Did The USA Kidnap Margaret Hassan in Iraq?

[Skeptic]

Rebel militias deny holding British aid worker Hassan
By James Sturcke
25 October 2004


Confusion surrounded the fate of the Iraq aid worker Margaret Hassan last night after main rebel groups denied being involved with her kidnap.

Insurgents in Fallujah condemned the abduction of the charity chief who was snatched by an armed gang in Baghdad six days ago. Despite making a video of the hostage in captivity, the kidnappers have not been pictured or made any claim of responsibility.

The statement by the Fallujah group came a day after the husband of Irish-born Mrs Hassan made an plea for her release on an Arabic TV station.

"This woman works for a humanitarian organisation. She should not have been kidnapped," the emir, or commander, of one group of Iraqi insurgents in Fallujah told Reuters reporters.

"She had been living in Iraq for 30 years and she was a humanitarian. The resistance did not kidnap her because this would have left a bad impression of the resistance in the world," he added.

Commanders of five separate guerrilla groups in Fallujah said they were not holding Mrs Hassan and had seen no evidence that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's organisation had kidnapped her.

The US military and Iraqi government officials say Fallujah is a base for foreign militants loyal to Zarqawi, a Jordanian whose group has claimed responsibility for kidnappings and murders, including that of British hostage Ken Bigley.

Mrs Hassan, who worked in Iraq for the aid agency Care International and holds British and Iraqi citizenship, was seized on Tuesday. She appeared on a video on Arabic al-Jazeera television on Friday making a tearful plea for her life.

On Saturday, her husband Tahseen Ali Hassan begged for her to be freed "in the name of Islam", as he appeared on another station, al-Arabiya.

"It hurts to watch my wife cry," he said. "This scene has saddened and worried her friends and loved ones. I plead with you, in the name of Islam and Arabism - while we are in the most sacred Islamic month - that my wife and beloved return to me."

Charity Care International has also pleaded for Mrs Hassan to be freed in a statement read on al-Jazeera by the organisation's secretary general, Denis Caillaux.

He said she was dedicated to the Iraqi people and added: "She is a naturalised Iraqi citizen and always holds the people of Iraq in her heart."

Yesterday, the Foreign Office refused to be drawn on a Sunday newspaper report that British security officials were trying to find the intermediary who established contact with the captors of Ken Bigley during his kidnap ordeal.

It was claimed they want to ascertain if she is being held by the group which seized and eventually killed Mr Bigley.

The report also said Prime Minister Tony Blair and Foreign Secretary Jack Straw had been asked to take a back seat in appeals for her release with Care International taking the lead.

A Foreign Office spokesman would only reiterate that efforts were continuing on her behalf, saying: "We are working closely with the Iraqi authorities to secure Margaret's release."

Mrs Hassan, who was born in Dublin, appeared in a video shown on al-Jazeera on Friday.

She looked tired and distraught in the video as she called on Tony Blair to pull out of Iraq and not to send troops to Baghdad.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...sp?story=575637 (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=575637)

[king Royale]

Wow, will there be another Berg syle beheading?

[h&s]

OK....just because the rebel groups deny holding her doesn't mean that the Americans are. There are hundreds of independant kidnap groups out there just to make money out of kidnaping westerners.
Honestly, a US conspiracy... :rolleyes:

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by hammer&[email protected] 27 2004, 08:01 AM
OK....just because the rebel groups deny holding her doesn't mean that the Americans are. There are hundreds of independant kidnap groups out there just to make money out of kidnaping westerners.
Honestly, a US conspiracy... :rolleyes:
Look at the amount of political hay the United States and Great Britain have orchestrated around the kidnapping of Margaret, H & S. You dismiss a very real possiblilty about U.S. complicity far too easily. Look at other scandals as past possible examples like the Nick Berg beheading. There was also evidence that the two Italian female workers had been kidnapped by Coalition forces.

[Skeptic]

KPFA FM Pacifica non corporate radio's show 'Flashpoints' has produced their latest interview with world renown BBC journalist Robert Fisk on the suspicious aspects of Margaret Hassan's kidnapping.

Thursday, November 18, 2004 Listen D'load (thanks to KPFA.org)


16:00 Music Break

17:00 Iraq and the Definition of Journalism

Robert Fisk, award-winning author and journalist with the Independent of London

Recently, the body which is believed to be that of humanitarian aid worker Margaret Hassan was found. Hassan’s body, mutilated and left to rot in the smoldering wreckage of Fallujah, was just one of dozens of dead bodies of men, women and children in the aftermath of the American-led assault on the city.

Someone who has been watching carefully the unfolding disaster in Iraq and predicting the outcomes with troubling accraucy is Robert Fisk, award-winning author and journalist with the Independent of London. He joins us now from Ireland.

Click on this link and look for the November 18th broadcast download:

http://www.flashpoints.net/

[LSD]

Look at the amount of political hay the United States and Great Britain have orchestrated around the kidnapping of Margaret, H & S. You dismiss a very real possiblilty about U.S. complicity far too easily. Look at other scandals as past possible examples like the Nick Berg beheading. There was also evidence that the two Italian female workers had been kidnapped by Coalition forces.

Pearl Harbor provided a way for Roosevelt to get involved in Europe, the assasination of Franz Ferdinand was perfect for Willhelm's imperial aims.

But few would claim that the US bombed themselves, or that Princip was working for Germany.

Just because a sitution is politically benneficial to the United States does not mean that they arranged it. The political ramifications of arranging such a kidnapping, were it to be exposed, would be so serious as to effectively proclude such an operation from being undertaken.

There are just too many people who would have to be involved that might "talk" one day.

The simplist explanation here is that, believe it or not, things are as they appear. I understand that it's easier to believe that the Americans are always wrong and their enemies are always right, but the real world is far more complex than that.

There are few on this board who support the US occupation of Iraq, but there is something you must remember:

These are not nice people.

They kill people.

Looking at the world as black and white is ludicrous. Sure the United States has killed civilians and sure they'll probably do it again but so have the insurgents. The fact that some of them deny that they had any part in this kidnapping (and consider that the organization structure in Iraq is practically non-existant, no cell really can be sure what the others are doing) is meaningless.

A good number of the insurgents are religous fundamentalists, a good number are political extremists.

hmm...fanatics and extremists....no they never kill innocents, do they?

[dso79]

Of course extremists kill people, even civilians, but not without a reason. The islamic fundamentalists usually target non-muslims or political leaders and clerics who disagree on their interpretation of islam, not muslim aid workers. The political extremists may also use violence against civilians (politicians, civilians working for the US army, etc) to further their cause but wouldn't target a politically neutral aid worker.

The US/Allawi definitely benefit more from this crime than the Resistance.

[Skeptic]

Look L.A.D. the U.S. got caught red handed beheading Nick Berg and producing a video in order to take the Abu Grahib torture scandal off the front lines of the U.S. press. That video included hooded men too fat to be Iraqis, standing at the U.S. forces costumary 'at ease' position, carrying Israeli weapons and even included a few frames of an American soldier wearing a U.S. military campaign cap, poking his head into the scene and then quickly withdrawing it. What we all know is that the United Snakes is vicious and morally depraved enough to start the beheadings in Iraq with the Berg murder and to continue their cruel kidnappings and murder with this foul deed against a beloved International Aid head.

As to 'do conspiracies happen' there is a whole political movement around the attacks on Sept. 11th 2001, investigating the planning and orchestration by the U.S. government in the attacks against their own people. I have looked into the 911 attacks thoroughly enough to be convinced and come to the conclusion that the attacks could have not happened the way the government said they did and could not have happened without U.S. government involvement. This conclusion includes being aware of facts like the major media have reported that the alleged hi-jackers were working for the U.S. government and were attending spy language schools and living on U.S. military instillations. Norad and the FAA reported that 22 false radar blips were injected onto flight screens of airplane trackers and that military air craft were diverted on 911 by military training exercises which could only have been orchestrated by the Government. No metal structured building has ever collapsed due to fire, the way the Twin Towers collapses is extremely suspcious and visually looks like a building demolition; Buidling 7 wasn't event hit and it was demolished from the top down and the building's owner admits on PBS that it was 'pulled' (trade talk for demolished) and it take days or weeks to set the explosives so how did Building 7 get demolished on 911 without explosive charges already being planted? Also a small drone crashed into the Pentagon not a giant 747. It might be unpleasant to think that the US government attacked New York City and the Pentagon, but look at the facts.

Here is yet another article on the murder of Margaret Hassan:


Who Killed Margaret Hassan? I Know

Sam Hamod

11/19/04 "ICH" -- We condemn the unjust, immoral and brutal killing of Mrs. Margaret Hassan in Iraq. This woman was an angel of mercy, a shining light to those who needed help for decades in Iraq. She stood up to Saddam Hussein and to the U.S.military, she wanted only to help the people of her adopted country.

We also do not believe any Muslims did this. There is an dictum in the Qur'an which forbids the killing of women; also, the killing of hostages. Also, Muslims and Iraqis had nothing to gain by killing this innocent, God-like, saint of a woman.

Just as we learned in Law School at the University of Chicago, one must always look to see who benefits from a crime when you are trying to get to the motive and the perpetrator of the crime. The Iraqi resistance groups had nothing to gain by killing a woman who was trying to help the Iraqi people. Thus, we must look in the direction of those who had the most to gain by making the Iraqi resistance look bestial, cruel and vicious.

In this case, the Americans, Allawi and the Israelis, all of whom are running rampant through Iraq had the most to gain. By these nefarious deed, they could blame the Iraqi resistance fighters, or that myth that America has created, the famous "Zarqawi" or even a "Bin Laden group." Once again, the Iraqis knew the British would not pull out, that there was nothing to gain by holding this non-political person as a prisoner. Then, there is this other point, as most experts have concluded long ago, the Zarqawi pictured is not the real Zarqawi and is an American myth concocted to justify destroying Fallujah and other Iraqi cities and the civilians therein. In this case, even the alleged Zarqawi group called for her release and asked that she be turned over to them. Because it was most likely a zionist, American or Allawi plot, they did not dare come close to real resistance fighters, but kept her apart from them so that they could kill her and blame the Iraqi resistance. Something smells in Denmark, and most of the honest world, the thinking world knows it--except the American media (but I'll get to that a bit later).

To repeat myself, all the Iraqi resistance groups called for her release and it makes no sense that Iraqi resistance groups or their allies would have killed her. No, it had to be some group that wanted to kill her and use her death to "show the world that the Iraqi resistance fighters are devils," "that they would kill this angel of mercy shows how cruel and bestial they are."

But as usual, the American media points it fingers at Iraqi resistance groups, or Muslim groups, neither of would so such a thing to a person who had been aiding them for decades. Even her husband, in an interview broadcast on short wave radio, but never talked about in the American media, said he was sure it was not Iraqi fighters, but most likely American mercenaries, American dark ops, Allawi's people or Israelis.

We give our sincere condolences to the family and friends, the many thousands in Iraq and in the world, of the sainted Margaret Hassan, and we condemn to damnation those who did this evil and brutal deed. We also condemn the American media for not asking hard questions or using one iota of intelligence t figure this murder out. We are also sick of the "embedded journalists" who are nothing but flacks for lying military commanders, for Allawi and for the Bush propaganda machine--because of their cowardly lies and because of their unwillingness to search for the truth; we see them as guilty of being complicituous in this dreadful execution. Fie upon such liars as Judith Miller and others at the NY Times, at the Washington Post, at the International Herald Tribune, fie upon the cowardly reporters on CBS, ABC, NBC and Fox who turn a blind eye on the torture, destruction of Fallujah and other Iraqi cities and who don't have the good moral sense to condemn this American bestiality or to search for the real truth behind the brutal killing of Margaret Hassan.

In the name of God, the almighty, those who did this deed will suffer on the earth and on the Day of Judgement with eternal hellfire and suffering.

Dr. Sam Hamod is the editor of www.todaysalternativenews.com and an expert on the Middle East and Islam; he is also the former Director of The Islamic Center in Washington, DC; also, editor of 3rd World News in D.C. He may be reached at [email protected]

[BuyOurEverything]

In response to LSD's post: While I do not neccessarily believe that the US did orchestrate this kidnapping, it is certainly possible. For the reasons which you outlined, it is unlikely that it as actually carried out by US military or intelligence personel, however it would be very easy for an operative in Iraq to seek out a group of either religious extremists or more likely, a group of Iraqi mercenaries, and offer them a sum of money if they kidnapp a specific target. S/he would not reveal their employer and there would really be no way of it ever becoming public other than unbacked rumors, which would be unplayable by the maintstream media and respectable independant media outlets. It would not be difficult to do.

In the specific case of Margaret Hassan, I'm not sure what to think. They never asked for money (at least that we know of), which would seemingly eliminate the less politically, more economically, driven groups. As for the religious and political groups, she seems like a pretty weak target. She's been living in Iraq for years and years, obviously she didn't come with the Americans. She's seemingly well liked among the Iraqi public and she was against the war. Apperantly, even Al Zarqawi came out against the kidnapping. Obviously this is entirely circumstantial, but it does make it difficult to believe that this kidnapping and murder was carried out by 'the usual group' of insurgents.

[LSD]

For the reasons which you outlined, it is unlikely that it as actually carried out by US military or intelligence personel, however it would be very easy for an operative in Iraq to seek out a group of either religious extremists or more likely, a group of Iraqi mercenaries, and offer them a sum of money if they kidnapp a specific target. S/he would not reveal their employer and there would really be no way of it ever becoming public other than unbacked rumors, which would be unplayable by the maintstream media and respectable independant media outlets.

Let's take that scenario.

Now the kind of operation you're talking about would need high level approval, if not from the President, at least Cabinet level. Let's say the DCI.

Now the current DCI, Mr. Gross, has very little experience with fielding such a military operation so he would have to consult an operations team, more likely he would set up a classified action committee to plan the mission. Let's say 6 high level CIA agents and military advisors.

Now once they reach a decision, the plan has to be confirmed by the DCI and his team who ensure that it meets his objectives fully. This would be his close team of say 3 people who he consults on such high level operations.

Now, once the mission has been approved, it must be sent to the Iraq CIA Station Chief who will do several things. First he will communicate with the local station chief in the specific area where the kidnapping is to take place. The local station chief will report on the specific logistics as well as decide upon the agent(s) to be used for the transfer of funds you speak of. He will confirm this with the Iraq Station Chief.

The Iraq Station chief will confirm all information with the CIA at home and request go-ahead confirmation. He will also need the monies to be exchanged for the kidnapping. This will most likely be in American dollars and will probably come from one of several covert CIA slush funds. This transaction must be approved by the relevent internal department which must file an internal justification report, classified of course.

Finally, the agent making the transaction will doubtlessly be protected by military personel to ensure that he isn't captured by insrugents who the US certainly doesn't trust!

These soldiers, let's say 4, would have to be specifically requested from Iraq CentCom and although the CIA wouldn't inform them of why they would inform them of where and when.

So...

we have at least 18 people who directly know what happened, a whole myriad of others with pieces of the puzzle and, that's not even mentioning the secretaries and technicians who ferry the messages, run the computers, and control the information.

If they did something this big, someone would talk.....besides

believe it or not, in this case, the political bennefits are not worth the risk. No one in Iraq trusts the United States and enough people will believe that the US was behind this that the advantage is outwieghted by the harm. In fact, it is very likely that this murder will do the US more harm than good, as even if they didn't kill her, the insurgents can convince a lot of people that they did!

And inside the US, no one cares.

People who are against the war will blame the US for "creating the chaos", people who support the war will just say this "proves them right".

So....who exactly is it that you think this will convince?


Unlike with Berg, this isn't an American who was murdered, this isn't an election season, and there aren't any uncomfortable stories in the papers that the administration wants to bury.

The timing isn't right and the motivation isn't there.


In the specific case of Margaret Hassan, I'm not sure what to think. They never asked for money (at least that we know of), which would seemingly eliminate the less politically, more economically, driven groups. As for the religious and political groups, she seems like a pretty weak target. She's been living in Iraq for years and years, obviously she didn't come with the Americans. She's seemingly well liked among the Iraqi public and she was against the war. Apperantly, even Al Zarqawi came out against the kidnapping. Obviously this is entirely circumstantial, but it does make it difficult to believe that this kidnapping and murder was carried out by 'the usual group' of insurgents.

The fact is that the "insurgency" movement is hardly organized.

It's quite possible that a group of radicals entirely unaffiliated just found an opportunity to grab someone and took it. Maybe they wanted some high proifile attention, maybe they just wanted to "get in on it".

I don't know.

There's a very real possiblity that we'll never know why she was killed, but it seems to be vastly unlikely that the US "arranged" it.

[Skeptic]

That was a very thorough and carefully thought out response L.A.D. Thanks for taking the time to write it and thanks for your insight. I think the motive is there. There are forces who want to paint the Iraqi fighters as 'depraved' or 'evil', something that would begin to match the level of crimes the USA is committing every day. I notice in the article I quoted that even the kidnapper respectfully referred to the occupiers as 'the coalition', which is suspicious in its own right. Robert Fisk went into detail why he didn't think it was insurgents who did the attack although he isn't go as far as I claiming that it could have been Israel, the Coalition or Allawri. I think these issues should be talked out and not cavalierly dissmissed. Thanks again for your imput.

[LSD]

I notice in the article I quoted that even the kidnapper respectfully referred to the occupiers as 'the coalition', which is suspicious in its own right. Robert Fisk went into detail why he didn't think it was insurgents who did the attack although he isn't go as far as I claiming that it could have been Israel, the Coalition or Allawri. I think these issues should be talked out and not cavalierly dissmissed.

I'll be honest, I don't know who killed Hassan!

There is every possibility that is wasn't any of the "usual suspects".

I'm leaning towards the possibility that it was just a bunch of angry guys who thought they'd "get in on it" or "make the papers" by kidnapping anyone or perhaps even by specifically kidnapping someone well-liked.

These people might call the US et al., the "coalition" because that's what the US has been pumping over the Iraqi airwaves for a year now.

But I don't know. It does seem strange that the organized resistance would kidnap her, but to me at least, it seems stranger that the US would do so.


I think the motive is there. There are forces who want to paint the Iraqi fighters as 'depraved' or 'evil', something that would begin to match the level of crimes the USA is committing every day.

The thing is, the motive really isn't there. The timing doesn't track.

Sure, the US wants everyone to believe that they are right and the Iraqis are wrong....but....in all honesty, right now there's no one they have to convince.

Their own people already support them in this war, and, frankly, the US doesn't really give a damn about some non-American woman.

As for the Iraqis themselves, it's pretty unlikely that this murder will convince any of them that the US occupation is justified. In fact, many will probably come to the conclusion that it was the US who killed her whether the US did or not!

[komon]

R.I.P margareth,like 100 000 people out there.in the name of freedom they shall bring you hell.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 20 2004, 12:17 AM
Pearl Harbor provided a way for Roosevelt to get involved in Europe, the assasination of Franz Ferdinand was perfect for Willhelm's imperial aims.

But few would claim that the US bombed themselves, or that Princip was working for Germany.
Actually, it's well established that the US intentionally provoked Japan into attacking. See http://rationalrevolution.net/fdr_provoked...nese_attack.htm (http://rationalrevolution.net/fdr_provoked_the_japanese_attack.htm)


The political ramifications of arranging such a kidnapping, were it to be exposed, would be so serious as to effectively proclude such an operation from being undertaken

US media almost certainly won't expose it. They didn't expose Pearl Harbor or Gulf Tonkin or Berg's beheading or the fall of Saddam's statue or lots of other things.


There are just too many people who would have to be involved that might "talk" one day

No, all it takes is one CIA agent hiring a few people to help him out. Maybe also a vaguely worded order to "make the resistance look bad" from higher up, but not necessarily.


Now the kind of operation you're talking about would need high level approval, if not from the President, at least Cabinet level. Let's say the DCI.

No it wouldn't. The CIA has overthrown entire governments without NSC approval (Ghana) and done lots of other things with little knowledge from the higher ups. And a directive covering this wouldn't necessarily need to specifically target Hassan - it could just authorize psychological operations designed to make the resistance look bad. This could include things like kidnapping Hassan even if this specific kidnapping wasn't approved by the higher ups.

Also, no one talked about the Saddam statue for a year and many other covert ops involving lots of people were covered up for years without it getting out.


No one in Iraq trusts the United States and enough people will believe that the US was behind this that the advantage is outwieghted by the harm.

I doubt it's intended to convince Iraqis, it's probably aimed at western audiences.


And inside the US, no one cares

I know several Americans who care.


The timing isn't right and the motivation isn't there

Yes there is. Hassan was a consistant critic of US imperialism. She was against the sanctions and the invasion. She was a leftist, she was one of us. This is not the first time the US has murdered a critic. Blaming the resistance is just gravy.

[LSD]

US media almost certainly won't expose it. They didn't expose Pearl Harbor or Gulf Tonkin or Berg's beheading or the fall of Saddam's statue or lots of other things.

Ah yes...but you know about these things which means that someone is reporting it. I didn't claim that NBC would run it (although I'm not convinced they wouldn't), but someone would.


Also, no one talked about the Saddam statue for a year and many other covert ops involving lots of people were covered up for years without it getting out.


But they got out! And the US knows that such things get out, so unless it's percieved as absolutely nescessary they wouldn't risk something like this.


No, all it takes is one CIA agent hiring a few people to help him out. Maybe also a vaguely worded order to "make the resistance look bad" from higher up, but not necessarily.

Bullshit.

No lone CIA operative can stage or arrange an execution without Cabinet level support. They wouldn't dare! (their job's at risk after all)

The Central Intelligence Agency is not a cell-based organization, it is highly centralized. Orders must come from the top.


No it wouldn't. The CIA has overthrown entire governments without NSC approval (Ghana) and done lots of other things with little knowledge from the higher ups. And a directive covering this wouldn't necessarily need to specifically target Hassan - it could just authorize psychological operations designed to make the resistance look bad. This could include things like kidnapping Hassan even if this specific kidnapping wasn't approved by the higher ups.

Screw the NSC, I'm talking about the internal hierarchy.

No one is being executed by the CIA without the "higher ups" at central intelligence knowing about it!

Again, the kind of "enthusiasm" you're ascribing to the agents in the field is ludicrous. These are highly trained and disciplined agents, they do not "run off on their own"!


Yes there is. Hassan was a consistant critic of US imperialism. She was against the sanctions and the invasion. She was a leftist, she was one of us. This is not the first time the US has murdered a critic. Blaming the resistance is just gravy.

There are lots of people the US "doesn't like", if any of them die does that mean the US did it?

You need something beyond "she was a consistant critic of US imperialism", that describes half the world!


I know several Americans who care.

I know several Americans who believe they're trout....just not many.

The Americans who care about this are the same ones who opposed the war in Iraq anyways!

Those who supported Bush's invasion are simply looking at this as a "tragic cost of war", but they aren't any more supportive of the administration because of it. Certainly those who are against the war aren't!

This barely made headlines, and besides, Bush just won re-election by 4 million votes. He doesn't fgive a fuck what the American people think.

[rainyday]

I know several Americans who care.

How many is "several"
And what are they doing that makes you believe they care?

[Little Moscow]

Rediculas .... dont you think Margret Hassan would realise from the first moment that they werent Iraqis kidnapping her ? I agree it is more likely that some group of bandits are just making a living out of the war .

[Debs'atron]

Wait wait wait. How the hell would Hassan tell anyone the US had captured her If she did know? Honestly. That was no live broadcast that was a tape and I'm sure they had more than one take. It is completely believable to me that the U.S. would have kidnapped her. Indeed what orginization would benefit from it? Was there a ransom made? No? hmmmmm, no one claimed responsibility either? well then that pretty much eliminates the things to gain from kidnapping. Press for your cause, or money. All this would do is inspire hate, which in my view benefits only the Coalition.
Human life is meaningless to the governement and our higher-ups. The lives of the dead civilians at pearl harbor and in new york, the countless civilians who have died as a result of American Imperialsm, the soldiers who have fought wars without cause. Power is the root of evil, and the preservation of power takes precedence over human life. And I really, really care.

[Skeptic]

Good post Debs'Atron, I like the sentiment of what you wrote. It is worth our time to approach orthodox views on political events with a skeptical mind. I also like the emotion I read when you talk about caring about the world. There is too much cynicism in the world and not enough heart.