Friday, May 20, 2005

Liar Liar, Saddam's Pants on Fire

The UK Sun's front page, showing photos of Saddam Hussein in only his underwear and the headline "The tyrant's in his pants," was beamed across the Middle East by Dubai-based satellite station al-Arabiya.

The newspaper, owned by media mogul Rubert Murdoch, said it obtained the photos from "U.S. military sources. The U.S. military in Baghdad said that the photos violated military guidelines "and possibly Geneva Convention guidelines for the humane treatment of detained individuals."

CBS News Correspondent Richard Roth reports that similar questions about compliance with the Geneva code were raised when the U.S. handed out video of Hussein after his capture nearly two years ago. American officials at the time said the pictures were published not to humiliate him, but to prove his fall from power to doubters.

U.S. military spokesman Staff Sgt. Don Dees said an investigation was launched Friday as soon as the military discovered the existence and use of the photographs.

Rupert Murdoch, eternal ally of the War on Terror and publisher of the UK propaganda rag, the Sun, has printed photos of 'Saddam' provided by sources in the U.S. military. The U.S. military is promising an "aggressive" investigation of the leak.

Anyone smell a rat?

We smell a giant rodent carcass. But then we would, wouldn't we? After all we wrote a first humorous article questioning the identity of 'Saddam' -just hours after the alleged 'capture'.

We followed up with a full investigation showing the careful media preparations for the Saddam Psyop:
Since the 'capture' a steady stream of 'stories' about Saddam has been spoonfed to the media to keep the illusion alive. These tall tales are necessary, because otherwise in the absence of real public contact with the 'detainee', the masses might catch on to the deception.

Nevertheless, it is remarkable how an alternative media which questions whether either Osama or his henchman al-Zarqawi are actually alive at all, is so coy about querying if the same is true of the third great bogeyman: Saddam Hussein.

Maybe that's because the Saddam Psyop is still an essential part of the U.S. information warfare program in support of the occupation of Iraq. It's a psychological operation aimed partly at Iraqis (who largely don't buy it), and partly at the Western media (who swallow it hook, line and sinker) for consumption by the deeply misled general public.

Therefore the bought and paid for elements of the alternative media (i.e. most of it) aren't about to bite the hand which feeds them.

Don't think that the alternative media don't know the truth. Enough of the media know the truth after the world's top reporters showed up in Baghdad for the initial indictment appearance of 'Saddam' only to find the U.S. military was providing the sole live feed from the 'courtroom' -video only, with no audio. The seperate audio was provided to the journalists later. Ehem.

Apparently, the guy(computer) who does the Saddam audio, is not the same guy who does the video/photo impersonations. It's easy to plastic-up a double, but a face and voice double would be a little hard to find.

So, let's be quite clear. It was a lie on 14th December, 2003.

It has been a lie ever since.

Let's leave the last word to an Iraqi:
Jassim Abu Ahmed almost spits his disgust at the
television set showing yet another image of the
dazed and bedraggled Saddam Hussein.
"It's not him," Mr. Ahmed says, waving his hand
and looking away from the screen.
"Everybody knows it's not him.
Why do they keep showing this?"

Iraqis doubt real Hussein behind bars

Globe and Mail 18 Dec, 2003
See Full Story: 'Saddamplicity'


Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is just another "Elvis Lives" conspiracy. Come on, for Jassim Abu Ahmed there are millions of other Iraqis that are pretty well satisfied that Saddam is in jail, and his sons are pushing up daisies.

9:18 pm  
Blogger Fintan, said...

The 'Elvis' analogy is very apt, though not in the way you perhaps intended.

Lot's of rumors of Elvis -but no Elvis in the flesh. Same with Saddam. Lots of photos, even some audio and some video. But all seperate. And no Saddam in the flesh.

Even for those who were prepared to buy the U.S. line, the failure to bring Saddam before the world media at the time of his capture, manacled between two burly Marines -for the flashing lenses of the press, was a clear sign something was wrong.

The propaganda effect would have been stupenduous. The Geneva convention issue would have been as irrelevant.

Anyhow, as with the case of Slobodan Milosevic, Geneva convention issues did not apply to 'Saddam's' indictment appearance. The failure to let the media see him in the flesh again at that opportunity, was confirmation something was wrong.

Instead, in both cases we got video and photos supplied by the U.S. Military. Giving them ample time -months even, to prepare this material.

There is plenty of other evidence besides -as detailed in our investigative articles: Saddamplicity

10:02 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More grist for the mill:

'Saddam's wife could not recognize her husband'

6:21 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home