A victory for the people of Libya? Ten myths of the war against Libya


A victory for the people of Libya? Ten myths of the war against Libya

By:  Maximilian C. FORTE

1.  Genocide
2.  Gaddafi is “bombing his own people”
3.  Benghazi Save
4.  African mercenaries
5. in May. fueled by Viagra mass rape
6.  Responsibility to Protect (R2P)
7.  Gaddafi – the Devil
8.  Freedom Fighters – Angels [or rebels Santos]
9.  victory for the Libyan people
10.  defeat for “the left”

Since Colonel Gaddafi has lost his military control in the war against NATO and the insurgents or rebels or new regime, numerous talking heads have taken  to celebrating this war as a “success”

They believe that this is a  “victory of the Libyan people” and we should all be celebrating. Others proclaim  victory for the “responsibility to protect,” humanitarian interventionism, “and condemn the” anti-imperialist left. “

Some who claim to be “revolutionaries,” or believe they support the “Arab revolution,” somehow find it possible to sideline  NATO’s role in the war, instead extolling the democratic virtues of the insurgents, glorifying his martyrdom, and expanding their role until everything  else is pushed from view. I wish to dissent from this circle of acclamation, and remind readers of  the role of fabrications ideologically motivated “truth”  that were used to justify, enable, enhance, and motivate the war against Libya-and to emphasize how damaging the practical effects of those myths have been to the Libyans, and all those who favored peaceful, non-militarist solutions.

These ten myths are some of the most repeated claims  by the insurgents, and / or by NATO, European leaders, the Obama administration, the mainstream media, and even the so-called “International Criminal Court”, the main actors speaking in war against Libya. In turn, we look at some of the reasons why these claims are better seen as imperial folklore, as the myths of the broader support of all myths-that this war is a “humanitarian intervention,” designed for ” protect civilians. “

Again, the importance of  these myths lies in their wide propagation, with little doubt, and  the lethal effect. Moreover, can severely distort the ideals of human rights and their invocation of the future, thus helping the continued militarization of Western culture and society.

1. Genocide.

Just a few days after street protests began on February 21 very quick to defect  Libyan deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Ibrahim Dabbashi,  said  :

“We are expecting a real genocide in Tripoli planes still bringing mercenaries to the airports..”  This is excellent: a myth that is composed of myths.  With that statement was linked  three key myths together  -  the role of   airports   (of Hence the need for that gateway drug of military intervention: the no-fly zone), the role of ”  mercenaries  ” (meaning, simply, black people), and  the threat of ”  genocide (geared toward language of the UN doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect). As goofy and totally unfounded assertion that era,  he was intelligent, improvising three horrible myths, one of them grounded in racist discourse and practice that endures to the present, with new atrocities reported against black immigrants in Libya and Africa on a daily basis. He was not alone in making these claims.

Among others like him,   Soliman Bouchuiguir, president of the Libyan League for Human Rights  , told Reuters on March 14 that if Gaddafi’s forces reached Benghazi, “there will be a suite of royal blood, a slaughter as we saw in Rwanda. “ That’s not the only time he remembered about Rwanda. Here was Lt. General Roméo Dallaire, the much  worshiped Canadian force commander of the UN peacekeeping  mission for Rwanda in 1994, currently an appointed senator in the Canadian Parliament and co-director of the project will intervene in Concordia University. Dallaire, in a race to judgment dizzying speed,  not only made ​​repeated references to Rwanda when trying to explain Libya, he  spoke of Gaddafi   as “employing genocidal threats to ‘cleanse Libya  house by house. ‘”This is a If it was taken selective attention to Gaddafi’s rhetorical excesses too seriously, when on other occasions, the powers that be rather quick to dismiss it:  U.S. State Department spokesman,   Mark Toner   scared Gaddafi alleged  threats Europe,  saying that Gaddafi is “someone who has given to overblown rhetoric”.

How very calm, by contrast, as very convenient, because on February 23,   President Obama said   he had instructed his  administration to reach a “choice” to take against Gaddafi.

But  “genocide” has a well established   international legal definition, as seen repeatedly in the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, where  genocide involves the persecution of a “one national, ethnical, racial or religious group “

Not all violence is “genocidal.”  domestic violence  is not genocide. Genocide is not just “lots of violence”  nor violence  against undifferentiated civilians. How much Dabbashi, Dallaire, and others do not was to identify  the group of national, ethnic, racial or religious persecution, and how they differ in terms of the alleged perpetrators of genocide.  They really should know better   (and do), one as UN ambassador and the other as a more exalted and lecturer on genocide expert. This suggests that myth-making was either deliberate, or founded on prejudice.

What foreign military intervention did, however, was to enable the actual genocidal violence that has been routinely sidelined until very recently:  the horrific violence against African migrants and black Libyans  , identified solely on the basis of their skin color .That has carried out  unhindered, without apology  , and until recently,  without much notice  . Indeed,   the media   even collaborates  , rapid to assert without evidence that any captured or dead black man must be a “mercenary”. This is  the genocide that the white, Western world, and those who dominate the “conversation” about Libya, have missed (and not by accident).

Two. Gaddafi is “bombing his own people”.

We must remember that one of the reasons why early in rushing to impose  no-fly zone was to  prevent  Gaddafi using his air force  to bomb “his own people”, a distinct phrasing that echoes what proven in  the demonization of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

On February 21, when the first alarmist  “warnings” about “genocidewere made ​​by the Libyan opposition, both   Al Jazeera   and the   BBC   claimed that Gaddafi had deployed his  air force against protesters, as the BBC “reported “: “Witnesses say warplanes have fired on protesters in the city.” However, on March 1, in a   press conference at the Pentagon  , when asked: ”  Did you see any evidence that he [Gaddafi] actually has fired on his own people from the air?  There were reports of him, but do you have independent confirmation? If so, to what extent? “answered U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, ”  We have seen the press reports, but we have no confirmation of that. ” Backing him up was Admiral Mullen: “That is correct.  we ‘ve seen no confirmation whatsoever. “

In fact, claims that Gaddafi also used  helicopters against unarmed protesters  are   totally unfounded, a pure invention based on false claims.  This is important since it was Gaddafi’s domination of Libyan air space that  foreign interventionists wanted to nullify, and therefore myths of atrocities perpetrated in the air took on added value of providing a starting point for  foreign military intervention  that went far beyond any mandate  to “protect civilians”.

David Kirkpatrick of   The New York Times  , as early as   March 21   confirmed that, “the rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda, claiming that there are no battlefield victories, asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Qaddafi forces, and making highly exaggerated claims of his barbaric behavior “. The “so inflated claims” are what became part of the  folklore of the imperial environment events in Libya,  that suited Western intervention. Rarely did the Benghazi-based question journalistic crowd or contradict their hosts.

Three. Save Benghazi.

This article is being written as the Libyan opposition forces march on Sirte and Sabha, the two last remaining strongholds of the Gaddafi government, with ominous  warnings to the population to be delivered, or otherwise. Apparently,  Benghazi  became somewhat of a  “holy city”  in international discourse  dominated by leaders of the European Union and NATO. 

Benghazi was the  only city on earth that could not touch. It was like a sacred place.  Tripoli?   Sirte?   Sabha? These can be sacrificed, as we all look on, without a hint of protest from any of the existing powers-that, even as   the first reports   of how the opposition has slaughtered people in Tripoli. So back to the  Benghazi myth.

If we wait another day, “said Barack Obama  in his  March 28 address  , Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte,  could suffer a slaughter  that have affected the region and stained the conscience of the world. “

In a   joint letter,  Obama with Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy,  said:. “By responding immediately, our countries advancing Gaddafi forces stopped the bloodbath he had promised to inflict on the citizens of the besieged city of Benghazi has been prevented. Tens of thousands of lives have been protected. ” Not only  French aircraft bombed  retreating column, what we saw was   a very short column   that included trucks and ambulances, and  that clearly could have neither destroyed nor occupied Benghazi.

Apart from the “exaggerated rhetoric” Gaddafi, the U.S. were quick to dismiss when it suited its purposes, it is not up to date yet you provided no evidence that programs of Benghazi would have witnessed  the loss of “tens of thousands” of lives as proclaimed by Obama.Cameron and Sarkozy  This by Professor Alan J. is best explained Kuperman in  ”  False pretense for war in Libya?  “

“The best proof that Gaddafi did not plan genocide in Benghazi is that do not occur in the other cities that were fully or partially recovered, including Zawiya, Misurata, and Ajdabiya, which together have a population greater than Benghazi ….  Gaddafi acts were far from Rwanda, Darfur, Congo, Bosnia, and other killing fields  …. Despite ubiquitous mobile phones equipped with cameras and video, there is  no graphic evidence of deliberate slaughter  …. Nor Gaddafi increasingly threatens slaughter of civilians in Benghazi,  as Obama says  .’s warning ‘mercilessly’, March 17, targeted rebels only, as reported by The New York Times, which noted that Libya’s leader promised a amnesty for those “who throw their weapons away.” Qaddafi even offered the rebels an escape route and open border to Egypt, to avoid a fight “to the bitter end.”

In a bitter irony, what evidence there is of massacres, committed by both sides, is now found in Tripoli in recent days, months  after NATO imposed its “life-saving” military measures .

Revenge killings daily reported most frequently, including   the slaughter of black Libyans and African migrants   by rebel forces. Another sad irony: in Benghazi,  which the insurgents have held for months, well after Gaddafi forces were repulsed, not even that has prevented violence: revenge killings have been reported  there too, the lowest number 6 below.

April. African mercenaries.

Patrick Cockburn   summarized the functional utility of  the myth of the “African mercenary”  and the context in which it arose: ”  Since February, the insurgents, often supported by foreign powers, said the battle was  between Gaddafi  and his family on the one hand,  and the Libyan people, on the other. Their explanation of t that large pro-Gaddafi forces was that they were all mercenaries, mostly from black Africa, whose only motive was money. “

As he notes,  black prisoners were put on display for the media (which is a violation of the Geneva Convention), but Amnesty International later found that all the prisoners had supposedly been released since  none of them were fighters, but rather were undocumented workers  from Mali, Chad and West Africa.

The myth was useful  for the opposition to insist that this was a war between “Gaddafi and the Libyan people,” as if he had no domestic support at all an absolute and colossal lie so that one might think that only children small could believe  such a fantastic story.  Myth is also  useful for cementing the intended rupture between “the new Libya” and Pan-Africanism,  realigning Libya with  Europe and the “modern world”, which the opposition so explicitly crave.

The “African mercenary” myth, as was deadly,  racist practice, is a fact that paradoxically has been both documented and ignored it. Months ago he offered me a   comprehensive review of  the role of the media, led by   Al Jazeera, as well as planting media, in creating the African mercenary myth.

Deviations from the norm of  vilifying Sub-Saharan Africans and black Libyans  that instead documented the abuse of these civilians, were the   Los Angeles Times,   Human Rights Watch  which found  no evidence of mercenaries at all in eastern Libya (in contradiction to the claims presented as truth by   Al Arabiya   and  The Telegraph, among others such as   TIME   and  The Guardian).

In a rare departure from  the propaganda about the black mercenary  threat which Al Jazeera and its journalists helped to actively disseminate,  Al Jazeera  produced  a single report   focusing on theft, murder, and abduction of black residents  in the eastern Libya (now that  CBS  , Channel 4 , and others are noting the racism, Al Jazeera is trying to ambiguously   show some interest ). Finally, there is a growing recognition of these facts of media collaboration in the racist media defamation  of civilian deaths insurgents see FAIR: ”  NYT Points Out of the racist overtones of misinformation in Libya, which helped spread  “. 

The racist attacks and murders of African Saharan black Libyans and  continues to the present.

Patrick Cockburn   and   Kim Sengupta   speak of the recently discovered mass of “rotting bodies of 30 men, almost all black and many handcuffed, slaughtered as they lay on stretchers and even  in an ambulance in central Tripoli“.

Even while showing us   video of hundreds of bodies   in the Abu Salim hospital,  the BBC dares not highlight the fact  that most of those who are clearly black people, and even wonders about who might have killed.  This does not is a question for the anti-Gaddafi forces  interviewed by Sengupta: “Come and verify. These are blacks, Africans, hired by Gaddafi, mercenaries,” shouted Ahmed Bin Sabri, lifting the tent door to show the body of a dead patient, his gray dark red blood-stained shirt, the saline pipe running into his arm black with flies. Why had an injured man receiving treatment been executed? “

Recent reports reveal the insurgents involved in   ethnic cleansing against black Libyans in Tawergha, the insurgents calling themselves “the brigade for purging slaves, black skin,” vowing that in  the “new” Libya  to Tawergha blacks would be   excluded from health care and schooling   in nearby Misrata, from which black Libyans had already been   expelled by the insurgents.

Today,  Human Rights Watch has reported: “Dark Skin Libyans and sub-Saharan Africans face  particular risks because rebel forces and other armed groups  have often considered them  Gadhafi mercenaries from other African countries have seen.  Violent attacks and killings of these  people in areas where the National Transitional Council took control “.

Amnesty International   has also just reported on the disproportionate detention of black Africans in rebel-controlled Al-Zawiya of and the  targeting of unarmed, migrant farm workers.

Reports continue to rise   as it is being written, with other human rights groups finding evidence of  the insurgents targeting Sub-Saharan African migrant workers. As president of the African Union,   Jean Ping, recently stated. “NTC seems to confuse black people with mercenaries. All blacks are mercenaries  If you do that, it means (that)  one third of the population of Libya, which is black , is also mercenaries. they are killing people, normal workers, mistreating them. ” (For more information, see the  list of the last reports   I have collected.)

The “African mercenary” myth continues  to be one of the most vicious of all the myths, and the most racist. Even in recent days, newspapers such as the   Boston Globe  uncritically and unconditionally show  photographs of   black victims   or   black detainees   with the immediate assertion that they must be mercenaries, despite the lack of evidence.

Instead, it is usually provided with casual assertions that Gaddafi is ”  known to have “recruited Africans from other nations in the past, without even bothering to  find out if those shown in the photos are black   Libyans. The lynching of two black Libyans and sub-Saharan African migrant workers  has been continuous and has not received any expression of concern, even nominal U.S. and NATO members , nor has aroused the interest of the  so-called “International Criminal Court”.

It is no coincidence, and some that is justice for the victims, and that is all stop these heinous crimes that  clearly constitute a case of ethnic cleansing.  The media, only now, is becoming increasingly aware of the need to cover these crimes, if any overlooked for months.

May. Viagra-fueled rapes mass.

The reported crimes and human rights violations of the Gaddafi regime are awful necessary, it is not that one has to wonder  why someone would make up stories  like that of Gaddafi’s troops, with erections powered by Viagra, going on a rape spree.
Maybe it was sold, because it is the kind of story that  ”  captures the imagination of the public traumatized  “. This article was taken so seriously that some people  started writing to Pfizer to get it to stop selling Viagra to Libya, since its product was allegedly used as a weapon of war. People who otherwise should know better, set out deliberately to mislead international public opinion.
The Viagra story was first disseminated by Al Jazeera, in collaboration with its rebel partners,  favored by the Qatari regime that funds Al Jazeera. It was then  redistributed  by almost all other  major Western media  .

Luis Moreno Ocampo ***(THE RAPIST), chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, appeared before the world media to say that   there was “evidence”   that   Gaddafi distributed Viagra   to his troops in order to ”  increase the possibility of rape  “and that Gaddafi   ordered  the rape of hundreds of women. Moreno-Ocampo insisted: ”  We are receiving information that Gaddafi decided to rape  “and that”  we have information  that   there was a policy to rape  in Libya those who were against the government. ” Also exclaimed that Viagra is “like a machete,” and that ”  Viagra is a tool of massive rape. “

In a surprise to the Security Council of the UN Declaration   U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice  also asserted that Gaddafi  was supplying his troops it with Viagra to encourage mass rape.

She offered   no evidence   to support THIS claim. In fact,  U.S. military and intelligence sources flatly contradicted Rice, telling NBC News that  “there is no evidence that Libyan military forces are receiving Viagra  and participation in systematic rape against women in rebel areas.”  Rice  is a liberal interventionist who was one of those  to persuade Obama to intervene in Libya.  She used this  myth because it helped her make the case at the UN  that there was  no “moral equivalence”  between Gaddafi abuses on the rights and insurgent .

U.S. Secretary of State   Hillary Clinton  also stated  that “Gaddafi’s forces on security and other groups in the region are trying to divide the people by using  violence against women and rape as a weapon of war, and United States condemns this in the strongest possible terms. ” He added that  it was “deeply concerned”  by these reports of “large-scale violations.” (Ha, so far,  said nothing at all about racist lynchings of the rebels  .)

On June 10,  Cherif Bassiouni, who is leading an inquiry into the rights of the United Nations on the situation in Libya, suggested that  the reporting of Viagra and mass rape was part of a “  massive hysteria  “.

In fact, both sides of the war have made ​​the same accusations against each other.  Bassiouni also told the press   of a case of “a woman who claimed to have sent  70,000 questionnaires and received 60,000 responses, of which 259 reported sexual abuse “.

However, his teams  asked for those questionnaires, they  never will-”was, but she goes around the world telling everybody about it  … so now I have that information to Ocampo and Ocampo is convinced that here we have potential 259 women who have responded to the fact that they have been sexually abused, “Bassiouni said.

He also noted that “there appears to be credible that the woman was able to send  70,000 questionnaires  in March  when the postal service was not working “.

In fact, Bassiouni’s team  “uncovered only four alleged cases” of rape and sexual abuse: ”  Can we come to a conclusion that there is a systematic policy of rape in my opinion, can not we?  “. In addition to the UN,  Donatella Rovera, Amnesty International said in an interview   with French daily   Libération  , that  Amnesty had “not found cases of rape  ….

Not only  we are not all victims, but  we have not even met people who have met victims.  Regarding boxes Viagra that Gaddafi is supposed to have had distributed, which were found intact near tanks that were burned completely. “

However, this  did not stop some news manufacturers  from trying to maintain the rape claims, in modified form.

The BBC   came to add another layer of only a few days after Bassiouni humiliated the ICC and the media:  the BBC now claimed  that rape victims in  Libya “honor killings” faced. This is news to the few Libyans  I know, who  ever heard talk about honor killings in their country.

The academic literature  on Libya turns into  little or nothing  on this phenomenon in Libya.  Myth of honor crimes  serves a useful purpose for  keeping the mass rape claim on life support: it suggests that women no show and witness, for shame. Also just a few days after Bassiouni spoke,  Libyan insurgents, in collaboration with CNN, made ​​a last effort to save the rape allegations:   a cell phone with a video of the violation it was presented ., claiming that it belonged to a soldier of the government  of men appearing in the video are in civilian clothes. No evidence of Viagra.  It is  no date  on the video and we have no idea  who recorded it or where. Those with mobile phone stated that many other videos existed, but they were conveniently being destroyed to preserve the “honor” of the victims.

6. Responsibility to Protect (R2P).

Having asserted, wrongly as we saw, that Libya before the impending “genocide” at the hands of Gaddafi’s forces, it became easier for Western powers to invoke 2005 UN doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect  .

Meanwhile, it is not entirely clear at the time that  the Security Council  adopted Resolution 1973 that  the violence in Libya  had even reached the levels seen in  Egypt, Syria and Yemen.

The most common refrain against critics of the selectivity of this supposed “humanitarian interventionism” is that the fact that the West can not intervene   everywhere   does not mean it should not intervene in   Libya. Maybe … but that still does not explain  why Libya was the chosen destination. This is a critical point because   some of the first reviews of theR2P   expressed in the UN raised the issue of  selectivity, of who decides and why some crises where civilians are targeted (  eg Gaza) are essentially ignored, while others receive maximum concern, and whether R2P served as the new fig leaf for hegemonic geopolitics.

The myth  at work here is that  foreign military intervention  was guided by humanitarian concerns.  For the myth, one has to willfully ignore at least three key realities.

One  you have to ignore  the new scramble for Africa, where Chinese interests are seen as competing with the West for access to resources and political influence, something thatAFRICOM wants to challenge  .  

Gaddafi challenged AFRICOM’s intent   to establish military bases in Africa.  AFRICOM has become  directly involved   in the Libya intervention and specifically ”  Operation Odyssey Dawn  “.

Horace Campbell   argued that ”  U.S. involvement  in the bombing of Libya is becoming a public relations ploy for  AFRICOM  “and an” opportunity to give AFRICOM credibility  under the facade of the Libyan intervention “. In addition,  Gaddafi’s power  and influence on the continent had also been  increasing, through aid, investment, and   a series of projects  designed to reduce  Africa’s dependence on the West  and to challenge Western institutions multilateral by building African unity it represented a rival U.S. interests.

Secondly, you have to just ignore the  anxiety  of Western oil interests   on “Gaddafi resource nationalism  “(threatening to take back what oil companies had gained), an anxiety now clearly manifest   in the   European corporate rush   Libya  to   collect  the spoils of victory, but one has to  ignore the fear  of what Gaddafi was doing with those oil revenues in  supporting greater African economic independence,  and for history to support national liberation movements  that challenged Western hegemony.

 Thirdly, one has to also ignore the fear in Washington that the  U.S. was losing control over the course of the ”  Arab revolution  “. How can stack up these realities, and match them against ambiguous and partial  “humanitarian concerns”, then the conclusion that,   yes,   human rights is what mattered most, seems entirely implausible and unconvincing- especially with the atrocious record of NATO and the U.S. violations of human rights  in  AfghanistanIraq, and before that  Kosovo [Serbia]. The humanitarian perspective is simply neither credible  nor even minimally logical.

If  R2P  is seen as founded on  moral hypocrisy  and contradiction  -now definitively revealed-it will become much more difficult in the future to cry wolf again and expect to get a respectful hearing. This is especially the case since little in the way of diplomacy and peaceful negotiation preceded the military intervention-while Obama is   accused by some   of having been slow to react, this was if anything  a rush to war, in a rate that far surpassed by  Bush’s invasion of Iraq.

We not only know of the  African Union   about how its efforts to establish a peaceful transition were impeded, but Dennis Kucinich also reveals that received reports that  a peaceful solution is at hand, only  to be ”  scuttled by officials of the Department. “These are absolutely critical violations of the R2P doctrine, showing how those ideals could instead be used for a practice that involved  a hasty march to war, and war aimed at regime change  (  which is itself a violation of international law  ). 

That R2P served as a justifying myth that often achieved the opposite of its stated objectives, it is no longer a surprise. I’m  talking not even  here  the role of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates in bombing Libya  and aiding the insurgents, even as a copy of  the Saudi military intervention  to crush the pro-democracy protests  in Bahrain, nor of cast ugly mantle in an intervention led by consumer tastes indisputable human rights who have committed war crimes with impunity in  Kosovo [Serbia],  Iraq  and  Afghanistan.

I am taking a narrower approach, such as  the documented cases  where  NATO  even not only willfully failed to protect civilians in Libya, but deliberately and consciously attacked in a manner that constitutes  terrorism  by most definitions officers used  by Western governments.

NATO  admitted to deliberately targeting Libya’s state television,  killing three  civilian reporters, in a move condemned by international journalist federations as   a direct violation of resolution 2006 of the Security Council  which prohibits attacks against journalists.

A U.S. Apache helicopter in a repeat of the infamous crimes listed in the  Collateral Murder video  -  gunned down civilians in the central square of Zawiya,  killing the brother of the information minister among others. Taking a fairly wide of what constitutes “command and control facilities” concept  targeting NATO civilian  residential space resulting in the death of some of the  members of the Gaddafi family, including   three grandchildren .

As if to protect  the myth of “protecting civilians”  and the unconscionable contradiction of a  “war for human rights, the  mainstream media  often  kept  silent   about  civilian deaths  caused by  NATO bombings.

R2P has been invisible when it comes to civilians targeted by NATO.

As for the failure to protect civilians, so that’s actually a  international crime, have numerous reports of  NATO ships ignoring the distress calls of refugee boats in the Mediterranean fleeing Libya.

In May,   61 African refugees died  on a single vessel, despite making contact with vessels belonging to  NATO  member states.  In a repeat of the situation,   dozens died in early  August   on another vessel.

In fact,  NATO  Watch, at least   1,500 refugees fleeing Libya have died at sea   since the war began. Were mostly  sub-Saharan Africans  , and they died in multiples of the death toll suffered  by Benghazi during the protests. R2P was utterly absent for these people.

NATO  has developed  a peculiar  terminological twist for Libya, designed to  absolve the rebels of any role  in the commission of  crimes  against civilians, and abdicating its responsibility to protect call.

Throughout the war,  spokespersons for NATO and the governments of the U.S. and Europe  always portrayed all actions of the Gaddafi forces as “threatening civilians,” even when in either defensive actions, or combat against armed opponents.

For example, this week  the NATO spokesperson, Roland Lavoie  , “appeared to struggle to explain how  NATO strikes were protecting civilians  at this stage in the conflict. Asked about  NATO’s assertion that hit 22 armed vehicles near Sirte on Monday,   was unable to say how the vehicles were threatening civilians, or whether they were in motion or parked. “

By  protecting the rebels, to the same extent that spoke of protecting civilians, it is clear that  NATO intended  to see Gaddafi’s armed opponents as mere civilians.

Interestingly, in  Afghanistan, where  NATO and the U.S.  fund, train and armed  that Karzai regime in attacking “his own people”  (as they do in  Pakistan), the armed opponents are labeled “terrorists” or “insurgents”-even if most of them are civilians who have never served in an army of official recognition. They are insurgents in Afghanistan, and their deaths at the hands of  NATO  are listed separately counts of civilian casualties. By  magic, in Libya, they are all “civilians”. In response to the announcement of  the UN Security Council  voting for military intervention, a volunteer translator for Western reporters in Tripoli made   ​​this key observation  : “? Civilians holding guns, and want to protect it is a joke .  We are civilians. What about us? “

NATO  has been a shield for the insurgents in Libya  to victimize unarmed civilians  in areas they came to occupy. There was no hint of any “responsibility to protect” in these cases.  NATO helped the rebels  in the  famine of Tripoli   of supplies, subjecting its civilian population  to a site that deprived  those of  water, food, medicine and fuel.

When Gaddafi was accused of doing this to   Misrata, the international  media  were quick to cite  this as a war crime.

Save Misrata, kill Tripoli  -whatever you want to label as “logic”  humanitarian   is not an acceptable option. Leaving aside the documented crimes by the insurgents against black Libyans and African migrant workers, the insurgents were also found by   Human Rights Watch  to have engaged in “looting, arson, and abuse of civilians in [four] people recently captured in western Libya. “

In Benghazi, which the insurgents have held for months now, revenge killings have been reported by  The New York Times   as late as May this year, and by   Amnesty International  in late June and the judgment of the Board of the National Transitional insurgents. Responsibility to Protect?  was now sounds like something deserving wild mockery.

7. Gaddafi, the Devil.

Depending on your perspective, either  Gaddafi is a heroic revolutionary, and thus  the demonization by the West is extreme, or Gaddafi is a very bad man, in which case the demonization is unnecessary and absurd.

The myth is that the history of power Gaddafi was marked by atrocity, only  that he is completely evil, without any redeeming qualities, and anyone accused of  being a “follower of Gaddafi”  must somehow  feel more ashamed  than those who  openly support NATO.

This is binary absolutism  at its worst, virtually any permission made ​​regarding the possibility that some may not support Gaddafi, the insurgents, nor NATO. Everyone was to be forced into one of these fields,  no exceptions allowed.  The result was a phony debate, dominated by fanatics of either side. lost in the discussion, recognition of the obvious: however much Gaddafi had been “in bed” with the West in the last decade, his forces were now fighting NATO-driven take over of his country.

The other result was  the impoverishment of historical consciousness, and the degradation of more complex appreciations of the full breadth of the Gaddafi record. This would help explain why some do not rush to condemn and disown the man (without having to resort to crude caricature children and their motivations).

While even   Glenn Greenwald   feels the need to properly insert, “No decent human being possibly harboring any sympathy for Gaddafi,”  I have known decent human beings in Nicaragua, Trinidad, Dominica, and among the Mohawks in Montreal, I very much appreciate Gaddafi’s support  -not to mention his support for various  national liberation movements, including the struggle against apartheid in  South Africa.

Gaddafi regime has many faces: some are seen by his domestic opponents, others are seen by recipients of his aid, and others smiled  at the likes of   Silvio Berlusconi,  Nicolas Sarkozy,   Condoleeza Rice,  Hillary Clinton   and   Barack Obama  .

There are many faces, and they are both true. Some refuse to “disown” Gaddafi,  to “apologize” for his friendship  towards them, no matter how distasteful, indecent, and embarrassing other “progressives” may find him. That has to be respected, instead of this now  fashionable bullying bumps and the gang  that reduces a range of positions on a lesser charge:  “you support a dictator”  . Ironically, we support many dictators, with our own tax money, and they usually offer  no apologies for this fact.

Speaking of the breadth of Gaddafi registration, which must resist the simplistic reduction revisionist, some might care to note that   even now  , the U.S. State Department  website in Libya   points to a  Library of Congress Country Study   on Libya that features some of the Gaddafi government  many social welfare achievements  in recent years in the  areas of  health care,  public housing  and   the education. In addition, Libyans have the highest literacy rate in Africa (see UNDP, p 171.) And Libya is the only African country to “high” in the Human Development Index of UNDP.  Even the   BBC recognized these achievements:

” Women in Libya are free  to work and to dress as they like, subject to family obligations. Life expectancy is in the seventies. And per capita income-while not as high as could be expected given Libya  ‘s oil wealth  and relatively small  p  -offering of 6.5 m is estimated at  $ 12,000 (£ 9,000), according to the World Bank.  Illiteracy has been almost wiped out  because homelessness is a chronic problem in the pre-Gaddafi era  where corrugated iron shacks dotted many urban centers around the country. “

So if one supports health care, makes a medium compatible with dictatorship?  And if “the dictator”  funds public housing and subsidizes incomes,  which simply erasing facts from our memory?

8. Freedom Fighters of Angels.

The complement to the demonization of Gaddafi was  the angelization of the “rebels”  .My goal here is not to counter the myth through investment, and demonizing all of Gaddafi’s opponents, who have many serious and legitimate grievances, and in large numbers have clearly had more than they can bear. I am interested in place  as “we” in the  North Atlantic part of the equation,  the construction of   the   ways that suit   our  intervention.

A standard way, repeated in  different ways through a range of media  and government spokesmen U.S. , can be seen in this   New York Times  ‘   depiction of  the rebels  as “secular-minded professionals-  lawyers , academics, businesspeople-who talk about democracy, transparency, human rights  and the rule of law. “

The list of professions  familiar to the American middle class  which respects them, is meant to inspire  a shared sense of identification  between readers and the Libyan opposition, especially when you consider that it is in the  hand of Gaddafi, where the forces of darkness dwell: the main “professions” we find are  torturer, terrorist, and African mercenary.

For many weeks it was  almost impossible to get reporters  embedded with the rebel National Transitional Council in Benghazi to begin to provide a description of what constitutes anti-Gaddafi movement, if it was one organization or many groups,  what their agendas They were, and so on.

The subtle thread in the reports was that cast  the rebellion as entirely  spontaneous and indigenous  - that may be true in part, and may also be an oversimplification.

Among the reports that significantly complicated the picture were those that discussed the  CIA ties to the insurgents   (for more information, see   this  ,   this  ,   this  , and that  ), while others highlighted the role of the  National Foundation  for Democracy, the International Republican  Institute  , the National Democratic Institute and  USAID  , which have been active  in Libya since 2005  , which detailed the role of various   expatriate groups , and reports of the active role of   “radical Islamist”  militias  embedded within the overall insurgency, with some pointing to   Al Qaeda  connections  .

Some feel a definite need to be on  the side of “good, “especially  as neither Iraq nor Afghanistan  offer a sense as fair claim.  Americans want the world to see them as doing good, it is, not only indispensable, but also irreproachable. You can wish for anything better than being seen as the forgiveness of their sins in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is a special moment, where the bad guy can safely be the other once again.  A world that is safe for America is a world that is unsafe for evil.  Marching Band, cane handles, Anderson Cooper , confetti, we got it.  

9. The victory for the Libyan people.

To say that the current turn in Libya represents  a victory by the Libyan people  in charting their own destiny, at best, an oversimplification that masks the range of interests involved from the beginning in  the development and determining  the course of events on the ground, and that  ignores the fact that much of the war Gaddafi was able to rely on a solid base of popular support.

As early as February 25, just one week after the start of the first street protests,  Nicolas Sarkozy had already determined that Gaddafi “must go”. On 28 February,  David Cameron,  began working on a proposal for  a no-fly exclusion  of these statements and decisions were made ​​without any attempt at dialogue and diplomacy.

At March 30,   The New York Times   reported that  for “several weeks” CIA operatives had been working inside Libya, which would mean they were there  from mid-February, ie, when the protests began-they were joined then  inside Libya “dozens of British special forces officers and intelligence MI6. “

The   New York Times   also reported in the same article that “several weeks” before (again, in mid-February), President Obama Several “signed a secret finding authorizing the CIA to provide  arms and other support to the rebels Libyans  “with the support of” other “has a number of possible”  covert actions  “.

USAID had already  sent a team   to Libya   in early March.  late March,   Obama publicly stated   that the goal was to overthrow Gaddafi. In terms awfully suspicious, ”  said a senior U.S.   administration had hoped that  the Libyan uprising  would evolve ‘organically,  ‘like those in  Tunisia  and Egypt,  without foreign intervention “sounding as t exactly  what kind of statesmen  ta makes when something  begins in a way  that is not “organic” and when comparing events in Libya, marked by a potential legitimacy deficit when compared to those in Tunisia and Egypt.

However, on March 14 the  NTC   Abdel Hafiz Goga  said: “We are able to control all of Libya, but only after the no-fly zone is imposed we”-that is not yet the case even six months later.

In recent days it has also revealed that what the rebel leadership   swore, “boots foreign field” oppose  is actually a reality   confirmed by NATO  ”  troops of special forces  from Britain, France Jordan and Qatar on  the ground in Libya  have stepped up operations in Tripoli and other cities in recent days to help rebel forces as they conducted their final advance on the Gaddafi regime. “

This, and   other summaries  only scratching the surface of the range of external support provided to the rebels.  Myth is that nationalist, self-sufficient rebel, fueled entirely by popular support.

At the moment, war supporters are proclaiming the intervention a “success”. It should be noted that there was another case in which an  air campaign, deployed to  support local armed militia  on the ground,  with the help of U.S.  covert military  operations, also succeeded in deposing another regime, and even much faster.  That case was Afghanistan. Success.

10. Defeat of “the left.”

As if reenacting the pattern of articles condemning “the left” that came in the wake of  the Iran  election protests in 2009 (see as examples   Hamid Dabashi   and   Slavoj Žižek  ), the war in Libya once again seemed to have submitted a  chance to go to the left, as if this were top on the agenda, as if “the left” was   the   problem to be addressed.

Here we see articles, in various  states of intellectual and political deterioration, by  Juan Cole   (see some of the rebuttals: ”  The case of Professor Juan Cole, “”  An open letter to Professor Juan Cole: The answer to a libel “,”  WSWS ‘answers’ Professor Cole on Libya: An admission of intellectual and political bankruptcy“), Gilbert Achcar   (and   this especially), Immanuel Wallerstein, and   Helena Sheehan  who apparently some of its most important conclusions reached in the airport at the end of his first visit to Tripoli.

There seems to be some  confusion over roles and identities. There is no homogeneous left, nor me  ideological agreement  among  anti-imperialists (which includes conservatives and liberals, between anarchists and Marxists).

Nor was the “anti-imperialist left”  in any position to make a real or damage on the ground, as in the case of  the actual protagonists.

There was little chance that the anti-interventionists in influencing foreign policy, which took shape in  Washington, before the serious critiques against intervention were published.

These points indicate that at least some of the reviews are moved by concerns that go beyond Libya, and they even have little to do with Libya ultimately. The most common accusation is that  the anti-imperialist left  is somehow coddling a dictator.

The argument is that this is based on a flawed analysis-in criticizing the position of  Hugo Chávez, Wallerstein says Chávez’s analysis is deeply flawed, and offers this among the criticisms: “The second point missed by Hugo Chavez’s analysis is that there is  not going any significant military involvement  of the western world in Libya “(yes, read it again). In fact, many of the counterarguments deployed against  the anti-interventionist  eco left or all the top myths that were dismantled above, that get their breed almost entirely wrong geopolitical analysis, and that pursue politics focused on part on personality and events of the day. This also shows us the deep poverty of the policy assumptions primarily on simplistic and one-sided ideas of  “human rights”  and “protection”(see Richard Falk’s critique), and the success of  the new military humanism  in diverting the energies left.

And a question persists:  if those opposed to intervention were faulted for providing  a moral shield for “dictatorship”  (as if  imperialism was not itself  one global  dictatorship), what about those  humanitarians  who have supported increasing  xenophobia and racism militants so many accounts engage in ethnic cleansing?

Does this mean that  the pro-interventionist  people racist? Even object racism? So far, I have heard  only silence  from those quarters.

The agenda on the forehead, beating  masks anti-imperialist straw man an effort to curb dissent against  an unnecessary war  that has lasted and expanded  human suffering; advanced the cause of war corporatists, transnational  companies  and  neoliberals, destroyed the legitimacy of  multilateral institutions  that were once openly committed to peace in international relations; violated  international law  and human rights, witnessed the emergence of  racist violence, to  the imperial state to justify  its continued expansion, violated  national laws, and reduces  the discourse of humanitarianism  to a mere handful of slogans, reactionary impulses, and policy formulas that  privilege war  as a first option.

Actually, the left is the problem here?  

Maximilian Forte   is an associate professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Concordia University in Montreal, Canada Professor. Their website can be found at http://openanthropology.org/ ~ ~ V   like his   previous articles  on Libya and other facets of imperialism.

About these ads

Lebanon: You wanted answers for the mysterious deaths of two of your people; I might have the answer


Lebanon: You wanted answers for the mysterious deaths of two of your people; I might have the answer

From: Mathaba

Musaal Sadr, an Iranian-Lebanese philosopher and Shi‘ah religious leader who disappeared in August 1978

By Mathaba Truth Seeker

I believe we all have our reasonable questions whence it concerns the deaths of two prominent Lebanese originated individuals for which we have only bloody vague answers from either NATO led Corporate Axis of Mainstream Media propagandists to shift our stances against those they want us to loathe, or the so-called ‘answers’, one must come to realise, are commencing to yield more questions than answers, if anything at all. One must thenceforth come to the realisation that if we wish to find the truth, or theorise to at least approach close enough to the truth, we must search deeper, more deeply than we ever tended to do in the past.

Hitherto, whom do I believe murdered Rafik Hariri? Whom do I believe murdered Mousa Sadr? For one, the latter’s death being caused by Abu Nadl was disproved in numerous cases, however the plausible conceptualisation that Mossad may have been behind it, in collusion with these ‘former Qadhafi era officials’ that proudly ‘defected’ to join the new NATO controlled ‘National Transitional Council’ régime now controlling Libya; has materialised even more to me. Whilst for the other, it has become a ritualised ceremony to incessantly blame Syria for the death of Hariri, only to have a DGSE from my country decide to act upon his conscience to expose the truth on Russian television to prevent the NATO deep state infrastructure from following him.

Rafik Hariri

Rafik Hariri

However, why would Syria kill someone that worked closely alongside them? Why would Qadhafi harm someone that has close connections with Iran, his most powerful regional ally, his Comrades in Arms of the Résistance against the NATO neo-colonisation world order mobsters? These questions have no answer, because it’s obvious. There is NO bloody way in hell that these scenarios could even be plausible, whilst the deaths are likely to be part of a much more sinister plot designed to undermine the Middle Eastern resistance whilst splitting it along sectarian lines. Furthermore, as Patrick Seale from the Guardian (whence it used to be there to report nothing more than some sincere news) once pointed out,

“Israel’s ambition has long been to weaken Syria, sever its strategic alliance with Iran and destroy Hezbollah. Israel has great experience at “targeted assassinations” - not only in the Palestinian territories however across the Middle East. Over the years, it has sent hit teams to kill opponents in Beirut, Tunis, Malta, Amman in addition Damascus. Syria, Hezbollah and Iran have stood up against US as well as Israeli hegemony over the region. Syria continues to demand that Israel return the Golan Heights, seized in 1967. Damascus will not allow Lebanon to conclude a separate peace with Israel unless its own claim is also addressed.”

Hence, if we take this point into consideration, as one example, Syria could not possibly be behind the death of someone that worked closely with Dimashq to keep Lebanon from making a separate via Israel, it’s the Premier that kept Lebanon completely aligned to Syria. Its therewith not only outrageous to claim Syria or even Hezbollah could ever be behind the death of Rafik Hariri, it is more likely either Phalangists as Seale points out, or even more bloody likelier, the operatives of Mossad whom seek to obliterate as well as divide the Resistance against NATO-Israel-Gulf Middle Eastern domination. Another important thing to remember is that Syria‘s largest reasons for being in Lebanon to commence with were to help Palestinian groups there, help Lebanese resistance groups such as Hezbollah, the Lebanese Communist Party, Amal, the Nasserist Organisations, against the Zionist entity Israel‘s government, corporate diasporas as well as its Deep State/Military-Industrialised-Complex.

Furthermore, it should be knownst that the moment Syria withdrew from Lebanon, meant the commencement of Israel‘s Zionist régime taking advantage of the situation to initiate numerous transgressions into Lebanon, especially incursions as well as invasions into South Lebanon whilst in addition to countless violations of Lebanese aerospace, something which Michel Sleiman has done nothing to ‘condemn‘, thenceforth further exposing to us his role as a puppet to Zionism, Capitalist-Imperialism in addition to Gulf Monarchism. It hitherto must affirmed that Israel wanted Syria out with all means necessary moreover only a fool could not see this truth. Whilst of course, quite naturally, whence-ever the truth comes close to being unravelled, the rubbish spouting neo-colonisation liars, they will find another way to white wash their crimes, to subdue the truth. Id est, in this case, the post-Syria Lebanon, now commanded by a government whose President, Michel Sleiman, is a flagrant puppet to the neo-colonialist hegemons, attempts to indict several members of Hezbollah for the Hariri death case, whilst Sleiman, Israhell, the Gulf régimes, Western Europe as well as Northern America both attempt to have Hezbollah labelled as a ‘terrorist organisation’.

Hezbollah rightfully counters this whence Comrade Imam Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, in an interview, re-affirmed the suspicions of what any aware, educated, geo-political TRUTH seeker individual might have thought. It’s quite so to the point. Indeed, Mossad, is quite the organisation of State Sponsored Terrorism, just as the CIA, the DGSE, MI6, MI5, or the Pakistani ISI could have ever been. All of whom are organisations that top the list in acts of subversive terror against nations across the globe, including false flags on themselves on themselves, such as the Boston Bombings, for the bloody matter, as an exempli gratia. Nonetheless, as one must recognise, these are not the mere sources of people commencing to awaken to these truths. We have onetwothreefour,five, moreover also six sources perfectly credible with what brings forth to be beheld before the world into materialisation, some truth on this matter.

Whence one sees the omnipotent capabilities of Western as well as Israeli intelligence services to infiltrating other countries to foment destabilisation or manufacture fabricated evidence, one could understandably see that this makes sense: Syria, Hezbollah, as well as Iran are completely utterly bloody innocent. None of them are responsible for the death of Rafik Hariri. Our NATO led coalition of Neo-Colonisation Dystopian World Order mobsters as well as their intelligence services are the ones responsible for his death. Furthermore, I may have addressed in due honour the case of Rafik Hariri in this article. However, we must hitherto proceed towards debunking another case. Whom is truly responsible for Imam Mousa Sadr’s ‘disappearance’ in 1978, as well as his alleged death? Moreover what are the controversies surrounding it?

Let me first commence with this. The official ‘defected’ ‘affidavit-sworn’ Libyan officials’ ‘testimony’, in addition to the extant supposed ‘evidence’ pertaining to the actus reus Comrade Qadhafi is supposedly accused of is, as I would put for the Hariri case,  contradiction in adjective in itself in all aspects. There are numerous reasons for this.  The ratio scripta which Qadhafi’s accusers use to justify their accusations, as well as the so-called modus operandi behind it, is that he had an ‘argument concerning theological matters’ with Mousa Sadr, moreover in the ‘heat of the anger in this debate ordered his entourage to have Sadr arrested as well as killed’.  This in itself does not make sense. Firstly, Qadhafi is not a sectarian leader, nor was he ever. If this were true, he would have brutalised his Shi’ite minority. Secondly, Qadhafi is allied with Iran’s Shi’ite ruled as well as Shi’ite majority country, whilst is one of the few Sunnah leaders of a Sunnah majority country ever to have done so (I apologise for using sectarian terms, however despite me loathing this bloody much, the context requires me to do so) in contemporary Middle Eastern history besides Algeria, Yemen at one time, Hamas (before it shifted to becoming a complete Qatari-Israeli puppet), Mauritania, Sudan, in addition to Western Sahara’s Polisario Front as well as the Palestinian PFLP.

Thirdly, this fact, combined with the additional fact of which some Libyan ‘defected’ traitorous officials, as with the case we now see in Syria, had some previously secretive connections as well as relations with Western as well as Israeli in addition to Gulf régimes intelligence services in which they colluded to overthrow Qadhafi, fabricate evidence amongstother things to discredit him whilst mobilise an entirely elaborate, exquisite, eloquent, over-the-top potent psyop (psychological operation) against the Libyan Jamahiriya to fomentinternal conflict as wellas to utilise tribalism interests to turncertain ethnic groups of Libya against thegreat Jamahiriya. Furthermore, the prison massacre of Abu Salim prisoners supposedly ‘political dissidents’ turned out to be al-CIA-da operatives of the LIFG as well as al-Qaeda, which, whilst the West in its publicised face (for public relations purposes) sanctioned as a set of “terrorist organisations” in addition to “sanctioning” them, whence in truth the West openly secretly gave these groups the arms they needed to perpetrate their terror.

Fourthly, it is quite so imperative to realise something else: the terrorist assaults allegedly committed by Qadhafi were furthermore in their own false flag operations waged by our own secret intelligence services in the West as well as those in Israel. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (all posts in this forum page, or most – 6) (7) (8) (9) Moreover, it must be recognised that Qadhafi may be a wonderful radicalised, revolutionary, benevolent, cunning, calculating, defiant anti-colonialist, as well as resilient Resistance leader against the neo-colonisation global mafia—all to me being exquisitely perfect qualities—however he is NO brutalising ‘régime leader’, he is NO ‘dictator’, nor is he a ‘murderer of his own people’ as our deliberately hypocritical double-standardised oxymoronic Western, Israeli, Gulf, Ikhwan, South Korean, Taiwanese (remember the KMT’s past White Terrors), Jordanian politicians, in addition to their corporate diaspora as well as military-industrialised-complex deep state sponsors; moreover also the countless other puppet régimes as well as organisations working for them worldwide; would have us believe Qadhafi is.

Indeed, how could the Yankee régime, (whose mass murders of 76 million indigenous peoples, deaths of 1,5 million Filipinos during their régime’s colonisation process, deaths of over 3-8 million Indo-Chinese (Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, Thai, ethnic Chinese) inhabitants of the region, deaths of 1-3 (if not tens of millions) of Indonesians under Suharto (whom the Yanks, the Dutch, the British helped remain in power for ‘Anti-Communist’ purposes), deaths of 1 million Somalis, deaths of 1,5 million Palestinians at the hand of their Zionist ally Israel, deaths of 1-4 million Iraqi civilians from Saddam’s demise to now, deaths of tens of millions by the White Terrors of Chiang Kai Shek as well as the last Tsar of the Russian Empire (both given tonnes of help by the Yanks as well as their ‘allies’, all of whom even invaded the USSR to help the Tsarist régime commit even more atrocities against its lower class populations across the lands, moreover, in forgotten history, Poland-Lithuania’s sacking of Moscow, the Georgian-Cossack led invasions of the USSR; amongst other things that eventually forced Lenin to maintain the Russian Empire’s borders to prevent a repetition of those events)…

… The deaths of 4 million Korean civilians (1,5 million South Koreans murdered by Rhee Sygman as well as Yankee forces; in addition to the 2,5 million North Koreans bombed, massacred on the ground, bio-chemical victimised, violated, pillaged, plundered, gased, napalmed, strategically over-the-top carpet bombed (18 of 22 cities pulverised to the ground) by Yankee, South Korean, as well as other ‘UN’ troops whom committed these punitive atrocities against the Korean people); the deaths of 1-3 million Afghans in the al-CIA-da quagmire that NATO unleashed upon Afghanistan in addition to the initial al-CIA-da terrorist attacks on the Soviet border that NATO white washed from history (which killed hundreds of Soviet border inhabitants) which penultimately was the true reason for the Soviet landing into Afghanistan; the Pol Pot false-’Communist’ government sponsored especially by Thatcher as well as the Yankees whose purpose was to plunder Cambodia so well that it would be a psyops stunt to discredit Communism before world eyes; the dirty wars of right-wing fascistic NATO sponsored régimes murdering a total of hundreds of thousands of people throughout Latin America; whilst up to 4 million deaths (including 220 000 deaths in the civil war mostly fomented by the CIA’s death squads) that continued in Guatemala; the 500 000 Angolans brutalised by Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA forces that NATO sponsored against the Communist-aligned government of Angola; amongst tonnes of other crimes NATO’s Western members have fomented, including the Taiping Crisis before NATO was ever formed; where Christian extremists as well as ensuing chaos that Western governments (especially Yanks, Britain, France) fomented caused 100 million Chinese deaths overall (disproportionately civilians)); or the rest of NATO as well as the international puppets of mass murder as well as death could even dare to make us believe that they are knights in shining ‘humanitarian’ armour that believe that they are in the ‘moral right’ whilst Qadhafi, is in the ‘moral wrong’, whence in fact it is quite the opposite?

Furthermore, knowing Qadhafi’s personality pretty well from my research, how could he be responsible for all that he supposedly alleged of being responsible for? As for Mousa Sadr, numerous controversies surround his whereabouts. For the most part, some claim he was killed by Qadhafi himself, others claim he ordered his security forces to first arrest him thence execute him later, others yet claim he was  murdered by Abu Nidal at Qadhafi’s nod, others yet (especially his family, by far the sole bloody credible source we could have that is concrete) claim he is still alive in Libya or somewhere else whilst sightings of his existence have been reported; others yet claim he left Libya in 1978 on a flight to Italy, others yet claim even more bloody outrageous madness. Several things are certain however.

One must come to the realisation that Lebanon’s Sleiman headed coalition government has shown a majority of un-interest in pursuing the case (whilst others rightfully claim they (Sleiman administration) were pressured into not pursuing it until the right time to do so came, id est the time for the West to neo-colonise Libya as well as foment anti-Hezbollah, anti-Syria, anti-Iran sentiments). Indeed, only Hezbollah, the LCP, the Amal movement ever decided to conduct smaller independent investigations. Moreover, some allege that Imam Sadr had connections with the SAVAK as well as Israel’s Mossad; others (the NTC régime of mass murderers, evidence-against-Qadhafi-manufacturers, as well as flagrant PROVEN liars NATO helped bring to power in 2011) claim that Sadr was detained in Abu Salim as well as ’23 000 other individuals that ‘disappeared’ across Libya’, moreover some even allege to have ‘found the body of Sadr’ after the Battle of Tripoli, whilst this lie was long disproved, as well as the aforementioned Abu Salim allegations.

All completely utterly, bloody fabricated rubbish by those whom wanted to neo-colonise Libya with the inside help of traitorous Qadhafi era officials that would proudly betray him for a wealthy reward from the West (its even the case for most ‘high ranking Syrian officials’ that did not have old prior contacts with the West that admitted they were bribed to ‘defect’ to the FSA rats). In addition, according to this pro-West mouthpiece mainstream media in Lebanon called ‘Naharnet’, the passports of Sadr as well as his companions were found in a hotel in Rome in 2004, furthermore raising questions on the entire matter. Kuwait’s régime, puppeted by Capitalist-Imperialist NATO as well as Zionist Israel, attempted to shift the blame from Qadhafi to saying that the Palestinians were responsible, whilst later one saying that Qadhafi ordered the Palestinians to do it? With all these contradicting reports on Imam Sadr’s death, one could only be mind boggled whilst utter in complete, utter bewilderment, Dafuq? Indeed so Comrades, this is the conflagration of rubbish, contradictions, lies, white washing that mainstream media aligned to NATO across the world have been spouting surrounding Mousa Sadr’s death, alive, detained, etcetera status.

Nonetheless, all of this propaganda as well as contradicting asides, whom stands to bloody benefit from this dishonourable spacegoating (scapegoating, I apologise for deliberately twisting the word for laughs) Qadhafi on some days, Palestinians on others, or even Iran or Syria by mind f*cked ‘Safavidist conspiracy’ theorists NATO has worked extremely hard to organise? Do we not see that this death could have been an inside task from the very people that bloody ‘defected’ from Qadhafi’s government to the NTC rats? Could it be that Senussi as well as others had secretive ties with NATO, just as Rifaat Al-Assad, Mustafa Tlass in Syria had secret ties with NATO as well as Israel against the Syrian revolutionary Résistance government to create manners with which to discredit them?

Furthermore, considering Mossad has such impeccable country-penetrating infiltration methods,  is it possible that they succeeded in getting into Libya with perfect timing, plotting to kill Mousa Sadr once he left Qadhafi, eliminating him before he ever left the country, whilst commence the white washing, spacegoating tirade against Libya amongst others blamed for Sadr’s death? Yes, I promised I would answer the questions of both murder cases, moreover whilst I answered one, the other is even more eccentric, queer, enigmatic, eloquently mysterious than I thought, except… after spending some additional time researching even as I wrote this article, I found answers that I did not find in the weeks I spent secretly conducting my investigations. Its quite inherent that those responsible for Mousa Sadr’s death would only be people willing to benefit from even sectarianisation of the Middle East for their vile neo-colonisation, avaricious, sadistic agendas. Whom else, other than Israhell, the Gulf monarchs, the Jordanian King, the NATO régimes; the Pakistani ISI, as well as South Korea, all of whom have their vested interests in fomenting a division of the Middle East?

It is not a coincidence that the 1982 Lebanon War commenced at least four years after this episode in history? Whilst furthermore Sadr was a uniting voice in Lebanon, as well as an advocate for respect as well as harmony between the country’s multiple religious sects. It has been said that had he lived, Lebanon would have avoided the bloodiest parts of its Civil War (1975-1990). Even today, the mention of Sadr provokes a strong reaction among Lebanese. In the measure passed by the Capitalist-Imperialist, Zionist, Gulf Monarchs controlled United Nations Security Council regarding Libya, Lebanon was one of the few Arab countries that supported Western intervention. This is still a raw wound for many in Lebanon. As well as it is perhaps coinciding with the aforementioned of what I said.

Is it possible that NATO, willing to restore the old Idris era Libyan puppet régime to power, or something of sorts, has arranged for the death of Mousa Sadr via infiltrators in Libya a while after his meet with Comrade Qadhafi; in order to use this death at a later time to convince Lebanon to join the intervention in Libya, whilst support it at its fullest. Furthermore, it must be remembered that this Sadr case file would be used, as well as bloody dishonourable intensive pressure against Iran by Western, Israeli leaders; combined with omnipotent sectarian threats coming from the NTC rats as well as the Gulf monarchs, forced Iran to switch its support from Comrade Qadhafi to the NTC rats. Iran was under tonnes of pressure during 2011 to end its support for the Green Résistance, for Green Libya, for the Glorious Jamahiriya by the Neo-Colonisation Axis of Mobsters.

Iran, surrounded by these intensive threats as well as pressures, yielded to pressure whilst its media as well as government turned on Qadhafi. Nevertheless, Iran is innocent, moreover this little factor here is being used by numerous persons wanting to turn pro-Qadhafis against Iran to support a neo-colonialist invasion there; completely utterly attempting to white wash the fact of which a NATO led pressuring against Iran had been organised prior. Thenceforth, whom was responsible for Mousa Sadr’s death? Whom was to benefit from his death? NATO, Israel, Sleiman, the Gulf Monarchs, as well as the ‘National Transitional Council’ contra death squads were the ones to penultimately benefit from this. For one, Shimon Peres, as well as other Zionist leaders, as I have read from numerous articles in addition to Israeli government documents, have been known to fear Comrade Imam Mousa Sadr due to his charisma as well as his potential capabilities in being a unifying leader for Lebanese, for Arabs at large, for Palestinian Resistance organisations as well as for perhaps even worse, the potential to Reunite Islam completely.

This the Zionists do so bloody fear. Whilst, another fact which must be noted concerning Comrade Qadhafi, is that he supported the 1979 Iranian Revolution whilst even went onwards to mobilising his country to support Iran against Saddam‘s NATO, Israel, Gulf monarchs directed invasion of Iran. It must be furthermore remembered that during Qadhafi‘s time, most abductions turned out to be committed by Libyan based al-CIA-da destabilisation, Balkanisation, takfiri NATO backed death squad, far right, contra mercenaries whilst so-called ‘executions‘ either never even occurred, or, for those that did, were organised by traitorous Libya officials with previously secretive relations with the neo-colonisers, id est the same officials that would ‘defect‘ later on whilst NATO led corporate mainstream media as well as these vile traitors would white wash the truth of Mousa Sadr amongst other cases whilst spacegoat all the blame upon the innocent glorious Comrade Qadhafi.

In addition to this, NATO led psyops materialising as well as manufacturing false evidence against the Jamahiriya to discredit the Qadhafi utopia for the justification of a neo-colonising invasion of Libya continued even after the war ended in 2011. Why would Qadhafi have Sadr killed? They had much in common. They both professed Islam and socialism, they were natural allies. Whilst it must be remembered, that besides the government officials colluding against Qadhafi alongside NATO (to which Qadhafi had reacted only with apathy as well as silence, fully confident that none of these things could occur in his country) with the help of a ruthless Anglo-American known as Edward Wilson whom was hired to help train these elements of the security apparatus that would in the future be utilised to discredit as well as spacegoat Qadhafi whilst furthermore white washing everything else (or so they bloody thought).

It must furthermore be noted that the ‘Arab Spring‘ spreading into Algeria, Libya as well as Syria were part of a profound Operation of destabilisation fomented by the CIA, MI5, MI6, our DGSE, Mossad, Turkey‘s MÌT, Pakistan‘s ISI, as well as Saudi Arabia‘s GIP, the Ikhwan ruled Mukhabarat, in addition to Qatar‘s State Security (QSS). I thenceforward finalised my investigation here. Who is responsible for Rafik Hariri, Imam Mousa Sadr, as well as Yaccoub‘s deaths? The same neo-colonialists now shredding Syria apart whilst attempting to get to Iran next. In conclusion, we must be careful not to allow the neo-colonisation mobsters to split the Middle East either along sectarian or ethnic lines or, make the world buy the rubbish that NATO led mainstream media spouts concerning certain leaders to procure public opinion in favour of their transgressive wars.

Lastly, I believe the Middle East needs a new Imam Mousa Sadr, one that the West led neo-colonialists bloody fear, as well as a charismatic, compromising figure that could help reunite Sunnis, Shi’its, Alawis, Maronite Christians, Orthodox Christians, Jews, etcetera together to form a powerful Résistance front against the NATO led neo-colonisation mobsters to finally help achieve peace in this messed up world. As for the truth concerning Mousa Sadr as well as Rafik Hariri, the truth is bloody simple: the alleged people responsible are not responsible, their deaths were arranged by NATO led neo-colonisation mobsters as well as their vile Axis of morbid intelligence service conceptualisations, the same intelligence services that have been responsible for tonnes of Cold War as well as even omnipresent transgressions world wide, including as an infamous example, attempting to assassinate Comrade Fidel Castro over-the-top, precisely 638 times.

It is our duty to find the individual persons responsible within the neo-colonialist intelligence services, as well as government officials responsible, whilst take them to justice whence-ever a conclusive, finalised, sweeping close to these case files occur. We have a generalised idea of those responsible, now its a matter of finding the individual persons indeed it is. Moreover perhaps, only perhaps, once I revolutionise my country France, as well as do so for Japan, I shall open such an investigation, including into our own country’s DGSE, to hold the individuals accountable for this mess guilty as well as have them brought to the just wrath of international, non-NATO ‘international community’, REAL ‘International Community’, justice.


Internet Sources concerning Qadhafi being innocent on numerous things; sources concerning Mousa Sadr, as well as some of the remaining sources on NATO led Pressure on Iran concerning Libya:(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18 – Iran being pro-Qadhafi in early March 2011) (19 - Iran provides secret support to Comrade; however do note that the ‘nuclear reasons’ for it as this article cites are nothing more than NATO rubbish) (20 - An Iranian article of truth fully support Comrade Qadhafi’s Resistance) (21 - Al Arabiya article being one of the last few articles of anti-Iran NATO led mainstream media online that were not deleted nor white washed that bring perspective that Iran was a secretly staunch ally of Qadhafi until his death; whilst the large majority of other contents in said article on other matters fomenting anti-Iran, anti-Qadhafi statements are rubbish) – add more later

Other reads: (1 - Telegraph propaganda article back in 2004 that was intended as a #BlameIran conceptualisation in addition to an anti-Libya article in an attempt to divide both allies using psyops)

Other interesting reads pertaining for NATO fomenting sectarianism as well as scientific assassinations: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

The Libyan Puzzle in the Scramble for Africa


The Libyan Puzzle in the Scramble for Africa

By Sam Muhho Global Research

 

2a9fa-arabia

 

As a new era in history has begun to dawn on humanity, new doors are being opened in both opportunities and also in the realms of potential threats and conflagrations. This reality has been noted most clearly in the developing affairs of Africa, a continent that is on the verge of transformation through both technology and evolving international interactions. In the face of potential progress driven by Africa’s lucrative natural resources and economic potential, an ominous threat looms above Africa, the threat of the neo-imperialist, globalist agenda which has scarred the face of humanity with its continual drive of global hegemony. This “globalist agenda” is a militarized corporatism in a neo-imperialist system operating from all sides of the western political spectrum and representing the corporate elite of Wall Street and London; no clearer was the nefarious nature of these interests shown than in the subversion of Libya two years ago in 2011.

Before delving into the demise of Libya, it is necessary to understand neo-imperialisms’ ambitions for Africa; its goal is the subjection of Africa into its orbit in order to serve as a critical lynchpin in the establishment of a unipolar world order (including ousting potential Chinese competition). The unipolar world order is the creating of a single center of global economic, political, and military power coupled with the control of international trade and the distribution of resources as is admittedly the agenda noted by Dr. Carroll Quigley in his Tragedy and Hope among various other publications from western corporate-financier think tanks ranging from the Council on Foreign Relations to the Brookings Institute. Russian President Vladimir Putin has also spoken of hegemonic ambitions on the part of the west to establish a unipolar order at a 2007 Munich conference.

As Libya again takes prominence again in the media with the increasing unrest even provokingmobilization of U.S. Marines from Spain to Italy, across from Libya, hinting a potential military involvement in the already decimated state, it is important to review the foundational history of the current Libyan dilemma before the “disinfo” echo chamber of the mainstream media begins a new full-throttle propaganda blitz. The increasing urgency for this review is news headlines even alleging a “new war” in Libya because of militia rivalries.

Libya has recently been ravished by increasing internal strife and ethno-tribal divisions that was the continuation of NATO’s systematic destruction of the nation-state in 2011. In  Dr. Webster Tarpley’s “Al Qaeda: Pawns of CIA Insurrection from Libya to Yemen”, it was explained that four primary factors contributed to the Libyan “revolution” in 2011 with the primary one being racist and monarchist elements among the eastern Libyan Harabi and Obeidat tribes found in the Benghazi-Darna-Tobruk corridor who had historically resented Gaddafi for toppling the western-backed King Idris which hailed from that region. This would explain why many of the protestors in eastern Libya were photographed carrying pictures of King Idris. That is not to say that all participants in the opposition were negative elements but it cannot be denied that negative elements had been pervasive as pawns of the western subversion and even culminated in the wide presence of Al Qaeda flags in Benghazieven atop the Benghazi courthouse, reflecting the prominent role of radical Islamist militias that will be discussed below. It is not to be forgotten that insurrectionary activity is not new in this region as Gaddafi had witnessed continuous waves of strife and militarized opposition, often propped up by the west for geopolitical purposes, and this was reflected during an Islamist insurgency in the 1990s, often with racial overtones. Tony Cartalucci in “Libya at Any Costdocumented the censored history of unrest in Libya driven by western interests:

1980′s: US-CIA backed National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) made multiple attempts to assassinate Qaddafi and initiate armed rebellion throughout Libya.

1990′s: Noman Benotman and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) wage a campaign of terror against Qaddafi with Osama Bin Laden’s assistance.

1994: LIFG kills 2 German anti-terrorism agents. Qaddafi seeks arrest warrant for Osama Bin Laden in connection to the attack but is blocked by MI6 who was concurrently aiding the LIFG.

2003: Upon Qaddafi’s abandonment of WMD programs, Libya’s collaboration with MI6 & the CIA to identify and expose the LIFG networks begins, giving Western intelligence a windfall of information regarding the group. Ironically this information would give Western nations an entire army to rebuild and turn against Qaddafi in 2011.

2005: NFSL’s Ibrahim Sahad founds the National Conference of Libyan Opposition (NCLO) in London England.

2011: Early February, the London based NCLO calls for a Libyan “Day of Rage,” beginning the “February 17th revolution.”

2011: Late February, NFSL/NCLO’s Ibrahim Sahad is leading opposition rhetoric, literally in front of the White House in Washington D.C. Calls for no-fly zone in reaction to unsubstantiated accusations Qaddafi is strafing “unarmed protesters” with warplanes.

2011: Late February, Senators Lieberman and McCain and UK PM David Cameron call for providing air cover for Libyan rebels as well as providing them additional arms.

2011: Early March; it is revealed UK SAS special forces are already operating inside Libya

2011: Mid-March; UN adopts no-fly zone over Libya, including air strikes. Immediately, the mission is changed from “protecting civilians” to “ousting Qaddafi.” Egypt violates the arms embargo of UN r.1973 with Washington’s full knowledge by supplying Libyan rebels with weapons, while Al Qaeda’s ties to the rebels are admitted by everyone including the rebels themselves.

2011: Late April; Documented evidence is revealed that Libya’s rebels are conducting a barbaric campaign, employing extrajudicial killings, indiscriminate military force, child-soldiers, landmines, and torture. New York Times blames a lack of support.

2011: Late April, early May; Followed by calls to assassinate Qaddafi, ordnance crash into his son’s home killing him and 3 of Qaddafi’s grandchildren. NATO concurrently seeks a new UN resolution authorizing ground troops while aggressor states seek to release seized Libyan assets to the rebels

This tribally-based resentment that categorized much of the violence in 2011 contributed to racially-driven atrocities committed against Libyan blacks that make up a third of the Libyan population and inhabit the western regions including the Fezzan tribes of the Libyan southwest. Dr. Webster Tarpley also documented the prominent role of Al Qaeda mercenaries in the Libyan conflict whose nest in eastern Libya had been a world-leading nurturing ground for extremism according to the US Military Academy at West Point’s “Combating Terrorism Center” (CTC) 2007 reports on foreign fighters in Iraq. The key rebel city of Darna, for example, was commandeered by a rebel terrorist triumvirate featuring Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, formerly of the Al Qaeda-tied “Libyan Islamic Fighting Group” (LIFG), who fought against NATO forces in Afghanistan. At his side were Sufian bin-Kumu, Osama bin Laden’s former chauffeur and an inmate at Guantánamo Bay for six years, as well as al-Barrani who is also a devoted member of LIFG.

Tarpley does an excellent job in demonstrating how such figures were not atypical but were the norm in a region that was the world’s “terrorist capital” according to the CTC. It is also disturbing to note the desperate attempts at damage control by the CTC in the wake of NATO’s disastrous intervention where previously documented facts were purposefully obscured and spun to cover NATO’s illegitimacy. Tarpley also documented the role of western assets such as the Libyan National Salvation Front as well as the French-assisted defection of top-Qaddafi associate Nouri Mesmari in 2010 who would later collaborate with the west in fomenting military mutinies against Gaddafi in northeast Libya.

Being the only African nation to rank as “high” on the Human Development Index and boasting a highly developed infrastructure, Libya under Gaddafi has become the globalists’ geopolitical gateway into Africa. To the detriment of all free humanity, this gateway has been trampled down by the illegal NATO war on Libya which revolved around verified propaganda regarding Libya leader Muammar Gaddafi’s alleged atrocities, a misrepresentation of the Libyan rebels, and a complete media blackout regarding geopolitical forces at play. These claims would culminate in international myths spun around Gaddafi who was claimed to be bombing his people, hiring African mercenaries, and staging mass rapes to terrorize opposition as the official dogmas justifying NATO’s aggression.

 Integral to the narrative justifying NATO’s intervention revolved around painting Gaddafi as a brutal tyranny launching a bloody crackdown against a “peaceful” movement with a host other atrocities ranging from hiring African mercenaries, using the air force against protestors, staging mass rapes, and threatening “genocide” against Benghazi. The NATO narrative of the revolution being the noble Libyan masses rising up against Gaddafi and his mercenaries was painted most clearly in the early March 14, 2011 Reuters article titled, “Libyan jets bomb rebels, France pushes for no-fly zone.” In this typical mainstream media report, rhetorical justification is given for the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine in sanctioning a no-fly zone in Libya based on the tired narrative of Gaddafi using air power to brutally suppress what is seen as an indigenous uprising, seeming to be heading down the pathos becoming a “tragedy for Libya.” A warning for an upcoming bloodbath against Gaddafi was sounded. Interestingly, even the “Independent” would later publish an article debunking this, pointing out the unreliability and factually-depraved basis for this propaganda among other accusations levied against Gaddafi. This baseless propaganda, already having poisoned western perception of what happened in Libya, would later be supplemented with reports involving the role of alleged mercenaries and mass rapes to whip up justification for intervention.

 In reality, such a narrative was factually bankrupt as masterfully documented by Maximillain Forte in his “Top Ten Myths in the War Against Libya” which directly nails the illegitimacy of the NATO campaign. While Gaddafi is certainly no saint and while many groups did have legitimate grievances against him, he nonetheless had a solid support base in Libya while the rebels were overall lacking legitimacy and were being driven by Islamist radicals, exiled politicians with globalist ties, and decades of ethnically-based tension. Gaddafi had invested heavily into the infrastructure and the social structure of his country, bringing the country to nearly eradicating illiteracy and also combating homelessness which had previously been a constant problem. Women rights were also championed as women in Libya were allowed to study and work where they desired as even BBC noted.

While Gaddafi had invested in infrastructure, the globalists sought to offset this by asserting their presence in Libya through both the destruction of its infrastructure and seeking to bring Libya into their economic orbit. There was a concerted effort to undermine Gaddafi’s agenda of building a united, strong, and self-sufficient African community and strengthening African multilateral institutions. Furthermore, Libya provided a gateway into Africa for the Pentagon’s “AFRICOM” to undermine and oust Chinese economic interests on the African continent which were a major challenge for western corporate interests’ access to resources and economic hegemony. Another key point was Gaddafi’s goal of creating a single, gold-based, African currency called the “gold dinar”with which he planned to trade African oil for. This would have conflicted directly with western corporate and banking interests and their international fiat monetary system upon which the IMF and their “casino economy” is built. Countries’ purchasing power would be determined by the amount of gold they had as opposed to fiat paper currency that made no substantial backing.

 Regarding the specific claims of Gaddafi’s atrocities as parroted by the mainstream media, Forte gives many insights that help dismantle the myths behind the “humanitarian” war. For example, the claims of air strikes by Gaddafi are noted to have been a fabrication peddled by the BBC and Al Jazeera. The claims were completely unfounded and based on fake claims. U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Mullen would admit during a Pentagon press conference that they had seen no confirmation of such reports. David Kirpatrick of the New York Times would be cited by Forte as admitting that, “the rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda, claiming nonexistent battlefield victories…and making vastly inflated claims about his [Gaddafi’s] behavior”.

 The claims of African mercenaries, integral to portraying Gaddafi as being on one side against Libya as a whole, were perhaps the most atrocious and racist of the myths, sprung from the rebels’ own tribal animosities towards indigenous Africans in Libya and migrant African workers that were common throughout the country. Human Rights Watch would claim that it found no evidence at all of African mercenaries in eastern Libya where the rebellion and fighting were centered and even noted that Gaddafi had attempted to end discrimination against these people, contradicting, as Forte noted, the rabid claims made throughout the mainstream press including Time MagazineThe Telegraph, Al Jazeera and Al ArabiyaThe Los Angeles Times also found no evidence of such mercenaries with the New York Times even pointing out the “racist overtones” involved in the conflict and the disinformation they helped spread. Amnesty International would later confirm that “mercenaries” put on display by the rebels had been undocumented African migrant workers and noted things like rampant discrimination and disproportionate detention of black Libyans in Az-Zawiya. Mainstream media and Al Jazeera would attempt to cover its crimes by pointing out, though briefly, the reality that Africans in Libya were being subjected to lootings, abduction, and killing by the rebels. All of this, of course, in light of the fact that Africans were an integral part of Libyan society, making up 33% of the population. A severe crime never to be forgotten is the ethnic cleansing of the beautiful black Libyan town of Tawargha, previously inhabited by 35,000 people, expelled by racist militants calling themselves,the brigade for purging slaves, black skin.”Another crime was the systemic slaughter of blacks in western Libya by the eastern rebels advancing on Tripoli (see here as well).

Another hysteria peddled by the media revolved around Gaddafi’s alleged planning of mass rapes, often blamed on nonexistent “mercenaries, which was then used by the media to help garner sympathy to the rebels. The source for these claims, also adequately exposed by Forte, began with Al Jazeera, a propaganda outlet for the Wall Street-London backed Qatari regime, claiming that Gaddafi had distributed Viagra to his troops and ordered them to use rape against those who opposed him. These claims were then redistributed throughout the media and found their way to the International Criminal Court (ICC). The chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo would later fraudulently claim that Gaddafi had ordered the rape of hundreds of women and that Gaddafi had personally ordered Viagra to be distributed. U.S. ambassador Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton would also make these allegations (see Forte’s article).

In reality, a UN rights inquiry in Libya headed by Cherif Bassiouni would find these claims a baseless “mass hysteria.” Bassiouni told of a woman to “claimed to have sent out over 70,000 questionnaires and received 60,000 responses, of which 259 reported sexual abuse.” Bassiouni would ask to see these questionnaires, but never receive them, casting doubt on the narrative. It was pointed out that it seems improbable that 70,000 questionnaires were sent out in March considering the fact that the postal service wasn’t working. Bassiouni whose team would uncover only 4 cases of sexual abuse in their study. The boxes of Viagra that Gaddafi supposedly distributed were found fully intact right next to burnt-out tanks, indicating staged propaganda (Forte). Further confirming this is Amnesty International and who further shamed the imperialist establishment and thoroughly shattered this lie. According to the “Independent”, “Donatella Rovera, senior crisis response adviser for Amnesty, who was in Libya for three months after the start of the uprising, says that “we have not found any evidence or a single victim of rape or a doctor who knew about somebody being raped”.

The most disingenuous claim peddled by the media to justify the Libyan war was the “save Benghazi” crusade. While it is true that Gaddafi had employed “overblown” rhetoric threatening to fight from house to house and “squash the cockroaches”, the media emphasizing these claims admits the radical-extremists nature of the hordes fighting among the rebels. The same media would also disregard Gaddafi’s “overblown” rhetoric when it was convenient to do so but attached to the Benghazi narrative as it seemingly gave justification for NATO to intervene. There is no evidence that Gaddafi had genocide planned as he only made the charges to the armed groups causing upheaval in the east of the country and even offered them amnesty and an open passage into Egypt across the border to avoid bloodshed. Professor Alan J. Kuperman exposed the propaganda talking-points of this argument, citing as evidence for the fact that Gaddafi had no genocide planned the reality that he did not perpetuate it in areas that he had captured fully or partially from the rebels including Zawiya, Mistrata, and Ajdabiya.

 The very actions of NATO itself would discredit the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine employed to justify NATO’s intervention as NATO would be directly responsible for the deaths of countless civilians. NATO would gun down civilians in the central square of Zawiya and “taking a fairly liberal definition of command and control” facilities by targeting a residential district, killing some of Gaddafi’s family members and three of his grandchildren. NATO was also responsible for targeting Libya’s state television, killing three civilian journalists and earning condemnation by international journalist federations (see Forte’s article).

 NATO oversaw the death of 1,500 refugees fleeing Libya by sea, mostly sub-Saharan Africans, the same people who were baselessly demonized as mercenaries. NATO would ignore their distress calls even though refugees would make contact with vessels belonging to NATO members. NATO also would launch numerous unjustifiable strikes against Libya furthering the damage toll. Above all, NATO was giving cover to rebels who were perpetuating verifiable genocide against cities, such as Sirte, with NATO backing and airstrikes to order, cutting off electricity, food, and water and using bombardment against civilians. Under this blueprint of destruction, scores of people would die in multiples of what was happening initially in Benghazi against armed rebel gangs which Gaddafi was fighting making a mockery out of the pre-text used to justify their globalist, faux-humanitarian war in the first place (Forte).

NATO and the globalist war on Libya was one bankrupt of any moral grounding or political justification. It was a war born of compromised interests that sought not the liberation of an oppressed people but rather the pillages of Libya which would later serve as a gateway into the heart of Africa. While the globalists attempt to sell their wars as moral and for the betterment of the world, they are at heart driven only by a desire to spread hegemony and consolidate control, with the ultimate goal being global hegemony. Any attempt to invoke a moral cover should be shunned in light of the barrage of fake atrocities attributed to Gaddafi and complementing crimes by NATO, best captured in the lies regarding Gaddafi massacring his people, hiring mercenaries, and staging mass rapes among other echo chamber distortions. Only when we tear down the media’s curtain of deception can we better understand the events at play and position ourselves intellectually to combat globalist imperialism which seeks to subvert us all.

NATO's work

NATO’s work

Before and Now

Before and Now

libye(8)

Matthew Vandyke

Matthew Vandyke say’s that his a journalist but in reality he was fighting with rebels its said that he has connections with CIA

MERCENARIES

Matthew Vandyke the journalist really?! So now we can say that the ratverments had paid Mercenaries and not the Qaddafi regime

BOMBINDG child

NATO BOMBED A VILLA IN SOURMAN THIS IS THE OUTCOME OF THE BOMBING THE WHOLE FAMILY DIED EXCEPT THE FATHER

 

TARGET LIBYA Behind the politics and dirty tricks that demonised Libya’s Colonel Qaddafi


TARGET LIBYA

Behind the politics and dirty tricks that demonised Libya’s Colonel Qaddafi

By David Guyatt

“It’s an easy hit.” The voice of Lester Coleman, former Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) operative and joint author of the explosive book Trail of the Octopus, echoed hollowly down the line. Lester answered my question in four simple words. I had asked him why the US continues blaming Libya’s Qadaffi for all the woes in the world. Since his enforced “exile,” Lester has become something of an expert on Libya.

“Listen David,” he continued, “It’s all domestic politics.” Libyan skulduggery plays to the “Red-necks” who inhabit middle America. Lester, an accomplished linguist launched into a humorous back-woods drawl to emphasise his point. Most Americans believe anything they’re told about “Ay-rabs” he said, particularly at politically sensitive times or during an election year. One reason, perhaps, why the US had threatened to use a nuclear weapon against Libya in spring of 1996.

Conservative Sir Teddy Taylor in British parliament

I was told this latter piece of gossip by Sir Teddy Taylor, Conservative Member of Parliament. Sir Teddy had consented to an interview to provide background on the assassination of WPC Yvonne Fletcher and also on the downing of Pan Am flight 103, over Lockerbie. The MP had a special interest in both cases. Somehow, I had missed picking up the US nuclear threat on the news. When Sir Teddy mentioned it, my jaw dropped with a jowl-shuddering “clunk.” I later confirmed the story from American media sources. In the event it was just bluster. 1996 has proved a peculiarly good year for Libya. For the second time in a decade, it got shunted into the political back woods by Presidential warlords. Instead the mad Ayatollah’s of Iran took centre-stage as America’s arch-demon in this election year. But by all accounts it was touch and go whether Libya or Iran would be awarded the honour of the black boot this time around.

Les Coleman is the first DIA operative to have gone public and blown the whistle. His book blew the lid on the Lockerbie story. Because of his inside knowledge, he was inundated with death threats from the intelligence community and fled with his family to Europe for safety. Originally given temporary political asylum in Sweden, two years later he was forced to move on. Most recently he was residing in Spain.

When I spoke to him, he was planning his return to the US after years of exile. Now penniless and unsettled, we spoke about his chances of arrest on an old charge of obtaining a passport in a false name – something he did under DIA instruction as a field operative. In any case, Les hoped the forthcoming Presidential election might insulate him from prosecution, but was going to return “home” no matter what. His family had, understandably, grown tired of their nomadic life and missed “home”.

Unsurprisingly, word of his return to the USA had leaked out. A short while before finalising his flight plans he was attacked by four men and beaten to a pulp. He arrived in the US in a wheelchair on 17 October 1996, arrested and placed in custody on Federal charges. His book, due to be published in the US has been now been suppressed. US distributors for Signet Books, say the publication date is “indefinitely postponed.”

Les was one of many people I spoke to in an attempt to get a clear understanding of the nonsensical US position on Libya. For the better part of twenty years Libya and its leader Muammar Qaddafi has been hoisted atop America’s most hated nation list. It was a form of political vilification that Europe didn’t share, until the murder of Yvonne Fletcher, to which I shall return.

Upon taking power, the Reagan administration immediately commenced a bitter campaign against Qaddafi, principally under the guidance of Director of Central Intelligence, Bill Casey – a gruff, no nonsense financial street-fighter who’s lack of political eloquence was matched by a well used black-jack. Casey had been Ronald Reagan’s Campaign Manager and carried Reagan to victory on the back of the “October Surprise” issue of 1980. President Carter’s re-election chances were dashed by the intransigence of both the Iranians and US officials who – unknown to him – had concluded a secret deal to delay the release of US hostages, held by Tehran, in exchange for battlefield weapons. Reagan romped home to a landslide victory and immediately announced that the hostages would be released. It is now clear that Casey was one of the central architects who negotiated the deal with the Iranian Ayatollahs.

A virulent pro-market, anti-Communist, Casey shared his views with British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher – a close personal friend. Thatcher was one of the few Prime Ministers who took an active interest in the machinations of the intelligence community. She went out of her way to attend Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) meetings and insisted on being regularly briefed. Her interest in these exotic areas may have been whetted by many of her ardent supporters, like Airey Neave, who possessed intelligence backgrounds.

Casey also had a “thing” about Qaddafi, who he saw as a lowlife rebel-rouser who bankrolled the globe’s terrorists. Along with other administration hard-liner’s, Casey set out to destabilise Libya and over-throw Qaddafi in true CIA fashion.

Within months of taking office, President Reagan authorised a battle fleet to sail along Libya’s coastline. Announced to the media as a “naval exercise,” the manoeuvre was designed to challenge Libya’s recently announced sovereignty over the Gulf of Sidra - a move that extended Libya’s territorial claims well beyond the internationally recognised twelve mile coastal boundary.

Ordinarily, a territorial dispute of this nature would typically be subject to international diplomacy and discussion. In the event the Reagan administration saw it as a perfect excuse to buckle on the hip-holsters and start blasting away with a set of Texan six-guns. Qadhafi was about to get a taste Reagan’s gung-ho, go-get-‘em diplomacy – the first in a series of “police actions” that were later to lead to the invasion of Granada and Panama.

On August 19, 1981, two US Navy F-14 “Tomcats” patrolling thirty miles inside the disputed territorial waters were attacked by Libyan jets. In the melee that followed two Libyan jets were shot down. A delighted Ronald Reagan mimicked his old western movie days – for the benefit of his close aides – by drawing two imaginary six-guns and peppering an equally imaginary Qaddafi with numerous bullets. It was pure “boy’s own” stuff but backed by multi-megaton muscles.

Over the following months, numerous intelligence briefings reported that Qaddafi had ordered a revenge attack against President Reagan and other high administration officials. Quickly shown to be unfounded, the fabricated report was traced to Manucher Ghorbanifar – a shadowy Iranian arms dealer who had helped to broker the arms for hostages deal. Despite this, the “false” death threat gave Casey and other administration insiders the ammunition they needed to wage a protracted campaign against the Libyan leader.

By November, a top secret National Security Planning Group (NSPG) chaired by the President (who was known to sleep through Cabinet meetings) authorised planning for ” a military response against Libya in the event of further Libyan attempts to assassinate American officials or attack U.S. facilities.” Soon drafted, the Top Secret memo “counter-terrorist planning towards Libya” recommended the President to “immediately direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff to ready assets to carry out military action against Libya in self-defence, following a further Libyan provocation.” A number of retaliatory “graduated” responses were planned. Out of the main five options, four centred on air strikes against Libyan targets. Fear-stricken at these developments, Qaddafi reacted by sending an envoy to Washington, pleading that the whole thing was pure bunkum. The strategy proved successful… for the time being.

There followed a hiatus in US activity against Libya, as the CIA and Casey focused most of its resources on the Nicaraguan situation. But Qaddafi was not to be forgotten. In a tour of European Capitals in early 1984 – a US Presidential election year – US officials seeking allied co-operation against Libya returned home in bleak mood. The picture they presented of European attitudes to Qaddafi was not encouraging. The Libyan leader was generally well regarded. First he did a lot of business with Europe; he wasn’t a fundamentalist, and; a large number of European ex-pats lived and worked in Libya. Collectively, the Europeans wouldn’t sanction US hostilities. Hardly surprising when the bulk of Libya’s crude oil – almost 80% – is exported to western Europe – principally Italy, Germany, Spain and France.

With administration insiders concluding that Qaddafi would be just the “ticket” leading to a Reagan victory at the upcoming election in November, something had to be done to modify European public opinion. Within months, “fate” seemed to lend a helping hand.

Woman Police Constable Yvonne Fletcher was on duty outside London Libyan people’s Bureau, on 17 April 1984. Located in the fashionable and serene St. James Square, the Libyan Bureau building huddles in a corner of the square. It’s address is No. 5. On that day a hail of automatic gunfire disturbed the tranquillity, sending Pigeons flying in all directions. The eleven round burst – fired by a 9mm Sterling sub-machine gun – from the first floor of the Libyan building, felled a number of anti-Qadaffi demonstrators protesting outside. WPC Fletcher was killed outright. The slaying caused uproar and hit the headlines around the world. Condemned in the worlds media and Parliament, all Libyan diplomats were expelled by a furious Home Secretary. The only problem with the Home Secretary’s understandable indignation was that the Libyan gunman didn’t shoot Yvonne Fletcher.

The Fletcher killing occurred out-of-the-blue and singularly changed British political and public opinion overnight. Open season was declared on Qaddafi and Libya by the US, and most importantly, was supported by Britain. The rest of Europe kept silent and sulked – having been out manoeuvred. With the aid of a single bullet, the Reagan administration’s “destabilisation” plan against Qaddafi was back on track.

Eighteen months after Fletcher’s assassination, 40 US warplanes screamed across the night sky above Tripoli and Benghazi. Of those, eight F111 bombers had launched from bases in East Anglia, England – with the blessing of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and a still enraged British population. Each bomber carried four 2000-pound laser-guided “smart” bombs. In all, 32,000-pounds of high explosive ordnance were explicitly targeted to kill Qadaffi. Miraculously, he escaped unhurt. His fifteenth-month old daughter was killed and two adopted sons badly injured.

The Reagan administration loosed the warplanes on Libya following the bombing of the La Belle Discotheque in West Berlin, nine days earlier. One US serviceman and a young Turkish woman had been killed outright, and 230 people injured. The Disco was a known hangout for off-duty US servicemen.

President Reagan claimed he had irrefutable proof of Libyan sponsorship for the atrocity. Despite this claim, no evidence has been submitted by the Reagan administration to support their allegations. A host of well informed individuals and “sources” doubt any proof ever existed – except in the fevered imagination of CIA boss, Bill Casey. Conservative MP, Sir Teddy Taylor, regards the American allegations as “total rubbish.”

In April 1996, Britain’s Channel Four “flagship” documentary programme Dispatches – in a massively researched broadcast – revealed that Fletcher had been murdered by elements of British and American intelligence. The purpose of the slaying, as outlined earlier, was to “shape” public opinion and, importantly, pre-empt Parliamentary indignation for the later bombing of Tripoli by British based US warplanes. Disgracefully, these astonishing revelations went unreported by the media.

The film, made by the highly regarded Fulcrum Productions, was the subject of a debate in the House of Commons on 8 May 1996. MP’s Sir Teddy Taylor and Tam Dalyell, demanded the government initiate a full inquiry. Responding for the government, Home Office Minister of State, David MacClean, described the Dispatches programme as “preposterous trash.” In doing so, he called into question the reputations of leading ballistics experts and gun-shot specialists – and carefully avoided reference to information provided to the documentary team by well placed, and knowledgeable, intelligence sources. It was a white-knuckle statement that will hopefully, one day, boomerang back on him.

Fulcrum had learned that British and US intelligence had established a major surveillance post – adjacent to the Libyan People’s Bureau – at No. 8 St. James Square. This post had been “active” for at least six weeks prior to the shooting, with up to 40 individual intelligence officers present. On the morning of the shooting, the post was abandoned. Moreover, Dispatches also learned that the demonstration outside the Libyan Bureau was a phoney. The demonstrators belonged to a CIA front organisation.

Two additional facts were discovered: British and American intelligence knew that Col. Qaddafi had sanctioned his London Bureau to shoot at the demonstrators – they had intercepted the secret message granting authorisation. Secondly, the CIA and MI5 knew precisely the calibre of weapon to be used. Both intelligence agencies had “penetrated” the Bureau and had Libyan “sources” supplying information to them.

Crucially, Fulcrum Productions learned, beyond doubt, that the bullet that killed Fletcher had been fired from the upper floor of No. 8 St. James Square – the location of the surveillance post. Ballistics experts consulted by the documentary team, confirmed the bullets entry track to have come from No. 8. The team also learned that the bullet was adapted to fire with “Terminal Velocity.” This technique – a speciality of SAS “shooters” - is achieved by removing some of the explosive propellant from the cartridge. The result is a quieter shot – similar to using a silencer. A side effect of a bullet fired in this manner is that it flies slower and “tumbles” as it strikes the target - wrecking havoc as it rips through soft tissue. In every respect it is a “killer” shot – where chances of survival are so slim as to be negligible. The information on the bullet’s “Terminal Velocity” characteristics were also confirmed by independent experts.

A well-placed and reliable “source” interviewed by this writer, explained why WPC Fletcher was targeted. Intelligence operatives knew Qaddafi had authorised a “hitman” to let loose with a sterling automatic weapon against CIA funded demonstrators gathering outside the London Bureau. This information was gleaned with the aid of signals intercepts and human intelligence (HUMINT) sources inside the Bureau itself. The great worry amongst the secret cabal who planned the assassination, was that random killing of Arab protesters would not be sufficient to force the British Home Secretary to expel all Libyan diplomats. It was argued that a targeting a British “Bobby,” especially a Police Woman would do the trick.

Such appalling cynicism is the hand-maiden to the intelligence community as well as heartless politicians who believe the end justifies the means. The “source” also explained that it was an “off the books” hit, and that “elements” inside the British and American intelligence community were “out of control.” But the suspicion remains that someone with power and influence gave a “nod and a wink” to the operation. It is just not credible to suppose otherwise. The key to this convoluted reasoning was the cabal’s fear that the Home Secretary, Leon Brittan, would not act as required, without immense public and political pressure to jog him along. This is the rationale of someone with a developed sense of political reality.

After the shooting, Brittan immediately ordered an investigation, which has remained under lock and key ever since. Not long afterwards, sordid stories began to circulate amongst the British media that the Home Secretary had unusual sexual appetites. The rumours were fed to the satirical magazine, Private Eye, who recognised the handiwork of the security service and refused to publish the allegations. However, within a year, Leon Brittan was forced from office for his part in the Westland helicopter debacle.

With Western European objections so neatly taken care of, Qadaffi’s demonisation went in to full gear. The anachronistic Bedouin was rapidly elevated from “useful” to “primary” middle east “scapegoat.” At the same time, European governments learned as a result of the Libyan bombing, just how “hard” the US were prepared to play in pursuit of domestic politics and wider foreign policy. Tarring Qadaffi as the world’s bad boy suited the selfish interests of the political power elite in the US, and was an added bonus when other illegal CIA middle east “covert ops” went belly-up. One such operation was the CIA protected Heroin pipeline operating from the middle east to the USA.

A recurring problem for President Reagan was his inability to rescue the US hostages held in Lebanon by Hezbollah. Hanging like a dark cloud over his otherwise successful term of office, the hostage problem was turned over to Lt. Colonel Oliver North to resolve. North, a medium ranked military officer with close personal ties to the CIA’s Bill Casey, was the administrations global Mr. Fixit. He, in turn, called on the services of his old friend, Manzur El-Khassar – a Syrian born “big-time” narcotics and arms trafficker. Earlier, the Syrian had assisted North in his time of need, by brokering a large shipment of weapons to the CIA backed, Nicaragua’s Contra’s. It earned him a lot of kudos inside the administration.

Lebanon’s Bekka Valley is a fertile and productive area specially suited to growing Opium poppies. Rifat Assad, the brother of Syria’s President Hafez Assad was widely known to have been in charge of Syria’s narcotics enterprise. As the “Supremo” of the Bekka Valley’s massive Opium industry, he was also a paid “asset” of the CIA and was being “groomed” to succeed his elder brother as Syrian President. He was also an extremely close friend to El-Khassar. It is widely believed that the influx of 30,000 Syrian troops in to the Bekka Valley during the eighties, had as much to do with protecting the lucrative Opium fields as with separating Lebanon’s warring factions.

El-Khassar agreed to negotiate on behalf of the US for the release of the US hostages. His side of the deal was to get an agreement that the US would protect the Syrian drugs pipeline that shipped through Frankfurt airport to the USA. The CIA allegedly established a group – known as “CIA One” – who would oversee and protect the drugs route. If publicly discovered, the response was to say that the “protected” drugs shipments were part of a Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) “sting” operation, dedicated to tracking distribution networks inside the USA.

Unknown to North and his cahoots, there was also a secret five-man Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) team working in Lebanon. The team, headed by Major Charles “Tiny” McKee was independently tasked with locating and rescuing the US hostages. During the course of his work, McKee, stumbled across El-Khassar’s “CIA One” protected Heroin network. Reporting his “discovery” to CIA HQ at Langley, and outraged at the lack of response, McKee booked his team on a flight home. At this point, El’Khassar learned of McKee’s activities and was also informed of his flight plans. Anxious that McKee would put a stop to his activities, he contacted his CIA One handlers who, in turn, communicated with their “control” in Washington.

Against this insidious backdrop, other, unrelated covert plans were being hatched. Following the July 1988 shoot-down of an Iranian Airbus by the US Navy battle-cruiser Vincennes, hard-line Iranian Ayatollah’s demanded swift retaliation for the 290 lives lost. They hired the Syrian based Popular front for the Liberation of Palestine, General Command (PFLP-GC) for a tit-for-tat attack. Led by Ahmed Jibril – and with a $10 million Iranian bounty – the PFLP-GC searched for a suitable target. An expert at bombing aircraft, Jibril soon learned of El-Khassar’s Frankfurt based dope pipeline and persuaded El-Khassar to place a bomb inside the Heroin laden suitcase. Pan Am flight 103 was scheduled for destruction.

Meanwhile, Germany’s Federal Police, the Bundeskriminalamt (BKA), received a warning that a bomb was to be substituted for the dope shipment aboard flight 103. They alerted CIA One, who passed the information on to their Stateside “Control.” The reply came back: “Don’t worry about it. Don’t stop it. Let it go.” On December 21st 1988, Pan Am’s Jumbo 747 “Maid of the Seas” exploded high above the Scottish village of Lockerbie. All 259 passengers perished. A further eleven people died as wreckage from the aircraft hurtled down to earth.

Within hours, a host of CIA agents arrived at the crash scene. It is thought that the CIA search team arrived via helicopter from a US Special Forces facility located at Machrihanish, on the Mull of Kintyre. The speed of their arrival suggests they had foreknowledge of the bombing. In any case the CIA agents, dressed in Pan Am overalls, set about ransacking the crash sight in a desperate search for incriminating evidence. For two days they searched for the luggage of the dead DIA team and frantically sought the suitcase containing the heroin shipment. One suitcase was recovered, flown out and later returned empty, to be “re-discovered” by the forensic team scouring the wreckage. It belonged to Major Charles McKee. Curiously, one unidentified body was snatched from the wreckage and never returned.

Les Coleman believes it would be wrong to blame the CIA in to for the Lockerbie atrocity. Intelligence outfits do not work as cohesively as many outsiders believe. There is a great deal of rivalry and fragmentation at work. DCI Bill Casey, had plenty of detractors inside the monolith he directed. Some worked hard feeding unattributed information to their favourite journalists that was designed to damage him and, hopefully, lead to his removal. Others are known to operate as part of small and secretive core that has variously been identified as the “Enterprise” or the “Octopus.” The latter is said to operate with organised crime and leading politicians who covertly traffic in guns, drugs laundered money and any other commodity that can generate massive profits. Whether the proceeds of these illegal activities are siphoned back into the “black” budgets of the CIA, or fill the pockets of participants – or both – isn’t entirely clear.

Despite Coleman’s caution, the CIA’s infamous history – stretching over fifty years – clearly suggest that US foreign policy and private gain “coalesce” in to a game-plan that benefits various parties. Some intelligence “watchers” point to the wealth of some long-term CIA officers and ask how they amassed their fortunes based on salaries of $60,000 a year? It is a valid question that can be equally addressed to former and serving politicians and senior government bureaucrats.

By attributing the responsibility of Lockerbie on Qaddafi, the US administration was following in the well-worn foot-steps of many predecessors in similar situations. It’s a technique as old as the hills. Caught virtually red-handed in massive illegality, the first thought is to cast round for a suitable scapegoat. As Lester Coleman said when I first spoke to him, Qaddafi is an easy target. Independently minded and unwilling to align himself with US middle eastern policy, he became a target in the US. His past bankrolling of “terrorist” causes – and one-time expansionism – also did him no favours. It’s a case of if you’re not for us, you’re against us.

Sitting on vast reserves of oil is also a significant factor for Libya’s treatment at the hands of the US. The fact that most of this oil flows to western European oil companies, clearly doesn’t cut much ice with the US. Rivalry between the European and US business elite is as intense as ever. US oil companies can’t be pleased that they are effectively out of the picture. In that sense Qaddafi was, as Les Coleman said, an “easy hit.”

Perhaps more telling than anything else, British support for the US anti-Libyan “campaign” clearly demonstrates the moral and ethical bankruptcy of the British political process. That those in power manipulated the British judicial system and continue to lie to the families of the Lockerbie victims is sinister enough. That they not only tolerated, but connived in the murder of an innocent woman police officer – to further American political designs – says more than any party political manifesto could begin to utter. All power corrupts, but the continued exercise of raw, unadulterated power of this magnitude is the very antithesis of a participatory democracy.

In researching this article I spoke with many different individuals. Some agreed to speak on the record, whilst others requested anonymity. One well placed and knowledgeable source summed up the situation with these words: “There is no democracy. There is no free press.” That source remains a leading Member of Parliament.

ENDS
NUJ

©1996 – David Guyatt

source: plane-truth.com

Quote

Global Public Alert – (Unite Yourself Together) HILLARY & BERNARD The Jew and Libya

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/hillary-bernard.html

http://counterpsyops.com/2012/09/17/hillary-bernard-the-jew-and-libya/

Following the recent events in Libya, Hillary Clinton http://times247.com/articles/clinton-confounded-by-libya-s-violence. ****(SORRY THE LINK CANNOT BE FOUND)

was quoted saying “how can this happen in a country we help liberate (colonize), in a city [Benghazi] we helped save from destruction?”***(really what destruction? when you finance the Al Qaida Muslim brotherhood, L.IF.G and the mercenaries of black ops CIA/MOSSAD/MI6/DGSE)

I guess that the American Foreign Secretary should address this question to Bernard-Henri Levy – the architect behind that interventionist war.

Apparently, a few months ago, at a convention organised by the notoriously right wing French Zionist Council of Jewish Organizations (CRIF), Bernard-Henri Levy announced:

http://extremeprejudiceusa.wordpress.com/2011/11/24/bernard-henri-levy-would-not-have-gone-to-libya-he-he-not-been-jewish/
“it is as a Jew“ that I “participated in the political adventure in Libya”, no kidding. “I would not have done it if I had not been Jewish,” added the immoral interventionist.

I guess that after more than a decade of Zio-centric global conflicts causing carnage and destruction to tens of millions of people around the world, we are too used to seeing a Zionist at the centre of every man-made disaster.

I have made myself a rule. Whenever I hear a person speak in the name of ‘Jewish values’ or ‘as a Jew’, I immediately seek cover. I suggest you do the same…

Bernard-Henri Lévy v. Abdel al-Bari Atwan on Libya intervention

The Poison of Bernard Henry Levy

Nothing against the normal jewish people….but people your religion has been hijacked by a group of criminals posing as peacekeepers…...be warned…
*- original source: http://youtu.be/9nPTZYSuCu0

_______________________________
Libya S.O.S.: BERNARD-HENRI LÉVY or BHL French members of the Israeli lobby [I]
http://libyasos.blogspot.ru/2011/11/bernard-henri-levy-or-bhl-french.html

BERNARD-HENRI LÉVY or BHL, French members of the Israeli lobby [I]
http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org/2011/11/08/bernard-henri-levy-or-bhl-french-members-of-the-israeli-lobby-i/

WHO IS Bernard Henry Levi?
http://libyasos.blogspot.ru/search?q=Bernard+Henry+Levi

Bernard-Henri Levy: Turning to Syria
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/bernard-henri-levy-turning-syria

REUPLOAD: Zionist Conspiracy on Libya (Sarkozy, Bernard Henri Levy, Klarsfeld (siehe Beschreibung))

Bernard Henry LEVY, le chef spirituel, commandant, philosophe des rebelles libyens.

Non, vous ne rêvez pas, c’est bien BHL…
Mais sur quel monde vit-on ???

Who is Gog and Magog?

ماشاء الله عليهم ….مسلمين …..لعنة الله على من ولاهم ..لوكانو يحمون المدنيين لدافعو عنهم فى العراق وفى فلسطين
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150808713147333
لاكن طالما هناك جردان على وجه الارض فالنصرلهم لامحاله..

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=280362778725618
هذا الخائن الجالس بجانب اليهودى ليفى هو حسن الدروعى من سكان مدينة سرت, تخرج من جامعة التحدى وخرج على حساب المجتمع لأكمال دراسته فى فرنسا وكان يرافق شباب سرت فى فرنسا, وبعد عدم تحصله على أمين أتحاد الطلبة فى فرنسا قبل شهور من هذه الفورة اللعينة وما أن جاءت الفورة كان هو من أوائل الكلاب اللي خانت وباعت وباع أهله فى سرت وذهب مع برنارد ليفى ليفنى الغازى وكان يشتغل كمترجم له. وبعد طرد السفير الليبى من فرنسا, قام جرذان الشرق بتقسيم مقاعد السفارة الليبية هناك ولم يتحصل هذا العميل حتى وظيفة عشاش على باب السفارة استخدموه وقعد كلب لان هذا مصير اللي يبيع هله وناسه وبلاده واللي مافيه خير لاهله مافيه خير لحد, وبعد ذلك لكى يزيد من اهتمام مجلس النذاله به قام بربط جرذان سرت بالناتو كـ عبدالسلام بالحاج وأخوته”على وعبدالله” وعجاج سكر وأبناء زرقون ومزاريط سرت اليهود وبعض كلاب القاعدة كـ على العمارى والصفرانى وعلى الكيوى وأبناء حريبة. والكلب مخلوف الناصري
ولقد تبرأ منه أهله منذ بداية الأحداث وأتصل خاله وأبوه بالدكتور حمزة التهامى وكان أخوته يجاهدون فى الجبهات. وتم هدر دمه من قبيلته.
فى المقعد الأمامىالخائن المقبور عبدالفتاح يونس والعميل مصطفى الزاقزلى. والحساب ماعادش بعيد لكل خاين فرخ حرام باع بلده

 

Conspiracy on Libya! {with Bernard Levi}
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=249304155086580

Conspiracy on Libya المؤامرة على ليبي {with Bernard Levi}

Bernard Levy said that it was him who convince Sarkozy to begin preparing for a war against Libya!
He repeatedly visited Benghazi and arranged for the rebels to meet in Paris to discuss the future shape of Libya.
Levy has a habit of turning up in every major trouble spot in the world! He has been directly involved in major trouble spots and in contact with the main players in these countries.

This behavior is unusual for a person who sees himself as an intellectual rather than a troublemaker.
In this video we will explore Bernard Henri Levy’s interventions through images showing his presence and involvement in the trouble spots.

Isn’t it surprising that countries like Bosnia and Sudan where he was active are now partitioned and its people divided?
Doesn’t this prove that the intent is to divide Libya between east and west?
We will also explore the special relation Levy has with the Zionist state of Israel and we will also look at Nicola Sarkosy’s Jewish roots.
>
Don’t forget and this in Bernard Henry Levy crimes series:

Libya Whos behind Sarkozy?
Many talk about that Sarkozy is going to be prosecuted but what about the man behind Sarkozy? Will he be allowed to run free and help terrorists in Algeria and Syria?

>
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=231807890174384
ثوار الناتو ينقسمون حول المبادرة الإفريقية ويدلون بتصريحات متناقضة
الاحد 3 تموز (يوليو) 2011

أدلى ثوار الناتو يوم السبت بتصريحات متضاربة حول موقفهم من المبادرة الإفريقية لحل الأزمة الليبية، فقد نقلت وكالة أنباء ارويترز عن ممثل المجلس الانتقامي في باريس قوله إن المجلس يقبل المبادرة الإفريقية ويفسرها على أنها تلبي معظم شروطه التفاوضية..

بعد ساعات من إذاعة هذا التصريح ظهر المتحدث باسم المجلس في بنغازي على القنوات الفضائية ليلعن أن المجلس لا يقبل المبادرة، وذهب ابعد من ذك حين قال إن الافارقة غير مؤهلين لطرح أي مبادرة..
التصريحات المتضادة تعكس عمق الهوة بين ما يسمى المعارضة الليبية، وهي هوة تتسع يوما بعد آخر، خاصة مع تكشف حقائق جديدة في وسائل الإعلام العالمي عن لجوء بعض المعارضين إلى التفاوض سرا مع طرابلس دون إشعار زملائهم، وهو ما زرع بذور الشك والريبة في نفوس بعضهم تجاه البعض الآخر..
وسبق لما يسمى الجبهة الوطنية لإنقاذ ليبيا أن بعثت برسالة إلى عبد الجليل تؤكد له فيها إجبارية المرور بها قبل الإدلاء بأي تصريح آخذة عليه تعدد الناطقين باسم المجلس وعدم التنسيق فيما بينهم..
ويذهب عدد من المراقبين إلى القول إن أيام المجلس باتت معدودة خاصة وأن الحلف الأطلسي بدأ ينفض يديه من اللعبة بعد ثلاثة أشهر لم يتحقق فيها شيئ على الأرض..
ويقول دبلوماسيون غربيون إن المعارضة الليبية خدعتهم حين قالت لهم إن لديها رجالا في الدائرة الضيقة حول القائد، وأنهم سيتحركون بمجرد سقوط أول صاروخ على طرابلس، وهو تأكد زيفه لاحقا إذ أفضت العمليات الجوية إلى نتائج عكسية وزادت من اللحمة الوطنية حول القائد الذي ينظر إليه الليبيون على أنه رمز وطني وقائد من النوع النادر جدا..

الدليل الموريتاني

ها ها ها ها هادي اخرتها.

Libyan Egaغرفة اسود الراية الخضراء
زيدو كبرو وخودو ساتر …. الفلوس رح تنتهي … ودعاية عصر الحرية رح تبان وتشديق الديمقراطية سراب تحلمو بيه.

لو في 1 من المليون من المليار من المية في انسان ايقول لا الله الا الله وأن محمد رسول الله وقف بجنب اليهود والنصري وساندهم ولو بكلمة يقول انا انسان مايدير لداروه ناس العار والفضائح.
.

لا حول ولا قوة الا بالله وحسبي الله ونعم الوكيل.
اللهم لا تاخدنا بما فعل السفها بينا.
.

Redstar Leroye >> Global Public Alert – (Unite Yourself Together)

Bernard Henry LEVY is now Libyan !!
He was naturalized Libyan by the Rebels of Misrata to thank him for his collaboration and commitment in influencing Nicolas SARKOZY to trigger off the military intervention in Libya.
Bernard Henry LEVY es…See More
Bernard Henry LEVY est libyen.

Il a été naturalisé libyen par les rebelles de Misrata pour le remercier de sa collaboration et de son engagement d’avoir fais influence sur Nicolas SARKOZY pour qu’il intervienne en Libye.

>

WARNING !!! The World Jewish Mafia is preparing to occupy the second country and kill hundreds of thousands of Libyans !!!

Jewish arrogance will never cease to harass the world, especially Muslims!

I am convinced that soon we will want in Egypt to return hundreds of thousands of Jews, because …
… 3-4 thousand years before the Egyptian Pharaoh cast them out (now in Egypt Zionist puppet military junta – is seeking civilian puppets!)

In Libya, thousands of mysterious Jews want to return and obtain redress for that mysteriously been banned!?
1) Is there evidence that the Jews were expelled to Libya … or are you going alone?
2) Is there evidence of just how much are these Jews?
3) Are there any Jewish evidence that he or his relatives have property in Libya?
4) Is there ever expelled or left the Jews of Libya?
5) The Jewish community will give you the compensations (hundreds of billions)

****(Libyan Jews in the 70′s left Libya on their own accord there was no order or law telling Libyan Jews to live the country)

Do all the Libyan people for murder, destruction of NATO and its terrorists and will return the full amount + redress robbed Libyan sovereign Jewish assets in monetary institutions (the reasons are – World Jewish Mafia (lobby) plan, perform and continue – genocide, ethnic cleansing, terrorism, colonization with the usual Jewish settlements and privatization of resources !!!

Throughout the genocide and destruction in Libya’s sovereign began with a lie - “thousands of peaceful protesters bombarded the Libyan aviation”, this historical lie constantly announced in the Zionist “media” (CNN, SKY, BBC, FOX, FRANCE 24, AL JAZEERA .. ….) and Zionist organizations such as false – “Human Rights Watch” and “Amnesty International” and “ICC” and all these parasitic and terrorist organizations and the media are owned or funded by the Jewish lobby !!! ….

… But someone must pay “bill” and “someone” must be judged on historical trial for genocide and ethnic cleansing, destruction and robbery of a peaceful, prosperous and beautiful country – Libya !?!

Required Libyan people should seek (and to take) hundreds of billions of redress from the Jewish community because -
1) just as the Jewish community planning, orchestration and ignite war in Libya, which all begin with false reports and propaganda in the Jewish media (CNN, SKY , BBC, FOX, FRANCE 24, AL JAZEERA ……)!
2) Just as the Jews caused the war and that Sarkozy parasite – Bernard Levy!
3) That the Jews in the Jewish monetary authorities arrested, Eastern and plundered billions of Libyan assets that are owned by the Libyan people!
4) That the Jewish lobby done and continues to do so – pressure on governments, politicians and all organizations working on behalf of the Board of rats and rats!
5) Just Jewish drone missile commit terrorist attacks against the Libyan people (not to wonder what these pilots and their conscience to carry out this genocide – read “Talmud” and you’ll understand why)
6) On the Jews and the Jewish lobby ran illegal TVsovereign in Libya (Benghazi) without the permission of the legitimate government and the Libyan people and deliberately drowned broadcast Libyan state television!? This means that the insurgency (with Libyan nationality) fought and killed the Libyan brothers and sisters, because they lied that the Libyan army carried out mass killings and rapes and that most cities were “liberated” by the “revolutionaries” and that there waiting for them with open hearts!
7) The Jewish lobby and Jewish politicians exert pressure in the U.S. to steal Libyan assets and to support the extermination, robbery and destruction of the Libyan people, sovereignty, infrastructure and state!
8) The Jewish Lobby performed worldwide pressure on governments and politicians to support a false and illegal resolutions in Libya (the UN) and talk shit about Gaddafi … “” Mode “”!
9) Jewish terrorist organization – Mossad arms and helped al-Qaeda (CIA + Mossad + M6) and the Libyan terrorists to kill, torture, kidnapping, rape and threaten Libyans!
10) The World Jewish Mafia war on fire in order not to violate Jewish world monetary monopoly of Gaddafi’s plans to establish an African Monetary Fund IMF and expelling terrorist! World Jewish Mafia and Jewish lobby (same) support the ethnic cleansing of blacks in Libya and genocide against the entire Libyan people to be able to reduce the population of the Libyans on behalf of Jewish settlers (with the lie that lived in Libya or relatives the Jews “expelled” from Libya …… usual lies and dirt of the Zionists), because Libya has everything that a nation wants – energy, water … everything needed to create a second Jewish state – second Palestine!
11) false Jewish organizations – owned by Jews and financed by Jews set fire to maintain and continue to backfire through the lies, manipulations and false reports to all their impertinence with the Libyan army accused of crimes against humanity and pass when the crimes of terrorists NATO – as “crimes committed by the Libyan army and militia … Gaddafi (” mode “)! We carcasses Libyans killed by NATO and its terrorists are transferred to the victims of Gaddafi …” mode “!? Jewish question organization or organizations created and funded by the Jewish mafia is as follows - “Amnesty International” and “Human Rights Watch” (most popular) – owned by Jewish terrorist financing George Soros and the so-called – “ICC”!
12) huge pressure from world Jewish Mafia – UN and Council of “security” vote “resolution” of the final decision – Libyan Q and of course – a change of the constitution and the UN Charter, international law and the Geneva Convention!!

According to this amendment (if done) from now on, foreign governments can be elected and appointed government, politicians and political systems in foreign “sovereign” countries! reason for this latest perversion of the Council of “security” and when the UN appointed government of Libya (rejected by the Libyan people) and which”Government is composed of foreigners, Jews lied that lived in Libya, a proven leader of a terrorist organization, Libyan traitors and former employees of the Libyan government (or through bribery or threats) and Libyan criminals!

As the United Nations with all its arrogance under pressure from Jewish Mafia gave full permission of the false “Libyan government to” kill, kidnapping, raping, torturing, and executing each threatens a Libyan terrorist government rejects al-Qaeda, NATO, foreigners, criminals and Libyan Jewish Mafia !!!

Indeed, who knows tricks and impudence of those Jewish communities (followers of the Talmud)! An example is the criminal acquisition of double, triple + citizenship through pressure from the Jewish Mafia and use their weapons – the “anti-Semitism!” For Israeli passports everyone knows! Jewslove to pretend always the most “tortured”, “most disadvantaged”, “most persecuted” ….. A “poor”!

They love to come to foreign countries and finds that it is their relatives who lived there before 50 … 100 or 200 years ago and immediately scream that his heirs and want passports for them, their children,their cousins … and their pets (often redress from the State for the fictional “repression” than their relatives)! In this way many Jews have several passport! It is possible that soon Jewish scientist to discover that Jews come from the planet Mars and claim ownership of Mars and Martians reparations that have driven them from “their home” place!!!!!

Democracy ?

Zionist European Union, USA, Israel and their false “media and organizations” – just not allowed to use such a word “democracy” “freedom,” “human rights and freedoms”, “free media” and “freedom of political orientation ” !!!

Example of what happens in Bulgaria! – Scenarios conducted by the World Jewish mafia is the same! Example of what happens in my country Bulgaria after the introduction of “democracy”!

Suddenly there were thousands of Jews claiming to be expelled after World War II came to power by the communist government?

Actually that’s a lie! Indeed, the communist government made nationalization, but Jews no one pursued them, just some decide to leave voluntarily by selling their properties in Bulgarian families and other property Bulgarian government gave compensation to Jewish owners – how fair is it not already know. …

But something has happened more than 60 years!

During this time these properties were repaired and maintained by the Bulgarian families and they are grown for 2-3 generations of Bulgarian families! (By this logic, the Jews can claim compensation from the Egyptian people that thousands of years ago Jewish slaves worked on the pyramids andthey had not been provided then the care deserved!)

Under pressure from the World Jewish Mafia “Bulgarian” puppet government Bulgarian families expelled from their homes and give them the mysterious Jewish heirs – repaired and maintained by Bulgarian citizens decades, “Bulgarian” Court even does not respect the documents presented by the Bulgarians, that these properties were bought with money from their moms and dads (or grandparents) and those Jewish heirs can not claim for restitution!This “little problem” was solved by a puppet “Bulgarian Parliament” by law for mandatory restitution to Jewish heirs who earn a “victim” and that their relatives in the past have received less money under threat!

So one way or another, all Jews were given their property and Bulgarian families hit the street on which they were given some junk – pieces of paper (called – compensatory vouchers) that not only were tens of times less value than those taken Jews of their property, but subsequently deliberately devalued by the Jewish mafia, which of course already had all the financial institutions in Bulgaria!

So far, this Bulgarian families litigate in Bulgarian and European courts without any result, of course! By the way thanks to the Jewish Mafia and many state properties and agricultural lands were “returned” to the Jews - not even own or produce documents and evidence to claim ownership of …

… were spent again they or their relatives in the past – “victims of repression” by … Ahhh “poor” – the communist regime !!!

WARNING !!! - UN and Council of “security” (the weapon of the Zionists) started a new Jewish occupation of the next sovereign state and its people -Libya!

Of course, again accompanied with genocide, destruction,humiliation and systematic extermination of the Libyan people(make them kill each – other and separate NATO and al-Qaeda (Mossad) further helps to reduce the population of the Libyan population!

Suddenly, that “someone “in the past been banished 37,000 Jews and mysterious” was taken away “their property” !?! Of course these “harassment” and mysterious Jews “had become”has 200,000,000 !?!

This means that hundreds of thousands of Libyans will be destroyed and hundreds of thousands of Libyan families will be displaced and their homes will be seized by the Jewish dirt (a fictitious reason that these were their homes and taken from the Libyans)! separate Jewish army and paid terrorists would deliberately kill and harass Libyan people for the simple treason to reduce this population, while others migrate !!!

Certainly hundreds of billions that are owned by the Libyan people and arrested (robbed) of Jewish monetary institutions will be forfeited in favor of the new Jewish state – Libya’s Jewish! …

… These dirty and sneaky Jews always pretend to be violated most of the planet and the world suffers most because of them! And now brazenly reclaim some mysterious “Jewish property” in Libya … !?

Jews want something from Libya?

OK – then we must speak the truth (without by passing) – Libya’s Jews ask

1) restoration of property destroyed by a Libyan terrorist Zionist Alliance!
2) redress from the Jewish community for complicity in genocide in Libya (UN Jewish pressure, “media” fake organizations “human rights” Jewish terrorism (by Mossad) and many leading Jewish evil lies, illegal war, genocide, ethnic cleansing of blacks, robbery Libyan sovereign assets of Jewish financial institutions ….!
3) Complete recovery of stolen Jewish institutions Libyan assets!
4) Court for the Jewish people made war in Libya – the instigators of war, the Jewish “media” false Jewish organizations (to know), Jewish agents (such as Bernard Levy), Jewish lobbies – like McCain and other parasites and the global war mongers!

After the war in Libya, no longer to ask stupid questions – why people hate Jews …
Perhaps it is true that all wars are for Jews !?!

(If a Jew is insulted … I recommend him to address his countrymen to criticism)
*-sourcephoto:

+

The Truth about Israel – Zionism & Oil

<<|| — with Syarif Hidayat, Blanca Lembo, Elena A. Stamenkov, Kareltje Van de Tuin, Miralem Campara, Metin Gülbahar, Funda Kansu, Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Rictv Newsagency Rictvagencia Noticias, Konstantin Scheglikov, Wilmer Enrique Agüero, Christof Lehmann, John Reed, Omar Sharif, Anthony F. Angelic, Ana Martinovic, Hassan Omar, Williams Ribeiro de Farias, Niakoi Niakakav, Carline Seiser, Ironsides xx, Jazira Chuibekova, Caty Cat, Che Bavaria, Marco Cataldi, Christella Bernardene Krebs, Md Sadiq, Ana Tsivdari, Ursula Riches, Salome Davidson, Hans Cany, Tatjana Dimitrijevic, Wissem Typhoon and Dejan Malićanin.

KARK

 source: aljamahiria.algaddafi.org

Global Public Alert – (Unite Yourself Together) HILLARY & BERNARD The Jew and Libya