What about al-Douri?

I knew you'd ask. According to all current reports, he's still at large. The reason I keep a watch out is that shortly after "the capture" of Saddam Hussein, it was reported in all of Rupert Murdoch's Australian papers that al-Douri had surrendered. But nothing was said in news sources here (or elsewhere that I could find online).

Today, I found a little tidbit that's stuffed down near the end of a 12/29 article which makes the idea of a recent surrender more interesting:

The organizing spirit of the insurgency, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, Saddam's number two, actually attempted to negotiate his surrender through Arab tribes in Mosul in April. The talks failed, because, according to sources in Mosul, he demanded immunity from prosecution.  article

I do think that if he has recently surrrendered, we will be given a periodic tease about him still being at large, and even this kind of tease that he's been seen. To keep the show going. And then, when Double-face needs another boost, Voila! We "capture" al-Douri - the last of the bad guys. I might have thought that his surrender would have been great PR after "the capture" - you know, it was such a coup that the rest of the bad guys just folded in fear and/or defeat. But, thinking about it a bit more, it may actually work best to leave Americans with the idea that he's still out there, as the demand to pull our troops out might get stronger if people think all the bad guys have been killed or captured. Isn't that why we're over there? And if we pull out before we get al-Douri, we leave an enemy with a leader.

Or something like that. It must be hell trying to figure all the angles and weight them.

Americans are fickle, though, and always in search of new entertainment. I know I am. So I think we will need something bigger and closer to home to take our minds off the steady loss of jobs and other dollar woes by the time another election comes round. (Which is really just more infuriating - they already know how to steal elections, so why terrorize us, too? Perhaps so that eventually they don't have to bother with the cost and trouble of even having elections?)

I guess turning all the news sources into Fox news will help greatly, though. We shall see.

DoJ and FCC have approved the contentious merger of DiretTV and News Corp (Fox News parent).

The Justice Department requires that News Corp. appoint only US citizens to the Hughes Electronics Corp./DirecTV audit committee.   article

How interesting is that?

FCC Chairman Michael Powell described the merger as offering "a particularly compelling public interest benefit in light of continued cable rate hikes."

By God, yes. Lower rates is more important than independence or diversity in broadcasting.

....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.