« Lawsuit filed | Main | UN meeting upcoming »
Al-Zarqari papers
Off-topic, but... Instapundit notes a debate over authenticity of documents captured in connection with the killing of Zarqawi (since there is dispute over whether they were actually found with him, or in a different raid that day, I have to be ambiguous). The document is in the form of a report and recommendations, the report essentially being that we terrorists are losing -- attacks down, national guard protecting the Americans, our finances obstructed, Iraqis turning against us and ratting us out constantly -- and the recommendation being that they try to embroil us in a fight against the Shiites, or else against Iran.
(Since the report would be good news, of course my local paper carried it in a story where the first half questioned its authenticity, and only a few of its statements were described).
Instapundit notes that Michael Ledeen thinks the document is a fake, largely because its descriptions (e.g., attacks are down) do not match reality (attacks were up in May). But the translations I've seen bear no date. One major purpose of writing a report down is to have it available to you later. That a document is captured in June is no basis to suppose it was written in June.
Wonder if terrorist managers write CYA memos? "I told them months ago things were going downhill, and made suggestions. Did anyone listen? Noooo...."
The thought of terrorism and bureaucracy at the same time is more than I can bear this early in the morning. At least it'd make the world safer. If an IED required the same paperwork that Interior Dept required for filing a notice of appeal (a 1-2 page court document), then planting the IED would require:
A set of recommendations and approval prepared in seven copies (plus an eighth that you kept for yourself, since once the seven were filed no one could ever find them again);
Approval four levels above you;
The documents can be stopped at any level over a minor typo, or nonconformity to the style manual (I once had an emergency appeal recommendation stopped because there was one space between the period ending a sentence and the first letter of the next sentence, and the style manual called for two). Correcting an error requires starting over ... seven copies, in a folder, reviewed by each level.
At each stage, the paperwork goes into a manager's in box and sits until he gets to it. Since five attorneys report to one Ass't Solicitor, he's always swamped, and the same problem exists at each higher level. Again, any typo means the journey thru in boxes begins anew. Oh, and each manager is likely to want to reword it a little to make it more ambiguous and thus less risky. That starts the process anew, as well.
They'd be lucky to plant an IED a month at that rate.
Comments
Why wouldn't they have a bureaucracy? It's consistent with the application to join Al-Qaeda we read about a couple of months back.
Posted by: Hale at June 17, 2006 04:58 PM
All your forms are belong to us!
Posted by: Achmed at June 17, 2006 06:24 PM
I agree that the inaccuracies in the report do not prove it is a fake. Bureaucratic memos often contain inaccuracy. Ledeen also mentions that the recommendations in the memo are mostly useless boilerplate. But bureaucratic memos often contain that too> The main argument for the authenticity of the memo would appear to be that one cannot think of any reason why they would want us to believe that they are losing the war and having trouble finding recruits> It also says their main hope is to manipulate the western media> Why would they want us to think that? It will warn the media that they are being manipulated
Posted by: doyne dawson at June 17, 2006 09:48 PM
David wrote, "Wonder if terrorist managers write CYA memos? "
Since David and no one else has offered proof that terrorist managers are robots or aleins from another planet, that means the terrorist managers are human and thus have human traits and characteristics.
This means that the answer to his question, though unprovable, nevertheless, beyond all doubt, is yes.
Posted by: Terry at June 18, 2006 02:03 AM
Why would they want us to think that? It will warn the media that they are being manipulated
Never underestimate the stupidity of the media.
Posted by: Ofc. Krupke at June 20, 2006 05:52 AM