On Libya, Now They Tell Us


On Libya, Now They Tell Us

The U.S. capture of an alleged al-Qaeda terror leader in Libya underscores the failure of the major news media to give the public the full story during the military intervention that led to Muammar Gaddafi’s ouster and murder. Mainstream journalists behaved more like propagandists, as Robert Parry reported in 2011.

By Robert Parry (Published on Sept. 15, 2011)

During the six-month uprising against Muammar Gaddafi, major U.S. news outlets repeated again and again that the Libyan dictator was behind the 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and they ignored warnings that militant Islamists were at the core of the anti-Gaddafi rebel army.

Indeed, for Americans to get alternative views on these points, they had to search out Web sites, like Consortiumnews.com, which had the audacity not to march in lockstep with the rest of the Western media. Only outside the mainstream press would you find significant questions asked about the certainty over Libya’s guilt in the Pan Am bombing and about the makeup of the rebels.

Libyan Ali al-Megrahi, whose conviction as the “Lockerbie bomber” remains a point of historical dispute.

Now, after the United States and its NATO allies have engineered the desired “regime change” in Libya – under the pretext of “protecting civilians” – those two points are coming more into focus. The New York Times and the Washington Post finally acknowledged that radical Islamists, including some with links to al-Qaeda, are consolidating their power inside the new regime in Tripoli.

And, the proverbial dog not barking – even as Libya’s secret intelligence files have been exposed to the eyes of Western journalists – is the absence of any incriminating evidence regarding Libya’s role in the Lockerbie case. Earlier interrogations of Libya’s ex-intelligence chief Moussa Koussa by Scottish authorities also apparently came up empty, as he was allowed to leave London for Qatar.

Since Gaddafi’s fall, news outlets also have reported that Libyan intelligence agent, Ali al-Megrahi, who was convicted of the Lockerbie bombing by a Scottish court and was later released on humanitarian grounds because of terminal prostate cancer, is indeed gravely ill, bedridden and seemingly near death. [He died May 20, 2012.]

Megrahi’s trial in 2001 before a panel of Scottish judges was more a kangaroo court than any serious effort to determine guilt – even a Scottish appeals court expressed concern about a grave miscarriage of justice – but the Western press continues to describe Megrahi, without qualification, as the “Lockerbie bomber.”

It also was common in the West’s news media to smirk at the notion that Megrahi was truly suffering from advanced prostate cancer since he hadn’t died as quickly as some doctors thought he might. After Gaddafi’s regime fell, Megrahi’s family invited BBC and other news organizations to see Megrahi struggling to breathe in his sick bed.

His son, Khaled al-Megrahi, also continued to insist on his father’s innocence. “He believes and we know that everybody will see the truth,” the younger Megrahi told the BBC. “I know my father is innocent and one day his innocence will come out.”

Asked about the people who died in the bombing, the son said: “We feel sorry about all the people who died. We want to know who did this bad thing. We want to know the truth as well.”

Convicted or Railroaded?

As more information becomes available inside Libya, the facts may finally be clarified about whether Gaddafi’s government did or did not have a hand in the bombing over Lockerbie. However, so far, the indications are that Megrahi may well have been railroaded by the Scottish judges who found a second Libyan defendant innocent and were under political pressure to convict someone for the crime.

After Megrahi’s curious conviction, the West imposed harsh economic sanctions on Libya, agreeing to lift them only if Libya accepted “responsibility” for the bombing and paid restitution to the families of the 270 victims. To get rid of the punishing sanctions, Libya accepted the deal although its officials continued to insist that Libya had nothing to do with the Lockerbie bombing.

However, amid the 2011 propaganda campaign in support of the Libyan rebels, none of this uncertainty was mentioned in the New York Times, the Washington Post or other leading U.S. news outlets. Gaddafi’s guilt for Lockerbie was simply stated as flat fact, much as the same news organizations endorsed false claims about Iraq’s WMD in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of that Arab country.

Similarly, there was scant U.S. media attention given to evidence that eastern Libya, the heart of the anti-Gaddafi rebellion, was a hotbed for Islamic militancy with that region supplying the most per-capita militants fighting U.S. troops in Iraq, often under the banner of al-Qaeda.

Instead, Gaddafi’s claims that he was battling Islamic terrorists in the Benghazi region were widely mocked or ignored in the West. Even a report by analysts Joseph Felter and Brian Fishman for West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center got short-shrift.

In their report, “Al-Qaeda’s Foreign Fighters in Iraq,” Felter and Fishman analyzed al-Qaeda documents captured in 2007 showing personnel records of militants who flocked to Iraq for the war. The documents showed eastern Libya providing a surprising number of suicide bombers who traveled to Iraq to kill American troops.

Felter and Fishman wrote that these so-called Sinjar Records disclosed that while Saudis comprised the largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq, Libyans represented the largest per-capita contingent by far. Those Libyans came overwhelmingly from towns and cities in the east.

“The vast majority of Libyan fighters that included their hometown in the Sinjar Records resided in the country’s Northeast, particularly the coastal cities of Darnah 60.2% (53) and Benghazi 23.9% (21),” Felter and Fishman wrote.

The authors added that Abu Layth al‐Libi, Emir of Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), “reinforced Benghazi and Darnah’s importance to Libyan jihadis in his announcement that LIFG had joined al‐Qa’ida.”

Top Libyan Terrorists

Some important al-Qaeda leaders operating in Pakistan’s tribal regions also are believed to have come from Libya. For instance, “Atiyah,” who was guiding the anti-U.S. war strategy in Iraq, was identified as a Libyan named Atiyah Abd al-Rahman.

It was Atiyah who urged a strategy of creating a quagmire for U.S. forces in Iraq, buying time for al-Qaeda headquarters to rebuild its strength in Pakistan. “Prolonging the war [in Iraq] is in our interest,” Atiyah said in a letter that upbraided Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi for his hasty and reckless actions in Iraq.

After U.S. Special Forces killed al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011, in Pakistan, Atiyah became al-Qaeda’s second in command until he himself was reportedly killed in a U.S. drone strike in August. [See Consortiumnews.com “Time Finally Ran Out for Atiyah.”] ***(Unfortunately Bin Laden had died of natural causes in 2002 or 2005 this has been proven, what they killed in May 1st 2011 is an unfortunate person who was not Bin Laden. Do a research and find out what happened to the CREW and SPECIAL FORCES who were involved in this escapade, If I am not mistaken they are all dead) 

However, to most Americans relying on the major U.S. news media, little of this was known, as the Washington Post itself acknowledged in an article on Sept. 12, 2011. In an article on the rise of Islamists inside the new power structure in Libya, the Post wrote:

“Although it went largely unnoticed during the uprising that toppled Gaddafi last month, Islamists were at the heart of the fight, many as rebel commanders. Now some are clashing with secularists within the rebels’ Transitional National Council, prompting worries among some liberals that the Islamists — who still command the bulk of fighters and weapons — could use their strength to assert an even more dominant role.”

On Sept. 15, 2011, the New York Times published a similar article, entitled “Islamists’ Growing Sway Raises Questions for Libya.” It began:

“In the emerging post-Qaddafi Libya, the most influential politician may well be Ali Sallabi, who has no formal title but commands broad respect as an Islamic scholar and populist orator who was instrumental in leading the mass uprising. The most powerful military leader is now Abdel Hakim Belhaj, the former leader of a hard-line group once believed to be aligned with Al Qaeda.”

Belhaj was previously the commander of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which was associated with al-Qaeda in the past, maintained training bases in Afghanistan before the 9/11 attacks, and was listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department.

Though Belhaj and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group deny current allegiance to al-Qaeda, Belhaj was captured during George W. Bush’s post-9/11 “war on terror” and was harshly interrogated by the CIA at a “black site” prison in Thailand before being handed over to Gaddafi’s government which imprisoned and – Belhaj claims – tortured him. ****(he was not tortured stayed in prison only a year and then was on a house arrest) 

The Times reported that “Belhaj has become so much an insider lately that he is seeking to unseat Mahmoud Jibril, the American-trained economist who is the nominal prime minister of the interim government, after Mr. Jibril obliquely criticized the Islamists.”

The Times article by correspondents Rod Nordland and David D. Kirkpatrick also cited other recent developments of growing Islamist influence inside the Libyan rebel movement:

“Islamist militias in Libya receive weapons and financing directly from foreign benefactors like Qatar; a Muslim Brotherhood figure, Abel al-Rajazk Abu Hajar, leads the Tripoli Municipal Governing Council, where Islamists are reportedly in the majority; in eastern Libya, there has been no resolution of the assassination in July of the leader of the rebel military, Gen. Abdul Fattah Younes, suspected by some to be the work of Islamists.”

It may be commendable that the Post and Times finally gave serious attention to this unintended consequence of the NATO-backed “regime change” in Libya, but the fact that these premier American newspapers ignored the Islamist issue as well as doubts about Libya’s Lockerbie guilt – while the U.S. government was whipping up public support for another war in the Muslim world – raises questions about whether any lessons were learned from Iraq.

Do these prestige news outlets continue to see their role in such cases as simply getting the American people to line up behind the latest war against a Mideast “bad guy” – or will they ever take seriously their journalistic duty to arm the public with as much information as possible?

About these ads

BASIT IGTET AND WIFE – THE ZIONIST AGENDA FOR LIBYA


BASIT IGTET AND WIFE – THE ZIONIST AGENDA FOR LIBYA

 

WHAT EVERY LIBYAN NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT THE COUPLE WHO WANT TO BE THE NEW LEADERS OF LIBYA

ILLICIT ALCOHOL, MAFIA EMPIRES, MONEY LAUNDERING, EMBEZZLING, EXTREMISM, LEGAL BATTLES, CULTISM AND MURDERS -THE EXTRAORDINARY STORIES OF THE FAMILY BEHIND IGTET – PLUS THE BANK OF ISRAEL – AND THE REAL REASON WHY JOHN MCCAIN SUPPORTS IGTET

 

BY LADY KHAMIS

 

  In recent times a new figure has appeared from almost nowhere as the self-proclaimed potential savior of war-ravaged Libya.

  Basit Igtet, a former Libyan exile, has announced his intention to run for the top job – with his American Jewish wife as the ‘First Lady’ of Libya.

  The smooth talking and debonair former fashion designer has been waxing lyrical about how he wants to unite the people. His wife has explained her desire to “help” the Libyans and make the world “a better place”. She and her family describe themselves as “philanthropists”.

  But just like Nato’s “humanitarian intervention”, this is all merely a façade. For behind the show lies an extraordinary morass of scandal, horror, illegality, greed and Zionist plotting – and a family that over the past century has stopped at nothing to get what it wants, using its vast and ill-gotten fortune to do so.

  Let us start by taking a closer look at Basit Igtet.

    Igtet is a native of Benghazi, east Libya, born into a tribe of around just ten people - hardly a base of support for him! East Libya is a region of many Libyans of Egyptian, Greek or Turkish descent. Some of these Easterners supported the foreign invasion and war on Libya in 2011, causing Libyan patriots to regard these particular easterners as being from another planet. They certainly do not wish to be ruled by them or their foreign masters.

  Igtet’s late father was a radical leader of Islamic extremists – although Basit denies this. But his father’s extremist activities soon caught the attention of Libya’s then leader, Muammar Gaddafi, and his Jamahiriyah government – which always took a zero-tolerance stance to any kind of internal terrorism. Particularly when those trying to subvert the Libyan state were doing so on behalf of foreign and Zionist agendas. Igtet Sr embezzled millions of dollars from the Gaddafi government and was sent to prison for doing so.

  Basit Igtet ran off to Switzerland. He lived in exile for over 20 years – but he chose Switzerland for a very specific reason. For it was here that Igtet found his fathers’ embezzled millions. This is how Basit Igtet built his company and became a multi-millionaire by the age of 45 – although he would have you believe a quite different story.

  Now he is using that same money to self-promote and buy himself a ticket to the ballot box – despite being a long-time ex-patriate with a complete lack of any national security experience. He is little known inside of Libya itself and, indeed, few people have heard of him outside of Libya either!

  Whilst in Switzerland, he joined with the wealthy Zionists and become a devout worker for Zionism. He seized his opportunity, when it came, to make the Jewess Sara Bronfman his girlfriend and later his wife. She is a daughter of a man who – until his death - was one of the world’s richest and most powerful Zionists, thanks to an empire based on trading in booze…

  Once he has cemented his position as leader of Libya, Igtet intends to announce Libya’s full recognition of the ‘state of israel’ – and to allow ‘israel’ to set up a military base in the Green Mountain region of Libya… He strongly espouses the Western and Zionist agenda of capitalism and free markets.

  He has acquired the services of the law firm of Barack Obama’s notorious foreign policy sidekick and former US Senator Joe Lieberman.

  Lieberman is an agent of ‘israel’ and works for the Muslim Brotherhood. He lobbies to Washington on behalf of Igtet and for enslaving Libya to Qatar – via his aforementioned law firm… Indeed, Igtet has overseen real estate projects in Qatar – one of Libya’s most fierce enemies.  

  Igtet has crazily stated that Libya needs a Rudy Giuliani-type figure – (former New York Mayor and a gangster, if ever there was one).

  Keen to get the top job, Igtet ruthlessly plotted post-war against the former Libyan ‘prime minister’ Ali Zeidan. No problem with that, but he claimed that Zeidan was all about ego, yet Igtet himself is on one massive ego trip.

  But he has one huge problem…My Libyan sources inform me that none of the tribal leaders will meet with Igtet or accept him – because of his Zionism, his marriage to a Jew and her families’ dealings in alcohol.

  One of Igtet’s top backers though is John McCain – a man who has been photographed shaking hands with almost every extremist in Libya and who was a major figure in the plot of the invasion and destruction of the country in 2011. (There is a particular reason why Igtet and McCain are so chummy and this will be explained here further on)!

  Igtet, himself, was also a major plotter, lobbying in 2011 on behalf of the so-called ‘Transitional National Council’ (‘TNC’ – later the ‘NTC’) – the illegal, alternative ‘government’ that was foreign-installed and outside of Libya itself.

  Igtet is also friendly with the odious John Kerry.

  Igtet denies he is an Islamist – yet he has courted support from some of the most extreme Islamist figures. He has met with Ahmed Abu Khattala – charged with the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Libya that killed four Americans – including its ambassador, the gunrunning Christopher Stevens.

  Igtet has known a senior Libyan Muslim Brotherhood leader, Emad Elbannani – since they both lived as businessmen in Switzerland. The latter introduced Igtet to Islamist politician Rachid Ghannouchi – leader of Tunisia’s controversial Ennahda party.

  Tellingly, Igtet is also an oilman – he founded an oil and gas exploration entity called Athal Energy in 2011. No coincidence that 2011 was also the year of Nato’s war on Libya and it is clear who Igtet intends to give the oil profits of Libya to – and it will not be the Libyan people.

  One of Igtet’s and Sara Bronfman’s business partners is a man named Richard Griffiths – who has considerable connections to American and Canadian intelligence agencies – including the CIA. Griffiths is also a director of public relations for Scaix – a company heavily involved with the CIA and the US military…

  Igtet, Bronfman and Griffiths all plan to profit from Libya via any future Libyan regime that has Igtet as leader. This will be done via a web of enterprises that they are involved with.

  Igtet has a ‘charity’ titled the ‘Independent Libya Foundation’ (INLIFO).  Founded in New York in 2011, this organisation has never been registered as a charity – despite being required to do so by US law. Nor has it registered to operate as a non-profit making organisation anywhere else in America! INLIFO has a financial affiliation with the American Chamber of Commerce – whose executive director just happens to be Richard Griffiths!

  Evidence – obtained by Friends of Libya – shows that, rather than being a “philanthropic” enterprise, as claimed, the real agenda is that the INLIFO will be used as a platform for Igtet’s political ambitions, influence peddling and business interests in Libya.

  As Igtet is owner of a number of business chambers, the situation that he and his INLIFO founding members have manufactured will be one where access to him and his ministries would be by direct payment to their chambers. This could be seen as corruption. If Igtet becomes ‘PM’ of Libya, he, his wife and their business partners will be raking in yet more money.

  When asked how he will try to solve the massive security issues currently beleaguering his country, Igtet bizarrely replied that solving the four problems of “fear, greed, love and sex” was the formula. One can only imagine what ordinary Libyans and Muslims make of this ridiculous statement.

  Then there is the mystery of Igtet’s young daughter. For a while, he and his wife tried to hide the existence of this child from the Libyan people by keeping mention and photos of her off their online biographies.

  The couple were married on 15th July 2012. Their daughter has been described in the media as being four months old in early May 2013. This means, by my calculations, that this child was conceived out of wedlock.

  This kind of immorality is endemic in the West, where it is promoted as both acceptable and normal and, I would go as far as to say, encouraged. Libya is a Muslim country and we do not want this kind of behaviour here.

  If all this does not disturb you enough about little Basit Igtet – then let us take a deeper look at the Igtet wifelet…

   American Jew, Sara Igtet – nee Bronfman – is the daughter of the recently deceased and massively wealthy Seagram alcohol magnate Edgar Bronfman Sr.  He was a former chairman of Seagram.

  Edgar Bronfman Sr was also for almost three decades the President of the World Jewish Congress. He was forced to retire from this position in 2007 – after evidence came to light that his trusted deputy had embezzled over $1 million.

  The Bronfmans are one of New York’s most prominent and social dynasties. They have sunk a large portion of their money into US entertainment and communications entities – meaning mainstream media rarely dare to criticise them. (Further on here, there will be more about both the Zionist connection and where the Bronfman family fortune came from).

  Sara Bronfman, 38, and her sister Clare Bronfman, 35, became heiresses to the multi-billion dollar Seagram alcohol fortune – estimated to be $2.5 billion. Edgar Bronfman Jr is their half-brother and is a former chairman of Warner Music Group. Their mother divorced their father and then married the popular British actor Nigel Havers.

  Sara has been described as an “airhead” and a party girl - and is already a divorcee - her marriage to Irish horse racing jockey Ronan Clarke hit the rocks after only four months. 

  Multiple lawsuits have been filed that involve both sisters. The allegations involved how they were using their family trust’s money as well as allegations that involve possible blackmail, perjury, theft, and conspiracy to forge documents – as well as other potential illegal activities.

  In 2009, Clare received what she called an “extortion” letter – intended for Sara – in which several women, including the sisters’ then financial planner, demanded money – or they would go to the press with highly damaging information connected to the sisters. But allegations have been made that Clare Bronfman lied to the court about this letter…

  Court records state that the blackmail letter Clare claimed to have received was, in fact, not addressed to her at all – but to a man named Keith Raniere and a woman named Nancy Salzman. It was signed by nine senior members of a group called NXIVM -  (pronounced ‘nex-ee-um’) – announcing their resignation from the group and a demand that they be paid money that they are owed. Salzman was NXIVM’s president.

  What we do know is that Clare and Sara have been heavily involved in this very secretive and dangerous NXIVM organisation – a group the sisters’ own father had referred to as “a cult”…

  Court papers have revealed that the sisters had siphoned off colossal amounts of money from their own family trust funds – to finance NXIVM and its nefarious activities.

  Around $150 million had been taken out of the trusts and bank accounts. It was allegedly used to buy real estate amounting to over a dozen properties for NXIVM’s activities, as well as a private jet to fly around NXIVM’s leader – the aforementioned Keith Raniere; a svengali David Koresh-type figure who likes to be called ‘Vanguard’.

  In 2009, Raniere made a disturbing video, in which he boasted to having had a number of people murdered – because their beliefs conflicted with his own…Raniere’s friends in high places are clearly high enough to give him the confidence that he will not be investigated by the Feds any time soon…

  The sisters also used their trust money to finance Raniere’s investment schemes – as well as to cover his failed bets in the commodities market. Even more disturbingly, millions were spent by the sisters to support a flood of lawsuits filed across the United States against - what they see as – NXIVM’s enemies.

  According to court filings, much of the money was spent by the sisters allegedly working to conceal the full extent of their spending from their father and the family trustees…

  Many former members of NXIVM are afraid to speak out against the cult. Those who have been brave enough tell of stories of the cult’s use of private detectives, allegedly obtaining bank and phone records of those trying to expose NXIVM, people being threatened and stalked – including one being ran off the road by a mysterious black car.

  NXIVM claims to be merely an organisation that conducts self-improvement workshops and life-coaching classes. Or as I prefer to say, social-engineering exercises preying on those feeling weak and vulnerable and needing to find solace in their empty lives.                   Disturbingly, NXIVM’s techniques include hypnosis, paramilitary exercises and controversial behavioural-modification regimes…

  The Bronfman sisters were easily drawn to NXIVM; allegedly having had a poor relationship with their father and feeling alienated. Sara felt she lacked a purpose in life – while sister Clare was described as angry – a competitive showjumper and trainer of horses, she preferred the company of equines instead of humans. (Yes, I can sympathise with that)! How ironic that Seagram is also known in the UK for their past long-time sponsorship of the Grand National – the world’s most cruel horse race.

  It is said that Keith Raniere had his sights on the girls’ father from the very start.

  Eager to improve his relationship with his daughters, and after Sara had completed her course, Edgar Bronfman Sr soon signed up to one of NXIVM’s VIP workshops. Ran by Salzman, the course was designed to draw in the rich and famous that Raniere was keen to have patronise his group.

  But Bronfman Sr soon cut all ties to NXIVM – after Clare revealed to him that the group had borrowed $2 million from her…

  Although Raniere’s group was raking in millions of dollars, a 2003 article in Forbes magazine blew the lid off NXIVM and portrayed him and his organisation as dark and “manipulative’ – and he mysteriously had no bank accounts in his name… His previous business venture had also been investigated by regulators in 23 US states and he was sued by New York’s attorney general for it being nothing more than a “ pyramid scheme”, according to court files. Some of his courses’ participants revealed they had suffered near-psychotic breakdowns after going through Raniere’s programmes; classic brainwashing techniques – separating people from their families and steadily breaking them down psychologically… It is also in this article that Bronfman Sr described NXIVM as “a cult” – and admitted that he had not spoken to his daughters for months.

  It was after this article appeared that Bronfman Sr received a phone call from a woman named Toni Natalie – warning him that he had now become NXIVM’s enemy.

  Natalie had been Raniere’s girlfriend for eight years and a business partner with him. She had even given up her marriage and caring for her child because Raniere had encouraged her to do so. He had also told her that she would father his child and that this child would save the world.

  After they split, she endured a nine-year nightmare. According to court files, her home was broken into, her electricity cut off and her family threatened. She was crippled with debts – from her business with Raniere after it collapsed – put into her name, and had to file for bankruptcy. Case after case was filed against Natalie by Raniere and two henchwomen – one of whom was Salzman – and which the judge described as nothing more than an act of a “jilted” man’s “revenge”.

  Even worse, Natalie also learnt that NXIVM had hired the hugely controversial Israeli private investigator Juval Aviv to spy on her home, her private life and her business dealings.

  Aviv, himself, is a self-confessed former agent of Mossad and claims the actor Eric Bana portrayed him as the character ‘Avner’ in the hit Spielberg film ‘Munich’.

  Ironically, Aviv was also brought in as an investigator into the Lockerbie plane bombing – but his findings certainly upset the CIA…

  Natalie by now was terrified and already broken psychologically by her time with NXIVM –– where she was told that she was “the chosen one”. She warned Bronfman Sr to get his daughters out of the cult – and that if he did not, then Raniere would use up all the girls’ money – and would sleep with both sisters.

  When Natalie was with Raniere, he also lived with two other women. He is also alleged to be a paedophile. He still lives in a neighbourhood that locals refer to as “the compound’ – because most of the people living in the houses there are NXIVM members – most of them females…When Raniere is seen out walking, he is often surrounded by women…Witnesses describe him as obsessed with controlling his world and everyone around him – and fascinated by power, money and the workings of the mind. Natalie describes him as a man who finds and preys on peoples’ vulnerabilities.

  In 2003, a 35-year-old woman, Kristin Snyder, a confident and seemingly well-adjusted environmental consultant disappeared after attending a NXIVM class in Alaska. Her body was never found – only a note in which she wrote about how she was “brainwashed” by NXIVM and her emotion killed or turned off – and that she had not known that she was “already dead”.

  Today, NXIVM’s sessions are described as more sinister than ever.

  Participants describe that they are brainwashed by the group’s ‘therapy’ sessions into thinking they are reincarnated Nazi’s, responsible for 9/11, or responsible for the Columbia space shuttle disaster!

  In 2007, desperate for yet more money to sink into NXIVM, Sara and Clare Bronfman were working to change the trustees that were overseeing their portion of the master trust – in order to gain access to another $200 million. At his wits end, Bronfman Sr reportedly then considered having his daughters both declared to be incompetent, by the courts.

  Both girls were now firmly under Raniere’s influence – Sara, was put on the board of NXIVM – and made responsible for organising all the group’s events, despite knowing nothing about how to run a business. While Clare turned her back on horses and threw herself into the running – and financing – of a string of Raniere’s projects.

  The courts became filled with claim and counter claim as the sisters said that they were the victims of the squandering of the Bronfman fortune. While others claimed contents of 17 mysterious bankers’ boxes of document copies about the sisters financial dealings – which the two women had desperately failed to retrieve – would show how the Bronfman sisters allegedly engaged in a conspiracy to forge documents.

  NXIVM is alleged to have been involved with various illegal activities – such as money laundering, immigration violations and tax evasion – although evidence of this had yet to be provided.

  The sisters’ legal bills and fighting NXIVM’s ‘enemies’ were said to have run up to $2million a month – and their private jet has had to go…

  Raniere filed court claims that Edgar Bronfman Sr was responsible for his daughters’ financial losses – saying their father conspired against him and “rigged the market” because he did not want his girls involved with Raniere.

  Despite their protestations, Sara is still involved with NXIVM – while Clare went onto the company’s executive board – and their spending continues…

  The sisters are still financing NXIVM projects – including retaining the services of highly unsavoury people and organisations, funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars to politicians like Mike Huckerbe – and, very disturbingly, the murderess Hillary Clinton…As well as hiring aggressive private investigators to carry out acts, such as the – subsequently abandoned – plot to murder the anti-cult activist, Rick Ross.

  Ross, Aviv and NXIVM also became mired in legal battles of claim and counter claim against each other.

  It was also alleged that the Bronfman sisters wired $500,000 on behalf of Raniere to two ex-CIA agents in an attempt to smear a NXIVM member who had committed suicide. (I assume this refers to poor Kristin Snyder).

  Libyans thinking of voting for Basit Igtet, need to seriously question if they really want someone with the judgement of Sara Bronfman to be their ‘First Lady’ of Libya….

   Trouble clearly runs in the Bronfman family. Three decades ago, on the eve of the wedding of the sisters’ mother and father, their half-brother, Samuel II, was ‘kidnapped’ and held for a $4.6 million ransom. But a year later the jury acquitted the abductors – on suspicion that Samuel II had been trying to extort money from his father, Edgar Bronfman Sr, in revenge for the anointing of Edgar Jr as heir to the Seagram throne.

  In 1977, Ira Einhorn, a close friend of Edgar Bronfman Sr’s sister-in-law, Barbara Bronfman – murdered his then girlfriend Holly Maddux, 32.

  Einhorn was a svengali-type figure with huge influence over Barbara (yes, sounds familiar doesn’t it)! Holly Maddox was breaking up with Einhorn – who had a history of violence against his women and enjoyed hearing the screaming of animals that he tortured. Holly’s skull was smashed in and Einhorn – in absentia – was found guilty of her murder. But Einhorn evaded justice after the Bronfmans allowed him to hide out in the family mansion. They had even paid for Einhorn’s bail. After fleeing the country, Einhorn continued to receive money – allegedly from Barbara Bronfman.

  But lets now look at just where the vast Bronfman fortune came from…

   In the 1920’s, alcohol was banned in America in an era known as the Prohibition. Over the border in Canada, an ambitious and ruthless family decided to take advantage of this situation.

  Canadian, Samuel Bronfman became a producer of oceans of alcohol and formed a racket of smuggling it from Canada into America. As it began to cross the border, this became illegal activity. In an industry already awash with shady characters and deals, Samuel Bronfman used a string of well-known gangsters to aid him. These included, none other, than Al Capone!

  Samuel Bronfman also dabbled in the oil business…

  Eventually the Bronfmans became Canada’s richest family – and Samuel’s son Edgar Bronfman Sr, who took American citizenship in 1959 – soon believed, in the words of his own daughters, that he could buy anyone he wanted.

  A web of Swiss bank accounts were opened. Some suggested this activity – as well as the Bronfman-controlled Bank of Montreal having had their bank account for the Prohibition Era alcohol put under a false name – led to suspicions of money laundering.        

  And is it merely coincidence that Basit Igtet ended up in Switzerland with his father’s ill-gotten gains already there?

  And now we come back to the subject of John McCain…

  The Bronfman family was the king behind the throne of the organised crime empire in Arizona – a crime empire that spawned the political career of John McCain.

  A man named Jim Hensley was well known in mob circles as a gangster in Arizona and was exposed in the seventies – by a man who was then killed in a car bombing in 1976. Hensley’s daughter married John McCain and the Hensley family was a key sponsor of McCain’s political career. Like the Bronfmans, Hensley was also involved with alcohol – as owner of the biggest beer distributor in Arizona. But what the media never mention is that the Hensley gangster fortune that backs McCain is, in fact, a branch of the same bootlegging and racketeering fortune of the Bronfman dynasty of Canada…

  Next time you see Basit Igtet and John McCain – an agent of ‘israel’ – shaking hands as they plot for the new Libya, you can remember this important connection…No wonder they are such pals!

  And now we come to another ultimate Zionist connection of the Bronfman family…

   My Libyan sources have sent me a copy of a document of the ‘Israel Discount Bank LTD’, dated February 10th 2014. It is an Amendment to a Bank Holding Permit – for the means of a control of the Bank by individuals from the Bronfman Group.

  The Bronfman Group had received an Amendment to the Holding Permit (following the death of Edgar Bronfman Sr on December 21st, 2013), as defined in the Amendment to the Holding Permit – issued by the Governor of the ‘Bank of Israel’…

  Appendix three of the addendum to permit to hold means of control of ‘Israel Discount Bank LTD’, contains the names of the beneficiaries of the trusts. The list contains more than 30 members of the Bronfman family – including Sara Igtet.

   Basit Igtet is the Zionists weapon of choice for Libya.

It is now up to the Libyan people to decide whether they wish to be ruled by a family that are hardly the sort of people to be getting into bed with.

  You do so at your peril…

 

Lady Khamis (‘T.G.W.L.K.’)

For libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org

LOCKERBIE: WHY ‘THE SUN’ NEWSPAPER FRAMED GADDAFI


 

LOCKERBIE: WHY ‘THE SUN’ NEWSPAPER FRAMED GADDAFI

 

The last few weeks have seen the complete crumbling of the case against Libya’s former leader Muammar Gaddafi as the perpetrator of the Lockerbie bombing. Framed by the West, it is clear that the ‘evidence’ against Libya is now proven to be false and it is now Iran that is evidenced as the new suspect. Whoever did bring down the plane – it was not Gaddafi.

  But there remain serious claims that it was the CIA who actually planted the bomb. What we know for certain is that both the CIA and the British government knew Libya was not responsible and deliberately withheld information that would have seen the convicted Libyan, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, acquitted of the bombing.

  Both Western governments and the Western media used Lockerbie as a way of demonising Gaddafi – ensuring that the brain-washed people of Britain and America would not make too much fuss if the opportunity ever presented itself to go to war against Libya.

  As well as being a convenient scapegoat, this is why Gaddafi was framed for the Lockerbie bombing.

  In 2011, that opportunity to launch war on Libya arose – thanks to severe subversion of the North African state by the West. The Western media went into overdrive and it was not long before one British newspaper – ‘The Sun’ – carried a full front-page story: ‘Gaddafi Ordered Lockerbie Bombing’.

  This startling information came from none other than Abdul Jalil – a former Libyan Jamahiriyah Government minister who was facing an investigation by Gaddafi for corruption. Jalil had quickly switched sides and was keen to appease his Western backers.

  The article, published on February 24th 2011, carried no evidence to back up the claims – which are now, of course, utterly discredited.

  The piece was written by the journalist Tom Newton Dunn.

  The fact that Newton Dunn would put his name to such a piece of gutter ‘journalism’ was no surprise to me – as some years earlier I had personally exchanged a number of private and intense communications with him over the subject of the Iraq war.

  Due to my previous involvement with the British media, when I spent many years (under another name) exposing something to do with horses, I gained a considerable number of contacts in press and television. Newton Dunn was not, as far as I know, interested in my subject, but our paths crossed when he was a reporter for the British newspaper ‘The Daily Mirror’.

  Newton Dunn and I argued for some weeks over the rights and wrongs of invading Iraq. He supported the war – I did not. Despite my best efforts, Newton Dunn felt the West getting rid of Saddam – whom he would call a nasty dictator – was in the best interests of the Iraqis. He was not concerned with my argument that Iraq was now doomed and the West’s killing machine would be beyond anything Saddam could unleash.

  Since then, we now indeed see Iraq ruined and over a million dead – purely for oil. Somehow, I do not believe Newton Dunn has changed his mind…

  The Mirror was a newspaper fiercely opposed to the Iraq war from the very start. Therefore, it was no surprise to me that not long after I ceased all communications with him, Newton Dunn left the Mirror and joined The Sun.

  The Sun newspaper is a right-wing propaganda machine and a warmongering monster. It viciously promotes British state terrorism at every sick opportunity – as well as promoting Islamophobia and xenophobia. It is also cheap and childish in its style and desperate to appeal to every lowest common denominator that it thinks its jingoistic readers want to read.

  However, The Sun’s most infamous institution is that of its daily Page Three feature – a naked woman with large breasts.

  Despite being more than well endowed myself, I have never understood why so many young females in my country have an ambition to be a ‘Page Three Girl’ – thereby, losing their dignity, morality and decency in the process.

  Bizarrely, as well as writing about wars, Newton Dunn was also tasked, at the same time, with writing the accompanying text to the Page Three feature.

  Using military language (so I will too then), Newton Dunn lasciviously wrote about one girl and the size of her two forward-facing assets as – what he called – her “cannons”.

  Any credibility Newton Dunn might ever have had as a journalist had now reached its end…

  The Sun is owned by the ‘elite’ Jew, Rupert Murdoch – who personally telephoned the then British Prime Minister Tony Blair and ordered him to do the Iraq war.

  One of The Sun’s most infamous editors was Rebekah Brooks (at that time, Rebekah Wade). Brooks is currently on trial in the British courts on charges of phone hacking – including that of a murdered schoolgirl.

  Brooks is also a former editor of The Sun’s sister paper, ‘The News Of The World’ – now reinvented as ‘The Sun On Sunday’, after the phone hacking revelations caused The News Of The World to close down.

  Brooks is also the former chief executive of the Murdoch media empire known as ‘News International’. Murdoch owned The News Of The World and owns The Sun On Sunday.

  Also on trial with Brooks – and for the same charges of both phone hacking at this newspaper and misconduct in public office – is another former editor of The News Of The World, Andy Coulson.

  Coulson became one of the personnel of British Prime Minister David Cameron – working for him as communications director. After the phone hacking scandal broke, Coulson was eventually forced to resign – much to Cameron’s reluctance. (I always say you can judge a man by his friends)…

  Rebekah Brooks is an ardent Murdoch lackey. The trial has recently seen the exposing of the text of secret emails sent to Brooks by Tony Blair – advising and helping her on how to deal with the situation she now finds herself in…

  Blair has recently been accused of having an affair with Murdoch’s wife, Wendi Deng. He, of course, strenuously denies this allegation. Whatever the truth, Deng was clearly obsessed with Blair – and Murdoch is now divorcing her.

  Brooks was married to the British soap actor Ross Kemp – himself, an ardent supporter of British state terrorists. During the relationship, she had an adulterous affair – with Andy Coulson. Kemp subsequently divorced her.

  Rebekah Brooks is now married to former racehorse trainer Charlie Brooks – a man who had been an invaluable contact of mine some years earlier. I found him to be one of few genuinely nice and decent people in his profession. He was extremely kind to me in all my dealings with him – and I still treasure today his detailed and honest hand-written notes to me on my lengthy ‘where are they now’ questionnaire I gave him about his horses.

  I later watched in sadness as he became involved with and then married Rebekah Wade – and now he stands dragged down to her level, accused of perverting the course of justice by helping his wife get rid of potentially incriminating evidence against her – including a missing laptop.

  Today, The Sun continues to misinform its readers – usually boys and men keen to get their daily fix of Page Three and with few brain cells to rub together between them – that the world must get rid of another ‘nasty dictator’, President Assad of Syria.

  What the likes of journalists and editors at The Sun will never tell their readers is the truth. In the case of Syria, just like Libya - readers will not be told that there is no real ‘civil war’ – for the vast number of foreigners fighting Assad are funded and sent there by the very same people that Newton Dunn and Brooks serve, or who pay their wages.

  Those people being the likes of Murdoch and Blair – and now David Cameron – and their New World Order, as espoused by the United States of America and ‘israel’ and their wars for oil or regional control.

  And to hell with how many people die for it…

(Author’s note: I would like to thank everyone who has read and enjoyed / empathised with my articles. Regulars will know that they have been primarily written under the name ‘The Girl Who Loves Khamis’. As of the recent book review I did here, my primary writing name will now be Lady Khamis. This is because it is more suitable as I become better known and respected for my work. I will NOT be dropping my TGWLK nickname though – as there is no truer statement!

  All this would not have been possible without my dear editor and friend, al-Fatah. Shukran jazeelan).

 

 

Lady Khamis  (‘thegirlwholoveskhamis’)

For libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org

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

CIA BRAINWASHING – MUAMMAR GADDAFI


 

 

CIA BRAINWASHING – MUAMMAR GADDAFI

 

Gaddafi with David Berg whose name has been linked to pedophilia and the CIA’s MK ULTRA brainwashing. (RELIGIOUS MIND-CONTROL CULTS)

 

Muammar al-Gaddafi – Lunch with the FT

 

Colonel Muammer Gaddafi was rumoured to be fleeing south across the Sahara in a heavily armed convoy when the man whose job it is to guard him emailed me with a date for lunch.

 

I met Colonel Gaddafi at a restaurant which must remain nameless.

 

Muammar looked different from the person who appears in his early photographs; somehow he reminded me of a scary looking Michael Jackson or Anders Breivik.

 

The Western media have speculated that Muammar is mentally disturbed.

 

I wondered if he was a victim of mind control.

 

Allegedly, Muammar has taken an interest in Black Magic.

 

 

While tucking in to Cuisses de Grenouillesal, Muammar talked about his time as a boy scout and about his military training in the United Kingdom.

 

Was he brainwashed by the British, I asked.

 

He took a mouthful of water and started talking about his bloodless seizure of power in 1969.

 

“The Americans wanted the British puppet King Idris to be toppled,” he explained.

 

He said that, like Nasser, he was at first an asset of the CIA, and then an enemy of the CIA.

 

He closed the American and British military bases, and demanded that more of Libya‘s oil wealth went to Libyans.

 

He said he felt that Israel could not defeat the Arabs, if the Arabs were to be united.

 

That meant Libya being friends with all Arab countries.

 

“The enemy is Imperialism and Zionism,” he said.

 

Gaddafi

 

“Your government conducted executions of political opponents,” I pointed out.

We executed people who tried to topple the government,” he replied, and recently the CIA provided us with information on Libyan dissidents.

“And you allowed Libya to be a base for extraordinary renditions.”

“I have been called a dictator,” he said.

“I moved Berbers out of their mud-brick towns into modern apartments, with electricity, running water and satellite TV.”

“But you tried to abolish the Berber culture.”

“I have made enemies.”

“The accusation is that your friends became rich while the people in the eastern parts of Libya were neglected.”

“Some people blame me for being a socialist,” he said.

“Libya now has the best educated people in Africa and the highest GDP per capita in Africa,” he continued.

“We had 10 percent growth of GDP in 2010, the highest of any state in Africa.

“In the first 15 years of Green rule, the number of doctors increased seven-fold.

“Infant mortality is the lowest in Africa.

“Our Great Man-made River scheme is the ‘Eighth Wonder of the World’.

 

 

Our Bouillabaisse arrived.

 

I asked Muammar about Islam.

 

I pointed out that some people have said that Libya is run like Saudi Arabia, along ultra strict Islamist lines. Strict punishments for theft and adultery. No alcohol.

 

“We are a Muslim country,” said Muammar.

 

I pointed out that he had been involved in a number of wars, including a bloody one in Chad and a conflict with Egypt.

 

“We have had our problems,” said Muammar. “But, in 1989, we had the Maghreb Pact linking Mauritania, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya. That must have worried the Imperialists and Zionists.”

 

I mentioned the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

 

“After the fall of Saddam”, said Muammar, “I got rid of certain weapons. Even before the Iraq War, I wanted good relations with the West. I had to get the sanctions removed.”

“I was tough with the oil companies.

“The Shah of Iran copied me.

“The Shah, of course, was toppled by the CIA.”

 

I pointed out that Libya had been friends with Idi Amin.

 

“Saddam, the Shah, and Idi Amin were all put into power by the West,” explained Muammar.“But when they displeased the West, they suddenly werepainted by the Western media asbeing monsters.”

 

 

I related that Libya had reportedly trained and supported Charles Taylor of Liberia.

 

“Charles Taylor was put into power by the CIA,” said Muammar.

 

I asked about Slobodan Milosevic.

 

Muammar pointed out that Milosevic was up against the CIA’s al Qaeda.

 

“Both Hugo Chavez and I wanted to fight imperialism in Africa and Latin America,” he added.

 

Muammar talked of Pan-Africanism and African Unity.

 

Muammar explained: “The Arab world refuses to become united. Africa has become so important because of its resources.”

 

Muammar related that he had spoken up for Sudan’s president Omar al-Bashir and for Idi Amin.

 

I asked about Zimbabwe, where Muammar reportedly owns at least 20 luxurious properties.

 

Muammar said that Mugabe was right to fight against attempts at destabilisation.

 

I asked about Libya’s alleged support for the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines.

 

“They are financed by the CIA,” said Muammar.

 

 

I asked Muammar about his support for the Red Army Faction, the Red Brigades, and the Irish Republican Army (IRA).

 

“These organisations were all controlled by the CIA and MI6,” said Muammar. “Many of the top people in the IRA are agents of the British security services. And it should not be forgotten that the CIA supplied weapons to the IRA.”

 

What about policewoman Yvonne Fletcher, killed in London in 1984, allegedly by a bullet from the Libyan embassy?

 

Muammar explained that a British TV documentary proved that the shot which killed Yvonne Fletcher came from a building with links to the CIA.

 

Was Muammar the planner of the Lockerbie Bombing?

 

Muammar said that the CIA brought down PanAm 103 to destroy Major Charles McKee and the evidence he and his team had collected of CIA drug smuggling.

 

Nelson Mandela persuaded Gaddafi to hand over two Libyans to the Scottish Court in the Netherlands, where they faced trial in 1999.

 

“You know, Nelson Mandela is an agent of MI6,” said Muammar.

 

Bernard Faucon

 

I put it to Muammar that he had said a number of controversial things over the years.

 

Muammar had claimed that certain viruses were biological weapons manufactured by a foreign military; that the Christian Bible was a forgery; that Europe would become a Muslim continent; and that a single-state solution was best for Israel-Palestine.

 

Muammar looked enigmatic. “You know that two Israeli women claim they are my close blood relations.”

“I am protected. When the SAS wanted to kill me in 1969, the CIA vetoed the plan.

“In 1981, when Giscard d’Estaing plotted to kill me, the CIA vetoed the plan.”

 

In 2011, a Brazilian plastic surgeon told the Associated Press that Gaddafi had been his patient in 1995.

 

I wondered who Muammar was really working for.

 

 

 

source: aangirfan.blogspot.com