Jun 25, 2011

AL QAEDA and LIBYAN REVOLUTION


    A new report from two French think tanks concludes that jihadists have played a predominant role in the eastern-Libyan rebellion against the rule of Moammar Qaddafi, and that “true democrats” represent only a minority in the rebellion. The report, furthermore, calls into question the justifications given for Western military intervention in Libya, arguing that they are largely based on media exaggerations and “outright disinformation.” 

Al Qaeda in Libya part I

    The sponsors of the report are the Paris-based International Center for Research Study on Terrorism and Aide to Victims of Terrorism (CIRET-AVT) and the French Center for Research on Intelligence (CF2R). The organizations sent a six-member expert mission to Libya to evaluate the situation and consult with representatives on both sides of the conflict.  and
    From March 31 to April 6, the mission visited the Libyan capital of Tripoli and the region of Tripolitania; from April 19 to April 25, it visited the rebel capital of Benghazi and the surrounding Cyrenaica region in eastern Libya.
Al Qaeda in Libya part II
    The report identifies four factions among the members of the eastern Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC). Apart from a minority of “true democrats,” the other three factions comprise partisans of a restoration of the monarchy that was overthrown by Qaddafi in 1969, Islamic extremists seeking the establishment of an Islamic state, and former fixtures of the Qaddafi regime who defected to the rebels for opportunistic or other reasons.
     There is a clear overlap between the Islamists and the monarchists, inasmuch as the deposed King Idris I was himself the head of the Senussi brotherhood, which the authors describe as “an anti-Western Muslim sect that practices an austere and conservative form of Islam.” The monarchists are thus, more precisely, “monarchists-fundamentalists.”
    The most prominent of the defectors, the president of the NTC, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, is likewise described by the authors as a “traditionalist” who is “supported by the Islamists.” The authors point out that Jalil played an important role in the “Bulgarian nurses affair,” so called for five Bulgarian nurses who, along with a Palestinian doctor, were charged with deliberately infecting hundreds of children with AIDS in a hospital in Benghazi. As chair of the Appeals Court in Tripoli, Jalil twice upheld the death penalty for the nurses. In 2007, the nurses and the Palestinian doctor were released by the Libyan government following negotiations in which French president Nicolas    Sarkozy’s then wife, Cecilia, played a highly publicized role. 
    The report describes members of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group as the “main pillar of the armed insurrection.” “Thus the military coalition under NATO leadership is supporting a rebellion that includes Islamic terrorists,” the authors write. 
   Alluding to the major role played by the Cyrenaica region in supplying recruits for al-Qaeda in Iraq, they add, “No one can deny that the Libyan rebels who are today supported by Washington were only yesterday jihadists killing American GIs in Iraq.”

    The full composition of the NTC has not been made public. But, according to the authors, one avowed al-Qaeda recruiter, Abdul-Hakim al-Hasadi, is himself a member of the NTC. (On al-Hasadi, see my March 25 report here.) Al-Hasadi is described by the authors as the “leader of the Libyan rebels.” Although Western media reports commonly say that he is in charge of the defense of his home town of Darnah in eastern Libya, the CIRET-CF2R report suggests that in mid-April, al-Hasadi left Cyrenaica by boat in order to participate in the battle of Misrata. He is supposed to have taken arms and 25 “well-trained fighters” with him. Misrata is in western Libya, a mere 135 miles from Tripoli.

Regarding the effects of western military intervention in support of the rebels, the authors conclude:
Western intervention is in the process of creating more problems than it resolves. It is one thing to force Qaddafi to leave. It is another thing to spread chaos and destruction in Libya to this end and to prepare the ground for fundamentalist Islam. The current moves risk destabilizing all of North Africa, the Sahel, and the Middle East and favoring the emergence of a new regional base for radical Islam and terrorism.
What follows are some further translated highlights from the CIRET-CF2R report. The full report is available in French here.

 Libyan rebel leader proudly announces him and his men are al-Qaeda

On the Battle of Misrata:
Little by little, the city is starting to appear like a Libyan version of Sarajevo in the eyes of the “free” world. The rebels from Benghazi hope that a humanitarian crisis in Misrata will convince the Western coalition to deploy ground troops in order to save the population.
 . . . During the course of April, the NGO Human Rights Watch published casualty figures concerning Misrata that reveal that, contrary to the claims made in the international media, Qaddafi loyalist forces have not massacred the residents of the town. During two months of hostilities, only 257 persons — including combatants — were killed. Among the 949 wounded, only 22 — or fewer than 3 percent — were women. If regime forces had deliberately targeted civilians, women would have represented around half of the victims.
It is thus now obvious that Western leaders — first and foremost, President Obama — have grossly exaggerated the humanitarian risk in order to justify their military action in Libya.
The real interest of Misrata lies elsewhere. . . . The control of this port, at only 220 kilometers from Tripoli, would make it an ideal base for launching a land offensive against Qaddafi.

On Benghazi and the Cyrenaica Region:
Benghazi is well-known as a hot-bed of religious extremism. The Cyrenaica region has a long Islamist tradition going back to the Senussi brotherhood. Religious fundamentalism is much more evident here than in the western part of the country. Women are completely veiled from head to foot. They cannot drive and their social life is reduced to a minimum. Bearded men predominate. They often have the black mark of piety on their foreheads [the “zebibah,” which is formed by repeated prostration during Muslim prayers].
It is a little-known fact that Benghazi has become over the last 15 years the epicenter of African migration to Europe. This traffic in human beings has been transformed into a veritable industry, generating billions of dollars.

Parallel mafia structures have developed in the city, where the traffic is firmly implanted and employs thousands of people, while corrupting police and civil servants. It was only a year ago that the Libyan government, with the help of Italy, managed to bring this cancer under control.
Following the disappearance of its main source of revenue and the arrest of a number of its bosses, the local mafia took the lead in financing and supporting the Libyan rebellion. Numerous gangs and members of the city’s criminal underworld are known to have conducted punitive expeditions against African migrant workers in Benghazi and the surrounding area. Since the start of the rebellion, several hundred migrant workers — Sudanese, Somalis, Ethiopians, and Eritreans — have been robbed and murdered by rebel militias. This fact is carefully hidden by the international media.


On African “Mercenaries” and Tuaregs:
One of the greatest successes [of Qaddafi’s African policy] is his “alliance” with the Tuaregs [a traditionally nomadic population spread over the region of the Sahara], whom he actively financed and supported when their movement was repressed in Mali in the 1990s.
 . . . In 2005, Qaddafi accorded an unlimited residency permit to all Nigerian and Malian Tuaregs on Libyan territory. Then, in 2006, he called on all the tribes of the Sahara region, including Tuareg tribes, to form a common entity to oppose terrorism and drug trafficking . . . 
This is why hundreds of combatants came from Niger and Mali to help Qaddafi [after the outbreak of the rebellion]. In their view, they were indebted to Gaddafi and had an obligation to do so. . . . 
Many things have been written about the “mercenaries” serving in the Libyan security forces, but few of them are accurate. . . . 
In recent years, foreigners have been recruited [into the Libyan army]. The phenomenon is entirely comparable to the phenomenon that one observes on all levels of Libyan economic life. There is a very large population of foreign workers in search of employment in the country. The majority of the recruits originally come from Mali, Chad, Niger, Congo, and Sudan. . . . 
The information from rebel sources on supposed foreign intrusions [i.e. mercenaries] is vague and should be treated with caution. . . . 
On the other hand, it is a proven fact — and the mission was able to confirm this itself — that Tuaregs from Niger came to Tripoli to offer their support to Qaddafi.(video) They did so spontaneously and out of a sense of debt.
 . . . It seems that Libyans of foreign origin and genuine volunteers coming from foreign countries are being deliberately confused [in the reports on “mercenaries”]. Whatever the actual number [of foreign fighters], they form only a small part of the Libyan forces.
On the role of the international media:
Up until the end of February, the situation in western Libyan cities was extremely tense and there were clashes — more so than in the east. But the situation was the subject of exaggeration and outright disinformation in the media. For example, a report that Libyan aircraft bombed Tripoli is completely inaccurate: No Libyan bomb fell on the capital, even though bloody clashes seem to have taken place in certain neighborhoods. . . . (video)
The consequences of this disinformation are clear. The U.N. resolution [mandating intervention] was approved on the basis of such media reports.(see Al Jazerra Lies) No investigative commission was sent to the country. It is no exaggeration to say that sensationalist reporting by al-Jazeera influenced the U.N.
On the insurrection in Benghazi:
As soon as the protests started, Islamists and criminals immediately took advantage of the situation in order to attack high-security prisons outside Benghazi where their comrades were being held. Following the liberation of their leaders, the rebellion attacked police stations (video)and public buildings. The residents of the city woke up to see the corpses of policemen hanging from bridges.
Numerous atrocities were likewise committed against African workers (video), who have all been treated as “mercenaries.” African workers were expelled, murdered, imprisoned, and tortured.(video)

On the insurrection in Zawiya (a town in western Libya):
During the three weeks [that the town was controlled by the rebels], all public buildings were pillaged and set on fire. . . . Everywhere, there was destruction and pillaging (of arms, money, archives). There was no trace of combat, which confirms the testimony of the police [who claim to have received orders not to intervene]. . . . 
There were also atrocities committed (women who were raped, and some police officers who were killed), as well as civilian victims during these three weeks. . . . The victims were killed in the manner of the Algerian GIA [Armed Islamic Group]: throats cut, eyes gauged out, arms and legs cut off, sometimes the bodies were burned . . .You can see video


— John Rosenthal writes on European politics and transatlantic security issues. You can follow his work at www.trans-int.com or on Facebook.

see also : WHO IS "OPPOSITION" in Libya  (part I) -> http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/06/who-is-oppostion-in-libya-part-i.html


HAPPY BIRTHDAY KILLARY from LIBYAN MOTHERS

One day someone threw a bombs on MY homeland, on MY city, on MY house.
One day someone
threw a bombs on My child
This one never had to be in MY homeland, had visited MY house
did not see the eyes of MY child.
20th Jun 2011.  someone killed MY child.

Jun 24, 2011

(V) +18 BLOODY FESTIVAL in Zlitan

   NATO continued it's bloodshed in the city of ZLITAN on the 22.06.! The bombs were thrown from the battleships, many civilians were chopped into pieces. You can see people bringing different parts of the bodies to the hospital, leg, head..This is just a continuation of the bloody imperialistic brutalities by the NATO terrorists, covered up with the fake aim of 'protecting civilians'. NATO's partners in crime - are western media, which are used in order to hide or downgrade these kind of massacres.

Jun 23, 2011

Who is "OPPOSITION" in Libya (part II)

The National Transitional Council (NTC) was established on the 5th of March 2011 in Benghazi. The NTC is a coalition of diverse groups and interests:

* The Libyan League for Human Rights (London)
* The National Front for the Safety of Libya ( Riyadh)
* Senoussi The NTC is a coalition of diverse groups and interests:
* The Monarchists (Riyadh)
* "Liberals", close to Saif al-Islam (including two of his relatives, one close to   Human Rights Watch, another AI)
* Personalities from the Gaddafi regime, but opposing his son’s succession and wishing to take power,
* Adherents of radical Islam, particularly activists.

   Individuals who are put forward - mainly lawyers, professors, academics - are actually not accurate representatives. The priority is to those who speak English and know how to communicate with Westerners and the media.
The NTC therefore includes both longtime opponents of the regime and those who have defected recently.The NTC is not homogeneous, some of its representatives conceal their identity for questionable reasons, its leaders are people with a very notorious past. In the present state of things, they offer no real guarantee of “democratic” leadership.

   Who is the “opposition” in Libya. The opposition is not a monolithic body.  The common denominator is the opposition to the rule of Qaddafi. It has to be said that “actions of opposition or resistance against an oppressor” and an “opposition movement” are also two different things.
There is an authentic form of opposition, which is not organized, and a systematic form of opposition, which is either external or led by figures from within the Libyan regime itself.  Opposition and revolt has been encouraged and prompted from outside Libya through social media networks, international news stations, and events in the rest of the Arab World.
----------

 The Senoussi monarchist movement

Gaddafi holds his power due to an alliance between the tribes of the Western, Central and Southern region (Tripolitania and Fezzan), to the detriment of the tribes of the East (Harabi and Obeidat), close to the old monarchy.

Politico-religious tradition dominant in Cyrenaica is that of Senoussi, an anti-Western Muslim sect, founded in 1842 in Al-Baida, which practices a conservative and austere form of Islam. It is closely associated with the monarchy since King Idris I - installed by the British in 1951 and overthrown by Gaddafi in 1969 - was its leader.

    These monarchists-fundamentalists are completely opposed to Democracy and remain opposed to any form of modern government, despite their declared intentions. One motivation is their fierce desire for historical revenge, following the coup of 1969, and they have no other purpose than to restore the monarchy and to eliminate Qaddafi.

One of the tribal leaders met Tobruk's - local leader of the NTC, whose father was a minister of King Idriss - has made no secret of his opinion: 
the monarchy is to him a necessary condition for stability.
----------
   The leadership of the internal opposition that is emerging in Libya is coming from within the regime itself. Corrupt officials that have rebelled against Gaddafi are not the champions of the people. These opposition figures are not opposed to tyranny; they are merely opposed to the rule of Colonel Qaddafi and his family. 
Aref Sharif and Al-Yunis are themselves Libyan regime figures.
It has to also be considered that some Libyan officials that have turned against Qaddafi are doing it to save themselves, while others in the future will work to retain or strengthen their positions.
   Abdel Moneim Al-Honi, the Libyan envoy to the Arab League in Cairo, can be looked at as an example. Al-Honi denounced Qaddafi, but it should be noted that he was one of the members of the group of Libyan officers who executed the coup in 1969 with Qaddafi and that later in 1975 he himself tried to take power in a failed coup. After the failed coup, he would flee Libya and only return in 1990 after Qaddafi pardoned him.
Libyan diplomat to put in his papers was Tripoli's Permanent Representative to the Arab League Abdel Moneim al-Honi, who said in Cairo that he had quit his job to “join the revolution” in his country. “I have submitted my resignation in protest against the acts of repression and violence against demonstrators, and I am joining the ranks of the revolution,” said Mr. Al-Honi. 
The Second Secretary Hussein Sadiq al Musrati, announced his resignation from China, in an interview with Al-Jazeera, and called on the Army to intervene in the uprising.
Again, these revolting officials, like Al-Yunis are from within the regime. They are not mere diplomats, but former ministers. There is also the possibility that these types of “opposition figures” could have or could make arrangements with external powers.
   Abdul Fattah Younis al Obaidi, a former interior minister and at one point Col Gaddafi's number two, was relying on well-established contacts with the SAS as he organised his forces to repel a counter-attack by pro-Gaddafi militias. SAS units have operated in the Libyan desert.
    Abdul Fattah Younis al Obaidi, a thick set paratrooper, was head of Libyan special forces until his appointment as interior minister, and oversaw special training programmes between the SAS and his own junior officers. One official said that Gen Obaidi was part of a group of officials that Britain "could do business with" in the post-Gaddafi era.
 Rebels holding up the colonial flag of Libya, the ironic symbol of this latest round of Western-backed unrest
   The self-appointed figures of the Benghazi-based Transitional Council opposed to Qaddafi are making contradictory statements. The Transitional Council has been described as being similar to Qaddafi’s regime, because “the operation around the rebel council is rife with family ties.” Moreover, the Transitional Council’s claims against Qaddafi are also similar to those made by Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress against Saddam Hussein.
   Take for example the position of General Abdul Fatah Al-Yunis (Al-Younis), Qaddafi’s interior minister who defected. General Al-Yunis has said: “[H]e believed that the [W]est should be ready to launch airstrikes against Colonel Gaddafi’s palace in Tripoli to prevent him [from] attacking the Libyan people with chemical weapons or causing terrible casualties in some other way. He [also said that he] was also in favour of establishing an international no-fly zone as soon as possible.” 

   Despite foreign aid which allows them to continue fighting, they have proved incapable of defeating the Libyan army. Without Western support, they would have been destroyed a long time ago.
“We need more than diplomacy. We need a no-fly zone but we need more than that,” pleaded Iman Bugaighis, a spokeswoman for the Provisional Transitional National Council, the self-styled alternative government, in Libya’s second [biggest] city of Benghazi. 
  Ali al-Essawi  National Transitional Council and...

   Opposition leaders have been deliberately giving mixed signals. Some of them claim that they are against military intervention, but that is fallacious. It has to be noted that while the Libyan opposition leaders in Benghazi asked for intervention, the majority of Libyans on both sides were against U.S. and NATO intervention.
   To defeat the Libyan military, which is still under the command of Qaddafi’s  regime, the opposition forces need military intervention and foreign arms. The Globe and Mail had this to report in this regard:
Even Mustafa Abdul Jalil [Abdel Jalil was born in 1952. He served as justice minister under Muammar Gaddafi, but resigned early last year and betray Libya.], one of leader of the rebel transitional council, concedes the rebels cannot win militarily: “Everybody should know that there is no balance between our capabilities and Moammar Gadhafi’s,” the former justice minister who defected early in the rebellion said.
   Numerous interlocutors seek the help of the coalition believing that the military situation would change quickly if NATO ground troops were engaged. Now, for the insurgents, the fall of the Tripoli regime depends on NATO. The idea of intervention is gaining ground because it seems to the leaders of the NTC that there is no alternative. The NTC is willing to accept NATO troops on the ground despite their comments a few weeks ago, wishing against “NATO losses”.
     But the support from Washington comes not only in the form of money and Tomahawk missiles, but also in military command. One of the commanders of the Libyan rebel army is General Khalifa Hifter. A long-ago Gadaffi-defector, he lived in a Washington suburb for the last 20 years before he took off to Libya in March this year to command the rebel forces. Khalifa Hifter lived just minutes away from CIA headquarters...
---------- 
The members of our mission were very surprised by the artificiality of this "revolution" by proxy, including the actors waving foreign flags, chanting the name of Sarkozy and calling for NATO intervention to achieve its purpose, which they claim is democratic.

The Libyan people have been led into a trap and they are being misled. It must also be pointed out that the good, the bad, and the ugly have also gathered together on the Benghazi-based opposition side led by the Transitional Council.
The enemy’s of genuine freedom and of the Libyan people have taken advantage of the situation in Libya.

Jun 22, 2011

Who is "OPPOSTION" in Libya (part I)


    From the very beginning the US-backed Libyan unrest played out in oafish measures, crutched along by the most irresponsible, intellectually dishonest "journalism" to date. A week before the unrest began, it was the the London based National Conference of Libyan Opposition (NCLO) that called for the February 17th "Day of Rage," not Libyans in the streets of Tripoli or Benghazi.

    The NCLO itself was created in London in 2005 by Ibrahim Sahad and his National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL), which in turn has been one of the leading Libyan opposition groups since the 1980's. The Daily Globe and Mail has reported that Sahad's NFSL had been behind several attempted armed uprisings and assassination attempts against Qaddafi in the 1980's, while records found in the US Library of Congress indicate Sahad's NFSL had CIA support and training.

    Sahad himself now directs the unrest in Libya from Washington D.C. while giving interviews with the corporate owned media literally in front of the White House.(video)

    Ali Tarhouni, Washington’s man on the inside of the Interim Transitional National Council (TNC). Tarhouni is an American professor of economics at the University of Washington but he’s taken a bit of a leave to serve as the TNC’s minister of finance, oil and economics.  Now he has returned to Washington from Benghazi to pass the hat so to speak in D.C. looking for access to the 35 billion or so of the Libyan people’s money that Hillary Clinton froze. You see, he want’s to use the people’s money to return Libya back to the good old days of the corrupt monarchy, the system that was entrenched in Libya before the revolution in 1969 led by one Moammar Gadhafi.

    The idea of taking the property of the people and handing it over to a few oligarchs and crony corporations is nothing new to Dr. Tarhouni, so this request shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. This is essentially what Tarhouni argued for in 1994 at a panel discussion at the globalist Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Just to you an idea of the kinds of people who make up the Center for Strategic and International Studies, this is a small sampling of their Board of Trustees. You think these guys would have a personal interest in the wholesale privatization of Libya?
Henry A. Kissinger — Chairman & CEO, Kissinger Associates, Inc.,James A. Bell — Corporate President and CFO, The Boeing Company, David M. Rubenstein — Cofounder and Managing Director, The Carlyle Group, Rex Tillerson — Chairman & CEO, Exxon Mobil , Corporation, Ray L. Hunt — Chairman of the Board, President and CEO, Hunt Consolidated, Inc., William A. Schreyer — Chairman of the Executive Committee, CSIS; Chairman Emeritus, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., Frederick B. Whittemore — Advisory Director, Morgan Stanley
   As you can see, this “spontaneous revolt” has been 15 years in the making and one of the key players installed by US interests has been waiting in the wings for a very long time. It was also cultivated by representatives of some of the wealthiest and most powerful corporations in the world. There is a lot at stake here.
   Dr. Tarhouni did an interview for the propaganda network al Jazeera back on Feb 20th 2011 or so in which he claimed that the “revolution” in Libya was really the result of the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. He claimed that Gadhafi had no support from the people of Libya and that the vast majority of Libyans were out of work, being starved by Gadhafi, being rounded up and arrested at his slightest whim… that sort of stuff. All of these claims he made while al Jazeera was showing in the background a small band of mercenaries running around in Benghazi looting and burning public buildingsNow of course we have ample footage of massive pro-Gadhafi rallys that have taken place all across Libya. We also have proof that under the Gadhafi regime life in Libya was much better for most Libyans, certainly much better than it was under the rule of the monarchy and the highest standard of living of any African nation.

So effectively what Dr. Tarhouni was doing was simply lying through his teeth.
And now he comes back to America to beg for more money from Congress. The Libyan Contact Group pledged 250 million dollars for their little CIA backed war, but that money is slated for “humanitarian aid” so Tarhouni says he needs more to buy bigger and better weapons so they can kill more Libyans in the cross-fire.


    Moussa Koussa was "Our Man in Tripoli". The circumstances of his defection as well as the history of his collaboration with the CIA and MI6, suggest that for the last ten years, he has been serving US and Allied interests, including the planning of the "pro-democracy" armed insurrection in Eastern Libya.
   Former head of Libyan intelligence Moussa Koussa [see update *]played a central role in channelling covert support to the LIFG on behalf of his Western intelligence counterparts. Former CIA director George Tenet, while not explicitly referring to "Our Man in Tripoli", acknowledges in his 2007 autobiography that "the easing of tensions with Libya [was] one of the major successes of his tenure, as it led to cooperation between the two spy services against al-Qaeda." (quoted in Intelligence Partnership between Qadhafi and the CIA on counter-terrorism, op cit)
    From the outset in  the early to mid-1990s, the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) performed the role of an "intelligence asset" on behalf of the CIA and Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, MI6. Starting in 1995, the LIFG was actively involved in waging an Islamic Jihad directed against the secular Libyan regime, including a 1996 attempted assassination of Muamar Qadhafi. 
"Former MI5 operative, David Shayler, revealed that while he was working on the Libya desk in the mid-1990s, British secret service personnel collaborated with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which is connected to one of Osama bin Laden’s trusted lieutenants. LIFG is now considered a terrorist group in the United Kingdom." (Gerald A. Perreira, British Intelligence Worked with Al Qaeda to Kill Qaddafi, Global Research, March 25, 2011, emphasis added)
    The media suggests that the LIFG was disbanded (following the implementation of the CIA-sponsored counterterrorism program). There is no evidence to that effect. The LIFG remains on the (updated March 24, 2011) United Nations Security Council terror list: 
QE.L.11.01. Name: LIBYAN ISLAMIC FIGHTING GROUP
Name (original script):
A.k.a.: LIFG F.k.a.: na Address: na Listed on: 6 Oct. 2001 (amended on 5 Mar. 2009)
Other information: Review pursuant to Security Council resolution 1822 (2008) was concluded on 21 Jun. 2010  
(The LIFG Listing is on p. 70, http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/pdf/consolidatedlist.pdf, Under the UNSC rules disbanded terrorist organizations are removed from the list in conformity with a delisting procedure. The LIFG has not been removed from the list). United Nations Security Council: Consolidated List established and maintained by the 1267 Committee with respect to Al-Qaida, Usama bin Laden, and the Taliban and other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them (updated March 24, 2011).
update* 20.09.2011. Spy documents found in Libya reveal more British double dealing - A cache of highly classified intelligence documents was recently discovered in the abandoned offices of former Libyan spy master, Foreign Minister and high-profile defector, Musa Kusa.  [1]
New Libyan “PM” is Big-Oil Goon [02. November 2011.]- 
Associated Press recently reported that Libya's rebel militants have named a new "prime minister" this week. AP depicts the latest unelected Western proxy, Abdurrahim el-Keib, as a progressive academic who has spent decades in the United States [35 years] teaching at Alabama University and leading the local Muslim community. 
Mentioned briefly as a "former employer," however, is the Petroleum Institute, based in Abu Dhabi, Dubai and sponsored by British Petroleum (BP), Shell, France's Total, the Japan Oil Development Company, and the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company
El-Keib is listed as a "Professor and Chairman" in his Petroleum Institute profile which also describes extensive research conducted by him sponsored by various US government agencies and departments over the years.

And so begins the farce that is Western "democracy." One corporate-fascist puppet, Manmud Jibril , steps down, another, Abdurrahim el-Keib, takes his place. In reality, it is NATO-states and their corporate sponsors that now determine Libya's fate.
....
In essence, el-Keib, like his predecessor Jalil, is Libyan in name only and has been working for Western corporations, governments, and institutions for decades
Like Jalil, or Egypt's Mohammed ElBaradei, el-Keib is yet another agent of Western interests masquerading as an indigenous leader in a foreign land.
That his rise to power was paved by thousands of NATO strike sorties in a 7 month military operation spearheaded by the United States and at the cost of tens of thousands of Libyan civilians makes his ascension to power in Libya ever more a desecration of Libya's sovereignty.* [Tony Cartalucci] -> http://www.infowars.com/new-libyan-pm-is-big-oil-goon/


[1] http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/spy-documents-found-in-libya-reveal-more-british-double-dealing/
read also:

Who is "OPPOSTION" in Libya (part II) - > http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/06/who-is-opposition-in-libya-part-ii.html

Al Qaeda in Libya ->http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/06/al-qaeda-in-libya.html

---

[source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24096]

... to be continued


Jun 21, 2011

(V) SORMAN MASACRE, LIBYA 20.jun 2011.

(WARNING: VIDEO CONTAINS GRAPHIC SCENES)
Nobody noticed that, among the guests, a spy had sneaked in. He was pretending to twitter his friends. In reality, he had just marked the targets and was relaying them through the social network at NATO Headquarters.

The next day, during the night of 19 to 20 June 2011, at around 2.30 am, Khaled went back home after having visited and assisted compatriots who had fled the Alliance’s bombings. He was close enough to his house to hear the hissing of missiles and their explosions.

--------------------- 
Just a day after admitting killing 9 civilians in a bungled airstrike, NATO has been accused by the Libyan authorities of causing at least another 15 deaths. The Alliance confirmed it had carried out another bombing, but has not responded to the allegations of civilian casualties. RT crew in Tripoli has shot some shocking footage of bodies mutilated in NATO bombings.

read more -- > http://libyasos.blogspot.com/2011/07/sorman-massacre.html

KILLING HOPE - List of U.S. Military & NATO Interventions since World War II


Organized mass murder (war) is very often justified as "justice" or moral. Indeed it is almost always the good guys against the bad guys (unless it is a war waged by mercenaries). American and Western wars are always in foreign countries against native peoples, so on the surface it is hard to understand why America and West are in so much denial about their empirism, colonialism, and imperialism...
Peace message from Neji 


List of U.S. Military & NATO Interventions since World War II

+ Japan (Nagasaki & Hiroshima)
1. China - 1945 to 1960s: Was Mao Tse-tung just paranoid?
2. Italy - 1947-1948: Free elections, Hollywood style
3. Greece - 1947 to early 1950s: From cradle of democracy to client state
4. The Philippines - 1940s and 1950s: America's oldest colony
5. Korea - 1945-1953: Was it all that it appeared to be?6. Albania - 1949-1953: The proper English spy
7. Eastern Europe - 1948-1956: Operation Splinter Factor
8. Germany - 1950s: Everything from juvenile delinquency to terrorism
9. Iran - 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings
10. Guatemala - 1953-1954: While the world watched
11. Costa Rica - Mid-1950s: Trying to topple an ally - Part 1
12. Syria - 1956-1957: Purchasing a new government
13. Middle East - 1957-1958: The Eisenhower Doctrine claims another backyard for America
14. Indonesia - 1957-1958: War and pornography
15. Western Europe - 1950s and 1960s: Fronts within fronts within fronts
16. British Guiana - 1953-1964: The CIA's international labor mafia
17. Soviet Union - Late 1940s to 1960s: From spy planes to book publishing
18. Italy - 1950s to 1970s: Supporting the Cardinal's orphans and techno-fascism
19. Vietnam - 1950-1973: The Hearts and Minds Circus
20. Cambodia - 1955-1973: Prince Sihanouk walks the high-wire of neutralism
21. Laos - 1957-1973: L'Armée Clandestine
22. Haiti - 1959-1963: The Marines land, again
23. Guatemala - 1960: One good coup deserves another
24. France/Algeria - 1960s: L'état, c'est la CIA
25. Ecuador - 1960-1963: A text book of dirty tricks
26. The Congo - 1960-1964: The assassination of Patrice Lumumba
27. Brazil - 1961-1964: Introducing the marvelous new world of death squads
28. Peru - 1960-1965: Fort Bragg moves to the jungle
29. Dominican Republic - 1960-1966: Saving democracy from communism by getting rid of democracy
30. Cuba - 1959 to 1980s: The unforgivable revolution
31. Indonesia - 1965: Liquidating President Sukarno … and 500,000 others
East Timor - 1975: And 200,000 more
32. Ghana - 1966: Kwame Nkrumah steps out of line
33. Uruguay - 1964-1970: Torture -- as American as apple pie
34. Chile - 1964-1973: A hammer and sickle stamped on your child's forehead
35. Greece - 1964-1974: "Fuck your Parliament and your Constitution," said
the President of the United States
36. Bolivia - 1964-1975: Tracking down Che Guevara in the land of coup d'etat
37. Guatemala - 1962 to 1980s: A less publicized "final solution"
38. Costa Rica - 1970-1971: Trying to topple an ally -- Part 2
39. Iraq - 1972-1975: Covert action should not be confused with missionary work
40. Australia - 1973-1975: Another free election bites the dust
41. Angola - 1975 to 1980s: The Great Powers Poker Game
42. Zaire - 1975-1978: Mobutu and the CIA, a marriage made in heaven
43. Jamaica - 1976-1980: Kissinger's ultimatum
44. Seychelles - 1979-1981: Yet another area of great strategic importance
45. Grenada - 1979-1984: Lying -- one of the few growth industries in Washington
46. Morocco - 1983: A video nasty
47. Suriname - 1982-1984: Once again, the Cuban bogeyman
48. Libya - 1981-1989: Ronald Reagan meets his match
49. Nicaragua - 1981-1990: Destabilization in slow motion
50. Panama - 1969-1991: Double-crossing our drug supplier
51. Bulgaria 1990/Albania 1991: Teaching communists what democracy is all about
52. Iraq - 1990-1991: Desert holocaust
53. Afghanistan - 1979-1992: America's Jihad
54. El Salvador - 1980-1994: Human rights, Washington style
55. Haiti - 1986-1994: Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?
56. Iraq 1991-till now
57. Kuwait 1991
58 Somalia 1992-94
59. of Serbs at Krajina 1994
60. Bosnia 1995
61. Iran 1998 (airliner)
62. Sudan 1998
63. Afghanistan 1998
64. Serbia 1999
65. Afghanistan 2001-02
66. Libya 2011
67. Ivory Coast 2011
...to be continue or 

COMMENT FOR RESPECT!

You can read comment for RESPECT! 

Avatarplaceholder
MoonPurpose at 1:35 AM June 21, 2011
 
Mr. McDonnell,
    I must say I am shocked with the way you wrote this article, although I haven't read your work before, so I can't really judge if you are always so biased when reporting from Libya. 
   I would just like to point out the obvious- when writing about crime scene ( and this is a crime scene on a larger scale), what should you cover? 
How many victims? 
Who were the victims? 
When did it happen? 
How did it happen? 
Who did it? 
Why? 
   Let's say one US Senator was accused of committing a crime, and was then targeted with bombs in his family house, without evidence or proper trial. Let's say he doesn't die, but his entire family is wiped out. What would be the appropriate title of the article covering a crime scene? Would it be: "The Corrupt Senator survives the attempted murder" or " 10 people killed in bombing attack on a US Senator in his house" or something like that?
  Would you then proceed to describe the "luxurious haven" and the China vases or try to answer the basic question - since when it is OK to attack somebody in his house, without trial, without evidence, just based on allegations. Would you, then take statements describing the character of the victims, because, hey-if a victim was not a good guy, it deserved to die anyway ( I just don't know how you could be able to justify the killing of children, but I guess you can always downplay it a little...) or would you try to do the basic search on the one victim you try to portrait and make sure you are as objective as possible. 

    As you will see, the majority of the resources portray him just as what the Libyan government said he was- A Humanitarian, but you either didn't make the effort to search them or decided to ignore them completely.
   And one last thing- what about this: "The government was eager to display evidence of a "barbaric" assault, in the words of Musa Ibrahim, the chief government spokesman." What kind of a man witnesses a bombed site, with multiple victims including children, and then makes such a remark???? Eager?! Really? 
  How would you react to find your house invaded, destroyed, your children killed, and your only way to seek some justice is to ask the media to show it? 
Because that's exactly what's going on in Libya- a foreign invasion under pretext of Humanitarian aid and protection. Humanitarian bombing...
I guess those 900 ( including over 100 children) people killed in NATO air strikes were not humans after all, maybe they didn't pass the test NATO makes when deciding on targets. 
Is there a code word or something? 
Are the rebels who make the minority of Libyan people the only humans who count? 
And You and Your fellow reporters don't have the guts to stand up for any other humans in Libya, except those politically correct according to your employer. 
But I guess it's like that in America- 
You have to chose: Your conscience or your carrier...


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...