Correction: “Islamic State of Iraq” leader not captured — or is he?
posted at 7:03 pm on March 5, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
We had a false alarm last month with the leader of AQ in Iraq but that doesn’t mean Rusty’s post was wrong. We do seem to be rolling up an awful lot of Sunni jihadis lately. According to AKI, yesterday’s report about the capture of the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq was wrong: turns out we didn’t get the top guy, we got the second in command. Then, today:
In another development, an official said on Monday that Iraqi and US forces had captured 29 members of Al Qaeda, including a death squad leader. Twenty-two Al Qaeda members, including two brothers of Abu Omar Al-Baghdadi – the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq – were captured on Monday at Baiji, said Interior Ministry Operations Director Brigadier General Abdel Karim Khalaf. “We have also arrested the most dangerous man in northern Iraq, Fuad Ahmed Al-Mufraji,” said Khalaf.
And for the cherry on top, Iraqslogger says one Iraqi paper is reporting that al-Baghdadi was captured today in the town of Dora along with four accomplices and that an official announcement is expected shortly.
Exit question: Was the report last month about the capture of AQ leader al-Masri more accurate than we’ve been led to believe? Remember, NBC initially reported that sources told them he was in custody. Then that paragraph disappeared without any acknowledgment that it had been wrong. That’s not terribly surprising for a news organization (e.g., the AP), but NBC got a lot of attention that night; you’d think they’d want to correct the record … unless the record wasn’t wrong and the military had asked them simply to remove it from the report. Richard Miniter’s subsequent report for PJM seemed weird, too. They surrounded a house where they thought al-Masri was hiding, captured a guy whom they thought was him and who had singed off his own fingerprints to obscure his identity — and yet it wasn’t him?
Having al-Masri in custody and sharing intel would help explain how we’re suddenly all over these guys from ISI. And it makes sense that we’d keep it hushed up for as long as possible to maintain our strategic advantage. Although … how long would it be before word got out among the jihadis themselves and then into the press? They’d want each other to know that the infidel has their leader, but then again, maybe they wouldn’t want to publicize that fact lest they hand the U.S. a propaganda victory. I don’t know. What was the exit question again?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
It was my understanding there would be no math on the exam.
see-dubya on March 5, 2007 at 7:14 PM
I think it’s worth noting that there doesn’t seem to be an over abundance of “official” press briefings on who’s getting rolled up and where.
Is the administration and the military being a bit more circumspect these days, or is it just me?
flipflop on March 5, 2007 at 7:19 PM
That’s a good question, flipflop, but what does it have to do with Ann Coulter?
see-dubya on March 5, 2007 at 7:27 PM
The comments really pile up in these terrorism threads, eh?
I’m going to go write about that Iranian general and see if maybe we can get zero comments for that one.
Allahpundit on March 5, 2007 at 7:29 PM
I know…how about an Anna Nicole Smith thread?
flipflop on March 5, 2007 at 7:31 PM
al Zarqawi was a different story. He bought the farm immediately after a 500 pound gift from the US tax-payers. His only value then was as a room-temperature poster child for US/Iraqi military ability.
History then quickly showed that cutting off the head has little effect unless it’s the denouement of a campaign to kill the body first.
If (very, very big if) al-Masri has been captured, we won’t know until every last shred of intel has been squeezed from him.
The alternate theory is that NBC is using Jamil Hussein’s cousin, Ibrahim.
SailorDave on March 5, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Now we have a disappearing Iranian general.
A win-win.
JammieWearingFool on March 5, 2007 at 7:41 PM
I just heard that Bin Laden is claiming paternity too. There’s your hook!
SailorDave on March 5, 2007 at 7:44 PM
Dude…this sounds big.
flipflop on March 5, 2007 at 7:46 PM
Now, if only Obama would do the same…
flipflop on March 5, 2007 at 7:55 PM
Yeah, big difference between cutting off the head and squeezing it. Squeezing produces more pain and less martyrdom.
RedWinged Blackbird on March 5, 2007 at 7:58 PM
the iranian general story is cool. Write up the general and I might even send you a trackback and a corresponding traffic-rocketing Junk-o-lanche.
The problem on this one is that the only thing one can say is “yeah, it would be very helpful if al-Masri were captured!” There’s no controversy inherent here aout the importance or the necessity of these events, and anyway few of us have the expertise or the big-picture view to contradict you or offer another interpretation. It just doesn’t make sense to compare the number of comments to this post to one on anyone can venture an opinion on.
Doesn’t mean this isn’t more valuable to the site as a whole, nor that it doesn’t get read as much as those others. There are plenty of blogs I can read about Giraffegaffe; few that parse outthe rogue’s gallery in the ISI and say why their arrests are important. Or whether reports of their arrests are credible.
see-dubya on March 5, 2007 at 8:04 PM
They’re great posts, Allah, and I read them all. But aside from “I hope they got the son of a b*tch and all his nasty little friends” or “Happy hunting, fellas” there’s not a whole lot to say about them. You’ve already covered the conjecture, so there just isn’t much left to add.
Pablo on March 5, 2007 at 8:16 PM
I prefer WOT posts. It’s just hard to comment on an unknown unknown. A known unknown is easier to form an opinion on. A known known such as photos of Uday and Qusay on gurneys – the comments will pour in.
Buck Turgidson on March 5, 2007 at 8:17 PM
What see-dubya said. And Pablo.
I read these posts and every link. I’m often deeply impressed by the comprehensiveness. They are so damned comprehensive there really is nothing left to say.
Want my Coke?
Stephen M on March 5, 2007 at 8:57 PM
Allahpundit,
What we need is the flow chart of these “individuals” like they have on “The Wire”……. you know, the pryamid from the boss on top, to the captains, to the Lt’s, you know……. and when they are killed or captured, sticker over the face.
For me, after reading two or three Islamic names in a row, my mind goes…… “… more wine?”
PinkyBigglesworth on March 5, 2007 at 9:45 PM
I’m withholding and comment on this until agent 99 checks in.
oakpack on March 5, 2007 at 9:54 PM
AP doing his job too well now?Shame on you AP.
Maybe they are not as comprehensive.What would you suggest while we are waiting for the next terrorist leader name drop? Something with some skank-fee content? Of course I go to the junkyard.
spazzmomma on March 5, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Phew!thought it was just me.I like the pyramid thang.
spazzmomma on March 5, 2007 at 10:16 PM
You’re right I think. Which would mean either A there are less captures as the bad guys are lying low in the face of the surge or B the press is downplaying this as there is a redundancy factor at work–how many times can you get the #2 or #3 guy and expect any real reaction. And let’s face it, and yes I know this is on one level a nasty comment, these people are all starting to look and sound alike.
We’re Americans, entertain us!!!
honora on March 6, 2007 at 9:08 AM
Comment pages: