Iraq Mosque Attack: People are arrested - but NO ONE will say who.

[file83]

From this article at adnki.com:

The Iraqi authorities said afterwards that ten people, including several foreigners, had been arrested in connection with the bombing.

Who are these ten people?
It states that they are foreigners, but from which country(ies)?
Who are they connected to?

It gets more mysterious, from ksbitv.com:

Ten people -- all dressed as Iraqi police commandos -- have been arrested, al-Rubaie said.

Who has access to "Iraqi police commando" uniforms? Note, they don't say regular "police uniforms", these are "police commando" uniforms - like SWAT team special tactics guys.

Who the hell are these guys and why don't we have answers yet?

Why is no one in the western media reporting on this? This is the most important piece of information concerning the bombing: Who did it.

Regardless of who did the "arrest", we know the US Military knows who these ten people are. So, why aren't they talking?

[neweurope]

1. Good find! From the first I was convinced - and, no, I really

don't need any proof anymore - that this was the work of the USA and GB. There's been too much info in the past. Like a US official in Iraq when asked about the danger of civil war answering "oh, everything is going according to plan", and those British soldiers dressed up as arabs with those weapons... That story died VERY quickly...

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[PassingThrough]

2. Well, the Brits were trying to break other Brits out of jail which they

did do later I believe. Also, they do say things are going according to plan but of course they are not really. There is nothing evil about having a plan. They should have a plan.

[neweurope]

4. I'm talking about the jailed Brits :)

And this "everything is going according to plan" had a different meaning. It meant that the plan WAS CIVIL WAR. I think I have kept the info somewhere but I have no time to look for it right now. Read it here on DU.

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[PassingThrough]

6. You are making an assumption of what they meant.

I do not think they ever said their plan was for a civil war. A civil war makes no sense. It would just make things worse.

[neweurope]

9. Believe what you will, and I believe what I do :)

Civil war in Iraq suits the US just fine.
The motto is "divide et impera". As always.


-----------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[PassingThrough]

10. I can see that... Conspiracy theories abound around here...

[neweurope]

12. Go and read up on "Operation Gladio" and the Bologna train massacre.

You might think differently about conspiracy theories afterwards.

-----------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[PassingThrough]

13. Even if those are correct that does not mean your new one is.

Just doesnt work that way.

[neweurope]

15. You know, I'm really not trying to convince you of anything.

But it is my firm conviction - and you won't be able to change my mind - that there is absolutely NOTHING your administration wouldn't do.

Have a nice day.

-----------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[file83]

18. Isn't it wierd how people totally shut out even the possibility that this

attack could have been orchestrated by Western intelligence operations?

1) Muslims have a long history of attacking eachother.
2) Western intelligence agencies have a LONG history of staging fake terrorist attacks.

When an attack happens - these types of narrow viewed people always shut down option #2 and will only assume option #1. Very revealing of their lack of education on the subject.

I like your openness to the possibility of BOTH options and thank you for attempting to open this person's eyes.

[PassingThrough]

19. But is it responsible to make such accusations without one sliver of

evidence that the theory is true? There is absolutely no evidence at this time the US or GB was involved. Some people require a little bit of proof before we go off and make such claims. Clearly the OP believes his theory regardless of any facts.

I try and keep an open mind but there is zero evidence to support option 2 as you call it. I will wait and see before I make such extreme accusations.

[file83]

20. But there you reveal your bias...

You characterize option #2 (Western involvment in a staged attack) as an "extreme accusation".

I argue that it is a perfectly plausible "accusation". Nothing "extreme" about it. And that is what the other guy was trying to point out to you by giving you one example from the long, well documented history of intelligence agencies from ALL OVER the world that do these sorts of operations for their own country's best national interests/strategies.

I know you know this. You can't be that in the dark about this topic.

The part where you are confusing yourself, is that you accuse the guy of requiring "evidence" in order to "speculate" on this matter. No such evidence exists concerning the particulars of this specific attack, and you know this. So you are really just making a rhetorical argument. Furthmore, the guy never claimed to have such evidence, so why are you creating a straw man that you can just easily knock down? REASON: Because you know he's right.

If it upsets your heart or creates a psychological discomfort to contemplate such a possiblity that our government, yes, the good ol' Red White and Blue, could possibly be involved in any such type of operation - then you are out of your element.

[PassingThrough]

22. Lol, more assuptions.

Your last 2 paragraphs say it all. You believe this regardless of facts. Thats the thing with conspiracy theorist. Facts just do not matter.

Peace Out

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PassingThrough]

26. and now name calling... Bravo! Way to have a discussion.

[file83]

28. What "name" did I call you? Creating more straw men, are ya?

I don't appreciate the false accusation that I called you a "name".

And, oh, the sweet irony: You are the one going around claiming people are making false accusations, yet you do it yourself!

You set up your own trap and stepped right into it. I could argue with people like you all day when you make it that easy. :smoke:

[file83]

21. To answer your question. Not only is it responsible, it's our duty

to speculate and investigate these activities.

[Minnesota Libra]

23. Passing Through- As time goes on.....

....you will notice many of those "conspiracy theories" turn out to be based on fact too. And just in case no one has noticed before, Bush and Co NEVER does anything for the simple supposedly straight forward reasons they put out in the press. So stayed tuned, it will get even better.

[file83]

25. Welcom to DU!!!

:hi: And I like your post!

[Minnesota Libra]

40. File83 - THANK YOU .......

.....for the very Nice Welcome. I think I'm going to like it here too!!!!

The one think I've learned about "conspiracy theories" is they involve gray matter above the shoulders fast at work and THAT IS GOOD!!!!

Anyway, thank you again for the welcome.

[PassingThrough]

27. I agree with you but I think one should wait before making such

assumptions without any facts whatsoever. Making such claims is alot like the story of Chicken Little. If you keep yelling Conspiracy! Conspiracy! No one will listen when there is an actual real conspiracy.

[neweurope]

29. "We are facing a major conspiracy that is targeting Iraq's unity"

Jalal Talabani,
Iraqi President

There are conspiracies and conspiracy theories all around us. When you refuse to even LOOK at the first one you encounter you really stand no chance.

You have accused me of not giving facts. As you well know there are no facts to go by yet. There IS vast past experience, though.
On the other hand: You are not giving facts that is was NOT a Western conspiracy.

-----------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[PassingThrough]

32. Lol, I have to prove you conspiracy theory wrong? Enough said.

Peace Out

[file83]

34. Before you go, check out what has just developed....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=497628&mesg_id=497979

Check out neweurope's post and my response. 5 of the people that were involved were Iraqi police TRAINED by US Troops (all of them are). Now what do you have to say about the "conspiracy theory"?

Peace to you to.

[neweurope]

35. Yes, enough said.

Enjoy DU:)

There are two possibilites,as has been pointed out to you:
1) It was muslims
2) it was done by Western agencies

Whether you're inclined to believe 1) or 2) you cannot demand the person who believes differently to come up with more facts than you yourself. WE have already pointed out that vast past experience supports our theory that it was 2). Which does count. WE are also digging in and trying to find facts. YOU, in the best case scenario, are doing nothing but firmly believing 1) and waiting for proof being presented to you.

I'm ending this now.

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Hubert Flottz]

50. My conspiracy theory has to do with people disrupting a thread

and trying to change the subject, because they don't like for other people to hear the truth about Bush and the GOPer gang. My theory is that such people are usually 'just passing through' here, because I see them vanish quite often, thanks to the on the ball mods. The mods can spot a conspiracy a mile away and most DUers can too!

May you soon...Rest in PEACE...OUT! []< ~~~~~<

Six months ago a faithful Freeper flocker would have screamed Conspiracy Theory as loudly as he/she could have screamed, if I'd told them Bush was spying on Quakers, peaceniks and tree huggers!

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClayZ]

55. It is quite the NEWS week, eh?

I seems like the Fat Lady may be practicing her DO RE MIs....


Welcome to DU!

[CJCRANE]

51. If Iraq was all peaceful

what would be the point of having coalition troops there?

If no coalition troops are there, how can US/GB have any leverage on Iraq or build permanent bases?

[spuddonna]

3. I'm sure they are not related to those guys they busted out with tanks

Remember them? Was it the Brits that literally drove a tank into an Iraqi jail to bust out the 'foreigners' dressed as Iraqi insurgents? Didn't they turn out to be 'British special forces', even though they had explosives and were helping/heading out to blow something up?

I'm sure it's totally unrelated... (sigh)

[file83]

5. Here is the unrelated story you speak of:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1573681,00.html

But at least we found out who they were. Not this time.

Are the people that dressed up like Iraqi Police Commandos Iranian? Are they Afghani? Are they Israeli(Massoud)? Are they just run of the mill Iraqi local insurgency? Are they British special forces?

I have no idea - but the US military does because they have these 10 guys in custody.

The question, is why are they keeping it a secret? Somebody is cooking up a cover story, I think. But what will it be? We'll find out, I'm sure, in a few days.

[PassingThrough]

8. Give them a little time to release info.

[Clark2008]

7. My guess is that the stories were shortened for

outside-of-Iraq coverage.

Honestly, do you care that Joe Schmoe, or in this case Jabal Solodad, was arrested? You probably wouldn't know them. It's probably in the local press.

And/or, they just don't have the names, yet. It's not like they have local reporters running down to the police stations to check on the arrest reports over there.

Give it another day or two before asking your question.

(Educated guess from a former police reporter, here).

[neweurope]

11. If those foreigners were Iranian or Jordanian or Syrian

freedom fighters they'd spit that message out RIGHT AWAY. They always do.

-----------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[file83]

16. I've noticed that some US "Officials" are saying that they "think"

this attack may have been done by, surprise surprise, Al Qaida. When asked if they had evidence, they said they did not:

James Jeffrey, the U.S. State Department's coordinator for Iraq,said the U.S. government believed that the bombings "can be traced back to the al-Qaida movement."

He said although U.S. officials had no solid proof against al-Qaida on the incident, they had, at least, concluded that the bombing of the Shiite mosque in the northern town of Samara fit a pattern of al-Qaida's past threats and actions.

Which is kind of a strange thing to say - if they have those 10 guys in custody AND they say they don't have any solid proof it was al-Qaida, then WHO ARE THOSE GUYS IN CUSTODY!!??

[neweurope]

17. Exactly. And Al Qaida to my knowledge had other aims than

produce a shift between different kinds of islam. In all those alleged Al Quaida tapes I have never heard a threat to blow up a mosque. That's absurd to the highest degree.

----------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[fujiyama]

37. Do you seriously believe

Al Qaeda or other extremist Sunni or Wahhabi elements wouldn't attack other Muslims?

I find that very naive and ignorant of history. Shiites and Sunnis clash frequently in several different Muslim countries. Shiite mosques are frequently attacked in Pakistan. The Taliban oppressed Shiites as well. That's why Iran never got along with them. To many Sunnis, Shhiites are considered idol worshippers.

Perhaps there was CIA involvement. I have no doubt the admin is capable of such acts. But I have no idea and to claim outright that it was blackops/CIA/Bush/UK is irresponsible. I have not yet heard a coherent explanation for such involvement, let alone seen even the slightest shred of evidence.

In fact, this further violence is another blow to attempts by the administration to speak about "progress" being made by the elections.

A possibility of a civil war was predicted well before the invasion. There is much hatred to go around in the region and it preceeeded the invasion by many years. But once the nation was invaded and a power vacuum emerged, the likelyhood of such a conflict because much greater.

[file83]

39. This isn't about Muslims attacking Muslims - this is about Muslims

attacking one of the holiest Islamic Mosques in Iraq. That's a big "no-no" for a ANY Muslim insurgent/terrorist. So don't confuse one scenario with the other.

[Behind the Aegis]

43. Terrorists have a 'code of ethics?'

You have got to be kidding. Do you honestly think that a terrorist would respect the laws of its own religion? Puh-lease!

[neweurope]

45. Puh-lease consider these are muslim terrorists fighting in the

name of their god, though :) I don't know what makes a terrorist to you, but why shouldn't they have a code of ethics? And let's remember that the goal of Iraqi terrorists so far has been to get the US the hell out of their country.

(I won't be around to read your answer, I have to leave).

--------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Behind the Aegis]

46. So, basically you admit that Muslims could have done this?

You seriously don't think the only thing they want is the US out? There is now nothing but chaos in the country, it is ripe for the picking.

[neweurope]

47. "Ripe for the picking." - "Mission accomplished."

And now I really have to go.

-------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Behind the Aegis]

48. Go if you must...

...I'll catch your response when you can return.

[file83]

59. It's not a "code of ethics" as you so rhetorically put it-but I challenge

you to provide me with 2 news stories where Muslims have blown up Mosques before.

In case you haven't noticed - these "terrorists", as you put it, are fanatical Muslims. That means that above EVERYTHING else in society, the one thing they respect is the Prophet Mohammed. That means Mosques that are built over the death place of the Prophet's descendents is not something they want to destroy - otherwise in their minds - they would NOT pass Go, the would NOT collect 72 virgins, they go straight to hell.

No "code" necessary - it's called the fear of Allah (God). Or did you miss that part?

[Behind the Aegis]

61. ...

Ahmadiyah mosques destroyed in attack
Rabu September 21, 2005 from The Jakarta Post
September 21, 2005
Yuli Tri Suwarni, The Jakarta Post, Bandung

Hundreds of people in West Java vandalized on Monday night houses, mosques and cars belonging to members of the Indonesian Ahmadiyah Congregation (JAI), a Muslim group whose teachings differ from the central tenets of Islam.

No casualties nor injuries were reported in the attack.

West Java Police said on Tuesday the vandalism had been localized to Campaka district in Cianjur regency, some 100 kilometers southeast of Jakarta, which is home to hundreds of Ahmadiyah followers.

The attackers, mostly from the neighborhood and the nearby Darul Rahman Islamic boarding school, destroyed or damaged four mosques, 33 houses and four Islamic schools, and set fire to three cars.

more...

<snip>

In the early hours of Friday 10 November, the mullah led a mob through the streets shouting anti-Ahmadi slogans. As they approached the Ahmadi mosque, people inside phoned police asking for protection. The mob swelled quickly, broke into the mosque and attacked and killed four Ahmadis, mutilating their bodies with axes. They then ransacked the building and set it on fire. One of the injured persons, a 14-year-old schoolboy, later died of his injuries. The police arrived when the incident was over.

<snip>

Amnesty International Scroll down to the bottom of the page.

Granted, the mosques were not blown up, but rather burned to the ground. Does that suffice? Of course, you could also read up on Saudi Arabia and see their offenses against Islam (although no mosques were destroyed (that I found), several holy sites were).

[file83]

62. First, finding just what you found wasn't easy, was it?

Most people don't even bother to research it - so I give you props for trying. I respect that.
However, neither one of the articles conclusively states that a mosque was actually ever destroyed.

From the first article we only have this sentence:
"...destroyed or damaged four mosques, 33 houses and four Islamic schools, and set fire to three cars."

The "destroyed or damaged" part is followed by a list of 41 structures, 4 of which are mosques - so we can not conclude that even 1 Mosque was actually "destroyed". It would be nice if the reporter was just a little more specific.

The second article states:
"They then ransacked the building (mosque) and set it on fire."

No where does it state that the building was destroyed - only that some ambiguous part of it was set on fire. No word on what the extent of that damage was.

Maybe now you can appreciate the uniqueness of this latest attack on the Askariya Mosque. This wasn't a random mob roaming the streets looking to destroy whatever was in their path. It was a carefully planned and executed precision strike by a group of commandos with the soul purpose of demolishing one of the holiest Mosques in Iraq.

[Behind the Aegis]

64. I wasn't easy or difficult.

It took me all of ten minutes. Those were just the first ones I came across. Many of the others were ancient tales, and would require further explanation/study.

The point is that Muslims do in fact attack Mosques. It is usually because they don't see it as a Mosque as in the most recent examples. Although, you asked for proof of destroyed Mosques, your very statement suggested that they wouldn't even attack Mosques because it would be a big 'no-no.'

There was another article I found that said it was not uncommon for rival groups to attack one another, sometimes even attacking Mosques. It gave a breakdown of 16 different sects of Islam, saying some were more reform/radical than others..

I already appreciated the uniqueness of the attack. And, although, not a roaming mob, it does heighten my belief that this could in fact be an attack from within, in order to either cement the two factions together (against the occupying force) or to deepen the riff, thus plunging the country into further chaos and bringing it to the brink of all-out civil war.

[fujiyama]

44. It was a Shiite shrine

While it was an important site for all Muslims, I have seen no indication that it was nearly as important for Sunnis as it was for Shiites.

Islamist terrorists and the insurgents as well don't care about structures and buildings, even mosques. They will attack wherever they please.

This view that Muslims wouldn't attack other Muslims' holy sites is naive and ignorant of the deep running conflict between the two sects of Islam.

It also assumes that terrorists have respect for their religion's teachings, which on the face is laughable. By their definition terrorists don't abide by any religion's teachings.

[file83]

57. You know, I've heard a lot of people ASSUME that Muslims regularly

blow up Mosques, but I've never seen even 1 person back that up with evidence. Can you?

I challenge you to provide even 1 news story where Muslims blew up a Mosque.

Not a bomb out in front of a Mosque.
Not a bomb in the back alley behind a Mosque.
Not a bomb in the courtyard near a Mosque.

But an actual bomb going off INSIDE of a Mosque that brought the Mosque down.

If it's such a common occurance, I'm sure it shouldn't be very difficult for you to dig up some news links.

Or are you just making an assumption based on uninformed stereotyping? There's only one way to find out....start hunting!

[rfkrfk]

49. entirly incorrect, tearing down shrines is a Muslim tradition

of the Wahabis sect, I believe.

way back, 17th C. or something, the Wahabis {spelling?} had to be
disuaded from tearing down everything,

nowadays do you think their modern decendents
have a problem tearing down someone else's shrine?

in more 'normal' times,
something of a 'circular firing squad - Mexican standoff',
keeps this from happening

[file83]

58. "tradition" of tearing down "shrines"? We are talking about Mosques.

And we are talking about the 20th and 21st centuries here, not the 1600's.

[ButterflyBlood]

66. one of the holiest SHIITE Islamic Mosques in iraq

The Vatican is pretty damn holy to a billion Christians, does that mean someone like Ian Paisley would have any problem blowing it up?

[neweurope]

41. Of course muslims are clashing as often as non-muslims.

It's harder for me to believe that they would attack that mosque than it is for be to believe it was Western agencies, though.

Civil war was predicted by most correspondents and politicians before the US attackl of Iraq, that's true.One of them was Robert Fisk who seems to have excellent judgment. Fisk had changed his mind about that about a year after the invasion, though.

All through the US occupation there were attacks. For quite a while Sunnis and Shia resisted the temptation to the thus divided. Somebody evidently decided it was time to step up the pace.

I might be wrong, of course. But considering what CIA and other Western agencies have done in the past I don't think I can be called naive, anyway :)

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[neweurope]

30. There's alink:

"The Interior Ministry said four men, one wearing a military uniform and three clad in black, entered the mosque and detonated two bombs, one of which collapsed the dome into a crumbly mess and damaged part of the shrine's northern wall.
...
U.S. and Iraqi forces in Samarra surrounded the shrine and searched nearby houses. Five police officers responsible for protecting the mosque were taken into custody, said Col. Bashar Abdullah, chief of police commandoes."

http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2006%20News%20Archives/February/22%20n%20b/Iraqi%20Civil%20War%20Intensifies%20%2029%20Sunni%20Mosques%20Attacked,%20Following%20Bomb%20Attack%20on%20a%20Samarra%20Shi'i%20Shrine.htm

According to this five of ten prisoners are policemen who were supported to guard the mosque.
Four men (one in military uniform, three in black) detonated the bomb. Which I cannot understand: Did they blow themselves up? How come then others lived to tell about it? Were they caught and are in custody? If so, the world should know who they are. Strange.

----------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[file83]

33. Excellent link! So the people involved in the crime were trained by

the U.S.!!!! That's exactly what I've been thinking all along! The Iraqi police are trained DIRECTLY by U.S. troops - and then they go and blow up a Mosque? Nice.

[neweurope]

36. Careful :) - they might not have blown it up; maybe they were

only taken in custody because they didn't guard the mosque well enough. It could well be that they were in cahoots with those who did, of course... If I'm guarding a place of worship and a guy in military uniform and three black clad guys come in I guess I would be a little suspicious...

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[file83]

38. Certainly - but they are suspects in this bombing plot. Of course, they

deserve a fair trial, but this is not a good development.

[neweurope]

42. I agree.It is a terrible development,in fact, and depresses me greatly.

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Yupster]

60. I bet the US would be shocked to realize

that some of the people we've trained are actually insurgents.

I hear there were Viet Cong sympathizers throughout the South Vietnamese Army too. I wonder if we knew that back then. It is most shocking.

[Clark2008]

52. That part is probably true, but I thought the OP was

asking why there are no specific names mentioned.

[file83]

14. You make a good point, but...

...I do care about who these people are that blew up the Mosque. It has major implications for how the citizens of Iraq will respond - Civil War or not. That has a direct impact on our Troops over there and the entire future of the stability of the Middle East Region. If the entire ME Region destabilizes and descends into war - that means oil shipments may suffer, gas prices rise globally, shortages perhaps...? Yeah, to say the least, I care. You should to.

That's a silly assertion you are making that "local reporters" wouldn't be "running down to the police stations to check on the arrest reports over there". Come on, are you trying to tell me that if you were a police reporter (which you claim to have been) and local police had just arrested 10 men suspected of blowing up one of the holiest churches in your country, you wouldn't be banging on the door at the station asking who they were? Of course you would, so I'm not sure how sincere you being with me/yourself.

[druidity33]

56. look at Cheney...

If he is any indication of how things are investigated then i think waiting a day or two will make this bombing "squeaky clean" for our allies... in fact i wouldn't doubt it if the perpetrators were found somehow to be Iranian or Syrian. The US Military should be touting this as a success in quelling sectarian violence... but they are mum. They are sure to know who they are holding in this bombing, what with the mountains of info they've garnered from "the insurgents in detention". Sorry, but it smells awfully fishy in here...

[cantstandbush]

53. Did the Supreme Leader blame US/Zionist before or after these arrests?

Do they know something we don't know?

[file83]

63. To be honest with you - I don't really give much legitimacy to

anything that either Bush or the Surpreme Leader of Iran says. But I catch your drift - I would like to know.

[susu369]

54. Riverbend's current Baghdad Burning

It may be extremely naive of me, but why would ANY Muslim do this?

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

"Thursday, February 23, 2006

Tensions...

Things are not good in Baghdad.

There was an explosion this morning in a mosque in Samarra, a largely Sunni town. While the mosque is sacred to both Sunnis and Shia, it is considered one of the most important Shia visiting places in Iraq. Samarra is considered a sacred city by many Muslims and historians because it was made the capital of the Abassid Empire, after Baghdad, by the Abassid Caliph Al-Mu’tasim."

[jmatthan]

65. Wonder why John Negroponte was sent to Iraq?

Mike Malloy predicted this a long long time ago!!

Chaos is the only way the Bush Administration can keep pumping out the oil to their hearts content!

The Soviet press reported that two Americans in Arab dress were caught by people in Baghdad.

To be expected.