Iraqi News Says Saddam Captured by U.S.

Do we actually have him??? (We thought we killed him at least twice already though)

The Iraqi newspaper Sada Al Watan says a unit of the U.S. Fourth Infantry Division captured Saddam Hussein, his son Qusay and his secretary Abid Hamid Mahmoud Tikriti in a farmhouse in Tikrit earlier this week, but U.S. Central Command only admits capturing the secretary. The newspaper says they were flown to an unknown destination for interrogation.
The Al Ra Al Aam newspaper in Kuwait quoted a U.S. official as saying that the U.S. wouldn't have been able to keep Saddam's capture a secret. Iraqi opposition sources say Saddam's older son Uday has contacted the U.S. regarding terms of his surrender.

The reason for keeping Saddam's capture a secret would be to prevent a rampage by his loyalist fighters. It should be noted that soldiers loyal to Saddam have killed a large number of U.S. soldiers recently.

www.unknowncountry.com...

Damn, can you confirm this?

I just sent an email to Skynews with the link.

SkyNews is incredibly jumpy, maybe they will pick up on it. and if they do, then you can thank meee

So far this is the only story on this topic I have found (beware!)

I'll be suprised if this is ever confirmed.
I hope it is, but I doubt it.
Saddam is worth far more to the propaganda machine if nobody except for the US military knows of his whereabouts.

It helps to sew confusion in our minds and they can channel that confusion.

I am still of the opinion that we will make Saddam pop up in the appropriate country when the need arises to invade.... Likeliest of places will be Iran or Syria.

...and then he'll get an armored diplomat limo with a US military escort to ensure his safe evasion.

It is possible that he is dead and the US administration has evidence of this.

There were two occasions during the Gulf War when I believe MI6 censored the BBC live on air (they may have done it more but I didn't see it). Wether this was due to a phone call or wether they had an agent in the studio I can't tell.

The first occasion occured at around about 4am GMT. A panel was discussing US tactics and future plans. The TV went blank and when they returned the panel were in an obvious state of confusion, and the topic was dropped immediately mid question. A couple of the panel kept looking nervously off screen. This leads me to believe that there was an agent on the edge of the studio.
It was almost impossible to construe this as a technical error. Everything about it stank of media control.



But the one that regards Saddam was the next.

The second occasion occured a few minutes after the second airstrike on Saddam (about 4:30am GMT I think). A BBC reporter was reporting from a sensitive area in the Pentagon. You could see and hear that the guys there were 100% certain that they got him. Yes, they make mistakes, but I don't believe they did this time. They definitely believed that they got him.
The reporter was cut off after she said she had spoken to a "guy in the know" who had confirmed the kill.
The story returned to the studio where another reporter just had time to say that the SAS had confirmed the kill too before the screen went blank again.

When the program resumed the story had been killed.
When it finally reappeared 1 hour later it was hidden way down the list of the day's stories and had been totally watered down.


It is in the US interest to keep the legend of Saddam alive. He's a bogeyman like Osama Bin Laden. The face of the enemy.


Personally, I think that Saddam is always going to be a conspiracy figure. Wether the US is responsible for this I don't know. But it is possible.

The first occasion occured at around about 4am GMT. A panel was discussing US tactics and future plans. The TV went blank and when they returned the panel were in an obvious state of confusion, and the topic was dropped immediately mid question. A couple of the panel kept looking nervously off screen. This leads me to believe that there was an agent on the edge of the studio.

Ohh, i am surprised i missed that, i'm normally one of the few 4am viewers, the BBC relies on "reporting" from people in certain government departments, as to pulling the plug on the feed, that can only be done from the gallery and by the programs director (i believe they need an access code to shut down a signal completely)

Maybe thats why the BBC is taking such an anti-war stance, they resent being censored.

Something else I remember from that occasion.
The BBC reporters were shuffling their papers as if they had lost the story.
Their body language was just all wrong too. They actually looked shocked.

Everything about it just stank.

I could be wrong. Like I said, anything is possible. But I create my opinion based on what I see. It just didn't seem right to me.

This is the closest thing I could find....

June 20 � Abid Hamid Mahmud al-Tikriti was captured only four days ago, but he�s reportedly already giving United States interrogators valuable information which U.S. officials hope will lead straight to Saddam Hussein � providing he�s telling the truth....

www.msnbc.com...

Captured Official Is Said to Tell U.S. Hussein Survived