Hmm, no bias in this little turd of a sentence. I note that the article ends with the clear implication that Zarqawi was playing the U.S. like a puppet with respect to the Iranian nuclear situation.
No matter. The facts of the article speak for themselves. And Zarky ain't comin' back.
It concerns me because A: he probably hoped it would drive a wedge between coalition forces and Iraq's majority Shi'ite population and B: he must have already gotten assurances that Russia, France and China would block any US action in the UN.
It would have blown up in his face eventually (if a couple of 500 pound bombs hadn't blown up in his face first) but for a short while, if he succeeded, it'd have seriously messed up the progress of the Iraqi government and caused BIG problems for President Bush and Tony Blair.