Iraqis Apprehend US Soldiers Dressed as Arabs Trying to Detonate a car Bomb

For a "conspiracy" website it sure is funny to watch peoples replies when something comes out that they don't want to believe. If mainstream media sources are what is required for people to believe a story, then why are they here in the first place? This is the exact same thing that was done when the brits were caught red handed, and with the photographs to prove it. This is what is done time and time again whenever coalition forces "mistakenly" bomb a civillian target. What will it take for anyone to believe this? An american official making a statement admitting guilt? Don't hold your breath people...

Doesn't matter if the site listed is biased either, as they are not the ones responsible for the iraqi resistance report. If people payed attention then they would know that the resistance report is Translated and/or compiled by Muhammad Abu Nasr, member, editorial board, the Free Arab Voice. Many websites have the resistance report as it has turned out to be one of the most reliable news sources coming out of Iraq, not just the russian one listed.

I read the resistance report at www.albasrah.net...

More often than not, they have been accurate in what they report. Looks like the truth about foreign provocateurs is starting to come to light. It has been rumored for years that coalition forces were trying to spark a civil war to justify their occupatoin as they never had plans to leave anyways. First the brits, and now reportedly the U.S, both caught red handed. When will people wake up and realize what is going on over there? When will people realize that they are not going to find this on CNN? Hell, even the story about the brits took days before it hit most western media sources. This however will probably stay burried unless some photos show up...Then again even photographic evidence isn't usualy enough to convince most of you people, I am sure excuses will still be made.



[edit on 14-10-2005 by phoenixhasrisin]

So soon do we all forget the "Bay of Pigs?" We are deception at the highest degree. Enough said. Now do you want a tall or grande frappuccino?

It is also funny how that site in the very first post has information on events that supposedly happened but yet NO news site anywhere is reporting that. We all know how much the media loves to tell the world how many soldiers and helicopters are shot down. I don’t care for main stream media and I don’t care for propaganda.

I don’t think that I have ever denied that this did happen, matter of fact I did say that it would not surprise me especially since there have been converted Americans that have been caught before.

I just find it awfully funny that there are no other reports about this anywhere to be found. BTW, I really do not like the “main” stream media.

It is good to see that some members actually look deeper instead of just jumping to conclusions right away.

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Al-Jazeera, the Arab TV network, does not have a news web site.

sure they do. right here ---->english.aljazeera.net...

It may be called Al Jazeera, but it is not related to the Satellite TV station that you can see here:

www.allied-media.com...

I stand by my statement.

Originally posted by ArchAngelI stand by my statement.

www.ccmep.org...

"The popular Arab satellite station Al-Jazeera officially launched its English website yesterday, five months after hackers brought down a temporary site at the height of the Iraq war"

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
Hell, even the story about the brits took days before it hit most western media sources.
[edit on 14-10-2005 by phoenixhasrisin]

How about hours? I knew, and ATS knew within hours of it happening.

Your records are wrong here some what.

I still want to see proof that it was US soldiers, and not just an attempt to inflame people, or bash US troops.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I still want to see proof that it was US soldiers, and not just an attempt to inflame people, or bash US troops.

Me too, as well as all the rest of the posters here.
I still think it is a crock of bull, but then again, that is my opinion.

Originally posted by BlackBeard
It is good to see that some members actually look deeper instead of just jumping to conclusions right away.

Thanks for that. At least someone takes notice of the credibility of the information quoted.

Originally posted by Bikereddie

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
Hell, even the story about the brits took days before it hit most western media sources.
[edit on 14-10-2005 by phoenixhasrisin]

How about hours? I knew, and ATS knew within hours of it happening.

Since when did ATS qualify as "most western media sources"?

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin

Since when did ATS qualify as "most western media sources"?

It doesn't. It was a thread started when the event was happening.
I just made a quote about ATS havening it..............

Originally posted by Bikereddie

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin

Since when did ATS qualify as "most western media sources"?

It doesn't. It was a thread started when the event was happening.
I just made a quote about ATS havening it..............

Yes, and you also made a comment on how my records were wrong or something. I never mentioned anything about ATS not having it, I said most western media sources did not report the story for a few days, and that was a true statement.

Here we go again.

I'll wait for the pictures of the captured Americans dressed as arabs to make a decision. So far, we have a report from a source that calls the Iraqi police "puppet police", no bias there, lol. I'm surprised they were polite enough not to call the Americans "infidels" or "Satan's minions".

I'm sure if it were true, it would make the news here. Our media is not under the Bush administration's control like many contend, they love to make Bush look stupid. Just last night CNN kept reporting about Bush's "unscripted" teleconference with the soldiers, and showing one of Bush's cronies telling the soldiers before the conference what Bush would be asking, and how they should answer. They were pointing out the BS of this administration and I don't think they would hesitate for a second to report this if it were true. Abu Ghraib anyone?

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
Yes, and you also made a comment on how my records were wrong or something. I never mentioned anything about ATS not having it, I said most western media sources did not report the story for a few days, and that was a true statement.

Not a true statement, I saw it reported on Fox news of all places, the very day it happened.

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
This will not hit main stream media.

Bets anyone?

Man, I shoulda took that bet. Just saw it on Fox news, they reported protesters in Basra set fire to a British tank after two british soldiers opened fire on Iraqi police, killing one officer. Although they didn't mention anything about them being dressed as arabs or in a car packed with explosives.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by 27jd
Here we go again.

I'll wait for the pictures of the captured Americans dressed as arabs to make a decision. Abu Ghraib anyone?

Abu Ghraib? If our media is not controlled by Bush and his cronies then explain why the majority of photos from Abu Ghraib have still not been released despite a court order? You know, the ones reportedly showing rape and what not?

And on another note, who cares if the Iraqi resistance report refers to the Iraqi forces as puppet soldiers? I do not see anyone up in arms around here when reports label the resistance "insurgents".

I am not trying to say that this report is necessarily true, I am just trying to point out the absurdity of asking for proof from western media sources that have proved to be biased time, and time again. Lest we forget it was western media that stood behind Bush in the first place, and helped him spread his false, oops, I mean faulty intelligence. Don't automatically discredit the story because it might not be your particular brand of propaganda, that's all.

They haven't been released because they're being held by the military. The media can't release what they don't have.

Originally posted by 27jd
Although they didn't mention anything about them being dressed as arabs or in a car packed with explosives.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Look at the last line of the post you provided...I saw it on fox news as well, they did not give the complete story though, even whilst it was being reported on the internet. Sorry but half, nay, a quarter of a story is not an accurate report.

Might I just point out, the coment on the british is completely untrue.
If arch wants to continue that via U2U or the actual topic about it then I will happily continue it.
Now back to the original topic.

I havent had a chance to read the entire topic but what unit where the soldiers from?

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin
Abu Ghraib? If our media is not controlled by Bush and his cronies then explain why the majority of photos from Abu Ghraib have still not been released despite a court order? You know, the ones reportedly showing rape and what not?

Well, for one I don't think pictures of rapes can be openly aired on the news, just like beheadings, in case children are watching. That said, if our media was controlled by Bush and his cronies, ALOT of things would not have seen the light of day, not even the pictures that were released. It's a bunk argument that ALL of our media is controlled by this administration.

And on another note, who cares if the Iraqi resistance report refers to the Iraqi forces as puppet soldiers? I do not see anyone up in arms around here when reports label the resistance "insurgents".

You're right, I don't care what they refer to them as. It just lacks professionalism, and gives clues as to how deeply they likely check the facts they are reporting. I wonder if they're the same ones who were reporting giant spiders fighting along side the resistance, I guess our biased media covered that up as well.

Lest we forget it was western media that stood behind Bush in the first place, and helped him spread his false, oops, I mean faulty intelligence. Don't automatically discredit the story because it might not be your particular brand of propaganda, that's all.

My brand of propaganda? I don't buy into propaganda on either side, and I'm against this war in Iraq. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to judge everybody who disagrees with you as somebody who supports Bush. I certainly don't. But that doesn't mean I believe every story that comes from the resistance/insurgents either, unlike some. I try not to buy into propaganda of ANY kind.

Originally posted by phoenixhasrisin

Originally posted by 27jd
Although they didn't mention anything about them being dressed as arabs or in a car packed with explosives.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Look at the last line of the post you provided...I saw it on fox news as well, they did not give the complete story though, even whilst it was being reported on the internet. Sorry but half, nay, a quarter of a story is not an accurate report.

So? There was no car packed with explosives in the context it was being reported. And you said it wasn't reported, which it was. You did not say it was reported, but didn't specify what the Brits were wearing. Now you're just trying to cover yourself, but your post is right near the top of the page. You said it was not reported. Now you say you saw it on Fox as well.