Saddam Threatens to Expose US . . . about America’s political games ..

[ConcernedCanuk]

.
.
. .

Saddam Threatens to Expose US

P.K. Abdul Ghafour, Arab News Staff

JEDDAH, 27 December 2003

— Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, now being grilled by American investigators, has reportedly warned US authorities that he will expose Washington’s “political games” and its behind-the-scene role in the occupation of Kuwait.

“Saddam threatened that if they continue to pressure him he will reveal startling facts — about America’s political games with his country — that would shock the whole world,” Al-Watan Arabic daily quoted a high-level European source as saying.

/snip/ . I don't think too many DUers would be shocked, but the world might

Back to the article:

"According to the European source close to US investigators, Saddam also said that he would ask the International Court of Justice in The Hague to try the United States for its crimes against the Iraqi people for allegedly using internationally prohibited weapons against the Iraqis during the last two wars against his country.

“If the Americans want to try me in a court of law, they should also try high-ranking international officials,” the source quoted the former Iraqi dictator as saying. Saddam has insisted that his statements are recorded verbatim, the paper said."



Hmmmm - will this hit the Western Media ?

And if this report is true, Saddam may not make it to a court, any court.

National Security and all, y'know - -

[Deesh]

1. Saddam on Trial...

At his trial, Saddam might decide to share some friendly photos of the time Uncle Don Rumsfeld came a'courtin' -- or maybe an audio tape of those meetings.

The Kurds should be sent an advance copy.

[w4rma]

2. Blah blah blah. Put-up or shut-up, Saddam. Spill the beans & let the chips

fall where they may.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. First off this is ahem common knowledge in the arab world

as in to the point that it is taken as almost a conspiracy

Secondly, even the Washington Times covered this the other day, sort
of kind off.

Sadamn is the prisoner who knew too much...

If he ahem ended before teh world court, sooner or later half of the
reagan bush adminstration would end on the docket.

On and NYT and WaPo have had stories of some of the great stories
they told us when we were growing up about our ahem, chum Sadamn and
uncle Rummy

[Judi Lynn]

4. Maybe they are aware that if they kill him, accidently, it's an admission

he's right, and they can't afford any more to come out.

I fully believe they will kill him before he has a chance to go to trial.

Would we be expecting something like a sudden heart attack? I think so.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. The problem is that the ever

so popular bar of soap or sudden death will look very bad

They are truly between a hard rock and a hard place... if they
do they confirm what many in the Arab Beliefs already are

If they do not... Sadamn will talk

[Jackpine Radical]

16. What makes you think that the US press would even take note

of Saddam's death? Hey, what about that Michael Jackson?!! Heard the latest about the Laci Peterson case?!! Jon Benet's mother fingered in investigation!!

[Thor_MN]

22. Odd that you should mention...DNA from JonBenet's clothes submitted to FBI

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/27/jonbenet.dna/index.html

Saturday, December 27, 2003 Posted: 7:02 AM EST (1202 GMT)

ATLANTA (CNN) -- Seven years after the 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey's body was found strangled and beaten in the basement of her parents' home in Boulder, Colorado, DNA found in a blood stain on the beauty queen's underwear has been given to the FBI in a possible step toward identifying her killer, the family lawyer told CNN Friday.

[goforit]

51. But will he be a reliable witness? Does he have video tapes of Bush?

And I mean Bush senior.

Hmmmm.........
Alot will be needed to convince the non-neocon republicans.

Saddam is not well respected even by the most libral Dems.

So this will be a hard sell.

[JailForBush]

6. This article was mentioned in another thread, where someone asked

how Arab News could possibly know what Saddam Hussein told his interrogators. Of course, we can safely assume that he did use the secrets in his head as a bargaining chip.

What amazes me is the apparent fact that the big dummy didn't record his secrets long ago and make several copies. If the only copy is in his head, then he's truly a dead man walking.

It's also common knowledge that Sasddam isn't going to be allowed to spill his guts. He'll either be killed before he can go to trial, or he'll be given a special trial that doesn't allow him to reveal his secrets.

[sistersofmercy]

20. I believe he did record them and that is the only reason he's been

taken alive. I bet there are records somewhere safely tucked away in another country. Perhaps Russia, Syria or Iran? My money goes on Russia.

[peterh]

58. This has me scratching my head also…..

I find it rather hard to believe that anyone that currently has access to SH would be leaking anything that might be construed as detrimental to current or past administrations….even the four or five Iraqi US puppets that were allowed to talk to him briefly.

On the surface, I’m inclined to say this might just be a lot of conjecture on the part of the arab press based on historical activities…..then again, I probably wouldn’t rule out that one of the few high ranking Iraqi puppets that has access to SH, may be a puppet in name only.

[jonoboy]

7. heart attack coming for Saddam

[GoBlue]

8. This is the WMD the Bushies most fear.

I predict they will destroy Saddam somehow.

[Rebellious Republican]

9. You guys are way off the mark with the heart attack theory.........

because everyone knows that the preferred method of assassination by the BFEE are airplane crash's. So I would say to look for Saddam to go down in a flight while transporting from where ever he is to the trial, or something like that!

[cowpie]

10. Saddam has zero credibility

We are not going to win on this issue. No way, no how. The only real chance we have to get back any power is to wage the war of ideas. Besides, if Saddam really had this smoking gun info would he have really been dragged from his hole alive?

[Rebellious Republican]

11. Does he!

Does the this Admin want to take that chance? Maybe he does have some credible evidence stashed somewhere!

Who turned in Saddam, the Kurds handed over Saddam to the Americans! So they could not just out right kill him. You remember the Kurds, those are the same people that King George the first betrayed in the first Gulf War. Do you suppose that they handed Saddam over without proof positive that he was alive and well, especially since they already had dealings with this very trust worthy admin. The last time they trusted a Bush, butt loads of them died!

Funny how someone is already trying to squash the possibility of an airplane crash? No mention of the heart attack theory in your comments cowpie! Curious is'nt it?

So whats your source that he is not credible, you know something we don't?

[Robbien]

12. It is a waste of time arguing with that poster

In another thread this new poster posted he believes the Democratic party is full of hate. Wonder how long he will be posting here?

[Rebellious Republican]

15. I agree Robbien, but I could not resist, it was to easy.

Got to admit two things,first,no time was wasted with them trying dispel the airplane crash theory, makes ya go hhmmmmm! Two, he is right about the Democratic party being full hate. We hate everything Dumbya is all about. Gosh, those warm fuzzy Republicans like Rush Dimbaugh and Ann Coulter just ooze with love and compassion for their fellow man! Here's to ya Robbien ..........

:toast:

[Sideways]

27. Guys PLEASE hit alert

With the new rules in place it is the only way to get rid of the verm...oops can't say it....fle...oops can't say it.....lic...oops can't say it...tro...oops can't say it.

JUST ALERT ON THE SO..oops can't say it.

[CatWoman]

29. that's something else I "gleefully support"

[Robbien]

52. I have repeatedly

but sometimes when these argumentative posters feel they may have pushed the repub propaganda too hard, they start spaming threads with "I agree" posts to confuse the moderators. These posters were trained well. Wonder if they are paid?

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dr Fate]

35. Go watch Fox or CNN...

...they have plenty of "balance", if that is what you want.

The same clear eyed "balance" and "debate" that convinced an entire nation that WMD's actually existed in Iraq too!!!

[CatWoman]

38. whoa!!!!!

"I have no desire to be here."

That's good news -- It's real hard for me to type while twisting your arm and making you post here.

Thanks for the relief.

[Sideways]

39. No Just Alert On You

Welcome to DU BTW.

[Cocoa]

23. this is not about the election

the trial wouldn't happen before the election under any circumstances anyway.

Regarding Saddam's credibility, one area his credibility is infinitely greater than the U.S.'s is WMD. If Saddam has zero cred, then the U.S. has negative cred.

[peekaloo]

17. add some drama

shot down by his own "loyalists".........

[koopie57]

37. I wonder how they would find

a pilot to charter him around?

[radfringe]

13. Poppy Bush and Gulf War

don't want to start rumors, and no link to back this up....

about a year or two after the gulf war I read an article that basically said Saddam invaded Kuwait after some oil deal with Poppy Bush and the Carlyle group fell through

anyone else ever hear about this?

[peekaloo]

18. something similar

http://www.greens.org/s-r/30/30-03.html

-------------
“OPEC keeps the price of oil stable by limiting how much oil each OPEC member country can produce,” says Siu Hin Lee, an international oil market analyst. “In 1989, after the end of the Iran-Iraq War, Kuwait suddenly exceeded its quotas by 20%, driving the price of oil down on the world market. As a result of Kuwait’s production hike, Iraq lost almost a third of its oil income. This was at a time when Iraq was desperate for money.” Kuwait, a major source of oil to the West, is an artificially created country, set up by the British Empire during the “Mandates Period,” and carved out of the southern tip of Iraq. The creation of Kuwait by the British took Iraq’s access to the Persian Gulf away from them and set up as rulers a British-picked royal family, or “emirate,” that was friendly to the West.

~snip~

As late as six days before Iraq’s invasion, the State Department was assuring Saddam Hussein that the United States had “no security agreement with Kuwait.” Taking his cue, in 1990 Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, convinced that the United States would not react. But in reality, the Pentagon was more than ready to react.
----------------


Trying to find the story on Kuwait's slant drilling of Iraqi reserves which I believe is what you are alluding...(Poopy's deceit on oil agreement).

[bahrbearian]

19. Oh yes , the old wink wink nudge nudge..

We need to review that again in the Press.

[Intelsucks]

14. Even If He Has Something, He'll Never Get The Chance To Show It

I think it will be SADDAM who is on trial, not the US. This won't go anywhere. It won't get any traction.

[cowpie]

21. They could have killed him easily

All they had to say was the he aimed the gun he had at them. Or that he refused to come out so threw in the grenade wich is stanrad procedure. Come on guys your not seeing the forest for the trees.

BTW, "he" is actually a she.

[CatWoman]

24. Yes -- just checked your profile

So, the democrats are full of hate, Saddam has no credibility, and you are a "she".

Well, "this" democrat hates Bush*, "this" democrat believes Saddam has once again outfoxed * (which isn't very hard to do), and "this" demcrat is a "she".

Point?

[cowpie]

25. Your point is?

So you hate Bush, and you seem to be gleefully endorsing a man responsible for mass murder, toture, rape rooms, feeding humans into a shredder. Nope, nothing wrong here. (substance would be good in your next post)

[Robbien]

26. And you seem to be supporting a man who invades

countries dropping bombs on innocent citizens to get one man. And the bombs didn't get him. Covert action did. But no, why use covert action when Bush's daddy makes armaments and Bush's daddy wants to get our tax dollars.

[CatWoman]

28. I'm gleefully supporting Saddam because I said he outfoxed Bush?

I'm not "gleefully supporting" anyone.

I just pointed out a fact.

And please, enough of the rape rooms, etc.

They sure didn't get into the way when he was our ally.

Nor did the mass graves.

Be careful, don't fall when you get off that high horse when you climb down.

and BTW: any of my cats could easily outfox * on any given day. And I do "gleefully support" them.

[INTELBYTES]

32. Jumping on the Cowpie bandwagon!!

Bush did the right thing taking out the tyrant of Baghdad! Bush hasn't done much else right but many people in Iraq are sleeping easier knowing the secret police are not coming in the middle of the night to drag them off to the plastic shredder. How can anyone defend that tyrant even in the name of politics?

If you can't get credit where credit is due, then all your arguements just sound irrational. Let's beat bush on the issues like healthcare, education, the economy and so on. But don't try to make the American public believe he made a mistake taking out a ruthless monster and his demon sons. They won't believe you, and will make you and your cause look stupid!!

Of course, IMHO.

[Dr Fate]

33. Yeah, DEMS need to stop telling the truth about Bush...

...when it would confuse uninformed people. That strategy worked great in 2002, no? Instead we lied and said Bush was doing a great job- a lot of good it did us...

Would you be willing to give up your life or your son's life so that Iraqi people can "sleep better"??? I doubt many Americans would- that is why recruitment is down...

DEMS should continue to point out that no WMDs were found and that we are no safer than we were before we were lied to and fooled into entering this war...

[INTELBYTES]

40. Amazingly enough Dr. Fate, the answer is YES!

I served in the military, I'm out now. But where ever the President would have sent me, Reagan at the time, I would have gone without question. Reagan was pretty scary to say the least! But that is the duty of a soldier to go where he is told. It is OUR duty as citizens to put the best President in office that can make wise decisions about where they send the military. If, by my son's own choosing, he decides to join the military, (which I will encourage him to do), if the unthinkable happens and he is killed in action, whether for Iraq's women and children, or Mexico's or Canada's.I will not blame the President in office. If his President sends him their, it is his duty to go.

By the way, as you, I am a Clark supporter. I believe he will use discretion on where he sends our troops.

I'm not saying we should tout Bush's accomplishments. I'm saying we shouldn't look like fools saying everything he does is a disaster. It may be on the economic front, but the war in Iraq was a necessary evil that bush carried through on.

[CatWoman]

41. You know -- you sound a lot like Rush

It may be on the economic front, but the war in Iraq was a necessary evil that bush carried through on.

He was high as a kite when he spewed forth his illogic and venom -- which is understood now that we know he was high as a kite.

Please educate me -- How was the war in Iraq a necessary evil?

I haven't seen any WMD!! Have you??? Did they find them in Saddam's hair, beard or throat???? Are they buried in his "spidey hole"???

I was told this war was "necessary" because Saddam had all of these super duper weapons that would obliterate me and my family in the wink of an eye.

[INTELBYTES]

44. Gee Catwoman, what a clever come back!!

That's a classic tactic trying to make your point by making someone else sound like a wingnut.

If you check my other posts, on other boards I made the point that he is a disaster on education, economy, healthcare, and about everything else on the home front.

But because someone disagrees with you on the war, that makes them a fundie? Instead of intelligent discourse we come to that? With over 1000 post I'd expect better than that.

Oh, for the record, this isn't a personal attack. Heaven forbid if you couldn't stand your ground and hit the "alert" button.

There is evidence of training camps used by al-queida in that country. And bush didn't start the "evidence of WMD's in Iraq". That was started long before. He DID exaggerate it to speed up the war which I fault him on, but he could not have known, just as the U.N. did not know, whether those weapons were still in the country or not.

[CatWoman]

46. I'm not accusing you of a personal attack

nor am I accusing you of being a fundie.

and it was quite clever (my comeback), wasn't it?

Again, where are the WMD????????? You said this was a justified war. I wholeheartedly disagree.

WHERE ARE THE WMD????????????

We were told that was the rationale for this war.

WHERE ARE THE WMD???????????

I don't want to hear the woulda, coulda, shoulda's.

WHERE ARE THE WMD???????????

Also, are you trying to goad me into hitting alert on you?? Where did that come from????

Back to my original statement -- you sound a lot like Rush. But sounding like him does not automatically make you a "fundy".

Excessive drug use has a way of emboldening people and making them say dumb shit.

[INTELBYTES]

50. LOL, OK Cat, maybe I was a little too quick on my reply...

I just have seen before how hard it is to express an opinion that may in some way support the war without being accused of being a freeper. I may have fired back my last message a little too caustically.

As far as the WMD's, how did you expect them to be found until we actually entered the country? Really, we had to be on ground before could do the proper search. And my question to you is, Where are they? We know he did had them. Our last great President said so, the U.N. said so, and nothing changed. Either he hid them well, or destroyed them and chose to let his Country be invaded rather than prove that he did destroy them. That doesn't make a lot of sense. So back to you, Where are the WMD's?

[ScrewyRabbit]

55. They have a shelf-life

and 10+ years of sanctions prevented him from building more.

Really, IB, you keep assuming the war was unavoidable, absolutely necessary. But many of us believe that sanctions, though a slight pain in the ass, were the right solution for the nature and scope of the threat.

I also don't believe that, once you read the documents produced by PNAC in the decade before the war, you can come to any other conclusion than that the whole WMD issue was a fig leaf covering naked aggression for other reasons.

[stevedeshazer]

56. Well, Mr. Bytes

If you support the war, you must also support Mr. Bush. This is obvious.

I'm sorry to interrupt, but may I ask you the following question?

Why did we invade Iraq?

[Dr Fate]

49. So why did Bush lie then?

You say "he could not have known"- but that does not expalin the LIES- such as the plagerized UN dossier, the forged Nigerian documents, the lies about "drones" and their capabilities, or the edited Saddam/Bin Laden tape that Powell played to the Senate Budget commmitee???...

We could give Bush the benifit of the doubt- that he "could not have known" about WMDs- IF he had not fabricated evidence on at least 4 occasions that we know of.

When Bush lied about Iraq not once, not twice, not three times, but at least 4 times that we know of- that should raise a red flag...These are just 4 lies that i came up with off the top of my head- there are probably many more...

DEMS should not be as willing as you are to give Bush 4 free passes on 4 lies. Our Troops are dying thanks to these 4 lies, and I think DEMS should inform people about them instead of lying for Bush...

If we need to be in iraq, then bush needs to come CLEAN about his LIES and give us the REAL reasons for being there.

[INTELBYTES]

53. I agree with you on this Dr. Fate....

I've even said so earlier. There is two separate issues though. Bush lying should be investigated and he should be prosecuted for fabricating evidence.

But that does not negate the fact that other credible sources including Clinton and the U.N. warned that Saddam was a threat and that he had WMD's. Now, if we can get past bush lying, (which he did!), we need to find out what became of those weapons.

[Dr Fate]

57. But none of those credible sources lied, or pushed a unilateral war...

...based on those lies. THIS is the message that I wish DEMS would spend more time on.

If we had such "credible" evidence, then the extra lies were not needed. Perhaps this evidence was not so "credible" after all- because lies come from desperation.

This should be the DEM comeback for your talking points:

"Sure, Clinton and the UN were concerned about Saddam, but they never LIED or fabricated evidence in order to have a war as a first resort. Unfortunatly Bush insisted on lying, not once, not twice, not three times, but at least four times in order to scare Americans into a unilateral war..."

[Dr Fate]

42. Then why is recruitment down to all-time lows????

I dont see anyone champing at the bit to go fight in the desert.

The answer may be "yes" for you and a handful of civic minded people,but the majority of Americans only "support" this war on the condition that "those other people" do the fighting.

If more DEMS like Clark & Dean told the TRUTH about Bush, Saddam, and WMDs, people would think better of lending their "support" to this effort...

Americans are willing to give up their lives to protect the country from WMDs- but I'm not so sure they are willing to die for a war based on lies.

If you are cool with dying for a war based on lies (WMDS), tehn so be it- but I dont see how that is patriotic...

My main point is that DEMS need to start telling the truth about Bush & WMDs. If people are still willing to die knowing the war was based on lies, then so be it.

[ScrewyRabbit]

47. I'll concede that credit should be given where due

Iraq doesn't fit the criteria, however. Is it good that Saddam is gone? Absolutely. But not all arguments rest on whether something is in our interest, or even moral. You can also argue whether the action was pragmatically achievable, and whether it was worth the cost. Bush's fiasco in Iraq fails on both of these counts.

I'm not just talking the number of dead Americans and Iraqis, which is appalling enough. I'm talking about whether we will ever achieve any of the (always-changing) objectives spewed by this administration (who can't get their story straight and stick to it), and whether years of occupation and billions of dollars will be worth it (your kids will thank you for having to foot that bill forever).

[Sideways]

48. Bush Is a Tornado Of Stupidity. End Of Story. On EVERYTHING.

We are not fools for saying so. The only fools are folks who believe anything he fucking says or does. Fucking malignant narcissists like Bush are a cancer on the world.

The worthless piece of shit is just that...a worthless piece of shit.

[Sideways]

43. No My Friend They Are Waiting For Americans To Bomb The Fuck Out Of Them

Sleeping easier my ass. Where is their water, their electricity, their jobs, their safety?

YMMV but Bush the little coke addled chimp has NEVER done anything right in his fucking life. And Iraq might just be his biggest god-damn fuck up.

Give power to a little man with no fucking humanity well my friend you've got BIG TROUBLE.

[leesa]

45. Oh brother, many thousands dead to get one worn out old man

who had not been a threat to anyone outside his borders for over twelve years. Please do yourself a favor and turn off your TV. You have swallowed too much kool-aid.
A mistake?? I think "a travesty" better suits the decision made by Bush to illegally invade a disarmed, compliant nation.

[mbperrin]

54. Umm..no, actually it's our troops now coming in the middle of the

night. Really, if we had wanted Saddam, why didn't Rummie stab him in the heart instead of shaking his hand?

[Sideways]

36. Whoa Cow Where Was There An Endorsement? WTF Is Up With The Rape Room Shit

Opposing Bush does not in any way shape or form endorse Saddam. As far as substance goes you appear to be lacking ANY except media GOP talking points which are woefully bereft and really lonely.

So we took out a Dick-Tater that used to be our bestest buddy and we turned the other cheek, head, ass, eyeball, whatever when he was such a baddy but our buddy but NOW for the sake of fucking FREEDOM he must be destroyed.

Study history much? Do you know how many of these despots we have fed and groomed? Taken to the fucking prom no less.

But rape rooms oh yeah baby just keep saying that just sounds so fucking evil.

The evil you can't see is amazing. You are on ignore until you get canned.