Reply #53: Because they haven't been told how to explain 'one legged' or 'two legged'

[Catrina]

corpse? Personally, I think the real Zarqawi never did have his leg amputated. There are too many reports that say he had two legs.

But, what can the administration do then, about Colin Powell's speech to the UN, where he used Zarqawi's supposed trip to Iraq before the war to show the 'Iraq/Al Queda' link?

This has been a problem for them, ever since the Nick Berg video which the administration claimed showed Zarqawi as the main terrorist. Only problem was, that guy had two legs.

Colin Powell's aide, Wilkerson, says that Colin was skeptical about the information he gave to the UN re Zarqawi's leg, 'but', says Wilkerson, 'it just shows how little we know about the guy'. Nice, since the Zarqawi/Iraq information from Colin Powell was one of two major claims the US used to persuade the American people to go to war in Iraq. NOW, they say, 'gee, well, we weren't sure back then'. When will the investigation begin?

Actually I think that the media, who did actually question the 'wooden leg' theory during the Nick Berg debacle, are asking questions for the same reasons we are. They remember all the contradictions about Zarqawi over the past several years, and the doubts expressed about his status even by top military personel.

How they explain whether this dead Zarqawi has one or two legs, could have implications for Colin Powell and the rest of the WHIG and OSP group in the future.

Iow, if they say this corpse has one leg, then Zarqawi was not responsible for much of what they attributed to him. But if they claim he has two legs, that confirms, (assuming this is Zarqawi) that Colin Powell passed on lies about the Iraq/Al Queda connection to the UN.

Why has no one asked that question yet? I see it as a very important one in relation to the lies told to get this war started.