Africom’s War on Libya


Africom’s War on Libya

In this excerpt from Bob Coen and Eric Nadler’s film “Shadow War of the Sahara”, broadcast on the Franco-German channel ARTE charts the rise of the U.S.military’s AFRICA COMAND (AFRICOM). This excerpt reveals why AFRICOM’s chief critic, Libya’s Mohammar Gaddafi, had to be removed from power for the project to succeed.

CNN: Libyan “Rebels” Are Now ISIS


CNN: Libyan “Rebels” Are Now ISIS

(Tony Cartalucci – LD) – The United States has attempted to claim that the only way to stop the so-called “Islamic State” in Syria and Iraq is to first remove the government in Syria. Complicating this plan are developments in Libya, benefactor of NATO’s last successful regime change campaign. In 2011, NATO armed, funded, and backed with a sweeping air campaign militants in Libya centered around the eastern Libyan cities of Tobruk, Derna, and Benghazi. By October 2011, NATO successfully destroyed the Libyan government, effectively handing the nation over to these militants. 

Images: Same convoy, different flag. Even in 2011, it was painfully obvious the so-called “rebels” fighting with NATO assistance in Libya were in fact members of long-standing Al Qaeda franchises including the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Their strongholds in eastern Libya served as the “revolution’s” cradle, meaning the “revolution” was merely cover for a NATO-assisted Al Qaeda uprising. In other words, NATO handed Libya over to Al Qaeda, and is attempting to do likewise with Syria.

 

What ensued was a campaign of barbarism, genocide, and sectarian extremism as brutal in reality as what NATO claimed in fiction was perpetrated by the Libyan government ahead of its intervention. The so-called “rebels” NATO had backed were revealed to be terrorists led by Al Qaeda factions including the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

The so-called “pro-democracy protesters” Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi was poised to attack in what NATO claimed was pending “genocide” were in fact heavily armed terrorists that have festered for decades in eastern Libya.

Almost immediately after NATO successfully destroyed Libya’s government, its terrorist proxies were mobilized to take part in NATO’s next campaign against Syria. Libyan terrorists were sent first to NATO-member Turkey were they were staged, armed, trained, and equipped, before crossing the Turkish-Syrian border to take part in the fighting.

CNN Admits ISIS is in Libya  

CNN in an article titled, “ISIS comes to Libya,” claims:

The black flag of ISIS flies over government buildings. Police cars carry the group’s insignia. The local football stadium is used for public executions. A town in Syria or Iraq? No. A city on the coast of the Mediterranean, in Libya. 

Fighters loyal to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria are now in complete control of the city of Derna, population of about 100,000, not far from the Egyptian border and just about 200 miles from the southern shores of the European Union. 

The fighters are taking advantage of political chaos to rapidly expand their presence westwards along the coast, Libyan sources tell CNN.

Only the black flag of Al Qaeda/ISIS has already long been flying over Libya – even at the height of NATO’s intervention there in 2011.  ISIS didn’t “come to” Libya, it was always there in the form of Al Qaeda’s local franchises LIFG and AQIM – long-term, bitter enemies of the now deposed and assassinated Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi.

Images: While CNN claims the “black flag of ISIS” is just now flying over Libya, in reality, the black flag of Al Qaeda and US-Saudi funded global terrorism has flown over Libya for years. Just weeks after US Senator John McCain was in the terrorist capital of Benghazi pledging funds and weapons to the militants, overt public demonstrations in support for Al Qaeda took place right on the doorsteps of the courthouse McCain appeared at.

CNN’s latest article is merely the veneer finally peeling away from the alleged “revolution” it had attempted to convince readers had taken place in 2011.

ISIS Didn’t “Come to” Libya, It Came From Libya

https://alfatah69.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/bb424-libyan_terrorists_in_syria.jpg?w=640&h=360

Image: Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the Al Qaeda affiliate LIFG, leading Libyan terrorists in Syria. LIFG terrorists would pass through NATO territory in Turkey on their way to Syria’s border. ISIS “coming to” Libya is simply LIFG terrorists returning from their NATO-backed expeditionary mission.

 

Even amid CNN’s own spin, it admits ISIS’ presence in Libya is not a new phenomenon but rather the above mentioned sectarian extremists who left Libya to fight in Syria simply returning and reasserting themselves in the eastern Cyrenaica region. CNN also admits that these terrorists have existed in Libya for decades and were kept in check primarily by Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi. With Qaddafi eliminated and all semblance of national unity destroyed by NATO’s intervention in 2011, Al Qaeda has been able to not only prosper in Libya but use the decimated nation as a spingboard for invading and destroying other nations.

Worst of all, Al Qaeda’s rise in Libya was not merely the unintended consequence of a poorly conceived plan by NATO for military intervention, but a premeditated regional campaign to first build up then use Al Qaeda as a mercenary force to overthrow and destroy a series of nations, beginning with Libya, moving across North Africa and into nations like Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and eventually Iran. From there, NATO’s mercenary force would be on the borders of Russia and China ready to augment already Western-backed extremists in the Caucasus and Xinjiang regions.

In 2011, geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley in his article, “The CIA’s Libya Rebels: The Same Terrorists who Killed US, NATO Troops in Iraq,” noted that the US strategy was to:

…use Al Qaeda to overthrow independent governments, and then either Balkanize and partition the countries in question, or else use them as kamikaze puppets against larger enemies like Russia, China, or Iran.

Dr. Tarpley would also note in 2011 that:

One of the fatal contradictions in the current State Department and CIA policy is that it aims at a cordial alliance with Al Qaeda killers in northeast Libya, at the very moment when the United States and NATO are mercilessly bombing the civilian northwest Pakistan in the name of a total war against Al Qaeda, and US and NATO forces are being killed by Al Qaeda guerrillas in that same Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of war. The force of this glaring contradiction causes the entire edifice of US war propaganda to collapse. The US has long since lost any basis in morality for military force. 

In fact, terrorist fighters from northeast Libya may be killing US and NATO troops in Afghanistan right now, even as the US and NATO protect their home base from the Qaddafi government.

Indeed, the very terrorists NATO handed the entire nation of Libya over to, are now allegedly prime targets in Syria and Iraq. The “pro-democracy rebels” of 2011 are now revealed to be “ISIS terrorists” with long-standing ties to Al Qaeda.

US Long-Planned to use Al Qaeda as Mercenaries 

Not even mentioning the fact that Al Qaeda’s very inception was to serve as a joint US-Saudi mercenary force to fight a proxy war in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, the terrorist organization has since played a central role in the Balkans to justify NATO intervention there, and as a divisive force in Iraq during the US occupation to blunt what began as a formidable joint Sunni-Shia’a resistance movement.

In 2007, it was revealed by Pulitzer Prize-winning veteran journalist Seymour Hersh that the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia were conspiring to use Al Qaeda once again, this time to undermine, destabilize, and destroy the governments of Syria and Iran in what would be a regional sectarian bloodbath.

Hersh would report (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda

Hersh would note that Iran was perceived to be the greater threat and therefore, despite a constant barrage of propaganda claiming otherwise, Al Qaeda and its various affiliates were “lesser enemies.” Even in 2007, Hersh’s report would predict almost verbatim the cataclysmic regional sectarian bloodbath that would take place, with the West’s extremists waging war not only on Shia’a populations but also on other religious minorities including Christians.

His report would note:

Robert Baer, a former longtime C.I.A. agent in Lebanon, has been a severe critic of Hezbollah and has warned of its links to Iranian-sponsored terrorism. But now, he told me, “we’ve got Sunni Arabs preparing for cataclysmic conflict, and we will need somebody to protect the Christians in Lebanon. It used to be the French and the United States who would do it, and now it’s going to be Nasrallah and the Shiites. 

And this is precisely what is happening, word for word, page by page – everything warned about in Hersh’s report has come to pass. In 2011, geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley and others would also reiterate the insidious regional campaign Western policymakers were carrying out with Al Qaeda terrorists disguised as “rebels,” “activists,” and “moderate fighters” for the purpose of arming, funding, and even militarily intervening on their behalf in attempts to effect regime change and tilt the balance in the Middle East and North Africa region against Iran, Russia, and China.

CNN’s attempt to explain why ISIS is “suddenly” in Libya is one of many attempts to explain the regional rise of this organization in every way possible besides in terms of the truth – that ISIS is the result of multinational state sponsored terrorism including the US, UK, EU, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Israel as its chief backers.

NATO Handed ISIS Libya, Wants to Hand ISIS Syria

Inexplicably, amid allegedly fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria, the United States now claims it must first overthrow the Syrian government, despite it being the only viable, secular force in the region capable of keeping ISIS and its affiliates in check. CNN, in an article titled, “Sources: Obama seeks new Syria strategy review to deal with ISIS, al-Assad,” would report:

President Barack Obama has asked his national security team for another review of the U.S. policy toward Syria after realizing that ISIS may not be defeated without a political transition in Syria and the removal of President Bashar al-Assad, senior U.S. officials and diplomats tell CNN.

Neither CNN, nor the politicians it cited in its article were able to articulate just why removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power would somehow diminish the fighting capacity of ISIS. With CNN’s recent article on ISIS’ gains in Libya despite US-led NATO regime change there, after decades of Libyan leader Qaddafi keeping extremists in check, it would appear that NATO is once again attempting not to stop Al Qaeda/ISIS, but rather hand them yet another country to use as a base of operations.

The goal is not to stop ISIS or even effect regime change in Syria alone – but rather hand Syria over as a failed, divided state to terrorists to use as a springboard against Iran, then Russia and China.

Clearly, ISIS’ appearance in Libya negates entirely the already incomprehensible strategy the US has proposed of needing to first depose the Syrian government, then fight ISIS. The Syrian government, like that of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, is the only effective force currently fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda’s many other franchises operating in the region. Deposing the government in Damascus would compound the fight against sectarian terrorists – and the West is fully aware of that. Therefore, attempts to topple the secular government in Damascus is in every way the intentional aiding and abetting of ISIS and the sharing in complicity of all the horrific daily atrocities ISIS and its affiliates are carrying out.

The morally bankrupt, insidious, dangerous, and very genocidal plans hatched in 2007 and executed in earnest in 2011 illustrate that ISIS alone is not the greatest threat to global peace and stability, but also those that constitute its multinational state sponsors. The very West purportedly defending civilization is the chief protagonist destroying it worldwide.  

Libya Before / After Rothschild’$ Illegal NATO Invasion : Pictorial / Video: Evil Walk$


Libya Before / After Rothschild’$ Illegal NATO Invasion : Pictorial / Video: Evil Walk$

 

Libya: Tripoli before and after the NATO invasion – war crimes

The True Democracy Party tried for months to get still pictures of the destruction of Libya under NATO’s Assault, months.
We wanted to show American’s what was really going on. To No Avail.

There was a complete nation wide media ban on what was going on. Not a single still picture could we locate on the web or through other news sources.

But as soon as they murdered Gaddafi, oh well it’s okay now to show the destruction that Rothschild’s NATO Army caused. There’s nothing the people of America can do now. Damage Done.

BEFORE: Libyan Truth

Short documentary: Life in Libya, before and after the NATO terror

Below here, every one of these pictures were censored from Americans for months.

What are American’s going to do about it?

AFTER:

THE JOKE OF THE YEAR: Press Laughs After U.S. Spokeswoman Claims We Do Not Support Coups


THE JOKE OF THE YEAR: Press Laughs After U.S. Spokeswoman Claims We Do Not Support Coups

So as you can see the United States is famous for backing coups or changing sovereign governments when ever it suits their purposes….. by denying it, it only makes you laugh so hard that tears come to your face, with their audacity that reporters and anonymous readers would believe such a blatant lie. Here is a small preview of the above table which I got it from this article and I suggest you read the whole article maybe some people will wake up from their lethargic sleep and do something

COMMON THEMES

Some common themes can be seen in many of these U.S. military interventions.

First, they were explained to the U.S. public as defending the lives and rights of civilian populations. Yet the military tactics employed often left behind massive civilian “collateral damage.” War planners made little distinction between rebels and the civilians who lived in rebel zones of control, or between military assets and civilian infrastructure, such as train lines, water plants, agricultural factories, medicine supplies, etc. The U.S. public always believe that in the next war, new military technologies will avoid civilian casualties on the other side. Yet when the inevitable civilian deaths occur, they are always explained away as “accidental” or “unavoidable.”

Second, although nearly all the post-World War II interventions were carried out in the name of “freedom” and “democracy,” nearly all of them in fact defended dictatorships controlled by pro-U.S. elites. Whether in Vietnam, Central America, or the Persian Gulf, the U.S. was not defending “freedom” but an ideological agenda (such as defending capitalism) or an economic agenda (such as protecting oil company investments). In the few cases when U.S. military forces toppled a dictatorship–such as in Grenada or Panama–they did so in a way that prevented the country’s people from overthrowing their own dictator first, and installing a new democratic government more to their liking.

Third, the U.S. always attacked violence by its opponents as “terrorism,” “atrocities against civilians,” or “ethnic cleansing,” but minimized or defended the same actions by the U.S. or its allies. If a country has the right to “end” a state that trains or harbors terrorists, would Cuba or Nicaragua have had the right to launch defensive bombing raids on U.S. targets to take out exile terrorists? Washington’s double standard maintains that an U.S. ally’s action by definition “defensive,” but that an enemy’s retaliation is by definition “offensive.”

Fourth, the U.S. often portrays itself as a neutral peacekeeper, with nothing but the purest humanitarian motives. After deploying forces in a country, however, it quickly divides the country or region into “friends” and “foes,” and takes one side against another. This strategy tends to enflame rather than dampen a war or civil conflict, as shown in the cases of Somalia and Bosnia, and deepens resentment of the U.S. role.

Fifth, U.S. military intervention is often counterproductive even if one accepts U.S. goals and rationales. Rather than solving the root political or economic roots of the conflict, it tends to polarize factions and further destabilize the country. The same countries tend to reappear again and again on the list of 20th century interventions.

Sixth, U.S. demonization of an enemy leader, or military action against him, tends to strengthen rather than weaken his hold on power. Take the list of current regimes most singled out for U.S. attack, and put it alongside of the list of regimes that have had the longest hold on power, and you will find they have the same names. Qaddafi, Castro, Saddam, Kim, and others may have faced greater internal criticism if they could not portray themselves as Davids standing up to the American Goliath, and (accurately) blaming many of their countries’ internal problems on U.S. economic sanctions.

One of the most dangerous ideas of the 20th century was that “people like us” could not commit atrocities against civilians.

  • German and Japanese citizens believed it, but their militaries slaughtered millions of people.

  • British and French citizens believed it, but their militaries fought brutal colonial wars in Africa and Asia.

  • Russian citizens believed it, but their armies murdered civilians in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and elsewhere.

  • Israeli citizens believed it, but their army mowed down Palestinians and Lebanese.

  • Arabs believed it, but suicide bombers and hijackers targeted U.S. and Israeli civilians.

  • U.S. citizens believed it, but their military killed hundreds of thousands in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere.

Every country, every ethnicity, every religion, contains within it the capability for extreme violence. Every group contains a faction that is intolerant of other groups, and actively seeks to exclude or even kill them. War fever tends to encourage the intolerant faction, but the faction only succeeds in its goals if the rest of the group acquiesces or remains silent. The attacks of September 11 were not only a test for U.S. citizens attitudes’ toward minority ethnic/racial groups in their own country, but a test for our relationship with the rest of the world. We must begin not by lashing out at civilians in Muslim countries, but by taking responsibility for our own history and our own actions, and how they have fed the cycle of violence.

and here is the rest of the article with the joke that America is not involved in any coups:

Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro has publicly accused the United States of trying to foment a coup in Venezuela. The accusations come as the Obama Administration has bizarrely labeled Venezuela a national security threat to the United States despite that obviously not being true.Maduro’s accusation stems not just from being labeled a national security threat but from a plot Venezuelan security services uncovered which was publicly detailed by Maduro on Venezuelan TV.

According to Maduro the plot involved Carlos Manuel Osuna Saraco who operates out of New York and Miami, allegedly with the help of the US government. There is audio of Osuna dictating a statement rebel leaders should read after the coup.

If the plot is true it will be the second attempt by the US to foment a coup in Venezuela this century. The first being an amazingly blatant attempt in 2002 against President Hugo Chavez which the White House itself publicly supported before the coup was reversed and Chavez was returned to power.

Which brings us to the laughing stock State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki became yesterday when she claimed [VIDEO] in response to Maduro’s accusations:

As a matter of long standing policy the United States does not support transitions by non-constitutional means. Political transitions must be democratic, constitutional, peaceful, and legal.

We’ve seen many times that the Venezuelan government tries to distract from its own actions by blaming the United States or other members of the international community for events inside Venezuela. These efforts reflect a lack of seriousness on the part of the Venezuelan government to deal with the grave situation it faces.

The Associated Press reporter, Matt Lee, immediately jumped in with quite reasonable incredulity saying “I’m sorry. Whoah, whoah, whoah. The US has a long-standing practice of not promoting [coups] – how long-standing would you say?” Lee continued audibly scoffing and laughing “In particular in South and Latin America that is not a long-standing policy.”

Quo Vadis Libya?


Quo Vadis Libya?

libya-split-and-stolen-by-rats

On the Heinous Deeds that US Interventionism Brought upon Libya and upon Libyan Women in Ousting and Murdering Qaddafi

By Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu

The late Col. Muammar Qaddafi, hailed as the “Great Leader” by the Libyan people during his incumbency, was murdered by Chad, Somali and Sudanese mercenaries in collusion with NATO and US invading forces on October 19, 2011. Qaddafi’s Libya, two years before he was ousted and assassinated was considered as one of Africa’s greatest nations.

Prof. Garikai Chengu a scholar of Middle East affairs in Harvard University wrote: In 1967, Colonel Qaddafi inherited one of the poorest nations in Africa; however, by the time he was assassinated, Qaddafi had turned Libya into Africa’s wealthiest nation. Libya had the highest GDP per capita and life expectancy on the African continent. Less people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands.”

But look at what happened to Libya now after the US/NATO interventionism! It is now in complete political anarchy, with a destroyed economy and its society is war torn and in full shambles. Presently, we cannot call Libya a State for after US/NATO armed intervention and regime change, all the Libyan villages are now run by the various tribes that was once united by Qaddafi. Libya is in the state of civil war showing the inevitability of what Hobbes called “the ugly, brutish, nasty, short state of nature” characterizing lawlessness.

In this post-Qaddafi Libya, the anarchic and lawless militias are wrecking havoc in different parts of the country—each fighting each other for supremacy. The so-called “Islamist” Jemaah-Islamiyya and ISIS forces are also staking out their fortune in the once secular and progressive socialist Libya.

Libya is now a stateless anarchy since various tribes and militias are declaring their own sort-of states in various parts of the country. NATO interventionism and US Hegemony has totally wrecked Libya and their so-called “Arab Spring” turned out as hell-hole of internecine, civil, regional and tribal wars in that side of the Middle East instead of exporting its so-called “democracy” to Libyan soil.

USA has been scheming for over four decades to topple Qaddafi because he never allowed US and the First World countries allied by US and Britain to dictate on the Libyan oil policy program nor did he allow the IMF-WB to wreck havoc in the economy of the country by not subscribing to its capitalistic financing and loan programs. Likewise, socialist Libya under the leadership of Qaddafi was a great supporter of the Non-Aligned Movement which detested foreign interventionism of superpowers in the affairs of the Third World countries.

He was a zealous supporter of Nelson Mandela’s ANC, the anti-apartheid, anti-racism socialist rebels in South Africa, while US and UK had been long supporters of Johannesburg apartheid regime—up until the time in the early 80’s when US/UK realized that the South African apartheid regime was already tottering apart, hence they belatedly withdraw support to the apartheid government.

Qaddafi’s Green Socialism strengthened economy by land distribution, free housing, free hospitalization, free education and profit-sharing of the nationalized oil industry and other State corporations to all Libyan citizens including the desert Bedouins

(See, Prof. Jaime Ramirez, “Qathafi: Assessment of Libyan Green Socialism”, pp. 18-29).

As of this juncture, it is beneficial to quote Prof. Garikai Chengu: Under Qaddafis rule, Libyans enjoyed not only free health-care and free education, but also free electricity and interest-free loans. Now thanks to NATO’s intervention, the health-care sector is on the verge of collapse as thousands of Filipino health workers flee the country, institutions of higher education across the East of the country are shut down, and black outs are a common occurrence in once thriving Tripoli.”

In many of his speeches, Qaddafi declared himself both as Islamic socialist and Islamic feminist—whatever and however those terms mean to him from the point of view of strict political theoretic. But one thing is very clear, from the point of political praxis, he practically endeavored to apply what he understood of socialism and most importantly of feminism, by way of State policies, in his public gestures: examples in his private life and in his government projects.

Again, let us hear it from the Harvard scholar of Middle East Affairs, Prof. Garikai Chengu: Even the United Nations Human Rights Council praised Qaddafi for his promotion of women’s rights. When the colonel seized power in 1969, few women went to university. Today, more than half of Libya’s university students are women. One of the first laws Qaddafi passed in 1970 was an equal pay for equal work law”.

In Libya, during Qaddafi’s rule, all women share the same rights as men and in fact, women are even preferred to men when it comes to access of education to State Universities and priority access of work opportunities in Libyan government corporations and institutions.

In 2007, women students in the University of Tripoli, University of Sirte and University of Cyrene bypassed the population of men students. In Libya, a woman can divorce her husband, demand for equal work-equal pay scheme with that of men, and husbands are given paternity leaves so that they can help their wives (likewise given maternity leaves) in taking care of their infant during the first three months after birth (Cf., Samuel Gurung, “Libyan Socialist Feminism under Colonel Qaddafi: Cases and Good Practices for Emulation to the Present Nepalese Government”, pp. 12-23).

It is no wonder that when NATO and US bombed Libya and the mercenaries financed by America eventually ousted Qaddafi and even mercilessly murdered him and his family, the sector that has suffered terribly from this interventionism was Libya’s womenry! As of the present, the anarchic and chaotic mini-tribal regimes ruling in every province in Libya are bent on subordinating women and denying them their rights. These anarchic tribes as well as the so-called extremist and resurgent “Islamist” militias allied with JI and ISIL see women empowerment as an aberration and are therefore bent on denying women their rights and freedoms. By removing Qaddafi, US hegemony has effectively turned back the struggle for gender equality and gender empowerment in Libya back to square one!

What did US hegemony achieve when it wrecked havoc on Libya by ousting Qaddafi?

Thanks to US interventionism, Libya from a progressive secularist and relatively economically well-off socialist country in North Africa has now become a putrid piece of cake to be cruelly subdivided by extremist terrorists, unruly tribes, armed bandits and undisciplined armed extremist sects—each militias of these armed sectors are presently wrecking havoc to the entire breadth and length of Libya, continuing their looting, raping, pillage and murder of civilians.

And yet America has never lifted a finger to intervene in this barbaric, anarchic and chaotic affair which it has caused in the first place! NATO bragged that the mission in Libya had been “one of the most successful in NATO history.”

Truth is, Western interventions have produced nothing but colossal failures in present Libya, Iraq, and Syria. Lest we forget, prior to western military involvement in these three nations, they were the most modern and secular states in the Middle East and North Africa—these three socialist and Islamic countries had fully subscribed to the recognition of women’s rights and they had relatively high standards of living in both Middle East and North African regions.

According to Dr. Michel Chossudovsky, the Arab Spring is actually not about initiating democracy in the Middle East, but it is all about petro-business and war-business. It is all about creating a situation where the Trans-Central Asian Afghan and Middle East Pipelines are easily facilitated throughout the whole breadth and length of the Middle East to the Caspian Sea up till Central Asia. Therefore, the US War on Terror—including its interventionism and bloody regime in Libya—is all about capitalist business and imperialist hegemony at their worst (See Michel Chossudovsky’s book “America’s War on Terrorism”, specifically chapter 5, ‘War and the Hidden Agenda’ and chapter 6, ‘Trans-Afghan Pipeline’; pp. 65-91).

Therefore, it is neither Libya nor the Middle Eastern countries, but it is the US corporatist military weapon producing mafia cliques that will truly benefit from this Arab Spring and destructive so-called “War on Terror” that US is waging against the Middle East and the Third World countries.

The so-called “Arab Spring” and the “US War on Terror” are all about US Hegemony, US/NATO Interventionism, Middle East-Central Asian Pipelines and the Military Industrial Complex from the start to finish, and this US interventionism is NEVER about democracy, NEVER about freedom nor for “just war”! These are all done for the selfish interest of US Hegemony! And at whose expense? It is always at the expense of the lives, limbs and properties of the oppressed and exploited peoples of the Middle East and the Third World!

OPPRESSED PEOPLES OF THE WORLD, UNITE! DOWN WITH ALL FORMS OF NEO-COLONIALISM, CAPITALISM AND IMPERIALISM!

(Written by Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu on March 7, 2015)

~

SOURCES:
Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu
Submitted by Libyan Fighters at
libyanfreepress.wordpress.com