(CBS/AP) Iraqi officials have received reports that the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq was killed by Sunni tribesmen but the information has not been confirmed, the chief government spokesman said Tuesday.
The statement by spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh followed a welter of reports from other Iraqi officials that Abu Ayyub al-Masri had been killed. Iraqi officials have rushed out similar reports in the past, only to acknowledge later they were inaccurate.
CBS News correspondent Mark Strassman reports U.S. military sources in Baghdad are being extremely cautious about taking the reports at face value.
One senior commander told CBS News that reports of al-Masri’s death or capture seem to come from Iraqi officials every month, and so far they have all been false alarms.
[...]
Strassman reports that the Iraqi intelligence suggests al-Masri was killed in fighting between different Sunni insurgent groups — some of which have reportedly taken issue with the indiscriminate violence employed by al Qaeda in Iraq.
Al-Masri is believed to have started first al Qaeda cell in Baghdad, and the U.S. authorities have put a $5 million bounty on his head, according to Strassman.
About Lance
I want to thank everybody who has encouraged me over the past few years to do this. I doubt it will hold but a few people's interest, but that is okay with me. Special thanks go to Peter over at http://www.liberalcapitalist.com.
I value my privacy a great deal, so I will guess you will have to get to know me over time to find out much. I am in the financial services, wealth management, investing or whatever you want to call it business. I have children, my oldest is entering college.
I have no great or imposing academic background, my grades varied from high enough to get invited to an honors program at my university to frustrating enough to cause my father great grief. My major was history, with a minor in ethics. My main interest towards the end was in the history of economic ideas before life took a turn and I ended up never going on to graduate school. However, I have a fair knowledge of history, economics, investing and would probably be considered well read. My tastes are eclectic and I pretty much find the entire world interesting.
I have an enduring interest in how people learn about and analyze the world; my posts here will examine this topic in detail over time. I make no claims to be above the very biases and errors I see in others, in fact it is my belief that we are incapable of escaping them, only moderating their control over us.
I am a member of no political party, but I would broadly consider myself a man of the right. I am inclined to free market economics, limited government and a fairly narrow view of the role of the state. A small L libertarian if you will. However, if you are looking for broad based "the left believes..." or "wingers are so...." types of attacks on liberals, conservatives, neo-cons or whatever enemy you want to slam, look elsewhere.
Lance
Gateway Pundit has some more, including this
Weird, wasn’t the invasion in 2003?
I’ll have to check my calendar, but I think you are correct.
The idea that Saddam wasn’t cooperating in various ways with al Qaeda is demonstrably false. The question of worth is that was that cooperation a threat or going to develop into one? I lean to the latter, all the nonsense about secular Saddam not being willing to work with the jihadists being nothing but Saddam’s propaganda. The same is true about Shiite and Sunni being unable to cooperate. See Baathist Syria and Iran just for starters.
Depends entirely on the situation. In some situations, certainly I can see a temporary cease-fire being declared between radical Shia and Sunnis in order to engage a greater threater. The sad fact of the matter is, however, that gettting Sunnis and Shiites to get along is like trying to get Palestinians and Israelis to get along. You have to remember that the overriding theme of life in most of the ME is, “My brother and I against my cousin; my cousin and I against the world.”