British Special Forces Caught Carrying Out Staged Terror In Iraq?
Paul Joseph Watson | 23.09.2005 19:48 | Terror War
British SAS were caught attempting to stage a terror attack and the media have dutifully shut up about the real questions surrounding the incident. What is admitted is that two British soldiers in Arab garb and head dress drove a car bomb towards a group of Iraq police and began firing. According to the Basra governor Mohammed al-Waili, one policeman was shot dead and another was injured. The BBC reports that the car did contain, "assault rifles, a light machine gun, an anti-tank weapon, radio gear and medical kit. This is thought to be standard kit for the SAS operating in such a theatre of operations."
Paul Joseph Watson
Comments
Hide the following 27 comments
OI!
23.09.2005 20:01
tired
To Blair's goons- this story is EVERYWHERE and will not be forgotten
23.09.2005 22:19
As for the hilarious goon statement that the car full of bombs and RPG's is merely standard kit- well yes, I'm sure every time a SAS guy takes a trip to his local supermarket, he always remembers to take his 'standard' kit with him.
None of us should be surprised at the sick crap spewed by New Labour (New Reich) goons though, since I'm posting on a day when a muslim was sent down for 15 years for the crime of owning a ball of socks!!! Annie Maguire, eat your heart out!
And for those New Reich members crying over the fact that the truth of Blair's perverted schemes have been revealed to the world, please stop. Your master doesn't worry, so why should his dogs.
twilight
Hard 'men' aren't they?
23.09.2005 23:00
The zombies are left to rule you 'un-flustered'.
Observation Post 23
.
23.09.2005 23:39
Think you might find that this wasn't a trip to the supermarket, maybe they were soldiers operating in a war zone - Oh the shock - British troops carry weapons in a war zone - better get the papers ready for the legal case at The Hague.
Sorry if it was short or generic, but I find that being succinct is far better than a two page rant - enjoyed it though.
Observer
Proof please!
24.09.2005 00:35
12 Angry Men
What of reports they had explosives and detonators?
24.09.2005 00:37
Now I'm sure that both the sadrist al-Mahdi army and the British state forces can and do lie - lies are part of war, and this report may or may not be true.
But the British media is criminally negligent (or much worse) for failing to even report these allegations or ask questions of UK state spokespeople about them.
However, UK special forces covert operations in Al-Basra area would be accompanied by a UK media cover-up - by definition.
And of course it will turn out that the UK is fighting a 'dirty war', and is up to its neck in bloody intrige worse than anything in Ireland. 'Our boys' will/have become a brutal faction in Al-Basra's power struggle, for sure.
The question is, do we sit back and wait for it to be on UK history channel in 40 years time, or organise mass popular protest and resistance here and now?
Barry Kade
Share!
24.09.2005 01:16
Share with us your knowledge that qualifies this.
12
Stake holder
24.09.2005 02:05
those poor fuckers who happen to have to deal up with world famous (INNIT) british justice face 2 face yeah yeah yeah she loves you and you know you are a fucking c+++ so that's all right and your 12 angry twats
all 4 one
all 4 one
24.09.2005 08:53
12
Oh, Aye?
24.09.2005 09:17
Because it is an internationally accepted principle that the accuser must prove his case, you dolt. Put up better evidence or shut up.
Boab
Possibility is there.
24.09.2005 13:05
So they should at least stand trial in Iraq.
And as for the blissful ignorance of the poster above who cannot believe that western security forces would do such a thing -
Sim1
'Standard' kit!
24.09.2005 13:41
why would they need an anti-tank weapon?
How many tanks do the 'insurgents' have???
Oi!
Lord give me strength *sigh*
24.09.2005 14:41
And you are misquoting that Times link:
"appears to be an anti-tank weapon"
See if you can spot where you went wrong.
What model is the launcher? Were the RPGs armour piercing? How do you know they weren't going to use them on a building/vehicle? Are you saying insurgents can't possibly have armoured 4x4s? Their procurements only extend as far as slingshots and donkeys?
In fact, WHAT do you know that supports these allegations? NOTHING!
I know full well of what has gone on before. But past precedent isn't good enough evidence for these allegations. That's the kind of judicial logic that gets the wrong men hanged.
I'm afraid finding two blokes undercover in a war zone with a boot full of weapons doesn't constitute anything. As for the Army response to the refusal to free their men, what the hell would you expect them to do? "Oh fine. Just let some militants cut their heads off. See if we care!"
Come on. Prove your allegations or shut up!
12
Lord give me strength *sigh*
24.09.2005 14:42
And you are misquoting that Times link:
"appears to be an anti-tank weapon"
See if you can spot where you went wrong.
What model is the launcher? Were the RPGs armour piercing? How do you know they weren't going to use them on a building/vehicle? Are you saying insurgents can't possibly have armoured 4x4s? Their procurements only extend as far as slingshots and donkeys?
In fact, WHAT do you know that supports these allegations? NOTHING!
I know full well of what has gone on before. But past precedent isn't good enough evidence for these allegations. That's the kind of judicial logic that gets the wrong men hanged.
I'm afraid finding two blokes undercover in a war zone with a boot full of weapons doesn't constitute anything. As for the Army response to the refusal to free their men, what the hell would you expect them to do? "Oh fine. Just let some militants cut their heads off. See if we care!"
Come on. Prove your allegations or shut up!
12
The 'standard' kit
24.09.2005 15:06
Sorry, the equipment and the allegations don't add up.
12
Hmmm....
24.09.2005 15:31
Sim1
Sim1
24.09.2005 16:55
12
You utterley failed to prove your accusations!
24.09.2005 16:56
Arthur
Unprecedented Step
24.09.2005 17:34
One can only wonder why they did not also take the unprecedented step to allow the two undercovers to be interviewed and explain themselves what they were up to with that equipment and disguise before they attracted the attention of Iraqi policeman and opened fire on them, killing one, to try to escape.
gaz
gaz
24.09.2005 17:46
12
12
24.09.2005 19:14
Because it is either intelligence gathering or terrorist attack those two blokes were up to.
gaz
gaz
24.09.2005 19:40
Or something completely different? I could envisage a few scenarios where and RPG would be handy and none of them involve commiting fake terrorist attacks.
The point I made about the M16 is enough to convince me this was not any "false flag". They aren't even standard issue in the British Army. It's obvious they are Special Forces Group. I mean it's just stupid to suggest they would go out pretending to be insurgents with that weapon.
If they were going to get up to those kinds of games, they'd pay a mercenary that was the right ethnicity to do it. And probably the merc wouldn't even know they were not doing insurgent business... the whole allegation is so simplistic and ill-informed it's laughable. Think it all through! How would you carry out a "false flag op"?
To answer your first question: yes, they would be normal if they expected to come up against something that would warrant its use. SAS are often deployed on long-range recons (i.e. behind enemy lines/into dangerous situations). Given that's the nature of their work, I haven't seen/heard anything surprising so far... except that they got delivered into the hands of militia by the Basra police despite being told by the Interior Ministry to let them go.
At any rate, you can whistle as far as any public statements on their mission. There will never be one... perhaps when we are old and grey something'll get declassified hahahaha!
12
12
24.09.2005 20:53
Also where is your proof that they were handed to the militia ? Just only London claims this and they have be proven to lie about many aspects of the story already such as attacking the prison which they claimed at first they didn't do, then they said it was by mistake because of darkness, if you remember.
Also, if the Basra police was as you and London say, why didn't they shoot those two blokes on the spot or give'em immediately to the militia or the mob ?
All the British gov is able to say is that the Coalition forces have an agreement with Iraq (understand the hyper-protected Green Zone puppets representing only themselves) allowing them to do there whatever they want in this country without ever being held accountable.
You're the photoshop anarchist with a yellow sportscar of the other day aren't you ?
By the way, are you so sure they are SAS. I thought they were better than that. Captured by simple Iraqi policemen and needing the intervention of several armored vehicles to be liberated. Hahaha.
gaz
M16
24.09.2005 21:20
They could have really been gathering intelligence. Or they could have been out to bump some person(s) off. They could have just been en route to reporting at another location ...
If you got pinned down by some sniper high up in a building. What would you prefer to have an RPG or some harsh language? If you wanted absolutely kill every motherfucker in a room very quickly: RPG. If you were expecting someone in an armoured vehicle ...
At the end of the day, there is nothing out there to piece together a compelling story of any sort and I doubt there will be.
Why was there shooting at the checkpoint at all??? There seems to be no detailed account of that part of the story given. No account of how they were arrested.
Like I said, M16 and False Flag= bollocks. And that weapon strongly suggests that they are Special Forces of some description. Who are after all still capable of error.
I only assume that the militia involvement is true because it fits in with the rest better than some mad todger's theory about blokes pretending to be terrorists with all the wrong kit.
Who knows maybe they lied about the militia. I don't see why they would though. Surely, after destroying half a police station it'd be better to have lied and said "Oh they were in the police station all along!"
And back to "cui bono", there is certainly nothing to gain from civil war in Iraq. Bush & Blair have been under increasing pressure to withdraw. And Blair is now under more pressure after this whole chimps' tea party.
12
Re : 12
24.09.2005 22:39
maybe if you read catch 22 you might understand that what is good for the syndicate is good for you, even
if that means bombing the base as Milo did under contract from the germans.
It appears you think that every thing is run on marquis of Queensbury rules and no hitting below the belt.
but the herion is flowing freely again and the asian black markets are all up and running and a civil war in iraq is just what the doctor (death) ordered more instability in the region and another step closer to invading Iran.
the usaul suspects are hitting the jack pot at the expense of the iraqie civilians and the various tax payers UK and U.S and cannon fodder SAS included.
worldly salt
12
24.09.2005 23:21
You have not been very imaginative as to what they could have been up to. Besides saying they might have been on their way to somewhere, you say the same as me finally as there is little difference in my eyes between commiting a terrorist act or murdering people (if that's what you mean by "they could have been out to bump some person(s) off").
Reading you, it seems that them having M16 makes them automatically innocent of any wrong doing. I still haven't grasped that.
Also, for your edification there ain't snipers in Basra. You'd know it otherwise. They'd be plenty of extra dead brits.
Don't feed the trolls they say but sometimes it's worth doing it.
So you said :
"If you got pinned down by some sniper high up in a building. What would you prefer to have an RPG or some harsh language? If you wanted absolutely kill every motherfucker in a room very quickly: RPG. If you were expecting someone in an armoured vehicle ..."
1) Where are the high up buildings in the Basra area ?
2) Who could they expect to attack in an armored vehicle ? British troops ? US troops ? Foreign Diplomats ? Iraqi officials ? I don't see who else's got armored vehicles over there.
3) So for you, Iraq is a country were there are roomfulls of motherfuckers to be terminated wholesale with RPGs ? I am sure you are not speaking about the foreign invaders who murder, rape, torture and loot on a grand scale in this country since two years.
You fucking stink man.
gaz
gaz
25.09.2005 06:42
The next significant point is that it is widely known that British soldiers carrying that weapon are usually special forces. And don't forget they were apparently carrying a Union Jack flag to wave at police.
Does that really sound like a professional attempt to pass yourself off as insurgents?
It may interest you to know that the shemagh (arab head dress) is also standard SAS kit in that part of the world- even in uniform.
Sorry I wasn't aware of the town planning bylaw prohibiting elevated positions in Basra. So, there is NO possibility that local insurgents, criminal, bent cops etc could be driving an armoured vehicle. Basra much have some level of vetting on the sales of such things, since even in the UK it is easy to obtain these things.
The motherfuckers thing was an ironic borrowing from a Tarintino film. Unfortunately, the world over motherfuckers congeregate in rooms. As for the rest, you are putting dehumanised racist words in my mouth, which is just juvenile.
And then we get the admission you have no argument left; the accusation of "troll"
Oh, and I don't have a driving license. Never have done!
I know you just want to see the world fit your prejudice and I have seen worse prejudices. I am well aware of what our dodgy governments have been up to and are capable of. I just don't like to believe *anyone* without first examining the facts.
12