http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_503527,001300180038.htm 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".
Could be true, or could the above paragraph reveal the ulterior motive behind this version? No one in the US forces broke rank and told the true version of events about the Jessica Lynch rescue. Both the Iraqi doctors and Jessica Lynch gave different version of events than the US Army.
Anything is possible. But not everything is likely or plausible. For the sake of believing that "Bush lied" and that our troops weren't really responsible for Saddam's capture, I have to believe that a) Uday raped a girl from some tribe before the war; b) this was a tribe in the Tikrit area; c) this tribe captured Saddam while he was on the run in order to satisfy a blood feud over the rape, yet d) kept him alive--in fact pretty healthy and well-fed---in order to e) turn him over to the Kurds, who f) decided to leave him in a spider hole near a farm house
near Tikrit in the Sunni triangle with loaded weapons at his disposal, just so the Americans could claim to have captured him on their own, g) in return for the American's promise to give the Kurds influence over a national government h) the Kurds don't really care that much about because i) they effectively have control over their northern part of the country, and are more concerned about what happens in Ankara than what happens in Baghdad, let alone Tikrit.
Now maybe all those things happened. But maybe the CIA drugged Mohammed Atta and the 18 others and exercise mind control over them to have them fly all those planes and crash 'em. I don't believe that either.
Like I said, sounds like something made up to vindicate Arab "honor." And to try to denigrate ours.