Carry on Killing
Now at midnight all the agents, and the superhuman crew,
Come out and round up everyone that knows more than they do - Bob Dylan
Damn the blind eyes of anyone who still can't see after Basra.
How it began:
"Two persons wearing Arab uniforms opened fire at a police station in Basra. A police patrol followed the attackers and captured them to discover they were two British soldiers," an Interior Ministry source told Xinhua. The two soldiers were using a civilian car packed with explosives, the source said.
Here are the two while in Iraqi police custody. Reuters appended a note to each photo over the wire: "ATTENTION EDITORS - THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT REQUESTS THAT THE IDENTIFICATION OF THIS MAN IS NOT REVEALED, EITHER VIA PIXELLATION OF THEIR FACES OR BY NOT PUBLISHING THE PHOTOS."
As you probably know, they didn't remain in custody for long:
British forces using tanks broke down the walls of the central jail in the southern city of Basra late Monday and freed two Britons, allegedly undercover commandos, who had been arrested on charges of shooting two Iraqi policemen.
Witnesses said about 150 Iraqi prisoners also fled the jail.
Violence flared earlier in the day as demonstrators hurled stones and Molotov cocktails at British tanks; at least four people were killed.
The British Defense Ministry spun, but found it difficult to maneuver with its pants about its ankles. "We‘ve heard nothing to suggest we stormed the prison," a defense ministry spokesman in London said. "We understand there were negotiations." When it found some equilibrium, it changed its story to better comport with the undeniables: "We understand that the authorities ordered their release. Unfortunately they weren't released and we became concerned for their safety and as a result a Warrior infantry fighting vehicle broke down the perimeter wall in one place."
These hard men, likely SAS ops, must have had some stories to tell, otherwise tanks would not have negotiated their way through the prison walls of Britain's reputed hosts so soon after their capture.
Walking into the untidied mess of this astonishing and grotesque and predictable story feels a bit like the British detective catching the killer red-handed: "Well well well, what have we here?" We have long had reason to suspect imperial instigation to Iraq's sectarian violence, but here, as clearly as we've ever seen it, is the provocateur state revealed: two British "undercover soldiers" in Arab dress, caught firing upon police from a car laden with explosives. And the British government all but admitting its culpability by breaking them out of prison.
It doesn't make sense? Only if you haven't been paying attention. This is the subtext of the Iraq tragedy: blow up the Hajis and play the Sunnis on the Shias; create the chaos that introduces the conditions necessary for the long-game, and the long-held aspirations of the neoconservatives to divide Iraq into ethnographic bantustans.
I wonder what will be made of this story by those who think escalating bloodshed in Iraq is a measure of the failure of US policy, and not its success, and who believe black ops and false flags are figments of our paranoiac fantasies. Probably, as with so much that would bedevil their worldview if only they were intellectually honest enough to permit it, this too will be filtered out and forgotten. But our burden is we won't forget. And damned if the Iraqis will.
A British soldier jumps from a burning tank which was set ablaze after a shooting incident in the southern Iraqi city of Basra September 19, 2005. Angry crowds attacked a British tank with petrol bombs and rocks in Basra on Monday after Iraqi authorities said they had detained two British undercover soldiers in the southern city for firing on police.
209 Comments:
The only source I can find referencing explosives in the car is Xinhua. Given that they were intially reprinting the story put out by the BBC one wonders just how much faith should be put in this Chinese media report.
Almost had you going there didn't I... waiting for confirmation on stories which may damage a really good conspiracy... who's heard of such a thing.
waiting for confirmation on stories which may damage a really good conspiracy...
From Kos, B.B.C. World Radio reports initially identified the car the SAS drove as being: "full of explosives and bomb making equipment."
Astonishing article Jeff.
I have watched various TV news reports on this incident and no where do they make it clear that these thugs were dressed as Arabs and were seen attacking Iraqi policemen.
It is still amazing to me just how complicit the UK media are in all this murder.
Instead of questions about what the hell the SAS were up to and why, all we get are dramatic shots of British soldiers on fire. And lots of commentary about how the soldiers never opened fire on the crowd! Amazing, UK soldiers get caught red handed in a false flag operation and the Iraqis are the bad guys.
Well if there ever was any doubt that the Iraqi on Iraqi attacks thyat we see on a daily basis were the work of the US, UK and Israel military they are surely gone now.
I just pray the Iraqis refuse to be manipulated into civil war.
Also I am now convinced the 7/7 London bombings were an inside job as well.
Reports in the media today are saying the 'bombers' did a trial run some weeks before. This comes as no surprise to me.
The bombers were conned into thinking they were on some other task. They were lulled into a false sense of security after they were made to do several dry runs (on who knows what made up reason) not knowing that on in a future run they were going to be carrying real bombs. The frantic phone calls from the bus bomber after he found out about the tube bombs tells us just how surprised he was. He must have realised he had been set up just prior to his own death.
Britain is a terrorist state and Tony Bliar is a criminal. I am sick of this shit. I want that bastard in jail.
"Well if there ever was any doubt that the Iraqi on Iraqi attacks thyat we see on a daily basis were the work of the US, UK and Israel military they are surely gone now"
That's like saying because you saw a black man wearing clogs that you no longer believe there is such a place as Holland.
The scale of studies into the Iraqi insurgency, guerrilla tactics and bombmaking cells are simply unprecedented. The same networks have taken over entire towns and imposed Islamic law.
I cannot even fathom the level of gullibility you would need to reach to believe that that the daily bombings in Iraq are a ruse. You would literally make the Moon Landing Hoax guys look like history professors.
It's OK, Tank. It's OK.
We know your just doing your job. But if you want to keep it, you'll need to be a bit more subtle - especially round here.
waiting for confirmation on stories which may damage a really good conspiracy
Washinton Post:
BASRA, Iraq, Sept. 19 -- Heavy clashes erupted Monday between Iraqi police and British soldiers based in Basra, Iraq's second-largest city, witnesses said.
The clashes are the latest in surging tensions in Basra, a Shiite-dominated city that had long been one of Iraq's calmest. Attacks have targeted British and Americans there.
Monday's clashes stemmed from the arrest by Iraqi police on Sunday of two Britons, whom Iraqi police accused of planting bombs.
A Western military spokesman in Basra confirmed "an ongoing disturbance" in the city on Monday but said Iraqi and British force were working together to try to quell it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/19/AR2005091900572_2.html?nav=rss_world
Tank:
Obviously, there is a real insurgency in Iraq, or rather several real insurgencies. What we are talking about is a policy which is using "agents provocateurs" to incite inter-sectarian violence, to manipulate the various ethnic and religious groups into mistrusting and hating and fighting each other. To achieve this end, it is necessary to do some killing, and make it look like someone else did it.
The motivations for doing this are obvious:
1. To prevent a unified front of Sunni Arabs, Shia Arabs and Kurds forming against the occupation. It's better to have them fighting each other, and for one or two of the groups to be dependent on the US/UK for their protection against one of the others.
2. To prevent a strong, central government from emerging in Baghdad. The new Iraqi government is already very close to Iran. A strong, popular government in Iraq, able to defend itself and thus having no need of US/UK forces, dominated by Tehran, would be the worst possible outcome for the neo-conservatives.
Thus, the killing must continue.
Excellent work Jeff, thank you for the fortitude to post this vital story, especially the mug shots!
That MI-6 used an asset and cut-outs to perform the synthetic terror op on 7/7/05 and now this is not beyond the pale at all. In fact it is standard operating procedure for British military intelligence. For example during the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya, the SAS went as far as to don blackface makeup to carry out terror attacks on civilians and pin it on the Mau Mau insurgents. These Al Jolson impersonators sought to "expose" to the world the "savagery" of the Mau Mau. Thus discrediting the Kenyan independece movement and opening the door to prop up their neo-colonial puppet moderates. The CIA did the same in Nicaragua by impersonating the Ortega's FLN soldiers to murder and terrorize the civilian populace and demonize their revolutionaries.
I had been following reports that stated the Iraqi people were now educated to this tactic and were on the lookout for synthetic terror operations to foment a civil war. They were apparently very successful and caught these two serial scumbags who have no compunction in killing men. women and children.
The SAS and MI-6 is now bare-assed to the entire world. It's just a matter of time before the CIA and Mossad are caught red-handed. I think the masses at large are getting hip to these operations, and it's having a chilling effect on their ops.
Cheney and his masters are foaming at the mouth to green light their next synthetic terror operation: a "nuke incident" in an American city. This will allow them to finish off their plans to manifest Police State U.S.A. We must all be as vigilant as the rest of the targeted world.
And while we're on the subject of BushCo and BlairCo's continued efforts to stay in Iraq at whatever cost , check out this astonishing story (and, equally astonishing, largely unreported or commented on):
http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1035.topic
Anonymous Pants Elk
Two things:
First, this begins to be another example of how the "incompetence theory" of history is simply inadequate. Oh those guys are just so DUMB...that's what the problem is.
Secondly, in a nice bit of timing, the BBC has announced that there is video evidence of the 7/7 bombers making a practice run and Zarqawi taking credit.
Of course, only one of the bombers has a backpack and they all three go to King's cross and there are simply no other possible reasons three young men could travel together...bu that's another story.
Amidst the din of wolf-crying, fantastic flights of extrapolation beyond the evidence, semiotic "scrying", and the paranoia crack trade that gets carried on around here, particularly on the RI board...THIS incident has the hallmarks of a legitimately suspicious event.
I just saw the CNN report of the jailbreak ordered by the British to free the two soldiers...no mention of the chain of events that led to their imprisonment in the first place.
Tank-
I'm one of those Moon Landing Hoax gals, or at least definitely leaning that way, it would take a lot to convince me otherwise. A topic for another day, though.
"...It's just a matter of time before the CIA and Mossad are caught red-handed."
Both organisations have been caught red-handed committing crimes before. People don't seem to mind that much, some considered Ollie North a hero.
Here's the CNN report. It says the 2 soldiers were "rescued" from a Shiite militia safehouse near the jail. Even with the meager attempts to downplay this incident, the article is actually pretty damning.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/20/iraq.basra/index.html
"This incident has the hallmarks of a legitimately suspicious event"
Gosh. Suspicious? Really? In what way? Looks like an in-yer-face, up-front, out-in-the-open bit of covert warmongering to me.
quoth The Omega Man:
"...It's just a matter of time before the CIA and Mossad are caught red-handed."
Yeah, any day now... >:-/
Here's three more! If I kept looking, I'm sure I could find another 5-6 crimson-soaked hands holding flags under which they were never born.
no s#*t sherlock, the British eeh!
well bless my soul Jim lad, who would have thunk it!
so who are the provocateurs -- insurgents - the
yanks the brits and the mossad -- possibly in reverse order
Shine a light shine a light --
Here's a link that details some of the SAS false flag operations. As we see more and more of these operations, we should educate ourselves to their previous "successes". US Special Forces units in Vietnam also participated in false-flage ops decimating villages and leaving behind AK's, black pajamas, sandals, etc. to implicate the VC/NVA. The link:
http://members.tripod.com/selousscouts/unconventional.htm
The most encouraging aspect of this story is the full-on reaction of the Iraqis to the British troops when they came to try and snatch their SAS death squad members.
The Iraqis are obviously very wise to the suspected activities of the British, Americans and Israeli military, and when they finally caught some of them red handed in a blatant false flag op they went ballistic, and rightly so.
Whatever goodwill the British had accumulated, by not being heavy handed jar headed Americans, will be gone now.
As for the SAS, I am glad the world is seeing how these 'heroes' really operate, by killing women and children in cowardly attacks. Heroes my arse.
After this is there anyone left in Iraq who believes that Iraqis are slaughtering Iraqis?
How does this impugn the "incompetence theory"? Unless getting caught red-handed, repeatedly, is itself falseflag-psyop-disinfo cleverness, in which case you cannot hope to ever know the real truth. Without looking it up, I'm not even sure if I'm using the word "impugn" correctly.
Tony Blair reminds me of Hugh Grant, more than anything else, and I suspect he'd be flattered by the comparison.
I'm rather curious as to why everyone always assumes Israel is the puppet master here? Without a shred of evidence posters keep assuming that Israeli's are involved. Hate on Jews much folks? Nevermind that it is obvious that the very process that is going on in Iraq has been going on in Israel for decades. It isn't coincidental that the UK, masters of pitting different ethno-religious groups against one another had a major role in creating the state of Israel, all while sitting on their hands while pogroms raged throughout Europe (and thus fueling the disapora). That there has been no lasting peace there is intentional and has little to do with the average Israeli or Palestinian and everything to do with the US/UK fueling the fires on both sides.
But back to Israeli's running around in Iraq. To what end? Israel has not gained a single thing since Bush has been in office. They've been forced to give up territory and their economy has gone in the toilet. Assisting with false flag ops in Iraq doesn't get them anything--they don't get rewarded by the US and if they are caught it will only turn world opinion against them more. Now mind you, I know that the sociopaths Sharon and Peres are hell-bent on destroying Israel anyway, so I wouldn't entirely put it past them to assist their masters in some task which does not at all benefit Israel (which sooner or later is going to get sacrificed). That said, there is no evidence that they're doing any such thing. And the very fact that people who get most of what is going on are always willing to lump Israel into the mess just goes to show the effectiveness of the anti-semetic psyops. Just witness various 9/11 researchers. Again, not coincidence that the story about Israelis getting emails about the WTC were leaked and the story about the Israeli's "celebrating" on the bridge...and then the Israeli "art student" story floated soon after. People are willing to believe Jews are evil and are the puppet masters (old, old meme there) and such stories make pefect covers to throw otherwise intelligent people off the trail of the ones that are really pulling the strings. Hitler's propaganda machine used to sell the same lies about the Jews. This is no different. And this is not to excuse any crimes the Israeli government may have committed (which, like all governments, they have), but to say that the knee-jerk "Israel did it" response is itself a false flag thrown out there to deceive.
One need only consider how the middle east would look if peace had been brought to the region 30 or 40 years ago. Democratic government would have been introduced to the Islamic states on their terms, Israel would have shared technology with its neighbors and helped to diversify those nations so that they weren't so dependent on oil for their economies. If everyone hadn't bought into the fact that having Jews not under Islamic rule wasn't really the thorn in their side holding them back then you'd see a stronger, more self-determined middle east now, one where fundamentalism (of any religion) had not taken such a strong foothold. And such states are not so corrupt and easily bullied. All of this divisiveness winds up working to our benefit (and by "our" I mean those that rule us).
So maybe Israeli's are running around helping the US and UK with their evil deeds--but I see neither evidence, nor self-interest in doing so. I'd say the fact the US is building rather large military bases in Israel (as documented by Barry Chamish and others) is indicative that they have a fate similar to Iraq coming to them shortly....
Interesting. And wrong. I'm not anti-semetic, and I think it's wise to be incredulous of the "blame the Jews" type propegandizing that often goes on, but to suggest that Israel is suffering due to US policies is simply hilarious. Israelis have been caught spying in US agencies, Israel gets plenty of money from the US taxpayer, Israel gets plenty of support from the US corporate media. My suspicion is that there is an Israeli faction in the US/UK terrorist state axis...
From ABC News:
"Iraqi television on Tuesday showed footage of the two soldiers, unshaven and looking nervous as Iraqi police looked over wigs, Arab headresses, an anti-tank missile and communications equipment, all apparently used in their mission."
Fine post on this crazy story, Jeff. I was hoping you would write something on this subject. I was writing an email to an editor friend as this started leaking out yesterday; I'll paste in the relevant part:
"U.K. undercover troops -- What the hell is an 'undercover' soldier? Isn't that just a spy or a terrorist or whatever? -- dressed as Arabs, shooting at Iraqi police, accused of planting bombs ... their capture leads, of course, to riots all over 'relatively peaceful' Basra, leading to the obvious need for more U.S. and U.K. troops to 'control the situation,' which of course they created, on purpose ... and just as I typed those words, that ignorant muppet Wolf Blitzer comes on with a photo of that very riot ... and claims it has something to do with local officials not looking for a missing child! Incredible!
And the picture shown behind Blitzer on CNN is the very picture that goes with the Reuters story about the U.K. troops dressed as Arabs firing on the Iraqi police. And the picture is of a U.K. soldier on fire, crawling out of a burning tank ... Oh, and another journalist was murdered in Basra. A local reporter for the New York Times. Found murdered today, just as Steven Vincent was murdered in Basra a few weeks ago. The occupying armies of freedom don't seem to like journalists very much, do they?"
I've believed at least some of the "suicide bombings" were the deliberate work of our fine black-ops death squads for some time now. These stories have been all over the Iraqi blogs -- the ones that aren't obvious CIA / State Dept. psyops, anyway. I'm sure most of you have seen this, which went public in May.
There may be a Grand Conspiracy behind all this, but I don't need one for everything to make perfect sense. And good lord, with Tony Blair on record as "relishing" sending his fellow citizens to die -- his "first blooding," as the papers reported over the weekend -- and the Bush gang taking obvious delight in refusing to meet with the families of killed soldiers or to even bother pretending to care about withdrawing troops, I sure don't need additional bogeymen like Israel's government. (Although it's fairly evident all three do empower each other's brutality and cruelty, just as the U.S. empowers Putin's fake terror operations and quick march to a new Russian dictatorship.)
I am satisfied knowing that shares of the five major U.S. defense stocks have risen by almost 75% since 9/11, and that energy & war service contractors are earning hundreds of millions of dollars per day in Iraq. Every day of chaos is a day of success. Even if this U.S. government falls and an ever-so-slightly less corrupt government replaces it and withdraws from Iraq (unlikely; Democrats are the biggest war whores in D.C., with "front runner" Hillary nearly frothing at the mouth for more bloodshed & more "wars on terror"), the current mafia in charge has another three years to bring home the money and leave so big a mess that those same contractors will continue operations all over the Middle East and Central Asia for decades to come. Corpses = Success, just like 9/11, just like Katrina. Sometimes you just luck out and get a killer storm that lets you try racially cleansing a city, sometimes you have to do the Hard Work yourself, but the important thing is to never pass up the opportunity to kill as many of your citizens as you can get away with, because the profits are tremendous.
And when the "oil crisis" (which is both real & fake) reaches true crisis level, then that trickle from Iraq's "terrorized" oil industry will turn to a river, and folks will be happy to see gasoline back to a reasonable $4 a gallon, as the oil companies continue raking in profits previously unseen in the history of their industry.
[quote]Just witness various 9/11 researchers. Again, not coincidence that the story about Israelis getting emails about the WTC were leaked and the story about the Israeli's "celebrating" on the bridge...and then the Israeli "art student" story floated soon after.[/quote]
Errrr...Ummm...
The stories are true.
Read into them what you will.
But you cannot doubt their veracity.
The initial reports that I heard on BBC 4 radio programme (Hourly headlines & the Today programme) mentioned that the cars were reportedly carrying explosives and that the British Soldiers were dressed in Arab Headress.
Listening to the same headlines over the past 2 days, the mention of the explosives has been dropped and the soldiers were described as being dressed in 'Civilian Clothes'. (it doesn't quite paint the same picture - most people would think of western civilian clothes - the point is they were in Aran civilian clothes i.e. IN DISGUISE!)
Also the UK Times paper this morning has a headline that the current troubles in Basra are the FAULT OF IRAN!! (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1788585,00.html )
I doubt the Ministry of Defence knows anything about what they were up to.
It smacks of the Shadow Government, direct from Buckingham Palace.
Just like the Force Research Unit under Brigadier Gordon Kerr in Northern Ireland.
For more details see my letter to Judge Peter Cory dated 10 July 2003 at
http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm9.showMessage?topicID=6.topic
post 176
"To survive, the spectacle must have social control. It can recuperate a potentially threatening situation by shifting ground, creating dazzling alternatives- or by embracing the threat, making it safe and then selling it back to us"- Larry Law, from The Spectacle- The Skeleton Keys
The guy with black shirt looks like a heavy duty ass-hole. He looks like he could use a good motherfucking kick to the head and telling by the shape of his mouth, he looks likes it's molded to take on dick so I'd give him the choice of sucking a bullet through his thorax or having his little dick cut off and tell him to eat it or fucking get a free trip to demon land where they are waiting for prostitutes like him. British stiff upper lip, what a crock of shit. I lost all respect for you stupid fucks years ago and America as well. Your full of nothing but and I pray your countries fall hard into the woven shit basket you've created for everyone. All of you who are silent are to blame just as much as anyone and none of that bullshit "we didn't vote for them"
Fuck-you.
Mom, don't post when you've been drinking...
Here's a picture of what these asshats were carrying: http://tinyurl.com/dvm3h
You should see me when I'm drunk. my favorite past time was pretending to be a roll over but I loved seeing the looks of Oh,Oh bit off more than on their stupid fucking faces. If I'm not punching metal bins I'm waiting to take out the guy with the black belt attitude. Fuck the shapeshifters .
Brits have carried on with the Monty Python tude long enough get your heads out of your..... what's the point, your a lost cause go vote your rock star B;air back in you could use another John Lennon wife beating acid head in the house for another decade. Till2112
Brits have carried on with the Monty Python tude long enough get your heads out of your..... what's the point, your a lost cause go vote your rock star Blair back in you could use another John Lennon wife beating acid head in the house for another decade. Till2012
Gotta give you something.
My post of the year:
"Anonymous said...
Mom, don't post when you've been drinking..."
... and anonymous, too!
to Dream's End re: "incompetence theory"
you're right! it makes great propaganda because it is one of the only excuses that allows one to remain behind the veil of plausible deniability. children use this excuse on parents and teachers all the time..."where is your homework" "oh i forgot it" "ok, bring it tomorrow" "whew". incompetence and false flags make the best Big Lies...
to RDR re: CNN confering "legitimacy"
perhaps individuals who believe this are what alphabet agency profilers refer to as a "scotch man" (one who trusts the authorities and their vintages/status/alma maters more than their own power of reason...aka catholic)
e.g., wolfowitz et al. understand that steam must occasionally be released. as a narrative becomes increasingly implausible (to those that are even prone evaluate it this way) glimpses must be revealed to those paying attention (everyone else has pretty much picked an authority figure they trust e.g., husband Tom Brokaw or even Mike Moore and if he doesn't say it..it ain't real). by revealing these glimpses to the initiated, pressure on their psychies is lifted and they need not dig any deeper to salve their dissonance. but among those figuring it out...what does this accomplish? some recoil in fear and awe and talk amongst themselves while certain others simply pat themselves on the back for their realization. these are sometimes the same people (race less important than class here) who clearly see other subcultures being gamed and turned against themselves but quietly ask themselves "is it up to ME to explain it to THEM?" (before climbing back in their volvo/lexus/suv at the filling station)
to Anonymous re: "hate on Jews" and "One need only consider how the middle east would look if peace had been brought to the region 30 or 40 years ago. Democratic government..."
no one was on THIS thread claiming that "isreal is the puppet master"..that is your quote. fact is, these tricks (false flags) are endemic to human nature (even CIA and Mossad every other human who has cleverly lied) and are more common on school playgrounds than in geopolitics. recognizing false flags when they occur is NOT an indication of paranoia or pinning the worlds problems on one institution but of rigorous intuition.
now, of course the other anonymice singling out "Jews" as problems and spewing out violent wet dreams ("sucking a bullet" etc etc...i too wish it was someones drunken mother) are most likely provocateurs because the stupidity necessary to make these remarks would never have allowed them to find, read, and post to this blog...
lastly to Tank and CERTAIN other anonymice: your handlers have you misprofiled (my $.02 in case any of my tax dollars are at stake)...
I'm a little confused at the speed with which commenters assert that some undercover military personnel being caught in some act constitutes proof that black-ops are the source of insurgency. If you can assume that not every event is a play in the conspiracy - that sometimes the conspiracy would just run parallel with 'normal' plans, I think it's fairly obvious that if you (as UK or US) thought that positions of civic / political / military power were being coopted by undesireable forces (let's face it, that's what half the stuff on this site is about), and bearing in mind you're in a warzone anyway - a 'reasonable' option might be to kill those elements you have determined to be undesireable, rather than openly denigrate the institutions you are trying to set up (police / local govt. etc). These particular style of action can be applied to a allies = good scenario as well as an allies = bad scenario.
I'd be more concerned about how easily it is public and why, it's not so hard to have it kept quiet or blown up into something significanly bigger to obscure the important event.
I don't want to sound like I'm not open to the basic idea presented in the article and comments, it's just not the only explanation. As an aside to at least one of the comments - maybe the fact that the soldiers in the APC didn't just shoot or steamroller their way out is something worthy of more than a sneer (i doubt the squaddies are in on the big conspiracy) - regardless of whether you think the mob were justified.
Finally, like the site alot - but I do have to try and think positive thoughts after reading it - it's pretty unrelenting in its ability to make one despondent.
.peace.
Fuck this blame game shit, when a guy sell's you a Swiss watch for 50 bucks and tell's you quickly [twice] it's a ten dollar watch then puts his money in that bank, who the hell's falt is it? Uh DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Theirs.
Joe American; "It's still a bargain cause I can sells it for 20 and make a profit so I know what I'm doing, your just jealous of our killing rate."
Number one, the Mossad is a terrorist organization, absolutely and unequivocally. Number two, the government of Israel has immense stockpiles of nuclear and CBW weapons, and has been conducting experiments in ethno-specific weaponry. Number three, Israel besides being the biggest benefitter of US welfare in the form of international aid has also blatantly flouted every UN sanction and parameter given them. Number four, no one here has commented on Jews, Judaism or even inflicted any sort of verbal malice towards Jewish people or the people of Israel. Comments were made about the government of Israel and their vile enforcer the Mossad. If someone mentions the CIA no one flies up in arms and says "Oh my god, they're attacking Christians!" or equally, "Oh my god the attacking the people of the U.S.!"
So how are associations like these to be drawn from relevant points and very specific targets. Anonymous 3:28 makes a very impassioned point that's being misconstrued. People who do not join the ranks of humanity and decide to be played out by falling prey to petty nationalism and even worse... blind obedience and leader idolatry, are indeed culpable for the acts done in their name.
Do you excuse nationalist masses of Germans or Japanese for supporting their sick leadership and heinous crimes during WWII?
Don't expect the world's long-suffering masses to excuse those of us compliant, supportive or silent as corporations and their government proxy sacks, loots, kills, extorts, assassinates, manipulates, sterilizes, poisons and genocidally culls their people.
And allow me to short circuit any wildly inappropriate accusation and castigations of anti-semitism before it starts. Don't fall into the M.O. of the B'Nai Brith and the ADL's of shouting down any mention of the word Israel, Mossad or any truly documented crimes and criminals with patently false wolf-cries of anti-semitism. The term has been viciously co-opted and misappropriated to suit specific agendas and censorship of criticism of STATE policies. The word even by it's very definition, incorporates ANYONE of semitic origin.
Semite:
1) Se·mit·ic, adj.
Of or relating to the Semites or their languages or cultures.
2) Of, relating to, or constituting a subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic language group that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic, and Aramaic.
So technically the war against the Iraqi populace could be considered an act of anti-semitism.
Is there real and ugly anti-semitism? Undeniably, so it behooves us to use that shotgun in very appropriate circumstances lest it cheapen the term. Much like inappropriate uses of racism, chauvinism or any other forms of discrimination.
I suggest you for your edification, George Galloway's book "Galloway Goes to Washington", as well as any of his extremely stirring, and enlightening speeches or interviews. I also recommend "By Way of Deception & The Other Side of Deception" by ex-Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky.
The people of aggressor nations do not define the people of that nation. I wish there was a disclaimer we could use to announce to the world... The views and opinions of the *insert nation here* DO NOT neccessarily represent the views and opinions of the masses of the nation in general.
Instead of blaming everybody in a sort of blanket way, how about we do a little bit of cui bono and think about who's really to blame.
There are always assholes ready to get swept up in whatever the brutality du jour may be, but their only payoff is that they get to be assholes. Who's really winning here?
The Brits are the most accomplished Machiavellians of the lot, and they have a history of meddling in the Middle East that goes back to at least when they picked up the Suez Canal on the cheap (1870-something was it?) and intensified after 1900 when the oil started coming in. Bank operations seem to be a British specialty, from BCCI to all the weird shit going on over the years from the Bahamas and the Channel Islands. I also don't doubt that they deliberately set up a Jewish state in Palestine as a way of establishing a beachhead of European culture in the Middle East.
But much of the British interest in the region passed into American hands between the end of World War II and the Suez Crisis (1956, I think), and their current activities in the region seem to be more out of nostalgia than as major players.
The Israelis, on the other hand, are very much a part of the action. Their current strategy (together with some of the US Neocons) seems to involve doing everything they can to weaken the Arabs while making alliances with non-Arab nations in the region like Turkey and Pakistan and potentially even Iran. And Israel (unlike the United States) does have citizens who can speak Arabic and pass as Iraqis. I wouldn't be surprised if a certain amount of the chaos in Iraq (possible including the intimidation of doctors and other professionals) was of Israeli making.
But I'd be really surprised if Israeli influence outside of their own immediate neighborhood went beyond lobbying, a little spying, and the occasional high-publicized commando operation. They just don't have the resources.
So that leaves the Americans, who as everybody knows are idiots who don't have the subtlety to make their way out of a brown paper bag without nuking it. They could theoretically be inciting the Brits and the Israelis to do their dirty work for them -- but to what purpose? Aside from the Neocons, the best interests of the Bush administration would seem to be in an Iraq modeled roughly after Germany or Japan -- peaceful, superficially democratic, happy to be part of the US economic sphere and to give house room to several American bases. Chaos of the kind we're seeing just doesn't fit into the game plan.
The BFEE has also notoriously had a lean towards the Arabs -- and the Brits often seem to as well. They want to control the heart of the Arab world, not leave it a hollow shell.
Which doesn't leave a lot of good options, does it? How about one of you clever folks tell me what I'm missing that would suddenly make everything fall into place?
starroute:ditto
We should focus all our combined psychic energy on a concept/word/narrative that has to be built upon
S-E-P-T-E-M-B-E-R-G-A-T-E
there you have. regardless of the micro-details, or if bush lihop or mihop.
frater plecticus
I disagree with the comment on the creation of Israel as a beachhead of euro culture. If anything the past several decades have seen a significant increase in the establishment of islamic culture into europe - both in terms of immigrant populations within euro countries, and the increased interaction of islamic states /regions with euro states - e.g. Kosovo or Turkey.
However complex it looks, I still think there is more to it than a scuffle in the middle east over 'ownership' of possible client state. And whatever equation the US happens to be working on at any given time - one of the variables must always be China.
lastly to Tank and CERTAIN other anonymice: your handlers have you misprofiled (my $.02 in case any of my tax dollars are at stake)"
Just to clarify... this guy feels confortable coming to the conclusion that anyone believing that the Iraqi insurgency is not fictional must be a government agent paid to think that rather than just any random fucker who has heard of Iraq's religious sects in the past 20 years.... or the general worldwide vide towards occupations throughout history.
Unfortunately in the "identify someone as something because of what they posted" game this disqualifies you as taxpayer either on the grounds you are in a mental instituion, explaining why you haven't been able to read a newspaper in the past 20 years or simply as someone just too retarded to hold a paying job.
It's OK, Tank. It's OK.
We know your just doing your job. But if you want to keep it, you'll need to be a bit more subtle - especially round here.
Explain how that works. You nimrods are able to completely ignore bombings, mortar and RPG attacks but some words on a page referring you to these will need to be subtle ?
There is nothing subtle about electroshock therapy. This of course being a last resort treatment for people detatched from reality. I don't think anyone would argue that being in denial about the existance of the Iraq insurgency in 2005 would qualify.
Starroute
This is what you're missing: while it is true that the preferred outcome for the US would be an Iraq modelled on old West Germany or Japan, and that this was undoubtedly what some of the key decision-makers had in mind when they made plans to invade, that is not where Iraq is headed nor would be headed even if there was no insurgency.
What we are seeing is rather a new political elite emerging that consist of Sh'ites groomed by the mullahs of Iran since the 1980s for just this eventuality. The SCRI, the Da'wa party. These people have seized control of the new Iraqi government, which has already become very cozy with Iran. These people don't like the US at all, and they are not going to be "happy to be part of the US economic sphere". But they have been elected, semi-democratically, and after all the talk of spreading democracy etc, the US has no choice but to let them do as they please. Installing Ahmed Chalabi is not an option at this stage.
If the security situation improves, the Iraqi government is likely to tell the US to get out. Then, the neocons will have achieved nothing but empowering Iran and by extension China and Russia, while weakening the US. That was probably not their intention (they had probably planned to be in Iran by now anyway).
See why they need to keep a certain pressure on the government in Baghdad?
I also find it interesting that these two Brits were firing at a police station and at police officers. The Iraqi police has become the favourite target of the insurgents, even more so, it seems, than US forces. One could almost suspect that the insurgents want to make sure that the Iraqi government is unable to provide for its own security, thus remaining dependent on the US...
Tank: You are quite right, denying the existence of a vast, home-grown insurgency in Iraq, directed at the occupying forces and their collaborators, is to be detached from reality. That doesn't mean that the occupiers aren't trying to steer the popular uprising in a certain direction, specifically towards sectarian violence, to prevent the formation of a unified resistance against US/UK occupation and to keep up the pressure on the pro-Iranian government.
Finally, I have to concur with those who have pointed out that disagreeing with a poster does not automatically make one a CIA operative. Frankly, I doubt the CIA et al. are sufficiently concerned by what is written on Rigorous Intuition to bother to post comments here :-)
Nimrods? WTF?
Tank you come off as the worst kind of John Wayne yank, the typical loud-mouthed swaggering cowboy randomly inflicting all of us with your insipid comments. You are definitely not humbling yourself to the environment and opening your mind to the discourse. Instead you jump up and boisterously scream out rhetorical rants that you've picked up off of some network parrot, or U.S. News & World Report.
No one else is storming in here with guns drawn blazing wildly, and arrogantly casting aspersions on everyone. Get some cognizant information and organize it into coherent statements or questions to challenge other people's posts. If you've sold your soul to the system and it's propaganda, that's your business. Emotional and hysterical outbursts are best kept deep inside if you feel compelled to run it up a flagpole and demand people to salute.
Part of the problem is anyone who dares disagree with the prevailing attitude in these comments is labeled a disinfo agent or worse.
It's possible that Tank just has looked at the evidence and come to a different conclusion. He's obnoxious in stating that conclusion, but others who have not been so have been treated the same way on previous posts.
Perhaps we should just all chill and if Tank acts like a troll, just ignore him. If Tank has something to say, then debate him. Discouraging dissenting opinions simply because the diverge from yours is not the way to handle it.
Clearly a false flag operation. The official line just does not stack up, how can it? British forces run basra, so why are they breaking into a Police station with Tanks?
The official spin on events is BS. That is obvious.
It is obvious to me that the US/UK want civil war - anything is better than IRAQ/IRAN making friends and quoting OIL in a basket of currencies. Anything is better than that.
So if that is the case - how on earth are BUSH/BLAIR going to sell failure in Iraq? How can they do it?
We didnt find WMD, we didnt find WMD manufacturing facilities, we didnt find plans to build WMD manufacturing facilities, we found no link to Bin Laden or 911, we can't pin any of this directly on Iran or Syria and the peace is lost and Iraq is failure.
So how on earth are they going to sell it? It beggars belief.
I guess they will muddle through controlling the media as much as possible and hopefully will get the Government they want.
My guess is a wider war with Iran is on the cards for both tactical (distraction) and strategic (oil).
have you ever seen a bullfight? of course you have, but did you get the message? all flags are false. that's what flags are for. they say "look at me!" why? so we're not looking at something else. behind every manufactured "nation" is THE STATE. it divides itself in order to hide. nations are arms of the beast, and each arm waves its own flag furiously so you don't notice the head. talking about america wants this, and israel did that, etc, is ultimately useless. you're chasing fabric.
understand this: ALL nations are evil. despite appearances to the contrary, they are completely unified in their desire to exist at our expense. we are being farmed, enslaved, killed for sport, and eaten. argue this and get everything you deserve.
I've been reading Rigorous Intuition for about two weeks and I absolutely love it because of the open-minded atmosphere of both Jeff(keep up the great work) and it's readers. Which is why it drives me crazy to see these snide accusations of dissenters being disinfo agents. Maybe some posters are paid disinfo agents, but childish accusations only reflect badly on the accuser. Perhaps some of those who disagree actually do disagree for their own reasons, and addressing them with insults is NOT a good way of dealing with them.
Why not address their points logically and rigorously, showing where they are in error and where they are using disinfo tactics.
I suspect people calling others disinfo agents are in fact disinfo agents themselves. Oh shit, I guess by definition I'm a disinfo agent. Better go get my paycheck!
R
Jeff: This is an amazing story because it provides incontrovertible proof that the British were engaging in a false flag operation and got caught red handed. How long before this disappears down the mainstream media memory hole? Kurt Nimmo has a brief history of other similar false flag operations by the British, including Kenya, Malaya and Northern Ireland that is worth a look.
It would be naive to assume that the Americans weren't doing exactly the same sort of thing with their P2OG forces, providing a steady diet of "al Quaida" or "al Zarquawi" atrocities to keep fuelling the military industrial machine.
The other issue that this episode raises is: whatever happended to the transfer of "sovereignty" last year when the Iraqi Police arrest two men acting unlawfully and they are immediately busted out of jail by occupying troops?
And why? To fuel the tensions to attack IRAN next.
This might be somewhat off-topic, but take a look at this article from a British newspaper's website about another British scandal around a "New Labor" MP whose diary-turned book is causing a stir, especially from Blair and company:
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=362725&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=&ct=5
Something for you all to think about: Are there "trigger" words or phrases, sometimes referred to as a "honeywords", that attract trolls when used in the text of this site or the Discussion Board?
I first starting getting this suspicion while reading another site some months ago. Now, when encountering trolls, I try to determine as specifically as I can, what is being discussed.
qutb -
On the whole I'd agree with you -- except that there were also some weird, destabilizing events going on at a very early point of the occupation. Attacks on, I think, the Jordanian embassy and the UN mission, plus a few lesser incidents helped drive out anyone who could have been a stabilizing force and make the country ungovernable. Where did those come from?
And there are also those recent attacks on doctors and other professionals that seem designed to drive the entire educated class out of Iraq. Those don't even seem to be meant to incite a civil war, but rather to hollow out the country entirely.
To whose benefit is that?
carlos -
What you say about all nations being evil would be fine if we were here discussing gnostic philosophy, but it doesn't answer the question of whodunnit. It's like those Agatha Christie mysteries I could never stand reading because all the characters were presented as despicable enough to be potential murderers. If everyone is equally corrupt, it kinds of paralyzes any possibility of meaningful action.
If I've got to be a mouse on the battlefield, I'd at least like to know who the armies are, and what they're fighting for, and what their tactics are so that I could maybe have some hope of staying out from under the hooves of the horses.
I saw and heard this story beaking on BBC World TV and they mentioned arab dress (at least once - I had work to do so only saw it once. I remember it well because I blurted it out when my wife arrived.
A very brief break in the facade I must say. But revealed none the less. Too bad I can't record all the media all the time for back reference. I saw and heard it.
PS I like how we're now directed to images and spin about the London bombings - apparently we are privy to their dry run. Luckily the authorities uncovered this additional proof on the very day that a distraction from the script was exposed.
Who is working whom?
Solemn Vigilance said... "You are definitely not humbling yourself to the environment and opening your mind to the discourse."
We are posting in a thread about post-Saddam Iraq. I don't know what discourse you think is possible on that topic which on the basis that the Iraq insurgency does not exist but lets assume
Instead you jump up and boisterously scream out rhetorical rants that you've picked up off of some network parrot, or U.S. News & World Report.
As opposed to what ? Burning books because they try to trick you into believing that what every person on the planet has agreed on for the past 20 years... that a post-Saddam Iraq would descend into persecution of Sunnis, religious factional infighting and eventually civil war?
No one else is storming in here with guns drawn blazing wildly, and arrogantly casting aspersions on everyone.
Which is why I singled out those two people who were doing just that.
The italics text were the quotes if you didn't get that on your own.
If you've sold your soul to the system and it's propaganda, that's your business. Emotional and hysterical outbursts are best kept deep inside if you feel compelled to run it up a flagpole and demand people to salute.
Yeah whatever chump. Everything I know is based on propaganda... blah blah blah.
Tell you what, just for once why don't you provide me with one of your secret non-propaganda sources which uses multiple sources to discredit what I wrote. That there is such a thing as the Iraq insurgency.
Shouldn't be too hard right ?
Monkey McGee said...
Perhaps we should just all chill and if Tank acts like a troll, just ignore him. If Tank has something to say, then debate him. Discouraging dissenting opinions simply because the diverge from yours is not the way to handle it.
Which when you consider that I do not exist beyond the arguement I make on a page is just downright logical.
So here is a debate for you all. Why does military personnel being undercover imply they are running a false flag operation rather than just... wel.. working undercover ?
Nobody thinks cops are trying to promote a myth that drug dealers exist when they work undercover so why the huge jump here ?
There is no shortage of reminders that direct military force on states is not the way to win a war against terrorist networks, or that the most valuable asset in fighting these in all arenas is human intelligence.
Personally I would find it outrageous if forces in Iraq were not undertaking surveillence and developing assets while disguised to allow them to more easily operate.
So if this incident had not occurred, I would suggest that if any of you would have found it a shocking revelation that armed forces were operating in disguise then you really do not have enough perspective on warfare or intelligence to be drawing any conclusions in the first place.
starroute, not even a bull, but a mouse. best of luck. (i really mean that, in some ways you remind me of me.) i, however, am a virus, not afraid. i'm bringing them all down, just like a virus does, indiscriminately.
my solution to your agatha christie dilemma is to infect every suspect. there's some meaningful action for you. we have the numbers to pull it off and the state knows this.
sorry to fuck up your spectator sport, but the state's time is up. put your head down and run for the woods, little mouse. the only thing that might crush you is its collapsing corpse.
(and a little gnostic philosophy wouldn't go astray amidst the civil war that this thread has become. i think it's hilarious that so many posters have succumbed to the very strategy that jeff's post exposes. olé!)
another source for the explosives and MINES in the car can be found here.
http://tinyurl.com/9kj33
I would be very concerned though because these reporters aren't white westerners and so they may be slanting their story to make it appear that we of the west might be not as nice as TV tells us we are.
Hey Tank,
My theory is they probably weren't really SAS, just posers from Hal Mercs.
The desired end result from the purchaser is the same.
There now...SAS rep is still preserved.
Since Rumfeld's Hal Merc's are readily available for a price
Who's buying?
The end result for the citizen's of Iraq are the same.
Kind of like the Mexicans going into New Orleans, huh?
for those like starroute, plectic, and Qutb who are interested in discussing ideas, i keep mulling over this type of macro-currency-level analysis:
(rough version ;)-
currencies are a technology that lend themselves to a pyramid shaped structure of control. commodities as well as volume and velocity of exchange represent the underlying value of any given currency. in a fiat currency environment (e.g., current one), the currency that is used for the largest volume and velocity of commodities (e.g., oil, street drugs/pharma, interest bearing financial instruments) will be the most powerful. benefits accrue to the entities who hold/wield the dominant currency (e.g., the us treasury can sustain higher deficits and can buy oil on credit while china's central bank has to use its more restricted credit limit to exchange yuan for $ and then buy oil). oil(1) ends up being the linchpin in the iron triangle of (2)currency value and (3)military-backed corporate control of oil (but also the other major commodities).
so, one reason the us (or more broadly, holders of long positions in $) disapproved of both noriega and saddam is that they tried to re-nationalise the profits (pass through *their* national banks instead of those on wall st.) from their major commodities; oil and drugs respectively. those with long positions in $s are betting on the prowess of the us military to continue to secure oil/energy resources for corporations that are financed in $.
if the euro or some basket of currencies becomes the denominating unit(s) for oil, investors will begin shorting the $ (betting against its future value), inflation will heat up, and those left holding $s and not diversified into other currencies or things like precious metals…will suffer a relative loss in purchasing ability.
it seems the neocons are committed to keeping this status quo or making the $ the only currency (though it is already the linchpin among all major treasuries). other players would either like to see their own currency chosen or some sort of basket currency approach (thereby spreading military and banking power “more broadly”, in one sense but not in others, and prompting the question among some of them: why not create a global currency to avoid friction?).
honest question then: is this a big conspiracy network tightly controlled by only a few "smoking men" and their hedge funds or is the "conspiracy", at this level of analysis, too diffuse with complicity spread amongst everyone trying to hoard and earn interest in $s (and all other vested currencies), with massive debt, or using petrochemicals? Is graft to blame? those using a local currency (see Ithaca Hours) or those who make use of some sort of urban or rural intentional community have experienced a withdrawal from this network that actually makes their goods & labor more valuable (more purchasing power) because of the inherent efficiency in non-interest-earning currencies or systems of trade.
discussions about these issues happen in publicly available policy papers and places like the london school of economics but the consensus in these arenas favors the benignly-broad complicity model. at what level do ends justify means? do sheeple want to understand these things? would mob mentality and scapegoating develop and would those who always do step in and promise to start a "war" against something on behalf of “the people”?
sorry this is so long…
resources i like (web resources and audio):
search “peter dale scott” ,“wizards of money”, and/or “ithaca hours”
anonymous said...
Very possible
however...
Israel has not gained a single thing since Bush has been in office.
U.S. Assistance to Israel
(FY1949 - FY2005)
(millions of dollars)
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html
Neither Sharon nor Netenyahu are innocents(ce) though the general Israeli population may be...
similar to any other countries' civilian population.
although I am somewhat intrigued by your innocence...
"I'm rather curious as to why everyone always assumes Israel is the puppet master here?"
and btw,
this is my favorite blog of this variety and by speaking of currency dynamics i only hope to offer what are taken to be complimentary ideas to the incisive reasoning that this blog seems devoted to.
Hey Tank,
My theory is they probably weren't really SAS, just posers from Hal Mercs.
The desired end result from the purchaser is the same.
There now...SAS rep is still preserved.
Since Rumfeld's Hal Merc's are readily available for a price
Who's buying?
The end result for the citizen's of Iraq are the same.
Kind of like the Mexicans going into New Orleans, huh?
I would be very concerned though because these reporters aren't white westerners and so they may be slanting their story to make it appear that we of the west might be not as nice as TV tells us we are.
If there is any exaggerated information I would expect that to come from the source rather than the media. For instance the reports of 150 prisoners escaping are more likely an bad guess by a source based on something rather than an invention by the media based on nothing.
Either the UK Independant/Telegraph has reported that the UK military was staking out the police who approached and apprehended them. These police were also the source of the reports and photographs of what was found in the car.
They are also the same police operating as death squads in Basra.
Hey they abduct and kill western journalists for writing about the other people they abduct and kill... but they wouldn't lie about the same military forces they openly oppose right ? Just like US forces never lie about terrorists right ?
A little perspective.
Report:The soldiers had been beaten and rogue policemen had been touring the area with loudhailers urging demonstrators on to the streets to protest that the “British saboteurs” had been planning explosions in the city which would be blamed on followers of Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shia cleric.
...
The two soldiers are believed to have been investigating a corrupt police unit in Basra who were colluding with Shia militia leaders. Some of the men who later interrogated them are believed to be part of this same unit.
Times Online
Just a reminder that in Basra, UK military forces shooting at the Shia police forces isn't the opposite of UK forces shooting at insurgents.
Basra death squads
if anyone needs a ready reference for how the sas/intel ops persecute a 'dirty war' grab the excellent book 'big boys rules' by mark urban which lays bare most of the methodology of the war against the IRA in nthn ireland. you'll find many points of similarity with this case, and others, and find a good basis for questioning the reality or otherwise of insurgency.
stakeknife, anyone?
Re: "honeywords":
The government certainly has the ability to track the blogs that they are concerned about for specific words, frequency of words, etc. Maybe when they get so many 'hits' they send in the trolls (cue Judy Collins ;) ).
Let me make it clear I don't think it of this site, but some sites are "honeypots" designed to attract dissenters and monitor what they say. On those sites, the task is a fine balance of not being so suppressive as to arouse suspicion yet to make sure certain avenues of thought are not, well, thought out to their ultimate conclusions.
Certain people who insist on pursuing a line of thought then are targeted with an eye to discrediting them. I saw this on dKos when right after the bombing a surprisingly large number of people immediately jumped to the conclusions it was an inside job...something that this very story and the 'bomber reconnaissance' story support. Kos (who is former military...or maybe military intelligence, who knows) immediately made a purge (his own word) of not only 'diaries' that took this view but people who recommended those diaries! The ostensible reason, not to make the site look bad with flaky speculation. Hmm. So cut off inquiry before you know whether it's flaky speculation or reasonable suspicion?
In addition to getting certain people discredited, or driven to leave the site, or banned, the other major tactic is to look for groups of people who work synergistically together to pursue a subject, and get them to turn against each other. Sorry to pick on Kos again, but any of you who post there may recall the great "Pie Fight" battle several months ago. Kos bought an ad that some women posters called sexist, and suddenly the entire blog erupted, everyone taking sides, bad blood galore, many women left. Kos's handling of it wasn't very sensitive...odd for a guy who is so concerned for the blog's 'image.' Did he just have a 'tin ear' for his female members, or....was the ad a deliberate attempt to create divisiveness?
I believe in free speech, and free and open discussion, but I also believe in maintaining vigilance toward disinformation specialists. I think in some other threads lately in which certain people have been accused of trollishness and seemingly then disappeared, or morphed their approach...well, it all bears watching. If someone isn't a shill, has a genuine argument, it seems to me, they will behave differently from someone who is advancing 'talking points' or deliberately trying to create chaos and ill feeling. How someone responds to the assertion they are a troll or a disinfo agent tells a lot--some people get upset but in a genuine-seeming way as someone might who is sincere and accused of being paid to say what they said, others laugh it off, etc.
You can look at it as a laboratory in which we can all learn a lot about what we're up against. I remember back in the Sixties, the joke was that of any radical group of 4, 1 guy was DEA, one was FBI Cointelpro, one was a local undercovercop, and the fourth, who was not the source of the wackier, more violent ideas, was a genuine radical. And often some of the agents didn't know who the other agents were! My guess is there were probably some groups where there weren't any genuine radicals, because the first time some wild-eyed guy no one knew anything about suggested blowing off bombs in bus station lockers the real radicals lit out for a Quaker meeting because they had no interest in killing people.
I know people disagree with me about the use of the "Anonymous" ID, but I do believe it is easier to get an idea of who is funky when someone is forced to maintain the same identity from day to day. On this blog, we don't know if the Anonymous who seemed trollish on one set of comments on one day is the same person who did it on an earlier article the day before.
Here's a whole 'nother theory from Xymphora, which I don't *think* I've seen on this thread yet.
His notion is that what's been going on in Basra -- not just the deal with the two undercover guys but also the murdered reporters and more -- is a plot between the US and some elements of the British government and military to discourage the UK from recent gestures towards pulling out.
I'm not sure what to make of this, but it does seem plausible on the surface. Any opinions?
Dear Tank
I will be sure to remember my 'taking the piss' tags on further posts. Maybe you can remind me how they're done.
OK, so some of us haven't read the Seymor Hersh articles, where P2OG and Israeli commandos are detailed in full. That's the 'sufficient condition' for 'payin attention.' the trap to watch for on this line isn't, "insurgency IS real--arghh," but the more subtle, "commandos go undercover to eliminate putative allies." This is the line generally taken by military memoires that "take the threat, massage it, and sell it back to you." Just remember, Mr. Mil-Hist buff(oon), as long as the Joint Chiefs want chaos, the commanders on the ground will always have lists of "legitimate targets."
And enough with the Kenyan pseudo-gangs! Read "Nato's Secret Armies" by Daniel Ganser. It's 100% germane to all posts @RI. Google Gladio, at least. Also: The Terror Industry, by Edward Herman; Iran Contra Connection by Peter Dale Scott; Killing Hope by William Blum.
The next time a lit major scoffs at your knowledge, crush his puny mind! Destroy All Monsters!!!
The "Terrorism" Industry
Seymor Hersh
P2OG & Balkanization
Nato's Secret Armies
Instruments of State Craft
Iran-Contra Connection
If your country was invaded by foreign powers for reasons that were an obvious pack of lies, and your fellow countrymen then formed a resistance movement, is it likely they would spend their precious resources attacking and killing their fellow citizens, including committing unspeakable atrocities against their women and children.
In history people consistently united against foreign invaders despite their severe political differences.
What is happening in Iraq today just does not make sense.
The insurgents have nothing to gain by killing each other while they remain under the yoke of hated foreign aggressors. I cannot discern a single strategic or tactical advantage in creating civil war while the invaders are still in power.
By inducing a civil war the insurgents would be handing the US/UK/Israeli axis of evil a huge advantage.
The Iraqi resistance is not run by idiots. They are tactically and strategically aware. Common sense alone dictates that they should unite to fight their common enemies. Once their enemies have been beaten then they can slog it out amongst themselves for control.
Did the resistance to the Nazis in any country ever try to create a civil war as a way to force them out. Has any country suffering under a foreign oppressor ever adopted this suicidal tactic as a way to force out the invaders?
It is simply a ridiculous argument to suggest that Iraqis are trying to provoke a civil war as a way to defeat the invaders. And the fact that an SAS death squad was caught red handed in a false flag operation is mere confirmation of this common sense.
Who would benefit from an Iraqi civil war - the axis of evil, Israel, the US and the UK.
Would a civil war make it more or less likely that the invaders would leave Iraq? Less.
Can you think of any kind of causal mechanism that will effectively force out the invaders after an Iraqi civil war breaks out? No it will empower them.
Civil war would significantly weaken the resistance and hand the invaders all the political capital they will ever need to stay longer.
Civil war would also take the eye of global public opinion off the criminal nature of the invasion and turn it into a humanitarian intervention.
You don’t need to catch an SAS death squad with their pants down to see what is really going on in Iraq.
Anonymous 5.15,
I have been desperately looking for something to say on this thread, in a concise and articulate way, and then, like Bread from Heaven, you have summed it up PRECISELY in my opinion, and saved me a further hour of head scratching.
Thanks. The forum here would easily be able to benefit from such insightful input.
Anonymous 5:15 - yep, very nice.
(And anonymous, too. It's what's being said that's important, not who's saying it. There's an argument that all posts should be anonymous, then (theoretically) we'd be building on arguments/points of view/information, rather than forming allegiances (or otherwise) with "personalities". Sort of like a "no logo" approach to forums.)
Put this false flag argument to a mate, and when making the point realised that its so full of holes that you cant say for sure that this was a false flag op gone wrong.
Seems to me that you girls start from a point of view that the state lies and wants to eat all of us. Then you work backwards to prove your point from the info/disinfo out there.
When someone posts a view that conflicts with this general world view you accuse them of being state employees! Seems that some of you are suffering from self sustaining phsycosi.
Farcical.
Better be carefull you arent just believing this stuff just because your life sucks and you want blame something else rather than yourself.
Personally, I want to believe the state is out to screw us all the time, as my life sucks and I do a sneaking suspicion it aint my fault.
But that doesnt mean i should intepret these events as a false flag operation, its just as likely to be what the media say it is. And the changing storylines are not proof of cover up or anything else, and neither is the picture of the burning tank and the daring raid. That's just better TV.
The arguments here are pretty rubbish and a definite drift away from the quality I'm used to seeing here.
So go suck a lolly and start again.
"But that doesnt mean i should intepret these events as a false flag operation, its just as likely to be what the media say it is."
Are you sure about that ?
I mean REALLY.
WMDs, Hostilities are over, The Twin towers collapsed due to heat, Al Zarquarwi is the instrument of terror in Iraq, We cant catch Bin Laden, Diebold is a trustworthy voting system, Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman, Pearl Harbour was a surprise attack, the Gulf of Tonkin incident was genuine, MK ultra didnt exist, Chapman and Hinckley were lone Gunmen, We arent using WMDs in Iraq (depleted Uranium), The downing st minutes mean nothing, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Some people either need to read a lot more, or if they know about the blatant lies involved in the above "official" versions, and just about every other major event in the history of the last century that ive studied, then they need a radical overhaul of either their job or their base reality.
Logic dictates as anon 5.15 said. Anyone who cant see that has got a blindfold on, or is simply fooling themselves.
I say that, cos they sure as hell aint fooling me, or most of the other folks around here.
An interesting article in the Guardian UK today, "Plans to withdraw substantial numbers of British troops from Iraq next month have been abandoned after the explosion of violence in Basra on Monday night."< /br>
It's always good to look at who prospers from these things.
carlos said...
have you ever seen a bullfight? of course you have, but did you get the message? all flags are false. that's what flags are for. they say "look at me!" why? so we're not looking at something else. behind every manufactured "nation" is THE STATE. it divides itself in order to hide. nations are arms of the beast, and each arm waves its own flag furiously so you don't notice the head. talking about america wants this, and israel did that, etc, is ultimately useless. you're chasing fabric.
understand this: ALL nations are evil. despite appearances to the contrary, they are completely unified in their desire to exist at our expense. we are being farmed, enslaved, killed for sport, and eaten. argue this and get everything you deserve.
This couldn't be more right.
Well said, and I agree, completely.
We must rise above the level of spectatorial victims.
Anon 5:15am hit the nail on the head.
Controlled Chaos is preferable to Uncontrolled Order.
In fact, you can bet your life, these exact words were used in articulating this Ancient Strategy.
Anonymous 5:15, I had to add my thanks to the others', for your 'occam's razor' approach, that cut through a whole bunch of knots that were accumulating on this thread.
Being priviledged to be able to watch the news both in English (BBC, CNN, even some US network tv) and in Arabic (Al-Jazeera, Al-Arabia and Manar), I can attest to the fact that the Iraqis are very aware that some of the so-called 'insurgents' are actually agents of Western intelligence.
But even though they know what's happening, like us, they are unable to counter the US and Britain's three-pronged approach:
(1) by pretending to BE resistance fighters or in the guise of FIGHTING INSURGENTS, kill civilians to induce terror and passive despair, kill Iraqi police and military to justify remaining in Iraq, and as a bonus, discrediting the legitimate resistance forces;
(2) lavishly bribe corrupt elements who either are leadership figures or aspire to be, with money and/or with positions in Iraq's "government";
(3)imprison, assassinate, harass and/or defame those leaders who resist (2).
It's interesting that just yesterday, the BBC World urgently announced that Iraq's Minister of the Interior was warning that the insurgency had "infiltrated" the Iraqi police and military, and that he could not estimate to what degree they had been compromised.
Funny how that "urgent" announcement came just after those two UK soldiers were caught shooting at the Iraqi police, eh?
But try as they might, I guess they couldn't come up with a reasonable explanation for why those two would be dressed as Arab civilians and SITTING IN A CAR FILLED WITH EXPLOSIVES, so the Ministry of Truth disposed of that part and showed us the exciting footage of the 7/7 "bombers' dry run" instead.
Tank, I have no opinion on whether you are sincere in your comments or whatever, but giving you the benefit of the doubt, think on this:
The US, the world's only superpower, decides to invade a country that had been ruled by a tyrant in order to liberate its people. Those people, although apprehensive, were initially ambivalent about the US' intervention, hopefully clinging to the US' promises of a better life, human rights and political freedom.
Two years and hundreds of billions of dollars later, the country's infrastructure and 25% of all residences have been destroyed, along with 85% of all schools and educational facilities; more than 100,000 civilians have been murdered, the land has been blighted forever with depleted uranium, torture, disappearances and child malnutrition are rampant; corrupt officials with no legitimacy are kept in power by the American occupation forces.
Maybe you could read the above paragraph one more time. Wouldn't it be odd if there WEREN'T a popular armed resistance movement against the occupiers and their collaborators?
Wouldn't it be even ODDER if that popular resistance movement began to indiscriminately kill mostly destitute civilians and humanitarian workers (or other eyewitnesses from outside?)
Speaking of gullibility, do you believe a man fighting to liberate Iraq from brutal foreign occupiers would sacrifice his life to kill and maim poor Iraqi men, women and children?
Or does it make more sense to understand that the US and Britain look very bad indeed, having lied to the world, their greed and evil intentions exposed, UNLESS they could muddy the waters and discredit the heroes of Iraq.
I would think it takes more gullibility to believe something that makes no sense, than to believe something that is supported by evidence AND logic.
You know... and all specious semantics placed aside... FUCK ALL THE BULLSHIT, I'm not going to sit around debating stone-cold facts. 2 assholes who are British SAS posing as Iraqi's were busted with evidence, eyewitnesses and a history of committing terrorist acts were arrested and then busted out of jail by their handlers. Simple end of story!
The goddamn semantic dialogue and reactionary speculation used to manipulate facts and derail the truth is bloody nauseating. I've had just about enough of phoney objectivity, apologists, "gray areas" and other clouded reasoning. If something looks like shit, and smells like shit, guess fuckin' what... IT IS SHIT!
No wonder people think that God has abandoned the people of Earth, the level of rank dishonesty, blindness, injustice and cowardice is beneath contempt.
Charge up your righteousness and rise to the occasion. Right is right, wrong is wrong. Up is up and down is down, totally incontrovertible.
Big up to all true warriors for truth and justice! The rest cast their lot and make treaties with Hell.
Alice said...It's interesting that just yesterday, the BBC World urgently announced that Iraq's Minister of the Interior was warning that the insurgency had "infiltrated" the Iraqi police and military, and that he could not estimate to what degree they had been compromised.
Funny how that "urgent" announcement came just after those two UK soldiers were caught shooting at the Iraqi police, eh?
This has been widely reported for at least a month and widely known for much much longer. The only "funny" thing is why you would not expect Iraqi leaders to be trying to explain away police handing prisoners over to militias controlled by religious leaders.
You know, just like it was "funny" how Bush had a lot to say about hurricanes just after one hit. Coincidence or conpiracy... or just really what you would expect. Hey perhaps reporters were asking questions about topics currently in the news or something crazy like that.
But try as they might, I guess they couldn't come up with a reasonable explanation for why those two would be dressed as Arab civilians and SITTING IN A CAR FILLED WITH EXPLOSIVES, so the Ministry of Truth disposed of that part and showed us the exciting footage of the 7/7 "bombers' dry run" instead.
Well they really don't have to come up with an explanation for explosives in the car because there is no serious suggestion there were any. The police/militia stripped the car... laid the contents all out neatly... photographed it for the EXPRESS of exposing exactly what these SAS had and not only were these explosives not framed front and centre they simply are ... not ... there.
I guess this is where the theory tries to incorporate the guys who got shot at and were telling people through bullhorns that there were explosives... are also in on the coverup.
Tank, I have no opinion on whether you are sincere in your comments or whatever, but giving you the benefit of the doubt, think on this:
Maybe you could read the above paragraph one more time. Wouldn't it be odd if there WEREN'T a popular armed resistance movement against the occupiers and their collaborators?
Fucken A. I thought I was already pretty clear that only gullible idiots believed otherwise but there you go.
Now maybe YOU can read YOUR last sentence there one more time and reflect on why you were correct to make no distinction between a resistance to an occupation targetting occupiers and THOSE WHO COLLABORATE.
It is the reason you cannot understand Iraqis killing other Iraqis which you refer to throughout the rest of your post. Unless of course you were under the impression the people lining up to join the Iraqi police and armed forces were of another nationality.
Wouldn't it be even ODDER if that popular resistance movement began to indiscriminately kill mostly destitute civilians and humanitarian workers (or other eyewitnesses from outside?)
That would be odd if it was occurring. However those civilians primarily targetted in attacks are those seen to be supporting the occupation, particularly those joining police and army units. Nobody is unaware that these recruiting lines are the most frequently targetting groups or civilians.
Speaking of gullibility, do you believe a man fighting to liberate Iraq from brutal foreign occupiers would sacrifice his life to kill and maim poor Iraqi men, women and children?
Yeah. Is this the part where you confess you are completely unaware of the concept of Jihad and suicide attacks ? Because they one of a number of very successful and quite effective gurrilla tactics.
Or does it make more sense to understand that the US and Britain look very bad indeed, having lied to the world, their greed and evil intentions exposed, UNLESS they could muddy the waters and discredit the heroes of Iraq.
Discredit them how ? By revealing that they in fact do not have GPS targetting systems and smart bombs and instead employ indirect area attacks which result in civilian casualties ? What ?
Seriously I dont even know WTF it is you are disbelieving here. Were you not expecting the guerrilla fighters to be using explosives or something ?
I would think it takes more gullibility to believe something that makes no sense, than to believe something that is supported by evidence AND logic.
Well how about we take the opinions out of the equation then.
How about you refer me to the evidence which supports the suggestion that bombings carried out in Iraq which kill civilians are conducted by UK/US forces rather than the insurgency.
If I understood you correctly you were suggesting that there was a greater body of evidence supporting this conclusion rather than the bleeding obvious one.
Go.
Quote: "The goddamn semantic dialogue and reactionary speculation used to manipulate facts and derail the truth is bloody nauseating. I've had just about enough of phoney objectivity, apologists, "gray areas" and other clouded reasoning. If something looks like shit, and smells like shit, guess fuckin' what... IT IS SHIT!
Right on brother.
And when reporters report on Shia militias infiltrating police units and police units running around acting as death squads in police cars and then gets whacked by some guys in a police car ... guess fucking what... IT WAS THE POMS WHO DID IT.
Or reality.
http://iraq-terror.blogspot.com/2005/09/iraqi-interior-minister-says-2-british.html
Iraqi Interior Minister says the 2 British soldiers were not handed to any militia.
Tank,
It's obvious you're an apologist for state power, and it's also obvious that you're posting here to rattle cages instead of participate in an intellectual debate. How do I know this? Because your every thought inflection matches the pabulum spewed by government press relases on a daily basis.
First off, there is no such thing as an Iraqi insurgency. An insurgency is an unlawful uprising against a legitimate government's authority. Since Iraq was invaded aginst the dictates of international law just like the Warsaw Pact was invaded by the Soviet Union, you cannot argue that foreign military occupation can ever be regarded as legitimate.
There is, however an Iraqi RESISTANCE movement, one which is proscribed by all conventions of international law against the illegal occupation of a sovereign state. This movement is able to thus far to fight the strongest military on Earth to a standstill using mere machine guns, mortars, unguided Katusha and Grad rockets and RPGs. No resistance that strong can operate without widespread popular support.
It is this very support which is being targeted both by Donald Rumsfeld P2OG group, along with SAS and their counterparts in the coalition of the shilling. It's the same scenario as Operation Phoenix in Vietnam. Now considering that the Geneva Conventions mainly protect uniformed soldiers, I'd love to hear you explain what the Brits in Basra are doing out of uniform with provocation materials.
The minute you start describing the situation in Iraq using objective and not state-friendly, sanitized terms meant for mental midgets, then the rest of us may start taking you seriously.
Please don't bother to patronize me and twist my focus or intent Tank for you are no brother of mine.
The CIA AND their cut-outs and assets, MI-6, Mossad, DIA, SAS, Delta Force, Special Forces and Navy SEAL's are all running special ops in Iraq. Both to prop up a pseudo-democracy and neo-colonial puppet-state, as well as destabilize ANY movement for Iraqi self-determination, nationalization of THEIR resources, and genuine independence.
Of course there's a resistance and insurgency, no one is going to allow murderous hordes of occupation and theft to go unchallenged. If a thief enters your home and kills your family members are you going to bring him wine and roses and serve him 'til your dying day? To assume there would be no resistance to aggression is arrogance and the ugliest of Americanism. There's insurgencies all around the world, in response to tyranny and oppression. And there are still more contrived to destabilize the national and economic sovereignty of nations through covert military ops and corporate incursions.
I also saw the all weapons the SAS murderers had in their car. The most memorable item was an anti tank missile launcher.
When did the Iraqi resistance get tanks?
Or maybe it can be fired at another vehicle and then claim it was a car bomb?
By the way - anyone know where I can pick up an anti-Tank bullshit deflector.
Anonymous 11:46 AM:
"First off, there is no such thing as an Iraqi insurgency. An insurgency is an unlawful uprising against a legitimate government's authority."
You are absolutely correct in your statement and accolades for your terrific post. I would like to formally retract the incorrect and unsuitable term "insurgency" from my last post.
Starroute -
there were also some weird, destabilizing events going on at a very early point of the occupation. Attacks on, I think, the Jordanian embassy and the UN mission, plus a few lesser incidents helped drive out anyone who could have been a stabilizing force and make the country ungovernable. Where did those come from?
Who knows, but it isn't inconceivable that the Iraqi Republican Guard or some other Iraqi elite unit did that. In fact, it's the most likely culprit.
But the murders of doctors and other proffessionals are suggestive of something more sinister.
Tank -
And when reporters report on Shia militias infiltrating police units and police units running around acting as death squads in police cars and then gets whacked by some guys in a police car ... guess fucking what... IT WAS THE POMS WHO DID IT.
Or reality.
You misunderstand the situation in Southern Iraq if you think the police has been "infiltrated" by the "insurgency" or by Shia militias opposed to the government.
The most important Shia militia is the Badr brigade, which is the "Sturmabteilung" of Ali al-Sistani's SCIRI, the dominant party in the governing coalition in Baghdad. Another is the Da'wa militia, which is connected to PM Ibrahim al-Jaafari's Da'wa party. It is probable that a significant portion of the police in the South also belong to one of those two militias.
The third is "maverick" Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, which may also have some overlap with the police forces. The Mahdi Army is against the occupation, but is not known to be attacking the Iraqi government or police. If those two SAS dudes were out on a false flag mission, the strategy is probably to get the pro-government Badr Brigade/Da'wa militia to believe the Mahdi Army is attacking the government/police, and get them to fight each other.
So which was this "militia" that the two Brits were supposedly handed over to, which is denied by the Iraqi Interior Ministry? Was there any real reason to suspect that the outcome would be their beheading, had they not been rescued?
I have more questions than answers about this, unlike certain others I won't pretend I know what is "reality" just because I've read this week's Newsweek.
About the explosives - it does indeed seem like the reports of the car being "filled with explosives" were untrue (though according to the Washington Post, they were "suspected of planting bombs"). What they did have was an "anti-tank missile", according to the Iraqi police that arrested them. What were they doing with an anti-tank missile?
The entire raison d'etre of the Special Forces is to exploit the situation to spread doubt, fear, confusion, terror, and ambiguity. Who else is there besides Navy SEALS, DIA, etc.? SSB, P2OG, TF121, and mercenaries from every dirty war the U.S. has ever sponsored! So there are MoI death squads, there is a real resistance, and then there are dozens of shape shifters stirring the pot. And because reality includes real people who actually don't like us, there are also some spies and saboteurs from the Middle East! Gasp. Regarding Anon. 5:15, if you follow my link to Instruments of Statecraft, chapter 3, you will see that Yugoslav resistance fighters focused on other partisans as much as on the Nazis. At first the US thought this was rediculous, but then during their review in the 50's, they started to fall in love with dynamic partisans and the concept of counter-terror. which brings us back to our Special Forces and the attritive dirty war mentality. So yes it is possible that some short-sighted fighters are jockeying for position amidst the political-economy of war, such a situation is no less real for all of the external aggravations that are added.
Tank said:
So here is a debate for you all. Why does military personnel being undercover imply they are running a false flag operation rather than just... wel.. working undercover ?
Because they were shooting at police? Just a guess.
Others are more knowledgeable about the politics in Basra, but to assume false flag operations is in no way to assume anything about the nature or legitimacy of genuine resistance movements. A prime use of special forces would be to discredit such resistance armies, thus alienating them from a popular base, or to create division among various factions. I mean, come on, I imagine they learn this on the first day in spy school.
Watch the movie, "The Quiet American" for a fictionalized account of how this might work.
I remember just a few days after the Zapatista uprising, there were bombs going off in shopping malls (maybe just one mall) in Mexico. Had nothing to do with Zapatistas, of course, but got credited as part of the same effort by the media. In fact, an entire guerilla army, complete with shiny new uniforms sort of sprung up soon after.
This sort of thing is old hat.
And if they were undercover to infiltrate something as opposed to shoot at people from further away...they probably should not have chosen a redhead. I don't think the wigs would fool anyone at too close a range.
The whole purpose of the mass media is to deflect the natural tendencies of the people to think rationally. This is why they all adhere to emotional angles and coverage as opposed to straight, independent factual reporting. Why? Because in every case there is a pre-packaged soundbyte designed to prevent the viewer from asking 'who benefits?'
There has never been a single shred of evidence presented for any of the horrendous Iraqi bombings targeting civilians that ever proved the resistance was behind them. All we ever get is some government pogue receiving a welfare check to wear a green or sand colored uniform telling us what his boss wants us to hear. We never get an independent translation from the local arab dialect, and we NEVER are given witnesses. Ever wonder why that is?
This is exactly the same template being applied to New Orleans: make sure needed help doesn't show up, wait until tempers are flaring and people get desperate, then call the survivors 'looters' and 'insurgents' and give yourself a pass to mow them down with impunity. Hitler and Stalin would have loved a plan this simple.
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/iraq/genevaconventions.html]Rummy sez:[/url]
[i]"An American military pamphlet on the law of war provides this definition: An unlawful combatant is an individual who is not authorized to take a direct part in hostilities but does. ... Unlawful combatants are a proper object of attack while engaging as combatants. ... If captured, they may be tried and punished. As examples, the pamphlet mentions civilians who engage in war without authorization; non-combat members of the military, such as medics or chaplains, who engage in combat; and [b]soldiers who fight out of uniform.[/b] In the Second World War, the United States captured eight German saboteurs who were out of uniform and executed six of them. "[/i]
I am sitting here thinking about the ruthlessness of the Iraqis who are behind the ethnic attacks on other Iraqis. These are Iraqis who are willing to slaughter fellow Arabs, fellow countrymen, women and children.
Yet they are never caught and never betrayed despite the hideous, repugnant nature of their acts. The terrifying fury of an Iraqi mob has never been filmed taking bloody revenge on Iraqis caught or suspected of planting bombs aimed at innocents. Or maybe I missed the news that night.
Is it not odd that the Iraqis are showing such unbelievable constraint by not retaliating against each other and despite the truth behind the attacks being reported in the western media.
It would be a strategic disaster now to start a civil war, when your occupier enemy is showing signs of weakness for the first time in a long, brutal war. It would be like Britain declaring war on America in 1943. So why do it.
Boy those Iraqi resistance battlefield generals sure must be dumb...yet they seem to be winning more and more.
This is not about giving your enemy a bad name in his local community. This is about making your enemy go to war against himself.
Why? Because he is starting to kick your ass and you are frightened to leave the compound.
Desperate people do desperate things.
how much longer do you think, before we can safely acknowledge that hell is a place on earth, and we are marching triumphantly thru its gates.....?
mission accomplished indeed.
I think i'm going to go to India, study vimanas.
Great thread! shame we can't respond directly--and NOT anonymously, perhaps?--to individual comments, in sub-threads, or whatever they're called.
We may also hope that we can evolve some sort of "billygoating" method to bait/trap trolls. On the other hand, we have certainly been cooperative mice by gathering on the Arpa/Internet--created in case the central government were to break down, indeed! Just like the part about the Interstate highway system being created to help us all evacuate the cities in an orderly fashion in the 12.5 minutes following a cruise missile attack.
I thought I read someone suggesting the Zapatistas weren't what they seemed. Right on! I would love a discussion on that. Stink very much of faux-Left, particularly after Marcos's disgusting attack on Obrador a few months ago.
I tend to go with a Quigleyan read on what's going on, in general (and he is highly respected for his account of world history, BTW, among historians--no fringe fellow), which asserts an Anglo-American alliance, provides plenty of evidence for the blackness of "international banking power" which we now now as investment banking, financiers, etc., and their long history, in the US and in Europe, of setting up the Jews to take the blame, then raking in the profits. The enemies, as someone posted eloquently, are national entities that won't play ball, PARTICULARLY those that had Anglo-American support in the first place (e.g. Nasser). Hence the real enemies so often the horrible Socialists, Chavez, Obrador, Fidel, Arafat, Saddam, etc and so forth.
We shouldn't forget the role Israel played in fomenting suicide bombing, nor the role US and UK played in setting up fundie Muslims (including Saudi) to disrupt nationalistic movements.
BTW saw an article today about LSU Ivor va Heerden who says the Ponchartrain levees were not topped (the Corps lied, basically), and the failure of the floodwalls is inexplicable. Word on the street among evacuees, and we have some in my neck of the woods, is that the floodwalls were blown out on purpose. This makes a lot of sense, of course--no need to "steer" a hurricane, just have a contingency plan to wipe out as many slums as possible.
Great link that fleshes out the SAS and pseudo-gangs used to commit terror on citizens.
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=32
Here's a brief:
"The Herald notes the following: “Sources say the British soldiers, possibly members of the new Special Reconnaissance Regiment formed earlier this month to provide intelligence for SAS operations, were looking at infiltration of the city’s police by the followers of the outspoken Shi’ite cleric, Moqtada al Sadr,” thus admitting the soldiers worked undercover.
The “Special Reconnaissance Regiment,” according to Regiments.org, “formed with HQ at Hereford from volunteers of other units to support international expeditionary operations in the fight against international terrorism, absorbing 14th Intelligence Company (formed for operations against Ulster terrorists), Intelligence Corps, and releasing the SAS and SBS for the ‘hard end’ of missions.” Is it possible the “hard end” of the “mission” in Iraq is to discredit the resistance and sow chaos in the country by fronting pseudo-gang terrorist groups (or the variant “pseudo-guerilla operations”), as the British have ample experience with elsewhere, notably in Kenya during the Mau Mau uprising and in Malaya? “Pseudo operations are those in which government forces disguised as guerrillas, normally along with guerrilla defectors, operate as teams to infiltrate insurgent areas,” writes Lawrence E. Cline for the U.S. Army War College External Research Associates Program."
more on the relevant logic of laissez-faire capital flows...in my last post i presented a rough version of my working formulation on the iron triangle of currency, commodities, and military (of course these thoughts have innumerable variants from peter dale scott to catherine austin fitts to henry kissinger).
hoping to connect my earlier thoughts to the para-political tactics of false flags and the cognitive dissonance of propaganda...more ruminations:
why do DOD, DOState, Rand corp. et al. hire such a large percentage of (their total employees) MBAs and graduates of political economy for employment in tactical (non-budgetary) positions? capital has become the most powerful magic wand (technology) at the disposal of state and non-state actors whose effectiveness depends upon their actions remaining plausibly deniable.
when hundreds of billions of $/yr. are laundered through cook, cayman, and bahaman island cut out banks - funds emanating from the afghanistan/columbia poppy/coca networks - there is enough hidden $ flowing to be channeled through other secret networks to fund any # of insurgents, dissemblers, contras, and any of the Al_____ s (fill in w/ your fav.).
and do the dictates of capital in its current iron triangle formulation take the safety and security of people into account? only perhaps if you are an extremely dutiful corporate yes-man of a "person" (but watch out for that pension and health care account you contributed to - ouch!). this type of non-transparent capital matrix, most of us are heavily involved in, all but declares "you are either with us or against us!". like the mantra "foreign investment" (read: us$ control) i'm sure is new to no one...come on let us plug you into our matrix and if you don't ask questions you'll get a free big mac...it's as simple as the lexus and olive tree...just ask good cop thom friedman.
is there even a long term desire to create stability in the former ottoman empire (or for that matter in the gold and oil rich areas of africa)? capital says "desperate refugee civilian populations work fine for me as long as hard military perimeters are established around the commodity that underlies my value". for-interest-laissez-faire capital wants good consumers and corresponding slaves to produce the consumables. so, in areas where oil, drugs, gold etc. are produced and only a FEW people are needed to actually produce massive profits, a work force is not a concern...among desperate and uneducated populations a few good workers can always be found.
those unable(unwilling) to suspend their disbelief or follow their own reason rather than a shifting cadre of "legitimate sources" some homework one might try is (um..first turn off fox news) reading up on the works of g.norquist and p.wolfowitz (they must be legit. right?) or read dissertations from the london school of econ., johns hopkins nitze school, tufts political economy etc. etc....the truth about most of these subjects anyway is out there in plain view.
Not to get too entrenched in this mess, but some points I'd like to make. Me most glaring evidence of this being a "false-flag" operation is the fact that they rescued these guys! Why would you do that? Especially when they were shooting at domestic Iraqi police? They rescued them because they could not tolerate such a glaring example of British/US complicity in provoking and/or invoking violence between factions. If they weren't British Agents/provocateurs, why did the Brit's rescue them? Why didn't GI Joe? No, a spade is a spade and the Britts got caught red handed. Judging by the equipment these guys were carrying, these were some of the best-equipped "insurgents" I've ever laid eyes on. The collapsed l.a.w. rocket (any true insurgent would be equipped with an RPG rather than the western law rocket), high explosives expertly packed, plenty of mags, a "breakdown" version of an assault rifle, high quality radios and communications equipment. There is a legitimate resistance in Iraq to the US invasion/occupation forces and these guys aren't it.
ME? Wtf?! Were'd that come from? The.
We may also hope that we can evolve some sort of "billygoating" method to bait/trap trolls.
Like spotting them is difficult?
It's about not responding to them, not letting them draw discourse away from the truth. Whatever their professed 'role' might be in the blog.
Quote:
Tank, It's obvious you're an apologist for state power, and it's also obvious that you're posting here to rattle cages instead of participate in an intellectual debate.
Right. Just like it's obvious you've read absolutely nothing I've posted.
First off, there is no such thing as an Iraqi insurgency. An insurgency is an unlawful uprising against a legit...... There is, however an Iraqi RESISTANCE movement
How very pointless of you.
Now considering that the Geneva Conventions mainly protect uniformed soldiers, I'd love to hear you explain what the Brits in Basra are doing out of uniform with provocation materials.
Then by all means read what has already been posted and not yet addressed on that very topic.
BTW I really dont know why you think the Geneva Conventions were a consideration for either side of in this instance but let's assume it's not worth referring to again.
The minute you start describing the situation in Iraq using objective and not state-friendly, sanitized terms meant for mental midgets, then the rest of us may start taking you seriously.
LMAO. Nobody is taking YOU seriously when you refer to participating in an intellectual debate then opt out of one in favour of taking issue with dictionary definitions which seem to have served everyone else just fine.
But I do wonder though what was it gave me away as a "state friendly state apologist". The part where I refer to the legitimacy of suicide bombings as an effective tactic, where I afford the deaths of civilians in these attacks as the same collateral damage pass as invading armies get, or where I refer to killing those supporting the police and armed forces as having the same legitimacy as killing occupying forces.
You've identified only one mental midget here and that's you. Seriously chump I really think you are gonna struggle to find a less occupation friendly assessment from fucking al Qaeda. Wise the fuck up.
Is anybody else having problems getting on the discussion board?
Qutb said...
You misunderstand the situation in Southern Iraq if you think the police has been "infiltrated" by the "insurgency" or by Shia militias opposed to the government.
...
It is probable that a significant portion of the police in the South also belong to one of those two militias.
No I wasn't relating these militia groups to insurgents, just stating that the most significant one has also stated opposition to the occupying forces and Iraqi government and operate under their own agenda.
That is not to say either that this agenda directly conflicts with that of UK troops. They do provide local security in these areas which assists the UK efforts in relation to criminal and insurgency operations. They are just doing it for their own agenda.
While I think towns like Basra are not detached enough for this to so easily occur and too strategically important to let it, we have seen in other areas what happens where local militias reach a certain level of autonomy in terms of security and defacto rule.
It remains to be seen whether the occupying forces have an interest in curbing or otherwise interfering in this trend towards power through local leadership rather than national, however I don't think it is likely the US/UK have the time to climb that mountain and will settle for whatever level of security/stability in whatever form it comes.
The third is "maverick" Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army, which may also have some overlap with the police forces. The Mahdi Army is against the occupation, but is not known to be attacking the Iraqi government or police. If those two SAS dudes were out on a false flag mission, the strategy is probably to get the pro-government Badr Brigade/Da'wa militia to believe the Mahdi Army is attacking the government/police, and get them to fight each other.
It is noteworthy that prior to this incident a couple of Mahdi members were apparently arrested by the British which included a close associate of al-Sadr.
I don't think this served as any sort of trigger since these groups have clearly been operating on their own terms for quite some time but it does give some perspective on tensions between this group and the UK forces.
So which was this "militia" that the two Brits were supposedly handed over to, which is denied by the Iraqi Interior Ministry? Was there any real reason to suspect that the outcome would be their beheading, had they not been rescued?
I don't think speculation on their fate serves much. The moment that they were handed over to the militia sealed the deal that they needed extraction even when you forget what these militias have been responsible for to date.
The real significance there is just what influence al-Sadr (most likely) has over the police force for them to get handed over in the first place.
Either by direct instruction or by numbers in that police force this didn't happen without overwhelming control.
I have more questions than answers about this, unlike certain others I won't pretend I know what is "reality" just because I've read this week's Newsweek.
I think a better perspective would be nobody knows anything the day after the event no matter what you read. No media outlet would pass up reporting on this and will obviously go with whatever assessment they could get at the time. Until there is enough time to investigate and ascertain which accounts are accurate and supported there is no full assessment or conclusion which can be made.
However I will say that whatever details come out I don't think anyone should be expecting SAS troops who were undercover for whatever purpose to have started a firefight without cause. Either you think they hand out those 3 letters randomly or you understand these are not guys that get spooked and panic on an undercover job.
About the explosives - it does indeed seem like the reports of the car being "filled with explosives" were untrue (though according to the Washington Post, they were "suspected of planting bombs"). What they did have was an "anti-tank missile", according to the Iraqi police that arrested them. What were they doing with an anti-tank missile?
I saw that and it did look like a LAW-sized weapon although it was hard to tell what it was. These do get used on targets other than armour such as buildings where enemies are entrenched however I find it unlikely any 2 man team would be expecting to encounter that situation or have to take that on themselves in an area where UK troops were available.
In the end I think what isn't in dispute is that none of us have any business making judgement calls on what kit the SAS choose to take with them. If they had NV goggles with them they would be equally unsuited to the task but also there only because these guys chose to take it with them. It's their arses not anybody elses.
Felix said...
"Is anybody else having problems getting on the discussion board?"
Yes.
Geographer1...not a Zapatista fan, I see. The rift between them and the PRD is a long one and I tend to side with the Zapatistas on this one, though I had respect for many I met in the PRD. Having been in Chiapas during elections some years ago...I was not impressed with the local PRD and their willingness to cave in and sell out. Sorry...that's just what I saw.
I also met Marcos and spent a little time in La Realidad and saw nothing to cause concern. And, to his credit, I found while I was there that Marcos had turned down an offer to be a photographic subject in a Benneton ad..back when they were doing that weird campaign with subjects such as dying aids patients.
The guerilla movement I spoke of was NOT the Zapatistas. They don't have uniforms and their weapons are crap. This was a guerilla group that sprung up soon after and confused everyone. I think they were called by the initials EPR...Probably People's Revolutionary Army...but I can't remember. Could look it up if you are really curious.
This was back in '96 and the differences between PRD and EZLN were already becoming clear.
dreams end said...
And if they were undercover to infiltrate something as opposed to shoot at people from further away...they probably should not have chosen a redhead. I don't think the wigs would fool anyone at too close a range.
And what do you think would happen at close range ? Shooting perhaps ? The one thing you identified as suggesting this might be a false flag operation rather than simply undercover recon.
You are talking about the SAS remember. The gangsta-style drive-by theory just ain't flying.
Hey, where has Cenoxo been lately?
Cenoxo, er, Cewillir, have you now morphed into Tank?
The foul stench of your breath is unmistakeable and known to all.
You cannot hide. We know who you are.
REPEAT:
Solemn Vigilance said...
cenoxo,
Tell your bosses the 'Hearts and Minds' spin and divert mission is a failure. People are awakening and moreover staying that way, the more you turn up like a pestiferous fly. The more of masses that are won over, not by your "Hannity & Combs" prattling but by the REAL. The enforced torment, suffering and containment of real, live individuals are paraded before our eyes every hour of every day.
Your efforts are unable to shake anyone's resolve. Your master's will have to send another more sophisticated operative, you are now ineffectual and obsolete. Maybe you can be a greeter at one of the new Amerikan concentration camps, or follow your pathetic nature and apply for the position of camp snitch. We owe you nothing in explanations and are certainly not answerable to the likes of you. People are openly mocking you and your voice is fading fast into the background din.
Jeff, Cassandra, and the sincere and critical contributions of others here at RI, are garnering success and the attention of many. Apparently so much so that an intelligence apparatus has deemed it necessary to place an amatuerish asset(s).
You condescendingly urge us to follow up on your traipses into Soma-land, yet fail to complete any personal investigation yourself. Again, none of us owe you or your blue-pill ilk anything. There are many forms of transportation leaving most timely for Louisiana, and you are welcome at any time to get on one and be captivated by sheer hell. Just don't linger or you may find yourself on a military transport to a Utah MK/death camp
Yes, Felix, I'm unable to get onto the discussion board -- been trying for more than an hour.
Well, Tank, sounds like you know a lot more about the SAS, special operations and military weapons than I do. As to what the SAS does...whatever they are ordered to, I presume. And I also presume that most of that is secret...
Since our own special forces most certainly engage in such activities, I don't know why SAS would not...but I didn't say drive by...maybe hit a building...kidnap someone...who knows. But an outfit involving wigs and a guy with redhair and commensurate complexion doesn't sound like they were getting ready to infiltrate anyone...in fact, I'm sure they wouldn't rely on someone who'd need a wig if that were the case.
anyway, keep posting...though I'd recommend the EZboard forum when it comes back up (problems now, I see.) I enjoy reading all your inside information on how the SAS works.
Here's the Al Jazeera report with the interview with the witness of the bomb in the car.
sorry if someone else already posted it.
[Anchorman Al-Habib al-Ghuraybi] We have with us on the telephone from Baghdad Fattah al-Shaykh, member of the Iraqi National Assembly. What are the details of and the facts surrounding this incident?
[Al-Shaykh] In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate. There have been continuous provocative acts since the day before yesterday by the British forces against the peaceful sons of Basra. There have been indiscriminate arrests, the most recent of which was the arrest of Shaykh Ahmad al-Farqusi and two Basra citizens on the pretext that they had carried out terrorist operations to kill US soldiers. This is a baseless claim. This was confirmed to us by [name indistinct] the second secretary at the British Embassy in Baghdad, when we met with him a short while ago. He said that there is evidence on this. We say: You should come up with this evidence or forget about this issue. If you really want to look for truth, then we should resort to the Iraqi justice away from the British provocations against the sons of Basra, particularly what happened today when the sons of Basra caught two non-Iraqis, who seem to be Britons and were in a car of the Cressida type. It was a booby-trapped car laden with ammunition and was meant to explode in the centre of the city of Basra in the popular market. However, the sons of the city of Basra arrested them. They [the two non-Iraqis] then fired at the people there and killed some of them. The two arrested persons are now at the Intelligence Department in Basra, and they were held by the National Guard force, but the British occupation forces are still surrounding this department in an attempt to absolve them of the crime.
Here's another report of the same issue from a different witness:
Why Basra is in revolt against occupation
An Iraqi resistance leader speaks out
Iraqis have accused British special forces of planning a terrorist attack on Basra.
Sheikh Hassan al-Zarqani, a spokesperson for rebel Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, told Socialist Worker that the two undercover soldiers seized by Iraqi police last Monday were armed with explosives and a remote control detonator.
The soldiers were disguised as members of Sadr’s militia, the Mehdi Army. The arrests sparked protests after British troops backed by tanks attempted to free the soldiers from an Iraqi police station.
Sheikh Hassan said trouble started when a senior Sadr official, Sheikh Ahmad Fartusi, was arrested on Sunday.
“We called a protest outside the mayor’s office on Monday demanding the Sheikh be released,” Sheikh Hassan said. “This protest was peaceful.
“But events in our city took a sinister turn when the police tried to stop two men dressed as members of the Mehdi Army driving near the protest. The men opened fire on the police and passers-by. After a car chase they were arrested.”
Basra, Iraq’s southern oil city, had been held up as a model of successful occupation by British authorities.
But many of the promises made in the wake of the 2003 invasion never materialised.
Discontent has also been building over a policy that favours some tribes above others.
The largely Shia city feared it would be a target of a bombing ahead of an important religious festival. The explosive find sparked rumours that British troops were about to commit an atrocity.
“What our police found in their car was very disturbing — weapons, explosives and a remote control detonator,” Sheikh Hassan said. “These are the weapons of terrorists. We believe these soldiers were planning an attack on a market or other civilian targets, and thanks be to god they were stopped and countless lives were saved.”
The arrest of the two soldiers brought discontent to the boil.
“The two men were taken to the police station to answer questions about their activities. That afternoon the British army came in tanks and armoured cars demanding the two be released.
“The police refused as they were considered to be planning terrorist attacks, and as they were disguised as members of the Mehdi Army, the police wanted to know who their target was.
“Thousands of people gathered to defend the police station. British troops opened fire and the crowds responded with stones and firebombs.”
Residents in Basra are now demanding the British authorites answer questions about the activities of the two men.
“Why were these men dressed as Mehdi Army?” Sheikh Hassan said. “Why were they carrying explosives and where were they planning to detonate their bomb?
“Were they planing an outrage so that they could create tensions with other communities? Were they going to kill innocent people to put the blame on Al Qaida, who do not have any support in our city.”
The questions were never answered. Instead British troops returned that night.
“The soldiers drove a tank into the police station and threatened to kill the police officers if they did not hand over the two terrorists,” Sheikh Hassan said. “It is only then, to save any further loss of life, that the men were released.”
Sheikh Hassan appealed to the British people to demand the withdrawal of all troops.
“We have only the warmest regards for the British people, who have protested in their tens of thousands against the occupation of our country.
“We fear than the British government plans to send more troops. We appeal to the British people to oppose this as it can only deepen our problems”
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=7426
Someone tell me why the explosives part of the story is now considered incorrect as opposed to covered up? I don't know the thinking behind that.
Anonymous said...
The whole purpose of the mass media is to deflect the natural tendencies of the people to think rationally. This is why they all adhere to emotional angles and coverage as opposed to straight, independent factual reporting. Why? Because in every case there is a pre-packaged soundbyte designed to prevent the viewer from asking 'who benefits?'
Which is exposed when consumers are given infinite choice in the matter. Like where you have 300 channels and the History Channel, documentaries and 24/7 current affairs programs is always more popular than fuckwits eating worms for money. Either that or the media really isn't the issue.
It's the same reason you buy Tonga Daily News every day. Sure nothing exciting, interesting or noteworthy ever happens but that's not what you are interested in reading about right ?
Personally I just got through reading a 14 volume expose on the use of wood dowels since the stone age. I shudder to think what dirty tricks they have used to keep that off the bestseller lists.
There has never been a single shred of evidence presented for any of the horrendous Iraqi bombings targeting civilians that ever proved the resistance was behind them.
Yeah that's the mainstream media trying to hurt the Bush administration with their propaganda that the Iraqis aren't welcoming the US as liberators. Frankly I suspect a rougue Reuters cell is behind the bombings and a disgruntled CNN teleprompter operator is responsible for shooting down the helicopters.
This is exactly the same template being applied to New Orleans: make sure needed help doesn't show up, wait until tempers are flaring and people get desperate, then call the survivors 'looters' and 'insurgents' and give yourself a pass to mow them down with impunity. Hitler and Stalin would have loved a plan this simple.
Except for the part where they don't get mowed down of course.
Join reality.
thrulookingglass said...
Not to get too entrenched in this mess, but some points I'd like to make. Me most glaring evidence of this being a "false-flag" operation is the fact that they rescued these guys! Why would you do that?
Was this your way of saying you haven't read what happened or that you would have no problem with someone you knew not only being detained by an Iraqi police force credited with acting as a death squad but then handed over to a LESS freindly religious militia group ?
Judging by the equipment these guys were carrying, these were some of the best-equipped "insurgents" I've ever laid eyes on. The collapsed l.a.w. rocket (any true insurgent would be equipped with an RPG rather than the western law rocket)
Not to mention UK issued British DNA.
Either you can understand that by the time anyone locates weapons in your car they would have already located your face on the front of your skull or you can't. I don't think anyone can really explain that to you.
Anonymous said...
Cenoxo, er, Cewillir, have you now morphed into Tank?
Nimrod the prerequisite for question someone's identity is to get one of your own.
Unless your name is actually Robert calling yourself "Bob" will make you just as anonymous as you are now. Try it.
Dream's End said...
Since our own special forces most certainly engage in such activities, I don't know why SAS would not...but I didn't say drive by...maybe hit a building...kidnap someone...who knows.
I was referring to the idea that SAS troops firing on police without provocation made no sense. If an attack on the local police force to give the impression of resistance or conflict was wanted you don't need to dodge bullets in a wig to do that.
Either the SAS is a little more advanced in their tactics and planning than LA gangs or they aren't.
doesn't sound like they were getting ready to infiltrate anyone in fact, I'm sure they wouldn't rely on someone who'd need a wig if that were the case.
Of course. Physical infiltration of police operations by white guys is ridiculous and if this was called for you would suspect they could come up with a couple of cooperative Iraqis from the government.
anyway, keep posting...though I'd recommend the EZboard forum when it comes back up (problems now, I see.)
I would recommend this blog's owner get himself a haloscan account and set the window to wide. This 5 words to a line comments crap is giving me the shits.
I enjoy reading all your inside information on how the SAS works.
I have no insights beyond knowing that nobody has any insight.
The only thing I do know is that these guys operating as small squads are pretty much on their own.
Either you post your full rank and serial to confirm you are their direct commanding officer or you have no business talking about what they should or should not carry.
Formed to perform acts of sabotage and assassination behind enemy lines during during World War 2, the SAS evolved into a counter-insurgency regiment after the war. The 1969 Army Training manual stated that their tasks included:
"the ambush and harassment of insurgents, the infiltration of sabotage, assassination and demolition parties into insurgent-held areas, border surveillance, . . . liaison with, and organisation of friendly guerrilla forces operating against the common enemy". (3)
Examples were found during the Mau-Mau rebellion in Kenya during the mid-fifties, when SAS officers commanded some of the infamous "pseudo gangs" that terrorised the civilian population; (4) in Borneo, where they used cross-border operations to attack and destroy guerrilla bases; (5) and in Aden in 1967, where they dressed as Arabs and would use an Army officer to lure Arab gunmen into a trap and kill them. (6) To defeat the insurgents counter-terror must be deployed back at them - described by Ken Livingstone as "subverting the subverters". (7) Little indication of this is found in Ambush. But in Fred Holroyd, we have a witness, and evidence that these tactics were used in Northern Ireland during the period of the Wilson government in the 1970's. Here are the origins of the so-called "shoot-to-kill" policy that John Stalker (and others) investigated, whose inquiry was effectively sabotaged by the RUC.
It is clear now, that because elements within the security forces did not want a political deal with the IRA in the mid-seventies, and the military solution was only possible with a change at the top of the Labour leadership, MI5 and the SAS were prepared to use the same methods the IRA are condemned for - civilian deaths, assassinations, bombings and black propaganda—to bring this about.
http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/dirty_war_in_ireland.htm
Strategy of tension
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The Strategy of Tension (Italian; "strategia della tensione") is a way to control and manipulate public opinion using propaganda, disinformation, psychological warfare, agents provocateurs and terror. Coined in Italy during the trials of the 1970s and 1980s terror attacks and murders committed by neofascist terrorists backed by deviated intelligence agencies or NATO's secret stay-behind networks ("Gladio"). Other examples include Operation Condor in South America and events in Algeria during the 1990s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_tension
All this and we haven't even touched upon Kermit Roosevelts' antics in Iran to wipe out Mossadegh.
hey 120+ comments? Some folks are listening.
The problem goes back to when the powers, beauties, and deep knowledges of the age-old women's traditions were supplanted by military-caste mystiques & the accumulation of heavy metals
From d.a. levy
"Really"
the police try to protect
the banks - and everything else
is secondary"
lol at dowels
Regarding these news reports quoting Iraqis stating that explosives were found in the car they all suffer from the same lack of information...
Has the guy who took the photo of the contents of the car been interrogated yet and just how much torture do you think you will need to have him reveal why he included the car jack and the tow rope in the photo but not the explosives.
Because that really does seem to have beeen an oversight on his part.
I am not suggesting the tow rope doesn't make the SAS guys look bad, I'm just saying the non-existant explosives seem to be a more significant talking point.
Either that or the story falls down right about there.
I wish to unreservedly apologize for my continual misinterpretation of both the available evidence and the comments of my fellow posters. I was talking out of my ass and fucked up this thread for everyone, which I admit was my purpose, but which I now regret.
This is obviously a false flag operation. Ordo ab chao.
Since the forum is down (getting too hot for the BFEE?) I wanted to post this here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/krwashbureau/_wea_rita_intensify
"The effect of the warm Gulf waters was predictable. But Katrina left a mystery in its wake.
As Katrina passed over an eddy of the Loop Current in late August, it should have cooled the water by about 5 degrees Fahrenheit. It didn't and that surprised scientists.
Rita is predicted to hit the same eddy on Thursday afternoon.
NOAA's buoys and thermometers are waiting."
That's a significant anomaly.
Since the board is down...
Link
From the article:
--
I have a word of advice I would like to offer Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon chieftains who currently preside over the 200 or more hunger strikers at Guantanamo Bay, 20 of whom are near death.
For God’s sake, let them die.
What more could you possibly want from them?
They’ve already provided you with the subjects you needed for your newly perfected sense-deprivation techniques and your sadistic methods of torture. They supplied you with the lab rats for your new drugs, your improved methods of psychological torment, and your sexually deviant abuses. Now, let them die. The experiment is over. Show that there is some speck of humanity left in your withered heart by allowing these men to pass away with dignity, the dignity you deprived them of in life.
--
Word.
Quote: "I wish to unreservedly apologize for my continual misinterpretation of both the available evidence and the comments of my fellow posters. I was talking out of my ass and fucked up this thread for everyone, which I admit was my purpose, but which I now regret.
This is obviously a false flag operation. Ordo ab chao.
You think it might have worked out better if you tried discrediting me before I discredited this story rather than waiting until just after I did that ?
Not to fault the efforts of others mind you. I mean the All Star line up of paranoid idiots here who have wanted to talk about me rather than the situation from start to finish have also made a valuable contribution to the non-reality based blogging community.
As is often the case I think that as or even more important than the details of an event--details which are often hard to come by--is reviewing the history of the people involved in it.
Many people have done a great job of pointing out the Brits' "Machiavellian" subterfuges for centuries in many different parts of the world. Ironically, in early September 2001 I was reading "Tournament of Shadows: The Great Game and the Race for Empire in Central Asia"and had just reached the massacre at Jagdalak in 1842 on 9/10...weird, eh? I highly recommend the book, by the way.
I am also Irish so I need no introduction to the Sassanagh's tactics, and in two consecutive evenings you can read "O Jerusalem!" about the British cock-up in leaving Palestine that left Arabs and Zionists at each other's throats and "Freedom at Midnight" on the British cock-up in leaving India that left Hindus and Muslims at each other's throats. Then take a break from reading and watch "Lawrence of Arabia" and remember that Emir Feisal was later put on the throne of the country the Brits' formed out of Mesopotamia and called "Iraq."
I also think however that, without any help from the trollsters, we weaken ourselves by trying to nail down all the details of the crimes that are being committed against humanity by the NWO.
Suppose a gang has been pulling robberies in your neighborhood, always leaving the gang name spraypainted on the wall. You come home one night from a movie, someone conks you on the head and you wake up to find everything of value in your home gone and the gang name spraypainted on the wall.
Now, of course the police need to do a thorough investigation, but do YOU really need to know (1) which window they came in (2) what sort of tool they used to break the lock (3) what they bonked you over the head with or (4) which door they took your stuff out, to know that you've been cleaned out by that gang?
I'm not defending being sloppy about facts. My point is, at what point do you and your neighbors begin to organize to do something about this gang? Only when you find out that you were hit over the head with a brick? When you find out where the gangbanger found the brick? When you find out what old building the brick once was part of? When you find out who owned that building? When you find out what color running shoes the kid was wearing when he hit you? When you find out what hardware store he bought the spray paint at, and exactly what color it is, whether it's metallic sky blue or metallic delft blue?
I personally believe that anyone who hasn't figured out yet what is going on either is part of it or needs Jack Nicholson to bark "You can't HANDLE the truth" at them.
In our time the Brits were those noble folks who survived the Blitz, and gave us Monty Python. Historically they've been evil imperialists, in fact their empire once included a little backwater called the 13 North American colonies who got a snootful of the limey bastards and send 'em packing. The limey bastards didn't get the message the first time and burned Washington to make that abundantly clear. They have sown heartache on every continent with their 'Great Game' and their penal colonies (one of which is now called Oz) and their opium trade.
There are some fine people of British extraction as there are fine people of every nationality. But as a nation, there is nothing...NOTHING...foul, vile, murderous, evil, that the Brits haven't already pulled, and wouldn't pull again.
Ever see the film "Breaker Morant"? Here's what our allies in Iraq were up to back then:
"The year is 1899. Queen Victoria has recently celebrated her Diamond Jubilee. The British Empire is at its zenith in power and prestige. But the High Commissioner of Cape Colony in South Africa, Alfred Milner, wants more. He wants to gain for the Empire the economic power of the gold mines in the Dutch Boer republics of the Transvaal and theOrange Free State. He also wants to create a Cape-to-Cairo confederation of British colonies to dominate the African continent. And he wants to rule over it.
To do this, Milner precipitates a war with the Boers. As always, over-confident generals and politicians predict the war will be over 'by Christmas'. And again, as frequently happened with the British in their colonial wars, they only win one battle - the last one. But they will have to wait two and a half years for that. Until then, disaster is piled on disaster, military careers are destroyed, 22,000 Tommy Atkins are laid to rest in 'some corner of a foreign field that is for ever England', and the Empire muddles on in the heat and dust of the South African veldt."
And the Boers?
"Some Boer commando units, the 'bitter-enders', escape into the vast bush country and for 2 more years continue to wage unconventional guerilla warfare by blowing up trains and ambushing British troops and garrisons. The British Army, unable to defeat the Boers using conventional tactics, adopt many of the Boer methods, and the war degenerates into a devastating and cruel struggle between British righteous might and Boer nationalist desperation. The British criss-cross the countryside with blockhouses to flush the Boers into the open; they burn farms and confiscate foodstuffs to prevent them falling into Boer hands; they pack off Boer women and children to concentration camps as 'collaborators'; they literally starve the commandos into submission. The last of the Boer commandos, left without food, clothing, ammunition or hope, surrender in May, 1902 and the war ends with the Treaty of Vereeniging....Due to British incompetence and neglect, 25,000 Boer civilians (mainly women and children) and 14,000 natives die in the infamous concentration camps."
And the nonwhites?
"* Mohandas K. Gandhi (1869-1948) also known as Mahatma (Great Soul), serves with the British medical corps as a stretcher-bearer.
* The native African population, who suffer greatly in this war, are barely acknowledged in the histories."
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/
8141/boerwar.html
Let's take a moment and bow our heads to remember all of those who died to advance the Anglo-American Empire.
The March of the Dead
The cruel war was over -- oh, the triumph was so sweet!
We watched the troops returning, through our tears;
There was triumph, triumph, triumph down the scarlet glittering street,
And you scarce could hear the music for the cheers.
And you scarce could see the house-tops for the flags that flew between;
The bells were pealing madly to the sky;
And everyone was shouting for the Soldiers of the Queen,
And the glory of an age was passing by.
And then there came a shadow, swift and sudden, dark and drear;
The bells were silent, not an echo stirred.
The flags were drooping sullenly, the men forgot to cheer;
We waited, and we never spoke a word.
The sky grew darker, darker, till from out the gloomy rack
There came a voice that checked the heart with dread:
"Tear down, tear down your bunting now, and hang up sable black;
They are coming -- it's the Army of the Dead."
They were coming, they were coming, gaunt and ghastly, sad and slow;
They were coming, all the crimson wrecks of pride;
With faces seared, and cheeks red smeared, and haunting eyes of woe,
And clotted holes the khaki couldn't hide.
Oh, the clammy brow of anguish! the livid, foam-flecked lips!
The reeling ranks of ruin swept along!
The limb that trailed, the hand that failed, the bloody finger tips!
And oh, the dreary rhythm of their song!
"They left us on the veldt-side, but we felt we couldn't stop
On this, our England's crowning festal day;
We're the men of Magersfontein, we're the men of Spion Kop,
Colenso -- we're the men who had to pay.
We're the men who paid the blood-price. Shall the grave be all our gain?
You owe us. Long and heavy is the score.
Then cheer us for our glory now, and cheer us for our pain,
And cheer us as ye never cheered before."
The folks were white and stricken,
and each tongue seemed weighted with lead;
Each heart was clutched in hollow hand of ice;
And every eye was staring at the horror of the dead,
The pity of the men who paid the price.
They were come, were come to mock us, in the first flush of our peace;
Through writhing lips their teeth were all agleam;
They were coming in their thousands -- oh, would they never cease!
I closed my eyes, and then -- it was a dream.
There was triumph, triumph, triumph down the scarlet gleaming street;
The town was mad; a man was like a boy.
A thousand flags were flaming where the sky and city meet;
A thousand bells were thundering the joy.
There was music, mirth and sunshine; but some eyes shone with regret;
And while we stun with cheers our homing braves,
O God, in Thy great mercy, let us nevermore forget
The graves they left behind, the bitter graves.
~Robert W. Service
Anyone remember the market place killing in Sarajevo which both happened on the eve of UN votes?
The canadian and russians experts concluded that it wasnt fired from the serb positions in the divided city AND french prime minister Balladur and his generals admitted to the Nouvel Observateur *sort of like Time magazine* that his government knew that the muslims created those events to get public
opinion but that it served their goals.
The fact that tens of thousands of muhajeddins were 'working' there wasnt enough of a clue. The canadian report was quickly hushed and Balladur's admission was a non-starter.
A few years later, a 'massacre' in Kosovo was used as pretense even though the finnish forensics team concluded that the wounds on the dead people didnt match the civilians clothes but hell, Commander Death himself William Walker was there to give his blessing so that overruled science.
Hey, how about those bearded types that were arrested in Sarajevo and shown on ABC? We were later told that they were 'counter-explosives' experts who were showing the nice muslims how to take bombs OUT of children's toy.
These events barely held any water when held to scrutiny but none the less, two wars were led based on them. And we now have TWO muslim terrorist bases in Europe and the one in Bosnia has 9.11 connections, Madrid connections, a dozen visitors at Camp Gitmo and not to mention the last three Al Quaeda heads in S.Araabia including the last one who arrive with his Bosnian passport and bosnian wife.
The WMD lies where child's play compared to the lies the democrats spun.
I wont event bring up the jewish lobby who shut their mouth and invited croatian president who had written in his historical book taht the only 2 millions jews perished and that they were their own worst enemies in those charming camps sinc e they were the capos who ran those place.
For political reasons, they brought a holocaust denier to their little opening and kicked out the president of the Buchenwald camp survivros.
But I digress. Events such as the Basra ones happen all the time.
Good god it took a long time to get through all of those posts. Wonderful!
I knew it was a false flag op when The British media attacked Kate Moss and played up her use of cocaine back to back with the sanitized version of the Iraq story. The house of Chanel revoked her contract as of October. In America isn't it illegal to fire somebody who suffers from a disease? It must at least be in bad form to do that in Europe. Reminds me of the prince's nazi uniform sensation (successful because I can't recall what it distracted me from, oh was it the downing street memo, no, ...shit it worked, )
I wonderwhy I'm reminded of the mechanics of an allergic reaction when I hear that western occupying forces are attacking the people they are protecting and supposedly liberating. Does the body forget/loose track of what to protect us from when we suffer an allergic reaction? Is the response massaged and sold back to us as a normal immune system when it is really distracted and weakened by the false flag, I mean allergic operations? Vaccine anyone?
sorry for the distraction
-firstimer
Tank said:
"Well they really don't have to come up with an explanation for explosives in the car because there is no serious suggestion there were any."
From the BBC World website:
"One (Iraqi) officer called the two UK soldiers "British terrorists" and claimed they should still be under arrest.
(BBC reporter) Paul Wood said demonstrators believed Iranian TV reports that the two men were detained after they opened fire on Shia pilgrims on Monday.
He said they were probably on a covert mission to get the intelligence needed to stop further attacks on British troops.
Their weapons, EXPLOSIVES and communications gear are standard kit for British special forces." (My emphasis)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4267054.stm
Tank, baby, it's time for a nap, hon.
Yeah we covered that already.
There was no car full of explosives and all that was found was SAS kit and vehicle parts.
"In a statement released in London, (British Defence Secretary)Reid did not say why the two had been taken into custody. But the Iraqi official, who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity, said their arrests stemmed from an incident earlier in the day.
The official said two unknown gunmen in full Arabic dress began firing on civilians in central Basra, wounding several, including a traffic police officer. There were no fatalities, the official said.
The two gunmen fled the scene but were captured and taken in for questioning, admitting they were British marines carrying out a "special security task," the official said."
Shooting at civilians? Dressed as Arabs? From a car filled with explosives? (see my previous comment) This is a "special security task"?
As my little kid would say, hey, Tank: DUH!!!
Oh, sorry. The above quotation was from CNN: http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/19/iraq.main/
Alice says...
As my little kid would say, hey, Tank: DUH!!!
I think you mean "doh".
So the anonymous Iraqi says they were firing wildly at civilians.
Meanwhile Iraqi officials in explaining just why these arrests were justified and expressing their outrage over the incident say they returned fire when they were stopped at a checkpoint...
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/21/news/iraq.php
Either you think a suitable followup to the unsupported and non-credible "car full of explosives" story is putting credence in another claim by another anonymous source or you don't.
BTW I'm not encouraging you to not believe another unconfirmed report which paints someone in the worst possible light... I'm just saying that's who you are.
OK, I get it. So, Tank, you are saying that there WERE no explosives, see, and that's why the BBC World was explaining that the um, explosives that they had were nothing to get all excited about, because the um, explosives found with them were merely part of their standard gear. But of course, there WERE no explosives. Right.
I'd stop beating that horse, Tank. I can smell it from all the way here.
PS: I'm going to stop responding to the tankmeister there -- he got me so annoyed I accidentally hit the "anonymous" button on my previous post.
That’s right Alice - no explosives.
And also regarding those anti tank missile launchers - when they hit their intended target they shower the victims with confetti, glitter and ribbons. OK.
Nothing to see here, move along.
...except a blatant false flag operation.
Wank said,
"I think you mean "doh"."
Unbelievable!
I suspect Alice knows what her own kid says.
The arrogance is astonishing.
Alice said...
OK, I get it. So, Tank, you are saying...
Said. Past tense. Like only about 3 posts up. The one you replied directly underneath.
They call it playing dumb for a reason you know.
I'd stop beating that horse, Tank. I can smell it from all the way here.
No idea what that is supposed to mean but you can assume you aren't interesting or smart enough to make it float.
PS: I'm going to stop responding to the tankmeister there -- he got me so annoyed I accidentally hit the "anonymous" button on my previous post.
Hey feel free to continue your debate with another reader who didn't immediately buy this hook line and sinker.
You can find one right ?
It's like talking about abortion at a Republican National Convention in here. There's just so much diversity.
"To flog a dead horse:
What it means:
To continue to argue a hopeless point or issue."
http://creativeclassroom.starhub.com/learn_adv/al_horse.asp
Good luck with your education, Tank.
The big question is whether or not there were explosives in that car. If there were, then it's pretty obvious what those two gentlemen were up to. If not, it's more of an open question IMO. And I agree with Tank that the absence of any explosives visible in the photos showing the inventory of the car is indicative of there being no explosives. All claims of finding explosives seem to come from the Sadrists. True, false, or a misunderstanding? I don't know at this point.
Can't believe it's come to this but here goes:
Duh - Used by young people (particularly Americans) and implies that the facts are so obvious they should be understood already.
Doh - Homer Simpsons catchphrase - an expression of his own stupidity as he realises he's got it wrong again.
The most damning evidence is that the Iraqis themselves strongly believe it was a false flag operation and that these activities have been going on for a while.
If the SAS guys were on an innocent mission, why attack Iraqi policemen when challenged.
And if the British army knew the SAS men were on an innocent mission, why attack a police station with tanks.
Surely they British commanders at a high level could simply explain their actions to the Iraqi commanders and the SAS would have been released once the misunderstanding was cleared up.
They Iraqis are on the ground at the sharp end.
I'll go with their perceptions of what is really going on.
hat the absence of any explosives visible in the photos showing the inventory of the car is indicative of there being no explosives.
Are there any pictures of the car itself?
I think some of you guys are unquestionably being hard on Tank with regard. Consider the proof that all life forms have intelligence as seen from below ;
The Backster effect has also been demonstrated with bacteria – an even simpler lifeform than brine shrimp. We attended a lecture of his that was hosted by Walter Russel’s University of Science and Philosophy on September 8, 2000, and during this talk, Backster revealed that he discovered the bacteria effect after pouring a pot of boiling water from the coffeemaker into the sink in his laboratory. His plants, which were always connected to the polygraph machine, registered a huge and immediate shock when he did this, which he later found on the printout. Obviously, he was very puzzled as to what had caused this at first, and had to think carefully about what he was doing right at the moment that the shock had registered. Once he traced it back to the boiling water, he sampled the sink with a cotton swab and analyzed the specimen under a microscope. He then got the answer, which was that a huge colony of bacteria was growing in the sink, which he did not clean regularly! Subsequent experiments proved that the plants consistently reacted to the death of the bacteria.
;-)
People, fuck this Tank punkass. Go on a personal Tank embargo and starve his stupid ass out. Let the shill piss in the wind.
Tank, you're full of sh*t.
You whine about nobody ever discussing your'talking points' while regularly avoiding any discussion that deviates from your favorite pro-statist party line. Here's your latest example:
"Which is exposed when consumers are given infinite choice in the matter. Like where you have 300 channels and the History Channel, documentaries and 24/7 current affairs programs is always more popular than fuckwits eating worms for money. Either that or the media really isn't the issue."
Only a simplistic moron who refuses to see that the same half dozen media conglomerates OWN those supposed 300 independent cable channels would pretend that there is such a thing as 'choice' here. Here's another doozy:
"Yeah that's the mainstream media trying to hurt the Bush administration with their propaganda that the Iraqis aren't welcoming the US as liberators. Frankly I suspect a rougue Reuters cell is behind the bombings and a disgruntled CNN teleprompter operator is responsible for shooting down the helicopters."
Instead of addressing the lack of evidence about the bombings in Iraq being attributed to the resistance, you go off on a tangent to portray the government as the 'victim' here. I really do think after reading this tripe that you are a paid government stooge whose job is to reinforce party dogma, just like the Soviets had back in the day.
In other words, until you start dealing with the issues being discussed instead of running interference for your paymasters, you will be ignored and disregarded as a propagandist poser.
Clarence said...
Tank, you're full of sh*t.
Only a simplistic moron who refuses to see that the same half dozen media conglomerates OWN those supposed 300 independent cable channels would pretend that there is such a thing as 'choice' here.
And when simplistic morons aren't doing that, they're failing to realise that whether or not Rupert owns overy channel everywhere it is still the viewer who choses to watch reality TV instead of programs which would inform them.
Instead of addressing the lack of evidence about the bombings in Iraq being attributed to the resistance, you go off on a tangent to portray the government as the 'victim' here.
When IS w3c going to come up with those satire tags I ask ?
I really do think after reading this tripe that you are a paid government stooge whose job...
Yeah that got old like the 5th time it got said.
Either you can name this mysterious party whos dogma includes legitimising suicide attacks against coalition forces and Iraqi recruiting lines or you are no different from all the tinfoil whackjobs who came before you.
In fact you could have saved yourself quite a bit of time by copy/pasting.
In other words, until you start dealing with the issues being discussed instead of running interference for your paymasters, you will be ignored and disregarded as a propagandist poser.
By someone who can see no discerable difference between the History Channel and Fear Factor ?
Yeah that's a worry.
I've got $5 says you kill yourself trying to take a shower in your refrigerator before that ever becomes a problem though.
Wank said,
"I've got $5 says you kill yourself trying to take a shower in your refrigerator before that ever becomes a problem though."
There is nothing sadder than someone who thinks they are being funny and clever when they are not.
Dear oh dear this is poor stuff...
An idiotic poster said:
"And when simplistic morons aren't doing that, they're failing to realise that whether or not Rupert owns overy channel everywhere it is still the viewer who choses to watch reality TV instead of programs which would inform them."
The fallacious assumption here is that ANY of the programs on TV do any appreciable amount of informing as opposed to spinning to favor advertisers and pet government agencies. 50 brands of junk food are still made of junk food; actual nurtition is incidental.
This same idiotic poser also said:
"Yeah that got old like the 5th time it got said.
Either you can name this mysterious party whos dogma includes legitimising suicide attacks against coalition forces and Iraqi recruiting lines or you are no different from all the tinfoil whackjobs who came before you."
This poster obviously hasn't figured out the extent to which he has been programmed to parrot the official line on world events. In his world, nations that breach international law and invade sovereign nations to plunder their resources and murder their people are the 'good guys.' If only those mean-spirited independent thinkers would give his little socialist experiment in the middle east a chance, all would be fine in the world.
The last bit of excrement this poster uses to avoid the topic of discussion is:
"By someone who can see no discerable difference between the History Channel and Fear Factor ? "
Both the History Channel and Fear Factor are contrived entertainment vehicles created to promote a specific point of view for public consumption. That their topics differ is of little importance, since they are both created from the same festering corporate socialist media swamp.
Maybe thinking this deeply into how the world works may be upsetting to those who would rather go about life believing everything their elitist-run government and media tell them. Here's the bad news: controlled medias and economies didn't work in the Soviet Union, and it isn't working now in the United States.
Just in case this poster wants to argue that there is any kind of free market or free anything in this country, just try to come up with a single major corporation or government agency that isn't run by Fabian Socialists like the CFR, Trilateral Commission or Bilderberg Group.
The denials on this ought to be amusing.
Why is Tank here?
Tank, why are you interested in this site?
I have to say that even though I don't agree with much of what he writes, I appreciate Tank's comments here more than I appreciate many of those who attack him. At least Tank occasionally offers some arguments, and a different perspective. Which is more than can be said about the dozens of "Can't you see it's the NWO CFR Bilderberg Satanist Socialist UN conspiracy!!! Shut up you're full of shit and by the way we're on to you you're paid by the government!!!" outbursts of information superhighway road-rage.
Wow Tank is really good at using comment to discredit those who believe that the two British man are terrorist or what ever they are.I think Bush will give Tank a medal for protecting the government interest.
As for me I don't know what to say but not surprise to see something evil going on in Basara.Am a christian praying for peace in Iraq.If the report about Briton caught red handed is true,then I thank God more people were not kill if they were not caught earlier.I pray for Bush to be mercyful to his people by stop sending more military to Iraq and bring them home.I pray for Bush to do the right thing.
of "Can't you see it's the NWO CFR Bilderberg Satanist Socialist UN conspiracy!!!
What a wonderfully telling ommission of the Zionists...
"What a wonderfully telling ommission of the Zionists..."
I'm sure it was... whatever that's supposed to mean.
Allow me to rephrase: Can't you see it's the NWO CFR Bilderberg Satanist Socialist Zionist UN conspiracy!!!
Did I leave anyone out this time?
Why is Tank here? Tank, why are you interested in this site?
Same reason everyone else is I guess. RI explores context to current events which you otherwise wouldn't find being raised. Certainly isn't unique in his subject matter but his take on them is.
Same reason I read global guerrillas.
But I really don't think you are interested in my blogroll. What you mean is "why are you here if you have so much criticism".
You're as puzzled by this as I am by why I am the only one criticising ridiculous theories.
I do it here for the same reason I rip into idiots on other sites for suggesting that al Qaeda doesn't exist.
It is very simple to understand. You just have to make a decision on this.....
By posting the criticisms I do, do you think I am hurting the credibility of this site or these discussions more or less than those people who refer to this as evidence that that there is no such thing as an Iraq insurgency ?
Or to put it another way...
If Rense had broken the story about the Downing Street Memo or extraordinary renditions or the Afghan massacre or DU or anything else of that nature.... do you think the UFO pictures and worldwide zionist conspiracy stories on the front page would have helped or hurt those stories receiving wider attention ?
Because right now I wouldn't rate a mention for anyone wanting to dismiss this story based on this discussion of it on this blog.
Nobody needs to look further than the 3rd post where a fan declares that all the daily bombings in Iraq are fake and carried out by the coalition forces.
Tank posted the 4th article and NOBODY wanting to dismiss you all as bunch of delusional tinfoil whackjobs needed to look that far.
You either see my first post and all others as a good thing or a bad one based on your understanding of that. And I do not give a shit what you settle on.
The discussion with Tank is very dull.
He is insulting and he puts words into other people’s mouths and then ridicules them on the basis of it.
These are tired and pathetic tactics.
My impression is that Tank is just looking to start an argument; the obnoxious tone, the insults, the gutter tactics.
By polarising the discussion and atagonising other people what purpose is being served?
I suspect Tank is not a troll but rather he strongly fancies himself as an intellectual heavyweight. The reek of his bloated ego oozes from every line he writes.
It could be funny, if his chat were a little more original or insightful, but sadly if I want to know everything Tank does I can just switch on Fox news for half an hour, maybe less.
Criticism is good but endless bouts of verbal karate is a bore. I suggest people stop pandering to his ego.
"This poster obviously hasn't figured out the extent to which he has been programmed to parrot the official line on world events...
Whether he has or not the question you pussied out of answering was what party has the official line that tagetting of coalition troops and Iraqi forces in collaboration with them are legitimate targets for the legitimate tactic of suicide bombings ?
What I gotta ask an 7th time ?
You doing more dodging than a professional shill like Scott McClellen. Step up som.
I think Bush will give Tank a medal for protecting the government interest.
...
As for me I don't know what to say but... [I] Am a christian praying for peace in Iraq ... I pray for Bush to be mercyful to his people by stop sending more military to Iraq and bring them home.I pray for Bush to do the right thing."
Yeah but realistically what has praying ever done for anyone. Certainly worked out well for hurricanes in the US hasn't it.
Why don't you show some REAL resolve to assist the people of Iraq and donate to a worthy cause that will help them make the most of their new found freedom...
Jesus General's call for donations
The discussion with Tank is very dull.
He is...
I suspect Tank is...
My impression is that Tank is...
I suspect Tank is not...
I want to know everything Tank does...
Perhaps you could piss off to whatever discussion board a dozen people have referred to here already... stay there till youve settled on a label youre all happy with then come the fuck back... mention it once in plain english and you can then finally... move the fuck on.
Because until you find a pidgeonhole to put me in that everyone can be happy with you will never understand what happened in Basra.
Label away! So I can be an unfunny troll and youll be tinfoil joe.
Aren't labels great ? Unless of course they really don't serve you that well. Just like the liberals.
Yawn.
I second that yawn, wotta fuckin' trite ass fondler. Why don't you volunteer for duty and serve your masters in Iraq Tank?
Tank, the big government apologist said:
"Whether he has or not the question you pussied out of answering was what party has the official line that tagetting of coalition troops and Iraqi forces in collaboration with them are legitimate targets for the legitimate tactic of suicide bombings ?"
This question was not answered because it made absolutely no sense in the context of the conversation. You keep repeating Scott McClellan's platitudes with every position you espouse, then you produce these meaningless little zingers and pretend they are legitimate arguments while ignoring the actual arguments being made.
Just like when Ann Coulter lionizes Joe McCarthy while completely steering the conversation away from the Wall Street interests that created the communists McCarthy chased, so too does Tank try to steer the discussion away from the culpability of the political leaders he defends. That is why you will never get a straight answer from him.
Notice how this thread has become about "Tank"? While he's spewing nonsense and childish insults at people who otherwise would be making thoughtful points and backing them up, we are being distracted from the real reason we are here, which is to be informed and to communicate on a higher level than we can in our normal social circles.
If I want to have a brawl, I won't come to RI to do it. Please, I suggest that anyone making a controversial point, provide their evidence for doing so.
For example, Tank, kindly provide a link to the pictures you keep referring to, so that others may evaluate them for themselves, rather than taking your word for it. I also suggest that we all do the same.
If we have a problem with the evidence presented, let's attack that more effectively and more intelligently than we've been attacking each other.
PS: Has anybody else on RI ever used the expression "pussied out"? Is that the level of our discourse? Too bad we can't seem to maintain the excellent standard of Jeff's posts in our comments.
"UFO pictures and worldwide zionist conspiracy stories"
YES, ABOVE ALL OTHER DIRECTIVES, DRIVE THE INVESTIGATION AWAY FROM THE ZIONISTS.
The silly and frankly vapid exchanges as to who is more intelligent in their discourse blah blah blah is really detrimental to the purpose of this site.
If this site (and others like it) succumbs to bitter elitist intellectuals, who seemingly only pose to impress... well, um NOBODY... then the purpose to educate the masses and prepare for the forthcoming assaults ~ and I do believe that they are forthcoming ~ will be lost, and all of Mr. Jeff's good work will be reduced to shit, pardon my French.
LOL and my real name IS Robert, so I can call myself Bob if I want to, and that is NOT anonymous.
alice said...Notice how this thread has become about "Tank"? While he's spewing nonsense and childish insults at people who otherwise would be making thoughtful points and backing them up,
That idea doesn't fly when I am only posting replies to posts which address me.
For example, Tank, kindly provide a link to the pictures you keep referring to, so that others may evaluate them for themselves, rather than taking your word for it.
I'm pretty sure that link is already posted here. If you can't find it go to news.yahoo.com search for "basra
police british" and choose "more photos" on the right.
PS: Has anybody else on RI ever used the expression "pussied out"? Is that the level of our discourse?
Your level of your discourse is where you rely on unsupported assertions and avoiding direct, repeated questions which challenge those assertions. Whether that is described as you "pussying out" or just "not a discourse" it is still the state of play.
Why don't you volunteer for duty and serve your masters in Iraq Tank?
Because I already have a job.
Unless you were under the impression the troops in Iraq occupation was required to protect your nation's security then being a soldier is just employment.
Interesting though that you would consider changing jobs, travelling abroad, killing people and putting your life in danger as an expected course of action for someone to back up their beliefs.
Meanwhile you can't even click a PayPal button to back up yours.
So you think all these terrorist attacks are government false flag operations. Well ok then that means you think this guy is innocent...
Os
So have you donated to this guy's legal defense fund yet ?
Or out of everyone who holds the same beliefs is there not one person willing to back them up anywhere ? LOL.
Keep in mind members of P2P forums who all know they ARE guilty raise $10s of thosands of dollars pretty regularly for legal defense. None of those sites are the size of Libertyforum etc.
Put's your commitment to your beliefs in perspective don't it.
BTW for those of you shouting "AHA! caught in the act" you might like to note that if you had done a little research you could have come up with this document published in June by the USAWC Strategic Studies Institute.
As I said previously you should be very disappointed and confused if you found out the coalition forces in Iraq have absolutely no interest in developing HUMINT assets to counter both the insurgency and terrorist networks operating in Iraq.
So depending on your bias towards ignorance, reading this will either leave you with the distinct impression that coalition forces in Iraq SHOULD be conducting undercover operations as you would expect....
...or you will see this as a confession / cover story in the same way that police forces acknowledging that they have undercover officers is.
Either way it's 3 months old.
Pseudo Operations and Counterinsurgency: Lessons from Other Countries
Quote:
SUMMARY
___Pseudo operations, in which government forces and guerrilla defectors portray themselves as insurgent units, have been a very successful technique used in several counterinsurgency campaigns. Pseudo teams have provided critical human intelligence and other support to these operations.
___These operations, although of considerable value, also have raised a number of concerns. Their use in offensive missions and psychological operations campaigns has, at times, been counterproductive. In general, their main value has been as human intelligence collectors, particularly for long-term background intelligence or for identifying guerrilla groups that then are assaulted by conventional forces. Care must be taken in running these operations both to avoid going too far in acting like guerrillas, and in resisting becoming involved in human rights abuses.
___Just who should control pseudo operations has been somewhat contentious, but the teams typically have worked for police services or intelligence agencies. This has been largely a result of weaknesses in the military intelligence system. Ideally, strengthening military intelligence structures to support pseudo operations would be the best solution since it would provide better connectivity between the pseudo teams and response forces.
No doubt this is yet another instance of a troll trying to divert you from your constructive discourse about Rupert Murdoch controlling your minds.
Or a theory why a government employee is providing you the ONLY military document produced to date that the military would have any interest in conducting false flag operations in Iraq.
Or everyone that suggested I'm a troll or paid commentator has zero credibility in this and every other thread they post in.
Tank said:
"I'm pretty sure that link is already posted here. If you can't find it go to news.yahoo.com search for "basra
police british" and choose "more photos" on the right."
Well, the link was unfortunately not already posted. So, I followed your instructions, and this is the only relevant photo I found:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050921/photos_wl/2005_09_20t104655_450x372_us_iraq
Is this the one you mean? It doesn't purport to show ALL the weapons found; the caption says:
"A GRAB from footage released on September 20, 2005 shows weapons (not THE weapons) which Iraqi police said were confiscated from two undercover British soldiers after their arrest in Basra, southern Iraq, September 19, 2005. (Al-Iraqiya via Reuters) television/Reuters)
Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that this photo shows everything that was found in the car: please explain why you believe this photo proves conclusively that there were no explosives in the car, despite the statements of eyewitnesses.
By the way, just to forestall any argument that because the eyewitnesses either happened to be Shia, mostly supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr, or police officers, that they are automatically liars, I would like to make the following points:
-Since Basra, a mostly Shia-populated town, was the scene of protests led by the supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr at the time of the incident in question, other than the 2 Brits and the Iraqi police, it's safe to say that that's who was there.
-Unlike the British government, the US government and their respective military leaders, who are proven, consistent liars, I am not aware that the supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr have been caught in a lie yet, other than on religious and/or racial grounds. I'd like to put those (ie religious and racial grounds) aside for the sake of our argument. Indulge me.
Next time, can you be more specific in presenting the evidence which convinced you? Maybe it will do the same for the rest of us. Or maybe not. But at least we'll be reading from the same page, so to speak.
In case you want to respond to every word, please don't. For now, just answer the question about whether this is the right picture and if so, why does this picture prove to you that there were no explosives in the car. If not, kindly provide the specific link.
PS: the reasons I believe that there WERE explosives in the civilian car is:
1) the statements of eyewitnesses
2) the indignant outrage of a crowd of poor Iraqis, who knew that by attacking the soldiers of a brutal, occupying army, they were risking the devastating wrath of said army.
3) the early reports of a BBC reporter on the scene, who explained the damning evidence thus:
"Their weapons, EXPLOSIVES and communications gear are standard kit for British special forces." (My emphasis)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4267054.stm
Tank,
I agree, there may not be explosives in the photo, so there is no colloborated evidence the captured, disguised-as-Arabs SAS operatives were or were not planting explosives, as claimed by one of the local leaders.
So, I won't jump to the conclusion there were explosives in the automobile. Fair enough? I ask you don't jump to the conclusion they were on innocent outing looking for afternoon tea, ok? Because until you address why they were dressed as Arabs (and if you speculate it is to infiltrate the "insurgents, so state), why they fired at the police, why they needed to be urgently rescued from the local officials in charge (yes, the occupiers in an illegal invasion are NEVER the LEGITIMATE officials) to the point of firing on the crowds protecting the police station.
Again, so you won't get to confused by this request, I will enumerate them for you:
1)Why were they dressed as Arabs?
2)Why did they fire on local police, when driving by the gathering disguised as Arabs?
3) Why would the British military find it so necessary to "rescue" these military operatives from the supposed officials THEY, the BRITISH, have placed in "control"?
Of course, you may need to speculate. I am intersested to see how you speculate, how your thought pattern works.
Because my thought pattern is fairly stright forward:
If i am a brit, in a foreign country occupied by my country in circumstances less than ideal, the last thing I go around doing is shooting at the local cops, disguised as a local.
That;s just me, I am certain you have a wonderful, witty, cuttting remark on why you would.
May I hear it, please?
Just read on teletext that an Iraqi judge has issued an arrest warrant for the two SAS (death squad) members.
No doubt we will now be told that the Iraqi judiciary has been infiltrated by militias as well.
Again, the most damning evidence in all of this is that the whole of Basra knows what is really going on.
By the way the discussion about missing explosives in the SAS car proves nothing.
If there were explosives they would have been in another vehicle.
The SAS are not likely to drive their own "suicide bomber rigged" car up to the cops, park, get out, casually walk away and then blow it up, leaving loads of UK issue hardware behind as evidence.
Alternatively the anti tank missile launcher they had in the car could have been used to replicate the impact of a suicide bomber if fired at the police station or a vehicle outside. The insurgents do not have tanks so why have such weapon.
I would guess another vehicle was involved, perhaps driven by a patsy or an unsuspecting Iraqi as suggested in numerous posts above.
Clearly something went wrong and they were rumbled before they could execute the plan.
alice said...
"Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that this photo shows everything that was found in the car
Based on the fact the tow rope and car jack are included I think that's a pretty good assumption.
please explain why you believe this photo proves conclusively that there were no explosives in the car, despite the statements of eyewitnesses."
Because unless those statements were "I stole the explosives" then the same police who aprehended the SAS guys, searched the car, and produced a photo of everything in it didn't find any explosives.
If you missed the point of the Iraqi police releasing a photo it was to make the SAS soldiers look guilty. ie That's as scandalous as it got... a closeup on an M4.
comment at 10:53pm.
Unlike the British government ... I am not aware that the supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr have been caught in a lie yet, other than on religious and/or racial grounds. I'd like to put those aside for the sake of our argument. Indulge me.
Indulge you in what ? A discussion of the personal integrity of these militias who are credited with operating death squads using police resources ?
Here they are the day before this incident...
How al-Sadr militia feels about UK troops the day beforehand
Nope can't see anybody lying in those photos. Does raise the question though if the SAS guys were carrying ENOUGH weapons to be able to impersonate al-Sadr militia members. If you want another reference for their character check Steve Vincent's blog. RIP should be the last entry.
3) the early reports of a BBC reporter on the scene, who explained the damning evidence thus: "Their weapons, EXPLOSIVES and communications gear ARE STANDARD KIT for British special forces." (My emphasis)"
With my emphasis added.
Seriously that sentence is 13 words long and you didn't make it to the end ?
Now either you think SAS forces get equipped with car bombs as standard or you think this guy is lying and in either case further discussion of that quote is equally pointless.
farang said...
Again, so you won't get to confused by this request, I will enumerate them for you:
1 <- Why were they dressed as Arabs?
2 <- Why did they fire on local police, when driving by the gathering disguised as Arabs?
3 <- Why would the British military find it so necessary to "rescue" these military operatives from the supposed officials THEY, the BRITISH, have placed in "control"?
That;s just me, I am certain you have a wonderful, witty, cuttting remark on why you would. May I hear it, please?
Yeah. You wanna know what I think you can go to the top of the page click collapse comments then open mine up one by one. Save me finding the links to shit I already said.
Nafeez Ahmed
www.rawstory.com
BRITISH UNDERCOVER OPERATIVES IN IRAQ
Zarqawi Eat Your Heart Out
Basra is relatively stable compared to central Iraq where violence involving insurgents, civilians and coalition forces is a daily routine. The city has rarely been a site of clashes between insurgents and coalition troops, nor is it a victim of regular terrorist attacks. This week, however, things changed, but not thanks to Zarqawi and his al-Qaeda ilk.
On Monday, two British soldiers were arrested and detained by Iraqi police in Basra. Within a matter of hours, the British military responded with overwhelming force, despite subsequent denials by the Ministry of Defence, which insisted that the two men had been retrieved solely through "negotiations."
British military officials, including Brigadier John Lorimer, told BBC News (9/20/05) that the British Army had stormed an Iraqi police station to locate the detainees. Ministry of Defence sources confirmed that "British vehicles" had attempted to "maintain a cordon" outside the police station.
After British Army tanks "flattened the wall" of the station, UK troops "broke into the police station to confirm the men were not there" and then "staged a rescue from a house in Basra", according a commanding officer familiar with the operation. Both men, British defence sources told the BBC's Richard Galpin in Baghdad, were "members of the SAS elite special forces." After their arrest, the soldiers were over to the local militia.
What had prompted this bizarre turn of events? Why had the Iraqi police forces, which normally work in close cooperation with coalition military forces, arrested two British SAS soldiers, and then handed them over to the local militia? A review of the initial on-the-ground reports leads to a clearer picture.
Fancy Dress and Big Guns Don't Mix
According to the BBC's Galpin, reporting for BBC Radio 4 (9/20/05, 18 hrs news script), Iraqi police sources in Basra told the BBC the "two British men were arrested after failing to stop at a checkpoint. There was an exchange of gunfire. The men were wearing traditional Arab clothing, and when the police eventually stopped them, they said they found explosives and weapons in their car…It's widely believed the two British servicemen were operating undercover."
Undercover? Dressed as Arabs? What were they trying to do that had caught the attention of their colleagues, the Iraqi police?
According to the Washington Post (9/20/05), "Iraqi security officials on Monday variously accused the two Britons they detained of shooting at Iraqi forces or trying to plant explosives." Reuters (9/19/05) cited police, local officials and other witnesses who confirmed that "the two undercover soldiers were arrested after opening fire on Iraqi police who approached them." Officials said that "the men were wearing traditional Arab headscarves and sitting in an unmarked car."
According to Mohammed al-Abadi, an official in the Basra governorate, “A policeman approached them and then one of these guys fired at him. Then the police managed to capture them.”
Booby-trapped Brits?
In an interview with Al Jazeerah TV, the popular Iraqi leader Fattah al-Sheikh, a member of the Iraqi National Assembly and deputy official in the Basra governorate, said that police had "caught two non-Iraqis, who seem to be Britons and were in a car of the Cressida type. It was a booby-trapped car laden with ammunition and was meant to explode in the centre of the city of Basra in the popular market." Contrary to British authorities' claims that the soldiers had been immediately handed to local militia, al-Sheikh confirmed that they were "at the Intelligence Department in Basra, and they were held by the National Guard force, but the British occupation forces are still surrounding this department in an attempt to absolve them of the crime."
The Special Reconnaissance Regiment and British Covert Operations
British defence sources told the Scotsman (9/20/05) that the soldiers were part of an "undercover special forces detachment" set up this year to "bridge the intelligence void” in Basra, drawing on 'special forces' experience in Northern Ireland and Aden, where British troops went 'deep' undercover in local communities to try to break the code of silence against foreign forces."
These elite forces operate under the Special Reconnaissance Regiment and were formed last year by then defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, "to gather human intelligence during counter-terrorist missions."
The question, of course, is how does firing at Iraqi police while dressed as Arabs and carrying explosives constitute "countering terrorism" or even gathering "intelligence"?
The admission by British defence officials is revealing. A glance at the Special Reconnaissance Regiment gives a more concrete idea of the sort of operations these two British soldiers were involved in.
The Regiment, formed recently, is "modelled on an undercover unit that operated in Northern Ireland" according to Whitehall sources. The Regiment had "absorbed the 14th Intelligence Company, known as '14 Int,' a plainclothes unit set up to gather intelligence covertly on suspect terrorists in Northern Ireland. Its recruits are trained by the SAS."
This is the same Regiment that was involved in the unlawful July 22 execution - multiple head-shots - of the innocent Brazilian, Mr. Jean Charles de Menezes, after he boarded a tube train in Stockwell Underground station.
According to Detective Sergeant Nicholas Benwell, member of the Scotland Yard team that had been investigating the activities of an ultra-secret wing of British military intelligence, the Force Research Unit (FRU), the team found that "military intelligence was colluding with terrorists to help them kill so-called 'legitimate targets' such as active republicans... many of the victims of these government-backed hit squads were innocent civilians."
Benwell's revelations were corroborated in detail by British double agent Kevin Fulton, who was recruited to the FRU in 1981, when he began to infiltrate the ranks of IRA. In his role as a British FRU agent inside the IRA, he was told by his military intelligence handlers to "do anything" to win the confidence of the terrorist group.
"I mixed explosive and I helped develop new types of bombs," he told Scotland's Sunday Herald (6/23/02). "I moved weapons… if you ask me if the materials I handled killed anyone, then I will have to say that some of the things I helped develop did kill… my handlers knew everything I did. I was never told not to do something that was discussed. How can you pretend to be a terrorist and not act like one? You can't. You’ve got to do what they do… They did a lot of murders… I broke the law seven days a week and my handlers knew that. They knew that I was making bombs and giving them to other members of the IRA and they did nothing about it… The idea was that the only way to beat the enemy was to penetrate the enemy and be the enemy."
Most startlingly, Fulton said that his handlers told him his operations were "sanctioned right at the top… this goes the whole way to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister knows what you are doing."
Zarqawi, Ba'athists and the Seeds of Discord
So, based on the methodology of their Regiment, the two British SAS operatives were in Iraq to "penetrate the enemy and be the enemy," in order of course to "beat the enemy." Instead of beating the enemy, however, they ended up fomenting massive chaos and killing innocent people, a familiar pattern for critical students of the British role in the Northern Ireland conflict.
In November 2004, a joint statement was released on several Islamist websites on behalf of al-Qaeda's man in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and Saddam Hussein's old Ba'ath Party loyalists. Zarqawi’s network had "joined other extremist Islamists and Saddam Hussein's old Baath party to threaten increased attacks on US-led forces." Zarqawi's group said they signed "the statement written by the Iraqi Baath party, not because we support the party or Saddam, but because it expresses the demands of resistance groups in Iraq."
The statement formalized what had been known for a year already – that, as post-Saddam Iraqi intelligence and US military officials told the London Times (8/9/2003), "Al Qaeda terrorists who have infiltrated Iraq from Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have formed an alliance with former intelligence agents of Saddam Hussein to fight their common enemy, the American forces." Al Qaeda leaders "recruit from the pool" of Saddam's former "security and intelligence officers who are unemployed and embittered by their loss of status." After vetting, "they begin Al-Qaeda-style training, such as how to make remote-controlled bombs."
Yet Pakistani military sources revealed in February 2005 that the US has "resolved to arm small militias backed by US troops and entrenched in the population," consisting of "former members of the Ba'ath Party" – the same people already teamed up with Zarqawi's al-Qaeda network.
In a highly clandestine operation, the US procured “Pakistan-manufactured weapons, including rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, ammunition, rockets and other light weaponry.” A Pakistani military analyst noted that the “arms could not be destined for the Iraqi security forces because US arms would be given to them.” Rather, the US is playing a double-game to “head off” the threat of a “Shi’ite clergy-driven religious movement” – in other words, to exacerbate the deterioration of security by penetrating, manipulating and arming the terrorist insurgency.
What could be the end-game of such a covert strategy? The view on-the-ground in Iraq, among both Sunnis and Shi'ites, is worth noting. Sheikh Jawad al-Kalesi, the Shi'ite Imam of the al-Kadhimiyah mosque in Baghdad, told Le Monde: "I don’t think that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi exists as such. He’s simply an invention by the occupiers to divide the people."
Iraq’s most powerful Sunni Arab religious authority, the Association of Muslim Scholars, concurs, condemning the call to arms against Shi’ites as a “very dangerous” phenomenon that “plays into the hands of the occupier who wants to split up the country and spark a sectarian war.” In colonial terms, the strategy is known as “divide and rule.”
Whether or not Zarqawi can be said to exist, it is indeed difficult to avoid the conclusion that this interpretation is plausible. It seems the only ones who don’t understand the clandestine dynamics of Anglo-American covert strategy in Iraq are we, the people, in the west. It’s high time we got informed.
---------------------------------
Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development, London. He teaches courses in political theory, international relations and contemporary history at the School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton.
"Save me finding the links to shit I already said." I couldn't have put it better myself, Tank.
A big thank you to Anonymous 9:40am, for the fascinating and informative article. If for nothing else, such as Tank can be used as springboards, motivating people like you to contribute to the discussion.
And everybody else, I wasted 5 minutes of my precious time so you wouldn't have to: I checked the photo link which was supposed to enlighten me, and what I got were some pictures of armed militiamen walking or sitting around. Big whoop.
The reference to "Steve Vincent" got me to a (sadly discontinued due to his murder at the hands of unknown assailants in Iraq) blog which you are all welcome to peruse at your leisure, if you wish to contemplate such gems as this:
"I am sometimes dismayed by my friend's willingness to believe the worst about America (working last year with British journalists corrupted her mind, I'm afraid), and while I can't always explain or defend Administration policies--are we in Iraq for the oil, and is that a bad thing?--I do want her to know that your basic Yankee "occupier" is an honest, well-meaning, straight-arrow Joe or Jane, trying to do the best job possible for the Iraqi people."
Please, Tank, it's time for the grown-ups to talk now...
Sorry, I forgot to add the link for the Steven Vincent thing:
http://spencepublishing.typepad.com/in_the_red_zone/
alice said...
"And everybody else, I wasted 5 minutes of my precious time so you wouldn't have to: I checked the photo link which was supposed to enlighten me, and what I got were some pictures of armed militiamen walking or sitting around. Big whoop."
Just walking around with RPGs. Big whoop. For those of you who didn't know the RPG is the Iraqi iPod. People walk around with them all the time. Stop making a big deal about it like it implies they aren't upstanding citizens.
The reference to "Steve Vincent" got me to a (sadly discontinued due to his murder at the hands of unknown assailants in Iraq)
Yeah Steve Vincent was killed by some unknown assailants driving a police car right after he wrote about militias driving around in police cars killing people.
Much in the same way that some people in Basra were killed by unknown assailants in a British tank right after this event happened.
Nobody knows who was driving the British tank or why the Basra residents were attacking it in the middle of their outrage at UK troops.
The dots theyre just too hard to join.
"Yeah Steve Vincent was killed by some unknown assailants driving a police car right after he wrote about militias driving around in police cars killing people."
There you go again, Tank, saying things without providing SPECIFIC links to back them up. I suppose you think your sterling character, razor-sharp intellect and impressive credentials should be enough to convince us...
alice said...
There you go again, Tank, saying things without providing SPECIFIC links to back them up.
WTF would I personally need to back up about that statement ?
His headstone is about the only thing you will find which mentions his name without reference to him as being killed by the same Basra police death squads he exposed.
How about for a specific link you try using google.com.
I suppose you think your sterling character, razor-sharp intellect and impressive credentials should be enough to convince us...
Either that or I made the assumption that someone who refers to his reporting as though they have read it and writes smartarse shit like "the grown ups need to talk now" in September might have the slightest fucking clue about who he was and what happened to him over a month ago.
come on tank see if you can drag this thing out to 200 comments! go man go. You're the best!!
From Reporteurs Sans Frontieres:
Iraq | 3.08.2005
Who killed Steven Vincent ?
Those responsible for murdering US freelance journalist Steven Vincent on 2 August in Basra have yet to be identified and several hypotheses are possible...
An eye-witness living on Al-Istiqlal street, where Vincent’s body was found, told Agence France-Presse (AFP) that "a white pickup pulled up alongside Vincent and his interpreter, Noor El-Khal, then four gunmen got out, grabbed them and bundled them into the pickup." They learned five hours later that his body had been found.
The US embassy in Baghdad said it was working with the Iraqi authorities and the British troops in the south of the country to do everything possible to find out who was responsible for Vincent’s murder.
...The day of his murder (Vincent)was wearing a black T-shirt with a picture of Imam Hussein, the grandson of Imam Ali, and black prayer-beads around his neck - the distinctive mark of Shiite."
(http://www.rsf.org/print.php3?id_article=14599)
And this, from the British Telegraph:
"Murder of US reporter in Iraq may be linked to marriage pledge
By Colin Freeman
(Filed: 07/08/2005)
British officials hunting the killers of an American journalist in Basra are investigating the possibility that he may have been targeted over his relationship with his Iraqi translator, whom he had pledged to marry.
Investigators believe that Steven Vincent, a freelance reporter who was abducted and shot last Tuesday, may have angered local religious hardliners with his conduct.
The interpreter, Nour Weidi, who was shot four times in the attack, has told investigators from her hospital bed that Mr Vincent planned to marry her so she could settle in the United States...
Speculation over the murder initially focused on the possibility that Mr Vincent was killed after writing articles alleging that Basra's police had been infiltrated by Shia death squads...
...No group has claimed responsibility, suggesting that terrorist involvement is unlikely, say investigators.
Staff at the Basra hotel where Mr Vincent had lived for three months say the couple's relationship had drawn disapproval and warnings of retribution. But investigators have not commented publicly on whether they think the relationship was sexual, and believe that the case has hidden complexities.
"There is a straight-line connection that people have drawn between Steven Vincent criticising the Iraq police and therefore being murdered," said one investigator.
"But from the evidence so far, including accounts we have had from the Iraqi interpreter, that is not the immediate conclusion we are drawing. It appears to be quite a complex case."
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/07/wirq107.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/08/07/ixworld.html)
And the Times Online:
"All of these security sources commented that whatever Vincent may have written was unlikely to have offended local sensitivities as much as his relationship with Tuaiz. “This was an honour code killing,” declared the former soldier...
“He was conducting himself with his interpreter in a manner that would have attracted attention in any Islamic country, let alone here,” added a senior official.
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1723967_1,00.html)
And now, for a little context, again from Reporters Sans Frontieres:
"News agencies targeted by Iraqi and US troops
Reporters Without Borders called today on the Iraqi army to explain at once why its soldiers shot and seriously wounded Associated Press Television News (APTN) cameraman Abdul Kamil Hassan on 7 September and charged that “those responsible for restoring order in Iraq - the Iraqi army and police, and US troops” - had become “serious persecutors” of journalists in recent months.
“Iraqi and Arab journalists working for international news agencies have a vital function as they are currently the only ones who can tell us what is happening amid the chaos in Iraq,” it said, urging Iraqi and US officials to take “energetic steps to halt the growing threats and dangers to news agency employees.”
Hassan was wounded while filming a spot in Samarra (100 km north of Baghdad) where a home-made bomb had been found. Investigating Iraqi troops followed him and opened fire, hitting him in the arm and stomach. They then took him to the city hospital, where his life is not in danger.
The Associated Press (AP) news agency has been hard hit since the start of the war in Iraq. Cameraman Saleh Ibrahim was killed on 23 April this year in an explosion probably aimed at US troops. Another employee, Ismaïl Taher Mohsin, was killed on 2 September last year and APTN journalist Sami Shuker Naji has been in Abu Ghraib prison since 30 March this year for supposedly collaborating with “insurgents.”
Local journalists for Reuters news agency has also been victims of violence over the past week. Sound-man Waleed Khaled, of Reuters TV, was killed on 28 August and cameraman Haider Khadem, who was with him, was slightly wounded and held by US troops for three days. Another Reuters TV cameraman, Ali Omar Abrahem al-Mashadani, has been held by the US army since 10 August.
Agence France-Presse (AFP) and Reuters photographers have also been roughed up recently by Iraqi police and have filed complaints at the prime minister’s office."
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=14947
I think it says a great deal that of all the cases mentioned in my post so far, only the Steven Vincent case has received intense scrutiny and been the subject of a proper investigation.
interesting article over at ICH
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10376.htm
has a handy list of media reports that support the 'bombs in car' version of events
great articles jeff!
FWIW to paraphrase ICH link above
"Early news reports from both the BBC and the Washington Post confirmed allegations that bomb-making material was discovered in the captured vehicle. The Post's Ellen Knickmeyer stated, "The Iraqi security officials on Monday variously accused two Britons they detained of shooting at Iraqi forces or TRYING TO PLANT EXPLOSIVES." (Washington Post, 9-20-05; "British Smash into Jail to Free Two Detained Soldiers)"
The Chinese news service Xinhuanet reported that, "A police patrol followed the attackers and captured them to discover that they were two British soldiers. The soldiers were using a civilian car packed with explosives." (Xinhuanet 9-20-05) The same basic story appeared on Syrian and Turkish TV, and in other news reports in the Gulf States
The Washington Post's foreign office filed a similar report by Jonathan Finer stating that, "Monday's clashes stemmed from the arrest by Iraqi police on Sunday of two Britons, WHOM IRAQI POLICE ACCUSED OF PLANTING BOMBS".
And then there was this from Syrian correspondent in Baghdad Ziyad al-Munajjid:
"Many analysts and observers here had suspicions that the occupation was involved in some armed operations against civilians and places of worship and in the killing of scientists. But those were only suspicions that lacked proof. The proof came today through the arrest of the two British soldiers while they were planting explosives in one of the Basra streets. This proves, according to observers, that the occupation is not far from many operations that seek to sow sedition and maintain disorder, as this would give the occupation the justification to stay in Iraq for a longer period."
The Chinese news service Xinhuanet reported that...
The Chinese news service Xinhuanet reports a lot of things. None of them worth referring to.
Since this story you could have found them reporting that US soldiers were executing a whole bunch of people including a Iraqi officials.
Iraqi officials of course have not made any press releases about this because they have been too busy talking about Brits shooting at cops.
Or the more obvious reason.
As mentioned previously in this story they took BBC reports and inserted a "an anonymous source told Xianhuanet the really bad part". You will find this a running theme if you reference them via google news using keywords which set their story apart from other more rational accounts.
It is pretty funny the amount of news scoop quotes they get on Iraq current events while having basically no original content of their own. ie... like you would expect if they had reporters in Iraq.
Who knows... perhaps some phone company has really cheap rates on Iraq-to-China calls.
Or anonymous quotes and uncorroborated accounts coming out of Xinhua really aren't worth shit.
Seriously if you have an opinion that ANY US media source is biased or lying you don't also get to refer to these idiots like it is shit worth referencing. It's one or the other... you don't get to have it both ways.
Al Qaeda does not exist.
Fucking GB, fucking USA! Market-fashism fuck off from Iraq - independet statment of Middle East!
Anonymous syas
" Anonymous said...
Hey, where has Cenoxo been lately?
Cenoxo, er, Cewillir, have you now morphed into Tank?
The foul stench of your breath is unmistakeable and known to all.
You cannot hide. We know who you are."
Nope neither of them are me I'm afraid.
Good to see your drooling conpiracy addled brain is still spewing this dogshit though....
From the way you claim you 'know' the identities of posters I have little faith in your knowledge of anything else related to reality.
But you have to love the murderer I've become
As I'm standing here in front of you
Standing right in front of you
Standing here in front of you
Killing birds I've spent my youth
Breaking down the walls my father built
Just like he did to his father before him.
greetings.
Cialis online
a senior English major at Virginia Tech, had previously been diagnosed with a severe anxiety disorder. During much of his middle school and high school years, he received therapy and special education support. After graduating from high school, Cho enrolled at Virginia Tech. Due to federal privacy laws, Virginia Tech was not informed of Cho's previous diagnosis or the accommodations he had been granted at school. In 2005, Cho was accused of stalking two female students; after an investigation a Virginia special justice declared Cho mentally ill and ordered him to attend treatment. Lucinda Roy,a professor and former chairwoman of the English department, had also asked Cho to seek counseling.also i would like to know if some body can help me with constipation some body have any remedy,
The pictures are really ugly.What a mess!
For let’s not forget that we have the technology and the pedigree as well as the power lust to engineer and sustain a nuclear holocaust –
and won’t it just be fun, especially
if it’s done in someone else’s backyard and as far away as possible from our own?
Wonderful blog & good post.Its really helpful for me, awaiting for more new post. Keep Blogging!
Aventura Dodge
Terima kasih informasinya gan
Obat Sipilis Instan
Obat Sipilis Tradisional
Obat Sipilis Ampuh
Obat Kanker Rahim Alami
Obat Kanker Rahim Tanpa Operasi
Obat Kanker Rahim Paling Ampuh
Obat Herbal Untuk Kanker Rahim
Obat Kanker Rahim Mujarab
Jual Obat Kanker Rahim Ampuh
My first thought when I heard this story was, where was the Secret Service? Would they allow someone with a shotgun to come up behind the vice president?
obat kutil kelamin herbal
obat sipilis herbal dan efektif
obat sipilis ampuh
obat sipilis herbal
obat sipilis ampuh
thax for your article..
obat kutil kelamin
obat kutil kelamin herbal d apotik
obat kutil kelamin herbal
obat kutil kelamin alami
cara mengobati kutil kelamin tanpa ke dokter
cara mengobati hpv
cara mengobati kutil kelamin dengan obat apotek
cara mengobati sipilis tanpa ke dokter
I have watched various TV news reports on this incident and no where do they make it clear that these thugs were dressed as Arabs and were seen attacking Iraqi policemen.
But you have to love the murderer I've become
As I'm standing here in front of you
Standing right in front of you
Standing here in front of you
Killing birds I've spent my youth
Breaking down the walls my father built
Just like he did to his father before him.
a senior English major at Virginia Tech, had previously been diagnosed with a severe anxiety disorder. During much of his middle school and high school years, he received therapy and special education support. After graduating from high school
terimakasih gan infonya...!!! smoga sukses
Post a Comment
<< Home