PDA

View Full Version : Car bombs in Iraq Set up



~Q~
06-29-2005, 02:19 PM
THe next 2 paragraphs will make you think.

“A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license. The next day, the driver did visit the camp and he was allowed in the camp with his car. He was admitted to a room for an interrogation that lasted half an hour. At the end of the session, the American interrogator told him: ‘OK, there is nothing against you, but you do know that Iraq is now sovereign and is in charge of its own affairs. Hence, we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. Therefore, go there with this clearance to reclaim your license. At the police station, ask for Lt. Hussain Mohammed who is waiting for you now. Go there now quickly, before he leaves his shift work”.
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."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KHA505A.html


So now we have a personal suspect in the car bombings in Iraq we hear every day.

M1911A1
06-29-2005, 02:25 PM
So now we have a personal suspect in the car bombings in Iraq we hear every day.


That's one of the sillier conspiracy theories I've ever heard.

You see, for a theory regarding a crime or attack or such to be reasonable, it must satisfy three elements. Motive, means, and opportunity.

Your unsubstansiated story, if true, satisfies the latter two, but fails to even consider the first, and primary, element.

Motive.

Why would the US Government choose to do this? What do they stand to gain from these car bombings?

TranceNRG
06-29-2005, 02:33 PM
That's one of the sillier conspiracy theories I've ever heard.

You see, for a theory regarding a crime or attack or such to be reasonable, it must satisfy three elements. Motive, means, and opportunity.

Your unsubstansiated story, if true, satisfies the latter two, but fails to even consider the first, and primary, element.

Motive.

Why would the US Government choose to do this? What do they stand to gain from these car bombings?


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=417&row=0

M1911A1
06-29-2005, 02:36 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=417&row=0


Yes, I've heard these before. Please explain to be precisely what function the car bombing of Shiites would have, within these supposed plans?

TranceNRG
06-29-2005, 09:33 PM
Yes, I've heard these before. Please explain to be precisely what function the car bombing of Shiites would have, within these supposed plans?

it simply gives an excuse for Americans to stay longer to fortify their oil plans :)

morgansd12
06-29-2005, 09:40 PM
That's one of the sillier conspiracy theories I've ever heard.


Why would the US Government choose to do this? What do they stand to gain from these car bombings?


Oil. Maaaaaahhhhaaaaan!

wayoutwest
06-29-2005, 10:51 PM
Yes, I've heard these before. Please explain to be precisely what function the car bombing of Shiites would have, within these supposed plans?

its an old British policy: Divide and Conquer...

keep those Shi'ias and Sunnis fighting...theyre be too occupied to be worried aobut foreign presence taking their oil

bulletproofsoul
06-29-2005, 11:35 PM
its an old British policy: Divide and Conquer...

keep those Shi'ias and Sunnis fighting...theyre be too occupied to be worried aobut foreign presence taking their oilThat was around long before the British, but in this case continued insurgency/internecine warfare isn't in US interests, economically or otherwise.

It's bad for business.

TranceNRG
06-30-2005, 10:04 AM
That was around long before the British, but in this case continued insurgency/internecine warfare isn't in US interests, economically or otherwise.

It's bad for business.

which business you talking about?

Oil / gas companies? or weapon building companies? ;)

JUSA
06-30-2005, 10:37 AM
This is absurd.

JUSA

TranceNRG
06-30-2005, 11:04 AM
This is absurd.

JUSA

ok :)

M1911A1
06-30-2005, 06:22 PM
it simply gives an excuse for Americans to stay longer to fortify their oil plans :)


They need an "excuse" to stay?

Apparently, the war was illegal anyway, so why do they need an excuse all of a sudden?

Butmonkey
06-30-2005, 06:57 PM
This is ridiculous. This is the time in which we can't afford to have ****ty yellow journalism like this.

Chute
06-30-2005, 07:05 PM
No, the United States has no motivation to take all the effort to follow with a helicopter car bomb some random guy with no strategic value whatsoever.


Lets see

benefits: kill some random guy with no strategic value


risks: huge international scandal about how evil the United States is

~Q~
06-30-2005, 09:18 PM
its an old British policy: Divide and Conquer...

keep those Shi'ias and Sunnis fighting...theyre be too occupied to be worried aobut foreign presence taking their oil


Yes that is exactly what is the motive. And who benifits from all this? THe benificary is usually the one who started the motive.



risks: huge international scandal about how evil the United States is

Too late for that. So why bother hiding it now.

Culmination
06-30-2005, 10:36 PM
you guys should read Frantz Fanon's "Toward an African Revolution, there are some intresting parallels in it. although i think its prob unlikely that the USi is behind such attacks. some of you dismiss it as if its impossible. Think about it,these so called "rebels" are in some regards winning the war. The last thing the US wants is mass public support behind these so-called rebels. so if these bombings start to occur and civilians are killed then public opinion will not sway in the favor of these rebels. i dunno tho, im sorta playing devil's advocate.

TranceNRG
06-30-2005, 11:08 PM
They need an "excuse" to stay?

Apparently, the war was illegal anyway, so why do they need an excuse all of a sudden?

yes the war was illegal based on International laws.

They need an excuse to show that their presence is necessary.
They need an excuse to prolong their stay until they fortify their oil plans.

How do you think if the world would react, if Iraq was calm and they still remained there? Wouldn't that expose their hypocritical agenda much clearer?

furuno
06-30-2005, 11:11 PM
which business you talking about?

Oil / gas companies? or weapon building companies? ;)

I can't wait until all the oil in the middle east dries up, then maybe all the conspiracy theorists will just shut up and move on to something else like the moon landing.

TranceNRG
06-30-2005, 11:14 PM
I can't wait until all the oil in the middle east dries up, then maybe all the conspiracy theorists will just shut up and move on to something else like the moon landing.

sure...
let's wait and see.

Actually one main reason behind U.A.E. and Dubai's great advancement is the lack of oil.

so think about that? ;)

furuno
06-30-2005, 11:15 PM
yes the war was illegal based on International laws.

They need an excuse to show that their presence is necessary.
They need an excuse to prolong their stay until they fortify their oil plans.

How do you think if the world would react, if Iraq was calm and they still remained there? Wouldn't that expose their hypocritical agenda much clearer?

Ummmm... how about the GASING of entire innocent villages???? How about the use of chemical weapons in the Iran/Iraq war, how about the mass killings he would do. Honestly is it that YOUR life is so much more important than an Iraqi's? Is that it? How about all the political leaders he executed, how about all of the death's he caused? (he being saddam). I'm glad you let CNN tell you what is right or wrong with the war. Good for you. I am sick of everyone forgetting what was happening in that country before we went in, Im glad everyone has forgotten 30 years of oppression. People like you probably would have had a problem with us putting a stop to the Nazi's in WWII. I hope that you are never put in the shoes of the oppressed, but it would serve you right.

furuno
06-30-2005, 11:16 PM
I'm not trying to bash you trance. Just trying to get you to look from a different point of view

Dave22reborn
07-01-2005, 12:07 AM
Ummmm... how about the GASING of entire innocent villages???? How about the use of chemical weapons in the Iran/Iraq war, how about the mass killings he would do. Honestly is it that YOUR life is so much more important than an Iraqi's? Is that it? How about all the political leaders he executed, how about all of the death's he caused? (he being saddam). I'm glad you let CNN tell you what is right or wrong with the war. Good for you. I am sick of everyone forgetting what was happening in that country before we went in, Im glad everyone has forgotten 30 years of oppression. People like you probably would have had a problem with us putting a stop to the Nazi's in WWII. I hope that you are never put in the shoes of the oppressed, but it would serve you right.

Those gassings, and use of chemical weapons happened when he was "our" guy. Hell he used chemical weapons one day, and the next day he was shaking hands with Rumsfeld.

And as for the Nazis, that war wasn't about freeing Germany, THEY declared war on us.

TranceNRG
07-01-2005, 12:42 AM
I'm not trying to bash you trance. Just trying to get you to look from a different point of view

I'm Persian
You don't need to convince me saddam was evil :)

But two wrongs don't make a right.
You don't punish a criminal by committing a crime against him.

TranceNRG
07-01-2005, 12:43 AM
Those gassings, and use of chemical weapons happened when he was "our" guy. Hell he used chemical weapons one day, and the next day he was shaking hands with Rumsfeld.

And as for the Nazis, that war wasn't about freeing Germany, THEY declared war on us.

Thank you :)

AntonToo
07-01-2005, 01:22 AM
THe next 2 paragraphs will make you think.


Yeaaaaaaaaaa.. I'm thinking can this ~Q~ guy actually be so heavily medicated, so brain damaged as to actually consider this story true????

From that website:

RELATED ARTICLE:
The Provocateur State - Is the CIA Behind the Iraqi "Insurgents"--and Global Terrorism? May 10, 2005:

Now I'm wandering what kind of idiots are running this website??? and more importantly what kind are reading it.

Diesel66
07-01-2005, 03:51 AM
Those gassings, and use of chemical weapons happened when he was "our" guy. Hell he used chemical weapons one day, and the next day he was shaking hands with Rumsfeld.

And as for the Nazis, that war wasn't about freeing Germany, THEY declared war on us.
And Stalin was a horrible leader who committed numerous attrocities and was shaking hands with FDR and Truman. Doesnt mean we ignored those attrocities just because he was our allie.

IROCthe5.7L
07-01-2005, 04:39 AM
Yeaaaaaaaaaa.. I'm thinking can this ~Q~ guy actually be so heavily medicated, so brain damaged as to actually consider this story true????

From that website:

RELATED ARTICLE:
The Provocateur State - Is the CIA Behind the Iraqi "Insurgents"--and Global Terrorism? May 10, 2005:

Now I'm wandering what kind of idiots are running this website??? and more importantly what kind are reading it.

Pwned!

Dave22reborn
07-01-2005, 09:22 AM
And Stalin was a horrible leader who committed numerous attrocities and was shaking hands with FDR and Truman. Doesnt mean we ignored those attrocities just because he was our allie.

Okay, but don't sit there and say "He was this horrible dictator that gassed his own people, and used chemical weapons." If we didn't care then, don't pretend to care now.

Culmination
07-01-2005, 09:39 AM
Okay, but don't sit there and say "He was this horrible dictator that gassed his own people, and used chemical weapons." If we didn't care then, don't pretend to care now.


very good point, dont forget we supplied saddam with weapons that cost nearly 1 million lives in the iraq-iran war.

olaf christ
07-01-2005, 10:03 AM
Even if you are dumb enough to believe the US would want to do this:

The man gets out and inspects the car and discovers the supposed explosives, and the supposed helicopter trailing him does nothing? Surely it would have just blown him the f*** up instead of letting him tell others about what happened? As he 'carefully stops and inspects the car', are the crew just saying 'damn, looks like he's foiled our scheme... oh well, it's only international scandal material' ?

this story = BS.

~Q~
07-02-2005, 02:13 AM
Yeaaaaaaaaaa.. I'm thinking can this ~Q~ guy actually be so heavily medicated, so brain damaged as to actually consider this story true????

From that website:

RELATED ARTICLE:
The Provocateur State - Is the CIA Behind the Iraqi "Insurgents"--and Global Terrorism? May 10, 2005:

Now I'm wandering what kind of idiots are running this website??? and more importantly what kind are reading it.


That was the first time I went to that site thru a link. This story is in Arabic to warn cab drivers and others in Iraq, it was just translated and put on the net.



olaf christ makes a point, but the cab probably stopped at an area where it was not good to exploded due to US soilders or ect.

Diesel66
07-02-2005, 03:06 AM
Even if you are dumb enough to believe the US would want to do this:

The man gets out and inspects the car and discovers the supposed explosives, and the supposed helicopter trailing him does nothing? Surely it would have just blown him the f*** up instead of letting him tell others about what happened? As he 'carefully stops and inspects the car', are the crew just saying 'damn, looks like he's foiled our scheme... oh well, it's only international scandal material' ?

this story = BS.
Shh dont let intellegence enter the conspiracy.