The U.S. behind suicide bombings in Iraq?

[Karl Marx's Camel]

"The Americans, my interlocutor suspected, are trying to provoke an Iraqi civil war so that Sunni Muslim insurgents spend their energies killing their Shia co-religionists rather than soldiers of the Western occupation forces. "I swear to you that we have very good information," my source says, finger stabbing the air in front of him. "One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: 'Come back in a week.' When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn't get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up."

"There was another man, trained by the Americans for the police. He too was given a mobile and told to drive to an area where there was a crowd - maybe a protest - and to call them and tell them what was happening. Again, his new mobile was not working. So he went to a landline phone and called the Americans and told them: 'Here I am, in the place you sent me and I can tell you what's happening here.' And at that moment there was a big explosion in his car."

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12885.htm



Robert Fisk is a british journalist from The Independent and has covered wars and conflicts in the middle east the past 30 years. He has received "International journalist of the year award" seven times, and has twice been chosen as "reporter of the year" and has twice received "Amnesty International UK Press award". He also has a PhD in political science.

[jaycee]

there was also the time when British soldiers were arrested apparently dressed as iraqis with explosives etc, but obviously this was denied. I don't know if it is true but i wouldn't be suprised.

[Jamal]

No surprizes!
That's how the CIA "Play The Game!"
From the begining, it always provoked the masses to fight themselves to get them occupied and never question its rule over the world and for it to snatch their goods from right under thier noses and they blame themselves as always because the CIA always plays the game in a correct way!

[Severian]

Nothing too ridiculous for conspiracy theorists, huh?

Considering the huge number of sectarian attacks, this conspiracy would have to be even bigger than all the other conspiracy theories put together. Of course, the more people are in on a secret the harder it is too keep it.

Not just the bombings: the shootings, the death-squad abductions, the letters saying "Move out now, (Shi'a or Sunni) dog".....etc.

And the evidence given? A friend of a friend told me. Like any urban legend.

Now for a non-conspiracy, sane explanation of how Washington has fueled the sectarian bloodletting with its divide-and-conquer policies....

Our meddling is accelerating this descent into civil war

The US occupation did not create the sectarian tensions that disfigure Iraq - but its policies entrenched the divisions

Mark Lattimer
Friday August 4, 2006
The Guardian

The leaked report from Britain's outgoing ambassador in Iraq, warning that "civil war and a de facto division of Iraq" are now a likelihood, elicited a studied silence from Downing Street and Whitehall yesterday; but William Patey's fears could not have come as a surprise.

The toll of sectarian killings has increased inexorably over the past few months since the destruction of the al-Askari shrine in Samarra, and the violently reworked geography of Baghdad and other mixed cities is beginning to resemble nothing so much as the mono-ethnic enclaves that 15 years of civil war imposed on Beirut. When I bumped into the former Iraqi defence minister last week, on the day that preparatory talks on national reconciliation broke up without agreement, he had the dead-tired eyes and relentless pessimism of a man losing a war.

But if the UK government often sounds as if it is in denial regarding sectarian war in Iraq, that may be because it and the US are partly to blame. Prior to the 2003 invasion, all Iraq's main opposition groups supported the continuance of a unified Iraqi state and emphasised the long tradition of inter-community cooperation and mixed marriages. Shias in particular would cite the fact that they fought alongside Sunnis in the Iran-Iraq war, and would point to the Shia uprising in 1991 - when revenge attacks were not targeted on sectarian grounds but included Sunni and Shia collaborators alike.

Yet one of the first acts of the coalition authorities was to create the Iraqi Governing Council, in which membership, and the power that went with it, was divided up on communal lines. Government ministries were similarly divided, and patronage soon ensured that they became dominated by officials from the minister's own sect or ethnic group. US advisers appeared to be applying the same power-sharing model they had promoted in Bosnia - and injecting some of the inter-communal poison that still courses through Bosnian politics - despite the fact that Iraq had not experienced a civil war. This error was compounded when Donald Rumsfeld placed enormous pressure on the Iraqi authorities not to extend the deadline for drawing up the new Iraqi constitution, thereby effectively destroying any chances of including Sunni Arab parties in the drafting process.

But perhaps most damaging of all has been the failure to hold the Iraqi government to account for mass human rights violations, against Sunni civilians in particular. For a long time these were reported in a kind of code: while suicide bombs and roadside attacks were immediately (and generally correctly) ascribed to Sunni insurgents, and justifiably condemned by Washington and London, we would read only that the bodies of another dozen or so civilians had been found dumped in Baghdad, their hands bound and with marks of torture.

It took the UN assistance mission in Iraq to help publicise the existence of alleged Shia death squads operating within the ministry of the interior. Only in a confidential report would the UK government talk of these militias as frankly as Ambassador Patey did: "If we are to avoid a descent into civil war and anarchy then preventing the Jaish al-Mahdi (the Mahdi Army) from developing into a state within a state, as Hizbullah has done in Lebanon, will be a priority."

The Iraqi human rights ministry investigates abuses in prisons and detention facilities, but the new minister, Wijdan Mikha'il, admitted to me that her investigators are sometimes too frightened to report what they find. The day before we met in June, she had delivered to the US authorities her unpublished investigation of the massacre at Haditha, where US marines were accused of killing up to 24 civilians; she told me that it was an attempt to introduce independent oversight. ("How can they do the investigation all by themselves if they were responsible for the incident? Who will believe them?")

We must be clear: although the 2003 invasion set the dogs of war running, western governments did not create sectarianism in Iraq. Saddam Hussein's repression of the Kurds and Shias left a legacy of inter-community hatred, and Iraq's new government is faced with insurgent groups such as al-Qaida, animated by Sunni supremacism, pursuing a deliberate strategy of sparking inter-community conflict in order to destabilise the country and unite Sunni opposition to the Shia-led government.

Yet time and again the policies of first the coalition authorities and then the multinational force in Iraq, far from promoting reconciliation, have entrenched sectarian divisions. The fear is that their legacy in Iraq will be seen not in Iraq's new multicultural parliament but in districts such as al-Dora, south of Baghdad, where Sunni and Shia have lived side by side for generations, but which are now systematically being emptied of their original population as people flee for the relative safety of their own kind. The bodies of the victims of sectarian killings are left to rot, or be eaten by dogs in the street, because their families are too frightened to collect them.

· Mark Lattimer is the director of Minority Rights Group International www.minorityrights.org

originally from the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1837002,00.html)

[Kamraten]

interesting, makes me think about a swedish documentary that went on tv here called "gitmo" wich mostly ofcourse brought up the issue with Guantanamo, but in the end they focus on that US indeed has "alot" of hired mercenaries from example Europe in Iraq , they are used in the front lines, and aswell has alot of contracts at the prisons, where they interogate prisoners, and this is in no way denied by the spokesman for one of the mercenaries groups. iam not so sure but as i understood it, they do not have to operate under any rules, they are just carrying out orders, to be able to do things wich U.S soldiers can not do under international law.
Like one of the mercenaries said: rules? i dont understand, there are no rules of what we can do or will do, only heart and moral.

so this information does not surprise me, its a dirty war, and they will use any means nessecary for their objectives.