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sent to the US to assassinate Reagan, shots were fired at the US ambassador to France while the ambassador to Italy was withdrawn after a plot to kidnap him was uncovered.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/

 

 

 

Spies, Lies & Whistleblowers: MI5, MI6 and the Shayler Affair by Annie Machon


Spies, Lies & Whistleblowers: MI5, MI6 and the Shayler Affair by Annie Machon

I desperately wanted to change MI5 so that it performed a useful job well and lawfully, but I did not then feel that I would have been able to do that either from outside the organisation or from a lower level job. In every potential situation, I therefore came up against a dead end. To complain would mark you out as a troublemaker. To leave took you outside any potential ability to alter things. — David Shayler

But I soon realised that people regarded you with suspicion if you asked too many questions, so I learned to keep quiet … I knew that open protest was not likely to to be successful. If one got a reputation as a revolutionary, one would be regarded as suspect and written off. — Dame Stella Rimington, former Director General MI5

I know all too well that I’m taking on the Establishment, but I am no traitor. All I am guilty off is exposing wrongdoing at the highest level. As a result of that my life has been changed irrevocably. This is not the prosecution of someone who has given away State secrets, but of someone who has embarrassed the Government. — David Shayler

You are working for an intelligence agency and you find it to be rotten to the core. What do you do: do you keep your head down and pretend not to notice what is going on all around you, do you raise your concerns with your superiors, or do you go public with what you know?

This was the dilemma facing David Shayler, an intelligence officer in MI5, the British internal intelligence agency. David Shayler took the riskiest option of the three and went public with what he knew, in doing so putting his life and freedom at risk.

MI5 and the government went on the offensive, doing their best to discredit David Shayler and the sordid tale he had to tell. Facing arrest and possible imprisonment, David Shayler fled to France.

In the meantime, Annie Machon, David’s girlfriend and herself an MI5 officer, appalled at the treatment of David, went public too to say that what he was telling was the truth.

And if that was not enough, Richard Tomlinson, an MI6 officer, spoke out at the abuses and lack of accountability at MI6.

David Shayler voluntarily returned from France to face trial. He was one of the first to try to make use of the Human Rights Act, which should guarantee the right to a fair hearing.

Unfortunately it was anything but. What David Shayler faced was a political show trial. He was even gagged and not allowed to speak in his own defence.

Writing several years after they first went public, Annie Machon documents in Spies, Lies & Whistleblowers: MI5, MI6 and the Shayler Affair what all the furore was about.

David and Annie witnessed at first hand:

  • how MI5 failed to foil at least four major IRA terrorist attacks

  • that MI5 compiled dossiers on British citizens for holding dissident political views

  • a blind eye turned to a known Libyan terrorist organising terror networks in the UK

  • illegal persecution of an innocent journalist

  • MI6 funding of an Al-Qaeda coup in Libya to topple and assassinate Colonel Gaddafi

In Spycatcher Peter Wright wrote of how MI5 ‘bugged and burgled its way across London’. Writing a generation later, Annie Machon shows that not a lot has changed: drunken officers who lose sensitive files, turf wars between the various agencies, turf wars between different sections within MI5, bureaucratic bungling, cavalier attitude to human rights, blatant lying to Ministers and an oversight committee, dirty tricks and smear campaigns against perceived enemies, enemies of the intelligence agencies that is, not enemies of the state, etc etc.

There were so many cock-ups in dealing with the Provisional IRA that it is a wonder they were ever defeated. This bodes ill for defeating Islamic terrorism. Irish terrorists were at least ‘decent’ terrorists. They shared the same values as us, they gave a warning when they planted a bomb, they were not intent on killing people, whereas, hate-filled Muslim terrorists are intent on slaughtering the maximum number of innocent civilians.

Prior to working on counter-terrorism, Annie and David were working on counter-subversion, monitoring and infiltrating fringe groups like SWP, Communist Party of Great Britain, and the anarchist group Class War. It is easy therefore to see why the pair were made less than welcome when they attended a fringe meeting at the Anarchist Bookfair 2005. But, they did not have to attend, and it in no way justifies the smear campaign that has been running against them. Annie describes some of the dirty tricks that were run, and the question has to be asked: are the smear campaigns that are being run by allegedly dissident groups, less the lunatic fringe and more dirty tricks by front organisations, or dissident groups that have been infiltrated and hijacked, as was Class War? [Anarchist Bookfair 2005]

Highlighting the abuses of human rights, that monitoring political dissent, is not what the intelligence services should be doing, was not guaranteed to enhance one’s career prospects.

David Shayler was prosecuted because he caused embarrassment, and to serve as an example to others who may be tempted to speak out. Is this what caused Dr David Kelly to take his own life (assuming he did and was not killed to silence him), an honourable man who spoke out against the lies on the illegal war with Iraq?

There is a confusion between ‘damage to national security’ and ‘harm to the national interest’. The former is easy to interpret, the latter is open to abuse, and too often is interpreted as embarrassment to those in power, and believe it or not not, there is a security classification of ‘causing embarrassment to HMG’.

We saw this in the Shayler Affair, and are seeing it again with the infamous memo where George W Bush allegedly wished to bomb the Qatar offices of Aljazeera. That part is believable, less believable is that Tony Blair acted to dissuade Bush.

We have here parallels with the Shayler Affair where a a Civil Servant and a Parliamentary Researcher are to be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act as their actions are deemed ‘prejudicial to the national interest’. But whose interest is that, as surely is it not in our interest, as a democratic society, to be told that the supposed leader of the free world, was contemplating bombing a TV channel in a friendly country, but was dissuaded by his comrade-in-arms in war crimes, the odious Blair?

The suppression of free speech ‘in the national interest’ is reminiscent of acts carried out ‘in the good of the people’ so favoured by totalitarian regimes, so no surprise it finds favour with Tony Blair.

The mainstream media as usual are a disgrace. They reported as ‘facts’ the anonymous unattributable briefings on the Shayler Affair, but rarely checked with the principle actors the truth of what they were being told.

We have learnt recently that the Muslim terrorists involved in the Tube bombings in London on 7 July 2005, were known to the intelligence services, had travelled to terrorist training camps in Pakistan, had met known or suspected terrorists in the UK, were mixing with extremist Muslim clerics, but failed to keep tabs on them due to lack of resources.

Would this tragedy have happened if the appropriate resources had been found? Would resources have been available if they were not being squandered on monitoring political dissidents? Questions that the relatives of the dead should be asking, and demanding answers.

Since Tony Blair came to power, we have had a succession of Terrorists Acts, each more Draconian than its predecessor. What is this legislation for? Is it for dealing with real terrorists, or is it for dealing with political dissent, for clamping down on the domestic population?

Would we not be more successful in dealing with terrorists if we had more competent security agencies, rather than passed legislation whose only function is to suppress political dissent?

Anti-terror legislation was used for dealing with protests at the G8 Summit in Scotland in Summer 2005. It was invoked again Autumn 2005 to deal with an elderly gentleman who was manhandled out of the Neo-Labour Party Conference by a bunch of thugs for daring to shout out ‘rubbish’ at the government’s policy on Iraq during a speech by Jack ‘boot’ Straw. An elderly gentleman who had fled Nazi persecution in Europe.

When we tie in the abuses that we see all the time, the steady erosion of our civil rights in the name of the bogus ‘war on terror’, with with the abuses that Annie Machon has laid bare within the intelligence services, then we have every reason to be worried.

The off-the-record briefings and smear campaign run against Dr David Kelly were near identical to that run against David Shayler.

In the US, if someone breaks cover and blows the whistle, the administration shrugs and moves on. There may even be an independent inquiry, to which the whistleblower is invited to give evidence, the whistleblower is not prosecuted. ***(that was once upon a time the US took the advice of the UK and changed the law) In the UK, the whistleblower will be smeared in off-the-record briefings, probably prosecuted to serve as an example to others. If they try to give evidence, as David Shayler did to Tony Blair’s Intelligence and Security Committee, they will be ignored, or as we saw with David Kelly after his death, an inquiry will be launched which is nothing more than a cover-up and a whitewash. Having refused to hear evidence from David Shayler, members of the PM’s ISC went on to brief against him.

Lord Hutton, who on behalf of Tony Blair carried out the cover-up and whitewash on Dr David Kelly, was also one of the Law Lord who sat in judgment on David Shayler.

The difference between the US and the UK is that free speech is protected. Although this has started to change post-911 with the Patriot Act. Those who have spoken out regarding the 911 cover-up have been ignored, gagged or threatened, so even in the US the climate is changing for the worse. [see 9-11 Revealed]

Tony Blair is not satisfied with merely shooting the messenger, he also wants to shoot those who carry and repeat the message. In the Shayler Affair threats were issued against anyone who either tried to help or reported on what David Shayler was saying.

A former editor of Punch now has a criminal record for writing on the Shayler Affair, a student at Kingston University lost her course place after being arrested and detained for offering to mobilise public support for David Shayler when he was on the run from the authorities in France.

We are now seeing history repeat itself with threats against the media if they cover the infamous memo containing allegations that George W Bush wished to bomb the offices of Aljazeera in Qatar, a friendly country.

Annie Machon’s description of MI5 is one of incompetence and bureaucratic bungling. MI5 management that lie to Ministers and an oversight committee to cover up their incompetence and bungling. Competent officers leaving, leaving behind the failures who have nowhere else to go. Having once worked in a similar environment, my experience was very similar.

With MI6 it is more sinister. The picture painted of MI6 is that of an agency out of control. When not busy trying to kill people, MI6 is planting stories in its in-house newspaper The Daily Torygraph.

MI6 financed an Al-Qaeda plot to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi. Although the coup and assassination attempt failed, innocent civilian bystanders were nevertheless killed. But let us assume their hair-brained scheme had succeeded. If it had, Al-Qaeda would now be running Libya. Would the world have been a safer place?

One reason David and Annie went public on the MI6/Al-Qaeda plot was that they were one of the few who knew of the plot and feared the fate that later befell Dr David Kelly to silence them.

Violence begets violence. We see that all over the Middle East. We see it in Israeli-occupied Palestine, we see it in the illegally-occupied Iraq.

After the failed assassination and coup attempt, a different approach was tried with Colonel Gaddafi. Softly, softly diplomacy. As a result Colonel Gaddafi has come in from the cold, has given up any WMD programmes (assuming he ever had any), he is cooperating in the war on terrorism, and Libya is slowly, slowly moving towards democracy.

Contrast the Libyan diplomatic approach with the illegal war and occupation of Iraq.

A well written and researched book and Annie Machon should be complimented for having had the courage to write it. A pleasant and realistic change from the breathy, jolly-hockey-sticks account we have of MI5 in Open Secret by Dame Stella Rimington, former Director General MI5, an account where it is jolly good fun to bug and burgle one’s way across London and steam open other people’s post.

I still thought the essence of the Cold War and spies and stuff was fun. You know, going around listening to other people’s telephones and opening their mail and stuff.

We expect the establishment not to forgive Annie and David, and that has been their experience. If they keep their heads down, they are left alone. If they speak out, then they receive undue attention.

What they fear is ending up like Dr David Kelly, the man who exposed the lies behind the illegal war with Iraq. A man who was found dead in a wood with his wrists slashed. And for that reason they are careful to protect some of their sources, as they do not wish to see them end the same way.

In this they are not alone. Gerald James was the boss of Astra, once a firework company and the company that provided the propellant for the Iraqi super-gun. When Gerald James spoke out, he found his life was under threat. [see Gerald James, In the Public Interest, Warner Books, 1996]

All this is understandable. What is less understandable and deeply regrettable, are the attacks on the integrity of these two coming from within the dissident community. The only possible explanation, apart from the usual lunatic fringe, is that those making the attacks are agents of the state doing their best to destroy the credibility of those who have dared speak out at their former employers.

Highly recommended for anyone who wants to see a little light shed into the deeper recesses of of our intelligence agencies and wants to better understand how our civil rights are being eroded.

Annie Machon has written a devastating critique of our intelligence agencies and the need for reform. Grounds if nothing else for a public inquiry into their operation.

We need an intelligence agency that is there to protect democracy, that is accountable, not one which is there to enslave us.

 

About these ads

‘Bought Journalism': German bestseller reveals CIA pay Western media for spin & bias


‘Bought Journalism': German bestseller reveals CIA pay Western media for spin & bias

 

 

Syria was knocked offline in 2012


Syria was knocked offline in 2012

Editors note: this small article was sent to me by Lady Khamis proving to me once again that the truth eventually will come out, having the Internet which keeps no secret hidden for very long everything comes out if you know where to look. When I was growing up my Historian teachers would say to find the truth about any war you have to wait till the dust settles down and then you will have two sides who will write the event. The winner who will write it the way they want it and the victims aka the losers will write it from their point of view with what they lived or know at the time. So we never got it accurately. It took me years and a lot of research from all parties to understand our World History. Now days the Historians have no excuse the Internet is full of information from all sides, every little thing that the Elite may think its secure it will be leaked into the internet we have to thank the hackers, You tube, Twitter and generally every single one of us who takes the time out of our heavy schedule to find out the Truth. As knowing the TRUTH will set you free. 

The media now days are paid in full to manipulate you and distort every single time by the Elite. Starting from the gossip to the political views, they even stage in their sets when they are not winning to show you a different image that they are winning only then comes the internet and makes a mockery of them. We have seen it several times from BBC, CNN, FOX AL ARABIA, ALZAJEERA etc.

From unfiltered news:

When all of Syria was knocked offline in 2012, not long after the dawn of the country’s civil war, both sides pointed their finger at each other. They should have pointed the finger at the U.S. government, according to former National Security Administration contractor Edward J. Snowden, who gave an extensive interview with James Bamford published Wednesday in Wired magazine.

Snowden, who was recently granted a three-year residency by the Russian government, said an elite NSA hacking unit was attempting to install malware on a central Syrian router to monitor the nation’s Internet activity but accidentally rendered it unusable, putting almost all of the Middle Eastern country in the dark.

“If we get caught, we can always point the finger at Israel,” he said someone at the NSA joked.

The intelligence agency, realizing its mistake, sought to put the country back online but was only able to do so to the extent that it could cover its tracks, not bring the Internet back. Instead, the State Department pointed fingers. “We condemn this latest assault on the Syrian people’s ability to express themselves and communicate with each other,” then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told a press conference days after the shutdown was reported in November 2012.

Snowden also told Wired that he’d love to return home to the U.S. if the Espionage Act charge (which prevents him from discussing his motivation to leak documents to the Guardian and Washington Post) is dropped.

EX- LIEUTENANT SALAH BADI FROM MISURATA GOES ON BLOODTHIRSTY RAMPAGE IN TRIPOLI


EX- LIEUTENANT SALAH BADI FROM MISURATA GOES ON BLOODTHIRSTY RAMPAGE IN TRIPOLI

MP resigned from Congress Salah Badi

CRAZY SELF APPOINTED COLONEL SALAH BADI

Salah Badi is from Misurata, was in the Jamahirya army as a Lieutenant were for medical reasons (psychopath)  he was forced to resign in 1992 I think, so it explains the hatred towards the Jamahirya government as he lost most of his privileges. CIA, MI6, MOSSAD, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA and TURKEY want such men on their side, as it is very easy to manipulate them. You can see on the photo above his eyes look kind of crazy, he must be from a mixed marriage as most Libyans do not have Green eyes. The man self-appointed to Colonel, it is said that he resigned from the puppet Congress in 2012 and ever since then he has been on the verge of a nervous breakdown because he can not control Tripoli.

Tripoli or Tripolitania as its originally called has completely disregarded the Misurati militias and its people, the capital can not forgive them for the MASSACRE OF GARGOUR (by the way I was there when it happened too much blood too many dead and they were innocent civilians killed by Bady and its crew).

This last rampage that he is doing and going against the peoples wishes is because his masters: CIA,MI6,MOSSAD, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA AND TURKEY who are connected to ALQAEDA, ANSAR SHARAIA, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, DAASH AND LIFG are loosing to the renegade Hafter plus they (Misurata and its crew) has lost the MILITARY airport Metiga, which means they can not have the support from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey with guns, money etc which is all done with Best Wishes from the Obama/Cameron/ Netanyahu and the French administration.

Here is an admission of the Muslim brotherhood who praises Badi for his accomplishments leading Muslim Brotherhood member Abdul Razag al Aradi supported the attackers, describing their grab for the airport as a response to “aggression” by Khalifa Haftar, the ex-general who has been leading Libyan armed forces in a crusade against Islamist militias. The Zintanis have been actively supporting Haftar’s “Operation Dignity” — his fight against Islamist militias in the east — and they have also played a role in Haftar’s forces in Tripoli. The Zintanis supported Haftar’s demands for the dissolution of the General National Congress (GNC), which they see as under the sway of the Islamists. Justice and Construction Party member Mahmud Abdulaziz also endorsed the operation, hinting that he knew about it in advance. “Libya Shield forces from Misurata have told me they’ll keep the number of causalities to a minimum as they attempt to take over the airport,” which of course it was not held to the minimum. Badi lost a lot of men on the first round. Now he is a wanted man in Tripoli and the police and army is looking for him. Naturally he is not hiding because he has his masters to protect him in Misurata. Now he commands from Misurata his small army that his masters gave him. Militias from Misurata tend to side with the Islamist groups within the GNC, such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the Wafa Islamist bloc (of which Salah Badi was a prominent member).

To conclude the Zintan still hold the international airport, but all of Tripoli is grieving for the deaths of the innocent civilians and children who were to Badi collateral damage. Here are the photos of his rampage.

02

International Airport

03

International Airport

04

International Airport

05

International Airport

Also a hospital was hit with no regard to the patience!

01

clinic area of Qasr Ben Ghashir

03

clinic area of Qasr Ben Ghashir

04

clinic area of Qasr Ben Ghashir

05

clinic area of Qasr Ben Ghashir

07

clinic area of Qasr Ben Ghashir