US, ominously, deploys Beecroft as Ambassador to Egypt


US, ominously, deploys Beecroft as Ambassador to Egypt

Christof Lehmann (nsnbc) : The United States deployed Robert Stephen Beecroft as Ambassador to Egypt. Beecroft is the first U.S. Ambassador to the North African country since the U.S., in 2013, following the ouster of Mohamed Morsi, limited relations to Chargé d’ Affaires.

Robert S. Beecroft, here, at the U.S. Embassy in Iraq.

Robert S. Beecroft, here, at the U.S. Embassy in Iraq.

Ambassador Beecroft succeeds former Ambassador Anne Patterson who represented a consistent pro-Morsi and Muslim Brotherhood U.S. foreign policy that also was consistent with the United States overt and covert involvement in the 2011 “Arab Spring” a.k.a. “The Great Muslim Brotherhood Project” and the US/UK/Turkish, Qatari, and Israeli led attempt to bring about comprehensive change in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

Ambassador Anne Patterson became Ambassador two years before she left Egypt in 2013, that is, at a time that coincided with the onset of the so-called Arab Spring. After leaving Egypt in 2013 she was promoted and became the Obama administration’s Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.

It is noteworthy that the Muslim Brotherhood linked Mohamed Morsi became a member of the “Ikhwan” while he was studying in Egypt. It was, however, during his PhD studies in the United States, that Morsi became introduced to powerful U.S. American think tanks and, according to many analysts, put into a position that later enabled him to attempt an Islamist Coup d’ État via abuse of Egypt’s governmental institutions. Following the ouster of Morsi, the current President of Egypt, Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi, referred to the same context in an interview with journalist Larry Weissman, saying:

“The people of Egypt are aware of the fact that the USA has stabbed Egypt in the back with the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi. It is nothing that Egypt will easily forget, or forgive”.

Robert Stephen Beecroft began his career in the U.S. Foreign Service in 1994 and served as Assistant Secretary for Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. Beecroft also served at U.S. embassies in the Jordanian capital Amman, the Saudi Arabian capital Riyadh as well as in the Syrian capital Damascus.

Beecroft also served as Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in the Iraqi capital Baghdad in July 2011, and was promoted to Chargé d’ Affairs by the Obama administration when Ambassador James Jeffrey left the country in June 2012. Later that year the U.S. Senate would confirm Obama’s nomination of Beecroft as Ambassador to Iraq. His promotion to Ambassador coincided with the marked increase of Saudi attempts to destabilize Iraq’s Al-Anbar province.

Several analysts and Washington-based pundits expected that the Obama administration would nominate the former U.S. Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford for the post of Ambassador to Egypt. It is likely that Egypt would have objected against Ford for a number of reasons and would rather have maintained Egyptian – U.S. relations at the level of Chargé d’ Affairs instead. Ford is considered as one of the main executives behind the U.S.’ involvement in launching the war on Syria with death squads and Muslim Brotherhood as well as Al-Qaeda linked terrorist brigades.

Beecroft’s track record, however, also puts him into the category of U.S. diplomats with a long-standing experience in the United States’ involvement in everything spanning from covert operations, subversion to overt and illegal war. The latter includes the covertly U.S.-backed war on Iraq with ISIS as proxy mercenary force or enemy, depending on utility.

Egypt is currently fighting an insurgency by the ISIS a.k.a. Islamic State linked Ansar Bayt al-Magdis in the North Sinai province and is struggling with stemming up the flow of arms and insurgents into the country via the Egyptian – Libyan border.

 

 

About these ads

10 THINGS YOU DID NOT KNOW ABOUT BRITISH SOLDIERS


10 THINGS YOU DID NOT KNOW ABOUT BRITISH SOLDIERS

BY LADY KHAMIS

Britain is one of the biggest rogue terror states in the world – it is the key ally of both America and ‘israel’ in their continual foreign adventures of colonialism and control of the planet and its resources. Along with France, it is the biggest military spender in the whole of Europe.

In the run-up to and in the earlier years of the catastrophe of the Iraq war, every opinion poll showed that the British people did not like their own soldiers. They did not just disapprove of the actions they took. Around 70% of British citizens did not like the British Army itself. But all that was about to change…

The British government regime decided that for the purpose of, at least, trying to improve foreign policy perception, they had to embark on a course of action to subvert the average Briton’s way of thinking about their army.

Today, the same numbers of people still disapprove of British foreign policy. They mostly hate the wars. They mostly know that they are lied to. They will protest as much as ever. But something important has now changed. Around 70% of Britons – allegedly – now support the actual soldiers.

How was this remarkable change of opinion achieved? By a massive secret government subversion campaign – via a massive media indoctrination of Britons.

Several years ago, a new covert policy was formed to encourage people to disassociate the soldiers from their crimes. That it was ‘not their fault’ and that ‘they are victims too’. The soldiers had to be seen as ‘heroes’. Indeed, a charity called ‘Help for Heroes’ was set up. But I could not find anything that was created for the ignored and forgotten victims of the crimes committed by these soldiers. Instead, we have the constant mantra that they are ‘just doing their job’ and that ‘other people sent them there’.

Well, if I was hired to kill my neighbour’s family for the false flag of doing ‘greater good’, and I told my neighbour ‘sorry mate, just doing what I was told to do’, would my neighbour understand? I don’t think so.

Soldiers are also branded ‘heroes’ for all those IED’s they regularly removed from the roads of Afghanistan. Unfortunately, the British public is largely too dumb to realise that if it were not for the presence of these troops in the first place, there would be no IED’s littering the streets of Afghanistan…

Too many Britons do not want to face the truth and prefer to live in a safe, jingoistic little bubble. They want to believe that their army – as well as their country and ‘royal’ family – are entities of which they can be proud.

The media took advantage of this and dutifully put into place a programme of brainwashing, which appears endlessly on our televisions and in our newspapers.

Soldiers became willing participants in this façade. They are recruited to give talks to the unemployed. They are recruited to go into schools and brainwash the young. Some are even re-trained as teachers.

Looking at a British television guide, it is virtually impossible now to find a day of programmes that do not feature a soldier taking part in a reality TV show – or doing cookery, gardening, singing, or even skating on TV… Getting them into sports and holding games tournaments is now the big wheeze.

The militarised, so-called ‘royal family’ also willingly avail themselves for being a prime weapon of subversion of their ‘subjects’. Harold Windsor – the so-called ‘Prince Harry’ – is rarely off our TV screens, yet he a dangerous, childish, vile mass murderer and a supreme psychopath. He regularly laughs at the people he has killed during his time as an army pilot in Afghanistan, when operating, what he so charmingly calls, his “video kill” missions. Indeed, his unit had the highest “kill rate”…

He is also an imposter. His family are foreigners whose real name is Saxe Coburg-Gotha. It was changed to Windsor to successfully delude the British public into forgetting that they are illegitimate usurpers to the throne.

He is also a radicalised extremist and a colonialist US agent nutcase.

But it is people who criticise British soldiers who are now branded as suspected traitors and ‘extremists’.

A 2013 survey showed that 1 in 5 British soldiers had been refused service in a bar or hotel during their ‘career’ – because of fears they would cause trouble. The political Labour party is calling for this type of refusal to be made a criminal offence. Already, anyone doing this now finds themselves on the front page of the newspapers. People are taught that it is both anti-social and bad to be anti-soldier.

Worse still, the British regime is now determined to bring in a new law in the next parliament – to make it a criminal offence to dare to criticise or abuse British soldiers in any way.

In other words, the dictatorial regime of suppression will make sure that they and their soldiers’ crimes will not be reported, commented, or reacted upon.

So readers, before I get arrested, here are 10 things that you will not know about British soldiers – (especially if you are British)…

  1. PLANTING CAR BOMBS TO KILL CIVILIANS AND TO FRAME ‘TERRORISTS’:

During the Iraq war, two undercover British soldiers were arrested in Basra in 2005 – disguised in Arab dress, wearing false beards and acting as ‘sectarian extremists’…

They were carrying guns and shooting at the locals and Iraqi police – after being stopped at a checkpoint… Two police officers died…

Later, to try and free the two soldiers, a prison – the al-Jamiat police station - was attacked by British soldiers. It was an event that became an infamous siege in Basra… 150 prisoners escaped…

Five civilians in the Iraqi crowd demonstrating outside the jail against the British actions were killed. (Both the police and civilian death totals are higher than in the reports of others as I am including those who died later in hospital from their wounds, as recorded in the notes that I made from multiple media sources at the time).

In 2006 – on Christmas Day – no less than 1,000 British troops again stormed the same station – killing seven people and then blowing up the building…. 127 inmates escaped. The soldiers upset the locals, trashed any vehicle they could find, and, once again, the local council called the operation “an illegal and provocative act”.

Clearly still in festive spirit, the troops then gleefully announced that they were going to spend Boxing Day going on a ‘rat hunt’ (not of the small, furry kind)…

But why had the two soldiers – who were from the SAS – been arrested in the original incident of 2005? And what had they really been doing in Iraq? The truth was never revealed to the British public by the Western media.

In fact, the vehicle the British soldiers were found cruising around in was also a car bomb – and they were about to explode it…

The two had been busy planting car bombs in Basra…

So who really were the Arab ‘terrorists’ causing trouble in some of the incidents in Iraq? Next time you hear on the news about a car bomb in Iraq, ask yourself who might really have set it off? Who is really doing some of the blowing up of the Arab world? Even Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was rumoured to have been set up for some things he did not do…

Iraqi officials insist that many of the bombings carried out against civilians in Iraq were actually committed by British and American forces… These acts go as far back to at least spring, 2004…

A string of car bombings in Baghdad that year were also widely rumoured to have been committed by the CIA…

Many ‘suicide’ bombings were, in fact, remotely exploded or bombs controlled by a timer…

Evidence had already emerged in 2002 that the British Army had been planting double agents in terrorist organisations – in order to carry out proxy assassinations and terror attacks on behalf of the British state…

This included the revelation that a British soldier had been one of the members of the IRA cell that committed the Omagh bombing in 1998 – killing 29 civilians. The police had also known the bombing was going to happen but did nothing.

What happened in Iraq was a reactivation of these same terror tactics.

  1. DELIBERATELY PROVOKING ENEMIES INTO COMMITTING ATTACKS:

In Afghanistan, the British Army operates a covert, actual army policy of deliberately provoking the Taliban into attacks. British soldiers actually commit pre-planned operations where they go out from their bases and provoke the Taliban into attacking them.

This again shows the true violent nature of the army’s own policies and shows that they set out to purposefully foment violence, put civilians at enormous risk and cause chaos, unrest, and unnecessary death in other peoples’ sovereign states.

Like most things here, this story was little covered by the media.

  1. USING REPLICA MOSQUES FOR TARGET PRACTICE:

In 2010, it was reported that the British Army had a base in the town of Catterick in the UK, shockingly using seven replicas of Muslim mosques – as firing ranges and target practice for soldiers…

This outrageous act shows the true demeanour and agenda of these soldiers and their bosses. Complaints from Muslims finally saw the removal of these replica mosques and an end to this atrocity.

  1. GUN-RUNNING:

The British Army was gun-running in secret missions in Iraq. 2,000 AK-47’s were flown from a secret weapons store in Baghdad to the northern city of Kirkuk. They were then handed on to the Americans and given to a large private Iraqi army force – led by a British company guarding the oil in Iraq!

Journalists who had cottoned on to the story were told “not to ask too many questions” about it…

These weapons – which, I believe originated from the Balkans – were also hugely inferior to those used by the British and Americans themselves…

Gun-running – especially when secretly being used to arm ‘insurgents’ – is usually described as weapons going ‘missing’ or having been ‘lost’. British soldiers ‘lost’ a huge cache of guns in Afghanistan.

In Iraq in September 2006, British soldiers were at the centre of an investigation after being caught illegally smuggling stolen guns out of the country – in exchange for cocaine…

  1. LETTING THE DRUG TRADE FLOURISH:

The British Army did nothing about the cultivation of poppies for the making of heroin that was going on right outside their own base, ‘Camp Bastard Bastion’, in Afghanistan.

A main reason for the war was that the Taliban had virtually stamped out all drug production in the country, as it is against Islam. America’s CIA had lost their drug profits so it was time to act…

(Indeed, the half-brother of the US puppet and former post-Taliban ‘President’ Hamed Karzai, Ahmed Wali Karzai, was a well-known CIA-backed drug lord in Afghanistan – until he was mysteriously shot dead in 2011 in his own home by his long-time trusted Head of Security)… 

  1. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS:

In 2007, Honey Badgers were seen in the proximity of the British Army base in Basra, Iraq – sparking rumours among the local residents that the British forces had deliberately released “man-eating” and “bear-like” badgers – in order to cause panic…

Under any normal circumstances, badgers are not found in the Arab world…

Badgers are a gentle enough wild animal and a protected species in Britain – and a special licence would be needed to kill them. But as always, it is another law for the army…

Also in Iraq, British soldiers deliberately mowed down and killed a donkey – using a tank to do so…

Every year the British Army put down around 100 of their own brave army dogs – for no other reason than they cannot be bothered to look after them, pay for them, or even try and re-home them.

During training, EVERY soldier has to break the necks of rabbits as part of the brutal army’s training regime. Now, that is an awful lot of rabbits being horrifically mistreated… In civilian life, you are likely to get a jail sentence for such cruelty.

The British regime’s Ministry of Defence has a secret training base in Denmark where live pigs are used for target practice. They are shot with real bullets and those that do not die are kept alive for study – and then killed anyway. They would not be able to get away with this in Britain – where we are known as an animal-loving country – so the operation was moved abroad.

  1. LACK OF INTELLIGENCE:

39% of adult British soldiers that are recruited have the reading ability of an 11-year-old child – or worse.

38% can only do mathematics aimed at pupils aged 11 – which is the last year of primary school!

The British Army continually castigates its foreign enemies for recruiting children to fight – but 28% of British Army recruits are under 18 years of age…

  1. VIOLENT MENTALITY:

The criminal acts committed against civilians in Iraq by British soldiers are so commonplace that it would take a whole book to write about them. But here are a couple that I have chosen at random:

In 2003, seven British soldiers attacked seven unarmed villagers for no reason. The civilians were pulled out of their car and beaten by the soldiers – who used their rifle butts, helmets, fists and feet. One victim, Nadhem Abdullah, died from a brain haemorrhage next day – he was just 18 years of age. One man was knocked out, a pregnant woman was also attacked, and another woman – who had given birth only three days before – was struck in the face. A dog barking nearby was also shot dead – before they departed the scene clapping and laughing…

The victims received no justice – successful convictions against British soldiers in their own military courts are almost impossible, due to the regime being so heavily weighed in their favour.

In 2006, the Arab world was shocked by the release of a video from 2004, showing teenage civilians in al-Amarah being dragged by British soldiers into a courtyard – and then brutally beaten as they screamed for mercy. One became unconscious. Disturbingly, a vast number of soldiers walked in during the attacks – but not one did anything to try and stop it.

It nailed the myth that ‘only a few rogue elements’ exist in the British Army…

The video also showed a dead Iraqi being kicked in the head…

But it is not just countries experiencing war that feel the wrath of British troops…

Thousands of British soldiers train in British Ministry of Defence bases in Kenya – before going to Afghanistan. In April 2012, 200 British soldiers destroyed a bar in a mass brawl in Kenya. In another incident, they murdered a 21-year-old woman – despite no military war action going on in that country. In yet another incident, a soldier shot dead a civilian – during a training exercise.

Kenyan locals regularly find they have cause to complain about the conduct of British soldiers – whom they call ‘Johnnies’ – most particularly about their behaviour and attitude.

The same is true in Cyprus where soldiers are also stationed; despite no military war action going on there either.

In Cyprus in 1994, three British soldiers kidnapped, raped and murdered a young Danish tour guide. They bludgeoned her to death with a spade and said afterwards that it was because they had “wanted a woman”…

There are regular demonstrations against the soldiers for being there – but the arrogant British government does not give a damn.

In Norway in 2008, British soldiers stripped naked in a bar and urinated on the locals.

One witness said that Norwegians had found British soldiers to have a “nasty edge” to them that makes them unpalatable to have around.

  1. MURDERS AND OTHER CRIMINAL ACTS CONTINUE AFTER ARRIVING HOME:

A staggering total of more than 100,000 British soldiers passed through police custody in 2011…

In March 2013, a study showed British soldiers are more than three times more likely to commit violent crime than their civilian counterparts. Violent offending is particular common among men under 30-years-old from the lower ranks. Of nearly 3,000 men aged under 30, and who had been in the army, nearly 20.6 per cent have a conviction for violence. (This compares to only 6.7 per cent of the same age group amongst ordinary civilians).

The report also found that the more war they were involved in, the far higher the chance of them committing violence back home. Indeed, those with multiple combat experience are 70-80 per cent more likely to commit acts of violence after arriving back home.

But the study also acknowledged that people who choose to join the British army are likely to have a more aggressive nature in the first place than the average person…

In a separate study, one in eight British soldiers admitted attacking someone after they had come home from Iraq or Afghanistan. (As it is by their own admittance, the true figure is likely to be considerably higher).

The British government regime fiddles official statistics on soldier convictions (just as they fiddle all crime figures and other statistics, such as unemployment, health etc). It is believed that the true number of ex-British soldiers in custody is 10 per cent of the entire prison population – which is three times higher than the regime claims of just 3 to 4 per cent…

The head of the British Army from 2006 until 2009, Richard Dannatt, later surprisingly admitted that there is a real problem with British soldiers in their attitude because many come from “chaotic backgrounds” - and there are problems in getting them to understand how civilians should be treated…

Too many of these soldiers had not been exposed to traditional values and they had a lack of respect, he said, at a ‘Royal United Services Institute’ event in London.

  1. THE PSYCHOPATH STUDY:

In the early years of the Iraq war, an extraordinary one-hour programme was broadcast on British television’s Channel 4. It conducted remarkable research to see if British soldiers were psychotic. Its findings concluded that, almost with no exception, British soldiers are “psychopaths”…

This programme was never repeated. Due to the current climate, it is doubtful that such a programme will ever be devised again – and certainly would not be commissioned now.

Sadly, many Britons think any young man involved in anti-social behaviour should be forced to join the army so that they can get some ‘discipline’.

Unfortunately, all this would do is complete the journey of turning a hoodlum into a fully-fledged psycho…

Help for ‘Heroes’? Help for Brit Shits!

For more shocking information on Britain and America doing car bombings in Iraq etc, see this link:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/state-sponsored-terror-british-and-american-black-ops-in-iraq/9447?print=1

 

Lady Khamis

For libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org

 

AN OBESE INSECT TRYING TO ATTACK RUSSIA!!! Is Qatar Attacking Russia?


AN OBESE INSECT TRYING TO ATTACK RUSSIA!!!

Is Qatar Attacking Russia?

Editor’s note: When I read the below article I could not stop laughing, after three years of severe depression over the illegal war in Libya, I found an article that the journalist has a sense of humor out of these dramatic situations such as Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Yemen, Egypt and Libya which one of the wardracula’s has financed in this misery is the Qatari family. The way Mr. Simonov ridiculous the Qatari Journalist Mahmud Zaaluk is something I could not leave out from my blog. Please enjoy as much as I did. Mr.Vladimir Simonov made smile as also gave me again faith that there are still real journalists who are not for the money.

The Qatari newspaper Al Raya which is close to the family of Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and expresses the official viewpoint of Qatar ran a story on December 1 under the headline “Syria: the seventh Muslim district of Russia” by Mahmud Zaaluk. The article offers a curious view on Moscow’s Middle East policy. Here is an excerpt: “Observing the destruction of Syria, it seems as if we are watching the final episode of a Russian TV serial. We missed the previous episodes … because if they were translated into Arabic, they would cause us to shed enough tears to drown the entire Middle East. … Today, Moscow’s Middle East screenplay is being filmed with Iran as the film director. The Arabs are simply spectators. Syria is where the filming of the serials is taking place, but it’s Russia alone that will reap the profits of the show.” He continues: “More than three hundred years ago, Russia had an area of no more than 400,000 square kilometers, but today the Russian flag flies over more than 17 million square kilometers! Historically, Russia was a small state in northeastern Europe, but then the tsars decided to enlarge the country at the expense of the Muslims. They managed to capture several major Islamic states: the Siberian, Astrakhan and Crimean khanates, Turkestan and lands in the Caucasus and the Urals.” Then at the end: “It seeks to acquire new lands to make them its own and completely assimilate the local population. And that is what is happening today with Syria. … The world has been stunned as it watches Russia savor the sight of the blood of hundreds of thousands of dead Syrians. The reason is that Russia has benefits from their destruction, exhaustion and deportation. As it systematically destroys the Syrian people, Russia simultaneously wants to develop a new generation of Syrians who will be brought up exclusively in the Russian culture. Genocide of all the Middle East peoples is occurring today, in its significance similar to what Moscow did to those Islamic states where Muslims have become a minority that has to fight for its freedom.”

Zaaluk’s profound familiarity with Russian history is breathtaking. Which is to say that his lack thereof is, of course, what is so astounding. Or, more appropriately, his complete “Jahiliyyah,” or ignorance to use the Arab word which is also how Arab describe the period before Islam. Someone should tell this Qatari hack: 300 years ago, meaning in 1714, Russia was a great European power that had torn the Polish and Swedish kingdoms to shreds, set out for the shores of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, and even succeeded in building a new capital, Saint Petersburg, on the Baltic Sea. And 150 years before that, Russia under Ivan the Terrible had seized Kazan, and by the time of Peter the Great, a thriving industry had already sprung up in the Urals, including weapons and metallurgical factories. And oh, by the way, the Russian Empire at that time was seven times larger than what the author described.

So now let’s look at what Qatar was back then. Truth be told, it wasn’t anything. The country just flat-out did not exist. A few hundred people lived on THE PENINSULA where Qatar is today, mostly fishermen, pearl divers and pirates who plundered Persian Gulf merchant ships en route from Basra to India. They were ruled by sheiks from the Al-Hiss region (which is now part of an eastern province of Qatar), and those sheiks were under the thumb of the Ottomans. Also, they were all Shiites, in contrast to the population of Qatar nowadays, the majority of which is made up of Wahhabi Sunnis. The Banu Tamim (literally, the sons of Tamim) is an Arab tribe related to the Mudar, an Arabian tribal group, that migrated to Qatar from the oases of southern Arabia and settled near the present capital of Doha which was a large village where the people sustained themselves through fishing and a smattering of date farming. They herded camels and goats as well. The entire area was controlled by the sheiks of Bahrain. The founding Al Miadadi clan which produced the “dynasty” of Al Thani emirs didn’t show up on the peninsula until the early 19th century, which was 200 years ago. The principality (or emirate) of Qatar is thought to have emerged in 1850, and its leaders were called hakims, or rulers. In 1868, the sheik of Bahrain recognized the independence of Qatar which was led by Sheik Mohammed bin Thani. That same year, he signed a treaty with Britain, stipulating that Qatar would conduct foreign policy only in consultation with a resident representative of the British crown. However, in 1871, the sheik declared himself a vassal of the Ottoman Empire and received the title of kaimakam of Doha. His grandson was forced to acknowledge Qatar as a British protectorate, and later he was forced to grant the British concessions for oil exploration and extraction. Sheik Ali Al Thani (1949-1960) was famous for his uncontrollable wastefulness (for example, he once presented a Saudi delegation with a gift of 60 Cadillacs). In October 1960, internal dynastic clashes led Sheik Ali to abdicate in favor of his son Ahmad. The new sheik (1960-1972) spent hardly any time in his own country. He continually made his way to highly prestigious CASINOS in Lebanon and Monte Carlo.

In 1971, the British “bestowed” a constitution on Qatar that proclaimed the country an independent emirate. The emir, or prince as it is, was given the title of head of state. That means Qatar has been a country for all of 43 years. ****(Gaddafi ruled Libya three years before Qatar became an independent country and Qatar is widely known for its Jealousy over other Arab leaders who were loved by their nationals) According to the 2010 census, it has a population of barely 300,000. The remaining 1.5 million people are expats, foreigners who work in the emirate on a contract basis. Of that number, 500,000 come from India, followed in numerical order by Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Nepalese and Filipinos. The country covers 11.5 square kilometers. That is four times smaller than the area of the Moscow region (44,700 square kilometers in area), where 7.2 million people reside (four times the population of Qatar).

So Mahmud Zaaluk has no room to talk about the size, population, and history of Russia like that. He would have been better served to recall the founding of the country that is the real ruler of Qatar – the United States of America. It just so happens that 300 years back, the Anglo-Saxons outright stole land that didn’t belong to them and almost totally wiped out the American Indians in the area. While we’re at it, the Qatari journalist might want to dredge up the history of Australia and its Aborigines, who were exterminated by those very same Anglo-Saxons. Then we have the Bani Tamim who also destroyed the local tribes upon arriving on the peninsula. And the country of Qatar was created by Britain, as were the United States and Australia. So the vassals are no different from their masters!

qatars_emir_hamad_bin_khalifa_al-thani_and_his_son_qatari_crown_prince_sheikh_tamim_bin_hamad_al-thani.jpg.crop_display

Now let’s move on and talk about Syria, the Middle East, the extermination of Muslims, and terrorism. Zaaluk is twisting meanings and distorting facts here. Was it not Qatar that in the 1990s funded the terrorists in Chechnya who were killing both Muslims and Christians? And wasn’t the Qatari Al Thani dynasty involved in the terrorist acts in New York and Washington on September 11, 2011, by giving a refuge to the conspirators? If not, then why has former Emir Hamad’s first cousin, the head of the Interior Ministry, been under house arrest since 2001? Why did Qatar have a lengthy spell on America’s list of countries involved in international terrorism?

twintowers1463

Qatar became eligible to come off that list only after providing Washington with the Al Udeid air base near Doha, which was used for the bombing of the “Arab brother country” of Iraq in 2003, and transferring full control of ExxonMobil to Washington.

Qatar Jerry

And what about the February 2011 coup in Egypt, for which Qatar footed the bill?

rev done by qatar large

Or the outbreak of civil war in Libya in March 2011 funded by Qatar, Qatari special forces’ presence in the assault on Gadhafi’s palace in Tripoli in August 2011, the bombing of Libya by six Qatari fighter planes from April through August 2011, arrangement of the barbaric murder of the Libyan leader in September 2011 and, a year later, arrangement of the murder of the American ambassador in Benghazi by Islamists, who, like Gadhafi, was sodomized with a stick?

war-in-libya-cartoon-598x457

The list of Qatar’s “feats” includes fomenting a war in Syria, that has killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims; supporting the terrorists of Jabat an Nusra, who were shown on camera eating the internal organs of captive Syrian soldiers, cooperating with the Islamic State group, backing the overthrow of Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Saleh by terrorists of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, financing terrorist attacks against the Shiite government in Iraq, etc.

arabspring forged th

To its CREDIT, even Riyadh got fed up with the antics of the “gas midget”, and in June 2013 the Saudis had Emir Hamad and his completely corrupted prime minister, Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, removed from office. The latter had put his haute couture and oh-so-civilized sensibilities on full display on November 29, 2011. He gave instructions to have Russia’s ambassador to Qatar, Vladimir Titorenko, roughed up at the airport in Doha out of rage for Moscow’s support of Syrian President Bashar Assad. Current Emir Tamim is certainly no improvement over his “retired” father Hamad, either. Par for the course, considering that he was raised by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who, besides being the chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, is also a well-known extremist and the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

So the question now is whether it might be worth Moscow’s while to respond more harshly to cheap shots like these from some Wahhabi riffraff and not to limit itself to downgrading diplomatic relations, as was the case in 2011.

The great country should not allow the malicious yipping of a lapdog of Washington to go unpunished. Everyone knows full well that without a nod from Washington, uppity little Qatar wouldn’t dare snarl at the Russian bear.

The time has come to put the matter before the UN and ask whether the rulers of Qatar should be tried for their complicity in terrorism, their financing of terrorism and their overthrow of legitimate governments in several countries. It is time to demand that all these “princes” be put in the dock at the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

Vladimir Simonov, an expert on the Middle East, Ph.D., written especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.“

KLEPTOCRACY4

S.O.S BEWARE OF KHALIFA HAFTAR WHO IS A CIA AGENT AND A TRAITOR TO LIBYA AND TO THE LIBYAN INTERESTS.


S.O.S BEWARE OF KHALIFA HAFTAR WHO IS A CIA AGENT AND A TRAITOR TO LIBYA AND TO THE LIBYAN INTERESTS.

 

TO ALL LIBYAN READERS WHO READ MY BLOG PLEASE PLEASE BEWARE OF THE WESTERN PROPAGANDA WHO ARE PUSHING KHALIFA HAFTAR TO BECOME THE NEW LEADER OF LIBYA DO NOT BE FOOLED. IN THIS ARTICLE I WILL PROVE TO YOU THAT THIS MAN AND HIS FAMILY DO NOT WANT LIBYA TO BE FREE FROM COLONIZERS NOR DOES HE CARE ABOUT THE INTERESTS OF THE LIBYAN PEOPLE.

He who has lost his dignity in Chad is not going to regain it back in Libya

So I will begin with some clippings of Western Media what they say about him:

A TRAITOR RISEN FROM THE DEAD A CIA/MOSSAD AGENT WHO COLLABORATED WITH THE WEST FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF LIBYA AND TO BECOME THE NEW LEADER.

A TRAITOR RISEN FROM THE DEAD A CIA/MOSSAD AGENT WHO COLLABORATED WITH THE WEST FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF LIBYA AND TO BECOME THE NEW LEADER.

A year before Reagan’s election a Libyan mob, imitating Iranian revolutionaries, burned down the US embassy in Tripoli and diplomatic relations were suspended. Two years later the Libyan embassy in Washington was closed down while US and Libyan jets skirmished over the Gulf of Sidra, which Gaddafi claimed to be part of Libya’s territorial waters.

Later in 1981 American press reports claimed that Libyan hit squads had been sent to the US to assassinate Reagan, shots were fired at the US ambassador to France while the ambassador to Italy was withdrawn after a plot to kidnap him was uncovered. After explosives were found in musical equipment at a US embassy sponsored dance in Khartoum, Sudan, Reagan ordered a travel ban and ordered all Americans out of Libya. ****(only to allow them in again with Canadian, British, French passports. THIS I SAW IT WITH MY OWN EYES WHEN TRAVELLING TO GERMANY FROM LIBYA A PLANE FULL OF AMERICANS BUT THEIR PASSPORTS WHERE CANADIAN, FRENCH, ENGLISH. When I asked why they said the American government had to re enter Libya but while there was a ban order they used the back door with other national passports.)

In 1983 there were more air skirmishes off the Libyan coast; two years later five US citizens were killed by bombs planted at Rome and Vienna airports and US officials blamed Libya. The worst clashes came in 1986, beginning with more air skirmishes over the Gulf of Sidra and the destruction of Libyan SAM sites by American missiles. In April a bomb exploded at the LaBelle nightclub in Berlin, a bar frequented by off-duty American servicemen. ***(although Mossad/Stazi/KGB stated otherwise America wanted to blame Libya)Three people were killed, two of whom were US soldiers and of the 200 wounded, sixty were American citizens. President Reagan blamed Libya and on April 15th, some 100 US aircraft, many flying out of bases in the UK, bombed Libyan bases and military complexes. The Libyans said that 70 people were killed in the attacks which also targeted Gaddafi’s compound in Tripoli, killing his adopted infant daughter, Hana. One ACCOUNT claimed that nine of the jets had been directed to blast Gaddafi’s compound in a clear attempt to kill him.

By the mid-1980’s, the Reagan administration and the CIA believed that Gaddafi was supporting terrorist groups or helping fellow radical states throughout the globe. In a November 3rd, 1985 article for the Washington Post, Bob Woodward listed the countries where Gaddafi was said by the White House to be active. They included Chad, Tunisia, Sudan, Iran, Syria, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Guatemala, El Salvador, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Lebanon and Iraq. Gaddafi was also supporting the IRA in Northern Ireland and significantly stepped up supplies of arms and CASH to the group after a British policewoman was shot dead and diplomats expelled following a confrontation and lengthy siege at the Libyan embassy in London in 1984.

In May 1984, less than a month after the London embassy siege, gunmen launched rocket and gun attacks against the Tripoli army barracks where Gaddafi’s family compound was located. The initial assault was repulsed and most of the insurgents killed when Libyan tanks shelled the building overlooking the barracks where the gunmen had taken refuge. It was though the most serious challenge to Gaddafi’s hold on power in Libya, made all the more threatening by the fact that it had happened on his doorstep.

The attack was claimed by a group calling itself the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL), composed of anti-Gaddafi exiles, some of them supporters of the Idris monarchy overthrown in the 1969 revolution. Claims that the NFSL was at that time supported by US intelligence derive some support from a leak to American newspapers a few days before the attack in Tripoli that President Reagan had recently signed a new directive authorizing US agencies to “take the offensive” against international terrorism by mounting retaliatory or pre-emptive attacks. But the Americans were, at this stage, not directly involved in supporting the exile group’s activities.

The NFSL was getting aid mostly from Saudi Arabia whose ruling family despised Gaddafi after he had accused them of defiling holy Islamic sites in their country but also from Egypt and Tunisia in whose internal affairs Gaddafi had meddled. Sudan was another sponsor. Gaddafi had tried to foment an uprising against its pro-Western leadership and in response Sudan supplied the NFSL with bases from which the May 1984 attack was planned.

The Sudanese, according to one ACCOUNT, kept the CIA informed of the plot. CIA Director, William Casey, was heartened by the attack even though it had failed and renewed his efforts to persuade Reagan to authorize specific covert action against the Libyan leader. Casey is said to have remarked: “It proves for the first time that Libyans are willing to die to get rid of that bastard” (p. 85). From thereon the NFSL was put on the CIA’s payroll.

It was after the unsuccessful effort to kill Gaddafi in his Tripoli compound that Reagan took the intelligence offensive. Bob Woodward revealed Reagan’s move, first in the Washington Post (November 3rd, 1985) and then in his ACCOUNT of Reagan’s secret wars in his book Veil, published in 1987. A secret presidential directive, which Woodward was able to quote, signaled that the exile groups like NFSL would be an important weapon wielded in this campaign against the Libyan leader: “…the exile groups, if supported to a substantial degree, could soon begin an intermittent campaign of sabotage and violence which could prompt further challenges to Qaddafi’s authority.”

The Reagan directive had listed ten options for action against Gaddafi, which ranged from regime change to economic sanctions, although it was obvious that the operation could only be judged a success if Gaddafi was dislodged: “…no course of action short of stimulating Qaddafi’s fall will bring any significant and enduring change in Libyan policies”, the document read.

The former French colony of Chad on Libya’s southern border had already been a major battleground in the war between Reagan and Gaddafi and after the 1984 bid to kill the Libyan dictator it assumed even greater importance. Chad had gained independence from France in 1960 but its history for many years thereafter has been one of coups and civil wars, often sponsored by foreign powers using Chad as an arena for their rivalry.

Libyan interest and activity in Chad pre-dated Gaddafi’s 1969 revolution and centered on a piece of land in Northern Chad called the Aouzou Strip which is rich in uranium and other rare minerals. Gaddafi formed an alliance with the government of Goukouni Wedeye who allowed the Libyans to occupy the strip but in 1982 Wedeye was overthrown by Hissene Habre who was backed by the CIA and by French troops.

Hebre’s was a brutal regime. During the eight years of his leadership some 40,000 people were estimated to have died in detention or executed. Human Rights Watch observed: “Under President Reagan, the United States gave covert CIA paramilitary support to help install Habre in order, according to secretary of state, Alexander Haig, to ‘bloody Gadafi’s nose’”. Bob Woodward wrote in Veil that the Chadian coup was William Casey’s first covert operation as head of the CIA.

During the years following Habre’s coup, Gaddafi’s army and the forces of the Chad government, the CIA and French intelligence clashed repeatedly. In March 1987 a force of some 600-700 Libyan soldiers under the command of General Khalifa Haftir was captured and imprisoned. Gaddafi disowned Heftir, presumably in anger at his capture, and the former Libyan General then defected to the major Libyan opposition group, the NFSL.

A Congressional Research Service report of December 1996 named Heftir as the head of the NFSL’s military wing, the Libyan National Army. After he joined the exile group, the CRS report added, Heftir began “preparing an army to march on Libya”. The NFSL, the CSR said, is in exile “with many of its members in the United States.”

In 1990 French troops helped to oust Habre and installed Idriss Debry to replace him. According to one ACCOUNT the French had grown weary of Habre’s genocidal policies while the new resident in the White House, George H W Bush did not have the same interest as Reagan had in using Chad as a proxy to damage Gaddafi even though the Libyan leader formed an alliance with Debry.

A New York Times report of May 1991 shed more light on the CIA’s sponsorship of Heftir’s men. “They were trained” it said, “by American intelligence officials in sabotage and other guerilla skills, officials said, at a base near Ndjamena, the Chadian capital. The plan to use the exiles fit neatly into the Reagan administration’s eagerness to topple Colonel Qaddafi”.

Following the fall of Habre, Gaddafi demanded that the new government hand over Heftir’s men but instead Debry allowed the Americans to fly them to Zaire. There Libyan officials were given access to the men and about half agreed to return to Libya. The remainder refused, saying they feared for their lives if they went back home. When US financial aid offered to Zaire for giving the rebels refuge failed to materialise they were expelled and sent to Kenya.

Eventually the Kenyans said the men were no longer welcome and the United States agreed to bring them to America where they were admitted to the US refugee programme. A State Department spokesman said the men would have “access to normal resettlement assistance, including English-language and vocational training and, if necessary, financial and medical assistance.” According to one report the remnants of Heftir’s army were dispersed to all fifty states.

That was not, however, the end of the Libyan National Army. In March 1996, Heftir returned to Libya and took part in an uprising against Gaddafi. Details of what happened are scant but the Washington Post reported from Egypt on March 26th that travelers from Libya had spoken of “unrest today in Jabal Akhdar mountains of eastern Libya and said armed rebels may have joined escaped prisoners in an uprising against the government….and that its leader is Col. Khalifa Haftar, of a contra-style group based in the United States called the Libyan National Army, the travelers said.”

The report continued: “The travelers, whose ACCOUNTS could not be confirmed independently, said they heard that the death toll had risen to 23 in five days of fighting between security forces and rebels, including men who escaped from Benghazi prison thursday and then fled into the eastern mountains.”

What part the CIA played in the failed uprising and whether the then US president, Bill Clinton had given the operation his approval are not known. By coincidence or not, three months later, Gaddafi’s forces killed some 1200 political prisoners being held in Benghazi’s Abu Simal jail. It was the arrest of the lawyer representing many of the prisoners’ families that sparked the February 17th uprising against Gaddafi and with it, the return of Khalifa Heftir.

As usual, the back story is complex. Valuable strategic resources abound. There are no good guys. And, as usual, the reporting that commands most of our attention just isn’t very good at helping us understand what is really going on.

Here is another link:

Khalifa Hifter was once a top military officer for Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, but after a disastrous military adventure in Chad in the late 1980s, Hifter switched to the anti-Gadhafi opposition. In the early 1990s, he moved to suburban Virginia, where he established a life but maintained ties to anti-Gadhafi groups.

Late last week, Hifter was appointed to lead the rebel army, which has been in chaos for weeks. He is the third such leader in less than a month, and rebels interviewed in Libya openly voiced distrust for the most recent leader, Abdel Fatah Younes, who had been at Gadhafi’s side until just a month ago. ****( Haftar had Abdel Fatah Younes murdered, although never proven not for lack of evidence but the CIA covered it up and pointing to the direction to a fanatic Islamist militia of committing this murder. Its a well known fact that Haftar never liked Abdel Fatah Younes the feelings were mutual but Younes had more experience than Haftar and Younis did not allow Haftar to be chief of military operations. Haftar complained to his daddy =>CIA and the CIA took care of Younes as their asset was very unhappy and going into depression in having Younes as his boss! Younis’s defection emboldened the rebels like no other, before or since. He was instrumental in the liberation of Benghazi from 18-20 February when he helped negotiate a ceasefire at the besieged main military base in the centre of town, allowing loyalist forces to flee. Of course CIA realised that Younes had found out about the big conspiracy done over the Libyan people and he was in secret talks with the Jamahirya which meant that had Younes returned to the Jamahirya he would have also taken his battalion which was very well-trained and one of the best in Libya, they also knew that Younes was very popular with the Libyan people and he was from a big tribe in Benghazi).

The New York Times  always in touch with the CIA/Mossad say this about Haftar:

General Hifter has cast himself in the role of strongman and national protector, the man who will “correct” Libya’s faltering revolution and purge the country of extremists. But he is a polarizing figure, as notorious for his ambition as for his shifting allegiances, and many people here wonder whether he will amount to more than a warlord, advancing his own narrow interests.

He has gathered a corps of soldiers, air force units and militiamen that he has declared to be the Libyan national army, ****(the LIBYAN ARMY ARE FROM THE HONORABLE TRIBES AND HAS NO CONNECTIONS TO HAFTAR) and has used it to mount assaults on the bases of powerful Islamist militias in the east, including several airstrikes on Wednesday. Libya’s multitude of militias have been a major focus of public anger, not least for repeatedly refusing to disarm.

For the moment, the front lines are in Benghazi. General Hifter’s troops operate from several bases, *****(one base) including one outside the city, while the militias have generally retreated to the farmland on the outskirts of town. Fighting flares nightly around the city’s edge, with heavy weapons deployed in some areas emptied of residents.

“They have declared war on each other,” Anas Toweir, a radiologist from Benghazi, said of General Hifter and the local militias. “No one is quite sure what’s going on. Everyone is hiding in their homes.”

General Hifter already has a controversial history in Libya. He was part of the team that carried out the 1969 coup, and later led a controversial war against Chad from 1978 to 1987. After Libya’s defeat in the war, General Hifter defected to the United States, where he became an American citizen and devoted himself to toppling the Qaddafi regime.

When the 2011 uprising began, General Hifter came back to Libya and fought side by side with the Islamists he has now condemned. While he presents himself as the unifier of Libya, some view his movement as a reaction to Libya’s controversial banning of all high-ranking members of Colonel Qaddafi’s government from holding public office, including General Hifter.

Washington Post:

Dressed in military uniform, Haftar, whom the speaker of parliament accused of plotting a coup, said his troops had temporarily withdrawn from Benghazi for tactical reasons. ***(Yes he lost as he is NO leader and stayed outside Benghazi till the HONORABLE TRIBES clean the place and then Haftar together with the western Media proclaimed that he did it… I will say it again he is a wimp has no leadership skills and he has his own agenda together with the CIA/MOSSAD corporation.)

Hifter said that he began planning his offensive around a month ago ****(his financiers have been planning it from 2013, he is not capable of planning or even executing anything, his bakers are France, America (playing with both sides) Israel, Canada and Britain (also playing with both sides) but that there had been discontent among former military officers for more than a year and a half. “We planned it after we saw people being slaughtered in the streets,” he said, referring to the slayings of police officers, judges, lawyers and others in Benghazi. *****(lets not forget who started the slaughtering; Hafter was first in line when he sided with the mercenaries that his second country gave him so that he could topple Qaddafi. There is a saying that a leopard can not change his spots neither Hafter, he is a TRAITOR TO LIBYA, A CIA/MOSSAD AGENT AND IS WORKING AGAINST LIBYA AND ITS INTERESTS.)

He said that he saw no quick end to the fighting.

“Operation Dignity is multiple battles; it’s not just one battle,” Hifter said. *****(What dignity? Hafter lost his dignity in Chad will not regain it in Libya)

Haftar’s offensive ultimately stalled, however, in part due to suspicions about his political ambitions and unconfirmed links to the CIA, as well as his aggressive stance against even moderate Islamist groups. His relationship to the government in Tobruk is ambiguous.

KEY PLAYERS IN LIBYA FROM THE ABOVE ARTICLE:

Qatar

The small Gulf state signaled its outsized geopolitical ambition in 2011 when it played an overt role in aiding the rebellion against Gaddafi. Reports at the time indicated Qatari special forces were operating inside Libya and that Qatari fighter jets may have run sorties in the country. Since 2011, the Qataris have emerged as one of the key backers of political Islamin the Middle East and North Africa, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and a range of Islamist outfits from Tunisia to Syria. As The Washington Post reported Tuesday, Qatar’s connections to an al-Qaeda-linked Salafist militia in Syria were instrumental in WINNING the release of a kidnapped American journalist this weekend.

This conspicuous footprint has made Qatar — as well as the government of Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a moderate Islamist —  the target of criticism from Arab autocrats and secularists elsewhere.

Egypt

On Monday, U.S. officials speaking on condition of anonymity said that Egypt had been involved in two airstrikes on Islamist forces in Libya. Fighter planes from the United Arab Emirates were believed to have used Egyptian bases as a launch pad for the attacks (Washington was not informed of the raids and Egypt has officially denied military operations in Libya).

If true, this intervention would appear to be driven by a broader policy against Islamist movements led by President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi.

The United Arab Emirates

While airstrikes were believed to have been conducted from Egypt, U.S. officials say that the planes flown had come from the UAE, the small country that sits on the Persian Gulf, more than 2,500 miles from Tripoli. The country’s air force is well-regarded and helped in the fight against Qaddafi’s government during the 2011 civil war.

The UAE is a military ally for the United States and a militia commander told The Washington Post that whoever launched the airstrikes had used munitions manufactured by the United States. “The bombs were American-made, and as far as our information goes regarding that ammunition, it is only used by Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Israel in the Middle East,” Abubaker al-Huta, a militia commander, said.

Saudi Arabia

Egypt and the UAE may have taken the lead this week in striking against Islamist targets in Libya, but behind the scenes, the Saudis are playing a concerted role. The kingdom looked on with horror at the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, as a series of Arab autocrats backed by Riyadh were replaced by chaotic, fledgling democracies that reshaped the geopolitical map of the Middle East. Now, it’s striking back with the UAE, a perennial sidekick, in tow alongside Sissi’s Egypt, to which it has already extended billions of dollars in aid.

As part of its larger regional chess match with Iran, a Shiite theocracy, the Saudis have at various times enabled the rise of Sunni militancy in corners of the Middle East. The country remains the source of support for some of the most virulent strains of Salafism in the Muslim world.

“Hifter’s military power is actually quite limited,” Abdullah said. “He hasn’t been able to control the situation.”

In addition to the scores of deaths, the fighting over the past couple of months has forced the evacuation of several civilian neighborhoods in Benghazi, government officials say.

Abdullah, who worked with Hifter before the 2011 revolt as part of the U.S.-based opposition to Gaddafi, says he believes the commander is aiming for a senior position in any new government. Elections to choose a new parliament were held June 25.

“He is as power hungry as it gets,” Abdullah said. “A lot of political movements wanted to piggyback on his popularity. But people are starting to take a step back.”

“He won’t stop until he’s the Sissi of Libya,” he said. ***(Pardon my French but Hafter doesn’t have the balls of the late Qaddafi or of Sissi.)

Switched sides in the 1980s

As a young army officer, Hifter took part in the coup that brought Gaddafi to power in 1969. But Hifter switched sides in the late 1980s, after he was captured while fighting for Gaddafi’s army in a war in neighboring Chad.

 He became the leader of a rebel group called the Libyan National Army, which he claimed received U.S. assistance. He later sought refuge in the United States. He apparently became a U.S. citizen — he voted in Virginia in elections in 2008 and 2009, records show.

One member of a prominent Libyan opposition family who knew Hifter when both were living in Northern Virginia noted that he and his family were comfortable. Hifter resided in Falls Church until 2007 and later in a five-bedroom home in a quiet neighborhood in Vienna, near the golf course of the Westwood Country Club. He sold the second home in 2010 for $612,000, according to public records.

“They lived a very good life, and nobody knows what his source for compensation was,” said the acquaintance, who added that Hifter’s family was not originally wealthy.

(The former general spelled his name “Hifter” on legal documents in the United States. It has also been rendered in reports from Libya as “Haftar” and “Hiftar.”)

But some who knew him said he was arrogant and angled for power.

“He was like a little child. He was actually trying to become the chief of staff,” said Jallal Galal, a former spokesman for the rebels. After the rebels chose another former general, Abdul Fattah Younis, to lead them, Hifter was irate, Galal recalled.

TWP: Is there any possibility of negotiation or is armed conflict the only way forward at this point?

KH: We see that confrontation is the solution. What is the discussion? They are armed, I do not think talks will work with them. These are criminals, international criminals from Europe and Asia and Africa. Unfortunately, we are not defending only Libya but we are now defending the entire world in this way because the escapists and killers they move from place to place. If we expel them from Libya they will go to another place, but if we are following them everywhere the situation will be different for all countries who fight terrorism. *****(He does not say that he brought them with him when F.UK.US decided to topple Qaddafi I am sure they promised him a leading role but got tired of waiting. Anyway back to his answer these criminals that he is talking about were his comrades when they entered Libya illegally in 2011, so what is he saying is he a lesser criminal than his comrades? All of them are financed by F.UK.US)

TWP: Are you receiving any support from abroad?

KH: No, there is no foreign support whatsoever given to us, we are fully reliant on ourselves. ***(Yes by France and USA)

TWP: Have you been in contact with the United States government?

KH: Until now, no. ****(Really? So why did he hide at the American Embassy in Tripoli when he did not succeed his coup de tat in February 2014? And let him explain where he gets his finance?)

When speaking to The Post, Hifter denied any intent to assume a permanent leadership position in the country and rejected accusations by opponents that he is a cipher for foreign interests. *****(we all know for a fact that he is a cipher for foreign interests) Instead, he frames his campaign, dubbed “Operation Dignity,” as a kind of nationalist crusade.

 

On Wednesday, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Deborah Jones, said at the Stimson Center in Washington: Hifter “has not declared that he wants to be in charge of the state. What he has declared is that he wants the GNC to step aside, because the GNC has thus far failed to take any action to respond to the unhappiness of many Libyans.” She was referring to the parliament *****(Didn’t he say a while ago in an interview that he is not assisted by the USA? In the link of US ambassador Deborah Jones you will hear her interview and who ever has followed her with her statements will know she is lying but that is for another article)

Here is a link from Pravda.ru

Haftar betrayed the revolution in the 1980s, when he cut a deal with anti-Gaddafi forces in the neighbouring country of Chad during the Chadian-Libyan conflict. In exchange for being freed from the Chadian prison that kept him locked up with about 600 other Libyan fighters, he vowed to set up the anti-Gaddafi Libyan National Army (LNA). This army was founded on June 21, 1988 – but not without the vast support of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), under the approval of then president Ronald Reagan, who had bombed the Libyan capital of Tripoli two years earlier in an attempt to kill the Gaddafi family.

U.S. by then offered a home to 350 Libyan soldiers who plotted to overthrow Gaddafi. Haftar is believed to be one of them. The Benghazi native started to live with his family in the town of Falls Church in suburban Virginia – just a few miles away from the CIA’s headquarters in Langley - for the next twenty years. In that period Haftar was pursuing LNA activities from the U.S.

In order to understand exactly what is going on with general Haftar and his “Operation Dignity” in relation to colonel Gaddafi and the 1969 Al-Fateh revolution, let’s first of all take a look at what is not going on. Contrary to the events on September 1, 1969 and the days after, Haftar’s operation has been far from bloodless. On May 17 alone, nearly 80 were killed in clashes between Haftar loyalists and a number of the militias that control various parts of Libya. But way more significant is the fact that Gaddafi and the FREE Officers Movement enjoyed the overwhelming support of the Libyan people. The Haftar supporters come from quite a different field. Among them is French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy who applauded the NATO bombing of Libya. His main supporters however seem to be the mainstream journalists and their clients who are eager to report on Haftar’s alleged popularity among the Libyan people. “We are now fighting not only on behalf of Libya, but on behalf of the whole world”, the New York Times quotes him saying on May 29. Strangely enough, the Libyan people themselves are remaining silent.

In fact they are not. It is the media that remains silent on the voices of the Libyans regarding Haftar. When current U.S. ambassador to Libya, Mrs Deborah Jones, said in a (mis)statement on May 21 that Libya is a strategic goldmine for the West, and that Libyans are incapable of running their own country, the Great Libyan Tribes, who represent 98% of the Libyans worldwide, thought it was about time to speak out in response. In a three page open letter the Tribes explained that their best days were the 42 years under Gaddafi. As for general Haftar, they declared:

The USA planned to overthrow the legitimate Libyan government in 1980 and hired a traitor Libyan military officer named Khalifa Haftar, trained him and several thousands mercenaries to destroy the Gaddafi government. The change of government in Chad made the USA stop that planned overthrow. Haftar and his band of traitors were moved to the USA near Langley Virginia where Haftar et al worked for the CIA for 20 years.” […] “You [ambassador Jones] talk as if you do not know General Haftar, when in fact he is the selected military front for the USA-CIA military division in Libya. He receives all his orders from Langley Virginia as do you. In fact, Haftar took refuge in the US embassy in February of this year when his first coup attempt failed. Has the USA not done enough damage to our country?

So what are we really dealing with here? Clearly not with a Gaddafi-like figure who aims to FREE his country from foreign occupiers and their mercenary puppets, and make it as prosperous as it was before the 2011 war. General Haftar is nothing but the West’s answer to their self-created chaos. This is a well-known strategy used by the imperialist powers all over the world for years now. Three years after the NATO war, Libya obviously has not become the free democratic state that according to the West would sprout from the destructive bombing raids. In other words, the lofty but naive promises of freedom made by the U.S. and the NATO countries in an attempt to justify their aggression, have failed loud and clear.

And here are some more links written about Hafter:

http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org/2011/12/17/libya-the-second-son-of-general-khalifa-hafter-was-kidnapped-in-tripoli-december-17-2011/

http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org/2013/10/13/sources-warn-of-imminence-of-a-military-coup-detat-in-libya-led-by-france/

http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org/2012/08/09/libya-libya-news-from-occupied-august-8-2012/

http://libyaagainstsuperpowermedia.org/2011/12/13/libya-attempted-assassination-of-general-khalifa-haftar-12122011/

http://www.libyaherald.com/2014/12/09/hafter-lays-out-his-conditions-for-joining-dialogue/

 

 

 

Video: Discovering detention camps and secret prisons belonging to Ansar al-Sharia in Benghazi that is what NATO Left Behind


Video: Discovering detention camps and secret prisons belonging to Ansar al-Sharia in Benghazi that is what NATO Left Behind

 

alrseefa: Libyan army forces discovered in the city of Benghazi, detention centers and prisons, a secret organization of Ansar al-Sharia in the city of Benghazi, and shows video circulated by activists communication and social Facebook site it is believed to be one of the prisons under the land that was used by the organization in detention and the abduction of citizens within the city.

Editor’s Note: This is what NATO and F.UK.US left behind the so-called Freedom fighters were nothing but EXTRIMISTS COWARD MERCENARIES but before they did that, they had them well-trained and showed them all the ropes of torture. Everybody knew about it, so my question to F.UK.US AND NATO; Is this how you install democracy? Did you train these extremists in Guantanamo Bay? Reading on the horrific and heinous acts of torture that the CIA and its allies did.