« Staff Sergeant Wutterich and Haditha | Main | Is this funny or what? »

13 June 2006


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.




Very interesting! Goes to show that the way to defeat the Jihadists is through good human intelligence and infiltrating their organizations. And draining the swamps of support in the Islamic communities through more enlightened policies rather than the current approach of riling them up.

It seems that we prefer to throw out common sense and go for the buzz words laden technology stuff that makes the defense contractors and the politicians a ton of money and forget about the objectives. Of course, unless the object is to transfer taxpayer funds to a few.

If we continue to fight the "War on Terror" like we fought the "War on Poverty" and the "War on Drugs", we'll end up with the same results.

Hannah K. O'Luthon

Interesting indeed, but hardly reassuring. It is nice to see
that one of the "intelligence sources" is a friend of Sale, so
that the otherwise unsourced reports have a greater credibility, but of course one never knows for sure who is a reliable source, and even reliable and authentically friendly sources can be fed disinformation in the wilderness of mirrors that is counterintelligence. Moreover, the scarcely veiled endorsement for torture (at the Fingernail Factory) is hardly in keeping
with Col. Lang's unequivocal rejection of that abomination.
All in all, I read this as one more part of the U.S. disinformation campaign regarding the Zarqawi operation,
with the added objective of justifying "extraordinary renditions".
I may, of course, be completely wrong in this judgment.

Norbert Schulz

The war-on-terror, as conceived by the Bushies, is the equivalent of cops beating up the usual suspects to coerce confessions.

Policework and fighting terrorists or guerrillas, requires much more, starting with patience and regional expertise.

W. Patrick Lang


I reiterate my rejection of that abomination. pl


An interesting point that seems to have been missed, is the fact that Zarqawi could have survived 2 500 pound bombs. I've only seen one reporter in the mainstream asking the right questions...

The facts released surrounding Zarqawi's death should raise red flags. The media have consistently reported that Zarqawi was killed by two direct hits from 500-pound aerial bombs while he occupied a single, rural dwelling. While the amount and type of explosives used in different aerial munitions varies substantially, an approximate kill radius for such a large high-order detonation -- that is, the radius in which a person would have virtually no chance of surviving -- is well over 50 meters.

The temperature of an aerial munition blast can reach as high as a few thousand degrees. Zarqawi apparently defied physics and logic. A government-released photo showed Zarqawi's face to be completely intact. U.S. Gen. William Caldwell denied that the photographs had been altered in any way. According to autopsy results released by the U.S. military, Zarqawi was allegedly conscious for nearly an hour after the monstrous blasts. In one last dramatic act of defiance, he turned his head away when an American soldier reached toward him as he lay on a stretcher.

Do the questionable facts surrounding Zarqawi's death point to a conspiracy? At the very least, it is worth entertaining reasonable alternative hypothetical situations . . .

Two 500 pound bombs were dropped on the house where Zarqawi was staying. Apparently there was not much left but Zarqawi was somehow not blown to pieces or incinerated and reportedly survived, and by one eyewitness account, he survived and was beaten. I just want to know how he survived the "depleted" uranium cooking to show such a pretty trophy shot for the Pentagon press conference.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

January 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad