From the leaked "Iraq: Options Paper" prepared by the UK Overseas & Defense Secretariat Cabinet Office, for consultation with their American "partners", a full year before this illegal war began:

" 'Divide & Rule' is easy " ...

Yep, nobody wants to destroy the unity of the Iraqi People like the Iraqi Resistance Movement. I liked the part where the US-trained and controlled soldiers were actually "insurgents" in disguise. Guess this means they were caught in the act, like those British soldiers in Basra.

Well, we know for CERTAIN that the bombing of the mosque in Samarra was carried out with military precision, just like the bombing of the UN near the beginning of the invasion. Those of us that follow the resistance know that, sadly, THEY do not have the tools or the expertise for THEIR attacks against the occupiers. Also, the resistance obviously does not engage in sectarian violence.

We do know for CERTAIN that the bombing of the mosque is in response to the imminent attack on Iran. The timing, and the extremity of the act make that clear.

I would argue that we do not yet know which of the interested parties was responsible. The circumstances of the attack would seem to rule out wider sunni interests (given that internal Sunni forces would never have done such a thing). This would seem to give us a list of:

1) Blair (British military forces have already been caught red-handed in similar operations)
2) The Iranian government
3) Internal Iraqi political force of the shia or non-aligned variety

For 1) to be true (and it is VERY hard not to immediately assume this, especially given the co-ordinated coverage of the event on the BBC), the new situation created in Iraq has to be to American Military Planners liking. Now, can this be reasonably argued? Maybe Blair intends a massive FALSE FLAG operation, and will blame the Iranians, citing this event as the motivation. If this were so, the FALSE FLAG would surely have to be against a sunni target (maybe a massive strike in Saudi or Jordan). Do the Americans really need a wider strife between the sunnis and shias before striking Iran? Do the Americans really want this kind of political turmoil in Iraq to facilitate their plans?

2) and 3) would seem to be easier to argue. Iran invaded Iraq in major partnership with US forces, and Iran controls many of the major political forces currently operating in Iraq. Such an attack seems to be an opportunity for shia forces to consolidate power. Certain internal groups obviously benefit greatly from this. Iran may feel that even greater control of Iraq discourages American Military Planners over the issue of striking Iran.

We are investigating a 'Black Box' (in the physics meaning of the term). We lack the accurate knowledge about too much internal information to be certain about local events. However, the road to war contains many energising events like this bombing. A peaceful present predicts a peaceful future. A violent present predicts a violent future.

For us as individuals, it may come as a depressing thought that most of those in power over us consider our individual lives as of no value whatsoever. After WW2, we had the opportunity to change this fact once and for all. The West was supremely powerful, and all we had to do was ensure that the leaders of the West were supremely moral. In this, we have failed absolutely and totally. Indeed, we are in a worse position than that, because of the hypocrisy of Western civilisation. This hypocrisy creates a perfect mask behind which Western politicians and elites are able to carry out vile crimes, safe in the knowledge that their people are the most self-deluded and mind-controlled in the history of the Earth. This state of affairs was never going to end well.

War is coming to Iran, and full bloodied war at that. All concerned powers will jockey for position, but the overwhelming strength of the US military, combined with the full support of Europe, makes the demise of Iran as certain as that snowball in hell.

Blame the people you don't like.

More nutty conspiracy tosh from Kurt. Of course, insurgents play by Marquis of Queensbury rules and wouldn't dare flout the Geneva Convention by wearing false uniforms.

Thank God we have a man on the ground like Kurt who daily risks his neck to get the REAL stories unlike "Baghdad hotel-bound corporate media hacks to report anything beyond what is read from a Pentagon script inside the Green Zone" and fat-arsed bloggers thousands of miles away who'll happily spread any old disinfo they can to score points.

LMFAO!

Samarra is the new Fallujah. Resistance from Sunni Arabs over the last year has been fierce and the US 1st infantry division are bogged down in a bloody guerrilla war which is destroying the city. A seven mile long, five foot tall earthen wall built around Samarra by soldiers has failed to pacify the insurgency, despite three military check-points positioned along the dirt wall, where residents must show identification and submit to searches. Distrust runs deep and Major Curtis Strange said, “It's apocalyptic out there.”

Following the destruction of the al-Askari shrine, Shia militia are now assisting the US and Iraqi troops with reprisal attacks on the Sunni’s. No group claimed responsibility for bombing the Golden Mosque, but four men, three disguised in black and one in military uniform, entered the building and detonated explosives which destroyed the dome. The Western media immediately implicated extremist groups linked to ‘al Qaeda’ but Sunni’s claim it was the work of “a foreign hand aiming to create differences among Iraqis.”

It worked, and Iraq is on the brink of a civil war, with an escalation in sectarian violence which could lead to the break-up of the country and export greater instability across the wider Middle East. This all coincided with a surprise visit to Baghdad by UK foreign secretary Jack Straw, who was urging politicians to speed up the formation of a new coalition government. This tenuous democractic process is even more fragile now, as Sunni’s have withdrawn from negotiations in protest over the revenge killings.

American soldiers have been seizing telephones with build-in cameras from Samarra citizens to prevent news from being distributed on the internet and four journalists, including Atwar Bahjat of al-Arbiya, were kidnapped and shot by gunmen on their way to the city to report on the situation. The holy places are sacred to Muslims from all different sects and the idea that they would blow up a shrine containing tombs of revered imams, believed to be the successors of the Prophet Muhammad, is inconceivable.

This act of desperation and desecration serves the interest of the warmongers who wish to ignite conflict and expand the ‘war on terror’ further a field, specifically into Iran and Syria, but Tony Blair said we must not listen to “conspiracy theories” only stand up for liberty everywhere. He said: “The struggle in Iraq today is the same struggle the world over - it's democracy versus extremism and terrorism.” These timely events also coincide with another tour of the Middle East by Condoleezza Rice, to promote PNAC policy.

You seemed to have argued against yourself:

"The holy places are sacred to Muslims from all different sects and the idea that they would blow up a shrine containing tombs of revered imams, believed to be the successors of the Prophet Muhammad, is inconceivable."

So you're opining that this is all an inside job and that the US & Iraqis are too stupid to realise that their targets are incredible? What a load of crap.

The poster conveniently left out this paragraph that illustrates what a rank amateur Nimmo is:

"Of course, two eye witnesses should not be considered conclusive evidence the Pentagon puppet Iraqi National Guard is behind the mosque bombings in Samarra. However, when added to the wealth of evidence from various sources detailing the existence of a Anglo-American “counterinsurgency” program in Iraq (including the now largely forgotten and never referenced by the corporate media story of two British covert operatives caught red-handed in terrorist behavior last September) the incident should at least stir a modicum of suspicion."

The paragraph references this fictitious load of bollocks:

 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050920&articleId=972


The UK Special Forces troops were not undercover, nor was the car boobytrapped. Their equipment was standard MoD issue and the boot was filled with thousands of pounds worth f field equipment (which I guess they just brought along to blow up).

You and Nimmo should just stick to writing about something you have a clue about and stop kidding yourselves and us on.

Take your stupid fantasies elsewhere. This site is for NEWS.

No idea who this 'M' is, but he/she is clearly not an indymedia type.

1. 'Conspiracy tosh'? The following article by Dr Fetzer might enlighten you(tho i doubt it)

'The phrase "conspiracy theory" harbors an ambiguity, since conspiracies are widespread and theories about them need not be mere speculations. '
 http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/fetzerexpandedx.pdf
 http://www.st911.org/

Kurt's articles are usualy very good, and he usually backs up what he says with evidence.

2.'Of course, insurgents play by Marquis of Queensbury rules and wouldn't dare flout the Geneva Convention by wearing false uniforms. '

If you have any evidence that the iraqi resistance(who u mean by 'insurgents) have been doing this, then post it here; otherwise, thats a good eg of 'conspiracy tosh'.

3. 'The UK Special Forces troops were not undercover'

Is arab dress standard issue?

'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.'
 http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/19/iraq.main/index.html

4. 'nor was the car boobytrapped. '

how do you know it wasnt? You dont give any source for this assertion.

'Take your stupid fantasies elsewhere. This site is for NEWS.'

This is not a news site...its a site for activists and commentary.It can include links to newsites.


5.'Thank God we have a man on the ground like Kurt who daily risks his neck to get the REAL stories'

As you are aware, Kurt links to a site that IS in iraq, and it gives eyewitness accounts.
Also, why would sunni or shia blow up a mosque sacred to both?

The likely villains are not iraqi. British, american or israeli DRESSED as arabs

'Of the MOSSAD, the Israeli intelligence service, the SAMS officers say: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act." '
 http://www.public-action.com/911/sams.html


SO,were the british planting bombs in Basra?
 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00052.htm

I posted a point by point reply last night. But for some reason the comment has since become hidden. So, I'll summarize.

I'm not offering any theories on who is behind what and why. Because I have no idea.

The SAS unit in Basra were wearing arab head dress which 100% standard issue for them in the Gulf. Also all their kit was MoD standard issue. There has been no corroboration whatsoever of them having a booby trapped or that there were any explosives seized, but given the very expensive field equipment that was found in the boot, they weren't about to blow the car up.

They had a laser marker for airstrikes, which may be the biggest clue as to what they may have been doing- if it is at all relevant. AFAIK the insurgents don't have an air force...

Nimmo is an idiot dabbling in matters he has no grounding in.

You have offered nothing better than he can to the argument= pure prejudiced speculation. If you have some hard evidence by all means share it, otherwise leave this Boy's Own Adventure stuff for conspiracy forums please.

M,

The points you make are valid ( the IMCistas roll dice to choose which comments get hidden around here but its good to point it out, it will embarrass them into stopping doing that so much eventually). However I disagree with your interpretation of the facts available to us. You quote Global Research. They are knowledgable but not trustworthy imao, I hope you realise the difference between a resource and the truth. I take it from your previous comments that you know a little history. Given what is public domain, isn't it realistic to assume UK SIS are operating in both South East Iraq and South West Iran. I'm looking for an honest answer as I'm thinking of going there sometime and I'm having to assume from previous SIS campaigns and current events that they are.

I am one of the few people who remember both Thatcher praising the Khmer Rouge to Simon Groom during the Blue Peter 'Kampuchia Appeal', and the SAS officer who was the first ever SAS to break ranks to the press complaining how they'd had to teach Pol Pot how to terrify schoolchildren into not attending school - by sticking pencils through their ears. I am sort of jaundiced against Blair by my own history. I am a pv fanatic - but I'm rational and try to work with facts. Given what we all know from official sources or from first hand testimony and government record, can you really argue that there aren't British forces operating undercover in that region for their own peculiar ends ? Or don't you think that, are you just postulating or are am misreading you ?

I appreciate the extemporous and difficult job the IMC bods do- and also recognise that if one person doesn't like a certain line of arguement you get hidden= no big deal!

I also, appreciate your interrogative stance rather than the usual ranting abuse.

Yes, I know fine well what sick bullshit UK intelligence and Special Forces are capable of. My objection is that based on the evidence presented the allegations are absurb. The Basra (0.5) SAS unit fiasco is especially insulting to the mildly informed regarding how "covert" regiments operate. I am only too willing to receive info on dubious practises (See Ulster) but what is being presented is reaching and actually downright infantile. I know people are frustrated; they think their hearts are in the right direction. But at the end of the day stupid suppositions like the abovementioned make IMC look stupid beyond belief.

I mean to say. Do YOU buy that these guys in Basra were operating in deep cover (with minimis and M16s)?

It's not a question of symapthies, it's a question of not tolerating ANYONE'S lies.

Sorry, in my ranting I forgot to address your direct question.

Of couse MI6 & SAS are operating coverty in the region. They always do. And yes, I would assume they are most active in SW Iran staging fron SE Iraq.

However, I am yet to be concinced of the strategic benifits of posing as insurgents in Basra etal. And certainly find the idea that the SAS themselves are dressing up scoobydoo style to plant bombs as especially daft- i.e. pointless.

Got any proof arab dress is SAS standard issue? and whatever for, if not to blend in.

and they also had an anti-tank werapon....standard issue? when the only tanks are the coalition of the killing.

As for the bombs, what proof do you have there was none? Do you expect the UK press to say there was?as in the US, the UK press often sides with the UK government.

Further, the brits saw nothing wrong in usingf not 1 but 10 tanks to break down a basra gaol and spirit the men away, before they could be tried. They did freely kill Basra policeman. How many jailbirds have that sort of help!

You dont know what happened , but you are quick to defend murderers.

And before i forget, the UK govt said about the gaol break..it didnt happen, until they were forced to acknowledge it had...why the reticence?

'Within a matter of hours, the British military responded with overwhelming force. Despite subsequent Ministry of Defence denials, insisting that the two men had been retrieved solely through “negotiations”, British military officials, including Brigadier John Lorimer, told BBC News (20/9/05) [1] 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 arrest, they had been handed over to local militia. '
 http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/20220

Nimmo has better information than you seem to have. Attacking the messenger is a standard issue for those who cant attack the message.

'Of couse MI6 & SAS are operating coverty in the region. They always do. And yes, I would assume they are most active in SW Iran staging fron SE Iraq. '

If they tried to do that in an allied state with the potential to target civilians, thered be hell to pay. As it is, the Basra govt was properly angry.

Breaking down the Basra gaol and killing several peope is a crime,and proof the brits like the US have contempt for the idea of sovereigny.

> I am only too willing to receive info on dubious practises (See Ulster) but what is being presented is reaching and actually downright infantile.
The incident was very reminicent of the two SAS soldiers who were beaten to death after driving into the IRA funeral in Belfast 19/3/88.

>I mean to say. Do YOU buy that these guys in Basra were operating in deep cover (with minimis and M16s)?
Probably a similar regular SAS recon mission to the Belfast debacle, more SNAFU than deep cover. It is amazing these soldiers survived.

>It's not a question of symapthies, it's a question of not tolerating ANYONE'S lies.
Or everyones mistakes. Admitted speculation though is to be encouraged even when the facts are obscured so here is my guess. MI6 are regarded as superior to US human intelligence agencies and that might even be the reason why the British army were allocated the Southern border region, to facilitate cross border MI6 operations. The official line of policing a safer region to minimise UK casualties and UK war opposition doesn't hold true after the Black Watch were sent to block refugees from Fallujah.

>And yes, I would assume they are most active in SW Iran staging fron SE Iraq.
The Iranians blame MI6 for a series of explosions and unrest in SW Iran, also for downing their planes. Allthough the effects of sanctions is enough to explain the aircraft crashes, I've not found any reference to explosions in SW Iran before the Brits encamped near Basra. In retaliation, British propaganda alleges Iranian involvement in the design of road side bombs as they are similar to Lebanese Hezbullah designs. I doubt Lebanese Hizbullah need Iranian instruction to oppose the Iraq occupation, they already beat the marines on thier home turf. Low intensity conflict / terrorism is preferable to war perhaps but it does seem to be employed by the British across both sides of the border. Iranian interests are so strongly linked to the prevailing power-structures and dominant militia in Iraq that they seem to have markedly less motive in destabilising the region further through terroristic acts.

>And certainly find the idea that the SAS themselves are dressing up scoobydoo style to plant bombs as especially daft- i.e. pointless.
Over the past years there have been numerous Iraqi eyewitness reports stating that various bomb attacks were in fact missiles. All of these reports were dismissed in our press as anti-occupation propaganda and at least some of them will be. Given the Laser kit the SAS were found to have, and US over reliance on airpower it is reasonable to assume that some of these reports are credible. The explosives in thier kit indicates they have blown up at least a few people directly. With their capture, and the various reports of MI6 involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, I'd guess MI6 would take all the major dirty work, assasinations and torture and market bombings, and these soldiers were more like the Belfast team, doing recon and firefight missions.

As for the mosque attacks - another one in Basra today - I am perplexed. The real question isn't 'who is attacking them' as too many different war-mongers stand to gain, the real question is why aren't they defended ? People who pointed out that no interceptors were scrambled on 911 are slow to notice the similar lack of protection around these mosques. These are incredibly holy sites in the heartland of religious militia in what many see as a religious war and yet noone is guarding them ?


Brian,

I don't think M is defending the actions, he's just attacking Nimmo. I wouldn't disagree with anything you say, but just because someone seems to has better information doesn't mean that they are telling you the truth. Because Nimmo was associated with Rense he is a dubious source at best and if you don't want to tarnish your own sensible points then you should find more credible sources or better yet, just quote yourself. You own thoughts read better than Nimmo does.

 http://www.campingandcamo.co.uk/ishop/975/shopscr1255.html

The SAS are pretty mucha covert regiment. They don't advertise anything much about themselves. It's the nature of covert operations to blend in. <- This was covered in the hidden comment.

As for their kit google any SAS glorifying site for details.

Um shoulder launch missles aren't JUST effective on any number of targets. And yes, they are pretty much standard kit for certain jobs.

"You dont know what happened , but you are quick to defend murderers."

You don't know what happened but you are quit to cast the judgement of "murder".

You obviously have no clue regarding the work of the SAS, and army personnel in general. Yet, you seem to think you can discern shit from sugar when it comes to something on a blog.


Even the idea that you could officially get the SAS to undertake such a mission is absurd. If you offered me the ideation that a mercenary outfit was to blame, I'd at least prick up my ears in interest.

NY


"The incident was very reminicent of the two SAS soldiers who were beaten to death after
driving into the IRA funeral in Belfast 19/3/88."

Well, even the PIRA conceded they made a mistake in reading the Singal Regiment mens' IDs wrong (Herford, Germany was assumed to be Hereford, England). AFAIK, there has been no credible claims that the men were SAS- but again, the SAS would never confirm ID. Sure, they may have been Detachment, but like I said, no credible sources. What the hell were they doing there? Haven't a clue.

Reminiscent in what way? I can't see any paralells myself... This time round the personnel were almost certainly SAS and there was no official line as to what they were up to- AFAIK.

I generally concur with your other points.

The simple point I'm putting is that Nimmo is talking out his backside out of his depth. He's citing news stories that were single-sourced and uncorrobaorated by the TV footage (the kit seized is enough to rubbish the claims) and to overlook the fact that there are many people with an active interest in smearing the "Coalition" at every possible opportunity is foolish.

There will certainly be "fun & games" at play in Iraq/Iran involving MI6 and secret ops run behind the borders in Iran. But an army regiment undertaking False Flags is naive to the point of absurdity. It doesn't make any sense on any level to get serving soldiers to do that kind of work. You outsource and keep the operation small. You manipulate and deceive the dupes into doing it for you.

As for the sense in fomenting civil war in a country they want to milk for its oil reserves. I can't reverse engineer any practical gain. If Haliburton/Bechtel want to profit from Iraq they need stability. If the CIA wants to a honeytrap for insurgents pretending to be insurgents and blowing up mosques doesn't make sense. Just being in the region and verbally rattling sabres is enough to up the attacks.

I'm not saying I definitely know who's doing what. Just that Nimmo, Rense, What Really (didn't) happen, GlobalResearch et al are very obviously talking out their arses a lot of the time. And on the subject of Basra/SAS they are plainly clueless.

>Well, even the PIRA conceded they made a mistake in reading the Singal Regiment mens' IDs wrong (Herford, Germany was assumed to be Hereford, England).
I never knew that. And since you are too mean-spirited to include links then I am going to have to search on the web to learn anything.

>Reminiscent in what way? I can't see any paralells myself...
The unusually incompetent tactics and execution of simple missions seem almost unique in both cases if they were SAS. Like I said though, I'll take your word in the mean time that the Belfast pair were standard issue squaddies and if so then my comparison is flawed. That's probably true, I never did understand why they held fire as the SAS have the fear trained out of them. Certainly anyone who wants to understand the capabilitities of the British state should understand recent Irish history, especially if your personal struggle has nothing to do with Ireland. Movements on either side of Irelands various communities already know the limits, the morals and the powers of Westminster. A file on everyone, microphones and cameras everywhere to no effect, families split and innocent blood spilled over and a political fudge at the end with communities voluntarily turning their own freedoms over to gangsters. Social control from the primary school to an early grave.

I've a couple of family friends who were in the Parachute Regiment before the worst of the brutality in NI. In social situations they talk about operations in other countries at other times but none of their anectdotes fill me with hope. I had been hoping you or someone else could provide better links to what is happening down the Iraq/Iran border, I'm too ignorant for my own good. If I do ever get there then I'll let you know my opinion through IndyMedia. There are about 60 million people in the UK, there should be at least 6 million independent journalists to inform us, we are lucky if we have 6. A good doctor can help save ten thousand lives but a good journalist can help prevent a war, this next war. With so many intent on mass extinction it is down to the rest of us to douse their passions as best we can, with facts and arguments.

>Just that Nimmo, Rense, What Really (didn't) happen, GlobalResearch et al are very obviously talking out their arses a lot of the time.
Most of the time. GR is a knowledgable cult front, the others don't even have that credibility. Innocent disinformation at best.

'
I don't think M is defending the actions, he's just attacking Nimmo. I wouldn't disagree with anything you say, but just because someone seems to has better information doesn't mean that they are telling you the truth. Because Nimmo was associated with Rense he is a dubious source at best and if you don't want to tarnish your own sensible points then you should find more credible sources or better yet, just quote yourself. You own thoughts read better than Nimmo does.'
=======================================================

Ny
What has Rense got to do with Nimmo's post or his views? Dahr Jamail also has queries on this topic. Qui Bono? Nimmo links to a site that reports eyewitnesses.
Also I recommend Michael Keefers article:

'Were British SAS Soldiers Planting Bombs in Basra?'
...
In May 2005 ‘Riverbend’, the Baghdad author of the widely-read blog Baghdad Burning, reported that what the international press was reporting as suicide bombings were often in fact "car bombs that are either being remotely detonated or maybe time bombs." After one of the larger recent blasts, which occurred in the middle-class Ma’moun area of west Baghdad, a man living in a house in front of the blast site was reportedly arrested for having sniped an Iraqi National Guardsman. But according to ‘Riverbend’, his neighbours had a different story:

"People from the area claim that the man was taken away not because he shot anyone, but because he knew too much about the bomb. Rumor has it that he saw an American patrol passing through the area and pausing at the bomb site minutes before the explosion. Soon after they drove away, the bomb went off and chaos ensued. He ran out of his house screaming to the neighbors and bystanders that the Americans had either planted the bomb or seen the bomb and done nothing about it. He was promptly taken away."

(Baghdad Burning – May 18, 2005 )

Also in May 2005, Imad Khadduri, the Iraqi-exile physicist whose writings helped to discredit American and British fabrications about weapons of mass destruction, reported a story that in Baghdad a driver whose license had been confiscated at an American check-point was told "to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license." After being questioned for half an hour, he was informed that there was nothing against him, but that his license had been forwarded to the Iraqi police at the al-Khadimiya station "for processing"—and that he should get there quickly before the lieutenant whose name he was given went off his shift.

"The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors. The only feasible explanation for this incident is that the car was indeed booby trapped by the Americans and intended for the al-Khadimiya Shiite district of Baghdad. The helicopter was monitoring his movement and witnessing the anticipated ‘hideous attack by foreign elements’."

(Albasrah.Net – 16th May 2005)

 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00052.htm

First of al, calling critics like Nimmo, globalresearch ad Rense names is not going to help put your opinion in a flattering light. Darhrjamail has not joined in:

 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022606B.shtml

Who benefits from what is an act the iraqis recognise quiet clearly is meant to promote sectarian division. You may not understand that, but they do..

What better cover for SAS ops than to say they are going after terrorists...thats why the War on terror is so useful...any disgruntled iraqi helps feed this everlasting war, and justifies SAS troops.

But why did UK use 10 tanks to break down a prison? They had kille a police man, in the course of his work. Do the Brits thinnk they are above Iraqi law? And Basra definitely looks on the incident as criminal.

Killing a policema in the course his duty is murder...it would be in UK, but seem to regard Iraq very differently.

Why is SAS there at all? There are no terrorists in Iraq. What there is is the following:

'In May 2005 ‘Riverbend’, the Baghdad author of the widely-read blog Baghdad Burning, reported that what the international press was reporting as suicide bombings were often in fact "car bombs that are either being remotely detonated or maybe time bombs." After one of the larger recent blasts, which occurred in the middle-class Ma’moun area of west Baghdad, a man living in a house in front of the blast site was reportedly arrested for having sniped an Iraqi National Guardsman. But according to ‘Riverbend’, his neighbours had a different story:

"People from the area claim that the man was taken away not because he shot anyone, but because he knew too much about the bomb. Rumor has it that he saw an American patrol passing through the area and pausing at the bomb site minutes before the explosion. Soon after they drove away, the bomb went off and chaos ensued. He ran out of his house screaming to the neighbors and bystanders that the Americans had either planted the bomb or seen the bomb and done nothing about it. He was promptly taken away."

(Baghdad Burning – May 18, 2005 )

Also in May 2005, Imad Khadduri, the Iraqi-exile physicist whose writings helped to discredit American and British fabrications about weapons of mass destruction, reported a story that in Baghdad a driver whose license had been confiscated at an American check-point was told "to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license." After being questioned for half an hour, he was informed that there was nothing against him, but that his license had been forwarded to the Iraqi police at the al-Khadimiya station "for processing"—and that he should get there quickly before the lieutenant whose name he was given went off his shift.

"The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors. The only feasible explanation for this incident is that the car was indeed booby trapped by the Americans and intended for the al-Khadimiya Shiite district of Baghdad. The helicopter was monitoring his movement and witnessing the anticipated ‘hideous attack by foreign elements’."

(Albasrah.Net – 16th May 2005)
 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00052.htm

Thanks for another considered replay Brian. As you've noticed my understanding of events on the ground pretty generalised. I wish I had more time to dig deeper, but alas such is life. In fact, I don't even know anyone currently serving. However, a good friend's grandson is joining the next Marines intake and since you at least seem like the type who'll look for corroboration to rumour, I'd happily keep in touch and help any way I can- even if I don't see wholly eye-to-eye.

There are organisations that train journalists in war zone survival skills. If that's beyond your budget, I'm sure someone will at least advise you on good practice. I think also seeking MoD permission to gain access to the soldiers on the ground isn't as absurd as it sounds.

Yeah, 22 SAS as you know has been in a bit of a decline for the last few decades and some of the tales of fuckups and poor soldiering are truly atonishing (read Peter Ratcliffe's book, if you haven't already! Heehee!)



Sorry, not being mean-spirited, just sloppy:

 http://loyalulster.150m.com/Corporals.html

I still wonder what a couple of NCOs were doing with side arms in the first place. A lot remains unexplained about that incedent. Maybe it's worth trying your hand at the FOIA with the MoD, Royal Corps of Signals Rgt., RUC, Home Office & MI5?

At any rate, best of luck, keep in touch and let us know your progress!
____

Unfortunately, however, Brian has no interest whatsoever in the function of Regiments like the SAS (counterterrorism is only one part of their remit), its ties to other other regiments (like the Paras) and the reality of soldiering in the first place. He seems only interested in these fabulous misrepresentations and stereotypes. Perhaps he read an "Andy McNab" book, sorry novel once???

He would also do well to understand that a rebuttal constitutes more than repeating yourself and reposting the links being criticised.

If besmirching Rense et al discredits me, I'll happily run out of town for charlatanism- with my objectivity and self-critique intact.

"Thanks for another considered replay Brian." should read "Thanks for another considered replay Ny."

nor should the US/UK etc soldiers....the invasion was illegal, based on lies,. The invaders have milled upward of 100000 iraqi civilians, and show contempt for iraqi sovereignty while, feigning to applaud their ne 'democracy'....

Virtually the entire American diplomatic and political effort in Iraq has been geared toward getting the Sunni to join the political process - not split the Iraqis up.

Only a complete fucking imbecile would imagine the US would want MORE civil unrest in Iraq.

But seeing as IndyMedia is synonymous with complete fucking imbeciles, that's precisely the line being taken here.

Not even the Iranians want MORE civil unrest in Iraq, because the only people who could possibly benefit would be the Sunni militias. Oh, them and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

The entire direction of left wing policy on Iraq has been to act as lickspittles to the Sunni militias.

Hence, they will peddle any line, no matter how stupid, to protect the Sunni fascist reactionary militias.

It's not a secret who was behind the attack on the shrine and I am sure that who did it were the Salafi/Wahabis whether Iraqi or foreigners and with external support from parties planning to disrupt the political process in Iraq.
The reason I believe it's the Salafis who did it comes from their own ideology which considers all mosques built upon tombs as places of polytheism and infidelity and thus must be destroyed. This also applies to Sunni shrines like Abu Haneefa and al-Gailani; Salafis consider the Shia and the Sufis their worst enemies and they commonly refer to them in their speech with the term "tomb worshippers" or Mushrikoon Quborioon in Arabic.

 http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

B,
-First of al, calling critics like Nimmo, globalresearch ad Rense names is not going to help put your opinion in a flattering light. Darhrjamail has not joined in:

Since I've previously never heard the name Darhrjamail it doesn't persuade me much. ERnlighten me. And even if you'd quoted God, Tony Blair or my father it wouldn't impress me much if it was itself quoting rense. You see, when rense first appeared lots of of us found links to it on various websites and like any website we gave it a chance. It doesn't take long on rense to come across neo-nazi links, or conspiracy theories that make David Ickes look credible. You can have an open mind without feeling the draft, a position of luxury that corrupts. And so even sensible facts quoted on rense become instantly dismissable. Rense is widely crap and you are better than that judging from your posts. To support even a just argument you have to have sources that are credible even on the most dismissive website. And indymedia should be the most critical website. I don't deny globalresearch has useful information on its website - I just doubt it is impartial or well-meaning.

You have put yourself in an unflattering light by quoting sites commonly considered as fools or frauds, while your initial arguments and premises are sound or at least arguable - if you want to propagate these arguments then you should rephrase them once you've stolen them from rense to avoid the natural aggression towards rense from intellectuals / arrogant snobs like me.

If this seems aggressive, it is not. I am not criticising you or your arguments, just your sources. Speaking as one of those few native english speakers who knows how to spell 'impugn', I suggest everyone learns the meaning of that word. It is effectively the opposite of 'impunity'.

See, I'd agree with your attitude while slanging your sources while me and M disagree without slanging each other. Slanging leads to silly comments which benefit no one. If you attack someone then it is predictable that they will attack you back. Treasure your enemies, your weakest enemy will tell you more about yourself than your best friend could. I doubt from M's previous posts that they are who you suspect them to be.


M,
-However, a good friend's grandson is joining the next Marines intake and since you at least seem like the type who'll look for corroboration to rumour, I'd happily keep in touch and help any way I can- even if I don't see wholly eye-to-eye.

Good, we can communicate via here out of courtesy to our hosts or of you prefer I'll make up an email account specifically for you and post it here. Our conversation would be dull if we agreed about everything.

-There are organisations that train journalists in war zone survival skills. If that's beyond your budget, I'm sure someone will at least advise you on good practice. I think also seeking MoD permission to gain access to the soldiers on the ground isn't as absurd as it sounds.

It is easy enough to gain access to former Iraq veterans in the UK, although nobody seems to take the trouble ( I have obvious suspicions why we see more 'Great War veterans' than Iraqi veterans on TV.

And everything is beyond my budget, I won't be interviewing anyone myself. I can't write well, I'm not a journalist, I'm an engineer. I'm hoping to set up direct links between Iraqis and Brits so that natural journalists have the links they need. We need !? I would love if our soldiers started posting about their experiences in Iraq on indymedia but they really can't. They do post on their own websites and mailing lists and if you are curious then you will find them, you could repost them here.

Keep passing on your experience and keep looking for ways to pass on what you've learnt without diminishing those that are still ignorant.

You corrected an obvious mistake where you replaced my pseudonymn with Brian - such mistakes are obvious and don't warrant correction on sites like this where conversational posts are discouraged. Only weak causes would seek to exploit such obvious, common and understandable typographical errors.