time is ticking

time magazine recently published an article detailing possible negotiations between secular iraqi insurgents and american military forces. call me cynical, but I'd give a 60/40 chance that the negotiations are bogus and the leak to time was political and psychological in nature. consider the introductory quote in the article:

An account of the secret meeting between the senior insurgent negotiator and the U.S. military officials was provided to TIME by the insurgent negotiator. He says two such meetings have taken place. While U.S. officials would not confirm the details of any specific meetings, sources in Washington told TIME that for the first time the U.S. is in direct contact with members of the Sunni insurgency, including former members of Saddam's Baathist regime. Pentagon officials say the secret contacts with insurgent leaders are being conducted mainly by U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers. A Western observer close to the discussions says that "there is no authorized dialogue with the insurgents" but that the U.S. has joined "back-channel" communications with rebels. Says the observer: "There's a lot bubbling under the surface today."

now, why precisely would the insurgents (read: terrorist war criminals) in question choose to leak accounts of these negotiations? why would they specifically choose to leak them to time? in any event, we conclude that the leak was not random and it was motivated by self-interest. the question is what self-interest motivated the leak. there are two primary candidates:
1. the negotiator leaked accounts to time as a means of arousing an American public eager for an excuse to leave Iraq to put additional pressure on the military. this pressure might speed up negotiations and/or persuade our military to grant additional concessions as this newest public relations campaign begins.
2. the negotiator leaked accounts to time (a well-known mouthpiece of the ted "who cares about an election; I want an exit strategy" kennedy segment of American culture) as a means of arousing the American public (specifically the already-sympathetic anti-war subculture) as above, as a means of weakening our resolve to prolonged nation-building and/or conflict in Iraq. this would be consistent with bogus negotiations. once such talks were revealed as bogus, hopes would be let down further and there would be increased political pressure to withdraw from Iraq in the absence of a complete clean-up of insurgent activities.

in either event, we must recognize this leak for what it is: a call to arms from subhuman criminals to the michael moore-spoonfed crowd to grant concessions/mercy devoid of merit or justice.

"Mercy without Justice becomes unmerciful."
- C. S. Lewis

UPDATE: let me make clear what I describe as mercy in the final paragraph above. I look forward to the day when we will be able to properly exhibit mercy and compassion towards these folks, no matter how vile they may be. it will be our joy and call as Christians. however, when these folks receive compassion/mercy, it should be an act of volition, enabled by the Spirit. it should not be a result of mindless political pressure and ignorance.