... CONSPIRACY WATCH ... CONSPIRACY WATCH ... CONSPIRACY WA
U.S. CAPTURED SADDAM'S DOUBLEby Der Voron. [December 15, 2003]
[WeeklyUniverse.com] Let us analyze what has been reported by CNN and other sources, and some other known facts.
It is known that Saddam has several doubles.
Saddam was reportedly captured in a "hole", with minimum commodities.
I believe his subordinates could have created a little bunker for their commander, deep in the earth and with sufficient reserves of food and beverage, where he could hide and direct their guerrilla war. That the military found a hole instead of a bunker may mean the person found was not Saddam, but his double. If the U.S. military wants to think that their enemy is so silly and helpless, it's their right. It may be, however, that they know they captured Saddam's double, but intentionally claim it is Saddam, because such a news:
A) Inspires our troops and all of us Americans;
B) Shows our enemy in a very pitiful situation;
C) Allows to organize a military tribunal, since "Saddam" is captured.
Maybe the U.S. military has itself created a full double for Saddam? It is not as hard as may seem. Today's technologies allow many possibilites.
Finally, compare the behavior of captured dictators Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic. When Milosevic was arrested, he behaved quite adequately and no TV channel showed him like half an idiot. But Saddam, or "Saddam", said different unclever things, for example:
Q: "How are you?"
A: "I am sad because my people are in bondage"
(Offered a glass of water)
A: "If I drink water I will have to go to the bathroom, and how can I use the bathroom when my people are in bondage?"
Repetitive "bondage" makes think that the conversation is unnatural. Indeed, I am sad as my people are in bondage, and how can I drink if I will need to go thereafter to the bathroom (maybe restroom?), and how can I use the bathroom or restroom if my people are still in bondage?
Q: "If you had no weapons of mass destruction then why not let the U.N. inspectors into your facilities?"
A: "We didn't want them to go into the presidential areas and intrude on our privacy."
Yes. Saddam was disturbed about his presidential apartments, but
certainly not about military units where he allowed the inspectors into. Don't TV watchers and newspaper readers see that he is an idiot?
Did Milosevic say anything similar to this when he was arrested? Saddam was a dictator of Milosevic's level, or better to say, Milosevic was a dictator of Saddam's level.
It is either a Saddam double who was created by the US military and said all these answers to show the audience what an unclever person Saddam was and is -- or it is his own double whom Saddam himself arranged to be caught (please see about this version below). It resembles the "public relations" practice in some backward countries when a double of, say, a candidate to mayor or parliament's deputy (arranged by the candidate's rival) comes to you in person and says some very "clever" things; often such a "double" is drunk. Some people don't understand that a candidate to mayor or deputy just cannot come to inhabitants in person, moreover drunk, and get a very poor impression of this candidate.
I don't defend Saddam, but let us be unbiased. Our enemies cannot be as silly as we want them to be. For example, when shah Reza Pehlevi ruled Iran, you could think that it was 45,000 American military and other specialists that were the principal support to his regime. But the reality showed that things were absolutely contrary. When in 1979 Iranians insurged against Reza Pehlevi, 45,000 Americans couldn't do anything to help his regime. Evidently, it was the regime and its security service "SAVAC" who made American presence in Iran possible, and not American specialists who made the regime's presence possible in Iran.
It may also be that it is Saddam's own double (not made up by US military), who was captured, and he maybe intentionally responds so silly, for Saddam his boss. An old rule of war says:
1) If you are weak then show that you are strong;
2) If you are strong then show that you are weak;
3) If you a-far then show that you are close;
4) If you close then show that you are a-far; etc.
Continuing this row of strategems, we can compose the 5th one:
5) If you have something on mind then show that you don't;
6) If you have nothing on mind then show that you do.
Because of this, I dare to believe it is somewhat more probable that it was Saddam's own double whom we got in a not very deep hole with a minimum of commodities.
... "But the photographs seem to show a real Saddam". Why not to have an expert determine this?
Copyright 2003 by Der Voron.
Der Voron authored Unidentified Flying Objects: Starcraft. For info about Der Voron or to contact him click here.
Tell Us What YOU Think -- On Our Message Board!
RETURN to The Weekly Universe!
"Weekly Universe" and "WeeklyUniverse.com" and "Mystic Gray Buddha" trademarks are currently unregistered, but pending registration upon need for protection against improper use. The idea of marketing these terms as a commodity is a protected idea under the Lanham Act. 15 U.S.C. s 1114(1) (1994) (defining a trademark infringement claim when the plaintiff has a registered mark); 15 U.S.C. s 1125(a) (1994) (defining an action for unfair competition in the context of trademark infringement when the plaintiff holds an unregistered mark).