Ripped From Hillary’s Emails: French Plot to Overthrow Gaddafi and Help Itself to Libya’s Oil

Ripped From Hillary’s Emails: French Plot to Overthrow Gaddafi and Help Itself to Libya’s Oil

By Conn Hallinan,

“Philosopher“ Bernard Henri-Levy (aka, BHL) worked undercover as a journalist to engineer the deal with Libya, thus paving the way for yet more journalists to be accused of being spies. (Photo: Itzik Edri / Wikimedia Commons)

“Philosopher“ Bernard Henri-Levy (aka, BHL) worked undercover as a journalist to engineer the deal with Libya, thus paving the way for yet more journalists to be accused of being spies. (Photo: Itzik Edri / Wikimedia Commons)

French intelligence plotted to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi to horn in on Libya’s oil and to provide access for French businesses.

For more of Conn Hallinan’s essays visit Dispatches From the Edge. Meanwhile, his novels about the ancient Romans can be found at The Middle Empire Series.

The Congressional harrying of former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over emails concerning the 2012 death of an American Ambassador and three staff members in Benghazi, Libya, has become a sort of running joke, with Republicans claiming “cover-up” and Democrats dismissing the whole matter as nothing more than election year politics. But there is indeed a story embedded in the emails, one that is deeply damning of American and French actions in the Libyan civil war, from secretly funding the revolt against Muammar Gaddafi, to the willingness to use journalism as a cover for covert action.

The latest round of emails came to light June 22 in a fit of Republican pique over Clinton’s prevarications concerning whether she solicited intelligence from her advisor, journalist and former aide to President Bill Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal. If most newspaper readers rolled their eyes at this point and decided to check out the ball scores, one can hardly blame them.

But that would be a big mistake.

While the emails do raise questions about Hillary Clinton’s veracity, the real story is how French intelligence plotted to overthrow the Libyan leader in order to claim a hefty slice of Libya’s oil production and “favorable consideration” for French businesses.

The courier in this cynical undertaking was journalist and right-wing philosopher Bernard Henri-Levy, a man who has yet to see a civil war that he doesn’t advocate intervening in, from Yugoslavia to Syria. According to Julian Pecquet, the U.S. congressional correspondent for the Turkish publication Al-Monitor, Henri-Levy claims he got French President Nicolas Sarkozy to back the Benghazi-based Libyan Transitional National Council that was quietly being funded by the General Directorate for External Security (DGSE), the French CIA.

According to the memos, in return for money and support, “the DGSE officers indicated that they expected the new government of Libya to favor French firms and national interests, particularly regarding the oil industry in Libya.” The memo says that the two leaders of the Council, Mustafa Abdul Jalil and General Abdul Fatah Younis, “accepted this offer.”

Another May 5 email indicates that French humanitarian flights to Benghazi included officials of the French oil company TOTAL, and representatives of construction firms and defense contractors, who secretly met with Council members and then “discreetly” traveled by road to Egypt, protected by DGSE agents.

Henri-Levy, an inveterate publicity hound, claims to have come up with this quid pro quo, business/regime change scheme, using “his status as a journalist to provide cover for his activities.” Given that journalists are routinely accused of being “foreign agents” in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Afghanistan, Henri-Levy’s subterfuge endangers other members of the media trying to do their jobs.

All this clandestine maneuvering paid off.

On Feb. 26, 2011, the UN Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1970 aimed at establishing “peace and security” and protecting the civilian population in the Libyan civil war. Or at least that was how UNR 1970 was sold to countries on the Security Council, like South Africa, Brazil, India, China and Russia, that had initial doubts. However, the French, Americans and British—along with several NATO allies—saw the resolution as an opportunity to overthrow Qaddafi and in France’s case, to get back in the game as a force in the region.

Almost before the ink was dry on the resolution, France, Britain and the U.S. began systematically bombing Qaddafi’s armed forces, ignoring pleas by the African Union to look for a peaceful way to resolve the civil war. According to one memo, President Sarkozy “plans to have France lead the attacks on [Qaddafi] over an extended period of time” and “sees this situation as an opportunity for France to reassert itself as a military power.”

While for France flexing its muscles was an important goal, Al- Monitor says that a September memo also shows that “Sarkozy urged the Libyans to reserve 35 percent of their oil industry for French firms—TOTAL in particular—when he traveled to Tripoli that month.”

In the end, Libya imploded and Paris has actually realized little in the way of oil, but France’s military industrial complex has done extraordinarily well in the aftermath of Qaddafi’s fall.

According to Defense Minister Jean-Yves Lodrian, French arms sales increased 42 percent from 2012, bringing in $7 billion, and are expected to top almost $8 billion in 2014.

Over the past decade, France, the former colonial masters of Lebanon, Syria, and Algeria, has been sidelined by U.S. and British arms sales to the Middle East. But the Libya war has turned that around. Since then, Paris has carefully courted Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates by taking a hard line on the Iran nuclear talks.

The global security analyst group Stratfor noted in 2013, “France could gain financially from the GCC’s [Gulf Cooperation Council, the organization representing the oil monarchies of the Persian Gulf] frustrations over recent U.S. policy in the Middle East. Significant defense contracts worth tens of billions of dollars are up for grabs in the Gulf region, ranging from aircraft to warships to missile systems. France is predominantly competing with Britain and the United States for the contracts and is seeking to position itself as a key ally of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as it looks to strengthen its defense and industrial ties in the region.”

Sure enough, the French company Thales landed a $3.34 billion Saudi contract to upgrade the kingdom’s missile system and France just sold 24 Rafale fighters to Qatar for $7 billion. Discussions are underway with the UAE concerning the Rafale, and France sold 24 of the fighters to Egypt for $5.8 billion. France has also built a military base in the UAE.

French President Francois Hollande, along with his Foreign and Defense ministers, attended the recent GCC meeting, and, according to Hollande, there are 20 projects worth billions of dollars being discussed with Saudi Arabia. While he was in Qatar, Hollande gave a hard-line talk on Iran and guaranteed “that France is there for its allies when it is called upon.”

True to his word, France has thrown up one obstacle after another during the talks between Iran and the P5 + 1—the permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany.

Paris also supports Saudi Arabia and it allies in their bombing war on Yemen, and strongly backs the Saudi-Turkish led overthrow of the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, even though it means that the French are aligning themselves with al-Qaeda linked extremist groups.

France seems to have its finger in every Middle East disaster, although, to be fair, it is hardly alone. Britain and the U.S. also played major roles in the Libya war, and the Obama administration is deep into the ongoing wars in Syria and Yemen. In the latter case, Washington supplies the Saudis with weapons, targeting intelligence, and in-air refueling of its fighter-bombers.

But the collapse of Libya was a particularly catastrophic event, which—as the African Union accurately predicted—sent a flood of arms and unrest into two continents.

The wars in Mali and Niger are a direct repercussion of Qaddafi’s fall, and the extremist Boko Haram in Nigeria appears to have benefited from the plundering of Libyan arms depots. Fighters and weapons from Libya have turned up in the ranks of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. And the gunmen who killed 22 museum visitors in Tunisia last March, and 38 tourists on a beach July 3, trained with extremists in Libya before carrying out their deadly attacks.

Clinton was aware of everything the French were up to and apparently had little objection to the cold-blooded cynicism behind Paris’s policies in the region.

The “news” in the Benghazi emails, according to the New York Times, is that, after denying it, Clinton may indeed have solicited advice from Blumenthal. The story ends with a piece of petty gossip: Clinton wanted to take credit for Qaddafi’s fall, but the White House stole the limelight by announcing the Libyan leader’s death first.


West interested in pure crooks, psychopaths and puppets to lead Libya

West interested in pure crooks, psychopaths and puppets to lead Libya

Reuters / Esam Omran Al-Fetori

Reuters / EsamOmranAl-Fetori


Libya is now a basket case of problems after suffering interference by western powers that are not interested in promoting peace, but rather managing the chaos, Gearoid O Colmain, an independent political analyst, told RT.

The EU has planned a naval operation in the Mediterranean to target those smuggling refugees from Libya to the EU. Such an operation would include reconnaissance runs and the destruction of human trafficking bases in Libya itself. It could even mean putting European boots on the ground.

RT: The EU wants to capture smugglers and destroy their boats off the Libyan coast. Is Europe trying to bring peace and stability to Libya? Or simply stop an inflow of illegal migrants?

Gearoid O Colmain: If you go to the streets of Paris, you can see a picture of one of the leaders of the so-called Libyan revolution in 2011. He has been portrayed and displaced on kiosks all over Paris. His name is Abdelhakim Belhadj and he is an al-Qaeda operative, he is known from official sources to be an al-Qaeda operative. In fact, he was accused by a former PM of Spain, José María Aznar, of being behind the bombing of Madrid in 2004. Abdelhakim Belhadj is now being presented as a possible future leader of Libya and being promoted all over Paris. These are the kind of people Western governments are interested in – pure crooks, psychopaths and puppets.

Here is a link just to show how MI6 asset is a victim: MI6 and multiple NGOs are working at positioning Belhadj as victim. Among them ” Reprieve ”
Funded (not cited on their website but) as far as I know, Open Society Foundations, Ford foundation, and others
. In the article it says that he was tortured in Libya which is not true a known fact he betrayed all his comrades which were apprehended in the process he was put on house arrest together with his pregnant wife and wearing a bracelet anklet on both for a year, after that both of them were free all charges dropped… once he swore allegiance to the Jamahirya government… What the article fails to mention that he is an MI6 asset. I will also put you the link of the French interview of Belhaj who is pretending to be a politician while all Libyans suffer under his rule with executions, rapes, kidnapping, torture. Lets not forget that Abdulhakim Belhaj has sworn allegiance to ISIS/Daesh which is even worse than Al Qaeda..









201505-04 Interview Belhadj 2201505-04 Interview Belhadj 3

They are not interested in leaders and they are not certainly interested in having a responsible government in Libya. Libya had a responsible government, a civil society. Libya was one of the most progressive countries in Africa. In fact, it was the richest country in Africa and it was making great progress in unifying the continent. And it was attacked in 2011 by a coalition of Islamist groups backed by NATO. They bombed the entire infrastructure, they bombed schools, hospitals and they murdered up to 100,000 people. Europe is not interested in peace in Libya. They are interested in military occupation. They are interested in preventing the development of the entire global south and that what the bombing of Libya was about. I don’t think this soi-disant government in Tripoli has any clue how to resolve this problem.

These are people who probably believe in everything they were told by their masters in Brussels, Paris, London and Washington and they are now realizing that Libya has been completely destroyed. It is no longer a nation state. It’s no longer a country that has any kind of a future. This problem will grow, you will see mass influx of immigrants and of course there will be more terrorist attacks. But this war on terror is a fraud, a fake and people need to realize that. They are really mocking the intelligence people by their actions. So I don’t think that Europe will be interested in anything stable in Libya. What they want is to simply manage the chaos.

I should also point out that an influx of desperate immigrants into Europe in a time of austerity is actually an advantage to Western corporations because these people will work for nothing. They are very desperate and they will drive down wages and wages are already coming down. So they will put pressure on the work force in Europe. And in that sense they are not too bothered by it. But what it will do of course it will lead to more repression because once we see more terrorist attacks like the one we saw in Paris in January that will lead then to more police repression, more militarization of European societies. But the big problem here is that the governments of the EU and the US are clinically insane, their actions are absolutely the contrary of reason. And that is the big problem. We do not have responsible government in Europe. We in Europe and in the US live under a dictatorship and that is the deep cause of the crisis we are seeing now in Libya.

Illegal migrants who attempted to sail to Europe, sit in a boat carrying them back to Libya, after their boat was intercepted at sea by the Libyan coast guard, at Khoms, Libya May 6, 2015. (Reuters/Aymen Elsahli)

Illegal migrants who attempted to sail to Europe, sit in a boat carrying them back to Libya, after their boat was intercepted at sea by the Libyan coast guard, at Khoms, Libya May 6, 2015. (Reuters/Aymen Elsahli)

RT: How is this mission different from previous naval operations there? Is Europe trying to control and militarize the Mediterranean?

GC: The term ‘Mare nostrum’ which was the term used by fascist Italy during the 1930s when they conquered Libya – that was the first aerial bombardment in history. The term ‘Mare nostrum’ is being used again, now by the EU. In other words, “the Mediterranean belongs to us.” The big problem with Gaddafi of course is that he didn’t agree with that. Libya was also a country that had its own interests; Africa is other side of the Mediterranean after all. Europe does want to militarize the Mediterranean; it does want to control all the coast of the Mediterranean. There will be a militarization of the other side of “Mare nostrum,” which is the Italian fascist term for the Mediterranean which was used officially. So I think there will be a militarization of the North African coast, particularly Libya. Algeria has not been conquered or attacked, but Algeria is on the list. That will come. The destabilization of Algeria has already begun and that will continue. It all depends on whether or not other countries will survive. If Syria falls you will have an absolute chaos in the Eastern Mediterranean, which will spread right up into Europe. We know Islamic State – an emanation [from] US imperialism – has now made significant conquests in Syria and they have also been training in Libya.

I don’t see any way out for the Libyan government unless it realizes that if they don’t seek other forces, other global powers and perhaps make contacts with them, there is no way they are ever going to get out of this chaos. In other words, they will be well-advised perhaps to go to Beijing and Moscow and discuss possibilities of stabilization with countries that are actually fighting a war on terrorism. Let’s not forget there the world is now split up between two forces: the countries who are sponsoring, financing and promoting terrorism, the US and the EU, and the countries who are fighting terrorism – Russia, China and Iran. The Libyan government will have to make this decision if they want actually to have peace and some kind of viable economy in the future. They are going to have to make a decision about who their patrons are going to be because if they continue to take orders from the EU and the US they are going to have military occupation and chaos for very long time indeed.

EU naval mission against African migrants combines ‘deep inhumanity & stupidity’

EU foreign ministers have agreed to a naval operation in the Mediterranean Sea to contain an influx of immigrants from Africa, a move Chris Nineham, vice-chair of the Stop the War Coalition, said will only increase bitterness against the West.

RT: Do you think targeting smugglers will be effective in stemming the flow of immigrants?

Chris Nineham: I don’t think it will be effective. I think it’s a policy that combines deep inhumanity with real stupidity. One reason – probably the main reason – that has created this migrant crisis in the first place is the catastrophe that was unleashed on Libya particularly back in 2011 by the bombing campaign by the West, which devastated the country socially and physically, as well as killing tens of thousands of people. The idea that what is needed in these circumstances, faced with this appalling humanitarian crisis, is more bombs and more military intervention leaves me virtually speechless, frankly. It’s the last thing that we need.

RT: How would you gather intelligence? Isn’t there a chance the EU’s forces could destroy vessels with innocent people onboard?

CN: Absolutely. Any so-called war on the traffickers will in practice end up being a war on the migrants themselves because presumably they are going to be attacking the boats and there are going to be migrants on them. That’s the main and most obvious reason why this is a catastrophic decision and a very wrong-headed policy. Any further Western military intervention in Libya itself, which is apparently – unbelievably – now being considered will only increase the level of anger and bitterness against the West but it will also lead to more destruction and devastation. That’s the driver of the migrant crisis in the first place. I think this is just a phenomenally inhumane policy and a very misguided one. And it will make the situation it claims to be addressing much worse, apart from creating huge amounts of tension in the region. It really needs to be rejected and they need to think again.

RT: This EU naval mission could also need to put boots on the ground in places like Libya. How likely is that?

CN: I don’t know, I’m not part of the decision-making process. It seems almost unthinkable that the people who orchestrated the disastrous military intervention in 2011 could be considering further military action. It’s almost as if the EU and the Western powers can only think, when they think of foreign policy, when they think of problems solving, they think of killing, of military solutions.

This is clearly a situation where the military dimension doesn’t even need to be raised. What is needed is first of all an acceptance of as many as possible of the suffering migrants into European countries so that they can live some sort of a life. And secondly, there needs to be a reconstruction effort, a serious aid operation to begin to undo the massive damage the West has done in Libya.













Jihadists in the Service of Imperialism

Jihadists in the Service of Imperialism

By Thierry Meyssan


Cheikh Youssouf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s star preacher and tele-Coranist on al-Jazeera. He blesses the jihadists in Syria and Iraq, and affirms, deadpan, that if Mohammed was alive today, he would be a NATO ally.

Western governments no longer hide the fact that they’re using jihadists – NATO overthrew Mouamar el-Kadhafi by using al-Qaïda as its only ground forces; Israël displaced the UN Forces to Golan, and replaced them with al-Nosra; the international anti-Daesh Coalition allowed Palmyra to fall in order to cause more problems for Syria. But while we can understand Western interests, we fail to grasp why and how the jihadists can serve Uncle Sam in the name of the Quran.

We often ask ourselves how the Pentagon and the CIA manage to manipulate millions of Muslims and send them off to fight for Uncle Sam’s interests. Of course, it’s true that certain leaders are paid agents, but all jihadists believe that they’re fighting and dying in order to gain access to Paradise. The answer is childishly simple – using the rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood as a start, it’s possible to evade human reality and send them to kill anyone you like as long as you wave a red flag at them.

Officially, the Islamic Emirate no longer recognises the authority of Ayman al-Zawahiri, and has therefore left al-Qaïda. Nonetheless, in many places, like the Qalamun mountains, it is still impossible to distinguish between them, since the same jihadists claim allegiance to both flags at once.

Of course, one could argue that this is only a personal quarrel – Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi simply wants to replace the current leader. But while the two organisations have exactly the same practices, they develop very different dialogues.

They share the slogans of the Muslim Brotherhood – « The Quran is our Constitution », « Islam is the solution ». A life of holiness is therefore very simple. It doesn’t really matter if the Creator has made us all intelligent, we must, in all cases, apply the Word of God like a machine. And when the situation is not dealt with in the Book, we should just smash it to pieces. The result is obviously catastrophic, and nowhere have these organisations been able to set up even the beginnings of the perfect society that they hope for.

History demonstrates their differences. From 1979 to 1995, in other words, from the CIA operation in Afghanistan to the Popular Arab and Islamic Congress in Khartoum, Oussama Ben Laden’s mercenaries fought the Soviet Union with public aid from the United States. From 1995 to 2011, in other words, from the Congress in Khartoum to operation « Neptune’s Spear », al-Qaïda took position against « Jews and Crusaders » while continuing its struggle against Russia in Yugoslavia and Chechnya. And since 2011, in other words, since the « Arab Spring », it has supported NATO in Libya and Israël at the Golan frontier. Generally speaking, Western public opinion has not kept up with this evolution. It remains convinced of the danger of a mythical Russian expansionism, persists in blaming the jihadists for the attacks of September 11th, has not realised what happened in Libya and at the Israeli frontier, and maintains the false idea that al-Qaïda is an anti-imperialist terrorist organisation. As for the Arabs, they do not base themselves on facts, but choose, according to the situation, between reality and Western propaganda so as to invent a romantic narrative for themselves.

From its side, the Islamic Emirate is moving away from the Quran and closer to the neo-conservatives. It claims that the main enemies are other Muslims – the Chiites and their allies. It has clearly forgotten the Bosnian episode during which Ben Laden’s Arab Legion were supported both by the United States, Saudi Arabia and Iran. But who are the allies of the Chiites? The Syrian Arab Republic (secular) and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Sunnite). In other words, the Islamic Emirate is fighting in priority against the Axis of Resistance to imperialism. De facto, it confirms that it is an objective ally of the United States and Israël in the « Greater Middle East », even though, theoretically, they are the enemy.

The malleability of these two organisations resides in their basic ideology, that of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is therefore logical that almost all of the jihadist leaders, at one time or another, have been members of one branch or another of the Brotherhood. By the same token, it is logical that the CIA has not only supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, since their reception at the White House by President Eisenhower in 1955, but also all its foreign branches and all the dissident groups. Finally, the califat that Hassan el-Bana dreamed about and that Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi pretended to want, is not the reproduction of the Golden Age of Islam, but the reign of obscurantism.

This was confirmed by Laurent Fabius in 2012, in other words, before the split between al-Qaïda and Daesh, when he declared: « On the ground, they’re doing a good job! »

It’s Ok, Everyone, Nusra Says Nusra Won’t Hurt Us

It’s Ok, Everyone, Nusra Says Nusra Won’t Hurt Us

By Brandon Turbeville

Al-Nusra Front has taken to the airwaves with a message for all Westerners and Americans in particular – they really aren’t that bad. And there are no plans to attack Americans. They are just your friendly neighborhood terrorist organization, funded handsomely by the West and the GCC, raping and beheading their way across the Middle East. There’s nothing to worry about so long as the US allows them to continue to rape little girls, cut off heads, impose savage Sharia law, and eat the hearts and livers of the occasional dissident.

This message was brought to you by the feudal monarchy of Qatar and its mouthpiece organization, Al-Jazeera and conducted with a journalist whose past is checkered with a conviction of supporting al-Qaeda.

The alleged leader of al-Nusra Front, Abu Mohammed al-Julani, appeared on al-Jazeera with a setting fit for a king (or Emir *ahem*) to discuss Nusra’s plans for Syria and the West. The man alleging to be Julani and alleging to be the leader of Nusra, despite claiming to be “fearless,” sat with his face covered and his back to the camera. The set was ornately decorated and almost appeared to be some type of palace room or high government building.

Julani reassured Westerners that he had been ordered by another alleged leader, this time of al-Qaeda proper, Ayman al-Zawihiri, not to launch attacks against the West as this would jeopardize the mission in Syria.

A New York Times report cited a US intelligence official as saying that Julani’s statements were merely self-serving propaganda.

Propaganda? Yes. Self-serving? Not exactly. Julani’s statements were actually serving NATO, the US, and Israel in their own propaganda efforts to assure the American people that supporting the so-called “rebels” in Syria is a good idea and one that will not come back to bite them.

Indeed, Julani truly spoke like a paid actor or a professional trained talking monkey in his job as message delivery boy. Obviously, neither designation would set him clearly apart from any other “expert” or “reporter” in the Western/Gulf media propaganda establishment.

Still, the “fearless” hijabed Julani stated, “We are only here to accomplish one mission, to fight the regime and its agents on the ground, including Hezbollah and others. Al-Nusra Front doesn’t have any plans or directives to target the West. We received clear orders not to use Syria as a launching pad to attack the US or Europe in order to not sabotage the true mission against the regime. Maybe al-Qaeda does that, but not here in Syria.”

The only true part of his statement was that Khorosan, painted as the end of the Western world and enemy #1 for a total of about five days, was a fictional organization invented by the Americans to deceive and frighten the American public.

His presentation of al-Qaeda and al-Nusra Front as different organizations, however, is ludicrous, since Nusra was merely the Syrian version of al-Qaeda proper before the two groups were largely united by the shadowy Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and renamed the Islamic Emirate of Iraq and the Levant, later to be renamed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIS, and IS. Of course, all incarnations of the group were entirely organized, funded, and armed by the United States, NATO, and GCC.

Julani also stated that Nusra would not harm Christians or Druze who refused to fight against it and that the even the Alawites would be spared if they would refuse to fight, reject Assad, and give up their religious beliefs and convert to Sunnism.

Of course, this is disingenuous to say the least. The “opposition” in Syria was famous for screaming “Christians to Beirut, Alawites to the grave!” as far back as 2011 when the crisis first began. Alawites have long been targeted by the so-called “rebels” from the start. Regardless, for the likes of the “moderate rebels,” no Muslim – even Sunni – is ever Muslim enough, unless he practices the Wahhabist filth that is labeled Islamic by its proponents and psychopathic adherents.

The reality of the situation is that Julani’s statements are nothing more than Western intelligence propaganda foisted upon the brains of the Western public in an effort to gin up support for the savages now bearing down on Latakia Syria as I write this article.

Of course, Nusra and al-Qaeda will still be played up as a threat to the US here at home. After all, there are a few straggler civil liberties ambling about that still need to be corralled and destroyed.

Libyan army force to battle heavily armed Islamic militias using “scraps”

Libyan army force to battle heavily armed Islamic militias using “scraps”

by Lesley Whiting

It is now recognized as an uncontested fact, that the tiny, but wealthiest state in the world, Qatar, was a major source of weapons and funding that enabled the so-called “rebels”, to overthrow the regime of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, in tandem with the firepower of the NATO countries who participated in the bombing and destruction of the thriving and prosperous state of Libya. Qatar, with the help of Turkey, is a prime sponsor of the Islamic extremist groups which now control Tripoli and Misurata under the collective name of “Libyan Dawn” as well as other violent jihadi groups such as ISIS, ISIL across the entire region.

Following this particular money trail, the extraordinarily sudden rise of the super-rich, highly trained ISIS, flaunting their arrays of brand new armoured vehicles, sophisticated weaponry, immaculate flags and jihadi uniforms, should come as no surprise! Moreover, they command formidable high-tech media capabilities, with which they apparently intend to “shock and awe” the public, via throat slitting, head chopping and other gory displays of bloodletting, into passive acceptance of their omnipotence and omniscience.

Not content with having brought to ruin of the formerly prosperous Libyan State, shipments of supplies, manpower and sophisticated weaponry continue to arrive in Misurata and Tripoli via regular flights or aboard “cargo” ships, from either Qatar or their partner state Turkey. In recent incidents, the Libyan forces have fired upon such vessels approaching Islamist controlled ports, that have ignored all warnings from legitimate authorities.

No longer a “conspiracy”, even the mainstream British conservative Daily Telegraph points out tersely:

“So it is that Qatar buys up London property while working against British interests in Libya and arming friends of the jihadists who tried to kill one of our ambassadors (referring to Dominic Asquith). A state that partly owns Hyde Park, London’s most expensive apartment block, and the Shard, the city’s tallest building, is working with people who would gladly destroy Western society”.

Such concerns apparently fall on deaf ears. The article continues:

It’s deeply concerning that these individuals, where sufficient evidence is in place to justify their inclusion on the US sanctions list, continue to be free to undertake their business dealings,” said Stephen Barclay, the Conservative MP for North East Cambridgeshire.

Qatar’s investment in Britain is so extensive, and the Foreign Office is so anxious to win its favour, that some question whether UK diplomats will have the resolve to ask robust questions. “If diplomats are focused on winning commercial contracts, there is a danger they will be reluctant to ask tough questions on the funding of unsavoury groups,” said Mr Barclay. (Daily telegraph Link below)


No one can deny that the vast natural gas and oil reserves upon which Qatar sits, enable it to wield huge influence in Europe. Moreover their plans to construct an oil pipeline to supply Europe, via Turkey, (in direct competition with the proposed Iraq-Iran-Syria pipeline, and the Russian Nabucco pipeline) happens to go straight through Syria; a proposal that Syria had rejected.

The key to Qatar’s power and political strategies, but also its vulnerability, lies in its abundance of natural gas. It has almost 14 percent of total world gas reserves, but most of it comes from a field that it shares with Iran. Regional experts say that Qatar’s principal security concern is that Iran may one day try to exert full control over the field.” (NY Times Link below)

Qatar is also home to a strategically important US military base. Thus, joining the dots, it would appear that a kind of balancing act is underway, both in engaging and co-operating with the US imperial plans to their mutual benefit, while keeping at bay any possible Iranian plans for extending its reach.

In Libya today, we discover a scenario where the Libyan army, still under the arms embargo imposed by the UN “in case weapons fall into the wrong hands”, is forced to defend its country against these heavily armed and trained mercenary fighters using scraps – working parts and weapons salvaged from destroyed military vehicles.

Dangerous: Images obtained by Libyan-based bloggers show a host of improvised, deadly weapons...and a picture of a hatchback with missiles perched atop being used by opposition militia Libya Dawn

Dangerous: Images obtained by Libyan-based bloggers show a host of improvised, deadly weapons…and a picture of a hatchback with missiles perched atop being used by opposition militia Libya Dawn

Surreal: The Libyan army - which has mounted machine gun turrets on trucks to take on ISIS and opposition factions - is running out of scraps to replenish its makeshift armoury

Surreal: The Libyan army – which has mounted machine gun turrets on trucks to take on ISIS and opposition factions – is running out of scraps to replenish its makeshift armoury

Improvised: The Libyan army supposedly salvaged naval guns (pictured) from defunct warships and fixed them to the back of trucks

Improvised: The Libyan army supposedly salvaged naval guns (pictured) from defunct warships and fixed them to the back of trucks

Protected: The makeshift trucks constructed by Libya's armed forces (pictured) - armed with machine guns that fire 700 rounds a minute - also have a metal casing to protect the driver

Protected: The makeshift trucks constructed by Libya’s armed forces (pictured) – armed with machine guns that fire 700 rounds a minute – also have a metal casing to protect the driver

Scraps: The Libyan army salvaged two AK-230 machine guns from a Natya-class warship (pictured) before it sunk due to lack of maintenence

Scraps: The Libyan army salvaged two AK-230 machine guns from a Natya-class warship (pictured) before it sunk due to lack of maintenence

Construction: Libyan government soldiers transform weapons dating back to the 1940s in six warehouses in the country's east and transform them into usable arms

Construction: Libyan government soldiers transform weapons dating back to the 1940s in six warehouses in the country’s east and transform them into usable arms


Whilst such creations stand as an extraordinary testimony to human ingenuity and the determination to resist under any circumstances, the situation is approaching critical as the supply of such scrap materials inevitably diminishes.

No doubt, all of this is intended to force the Libyan government to ask for “international intervention” a cry that still goes up from either the woefully ignorant or from the deliberately traitorous.

Libya’s Green Resistance insists that it does not require further “International intervention”. Libya only requires that the UN embargo be lifted, since the original stated cause of “weapons falling in the wrong hands” has been proven a farce. The Benghazi incidents revealed that the US consulate and CIA was directly involved in extensive gun-running operations between Libya, Egypt, Syria and Iraq, and the NATO Israel Qatar Turkey axis have been ensuring, for a very long time, that weapons, training and funding: do, in fact, get directly into the “unsavoury” hands of mercenaries, jihadists and terrorists wreaking havoc in a massive destablisation campaign across the Middle East.

Interestingly, recent indications claim that “ISIS” (include here sponsors and creators) is enraged that they are beginning to lose fighters who flee when they awaken to the “ awkward moment” when they realize that they are actually fighting for western intelligence agencies. ISIS videos and publications are now busily engaged in damage control efforts, denouncing (to their faithful) “conspiracy theories” that suggest such a thing.

This is an excellent indication that the alternative media, bloggers and all those passionate about truth are having a powerful influence. There can be no greater nightmare to the US, Israeli, Qatari and Turkish sponsors of the Muslim Brotherhood and their offspring ISIS/ISIL and associated jihadi forces, than to have them turn on their “handlers” when they realize they have been duped into fighting for the intelligence agents of Western Imperialism.