Debunking

Josh Marshall took the time today to express his own skepticism about something that I noted a couple of days ago. Marshall notes the reporter in question (Yvonne Ridley) might not be in the best position to check the veracity of the story. Additionally, she's not on top of some obvious facts--for instance, the name of the leading Kurdish opposition group.

So chalk it up to--well, take your choice--a fanciful mind, a gullible reporter, whatever. Not that it really made much difference.

On the other hand, Today in Iraq links to a Seattle Times story that suggests Saddam behaved much more--how say--Saddam-like when captured:

...as Saddam was being handcuffed, he began to struggle with his captors. He spat at the soldiers. One of the commandos decked him, either with a punch or a rifle butt. (The military later tidied up the story of his capture for popular consumption.)"

The story goes on to note that the Bush Administration has essentially denied the story--or is it that they simply can't recall?