Is this al-Qaeda's "a bridge too far" when al-Jazeera reports this kind of stuff ?

I should have taken you up on your bet.

From tonight's speech:

In Anbar, the enemy remains active and deadly. Earlier today, one of the brave tribal sheiks who helped lead the revolt against Al Qaeda was murdered. In response, a fellow Sunni leader declared: “We are determined to strike back and continue our work.” And as they do, they can count on the continued support of the United States.

* AQI
* Holdout Baathist groups
* Rival sheiks within the ASC
* Shiite factions against America's pro-Sunni tilt
* Iranian intelligence

It's a "Kill Doctor Lucky" situation. Naturally anyone official will say he was killed by "Al Qaeda." Too many doves will say the same thing, since it makes the Anbar Awakening rhetoric ring hollow. But we don't know and aren't likely to find out.

I'd be willing to bet a large amount of money, if I had a large amount of money to bet, that this incident will not be mentioned. The vast majority of Americans will remain unaware of Mr. Abu Risha or his assassination.

It will be interesting to see whether/how GWB covers this in tonight's message.

One would hope that this assassination would spur the Anbarians' determination to get rid of the insurgents in their midst to even higher levels.

What makes you think this assassination was the work of insurgents?

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1627400,00.html

Sheikh Sattar, whose tribe is notorious for highway banditry, is also building a personal militia, loyal not to the Iraqi government but only to him. Other tribes — even those who want no truck with terrorists — complain they are being forced to kowtow to him. Those who refuse risk being branded as friends of al-Qaeda and tossed in jail, or worse. In Baghdad, government delight at the Anbar Front's impact on al-Qaeda is tempered by concern that the Marines have unwittingly turned Sheikh Sattar into a warlord who will turn the province into his personal fiefdom.

And also http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/10/AR2007061001453.html

In an interview in his Baghdad office, Ali Hatem Ali Suleiman, 35, a leader of the Dulaim confederation, the largest tribal organization in Anbar, said that the Anbar Salvation Council would be dissolved because of growing internal dissatisfaction over its cooperation with U.S. soldiers and the behavior of the council's most prominent member, Abdul Sattar Abu Risha. Suleiman called Abu Risha a "traitor" who "sells his beliefs, his religion and his people for money."

[...]

Suleiman said 12 Anbar tribal leaders have signed an agreement to form a new coalition that would result in the dissolution of the Anbar Salvation Council and the purging of Abu Risha. "Those people have thrown themselves in the arms of the U.S. forces for their own benefit," he said.

He wasn't exactly liked outside of Al Qaeda either.

Certainly, if we can’t protect our chief ally in the one region we’re pointing to as signs of the success in the Surge, confidence in assertions that the corner is about to be turned is undermined.

Give me a break! The surge is proceeding quite swimmingly, thank you. Its not like the oil-sharing agreement between the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites is collapsing or anything.

This is clear evidence that the political situation is stabilizing and that our troop escalation is working wonders.