Britain’s Seven Covert Wars


Britain’s Seven Covert Wars

by Mark Curtis

Britain is fighting at least seven covert wars in the Middle East and North Africa, outside of any democratic oversight or control. Whitehall has in effect gone underground, with neither parliament nor the public being allowed to debate, scrutinise or even know about these wars. To cover themselves, Ministers are now often resorting to lying about what they are authorising. While Britain has identified Islamic State (among others) as the enemy abroad, it is clear that it sees the British public and parliament as the enemy at home.

Syria

Britain began training Syrian rebel forces from bases in Jordan in 2012. This was also when the SAS was reported to be ‘slipping into Syria on missions’ against Islamic State. Now, British special forces are ‘mountinghit and run raids against IS deep inside eastern Syria dressed as insurgent fighters’ and ‘frequently cross into Syria to assist the New Syrian Army’ from their base in Jordan. British special forces also provide training, weapons and other equipment to the New Syrian Army.

British aircraft began covert strikes against IS targets in Syria in 2015, months before Parliament voted in favour of overt action in December 2015. These strikes were conducted by British pilots embedded with US and Canadian forces.

Britain has also been operating a secret drone warfare programme in Syria. Last year Reaper drones killed British IS fighters in Syria, again before parliament approved military action. As I have previously argued, British covert action and support of the Syrian rebels is, along with horrific Syrian government/Russian violence, helping to prolong a terrible conflict.

Iraq

Hundreds of British troops are officially in Iraq to train local security forces. But they are also engaged in covert combat operations against IS. One recent report suggests that Britain has more than 200 special force soldiers in the country, operating out of a fortified base within a Kurdish Peshmerga camp south of Mosul.

British Reaper drones were first deployed over Iraq in 2014 and are now flown remotely by satellite from an RAF base in Lincolnshire. Britain has conducted over 200 drones strikes in Iraq since November 2014.

Libya

SAS forces have been secretly deployed to Libya since the beginning of this year, working with Jordanian special forces embedded in the British contingent. This follows a mission by MI6 and the RAF in January to gather intelligence on IS and draw up potential targets for air strikes. British commandos are now reportedly fighting and directing assaults on Libyan frontlines and running intelligence, surveillance and logistical support operations from a base in the western city of Misrata. <= ***which involves of AlQaeda, Isis and other Radical groups.

But a team of 15 British forces are also reported to be based in a French-led multinational military operations centre in Benghazi, eastern Libya, supporting renegade Libyan general Khalifa Haftar. In July 2016, Middle East Eye reported that this British involvement was helping to coordinate air strikes in support of Haftar, whose forces are opposed to the Tripoli-based government that Britain is supposed to be supporting.

Yemen

The government says it has no military personnel based in Yemen. Yet a report by Vice News in April, based on numerous interviews with officials, revealed that British special forces in Yemen, who were seconded to MI6, were training Yemeni troops fighting Al Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and also had forces infiltrated in AQAP. The same report also found that British military personnel were helping with drone strikes against AQAP. Britain was playing ‘a crucial and sustained role with the CIA in finding and fixing targets, assessing the effect of strikes, and training Yemeni intelligence agencies to locate and identify targets for the US drone program’. In addition, the UK spybase at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire facilitates US drone strikes in Yemen.

Britain has been widely reported (outside the mainstream media) as supporting the brutal Saudi war in Yemen, which has caused thousands of civilian deaths, most of them due to Saudi air strikes. Indeed, Britain is party to the war. The government says there are around 100 UK military personnel based in Saudi Arabia including a ‘small number’ at ‘Saudi MOD and Operational Centres’. One such Centre, in Riyadh, coordinates the Saudi bombing campaign in Yemen and includes British military personnel who are in the command room as air strikes are carried out and who have access to the bombing targets.

The UK is of course arming the Saudi campaign: The British government disclosed on 13 October that the Saudis have used five types of British bombs and missiles in Yemen. On the same day, it lied to Parliament that Britain was ‘not a party’ to the war in Yemen.

A secretmemorandum of understanding’ that Britain signed with Saudi Arabia in 2014 has not been made public since it ‘would damage the UK’s bilateral relationship’ with the Kingdom, the government states. It is likely that this pact includes reference to the secret British training of Syrian rebels in Saudi Arabia, which has taken place since mid-2015. Operating from a desert base in the north of the country, British forces have been teaching Syrian forces infantry skills as part of a US-led training programme.

Afghanistan

In Afghanistan, the public was told that British forces withdrew at the end of 2014. However, British forces stayed behind to help create and train an Afghan special forces unit. Despite officially only having ‘advisors’ in Afghanistan, in August 2015 it was reported that British covert forces were fighting IS and Taliban fighters. The SAS and SBS, along with US special forces, were ‘taking part in military operations almost every night’ as the insurgents closed in on the capital Kabul.

In 2014, the government stated that it had ended its drone air strikes programme in Afghanistan, which had begun in 2008 and covered much of the country. Yet last year it was reported that British special forces were calling in air strikes using US drones.

Pakistan and Somalia

Pakistan and Somalia are two other countries where Britain is conducting covert wars. Menwith Hill facilitates US drone strikes against jihadists in both countries, with Britain’s GCHQ providinglocational intelligence’ to US forces for use in these attacks.

The government has said that it has 27 military personnel in Somalia who are developing the national army and supporting the African Union Mission. Yet in 2012 it was reported that the SAS was covertly fighting against al-Shabab Islamist terrorists in Somalia, working with Kenyan forces in order to target leaders. This involved up to 60 SAS soldiers, close to a full squadron, including Forward Air Controllers who called in air strikes against al-Shabab targets by the Kenyan air force. In early 2016, it was further reported that Jordan’s King Abdullah, whose troops operate with UK special forces, was saying that his troops were ready with Britain and Kenya to go ‘over the border’ to attack al-Shabaab.

Drones

The RAF’s secret drone war, which involves a fleet of 10 Reaper drones, has been in permanent operation in Afghanistan since October 2007, but covertly began operating outside Afghanistan in 2014. The NGO Reprieve notes that Britain provides communications networks to the CIA ‘without which the US would not be able to operate this programme’. It says that this is a particular matter of concern as the US covert drone programme is illegal.

The Gulf

Even this may not be the sum total of British covert operations in the region. The government stated in 2015 that it had 177 military personnel embedded in other countries’ forces, with 30 personnel working with the US military. It is possible that these forces are also engaged in combat in the region. For example, the First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Philip Jones, has said that in the Gulf, British pilots fly US F18s from the decks of US aircraft carriers. This means that ‘US’ air strikes might well be carried out by British pilots.

Britain has many other military and intelligence assets in the region. Files leaked by Edward Snowden show that Britain has a network of three GCHQ spy bases in Oman – codenamed ‘Timpani’, ‘Guitar’ and ‘Clarinet’ – which tap in to various undersea cables passing through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf. These bases intercept and process vast quantities of emails, telephone calls and web traffic on behalf of Western intelligence agencies, which information is then shared with the National Security Agency in the US.

The state of Qatar houses the anti-IS coalition’s Combined Air Operations Centre at Al Udeid airbase. The government says it has seven military personnel ‘permanently assigned to Qatar’ and an additional number of ‘temporary personnel’ working at the airbase. These are likely to be covert forces; the government says that ‘we do not discuss specific numbers for reasons of safeguarding operational security’.

Similarly, the government says it has six military personnel ‘permanently assigned’ to the United Arab Emirates and an additional number of ‘temporary personnel’ at the UAE’s Al Minhad airbase. Britain also has military assets at Manama harbour, Bahrain, whose repressive armed forces are also being secretly trained by British commandos.

Kenya and Turkey

Kenya hosts Britain’s Kahawa Garrishon barracks and Laikipia Air Base, from where thousands of troops who carry out military exercises in Kenya’s harsh terrain can be deployed on active operations in the Middle East. Turkey has also offered a base for British military training. In 2015, for example, Britain deployed several military trainers to Turkey as part of the US-led training programme in Syria, providing small arms, infantry tactics and medical training to rebel forces.

The web of deceit

When questioned about these covert activities, Ministers have two responses. One is to not to comment on special forces’ operations. The other is to lie, which has become so routine as to be official government policy. The reasoning is simple – the government believes the public simply has no right to know of these operations, let alone to influence them.

Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told parliament in July that the government is ‘committed to the convention that before troops are committed to combat the House of Commons should have an opportunity to debate the matter’. This is plainly not true, as the extent of British covert operations show.

Similarly, it was first reported in May that British troops were secretly engaged in combat in Libya. This news came two days after Fallon told MPs that Britain was not planning ‘any kind of combat role’ to fight IS in Libya.

There are many other examples of this straightforward web of deceit. In July 2016, the government issued six separate corrections to previous ministerial statements in which they claimed that Saudi Arabia is not targeting civilians or committing war crimes in Yemen. However, little noticed was that these corrections also claimed that ‘the UK is not a party’ to the conflict in Yemen. This claim is defied by various news reports in the public domain.

British foreign policy is in extreme mode, whereby Ministers do not believe they should be accountable to the public. This is the very definition of dictatorship. Although in some of these wars, Britain is combatting terrorist forces that are little short of evil, it is no minor matter that several UK interventions have encouraged these very same forces and prolonged wars, all the while being regularly disastrous for the people of the region. Britain’s absence of democracy needs serious and urgent challenging.

Advertisements

The Sixth Crusade


The Sixth Crusade

by Jim Kirwan

In 1095 the first of five Crusades were initiated against the Muslim world, by the Pope, to wipe out the Muslim world for Christendom.

The first five fake Crusades all failed.

This time the Khazarian Supremacy together with their lackeys have now declared their privatized version of a Sixth Crusade against the planet:

But this time they’ve created their own “Conquest Army” to wipe out both Christianity and the Muslim World in today’s global blood-bath that has never before been seen, much less experienced. Those who have tried to rewrite all of ancient history are now trying to erase the past for all of us still living today. This is what has been behind the ongoing attempt to liquidate the many thousands of years that remain in the ruins of all the ancient civilizations that once marked the rise and fall of man throughout time from the eleventh century to the present day…

All of this to supposedly pave the way for their one-world wet dream of a privatized corporate oligarchy to enslave every man woman and child on the planet. The wholesale slaughter of the nations of the world has already begun.

The crucible for all of this, this time, has been shifted after already having moved on from Afghanistan and Iraq through Libya to have arrived in Syria for a struggle to the last drop of blood, that will supposedly be achieved by the current global-army of Conquest, which supposedly cannot be stopped. But for the record that “war” has been going on now for over four years, and the ‘Conquest-Army’ is still failing to crush their must-conquer-targets which have always been first Syria and then Iran. CrossTalk http://rt.com/shows/crosstalk/258701-syria-civil-war-is/

Since the Irresistible-force still refuses to factor in Russia or the global failures of the EU, it’s more than likely that they will lose this confrontation once again ­ but that could easily force the Barbarians to shift the whole process over into nuclear war. The creatures in the global-supremacy cabals are fixated on the money, and that addiction has blinded them to all the real facts of life, which are in total opposition to the ‘Full Spectrum Dominance which they continue to seek: While the world did nothing!

All of this became crystal clear to the world when we blatantly murdered Libya and denounced both Gadhafi and his works as “evil”.

Thanks to David Dees for these excellent illustrations ­ We can now see what we did to Gaddafi, and what we got in return was nothing but ruination:

This time around there’s yet another redevelopment of a very old idea: Their semi-eternal Death Squads which they used to get this far in the first place. These same ‘death-squads were used to start the wars in what used to be Yugoslavia, and now what is being prepared in Romania as well as Ukraine, where of course they’re beginning to be forced into another massive collapse because the whole structure of the failed state of Ukraine that’s been a star-crossed failure, from the day it was artificially begun, with the lies beneath the murders in the Maidan-slaughter that lacked all legitimacy from the very beginning. And that farce must come to an ignoble end within the next few months ­ because there’s no way out of the Labyrinth they’ve built for themselves, from the very beginning, with no facts at all behind any of their continuing and wildly bizarre proclamations that have no basis in any reality – anywhere except in the Dreams of Madness to which the fake leadership of Kiev still clings.

The Death Squads worked. so long as they were only used against smaller nations, but in the wider world they’re as transparent as glass, by whatever name they are used and they cannot be successfully used against major nations no matter how degraded those states might be at the moment. The fact that another attempt is being made now to restart the Kosovo wars to block the next European pipeline, from Russia, will not succeed, once the world can see what the endgame there is really all about. Because while “Sanctions” are only impacting the EU states and refugees are now flooding Europe, country by country: Not even Death Squads can stop the natural movements of millions of people, towards freedom and away from global-slavery, that was set in motion by the first thirty or so “Color-Revolutions” that have finally lost the ‘cloaking-devices’ they once enjoyed:. Because all of this is going the same way now, just as the U.S. refuses to count the fifty-plus millions of immigrants which the government is bringing in to undermine this country, the same thing is coming up for all the Western-leaning people that supported the slaughter of Libya, just as they supported the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq in the last fifteen years of this global war. This is happening because the victims of those wars did not all die and far too many have survived to create the latest aspect to the global-nightmare that will not end until the Oligarch’s pay for their crimes against humanity ­ on the guillotine or in the streets where they will be stripped and murdered for what they thought they had protected themselves from; with a fake global-government where they and only they would remain immune to the rage and outrage that’s beginning to make its comeback now.

This lawless and barbaric place cannot survive in this condition where such a miniscule few can control all the life upon this planet ­ any more than they can actually control the winds, the weather or the planet that has been awakened to the crisis from which no one will remain unscathed. . . The human race needs the earth, the seas and the skies to survive, but nature has no need of mankind in order to continue. Nature will adapt where mankind will probably perish. That lesson is something that no Oligarch, Banker or Khazarian Supremacist has ever been able to understand, much less the global-military-industrial-complex that will be the first victim of this world without a functioning currency.

The reason that all of this will and indeed must fail is because the Global-Supremacy’s that have decided to “own” the world, have never had any plans to rebuild the ruins they have left to the survivors. They create nothing. They destroy everything they touch, while they promise freedom & democracy while bringing torture, dismemberment, rape and the chains of eternal slavery.

These ‘sages’ that ‘determine’ everything now by money, money, and only money, are about to get that rude awakening that always follows whenever ‘global-leadership’ disappears or becomes addicted to the fallacy’s of power without vision or humanity to guide whatever passes for “power” – in whichever world we end up dying in. Like it or not the world of humanity demands that people pursue their desire “to thrive as well as to survive” – because there is far more to this life than just money, or as someone once said: “We have become so poor, that the only thing we have is money”. All of that is what is about to be put on the public chopping block, once more ­ ask yourself where will you be once this begins to happen, because each of us must choose which side we want to defend?

Islamic State is the Cancer of Modern Capitalism


Islamic State is the Cancer of Modern Capitalism

By Nafeez Ahmed
Islamic State is the Cancer of Modern Capitalism

The brutal ‘Islamic State’ is a symptom of a deepening crisis of civilisation premised on fossil fuel addiction, which is undermining Western hegemony and unravelling state power across the Muslim world

Debate about the origins of the Islamic State (IS) has largely oscillated between two extreme perspectives. One blames the West. IS is nothing more than a predictable reaction to the occupation of Iraq, yet another result of Western foreign policy blowback. The other attributes IS’s emergence purely to the historic or cultural barbarism of the Muslim world, whose backward medieval beliefs and values are a natural incubator for such violent extremism.

The biggest elephant in the room as this banal debate drones on is material infrastructure. Anyone can have bad, horrific, disgusting ideas. But they can only be fantasies unless we find a way to manifest them materially in the world around us.

So to understand how the ideology that animates IS has managed to garner the material resources to conquer an area bigger than the United Kingdom, we need to inspect its material context more closely.

Follow the money

The foundations for al-Qaeda’s ideology were born in the 1970s. Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden‘s Palestinian mentor, formulated a new theory justifying continuous, low-intensity war by dispersed mujahideen cells for a pan-Islamist state. Azzam’s violent Islamist doctrines were popularised in the context of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

As is well-known, the Afghan mujahideen networks were trained and financed under the supervision of the CIA, MI6 and the Pentagon. The Gulf states provided huge sums of money, while Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) liaised on the ground with the militant networks being coordinated by Azzam, bin Laden, and others.

The Reagan administration, for instance, provided $2 billion to the Afghan mujahideen, which was matched by another $2 billion from Saudi Arabia.

In Afghanistan, USAID invested millions of dollars to supply schoolchildren with “textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings”, according to the Washington Post. Theology justifying violent jihad was interspersed with “drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines”. The textbooks even extolled the heavenly rewards if children were to “pluck out the eyes of the Soviet enemy and cut off his legs”.

The conventional wisdom is that this disastrous configuration of Western-Muslim world collaboration in financing Islamist extremists ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union. As I said in Congressional testimony a year after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, the conventional wisdom is false.

Protection racket

A classified US intelligence report revealed by journalist Gerald Posner confirmed that the US was fully aware of a secret deal struck in April 1991 between Saudi Arabia and bin Laden, then under house arrest. Under the deal, bin Laden could leave the kingdom with his funding and supporters, and continue to receive financial support from the Saudi royal family, on one condition: that he refrain from targeting and destabilising the Saudi kingdom itself.

Far from being a distant observer of this covert agreement, the US and Britain were active participants.

Saudi Arabia’s massive oil supply underpins the health and growth of the global economy. We could not afford it to be destabilised. It was pro quid pro: to protect the kingdom, allow it to fund bin Laden outside the kingdom.

As British historian Mark Curtis documents meticulously in his sensational book, Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam, the US and UK government continued to covertly support al-Qaeda-affiliated networks in Central Asia and the Balkans after the Cold War, for much the same reasons as before – countering Russian, and now Chinese, influence to extend US hegemony over the global capitalist economy. Saudi Arabia, the world’s leading oil hub, remained the conduit for this short-sighted Anglo-American strategy.

Bosnia

A year after the 1993 World Trade Center (WTC) bombing, Curtis reports, Osama bin Laden opened an office in Wembley, London, under the name of the Advice and Reformation Committee, from which he coordinated worldwide extremist activity.

Around the same time, the Pentagon was airlifting thousands of al-Qaeda mujahideen from Central Asia into Bosnia, in violation of the UN’s arms embargo, according to Dutch intelligence files. They were accompanied by US special forces. The “Blind Sheikh”, convicted of the WTC bombing, had been deeply involved in recruiting and dispatching al-Qaeda fighters into Bosnia.

Afghanistan

From around 1994, all the way until 9/11, US military intelligence along with Britain, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, covertly supplied arms and funds to the al-Qaeda-harbouring Taliban.

In 1997, Amnesty International complained about “close political links” between the incumbent Taliban militia, who had recently conquered Kabul, and the US. The human rights group referred to credible “accounts of the madrasas (religious schools) which the Taleban attended in Pakistan,” indicating that “these links may have been established at the very inception of the Taleban movement.”

One such account, reported Amnesty, came from the late Benazir Bhutto – then Pakistan’s Prime Minister – who “affirmed that the madrasas had been set up by Britain, the United States, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan during the Jihad, the Islamic resistance against Soviet occupation of Afghanistan”. Under US tutelage, Saudi Arabia was still funding those madrasas.

US government-drafted textbooks designed to indoctrinate Afghan children into violent jihad during the Cold War, now approved by the Taliban, became part of the Afghan school system’s core curriculum, and were used extensively in militant madrasas in Pakistan being funded by Saudi Arabia and the Pakistani ISI with US support.

Both the Clinton and Bush administrations were hoping to use the Taliban to establish a proxy client regime in the country similar to its Saudi benefactor. The vain hope, clearly ill-conceived, was that a Taliban government would provide the stability necessary to install a Trans-Afghan pipeline (TAPI) supplying Central Asian gas to South Asia, while side-lining Russia, China and Iran.

Those hopes were dashed three months before 9/11 when the Taliban rejected US proposals. The TAPI project was subsequently stalled due to the Taliban’s intransigent control of Kandahar and Quetta, but has been shepherded along by the Obama administration and is now being finalised.

Kosovo

NATO continued to sponsor al-Qaeda-affiliated networks in Kosovo by the late 1990s, reports Mark Curtis, when US and British special forces supplied arms and training to Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) rebels who included mujahideen recruits. Among them was a rebel cell headed by Muhammad al-Zawahiri, the brother of bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman, who now leads al-Qaeda.

In the same period, Osama and Ayman coordinated the 1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania from bin Laden’s office in London.

There was some good news, though: NATO’s interventions in the Balkans, accompanied by the disintegration of socialist Yugoslavia, paved the way to integrate the region into Western Europe, privatise local markets, and establish new regimes supportive of the Trans-Balkan pipeline to transport oil and gas from Central Asia to the West.

The Middle East redirection

Even after 9/11 and 7/7, US and British addiction to cheap fossil fuels to sustain global capitalist expansion led us to deepen our alliance with extremists.

Around the middle of the last decade, Anglo-American military intelligence began supervising Gulf state financing, once again led by Saudi Arabia, to Islamist extremist networks across the Middle East and Central Asia, to counter Iranian Shiite influence in the region. Beneficiaries of this enterprise included al-Qaeda-affiliated militant and extremist groups from Iraq to Syria to Lebanon – a veritable arc of Islamist terror.

Once again, Islamist militants would be unwittingly fostered as an agent of US hegemony in the face of rising geopolitical rivals.

As Seymour Hersh revealed in the New Yorker in 2007, this “redirection” of policy was about weakening not just Iran, but also Syria – where US and Saudi largess went to support the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, among other opposition groups. Both Iran and Syria, of course, were closely aligned with Russia and China.

Libya

In 2011, NATO’s military intervention to topple the Gaddafi regime followed hot on the heels of extensive support to Libyan mercenaries who were, in fact, members of al-Qaeda’s official branch in Libya. France had been reportedly offered 35 percent control of Libya’s oil in exchange for French support to insurgents.

After the intervention, European, British and American oil giants were “perfectly poised to take advantage” of “commercial opportunities”, according to Professor David Anderson of Oxford University. Lucrative deals with NATO members could “release Western Europe from the stranglehold of high-pricing Russia producers who currently dominate their gas supply”.

Secret intelligence reports showed that NATO-backed rebels had strong ties to al-Qaeda. The CIA also used Libya’s Islamists militants to funnel heavy weapons to rebels in Syria.

A Canadian intelligence report from 2009 described the rebel stronghold of eastern Libya as an “epicentre of Islamist extremism”, from which “extremist cells” operated in the region – the same region, according to David Pugliese in the Ottawa Citizen, that was being “defended by a Canadian-led NATO coalition”. Pugliese reported that the intelligence report confirmed “several Islamist insurgent groups” were based in eastern Libya, many of whom were also “urging followers to fight in Iraq”. Canadian pilots even joked privately that they were part of al-Qaeda’s air force, “since their bombing runs helped to pave the way for rebels aligned with the terrorist group”.

According to Pugliese, Canadian intelligence specialists sent a prescient briefing report dated 15 March 2011 to NATO senior officers just days before the intervention began. “There is the increasing possibility that the situation in Libya will transform into a long-term tribal/civil war,” they wrote. “This is particularly probable if opposition forces receive military assistance from foreign militaries.”

As we know, the intervention went ahead regardless.

Syria

For nearly the last half-decade at least, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Jordan and Turkey have all provided extensive financial and military support primarily to al-Qaeda-linked Islamist militant networks that spawned today’s “Islamic State”. This support has been provided in the context of an accelerating anti-Assad strategy led by the United States.

Competition to dominate potential regional pipeline routes involving Syria, as well as untapped fossil fuel resources in Syria and the eastern Mediterranean – at the expense of Russia and China – have played a central role in motivating this strategy.

Former French foreign minister Roland Dumas revealed that in 2009, British Foreign Office officials told him that UK forces were already active in Syria attempting to foment rebellion.

The ongoing operation has been closely supervised under an on-going covert programme coordinated jointly by American, British, French and Israeli military intelligence. Evidence in the public record confirms that US support alone to anti-Assad fighters totalled about $2 billion as of the end of 2014.

While the conventional wisdom insists that this support to Islamist extremists was mistaken, the facts speak for themselves. Classified CIA assessments showed that US intelligence knew how US-led support to anti-Assad rebels through its Middle East allies consistently ended up in the hands of the most virulent extremists. But it continued.

Pentagon officials were also aware in the year before IS launched its campaign of conquest inside Iraq, that the vast majority of “moderate” Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebels were, in fact, Islamist militants. It was, officials admitted, increasingly impossible to draw fixed lines between “moderate” rebels and extremists linked to al-Qaeda or IS, due to the fluid interactions between them.

Increasingly, frustrated FSA fighters have joined the ranks of Islamist militants in Syria, not for ideological reasons, but simply due to their superior military capabilities. So far, almost all “moderate” rebel groups recently trained and armed by the US are disbanding and continuously defecting to al-Qaeda and IS to fight Assad.

Turkey

The US is now coordinating the continued supply of military aid to “moderate” rebels to fight IS, through a new arrangement with Turkey. Yet it is an open secret that Turkey, throughout this entire period, has been directly sponsoring al-Qaeda and IS as part of a geopolitical gambit to crush Kurdish opposition groups and bring down Assad.

Much has been made of Turkey’s “lax” efforts to curb foreign fighters crossing its territory to join IS in Syria. Turkey has recently responded by announcing that it has stopped thousands.

Both claims are mythical: Turkey has deliberately harboured and funnelled support to IS and al-Qaeda in Syria.

Last summer, Turkish journalist Denis Kahraman interviewed an IS fighter receiving medical treatment in Turkey, who told him: “Turkey paved the way for us. Had Turkey not shown such understanding for us, the Islamic State would not be in its current place. It [Turkey] showed us affection. Large number of our mujahedeen [jihadis] received medical treatment in Turkey.”

Earlier this year, authenticated official documents of the Turkish military (the Gendarmerie General Command) were leaked online, showing that Turkey’s intelligence services (MIT) had been caught in Adana by military officers transporting missiles, mortars and anti-aircraft ammunition via truck “to the al-Qaeda terror organisation” in Syria.

“Moderate” FSA rebels are involved in the MIT-sponsored Turkish-Islamist support network. One told the Telegraph that he “now runs safe houses in Turkey for foreign fighters looking to join Jabhat al-Nusra and Isil [Islamic State].”

Some officials have spoken up about this, but to no avail. Last year, Claudia Roth, deputy speaker of the German parliament, expressed shock that NATO is allowing Turkey to harbour an IS camp in Istanbul, facilitate weapons transfers to Islamist militants through its borders, and tacitly support IS oil sales. Nothing happened.

The US-led anti-IS coalition is funding IS 

The US and Britain have not only remained strangely silent about the complicity of their coalition partner in sponsoring the enemy. They have tightened up the partnership with Turkey, and are working avidly with the same state-sponsor of IS to train “moderate” rebels to fight IS.

It is not just Turkey. Last year, US Vice President Joe Biden told a White House press conference that Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Turkey among others, were pouring “hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, thousands of tons, of weapons” into “al-Nusra and al-Qaeda and the extremist elements of jihadis” as part of a “proxy Sunni-Shia war”. He added that, for all intents and purposes, it is not possible to identify “moderate” rebels in Syria.

There is no indication that this funding has dried up. As late as September 2014, even as the US began coordinating airstrikes against IS, Pentagon officials revealed that they knew their own coalition allies were still funding IS.

That month, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was asked by Senator Lindsay Graham during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing whether he knew of “any major Arab ally that embraces Isil [IS]?” He said: “I know major Arab allies who fund them.”

Despite this knowledge, the US government has not merely refused to sanction these allies, but rewarded them by including them in the coalition that is supposed to fight the very extremist entity they are funding. Worse, the same allies continue to be granted ample leeway to select fighters to receive training.

Key members of our anti-IS coalition are bombing IS from the air while sponsoring them behind the scenes – with the knowledge of the Pentagon.

The arc of Muslim state-failure

In Iraq and Syria, where IS was born, the devastation of society due to prolonged conflict cannot be underestimated. Western military invasion and occupation of Iraq, replete with torture and indiscriminate violence, played an undeniable role in paving the way for the emergence of extreme reactionary politics. Before Western intervention, al-Qaeda was nowhere to be seen in the country.

The continual input of vast quantities of money to Islamist extremist networks, hundreds of billions of dollars worth of material resources that no one has yet been able to quantify in its totality – coordinated by the same nexus of Western and Muslim governments – has over the last half century had a deeply destabilising impact. IS is the surreal, post-modern culmination of this sordid history.

The West’s anti-IS coalition in the Muslim world consists of repressive regimes whose domestic policies have widened inequalities, crushed legitimate dissent, tortured peaceful political activists, and stoked deep-seated resentments. They are the same allies that have, and are continuing to fund IS, with the knowledge of Western intelligence agencies.

Yet they are doing so in regional circumstances that can only be described as undergoing, in the last decade, escalating converging crises. As Princeton’s Professor Bernard Haykel said: “I see ISIS as a symptom of a much deeper structural set of problems in the Sunni Arab world… [It has] to do with politics. With education, and the lack thereof. With authoritarianism. With foreign intervention. With the curse of oil … I think that even if ISIS were to disappear, the underlying causes that produce ISIS would not disappear. And those would have to be addressed with decades of policy and reforms and changes – not just by the West, but also by Arab societies as well.”

Yet as we saw with the Arab Spring, these structural problems have been exacerbated by a perfect storm of interlinked political, economic, energy and environmental crises, all of which are being incubated by a deepening crisis of global capitalism.

With the region suffering from prolonged droughts, failing agriculture, decline in oil revenues due to domestic peak oil, economic corruption and mismanagement compounded by neoliberal austerity, and so on, local states have begun to collapse. From Iraq to Syria, from Egypt to Yemen, the same nexus of climate, energy and economic crises are unravelling incumbent governments.

Alienation in the West

Although the West is far more resilient to these interconnected global crises, entrenched inequalities in the US, Britain and Western Europe – which have a disproportionate effect on ethnic minorities, women and children – are worsening.

In Britain, nearly 70 percent of ethnically South Asian Muslims, and two-thirds of their children, live in poverty. Just under 30 percent of British Muslim young people aged from 16-24 years are unemployed. According to Minority Rights Group International, conditions for British Muslims in terms of “access to education, employment and housing” have deteriorated in recent years, rather than improving. This has been accompanied by a “worrying rise in open hostility” from non-Muslim communities, and a growing propensity for police and security services to target Muslims disproportionately under anti-terror powers. Consistently negative reporting on Muslims by the media, coupled with grievances over justifiable perceptions of an aggressive and deceptive foreign policy in the Muslim world, compound the latter to create a prevailing sense of social exclusion associated with British Muslim identity.

It is the toxic contribution of these factors to general identity formation that is the issue – not each of the factors by themselves. Poverty alone, or discrimination alone, or anti-Muslim reporting alone, and so on, do not necessarily make a person vulnerable to radicalisation. But together these can forge an attachment to an identity that sees itself as alienated, frustrated and locked in a cycle of failure.

The prolongation and interaction of these problems can contribute to the way Muslims in Britain from various walks of life begin to view themselves as a whole. In some cases, it can generate an entrenched sense of separation and alienation from, and disillusionment with wider society. This exclusionary identity, and where it takes a person, will depend on that person’s specific environment, experiences and choices.
Prolonged social crises can lay the groundwork for the rise of toxic, xenophobic ideologies on all sides. Such crises undermine conventional mores of certainty and stability rooted in established notions of identity and belonging.

While vulnerable Muslims might turn to gang culture, or worse, Islamist extremism, vulnerable non-Muslims might adopt their own exclusionary identities linked with extremist groups like the English Defence League, or other far-right extremist networks.

For more powerful elite groups, their sense of crisis may inflame militaristic neoconservative ideologies that sanitise incumbent power structures, justify the status quo, whitewash the broken system that sustains their power, and demonise progressive and minority movements.

In this maelstrom, the supply of countless billions of dollars to Islamist extremist networks in the Middle East with a penchant for violence, empowers groups that previously lacked any local constituency.

As multiple crises converge and intensify, undermining state stability and inflaming grievances, this massive input of resources to Islamist ideologues can pull angry, alienated, vulnerable individuals into their vortex of xenophobic extremism. The end-point of that process is the creation of monsters.

Dehumanisation

While these factors escalated regional vulnerability to crisis levels, the US and Britain’s lead role after 9/11 in coordinating covert Gulf state financing of extremist Islamist militants across the region has poured gasoline on the flames.

The links these Islamist networks have in the West meant that domestic intelligence agencies have periodically turned blind eyes to their followers and infiltrators at home, allowing them to fester, recruit and send would-be fighters abroad.

This is why the Western component of IS, though much smaller than the number of fighters joining from neighbouring countries, remains largely impervious to meaningful theological debate. They are not driven by theology, but by the insecurity of a fractured identity and psychology.

It is here, in the meticulously calibrated recruitment methods used by IS and its supporting networks in the West, that we can see the role of psychological indoctrination processes fine-tuned through years of training under Western intelligence agencies. These agencies have always been intimately involved in the crafting of violent Islamist indoctrination tools.

In most cases, recruitment into IS is achieved by being exposed to carefully crafted propaganda videos, developed using advanced production methods, the most effective of which are replete with real images of bloodshed inflicted on Iraqi, Afghan and Palestinian civilians by Western firepower, or on Syrian civilians by Assad.

The constant exposure to such horrifying scenes of Western and Syrian atrocities can often have an effect similar to what might happen if these scenes had been experienced directly: that is, a form of psychological trauma that can even result in post-traumatic stress.

Such cult-like propaganda techniques help to invoke overwhelming emotions of shock and anger, which in turn serve to shut down reason and dehumanise the “Other”. The dehumanisation process is brought to fruition using twisted Islamist theology. What matters with this theology is not its authenticity, but its simplicity. This can work wonders on a psyche traumatised by visions of mass death, whose capacity for reason is immobilised with rage.

This is why the reliance on extreme literalism and complete decontextualisation is such a common feature of Islamist extremist teachings: because it seems, to someone credulous and unfamiliar with Islamic scholarship, to be literally true at first glance.

Building on decades of selective misinterpretation of Islamic texts by militant ideologues, sources are carefully mined and cherry-picked to justify the political agenda of the movement: tyrannical rule, arbitrary mass murder, subjugation and enslavement of women, and so on, all of which become integral to the very survival and expansion of the “state”.

As the main function of introducing extreme Islamist theological reasoning is to legitimise violence and sanction war, it is combined with propaganda videos that promise what the vulnerable recruit appears to be missing: glory, brotherhood, honour, and the promise of eternal salvation – no matter what crimes or misdemeanours one may have committed in the past.

Couple this with the promise of power – power over one’s enemies, power over Western institutions that have purportedly suppressed one’s Muslim brothers and sisters, power over women – and the appeal of IS, if its religious garb and claims of Godliness can be made convincing enough, can be irresistible.

What this means is that IS’s ideology, while important to understand and refute, is not the driving factor in its origins, existence and expansion. It is merely the opium of the people that it feeds to itself, and its prospective followers.

Ultimately, IS is a cancer of modern industrial capitalism in meltdown, a fatal by-product of our unwavering addiction to black gold, a parasitical symptom of escalating civilisational crises across both the Muslim and Western worlds. Until the roots of these crises are addressed, IS and its ilk are here to stay.

 

NATO is Building Up for War


NATO is Building Up for War

undefined

The German city of Frankfurt is continental Europe’s largest financial center and host to the country’s Stock Exchange, countless other financial institutions, and the headquarters of the European Central Bank (ECB) which is responsible for administering the monetary policy of the 18-nation Eurozone. The place is awash with money, as demonstrated by the plush new ECB office building which is costing a fortune.

The original price of the bank’s enormous palace was supposed to be 500 million euros, about 550 million dollars, but the bill has now been admitted as €1.3 billion (£930 m; $1.4 bn). This absurdly over-expensive fiasco was directed by the people who are supposed to steer the financial courses of 18 nations and their half billion unfortunate citizens. If the ECB displays similar skill sets in looking after Europe’s money as it has in controlling the cost of constructing its huge twin-tower headquarters, then Europe is in for a rocky time.

Intriguingly, the Bank isn’t alone in contributing to Europe’s bureaucratic building boom. There is another Europe-based organization of equal ambition, pomposity and incompetence which is building a majestically expensive and luxurious headquarters with a mammoth cost overrun about which it is keeping very quiet indeed.

The perpetrator of this embarrassing farce is NATO, the US-Canada-European North Atlantic Treaty Organization which is limping out of Afghanistan licking its wounds, having been fighting a bunch of sandal-wearing rag-clad amateur irregulars who gave the hi-tech forces of the West a very hard time in a war whose outcome was predictable. But the debacle hasn’t dimmed the vision of the zealous leaders of NATO who are confronting Russia in order to justify the existence of their creaking, leaking, defeated dinosaur. Their problem is not only do they lose wars, but they then look for another one to fight — to be directed from a glittery new and vastly expensive building whose cost has soared above all estimates.

Just like NATO’s wars.

NATO’s operation “Unified Protector” to overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi involved a massive aerial blitz of 9,658 airstrikes which ended with the gruesome murder of Gadhafi — and caused collapse of Libya into an omnishambles where fanatics of the barbarous Islamic State are now establishing themselves.

In spite of the horror of NATO’s Libyan catastrophe one does have to have a quiet smile about Ivo H. Daalder and James G Stavridis whose deeply researched analysis in the journal Foreign Affairs in 2012 was titled “NATO’s Victory in Libya.” These sages declared that “NATO’s operation in Libya has rightly been hailed as a model intervention . . . NATO’s involvement in Libya demonstrated that the alliance remains an essential source of stability . . . NATO may not be able to replicate its success in Libya in another decade. NATO members must therefore use the Chicago summit to strengthen the alliance by ensuring that the burden sharing that worked so well in Libya — and continues in Afghanistan today — becomes the rule, not the exception.”

Not much is working well in either Libya or Afghanistan two years after the Daalder-Stavridis advocacy of “burden sharing” and it is obvious that NATO has been the opposite of a “source of stability” in both unfortunate countries.

In October 2005 I wrote that “NATO is to increase its troop numbers in Afghanistan to 15,000 and its secretary-general states that instead of acting as a peacekeeping force it will assume the combat role of US troops, which is insane . . .  The insurgency in Afghanistan will continue until foreign troops leave, whenever that might be. After a while, the government in Kabul will collapse and there will be anarchy until a brutal, ruthless, drug-rich warlord achieves power. He will rule the country as it has always been ruled by Afghans: by threats, religious ferocity, deceit, bribery, and outright savagery when the latter can be practiced without retribution. And the latest foreign occupation will become just another memory.”

The number of US-NATO troops in Afghanistan has been reduced from a high of 130,000 to 13,000, of which some 10,000 are US, but NATO’s new headquarters building in Brussels is expanding in both size and cost. The budget for the immense complex was approved at 460 million Euros (500 million US dollars) in 2010 but has now surged to over 1.25 billion Euros, about 1.4 billion dollars.

Germany’s Der Spiegel reported in January that the scandal of the cost overrun was being kept secret by all governments contributing to this redundant organization. A leaked cable from Germany’s ambassador explained that at a meeting of NATO representatives last December they “pointed to the disastrous effect on the image of the alliance if construction were to stop and if NATO appeared to be incapable of punctually completing a construction project that was decided at the NATO summit of government leaders in April 1999 in Washington. The risk of a further cost increase is already palpable.”

The solution to NATO’s self-imposed image problem was simple : the people responsible for managing the affairs of a military alliance involving 28 countries, 3.5 million combatants and 5,000 nuclear weapons decided, as asked by the staff of its Secretary General, to deal with the matter “confidentially.” In other words, the cost overruns and delays in construction are being deliberately concealed from the public in the hope that NATO’s executives will not appear incompetent.

Meantime, while trying to conceal their flaws, faults and failings in management of basic administrative affairs, NATO’s chiefs are squaring up to Russia in an attempt to persuade the world that President Putin is about to mount an invasion from the east. The focal point of NATO’s contrived alarm is the corrupt and chaotic regime in power in Ukraine, which has serious disagreements with Russia and is therefore energetically supported by the United States to the point of distortion, menace, and mendacity.

As reported in the UK’s Daily Telegraph on March 4, the commander of US troops in Europe, General Frederick “Ben” Hodges, has accused Russia of having 12,000 troops inside eastern Ukraine, which was irresponsible nonsense.

Hodges was formerly the army’s Congressional Liaison Officer in Washington where he obviously acquired a taste for political grandstanding, as in a political speech of the sort that generals have no right to make he declared that “We have to raise the cost for Putin. Right now he has 85 per cent domestic support. But when mothers start seeing their sons come home dead, when the price goes up, domestic support goes down,” which was as offensive as it was hostile.

In February the Wall Street Journal reported Hodges as saying “I believe the Russians are mobilizing right now for a war that they think is going to happen in five or six years—not that they’re going to start a war in five or six years, but I think they are anticipating that things are going to happen, and that they will be in a war of some sort, of some scale, with somebody within the next five or six years.” Just what President Putin was supposed to make of that is anyone’s guess — but it is certain that Hodges’ bellicose meanderings did nothing to persuade Moscow that there would be any attempt by the US-NATO coalition to modify its policy of uncompromising enmity.

Other pronouncements by NATO leaders have been equally threatening and intended to convince the public of western Europe that Russia attacked Ukraine.

But even if Russia had indeed invaded Ukraine, it would have had nothing whatever to do with anyone else.

The US-NATO coalition willfully ignores the fact that Ukraine is not a member of either the European Union or NATO and has no treaty of any sort with any nation in the world that would require provision of political, economic or military support in the event of a bilateral dispute with any other country. Yet NATO has seized upon the Ukraine-Russia discord to justify its policy of unrelenting hostility to Moscow.

NATO should have been disbanded at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union because that threat was the sole reason for its existence; but it decided to multiply membership and extend its military presence closer and closer to Russia’s borders. There is little wonder that Russia is apprehensive about NATO’s intentions, as the muscle-flexing coalition lurches towards conflict.

NATO’S Supreme Commander, US General Breedlove, has also contributed greatly to tension and fear in Europe by issuing dire warnings about Russia’s supposed maneuvers. On March 5 he indulged in fantasy by claiming, without a shred of evidence and no subsequent proof, that Russia had deployed “well over a thousand combat vehicles” along with “combat forces, some of their most sophisticated air defense, battalions of artillery” within Ukraine. This pronouncement was similar to his downright lie of November 18, 2014, when he told the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that there were “regular Russian army units in eastern Ukraine.”

The swell of anti-Russian propaganda, confrontation and attempted intimidation by NATO has increased, and if it continues to do so it is likely that Moscow will take action, thereby upping the stakes and the danger even more. It is time that NATO’s nations came to terms with the reality that Russia is a major international power with legitimate interests in its own region. Moscow is not going to bow the knee in the face of immature threats by sabre-rattling US generals and their swaggering acolytes. It is time for NATO to forge ties rather than destroy them — and to build bridges rather than glitzy office blocks.

EURONEWS & GUARDIAN ADVERTISE TERRORISTS OF AL QAEDA ABDULHAKIM BELHAJ AS GOOD POLITICIAN SHAME ON YOU!


EURONEWS & GUARDIAN ADVERTISE TERRORISTS OF AL QAEDAABDULHAKIMBELHAJ AS GOOD POLITICIAN SHAME ON YOU!

I never thought it will come a day that I would see all Western News Media GROOMING a terrorist as a good man and politician for Libya. It seems to me that the west are copying the policy of Israel when after 1945 they went to Palestine, with the blessings of the English and the Zionists to thank them blew up the Hotel David and blamed it onto the Palestinians. On July 22, 1946, the southwestern corner of the hotel was bombed in a terrorist attack by the militant Zionist group the Irgun. 91 people died and 45 people were injured. An earlier attempt by the Irgun to attack the hotel was foiled when the Haganah learned of it and warned the British authorities.[2] On May 4, 1948, when the British flag was lowered, the building became a Jewish stronghold. At the end of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the hotel found itself overlooking “no-man’s land” on the armistice line that divided Jerusalem into Israeli and Jordanian territory. It was purchased by the Dan Hotels chain in 1958. The film Exodus was shot at the hotel in 1960. When East Jerusalem was annexed by Israel following the 1967 Six-Day War, the hotel was expanded, with two additional floors.

Here is one of those terrorists:  Menakhem Vol’fovich Begin; 16 August 1913 – 9 March 1992) he was the leader of the Zionist militant group Irgun, the Revisionist breakaway from the larger Jewish paramilitary organization Haganah. He proclaimed a revolt, on 1 February 1944, against the British mandatory government, which was opposed by the Jewish Agency. As head of the Irgun, he targeted the British in Palestine.[1] During his leadership Irgun targeted the Arabs in the Deir Yassin massacre and in 1977 he was elected prime minister.

So now the Zionist propaganda internet newspapers are doing the same thing again in Libya, Let me remind you who ABDELHAKIM BELHAJ IS: Abdul Hakim Alkhoal de Belhaj graduate of civil engineering and after graduating immediately traveled to Afghanistan for jihad in 1988 participants in the Afghan jihad at the time and remained there for several years he joined the group the Libyan Islamic Fighting since the beginning of its establishment (any of the founders) at the beginning of the nineties, but After opening the cable left Afghanistan and traveled to twenty-two States, notably or rather most stay: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Sudan. He returned to Libya in 1994 and began to rearrange the group and trained mountain green for processing for jihad against the system, but the system is pre-empted the group multiplying training centers in 1995 and killed her prince Abdul Rahman Hattab and could Abdelhakim Belhadj to leave Libya and return to Afghanistan, known Abdul Hakim Belhaj Throughout his jihadist as ( Abdullah Sadiq). Was chosen Abdel Hakim Belhaj (Abdullah Sadiq) emir of the Libyan Fighting Group in the rearrangement of the ranks of the group in Afghanistan, and Abu Hazim was chosen as his deputy, Abu Mundhir al-Saadi as a legitimate administrator, Khalid Al-Sharif as a security administrator.Belhadj now occupies a large role in Libya’s new leadership in Tripoli Military Council which is fully controlled at Mitiga airport, where they are on the way import and export of arms and the entry of a large group of al-Qaeda members and leaders of his colleagues in Afghanistan.

And his close friends are: Abdul Hakim al Haseidi a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, one of the city of Derna, too, has left Libya in 1995 to settle its place in Afghanistan, before returning to stability in Libya, al Haseidi battalion commander «Martyrs of Abu Salim» Battalion, the largest in  Derna east of the country, and was seen as one of the most prominent leaders in the field. Despite his background and demanding permanent jihadist b «Arbitration Sharia» stepping cautiously al Haseidi the work towards closer political Mahmoud Jibril, one of the symbols of the liberal trend in the country. The former leader of the Libyan group condemns the attack on the U.S. embassy, ​​and says that «the American ambassador helped us during and after the revolution, and  this act must be punished. Mustafa Khalifa al-Saadi, who holds a master’s degree in Islamic Studies from Pakistan in 1999 and a member of Scholars Libya, collaborator and member of the Fatwa and preacher in several mosques in Tripoli and the throwing many seminars inflammatory and lessons, and accused of involvement with al-Qaeda, and that the latter Abu Salim prison from 2004 to 2010, until he was released on August 20, 2011, to take over now as Minister of the so-called care of the families of martyrs and missing persons. And last but not least is: friend Ghaithi was a cadre of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and confidant of bin Laden and a friend of Abdul Hakim Belhadj, was commissioned by the government functions to secure the border have been given large sums of money to spend to establish a private army, and therefore outside the scope of the General Staff and outside the budget of the Ministry of Defense and outside the control of the ministries of defense and interior, He accused by the defense minister of trying to assassinate the minister on the grounds that the Minister issued a decree for his dismissal from office.
Some Libyans living in the eastern regions The punitive ideas in fact spread over a wider range of that only Nhzareth between radical Islamic groups, regarding them as the fact that the United States failed in recognizing the wake attack Benghazi in September of the past, stressing not all extremists belonging to particular groups, which may create an opportunity for recruitment. On February 15 last, Dr. Awad Barasi Vice Chairman Minister said that after the appointment of the Minister of Awqaf government will open the door to dialogue with militants in Libya by clerics and imams inside and outside the country, there is no way to resolve only peaceful means and dialogue.

This is a quote of these terrorists who were brought by NATO, F.U.K.U.S AND ISRAEL and now they are trying to polish them into politicians: “Libya is a nation of Islam and Jihad. The light of Islam will shine forth from it despite the noses of everyone. The weapons are here and the Mujahideen from every corner of the earth are here with us and we have all the weaponry – that was prohibited before – with us now. We will not hesitate to use it against anyone who touches the land of Libya and that is the end of this discussion.”

GIF - 67.5 kb

Abdul Hakim Alkhoal de Belhaj

Historical leader of Al Qaeda in Libya, Abdel Hakim Belhadj, is now the military governor of “liberated” Tripoli and in charge of organizing the army of the “new Libya”. In the 80s, the CIA instigated Awatha al-Zuwawi to create an agency in Libya to recruit mercenaries for the jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan. As from 1986, recruits were trained in the Salman al-Farisi Libyan camp in Pakistan, under the authority of anti-Communist billionaire Osama bin Laden. When bin Laden moved to Sudan, the Libyan jihadists followed him there, and regrouped in a compound of their own. In 1994, Osama bin Laden dispatched Libyan jihadists back to their country to kill Muammar Gaddafi and reverse the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. All across “liberated” Cyrenaica, Al-Qaeda men have been spreading terror, resorting to massacre and torture; they have specialized in slitting the throats of Gaddafi sympathizers, eye-plucking and cutting off the breasts of immodest women. The lawyer for the Libyan Jamahiriya, Marcel Ceccaldi, has accused NATO of “complicity in war crimes.”

Belhaj and his gangs did this to the Libyans: While Belhaj claims that now he is a politician and does not give orders to massacres or the killing, beheading, kidnapping and rapping, here are some horrific Videos and  Pictures of his gang affiliates from 2011 till today:

Libya’s Abdulhakim Belhadj: “We are working to find a solution to end this crisis”

Four years of revolution have not left Libya the way its people were expecting. Huge political division and armed conflict are tearing the country apart. Lives have been lost and Libya’s resources wasted. It’s a situation that’s worrying the international community, particularly Libya’s neighbouring North African countries.

We discussed the goings-on in Libya with politician, military leader and president of the nationalist Islamist Al-Watan (‘Homeland’) Party, Abdulhakim Belhadj.

Belhadj’s backround lies in Salafi-Jihadism. He fought in Afghanistan and was later imprisoned in the US and Libya for establishing the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. Belhadj also participated in the downfall of the capital Tripoli during the 2011 uprising.

He now introduces himself as a politician and a moderate Islamist, calling for discussion and rejecting terrorism.

Mohammed Shaikhibrahim, euronews: “First of all, what is the current situation in Libya?”

Abdulhakim Belhadj: “The problem right now in Libya is totally political. This issue has resulted in Libya being divided into two parliaments: the ‘Libyan Parliament’ and the ‘National Congress’. This means there are two legislative bodies, two governments and even two armies.

“But, the reality we are witnessing on the ground plays the main role in what is happening in Libya these days.”

euronews: “So, you’re saying this conflict began as a political struggle, but turned into an armed conflict? Who started the battle? And how did it begin?”

Abdulhakim Belhadj: “It started when the retired General Khalifa Haftar came back onto the scene. He took part in a military coup on the ruling General National Congress (GNC), before forming the current parliament in Tobruk.

“So, General Haftar is the person who sparked this war. He contended that he was against terrorist organisations and groups working outside the boundaries of the law. But I would describe this general as an outlaw, because he began this war and failed to find a solution to the Libyan crisis.”

euronews: “Some reports say forces loyal to you started a war in the streets after you extended your control over Tripoli airport. They suggest you are the cause of this internal fighting. So, are you part of this armed conflict?”

Abdulhakim Belhadj “No, of course this is not true. And people observing the situation in Libya know who Abdulhakim Belhadj is. I resigned the presidency of the Tripoli Military Council, which comprised more than 23,000 fighters and my goal is not to cling on to this scene or position. Neither did I order any fighter to do so.

“I now lead a political party – the Al-Watan Party – and our main loyalty lies with the nation. We want to address the Libya question and put the interests of the country and its citizens first. This affiliation is now leading us to gather for discussion with all the Libyan factions.” ****(Here is how he created his political party: “In Tripoli, the military governor of Tripoli, the member of the Al Qaeda(= It’s Parent’s are CIA + MOSSAD) Abdelhakim Belhadj has funded the party ‘Hizb El Watan “with money from the Libyan people. It uses its influence to support this party. It uses the meeting rooms and hotels for meetings and gain the confidence of the Libyans.” So by stealing the money of the Libyan people he has changed his ways? really? Does a leopard changes his spots?)

euronews: “Do you accuse certain countries of being behind General Khalifa Haftar?”

Abdelhakim Belhadj: “Yes, certainly. And they don’t deny that. The United Arab Emirates, for example. We hoped they would offer support for the stability of Libya, that they would help to restore security and establish Libyan institutions. But we notice now that the UAE sends aircraft, weapons, ammunition and armour to those who are killing the Libyan people.” ***(Both Belhaj and Haftar are fighting for power plus they are financed by the same players the only difference Haftar is not that of a fanatic and UAE decided to bet on him. But all players meaning FUKUS, QATAR, TURKEY, UAE, SAUDI ARABIA are financing both.)

euronews: “If these countries are, as you say, supporting General Khalifa Haftar, which nations are supporting you?”

Abdulhakim Belhadj: “I want to reiterate that I am not one of those people who is armed, who is walking around with weapons. But, I can say that those who are leading the scene now and are carrying out the orders of the GNC are those who have had legitimacy from the beginning.

“For example, the military forces operating under the name of Fajr Libya – or Libyan Dawn – are valid. It has been in operation since the era of former Defence Minister Abdullah al-Thani, who gave the group authority. It took orders from Chief of Staff Abdul Salam Jadallah.” ****(They stopped being valid after the election of June 2014 when they lost the elections and now they are illegitimate and not internationally recognized, Lets not forget that Hassi is also a terrorist belongs to the HMS terrorist group and he presents himself as the prime minister of Tripoli…..)

euronews: “What is preventing you from meeting your opponents to negotiate an end to the crisis?”

Abdelhakim Belhadj: “We support this and we are calling for talks. We have sat down several times with international organisations, such as the United Nations, and we have introduced many initiatives to try to reach a solution. But, we don’t think that what the UN did recently at the conference in Geneva was effective.

“With due respect to all the international organisations supporting a resolution to this conflict, I would like to say: some of those who are invited to conferences such as the one in Geneva are far removed from what is influencing politics in Libya, especially the current ground operations.”

euronews: “As we understand, you are saying that you are just a political man, but what we do know is that you are in fact now ruling the city of Tripoli.”

Abdulhakim Belhadj: “That’s not completely true. Our only comment on the confusing scene in Libya is as follows: due to a series of weak governments in our country following the uprising of February 17, 2011, plans to develop security and military institutions have not been carried out. So, Libya is awash with militia groups and armed entities, which do not have the official support needed to legitimise them.

“So, the scene remains as it is now. Divisions and conflicts have occurred because some political groups have allowed armed entities to increase their control on state institutions in Tripoli.”

euronews: “Are you now a fighter under the guise of a politician?”

Abdulhakim Belhadj: “I stand with my brothers, who are seeking to find a solution to the Libyan crisis regardless of their political affiliation. Because, democracy means accepting the principle that people have different points of view. We have taken this on board.

“But, what I would like to confirm here is this: today we are working to find a solution to end this crisis – a crisis we do not want to continue or to be repeated.”

euronews: “Your background lies in salafi-jihadism. You fought in Afghanistan and were imprisoned in the US, then in Libyan jails because you established the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. You also participated in the downfall of Tripoli during the 2011 uprising. But now you introduce yourself as a politician and a moderate Islamist, calling for discussion and rejecting terrorism. What is the secret behind this drastic change?”

Abdulhakim Belhadj: “You are going back to our roots and the war we fought against the Muammar Gaddafi dictatorship. That battle was linked to the spatial and temporal conditions at the time.

“Because we were fighting a dictatorial regime in Libya, it was necessary for us to use weapons in order to save the Libyan people from Gaddafi’s rule.

“This was the role of the Group in the past, but I would like to clearly affirm that the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group has been terminated. It ceased to exist at the downfall of the Gaddafi regime.”

euronews: “You accused the British government of involvement in the torture you were subjected to at the hands of Libyan intelligence officials. Are you still filing legal action against them?”

Abdelhakim Belhadj: “Yes. I was tortured in Libyan prisons by Libyan intelligence officials, with the help of British intelligence. We discovered evidence of this after entering the security headquarters in Tripoli during the revolution. We found documents proving that the British Intelligence Agency MI-6 were involved, as well as some other people who handed me over to the Gaddafi regime.

“They put me at the mercy of a regime that does not respect human rights, and I would ask the British government to acknowledge this. It is proved by letters, which are signed by British agents. I ask them simply for an apology, then I will drop the matter.”

Copyright © 2015 euronews

If you want to find out more about who is Abdulhakim Belhaj is and who he works for, please read these links:

Al-Qaeda in Libya … documentary film ,

Al-Qaeda in Libya: Al-Qaeda in Libya to find a new home

How Al Qaeda men came to power in Libya,

Abdelhakim Belhadj finance his party with the Libyan people’s money! 

Al Ahram Al Arabi reveals the most dangerous of al Qaeda network in Libya,

U.S. CREATED a Terrorist Safe Haven In Libya

Libya is controlled by Al-Qaeda(/U.S.A)

Libyan Leaks: More Secret Documents Reveal Obama’s failure in Libya,

Intel shows Libyans feared Al-Qaeda fighters were armed by NATO in Gaddafi ouster

Al Qaeda Heads the General National Congress in Libya,

Al Qaeda Terrorists Live 5 Star Lifestyle while Libyans Suffer,

UPDATE LIBYA 2015 Legitimate Tribes winning, Belhaj / McCain Corruption Continues John McCain: Founding Father of the Terrorist Emirate of Benghazi,

Britain denies supporting any party in Libya confirms lack of recognition of the government of Hassi

MI5 TOPS ALL THE EXCUSES FOR THEIR FINANCING RADICALS LIKE ABDULHAKIM BELHAJ