Did Muammar Gaddafi Finance Sarkozy ?

Former French President might be the one of the axe bearers to chop the head of Gaddafi regime together with the other Arab, European leaders and US President Obama, but there are skelotons in Sarkozy’s closet which will haunt him forever. Sarkozy will always feel guilty about the fact that he was a part of the larger group of world leaders which plotted against Gaddafi.

Does that make Nicolas Sarkozy a back stabber?

Mediapart in its investigation of the possibility of illicit financing of the presidential campaign of Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007. Launched in July 2011, this long-term research revealed financial ties forged in secret in 2005 by the entourage of Mr. Sarkozy, then interior minister, with the Libyan regime of Colonel Gaddafi deceased.The current investigations of Medipart about Gaddafi financing the Sarkozy 2007 election campaign will never get a justified judgement, but one thing was sure, that Gaddafi was the key sponsor of Sarkozy.

The seriousness of the facts revealed by the sections of Mediapart, which reveals strong evidence of corroboration of the illicit financing and consistency of submissions is indispensable to justice the appointment of an independent and impartial, to perform all acts necessary to ascertain the truth. Our attorneys, Mi, Jean-Pierre Mignard and Emmanuel Tordjman, had specifically requested that the Paris prosecutor, François Molins. Ignoring this legitimate request, prefers to stick to a preliminary inquiry into allegations by Mr. Sarkozy.

It is only in the context of a criminal investigation secret, under the control of the prosecution and without respect for the parties, which Mediapart been cited for the judicial police. As editor in chief, I asked for Friday, May 18, while the authors of the research, Fabrice Arfi and Karl Laske, are Monday 21 and Tuesday, May 22 After being deprived of a public debate on the choice of procedure of Nicolas Sarkozy, who has not placed on the floor of the defamation through the press, is now private Mediapart for the prosecution of human rights defense enjoyed in democratic societies continued to any journalist because of his writings.

Mediapart this procedure refused to limit press freedom, but remains at the disposal of justice that respects the equality of arms. We are determined to prove we have made ​​in compliance with our rules of conduct, a legitimate mission of information on a topic public interest . So to show our good faith, we will give the police all the articles and pieces in which our investigative reporting, and have joined our complaint for false accusation.

But they refuse to answer questions as part of this preliminary investigation. And we reiterate our request for an independent and impartial justice, respecting the right of the press is that the right of citizens to know. Above all, a justice who diligently investigate facts grave discovered by our disclosures and attest that the documents filed by us with justice.

List of documents disclosed to the court by Mediapart

Annex 1: The article of April 28, 2012 entitled “Sarkozy and Gaddafi: proof of funding” .

Annex 2: Mail the card of Mr. Takieddine of April 27, 2012.

Annex 3: Interview with Mr. Takieddine the newspaper Libération , April 29, 2012.

Annex 4: July 10, 2011 article entitled “ The financial secrecy that endangers the Sarkozy clan ” .

Parts 5: The article of July 22, 2011 entitled “ The Elysee secret negotiations to wash the right arm of Gaddafi ” , and reference sample (3 pages):

-. 1.5 Fax dated October 30, 2008 I Azzad Maghur lawyer, Libya. – 5.2. Note of 25 June 2008 on the legal situation in France by Mr. Senoussi. – 5.3. confidential note of a meeting of 16 May 2009 in the presence of Mr. Herzog and Mr. Gueant.

Part 6: The article of July 28, 2011 entitled “ Sarkozy and Gueant: suspicion of Libya, a large ” and reference sample (29 pages):

– 6.1. letter of invitation to Libya Mr. Sarkozy, interior minister, June 22, 2005 (in Arabic). -. 6.2 surround the private secretary of Mr. Gueant, chief of staff for Mr. Sarkozy, addressed to Mr. Takieddine. -. 6.3 Mr confidential note Takieddine preparing Sarkozy’s visit October 6, 2005. -. 6.4 Note of Mr. Takieddine in a preparatory visit to Claude Gueant in Libya. -. 6.5 Letter of 10 September 2005, Mr. Sarkozy confirmed his visit to Libya on October 6, 2005. -. 6.6 Letter of 23 September 2005 Mr Gueant confirm his arrival in Tripoli from 30 September to 2 October 2005. -. 7.6 Letter of 15 November 2005 Hortefeux, minister for local government on a future visit to Libya. -. 6.8 Presentation Software CryptoWall society i 2 e (Amesys) -. 6.9 Set of six payroll, payment of commissions by firm i 2 e (Amesys) foreign companies Mr. Takieddine. to 6.10. undated note of a meeting with Mr. Seif al-Islam Gaddafi and Mr . Senussi . 6.11 – Fax series of 20 July and 29 August 2007 from the Secretary General of the Elysee to Mr. M. Gueant Takieddine (11 pages). -. 6.12 Mr Takieddine confidential note of 23 April 2008 concerning the various files of Libya.

Table 7: August 12, 2011 article entitled “ The arms dealer, Gaddafi’s nephew and beaten prostitutes in London ” .

Pieces of 8: August 18, 2011 article entitled “ The emissary of the Sarkozy clan in Libya paid in total secrecy “ parties and referenced (38 pages):

- 8.1 by mail on 13 and 17 June 2008 in reference to a proposed partnership between the Libyan national oil company TOTAL. -. 2.8 Notes 9 and 25 June 2008 Mr de Margerie, Total CEO Ghanem, the Libyan company counterpart. – 8.3. Letter dated 3 December 2008 the Director of Global Oil and Gas Co. North, the total. – 8.4. Fax 12 December 2008 refers to the full cooperation of Libya and North Oil and Gas Global Co. -. 5.8 Confidential letter of December 19, 2008 Lord Pouyanné, CEO of Total, the North Oil and Gas Global Co. – 8.6 . Booklet 20 pages, dated July 2008 on cooperation in TOTAL LIBYA. – 8.7 . Confidential letter of 20 January 2009 Lord Pouyanné, executive director of the North Oil and Gas Co. the world total -. 8.8 Calendar confidential “TOTAL LIBYA” Mr. Takieddine. – 8.9. memo written by Mr. Takieddine. – 8.10. Memorandum of Understanding of 27 August 2009 between the National Petroleum Corporation and Total signed by Mr. Chokri Ghanem and Mr. de Margerie. – 8.11. Letter of 17 September 2009 Northern Oil and Gas Global Co. sent TOTAL – 8.12. Letter Pouyanné 30 September 2009, Mr, executive director of the North Oil world total and Gas Co.

Pieces of 9: 18 September 2011 article entitled “ Delivered by the clan of Sarkozy, the French 4 × 4 that protects Gaddafi ” , and pieces of reference (10 pages):

- 9.1. eight-page extract of the contract “Program for Homeland Security” company i2e (Amesys) and technical descriptions on the sale of four quarters Gaddafi regime secure. -. 2.9 Slip counter 18 December 2007 the company i2e on payment of a fee of 990.720 euros to an offshore company of Mr. Takieddine.

Parties No. 10: October 6, 2011 article titled “ Evidence of French intelligence network in Libya ”, and part references (18 pages):

- 10.1. Extract 18-page contract “Program for Homeland Security” company i2e (Amesys) and the technical descriptions of the “current network analysis”, foreshadowing the system “Eagle” spy in the country to the Internet.

Annex 11: December 17, 2011 article entitled “ Justice survey of Libya’s spy network ” .

Annex 12: the article of March 12, 2012 entitled “ Presidential Election 2007: Gaddafi was financed Sarkozy “ , and quoted parts: -. 12.1 . Hearing of Mr. Brisard by the National Financial Investigation Division (DNIF), October 18, 2011 – 12.2. list of notes given by Mr. Brisard. – 12.3. Memo Shows of December 20, 2006 – 12.4. new hearing Jean-Charles Brisard of October 18, 2011, at 14h 30. – 12.5. Appearance by Mr. Didier Grosskopf of October 19, 2011 – 12.6. Tickets for MM. Takieddine Grosskopf and a common movement in Tripoli in May June 2006.

Exhibit 13: Article of March 15, 2012 entitled “ Gaddafi-Sarkozy: Our new revelations ” .

Exhibit 14: Article 16 March 2012 entitled “ Gaddafi-Sarkozy: Mr. Brisard, under pressure, he wrote ” . Exhibit No. 15: Article of April 10, 2012 entitled “ The Libyan refugees spied accuse France in Paris ” , and some mentioned (10 pages):

-. 1.15 Note 13 June 2007 headed the direction of the Libyan intelligence to spy on a petition from residents of the opposition in Paris, in Arabic and translated into French.

Annex 16: April 28, 2012 article entitled “ Libya, the urgency of a formal investigation ” .

Annex 17: April 29, 2012 article titled “ Sarkozy-Gaddafi: news, their disinformation ” .

Proof # 18: April 30, 2012 article entitled “ Saleh Bashir is protected by France: the tangle of power ” .

Proof # 19: May 2, 2012 article titled “ Sarkozy-Gaddafi: the Elysee caught by witnesses ” .

Exhibit 20: The free transcripts of Sarkozy’s statements of 29 and 30 April 2012.

Exhibit 21: AFP dispatch of August 19, 2011 on the destruction of the residence of Mr. Senoussi, head of Libyan intelligence.

Part 22: Dispatch from Reuters March 22, 2012 regarding the arrest of Mr Senussi.

Annex 23: Hearings on 5 and 6 March 2011 Mr Takieddine.

Annex 24: . The examination of Mr. Takieddine of October 12, 2011 Exhibit No. 25: Article of May 3, 2012 entitled “ 50 million Sarkozy: Former Prime Minister of Libya confirmed ” . Exhibit No. 26: Article 4 May 2012 entitled “ Gaddafi, Sarkozy knew the Tunisian justice ” .

Annex 27: . The examination of Mr. Takieddine of May 10, 2012

Parties No. 28: Article of May 11, 2012, entitled “ Following his election, Sarkozy proposed nuclear plant Gaddafi “ and refers to part (7 pages):

- 28.1. The transcripts of the telephone conversation of May 28, 2007 between Nicolas Sarkozy and Gaddafi in Arabic and French.

Parties No. 29: Article on May 15, 2012 entitled “ Libya: Sarkozy to ingratiate himself with Saleh’s family “ , and pieces of reference (2 pages):

-. 29.1 Boris Boillon note of 30 June 2008 -. 29.2 Muriel Mathieu mail June 20, 2008

Proof # 30: Mandate of July 6, 2006 Mr. Abdallah Senussi Thierry Herzog, for me to represent you in the case of UTA DC10.

Annex 31: Evaluation of Mr. Takieddine visit to Libya on 11 and 12 April 2005.

Proof # 32: Draft letter to Mr. Takieddine Hortefeux.

Annex 33: Evaluation of two pages of Mr. Takieddine of September 7, 2006

Part 34: The translation of an invitation from the Libyan authorities on October 22, 2005, addressed to Mr. Hortefeux

Annex 35: Letter dated May 17, 2005 by M. Takieddine Brochand, director of the DGSE.

Exhibit 36: undated note on the establishment of a think tank Franco-Libyan

Annex 37: Summary of January 26, 2006 Mr. Takieddine an appointment with Mr. Alain Juillet, economic intelligence advisor to the Prime Minister.

Exhibit 38: Note Confidential January 23, 2007 on “the flying club contract” of 12 Mirage F1 of the Libyan Air Force.

Proof # 39: confidential notes of June 11, 2007 referred in particular to industrial cooperation between France and Libya in the areas of arms and nuclear.

Exhibit 40: undated confidential memorandum on a visit to Tripoli by Claude Guéant.

Parties No. 41: confidential note 11 June 2007 refers to a visit from “The minister Hortefeux” in Tripoli.

Annex 42: Evaluation of 11 July 2007, citing “important points” file Franco and Libya.

Annex 43: Evaluation of 3 September 2007 refers to “following the case of nurses and the establishment of a Crown corporation Franco-Libyan arms.

Exhibit 44: undated note on “the elements of the language of a letter from the president leader” .

Part # 45: My letters sent by Mignard and Tordjman to the Prosecutor of the Republic, Mr. François MOLINS

(Editor’s Note: This is the reason why General Abdel Fatah Younes was murdered! as he knew too much the same goes for the son of Qaddafi Mutassem Qaddafi, and lets not forget of-course Mr. Ghanem that he suddenly drowned in Austria! they all knew too much. The people who are still alive and should die as it will burn the WEST are: Saif Qaddafi, Khamis Qaddafi, Dr. Abuzeid Dorda and Mr. Baghdadi al Mahmoudi.)

Read Full Post »

The beginning of the end of Libya

( Rival militias clashed on the outskirts of the Libyan capital for a fourth day Sunday in the deadliest and most sustained violence since the capture and killing of Moammar Gadhafi last month.

Fighters attacked each other with rockets, mortars and machine guns, witnesses said. The fighting, which has killed at least 13 people since late last week, raised new concerns about the ability of Libya’s transitional government to disarm thousands of gunmen and restore order after an eight-month civil war……todays Yahoo news )

Few days ago a  German company had canceled a major advertising contract with an Italian-American model after she described her passionate relationship with Moammar Gadhafi’s son Muatassim and praised his family.

she’s entitled to her opinion and to express it. It’s also the right of the company to dismiss her if they don’t like her “opinion” because it doesn’t enhance their image.

New world order dictatorship. Zombies are welcomed. Independents no.

Don’t forget Hillary Clinton was happily shaking Muatissim’s hand just two years ago and saying how “we deeply value the relationship between the United States and Libya” and that she “was very much looking forward to building on this relationship.”

She did build on it. He now has 6 feet of dirt over him.

Didnt countries like Germany, France and spain honor Gadaffi as recently as March this year for his humanitarianism. Yes thats right they honored Gadaffi for his efforts to improve the welfare of his people and thats what this model was talking about.

The media  should tell us how the West robbed Libyan people of their petroleum to enrich the West and impoverish Libyan people during 1951–1969 that caused Muammar Gaddafi to overthrown King Idris the puppet of the West so that he could save the people of Libya. Libyan people lived better under Gaddafi’s rule.  Muammar al-Quathafi is dead but the Libyan war of aggression exposed the hypocrisy of Western governments as well as major newspapers.
The war also destroyed the credibility of the United Nations organization and the International Criminal Court. These entities can still pretend to take themselves seriously; but the naked truth has been exposed to all the world. The Libyan war of aggression was a very sordid and ugly affair. What started as an uprising against al-Quathafi, who had indeed been in office for way too long –he was popular after he had deposed King Idris Sanussi, modernized the nation and spent billions of oil dollars on the infrastructure and education– was quickly hijacked by Washington, Paris and London.

So, today, which countries are the worst abusers and violators of United Nations Resolutions? Clearly, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. Resolution 1973 was intended to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya and to protect civilians from all combatant in the civil war. A Google search will reveal that NATO initially claimed the insurgent would also be punished with air-strikes should they abuse civilians. This statement was merely for public relations consumption.

Instead, NATO promptly became the air forces of the insurgents, taking sides in the civil war and staffing the Libyan army. NATO never took any action against the insurgents even though they committed far worse abuses than any that were committed by al-Quathafi’s forces.

Thanks to The Wall Street Journal, which broke ranks with other corporate media outlets such as The New York Times and CNN, we found out that the rebels committed war crimes and crimes against humanity; with the assistance of air cover provided by the NATO bombardments. For its expose –from a newspaper better known for business reporting– The Wall Street Journal deserves a Pulitzer Prize for foreign news reporting, hands down.

The Journal informed the world that the rebels ethnically-cleansed the city of Misurata of its Black population and even issued a bounty for Black people. The units that carried out the crimes was “The Brigade to Purge Slaves, black skin,” according to a Wall Street Journal article of June 21, 2011.

Subsequently, the U.S.- , U.K.-, and French-, and NATO-assisted rebels attacked the city of Tawargha and depopulated it of its 35,000 Black residents. The homes were looted and burned down and on the walls, the insurgents from Misurata, who are darlings of The New York Times –on several occasions the newspaper has described their fighting skills as “legendary”– scribbled the words “slaves”  and “negroes” on the walls of the burned homes, The Wall Street Journal reported on September 13, 2011.

As the Libyan conflict enters its endgame, the time for the country’s rebels to seize power is almost at hand. But are they ready to govern Libya when divisions and rivalries pull at the very threads of their alliance?

The struggle for peace, security and stability is unlikely to end. With long-held distrust and divisions over potential power-sharing roles threatening to rip the loosely-aligned rebel factions apart, there are even fears that the gunfire of celebration may soon be redirected in anger at rivals for control over the scraps of post-Gaddafi Libya. The NTC, recognised as the sole representative of Libya by 32 countries, currently lacks a ruling cabinet. The last one was dissolved by Mustafa Abdul Jalil – a judge who resigned as justice minister after the uprising began and is now the NTC’s chairman – over the failed investigation into the murder of rebel army commander Abdel Fattah Younes in July.

I wonder now NATO will support which rebel group or will they start the process of bombing all over again to restore peace and stability in Libya?

Well, this was as if the western powers didn’t see this coming. The fate of Libya joining the Afghanistan & Iraq club was evident. However, the mainstream media was fully busy in defaming Gaddafi and making a mockery out of him or trying to show the world that how evil he was. If that was the case why didn’t NATO bomb Greece. There were protests everyday. There are several African nations where people are suppressed, killed, and there is no democracy and in reality ruled by some worst tyrants currently, but western powers don’t have interest in those nations as there is no oil, gold or other resources to suck out. Today Libya has been sent 1000 years behind after this horrible action of rebels and NATO on its soil. The people of Libya will only see themselves more and more in trouble if they don’t get their acts together and throw out these criminals outside.

 

Read Full Post »

16 Things Libya Will Never See Under NATO-Rebel Regime

Muammar Gaddafi transformed Libya from the poorest country in the world to the most prosperous country of Africa, more prosperous than Brazil, Russia and Saudi Arabia.

 

“Multiparty democracy is a sham promoted by governments that treat their people like donkeys and deny them real power. We have seen the world shaken by the multiparty systems. What on earth do we need with the alternation of power when power is in the hands of the masses?

The world is fed up with parties and elections. Even the Western intelligentsia feels disgusted with the party system and the farce of elections. They acknowledge the fact that what is going on is not democracy but falsification.The world is going to eventually embrace the people’s authority, sweeping away all those old systems.

We will never abandon the State of the Masses. There will be no going back on the people’s authority.” – Muammar Gaddafi, 2007.

Below are sixteen of the numerous benefits Gaddafi brought to Libya, which things the Libyan people will never see again if there lasamahAllah will be a Western “democratic” puppet regime installed in their country:

1. There is no electricity bill in Libya; electricity is free for all its citizens.

2. There is no interest on loans, banks in Libya are state-owned and loans given to all its citizens at zero percent interest by law.

3. Having a home is considered a human right in Libya.

4. All newlyweds in Libya receive $60,000 dinar (U.S.$50,000) by the government to buy their first apartment so to help start up the family.

5. Education and medical treatments are free in Libya. Before Muammar Gaddafi only 25 percent of Libyans were literate. Today, the figure is 83 percent.

6. Should Libyans want to take up farming, they would receive farm land, a farm house, equipment, seeds and livestock to kickstart their farms all for free.

7. If Libyans cannot find the education or medical facilities they need, the government funds them to go abroad. It is not only paid for, but they get a U.S.$2,300/month for accommodation and car allowance.

8. If a Libyan buys a car, the government subsidizes 50 percent of the price.

9. The price of petrol in Libya is $0.14 per liter.

10. Libya has no external debt and its reserves amounting to $150 billion are now frozen globally.

11. If a Libyan is unable to get employment after graduation the state would pay the average salary of the profession, as if he or she is employed, until employment is found.

12. A portion of every Libyan oil sale is credited directly to the bank accounts of all Libyan citizens.

13. A mother who gives birth to a child receives U.S.$5,000.

14. Food is subsidised: 40 loaves of bread in Libya costs $0.15.

15. 25 percent of Libyans have a university degree.

16. Muammar Gaddafi carried out the world’s largest irrigation project, known as the Great Manmade River project, to make water readily available throughout the desert country.

About Quoriana

Visit Quoriana on twitter or at www.eccleza.net.

View all posts by Quoriana →

#

http://www.mathaba.net/news/libya

Read Full Post »

Libya and the Big Lie: Using Human Rights Organizations to Launch Wars

by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

The war against Libya is built on fraud. The United Nations Security Council passed two resolutions against Libya on the basis of unproven claims, specifically that Colonel Muammar Qaddafi was killing his own people in Benghazi and Libya. The claim in its exact form was that Qaddafi had ordered Libyan forces to kill 6,000 people in Benghazi and Libya. These claims were widely disseminated, but always vaguely explained. It was on the basis of this claim that Libya was referred to the U.N. Security Council at U.N. Headquarters in New York City and kicked out of the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva.

False claims about African mercenary armies in Libya and about jet attacks on civilians were also used in a broad media campaign against Libya. These two claims have been sidelined and have become more and more murky. The massacre claims, however, were used in a legal, diplomatic, and military framework to justify NATO’s war on Libya.

Using Human Rights as a Pretext for War: The LLHR and its Unproven Claims

One of the main sources for the claim that Qaddafi was killing his own people is the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR). The LLHR was actually pivotal to getting the U.N. involved through its specific claims in Geneva. On February 21, 2011 the LLHR got the 70 other non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to sent letters to the President Obama, E.U. High Representative Catherine Ashton, and the U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon demanding international action against Libya invoking the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. Only 25 members of this coalition actually assert that they are human rights groups.

The letter is as follows:

We, the undersigned non-governmental, human rights, and humanitarian organizations, urge you to mobilize the United Nations and the international community and take immediate action to halt the mass atrocities now being perpetrated by the Libyan government against its own people. The inexcusable silence cannot continue.

As you know, in the past several days, Colonel Moammar Gadhafi’s forces are estimated to have deliberately killed hundreds of peaceful protesters and innocent bystanders across the country. In the city of Benghazi alone, one doctor reported seeing at least 200 dead bodies. Witnesses report that a mixture of special commandos, foreign mercenaries and regime loyalists have attacked demonstrators with knives, assault rifles and heavy-caliber weapons.

Snipers are shooting peaceful protesters. Artillery and helicopter gunships have been used against crowds of demonstrators. Thugs armed with hammers and swords attacked families in their homes. Hospital officials report numerous victims shot in the head and chest, and one struck on the head by an anti-aircraft missile. Tanks are reported to be on the streets and crushing innocent bystanders. Witnesses report that mercenaries are shooting indiscriminately from helicopters and from the top of roofs. Women and children were seen jumping off Giuliana Bridge in Benghazi to escape. Many of them were killed by the impact of hitting the water, while others were drowned. The Libyan regime is seeking to hide all of these crimes by shutting off contact with the outside world. Foreign journalists have been refused entry. Internet and phone lines have been cut or disrupted.

There is no question here about intent. The government media has published open threats, promising that demonstrators would meet a “violent and thunderous response.”

Accordingly, the government of Libya is committing gross and systematic violations of the right to life as guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Citizens seeking to exercise their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are being massacred by the government.

Moreover, the government of Libya is committing crimes against humanity, as defined by the Explanatory Memorandum to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Libyan government’s mass killing of innocent civilians amount to particularly odious offences which constitute a serious attack on human dignity. As confirmed by numerous oral and video testimonies gathered by human rights organizations and news agencies, the Libyan government’s assault on its civilian population are not isolated or sporadic events. Rather, these actions constitute a widespread and systematic policy and practice of atrocities, intentionally committed, including murder, political persecution and other inhumane acts which reach the threshold of crimes against humanity.

Responsibility to Protect

Under the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document, you have a clear and unambiguous responsibility to protect the people of Libya. The international community, through the United Nations, has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help to protect the Libyan population. Because the Libyan national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their population from crimes against humanity, should peaceful means be inadequate, member states are obliged to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the UN Charter, including Chapter VII.

In addition, we urge you to convene an emergency Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council, whose members have a duty, under UNGA Resolution 60/251, to address situations of gross and systematic violations of violations of human rights. The session should:

-Call for the General Assembly to suspend Libya’s Council membership, pursuant to Article 8 of Resolution 60/251, which applies to member states that commit gross and systematic violations of human rights.

-Strongly condemn, and demand an immediate end to, Libya’s massacre of its own citizens.

-Dispatch immediately an international mission of independent experts to collect relevant facts and document violations of international human rights law and crimes against humanity, in order to end the impunity of the Libyan government. The mission should include an independent medical investigation into the deaths, and an investigation of the unlawful interference by the Libyan government with the access to and treatment of wounded.

-Call on the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights and the Council’s relevant Special Procedures to closely monitor the situation and take action as needed.

-Call on the Council to remain seized of the matter and address the Libyan situation at its upcoming 16th regular session in March.

Member states and high officials of the United Nations have a responsibility to protect the people of Libya from what are preventable crimes. We urge you to use all available measures and levers to end atrocities throughout the country.

We urge you to send a clear message that, collectively, the international community, the Security Council and the Human Rights Council will not be bystanders to these mass atrocities. The credibility of the United Nations — and many innocent lives — are at stake.

According to Physicians for Human Rights: “[This letter was] prepared under the guidance of Mohamed Eljahmi, the noted Libyan human rights defender and brother of dissident Fathi Eljahmi, asserts that the widespread atrocities committed by Libya against its own people amount to war crimes, requiring member states to take action through the Security Council under the responsibility to protect doctrine.”

The letters signatories included Francis Fukuyama, United Nations Watch (which looks out for Israel’s interests and according to Israeli sources organized the entire session against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), B’nai B’rith Human Rights Commission, the Cuban Democratic Directorate, and a set of organizations at odds with the governments of Nicaragua, Cuba, Sudan, Russia, Venezuela, and Libya. Some of these organizations are viewed with hostility as organizations created to wage demonization campaigns against countries at odds with the U.S., Israel, and the European Union. Refer to the annex for the full list of signatories for consultation.

LLHR is tied to the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), which is based in France and has ties to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). FIDH is active in many places in Africa and in activities involving the National Endowment for Democracy in the African continent. Both the FIDH and LLHR also released a joint communiqué on February 21, 2011. In the communiqué both organizations asked for the international community to “mobilize” and mention the International Criminal Court while also making a contradictory claiming that over 400 to 600 people had died since February 15, 2011. This of course was about 5,500 short of the claim that 6,000 people were massacred in Benghazi. The joint letter also promoted the false view that 80% of Qaddafi’s support came from foreign mercenaries, which is something that over half a year of fighting proves as untrue.

According to the General-Secretary of the LLHR, Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir, the claims about the massacres in Benghazi could not be validated by the LLHR when he was challenged for proof. When asked how a group of 70 non-governmental organizations in Geneva could support the LLHR’s claims on Geneva, Dr. Buchuiguir has answered that a network of close relationship was the basis. This is a mockery.

Speculation is neither evidence nor grounds for starting a war with a bombing campaign that has lasted about half a year and taken many innocent civilian lives, including children and the elderly. What is important to note here is that the U.N. Security Council decided to sanction the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on the basis of this letter and the claims of the LLHR. Not once did the U.N. Security Council and the member states pushing for war once bother to even investigate the allegations. In one session in New York City, the Indian Ambassador to the U.N. actually pointed this out when his country abstained from voting. Thus, a so-called “humanitarian war” was launched without any evidence.

The Secret Relationship between the LLHR and the Transitional Council

The claims of the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) were coordinated with the formation of the Transitional Council. This becomes clear when the close and cagey relationship of the LLHR and the Transitional Council becomes apparent. Logically, the Obama Administration and NATO had to also be a part of this.

Whatever the Transitional Council is and whatever the intent of some of its supporters, it is clear that it is being used as a tool by the U.S. and others. Moreover, five members of the LLHR were or would become members of the Transitional Council almost immediately after the claims against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya were disseminated. According to Bouchuguir individuals with ties to the LLHR or who hold membership include Mahmoud Jibril and Ali Tarhouni.

Dr. Mahmoud Jibril is a government figure brought into Libyan Arab Jamahiriya government circles by Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi. He would undemocratically be given the position of Transitional Council prime minister. His involvement with the LLHR raises some real questions about the organization.

The economist Ali Tarhouni on the other hand would become the minister for oil and finance for the Transitional Council. Tarhouni is Washington’s man in Libya. He was groomed in the United States and was present at all the major meetings about plans for “regime change” in Libya. As Minister of Oil and Finance the first acts he did were privatize and virtually handover Libya’s energy resources and economy to the foreign corporations and governments of the NATO-led coalition against Libya.

The General-Secretary of the LLHR, Sliman Bouchuiguir, has even privately admitted that many influential members of the Transitional Council are his friends. A real question of interests arises. Yet, the secret relationship between the LLHR and the Transitional Council is far more than a question of conflict of interest. It is a question of justice and manipulation.

Who is Sliman Bouchuiguir?

Sliman Bouchuguir is an unheard of figure for most, but he has authored a doctoral thesis that has been widely quoted and used in strategic circles in the United States. This thesis was published in 1979 as a book, The Use of Oil as a Political Weapon: A Case Study of the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. The thesis is about the use of oil as an economic weapon by Arabs, but can easily be applied to the Russians, the Iranians, the Venezuelans, and others. It examines economic development and economic warfare and can also be applied to vast regions, including all of Africa.

Bouchuguir’s analytical thesis reflects an important line of thinking in Washington, as well as London and Tel Aviv. It is both the embodiment of a pre-existing mentality, which includes U.S. National Security Advisor George F. Kennan’s arguments for maintaining a position of disparity through a constant multi-faced war between the U.S. and its allies on one hand and the rest of the world on the other hand. The thesis can be drawn on for preventing the Arabs, or others, from becoming economic powers or threats. In strategic terms, rival economies are pinned as threats and as “weapons.” This has serious connotations.

Moreover, Bouchuiguir did his thesis at George Washington University under Bernard Reich. Reich is a political scientist and professor of international relations. He has worked and held positions at places like the U.S. Defense Intelligence College, the United States Air Force Special Operations School, the Marine Corps War College, and the Shiloah Center at Tel Aviv University. He has consulted on the Middle East for the Foreign Service Institute of the U.S. State Department and received grants such as the Defense Academic Research Support Program Research Grant and the German Marshal Fund Grant. Reich also was or is presently on the editorial boards of journals such as Israel Affairs (1994-present), Terrorism: An International Journal (1987-1994), and The New Middle East (1971-1973).

It is also clear that Reich is tied to Israeli interests. He has even written a book about the special relationship between the U.S and Israel. He has also been an advocate for a “New Middle East” which would be favourable to Israel. This includes careful consideration over North Africa. His work has also focused on the important strategic interface between the Soviet Union and the Middle East and also on Israeli policy in the continent of Africa.

It is clear why Bouchuiguir had his thesis supervised under Reich. On October 23, 1973, Reich gave a testimony at the U.S. Congress. The testimony has been named “The Impact of the October Middle East War” and is clearly tied to the 1973 oil embargo and Washington’s aim of pre-empting or managing any similar events in the future. It has to be asked, how much did Reich influence Bouchuiguir and if Bouchuiguir espouses the same strategic views as Reich?

The “New North Africa” and a “New Africa” – More than just a “New Middle East”

A “New Africa” is in the works, which will have its borders further drawn out in blood like in the past. The Obama Administration and its allies have opened the gateway for a new invasion of Africa. United States Africa Command (AFRICOM) opened the salvos of the war through Operation Odyssey Damn, before the war on Libya was transferred to NATO’s Operation Unified Protector.

The U.S. has used NATO to continue the occupation of post-Second World War Europe. It will now use AFRICOM to occupy Africa and create an African NATO. It is clear the U.S. wants an expanded military presence in Libya and Africa under the disguise of humanitarian aid missions and fighting terrorism – the same terrorism that it is fanning in Libya and Africa.

The way is being paved for intervention in Africa under the guise of fighting terrorism. General Carter Ham has stated: “If we were to launch a humanitarian operation, how do we do so effectively with air traffic control, airfield management, [and] those kind of activities?” General Ham’s question is actually a sales pitch for fashioning African military partnerships and integration, as well as new bases that could include the use of more military drones against Libya and other African countries. The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) have both made it clear that the Pentagon is actively trying to establish more drone bases in Africa and the Arabian Peninsula to expand its wars. In this context, the AFRICOM Commander says that there are ties between the Al-Shabaab in Somalia, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in North Africa, and the Boko Harem in Nigeria.

The War in Libya is a Fraud

General Ham has said: “I remain confident that had the U.N. not made the decision, had the U.S. not taken the lead with great support, I’m absolutely convinced there are many, many people in Benghazi alive today who would not be [alive].” This is not true and a far stretch from reality. The war has cost more lives than it could have ever saved. It has ruined a country and opened the door into Africa for a neo-colonial project.

The claims of the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) were never supported or verified. The credibility of the United Nations must be questioned as well as the credibility of many humanitarian and human rights organizations that have virtually pushed for a war. At best the U.N. Security Council is an irresponsible body, but it has clearly acted outside of due legal process. This pattern now appears to be repeating itself against the Syrian Arab Republic as unverified claims are being made by individuals and organizations supported by foreign powers that care nothing for authentic democratic reforms or liberty.

About Auntie Adjeley

Auntie Adjeley is a retired musician, teacher and artisan who is dedicated to Peace, Justice and Social Harmony and is opposed to the hegemony of the so-called ‘New World Order’.

View all posts by Auntie Adjeley →

#

http://www.mathaba.net/news/libya ( Reference )

Read Full Post »

Al Qaeda LIFG terrorist Abdul Belhaj writes column for London Guardian Newspaper

A cruel terrorist is now a newspaper writer. Perhaps this is the way the western elite are trying to control the world with their new strategy by openly employing former terrorists as head of governments. The western elites have been using this tactic for a long time, earlier with Saddam, Mubarak and others. First by replacing them as head of governments and then getting rid of them, it’s going to be the same fate of the current NTC Libyan puppet leader and terrorist.

 

Global elite defile memories of “War on Terror” dead, humor terrorist Belhaj who fought and killed Western troops. Photo: The face of Libya’s “rebels” is literally Al Qaeda. The Western world now enters surreal territory as men who have verifiably killed Americans are writing pro-NATO propaganda for British newspapers.

by Tony Cartalucci

One would think Abdul Belhaj, leader of Libya’s NATO-backed seizure of Tripoli a month ago would be an overly busy man. After all, the city itself is still not secure enough to move the alleged “National Transitional Council” there to preside over the war torn nation, and rebel forces 85 miles southeast near Bani Walid have been soundly defeated and are now slinking away from the battlefield. Meanwhile, the “final, final” siege of Sirte looks to be once again stalled, and now civilians fleeing the brutalized city are claiming NATO and rebels (western media incorrectly call them “revolutionaries”), not Qaddafi, are committing genocide against the civilians of Libya. [1]

However, Mr. Belhaj has had time, apparently, allegedly, to draft a lengthy editorial titled, “The revolution belongs to all Libyans, secular or not,” gladly published by the London Guardian, where he is allowed to go on at length, whitewashing what is essential a life-long career in terrorism and expound the merits of the wholesale mass murder he and his cohorts, under NATO cover, are committing against the Libyan people. Belhaj, for those that don’t know, is a founding member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an official Al Qaeda affiliate, and listed by both the US State Department [2] and the United Kingdom Home Office [3] as a foreign terrorist organization and proscribed terrorist organization respectively. LIFG was the subject of a lengthy report issued by West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center [4] regarding foreign fighters turning up in Iraq killing US and British soldiers, LIFG and more specifically, the Benghazi-Darnah region of Libya lending more fighters to Iraq per-capita than any other nation, including Saudi Arabia.

Image: Terrorist Op-Ed. The Guardian affords Belhaj, commander of LIFG, a US/UK listed terrorist organization ample room to praise NATO’s efforts in Libya and give stern warnings to those that threaten to impede his “freedoms.”

….

Belhaj’s Gaurdian piece, worded suspiciously more like a US State Department PR release than an essay by an Al Qaeda terrorist, verbatim touches on each and every point made by the US, UK, NATO, and found within UNSC r.1973. Belhaj maintains that in 2010 he was released from Libyan prison after promising to abandon his campaign of terror in Libya, only to go on to lead armed insurrection against the Libyan government months later in February of 2011. Belhaj claims that the revolution turned violent only after Qaddafi used force against protesters – this is a verified lie, as Belhaj and his LIFG have been in continuous US/UK-backed armed conflict with Qaddafi’s government for over 30 years.

Belhaj, after this initial, seemingly scripted litany of lies goes on to make veiled threats against the new “transitional government” over the dangers of “excluding” members of the “revolution.” He then thanks the “international community” presumably NATO who literally handed the country to him – NATO whose soldiers he was literally killing in the mountains of Afghanistan, and whose soldiers his fellow LIFG fighters were killing in Iraq, and whose member states captured, imprisoned and tortured him. Belhaj looks forward to Libya becoming a “politically, economically and socially advanced civil state” and a “dynamic player among the family of nations.” Compared to the secular leaders Belhaj claims to fear will undermine his and his followers’ “freedom” one must wonder where exactly the divergence in ideology is, as both seem to relish the concepts of globalization [5].

One doesn’t know whether to laugh, cry, or scream. Not just because of the obvious fraudulent propaganda the guardian is trying to pass off as the words of a stone cold killer with the writing prowess of a statesman, or the fact that the Guardian, even as a hoax, is affording column space to the leader of a listed terrorist organization who we are told is part of a decade long war that has cost millions their lives, liberty, national stability, and economic prosperity. It is the fact that the Guardian, along with the rest of the corporate media is trying to literally rewrite reality and paradigms they have forced down our throats for decades with new narratives so ridiculous and contrived it is an assault against human dignity.

The Guardian itself is a corporate-owned propaganda machine, a member of the unelected policy think-tank Chatham House [6], along side a myriad of other media, corporate, and financier interests that in reality shape our national and global destiny rather than the politicians we think we elect to represent us and our interests. Think-tanks like the Chatham House represent the collective interests and agenda of the world’s most powerful elite. They are the literal architects and helping hands that propel the global elite’s agenda forward, as clearly the Guardian is now in trying to rewrite the narrative regarding the 1o year ongoing “War on Terror” by whitewashing and elevating one of the war’s most notorious terrorists by either giving him column space, or ghost writing a column in his name.

Quite truly if Belhaj wrote this farcical, verbatim repeat of US State Department talking points regarding Libya and its future, one must wonder what prompted Belhaj to fight in the mountains of Afghanistan against US troops in the first place. Surely what is good for Libya is good for Afghanistan. We must also wonder why this terrorist and his organization, apparently enamored with the idea of fitting into the “family of nations” were fighting in Iraq against nations he is now thankful toward. More than likely Belhaj has been turned into another fictional character upon the stage of globalist theater, confounding an ignorant public with well-written statements giving well-intentioned people exactly what they want to hear, however debased from logic or reality it may be.

And above all, let us remember this is not only “Obama’s War” but a war of the global elite including big oil, big banks, the military defense industry, and many of the “Neo-Conservatives” that helped engineer the “War on Terror” during Bush’s “administration.” In fact, some of the most vehement supporters of Obama’s war in Libya have included John McCain [7] who was literally praising the Benghazi terror brigades in person, and the remnants of the Bush era “Project for a New American Century.” [8]

The “War on Terror” is a war on free humanity by the criminally insane. Civilians, police, and military alike, who adhere to any code of honor must face the reality that their leadership has lost all legitimacy and needs to be expediency removed from power. Hard decisions are coming as the insanity becomes ever more acute. A certified terrorist writing columns for a British newspaper regarding a war that is supported by both “left” and “right” political establishment should ring alarms and conjure horror in even the most skeptical of minds.

[1] The Australian, “Civilians accuse NATO of massacre in Sirte raids” September 28, 2011
[2] US State Department, List of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, #26 Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
[3] UK Home Office Proscribed Terrorist Groups, page 5
[4] 2007 West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) report
[5] The Future of Libya: A View from the Opposition, Brookings Institution May 12, 2011
[6] Chatham House, Standard Corporate Members, listed as “Guardian, The”
[7] Senate.gov, Statement by Senator McCain in Benghazi, Libya April 22, 2011
[8] Foreign Policy Initiative, Foreign Policy Experts Urge House Republicans to Support U.S. Operations in Libya, June 20, 2011
#

Courtesy from the original posting from : http://www.mathaba.net/news/libya

Read Full Post »

Russia Recognizes NATO-led Al Qaeda Terrorists As Libyan Government

Russia gives a slap in the face of the tens of thousands of Libyans butchered in recent days, weeks and months by terrorists and NATO on the 1st September Revolution day while the democratic Libyan Jamahiriya is still very de facto and in all cases de jure

by Quoriana

 

As world leaders met in Paris on Thursday to discuss how to spend the billions of stolen Libyan financial assets, Russia declared to recognize the NATO-led Libyan Al Qaeda rebels’ National Transitional Council as the country’s legitimate government.

“The Russian Federation recognizes the National Transitional Council (NTC) as Libya’s current authorities,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

The announcement was made just a week after Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that “Russia will not recognize the National Transitional Council as the sole legitimate representative”, because “NATO far exceeded the mandate handed to the alliance by the UN Security Council” and “the Russian and Libyan people have traditions of friendship and years-long interaction”, herewith explaining Russia supports the huge majority of the Libyan who support Gaddafi and their legitimate government.

Russia, which always has been very critical of NATO’s war against Libya, is holding Libyan Government assets worth billions of dollars, including arms, energy and infrastructure deals with Libya’s legitimate government.

In July Russia turned down an invitation by the U.N. Security Council for a meeting in Istanbul concerning a Turkish proposed road-map for a political settlement in Libya, saying Russia will have no part in the NATO aggression against Libya as they have been calling for it to stop since several months.

Also a few weeks ago Russia’s Foreign Ministry denounced France’s decision to transfer almost $260 million to the Benghazi-based rebels, saying: “Paris is a going to spend the Libyan money which means that Libyan money is used to fight Libyans. This is absolutely illegal.”

However, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, who has been accused of being a US agent in a leaked report, now joins Western leaders in urging Gaddafi to give up power and in the theft and plundering of the Libyan resources.

About Quoriana

Visit Quoriana on Twitter: @Quoriana

Read Full Post »

Captured Libyan soldier: “Qaddafi gave us Dignity, I would die a thousand times for him”

Wounded Libyan soldiers at Mitiga Hospital in Tripoli on August 28

“I myself would die a thousand times for Qaddafi, even now,” said Faraj Mohamed, a 20-year-old soldier from Sirte, lying in a hospital in Tripoli as a prisoner of the Libyan rebels. “I love him because he gave us dignity, and he is a symbol for the patriotism of the country.” At moments when the rebel guards were out of earshot, Mr. Mohamed said he fought on, fearful of a future without Colonel Qaddafi. He warned what would happen if the rebels take over Libya: “Murder and killing and stealing and chaos.” “What is happening now is because of the rebels, not Qaddafi,” Mr. Mohamed said. Mr. Mohamed, his leg in a cast and a wound on his back, lay with five other captives in a prison unit of the Mitiga air base hospital, with an armed guard in the hall. The rebels call them prisoners of war, but Mr. Mohamed was the only one who admitted to fighting for Colonel Qaddafi. Two fellow patients said they were migrant workers, from Niger and Somalia, who had been falsely accused of being “mercenaries”. Another patient, a Libyan, said he had simply been shot in the street. “I am innocent,” he said. Another was handcuffed to his bedrail. Mr. Mohamed mentioned how many remember that when Colonel Qaddafi took power in 1969 Libya was a poor and almost entirely undeveloped nation of Bedouin herders whose oil wealth appeared to enrich mainly the foreign companies that exploited it. Qaddafi pursued development programs that helped turn Libya into a primarily urban country. He said Colonel Qaddafi had brought Libyans self-respect by kicking out foreign colonialists; under Colonel Qaddafi, Libyans celebrated a national holiday every year on the day the United States evacuated the air base that included the hospital where Mr. Mohamed was held. Then there was the special patronage — buildings, roads, schools, hospitals, jobs — lavished on Colonel Qaddafi’s two former hometowns, Sirte and Sabha. Sirte flourished as Colonel Qaddafi’s favorite place to hold conferences, Mr. Mohamed said of the Mediterranean port city that is his hometown as well. “Sirte really loves Qaddafi,” he said. “And they will fight for him.” But he also professed a high-minded fear that without Colonel Qaddafi’s strong hand to preserve order, the rebels would drag Libya into chaos. In a Tripoli neighborhood supportive of Colonel Qaddafi, Mr. Mohamed recalled, he met residents who “said they were scared the rebels would rape the women and kill the men.” Residents fought for the Colonel even after it was said rebels were inside his compound. Also Mr. Mohamed fought on until the next day, when his militia was in a battle and the rebels shot him. “I would sacrifice myself, I would sacrifice my family,” he said. “I would die for Qaddafi.”

About Quoriana

Visit Quoriana on Twitter: @Quoriana

 

Reference – This post is from www.mathaba.net

 http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=628408?rss

Read Full Post »

German Solidarity with great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

 

German officials send a Message of Solidarity to the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya: “We say NO to any German participation in this War of Terror”

Posted: 2011/08/27

A message of Solidarity from German Resistance Groups to the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:

The imperialist aggression of NATO against Libya nowadays manifests itself to the entire world as a war that aims to destroy the sovereignty of Libya and the Libyan economy. NATO wants to replace Libya’s legitimate government with Western puppets and wants foreign corporations to steal Libya’s wealth.

After months of aggression against Libya by NATO and the NATO-led rebels, NATO now has worked out a plan which has to bring quick “victory”. With massive air attacks and terror against the Libyan civilians they want to secure a speedy advance of the rebels.

Now that the Libyan army is fighting under command of the Great Leader Muammar Al Gaddafi in the streets of Tripoli, NATO is sending special forces from France, Britain, Jordan and Qatar to Libya’s territory to support the rebels on the ground.

We, German people from many walks of life, stand in Solidarity with the Libyan Revolutionary Freedom Fighters against NATO. Long live the Resistance against the Occupiers, long live Free Green Libya!

We demand an immediate halt to the NATO aggression and urge NATO to stop bombing Libya. We say NO to any German participation in this war of terror.

We are Germans who held official positions during the time of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), we are anti-imperialists and we are friends of the Libyan people. We want to engage with them in their fight against the NATO aggression and declare them our loyalty.

Down with the mercenaries and invaders who terrorize Libya – the fight will go on until all of them are defeated!

Solidarity and Comradely Greetings from:

Dr. Angelika and Dr. Wolfgang Bator, former Ambassadors of the GDR in Tripoli until 1989

Helmut Müller, former member of the Central Committee of the SED [German Socialist Unity Party] and second Secretary of the SED district leadership of Berlin

Michael Koth, Anti-Imperialist Platform – District Administration Berlin

About Quoriana

Visit Quoriana on Twitter: @Quoriana

 

Source : as posted on www.mathaba.net  on 27 August 2011

 

Read Full Post »

Libya War

In last five months the Libya war has just made the western powers more frustrated. The financial crises which will soon decide fate of many western nations in September 2011, fully depends upon the speedy result of the Libyan war. When I say speedy result, it means the total share of control of Libyan natural resources. This aggression displayed by NATO, US and its allies only proves that our planet, even in the 21st century is not yet civilised. War and bloodshed is still the rule of our era. NATO has waged a Ariel war on Libya, paving clear path for its terrorist ( Al-Qaeda ) rebels. The rebels have to just walk into those destroyed towns and claim victory on behalf of NATO’s Ariel bombing and direct target air strikes. The strategy of declaring No-Fly zone has worked for NATO, US and its allies in Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Libya, as the NATO aircrafts can destroy the air bases and military target. However, the failure on NATO’s part is to establish a legitimate and peaceful governments after those bombing.

One of the greatest features of the Libyan war is that, the Libyan soldiers still maintain their integrity and personal honor to defend its mother nation from the outside imperial hordes. The west might defeat Gaddafi and his army, but the patriotism of the Libyans will soon rise again against these evil invaders.

 For five months, beginning March 19, the armed forces of a small country of six million people dared to defy the most advanced weapons systems on the planet, on terrain with virtually no cover, against an enemy capable of killing whatever could be seen from the sky or electronically sensed. Night and day, the eyes of the Euro-American war machine looked down from space on the Libyan soldiers’ positions, with the aim of incinerating them. “”- By Glen Ford(1)

NATO’s rebels or mercenaries are nothing but a bunch of imported terrorists, well paid to claim as Libyan citizens fighting against Gaddafi. Many neutral journalists have reported that these rebels are Qatari, Yemeni , Egyptian, Jordanian national and NATO special forces on ground.  However the west is trying hard through its propaganda media machine CNN, BBC, Al Arabia, Al Jazeera, Fox news to spread lies around the world. In addition the total cut off of internet connection only stops the real information being leaked out to the outside world. Yet there are many brave heroes in the field of journalism who are passing us with real unbiased information about Libya.  The bankrupt western thieves are trying their best to steal the resources on pretext of protecting humanity from ruthless dictators and to restore democracy. Well the people of Libya were extremely happy under Gaddafi and they never asked any western nation to come and start this evil war.

Foreign reporters including Greece’s Panos Haritos, have confirmed that Tripoli is not under rebel control, that people are fighting for Qaddafi, and that Green Square too is not under rebel control.

The journalists, reporting from the Corinthia Hotel where they have a good view of the city, have confirmed that Green Square is controlled by Qaddafi loyalists.

The green masses also have control in all the areas of east and central Tripoli and also half of west Tripoli.

Also the terrorist rebels don’t control Tripoli airport they use the highway to land small planes for their supplies. This was shown live on TV, with a broadcast failed to be cut off by NATO.

The mercenaries on the perimeter of the Corinthian Hotel and trying to enter Green Square, but the green masses are steadfast in all of Tripoli except Gergaresh and some areas in the west.

NATO-supported rebels entered a hospital and killed all the patients thus committing yet another heinous crime.(2)

What surprises me is that the entire African Union is mum and isn’t raising their protest at UN to stop this war or even to vocally support Gaddafi. Gaddafi has done so many great things for Africa and was the only real leader who could lead Africa against the colonial western evil powers, but I suppose the African Union has succumbed to the pressure of West.

At last reports last night, yesterday another estimated 1,365 foreign invaders and terrorist rebels were killed by the Libyan people and defence.

Most areas of Tripoli, including Abu Slim and the plateau green, and Aziziyah, were safe and under the control of the Libyan Army and the Revolutionary Guard.  Violent clashes were occurring in Tajoura and some areas of the Friday Market (Souk El Jouma).

Dr Franklin Lamb, who resides in a luxury hotel which has remained the first and only to get Internet connection, and for who there are many questions, is not to be trusted, according to our sources.

Others say that after he was shot in the leg, his tune changed. From the view of his hotel room he sees all, but sees nothing.

Lamb has however correctly observed the shallow human nature that is a hall-mark of today’s world. Indeed it is a fact and has been a known fact for decades that those that shout loudest, as the weakest.

This is a reference to the Libyan arm-chair revolutionaries. However, a new generation of young powerful Libyans who have understood the leader, and who have taken up his call, have been baptised by fire.

A battle in the center of Al-jamhoria in Tripoli was finished without casualties to the greens.

Many terrorist rebels were killed as well as foreign mercenaries.

Brega is firmly under the control of the Libyan Jamahiriya. The rebels can’t head one step toward Brega.(3)
America’s Libya war is symptomatic. Aside from its resources and material wealth, demographically its size is less than metropolitan Chicago, considerably less, in fact. As a result, it should have been a military walkover but wasn’t and may not be now, given mass Libyan resistance to imperial control. With this war, is US and Europe creating more fear in less stronger regimes or giving birth to more enemies. US or Europe has no threat from Libya militarily and yet the world was made to understand that Libya was a threat or perhaps the Libyan people wanted democracy. Compared to the people of other African nations or Asia or even west, the people of Libya had better social security and living standards, with an amazing 5% unemployment rate. Gaddafi had worked best strategy to share the natural resources revenue after all expenditures with its people. Something which will never happen in a western nation.

In his book Rogue State, William Blum estimated America tried to overthrow at least 40 foreign regimes since 1945. It also exhibits another rogue characteristic, having the word’s most destructive arsenal, including various type WMDs, besides a military establishment dwarfing all others, and an out-of-control addiction to use it.

It’s also an outlaw state, trashing international law, global treaties and conventions. Choosing military solutions often as a first option, it exhibits classic sociopathic or psychotic symptoms, unable to engage other nations constructively, notably ones it doesn’t control.

As a result, it doesn’t negotiate. It demands, and when checked responds belligerently like a street bully, picking easy targets of lesser size, strength and ability to strike back.

America is a global bully, a rogue state marauder, terrorizing humanity because it can, waging permanent wars in lieu of other ways.

Imagine, America’s been at war with North Korea since June 1950. The July 1953 armistice ended hostilities, leaving a cold unresolved standoff.

Moreover, a cold war raged with Cuba for over 50 years, interrupted briefly by the failed April 1961 Bay of Pigs failure to oust Castro. He’s 85 years old and still around, a legend in his own time, surviving everything America threw at him short of war.

As a result, he’s an inspiration for other leaders to go their own way like he did even though some tried and failed.

He also deplores America’s imperial wars, very much subscribing to the maxim that there never was a good war or bad peace. America’s opposite predilection is ruinous.

Yet policy makers don’t envision or alarm themselves about pursuing unsustainable destructive policies, highlighted by attacking Libya, a small nonbelligerent state, threatening no other, eager to get along.

The injustice is glaring, especially since NATO doesn’t plan liberating Libyans. Persecution and exploitation are coming if killing and destruction end successfully, what Libyans can’t ever stop contesting to be free.

On August 17, the London Guardian quoted former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev saying:

“Stop the bombing. Stop the killing. Stop the destruction. It’s degenerated into killing people and destruction, and I think this is really defiance. It’s defiant behavior.”

Let’s go to the United Nations and discuss whether the current policy is acceptable. I say no. Poor democracy. Under the flag of democracy all kinds of things are done.”

Often, it’s lawless, ruinous, lethal, roguish, and through the barrel of a gun, not good faith efforts for peace, social justice, good will and fairness. – by Stephen Lendman(4)

“They have torn apart a country, and it wasn’t Gadafi who did it. They have set the country ablaze, and it wasn’t Gadafi who did it; no, it was precisely imperial madness and capitalism’s global crisis who did it” – Chavez

On Wednesday Venezuela’s ambassador in Libya denounced the looting of his official residence by armed men, calling the assault “a violation of Venezuelan sovereignty” by “NATO itself.” The  governments of Cuba, Ecuador, Bolivia, among other ALBA nations, denounced the violent attack as a “breach of international law,” as did Venezuela’s ruling United Socialist Party (PSUV).

 

Speaking to TeleSUR on Wednesday, Venezuelan Ambassador to Libya Afif Tajeldine explained that “a group of armed men” had shot their way in to the official residence, “began searching the house and asking for me,” before “looting all things, including the vehicles, the entire house, leaving nothing in the residence and shooting in the air as they left.”

 

“This is an act that violates international law, since this site is part of our territory, Venezuelan territory, which they must respect as such,” said the ambassador.

 

This breach of international law, affirmed Tajeldine, “was carried out by armed groups supported by NATO, leading us to consider it a violation, by NATO itself, of our sovereignty.”

 

According to NATO and western powers Gaddafi was supposed to fall in March 2011, but today 26 August 2011 and his power is still intact. Even if Gaddafi is captured or killed, there is still extended tribes loyal to Gaddafi and they will bounce back sooner or later with larger scale devastation on the occupying forces and on west. Libyan soldiers, I consider them true heroes of this war, as they have remained loyal to the regime despite weaker military strength against the much stronger western force and terrorist rebels who are backed and covered by atleast 20000 sorties in last five months. For these rebels it was just a walk in the park to take over bombarded locations in Libya. With no support from any other nation or even a strong vocal protest in UN the loyal Gaddafi soldiers have really fought a hard battle and are still resisting the modern weaponry of west.

“Independent of the internal situation in Libya,” said Chavez, “nothing justifies this outrageous act, a disregard for the world, a threat towards the entire world.”

 

NATO humanitarian mission is clearly bombing the living daylights of the civilians. Once the war is over Libya will not enter a new era of Democracy, but will be ripped apart by colonial invaders and internal tribal wars. NATO assured to restore the infrastructure and carryout wide scale developments. Oh yes, we can see the development that have been carried out in Iraq and Afghanistan in last two decades.

 

Gaddafi gave up his weapons of mass destruction program and surrendered to the West in political and economic areas in 2003, but Libya still suffered military attacks from Western countries.  Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei recently said publicly that it has proved to be a right decision for Iran not to abandon its nuclear program. Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has also said publicly that the Libya war shows it is absolutely necessary for Russia to build up its military forces and to enhance national security. The two leaders’ remarks have shown the negative effects of the war in Libya. The war has sent a strong signal to anti-West state leaders: once they become the enemies of the West, they should either completely capitulate as soon as possible, or develop sophisticated weapons to ensure their own safety. As more and more anti-West leaders preferring to the latter choice, the world is facing larger risk of re-entering a “political jungle.”

 

A negotiated settlement in Libya was deliberately avoided for months while NATO, in violation of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions 1970 and 1973, illegally pursued regime change. NATO chose sides, intervened in a civil war and morphed into the air force for the rebels, who could not have succeeded but for NATO’s attacks. The reasons for the US/NATO intervention in Libya keep changing. First it was about the potential for a massacre in Benghazi. When the massacre did not materialize and once the war against Libya was underway, the reasons for intervention changed.

 

We were reminded Libya had spent ’forty years under a tyrant.’ We were urged to remember the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Scotland, which occurred 23 years ago this December 21st. Yet almost 20 years later, on November 18, 2008 the Associated Press reported that President George Bush called Colonel Gaddafi personally “to voice his satisfaction that Libya has settled a long-standing dispute over terrorist attacks, including the bombing of a Pan Am jet over Scotland.”

 

On December 19, 2003 Libya voluntarily gave up its nuclear weapon-making capability and on January 6, 2004 ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Its relationship with the US on the mend, Libya then opened up to international investment and began the wholesale privatization of its industries, leading to massive unemployment and dissatisfaction with the state of things, particularly among younger Libyans.

 

 

I mention this not to sympathize with Colonel Gaddafi’s brutality or to minimize the great tragedy of Flight 103. But if the US had come to terms with Gaddafi’s past violence, why does the Obama Administration invoke it as justification for an attack on Libya? One conclusion could be that the reasons for the March 2011 attack were bogus.

 

Once into the war, the Administration promptly passed off nominal responsibility for the war to NATO, after beginning the war without congressional authorization. NATO became the beneficiary of US funds, US war planes, US drones, US bombs, and US intelligence assets.

 

NATO violated UNSC resolutions. The Obama Administration violated the US Constitution by bypassing Congress on the war. These are not mere academic matters. They have moved the world community from the rule of law to the rule of force and have set a precedent for NATO to become the new global-cop. Far from bringing a new level of security to the world scene, NATO has brought a new level of insecurity and unaccountability.

 

Refrences :-

(1) From the article of Glen Ford

(2) & (3) From Mathaba News an independant unbaised news agency

(4) From – Obama’s War on Humanity by Stephen Lendman

Read Full Post »

The CIA’s Libya Rebels: The Same Terrorists who Killed US, NATO Troops in Iraq

March 29, 2011

Source: By Dr. Webster G. Tarpley

http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_CIA%E2%80%99s_Libya_Rebels%3A_The_Same_Terrorists_who_Killed_US%2C_NATO_Troops_in_Iraq/13276/0/27/27/Y/M.html

“Serpents, thirst, heat, and sand … Libya alone can present a multitude of woes that it would beseem men to fly from.” Lucan, Pharsalia

Washington DC, March 24, 2011 — The current military attack on Libya has been motivated by UN Security Council resolution 1973 with the need to protect civilians. Statements by President Obama, British Prime Minister Cameron, French President Sarkozy, and other leaders have stressed the humanitarian nature of the intervention, which is said to aim at preventing a massacre of pro-democracy forces and human rights advocates by the Qaddafi regime.

But at the same time, many commentators have voiced anxiety because of the mystery which surrounds the anti-Qaddafi transitional government which emerged at the beginning of March in the city of Benghazi, located in the Cyrenaica district of north-eastern Libya. This government has already been recognized by France and Portugal as the sole legitimate representative of the Libyan people. The rebel council seems to be composed of just over 30 delegates, many of whom are enveloped in obscurity. In addition, the names of more than a dozen members of the rebel council are being kept secret, allegedly to protect them from the vengeance of Qaddafi. But there may be other reasons for the anonymity of these figures. Despite much uncertainty, the United Nations and its several key NATO countries, including the United States, have rushed forward to assist the armed forces of this rebel regime with air strikes, leading to the loss of one or two coalition aircraft and the prospect of heavier losses to come, especially if there should be an invasion. It is high time that American and European publics learned something more about this rebel regime which is supposed to represent a democratic and humanitarian alternative to Gaddafi.

The rebels are clearly not civilians, but an armed force. What kind of an armed force?

Since many of the rebel leaders are so difficult to research from afar, and since a sociological profile of the rebels cannot be done on the ground in the midst of warfare, perhaps the typical methods of social history can be called on for help. Is there a way for us to gain deeper insight into the climate of opinion which prevails in such northeastern Libyan cities as Benghazi, Tobruk, and Darnah, the main population centers of the rebellion?

Download West Point Study (pdf)

It turns out that there is, in the form of a December 2007 West Point study examining the background of foreign guerrilla fighters — jihadis or mujahedin, including suicide bombers — crossing the Syrian border into Iraq during the 2006-2007 timeframe, under the auspices of the international terrorist organization Al Qaeda. This study is based on a mass of about 600 Al Qaeda personnel files which were captured by US forces in the fall of 2007, and analyzed at West Point using a methodology which we will discuss after having presented the main findings. The resulting study¹ permits us to make important findings about the mentality and belief structures of the northeastern Libyan population that is furnishing the basis for the rebellion, permitting important conclusions about the political nature of the anti-Qaddafi revolt in these areas.

Darnah, northeast Libya: World Capital of Jihadis

The most striking finding which emerges from the West Point study is that the corridor which goes from Benghazi to Tobruk, passing through the city of Darnah (also transliterated as Derna) them represents one of the greatest concentrations of jihadi terrorists to be found anywhere in the world, and by some measures can be regarded as the leading source of suicide bombers anywhere on the planet. Darnah, with one terrorist fighter sent into Iraq to kill Americans for every 1,000 to 1,500 persons of population, emerges as suicide bomber heaven, easily surpassing the closest competitor, which was Riyad, Saudi Arabia.

According to West Point authors Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, Saudi Arabia took first place as regards absolute numbers of jihadis sent to combat the United States and other coalition members in Iraq during the time frame in question. Libya, a country less than one fourth as populous, took second place. Saudi Arabia sent 41% of the fighters. According to Felter and Fishman, “Libya was the next most common country of origin, with 18.8% (112) of the fighters listing their nationality stating they hailed from Libya.” Other much larger countries were far behind: “Syria, Yemen, and Algeria were the next most common origin countries with 8.2% (49), 8.1% (48), and 7.2% (43), respectively. Moroccans accounted for 6.1% (36) of the records and Jordanians 1.9% (11).”

This means that almost one fifth of the foreign fighters entering Iraq across the Syrian border came from Libya, a country of just over 6 million people. A higher proportion of Libyans were interested in fighting in Iraq than any other country contributing mujahedin. Felter and Fishman point out: “Almost 19 percent of the fighters in the Sinjar Records came from Libya alone. Furthermore, Libya contributed far more fighters per capita than any other nationality in the Sinjar Records, including Saudi Arabia.” (See the chart from the West Point report, page 9)

But since the Al Qaeda personnel files contain the residence or hometown of the foreign fighters in question, we can determine that the desire to travel to Iraq to kill Americans was not evenly distributed across Libya, but was highly concentrated precisely in those areas around Benghazi which are today the epicenters of the revolt against Colonel Gaddafi which the US, Britain, France, and others are so eagerly supporting.

As Daya Gamage of the Asia Tribune comments in a recent article on the West Point study, “…alarmingly for Western policymakers, most of the fighters came from eastern Libya, the center of the current uprising against Muammar el-Qaddafi. The eastern Libyan city of Darnah sent more fighters to Iraq than any other single city or town, according to the West Point report. It noted that 52 militants came to Iraq from Darnah, a city of just 80,000 people (the second-largest source of fighters was Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which has a population of more than 4 million). Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s provisional government declared by the anti-Qaddafi rebels, sent in 21 fighters, again a disproportionate number of the whole.”⁴ Obscure Darnah edged out metropolitan Riyadh by 52 fighters to 51. Qaddafi’s stronghold of Tripoli, by contrast, barely shows up in the statistics at all. (See chart from West Point report, page 12)

What explains this extraordinary concentration of anti-American fighters in Benghazi and Darnah? The answer seems related to extremist schools of theology and politics which flourished in these areas. As the West Point report notes: “Both Darnah and Benghazi have long been associated with Islamic militancy in Libya.” These areas are in theological and tribal conflict with the central government of Colonel Gaddafi, in addition to being politically opposed to him. Whether such a theological conflict is worth the deaths of still more American and European soldiers is a question which needs urgently to be answered.

 

Felter and Fishman remark that “The vast majority of Libyan fighters that included their hometown in the Sinjar Records resided in the country’s northeast, particularly the coastal cities of Darnah 60.2% (52) and Benghazi 23.9% (21). Both Darnah and Benghazi have long been associated with Islamic militancy in Libya, in particular for an uprising by Islamist organizations in the mid-1990s. The Libyan government blamed the uprising on ‘infiltrators from the Sudan and Egypt’ and one group—the Libyan Fighting Group (jama-ah al-libiyah al-muqatilah)—claimed to have Afghan veterans in its ranks. The Libyan uprisings became extraordinarily violent.”⁵

Northeastern Libya: Highest Density of Suicide Bombers

Another remarkable feature of the Libyan contribution to the war against US forces inside Iraq is the marked propensity of the northeastern Libyans to choose the role of suicide bomber as their preferred method of struggle. As the West Point study states, “Of the 112 Libyans in the Records, 54.4% (61) listed their ‘work.’ Fully 85.2% (51) of these Libyan fighters listed “suicide bomber” as their work in Iraq.”⁶ This means that the northeastern Libyans were far more apt to choose the role of suicide bomber than those from any other country: “Libyan fighters were much more likely than other nationalities to be listed as suicide bombers (85% for Libyans, 56% for all others).”⁷

The anti-Qaddafi Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Merges with al Qaeda, 2007

The specific institutional basis for the recruitment of guerrilla fighters in northeastern Libya is associated with an organization which previously called itself the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). During the course of 2007, the LIFG declared itself an official subsidiary of al Qaeda, later assuming the name of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). As a result of this 2007 merger, an increased number of guerrilla fighters arrived in Iraq from Libya. According to Felter and Fishman, “The apparent surge in Libyan recruits traveling to Iraq may be linked the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group’s (LIFG) increasingly cooperative relationship with al-Qaeda, which culminated in the LIFG officially joining al-Qaeda on November 3, 2007.”⁸ This merger is confirmed by other sources: A 2008 statement attributed to Ayman al-Zawahiri claimed that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group has joined al-Qaeda.⁹

Terrorist “Emir” Touts Key Role of Benghazi, Darnah in al Qaeda

The West Point study makes clear that the main bulwarks of the LIFG and of the later AQIM were the twin cities of Benghazi and Darnah. This is documented in a statement by Abu Layth al-Libi, the self-styled “Emir” of the LIFG, who later became a top official of al Qaeda. At the time of the 2007 merger, “Abu Layth al-Libi, LIFG’s Emir, reinforced Benghazi and Darnah’s importance to Libyan jihadis in his announcement that LIFG had joined al-Qa’ida, saying: ‘It is with the grace of God that we were hoisting the banner of jihad against this apostate regime under the leadership of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which sacrificed the elite of its sons and commanders in combating this regime whose blood was spilled on the mountains of Darnah, the streets of Benghazi, the outskirts of Tripoli, the desert of Sabha, and the sands of the beach.’”¹⁰

This 2007 merger meant that the Libyan recruits for Al Qaeda became an increasingly important part of the activity of this organization as a whole, shifting the center of gravity to some degree away from the Saudis and Egyptians who had previously been most conspicuous. As Felter and Fishman comment, “Libyan factions (primarily the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group) are increasingly important in al-Qa’ida. The Sinjar Records offer some evidence that Libyans began surging into Iraq in larger numbers beginning in May 2007. Most of the Libyan recruits came from cities in northeast Libya, an area long known for jihadi-linked militancy.”¹¹

The December 2007 West Point study concludes by formulating some policy options for the United States government. One approach, the authors suggest, would be for the United States to cooperate with existing Arab governments against the terrorists. As Felter and Fishman write, “The Syrian and Libyan governments share the United States’ concerns about violent salafi-jihadi ideology and the violence perpetrated by its adherents. These governments, like others in the Middle East, fear violence inside their borders and would much rather radical elements go to Iraq rather than cause unrest at home. U.S. and Coalition efforts to stem the flow of fighters into Iraq will be enhanced if they address the entire logistical chain that supports the movement of these individuals—beginning in their home countries — rather than just their Syrian entry points. The U.S. may be able to increase cooperation from governments to stem the flow of fighters into Iraq by addressing their concerns about domestic jihadi violence.”¹² Given the course of subsequent events, we are on firm ground in concluding that this option was not the one selected, neither in the closing years of the Bush administration nor during the first half of the Obama administration.

The West Point study also offers another, more sinister perspective. Felter and Fishman hint that it might be possible to use the former LIFG components of Al Qaeda against the government of Colonel Qaddafi in Libya, in essence creating a de facto alliance between the United States and a segment of the terrorist organization. The West Point report notes: “The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group’s unification with al-Qa’ida and its apparent decision to prioritize providing logistical support to the Islamic State of Iraq is likely controversial within the organization. It is likely that some LIFG factions still want to prioritize the fight against the Libyan regime, rather than the fight in Iraq. It may be possible to exacerbate schisms within LIFG, and between LIFG’s leaders and al-Qa’ida’s traditional Egyptian and Saudi power-base.”¹³ This suggests the US policy we see today, that of allying with the obscurantist and reactionary al Qaeda fanatics in Libya against the Nasserist modernizer Qaddafi.

Arming the Rebels: The Experience of Afghanistan

Looking back at the tragic experience of US efforts to incite the population of Afghanistan against the Soviet occupation in the years after 1979, it should be clear that the policy of the Reagan White House to arm the Afghan mujahedin with Stinger missiles and other modern weapons turned out to be highly destructive for the United States. As current Defense Secretary Robert Gates comes close to admitting in his memoirs, Al Qaeda was created during those years by the United States as a form of Arab Legion against the Soviet presence, with long-term results which have been highly lamented.

Today, it is clear that the United States is providing modern weapons for the Libyan rebels through Saudi Arabia and across the Egyptian border with the active assistance of the Egyptian army and of the newly installed pro-US Egyptian military junta.¹⁴ This is a direct violation of UN Security Council resolution 1973, which calls for a complete arms embargo on Libya. The assumption is that these weapons will be used against Gaddafi in the coming weeks. But, given the violently anti-American nature of the population of northeast Libya that is now being armed, there is no certainty that these weapons will not be soon turned against those who have provided them.

A broader problem is represented by the conduct of the future Libyan government dominated by the current rebel council with its large current majority of northeastern Islamists, or of a similar government of a future Cyrenaica rump state. To the extent that such regimes will have access to oil revenues, obvious problems of international security are posed. Gamage wonders: “If the rebellion succeeds in toppling the Qaddafi regime it will have direct access to the tens of billions of dollars that Qaddafi is believed to have squirreled away in overseas accounts during his four-decade rule.”¹⁵ Given the northeast Libyan mentality, we can imagine what such revenues might be used for.

What is al Qaeda and Why the CIA Has Used It

Al Qaeda is not a centralized organization, but rather a gaggle or congeries of fanatics, dupes, psychotics, misfits, double agents, provocateurs, mercenaries, and other elements. As noted, Al Qaeda was founded by the United States and the British during the struggle against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Many of its leaders, such as the reputed second-in-command Ayman Zawahiri and the current rising star Anwar Awlaki, are evidently double agents of MI-6 and/or the CIA. The basic belief structure of Al Qaeda is that all existing Arab and Moslem governments are illegitimate and should be destroyed, because they do not represent the caliphate which Al Qaeda asserts is described by the Koran. This means that the Al Qaeda ideology offers a ready and easy way for the Anglo-American secret intelligence agencies to attack and destabilize existing Arab and Muslim governments as part of the ceaseless need of imperialism and colonialism to loot and attack the developing nations. This is precisely what is happening in Libya today.

Al Qaeda emerged from the cultural and political milieu of the Moslem Brotherhood or Ikhwan, itself a creation of British intelligence in Egypt in the late 1920s. The US and the British used the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to oppose the successful anti-imperialist policies of Egyptian President Nasser, who scored immense victories for his country by nationalizing the Suez Canal and building the Aswan High Dam, without which modern Egypt would be simply unthinkable. The Muslim brotherhood provided an active and capable fifth column of foreign agents against Nasser, in the same way that the official website of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb is trumpeting its support for the rebellion against Colonel Qaddafi.

I have discussed the nature of Al Qaeda at some length in my recent book entitled 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism: Made in USA, and that analysis cannot be repeated here. It is enough to say that we do not need to believe in all the fantastic mythology which the United States government has spun around the name of Al Qaeda in order to recognize the basic fact that militants or patsies who spontaneously join al Qaeda are often sincerely motivated by a deep hatred of the United States and a burning desire to kill Americans, as well as Europeans. The Bush administration policy used the alleged presence of Al Qaeda as a pretext for direct military attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq. The Obama administration is now doing something different, intervening on the side of a rebellion in which Al Qaeda and its co-thinkers are heavily represented while attacking the secular authoritarian government of Colonel Gaddafi. Both of these policies are bankrupt and must be abandoned.

Rebel Leaders Jalil and Younis, Plus Most of Rebel Council are Members of the al Qaeda-linked Harabi Tribe

The result of the present inquiry is that the Libyan branch of Al Qaeda represents a continuum with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group centered in Darnah and Benghazi. The ethnic base of the Libyan Islamic fighting group is apparently to be found in the anti-Qaddafi Harabi tribe, the tribe which makes up the vast majority of the rebel council including the two dominant rebel leaders, Abdul Fatah Younis and Mustafa Abdul Jalil. The evidence thus suggests that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, the elite of the Harabi tribe, and the rebel council supported by Obama all overlap for all practical purposes. As the late Foreign Minister of Guyana Fred Wills, a real fighter against imperialism and neo-colonialism, taught me many years ago, political formations in developing countries (and not just there) are often a mask for ethnic and religious rivalries; so it is in Libya. The rebellion against Qaddafi is a toxic brew compounded of fanatical hatred of Qaddafi, Islamism, tribalism, and localism. From this point of view, Obama has foolishly chosen to take sides in a tribal war.

When Hillary Clinton went to Paris to be introduced to the Libyan rebels by French President Sarkozy, she met the US-educated Libyan opposition leader Mahmoud Jibril, already known to readers of Wikileaks document dumps as a favorite of the US.¹⁶

While Jibril might be considered presentable in Paris, the real leaders of the Libyan insurrection would appear to be Jalil and Younis, both former ministers under Qaddafi. Jalil seems to be the primus inter pares, at least for the moment: “Mustafa Abdul Jalil or Abdul-Jalil (Arabic: مصطفى عبد الجليل, also transcribed Abdul-Jelil, Abd-al-Jalil, Abdel-Jalil or Abdeljalil; and frequently but erroneously as Abud Al Jeleil) (born 1952) is a Libyan politician. He was the Minister of Justice (unofficially, the Secretary of the General People’s Committee) under Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi…. Abdul Jalil has been identified as the Chairman of the National Transitional Council based in Benghazi… although this position is contested by others in the uprising due to his past connections to Gaddafi’s regime.”¹⁷

As for Younis, he has been closely associated with Qaddafi since the 1968-9 seizure of power: “Abdul Fatah Younis (Arabic: عبد الفتاح يونس) is a senior military officer in Libya. He held the rank of General and the post of Minister of Interior, but resigned on 22 February 2011….”¹⁸

What should concern us most is that both Jalil and Younis come from the Haribi tribe, the dominant one in northeast Libya, and the one that overlaps with al Qaeda. According to Stratfor, the “…Harabi tribe is a historically powerful umbrella tribe in eastern Libya that saw their influence wane under Col. Gadhafi. The Libyan leader confiscated swaths of tribal members’ land and redistributed it to weaker and more loyal tribes…. Many of the leaders now emerging in eastern Libya hail from the Harabi tribe, including the head of the provisional government set up in Benghazi, Abdel Mustafa Jalil, and Abdel Fatah Younis, who assumed a key leadership role over the defected military ranks early in the uprising.”¹⁹ This is like a presidential ticket where both candidates are from the same state, except that Libya’s ferocious tribal rivalries make the problem infinitely worse.

The Rebel Council: Half the Names Are Kept Secret; Why?

This picture of a narrow, sectarian tribal and regional base does not improve when we look at the rebel council as a whole. According to one recent version, the rebel council is “chaired by the well-spoken former justice minister for Libya, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, [and] consists of 31 members, ostensibly representatives from across Libya, of whom many cannot be named for “security reasons”…. “The key players on the council, at least those who we know about, all hail from the north-eastern Harabi confederation of tribes. These tribes have strong affiliations with Benghazi that date back to before the 1969 revolution which brought Gaddafi to power.”²⁰ Other accounts agree about the number of representatives: “The council has 31 members; the identities of several members has not been made public to protect their own safety.”²¹ Given what we know about the extraordinary density of LIFG and all Qaeda fanatics in northeast Libya, we are authorized to wonder as to whether so many members of the council are being kept secret in order to protect them from Qaddafi, or whether the goal is to prevent them from being recognized in the west as al Qaeda terrorists or sympathizers. The latter seems to be a more accurate summary of the real state of affairs.

Names released so far include: Mustafa Abduljaleel; Ashour Hamed Bourashed of Darna city; Othman Suleiman El-Megyrahi of the Batnan area; Al Butnan of the Egypt border and Tobruk; Ahmed Abduraba Al-Abaar of Benghazi city; Fathi Mohamed Baja of Benghazi city; Abdelhafed Abdelkader Ghoga of Benghazi city; Mr. Omar El-Hariri for Military Affairs; and Dr. Mahmoud Jibril, Ibrahim El-Werfali and Dr. Ali Aziz Al-Eisawi for foreign affairs.²²

The State Department needs to interrogate these figures, starting perhaps with Ashour Hamed Bourashed, the delegate from the terrorist and suicide bomber stronghold of Darnah.

How Many al Qaeda Members, Veterans, or Sympathizers are on the Rebel Council?

Seeing as clearly as we can in the fog of war, it looks like slightly more than a dozen of the members of the rebel council have had their names officially published — in any case, not more than half of the reported 31 members. The US and European media have not taken the lead in identifying for us the names that are now known, and they above all have not called attention to the majority of the rebel council who are still lurking in the shadows of total secrecy. We must therefore demand to know how many LIFG and/or al Qaeda members, veterans, or sympathizers currently hold seats on the rebel council.

We are thus witnessing an attempt by the Harabi tribe to seize dominance over the 140 tribes of Libya. The Harabi are already practically hegemonic among the tribes of Cyrenaica. At the center of the Harabi Confederation is the Obeidat tribe, which is divided into 15 sub-tribes.²³ All of this might be of purely academic ethnographic interest, were it not for the fact of the striking overlap between the Harabi tribe and the LIFG and al Qaeda.

The Senussi Movement of Libya — Monarchist Democracy?

The political-religious tradition of northeast Libya makes this area such fertile ground for the more extreme Muslim sects and also predisposes it to monarchism rather than to the more modern forms of government favored by Qaddafi. The relevant regional tradition is that of the Senussi or Sanussi order, an anti-western Moslem sect. In Libya the Senussi order is closely associated with monarchism, since King Idris I, the ruler installed by the British in 1951 who was overthrown by Gaddafi in 1969, was also the leader of the Senussi order. The Senussi directed the rebellion against Italian colonialism in the person of Marshal Rodolfo Graziani and his army in the 1930s. Today, the rebels use the monarchist flag, and may advocate the return to the throne of one of the two pretenders to the Idris line. They are far closer to monarchism than to democracy

King Idris, Revered by the Libyan Rebels of Today

Here is the Stratfor view of King Idris and the Senussi: “King Idris came from a line of rulers of the Sanussi order, a Sufi religious order founded in 1842 in Al Bayda, that practices a conservative and austere form of Islam. The Sanussiyah represented a political force in Cyrenaica that preceded the creation of the modern state of Libya, and whose reverberations continue to be felt to this day. It is no coincidence that this region is the home of Libyan jihadism, with groups like the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). The Gadhafi family has thus been calling the current uprising an elaborate Islamist plot….”²⁴ Under the monarchy, Libya was by some estimates absolutely the poorest country in the world. Today, Libya ranks 53 on the UN Human Development Index and qualifies as the most developed country in Africa, ahead of Russia, Brazil, Ukraine, and Venezuela. Qaddafi’s stewardship has objective merits which cannot be seriously denied.

Glen Ford’s Black Agenda Report has correctly sought to show the racist and reactionary character of the Libyan insurrection. The tribes of southern Libya, known as the Fezzan, are dark skinned. The tribal underpinning of the Gaddafi regime has been an alliance of the tribes of the West, the center, and the southern Fezzan, against the Harabi and the Obeidat, who identify with the former monarchist ruling class. The Harabi and Obeidat are known to nurture a deep racist hatred against the Fezzan. This was expressed in frequent news reports from the pro-imperialist media at the beginning of the rebellion evidently inspired by Harabi accounts, according to which black people in Libya had to be treated as mercenaries working for Gaddafi — with the clear implication that they were to be exterminated. These racist inventions are still being repeated by quackademics like Dean Slaughter of the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton. And in fact, large numbers of black Africans from Chad and other countries working in Libyan have been systematically lynched and massacred by the anti-Gaddafi forces. The Obama White House, for all its empty talk of not wanting to repeat the massacre in Rwanda, has conveniently ignored this shocking story of real genocide at the hands of its new racist friends in Cyrenaica.

Against the obscurantism of the Senussi, Qaddafi has advanced the Moslem equivalent of the priesthood of all believers, arguing that no caliphate is necessary in order to discover the meaning of the Koran. He has supplemented this with a pan African perspective. Gerald A. Perreira of the Black Agenda Report writes the following about the theological division between Gaddafi and the neo-Senussi of northeast Libya, as well as other obscuranitsts: “Al Qaeda is in the Sahara on his borders and the International Union of Muslim Scholars is calling for [Qaddafi] to be tried in a court…. [Qaddafi] has questioned the Islam of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda from a Quranic/theological perspective and is one of the few political leaders equipped to do so…. Benghazi has always been at the heart of counter-revolution in Libya, fostering reactionary Islamic movements such as the Wahhabis and Salafists. It is these people who founded the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group based in Benghazi which allies itself with Al Qaeda and who have, over the years, been responsible for the assassination of leading members of the Libyan revolutionary committees.”²⁵ And what would be for example the status of women under the neo-Senussi of the Benghazi rebel council?

Al Qaeda from Demon to US ally in Libya

For those who attempt to follow the ins and outs of the CIA’s management of its various patsy organizations inside the realm of presumed Islamic terrorism, it may be useful to trace the transformation of the LIFG-AQIM from deadly enemy to close ally. This phenomenon is closely linked to the general reversal of the ideological fronts of US imperialism that marks the divide between the Bush-Cheney-neocon administrations and the current Obama-Brzezinski-International Crisis Group regime. The Bush approach was to use the alleged presence of Al Qaeda as a reason for direct military attack. The Obama method is to use Al Qaeda to overthrow independent governments, and then either Balkanize and partition the countries in question, or else use them as kamikaze puppets against larger enemies like Russia, China, or Iran. This approach implies a more or less open fraternization with terrorist groups, which was signaled in a general way in Obamas famous Cairo speech of 2009. The links of the Obama campaign to the terrorist organizations deployed by the CIA against Russia were already a matter of public record three years ago.²⁶

But such a reversal of field cannot be improvised overnight; it took several years of preparation. On July 10, 2009, The London Daily Telegraph reported that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group had split with Al Qaeda. This was when the United States had decided to de-emphasize the Iraq war, and also to prepare to use the Sunni Moslem Brotherhood and its Sunni Al Qaeda offshoot for the destabilization of the leading Arab states preparatory to turning them against Shiite Iran. Paul Cruikshank wrote at that time in the New York Daily News about one top LIFG honcho who wanted to dial back the relation to al Qaeda and the infamous Osama Bin Laden; this was “Noman Benotman, a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. While mainstream Muslim leaders have long criticized Al Qaeda, these critics have the jihadist credentials to make their criticisms bite.”²⁷ But by this time some LIFG bosses had moved up into al Qaeda: the London Daily Telegraph reported that senior Al Qaeda members Abu Yahya al-Libi and Abu Laith al-Libi were LIFG members. Around this time, Qaddafi released some LIFG fighters in an ill-advsided humanitarian gesture.

Northeast Libyan Jihadis Killing US, NATO Forces in Afghanistan Right Now

One of the fatal contradictions in the current State Department and CIA policy is that it aims at a cordial alliance with Al Qaeda killers in northeast Libya, at the very moment when the United States and NATO are mercilessly bombing the civilian northwest Pakistan in the name of a total war against Al Qaeda, and US and NATO forces are being killed by Al Qaeda guerrillas in that same Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of war. The force of this glaring contradiction causes the entire edifice of US war propaganda to collapse. The US has long since lost any basis in morality for military force.

In fact, terrorist fighters from northeast Libya may be killing US and NATO troops in Afghanistan right now, even as the US and NATO protect their home base from the Qaddafi government. According to this account, a top Al Qaeda commander in northwest Pakistan was killed by US action as recently as October 2010: “A senior al Qaeda leader who serves as al Qaeda’s ambassador to Iran, and is wanted by the US, is reported to have been killed in a Predator air strike in Pakistan’s Taliban-controlled tribal agency of North Waziristan two days ago…. [This was] Atiyah Abd al Rahman, a Libyan national who has been based in Iran and served as Osama bin Laden’s ambassador to the mullahs. Unconfirmed press reports indicate that Rahman was killed in an airstrike….”²⁸ The US State Department’s Rewards for Justice page for Atiyah Abd al Rahman notes that he was al Qaeda’s “emissary in Iran as appointed by Osama bin Ladin.” Atiyah “recruited and facilitated talks with other Islamic groups to operate under” al Qaeda and was “also a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and Ansar al Sunna.”²⁹ Rahman was ranked high enough in al Qaeda to be able to give orders to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of al Qeada in Iraq, in 2005.

Also killed in Pakistan was another apparent northeast Libyan going by the name of Khalid al Harabi, whose choice of a nom de guerre may well link him to the jihadi farm among the Harabi tribe in Cyrenaica. According to one account, “Khalid al Harabi is an alias for Khalid Habib, al Qaeda’s former military commander who was killed in a US Predator strike in October 2008.”³⁰

The Scenario Uncovered by the 1995 Shayler Affair is Operative Today

In 1995, David Shayler, an official of the British counterintelligence organization MI-5, became aware that his counterpart at the British foreign espionage organization MI-6 had paid the sum of £100,000 to an Al Qaeda affiliate in exchange for the attempt to assassinate Qaddafi. The assassination attempt did occur, and killed several innocent bystanders, but failed to eliminate the Libyan ruler. As Shayler understood the MI-6 scenario, it included the liquidation of Gaddafi, followed by the descent of Libya into chaos and tribal warfare, with a possible option for a direct seizure of power by al Qaeda itself. This situation would then provide a pretext for Britain, probably but not necessarily acting together with the United States or other countries, to invade Libya and seize control of the oil fields, probably establishing a permanent protectorate over the oil regions, the pipelines, and the coast.³¹ This remains the goal today.

Timed to coincide with the attempt to assassinate Qaddafi, MI-6 and other Western secret intelligence agencies fomented a considerable insurrection in northeast Libya, almost precisely in the same areas which are in rebellion today. Its insurrection was successfully crushed by Qaddafi’s forces by the end of 1996. The events of 2011 are simply a reprise of the imperialist attack on Libya 15 years ago, with the addition of outside intervention..

The War Against the Nation State

Today’s attack on Libya comes in the context of a broad attack on the institution of the sovereign nation state itself, as it has existed since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The United States and the British are deeply concerned by the large number of nations which are seeking to escape from Anglo-American hegemony by actively pursuing large-scale cooperation with Russia on security, with China on economic questions, and with Iran for geopolitical considerations. The CIA/MI-6 response has been a wild orgy of destabilizations, people power coups, color revolutions, and palace putsches, signaled by the document dumps by the CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks, which has targeted names of the CIA hit mist from Ben Ali to Qaddafi. The Obama strategy would have preferred an exclusive reliance and the illusion that the Arab Spring was really a matter of youthful visionary idealists gathering in the public square to praise democracy, the rule of law, and human rights. This was never the reality: the actual decisions were being made by brutal cliques of generals and top officials bribed or blackmailed by the CIA who were moving behind the scenes to oust such figures as Ben Ali or Mubarak. Whatever else Qaddafi has done, he has undoubtedly forced the CIA and NATO to drop the pleasant mask of youthful idealism and human rights, revealing a hideous visage of Predator drones, terror bombing, widespread slaughter, and colonialist arrogance underneath. Qaddafi has also ripped the mask of “Yes We Can” off Obama, revealing a cynical warmonger intent on the continuation of Bush’s infamous “Dead or Alive” and “Bring it on” policies, although by other means.

A Distant Mirror for Imperialists in Libya: Lucan’s Pharsalia

Modern imperialists eager to rush into Libya should ponder Lucan’s Pharsalia, which treats of warfare in the Libyan desert during the contest between Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great at the end of the Roman Republic. A critical passage in this Latin epic is the speech by Cato of Utica, a follower of Pompey, who urges his soldiers to undertake a suicide mission into Libya, saying: “Serpents, thirst, heat, and sand … Libya alone can present a multitude of woes that it would beseem men to fly from.” Cato goes forward, and finds “a little tomb to enclose [his] hallowed name, Libya secured the death of Cato….”³²

Let us not imitate this folly.

Investigative leads from the West Point Study: An Appeal to Scholars

The West Point study, as noted, was conducted on the basis of almost 700 Al Qaeda personnel files captured by coalition forces in Iraq.³³ The authors of the study have promised to keep available online the documentary basis of this investigation, both in the form of the raw Arabic language al Qaeda personnel files³⁴, and also of the same file cards in English translation.³⁵ Assuming that this material remains available, it might be possible for researchers and reporters, and especially those with capabilities in Arabic not possessed by the present writer, to investigate the Libyan fighters who went into Iraq with a view to determining whether any of them are family members, neighbors, or even political associates of the known members of the Benghazi rebel council or of other anti-Qaddafi forces. Such a procedure could contribute to allowing the European and American public as well as others around the world to better understand the nature of the military adventure currently unfolding in Libya by gaining a more specific knowledge of who the Libyan rebels :

Notes

1 Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, “Al Qa’ida’s Foreign Fighter in Iraq: A First Look at the Sinjar Records,” (West Point, NY: Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center, Department of Social Sciences, US Military Academy, December 2007). Cited as West Point Study.

² Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman, “Al Qa’ida’s Foreign Fighter in Iraq: A First Look at the Sinjar Records,” (West Point, NY: Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center, Department of Social Sciences, US Military Academy, December 2007). Cited as West Point Study.

³ West Point Study, pp. 8-9.

⁴ Daya Gamage, “Libyan rebellion has radical Islamist fervor: Benghazi link to Islamic militancy, U.S. Military Document Reveals,” Asian Tribune, March 17, 2011, at http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2011/03/17/libyan-rebellion-has-radical-islamist-fervor-benghazi-link-islamic-militancyus-milit

⁵ West Point Study, p. 12.

⁶ West Point Study, p. 19.

⁷ West Point Study, p. 27.

⁸ West Point Study, p. 9.

⁹http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2008/04/200861502740131239.html; http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Security/?id=1.0.2055009989;

¹⁰ West Point Study, p. 12.

¹¹ West Point Study, p. 27.

¹² West Point Study, p. 29.

¹³ West Point Study, p. 28.

¹⁴ See “Egypt Said to Arm Libya Rebels, Wall Street Journal, March 17, 2011, at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704360404576206992835270906.html; see also Robert Fisk, “America’s secret plan to arm Libya’s rebels,” Independent, Mach 7, 2011, at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/americas-secret-plan-to-arm-libyas-rebels-2234227.html

¹⁵ Gamage.

¹⁶http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12741414

¹⁷http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Abdul_Jalil

¹⁸http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Abdul_Jalil

¹⁹ Stratfor, “Libya’s Tribal Dyanmics, February 25, 2011, available at http://redstomp.org/forums/showthread.php?1109-Libya-s-Tribal-Dyanmics

²⁰ Venetia Rainey, “Who are the rebels we are fighting to protect,” The First Post, http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/76660,news-comment,news-politics,who-are-the-rebels-we-are-fighting-to-protect#ixzz1HMRIrUP9

²¹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transitional_Council

²² Statement by “Transition National Council,” Benghazi, March 5, 2011 at http://www.libyanmission-un.org/tnc.pdf; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transitional_Council

²³ Massimo Introvigne, “L’occidente alla guerra delle tribù,” La Bussola quotidiana, March 22, 2011, at http://www.cesnur.org/2011/mi-rivolte-05.html

²⁴ Stratfor, “Libya’s Tribal Dyanmics, February 25, 2011, available at http://redstomp.org/forums/showthread.php?1109-Libya-s-Tribal-Dyanmics

²⁵ Gerald A. Perreira, “Libya, Getting it Right: A Revolutionary Pan-African Perspective,” Black Agenda Report, March 2, 2011, at http://blackagendareport.com/content/libya-getting-it-right-revolutionary-pan-african-perspective

²⁶ Webster G. Tarpley, “Obama Campaign Linked To Chechen Terrorism: Grant Of Taxpayer-Funded U.S. Asylum For Chechen Terror Envoy Gave Obama Foreign Policy Guru Zbigniew Brzezinski ‘One Of The Happiest Days Of My Life,’” February 2, 2008, Obama the Postmodern Coup: The Making of a Manchurian Candidate (Joshua Treet CA: Progressive Press, April 2008), pp. 97-115, online at http://tarpley.net/2008/02/03/obama-campaign-linked-to-chechen-terrorism/

 

Read Full Post »

Libya war conspiracy

Afghanistan, Iraq and now Libya. War on terror. George Bush. George W Bush and now Obama.

Certainly the Libyan government hasn’t invited US & its allies to bomb its nation and neither have the rebels ( These rebels do not have an organized leadership to dictate terms ). We only know these rebels as Al Qaeda or foreign mercenaries trying a provoke an international attention, which only attracts the west. The initial condemnation of the Russian, Indians & Chinese have become soft and now these three nations do not oppose Allied attacks on Libya and have given a blind eye to this crises. The rest of the world has just become a spectator of the drama created by west. Its been almost 1000 years of religious bloodshed, imperialism, invasion and power which have torn apart the worlds developing nations and most nations still strive to be under the chains of western rule, directly or indirectly.The mess that the West has created in the Middle East, namely a number of rogue states (not just Israel), corrupt oil sheiks and puppets, a mosaic of CIA failures which the Islamic world has been duped, is suddenly threatened by forces that are fighting to modernize and democracy. Gaddafi’s despotic rule has no political base and is funded by all of us when we buy gasoline. Gaddafi went on one day with his checkbook to Israel to order arms and 50,000 mercenaries. Stories about deserted troop and tank brigades appear fictitious.

It is easy to see that countries like the United States, Britain and Australia are under the control of the kabbalistic associations. Any legitimate opposition to the status quo is immediately discredited by a mix of paid and unpaid disinformation agents. Those who most news achieve from the Internet are unable to distinguish and run the risk to be deceived. Add here the “researchers” who have no experience in the real world and have learned to survive in a university atmosphere where cronyism and cowardice long ago have replaced activism and originality, and the deception is complete.

The internet is full of stories about U.S. and British oil companies who try to take-off Gaddafi. First they should need to throw out BP and Halliburton. They and 300 other British and American companies control Libya since 2004. Gaddafi took power in 1969 after a military coup. He was never able to allow elections and a constitution is prohibited. The party congress of the Libyan comprises 2,700 members, chosen by the regime. In fact, Gaddafi was a Marxist, but he is flexible enough to handle his billions of oil money to buy a circle of friends.

US and its allies are embarking on yet another regime change and this is done all at the cost of their tax payers. Little less the tax payers in US and in the allied countries know that how much financial burden its going to cause on its country, while they are spending huge amounts on this war on terror. There isn’t any internet website which will show anything related to the financial situation on its country. Dont waste your time google this, cause the topics in US, UK , French or German money matters is not and cannot be studied by common man. All that is at common mans disposable is youtube and some other internet sites which will keep their curiosity rolling. The conspiracy theory followers will be happy with the stories given on internet, which are in reality only behind veils. The real intentions of the white house and their allies never get published on websites.

If US and its allies were so concerned about Democracy then I wonder why they didn’t attack North Korea or Burma or Zimbabwe or Sudan. It’s difficult to get those answers. One reason is sure, its slow and steady strategy of the west to have a sovereign world government, to get rid of all the despotic rulers and to have their command in all major economies around the world. This has nothing to do with religion. This has nothing to do with people thinking that this is some Zionist or Jewish agenda and the Jews are the ones controlling the world, no it’s not. This is just a cover, so that weak people will continue to discuss about Jews in control of the world and be busy in this anti-semitic drama. No one has been deprived of their success in the world or to become successful in the world. Today we have more Indians, Chinese, Persian gulf Arabs who are richer than the jews. The entire game is about money, about power about economic gains. Whereas the weaker and ignorant mass will be busy in the religious drama. Once Gaddafi is ousted we will have the similar situation in the peaceful Libya like how we have in Iraq or Afghanistan today. Libya will be torn to pieces, western contracts will dominate all  businesses in Libya, ethnic groups will fight against each other and Libya will never be peaceful again.

I know Libya from last 20 years and I don’t think anyone there has ever disrespected Gaddafi or even doubted his ability to run the country. The people in Libya knew that they have no rights to vote, but at least the have employment and best basic necessities provided to them by Gaddafi.

There was law & order in the country , people lived happily and in peace. Libya had the best standard of living in the African continent and the best GDP. Libya had given equal rights to woman, as compared to other Islamic countries where woman are denied of their rights. Libya according to my eye-witness experience was the best nation in Africa & Middle east.

The protest and the protesters which marked the beginning of Gaddafi downfall is surely not bred in Libya. I only hope that Libya doesn’t become like the next Iraq or Afghanistan.

Read Full Post »

Libya & Bahrain ( Similar reforms, different approach )

UN warns of ‘shocking’ abuses in Bahrain

Released on – Thursday,17 March , 2011 -14:47

The United Nations warned on Thursday of “shocking and illegal” abuses in Bahrain after a bloody crackdown on Shiite-led protesters which has alarmed the United States and infuriated the Shiite world.

Political dissidents were rounded up at gunpoint in midnight raids and police armed with shot-guns stood outside Manama’s main hospital, amid reports the authorities were beating doctors and denying treatment to the wounded.

UN rights chief Navi Pillay said any takeover by the security forces of hospitals and medical facilities was “a blatant violation of international law.” (  Source AFP )

When we read the above news section, we understand that its clear case of double standards displayed by UN and the allied forces of USA, UK & France. We are witnessing since last week continuous air strikes on Libya and many civilian lives have been lost. The Libyan Air Force is fully decimated and the Libyan dictator still vows to defend and fight back. When we look at the Libyan turmoil and the Bahrain anarchy, we can only observe that the western powers are playing double standards in the Middle East crises. Why does the West turn a blind eye against Bahrain, Iran, Yemen and Oman, where the suppression of the reformists and the protesters killed in aggression doesn’t serve a valid argument.

The violation of International Law by the Bahraini leader is given a blind eye by the west, whereas a similar kind of protest in Libya is met with military action. What is the role of USA, UK & France to attack Libya? Why will they not attack countries like Sudan, Israel, Syria, Iran, Bahrain, Oman & Yemen, where the toll of human lives much more higher than Libya. Are the western forces planning a step by step destruction of the Islamic world? Is this the crusade of our generation?

We might get very contradictory answers for this or we might not get any, but what is important to see is this aggressive imperialism which continues to haunt the modern world.  At one side the Saudis, Kuwaitis, and other GCC nations rank high on human rights and abuse and also do not share any governmental powers with common people and yet the western forces do not even raise a single question about these policies of the GCC nations.

Libya has been attacked with air strikes by USA, UK & France, now we need to see what will be the actions against Syria, Iran & Bahrain. Will the western powers strike these countries too, or will they trounce Gaddafi out of his power and replace him with a puppet ruler, who would dance to the tunes of western powers. Saudi tanks and armed personnel did march into Bahrain last week to curb the protests and to calm things in Bahrain. Then was not the same approach used in Libya in curbing the protests. Two countries and two different approach by the world. No matter what Gaddafi responds to the western air strikes, he will be ousted, as no nation in the world today could face three military powers USA, UK & France. Therefore, what Gaddafi says is given least attention as he has to go and the Libyan people will also lead into a troubled life post-Gaddafi, just like what happened in Iraq.

Which nations in the world will oppose in reality and not on media or paper against the western imperialism.

Read Full Post »

War on Libya

Libya was always on the agenda of west, even before the Iraq invasion. The western forces then, were not prepared to tackle Libya as they had extreme pressure from the Saudis and Kuwaitis to topple Saddam. The Iraqi dictator then and his team from the Ministry persuaded the Saudis & Americans not to attack Iraq. USA & Saudi never paid heed to Saddam, as his days were already numbered. Today we have a same scenerio with Libya. What surprises me is that I have not heard the Libyans ever complaint about their lifestyle of any economic problems. Although the regime controls the nation with a iron fist, yet I do not see why thats wrong?

Even countries like India or England or France , for that instance which have democracy still have large numbers of people who are unhappy with the ruling party or their corrupt governments. For example in India, you can hear every other day about millions of dollars worth of scam done by the government.

Look at Sudan, how many civilians have been killed by Bashirs regime, does west not count such atrocities under Human rights or peoples right to vote?

Look at the scene of Zimbabawe , Robert Mugabe, he is certainly more brutal and killed many more people than Saddam Hussein.

 

On March 19, ironically on the eighth anniversary of “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” a White House Office of the Press Secretary quoted Obama saying:

“Today I authorized the Armed Forces of the United States to (attack) Libya in support of an international effort to protect Libyan civilians,” he, in fact, doesn’t give a damn about. “That action has now begun,” he added, claiming military action was a last resort.

 

 

In fact, it was long-planned. All military interventions require months of preparation, including target selections, strategy, enlisting political and public support, troop deployments, and post-conflict plans.

Weeks, maybe months in advance, Special Forces, CIA agents, and UK SAS operatives were in Libya, enlisting, inciting, funding, and arming so-called anti-Gaddafi opposition forces, ahead of Western aggression for imperial control. More on it below.

A March 19 Department of Defense (DOD) Armed Forces Press Service release announced America’s led “Operation Odyssey Dawn,” saying:

“Coalition (of the willing) forces launched “Operation Odyssey Dawn” today to enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1973 to protect the Libyan people from the country’s ruler….Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people.”

False! In fact, Washington-led naked aggression was launched to replace one despot with another, perhaps assassinate Gaddafi, his sons and top officials, colonize Libya, control its oil, gas and other resources, exploit its people, private state industries under Western (mainly US) control, establish new Pentagon bases, use them for greater regional dominance, perhaps balkanize the country like Yugoslavia and Iraq, and prevent any democratic spark from emerging.

According to DODspeak, Libya is being attacked, its people killed, civilian targets destroyed, and a humanitarian disaster created to save it. In other words, “destroying the village to save it” on a nationwide scale like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Southeast Asia in the 1960s and 70s, and Korea in the 1950s since WW II alone. Besides numerous proxy wars in Central America, Africa and elsewhere. Wherever America shows up, blood spills followed by horrific human suffering, what Libyans can now expect.

Military and government targets include:

• command-and-control centers;
• air defense systems;
• Gaddafi, his sons and senior officials;
• communications systems;
• government buildings and other facilities; and
• military air fields, tanks, artillery, other weapons, munitions, fuel depots, mobile and other targets.

About 25 US, UK, French, Canadian and Italian ships are involved, 11 from America, including three nuclear submarines. The Pentagon is providing command, control and logistics support. Air and surface-launched munitions are being used, including against Tripoli, the capital and Gaddafi stronghold.

Moreover, invasion and perhaps occupation may follow, despite official denials.

Either way, widespread death and destruction is likely. Surgical war is an oxymoron. Expect considerable “collateral damage,” the Orwellian designation for war crimes against noncombatants and civilian targets.

In his 1992 book titled, “Beyond Hypocrisy,” Edward Herman referred to “nuclear chicken analysis,” defining “collateral casualties” as “civilians killed as a regrettable ‘spillover effect’ of a nuclear attack on a military target’ more generally, allegedly unintended casualties” of any type attack.

In other words, “inadvertent and tragic errors” that, in fact, constitute wanton murder and destruction of schools, hospitals, vital infrastructure and other non-military targets.

Pack Journalism Promotes War

A previous article explained how it enlists public support for imperial war, accessed through the following link:

http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/9211-promoting-war-on-libya.html

Western media, including BBC and Al Jazeera incite it, no matter how lawless, mindless, destructive and counterproductive. Smell it. It arrived again because inflammatory journalism stoked reasons to attack. As a result, America, Britain and France primarily readied strikes. Ground and submarine-launced cruise missiles inflicted widespread destruction. In addition, French jets struck “targets of opportunity,” preceded by exaggerated/unverified/inflammatory reports like the following:

On March 19, New York Times writers David Kirkpatrick and Elisabeth Busmiller headlined, “Reports Say Attacks by Regime Against Rebels Continue,” saying:

Unverified “(r)eports indicated that Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s forces were continuing to press their attacks despite warnings that such moves would provoke military action.”

On March 19, Financial Times writer Tobias Buck headlined, “Gaddafi launches assault on Benghazi,” saying:

Forces loyal to Gaddafi attacked “in violation of the regime’s promise of a ceasefire.”

Libyan state TV channel, Al Jamahiriya, reported it differently, saying “the people of Benghazi have risen up against the rebels and raised the flag of Libya over the government building in the middle of the city.”

On March 19, New York Times writers Steven Erlanger and David Kirkpatrick headlined “Allies Open Push in Libya to Block Qaddafi Assaults,” saying:

“American, European and Arab leaders began the largest international intervention” since 2003 against Iraq, omitting the illegality of both aggressions.

On March 19, New York Times writers David Kirkpatrich and Elisabeth Musmiller headlined, “France Sends Military Flights Over Libya,” saying:

Flying reconnaissance missions, it’s “the first sign” of premeditated war, launching new hostilities against a war-torn region, without explanation why.

On March 19, Times writers Steven Erlanger and David Kirkpatrick headlined, “Allies Open Push in Libya to Block Qaddafi Assaults,” saying:

Hostilities began to stop “Qaddafi’s war on the Libyan opposition,” after a no-fly zone was established.

As a result, war arrived preemptively. French President Sarkozy said it’s to stop Gaddafi’s “murderous madness,” no matter that he responded to violence. He didn’t instigate it. So would Sarkozy, Obama or any leader against armed insurrection.

Love or hate him, Gaddafi said:

“Libya is not yours. Libya is for all Libyans. This is injustice, it is clear aggression, and it is uncalculated risk for its consequences on the Mediterranean and Europe. You will regret it if you take a step toward intervening in our internal affairs.”

Hours earlier, he pledged a ceasefire. Conflicting reports disagree if he honored it. Is he or Western intervention stoking violence? US media reports point fingers one way.

Washington, Britain, France, other NATO allies, and complicit Arab States back armed anti-Gaddafi insurrection. They’re promoting it, inciting it, funding it, arming it, with clear imperial aims. A previous article explained, accessed through the following link:

http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/9399-un-war-resolution-on-libya.html

On March 19, ahead of intervention, Al Jazeera headlined, “Gaddafi forces encroaching on Benghazi,” saying:

Gaddafi unleashed “a fresh act of defiance even as the United States and its allies prepared to launch military attacks on Libya.”

Unverified “(r)eports from Libya say pro-government forces have entered the western outskirts of the opposition stronghold of Benghazi, with the city also coming under attack from the coast and the south.”

Unnamed “(w)itnesses….said they heard large explosions….Government troops reportedly bombed the southern Benghazi suburb of Goreshi among other places.”

No verification was given, except to quote Mustafa Abdel Jalil, opposition National Libyan Council leader. More on him below. Al Jazeera’s Tony Birtley reported “a lot of jittery people…a lot of activity and a lot of firing going on.”

In contrast, Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim told the BBC that “the ceasefire is real, credible and solid. We are willing to receive (international and NGO) observers as soon as possible.” He insisted no air strikes were launched.

Hours later Al Jazeera headlined, “Airstrikes begin on Libya targets,” saying:

“French warplanes hit four tanks….on a day when opposition fighters in (Benghazi) reported coming under constant artillery and mortar fire.” Expect sustained strikes to follow.

Al Jazeera and other media reports don’t explain that  “opposition” officials from organizations like the National Libyan Council and National Front for the Salvation of Libya have close Western ties, pretending they’re credible. More about them below.

Headquartered in Qatar, moreover, Al Jazeera noticeably abstains from criticizing its government, now part of Washington’s anti-Gaddafi coalition-of-the-willing, complicit in illegal aggression.

On March 18, Obama stopped short of declaring war, announcing “all necessary measures” against Gaddafi without full compliance with UN Resolution terms, including an immediate ceasefire, withdrawing his forces, reestablishing essential services to all parts of the country, and letting in “humanitarian assistance,” including foreign imperial forces opposed to his leadership.

In other words, impossible terms to accept to be followed by others likely demanding he step down, permit balkanization, predatory Western investment, US bases, and free exploitation of his resources and people. Imagine comparable demands made on America – non-negtiable to be followed by military action for non-compliance.

On March 18, NATO Secretary-General Anders Rogh Rasmussen signaled war, saying the alliance was “completing its planning to be ready to take appropriate action in support of the UN resolution as part of the broad international effort.”

Launched the next day, the resources of another resource-rich Arab state will be divided among Western belligerents, to benefit Libyans, they claim.

On March 20, New York Times writers David Kirkpatrick, Steven Erlanger and Elisabeth Busmiller headlined, “Qaddafi Pledges ‘Long War’ as Allies Pursue Air Assault,” saying:

“On Sunday, American (stealth) B-2 bombers were reported to have struck a major Libyan airfield,” following initial attacks against Libya’s air defense systems, “missile, radar and communications centers around Tripoli,” Misurata and Surt.

Reuters said “US fighter planes backed by electronic warfare aircraft” attacked Gaddafi’s ground troops and air defenses. A Pentagon statement stated:

“US Navy Growlers provided electronic warfare support over Libya while AV-8B Harriers from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit conducted strikes….”

Parliamentary secretary Muhammad Zweid said attacks “caused some real harm against civilians and buildings.” According to an unnamed US official, Libya’s air defenses are now “severely disabled.”

As of Sunday morning, visible destruction also included 14 tanks, 20 armored personnel carriers, two or more trucks, rocket launchers, dozens of pick-ups, and exploding munitions. Ahead of cruise missile attacks, France initiated reconnaissance flights and aggression.

On March 19, Middle East/Central Asian analyst Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya’s Global Research.ca article headlined, “Breaking News: Libyan Hospitals Attacked. Libyan Source: Three French Jets Downed,” saying:

Regime change-planned naked aggression was launched. “The war criminals are back at it again,” Washington, of course, in the lead. On March 19, “sources in Libya have reported that three medical facilities were bombarded. Two were hospitals and one a medical clinic. These were civilian facilities.”

Targets attacked included Al-Tajura and Saladin hospitals as well as a clinic near Tripoli, unrelated to military necessity, distant from combat areas. Moreover, civilian air facilities were struck as well as “all Libyan military bases” – air, naval and ground. In addition, “a vast naval blockade around Libya has now been imposed,” America the lead belligerent.

Further, Libyan sources report “two French jets were also shot down….near Janzour” plus another “near Anjile.” Washington and co-belligerents “are creating a real humanitarian disaster,” waging war for peace, killing civilians to save them, and destroying Libya by “humanitarian intervention.”

Moreover, Washington enlisted Egypt and Saudi Arabia to supply “opposition forces” with weapons, in violation of Resolution 1973 prohibiting any sent. Of course, international and US law forbid aggressive war, but that never deterred imperial America from preemptively attacking, invading, occupying and colonizing nations illegally, Libya its latest target.

Libya’s So-Called “Opposition”

Included are the National Front for the Salvation of Libya, its officials with ties to the CIA and Saudi Arabia. Also, Muhammad as-Senussi, Libya’s so-called heir to the Senussi Crown, concerned only for his own self-interest.

Central is the National Libyan Council (NLC), announced on February 26, established officially on March 5, led by former Libyan Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, a Western-allied opportunist.

NLC is an umbrella group of local so-called opposition leaders headquartered in Benghazi. Bogusly, it claims to represent all Libyans. Abdel-Jalil calls it a “transitional government” ahead of future elections after Gaddafi is deposed.

At the same time, Abdel-Hafidh Ghoga, a Benghazi lawyer, refuted his leadership, calling himself NLC’s official spokesman. Both men, however, have similar aspirations, including controlling Libya by ousting Gaddafi.

As of now, Abdel-Jalil remains NLC’s official head, Ghoga its spokesman, and Omar El-Hariri in charge of military operations. General Abdel Fattah Younis may be another key member, his status, however, not confirmed. In total, NLC has about 30 members. Most aren’t named. Two known include, Mahmoud Jebril and Ali al-Essawi, former Libyan ambassador to India in charge of foreign affairs.

On March 5, Reuters headlined, “Rebel National Libya Council sets up (a three-member) crisis committee,” saying:

In charge of military and foreign affairs, members include Omar El-Hariri, Ali al-Essawi, and Mahmoud Jebril as leader.

Western Hypocrisy – Denouncing Violence While Backing It

At Obama’s behest, about 1,000 Saudi troops invaded Bahrain guns blazing, attacking peaceful protesters, arresting opposition leaders and activists, occupying the country, denying wounded men and women medical treatment, and imposing police state control in support of the hated monarchy.

Not an angry Western demand was heard to stop hostilities and leave. Nor against similar Egyptian army attacks or on civilians in Tunisia, Jordan, Algeria, Oman, Iraq, and Yemen, let alone daily against Palestinians.

On March 18, in fact, dozens of Yemenese were killed, scores more wounded in Sanaa, the capital, when security forces attacked thousands, demanding President Ali Abdullah Saleh step down.

Ally turned bete noire Gaddafi was targeted for removal. In contrast, Saleh is supported because of Yemen’s strategic location near the Horn of Africa on Saudi Arabia’s southern border, the Red Sea, its Bab el-Mandeb strait (a key chokepoint separating Yemen from Eritrea through which three million barrels of oil pass daily), and the Gulf of Aden connection to the Indian Ocean.

Instead of denouncing his brutality, Obama endorsed it, calling on “all sides (to pursue) a peaceful, orderly and democratic path to a stronger and more prosperous nation.”

Friday’s massacre was the bloodiest since resistance erupted in mid-February. Security forces and plainclothes police opened fire on demonstrators, shooting to kill, hitting some in the back of the head as they fled. Afterward, Saleh imposed a state of emergency and nationwide curfew.

Demonstrations, nonetheless, persist, Yemenese wanting his 32-year dictatorship ended. Achieving it, however, entails overcoming Washington’s imperial grip on regional client states, all run by favored despots.

A Final Comment

On March 19, Professor As’ad AbuKhalil’s Angry Arab.com headlined, “Bush Doctrine revised: Obama puts his stamp,” saying:

“Western/Saudi/Qarari military intervention in Libya sets a dangerous precedent.” Under Bush, ousting regimes for democracy “was a bloody farce….” Obama’s model may be installing puppets “without having ‘boots on the ground,’ ” but don’t discount them. He expanded Bush’s Afghan war, began his own in Pakistan as well as in Somalia, Yemen and Bahrain, backing favored despots besides the Saudi monarchy.

AbuKhalil calls NLC’s Abdel-Jalil “a useful idiot.” Moreover, “Western enthusiasm for (Libyan) intervention” was never properly explained beyond nonsensical platitudes about “humanitarian intervention” to protect civilians.

In contrast, “why (didn’t) the hundreds of deaths in Egypt or Tunisia….warrant” similar outrage, let alone Israel’s Cast Lead, occupation and daily aggression against defenseless Palestinians.

Intervening militarily is Libya “is far more dangerous: it is intended to legitimize the return of colonial powers, (and) abort democratic uprisings all over the region. Bahrain (Yemen and Saudi Arabia) of today (are) the vision for Libya for tomorrow,” Western-dominated, of course.

Will it work? Love or hate Gaddafi, Libyans know what Iraqis, Afghans and Palestinians endure. Moreover, its society is fractious, divided by tribal loyalties, suspicious of Western intervention, and long-governed locally as well as nationally.

Against them is America’s military might under leaders not shy about using it. As a result, Libyans are experiencing firsthand what’s ahead under Western control, what makes Iraqis yearn for Saddam, almost saintly compared to Washington.

After I watched a number of news shows about Libya and saw that very few of them were trying to show an objective outlook on Gadhafi or on Libya, I decided that another perspective really needed to be presented to the American people. I have decided to write on the information presented to me and let the readers of this article make their own judgment on the information presented.

First of all, very few good things have been presented on Col. Gadhafi. I would like to mention some of the things that have taken place in Libya since he overthrew the monarchy in 1969 in a popular revolution against the US supported King.

Some aspects of Libyan progress since the downfall of the monarchy in 1969:

1. Literacy rates have risen from 10% of the nation to around 90% of the population. (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_literacy_rate_in_Libya)
2. Women have the right to go to school and hold down a job.
3. The life expectancy of Libyans has risen by twenty years and the infant mortality rate has dropped dramatically.
4. Libya had the highest Human Development Index ranking in Africa. This is a U.N. measurement of life expectancy, educational attainment and adjusted real income.  (http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/)
5. Most basic necessities: food, housing, fuel, healthcare and education were either heavily subsidized or became entirely free. Subsidies were considered the most effective way to redistribute the national wealth.
6. Libya had a lower incarceration rate than the Czech Republic (or the United States). Libya ranked 61^st in the world while the US has been number one for years.
7. Libya has the third highest GDP on the African continent, South Africa has the highest, Algeria is second.(http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/)

Who is behind the insurgency in Libya?

This is the question that most people following the situation there would like to know. The details are far from clear. There are more questions than answers. One question in particular seems to be elusive, and that is why does the United States take such an active interest in a nation that has less than 6.5 million people? Egypt by comparison (with a population of almost 79 million) was a resolute ally that had a peace agreement with our other ally Israel and controlled the Suez Canal, the oil gateway into the Middle East. Why does Libya provoke such a response like the one Secretary of State Hillary Clinton articulated from the Middle-East yesterday when she said “all of our options regarding actions towards Libya are on the table” (This is euphemism for military options). Yesterday President Obama made the statement that Gadhafi’s time was up and that he should resign. This is a much harder stance than the one the United States took towards Mubarak in Egypt.

The primary opposition group most widely quoted is the National Front for the Salvation of Libya. According to Wikipedia:

“NFSL was based in Sudan until 1985 when the regime of Colonel Nimeiry fell. It opposed military and dictatorial rule in Libya, and called for a democratic government with constitutional guarantees, free elections, a free press, and separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. NFSL launched a wide campaign to topple Gaddafi in Libya, establishing a short-wave radio station, a commando military training camp and also published a bi-monthly newsletter, Al Inqadh (Salvation). According to various sources, Saudi Arabia and the United States Central Intelligence Agency had supported the NFSL.”

The facts are that the United States has considered Gadhafi an enemy of the U.S. for well over 35 years. The NFSL now operates out of Virginia. According to Sara Flounders, writing for Global Research:

“The U.S. carried out numerous assassination and coup attempts against the Gadhafi regime and financed armed opposition groups, such as the NFSL. Some U.S. attacks were blatant and open. For example, without warning 66 U.S. jets bombed the Libyan capital of Tripoli and its second-largest city, Benghazi, on April 15, 1986. Gadhafi’s home was bombed and his infant daughter killed in the attack, along with hundreds of others.”

Looking at the situation in Libya now, according to past history, the United States is not behaving in any way that could be described as anything new. She also states that:

“Even if Gadhafi were as quiet and austere as a monk and as careful as a diplomat, as president of an oil-rich, previously underdeveloped African country he still would have been hated, ridiculed and demonized by U.S. imperialism if he resisted U.S. corporate domination. That was his real crime and for that he has never been forgiven.”

As Americans, what can we do to stop American involvement in the affairs of Libya, A country we have been engaged against for almost 40 years?

It is clear from the outset that it is our political establishment and not our military that are calling for interference in another nation’s internal affairs. The Secretary of defense, Robert Gates has warned that a No-Fly Zone begins with a military attack on Libya’s air defense facilities.

“Let’s just call a spade a spade. A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya. That’s the way you do a no-fly zone. And then you can fly planes around the country and not worry about our guys being shot down.”

That is calling a spade a spade indeed. We need people like Gates to stop another war being waged against another nation that has not attacked us. Once the military option is used in any situation, it is hard to control. We have enough debt to deal with and even without intervention in Libya we spend 53% of our total Federal spending on defense (defense, really?) Politicians like John Kerry are calling for a no fly zone in order to stop Gadhafi from bombing his people.  According to the Associated Press, “Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that despite media reports of Libyan aircraft attacking rebel areas, the Pentagon had not confirmed any air attacks.”

How often are we going to allow the American military to act as the world’s policemen? In the long run, we stand to gain nothing from interfering in the politics of Libya. This will only turn out to be another in a long list of military attacks on sovereign nations. The truth of the matter is that we would not be thinking of acting militarily against Libya if they did not sit on oil reserves estimated at over 40 billion barrels of high-quality crude. If Russia or China launched military operations against Libya we would be screaming at the top of our lungs.

The American people need to see this as what it is, and that is just another attempt by the United States to secure resources by force. We are already fighting a war in Afghanistan in order to stabilize the country so that we can build the Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indian pipeline (T.A.P.I.). Our attempt to control the oilfields of Iraq has yielded no significant gains for the U.S. Sending America’s military to Libya will be a grave mistake. Obama’s entire presidency will be gauged by what we do in Libya and other potential trouble spots in the resurgent Middle-East. I don’t want to be writing about what I wrote today years from now.

Resources:

http://www.medialens.org/articles/the_articles/articles_2002/rk_secret_war.html
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/Test-CIA/LIBYA
http://empirestrikesblack.com/2011/02/libya-the-rest-of-the-story/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23472
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/24-02-2011/117000-libya_surface-0/#
http://davidrothscum.blogspot.com/2011/02/world-cheers-as-cia-plunges-libya-into.htm

Read Full Post »