So the US media totally ignored reports of Kurds capturing Saddam?

[Woodstock]

I know we talked about this breaking in the Australian media Sunday & Monday, but I'm checking around, and still no American news has picked it up? Their goal accomplished, Bush lauded, so no need to give a little credit to the Kurds? I thought this was a totally altruistic war, just out of the depths of our hearts to liberate these people, and for no gain of our own. So how about giving credit where credit is due?

I mean, you check Google News for Howard Dean and you get a zillion US articles called "Howard Dean Experiments on Children," "Howard Dean had My Alien Baby," ... (OK, so I made up the alien baby one, but look at the volumes of negative press the so-called "liberal media" is putting out on one of the Democratic frontrunners.) :eyes: But you check "Kurds captured Saddam" and you only get a couple of articles from the US? I mean, they couldn't even entertain the Kurds' claims? The only major outlet I found was Fox, where Brit Hume falls all over himself praising his master and discrediting the Kurds.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1221-01.htm

[Postman]

1. it doesn't fit the propaganda model we've been fed....

US good, everyone else bad, stupid or greedy. Don't you get it?

[seventhson]

2. Drudge had it, for what its worth

Most intelligent people get their news from the net anyway.

CNN etc is just entertainment now -- and not very good entertainment.

Drudge, for all his faults, at least reports SOME of these stories and millions get them.

[NicoleM]

8. Actually

Anderson Cooper mentioned it on his CNN show the other night.

[BlueEyedSon]

3. Check talking points memo

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2003_12_21.html#002341

[Nlighten1]

5. I think TPM is off his mark here...

Debka File has been right about things plenty of times whether or not it is "raw" intelligence we should not discount this story. I think what Marshall should be saying is "maybe it wasn't the Kurds" but who was it? Who were the two armed men standing over Saddam's hidey hole with a taxi waiting? Initial reports said that Saddam was disoriented and "chatty" which is just like someone coming out from under anesthesia.

It is good to be skeptical but given this Administration's propensity for lying it lends credibility to sources overseas regardless of how shaky they might be.

[windansea]

4. it's not getting picked up

because it's a joke of a story...I think there might be a few reporters in the US that are not controlled by the corporate media

chill Neo...the matrix was just a movie

[Nlighten1]

6. LOL!

Where is your reality? Do you really believe that our 600 troops surrounded this farm and didn't kill one person but captured the most wanted man in the world with out a fight?

Give it a couple of weeks while the media whores blast about how triumphant Bush's Iraq war crimes are going and then we might hear about this in a passing note late at night.

[windansea]

7. tell you what

prove the theory...you'll win a pulitzer for sure!!

the amazing mz Ridley awaits you!

http://www.thereisnocat.com/showme585.html

[DoYouEverWonder]

34. Please explain to me

How come the first reports of Saddam's capture came from Iran and not the Pentagon? How come on the morning of 12/14 these stories out of Iran were all over the Internet before the US media even had a clue. If the US had captured Saddam wouldn't they have controlled the story? The Iranian press upstaged them and from their they were in damage control mode.

The story that Josh Marshall is referring to is based on a report that was written by Yvonne Ridley and published in the Sunday Express on December 21, 2003.

http://mlcastle.net/piracy/express.txt

However, if he had done his homework he would have found that this was not the first time this story was reported. Ridley's article only confirmed and provided more details on what was in the first reports of Saddam's capture that came out on Sunday, Dec. 14th before the US even acknowledged that they had Saddam.

Here is one example:

http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/dec15/i2.asp

He was caught napping

BAGHDAD, Dec 14 (AFP)

Saddam Hussein was captured before dawn today while sleeping at a house in his hometown of Tikrit, Governing Council member Mahmud Othman told AFP.

“Before four am (6.30 am IST), Qusrat Rasul Ali called me to inform me that his men along with the Americans had managed to capture Saddam Hussein as he slept in his hideout in Tikrit this morning,” Othman said. Rasul Ali, who was tortured by Saddam’s henchmen and is known as the lion of Kurdistan, heads a unit of special forces hunting down former regime leaders.

“I was sure the Kurds would catch Saddam Hussein because they have Arab friends in Tikrit, Mosul and the country,” said Othman, a Kurd himself.



If you need more evidence that it was the Kurds who were in control of the situation then I will have to dig through the archives for the threads from the day of the capture. It was apparent to many of us news junkies that it was the Iraqis and the Kurds who were in control of the situation and that they screwed both Saddam and the US by keeping him alive. If this operation had been under the control of US forces Saddam would be dead and buried by now. His body would have paraded through the streets of Baghdad and the US wouldn't be scrambling around trying to figure out what the heck to do with him. If the US had been in control of the situation, W wouldn't have been walking around for two days in a barely coherent state of shock.

I could go on, but I and others have already done that on previous threads. All I can add is that I happened to have been up at 5:00 AM on Sunday Dec. 14th hanging out at DU and watched this story while it unfolded. Even then I was convinced that it was the Kurds and Iraqis that were in control of Saddam and set things up for the US to 'capture' him.

So instead, maybe you would like to present your evidence of how you know that the US version of events is true? In the meantime, I'll be waiting for my Pulitzer.

[Woodstock]

16. Exactly - the surprising thing would be if the US DIDN'T get help

so what's wrong with giving a little pat on the back? windnsea missed my point - even if it is false, why not talk about it? It's obviously an issue with the Kurds - they brought it up in the most public way available to them. And we're supposed to care so deeply about their well-being, surely we could at least entertain it - and then dismiss it if it happens to be completely false? But if they even helped a little, is the US taking 100% credit going to help with our already in the dumps image over there? The so-called "liberal media" entertained every single aspect of Clinton's anatomy, but they can't entertain an issue of national pride to a people we're supposedly spending billions of dollars and hundreds of American soldiers' lives (not to mention the soldiers who gave up arms, legs, eyes, ...) to "liberate"?

[Old and In the Way]

9. How is this different from the Jessica Lynch story?

I recall that the Pentagon fed us a heroic meme on Ms. Lynch....and that fell apart under closer scrutiny.

In fact, the story about the warlord capturing Saddam and negotiating his release for more local control sounds much more believable.

What I'd like to see is a trace on that cooler of crisp new $100.00 bills........

[robcon]

10. The story has been discredited, IMO

Josh Marshall had a devastating post on it, and i think it was a bogus story.

[frylock]

12. josh marshall's post is pure speculation as well..

and yes, I did read it.

[0rganism]

29. devastating? Hardly

Josh didn't bother to do the basic research to figure out that "Kurdish Patriotic Front" and "Patriotic Union of Kurdistan" are THE SAME DAMN THING (alternate translations). His "devastating" post was full of stinky crap.

[ochazuke]

11. the truth will out

I remember getting stuff from the mainstream media to the effect that "Bush proved his case" everytime he opened his mouth about the case for war (end 2002, early 2003), and when Powell gave his speech at the U.N., even the anchor of the PBS Newshour gushed "the epitome of credibility!"

All the while, I was getting info from DU about how all of that was HORSESHIT.

Then, months later, it comes out in the mainstream media that we were in fact misled.

Our media is not adversarial. They are cowards with a herd mentality. If the Kurds Got Him story is true, it will be back, and in the mainstream media. Betcha ANYTHING that it will come out at a time when Shrubco's in trouble.

[frylock]

13. and the folks who cast aspersions towards the so-called conspiracy nuts..

will be front and center, offering apologies. Or probably not.

[windansea]

14. where are those conspiracy nuts??

there were some huge threads here last couple of days

guess they lost interest???

[wanderingbear]

26. Ever hear of the quite before the storm?

[windansea]

15. kick!!!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[Woodstock]

17. what did you kick it for?

To defend the corporate media - who don't hesitate to report the most minute piece of dirt on Democrats no matter how false, but they can't even bother to report the Kurds' claims on an issue of national pride? You're so certain it's false - but how the US could have captured Saddam WITHOUT help is more of a reach than that they got some help.

And here's a question for you - why is it that the vast majority of the US thought for the longest time Saddam had a 9/11 connection? Yes, the corporate media does a rocking good job.

[windansea]

18. I am not defending corp media here

I am defending the credibility of those who oppose the real lies of Bush admin...knee jerk conspiracy theories for every event that happens weaken our opposition...marginalize it and have little chance in gaining traction...every day I see weak conspiracy theories posted here...bolstered by "links" and heresay that a supposedly 100% admin controlled corporate press denies...

examples:
saddam captured by kurds and stored by bush for 3 months
bush caused california eartquake
bush caused mad cow disease
LIHOP
MIHOP
etc etc

Do you seriously believe that each and every investigative journalist in the USA is controlled by this admin?? Believe me there are 1000's that would jump on any story they could to win a pulitzer and expose bush lies...what conspiracy theorists propose is that there is not one single reporter willing to expose the truth about anything...I DON'T BELIEVE THAT!...if you truly believe this then all is lost and indeed we are all part of the Matrix.

Bottom line is...have a conspiracy theory?....prove it...fame and fortune awaits you...I am just sick of the daily CT posts by posers that run and hide when their BS is exposed...you weaken the democratic message and your agenda is suspect

back to the topic at hand...anyone ready to debate me with kurdish konspiracy bs....let's go!

[Woodstock]

19. you don't want to debate and you still fail to see the point

Debating and mocking are two different things. For one thing, I'd suggest not calling people "conspiracy nuts" if you want to debate with them. The way you are coming off is as though all of us who disagree with you are to be laughed at. That's not a debate.

No, not all journalists are in bed with the administration, but many of the ones who can their stories if they don't like them are. And you didn't answer the question about the 9/11 & Saddam link - if they are doing their job, why were so many Americans under the wrong impression for so long?

Much of the news outlets picking this story of the Kurds up are Arab operations - Palestinian, etc. That says a lot to me.

By the US media burying this story instead of bringing it to light - and refuting it if it so deserves (if you are correct, which I still don't think you have any way of knowing yet) - then that is just fueling mistrust of Americans.

Sorry, but your saying it isn't so doesn't quite ring the same as if the major US news outlets were saying it (after good investigative journalism.)

The story has wings, but not in the US. There's barely a peep here That's not a good thing on a number of levels. The first question is why. And that's the point you are missing. Not if it is true or false (and again, I haven't seen anyone disprove it to my satisfaction yet.) But why it's got wings elsewhere but not here. That's the interesting story. What does it say about us? What does it say about them?

This story is just one example of many. This is part of a systemic problem with our media.

[windansea]

22. sorry if you don't understand

lots of people here will try to convince you our media is totally compromised

I'm ready to debate anyone here on a wide variety of bogus conspiracy theories...

lets rock...

[lewiston]

33. Amen!

nt

[wanderingbear]

20. No they lied because they were ordered too by Bush..

[windansea]

23. it's a free country

you have something?? lets go

[wanderingbear]

25. Ever hear of the FCC.

They are the Federal oganizations that controls the Media..Just how did you think rateings got enforced.. They also control what the media gets to say.They are the Federal censors. And the Bush Administation is in control of the FCC right now. 2+2 = ?

[windansea]

28. heh heh!

sorry but no

call your local reporter and ask him if he is controlled by FCC

if he says yes then I am sure you have the freedom to speak your mind and expose the truth for us

what's stopping you??

[wanderingbear]

30. They all say that. Many accually beleve it..

But the reality is thre is a line they can not cross with out loosing their FCC Licence.

[windansea]

31. what's your excuse?

lets rock!

[grasswire]

21. Josh Marshall.....

....has been wrong before.

The track record of the administration is more filled with deceit than with truth. So the proper assumption is that they have deceived the world at least in some of the details, if not in major ways.

[windansea]

24. facts please

I am sick of the bogus crap I see here every day...if you have something REAL I will join you 100%...otherwise we will be passed off as tin foil idiots...understand??

[buycitgo]

32. we?

try this

post something as an example the administration HASN't lied about, other than Wednesday follows Tuesday. then, someone will easily refute your allegation. it would help if it were something open to discussion, eg: recent revelation that the yellowcake story was a matter of "faulty fact checking by INTERNS!!!!!!!!"

something with meat on it.....not boeuf, s'ilvousplait

let's rock

or is it roll?

bring em on, citizen

[wanderingbear]

27. 2 + 2 = ?

[slack]

35. in germany

newsmagazins like spiegel, focus or netzeitung.de reported about the article of the sunday express, but only in the web-issue and the big magazins like spiegel remove the story after few hours. I think they have a problems with the credibility of the sunday express.
Nevertheless everybody knows bush is a liar and everybody expect such lies of the bush-adminstration, nobody would be surprised or appalled if this story is true.

[DoYouEverWonder]

36. The woman who wrote the story

in the Sunday Express is Yvonne Ridley. Doesn't that name ring a bell? This is the same woman/journalist who was captured by the Taliban at the beginning of the Afghan War. She has covered conflicts around the world for years and is a very credible source. She is also the same person who set up al Jazeerah's English version website. However, because of pressure from the US she was fired a couple of months ago. It seems that the US doesn't like anyone who is credible out there reporting the truth, especially if that someone happens to have converted to Islam and is an outspoken anti-Iraq war advocate.

However, aside from all that, Ridley did not make up this story. She was basing it on reports out of Iran and from information from the Kurds that was published on the day of Saddam's 'capture' excuse me 'handover' to US forces.