Updated 17.15

Coalition troops seize a tramp who looks like Saddam

Simon Aronowitz

Sunday 14th December 2003

Touting the arrest as a major victory for coalition forces in Iraq, L Paul Bremer announced a short time ago that Saddam Hussein had been arrested after being found hiding in a hole approximately 15 miles south of Tikrit.

The confirmation that Saddam was arrested came early this morning from Tony Blair, but until the briefing at around noon, London time, no images of the captured Saddam had been released.

This sounds odd when one considers that the Americans have moved to push their US-friendly photographs and footage as soon as they have it.

Looking at the images of the captured `Saddam' and the conditions in which he was hiding, I doubt that it is the genuine Saddam we see in US custody. For the benefit of American readers, `tramp' is the English term used for `hobo'.

The `Saddam' depicted in the video released by US forces had long hair and a long beard, both severely matted. The hole he was apparently hiding in was somewhat squalid and very undignified.

Would the real Saddam Hussein allow himself to cowardly hide in this manner, and allow his circumstances to deteriorate so? Or would this instead be one of his many body-doubles?

BBC

Click here to download video of the bunker where `Saddam' was hiding

As is typical of the sycophantic `journalists'  who are reporting on the conflict of Iraq with the apparent benefit of access to coalition briefings, there was a marked absence of probing the true identity of the `Saddam' in custody.

The pictures shown of `Saddam' before and after his shave are of dubious quality, being displayed on a plasma screen for the cameras and having been taken in poor lighting conditions. This makes comparison with archive photos of the genuine Saddam impossible.

The information held in Saddam's head is too valuable to allow him to testify about his past activities. He holds too many damaging secrets about American administrations from 1959 onwards when, according to United Press International, (UPI) he was recruited by the CIA. The deals done between Saddam and George HW Bush first as Director of the CIA, then as Vice-President and President of the USA are too hot to handle for the media. It would be very inconvenient to publish details of the arrangements made between Saddam and his western benefactors.

This is demonstrated by stories such as Sherman Skolnick's `Overthrow of the American Republic' series, part 28 tells of the $16 billion dollars used by the Bush family to persuade Tony Blair to send troops to Iraq, and the $100 billion dollars transferred from Saddam to George HW Bush, laundered by HM The Queen through a joint bank account at Coutts Bank, London.

The Overthrow of the American Republic part 28

The document showing the $100 billion transfer

The British press have of course avoided such awkward stories, despite the political editor of the BBC's flagship Newsnight programme being fully furnished with all the details.

For those who acknowledge that our enemies have previously been our allies, the supply of chemical and biological weapons to Iraq by the UK, USA and other countries is old news.

However, the reality presented by the gatekeepers of public consciousness, the mainstream media, has of late ignored these crucial details to paint Saddam as a rogue and a maverick who would use his mysterious stock of weapons (destroyed in the 1990's according to Scott Ritter) against the countries that once supported him.

Since the mainstream news has been devoid of the details of Saddam's sponsorship by the west, many members of the public only heard about what he was accused of possessing, not who originally supplied him with this merchandise. Repetition of this same message is tantamount to brainwashing for the current generation who are drip-fed entertainment like MTV, Fox News, `reality-TV' and chart-music.

It was as a result of this propaganda that many Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the attacks on 11th September, despite there being no evidence to suggest his involvement. 

The fact that Saddam will be put on trial in Iraq is a big red flag. On trial, he could use any one of a number of facts incriminating the west as his defence. If he does not do so, then the trial will be nothing more than a fix. Stories of western involvement in Iraq since the late 1950's would be conspicuous by their absence, but would tell serious researchers who know their facts that the Saddam on trial was not working very hard to defend himself with the material which should be available to him.

In fact, those who have followed the news via the internet rather than from the glowing box in the corner of the room are already familiar with the following stories:

IRAQI COMMANDER SWEARS HE SAW USAF FLY SADDAM OUT OF BAGHDAD 

Iran continues to raise secret deal claim

Condoleeza holds talks in Moscow

Russian ambassador fired upon

Other awkward news articles include:

Saddam 'had time to commit suicide'

US Rep. LaHood: Hussein's capture imminent

Newsmax: Saddam recruited by CIA in 1959

Until the trial of `Saddam' begins, there are many who will consider this pure speculation. But we can already understand that what the real Saddam has to say is too damaging for the western powers.

So would the real Saddam Hussein please stand up.

Thanks to PropagandaMatrix for its newsgathering

Elsewhere on
this site

In the western world,
only one newspaper reports the suicide
of the woman who
accused George W Bush of rape