The Legend of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi (Scott Ritter)

We alll know the name, most of us have seen the picture by now, weve heard of the prostethic leg, we despise his actions as he runs around Iraq creating havoc. We hear of his death, his rebirth and his capture, be argue if he is alive or not, if he is real or not, some of us believe, some of us don't.

but what do Iraqis and arabs in the region think of Al-Zarqawi, Scott Ritter shares his view:

Read this:
The risks of the al-Zarqawi myth

For months now, the Bush administration had been building up the image of a massive network of foreign terrorists using Falluja as a base for their terror attacks against targets associated with the interim government of Iyad Allawi and the US military which backs him.

One name appeared in western media accounts, over and over again: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a wanted Jordanian turned alleged "terror" mastermind. Almost overnight, Zarqawi's terrorist group, al-Qaida Holy War for Iraq, expanded its operations across the width and breadth of Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi was everywhere, his bombers striking in Mosul, Baghdad, Samarra, Najaf, Baquba, Ramadi and Falluja. Islamist websites published accounts of al-Zarqawi's actions, and the western media, together with western intelligence services, ran with these stories, giving them credibility. The al-Zarqawi legend, if one can call it that, was born.

The problem is, there is simply no substance to this legend, as US marines are now finding out. Rather than extremist foreign fighters battling to the death, the marines are mostly finding local men from Falluja who are fighting to defend their city from what they view as an illegitimate occupier. The motivations of these fighters may well be anti-American, but they are Iraqi, not foreign, in origin.

There is, indeed, evidence of a foreign presence. But they were not the ones running the show in Falluja, or elsewhere for that matter. As a result, the US-led assault on Falluja may go down in history as the tipping point for the defeat of the US occupation of Iraq. The January 2005 elections are now very much in doubt, and anti-coalition violence has erupted throughout Iraq (including from sources claiming to be aligned with - no surprise - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi).

Reflecting back, one cannot help but wonder if al-Zarqawi was used as a lure to trap the Americans into taking this action. On the surface, the al-Zarqawi organisation seems too good to be true. A single Jordanian male is suddenly running an organisation that operates in sophisticated cells throughout Iraq. No one man could logically accomplish this. But there is an organisation that can - the Mukhabarat (intelligence) of Saddam Hussein.

So it is possible that Scott Ritter could be right, that this organized resistance and terror attacks are not the work of Al-Zarqawi but of former Hussain intelligence?

Read the rest and share your thoughts.







[edit on 1-5-2005 by worldwatcher]

I have always contributed al-Zarqawi's hype to the US/Bush administration's relentless efforts in trying to associate the war on terrorism to the war in Iraq. Or at best, trying to justify the invasion on Fallujah to "smoke out" al-Zarqawi's terror network stronghold.

Perhaps the Mukhabarat are behind his legend. Good post! It will certainly keep me busy researching info on al-Zarqawi's latest.

If there is any right?

ive done a lot of reading on this, for the past year or so ive followed lots of blogs and news sources (both UK/US sources and international sources. I believe Al-Zarqaw is either a myth made up by the US, so they can claim they are losing to a far more organized enemy then so, or he has died in the first attacks in iraq (as claimed by some sources i can remember reading).
As for the organization, i dont think this is due to much external involvement (al-quawda or any arab govt) but the fact that Iraq is a very different place then the west, its had loads of wars and probably corrupt police etc There are also lots of "tribes" in iraq who commonly have armed disputes... The fact is the US is not use to these conditions,the iraqis are at there best here and there morals will be much higher (there not fighting because there ordered to, there fighting for there country)

I personally take anything that Scott Ritter has to say with a grain of salt.
Duly noted is the source Aljazeera DUH! It is common knowledge they only want to discredit the US and its allies.

Also did you know Scott Ritter was secretly prosecuted in Albany County in 2001 after he was snared in an Internet sex sting operation?

Hardly what I would call a creditable source.

I think the article is correct on several levels: there is much resistance from members of the Mukhabarat, and there is evidence of a foreign presence. But accepting this theory

The Mukhabarat was desperate for a way to divert attention from the fact that it was behind the attacks against Iraqi civilians. Iraqis killing Iraqis would turn the public against the resistance. It needed a foreign face, and al-Zarqawi provided it. A few planted CD disks later, and the al-Zarqawi myth was born.

underestimates the intelligence of the Iraqi people and the US military.

Originally posted by shots
I personally take anything that Scott Ritter has to say with a grain of salt.

Right, Shots, and lets see, wasnt he the ONLY one claiming the truth, that Saddam did not have any WMD's? Remember how he was ridiculed? He was laughed right off the tv interviews for knowing nothing...Ummm..he was absolutely correct. I have a tendency to believe him for this.

The difference with Zarqawi is that he not only has a shady back ground but he has been so hard to place, even when they have his description he can fit any middle easter man description.

Compare to Bin laden, that is from a prominent Saudi family and with a establish back ground.

Zarqawi can be any one and any body.

But Bin laden can be only Bin laden.

thanks dgtempe, for the reminder that Scott Ritter was right before.

hmmm how quick we forget.

worldwatcher,
Even the ordinary 'joe of pediphilia' gets lucky in making assertions sometimes, eh? I mean after all, its a game of law and averages. With the amount of assertion he has made, he was bound to get one right....
As such, Scott Ritter also claimed that 100,000 died because of the war. Did they?

This is the same man that recieved and was paid off by one of Saddam's henchmen for his undying support in ending sanctions against Iraq, prior to the 2nd Gulf War?

This guy is such bad mojo, that many to many news outlets won't carry anything he says, but hey.....there's always Aljazeera.net, right? You are aware that the credibility of this man is so shank that the only job he could get was with.....Aljazeera.net?




seekerof

The news outlets will not give Scott Ritter airtime because he speaks the TRUTH. We cant have that. No exposing this government.

so you admit it eh, he was right, even it was just pure luck.

seekeroff, I totally understand where you're coming from in regards to Scott Ritter and I found it funny that he is writing for Al-Jazeera.net too but, you have to admit as in regards to Al-Zarqawi, 1+1 isn't always adding up to 2. There are major discrepancies in the Al-Zarqawi story and the possibility of him being a product of US intelligence services is very likely.

WW, Scott resigned as UN weapons inspector due to the fact that this government INSISTED there were some and time was short

The Greatest Story Ever Told

Originally posted by dgtempe

The news outlets will not give Scott Ritter airtime because he speaks the TRUTH. We cant have that. No exposing this government.

Nice blanket statement, dgtempe.
Amounts to abstract thinking....works for some, doesn't work for me.
In your like thinking, it could very easily be stated and asserted that news outlets are not giving Scott Ritter airtime because of, uh....as already said...credibility issues.
I believe that my assertion is more to the point of being accurate versus your blanket assertion?


worldwatcher, besides those so-called decrepancies, field intelligence in Iraq indicates otherwise. Please bear in mind that the 'mass' media has reported that Zarqawi has been killed numerous times. And just recently, also reported by Aljazeera, that Zarqawi was captured....




seekerof

Right, seekerof, like i said, anyone who speaks the truth has a "credibility issue"

Lucky guess? I think he is in a position to know better than you whether there were any weapons o mass destruction.

He told the truth. That makes him "credible"

The problem is that "credible" people are anti-Bush and the neocons cant have that.

as posted by dgtempe
He hold the truth

If you must say continue to think and assert such....
Lets pray that his continued spilling of the "truth" stays with the accurate and factual Aljazeera, k?




seekerof

[edit on 7-1-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
worldwatcher, besides those so-called decrepancies, field intelligence in Iraq indicates otherwise. Please bear in mind that the 'mass' media has reported that Zarqawi has been killed numerous times. And just recently, also reported by Aljazeera, that Zarqawi was captured....
seekerof

that's the prob seek, how many times does the same guy gets captured and killed before you begin to realize that there is no one, singular Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. The real man is probably rotten in his grave by now and unable to defend his name as it is being used by the US govt to cover a variety of individuals.

I certainly understand what you imply, worldwatcher.
The are intriguing questions, but as I indicated, field intelligence (special forces, etc.) In Iraq, indicate otherwise. Till I see the grave and DNA is done to confirm, I will continue to go with what is being asserted now: that he does exist, that he is indeed a "singular" entity with a $25 million dollar price tag on his head, and that he is bent on killing as many Iraqi and American's as possible till one or both submit to his demands and will.





seekerof

[edit on 7-1-2005 by Seekerof]

i totally understand where you're coming from with this too Seek, I just tend to be on the otherside, unwilling to buy the assertions that he is what they he is until I too see the man, his grave or dna proof.

at least we agree that the message or idea of the man isn't a good one and that he or his name is responsible for alot of horrible things and has no good intentions towards Iraq and Americans.