« 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.