Bush claims Osama ordered Zarqawi to launch attacks in the U.S.
posted at 6:16 pm on May 23, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
How is this news? We’ve known about it for years. Newsweek, April 2006:
Bin Laden had already made his wishes known to Zarqawi via [Abdul Hadi] al-Iraqi. “My greatest wish is for you to keep the resistance alive and growing, to increase the number of local insurgents and give the Iraqis more decision-making powers,” Zarqawi was told. “Make it as much of an Iraqi organization as possible.” Bin Laden also urged his prince to widen the war against America: “We have to expand our attacks on the enemy outside Iraq.”
Al-Iraqi was the AQ honcho nabbed late last year whose capture was announced last month, remember? And remember this, from January of this year?
Insurgents reportedly tied to al Qaeda in Iraq considered using student visas to slip terrorists into the United States to orchestrate a new attack on American soil…
The plot was discovered six months ago, roughly the same time that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, was killed by coalition forces. Sources tell ABC News that the suspects involved in the effort to launch the U.S. attack were closely associated with Zarqawi.
The plan also came only months after Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda’s No. 2, had requested that Zarqawi attempt an attack inside the United States.
I guess you have to remind people occasionally or else they end up saying dopey things like “there was never any evidence that Zarqawi had any ambitions beyond Iraq’s borders.” WaPo thinks Bush is floating this now to draw attention away from the Shiite militias and native Sunni insurgency in Iraq and recast the battle as U.S. versus AQ, which has the dual advantage of being a fight (almost) all Americans can support and preparing public opinion for a possible deal down the road with the Sadrists in case we can’t get the violence under control and have to bug out. Probably true. In fact, if Bush really wanted to impress upon the public the connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda’s leadership, he could have simply pointed to this LA Times article last weekend about the Anbar jihad having become AQ’s prime moneymaker, with cold cash flowing from Iraq into the Pakistani tribal areas thanks to Musharraf’s super keen “peace treaty” in Waziristan.
But for obvious reasons, I don’t think he wants to call attention to that.
Skip the Bush/Osama/Zarqawi pieces and read this NBC News report about “Al Qaeda 3.0″ instead. The first incarnation was a top-down integrated organization, the second incarnation was far-flung unrelated cells finding inspiration in AQ’s message via videos and the Internet, and the third incarnation is a hybrid in which midlevel commanders are trained by the leadership in Pakistan and then sent home to find recruits among the propaganda-fed Muslim locals. (That’s how the London bombings and last year’s British airline plot allegedly went down.) Lots of interesting theories are floated in the piece about AQ’s prospects, but most seem to agree that their best chance of sustaining the movement is to topple an unstable, otherwise “moderate” Muslim state. That would give them all kinds of momentum, not to mention a base of operations. Lebanon is suggested as one possibility, but the Sunnis aren’t strong enough there, I don’t think. Pakistan is another, but Pakistanis actually don’t vote (when they get to vote) in any great numbers for extremists. The big A’s own special dark-horse pick: Egypt.
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’s news because the drive-by’s never thought AQ was in Iraq…ever! WE’RE the problem over there, not the muslim freaks, don’t you know that!?!?!
SouthernGent on May 23, 2007 at 6:39 PM
Good pick, Big A. I’ll go with that one too. Or maybe a top two exacta box with Egypt and Indonesia.
Chris L. on May 23, 2007 at 6:41 PM
Which freaks?
Tim Burton on May 23, 2007 at 6:57 PM
Apparently Al Qaeda has its fans on the Egyptian street. Still, even if there were a radical change in Egyptian government, I’m not sure it’d be all that comfortable place for Al Qaeda, as it would place them within easy striking range of Israel.
The truth is that, with Iraq out of the picture, it’s hard to think of a viable, functioning host nation for Al Qaeda. Which is why, in my eyes, taking out Iraq was so important.
Future events in Pakistan could theoretically change that equation, however, in profound and disturbing ways.
Blacklake on May 23, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Agreed. My money is on Pakistan launching or giving away the first nuke in the name of the moon god.
Because they worship the moon god howz about we call them lunatics.
Mojave Mark on May 23, 2007 at 7:14 PM
AQ has its fans on every street in every country across the Globe but I sincerely doubt another attack on US soil is in the works. They know, or should know unless they are as stupid as our own Congress, that any attack now would energize the US to a renewed GWOT position, deeply hurt the lefts position on Iraq and Afghanistan and ensure a Republican President and possibly Congress in 2008. Then again why should they attack us when the Democrats are so close to winning the war for them.
Buzzy on May 23, 2007 at 7:15 PM
i think the average joe thinks AQ isn’t in Iraq fighting us
jp on May 23, 2007 at 7:17 PM
I’d think not Indonesia, both because democracy is actually doing fairly well there, considering, and because they elected a former general in the last election, out of a desire for strong leadership, despite having come out from under a dictator less than 10 years before. Indonesians are likely to turn to the military if things get unstable, and the military is not wrapped in Islam there.
Plus, geographically and economically, it’s not a sweet target for them. They topple Indonesia, it’s news for …two days? …three?
TexasDan on May 23, 2007 at 7:30 PM
Not Indonesia.
Algeria? Not today, but maybe in a year or two.
The Apologist on May 23, 2007 at 7:35 PM
No one has questioned the timing yet???
db on May 23, 2007 at 8:18 PM
I think the attempt on Algeria fizzled out – man, that was a bloody one tho’ (whole rural villages found with everyone decapitated, etc). Way-back-of-the-pack-Dark-Horse is Syria. It could slide right down the poop chute if Assad Jr. goes down and the Iranians and their lackeys get the first jump.
Man, that was pessimistic. I think I need a drink.
major john on May 23, 2007 at 9:38 PM
As long as Bush can put OBL in the same dirt nap as Z, fine.
profitsbeard on May 24, 2007 at 12:45 AM
**don’t mind me, i’m using this old thread to learn how to quote and stuff….we could really have used a Tutorial ya know.
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:11 PM
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:11 PM
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:12 PM
blah blah
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:13 PM
I DON”T get it!!
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:14 PM
do I copy and quote or do I quote and copy?
how do I quote, write someting, and quote again??
argggg….
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:15 PM
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:15 PM
balh blah
argggg
Tru2my2 on May 24, 2007 at 7:16 PM
Comment pages: