Libya Tribes leader: Trump’s travel restrictions justified, terrorists using fake Libyan passports to enter U.S.


Libya Tribes leader: Trump’s travel restrictions justified, terrorists using fake Libyan passports to enter U.S.

ByHarrison Koehli
Sott.net

Passports of Syrian mercenaries who come to Libya to receive new identities.

In his first week in office, President Trump signed an order temporarily freezing immigration from seven Middle Eastern and North African countries, including Libya. According to Trump, the order’s purpose was to “keep America safe” by blocking groups of people who can not yet be properly vetted. Trump’s critics labeled the order a ‘Muslim ban’, deeming it unfair, mean-spirited, and racist. One recent editorial even criticizes Trump for playing up “the imaginary threat of terrorists” from the countries in question.

Now, after the U.S. court of appeals upheld federal judge Robart’s restraining order on the executive order, it appears that Trump plans to sign a new executive order before, or perhaps alternatively to, the appeal to the Supreme Court. But the question remains: is the executive order unreasonable? And is the terrorist threat ‘imaginary’?

Libyan tribal leader Sheikh Khaled Tantoush doesn’t think so. Sheikh Tantoush, a fierce critic of the jihadist movements and one of Libya’s most esteemed clerics, was captured by Libyan “rebels” in Sirte in 2011 along with Colonel Gaddafi. He performed the final Islamic rites over Gaddafi’s body after he was murdered, and the Sheikh himself was subsequently imprisoned and tortured. In a 2013 show trial he was sentenced to life in prison on trumped-up charges of “glorifying Gaddafi”, but was released last month after spending over five years in prison.

In his first interview with Western media since his release from rebel captivity, Sheikh Khaled told SOTT.net that the so-called Muslim ban is meaningless to the vast majority of ordinary Libyans, who find it difficult enough to move from city to city, let alone leave the country for the U.S. There is an extreme cash shortage in the country, and the only Libyans with the means to come to the U.S. are mostly criminals and terrorists. He said:

A small number [of Libyans] might travel to the USA for studying, but the others [who travel] are traitors who have been working for and are paid for by the US government. The majority of Libyans don’t care about this ban, because we are struggling to travel from one city to another in Libya… The real Libyans don’t care to travel to the USA. They care about finding a solution for Libya. This [travel ban] is a small thing for us.

Syrian President Assad gave a similar assessment of the ‘ban’ on Syrians, telling Yahoo News that it is “an American issue” and that his responsibility is simply to restore stability in his country, “in order to bring [the refugees] back”. When asked if he thought some of the refugees are aligned with terrorists, he replied, “Definitely.”

Passports for Al-Qaeda

James and JoAnne Moriarty, the only official American spokespersons of the tribes of Libya, say the problem in Libya is even worse. In 2011, al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood “rebels” took over all ministries of the Libyan government, including the passport office of the Libyan Interior Ministry in charge of Border Control and Strategic Institutions, which was put under the control of one Abdul Wahhab Hassan Qayed. Qayed’s brother was Abu Bakr Hassan Qayed (aka Abu Yahya al-Libi), a top-level al-Qaeda operative who was killed by U.S. drones in June of 2012.

 

The man in charge of the Libyan passport office after NATO’s invasion (right).

As JoAnne Moriarty put it, “Al Qaeda controlled the passport office right after the fall of Libya and was issuing Libyan passports to foreign mercenaries as fast as they came across the border.” For example, back in February 2014, the Libyans caught five spies from Qatar carrying fraudulent Libyan passports (including Qatari intelligence officer Abdel-Hadi Saleh Al-Rushaydi, Faraj Saleh Al-Mansour Jatlawi, and Ali Al-Mohamad Sadeq-Obaidi). The spies told Libyan authorities that the passports were provided to them by the CIA during NATO’s war on Libya in 2011 (see this article for pictures and a video of their arrest).

A fake Libyan passport provided to al-Qaeda-linked terrorist Abdelhakim Belhadj, created 26 May 2011, 3 months after the start of the war, 2 months after his release from Libyan prison.

Belhadj’s fake passport, made out in the name of “Salem Al Elwani”. Notice the occupation: “Free Trade.”

 

Another fake Libyan passport (Left) provided to an Egyptian mercenary (Ahmed Salh Amwer Salh). On the right is his Egyptian passport. Caption says: “Picture of Egyptian terrorist sent from Dorna with a fake Libyan passport to bomb an Arab airport. The passport number sequence was stolen from Tripoli but wasn’t issued by any recognized Libyan department.”

This identity-laundering scheme in Libya – where an untold number, likely in the thousands, of jihadi mercenaries exchanged their old ‘terrorist’ identities for fresh post-Gaddafi Libyan ones – became so bad that Morocco had to introduce a visa requirement for Libya due to the prevalence of fraudulent passports. In one month alone the Moroccans caught 285 foreigners carrying Libyan passports – from Pakistan, Chechnya, Mozambique, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.

The Moriartys told SOTT.net that the Libyan rebels used their control of the passport office not only to issue fake identities and passports to their fellow terrorists, but also to distribute funds to them, providing millions of dollars to English-speaking fighters sent to the U.S., where they were routinely passed through immigration and were given green cards or multiple-entry visas, at a rate of 100 to 1,000 per month:

“The rate [of entries into the United States] was 100 a month, moving up to 1,000 a month. They have been processing people through Libya since October of 2011 into the United States. They’ve been doing the same thing into France, same thing into Germany.”

James Moriarty went on to say that he has spoken to a pilot who flew out of Syria (now deceased), who told the Moriartys that he was part of caravan of three 747s that “picked up over 700 men each in Syria and flew them to the United States”, to an airport in New York. The pilots were then “required to sign a 21-page non-disclosure agreement that included guaranteed jail-time if they ever spoke about it.” This pilot told the Moriartys that upon landing, U.S. government officials gave these men passports and “buckets of money”.

The Moriartys hope that this information about the prevalence of Libyan passports provided to terrorists will influence the U.S. government to stop this from happening. At the very least, officials need to vet everyone who has traveled into the States from Libya since 2011. As for those who continue to come, the Libyan tribes have extended an offer to President Trump to cooperate with American officials.They know who most of these people are because they became notorious in Libya over the last six years of causing bloody mayhem there.

Libyan Tribes Endorse Trump, Want To Work Together

In March of 2016, the Tribal Leaders of Libya officially endorsed Trump for the office of President of the USA. In their message to Trump on behalf of the Tribes, the Moriartys wrote:

“The people of Libya reiterate their pledge to eliminate all the radical Islamists in Libya as soon as the U.S. stops support of these entities in their country. Thereafter, the Great Tribes of Libya have pledged to go country-to-country joining hands with other Tribes of the Middle east, and you as President of the United States, to eliminate radical Islam worldwide.”

As the Moriartys told SOTT.net on 12 February, this offer still stands. The Tribes are the only Libyans who know who’s who in Libya. As such, they are willing and able to work with the Americans to vet any individuals entering the United States from Libya, or carrying Libyan papers.

The Tribal Leaders are the only legitimate representatives of Libya’s approximately 6 million citizens. These ordinary Libyans, who make up 95+% of the Libyan population, have suffered for six years under the rule of violent jihadist groups like the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Ansar al-Sharia, Muslim Brotherhood and ISIS, all of whom were shepherded into the country by Western government agents and their clients in the Middle East. They are natural allies in the fight against the jihadists – not the illegitimate “governments” set up by the terrorists and their supporters.

Advertisements

Gen. Mike Flynn: Why Hillary’s record on Libya is even worse than you think


Gen. Mike Flynn: Why Hillary’s record on Libya is even worse than you think

By Michael Flynn

A failed state, a terrorist haven, four dead Americans – this is the Hillary Clinton record in Libya we know about.

But new evidence — and a review of the public record — reveals that Hillary Clinton’s actions in Libya were not just disastrous policy, but a violation of U.S. anti-terrorism law.

A recent report to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the British House of Commons concluded that Western intervention in Libya was based on “inaccurate intelligence” and “erroneous assumptions.” Advocates failed to recognize that “the threat to civilians was overstated and that the rebels included a significant Islamist element,” and the failure to plan for a post-Qaddafi Libya led to the “growth of ISIL” in North Africa.

However, “inaccurate intelligence” doesn’t fully describe the whole story. A closer examination of the run-up to the Libya debacle on September 11, 2012 leads to the irrefutable conclusion that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knowingly armed radical Islamist terrorists in Libya.

False pretenses

The American public was told that the intervention in Libya was necessary to prevent a humanitarian crisis. But just as Hillary Clinton would describe the attack on our Benghazi diplomats as a spontaneous protest over a video, the military intervention that led inexorably to the debacle in Benghazi was sold on false pretenses: to prevent an imminent massacre of civilians engaged in a pro-democracy uprising.

Hillary Clinton described the 2011 Arab Spring rebellion in eastern Libya as a spontaneous pro-democracy uprising, but the Libyan connection to radical Islamic extremist groups was well known long before 2011.

The region where the rebellion began was a fervid recruiting ground for jihadis who killed American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The leaders of the “civilian uprising” that Hillary Clinton supported were members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) who had pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda. They refused to take orders from non-Islamist commanders and assassinated the then leader of the rebel army, Abdel Fattah Younes.

The LIFG had been jailed under Qaddafi until hundreds of their members were released through a de-radicalization program. That program was spearheaded by an exiled Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Libyan cleric based in Qatar named Ali al-Sallabi. The jihadis pledged they would never use violence against Gaddafi again.

But nearly as soon as the LIFG was released they took up arms against the Qaddafi regime.

Just as there was ample evidence that Hillary’s “pro-democracy protestors” were radical Islamists, there was no truth to the assertion a civilian massacre was imminent.

Libyan doctors told United Nations investigators that, of the more than 200 corpses in Tripoli’s morgues following fighting in late February 2011, only two were female. This indicates Qaddafi’s forces targeted male combatants and did not indiscriminately attack civilians. Nor had Qaddafi forces attacked civilians after retaking towns from the rebels in early February 2011.

While Muammar Qaddafi had a 40-year record of appalling human rights violations, his abuses did not include large-scale attacks on Libyan civilians. We restored full diplomatic relations with Qaddafi in 2007 and he was a key partner in counter-terrorism efforts.

LIFG and affiliated jihadis received at least 18 shipments of arms from Qatar with the blessing of the U.S., the Wall Street Journal reports. The arms shipments were funneled through none other than Ali al-Sallabi, the Qatar cleric who brokered their release from prison.

The Islamists were able to pay for the weapons because Clinton had convinced Obama to grant full diplomatic recognition to the rebels, against the advice of State Department lawyers and the Secretary of Defense.

As the Washington Post reported, this move “allowed the Libyans access to billions of dollars from Qaddafi’s frozen accounts.”

These arms shipments are significant for several reasons. It led to the indictment of American arms dealer Marc Turi who was charged with selling weapons to Islamist militants in Libya through Qatar. The charges were dropped this week after Turi threatened to reveal emails showing Clinton had approved the sales.

Here’s where it gets very sticky for Secretary Clinton. The rebel leaders were on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization list. It is a direct violation of the law to provide material support for terrorist organizations under 18 U.S. Code 2339A & 2339B. Penalties for providing or attempting to provide material support to terrorism include imprisonment from 15 years to life.

Nor is the Qatar connection insignificant. Qatar has donated anywhere from $1 to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, and emails reveal members of the Qatari royal family were privileged with back channel meetings with Secretary Clinton at the State Department. While whipping up support for the Libya military campaign, Clinton told Arab leaders, “it’s important to me personally,” the Washington Post reported.

Hillary Clinton’s prosecution of foreign policy in Libya crossed several lines: she showed extremely bad judgment by ignoring military and intelligence officials, she let personal interests conflict with U.S. foreign policy and, most importantly, she may have broken the law — again.

Any one of these transgressions should disqualify her from holding any kind of leadership role in our government, let alone president of the United States. The last one qualifies Hillary Clinton for government housing, though not in the White House.

David Cameron, Libya and Disaster


David Cameron, Libya and Disaster

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark

The UK Foreign Affairs Committee was a long time coming with this judgment, but when it came, it provided a firm reminder about how far the 2011 intervention against the Gaddafi regime was not merely flawed but calamitous in its consequences. There had been no coherent strategy on the part of the Cameron government; the campaign had not been “informed by accurate intelligence.”

For members of the committee, it was clear that the then UK prime minister, David Cameron, had to carry a rather large can on the issue. “Through his decision-making in the National Security Council, former prime minister David Cameron was ultimately responsible for the failure to develop a coherent Libya strategy.”

The consequential nature of this bloody and ultimately catastrophic blunder of international relations triggered continental instability, with a foul global aftertaste. The collapse of Libya into territories battled over with sectarian fury and the death of Muammar Gaddafi unsettled the ground in Mali. It also propelled violence through North African and the Middle East.

It is hard to rank the levels of severity in what went wrong in the aftermath of the Libyan collapse. Could a finger be pointed at the militia hothouse that was created within the state? (Tripoli alone currently hosts somewhere up to 150.) What of the external outrage stemming from it?

Near the top must be the conflict in northern Mali, precipitated by members of the Tuareg ethnic group who had long supplied Gaddafi with soldiers. Armed to the teeth, the MNLA, with the assistance of such Islamist groups as Ansar Dine, commenced a separatist action that in turn encouraged interventions by al-Qaeda sponsored Islamist groups.

Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb eventually became one of the big and most menacing players, busying itself with operations beyond Mali, including Algeria, Niger, Mauritania, Tunisia and Morocco.

Meshed between these skirmishing groups were a French-led intervention in 2013 that petered out, followed by a continuing peace keeping operation which has long since ditched the word “peace” in its equation.

Not even the presence of 12,000 UN soldiers under the mission known as MINUSMA has done much to prevent the fraying of that land, despite the June 2015 peace deal. Since 2013, the mission has taken over a hundred casualties, a deal of it occasioned by the ubiquitous landmine and roadside bomb.

While Mali burned with fury, other African states felt the aftershocks, notably through a huge, easily accessible arms market that was not brought under control after Gaddafi’s fall. Marty Reardon, Senior Vice President of The Soufran Group, a US-based security consultancy, surprised no one in telling The Independent that Libya’s implosion led to the arming of “well-armed and militant groups” in Tunisia, Algeria, Niger, Chad, Sudan and Egypt.[1]

In this belligerent free for all, jihadi groups jostle and scratch for gains, creating a further pool of radicalised fighters who will, in time, find nowhere else to go. The Libyan collapse, in other words, has created a certain type of roving tourist jihadi, notching up points with each campaign.

Crispin Blunt, who chaired the committee, scoldingly suggested that the 2011 intervention was based on “erroneous assumptions and an incomplete understanding of the country.” This kindergarten world view did not stop there.

Having made a right royal mess, it was incumbent on France and the UK to right the ship, with a “responsibility to support Libyan economic and political reconstruction.” This responsibility was also a muddled one, with British and French institution builders profoundly ignorant about local matters. Having pushed Humpty Dumpty over, they showed scant knowledge on how to put him back together.

The sense of culpability for Cameron is further compounded by the nonsense the intervention made of such international humanitarian doctrines as the responsibility to protect. There was always a sense that the French-UK led mission was struggling for a plausible alibi, but recourse to the nonsensical notion of civilian protection reared its head.

That door was opened by the hoovering effect of UN Security Council Resolution 1973, which authorised “all necessary means” to protect that most wonderful contrivance, irrespective of what those in the host state thought.[2] Find the civilians and save the day.

While it remains the most insidious of contrivances at international law, that responsibility to protect could be said to have been discharged rapidly – after the initial round of strikes. In the words of the MPs, “If the primary object of the coalition intervention was the urgent need to protect civilians in Benghazi, then this objective was achieved in March 2011 in less than 24 hours.”

This was not to be. Instead, the intervention ballooned into a monstrous matter of regime change, with no attempt made to “pause military action” when Benghazi was being secured. “This meant that a limited intervention to protect civilians drifted into an opportunist policy of regime change by military means.” Docks in international criminal courts should be warmed by such adventurous men.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Notes

[1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/libya-report-britain-uk-gaddafi-civil-war-david-cameron-responsible-terrorism-isis-al-qaeda-mali-a7309821.html

[2] http://www.elac.ox.ac.uk/downloads/Welsh%20Civilian%20Protection%20in%20Libya.pdf

The original source of this article is Global Research

USA returns to Libya with a genocidal military campaign without “endpoint”


USA returns to Libya with a genocidal military campaign without “endpoint”

US criminal and irrational barbarity Western complicity in genocide against the people of Libya

It had long US He planned to extend its military campaign against the Islamic State in Libya

 The actual data more than 240 thousand dead

On August 1 US  bombed  first positions of the Islamic State  in the Libyan city of Sirte.

As noted by the portal  Intercept , attacks represent a significant escalation in the US war against the Islamic State, which now develops far beyond the borders of Syria and Iraq. The attacks were carried out without the authorization of Congress or any prior debate.

“We want to attack the Islamic State wherever lift his head. Libya is one of those places,” said Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook.

According to Cook, air strikes “will continue as long as [the Government of Libya] the request” and have “an end point at this particular time.”

It had long US planned to extend its military campaign in Libya. In January, General Joseph Dunford the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs United States, told reporters that the country was preparing to take “decisive military action against the Islamic State” in Libya.

Does the Pentagon little memory?

The bombings in Libya surprised those who remember the consequences of military intervention in this country in 2011. “The US intervention in Libya was such a resounding success that awaits us a second part,” he quipped one of the founders of Intercept Glenn Greenwald.

The ‘New York Times’  described  the plan as “very worrying” and said it represented a “significant advance of a war that could easily spread to other countries in the continent.”

In 2011 US He led the air campaign  NATO  to oust Muammar Gaddafi from power.However, after the assassination of the dictator, the country was plunged into a chaos that has lasted for years. Later President  Barack Obama  confessed that lack of planning on replacing Gaddafi was his “worst mistake” as thousands of fighters of the Islamic State invaded the country.

And now US returns to Libya. Cook stressed that Washington “is prepared to carry out more air strikes”, but has not provided details of the operation on Monday, even accurate data on victims of the attack.

Libya: Suicide bombing against military leaves at least 23 dead and dozens injured

At least 23 people were killed and 20 others wounded in a suicide attack Tuesday against a group of soldiers in the Libyan city of Benghazi, northwest, reports the agency  RIA Novosti .

Reportedly, the attack was carried out using a car bomb. At the moment no terrorist organization has claimed responsibility for the attack. In Benghazi, troops controlled by Parliament based in Tobruk, contrary to the Government of Tripoli, fighting the jihadists groups Al Qaeda and Islamic State.

Source: https://actualidad.rt.com

USA OPENS ANOTHER MILITARY FRONT AGAINST ISLAMIC STATE

deceptively brandishing the infamous authorization puppet regime of Fayez al-Sarraj, this August 1st, by direct order of slave slave Obama, the US imperialist army has gone into action against ISIS in Libya.Indeed, by orders Pentagon has begun aerial bombardment against the city of Sirte, located between Tripoli and Benghazi, and martyred in the North African country.

Peter Cook, a Pentagon spokesman, said: “At the request of the Libyan government of national unity” -not laugh, please, which is seriously N QG- “US military conducted airstrikes against targets precise ISIS. in Sirte, Libya. “and often he remarked that” the United States stands with the international community in supporting the national unity government and its struggle to restore stability and security in Libya. “so, auto justification wolf his new depredation harm the Libyan people.

 With such a statement from his spokesman, he is given by officially initiated, by such imperialist superpower War Imperialist Aggression US-led coalition against Libya.Coalition who they are part, among others, England, France, Italy, Spain and presumably Belgium.

 For his part, President Obama, liveried footman of white supremacists and Yankees hegemonistic, read the mandate have dictated the fascist military of the Pentagon that “operations … are consistent with our approach to combat ISIS, working with forces competent local and motivated. “

 Meanwhile the puppet of Tripoli Fayez al-Sarraz, very loose tongue has exposed its sad role of traitor and accomplice of the new slaughter of his people, through television said: “We have inflicted heavy losses on terrorists” (read anti-imperialist fighters loyal to Libyan EI).

The Doha Meetings: Truth vs Deceit


The Doha Meetings: Truth vs Deceit

Jamahiriya News Agency
Contrary to statements made by attendees that Qatar simply hosted the Doha meetings and in no way influenced them, the Muslim Brotherhood, through Turkey, Qatar, the US and the United Nations, have been deeply invested in these dialogues chaired by their terrorist colleague, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) commander, Khaled Al Sharif.
Facts to Remember:
Qatar was a major supporter of the NATO-backed 2011 war. Qatar not only funneled hundreds of millions to the opposition, but dispatched Western-trained advisers who helped finance, arm and train terrorist militias. At least 5,000 Qatari troops were sent in to colonize Libya.
Qatar owns 49% of Libya’s state bank.
A former Qatari intelligence officer confirmed that the plot to assassinate Revolutionary Leader, Mu’ammar Al Qaddafi was hatched in Doha. (The Saudi Cables)
Two years after the murder of Mu’ammar Qaddafi Western intelligence and Qatar govern Libya.
Today, Libya remains oppressed and shackled by the Muslim Brotherhood project.
Regarding the Doha meetings, Moussa Ibrahim stated that, (approximate translation, please see the original in Arabic)
The Muslim Brotherhood are attempting to monopolize the National Dialogue project by conducting meetings in Doha that will lead to the certain failure of efforts for national reconciliation in the country.
He added,
Certain foreign countries, such as Qatar and Turkey, have a vested interest in dominating the Libyan landscape, imposing their own agendas to usurp Libyan sovereignty, undermining the will of the Libyan people.
Al Sharif, Chair of the Doha meetings, is also the head of the Presidential Guard and National Guard, which morphed from its terrorist designation when first formed in 2013, to being an internationally recognized army appointed to serve the US-UN-instated government of accord, a Muslim Brotherhood project sanctioned by over 20 nations in Vienna…
…The United States, United Nations, Turkey and Qatar conspired to usurp Libyan sovereignty, complete a coup d’etat that began five years ago with their brutal murder of beloved leader Muammar al Qaddafi, place the Muslim Brotherhood in power as the official government, assign terrorists the task of guarding them.
In March, Martin Kobler announced on his twitter account that he had concluded successful meetings with terrorist commanders from Libya.
Attendees included the notorious Abdel Hakim Belhaj, al Qaeda commander.
Other Islamist militia leaders present were:
Hafed Gaddour of the Coalition of liberal forces,
Rufadi Abdallah of the National Front,
Jamal Ashur of the National party,
Abdel Mona Fageh of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Was Martin Kobler a witness to the Istanbul meeting with the above participants that plotted the assassination of Libyan Army officers?

Before the latest Doha meetings began, Martin Kobler announced that he had met with Qatari Foreign Minister, Sheikh Mohammad Bin Abdul Rahman, to brief him on the encouraging developments in Libya.
Martin Kobler ‏@KoblerSRSG
We remain firm in our position that we resolutely reject both the Doha meetings and the “Forget September and February” initiative. We also reject all efforts of the UN|UNSMIL and regard them as unlawful interventionism, blatant foreign interference in Libya’s sovereign affairs.
Regarding the plans for the permanent occupation of Libya, there is no separation between the Muslim Brotherhood agenda, al Qaeda, Da’esh and other Islamist militias, NATO, AFRICOM, the United Nations, United States, United Kingdom, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. They are the enemies of Libya.