| |
|
Subject: "Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
|
Archived thread - Read only
|
SE

unregistered user
|
Dec-14-03, 03:32 PM (EDT) |
|
|
"Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
| |
Sorry to violate my own rule, I am doing this only on this historic occasion, but this has to be told:Israeli intellegence dispclosure- December 14, 2003, 6:55 PM (GMT+02:00)
A number of questions are raised by the incredibly bedraggled, tired and crushed condition of this once savage, dapper and pampered ruler who was discovered in a hole in the ground on Saturday, December 13: 1. The length and state of his hair indicated he had not seen a barber or even had a shampoo for several weeks. 2. The wild state of his beard indicated he had not shaved for the same period 3. The hole dug in the floor of a cellar in a farm compound near Tikrit was primitive indeed – 6ft across and 8ft across with minimal sanitary arrangements - a far cry from his opulent palaces. 4. Saddam looked beaten and hungry. 5. Detained with him were two unidentified men, two AK-47 assault guns and a pistol, none of which were used. 6. The hole had only one opening. It was not only camouflaged with mud and bricks – it was blocked. He could not have climbed out without someone on the outside removing the covering. 7. And most important, $750,000 in 100-dollar notes were found with him – but no communications equipment of any kind, whether cell phone or even a carrier pigeon for contacting the outside world. According to DEBKAfile analysts, these seven anomalies point to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein was not in hiding; he was a prisoner. After his last audiotaped message was delivered and aired over al Arabiya TV on Sunday November 16, on the occasion of Ramadan, Saddam was seized, possibly with the connivance of his own men, and held in that hole in Adwar for three weeks or more, which would have accounted for his appearance and condition. Meanwhile, his captors bargained for the $25 m prize the Americans promised for information leading to his capture alive or dead. The negotiations were mediated by Jalal Talabani’s Kurdish PUK militia. These circumstances would explain the ex-ruler’s docility – described by Lt.Gen. Ricardo Sanchez as “resignation” – in the face of his capture by US forces. He must have regarded them as his rescuers and would have greeted them with relief. From Gen. Sanchez’s evasive answers to questions on the $25m bounty, it may be inferred that the Americans and Kurds took advantage of the negotiations with Saddam’s abductors to move in close and capture him on their own account, for three reasons: A. His capture had become a matter of national pride for the Americans. No kudos would have been attached to his handover by a local gang of bounty-seekers or criminals. The country would have been swept anew with rumors that the big hero Saddam was again betrayed by the people he trusted, just as in the war. B. It was vital to catch his kidnappers unawares so as to make sure Saddam was taken alive. They might well have killed him and demanded the prize for his body. But they made sure he had no means of taking his own life and may have kept him sedated. C. During the weeks he is presumed to have been in captivity, guerrilla activity declined markedly – especially in the Sunni Triangle towns of Falluja, Ramadi and Balad - while surging outside this flashpoint region – in Mosul in the north and Najef, Nasseriya and Hilla in the south. It was important for the coalition to lay hands on him before the epicenter of the violence turned back towards Baghdad and the center of the Sunni Triangle. The next thing to watch now is not just where and when Saddam is brought to justice for countless crimes against his people and humanity - Sanchez said his interrogation will take “as long as it takes – but what happens to the insurgency. Will it escalate or gradually die down? An answer to this, according to DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources, was received in Washington nine days before Saddam reached US custody. It came in the form of a disturbing piece of intelligence that the notorious Lebanese terrorist and hostage-taker Imad Mughniyeh, who figures on the most wanted list of 22 men published by the FBI after 9/11, had arrived in southern Iraq and was organizing a new anti-US terror campaign to be launched in March-April 2004, marking the first year of the American invasion. For the past 21 years, Mughniyeh has waged a war of terror against Americans, whether on behalf of the Hizballah, the Iranian Shiite fundamentalists, al Qaeda or for himself. The Lebanese arch-terrorist represents for the anti-American forces in Iraq an ultimate weapon. Saddam’s capture will not turn this offensive aside; it may even bring it forward. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
- RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive,
TS
, Dec-14-03, 03:47 PM, (1)
- RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive,
DavidF
, Dec-14-03, 03:57 PM, (2)
- RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive,
Brooke, Dec-14-03, 04:08 PM, (3)
- Interseting theory...,
smelick, Dec-14-03, 07:50 PM, (11)
- RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive,
MonkeyPox, Dec-15-03, 01:24 AM, (13)
- RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive,
GSTom
, Dec-15-03, 12:50 PM, (15)
- RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive,
Stabbitha, Dec-15-03, 02:29 PM, (16)
|
TS

unregistered user
|
Dec-14-03, 03:47 PM (EDT) |
|
|
1. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #0
| |
Ok, I could see someone at the last moment selling him out. $25 mil. goes a long ways in the mideast, assuming you actually get it and can put it somewhere safe (the local banks might steal it from you). But the appearance doesn't wash as a captive. He was in diguise. Looking a dirty bum would be the last thing anyone would expect him to look like. He was hungry and beaten? No beans. Being a fugitive means you have to eat whatever you can. You don't get to just crawl out of a hiding space and have a full course meal whenever you want. He had people near him with weapons. Um...bodyguards? What a concept. He had cash in the hole with him. Huh? Oh yeah, he needed toilet paper... good thinking. His hole was blocked from the outside. Well yah, when someone is hiding someone, they usually do it in a way that it doesn't look like a hiding place. And if it's a hole in the ground, you usually put something over it.. duh. I think the reporter and the israeli intelligence are just miffed they didn't know what happened first. Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DavidF

unregistered user
|
Dec-14-03, 03:57 PM (EDT) |
|
|
2. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #0
| |
I wouldn't waste my time passing on that drivel if I were you. He was found with a pistol on his person. Why in hell would his captors let him keep a pistol? Thats right, they would not. Also if he was a prisoner what reason would his captors have for not turning him in for the 25 million dollar reward? None! And finally, to keep it On Topic, if he was a captive those two guards would have taken some of the $750,000 found there and bought themselves a couple of really cool scooters so when the US Special Forces arrived they would look somewhat cool making their escape, but they ran away.....very Iraqi but very uncool for someone sitting on so much money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
e
Member since Jun-3-02
7493 posts |
Dec-14-03, 05:37 PM (EDT) |
|
|
6. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #2
| |
I'll buy it long before I'll believe anything that comes from the US media. I have nothign but respect for for our troops, but this war isn't about freedom. It's all about big buisness and oil.Nero's playing his fiddle as Rome burns.... “You see things … on a motorcycle in a way that is completely different from any other. In a car you’re always in a compartment and because you’re used to it you don’t realize that through that car window everything you see is just more TV. You’re a passive observer and it is all moving by you boringly in a frame. On a cycle the frame is gone. You’re completely in contact with it all. You’re in the scene, not just watching it anymore, and the sense of presence is overwhelming. That concrete whizzing by five inches below your foot is the real thing, the same stuff you walk on, it’s right there, so blurred you can’t focus on it, yet you can put your foot down and touch it anytime, and the whole thing, the whole experience is never removed from immediate consciousness.” -Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
John
Member since Jun-6-02
5724 posts |
Dec-14-03, 06:05 PM (EDT) |
|
|
7. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #6
| |
it's all about halliburton's $61 million overcharge. Oh YEAH! So here's a conspiracy theory for you all to kick around. Friday started with the headlines that Halliburton overcharged the government by $61 million. Sunday, we have headlines that we caught Saddam. Hmmmmmmm, any paranoid people out there wondering if we had Saddam the whole time and orchestrated this, as a little sleight of hand, to take attention away from the Plunderers? Could entirely be a coincidence, but it's awfully convenient. Unforgiven SC - the NEW home of Unforgiven SC http://www.unforgivensc.net 
Texas is the reason |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
chopper
Member since Jun-9-02
8035 posts |
Dec-16-03, 10:17 AM (EDT) |
|
|
20. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #6
| |
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-03 AT 10:18 AM (EDT) "this war isn't about freedom. It's all about big buisness and oil."exactly. this war is about two things. 1) re-establishing an american hegemon in the mideast. in part to counter the growth of the EU and China, which are grooming themselves to be the big superpowers of this century, and the US wants to stay on top. remember, back when it was the US versus the Great Commie Hordes, we and the russians were playing a big game of speed chess with countries in central and south america and eastern europe. it was all about having the most strategic locations under your control. 2) stabilize the oil market. we've all known for some time that Saudi Arabia is not a nation we can count on, 911 really brought that home. the fact that the oil and auto companies are trying their damndest to keep high-gas-mileage cars off the road doesn't help. so now we're stuck. we can either figure out a way to reduce our dependence on oil from unstable terror-supporting states, or we can just go make ourselves a happy pro-american mideast state, and buy oil from them. hell, it worked in 1953 in Iran, at least until the religious nut-balls took over. of course, Iraq was the clear choice; it is in a strategic location, sitting on huge stocks of oil. the fact that Hussein was already an enemy of the US sealed the deal; everybody still remembers Hussein from Gulf War I. all they needed was the right context to convince the people to let them invade. and 911 gave it to them in spades. seriously, if this is all about saving the Iraqi people, why did the administration uphold UN sanctions, which we knew were really bad? why does this administration, chock full o' the same guys who gave Hussein weapons in the first place despite knowing that he was a psycho, suddenly care? why is the Saudi Arabian royal family so tight with the Bush family, even though they (SA) rule their people with an iron fist as well? why is Bush friendly with the president of Uzbekistan, a guy who boils political dissidents alive?
 again, it's all about business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brooke
Member since Jun-3-02
2807 posts |
Dec-14-03, 04:08 PM (EDT) |
|
|
3. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #0
| |
I have a feeling that the operation will come to be tainted with misinformation and dramatics like the jessical lynch "rescue". Next stop, Kangaroo Court! I bet Imad Mughniyeh will be the new bad guy. Every drama needs a bad guy. With Sadam in custoday and Osama being so 2002, this show needs a new cast of characters for it to sustain it's ratings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
cha cha
Member since Jul-16-03
717 posts |
Dec-14-03, 04:34 PM (EDT) |
|
|
4. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
cphilip
Member since Jul-16-03
7408 posts |
Dec-14-03, 07:08 PM (EDT) |
|
|
8. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #4
| |
Drivel and poppy cock... make shit up all day long guys. Seriously go ahead with all your anti american paranoic rumor mongering. It saddens me but heck I could care less what you all think. Really at this point I really cannot take you very seriously at all. They make pills to cure this if you would only seek some help. He's a killer and a thug. He was tracked down and eventually someone close gave him up. Period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
e
Member since Jun-3-02
7493 posts |
Dec-14-03, 07:35 PM (EDT) |
|
|
9. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #8
| |
>Seriously go ahead with all your anti american paranoic rumor mongering. Patriotism isn't bindly following a leader (that wasn't really elected in the first place) that's what lemmings do. I'm not anti American, I'm anti the people getting the wool pulled over thier eyes. I'm a flag waving gun owning harley riding red blooded all American country boy. I just don't play follow the leader blindly. But this isn't really the right subject for the scooter board. It's stopped raining for now, I think I'll go out for a ride. My '59 is finally completely finished (just got the floor rails on) after sitting in storage for about 8 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
cphilip
Member since Jul-16-03
7408 posts |
Dec-14-03, 07:39 PM (EDT) |
|
|
10. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #9
| |
Well I just find all this so convenient! You should too if you think people are trying to pull the wool over your eyes. If ever there was a case of that THIS IS IT! It ain't always your own government it seems now is it? In this case your Bull shit meter shoulda gone off loud. If this was know funny how all the sudden it's released today! Anyway your right of course. This ain't no place for this anyway. I apologise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
JFG
Member since Dec-9-03
59 posts |
Dec-14-03, 05:21 PM (EDT) |
|
5. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
smelick
Member since Jun-3-02
1357 posts |
Dec-14-03, 07:50 PM (EDT) |
|
|
11. "Interseting theory..."
In response to message #0
| |
If this were the case, too bad he didn't have an broken bones. Seriously though, we have him now and that is all that matters. We all know the saying: A bird in hand.... -Scott
Come to the happy little sidecar place:
http://www.scooter-sidecars.com

|
_ (_\ / \ `== / /\=,_ ;--==\\ \\o /____//__/__\ @=`(0) (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
SE

unregistered user
|
Dec-14-03, 08:20 PM (EDT) |
|
|
12. "RE: Interseting theory..."
In response to message #11
| |
I didnt see a damn thing anti american except an attempt to censure public discussion. You will note no one said anything anti american. Mistrust of the intentions of government is written into the constitution!!! None of us was there. So any info is speculation, period. Secondly, how is it that jessica lynch was the american hero when the guy in her unit that took out 9 iraqis at that battle and lived to tell the tale is not ever heralded for his bravery????This is a great day for freedom and the I am super happy. Paying off mafia underworld people to get that asshole is fair game to me, I dont care how and I am happy with the result. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Fidget
Member since Feb-14-03
920 posts |
Dec-15-03, 10:04 AM (EDT) |
|
|
14. "RE: You mean Pfc Patrick Miller?"
In response to message #12
| |
The mechanic who shot several of the attacking Iraqi's, and took out everyone in a mortar pit, before being captured? He got the Silver Star for valor, then went back to working on trucks. His story hasn't changed over and over again like Jessica Lynch's. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/06/60minutes/main582354.shtml ~Scott ~Scott ------------------------- It's all fun and games until someone farts in your helmet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MonkeyPox
Member since Jul-28-03
56 posts |
Dec-15-03, 01:24 AM (EDT) |
|
|
13. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #0
| |
Sounds like the seed of another internet-based rumor to me. A lot of speculation with definitive conclusions based on...?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSTom

unregistered user
|
Dec-15-03, 12:50 PM (EDT) |
|
|
15. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #0
| |
A captive doesn't have a loaded pistol and $750K of cash on him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
e
Member since Jun-3-02
7493 posts |
Dec-15-03, 06:22 PM (EDT) |
|
|
17. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #15
| |
>A captive doesn't have a loaded pistol and $750K of cash on >him. So far everyting is just speculation, everybody has a different story, but I don't think that the US medias first version is going to turn out to be it, and by the time the truth comes out, if it ever does, nobody will care The US media claimed he was armed and had cash on him. Most recent reports are:
1)He was buried in a hole that supposably wasn't meant to be openable from the inside. 2)There were two men guarding the hole w/ AK47's that ran off, most likely not guarding the his life, more likely guarding a valuable asset to make sure it doesn't get away. They were the only potential opposition. 3)The money/guns were not found in the hole with him, they were found elsewhere near the hole. There are also reports that the people holding him had called in a doctor (who later tipped authorities) to try and get Sadam to talk because for awhile he was in pretty bad shape and not coherent. His freinds that were hiding him were trying to extract info from him? Probably not.. If that is the case I'd say the people holding were trying to find out where he had hidden loot before turning him in for a reward.
These stories of "He was armed but surrendered" were just US media hype, people are dumb, they cheer and wave some flags, and when they find out it was all a lie a couple of weeks later, they don't care anymore. Nobody talks about weapons of mass destruction anymore either, now that the hype is over nobody cares that the only weapons they probably ever had were the ones we gave them. My bet is that he was being held by some local Iraqi gang that was trying to collect the 25mil reward, and to save face (what headlines look better "US Army captures Saddam" or "US pays $25m ransom to Iraqi gang for Saddam") and not pay out $$$ to a "terrorist" orgainization we went in and just took him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Stabbitha
Member since May-27-03
1482 posts |
Dec-15-03, 08:21 PM (EDT) |
|
|
18. "Yo e.."
In response to message #17
| |
That's really interesting. So far I've heard nothing of any of that. You have any sources? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
e
Member since Jun-3-02
7493 posts |
Dec-15-03, 10:11 PM (EDT) |
|
|
19. "RE: Yo e.."
In response to message #18
| |
The LA times has conflicting stories in it, one says: -although he had a pistol he didn't put up a fight. Then later in the story says: -A search found small arms and $750k in a nearby hut. The other story, which is more in detail about his hidding place w/ diagrams just says: -A search found $750,000 and a pistol nearby, and talks about apprehending the guards, but makes no mention of Saddam being armed.The thing about a doctor providing the tip to find him was from an interview on the news last night, not sure who they were interviewing though, it wasn't a US forces guy, it was a middle eastern diplomat or newsperson, maybe BBC? looked middle eastern, spoke very eloquently. The rest is all from random TV and radio news. Other then the article that SE posted above, I haven't seen all that stuff put together yet. Who knows, maybe we did happen to trip over a peice of carpet and find a burried room near a mud hut in the middle of nowhere on our own, but I think the odds are slim that that's the case. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stabbitha
Member since May-27-03
1482 posts |
Dec-15-03, 02:29 PM (EDT) |
|
|
16. "RE: Indications Saddam Was Not in Hiding But a Captive"
In response to message #0
| |
I think it's more probable that Saddam loyalists are trying save face- boy do they look bad...look at their invincible leader now. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|