BREAKING: SAS caught red-handed in Iraq false flag terror

by **slimmouse** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:50 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>As a result I took the difficult decision to order entry to the Jamiat police station. By taking this action we were able to confirm that the soldiers were no longer being held by the IPS [Iraqi police service]. An operation was then mounted to rescue them from a house in Basra.<hr></blockquote> Lucky the old "insurgents" didnt kill them before the 'Good guys' managed to rescue them, right. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol"> Anyone see a movie of this coming ? This story is so hopelessly pathetic, that if it wasnt for the fact that a large number of braindeads are gonna fall for it, it would be hilarious.

by **professorpan** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:02 pm

BBC News article: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4264614.stm">news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world...264614.stm</a> Note this photos with wigs and clothing: <img src="http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40822000/jpg/_40822800_wigs_203.jpg" style="border:0;"/> Iraq probe into soldier incident The Iraqi government has launched an inquiry into the events that led the British Army to stage a dramatic rescue of two UK soldiers detained by police. Both men were members of the SAS elite special forces, sources told the BBC's Richard Galpin in Baghdad. The soldiers were arrested by police and then handed over to a militia group, the British Army says. Iraq's interior ministry ordered the police force in Basra to release the soldiers but that order was ignored. Defence Secretary John Reid told reporters that a delegation of six British military personnel, including a legal officer, had been sent to the police station to ease the release of the men. Mr Reid said surveillance had established the men were being moved to another location, while at the same time an angry crowd posed an obstacle to the departure of the six-strong team. The British commander on the ground, Brigadier John Lorimer, ordered British forces to move into the police station to help the team. Almost simultaneously, a separate operation was staged to rescue the men from the place where they had been moved to. It is understood force was also used in this operation, although there were no casualties as the Shia militia holding the British soldiers fled. The episode saw a wall flattened at the police station by a British armoured personnel carrier, but Mr Reid said the coalition was still going "in the right direction" in terms of its overall strategy in Iraq and said this incident was merely "local". Basra governor Mohammed al-Waili said the men - possibly working undercover - were arrested for allegedly shooting dead a policeman and wounding another. Richard Galpin said al-Jazeera news channel footage, purportedly of the equipment carried in the men's car, showed 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, he said. The arrests sparked angry protests from locals in which British vehicles were attacked and set on fire. Haydar al-Abadi, a spokesman for Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, said the British rescue had been "a very unfortunate development". "My understanding is that, first, it happened very quickly. Second, there is lack of discipline in the whole area regarding this matter... We remain committed to helping the Iraqi government for as long as they judge that a coalition presence is necessary Defence Secretary John Reid "It is a very unfortunate development that the British forces should try to release their soldiers the way it happened, it's very unfortunate." Soon afterwards, the Iraqi prime minister's office released a statement insisting there was no crisis in relations with the British. "In response to recent events in Basra, the Iraqi government wants to clarify that there is no 'crisis' - as some media have claimed - between it and the British government. "Both governments are in close contact, and an inquiry will be conducted by the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior into the incident. "We will await the outcome of that inquiry. In the meantime we urge all sides to remain calm." In a statement, Brig Lorimer said that under Iraqi law the soldiers should have been handed over to coalition authorities, but this failed to happen despite repeated requests. The Conservatives' defence spokesman Michael Ancram has accused the government of "uncertainty" over its strategy in Iraq, while the Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy said Iraq was drifting towards civil war. Tensions were already high in Basra on Monday morning following the detention on Sunday of a senior figure in the Shia Mehdi Army, suspected of being behind a series of attacks on British troops.

by **Qutb** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:42 am

Richard Norton-Taylor and Ewen MacAskill Wednesday September 21, 2005 <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1574668,00.html" target="top">The Guardian</a> 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. The decision has dismayed military commanders, who are concerned about growing pressure on their soldiers. "We are not planning a withdrawal," a senior defence source said yesterday, referring to a plan to hand over control of two southern provinces to the Iraqis. The fragile situation in the south of the country was dramatically exposed when Iraqi police arrested two undercover British SAS soldiers on Monday and handed them over to militiamen before they were rescued. The incident came after months of concern that local security forces in the region had been infiltrated by radicals. Senior defence officials admitted yesterday that far from improving, the security situation in southern Iraq might well get worse over the next few months. They referred in particular to the Mahdi army, a militia headed by the radical Shia cleric, Moqtada al-Sadr. "Sadr is positioning himself as an Iraqi nationalist," a senior British defence source said. He added: "People want to use violence to create political power." In July, the then commander of British forces in southern Iraq, Major General Jonathan Riley, predicted that Britain would hand over "two provinces, Maysan and al-Muthanna, this year and [the] other two [Dhi Qar and Basra] next year." That hope was reflected in a secret memo sent by John Reid, the defence secretary, in July to cabinet colleagues. However, this is now regarded by military commanders and diplomats as hopelessly optimistic. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **thumper** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:21 am

The constant agitation and fear of death brought on by war/terrorsim reminds me of that phrase Mao used, "pemanent revolution" and I think it sums up the NWO nicely. In this state we are easily manipulated, and it brings out the worst in us.

by **DrDebugDU** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:31 am

British government blames the Iraqi police now. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Iraq police militants 'must go' "Rogue elements" in Iraq's police force must be rooted out, the head of the multi- national force in Basra has said. Colonel Bill Dunham's comments came after the British army said it had to rescue two soldiers arrested in Basra and handed to Shia militants by police. UK Defence Secretary John Reid and Iraqi prime minister Ibrahim Jaafari are in London discussing the tensions. Meanwhile, Iraq's interior minister has disputed the UK military's account of how it freed the soldiers on Monday. Baqir Solagh Jabr told BBC News the men never left police custody or the prison building in Basra and were not handed to militants. He said the British army acted on "rumour" when it stormed the prison looking for them. The Army says it rescued the soldiers from a house in Basra where they were taken by militants after the police ignored an order from the interior ministry to release them. The Iraqi government has launched an inquiry into events surrounding the arrest of the soldiers, both thought to be members of the SAS elite special forces. Iraq's national security advisor, Muwafaq al-Rubaie has admitted security forces and police in "many parts of Iraq" had been penetrated by insurgents. He told the BBC's Newsnight programme Iraq now had "a very scrupulous, very meticulous vetting procedure" to "clean our security forces, as well as stop any penetration in future from the insurgents or the terrorists". He conceded he did not know the extent of the infiltration. But he criticised the use of force in British operation to free the captured soldiers, saying: "They could have been freed in a much more peaceful, much more friendly and amicable way than that." (...) <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4267054.stm">news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4267054.stm</a> <hr></blockquote>

by **antiaristo** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:32 pm

Five Iraqi civilians died in clashes surrounding the controversial operation to free two British SAS men captured in Basra, it was claimed today. Iraqi police said the latest two died in hospital today after being wounded as British troops stormed a police station jail on Monday. snip Confusion still surrounds whether British forces knocked down a prison wall, resulting in the escape of prisoners, in their attempt to rescue the two SAS men. <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main">www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main</a> (truncated - URL too long) They showed the prison on the television news yesterday. There's not much confusion about the wall in Basra! Five dead Iraqis, killed during a jailbreak.

by **antiaristo** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:57 pm

There is some serious political fallout in Britain. We have been complaining about the pictures showing Brits as victims. this may have backfired. This article is good. Face it. It’s time we got our army out of Blair’s Vietnam Iain Macwhirter September 21 2005 Regular readers of this column know that it is not given to gloating at the misfortunes of Messrs Bush and Blair. Heaven forfend. So it gives me no satisfaction whatever that the tide of opinion on Iraq is moving rapidly towards the "troops out" line that has long been advocated in this space. Until now, such a posture has been regarded as irresponsible, defeatist, unpatriotic. Not any more. Suddenly everyone is talking about when and how we get out of this quagmire. All three main opposition leaders are calling for it explicitly or in terms, by demanding an exit strategy following the latest disturbances in Basra. Even that redoubtable old war-horse, Max Hastings, the man who beat the Army into Port Stanley in 1982, says he was wrong about keeping the troops in Iraq "until the job is done". "We are waist-deep in the big Muddy", the former Telegraph editor concluded in a newspaper article yesterday. "The only sensible thing is to strike for the shore." Hastings's decision to swim for it is less to do with ending the suffering of the poor Iraqis, than with avoiding the imminent humiliation of the British Army. The sight of burning British uniforms tumbling out of armoured vehicles besieged by a Basra mob is causing something of a panic in the British military Establishment. Unlike the Americans, we don't do defeat. Certainly not at the hands of petrol-bombing "natives". When we are reduced to driving tanks into the local police station in pursuit of British soldiers detained by the very Iraqi police force we helped to train, then it really is time to ask what we are doing here. There is widespread acceptance now that Iraq is heading inexorably toward civil war. British troops have no role to play in that civil war and should not be called upon to get in its way. This is not Belfast. The only way to keep our soldiers out of this fight is to take them out before they are taken out themselves. Yet, at the weekend, the government seemed to be talking about sending more troops to Iraq. This is madness. Ninety-five British soldiers have already died in Iraq. When that figure tops 100, then our war aims will anyway have to be reviewed. You simply cannot allow soldiers to die in such numbers without any clear idea of what they are dying for. They don't even know who the enemy is in Iraq. The Sunnis have long been hostile, but even the Shia Muslims seem to be losing patience at the British presence. The nationalist leader, Moqtada al Sadr's militants appear to have taken over sections of the local police. Many have detected Iranian involvement in the recent disturbances, which is intensely worrying. From the start, this war has been conducted without any clear war aims, political objectives, civil contingency planning or exit strategy. We long ago stopped looking for WMD; we're certainly not defeating terrorism; the country is in ruins; and our continued military presence is a focus for instability. Certainly, we should do our best to leave Iraq in as good order as possible. The last service we can do for the country is to try to ensure that the constitutional ballot on October 15 is as democratic as possible. But immediately thereafter we should announce a timetable for withdrawal. The last thing we want to see is the last British soldier being bundled into a helicopter as we escape in disarray from Basra, pursued by the crackle of AK 47s. We should never have been there in the first place. The best thing we can do now is remove ourselves with as much dignity as we can muster. As Colonel Tim Collins put it at the weekend: "One cannot help but wonder what it was all about." This is the same Colonel Tim "Nails" Collins, commander of the First Battalion Royal Irish Regiment, who sent his men into battle in March 2003 with those stirring words about going to Iraq "to liberate, not to conquer". About being "ferocious in battle, but magnanimous in victory". About zipping up British dead "in their sleeping bags" and sending them back home. He now believes he was duped by the politicians: "I made certain assumptions that my goodwill and altruistic motivations went to the top. Clearly, I was naive." He goes on to demand and explanation of "where we are going, and why". Like Max Hastings, Collins is expressing the view held by many in the British military who realise that Iraq has been a disaster and that things are going to get worse. His demand for an explanation of what we are doing there is thinly disguised code for saying that we shouldn't be there at all. It is remarkable for a former field commander to deliver such a public condemnation of his commander-in-chief effectively, if not constitutionally, Tony Blair. But it is more all the more extraordinary when the soldiers he sent into battle are still in there fighting and dying. These are the people everyone seems to forget about – the poor bloody infantry. Eying their sleeping bags with some apprehension as Iraq goes up in flames. The idea that in some way the Brits had "sorted" the south is no longer sustainable. We cannot strike poses as the helmet-less liberators, patroling the streets with cockades high, when we are having to resort to heavy armour. There was always a dose of mythology about the conduct of the war in the British theatre. As we saw at Camp Breadbasket, we were almost as bad as the Americans when it came to mistreating the locals. However, it was generally thought that Britain had gone further towards winning the "hearts and minds" (that awful phrase from the Vietnam era) than in the north where the Americans' idea of enlisting popular support is to raze towns like Falluja and kill everything in it that moves. The British had also supposedly advanced the "Iraqi-isation" (another hateful Vietnam-era neologism), of the police and security forces. But as the New York Times journalist, Steven Vincent pointed out in a remarkable article two months ago, this had been at the cost of allowing Muslim extremists to infiltrate many police stations. He paid for that story with his life. Vincent was assassinated in Basra shortly after it was published. It's time to face reality. When Sir Menzies Campbell, the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats calls for a "strategy for withdrawal", and the Tory leader Michael Howard calls for "an honest assessment of the difficulties", they both insist they don't want to "cut and run". But sometimes cutting and running is all you have left. As the Labour ex-spin doctor, Lance Price, makes clear in his memoirs, the prime minister rather likes the idea of being a war leader. He would take withdrawal as a personal defeat. Which of course it would be. However, British soldiers should not be required to give their lives in order to feed the vanity of an arrogant politician. This is Blair's Vietnam, not theirs. <a href="http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/47401-print.shtml">www.theherald.co.uk/featu...rint.shtml</a>

by **DrDebugDU** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:01 pm

Very good article!! It sounds like they've announced Blair's Political Coffin. And if one falls then the others will fall as well <img src="http://www.kirkbytimes.co.uk/images/warimages/antiwar/troops_carry_coffin.jpg"/>

by **Starman** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:23 pm

"... a senior British defence source said. He added: "People want to use violence to create political power." No shit, Sherlock. That's like, the coke-fired blast furnace commenting on the fireplace hearth, "Euie! It's DIRTY!!!" Un-fucking-believeable -- Or rather, TOO fucking predictable. The "liberators-occupiers" can murder wounded, disarmed 'enemy' soldiers with impunity, can and do kill civilians including women and children without a second-thought (not even bothering to keep track of numbers), use helicopter gunships and missiles and bombs to destroy houses where 'suspects' are 'thought' to be, detain and mistreat and torture 'suspects' who aren't even charged with anything for months and months and months, with NO information provided about who they are holding or where, fire indiscriminately on the slighest or even NO provocation, even shooting into unarmed crowds or to break-up traffic -- but when their ALLIES among the Iraqi police forces arrest British marines disguised as spies or covert terrorists for shooting at a police station and firing on policemen, the Iraqis are 'exceeding their authority'. Who the HELL do these British officials think they ARE -- AMERICANS??? Like the brits are actually doing the people of Iraq a big favor by killing and terrorizing and destroying? This CAN'T endear the frustrated, angry people of Iraq to their oppressors. Many recall the incidents of drivers having their cars loaded with explosives while they were being 'lectured' by American authorities, then told they needed to go to a local police dept for their license (while being tracked by a low-flying helicopter). This 'warning' was well-publicized in Iraq, showing the occupier's hands in covertly plotting terrorism, blamed on insurgents. Also, there have been reports of professionals and scientists being selectively assassinated by US or Israeli black ops. All these horrors extend from an illegal, unjustified and immoral invasion and occupation. How I wish those officials most responsible for causing such suffering would be held to account. Starman

by **DrDebugDU** » Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:55 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Continued anger on the streets of Basra as marchers denounce British aggression Michael Howard in Baghdad Thursday September 22, 2005 The Guardian Hundreds of policemen and civilians marched in Basra yesterday denouncing British aggression in the raid to free the two undercover soldiers arrested by Iraqi police on Monday. The protesters, some carrying handguns and AK-47s, chanted "No to occupation" and waved banners calling for the two men be tried as terrorists. Soldiers and armed police watched the march but did not intervene. Senior aides to Moqtada al-Sadr, whose Mahdi militia were at the heart of Monday's events, hit back at what they said were distortions and nonsense designed to discredit the firebrand cleric. "What is all this talk of infiltration of the police and destabilisation of Basra by supporters of Moqtada?" asked Abbas al-Rubaei, a spokesman for Mr Sadr in Sadr city in eastern Baghdad. "The real problem of stability in Basra was the fact that British forces attacked a police station and in doing so released 150 Salafists [Sunni militants] on to the streets." He was referring to reports, denied by British forces, that 150 prisoners escaped when British tanks demolished a prison wall to rescue the two men. In Najaf, a senior aide to Mr Sadr, Sheikh Salah al-Obeidi, said: "The media and the British are not reflecting a true version events, which is that the people of Basra, including members of the al-Mahdi army, came to the support of the Iraqi police who were under attack by the British for trying to do their jobs. The real problem here is of Iraqi sovereignty. We may have it in name but we won't see it in reality until the occupation forces leave. That is the only message that Moqtada is giving." (...) <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1575387,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1575387,00.html</a> <hr></blockquote> Deliberate understatement quotes in words like aggression removed from original article. <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Blair in denial over Iraq, says Kennedy · Pride preventing troops' withdrawal, members told · Offence of glorifying terrorism 'is unworkable' Tania Branigan and Michael White Thursday September 22, 2005 The Guardian Charles Kennedy will today use his keynote address to the Liberal Democrat conference to accuse the prime minister of "playing politics" with opposition leaders over anti-terrorism legislation and of letting his pride get in the way of withdrawing British troops from Iraq. Recalling the extra 1m votes his anti-war stance won on May 5, the Liberal Democrats' leader will don the mantle of "real opposition leader" to accuse Tony Blair of being in denial over Iraq and over anti-terror legislation. Mr Kennedy will step up his demand for a timetable for withdrawing UK troops, saying: "The government must confront the fact that the presence of British and American forces in Iraq is a part of the problem. After this week's events in Basra we cannot sustain the myth that Iraqis see coalition troops as liberators. What they see is an occupation." (...) <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1575387,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1575387,00.html</a> <hr></blockquote>

by **antiaristo** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:36 am

A picture worth a thousand words... <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,7371,1576787,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/cartoo...87,00.html</a>

by **Qutb** » Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:38 am

TIKRIT, Iraq, Sept. 23 (Xinhuanet) -- A deputy mayor of the Iraqi town of Dhuluiyah, some 100 km north of Baghdad, and two police officers were killed by US forces there on Friday, local policeand witnesses said. "A group of US soldiers stormed the house of Brigadier Jabar Atiyah Saud, the deputy mayor of Dhuluiyah and dragged him out of his house before they shot him several bullets in his head," asource from the Joint Coordination Center in Tikrit told Xinhua on condition of anonymity. Meanwhile, the US soldiers also killed two local police officers, Captain Amir Yousif and the 1st Lt. Jasim Khalaf, the source added. The US troops have sealed off the town of Dhuluiyah since Tuesday, imposing curfew and preventing people from leaving their homes as US snipers deployed on roofs of high buildings, local residents told Xinhua by telephone. "The US soldiers shot the drinking water containers above houses and many families are suffering from shortage in watersupplies," a local resident, Ammar al-Jubouri said. The wounded people or even deaths were not allowed to shift to the medical center outside the town, Jubouri said. On Wednesday, the US troops had detained the police chief of the town and hundreds of people, including dozens of policemen, after insurgents in Dhuluiyah attacked a convoy of trucks carrying military supplies for the US troops. ------------------ Iraq arrest warrant for UK troops (CNN) Report: Rockets fired at buildings housing British officials BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- An Iraqi judge said on Saturday he had renewed arrest warrants for two British soldiers who were rescued from jail early this week by troops using armor to crash through the prison walls. The British government said the warrants are not legally binding, as the soldiers are subject to UK law. This week's violence in Basra infuriated local Iraqi police and government officials, and tensions remained high in the city on Saturday. Rockets were fired at two buildings housing British officials, police said. Most of them missed their mark, and no British officials were hurt. However, two of the rockets hit nearby homes and wounded an Iraqi civilian, police said. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/24/iraq.basra.ap/index.html">www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/me...index.html</a> Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Qutb** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:11 am

So what were two undercover British soldiers up to in Basra? The dramatic rescue of two special forces men from an Iraqi police station has exposed hidden tensions and highlighted increasing dangers for British troops. Raymond Whitaker in London and Sarah Tejal Dave in Basra report Published: 25 September 2005 <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article314977.ece" target="top">The Independent</a> An Iraqi judge yesterday issued arrest warrants for two British soldiers, presumed to be SAS men, whose detention by Iraqi police and subsequent rescue by British forces in Basra last week has thrown an unprecedented spotlight on Britain's role in Iraq. Early yesterday a flurry of rockets was fired at buildings occupied by British troops, but police said the only injuries were suffered by an Iraqi family in a house hit by one missile. Tensions aroused by last week's clashes remain high, with Basra's governor refusing to co-operate with British forces until the local authorities receive an apology and compensation for the damage caused when troops stormed the al-Jamiat police station on Monday. But Judge Mudhafar says he is not convinced the two men are British - possibly because one of them was said to have been carrying a Canadian-made weapon - and they may not be entitled to immunity. This has added yet another layer of mystery to what is already an extremely murky affair. Who are the two men, and what were they doing when they were seized outside Jamiat police station? What prompted British forces to smash down the wall of the station and demolish several prefabricated buildings inside the compound in the operation to snatch them back? Is it true that they had been handed over to a militia, or that the men inside the station were militia in police uniform? The search for answers to those questions reveals that the picture the British public has been allowed to gain of our occupation of southern Iraq - one of relative tranquillity and co-operation compared to the bloody mayhem further north - is at best misleading, at worst deliberately distorted. At the request of the MoD, British media obscured the faces of the two captured men. The two sides give wildly differing accounts of events, but it is not disputed that they had been sitting in a car outside the police station in Arabic dress. They were heavily armed and had an impressive array of surveillance equipment with them. It is not impossible that one or both of the men are not British. Special forces from Australia and New Zealand, for example, often work closely with the SAS. They could even be "civilian contractors" of the kind hired by the CIA, usually ex-special forces. But it is their mission that is more significant. Subversion from nearby Iran has been blamed for a recent increase in attacks on British forces in southern Iraq, including the use of more sophisticated and deadly roadside bombs, which have claimed the lives of three soldiers. Initial assumptions that the undercover pair were working to combat such influence have been contradicted by military and other sources, however. Not only are they sceptical about the Iranian connection, pointing out that there is more than enough explosive and bomb-making expertise available in Iraq, but they say the surveillance operation was the result of a problem largely of Britain's own making. more Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Qutb** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:15 am

<a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1796566,00.html" target="top">The Sunday Times</a> SAS in secret war against Iranian agents Michael Smith and Ali Rifat, Basra TWO SAS soldiers rescued last week after being arrested by Iraqi police and handed over to a militia were engaged in a “secret war” against insurgents bringing sophisticated bombs into the country from Iran. The men had left their base near the southern Iraqi city of Basra to carry out reconnaissance and supply a second patrol with “more tools and fire power”, said a source with knowledge of their activities. They had been in Basra for seven weeks on an operation prompted by intelligence that a new type of roadside bomb which has been used against British troops was among weapons being smuggled over the Iranian border. The bombs, designed to pierce the armour beneath coalition vehicles, are similar to ones supplied by Iran to Hezbollah, the Islamic militant group. “Since the increase in attacks against UK forces two months ago, a 24-strong SAS team has been working out of Basra to provide a safety net to stop the bombers getting into the city from Iran,” said one source. “The aim is to identify routes used by insurgents and either capture or kill them.” The forces have tried to seal the notoriously porous border using high-technology sensors that monitor movement by night. They report to a major based in Baghdad in an unmarked building known as the “station house”. Special forces commanders believe that a tip-off from a local worker at their base may have led to the men’s capture last Monday after a car chase by police, who later handed them to the Mahdi army of Moqtada al-Sadr, the maverick Shi’ite cleric. They were freed from a nearby house. The disclosure that the SAS has targeted the Iranian border coincides with claims by a former Iraqi defence minister that parts of Iraq have fallen under Tehran’s control. Hazim Shalan, who left office last May amid a scandal over huge sums of missing money, claimed that 460 Iranian agents had been apprehended in the past two years. He accused Iranian officials of bringing weapons and drugs into Iraq and of paying voters to back their chosen candidates. more Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Qutb** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:46 am

I'm slightly sceptical of Raimondo, but he has a good grasp of <a href="http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=7366" target="top">what's going on</a> in Iraq: The closer we look at what happened in Basra the other day, the murkier and more suspicious the picture gets. Two British undercover operatives fired at the Iraqi police, killing one and injuring another, and were taken into custody, then "rescued" as British tanks laid siege to police headquarters. The incident culminated in a pitched battle between Iraqi and British forces, and in its aftermath a war of words is heating up that threatens to expose a widening chasm between these two ostensible "allies." We are told that our enemy in Iraq is a shadowy network of al-Qaeda-affiliated suicide bombers who will do anything to disrupt that country's march toward "democracy," but instead we find coalition troops shooting at the very Iraqi police we are investing so much money, effort, and hope into. What in blazes is going on? The two sides do not agree on even the most basic facts. The Brits aver that the two arrested special ops soldiers – members of the Special Reconnaissance Regiment – were moved from the Basra jail to a private home during the negotiations for their release. After British tanks knocked down a wall, troops busted into the jail, held the Iraqi police at gunpoint until they revealed the soldiers' whereabouts, and the pair were freed. The Iraqis, in the person of Iraqi Interior Minister Bayan Jabr, say the soldiers never left the jail, were not handed over to a militia group, and that the whole incident was provoked by a "rumor" that the pair were about to be executed. The Iraqis, for their part, have their own version of what went down, as the Washington Post reports: "Iraqi security officials on Monday variously accused the two Britons they detained of shooting at Iraqi forces or trying to plant explosives." Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive: they could have been shooting at Iraqi forces – indeed, they killed at least one policemen, when he approached the pair – and trying to plant explosives. But never mind… At any rate, the disagreements continue over what was found in the pair's possession. In spite of initial BBC Radio reports that the car the Brits were cruising around in was packed full of explosives, the BBC News site now avers that the Iraqis found nothing more untoward than "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 theater of operations." An antitank weapon – standard operating equipment? That sounds rather doubtful. Look at this photo of what was recovered from the car, and you tell me if that haul seems rather a lot more than just your Spooks' Standard Issue spying kit. On the question of what was found in the car, Sheik Hassan al-Zarqani, a spokesman for the Mahdi Army, the organization headed up by firebrand Shi'ite leader Moqtada Sadr, had this to say: "What our police found in their car was very disturbing – weapons, explosives, and a remote control detonator. 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." Furthermore, Sheik al-Zarqani says, the two Brits were not just in "traditional Arab dress," as several news reports aver, but were disguised in the uniform worn by members of the Mahdi Army. The Brits, says the Sheik, have some 'splaining to do: "Why were these men dressed as Mahdi Army? Why were they carrying explosives and where were they planning to detonate their bomb?" more Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

BREAKING: SAS caught red-handed in Iraq false flag terror

Re: Never Apologise, Never Explain

Re: Never Apologise, Never Explain

Plans to withdraw abandoned

yep

Iraq police militants 'must go'

Re: BREAKING: SAS caught red-handed in Iraq false flag terro

Fallout

This is Blair's Vietnam, not theirs

oh my gosh ...

Continued anger Basra marchers denounce British aggression

Steve Bell

US troops execute deputy mayor

Independent What were two undercover soldiers up to in Basra

The Times: They were fighting the Iranians (of course)

Justin Raimondo: Bizarro Basra

Who is online