Who Really Captured Saddam Hussein in 2003?

[Carlos Hernandez]

December 21, 2003
Who captured Saddam Hussein?
Well, the cat is out of the bag so to speak. Saddam Hussein was captured by Kurds, not US forces. Here is the story as best I can determine by looking through a number of articles (see full list at end of this post).

Hussein was betrayed to the Kurds by a member of the al-Jabour tribe because Hussein's son Uday had raped a daughter of the tribe. Saddam had previously paid 7 million pounds in blood money to the tribe with the warning that he would wipe out the entire tribe if it ever came out. (Sify report)

Complete text at http://www.correspondences.org/archives/000507.html

 

[Monique]

Again such a shady weblink..

What I read is that they (the Military) captured one of the card faces (I don't remember the name now..) and during interrogations that person talked and told the military that Saddam was hiding near tikrit.

Let me find a source of the person who was captured..

 

[Monique]

Not that you'd believe it, but:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/15/sprj.nirq.saddam.reward/index.html

In recent days, U.S. officials pulled in former Saddam bodyguards and members of Tikriti families close to his regime for intense interrogation. Information extracted from one person led to another and then eventually to the former Iraqi leader.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Monique
Not that you'd believe it, but...

I'm not sure why there is reason to disbelieve it. Maybe its because it seems like we got lucky, but that's pretty much what that kind of search is all about. The troops in Tikrit had been tracking down thin leads for months without getting lucky.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by russ_watters
I'm not sure why there is reason to disbelieve it.

CNN is an American source and thus propaganda can be a reason to distrust.

 

[Carlos Hernandez]

It is my understanding that George Bush has ordered the CIA make sure the major media, like CNN and Fox News, don't say anything that can harm Bush's agenda. In other words, or so I heard, CIA secretly controls what info. the major media can release to the public, and this is true regardless of which political party controls the White House. I am sure Clinton did the same thing. And then of course their is the fact that the CIA often outright fabricate stories for political reasons. why do humans think politicians never lie? Look at the history of western civiliation for the last 5,000 years: the controlling elites always lie and harm the masses for their own gains. Why do we assume that today's politicians have somehow escaped human nature?

Let me ask you this: if the CIA did fabricate a story and Bush went along with it, how would you and I, the average civilian, ever find out? None of us were their to be eye-witnesses to what actually happened.

Carlos Hernandez

 

[Carlos Hernandez]

The british microbiologist who worked for the government and who reported to the BBC that Blair lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. He shortly afterward was found dead in the forrest area. Tony Blair says, he killed himself. Really? Makes me wonder. . .

 

[Nommos Prime (Dogon)]

Yep

The other day I posted a similar theory on this Forum;
That Saddam was already being held prisoner when US Forces "apprehended" him.
Thanks for the links Carlos.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Monique
CNN is an American source and thus propaganda can be a reason to distrust.

I guess I'll have to give you that, but being a skeptical person, I always look for evidence.

Originally posted by Carlos Hernandez
It is my understanding that George Bush has ordered the CIA make sure the major media, like CNN and Fox News, don't say anything that can harm Bush's agenda. In other words, or so I heard, CIA secretly controls what info.

And you "understand" this how?

 

[Carlos Hernandez]

Here we go, a more recognizable source:

Saddam was held by Kurdish forces, drugged and left for US troops

Sat Dec 20,11:00 PM ET

LONDON, (AFP) - Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was captured by US troops only after he had been taken prisoner by Kurdish forces, drugged and abandoned ready for American soldiers to recover him, a British Sunday newspaper said.

Saddam came into the hands of the Kurdish Patriotic Front after being betrayed to the group by a member of the al-Jabour tribe, whose daughter had been raped by Saddam's son Uday, leading to a blood feud, reported the Sunday Express, which quoted an unnamed senior British military intelligence officer.

Complete text at http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=1514&u=/afp/iraq_saddam_britain&printer=1

 

[Carlos Hernandez]

I bet neither CNN nor Fox News will cover this story because both are controlled by the CIA, or so I have heard. Only if this news gets too wide spread by alternative news sources will CNN or Fox News maybe cover the story, after Bush of course comes up with some excuse for lying, as usual.

Carlos Hernandez

 

[Njorl]

I have never seen enough evidence of competence at the CIA to believe they could control major news sources. I doubt they try to do more than "spin".

Njorl

 

[Njorl]

All sources of this story have been traced back to the Sunday Express story. No independent confirmation has been found. The Sunday Express story claimed that Saddam was handed over by a tribe of Arabs to The Kurdish Patriotic Front. There is no Kurdish Patriotic Front.

The author of the story was in Qatar, not Iraq, when she wrote it. She is not a particularly stable person. She was kidnapped 2 years ago by the Taliban in Afghanistan, and converted to Islam in captivity. She had been working for Al Jazeera up to about 2 weeks ago, and was fired. At her firing, she swore jihad against the management of Al Jazeera.

Njorl

EDIT - whoops, forgot to link to the source of this:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com