portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

imperialism & war

The Capture of Saddam Hussein

American politics is never what it appears to be. The "capture" of Saddam Hussein is no exception.
The Capture of Saddam Hussein
By Joseph P. Diaferia
December 14, 2003

In the seven months since the fall of Baghdad, U.S. troops have clumsily and fruitlessly searched for the dictator believed to pose the greatest threat to the world peace and security. A military that could not stop terrorist attacks carried out by suicidal hijackers armed only with box cutters on 9/11 should have surprised no one with their abject incompetence in finding and apprehending Saddam Hussein. However, suddenly yesterday, a US military contingent six hundred strong, came upon a hole in the ground in Saddam's hometown of Tikrit, and voila! There he was!

Both the timing and the circumstances of Hussein's capture are highly suspect. In recent days, the Bush administration has faced intense international condemnation over its candid policy of excluding "uncooperative" nations from sharing in the spoils of the war with Iraq. In addition, an oil company, of which the current vice-president is former CEO, now faces a congressional investigation for its skullduggery in the sale of Iraqi oil. Furthermore, there have been recent signs that the president's re-election prospects have begun to erode, owing primarily to his administration's atrocious and indeed criminal foreign policy and his appalling inattention to domestic matters.

The appearance of a bearded Saddam Hussein on international television, with several hundred thousand dollars in U.S. currency in his possession should immediately instill doubt. Why would he be so well endowed financially, and yet appear so unkempt? If he were trying to elude U.S. occupation forces, why would he not make himself completely incognizable? In fact, Saddam's face is unmistakable despite the uncharacteristic beard. Could it be that the former Iraqi dictator has actually been in U.S. custody (or under house arrest) for some time, and that the administration waited until it needed this public relations boost to announce Hussein's capture to the world? Such a suggestion may at first seem preposterous, but it would not be the first such psychological tactic ever employed. Other examples include the spectacular lies and distortions relating to 9/11, the fraud of "The War on Terrorism" and the Jessica Lynch hoax.

Moreover, is it not a compelling coincidence that the formation of an Iraqi war crimes tribunal preceded his capture by only a week? And, why an Iraqi war crimes tribunal (comprised of U.S. puppets) and not an international one? Perhaps the Bush administration knows that the United Nations and other world bodies will not be duped by U.S. propaganda.

Finally, that Saddam Hussein will be charged with war crimes and genocide is staggeringly disingenuous. While Hussein is undeniably a criminal, it is the United States that has destroyed Iraq and killed two million of its people with genocidal sanctions. It is the United States that has flagrantly violated international law in pursuit of regime change in Iraq, and it is the United States that bears full responsibility for bringing Hussein to power.

Since the United States brought Saddam Hussein to power after the assassination of Abdul Karem Kasim, any charge of war crimes or genocide should be brought not only against the former Iraqi leadership, but also against every U.S president since and including John F. Kennedy (obviously deceased presidents would be tried in absentia).

The U.S. boasts a long history of deposing and installing leaders as Washington's and Wall Street's "interests" have required. In addition to the American CIA's installation of Saddam Hussein, examples include: The Somozas in Nicaragua, Battista in Cuba, the Shah of Iran, Salazar in Portugal, Marcos in the Philippines, Pinochet in Chile, Stroessner in Paraguay, the Duvaliers in Haiti, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, Mobutu in The Congo, Suharto in Indonesia, the government of South Africa during apartheid, and even Pol Pot in Cambodia.

Seldom if ever, did any of the aforementioned dictators elicit a word of censure from their benefactors in the Oval Office.

Saddam Hussein is likely to face some form of justice, whether in a legitimate international tribunal, or in some U.S. orchestrated kangaroo farce. To the extent that he has dealt with his political adversaries violently and that he has long been a willing accomplice in U.S. atrocities, he should be brought to decisive and conclusive justice.

But, will the real war criminals and authors of genocide ever be brought to justice? The final chapters of that book have yet to be written.

address: address: New York City

Stupid 15.Dec.2003 12:52


What a stupid post.

Dear ME 15.Dec.2003 13:05


OK I agee you are stupid. Your posting the fact convinces us.

poor old "ME" is in the dark on this matter, isn't he? 15.Dec.2003 13:38

light bringer

Lordy! Poor old "ME" is clearly in the dark on this matter. The reposting makes perfect sense. Of course, to
understand and appreciate it, it helps to have more than double-digit IQ and still have "critical thinking" capa-
city left in one's brains to successfully process the information imparted. Sadly, even the greatest "light bring-
ers" are seemingly powerless to bring illumination to these sad sorts who get their light--what little they do--
from th Illuminati. So, guess those of us who stand in the bright light of reality shouldn't waste our little light
on them. Wonder if poor old "ME" would find it helpful if I upped the wattage on this...if so, let it be known!

something in there 15.Dec.2003 13:38


Maybe instead of gloating how "clean freak" Saddam had gotten all skanky, the major news networks should have been thinking "gee that's not like Saddam at all" (hint). I mean, I'm supposed to think this "clean freak" thing was compulsive, right? Still a very good point that if he wanted to fade, maybe it's the eyebrows or something that he should have done something about... THAT was a disguise?

I could ask what he's doing with so little cash. When there's a... what was it, $25 million?... bounty on you, you may want bigger bribes to bribe your way out...

Or I could ask what Saddam is even doing in Iraq. I'm supposed to automatically believe that the genocidal maniac is a sentimental old fart who can't bear not to be near his hometown, obviously... no matter how many times it's been widely aired by the Bushies that that's the place to look... they also widely aired the idea he'd be wearing a beard... will it be a wonder they didn't find him in the middle of the busiest street in Baghdad waving his arms and yelling "I'm Saddam"...?

I don't quite get this timeline...  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/276501.shtml there's the hinting, about a week until the War Crimes Tribunal (with Chalabi on it!) starts, and about a week after that to capture. Obviously, the tribunal seems to be just for him, but I wonder how that played exactly? Had they had him surrounded for two weeks? Did they take the risk for two weeks of their informant being a double agent and tipping off Saddam to bug out? Did they know where he was and just leave him alone to escape if he wanted for that long? I can imagine a tribunal and no Saddam might have put much pressure and embassment on the admin, but would there be any way at all that holding off on this for two or three weeks represents any kind of advisable prudence? Or does it just imply that with the tribunal going up, they'd need a Saddam even if they had to... improvise... a little? Or, as the article suggests, get the real one out of storage? Just in time for a holiday shopping boost and a little too late for the Democratic debaters to take on the issue outside of soundbites.

Dang. The Bushies must be getting smarter. This may be the first thing they've done that hasn't been *completely* transparent... Keep after it, they're not *that* smart... They've had few occasions to have to be.

mybe "ME will find this one helpful in better understanding it all? 15.Dec.2003 13:44

we repost, you decide

Rejoice America, Satan is in Custody!

by Michael A. Hoffman II

On Dec 14, 2003, at 5:55 AM, a Hoffman Wire Reader wrote:
Mr. Hoffman, The media is using the term "spider hole" to describe the
place where Sadam was in hiding. Does this term have any significance in
the occult? Thanks!
-- K.B.

Hoffman replies:

According to President Bush, the U.S. has captured Satan himself. They
caught him in a hole, "like a rat," or, in a "spider's hole." This is
not so much occult as infantile, on the level of a bedtime story for
very young children. The establishment tale does not have to be geared
very far beyond the pre-school level.

We should be asking, is this actually Saddam or is it one of the
numerous doubles he is known to have employed? How does one grow a foot
long beard in three or four months as this captive "Saddam" supposedly

How interesting that the U.S. "caught Saddam" on cue, in other words in
a period when Bush's popularity was in precipitous decline and in time
for intense discussion and exhilaration by millions of American families
soon to gather for Christmas festivities?

Fox News apparently has discovered Saddam Hussein's real name. Just so
the kiddies are certain to get the message, he is always referred to as
"Tyrant Saddam." Apparently his parents named him Tyrant Saddam Hussein.
What prescience on their part.

The Chinese Communist butchers recently wined-and-dined by Bush at the
White House are not tyrants, of course and neither is Ariel Sharon. Only
Arabs and Muslims, or should I say, only those nations without nuclear
weapons or a nuclear power willing to shield them with such weapons, are

Saddam is a product of U.S. Intelligence. President Reagan used him as
the U.S./Israeli proxy in their war on Islamic Iran and paid him well
for the mercenary butchery he implemented against the Iranians.

George Bush just lifted the tariff on imported steel. Meanwhile here in
north Idaho hundreds of fathers who are the sole or main support of
their families, have seen their lumber mills close due to the
importation of cheap foreign lumber. The Bush administration is an
unusually corrupt Enron regime or perhaps it is more appropriate to
describe it as a coolie-labor Wal-Mart administration.

However duplicitous presidential candidate Howard Dean may be (the
former head of AIPAC is his campaign manager), Dean briefly gave voice
to a persistent contradiction haunting American politics: the support
for Bush among Southern and Western white American males who are being
bankrupted by his cheap labor policies. And what of the elderly who are
watching as the pharmaceutical companies have been handed a
price-gouging bonanza by Bush and Congress with the recent "Medicare

Do not despair. The System sows despair, fear and a sense of
powerlessness. If you are experiencing those sensations, you are obeying
Bush. In a mobocracy "informed" by the Babel box and talk radio, it is
inevitable that the masses will be deluded. Our task is to reach the
elite of all American classes and races, though it must be said that
whites are much more prone to fall sucker to the Bush hype than anyone

Bush has killed tens of thousands of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.
His "foe," the Clinton's preferred presidential candidate, Wesley Kanne
Clark, killed hundreds of Orthodox Christian civilians in Serbia and
destroyed more than 50 churches and monasteries. John Kerry, the
Kennedy's choice for the nomination, led a massacre of civilians in
Vietnam. But only Saddam is the tyrant. Americans who believe such tripe
deserve to be fleeced. Those who support Bush deserve to see their jobs
exported to the Bush family's feudal estates in Red China.

The System stage-manages events like the "surprise" capture of "The
Tyrant" whenever support for their insanity begins to seriously erode.
Then they surpass Barnum and ensure that a million suckers are RE-born
every minute.

In the final analysis, I don't care whether it is Saddam they have
captured or not. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, Saddam neither picked
my pocket nor broke my leg. He is known to have had nothing more lethal
in his weapons' stockpile than the 21st century equivalent of a
slingshot. The fact that American taxpayers have shelled out billions of
dollars to lay hands on Saddam's sad, old moth-eaten carcass (if indeed
it's him), is the great crime.

Lately Hussein had been a threat to God's Chosen Real Estate dealers in
the Middle East; that is why we expended blood and treasure to bring him
down. Otherwise, he was a non-entity. I agree with 70% of Europe: the
threat to world peace is Ariel Sharon, Mr. Bush's "closest ally," not a
camel jockey from a Third World hellhole. But American suckers think
otherwise, and as they jingle all the way to bankruptcy court, they can
rejoice in the fact that "we" got Saddam!

Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated
Press and the American Contemporary Radio division of ABC News.

Brilliant comments from GWB 15.Dec.2003 13:58


Of course all GWB could muster at his press conference were repetitive statements about Hussein "facing the justice that he denied his countrymen" the whole "tyrant, killer, rapist, etc" rap, and the fact that he was "hiding in a hole" as if that's somehow hugely indicative of what type of person he is. (Never mind that Dick Cheney certainly holed himself up post 9-11). He continued to totally contradict himself by saying that he didn't expect interrogating Hussein would turn up valid info about the WMD, or lack thereof. And that "coalition forces"-- those 60 brave and powerful nations like Azerbaijan who support the war-- would stay the course regardless of the capture. So, remind me again why finding him was so important?
The vacant stare, painful pauses, ums, stuttering, and evasive answers to questions from GWB never cease to amaze me. The only thing he said that was a direct answer was that Dean's accusations that he knew about 9-11 were ludicrous or something like that.

Stupid 15.Dec.2003 14:30


thanks for all the brilliant comments. Ole jilli couldn't figure out that I meant the post was stupid. Oh, you mean you knew that, but just wanted to say something original and quick witted. Go to the head of the class for your original comment. And ole light bringer, god, how illuminating you are. Let's see, could you pour piss out of a boot with directions on the heel? Oh you would have to have some light to see the directions? Just what I thought.

You see we can all be a smart ass. I said the post was stupid, and I meant it. Why don't you just explain why I shouldn't think that instead of attacking my intelligence. No wonder you can't fill the "church" and are always preaching to the "choir". You are so arrogant in the belief that YOU are right, that you automaticly assume anyone with a different take on things is "take your pick here of any of the brilliant names you all called me in the above posts". Good luck with trying to convert anyone to your point of view, for with the attitude I have seen adopted here, you will always just be "preaching to the choir"

Lieberman responds 15.Dec.2003 14:49


"On the question that we're celebrating today, Howard Dean throughout this campaign has said he wasn't sure that Saddam really represented a threat to us. At one point he said, 'I suppose the Iraqis are better off with Saddam Hussein gone.' I would say this, and this is a choice the voters have to make in the primaries. If Howard Dean had his way, Saddam Hussein would be power today, not in prison."

Interesting, that. Too bad Tim Russert didn't point out that Lieberman -did- get his way. He got his way, and now hundreds of U.S. soldiers are dead, beaten with bricks. Got his way, and ten thousand innocent Iraqi children are dead, their mothers and fathers dead, beneath 2,000 pound bombs. Got his way, and fifty thousand Iraqi soldiers fighting for $3/day and the chance to buy a loaf of bread in their post-sanctions shell of a country, they too are dead.

Got his way and the morgues in Baghdad can't keep up, as the death rate is over twice what it was before war. Got his way and the Iraqi people now have a new dictator-king: Ahmed Chalabi. Got his way and billions of dollars flow into Iraq, to rebuild what we spent billions to destroy. Got his way, and hatred towards America increases unabated across the world.

Lieberman got his way, and those who would do violence to innocent people are able to recruit others at ever increasing rates; able to channel hatred into belief of the ridiculous. Got his way and our traditional friends and allies no longer want anything to do with us. Got his way, waged war in all of our names, against our morals and in defiance of our beliefs.

So fuck you too, Joe. I can't wait for this jingoistic circle-jerk to be over. For the shine to wear off, Mr. Bush's smirk to turn over, and for the FReepers to realize the resistance was not getting its barking orders from Mr. Hussein, huddled-up in his 3-foot dirt hole. For the media to realize Mr. Hussein was never more than the tired, scared man we all saw on television and everywhere else these past two days. Just a man, wielding the power of the state towards his goals.

Now he no longer has that power, and he should be sent to prison. But if Mr. Hussein's crimes are worthy of prison, surely so too are Mr. Bush's.

ME 15.Dec.2003 16:01


Have you ever gone to any school? I mean don't take this badly but you really are stupid. Please write somemore I sharing this with some friends in France. Now don't get a big head but we think you're even better than Andy.

ME ME 15.Dec.2003 16:37


I don't know, but I can guess retention is not one of your strengths but you misspelled my name while it was in front of you. But enough about me, you said

"And ole light bringer, god, how illuminating you are. Let's see, could you pour piss out of a boot with directions on the heel? Oh you would have to have some light to see the directions? Just what I thought.

You see we can all be a smart ass." That's not smart. Playing with urine is, well - stupid. You do that a lot? Please give us some more.

I heard this joke about you. You were in Pioneer Square holding a dog turd saying. "Look what I almost stepped on".

We have James thanks for the good post. Try to be more like him, you know smart.

can we just 15.Dec.2003 22:00


Cool it with the saddam articles? It's clogging up the newswire! Here are the facts: The US government claims that they have saddam hussein. This may or may not be true. Saddam was a total fucker, but unfortunately, there has been and will be no effective change in the status quo even with his regime gone. This is where right wingers and left wingers part ways on the present Iraq situation: Right wingers tend to believe that nothing the US does over there now is wrong and that any civilian casualties are terrorist casualties and that when US <a href" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5365.htm" target=blank>marines shoot an incapacitated Iraqi soldier twice in the back</a> that it is not actually a war crime but a "heat of the moment" situation (yeah right), while left wingers tend to believe that the US has done nothing (other than killing off a lot of the Iraqi government oppressors, which was actually cool as far as I'm concerned) but fuck things up since they've decided to meddle. Other than all this, of which we already have ample articles on which to use the comment sections on which to debate, there need be no further postings. Yadda yadda blah blah I like to use a lot of words to say something that could be more simply put blah blah...


anti-American freedom fighter

What all of the previous posts avoid is the fact that it is the American Empire which is the true tyranny on this planet. Its America which has hundreds of military bases stationed on other nations' land, and it is America which has invaded and attacked sovereign countries around the world from Iraq to Yugoslavia to Afghanistan to Somalia to Vietnam to Korea and on and on. And it is America which has killed millions of people around the world through its murderous wars and its predatory capitalist system.

All of the posters above (whether they are critical or non-critical of the Hussein capture) carefully ignore these basic truths.

Its the height of self-righteous American hypocrisy for Americans to pointing their fingers at anyone whether that be Saddam Hussein or some other country. IF there is anybody that needs to be hunted down and brought to justice, it is the Imperialist States of Americans and its flag-waving citizens.

False dichotomy 16.Dec.2003 22:15


"Its the height of self-righteous American hypocrisy for Americans to pointing their fingers at anyone whether that be Saddam Hussein or some other country."

This is simply illogical. You've created a false dichotomy in your own mind. I can criticize Saddam Hussein all I like, for his crimes, his alone. Nor do I need to qualify all of my critical remarks against other nations or leaders with a tirade against America, or its leaders. They are seperate, and in as much as they are, can be discussed seperately.

It -is- the height of "self-righteous American hypocrisy" for the curent American government to criticize others while simultaneously committing similar crimes. But hypocrisy follows one's own actions, not one's government's actions. I am a citizen of the World. While my particular position on this planet does bring with it a certain culpability for the actions of my government, it does not make me a hypocrite to acuse others of crimes also committed by my government.

Further, your analysis of the current world political situation is shallow. The United States is responsible for many conflicts around the globe, but you can hardly claim it has a monopoly. To suggest otherwise makes you seem ignorant, or blind. You might think you've kept an open mind, but in reality, your mind is as closed as the "flag-waving citizens" you seem to abhor.

www.clydelewis.com plug 27.Dec.2003 14:36

klingon V licker


kotk 1080

Ground Zero Radio show

F & Sa 10P - 1AM

SU 8P -- 11P

interesting forum and all the slants on this topic. Clyde thinks GW Bush and Sadam met face to face before the bagged him. He's suggested the beard may have been fake. --- I suppose from someone's pubic hairs.

Never underestimate our own BlackJack mormon bishop, the one and only chubby butt Neo-Orsin Welles sensationalist talk radio host of Portland