billvon 2,991 #1 September 20, 2005 To sum up - Two coalition soldiers (out of uniform) opened fire on civilians. They were arrested. We then attacked the jail they were being held in to free them. How evil of that regime to illegally hold honest coalition troops! Clearly, additional violence is called for. --------------- Official: British troops freed in jailbreak Monday, September 19, 2005; Posted: 10:56 p.m. EDT (02:56 GMT) BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A British armored vehicle escorted by a tank crashed into a detention center Monday in Basra and rescued two undercover troops held by police, an Iraqi Interior Ministry official told CNN. British Defense Ministry Secretary John Reid confirmed two British military personnel were "released," but he gave no details on how they were freed. In a statement released in London, Reid did not say why the two had been taken into custody. But the Iraqi official, who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity, said their arrests stemmed from an incident earlier in the day. The official said two unknown gunmen in full Arabic dress began firing on civilians in central Basra, wounding several, including a traffic police officer. There were no fatalities, the official said. The two gunmen fled the scene but were captured and taken in for questioning, admitting they were British marines carrying out a "special security task," the official said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amanduh 0 #2 September 20, 2005 Quoteopened fire on civilians. QuoteThe two gunmen fled the scene but were captured and taken in for questioning, admitting they were British marines carrying out a "special security task," the official said. This has got to be a joke. A special security task involving firing at civilians. I guess it is unknown if someone of "imporant :enemy: stature" was around the area at the time, but still... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gemini 0 #3 September 20, 2005 Be nice to know the facts before jumping to conclusions. Blue skies, Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #4 September 20, 2005 Agreed. And if anyone knows that, Billvon does. So, Billvon, what are the facts? I doubt they were shooting at a guy because he fathered too many Shiites.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #5 September 20, 2005 QuoteWe then attacked the jail they were being held in to free them. When did you become British? Was it on "Talk like a Pirate Day"? Argggghhh... Matey. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GTAVercetti 0 #6 September 20, 2005 QuoteQuoteWe then attacked the jail they were being held in to free them. When did you become British? Was it on "Talk like a Pirate Day"? Argggghhh... Matey. I would say that the Brits are part of the coalition. Which the government has SO OFTEN pointed out. Pirate day. That was Monday. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #7 September 20, 2005 >A British armored vehicle escorted by a tank crashed into a detention center... Now that something movies are made of. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
immanence 0 #8 September 20, 2005 QuoteA British armored vehicle escorted by a tank crashed into a detention center Monday in Basra Maybe Bechtel had a pre-war contract to the rebuild the detention center but some dumbass overlooked it so they had to take its' ass down "where danger is appears also that which saves ..." Friedrich Holderlin, 'Patmos' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #9 September 20, 2005 QuoteBe nice to know the facts before jumping to conclusions. What? And take all the fun out of bashing Bush's war? Facts:The incident began when the two undercover soldiers, dressed in Arab garments, fired on an Iraqi police patrol. Violence broke out and at least two Iraqis are reported to have been killed. (They must have had some good reason, but "why" is not stated yet.) John Reid, the Defence Secretary, has said he is alarmed that Iraqi police, supposedly British allies, handed over two undercover soldiers they had captured to local militias. The British Army said today it was forced to send in troops to free the two in Basra in southern Iraq after discovering what Iraqi police had done. Dr Reid said: "For whatever reason, throughout the day it became obvious that the police were not doing what we would expect them to do, what was required under the law for them to do, which is to hand over the soldiers to us, and what apparently they were told by their own ministry of the interior to do. "That is worrying. We don't know why it happened. I don't know whether they were coerced, threatened or whatever by a mob, by militants, I don't know whether there was collusion." Brig John Lorimer, the British commanding officer in Basra, said he ordered the operation after receiving information the two men had been handed over to "militia elements". He added: "From an early stage I had good reason to believe the lives of the two soldiers were at risk.London Telegraph News BBC News Maybe the British soldiers shot the Iraqii policemen, because they were doing something terribly wrong, and the Brits were trying to save lives. One should not presume evil on the part of the Brits, since the motives are not yet known. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #10 September 20, 2005 Yea, thats it, but look at the jobs that will be provided, food on the table, new car in the driveway. And BP fueling the way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #11 September 20, 2005 John, you don't find it odd that the local militia would control the detention centre? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #12 September 20, 2005 >Maybe the British soldiers shot the Iraqii policemen, because they > were doing something terribly wrong, and the Brits were trying to >save lives. Ah! And perhaps the insurgents who killed four US soldiers yesterday were doing it to save lives as well. That's a nice thought. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gemini 0 #13 September 21, 2005 QuoteAnd perhaps the insurgents who killed four US soldiers yesterday were doing it to save lives as well. Always the devils advocate Bill. Blue skies, Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #14 September 21, 2005 Clearly we will never get to the real facts but..... It seems that we have been training insurgents to become police men ..news?... QuoteInsurgents have infiltrated Iraq's security services, National Security Adviser Muwafaq al-Rubaie has admitted. -well, what a surprise - it wouldn't taken the Brain of Britain to know that was going to happen...... Pah, you reap wot sow . (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #15 September 21, 2005 The insurgents weren't in the police station. They were in a house in Basra where the two SAS troopers had been taken and filmed. The police had released the two troopers to insurgents who had taken them away from the detention centre. These insurgents are the same one's who had recently been attacking British troops out there. When the Commander was informed that the SAS troopers had been handed over and taken away from the centre sent in 6 negotiators to speak with the police about where their soldiers were. They were then held hostage. The commander then ordered a Warriors armoured vehicle to break into the compound and the police then released the 6 negotiators and point out where the captured SAS troopers were. They were then rescued from the house in Basra where they were being held. There's a lot more to this story than is being told. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #16 September 21, 2005 Whether or not the SAS did anything wrong in the first place to warrant arrest is immiterial to what went on. Iraqi law requires coalition soliders to be handed over to coalition authorities if they are arrested. The police regulations require this also. The Iraqi police were clearly under a legal duty to hand the SAS troopers over to the Brits and refused to do so. The Iraqi Govt. got involved and sent a direct order to the Iraqi police to release the troopers into British custody. They also ignored direct orders from the Iraqi government. The police then released the SAS troopers into the hands of insurgents who had been attacking British Troops and refused to tell the British where they were. Only when they had a 30mm Rarden cannon pointed at them did they fess up to what they had done. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eaglenrider 0 #17 September 21, 2005 QuoteQuoteBe nice to know the facts before jumping to conclusions. What? And take all the fun out of bashing Bush's war? Facts:The incident began when the two undercover soldiers, dressed in Arab garments, fired on an Iraqi police patrol. Violence broke out and at least two Iraqis are reported to have been killed. (They must have had some good reason, but "why" is not stated yet.) __________________________________________________ You left out the part about the SAS driving a car packed full of explosives and attempting to dodge the police checkpoint. Who is setting off all those car bombs in Iraq? Blues, Cliff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #18 September 21, 2005 Funny how when the facts come out it's not close to what was reported. Kind of like a big story about kids being kept in cages a few weeks ago. Turned out to be special needs kids that were endangering each other and they were not cages. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #19 September 21, 2005 Yep, we gotta thank Billvon for that one!!! Thanks Bill! great story."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #20 September 21, 2005 QuoteYou left out the part about the SAS driving a car packed full of explosives and attempting to dodge the police checkpoint. Who is setting off all those car bombs in Iraq? What is your source for that? Have you been reading those conspiracy websites with Rhino? News: Paul Wood said demonstrators believed Iranian TV reports that the two men were detained after they opened fire on Shia pilgrims on Monday. He said they were probably on a covert mission to get the intelligence needed to stop further attacks on British troops. Their weapons, explosives and communications gear are standard kit for British special forces. - BBC NewsSo the crowd may have just reacted to something they saw on TV, and Iranian TV isn't exactly known for reporting truthfully. I would think you would give these professional soldiers a little more benefit of the doubt than this. Ahhh, but nothing is too evil to disbelieve about America and her allies! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites eaglenrider 0 #21 September 21, 2005 [I would think you would give these professional soldiers a little more benefit of the doubt than this. __________________________________________________ "Profesional soldiers" dress in uniform. These are clearly illegal combatants and do not deserve any of the protections of the Geneva Convention. Certainly they can't be considered as "coalition troops" and there fore the police were not required to turn them over to the coalition. Goes both ways. Blues, Cliff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites StreetScooby 5 #22 September 21, 2005 Quote And perhaps the insurgents who killed four US soldiers yesterday were doing it to save lives as well What??? Their votes didn't count?We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites eaglenrider 0 #23 September 22, 2005 QuoteWhether or not the SAS did anything wrong in the first place to warrant arrest is immiterial to what went on. Iraqi law requires coalition soliders to be handed over to coalition authorities if they are arrested. __________________________________________________ "Soldiers" wear uniforms. These two are obvious "enemy combatants" or common street thugs. The police were not required to extend to them any privelage granted Coalition Troops nor are these "combatants" protected under the Geneva Convention. Blues, Cliff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,991 #24 September 22, 2005 > Funny how when the facts come out it's not close to what was reported. It's exactly what's reported. You have to actually read the report to see it, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #25 September 22, 2005 QuoteIt's exactly what's reported. You have to actually read the report to see it, though. my point is just because it's what is reported does not make it true. Dan Rather comes to mind Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
bodypilot90 0 #18 September 21, 2005 Funny how when the facts come out it's not close to what was reported. Kind of like a big story about kids being kept in cages a few weeks ago. Turned out to be special needs kids that were endangering each other and they were not cages. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #19 September 21, 2005 Yep, we gotta thank Billvon for that one!!! Thanks Bill! great story."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #20 September 21, 2005 QuoteYou left out the part about the SAS driving a car packed full of explosives and attempting to dodge the police checkpoint. Who is setting off all those car bombs in Iraq? What is your source for that? Have you been reading those conspiracy websites with Rhino? News: Paul Wood said demonstrators believed Iranian TV reports that the two men were detained after they opened fire on Shia pilgrims on Monday. He said they were probably on a covert mission to get the intelligence needed to stop further attacks on British troops. Their weapons, explosives and communications gear are standard kit for British special forces. - BBC NewsSo the crowd may have just reacted to something they saw on TV, and Iranian TV isn't exactly known for reporting truthfully. I would think you would give these professional soldiers a little more benefit of the doubt than this. Ahhh, but nothing is too evil to disbelieve about America and her allies! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eaglenrider 0 #21 September 21, 2005 [I would think you would give these professional soldiers a little more benefit of the doubt than this. __________________________________________________ "Profesional soldiers" dress in uniform. These are clearly illegal combatants and do not deserve any of the protections of the Geneva Convention. Certainly they can't be considered as "coalition troops" and there fore the police were not required to turn them over to the coalition. Goes both ways. Blues, Cliff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #22 September 21, 2005 Quote And perhaps the insurgents who killed four US soldiers yesterday were doing it to save lives as well What??? Their votes didn't count?We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eaglenrider 0 #23 September 22, 2005 QuoteWhether or not the SAS did anything wrong in the first place to warrant arrest is immiterial to what went on. Iraqi law requires coalition soliders to be handed over to coalition authorities if they are arrested. __________________________________________________ "Soldiers" wear uniforms. These two are obvious "enemy combatants" or common street thugs. The police were not required to extend to them any privelage granted Coalition Troops nor are these "combatants" protected under the Geneva Convention. Blues, Cliff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,991 #24 September 22, 2005 > Funny how when the facts come out it's not close to what was reported. It's exactly what's reported. You have to actually read the report to see it, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #25 September 22, 2005 QuoteIt's exactly what's reported. You have to actually read the report to see it, though. my point is just because it's what is reported does not make it true. Dan Rather comes to mind Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 2,991 #24 September 22, 2005 > Funny how when the facts come out it's not close to what was reported. It's exactly what's reported. You have to actually read the report to see it, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #25 September 22, 2005 QuoteIt's exactly what's reported. You have to actually read the report to see it, though. my point is just because it's what is reported does not make it true. Dan Rather comes to mind Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)