Skip to content or view screen version

Saddams face shown in violation of the Geneva convention.

Cat | 14.12.2003 13:05

At approximately 18:00 yesterday american and Kurdish forces began an operation to catch Saddam. They did.

This morning the americans released fotage of saddam was this in breach of the geneva convention?

Saddam Hussein arrested in Iraq

Video footage of Saddam receiving a medical check was shown

Ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has been captured by US forces, says the US chief administrator in Iraq.

"Ladies and gentlemen, we got him," Paul Bremer said at a news conference in the capital, Baghdad, prompting loud cheers from Iraqis in the audience.

The former leader was found hiding in a cellar in a town about 30 kilometres south of his ancestral hometown Tikrit.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair has welcomed the news, saying it "removes the shadow" hanging over Iraq.

Saddam Hussein is the most wanted man on the list issued by US authorities but has not been seen since Baghdad fell to US forces in April.

Video footage apparently showing a dishevelled-looking Saddam with a long black beard in custody receiving a medical check up was shown at the press conference.

'No resistance'


I'm very happy for the Iraqi people, life is going to be safer now... now we can start a new beginning.»



Baghdad resident Yehya Hassan

Saddam Hussein was found following intelligence indicating he was at one of two possible locations south of Tikrit, Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, commander of coalition ground forces in Iraq.

A large contingent of US forces conducted extensive searches of the area and found a small rural farmhouse..

A "spider hole" was detected within the house with an entrance camouflaged with bricks and dirt.

When uncovered, US troops found the former Iraqi president in a hole barely six to eight feet (1.8m to 2.5m) deep.


Colonel Sanchez said he offered no resistance.

Two unidentified people said to be "close allies" of Saddam Hussein were also arrested and weapons and more than $750,000 cash were confiscated.

Intensive search

Iraqi Governing Council head Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim was quoted as saying that a DNA test had proved the man in custody was Saddam Hussein.

The news comes as violence continued in Iraq, with at least 17 people killed and 30 wounded after a powerful car bomb exploded at an Iraqi police station in Khalidiyah, about 35 miles (60 km) west of Baghdad.


People were seen celebrating in the streets of Baghdad

US officials say it may have been a suicide attack.

Saddam Hussein had been the object of intensive searches by US-led forces in Iraq but previous attempts to locate him had proved unsuccessful.

People have started celebrating the capture of their former president in the streets of Baghdad and the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk by sounding their horns and firing into the air.

The former Iraqi leader was last seen in television footage shot in April at a Baghdad market just before the city fell to US forces in the recent Iraq conflict.

US authorities have offered a $25m reward for information leading to his capture.

On 22 July his sons, Uday and Qusay, were killed in a raid by US forces in the northern city of Mosul.

Intelligence

In October, US officials said they had intelligence indicating Saddam Hussein was hiding in Tikrit.


Saddam Hussein's sons were killed in a US raid in July

They said he seemed to be moving around various safe houses with the aid of family members, often in disguise.

Saddam Hussein was born in Tikrit and has a tight network of family and clan ties which permeated all of the regime's main military, security and political institutions while he was in power.

Coalition authorities have said that the former Iraqi president could be tried at a war crimes tribunal, with Iraqi judges presiding and international legal experts acting as advisers.

Cat

Comments

Hide the following 20 comments

At the Hague.

14.12.2003 13:14



So co-alition forces only indicate he 'could' be tried before a war trial tribunal.

He MUST be brought before the Intl Court at The Hague in an open and fair trial.

(Standing alongside those who propped him up and illegally deposed him.
i.e. Bush Sr and Jr, Blair, Thatch, Rummy and the rest.)

He might get a trial-but 'open and fair' I doubt.

GL


I doubt it very much indeed

14.12.2003 13:15

Firstly, he's not a captured soldier.
Secondly, he's not exactly anonymous.
Thirdly, was against the Geneva convention to publish the pics of the likes of Goering after their capture?

sceptic


who the hell cares???

14.12.2003 14:20

Who the hell cares? Showing pictures removes any doubt and shows him as the pathetic creature he is. Why should he recieve a fair trial anyway? I expect he will, but Mussolini didn't recieve a 'fair trial' (executed on the spot) and nobody complains about that. Iraqi secret police, police, collaborators etc didn't recieve 'fair trials' in the 1991 insurrection either. He deserves the death penalty or real life imprisonment at least, there can be no doubt about that, the only point in a trial will be to list his crimes against humanity and so no-one can say that he was got unjustly.

fsgsgsg


Lookalike?

14.12.2003 14:39

Given that the US admit themselves that Saddam had many lookalikes he used, how can we be sure that they really have captured him? After all, I seem to remember one or two other people who have been "captured" twice, or been captured after being reported dead.

Richard
- Homepage: http://lordrich.com


Actually...

14.12.2003 14:45

is a fair trial possible? Probably not... either way he's guilty as hell.
But the interesting thing will be whether he is given the chance to defend himself.
If you read Goering's or more recently Milosovich's trials we can see that they are incredibly embarrassing for our "liberator" governments.

Goering asks many questions about how different he really was, weren't Hiroshima and Nagasaki genocides? Milosovic is revealing similar hypocracies from the Yugoslav conflict.
These may be monsterous men but they also have information that we are not told.

I hope Saddam tells all about the US and UK 12 year sanctions/genocide of Iraqi children, the offers he made them to avoid being toppled, the role of the US in subverting the UN weapons inspections, the arms deals they gave him, the guarrantees they offered him for invading Kuwait and the support they gave him for attacking Iran.

Maybe then we'll see all the murderers on trial (even if some of them will only be unofficially).

If you are interested in less biased news on the capture check out aljazeera:
 http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
(These are the guys the US keeps "accidentally" bombing for telling the world stuff they don't want people to know)

peace

James


Open trial does matter.

14.12.2003 15:06



An open & fair trial,at the Hague, does matter for the reasons james mentions
To expose those who helped him.
Somehow,there needs to be pressure for this to happen even though the likes of
Bliar and Bush will try to 'spin' their way out of any accusations.
If it helps get rid of them though (resignation,non re-election).
The role of the PNAC in the US also needs to be linked in.

Methinks,we'll be hearing about an SWP/stopwar campaign shortly.
Another plod from A to B.???

GL


deposition

14.12.2003 16:16

illegally deposed him? how does one 'legally' declare war? By that logic, the war against Hitler and Hirohito were illegal.

Nagasaki and Horishima genocide? More were killed in the bombing of Tokyo. And more would have been killed in any attempted invasion of Japan. And before anyone says that Japan was putting out peace feelers - it might have been, but they would have wanted to end the war on its terms, not on Allied terms. And given the record of Japan's genocide in places such as Korea and China, they almost certainly would not have been acceptable.

As for the UK and US supplying arms: how many aircraft, tanks, artillery or guns of UK or US manufacture were there in the Iraqi army?

And the sanctions were imposed by the UN, and by your logic, therefore quite legal.

sceptic


US and UK weapons

14.12.2003 17:56

The 'mobile biological labs' that turned out to be hydrogen generators for artillery use were a development of technology licensed to Iraq by a UK firm.

I seem to remember that the chemical weapons used by Saddam against the Kurds and Iranians were of US origin. You'ld have to look that one up though.

He certainly was supplied with weapons by the Americans during the 8 year Iran/Iraq war, which killed 1 million people.

Mark


cemical weapons against the kurds

14.12.2003 18:50

I have looked it up:
"ORIGIN OF THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS

The UN report provides only negative evidence of the origin of the mustard gas sample. The absence in the sample analysed in Sweden and Switzerland of polysulphides and of more than a trace of sulphur indicates that it is not of past US-government manufacture, for all US mustard was made by the Levinstein process from ethylene and mixed sulphur chlorides. That process is also said to have been the one used by the USSR. From similar reasoning, British-made mustard, too, can probably be ruled out, even though substantial stocks were once held at British depots in the Middle East. For more positive evidence other sources of information must be used. Over the years since the mid-1960s quite a lot of information has been published purporting to describe Iraqi chemical weapons, but much of it is contradictory and all of it is of a reliability which SIPRI is in no position to judge. A major caveat must be entered: chemical warfare is such an emotive subject that it lends itself very readily to campaigns of disinformation and black propaganda, campaigns which the politics both of the Gulf War and of the current chemical-weapons negotiations have unquestionably stimulated to no small degree. "

for more details see:  http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/research/factsheet-1984.html

sceptic


Out of date

15.12.2003 00:51

That report just says 'we don't know where they were from'. And besides, it's from 1984, so a little out of date.

Mark


you're quite right

15.12.2003 02:38

I should of course said against the Iranians.

But it does specifically say: "it is not of past US-government manufacture"

The report was from 1984. Since Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, it would not have been supplied after that date either.

Any other weapons supplied by the US or UK that you could point us to?

It seems that most of it was supplied by Russia and France:

 http://countrystudies.us/iraq/90.htm

not co-incidentally two of the countries most opposed to taking action against Saddam. SO if you want to blame anyone - there are two choices for you.

sceptic


US source

15.12.2003 03:21

Isn't it rather surprising that a US gov source claims that most weapons sales to Iraq were by Russia and France. Must be true I suppose, can't think of any recent occasions when the US administration has lied

Mark


Anthrax

15.12.2003 03:30

Well here's one article which details some of the weapons sales to Iraq.

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html

'The US provided less conventional military equipment than British or German companies but it did allow the export of biological agents, including anthrax; vital ingredients for chemical weapons; and cluster bombs.'

'Furthermore, in 1988, the Dow Chemical company sold $1.5m-worth (£930,000) of pesticides to Iraq despite suspicions they would be used for chemical warfare.'

Mark


twenty years ago

15.12.2003 11:45

so some material was supplied to Iraq 20 years ago. But then, 60 years ago, we supplied what was possibly the world's reatest mass murderer with munitions. That was Stalin. We supplied him because he was fighting Hitler - and we didn't want him to lose. In the same way, the US didn't want Iraq to lose against Iran.

Can you point me to any other material supplied by the US?

And it still doesn't justify Saddam's actions against the Kuwaitis, the marsh arabs, and 300,000 of his own people.

sceptic


OLD RUMMY

15.12.2003 14:47

The US gave himsomthing more valuable than the weapons the credit to purchese
them,They also gave him details of leading left figures to be exterminated(remember the middle east used to be awash with large communist parties until the US baked the likes of saddam) ,VX nerve gas
.Satilite photos of iran positions which he gased
Or may be Old rummy and the british tory minister who were over there meeting him in his prime just went for a holiday.

Back to now He will not be allowed to stand trial ,I predict that a nice jailer will offer him the use of his belt .
The two bombs today the protesting exiraqi soldiers in basra show that the resistance to the occupation has little to do with this sad finished looking figure.Whos only real crime that the US elite care about is that he stopped doing as he was told from washington and became a problem .Its funny how our freedom loving goverments are the two biggest arms merchants to the dictators in africa ,Indonesia, israel.and saudi to name just a few.
What about the recent relevations about good old freedom fighter henry kissinger and his backing for the junta in argentina which killed thousands.Whens he on trial ooppps sorry US people are above international law.
Guess what on fox today i saw a demonstartion in iraq with people waving the old red flag ,Want chance the US will let them and there supporters help build the new iraq???

angus the mangus


Saddam apologists

15.12.2003 16:51

So you're saying it's ok that we supplied weapons to Saddam after he had gassed the kurds, because 'that was 20 years ago'

Sceptic, you are the worst apologist for Saddam I have ever seen.

Mark


In defence of truth, not Saddam.

16.12.2003 03:43

There has already been some debate about the claims against Saddam gasing "his own people" and that the US govt. backed Saddam. I thought this might be a good time to post a couple of related links containing declassified US documents and a United States Defense Intelligence Agency report.


The first link is to The National Security Archive at George Washington University which contains...
"documents detailing the U.S. embrace of Saddam Hussein in the early 1980's, including the renewal of diplomatic relations that had been suspended since 1967. The documents show that during this period of renewed U.S. support for Saddam, he had invaded his neighbor (Iran), had long-range nuclear aspirations that would "probably" include "an eventual nuclear weapon capability," harbored known terrorists in Baghdad, abused the human rights of his citizens, and possessed and used chemical weapons on Iranians and his own people. The U.S. response was to renew ties, to provide intelligence and aid to ensure Iraq would not be defeated by Iran, and to send a high-level presidential envoy named Donald Rumsfeld to shake hands with Saddam (20 December 1983)."

 http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm



The second link is to a report by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency which states...
"Blood agents were allegedly responsible for the most
infamous use of chemicals in the war—the killing of Kurds at
Halabjah. Since the Iraqis have no history of using these two
agents-and the Iranians do-we conclude that the Iranians
perpetrated this attack."


 http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/3203/appb.pdf appendixB page 2 or
 http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/docs/3203/ for full report.





"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

oi!


correction

16.12.2003 12:29

Thanks for the info, but the second claim (that the Iranians gassed the Kurds), has been widely discredited as an attempt by the Reagan administration to blame the Iranians for what their ally (Saddam) had done.

Mark


whatever the case may be

16.12.2003 18:45

If it was Iraq that carried out the gassing of the Kurds it shows (the above) US military intelligence to be a pile of lies if however it was the Iranians it shows (the more recent) US military intelligence to be a pile of lies!

oi!


They weren't only funding Saddam

17.12.2003 13:56

Nobody seems to have mentioned that the US was also funding Iran. As always, America likes tension in the Middle East.

Afinkawan