The story sounds amazing, almost fantastical.
A car driving through the outskirts of a besieged city opens fire on a police
checkpoint, killing one. In pursuit, the police surround and detain the drivers
and find the vehicle packed with explosives – perhaps part of an insurgent's
plan to destroy lives and cripple property. If that isn't enough, when the suspects
are thrown in prison their allies drive right up to the walls of the jail, break
through them and brave petroleum bombs and burning clothes to rescue their
comrades. 150 other prisoners break free in the ensuing melee.
Incredible, no? Yet this story took place in the southern Iraqi city of Basra
recently. Violence continues to escalate in the breakout's aftermath... just
not for the reasons you think.
You see, the drivers of the explosive-laden car were not members of
an insurgency group – they were British Special Forces. Their rescuers?
British soldiers driving British tanks.
That's right – two members of the British Armed forces disguised
as Arab civilians killed
a member of the Iraqi police while evading capture. When
the people of Basra rightfully refused to turn the murderers over to the British
government, per Coalition "mandate," they sent their own men in and
released over 100 prisoners in the process.
Winning the hearts and minds, aren't we?
Sadly, this story is really not all that surprising. After hearing
countless accounts of using napalm and torture against innocent civilians in
addition to the other daily abuses dished out by American overseers, the thought
of British scheming seems perfectly reasonable.
So what we have here is a clear instance of a foreign power attempting
to fabricate a terrorist attack. Why else would the soldiers be dressed as Arabs
if not to frame them? Why have a car laden with explosives if you don't
plan to use them for destructive purposes? Iraq is headed towards civil war,
and this operation was meant to accelerate the process by killing people and
blaming others. Nothing more, nothing less. That the British army staged an
over-the-top escape when it could rely on normal diplomatic channels to recover
its people proves that.
Such extreme methods highlight the need to keep secrets.
There have been a number of insurgent bombings in Iraq recently. Who really
is responsible for the bloodshed and destruction? The only tangible
benefit of the bombings is justification for Coalition forces maintaining the
peace in Iraq. Who benefits from that? Certainly not the Iraqis – they
most suicide bombings are done by the United States to prompt religious
war. After reading about this incident, I'm not inclined to disagree.
Even though this false-flag operation was blown wide open, I'm afraid it might
still be used in the mainstream media to incite further violence in the Middle
East. Judging by the coverage that has emerged after the incident, my fears
Several articles have already turned the story against the angry Iraqis who
fought the British tanks as they demolished the jail wall, painting them as
militia attacking the doe-eyed, innocent troops responding to the concern
that their comrades were held by religious fanatics. A photograph of a troop
on fire comes complete with commentary that the vehicles were under attack during
a "bid to recover arrested servicemen" that were possibly undercover.
All criminal elements of British treachery are downplayed, the car's explosive
cache is never mentioned and the soldiers who instigated the affair are made
victims of an unstable country they are defending.
Hilariously, all of this spin has already landed Iran at
the top of the blame game. Because when the war combine botches its own
clandestine terrorist acts, what better way to recover than by painting the
soulless, freedom-hating country you'd love to invade next as the culprit? In
a way, I almost admire the nerve of officials who are able to infer that Basra's
riots have nothing to do with fake insurgent bombing raids and everything to
do with religious ties to a foreign country. It's a sheer unmitigated gall that
flies in the face of logic and reason.
"The Iranians are careful not to be caught," a British official
said as the UK threatened to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for sanctions.
Too bad the British aren't! Maybe then they'd be able to complete their black-ops
mission without looking like complete fools in the process!
Make no mistake – any and all violence to erupt from Basra over this
incident lands squarely on the shoulders of the British army and its special
forces. Instead of stoking the flames of propaganda against a nation it has
no hope of ever conquering, maybe Britain should quit trying to intimidate the
Iraqis with fear and torture and start focusing on fixing its mistakes and getting
out of the Middle East.
These actions are inexcusable and embarrassing; however, they should
make you think. If a country like the United Kingdom is willing to commit acts
of terror, what kind of false-flag operations do you think the United States
is capable of?
If you thought the U.S. wouldn't blow up people it claims to support
in the hopes of advancing its agenda, think again. Use this incident as your
first reference point.