According to a report in the British newspaper the Daily Telegraph, Abu Nidal was killed because he refused to train al-Qaeda fighters, who had fled Afghanistan. He also refused to carry out attacks against the U.S. and its allies, the report said.
A U.S. official was quoted as saying that he had "paid the price for not cooperating with Saddam's wishes."
Whatever the case, Karmon said it exposes the nature of the Iraqi regime.
"It proves again the character of the Iraqi regime that even if it was not directly involved, the regime has a lot to hide," Karmon said.
A lot to hide? I'll say!
The reason given -- that he "refused to carry out attacks against the U.S." -- sounds like classic disinformation to me.
UPDATE: Thank you, Glenn Reynolds, for kindly linking to this post. Welcome all newcomers to this blog!
Well, I still think the suicide story is fishy as hell. I read a biography of Abu Nidal (aka Sabri al Banna) and the man was too much of a disciplined master-terrorist to commit suicide. I don't know what he was doing in Iraq, but I doubt it was fun-in-the-sun -- or even studying Mesopotamian archaeology!
posted by Eric on 12.14.03 at 09:11 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/590
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference END OF THE ROAD?:
» Obligatory post on Saddam's Capture from aimless
I got a phone call from my friend B this morning that included the news of Saddam's capture. You all know I mostly ignore the news, but that got my attention. It will be interesting to see how it all... [Read More]
Tracked on December 14, 2003 02:12 PM
» Obligatory post on Saddam's Capture from aimless
I got a phone call from my friend B this morning that included the news of Saddam's capture. You all know I mostly ignore the news, but that got my attention. It will be interesting to see how it all... [Read More]
Tracked on December 14, 2003 02:12 PM
More likely, Abu Nidal was killed not because he "refused to carry out attacks against the U.S.", but to keep him from implicating Saddam for sponsoring those attacks.
Bernard · December 14, 2003 10:02 AM
The Atta story is just a little fishy, no? The document implicates Saddam for 9/11 and also helps us on the Niger story at the same time. Seems just a little too perfect. We shall see.
hmm · December 14, 2003 10:06 AM
Well, the Iraqi version was that Abu Nidal killed himself!
I think it would be great if the Atta story turned out to be true. I am a big supporter of this war. Bush may well turn out to be one of our greatest presidents in terms of foreign policy (though clearly a disaster domestically). All that said, there is no reason to suspend logical thinking and healthy skepticism.
So again, it is a little fishy, but we will see. Of course, if it does turn out to be credible, we'll never hear that from the major media, as it would justify the war they were so opposed to.
More likely, Abu Nidal was killed not because he "refused to carry out attacks against the U.S.", but to keep him from implicating Saddam for sponsoring those attacks.