Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Undercover British Forces Shoot Iraqi Security.

Bigdavalad said:
OliversArmyChapt005Pic10.jpg


Is it this photo?

A very obviously faked photo.
 
tobyjug said:
A very obviously faked photo.

I know, it's fucking awful, there was a worse one in the thread I found that one, some Brit apparently outside a concentration camp we had built somewhere, complete with white background all the way round him.
 
Bigdavalad said:
I know, it's fucking awful, there was a worse one in the thread I found that one, some Brit apparently outside a concentration camp we had built somewhere, complete with white background all the way round him.

Shouldn't you be off somewhere bringing peace to the world with a gun instead pedalling a boys own adventure story version of the history of the British Army?
 
Bob_the_lost said:
Ah the barbed whip of sarcasm!



Some new accounts of torture by U.S. troops puts things into perspective. Although we'll have to wait for similar accounts from British soldiers.

“Trends were accepted. Leadership failed to provide clear guidance so we just developed it. They wanted intel [intelligence]. As long as no PUCs [Persons Under Control] came up dead it happened. We heard rumors of PUCs dying so we were careful. We kept it to broken arms and legs and shit.”
 
MC5 said:
Obviously, the British armed forces are only interested in winning hearts and minds.

It is so obviously a fake I can't think why it was posted on the first place.
The British army have several times in the past paid a bounty to local "natives" if the bring in the heads of enemy soldiers. I think it was £50 for a Japanese soldiers head. There are numerous genuine photos of that without the need for fake photos.
 
pin retaining said:
Do you remember Bugis Street in Singers ? Raffles was much better years ago than it is now. How many monsoon ditches did you fall in ? ...happy days.

(I was in Singapore/Malaya 1949-52 - I was only 3yrs old when we got there.)
A bit too young to appreciate the dubious delights of Boogy Street and Lavender Road, or the he/she's and lady boys up country in KL (Kuala Lumpur)!
I remember having 'tiffin' in Raffles as a special treat.
As for monsoon ditches, a toddler that lived a few doors away from us when we were in Tanglin Barracks, got swept away down one, his little body was found jammed up against a grating near the harbour.

We had a 14ft. python that used to lodge in a large tree not far from our house and I once had a cobra slide over my bare feet.
By kid bro. got bitten by a grumpy old male monkey he was feeding peanuts to in the Botanical Gardens.
I recall having nosh at the Union Jack Club being going off to Changi Beach for a swim, and the old Changi airstrip and the forbidding looking prison where many British, Aussie etc. troops languished as 'guests' of the Nipponese Co-Prosperity Sphere.

ps. I think the Brits used a combination of the carrot and the stick.

Yes, people were rounded up into compounds, some as glorified prisons and others in order to best afford them protection during the night.
An old guy I once knew who was in the Special Forces at the time, talked about having a good relationship with locals to the point were they would supply intelligence that allowed them to do the ambushing, not the other way round.
 
Back to the point of this thread. Updated source.

This raises some questions.

What credence can be given to the claim about explosives? Justin Raimondo writes that while initial BBC Radio reports acknowledged that the two men indeed had explosives in their car, subsequent reports from the same source indicated that the Iraqi police found nothing beyond "assault rifles, a light machine gun, an anti-tank weapon, radio gear, and medical kit. This is thought to be standard kit for the SAS operating in such a theater of operations"
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=7366.

One might well wonder, with Raimondo, whether an anti-tank weapon is "standard operating equipment"—or what use SAS men on "a surveillance mission outside a police station" intended to make of it. But more importantly, a photograph published by the Iraqi police and distributed by Reuters shows that—unless the equipment is a plant—the SAS men were carrying a good deal more than just the items acknowledged by the BBC.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050923&articleid=989
 
The "global research" article isn't very well thought through. It does not ask any questions of the statements, and include the vaugely ridiculous idea that the USA are planting car bombs in people's vehicles. Especially with the example they use for it.
 
Bob_the_lost said:
The "global research" article isn't very well thought through. It does not ask any questions of the statements, and include the vaugely ridiculous idea that the USA are planting car bombs in people's vehicles. Especially with the example they use for it.

Not as 'ridiculous' as some might think.

In 1985, authorized by William Casey, the CIA planted a car bomb near a mosque in Beirut to kill Sheik Mohammed Hossein Fadlallah, a muslim cleric. The bomb missed the Sheik but killed 80 people, including children.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/torture
 
No, but the article they refer to is. http://www.albasrah.net/maqalat/english/0505/Combat-terrorism_160505.htm

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.

But the inept americans in the following helicopter didn't decide to do the smart thing and blow them up when they discovered it! Oh no! They let the poor bloke go, how nice.
 
Back
Top Bottom