[graffis-l] suicide bombings-favorite us counter-insurgency tactic

[Guest guest]

At 08:46 AM 8/22/07, you wrote:

 

>Suicide Bombings - A Favourite US Counter-Insurgency Tactic

>

>http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/articles/show/138504-Suicide+Bombings+-+A+Fav\

ourite+US+Counter-Insurgency+Tactic

>Aeneas

>Signs of the Times

>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:46 EDT

>

>The true face of Iraqi suicide bombers. Two SAS agents dressed in full

> " Arab Garb " driving a car full of explosives were caught carrying out a

>false flag terror attack in Basra, Iraq September 20th

>

>Since 9-11 reports of " suicide bombings " have increased exponentially in

>the news. We are led to believe by the experts that it is one of the

>favorite weapons of the insurgency against the occupation forces, since it

>is a cheap and simple way to create chaos. Hardly a day goes by without at

>least one bombing in Iraq or Afghanistan being immediately seized upon by

>the media as the work of Iraqi insurgents.

>

>It is one thing for an insurgency to commit suicide bombings against the

>occupation forces, it is another thing entirely to use them to target and

>kill civilians. We have been brainwashed into believing that the

>insurgents in Iraq are such brutal, uncivilized, fanatical crazy

>extremists that they will do anything to fight 'freedom' - even kill their

>own people.

>

>This picture presented to us by the US government and mainstream media is

>so insane that Joe Quinn, in response to the massive 'suicide' bombings in

>Mosul that killed 350+ people last week, felt confident to say:

>

> " The person who can present a convincing argument (i.e. logical and backed

>up with reliable data) that explains why any anti-American Arab or Islamic

>group, " terrorist " or otherwise, would kill hundreds of thousands of

>Iraqis as a response to the US occupation of Iraq, will receive a prize of

>1 million USD. "

>

>Looking at this from a historical perspective, precedence for the type of

>bombings in Iraq that are attributed to the insurgency or " al-Qaeda " is

>virtually non existent. During world war II, a number of countries were

>occupied by the Nazis. Countries such as France, Denmark, Norway and many

>others all had resistance movements who used various tactics to hamper the

>Nazi take over. Yet, there are no records whatsoever that the resistance

>fighters resorted to the mass murder of their fellow country men in an

>effort to evict the Nazis. Sure there was factional infighting, but

>nothing on the massive scale that we are seeing in Iraq. And of course,

>how could there be? It defies all logic.

>

>Fast forward to the Vietnam war and here too we find no evidence that the

>Vietcong waged a campaign to kill their own fellow citizens as part if the

>fight against American forces.

>

>Of course, there are those who would suggest that Muslims are a different

>breed, that they, like so many other ungrateful peoples who attempted to

>throw-off the chains of empire, are little more than uncivilised savages

>and we cannot therefore hope to understand their mentality or actions.

>Such an ill-informed attitude however is in no way backed up by any

>evidence and must therefore be dismissed for the obvious racism that it is.

>

>When the Iraqis first fought the British Empire in the 1920's, there were

>no " suicide bombings " by insurgents against Iraqis. On the contrary and

>according to good strategy, they united despite minor cultural and

>religious differences to confront the common British enemy.

>

>Likewise in Afghanistan during the 10 year war with the Soviet union there

>were no instances of suicide bombings targeting Afghan civilians. Here

>too, the Afghan tribes united despite previous disagreements against the

>common aggressor.

>

>Does no one find all of this even mildly odd? After 9-11, suddenly this

>bizarre phenomenon of an insurgency using suicide bombings against their

>own people rather than the invaders appears, as if to provide supporting

>evidence for the reality of the crazed " suicide bombing " hijackers that

>attacked America - or so the official story goes.

>

>Could the answer be as simple as that what is being touted as suicide

>bombings are in fact the work of US/British/Israeli counterinsurgency

>teams? In Iraq, are we in fact dealing with the what are better know as

> " false flag operations " ?

>

>This certainly would explain a lot of the confusion over why Iraqi groups

>would kill their own people in response to a US invasion of their country.

>After all, the people who are dying by the hundreds every day in Iraq are

>the people who support the insurgency, and the US, British and Israeli

>forces in Iraq are fighting that insurgency, so who benefits from the

>daily mass murder of the supporters of the insurgency?

>

>Past counterinsurgency tactics involved such things as ethnic cleansing

>( " draining the dam " as this tactic was known) and/or the destruction of

>crops like with agent orange in the case of Vietnam. But these methods had

>little success.

>

>In recent years it seems that devious and deviant minds in the employ of

>the military industrial complex came up with much more insidious modern

>tactics.

>

>Roger Trinquier, an immensely influential French counter-insurgency

>expert, suggested in his book Modern Warfare: A French View of

>Counterinsurgency (1961) (Available online here) three simple principles

>of Counter Insurgency:

>

>1. separate the guerrilla from the population that supports him;

>

>2. occupy the zones that the guerrillas previously operated from, making

>them dangerous for him and turning the people against the guerrilla movement;

>

>3. coordinate actions over a wide area and for a long enough time that the

>guerrilla is denied access to the population centres that could support him.

>

>Remote controlled bombings masquerading as " suicide bombings " that are

>carried out by the US, British and Israeli occupation forces fit these

>principles very neatly. By detonating bombs on a daily basis across Iraq

>and Afghanistan and via the propaganda organs touting them as being the

>work of Iraqi/Afghani " suicide bombers " belonging to the insurgency, the

>occupying military hopes to achieve several goals:

>

>cut off the widespread support base that the insurgency have amongst the

>Iraqis

>

>create tensions between religious lines, especially by ascribing the faked

> " suicide attacks " to either Shias or Sunnis.

>

>In other words divide and conquer.

>

>The sheer carnage shown on TV back in the West only supports the idea that

>the Iraqis/Afghans can't take care of their own country without help from

>the occupation forces or that they are uncivilised savages. This

>propaganda reinforces the US government's persistent claim that it would

>be dangerous to pull US troops out of Iraq and for the American military

>grunts on the streets of Iraq it helps them to rationalise their continued

>presence. Either they are trying to show a lesser class of human how to

>become civilised, or they are doing god's work in wiping them out.

>

>There is ample evidence for the inquiring reader to discover that

>so-called suicide bombings against civilians are not the product of the

>insurgency. Some will say that it is the product of " al-Qaeda " , which is

>true if you first clarify that " al-Qaeda " is simply a tool of the very

>same counterinsurgency, namely CIA/MI6/Mossad. Always ask yourself, " who

>benefits? " , and in this case it is pretty obvious who doesn't benefit.

>

>For years Israel has very effectively used 'suicide' bombings as a tool in

>the perpetration of its slow genocide of the Palestinian people, with the

>effect that, today, the world's sympathy lies with the perpetrator

>(Israel). As a result, all peace initiatives have been stalled and the

>world has provided tacit if not outright approval of Israel's covert

>genocidal policies.

>

>The knowledge gained by the Israelis has certainly been passed on to the

>their counterparts in MI6 and the CIA as this SOTT editorial from

>September 2005 illustrates:

>

> " Today in Basra, Southern Iraq, two members of the British SAS (Special

>Ops) were caught, 'in flagrante' as it were, dressed in full " Arab garb " ,

>driving a car full of explosives and shooting and killing two official

>Iraqi policemen.

>

>This fact, finally reported by the mainstream press, goes to the very

>heart and proves accurate much of what we have been saying on the Signs of

>the Times page for several years.

>

>The following are facts, indisputable by all but the most self-deluded:

>

>Number 1:

>

>The US and British invasion of Iraq was NOT for the purpose of bringing

> " freedom and democracy " to the Iraqi people, but rather for the purpose of

>securing Iraq's oil resources for the US and British governments and

>expanding their control over the greater Middle East.

>

>Number 2:

>

>Both the Bush and Blair governments deliberately fabricated evidence

>(lied) about the threat the Saddam posed to the west and his links to the

>mythical 'al-Qaeda' in order to justify their invasion.

>

>Number 3:

>

>Dressed as Arabs, British (and CIA and Israeli) 'special forces' have been

>carrying out fake " insurgent " attacks, including 'car suicide bombings'

>against Iraqi policemen and Iraqi civilians (both Sunni and Shia) for the

>past two years. Evidence would suggest that these tactics are designed to

>provide continued justification for a US and British military presence in

>Iraq and to ultimately embroil the country in a civil war that will lead

>to the breakup of Iraq into more manageable statelets, much to the joy of

>the Israeli right and their long-held desire for the establishment of

>biblical 'greater Israel'

>

>Coming not long after the botched London bombings carried out by British

>MI5 where an eyewitness reported that the floor of one of the trains had

>been blown inwards (how can a bomb in a backpack or on a " suicide bomber "

>INSIDE the train ever produce such an effect), more than anything else

>today's event in Basra highlights the desperation that is driving the

>policy-makers in the British government.

>

>British intelligence would do well to think twice about carrying out any

>more 'false flag' operations until they can achieve the 'professionalism'

>of the Israeli Mossad - they always make it look convincing and rarely

>suffer the ignominy of being caught in the act and having the faces of

>their erstwhile " terrorists " plastered across the pages of the mainstream

>media. "

>

>As in Israel, 'suicide' bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan often occur at a

>time that most benefits the occupiers. A recent 'suicide' bombing in

>Afghanistan illustrates this aspect well:

>

>Seventeen civilians, a dozen of them schoolboys, were killed and 30 others

>wounded when a suicide bomber blew himself up near a NATO convoy in

>southern Afghanistan, officials said Tuesday.

>

>The timing just couldn't have been better. NATO had been under a lot of

>international pressure due to their random use of Aerial bombings with

>very large numbers of civilian casualties. This incident (as in most

>cases) harmed no troops, most victims were children. The desired effect of

>the bombing was described in the article:

>

>The UN representative in Afghanistan, Tom Koenigs, was shocked.

> " I am especially concerned by the reports I am seeing of a large number of

>children being among the dead from todays bomb, " he said in a statement. "

>Such utter disregard for innocent lives is staggering and those behind

>this must be held responsible. "

>

>You see? The enemy is uncivilised, crazy, half human in contrast to the

>civilised benevolent white crusaders who sacrifice so much in the fight

>against evil. The article concludes:

>

> " There have been more than 70 suicide attacks in Afghanistan this year, as

>compared with about 140 in all of 2006. Most are aimed at the security

>forces but civilians are usually the primary victims. "

>

>It should be pointed out that these so-called suicide bombings seem to be

>a speciality of Western intelligence agencies and their client regimes. In

>recent months we have also heard a lot about suspicious suicide bombings

>targeting civilians in Pakistan, whose intelligence agency, ISI, has close

>ties to the CIA.

>

>In Chechnya there have been 28 acts of suicide bombings from June 2000

>until 2006. The difference is that these attacks were against Russian

>civilians and not their own people. Perhaps the defining point is that

>Western (US/British/Israeli) counterinsurgency teams are not involved in

>these attacks because they do not wish to hand the Russians a victory.

>Certainly suicide bombings would demonize the Chechnyan rebels and provide

>propaganda value to the Russians. This is not to say that Russia does not

>engage in its own counter-insurgency, it is just that faked suicide

>bombings do not appear to form a core part of their strategy.

>

>As mentioned before, during the 10 years of Russian occupation of

>Afghanistan, no suicide attacks were carried out by the insurgency against

>the Afghan population. Why? It certainly didn't benefit the Americans to

>kill Afghans who were engaged in killing Russians, the key enemy of the

>Americans at the time. The Americans were heavily involved in recruiting

>and supplying the insurgency with all kinds of military hardware. Now

>however, the situation is different. In Afghanistan it serves the American

>agenda to murder as many Afghani civilians as possible under the cloak of

>Taliban " suicide bombings " because it provides the justification for the

>troops to stay there to fight this manufactured " evil " . In Iraq, the goal

>is the same, with the added element of the Neocons' desire to destroy the

>real Iraqi resistance by dividing and alienating them from the ordinary

>people that support their fight against a brutal occupier. It seems that

>the American, Israel and British tactic in Iraq is that if the ordinary

>Iraqi people will not be intimidated into accepting occupation and

>rejecting the real insurgency, then they will be murdered. Plain and simple.

>

>Despite Joe Quinn's offer of 1 million dollars then, he can rest assured

>that it is unlikely that he will have to go and talk to the bank anytime soon.

 

******

Kraig and Shirley Carroll ... in the woods of SE Kentucky

http://www.thehavens.com/

thehavens

606-376-3363

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release 2/14/05