Did the US Troops really capture Saddam

[editor]

Originally posted by montevideo
Those type of dates don't ripen in iraq in december? Nobody has 'proved' anything to the contrary have they?

So it would be really fucking stupid to dream up a whole conspiracy theory boldly claiming that Saddam's arrest was all a big world-fooling, con-job based on that information, no?

And that's exactly my point. A classic conspiracy nutjob based on the flimsiest of unresearched 'evidence' from conveniently anonymous and unqualified sources.

Do you believe that it was all faked then?

 

[montevideo]

Originally posted by editor
So it would be really fucking stupid to dream up a whole conspiracy theory claiming that Saddam's arrest was all a big world-fooling con-job based on that information, no?

And that's exactly my point. A classic conspiracy nutjob based on the flimsiest of unresearched 'evidence' from conveniently anonymous and unqualified sources.

Do you believe that it was all faked then?

I neither know nor particularly care.

BUT your sources are equally dubious. Your sources 'prove' nothing other than offering a different opinion. An opinion you rely on to discredit an alternative opinion. I trust neither position.

I do though expect the least we can do is to be naturally suspicious of every single thing the us government tries to offer as 'information' & question that information constantly.

 

[editor]

Originally posted by montevideo
I neither know nor particularly care.

BUT your sources are equally dubious.

Yes, they may be.

But I'm not hanging an immense, world-fooling, highly complex, mass conspiracy theory on them!

If you can't see the difference, I truly give up.

 

[Jazzz]

lack of evidence

Originally posted by Athos
My experience of him suggests that DrJazzz would refuse to accept the authenticity of any fingerprint or DNA evidence, so it's pointless for him to call for it.

Forgive me for being away for a few days. I'd like to pick to pick up on this comment which I find quite bizarre.

For a start, I would find the US claim here MUCH more convincing if they provided sourced DNA evidence and fingerprint evidence. I might even believe it! However, the fact that they have not while easily in a position to do so should the captured man be Saddam leads me to believe that something fishy is afoot.

But that's neither here nor there anyway, we are here to discuss aspects of the situation and not necessarily agree. By Athos's logic, a prosecutor could argue "I don't intend to present any evidence against the accused, what's the point, because that crazy defence counsel would just seek to pick holes in it anyway"

editor - I did think that the Huntley's encounter with a police dog was significant. But after Stobart Spotter was good enough to address the point, I changed my mind on that and said so. I'm big enough to concede points when argued against properly or given good evidence, and that's what I come here for.

 

[editor]

lack of evidence

Originally posted by DrJazzz
editor - I did think that the Huntley's encounter with a police dog was significant.

You did more than that. You claimed that the untrained pooch PROVED Huntley's complete innocence beyond all doubt, and that's typical of your conspiracy-tastic mind - make massive definitive claims about an evil conspiracy and look for the facts after.

You're probably too caught up in the 'excitement' of finding thrilling US govt cover-ups at every turn to know just how offensive your claims were.

We were discussing the case of a mass murdering child killer, and you used it as yet another opportunity to dredge up some tasteless, ill-informed conspiracy shite, no doubt sourced from that pitiful fuckwit Vialls.

Understand why your groundless, sensationalistic and evidence-untroubled claims can be offensive and you may then understand why you sometimes get such a negative reaction...

 

[Jazzz]

Well a while ago I got the same kind of emotional blackmail used against me expressing my opinions of 9-11. Yet now it turns out that many of the 9-11 widows - far from being offended by the likes of me - have turned down $millions of goverment hush money for the right to ask in court the very questions I have been raising, and indeed one such widow has charged George Bush with murder of her husband.

I would rather get it wrong sometimes than be afraid to air a challenging opinion.

 

[Jazzz]

Also, there really is little reason for those who disagree with to get uptight. As someone remarked - I forget who....

"These boards are many different things to different people - the trick is to interact with the bits you like and ignore the other stuff."

 

[editor]

Originally posted by DrJazzz
Well a while ago I got the same kind of emotional blackmail used against me expressing my opinions of 9-11. Yet now it turns out that many of the 9-11 widows - far from being offended by the likes of me - have turned down $millions of goverment hush money for the right to ask in court the very questions I have been raising, and indeed one such widow has charged George Bush with murder of her husband.

Are they claiming that "remote control planes" hit the twin towers and that the building was "exploded from within"?

Or are they claiming that the phone calls from their loved ones were all faked?

And you having been 'raising questions'. You've been making definitive claims about 'obvious conspiracies' without a shred of hard evidence to support them.

 

[Jazzz]

Originally posted by editor
Are they claiming that "remote control planes" hit the twin towers and that the building was "exploded from within"?

Or are they claiming that the phone calls from their loved ones were all faked?

And you having been 'raising questions'. You've been making definitive claims about 'obvious conspiracies' without a shred of hard evidence to support them.

Well I would be very happy to discuss the details of the case in which the 9-11 widow Ellen Mariani is charging George Bush with murdering her husband, but I understand that you have censored the topic.

And for someone who apparently calls for 'hard evidence' before entertaining a claim, I don't hear you calling for a scrap of evidence that this captured man is Saddam Hussein and not one of his many doubles.

 

[montevideo]

Ellen Mariani's open letter to george bush:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0311/S00262.htm

 

[Julie]

I wondered who 'Mariani' was. I recall the person's name mentioned in another thread, but had no clue who was being discussed.

Does anyone know if GWB and his staff cited in the RICO lawsuit are unnerved by her legal action? Or are they pretending to ignore it? Is this woman being taken seriously by the media (and the US public) or is she being mocked?

Hmm..... are members of the USG digging around in her past as we live and breathe, looking for any and all "dirt"? I don't know.... perhaps she visited a therapist some years ago and will be portrayed as a nut.... or something. Think Bill Clinton. It's been known to happen.

Sorry for the conspiratorial feel of my post, but I am deeply suspicious of Bush et al. To be frank, I'm increasingly suspicious of most conservative politicians. So many are *so* on the nose.

 

[pbman]

Originally posted by Julie
I wondered who 'Mariani' was. I recall the person's name mentioned in another thread, but had no clue who was being discussed.

Does anyone know if GWB and his staff cited in the RICO lawsuit are unnerved by her legal action? Or are they pretending to ignore it? Is this woman being taken seriously by the media (and the US public) or is she being mocked?

Hmm..... are members of the USG digging around in her past as we live and breathe, looking for any and all "dirt"? I don't know.... perhaps she visited a therapist some years ago and will be portrayed as a nut.... or something. Think Bill Clinton. It's been known to happen.

Sorry for the conspiratorial feel of my post, but I am deeply suspicious of Bush et al. To be frank, I'm increasingly suspicious of most conservative politicians. So many are *so* on the nose.

Looks like low grade crap to me.

I will prove this in a court of law!

This is redicules, as you can't sue the gov't or its represntatives unless they give you permition to do so.

 

[fela fan]

But, WHERE THE FUCK IS HUSSEIN?

When's his court case? Where is he going to be tried? By whom? Has he given the 'allies' any info re the whereabouts to the WMD that were the reason for the invasion? Why was he in a rat hole?

I hope the american and british press are asking these questions. Or have they stopped writing about the man?

What's going on? We were told about how he was such a brutal dictator that was going to unleash massive weapons against us in 40 minutes, and yet the whole story seems to have gone to ground.

Why is this no longer news? Where the fuck is he?

 

[editor]

Originally posted by DrJazzz
Well I would be very happy to discuss the details of the case in which the 9-11 widow Ellen Mariani is charging George Bush with murdering her husband, but I understand that you have censored the topic

Nice deceitful wriggle but you know damn well Mariani is not echoing your billy bonkers claims about "remote control planes" and the 9/11 towers being blown up from within.

 

[montevideo]

Originally posted by editor
Nice deceitful wriggle but you know damn well Mariani is not echoing your billy bonkers claims about "remote control planes" and the 9/11 towers being blown up from within.

But she doesn't trust what the us government has to say & she is asking awkward inappropriate questions.

 

[editor]

Originally posted by montevideo
But she doesn't trust what the us government has to say & she is asking awkward inappropriate questions.

But she is not - in any way whatsoever - supporting DrJ's definitive conspiracy-tastic claims that the towers were hit by remote control aircraft and blown up from within.

Therefore his evidence-free claims remain as inaccurate and as irrelevant as the offensive drivel he posted up about Huntley's supposed 'innocence'.

 

[Jazzz]

Ellen Mariani's questions

We the families of 9/11 victims need to have answers to the following questions:

1. Why were 29 pages of the 9/11committee report personally censored at your request?

2. Where are the "black boxes" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

3. Where are the "voice recorders" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

4. Why can't we gain access to the complete air traffic control records for Flight 11 and Flight 175?

5. Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers boarding the doomed flights?

6. When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?

7. Why did your brother Jeb (the Governor of Florida) go to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130 government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they taken and who ordered it done?

If she accepts the official Osama hijack story, perhaps you could then explain to me why she is asking these questions - questions highly pertinent to establishing what actually happened on 9-11, and I have asked similar ones myself on these boards. She is holding George W. Bush responsible for the death of her husband. I urge you to read the suit http://www.nancho.net/911/mariani.html

 

[editor]

Ellen Mariani's questions

Originally posted by DrJazzz
If she accepts the official Osama hijack story, perhaps you could then explain to me why she is asking these questions - questions highly pertinent to establishing what actually happened on 9-11, and I have asked similar ones myself on these boards.

You don't ask questions.

You've made definitive statements about 9/11 and a host of other wacko conspiracy theories, claiming to have discovered 'the truth' based on the flimsiest of evidence (often sourced off Vialls' comedy site).

I was hoping that after making a complete twat of yourself by proclaiming Huntley absolutely innocent of all crimes you might have learnt from your mistakes, but it looks like you're going to carry on claiming sensational conspiracies first and looking for the facts to fit the claims later.

Oh well....

 

[flimsier]

DrJ: those questions are great questions.

I've only ever seen you ask questions of posters in trying to back up your claims about what happened.

Even now, you claim you proved that Saddam's sons were not the people killed. A very very poor standard of proof. You wouldn't let anyone else get away with those standards!

 

[XerxesVargas]

Dr J and his like are loved by the US?UK govt. He wont believe them whatever they say, and that suits them perfectly.

The question is not if they organised some great Saddam conspiracy but why? A conspiracy liek this would only be organised if there was sompe point to it, they wouldnt just do it for the hell of it it. So I ask, for the 3rd time, what is their motivation here? Why organise this "conspiracy" when they did? What had they to gain from it?

Secondly, to use as proof of a conspiracy the fact that Saddams hole wanst nice enough is just balls. Its not just balls actually, its balls and tosh.

As for the nonsense on Dates, well for the love of god.............

THe problem with your conspiracy theory Dr J is that you just suspect it, you have no real evidence to support your claims.

So it comes down to scruffy holes and Dates. Also a lack of DNA, from Scientist paid by the US government, whom you'd disbelieve anyway. Why would they get an independent group to do the tests, and wouldnt the independence of that group be compromised in your eyes the second they agreed to do it? They dont care whether you believe them or not.

As the Ed has pointed out, you have regularly come out with barking theories recently in connection with most major political events. You seem to have no critical capacity to look at what you are saying, and trot out all kinds of nonsense.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

DrJazzz posting

Originally posted by MrMalcontent
Dr J and his like are loved by the US?UK govt. He wont believe them whatever they say, and that suits them perfectly.

The question is not if they organised some great Saddam conspiracy but why? A conspiracy liek this would only be organised if there was sompe point to it, they wouldnt just do it for the hell of it it. So I ask, for the 3rd time, what is their motivation here? Why organise this "conspiracy" when they did? What had they to gain from it?

Secondly, to use as proof of a conspiracy the fact that Saddams hole wanst nice enough is just balls. Its not just balls actually, its balls and tosh.

As for the nonsense on Dates, well for the love of god.............

THe problem with your conspiracy theory Dr J is that you just suspect it, you have no real evidence to support your claims.

So it comes down to scruffy holes and Dates. Also a lack of DNA, from Scientist paid by the US government, whom you'd disbelieve anyway. Why would they get an independent group to do the tests, and wouldnt the independence of that group be compromised in your eyes the second they agreed to do it? They dont care whether you believe them or not.

As the Ed has pointed out, you have regularly come out with barking theories recently in connection with most major political events. You seem to have no critical capacity to look at what you are saying, and trot out all kinds of nonsense.

Well I don't detect any critical capacity coming from your direction mate. I have simply asked, where is the proof that this man is Saddam? Neither you, nor editor, nor anyone on this thread seem to be at all bothered about such a trivial question. Instead, it is apparently down to me to prove my reasons for doubting this unproved claim!

The scruffy hole is just an observation, not proof. I have not brought dates or any other fruit into a single argument. How do you know that I would disbelieve a DNA match? What does that matter anyway? Why aren't you demanding more evidence??

Why do you simply believe the US military although we know that they fib their asses off? Why do you not require a scrap of evidence before believing them?

 

[editor]

DrJazzz posting

Originally posted by GarfieldLeChat
Why do you simply believe the US military although we know that they fib their asses off? Why do you not require a scrap of evidence before believing them?

Why do you believe that the Iraqi people, the Arab media, Saddam's own daughter, friends, colleagues and just about anyone and everyone who's ever been remotely involved with Saddam that they're all wrong?

Why do you think you're right and they're all stupid dupes, conned by an obvious American trick?

 

[Jazzz]

I would like to see some good hard evidence that this man is Saddam Hussein. It isn't there - why not? If it is, it should have been a matter easily settled.

I'm not aware what the people you mention think - I've read that a good number of Iraqis do not believe it to be Saddam and some US soldiers to boot. I need not limit my beliefs to that which appears in the papers (controlled by some very few media magnates).

The daughter you quoted was remarking that the man's manner was so unlike Saddam that she thought he must have been drugged. Hardly a strong identification when one considers the quality of Saddam's doubles.

 

[editor]

Originally posted by DrJazzz
I would like to see some good hard evidence that this man is Saddam Hussein. It isn't there - why not?

What's the point?

You'll only dispute it and claim to know better based on, err, some anonymous tosh you've found on the internet somewhere.

After all, you still believe Vialls' claims about an untraceable 'retired expert' (who managed an entire career of being an expert without leaving a single trace ) posting on untraceable bulletin boards (of which not a solitary trace can be found).

And then there was your steadfast belief that the mass murdering child killer Huntley was completely innocent of all crimes based purely on the nose of an untrained pooch!

Such was your belief in a dreadful conspiracy at work, that you boldly declared that the defence team was being nobbled and that you could have made a better defence.

All evidence-untroubled claims, of course.

And then there was the 'tripod mounted' WTC footage - except you had no idea or proof that the camera was 'mounted' anywhere. Or where it was. Or who took the footage.

I could go on and on and on.

Perhaps if you didn't cry wolf so readily and jump to fantastic conclusions before you know the facts, your claims wouldn't be treated with such cynicism.

 

[Jazzz]

Originally posted by editor
What's the point?

You'll only dispute it and claim to know better based on, err, some anonymous tosh you've found on the internet somewhere.

So by this extraordinary line of reasoning, the US military need present no evidence for anything, WMD, Saddam, Osama, you name it, because some conspiracy theorist might not believe it.

Amazing!

I could go on about the 'barmy bonkers' conspiracy stuff that has since been incorporated into the mainstream. Like, vaccine cocktails possibly playing a role in Gulf War Syndrome. You know what people said about that when I posted it nearly two years ago? Hatstand. Ridiculous. Sources not credible. Yet it's now a mainstream view and soldiers are turning down the vaccine shots and nerve agent medication.

Let's not forget too all the 9-11 threads. Now nearly 100 victim's families have turned down $millions of compensation so they can prosecute should they wish, and one widow is already doing so in the court case of the 21st century. You constantly demanded to know why there weren't any widows who were pissed off. Well, here they are. Or any British MPs saying that there was a deliberate stand-down. Well, one of those appeared. Yet there is never any admission from you that you may have been hasty in your judgment or that your past ridicules were proved unfounded.

Oh, and of course the DNA tests results for 'Uday' and 'Qusay' (the sons who held an entire US battalion at bay for four hours ) never appeared, just as I said they would, while you and Dr. Christmas thought they were just round the corner. Yet... you never hold your hands up and go, DrJazzz, you were right there, do you? Oh no!

Now you prepared to believe what seems evermore like a staged propaganda coup (curiously coinciding with George Bush signing Patriot Act II legislation) ON NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, and you have the chutzpah to continually demand evidence from me!

 

[editor]

Originally posted by DrJazzz
Now you prepared to believe what seems evermore like a staged propaganda coup (curiously coinciding with George Bush signing Patriot Act II legislation) ON NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER, and you have the chutzpah to continually demand evidence from me!

So all the Iraqi people, all the world's leaders, the Arab press, the mainstream international press and just about anyone who's ever been remotely connected with Saddam are all completely wrong and gullible fools because they've been taken in my America's grand deception, but clever ol'DrJ 'knows' the real truth and is completely right, yes?

Funny. I recall you making similar claims about knowing the 'real truth' about a convicted mass murdering child killer not so long ago. You were so sure that you started a thread proclaiming his innocence and insisting that there was a terrible conspiracy at work.

 

[pk]

Saddam has been positively identified, not only by US army and international diplomats who have met him and had lengthy discussions, but also by international journalists who have also met him personally.

I'll take their word for it far quicker than the word of someone who trusts Joe Vialls.

Sorry Dr J but there it is - and your track record in these matters leaves much to be desired.

 

[fela fan]

Originally posted by pk
Saddam has been positively identified, not only by US army and international diplomats who have met him and had lengthy discussions, but also by international journalists who have also met him personally.

I'll take their word for it far quicker than the word of someone who trusts Joe Vialls.

Sorry Dr J but there it is - and your track record in these matters leaves much to be desired.

For those US army (presumably specific soldiers) and international diplomats to be able to positively identify Hussein, it is necessary for them to have met him personally before their capture, and after it too. Or at the very least they must have met him at least once, in more recent days of his leadership of Iraq. But even then, judging it to be him on the telly is a bit hit and miss, no?

Can you confirm this is the case pk?

And who are those international jounalists who met him personally, then came out and put their credibility on the line by stating that the drugged man they saw on the telly that came out of a rat hole was the same Hussein that they previously met?

You see, unless you can answer these questions, your reliance on information received is just as secure or dodgy as the man you say has got it all wrong .

 

[fela fan]

Originally posted by editor
So all the Iraqi people, all the world's leaders, the Arab press, the mainstream international press and just about anyone who's ever been remotely connected with Saddam are all completely wrong and gullible fools because they've been taken in my America's grand deception, but clever ol'DrJ 'knows' the real truth and is completely right, yes?

My my, you do get about a lot. You have just said in this post of yours that ALL the iraqi people, and ALL the world's leaders have decided this man is Hussein.

How on earth did you happen across that information? Which website are you using to find out such stuff? And how can you believe it to the extent that you present it as facts?

So definitively claimed too.

And wherever you read this information, how can the writers claim to speak on behalf of ALL iraqis?? And have these writers actually phoned up ALL the world's leaders? Coz that's over 200 of them.

And due to your claim about the arab press, i guess you must therefore read arabic...

 

[fela fan]

And just where is this Hussein man, so triumphantly paraded in front of the world, and who since then has not been heard of?

Completely disappeared he has. And the west - leaders and media - seem to have forgotten about him too.

Just where the fuck is he? Anyone know?