The Shrub War
December 22, 2003
Saddam Actually Captured By The Kurds

Can't the Shrub Administration tell the truth about anything?

Would it have really been so bad to just tell the truth on this one? We still have him in custody and all. The Kurds could have gotten their proper credit -- we could have bonded with a persecuted people, and then we all could have held hands and hated Saddam together. (These are the Kurds, remember? The ones that were gassed ten years ago that the Administration likes to bring up all the time as justification for the Shrub War's unfound WMD!)

But no.

Instead we have to find out a week later that we were lied to yet again.

I hope this is getting as old for you as it is for me. I want a President that can tell the truth at least part of the time. How about once. I'd like to go a day or two, or maybe a week even, without hearing a lie from my President. I don't think it's too much to ask.

Well, at least now we know what the new terror alert level is all about. It's all about diversion: "Pay no attention to the information coming in from the rest of the world. Just be afraid and keep watching the box for further instructions."


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


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.

The newspaper said the full story of events leading up to the ousted Iraqi president's capture on December 13 near his hometown of Tikrit in northern Iraq (news - web sites), "exposes the version peddled by American spin doctors as incomplete".

A former Iraqi intelligence officer, whom the Express did not name, told the paper that Saddam was held prisoner by a leader of the Kurdish Patriotic Front, which fought alongside US forces during the Iraq war, until he negotiated a deal.

The deal apparently involved the group gaining political advantage in the region.

An unnamed Western intelligence source in the Middle East told the Express: "Saddam was not captured as a result of any American or British intelligence. We knew that someone would eventually take their revenge, it was just a matter of time."

Here is the full text of the article in case the link goes bad:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20031221/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_saddam_britain&cid=1514&ncid=1480


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.

The newspaper said the full story of events leading up to the ousted Iraqi president's capture on December 13 near his hometown of Tikrit in northern Iraq (news - web sites), "exposes the version peddled by American spin doctors as incomplete".

A former Iraqi intelligence officer, whom the Express did not name, told the paper that Saddam was held prisoner by a leader of the Kurdish Patriotic Front, which fought alongside US forces during the Iraq war, until he negotiated a deal.

The deal apparently involved the group gaining political advantage in the region.

An unnamed Western intelligence source in the Middle East told the Express: "Saddam was not captured as a result of any American or British intelligence. We knew that someone would eventually take their revenge, it was just a matter of time."

Posted by Lisa at December 22, 2003 06:31 AM | TrackBack
Me A to Z (A Work In Progress)
Comments

I guess DEBKAfile was right.

Posted by: Owen on December 22, 2003 07:28 AM

Because it makes sense that the Kurds would turn over Saddam drugged to the US without killing him (even with a blood feud hanging over his head), or splashing their name and their accomplishment all over the foreign press.

They forfeit the $25 million reward, and didn't talk to anyone but Britain's version of the National Enquirer.

Wow. How did you buy this? Did you know Bill Gates will give you money if you forward this e-mail?

It doesn't pass the logic test.

How would the Kurds capture Saddam in the first place? He was near his hometown of Tikrit - where Kurds aren't exactly milling around with rifles!

Posted by: TheYeti on December 23, 2003 08:14 AM

Because it makes sense that the Kurds would turn over Saddam drugged to the US without killing him (even with a blood feud hanging over his head), or splashing their name and their accomplishment all over the foreign press.

They forfeit the $25 million reward, and didn't talk to anyone but Britain's version of the National Enquirer.

Wow. How did you buy this? Did you know Bill Gates will give you money if you forward this e-mail?

It doesn't pass the logic test.

How would the Kurds capture Saddam in the first place? He was near his hometown of Tikrit - where Kurds aren't exactly milling around with rifles!

Posted by: TheYeti on December 23, 2003 08:15 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


No free link advertizing is allowed here. If you post a commercial link in this comment you agree to pay me $500 per link pursuant to the Terms posted here. Type "AGREE" here:

Comments:


Remember info?