Was Saddam caught early, and left for our troops?
 

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...tain&printer=1

I'll wait for several more confirming sources, and hopefully Saddams own statement before I believe it, but it's intriguing.
Why would Bremer and Bush lie about something like this that would come out as soon as Saddam was allowed to make a statement?
Possibly to demoralize the Iraqi's I suppose. Still, this whole expedition has been marked with enough lies.

And it brings into question whether or not Bush has been timing events like this for political gain.

Who knows? who cares?
He's caught, he's finished.
Let's move on
Let's rebuild

I care. I want to find out if we were lied to again.

Based on what I recall from the capture, even if it were 100% true it wasn't a lie.

They said it was due to 'human intelligence' which means SOMEONE told him where he was. If it was the Kurds good for them. On the other hand I'm sure there might be some people in the Kurdish govt who would like to take credit for getting Saddam, so who do you believe?

Right now, the official account. But I will be paying attention to this to see if there is more to learn.

Re: Was Saddam caught early, and left for our troops?
 

What lies?

Again, what lies?

Reckless speculation, innuendo, and conspiracy theories...

We captured Saddam. Got that? We captured him and he is in our custody. Why can't you even acknowledge something as basic as that without alleging lies, conspiracies, and ulterior motives for which you have no evidence?

Have you no shame?

Lies: such as the Bush administration telling members of Congress that Saddam was able to attack our shores with WMD "today" with drone aircraft. That was a lie.

Speculation, innuendo, theories: Of course it is, and I identified it as such with "brings into question whether or not" That clearly states I am not sure and at this point, with no extra information, is only a theory.

This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You basicly said the administration lied about how we captured Saddam. Now back it up.

Your reply brings into question whether or not the real "Superbelt" has been abducted by aliens and implanted with a mind control device that causes his imagination to conjure up wild conspiracy theories and think they're plausible and worth repeating in this forum. :D

Oh, and Bush briefing Congress on intelligence gathered by the CIA is not a lie.

I said:
He said, in response:
I retort:
So, it does fit into the discussion, which I started, about this entire excursion being filled with lies.

__
I have not stated, yet, that Saddams capture was a lie. But this is some information that CASTS DOUBT on the official account. That's the point. The only thing that would back it up thus far is a single account, which I have admitted in the first post is far from conclusive. You guys are trying to stuff a great deal of words into my mouth. I have had to state THREE TIMES already, I don't believe this is true at this point in time, because neither of you seem to want to listen.

apechild, please grow up.

Ummm here is my point. I listened to all the offical press conferances etc after the capture. Nothing they said would rule out the Kurdish story. They said they had human intelligence which gave his location. They moved in and got him in. Obviously there was more to the story. They didn't state who it was who gave them the tip etc. Now maybe later they changed their story on how they got him and I missed that, but everything I heard was very scant on details.

Why would they give him a gun? Maybe that was a lie too. Why would they give him $750,000? Maybe that was a lie too. Who knows. I'll believe the official thing as opposed to an unnamed Western intelligence source in the Middle East. This sounds like propaganda to discredit the US in Iraq and spurn hatred towards the kurds by the insurgents. It also sounds like people trying to rationalize and hang onto their delusions that Saddam was not a coward hiding in a hole.

Don't start talking about conspiracy theories or wrong doing or nothing. Believe everything the U.S Admin says as well as the media. Eat it up as fast as you can. Believe everything unconditionally because the President and the media aren't gonna lie to you. Hurry,hurry, hurry eat it up. If you don't,you may find yourself on a list of conspirators and you will then be forced to lie in order to tell the truth. Truth? What truth? Does anyone know the truth?

Seriously though as much as discussions like this promote different ideas of debate, for those who think they know what goes on and that everything is a conspiracy, I have to say look into reality. Unless your getting briefed in the Oval office at 7:00 every morning,you don't know squat.

Superbelt, I have been quite patient with you.

You've made reckless allegations that the President has lied repeatedly, but you have not presented one shred of evidence to support those assertions.

You've used careless innuendo to suggest conspiracy theories that have even less basis in reality.

I've given you several opportunities to back up your statements with fact, logic, and reason. You have failed to do so and continue to cling to your fantasies.

And then you ask me to "grow up."

Yes I tell you to grow up because, try as I might I was unable to respond to your previous post with anything other than a flame. What you wrote was a troll. So I told you instead to grow up.

I have offered ideas, not cast a judgment. What you are trying to do is shut me up by throwing words in my mouth and marginalizing me.

I have presented not one shred of evidence to support my assertions? WTF? I have presented EXACTLY ONE shred of evidence to support my assertions!

Also, I am using careful innuendo, actually. I made sure to qualify what I said by not trusting this single bit of information (Why do I feel the need to continually justify this to you on every post..?)

Want more information about admin lies leading up to this war?

Here is me, "backing my shit up"

http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/localstoryN1216NELSON.htm

This briefing came from the PENTAGON, not the CIA, State Department or any other real intelligence communities.

None of that is evidence. It's hearsay. And not very convincing hearsay at that.

I still don't see how the Kurdish story would show the administration lying even if true.

Oh well, I think it wishfull thinking.

Because he's a democrat?

The Kurdish story, if true, shows the admin as lying because it would show that Kurdish forces held Saddam for a time until they could negotiate a trade of Saddam to our forces.

Our story is we were given information about where Saddam was hiding, we stormed the hole in the ground and Saddam and several guards were taken without a fight.
That is significantly different accounts.

Because of its nature.

Hearsay - n. Unverified information heard or received from another; rumor.
American Heritage definition

Evidence would be a tape recording of the briefing or at the very least a corroborated account.

If there were evidence of lies, Bill Nelson would not be the only Senator hinting at them and impeachment proceedings would be underway.

I'm tired of people calling the President a liar when no one has yet been able to show me where he lied.

The story was 2 armed men were taken, and Saddam. Thats it.

Its quite possible those 2 armed men were making sure Saddam didn't get out of the hole. Nothing much was said about them.

If the Kurds had in fact caught him, do you really believe they would not have beat him to death, concidering the hell he had put them through for the last 25 years.

And now you are trusting the same British intelligence agency that was so bashed over the enriched U. from the Congo intel....

Next we will find out that Glenda the good witch has OBL and is looking to make a deal.

When was any of these things ever proven to be wrong? Can you please show me the exact dates that these were proven to be lies?

With the price he has on his head and as well publicized as the reward was, anyone who honestly believes that anyone had anything whatsoever to do with his capture, and then gave him to someone else is in line to buy 47,000 acres of ocean front property that I don't own in Oklahoma. This is totally inane - more inane than this type of post normally becomes after it is helped a bit! I don't think that some of you all think at all!!!

Can you prove otherwise? How do you know what decisions are being made at the Executive level?Do you work for an intelligence agency/agencies? Does George Bush or Condelezza Rice greet you every morning for briefings?

As far as people not thinking!! Hmmm,...yeah ,I agree

I can think of 25 million reasons why this is total bullshit - everyone of the are $ and I don't need anyone to brief me on what that will buy.

Good enough, you're the Liquor Dealer.

And by the way, you have a great Christmas. Are you from Texas? All the best to you. I like your posts. Bet it isn't snowing like it is here. Sorry changed the topic.

Back to Saddam.

Merry Christmas to you too! I'm about 40 miles north of Texas and it was snowing here earlier today! It's quit now.

OK,
Superbelt has found an article that may or may not be credible, marked it as such, and noted that he is waiting to hear more on it before he buys into it. Where's the conspiracy theory there? If one swallows this hook, line, and sinker, then one is no better than those who, like certain simian infants, seem to have swallowed the neocon line and will defend it to the rapidly approaching death of their credibility.

Now, LD has a good point: $25M is a chunk of change. But will it buy all of Kurdistan? Will it buy the oil wells of Kirkuk? If Kurds caught Hussien, and brought him in to a Kurdish leader, there is no way he would have been harmed. He's golden. Laying aside the money, if it could be arranged for American troops to find and "capture" him without bloodshed, perhaps the Americans would be willing to look favorably on Kurdish claims to some of the Northern "Sunni Triangle". The Kurds are probably deluded if they believe this, but it wouldn't be the first time nationalism has been manipulated.

It could have happened like that. Most likely not, but there's a possibility. Let's see who else picks up the story before we get hackles raised.

Ustwo: I agree that this is wishful thinking unless there's significant corroberation. Even with a fundamentally dishonest administration like the one we have now, it takes more than one news item to condemn them of anything specific. However, when one is asked, essentially, "Why would you think they are dishonest," it is an open invitiation to pull in any or every instance of their patently mendacious behavior. In reply to that question none of their significant spins or dishonesties is really off topic. Don't want to hear about them? Don't ask open ended questions. (Not that you did, but you used a reply to someone else's open question to criticize the relevance of the reply.)

there are always going to be questions about saddams capture the first was did they get saddam or a look a like,(we now know it is him) now this. there are always going to be conspiracy theories about this just the same as when Osama is caught. it would be nice to see saddams comments on this but that will never happen.

We could ask Bruce Willis. Apparently he put up a cool million to the finder of Saddam. Go figure.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...iz/3141942.stm

poor bruce, looses Demi to that punk Kutcher, makes Tears of the Sun and now this. what a bad movie

Can anyone here prove that it is not a robot version of Saddam that was put together by the CIA under the direct command of George W Bush? I can't prove that its not. It may be true given the past of this administration.

that's one of those things that makes you go hhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

If you squint your eyes he does look a little like one of those Disney animatronic puppets.

yes he does. its another conspiracy theory

I'd be interested in hearing what Saddam has to say on this. Not that any of the neo-cons would believe it.

the americans will never let saddam speak he could incriminate too many people and tell secrets about american involvement in the iran-iraq war.