But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration
had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi
himself — but never pulled the trigger.

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi
and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq,
producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles
and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S.
government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security
Council.

“Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to
support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,”
said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings
Institution.

Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in
terrorist attacks in Europe.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed
it. By then the administration had set its course for war with
Iraq.

“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow
Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,”
according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger
Cressey.

In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six
terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in
Iraq.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the
National Security Council killed it.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was
airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq
could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war,
but it was too late — Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. “Here’s
a case where they waited, they waited too long and now we’re suffering as a
result inside Iraq,” Cressey added.

On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were
briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an
insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to
Bush's 174, with fifty-five too close to call. [28] In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry. [29]

As the last polling stations closed on the West Coast, exit polls showed
Kerry ahead in ten of eleven battleground states - including commanding leads in
Ohio and Florida - and winning by a million and a half votes nationally. The
exit polls even showed Kerry breathing down Bush's neck in supposed GOP
strongholds Virginia and North Carolina. [30] Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000. [31] "Either the exit polls, by and large, are completely wrong," a Fox News analyst declared, "or George Bush loses." [32]

But as the evening progressed, official tallies began to show implausible
disparities - as much as 9.5 percent - with the exit polls. In ten of the eleven
battleground states, the tallied margins departed from what the polls had
predicted. In every case, the shift favored Bush. Based on exit polls, CNN had
predicted Kerry defeating Bush in Ohio by a margin of 4.2 percentage points.
Instead, election results showed Bush winning the state by 2.5 percent. Bush
also tallied 6.5 percent more than the polls had predicted in Pennsylvania, and
4.9 percent more in Florida. [33]