US funded ouster of Egypt’s democratic President Morsi

US funded ouster of Egypt’s democratic President Morsi

by Daya Gamage

Pro-Morsi supporters on the rampage

US President Barack Obama recently stated the United States was not taking sides as Egypt’s crisis came to a head with the military overthrow of the democratically elected president.

His top diplomat, secretary of state John Kerry in an interview to Pakistani media on Thursday during his visit there gave a twist to the military takeover as “restoration of democracy.”

A review of dozens of US federal government documents shows Washington has quietly funded senior Egyptian opposition figures who called for toppling of the country’s now-deposed president Mohamed Morsi.

Documents obtained by the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley show the US channelled funding through a State Department program to promote democracy in the Middle East region. This program vigorously supported activists and politicians who have fomented unrest in Egypt, after autocratic president Hosni Mubarak was ousted in a popular uprising in February 2011.

The State Department’s program, dubbed by US officials as a “democracy assistance” initiative, is part of a wider Obama administration effort to try to stop the retreat of pro-Washington secularists, and to win back influence in Arab Spring countries that saw the rise of Islamists, who largely oppose US interests in the Middle East.

Activists bankrolled by the program include an exiled Egyptian police officer who plotted the violent overthrow of the Morsi government, an anti-Islamist politician who advocated closing mosques and dragging preachers out by force, as well as a coterie of opposition politicians who pushed for the ouster of the country’s first democratically elected leader, government documents show, according to the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley.

Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, interviews, and public records reveal Washington’s “democracy assistance” may have violated Egyptian law, which prohibits foreign political funding.

It may also have broken US government regulations that ban the use of taxpayers’ money to fund foreign politicians, or finance subversive activities that target democratically elected governments.

‘Bureau for Democracy’

Washington’s democracy assistance program for the Middle East is filtered through a pyramid of agencies within the State Department. Hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars is channeled through the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labour (DRL), The Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), USAID, as well as the Washington-based, quasi-governmental organisation the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Mohamed Morsi

In turn, those groups re-route money to other organisations such as the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute (NDI), and Freedom House, among others. The U.S. Federal documents show these groups have sent funds to certain organisations in Egypt, mostly run by senior members of anti-Morsi political parties who double as NGO activists.

The Middle East Partnership Initiative – launched by the Bush administration in 2002 in a bid to influence politics in the Middle East in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks – has spent close to $900m on democracy projects across the region, a federal grants database shows.

USAID manages about $1.4bn annually in the Middle East, with nearly $390m designated for democracy promotion, according to the Washington-based Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED).

The US government doesn’t issue figures on democracy spending per country, but Stephen McInerney, POMED’s executive director, estimated that Washington spent some $65m in 2011 and $25m in 2012. He said he expects a similar amount paid out this year.

A main conduit for channeling the State Department’s democracy funds to Egypt has been the National Endowment for Democracy. Federal documents show NED, which in 2011 was authorised an annual budget of $118m by Congress, funneled at least $120,000 over several years to an exiled Egyptian police officer who has for years incited violence in his native country.

This appears to be in direct contradiction to its Congressional mandate, which clearly states NED is to engage only in “peaceful” political change overseas.

Exiled policeman

Colonel Omar Afifi Soliman – who served in Egypt’s elite investigative police unit, notorious for human rights abuses – began receiving NED funds in 2008 for at least four years.

During that time he and his followers targeted Mubarak’s government, and Soliman later followed the same tactics against the military rulers who briefly replaced him.

Most recently Soliman set his sights on Morsi’s government.

Soliman, who has refugee status in the US, was sentenced in absentia last year for five years imprisonment by a Cairo court for his role in inciting violence in 2011 against the embassies of Israel and Saudi Arabia, two US allies.

He also used social media to encourage violent attacks against Egyptian officials, according to court documents and a review of his social media posts.

Opponents of President Morsi protest outside the presidential palace in Cairo

US Internal Revenue Service documents reveal that NED paid tens of thousands of dollars to Soliman through an organisation he created called Hukuk Al-Nas (People’s Rights), based in Falls Church, Virginia. Federal forms show he is the only employee.

After he was awarded a 2008 human rights fellowship at NED and moved to the US, Soliman received a second $50,000 NED grant in 2009 for Hukuk Al-Nas. In 2010, he received $60,000 and another $10,000 in 2011.

In an interview with the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley, Soliman reluctantly admitted he received US government funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, but complained it wasn’t enough. “It is like $2,000 or $2,500 a month,” he said. “Do you think this is too much? Obama wants to give us peanuts. We will not accept that.”

‘Pro bono advice’

NED’s website says Soliman spreads only nonviolent literature, and his group was set up to provide “immediate, pro bono legal advice through a telephone hotline, instant messaging, and other social networking tools”.

However, in Egyptian media interviews, social media posts and YouTube videos, Soliman encouraged the violent overthrow of Egypt’s government, then led by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party.

“Incapacitate them by smashing their knee bones first,” he instructed followers on Facebook in late June, as Morsi’s opponents prepared massive street rallies against the government. Egypt’s US-funded and trained military later used those demonstrations to justify its coup on July 3.

“Make a road bump with a broken palm tree to stop the buses going into Cairo, and drench the road around it with gas and diesel. When the bus slows down for the bump, set it all ablaze so it will burn down with all the passengers inside … God bless,” Soliman’s post read.

In late May he instructed, “Behead those who control power, water and gas utilities.”

Soliman removed several older social media posts after authorities in Egypt took notice of his subversive instructions, court documents show.

More recent Facebook instructions to his 83,000 followers range from guidelines on spraying roads with a mix of auto oil and gas – “20 litres of oil to 4 litres of gas – to how to thwart cars giving chase.

On a YouTube video, Soliman took credit for a failed attempt in December to storm the Egyptian presidential palace with handguns and Molotov cocktails to oust Morsi.

“We know he gets support from some groups in the US, but we do not know he is getting support from the US government. This would be news to us,” said an Egyptian embassy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to the media.

Funding other Morsi opponents

Other beneficiaries of US government funding are also opponents of the now-deposed president, some who had called for Morsi’s removal by force.

The Salvation Front main opposition bloc, of which some members received US funding, has backed street protest campaigns that turned violent against the elected government, in contradiction of many of the State Department’s own guidelines.

A long-time grantee of the National Endowment for Democracy and other US democracy groups is a 34-year old Egyptian woman, Esraa Abdel-Fatah, who sprang to notoriety during the country’s pitched battle over the new constitution in December 2012.

She exhorted activists to lay siege to mosques and drag from pulpits all Muslim preachers and religious figures who supported the country’s the proposed constitution, just before it went to a public referendum.

The act of besieging mosques has continued ever since, and several people have died in clashes defending them.

The U.S. Federal records show Abdel-Fatah’s NGO, the Egyptian Democratic Academy, received support from NED, MEPI and NDI, among other State Department-funded groups “assisting democracy”. Records show NED gave her organisation a one-year $75,000 grant in 2011.

Abdel-Fatah is politically active, crisscrossing Egypt to rally support for her Al-Dostor Party, which is led by former UN nuclear chief Mohamed El-Baradei, the most prominent figure in the Salvation Front.

She lent full support to the military takeover, and urged the West not call it a “coup”. “June 30 will be the last day of Morsi’s term,” she told the press a few weeks before the coup took place.

Courtesy: Asian Tribune




Libya Déjà Vu in Syria: Using Human Rights Organizations to Launch Wars

Libya Déjà Vu in Syria: Using Human Rights Organizations to Launch Wars

20.11.2011 | 21:11
Mahdi Darius NAZEMROAYA (Canada)

The virtually equivalent public and diplomatic discourse that unfolded against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya is at play against Damascus. In Geneva, the same so-called human rights groups are pressing for the censorship of the Syrian Arab Republic. In line with this, the Arab League has moved to supplant the Syrian government and handover its diplomatic recognition to a proxy Syrian opposition. It is also no mere coincidence that the Transitional Council in Libya became the first body to recognize the Syrian National Council as the legitimate government of Syria on October 10, 2011.

More than ever, international institutions and there partiality must be taken into serious question. The U.S. and its allies are replicating the same steps they took against Tripoli for Damascus. This includes calls for taking Syrian officials to the International Criminal Court and for a Turkish-imposed “humanitarian buffer zone” in northern Syria, which is the land equivalent of a no-fly zone.

What happened to Libya in Geneva at the United Nations?

One of the main sources for the allegations that Colonel Qaddafi was killing his own people was the Libyan Human Rights League (LLHR). The LLHR was pivotal in getting the U.N. Human Rights Commission to suspend Libya and for getting the U.N. Security Council in New York City to pass U.N. sanctions against Libya. This organization is also a member of the French-based International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) that is tied to the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

On February 21, 2011 the LLHR got 70 other NGOs to send letters to the U.N. Secretary-General, President Obama, and Catherine Ashton demanding international action and intervention in Libya. The subsequent campaign against Libya was organized by U.N. Watch, a NGO that firmly works to protect and serve Israeli interests. Additionally, only 25 members of this coalition against Tripoli actually asserted that they were human rights organizations. On the basis of their letter and without any evidence or proof about the LLHR’s accusations that Qaddafi had killed 6000 Libyan civilians the U.N. Security Council was manipulated by Washington and its allies into creating a no-fly zone. The U.S. and NATO would use this as a pretext and cover for to waging a war of aggression that would illegally end with regime change in Tripoli that would ultimately result in the murder of Muammar Qaddafi in the city of Sirte.

Rightly, the Indian Ambassador to the U.N. would actually point out that the U.N. was passing resolutions against Libya without any evidence and that this was a worrying development. Attempts are being made to do the same to Syria. Afterwards, when the LLHR and its head were challenged for proof about their allegations that Qaddafi was murdering his people, they failed to provide evidence and bluntly said there was no proof. Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir, the head of the LLHR and a Swiss citizen, has actually admitted that it was Mahmoud Jibril that was the source of the accusations. Jibril would subsequently form the Benghazi-based Transitional Council and become its prime minister.

What is not known is that Mahmoud Jibril, a cabinet member of the Jamahiriya’s government, was Sliman Bouchuiguir’s friend for years. Five individuals, who would become ministers in the Transitional Council, were also members of the LLHR and also Bouchiguir’s friends. This includes Ali Tarhouni. This is a clear conflict of interest that no serious body would ignore. When Dr. Bouchiguir was asked how he got other NGOs to accept the LLHR’s claims, he explained in an interview that it was on the basis of his personal ties.

During the same period as these allegations, Aly Abuzaakouk and these individuals were also renegotiating Libya’s oil contracts under favourable terms for the U.S. and the E.U. for when the regime change would take place in Tripoli. Ali Tarhouni, a U.S. economics professor preaching economic neo-liberalism, would be given responsibilities over both the important energy and finance sectors in an oddly combined ministerial portfolio. This would appear as odd for a minister’s portfolio unless one understands what Tarhouni’s objectives were. He was essentially sent by Washington to open the doors of Libya for foreign plundering. Ali Tarhouni, as the minister responsible for both the oil and finance sectors, would immediately privatize Libya’s energy and financial sectors as his first act. This is while he and his conspirators would promise their supports that Libya would transform into a new Dubai.

It was these unverified claims coupled with the media lies about sub-Saharan African mercenaries in Libya, which portrayed black-skinned Libyans as non-Libyan foreigners, and the false claims about Libyan military jets firing on unarmed civilian protesters that were used to frame Libya and open the door to war for NATO. Later, Bouchiguir would be rewarded for his part in the plot in Geneva by being appointed the new ambassador of Libya to Switzerland in Bern.

Supplanting the Syrian government with the Syrian National Council

Like Libya, the Arab League has set the framework for the unlawful recognition of the Syrian National Council. Libya was suspended by the Arab League before NATO launched its war and now Syria has too. The Arab League has, however, gone two steps further. The Arab League has opted to give Syria’s Arab League chair to the Syrian National Council. This time the Arab League has also blatantly and unashamedly violated its own charter. The decision needed unanimous consent to be ratified and legally binding, but was not. Aside from Syria, Lebanon and Yemen voted against the move. Iraq also abstained. Algeria and Sudan were also pressured by the U.S., E.U., and Arab Sheikhdoms into voting for the suspension of Syria.

The United Nations Human Rights Commission will now be used in an attempt to supplant the Syrian Arab Republic with the Syrian National Council, which is a clone of the Transitional Council that supplanted the Jamahiriya government of Libya. Again, U.N. Watch is leading the charge and organizing the NGOs in Geneva. It is doing this in league with the FIDH, NED, and several Syrian equivalents to the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR). This includes the Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies, which is tied to the FIDH.

The Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies and its leader, Dr. Radwan Ziadeh, are acting as equivalents to the LLHR. Ziadeh has even been present at the same forums as the leaders of the Transitional Council of Libya. Moreover, Bouchiguir has ties to Israeli interests through his thesis supervisor and doctoral work about preventing the Arabs from using oil as a bargaining chip. It appears that Dr. Ziadeh falls under the same track as a foreign agent. Ziadeh and his cohort have refused to answer if they will recognize Israel if they form the government of Syria. Because of their allegiances, they refuse to answer the question. They have avoided the subject of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and have shown Tel Aviv no hostility, whereas they have been very hostile towards Iran, Russia, and China.

What is going to happen is that the Syrian National Council is going to be illicitly, and in violation of international law, be granted recognition as the government of Syria by the Arab petro-Sheikhdoms and Turkey. If the gambit is successful, the E.U. and U.S. will do the same at one point or another. Syrian embassies will be handed over to them or taken over by the Syrian National Council and the diplomatic war against Syria will intensify. In parallel, the mainstream media and human rights organizations will begin to clamour for intervention against Syria, while pressure is put on Iran, Russia, China, and others to abandon the Syrians… 

Washington is Conquering Africa using France, Human Rights, Terrorism, and the National Endowment for Democracy

Washington is Conquering Africa using France, Human Rights, Terrorism, and the National Endowment for Democracy.

From Mathaba

Washington is Conquering Africa using France, Human Rights, Terrorism, and the National Endowment for Democracy. Photo: Nazemroaya
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya and Julien Teil

A repeat of the disorder and pandemonium generated inside Afghanistan is in the works for the continent of Africa.   The United States, with the help of Britain, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, created the brutal Taliban and then eventually waged war on its Taliban allies. Similarly, across Africa, the United States and its allies are creating a new series of future enemies to fight, but after initially working with them or using them to sow the seeds of chaos in Africa.

Washington has literally been helping fund insurgencies and regime change projects in Africa.  “Human rights” and “democratization” are also being used as a smokescreen for colonialism and war.  So-called human rights and humanitarian organizations are now partners in this imperialist project against Africa.

France and Israel:  Is Washington Outsourcing its Dirty Work in Africa?

Africa is just one international front for an expanding system of empire.  The mechanisms of a real global system of empire are at work in this regard. Washington is acting through NATO and its allies in Africa. Each one of Washington’s allies and satellites has a specific role to play in the global system of empire.

Tel Aviv has played a very active role on the African continent. Israel was a major unapologetic supporter of South Africa under the racist apartheid system.  Tel Aviv also helped smuggle arms into Sudan and East Africa to balkanize that sizeable African nation and destabilize its region.The Israelis have been very active in Kenya and Uganda, for example.  The Israeli presence has also existed wherever blood diamonds and conflicts have been present in Africa.  Israel is also now working with Washington to establish total hegemony over the African continent.  It isactively involved through its business ties and intelligence operations in establishing the contacts and agreements that Washington needs for expansion in Africa and to disrupt the rise of Chinese influence.

France, as a former colonial master and a declining power, on the other hand has traditionally been a rival and competitor of Washington on the African continent.  With the rise of the influence of non-traditional powers in Africa, such as the People’s Republic of China, both Washington and Paris began to look at ways of cooperating.  On the broader global stage this is also evident. Both the U.S. and several of the major powers in the European Union considered China and other emerging global powers as great enough threats to end their rivalries and work together.  Thus, a consensus leading to integration emerged, which was greatly boosted by the presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007.

President Sarkozy also wasted no time in pushing for reintegration of the French military command structure with NATO, which has subordinated the French military to the Pentagon.  In 1966, President Charles de Gaulle pulled French forces out of NATO and removed France from the military command structure of NATO as a means of maintaining French independence. Nicolas Sarkozy has reversed all of this. In 2009, Sarkozy ordered that France rejoin the integrated military command structure of NATO.  In 2010, he also signed an accord to start amalgamating the British and French militaries.

On the African continent, Paris has a special place or niche in the U.S. system of global empire– as a regional gendarme in North Africa, West Africa, Central Africa, and all the countries that were its former colonies. France’s special role, in other words, is due to history and the existing, albeit declining, position of France in Africa, specifically through the “Françafrique.”  The Union of the Mediterranean, which Sarkozy officially launched, is one example of these French interests in North Africa.

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) has also been working through France’s International Federation of Human Rights (Fédération internationale des ligues des droits de l’Homme, FIDH). The FIDH is much more established in Africa. The NED has essentially outsourced its work to manipulate and control African governments, movements, societies, and states to the FIDH.  It was the FIDH and the affiliated Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) that helped orchestrate the grounds for the NATO war against Libya via the United Nations through unsubstantiated and false claims.

The NED and FIDH

Following the 2007 election of Nicolas Sarkozy as the leader of the French Republic, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) started to develop a real partnership with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Both organizations are also partners within the World Movement for Democracy. Carl Gershman, the president of NED, even went to France in December 2009 to meet with the FIDH to deepen collaboration between the two organizations and to discuss Africa. [1]  Most of the partnerships between the FIDH and the NED are based in Africa and the intersecting Arab World. These partnerships operate in a zone that covers countries like Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast), Niger, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.North Africa, which includes Libya and Algeria, has been a specific area of focus for the FIDH, where Washington, Paris, and NATO clearly have major ambitions.

The FIDH, which is directly implicated in launching the war on Libya, has also received direct funding, in the form of grants, from the National Endowment for Democracy for its programs in Africa.  A NED grant of $140, 186 (U.S.) has been the latest amount given to the FIDH for its work in Africa. [2] The NED was also one of the first signatories, along with the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) and U.N. Watch, demanding international intervention against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. [3]

AFRICOM and the Post-9/11 Road Towards Conquering Africa

In 2002, the Pentagon started its first major operations aimed at controlling Africa militarily.  This was in the form of the Pan-Sahel Initiative, which was launched by United States European Command (EUCOM) and United States Central Command (CENTCOM). Under the project, the U.S. military would trains troops from Mali, Chad, Mauritania, and Niger. The plans to establish the Pan-Sahel Initiative, however, date back to 2001, when the initiative for Africa was actually launched after the tragic events of September 11, 2001 (9/11).  Washington was clearly planning military action in Africa, which already included at least three countries (Libya, Somalia, and Sudan) identified as targets by the Pentagon and the White House according to General Wesley Clark.

Jacques Chirac, the President of France at the time, tried to offer resistance to the U.S. push into Africa by reinvigorating Germany’s role in Africa as a means of supporting France.  In 2007, the Franco-African summit even opened its doors to German participation for the first time. [4]  Yet, Angela Merkel had different ideas about the direction and position that the Franco-German partnership should take in regards to Washington.

Since 2001, the momentum towards creating AFRICOM had started. AFRICOM was officially authorized in December 2006 and the decision to create it was announced several short months later in February 2007.  It would be in 2007 that AFRICOM would actually be established. This momentum also received Israeli encouragement.  The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), for example, was one of the Israeli organizations supporting the creation of AFRICOM.

On the basis of the Pan-Sahel Initiative, the Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative (TSCTI) was launched by the Pentagon in 2005 under the command of CENTCOM.Mali, Chad, Mauritania, and Niger were now joined by Algeria, Mauritania, Morocco, Senegal, Nigeria, and Tunisia in the ring of military cooperation with the Pentagon.  The Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative would be transferred to the command of AFRICOM on October 1, 2008, which is when AFRICOM would be activated.

The Sahel and Sahara: The U.S.Clearly Adopts France’s Old Colonial Projects in Africa

“Fighting terrorism” and executing “humanitarian missions” are just façades or smokescreens.  While the stated goals of the Pentagon are to fight terrorism in Africa, the real aims of Washington are to restructure Africa and to establish a neo-colonial order.In this regard, Washington has actually adopted the old colonial projects of France in Africa.  This includes the old U.S., British, Italian, and French initiative to divide Libya after 1943 and the unilateral French initiative to redraw North Africa.

The map used by Washington for combating terrorism under the Pan-Sahel Initiative says a lot.  The range or area of activity for the terrorists,within the borders of Algeria, Libya, Niger, Chad, Mali, and Mauritania according to Washington’s designation, is very similar to the boundaries or borders of a colonial entity that France tried to create in Africa in 1957.  Paris had planned to propup this African entity in the western central Saharaas a French department (province) directly tied to France, along with coastal Algeria.

This desired entitywas referred to as the Common Organization of the Saharan Regions (Organisation commune des regions sahariennes, OCRS).  It comprised the inner boundaries of the Sahel and Saharan countries of Mali, Niger, Chad, and Algeria.  The French goal was to collect and bind all the resource-rich areas into this one central entity for French control and extraction. The resources in this area include oil, gas, and uranium.  Yet, the resistance movements in Africa, and specifically the Algerian struggle for independence, dealt Paris a hard blow. France had to give up its quest and finally dissolve the OCRS in 1962, because of Algerian independence and the anti-colonial stance in Africa, which also cut France off from the inland area in the Sahara and created opposition towards France in Africa.

Washington clearly had this energy- and resource-rich area in mind when it drew out the areas of Africa that need to be cleansed of alleged terrorist cells and gangs.  The French Institute of Foreign Relations (Institut français des relations internationals, IFRI) has even openly discussed this in March 2011. [5]  It is also in this context that the amalgamation of Franco-German and Anglo-American interests is allowing France to become an integrated part of the U.S. system of global empire with shared interests.

Regime Change in Libya and the NED: A Nexus of Terrorism and Human Rights

Since 2001, the U.S. has falsely presented itself as a champion against terrorism.  The Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative (TSCTI), which opened the doors for AFRICOM in Africa, was justified as necessary by Washington to fight organizations like the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) in Algeria and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) in Libya.  Yet, Washington is cooperating and using these very same groups in Libya, along with the National Front for the Salvation of Libya and the Muslim Brotherhood, as foot soldiers and proxies in Libya and Africa. Moreover, many of the key Libyan individuals that are members of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) are members of these groups and have also been part of conferences and longstanding plans pushing for regime change in Libya.

One of the key meetings for establishing what would become the current Transitional Council in Libya took place in 1994 when the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) organized a conference with Ashur Shamis and Aly (Ali) Abuzakuuk.  The 1994 conference’s title was “Post-Qaddafi Libya: The Prospect and the Promise.” In 2005 another conference with Shamis Ashur would be held in the British capital of London that would build on the idea of regime change in Libya. [6]

Ashur Shamis is one of the founding members of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya, which was founded in 1981. He was also wanted by Interpol and the Libyan police. [7]  Ahsur was also a director in the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and in the Human and Political Development Forum (and the editor of the Akhbar webpage, which was registered under Akhbar Cultural Limited and was essentially a NED project). He has also participated in key conferences, including the one in London held by Chatham House in 2011, which discussed NATO plans for the invasion of Tripoli. [8]

Like Ashur, Aly Abuzaakouk is also a member of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya and tied to the National Endowment for Democracy. He was one of the key participants and attendees at the roundtable held for the 2011 Democracy Awards by NED. [9]  Like Ashur, he is also wanted by Interpol and serves as a director at the Libyan Human and Political Development Forum. [10]

There is also Noman Benotman, a former leader and founder of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and a wanted terrorist.  He conveniently left the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group due to the attacks of September 11, 2011 in the United States.  Benotman is not only a National Endowment for Democracy (NED) director in the Libyan Human and Political Development Forum, but he is also tied to the news network Al Jazeera.

Not only have these three men lived in Britain without any problems while they were wanted by Interpol and sought because of their ties to terrorism or, in the case of Benotman, drug-related crimes and forgery, but they also received grants from the United States.  They received U.S. grants that formalized their NED organizations, which have been integral to the regime change agenda against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. This regime change agenda was done with the help of MI6 and the CIA.  The legal documents that have been filed for their NED organizations have been deliberately and illegally tampered with.  One key individual’s identity has been hidden in the list of NED directors.  Thus, legal documents have been fraudulently filled out to hide a certain individual’s identity under the alias of “Beata Wozniak.” Even Wozniak’s birthday is invalid, appearing as January 1, 1 (01/01/0001). She is listed as a director and secretary of Akbar, Transparency Libya Limited, and several British companies.

The Gate into Africa has been Opened

The fanning of terrorism in Africa is part of a deliberate strategy used by the U.S. and its allies, including NATO, for opening the door into the African continent by expanding the so-called “Global War on Terror.”  This will give purpose to the U.S. objective of expanding its military presence in the African continent and it will also justify the creation of the Pentagon’s AFRICOM, which is meant to manage Africa by creating an African version of NATO as a means for establishing Washington’s control.  In this regard, the U.S. and its allies have already put budgets aside to fight the very terrorist organizations that they have cooperated with, encouraged, nurtured, armed, and proliferated across the map of Africa from Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and Mali to Mauritania, Niger, Algeria, and Nigeria.

The terrorists not only fight for Washington on the ground, but they also interact with Washington through so-called human rights organizations that promote democracy.  These individuals not only destabilize their countries, but they also actively work for regime change and military intervention.  Libya is a clear case of this.


[1] National Endowment for Democracy, “NED Strengths Democracy Ties with France,” March 16, 2010:


[2] National Endowment for Democracy, “Africa Regional,” August 2011:


[3] United Nations Watch et al., “Urgent Appeal to Stop Atrocities in Libya: Sent by 70 NGOs to the US, EU, and UN,” February 21, 2011:


[4] Ministry of European and Foreign Affairs (France), “XXIVème sommet Afrique-France,” February 2007:


[5] Etienne de Durand, “Francs-tireurs et Centurions. Les ambiguïtés de l’héritage contre-insurrectionnel français,” Institut français des relations internationals, March 2011:


[6] The National Conference of the Libyan Opposition, “The National Accord: The National Conference of the Libyan Opposition, London, 26thJune 2005,” 2005.


[7] Interpol Wanted Notice for Ashour Al-Shamis :


[8] Foreign and Commonwealth Office (U.K.), “Chatam House event: the future of Libya,” June 2011:


[9] National Democracy for Democracy, “2011 Democracy Award Biographies,” June 2011:


[10] Interpol Wanted Notice for Aly Abu Zaakouk:


Libya: The Rest of the Story

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Libya: The Rest of the Story

 Libyan opposition literally running protests from Washington.

by Tony Cartalucci

Please note the “” signs.’s
webmaster is listed on the US State Department‘s as
the “Twitter” to follow.

When Qaddafi‘s son, Saif al-Islam, accused foreigners and opposition groups of fomenting unrest within Libya, it appears no truer words have been spoken.

It is not surprising BBC and the rest of the corporate owned media went through extensive measures to discredit his speech.

Unbelievable revelations have been discovered regarding the unrest in Libya.

The leader of Libya’s opposition group organizing the protests both inside and outside of Libya, is currently in Washington D.C. as he and his organization direct the upheaval and bedlam consuming the North African nation.

An interview with Ibrahim Sahad of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) on ABC Australia, features every talking point covered by the mainstream corporate media from over the past week, all with the White House and Washington Monument looming over him in the background.

Sahad echos the Soros/Brzezinski International Crisis Group’s calls for
the UNSC to convene and discuss intervening in Qaddafi’s defiance.

Ibrahim Sahad and his NFLS formed the National Conference of the Libyan Opposition (NCLO) in London in 2005.

This group specifically went out of its way to appear not to be influenced or supported by the United States.

Perhaps to cement this notion, Huffington Post featured documents released by the NCLO in a wikileaks-esque move to pin US support on Qaddafi.

Of course, as with all the unrest in the Middle East, as the facts trickle out we find out this is not to avoid confusion, it is to avoid the truth.

The Sahad’s NCLO began organizing the February 17th “Day of Rage” right on cue as Egypt fell so the mainstream media apparatus could swing around and put the focus on Libya.

Conveniently, the media needs only move from Cairo to Egypt’s western border and wait for Sahad’s men on the ground to secure them a base of operations, presumably in Libya’s eastern city of Benghazi.

Qaddafi apparently understands the role of NGOs and the foreign media, which is why they are not in the streets of Libya’s cities, and coverage has been admittedly daunting.

  • It turns out that both the corporate owned news and the US State Department/corporate funded are getting their reports entirely from Sahad’s NCLO in Washington, who claims to be in contact with “first hand” reports out of Libya.

  • Other NFSL members including one in Dubai, are also supplying the media with this “first hand” information.

  • These reports have become the basis for accusations of “genocide”, the convening of the UNSC, economic sanctions, threats directed toward Libyan security forces that attempt to quell protesters, and NATO enforced no-fly zones.

  • The Neo-Con infested National Endowment for Democracy and its army of US funded NGOs recently made an official statement urging the US and EU to confront the Libyan “massacres” in the UNSC and Human Rights Council.

  • This is still amidst reports BBC admits are “impossible to verify,” based on information coming from and a Washington based Libyan protester leader.

  • It should also be noted that a Ghonim-esque Libyan blogger is being reported by US corporate funded as a “Twitter user to follow.”

  • He goes by the name “EnoughGaddafi” and is the webmaster of

  • EnoughGaddafi’s work can also be found archived on Washington based Ibrahim Sahad’s NFSL site ( was hacked according to

  • Again we are told the protests are spontaneous, inspired by the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings.

  • Again we are told it is the youth yearning for freedom and “democracy.”

  • But when we look behind the curtain, we see yet another old man from Washington pulling the levers, blowing the smoke, and flashing the lights.

  • If you are religious, pray for the people in the streets of Libya, many of whom may be merely swept up in this cruel hoax.

  • The US and their stooges will only be disheartened if their plot doesn’t succeed. The rivers of blood that will flow to ensure that it does is never entered into their calculations.

    When your US State Department sponsored “liberation” comes to you, you will hope others elsewhere will stand in solidarity with the truth, not the emotions of an engineered hoax. You will hope others take it upon themselves to speak the truth amongst the deafening din of corporate media propaganda.                                                                                                                                                                So spread the word, wake your neighbors up, and most importantly, boycott the corporations whose greed drives this agenda and whose members are planning and carrying it out.

    Do it for the Libyans, the Egyptians, the Tunisians, and do it for yourself.

The conflagration is consuming the Middle East and North Africa now, it may consume you next.

  • Corporate memberships and supporters of the the Anglo-American globalist agenda:

Globalist Richard Haas Calls for NATO Occupation of Libya

Globalist Richard Haas Calls for NATO Occupation of Libya

Robert Gates (left), Richard Haas (right)

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer

Activist Post

The Financial Times has featured an editorial penned by Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haas titled, “Libya Now Needs Boots on the Ground,”where the arch globalist states that Libya’s rebels are in no way capable of rebuilding Libya properly and will require an “international force” to maintain order. Haas breathtakingly admits that the NATO intervention to “protect civilians” was in fact a political intervention designed to bring about regime change. With NATO leading the offensive against Tripoli, a relatively calm city until now, the alleged cause of “protecting civilians” rings hollower than ever.

Haas goes on to explain that NATO’s “success” is what requires this international assistance in the predictable form of an occupation force to deal with looting, “die-hard regime supporters,” and tribal war. Haas also implores Obama to reconsider his decision to rule out American boots on the ground and to do so quickly.

Of course, NATO didn’t just spend the last 5 months conducting 7,000+ airstrikes on Libya to “protect civilians” and then ride off into the sunset. This was a war of conquest from the very beginning, with globalists openly declaring it would determine the “primacy of international law” over the nation-state.

In fact, the initial uprising itself was gestated in Washington and London where opposition leaders were provided resources and safe-havens to conduct their sedition, with globalist stooges like Ibrahim Sahad literally sitting in front of the White House calling for NATO to bomb his homeland.

NATO, its members, particularly the US, UK, and France, and the globalist corporate-financiers behind them, fully intend to rebuild Libya according to their own aspirations shoehorned into a national consensus imposed upon the Libyan people under the guise of “democracy” and “civil society.” We are watching a modern empire expand its boundaries into yet another sovereign nation.

Readers may remember an April 2011 article titled “Libyan Rebels Fighting the Globalists’ War” with the ever increasingly appropriate subtitle, “How the Devil Pays.” In it a caption attempts to sum up Libya’s future by stating, “if these rebels really think the West is going to hand them Libya and its riches, they have another thing coming.

The Neo-Con arm of the globalist agenda is already seeding the ground to deal with “extremists” coming to power after the “Arab Spring” runs its course. That means Libya’s oil & future will be left in the hands of NATO troops, not the Libyan people.”

The article continues:

While the dichotomy of Western politics is merely for public consumption, what each camp states publicly can be put together as a composite giving us a clearer picture of the overall globalist agenda. Neo-Conservative war monger Daniel Pipes, a PNAC signatory, CFR member, and co-conspirator in many of the darkest chapters of recent American history, was recently sharing his “doubts” over the final result of the “Arab Spring.” He believes that ultimately extremists will prevail in many cases and only complicate US relations with certain countries.

Of course, Pipes most likely didn’t miss the memo and is fully aware that the “Arab Spring” is a US funded gambit, one his fellow “Neo-Cons” lining the National Endowment for Democracy and the fraudulent Freedom House are admittedly involved in. At the very least, he must have picked up the New York Times and read as much. So what exactly is Pipes trying to tell us? He is saying that as soon as the Libyan rebels secure Libya, or the Muslim Brotherhood takes hold of Syria, or Yemen, or wins out in a co-opted counterrevolution against International Crisis Group stooge Mohamed ElBaradei in Egypt, the blinders Western propagandists seem to be wearing will suddenly drop and point out that indeed the globalists have installed extremists “by accident.”

To rectify this, Libyan rebels will be betrayed just as quickly as Qaddafi was.

They will be removed from power, and replaced by Western stooges protected by NATO ground troops, conveniently already being put on the ground in Libya, and will stay there permanently.

The globalist “Neo-Con” think tank Foreign Policy Initiative has stated, “The best way to reduce the potential dangers posed by extremist infiltration is for the United States and its allies to remain engaged in Libya.”

This engagement most likely will take the shape of the other unending “engagements” in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the years of cross-border raids into Pakistan. The oil money that once built water ways, public housing, and farms from Benghazi to Tripoli, will be funneled directly out of the country and into the corporate-financier’s accounts.

The corporate-financier oligarchs will have taken yet another nation-state down with the help of its own gullible population, and for their gullibility, they will pay for the rest of their lives, as will their children and their children’s children.

To understand the full scope of the global corporate-financier oligarchy’s designs toward any given nation, we must simply look back at the brazen admissions made over the intended future stemming from the outright military conquest of Iraq and Paul Bremer’s (CFR) planned economic reformation of the broken nation.

The Economist enumerates the “economic liberalization” of Iraq in a piece titled “Let’s all go to the yard sale: If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist’s dream:”

1. 100% ownership of Iraqi assets.

2. Full repatriation of profits.

3. Equal legal standing with local firms.

4. Foreign banks allowed to operate or buy into local banks.

5. Income and corporate taxes capped at 15%.

6. Universal tariffs slashed to 5%.

Anyone who would willfully make a deal with such people must have their discernment called into question. As Hugo Chavez of Venezuela said of Hosni Mubarak’s decades of appeasing the globalists and his eventual ousting from power at the hands of US funded, trained, and supported protesters, “that’s how the devil pays.” Indeed it is, and it is an instructive lesson for others including the rebels of Benghazi to consider as they attempt to make their own deals with the globalists today.”

And indeed, as NATO rushes through to the finish line with a spectacular display of mass-murder and mayhem in Libya, and with the rebels dancing in the streets as NATO warplanes roar overhead, the time is soon approaching for Benghazi to pay back the West for their “help.”

As pundits in the duplicitous corporate media feign ignorance over the future of Libya, as if it is truly in the hands of the Libyan people as Obama cartoonishly portrayed in his latest teleprompter reading, the self-proclaimed “Transitional National Council” leader Gibril Elqarfally gave us cyrstal clear picture of Libya’s future – one inspired by globalization.

In a May 12, 2011 talk before the Brookings Institution, he claimed “what’s taking place is a natural product of the globalizational process that started in the mid-80s.”
Elwarfally talks about a “new global cultural paradigm,” “new global values,” common values, shared by many “young people.” These young people, he says, are calling for human dignity, democracy, and inclusion at all levels of national government, repeating verbatim statements coming from geopolitical meddler Zbigniew Brzezinski and the myriad of US-funded NGOs that promote these “new global values.

Photo: Libyan rebel leader Gibril Elqarfally stands before the Fortune 500-funded Brookings Institution openly declaring fealty to the globalist agenda of interdependency and subservience to a Wall Street-London international order.


When asked by an audience member what Libya will look like in 2025, it turns out conveniently he was part of a study by Libyan professors and “Libyan practitioners” in 2007-2008 titled “Libya: Vision 2025.” Not surprisingly, this project was conducted with input from the IMF and involved Libya’s placement within the “global scene.” Elwarfally laments that Libya’s oil reserves are limited and that the solution is a transition to a service economy. He also claims Vision 2025s conclusion included an education shift, turning Libya into “a lake” to develop the skills of Africans to serve the needs of the European Union.

Surely Africans are eager to once again be in the service of wealthy Europeans, who at one point owned tremendous swaths of their continent, some tycoons naming entire nations after themselves in the ultimate expression of imperial megalomania. Elwarfally, a man educated in Pittsburgh, and apparently a lifelong fan of globalization, stuns us with his frank comments and his disturbing vision for the future of not only Libya, but the role it will play in directing Africa’s efforts and resources toward American and European corporate-financier interests.

While Qaddafi’s comments are dismissed out of hand, a recent message sent to his followers amidst fighting in Tripoli declared, “the traitors are paving the way for the occupation forces to be deployed in Tripoli.” It seems no truer words have ever been spoken and the Libyan people,

including the rebels, will have no one but themselves to blame if they allow such a way to be paved.

Tony Cartalucci’s articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at 
Land Destroyer Report.