So the UN is complaining what a shame! Let us help the UN to understand WHY? UN: Libya armed groups attacking human rights defenders


So the UN is complaining what a shame! Let us help the UN to understand WHY? UN: Libya armed groups attacking human rights defenders

 

Ok! finally the UN is complaining about the situation in Libya and its activists who by the way most of them are expatriates who lied, begged, blackmailed the western world to come and bomb Libya because Qaddafi went crazy and massacred his people who later was proved to be a LIE. The plans of USA and its allies which is France and England ordered the UN to go ahead with the No-fly zone to protect the civilians, so where did all those activists and allies go wrong? I can not imagine that the activists who are CIA assets installed in Libya are naive they knew exactly what they were doing. They are all responsible for the destruction of Libya and have blood on their hands for killing thousands of civilians with depleted uranium bombs, sex slavery, organ trafficking and children trafficking.

These activists that the UN is so worried about their safety are no activists… It says in this article that some activists are being threatened even abroad that is a blatant lie, because colleagues of mine and I included have not been threatened by Armed groups but we have been threatened by secret agencies there is a difference. Lets not forget that the UN and its people like Bernandino Leon are pushing for Muslim Brotherhood to be installed by force in Libya and they are protecting these armed groups so my question to the UN why are you complaining?

These people are your people they are not TRUE LIBYANS they are Libyans born outside Libya and grew up with western ideas which has nothing to do with the Libyan society. I will not say that I am glad that they are killed or kidnapped but I am sure YOU HAVE YOUR AGENDA in not helping them, maybe they found out your true face and they had to be silenced, it will not be the first time or the last.

Your Human Rights defenders where the ones LYING  to the world about the atrocities that supposedly Qaddafi did because your bosses told you so, only to come a year later to deny everything… and you think that the Libyan people have forgotten your role?  You believe that we have forgotten that the Red Cross would supply YOUR freedom fighters with arms instead of helping civilians. Or do you think we have forgotten your “doctors without borders”helped these armed groups to revive prisoners of war so that they would be tortured again?

You have the audacity to claim that the tribes are involved in this killing how dare you? Where were you when the whole of Bani Walid was attacked by your ARMED GROUPS with WHITE PHOSPHORUS AND SARIN gases? You did nothing to help the children and civilians you just stood there SILENTLY and now you are complaining… these groups are your groups you armed them, trained them, financed them and you brought them in Libya. It serves you rightly what is happening now to your people who never had the balls to stand up and say no.

All of you are responsible for what is happening in Libya and still you are insisting to install by force these armed groups who are a menace to society and to the world so that you can please Israel, SHAME ON YOU in destroying so many lives. What is happening now in Libya will happen to you very soon by your own people.

When you decided to illegally bomb Libya you should have thought of all the con’s and pro’s but you were hasty as you thought it was your chance to steal everything from Libya and not considering that you can not control Libya.

Libya by its own right after 42 years has understood its worth we are not the Libyans you thought you left behind in 1969. Every single Libyan after 1969 understood that we were a thorn to your eye because of our geopolitical position, our oil, our gold and other resources. We knew it was a matter of time that you would invade us. What you didn’t know was that we are a STRONG TRIBAL SOCIETY not like the Saudis or the Qataris and Qaddafi knew exactly what he was doing supplying every civilian with arms.

Qaddafi is laughing from his grave because after FOUR YEARS you still can not control us…. and you will never be able to find the recipe of having all the TRIBES united.. but you can not divide them the only tribe you have under your control is Misurata which supplies you the Armed groups that you are complaining now…. You tend to forget that the Misurata people are a mixed race from Jewish and Turkish origin. You believe that they are your friends but they are not they will betray you eventually and by the looks of it they already have. My suggestion, if you want peace in Libya START TALKING TO THE HONORABLE TRIBES AND THE LEGAL GOVERNMENT AND LET GO OF THE TERRORIST GANGS THAT YOU WANT TO INSTALL BY FORCE… because if you do not, things will escalate even worse and terrorists from all the world will come to Libya and then travel to Europe and there is nothing you can do to stop them…  So stop complaining and lift the ban for arms so that the Libyan Army can clean our country.

[JURIST] Armed groups in Libya are deliberately attacking human rights defenders, according to a UN report [text, PDF] released Wednesday. Attacks have increased since fighting escalated in May 2014 and have been documented in a joint report [press release] by the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official websites]. Attacks include killings, abductions, torture, unlawful deprivation of liberty and threats via phone and social media. Prominent civil society activist Entissar al-Hassaeri was shot and killed in Tripoli last month [UN report], and two members of the National Commission for Human Rights-Libya, a human rights NGO, were abducted in central Tripoli. Both individuals have been released, but other activists remain missing. Many activists are receiving threats against themselves and their families even after leaving the country. The National Council for Civil Liberties and Human Rights in Libya closed its offices in Tripoli in late 2014 as a result of such threats. Armed groups across all ideological, political and tribal divides are responsible for the attacks after many human rights activists were drawing attention to the widespread human rights abuses across Libya. The joint report stresses a need for stronger state institutions, especially in law enforcement and criminal justice. It also calls upon neighboring countries to issue emergency visas to threatened or attacked human rights activists.

You can read the rest of this stupid article at this link: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2015/03/un-libya-armed-groups-attacking-human-rights-defenders.php

The Middle East oil/nuclear puzzle


The Middle East oil/nuclear puzzle

by Pepe Escobar

Reuters / Ali Jarekji

Reuters / Ali Jarekji

US Secretary of State John Kerry may be starting to enjoy the brinkmanship, as he says it’s “unclear” whether the US and Iran would reach a political framework nuclear deal before the end of this month.

Loud applause may be heard in corridors ranging from Tel Aviv to Riyadh.

As negotiations resume in Lausanne, the fact is a potential nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 (US, UK, France, BRICS members Russia and China, and Germany) is bound to open the possibility of more Iranian oil exports – thus leading oil prices to fall even further. As of early this week, Brent crude was trading at $54.26 a barrel.

Assuming the US and the EU nations that are part of P5+1 really agree to implement the suspension of UN sanctions by the summer (Russia and China already agree), not only will Iran be exporting more energy – that should take a few months – but also OPEC as a whole will be increasing its oversupply.

The EU badly wants to buy loads of Iranian energy – and invest in Iranian energy infrastructure. Beijing, a key yet discreet member of the P5+1, is also watching these developments very carefully.

Whatever happens, for China this is a win-win situation, as Beijing keeps actively building up its strategic petroleum reserves profiting from low prices. And even as oil prices also remain under pressure from the strong US dollar – which makes oil way more expensive if you are paying with a different currency – that’s certainly no problem for China, with its mammoth US dollar reserves.

The oil price war essentially unleashed by Saudi Arabia has hit Iran with a bang. The country may be down, but not out. There were no good options for Tehran except to try to keep its market share by offering the same discounts – especially to Asia – the Saudis are offering.

Tehran has been under a tsunami of nasty Western sanctions for years, which limit its ability to export oil and increase production. It’s extremely difficult for the Iranian governments to reduce the gap of the expected revenue based on previous high oil prices.

Now the name of the game among major oil producers is to keep market share at all costs. Iran can’t escape it – as it needs to keep in check at all times the fear of oversupply and its desire to increase production. Some oil producing countries are definitely keeping upcoming oil supplies out of the market. The result is Iran will have serious trouble going for more production and more exports while trying to regain its pre-sanctions market share.

Reuters / Azad Lashkari

Reuters / Azad Lashkari

Wanna buy a Middle East condo?

While a sort of undeclared “oil war” is still far from reaching an endgame, the nuclear front promises some eye-popping breakthroughs.

Powerful – if sometimes conflicting – ‘Empire of Chaos’ factions in Washington are actively entertaining the dream of transferring US military assets from the Middle East to Europe to keep ratcheting up the pressure on Russia, under the pretext of the “aggression” on Ukraine.

That might happen only after “control” of the Middle East is somewhat shared between Turkey, Iran, and to a much lesser extent, the House of Saud. For the notoriously wobbly “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” Obama administration’s foreign policy, this development would be a key rationale behind the push for a successful P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran to be reached this summer.

Iran has already cultivated – and blossomed – its own sphere of influence. It’s the Turkey-Saudi case that is way more complicated.

As much as Ankara is well aware of the fierce catfight for regional power between Tehran and Riyadh, it tries to maintain good relations with both.

Crucially it’s in Syria that Ankara and Riyadh are almost on the same “Assad must go” page. Almost – because in fact a pro-Muslim Brotherhood Turkey-Qatar alliance has found itself for four years in direct competition with a Salafi-boosting House of Saud.

Anyway, when Turkey’s President, also known as ‘Sultan’ Erdogan, visited the new Saudi King Salman in early March, they reached an understanding; they will both turbo-charge “support” – weaponized and otherwise – for the Syrian opposition. Problem is there is no credible Syrian opposition; virtually everyone that knows how to fight has migrated to the fake Caliphate of ISIS/ISIL/Daesh.

What this means in a nutshell is once again a Sunni against Shi’ite set up; a classic Divide and Rule gambit that is the perennial House of Saud priority.

The ’Empire of Chaos’, in theory, should but be pleased. But it’s not. The Obama administration’s objective – on the record – is “[prioritizing] the Islamic State, not Assad.”

But that may also change in a heartbeat. New Pentagon supremo Ashton Carter has just admitted, “the forces that we train in Syria, we will have some obligation to support them after they’re trained.” But that would also “include the possibility that, even though they’re trained and equipped to combat ISIL, they could come into contact with forces of the Assad regime.”

No wonder Damascus is weary, and will wait for US “actions” before any possible negotiation with Washington. One day Kerry says talks with Damascus are necessary to end the Syrian civil war. The next day he repeats, “Assad must go.”

Osama’s pal plays paranoia

As for a no-fly zone over northern Syria – heavily pushed by Erdogan, and a wet dream of neo-cons in Washington – it won’t fly. One extra reason for Ankara to stay away from this new Saudi anti-Iran push.

To complicate things further, power within the House of Saud remains diffused. Both the CIA and BND – German intelligence – agree, and there have been constant rumblings in Washington that the House of Saud eventually should go.

The House of Saud still has not understood that Syria is not the main “threat” against them. They are freaking out about their border with Iraq – as well as their borders with Yemen and Bahrain. On top of it they picked a fight with Russia via the oil price war. The Saudis say they are pumping only 9.5 million barrels of oil a day out of their 12.5 million barrels a day; Moscow is essentially saying they are pumping their entire capacity.

If the oil price war delights the Russia-demonizing ‘Masters of the Universe’, they are at the same time deeply enraged because it is decimating the US shale oil “revolution”. What’s left for masses of unemployed US workers? Find a job in Saudi Arabia. Still one more reason for the ‘Masters of the Universe’ to dump the House of Saud anytime they feel like it.

Predictably, House of Saud paranoia remains the norm. Former Saudi intelligence capo di tutti i capi (and former great pal of Osama bin Laden), Prince Turki, is on overdrive, charging Iran with being “a disruptive player in various scenes in the Arab world, whether it’s Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Palestine or Bahrain”; accusing Iran of “expanding its occupation of Iraq”; insisting “the enemy” is both Assad and ISIS/ISIL/Daesh; and last but not least unequivocally blasting any possible nuclear deal with Iran.

What’s even more worrisome is that King Salman brought Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to Riyadh – rushing to meet him at the airport – to confirm a key strategic, secret nuclear agreement before any Iran/P5+1 deal is clinched. The bottom line: the House of Saud does not trust the American nuclear umbrella anymore. They are making their own nuclear power play with the help of nuclear power Pakistan. The connection does exist, but remains extremely mysterious.

No need to outline the upcoming maze of ominous consequences. Demented nuclear Wahhabis, anyone?

 

Qatar and Saudi Arabia ‘have ignited time bomb by funding global spread of radical Islam’


Qatar and Saudi Arabia ‘have ignited time bomb by funding global spread of radical Islam’

By David Blair

General Jonathan Shaw, Britain’s former Assistant Chief of the Defence Staff, says Qatar and Saudi Arabia responsible for spread of radical Islam

Gen Jonathan Shaw is a former commander of British forces in Basra

General Shaw told The Telegraph that Qatar and Saudi Arabia were primarily responsible for the rise of Wahhabi Salafism, the extremist Islam that inspires Isil terrorists Photo: EPA

Qatar and Saudi Arabia have ignited a “time bomb” by funding the global spread of radical Islam, according to a former commander of British forces in Iraq.

General Jonathan Shaw, who retired as Assistant Chief of the Defence Staff in 2012, told The Telegraph that Qatar and Saudi Arabia were primarily responsible for the rise of the extremist Islam that inspires Isil terrorists. ****(What he is not telling you is: the isis/isil/daesh was created by the European and American forces as a paramilitary, inside in these groups are all mercenaries well paid by either private army/companies or by the government. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the front its like laundering money for drugs it just changed the object remember who created Al Qaeda so that they could get rid of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The General is well aware of this and tries to cover the unrecoverable mistakes of his country and allies that they have done in the middle east and north Africa.)

The two Gulf states have spent billions of dollars on promoting a militant and proselytising interpretation of their faith derived from Abdul Wahhab, an eighteenth century scholar, and based on the Salaf, or the original followers of the Prophet.

But the rulers of both countries are now more threatened by their creation than Britain or America, argued Gen Shaw. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) has vowed to topple the Qatari and Saudi regimes, viewing both as corrupt outposts of decadence and sin.

So Qatar and Saudi Arabia have every reason to lead an ideological struggle against Isil, said Gen Shaw. On its own, he added, the West’s military offensive against the terrorist movement was likely to prove “futile”.

“This is a time bomb that, under the guise of education, Wahhabi Salafism is igniting under the world really. And it is funded by Saudi and Qatari money and that must stop,” said Gen Shaw. “And the question then is ‘does bombing people over there really tackle that?’ I don’t think so. I’d far rather see a much stronger handle on the ideological battle rather than the physical battle.”

Gen Shaw, 57, retired from the Army after a 31-year career that saw him lead a platoon of paratroopers in the Battle of Mount Longdon, the bloodiest clash of the Falklands War, and oversee Britain’s withdrawal from Basra in southern Iraq. As Assistant Chief of the Defence Staff, he specialised in counter-terrorism and security policy.

All this has made him acutely aware of the limitations of what force can achieve. He believes that Isil can only be defeated by political and ideological means. Western air strikes in Iraq and Syria will, in his view, achieve nothing except temporary tactical success.

When it comes to waging that ideological struggle, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are pivotal. “The root problem is that those two countries are the only two countries in the world where Wahhabi Salafism is the state religion – and Isil is a violent expression of Wahabist Salafism,” said Gen Shaw.

“The primary threat of Isil is not to us in the West: it’s to Saudi Arabia and also to the other Gulf states.”

Both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are playing small parts in the air campaign against Isil, contributing two and four jet fighters respectively. But Gen Shaw said they “should be in the forefront” and, above all, leading an ideological counter-revolution against Isil.

The British and American air campaign would not “stop the support of people in Qatar and Saudi Arabia for this kind of activity,” added Gen Shaw. “It’s missing the point. It might, if it works, solve the immediate tactical problem. It’s not addressing the fundamental problem of Wahhabi Salafism as a culture and a creed, which has got out of control and is still the ideological basis of Isil – and which will continue to exist even if we stop their advance in Iraq.”

Gen Shaw said the Government’s approach towards Isil was fundamentally mistaken. “People are still treating this as a military problem, which is in my view to misconceive the problem,” he added. “My systemic worry is that we’re repeating the mistakes that we made in Afghanistan and Iraq: putting the military far too up front and centre in our response to the threat without addressing the fundamental political question and the causes. The danger is that yet again we’re taking a symptomatic treatment not a causal one.”

Gen Shaw said that Isil’s main focus was on toppling the established regimes of the Middle East, not striking Western targets. He questioned whether Isil’s murder of two British and two American hostages was sufficient justification for the campaign.

“Isil made their big incursion into Iraq in June. The West did nothing, despite thousands of people being killed,” said Gen Shaw. “What’s changed in the last month? Beheadings on TV of Westerners. And that has led us to suddenly change our policy and suddenly launch air attacks.”

He believes that Isil might have murdered the hostages in order to provoke a military response from America and Britain which could then be portrayed as a Christian assault on Islam. “What possible advantage is there to Isil of bringing us into this campaign?” asked Gen Shaw. “Answer: to unite the Muslim world against the Christian world. We played into their hands. We’ve done what they wanted us to do.”

However, Gen Shaw’s analysis is open to question. Even if they had the will, the rulers of Saudi Arabia and Qatar may be incapable of leading an ideological struggle against Isil. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is 91 and only sporadically active. His chosen successor, Crown Prince Salman, is 78 and already believed to be declining into senility. The kingdom’s ossified leadership is likely to be paralysed for the foreseeable future.

Meanwhile in Qatar, the new Emir, Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, is only 34 in a region that respects age. Whether this Harrow and Sandhurst-educated ruler has the personal authority to lead an ideological counter-revolution within Islam is doubtful.

Given that Saudi Arabia and Qatar almost certainly cannot do what Gen Shaw believes to be necessary, the West may have no option except to take military action against Isil with the aim of reducing, if not eliminating, the terrorist threat.

“I just have a horrible feeling that we’re making things worse. We’re entering into this in a way we just don’t understand,” said Gen Shaw. “I’m against the principle of us attacking without a clear political plan.”

 

Obama’s Gun-running Operation


Obama’s Gun-running Operation

If you thought the Isis war couldn’t get any worse, just wait for more of the CIA
Even America’s top spies know that arming rebels is ‘doomed to failure’ – but that can’t stop Obama’s gun-running operation

By Trevor Timm

Information on secret weapons already flowing into Syria has been kept in hiding from most of the people who approved paying for them. Photograph: Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty

Information on secret weapons already flowing into Syria has been kept in hiding from most of the people who approved paying for them. Photograph: Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty

As the war against the Islamic State in Syria has fallen into even more chaospartially due to the United States government’s increasing involvement there – the White House’s bright new idea seems to be to ramping up the involvement of the intelligence agency that is notorious for making bad situations worse. As the Washington Post reported late Friday, “The Obama administration has been weighing plans to escalate the CIA’s role in arming and training fighters in Syria, a move aimed at accelerating covert U.S. support to moderate rebel factions while the Pentagon is preparing to establish its own training bases.”

Put aside for a minute that the Central Intelligence Agency has been secretly arming Syrian rebels with automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, ammunition and antitank weapons since at least 2012 – and with almost nothing to show for it. Somehow the Post neglected to cite a front-page New York Times article from just one month ago alerting the public to the existence of a still-classified internal CIA study admitting that arming rebels with weapons has rarely – if ever – worked:

As the Times’ Mark Mazzetti reported:

‘One of the things that Obama wanted to know was: Did this ever work?’ said one former senior administration official who participated in the debate and spoke anonymously because he was discussing a classified report. The C.I.A. report, he said, ‘was pretty dour in its conclusions.’

The Times cited the most well-known of CIA failures, including the botched Bay of Pigs invasion and the arming of the Nicaraguan contra rebels that led to the disastrous Iran-Contra scandal. Even the agency’s most successful mission – slowly bleeding out the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s by arming the mujahideen – paved the way for the worst terrorist attack on the US in its history.

But as anyone who has read journalist Tim Weiner’s comprehensive and engrossing history of the CIA knows, the agency’s past is a graveyard rife with literally dozens of catastrophic failures involving covert weapons deals to countless war criminals and con artists in an attempt to overthrow governments all over the world. Not only has the CIA failed repeatedly, but oftentimes its plan has completely backfired, solidifying the very power of the actor it sought to remove and leaving the people the agency claimed to be helping in a much, much worse-off spot than before the CIA gun-running mission began.

We’ve already seen Syrian fortunes turn for the worse as the US has stepped up involvement in the past few months, as Bashar al-Assad has gone on the offensive against the US-backed rebels, and as the US airstrikes have reportedly led to Isis and al-Qaida reuniting, after being sworn enemies for more than a year. The two terrorist groups then proceeded to route the “moderate” rebels in combat and are currently in possession of many of the US-made weapons previously owned by the rebels.

Two months ago, the US Congress voted to send hundreds of millions of dollars in more arms to Syria. Even the politicians voting on sending countless more US weapons into the middle of a civil war were kept in the dark about the CIA’s internal report. That should be a scandal, right up there with the torture report the CIA is trying to keep secret, too.

But at least a few in-the-know elected officials were aware of the dangers of insanity of Congress’ Syria vote. The Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim and Sam Stein quoted an unnamed Democratic Congressman in September who was even more blunt, insisting that the CIA’s belief in arming rebels was “doomed to failure”:

‘I have heard it expressed, outside of classified contexts, that what you heard from your intelligence sources is correct, because the CIA regards the effort as doomed to failure,’ the congressman said in an email. ‘Specifically (again without referring to classified information), the CIA thinks that it is impossible to train and equip a force of pro-Western Syrian nationals that can fight and defeat Assad, al-Nusra and ISIS, regardless of whatever air support that force may receive.’

The unnamed Congressman added: “The CIA also believes that its previous assignment to accomplish this was basically a fool’s errand, and they are well aware of the fact that many of the arms that they provided ended up in the wrong hands.”

But the information on the secret weapons that were already flowing into Syria has been kept in hiding from most of Congress. John Kerry refused to answer any questions about the CIA’s activities in Syria when asked by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, despite the news of the agency’s involvement in Syria being on the front page of newspapers for years. “I hate to do this,” he said. “But I can’t confirm or deny whatever that’s been written about and I can’t really go into any kind of possible program.

Perhaps the most shocking part is that we know Barack Obama himself has read the CIA study and knows that arming rebels in Syria – or anywhere – was an incredibly dangerous idea. Seemingly referencing the study, Obama told David Remnick of the New Yorker earlier this year:

Very early in this process, I actually asked the C.I.A. to analyze examples of America financing and supplying arms to an insurgency in a country that actually worked out well. And they couldn’t come up with much.

So even though the CIA “couldn’t come up with much” proof of any time when sending tons of weapons into a war zone full of extremists has worked in the past, or that the agency itself has told Congressmen arming the rebels was “doomed to failure,” the Obama administration is ready to do just that.

No one doubts that Isis is a horrific terrorist group that’s terrible for the entire Middle East – as it proved over the weekend by barbarically beheading another innocent aid worker – but further entrenching the CIA and its weapons into an already awful situation can really only make things worse. Much worse.

© 2014 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

 

The 4 Deeper Truths about Benghazi and Libya


The 4 Deeper Truths about Benghazi and Libya

 

Democrats and Republicans Are Both Missing the Big Picture On Benghazi and Libya

Democrats and Republicans have very different views about Benghazi, Libya.

The 4 Deeper Truths about Benghazi and Libya 070514ben

Image: Clinton & Obama (YouTube).

Republicans say the Obama administration is to blame for the death of Ambassador Stevens – and have created a special committee to investigate Benghazi – while Democrats by and large say that the is nothing but politics.

The truth is bigger than either side is admitting …

First, Pulitzer prize winning reporter Seymour Hersh – who broke the story of the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam under Nixon and the torture scandal under Bush – says that Benghazi was really a CIA outpost for running weapons capture from Libya after Gaddaffi was overthrown into Syria … approved on a bipartisan basis by both Democrats and Republicans.

Second, it has been confirmed that the U.S. backed Al Qaeda terrorists in Libya so that they would overthrow Gaddaffi.

Third, as we noted right after Gaddaffi fell, the Obama administration’s stated reason for going into Libya makes no sense. Now, RAND Corporation political scientists theorize that Obama might have decided to bomb Libya – not for any reason having to do with Libya or Gaddaffi themselves – but rather “to keep the Arab Spring going“.

The U.S. ousted Gaddaffi and then left, and Libya has now descended into chaos.

The Washington Post argues that America fighting the Libyan war is a bigger scandal than Benghazi itself:

Republicans have a potentially strong case to make against the Obama administration’s handling of Libya, as the latest political developments there underline. On Sunday, a disputed vote in parliament led to the swearing-in of a new prime minister — the sixth since former dictator Moammar Gaddafi was overthrown in 2011 with the help of U.S. and NATO air forces. The new leader, an Islamist from the city of Misurata, replaced pro-Western prime minister Ali Zeidan, who was driven out of the country this year after his government proved unable to stop a militia from filling a tanker with stolen oil.

From the safety of Europe, Mr. Zeidan conceded what was obvious all along: Libya’s post-Gaddafi government has no army and no way of establishing its authority over the hundreds of militias that sprang up in the vacuum that followed the revolution. Libya has fragmented into fiefdoms, its oil industry is virtually paralyzed, massive traffic in illegal weapons is supplying militants around the region and extremist groups such as Ansar al-Sharia, which participated in the Sept. 11, 2012, assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, are unchecked.


The Obama administration and its NATO allies bear responsibility for this mess because, having intervened to help rebels overthrow Gaddafi, they then swiftly exited without making a serious effort to help Libyans establish security and build a new political order. Congress might usefully probe why the administration allowed a country in which it initiated military operations to slide into chaos.

Fourth, the Libya war – just like the Iraq war – was illegal, as noted in the New York Times,Washington PostHuffington PostWashington TimesGuardianSalon, and elsewhere.

Those are four the deeper stories about Benghazi and Libya which neither the Democrats or Republicans are talking about …

source: washingtonsblog.com