Saddam held captive?

About a week ago, Debka, an Israeli news/intelligence site came out with an article describing indications that Saddam was not in hiding, but a captive. They outlined a few points:

A number of questions are raised by the incredibly
bedraggled, tired and crushed condition of this once savage, dapper and
pampered ruler who was discovered in a hole in the ground on Saturday,
December 13: 1. The length and state of his hair indicated he had not
seen a barber or even had a shampoo for several weeks. 2. The wild
state of his beard indicated he had not shaved for the same period 3.
The hole dug in the floor of a cellar in a farm compound near Tikrit
was primitive indeed � 6ft across and 8ft across with minimal
sanitary arrangements - a far cry from his opulent palaces. 4. Saddam
looked beaten and hungry. 5. Detained trying to escape were two
unidentified men. Left with him were two AK-47 assault guns and a
pistol, none of which were used. 6. The hole had only one opening. It
was not only camouflaged with mud and bricks � it was blocked. He
could not have climbed out without someone on the outside removing the
covering. 7. And most important, $750,000 in 100-dollar notes were
found with him (a pittance for his captors who expected a $25m
reward)� but no communications equipment of any kind, whether cell
phone or even a carrier pigeon for contacting the outside world.
According to DEBKAfile analysts, these seven anomalies point to one
conclusion: Saddam Hussein was not in hiding; he was a prisoner.
After his last audiotaped message was delivered and aired over al
Arabiya TV on Sunday November 16, on the occasion of Ramadan, Saddam
was seized, possibly with the connivance of his own men, and held in
that hole in Adwar for three weeks or more, which would have accounted
for his appearance and condition. Meanwhile, his captors bargained for
the $25 m prize the Americans promised for information leading to his
capture alive or dead. The negotiations were mediated by Jalal
Talabani�s Kurdish PUK militia. These circumstances would explain the
ex-ruler�s docility � described by Lt.Gen. Ricardo Sanchez as
�resignation� � in the face of his capture by US forces. He must
have regarded them as his rescuers and would have greeted them with
relief. From Gen. Sanchez�s evasive answers to questions on the $25m
bounty, it may be inferred that the Americans and Kurds took advantage
of the negotiations with Saddam�s abductors to move in close and
capture him on their own account, for three reasons: A. His capture had
become a matter of national pride for the Americans. No kudos would
have been attached to his handover by a local gang of bounty-seekers or
criminals. The country would have been swept anew with rumors that the
big hero Saddam was again betrayed by the people he trusted, just as in
the war. B. It was vital to catch his kidnappers unawares so as to make
sure Saddam was taken alive. They might well have killed him and
demanded the prize for his body. But they made sure he had no means of
taking his own life and may have kept him sedated. C. During the weeks
he is presumed to have been in captivity, guerrilla activity declined
markedly � especially in the Sunni Triangle towns of Falluja, Ramadi
and Balad - while surging outside this flashpoint region � in Mosul
in the north and Najef, Nasseriya and Hilla in the south. It was
important for the coalition to lay hands on him before the epicenter of
the violence turned back towards Baghdad and the center of the Sunni
Triangle.

Today, AFP reports that Saddam was held by Kurdish forces, drugged and left for US troops:

Saddam Hussein was captured by US troops only after he had
been taken prisoner by Kurdish forces, drugged and abandoned ready for
American soldiers to recover him, a British Sunday newspaper said.
Saddam came into the hands of the Kurdish Patriotic Front after being
betrayed to the group by a member of the al-Jabour tribe, whose
daughter had been raped by Saddam's son Uday, leading to a blood feud,
reported the Sunday Express, which quoted an unnamed senior British
military intelligence officer. The newspaper said the full story of
events leading up to the ousted Iraqi president's capture on December
13 near his hometown of Tikrit in northern Iraq, "exposes the version
peddled by American spin doctors as incomplete". A former Iraqi
intelligence officer, whom the Express did not name, told the paper
that Saddam was held prisoner by a leader of the Kurdish Patriotic
Front, which fought alongside US forces during the Iraq war, until he
negotiated a deal. The deal apparently involved the group gaining
political advantage in the region. An unnamed Western intelligence
source in the Middle East told the Express: "Saddam was not captured as
a result of any American or British intelligence. We knew that someone
would eventually take their revenge, it was just a matter of time."

Could the Bush Administration be lying about the circumstances
surrounding Saddam's capture? All I know is, they haven't done a lot to
instill much confidence in their truth-telling abilities so far.

Posted by flow Frazao on December 21, 2003 at 02:21 PM | Permalink