with peace.

[edit on 24-4-2006 by grimreaper797]

They're lying about a terrorist trying to get as many other people to hate this terrorist in the hopes of increasing the chances of someone turning in or capturing this terrorist.

No, they're lying to the world to galvanize support for their war. This is about politics and winning votes and support. The US administration knows the majority of people do not support the Iraqi war yet support the war on terrorism. Thus is why they are trying to tie the war in Iraq with the war on "terror." It's right there in the article if you care to read. As well, since when do the ends justify the means? Is the government justified in lying, spying, imprisoning, and torturing its own citizens without probable or just cause so that they can further their own interests?

Zarqawi was played up because he was foreign-born and the administration wants people to believe that these are foreigners fighting in Iraq and not regular old Iraqis. They want people to believe that all Iraqis are happy the US is occupying their country. The administration would like you to believe that Zarqawi is the cause of most of the violence in Iraq, whereas anyone who paid an ounce of attention to the history of the country before the war would realize that a domestic insurgency was almost guaranteed to happen.

But, go ahead, embrace ignorance, for it seems that you cannot handle the truth. It's easier when you have the security of the US "official version"s to fall back on, isn't it?

To SS and others...do you honestly think that the Pentagon would admit this or do you think the WP or anyone would be allowed to talk about this if Zarquawi didn't exsist?

This story was leaked. Why do you think only a couple smaller outlets are running this story and not the big ones, i.e. CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc.? Even MSNBC pulled a Newsweek article from their website about this. Google is linking to it, but MSNBC states the page cannot be found. The government is trying to prevent this story from reaching the mainstream and ironically, ATS moderators decided to hide it in PTS slugfest. Go figure...

[edit on 24-4-2006 by Jamuhn]

The difference in our positions seems to be that ya'll think that the
pentagon did it on purpose. I see it as an unfortunate product of
them educating the public as to who he is. The educating about
him is what made him bigger and more important than he had been
to the radicals in the past.

At least, that's what I think the difference seems to be.

Originally posted by Jamuhn
go ahead, embrace ignorance, for it seems that you cannot
handle the truth.

Snotty.
Untrue.
Bad behavior towards fellow site members.
Unworthy of being posted at this site.

Originally posted by FlyersFanSnotty.
Untrue.
Bad behavior towards fellow site members.
Unworthy of being posted at this site.

What do you expect when a moderator decides to move this to slug-fest. I'm being frank, grow some tougher skin and stop whining.

[edit on 24-4-2006 by Jamuhn]