Kadhafi est le fils d’un aviateur corse au nom d’Albert Preziosi Left (and inset) Captain Albert Preziosi, aged 27, right Libyan guide to 33 years. [Gadhafi during the summit of the Organization of African Unity on Aug. 4, 1975, in Kampala, Uganda. (AFP – Getty Images)] According to all evidence received, the resemblance is striking.
The venerable Guide of the Libyan Revolution Muammar Gaddafi, is he of Corsican ancestry? According to a legend (alive on ‘the Island of Beauty’), he is the son of a Corsican bomber, hero of Free France, sent a mission to Libya during the Second World War. No conclusive evidence, but a body of evidence that’s even very troubling in recent years, concerning mobilized army officers of the Airforce.“You know you’re in the birthplace of the father of Qaddafi?»“The few ” pysans” (as they are called on the continent) of Vezzani, a charming little village of Haute-Corse on the mountainside, are immediately put into the bath. Not merely a little proud, the people engage willingly in the memories of villagers: that Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan head of state, is the son of a Corsican airman by the sweet name of Albert Preziosi. Oh, Albert! His shadow still hangs over Vezzani. From the village entrance, a marble plaque affixed to the building of the Post pays tribute to this master, who was born in 1915 and died in 1943 in Russian skies, flying an aircraft of the squadron from Normandie-Niemen. A few turns later, a war memorial commemorating the heroes “fallen gloriously in a dogfight to the north-east of Karachev”and whose body was never found. Even in the office of the Town Hall, the photo under glass of the young Albert, wearing his military uniform, occupies more space than the portrait of the omni-Sarkozy …Like his administration, Mayor of Vezzani, Jean-Pierre Pagni, is hardly surprised when talking to him about the “legend” of Gaddafi’s Corsican ancestry. He even says that he “always heard”. But, like everyone, he never had in his possession “evidence to substantiate or to refute it ….” Pointing to the portrait of the aviator, he can not help remarking: “The resemblance between Muammar Gaddafi, a young officer, and Albert Preziosi is very striking. This, of course, proves nothing, but it’s a nice story. “ And if the “legend” comes one day to be confirmed, it would do him no problem, “the town is ready to offer land to Mr. Qaddafi, he could pitch a tent or build a house!”
Recollections of a meeting in Niger
And the villagers Vezzani, notables of the island, too, are passionate about this “legend”. And everyone looks after their own door. For Alessandrini Alexander, general counselor of the township of Vezzani and adviser to the Assembly of Corsica, the political facts would justify the parentage, as a friend of Gaddafi: Libya supported Corsican nationalists at the beginning of their passionate actions in the 1970s. Without blinking, he asserts that “nationalists have been invited to training camps in the handling of weapons and explosives in Libyan camps.” Evidence, to advise him, that the Colonel had a soft spot for his cousin-revolutionaries.
But times have changed. Gaddafi has now become persona grata on the continent. Dommage, moreover, that “native son” had not “taken advantage of his official visit to France to stay in Corsica: where he would have received the warmest welcome.” Even a better reception …
The same belief is in Francis Quilichini, dashing retired general of information forAjaccio, and the former “colonial” from 1967 to 1977. He then exercised the function of chief of information & security officer with the President of Niger. And remembers precisely the first official visit of the young Libyan head of state with his counterpart from Niger, Hamani Diori.
“In January 1974, President Diori received Colonel Gaddafi in Zinder (The Nigerian’s Sahara’s last town, before its border with Libya). I was there. That evening, President Diori spoke to me & I shook hands with the fellow! Then I learn that Gaddafi had a Corsican father. “ At the time, “I have not tried to find out more, and I regret it.But we must recognize that the assumption is not meaningless, given the presence of Albert Preziosi in Libya in the 40s. And then, the colonial, who spawned the most easily with the natives, was Corsicans …. “
Minimum of Archives
Seen from the Vezzani, the legend of Gaddafi’s Corsican ancestry is so tenacious that it ended up enrolling in the collective imagination of the ‘Island of Beauty’. Yet, apart from oral transmission, it did not leave a paper trail. So far anyway. Not a biography of Albert Preziosi mentions the birth of a child, the result of a romance with a Jewish-Libyan. Nor, is it the story one demented.
Moreover, little literature exists on the driver. When contacted, the service history of the Air Force, located in Vincennes (94), which centralizes all documents and serves as a reference for biographers and historians of the war, it is clear that the record “Preziosi” is rather thin: a few biographical elements from the specialized press as well as compilations of files from the army. Even a section of the far-right weekly Minute, released in 1977 under the title “Gaddafi is it the son of a Corsican captain?» ,“Which had caused a stir on the island, is not there. So we exit the archives of the Air Force, for the moment.
Only hope at this stage of the investigation: track by itself the peregrinations of Albert Preziosi in Libya. Objective: To determine whether these dates coincide with the design of Muammar Gaddafi. Officially, the Gaddafi was born June 19, 1942 in Sirte, in a family of Bedouin tribe Senoussi, originally from the Fezzan region, which borders with Nigeria and Chad. Logically, he was conceived between September and October 1941.
Where was the beautiful Albert at this moment? Alas! The few existing literature on the pilot (pamphlets on the history of the Escadrille Normandie-Niemen, dictionaries Aviation, chapters in history books …) certainly agree on the regular presence of the pilot in Libya but with discrepancies of dates and places.
However, among the many assumptions routes of Preziosi in Lybia, this track stands out: that the pilot has taken the column Leclerc in his conquest of the Fezzan. The French are indeed located in this region since the 1940s, [before administration in 1943 and afterwards, until 1951]. Historical facts abound in this direction.
Indeed, General Leclerc left Africa to cut back Italian and German armies. The first contingent of the column was shipped from England, 30 August 1940, towards the African continent. However, two traveling companions Preziosi – Bellows and Yves Jacques Ezanno – left France in June 1940. The logic is therefore that, like them, Preziosi be reassembled with the column Leclerc to the north of Chad, he then crossed the south by Libya, to join Egypt and Rayak, where he arrived in late 1941 .
In view of these dates, the pilot actually met a Jewish woman in the Libyan Fezzan region at the time of the conception of Muammar Gaddafi. Preziosi could be one of those airmen, who in time of war, plunged into anonymity, to better ensure the success of their missions.
Legend of Supreme Leader of the Libyan revolution requires, that Muammar Gaddafi had indeed a Libyan father. Gadhafi honored Abu Meniar Al Gaddafi, Bedouin goat farmer in the region of Sirte as his true father, up until his death. But mystery and gumdrop, we did not find any trace that Abu Meniar sired Moammar with Aisha, the only mother Muammar knew and was raised by. It is never clear either if Aisha had a sister that could have died and she and Abu Meniar raised Moammar as their own son. Marital status and childbirth records in Libya, under Italian colonial rule, were very random; and, the vagueness of the Qaddafi family is only bigger.
Evidence of the fluctuating numbers of brothers of Gaddafi: According to some biographers, the Libyan leader was an only son. For others, it would be the last of many siblings. Finally, after the American journalist John Cooley, who has devoted a well-documented work published in France in 1982, Wind sand on Libya, Muammar has a brother, Sayed Kaddam …
The fellow combatants testify
In this context, the testimony of the few comrades of Albert Preziosi remaining alive, should provide valuable assistance. They are, after all, the only ones still able to hang up the missing links.
Captain Georges Masurel is just one of the last Free French able to be a witness their epic. A Mechanic gunner, he then became a pilot, where he met, for the first time, Albert Preziosi in Libya in 1942 within the group from Alsace. Then, he accompanied him as a mechanic in the “Neu-Neu”, the group Normandie-Niemen [in the jargon of the ancients].
Validating the theory for the Corsican paternity of Muammar Gaddafi, he says, “Preziosi was certainly on the team of the Leclerc Column” before joining the end of 1941, the base of Rayak order to train pilots.“The group came from Alsace Moreover, and many men there had “done Africa” and therefore passed through Libya. “ Is it then that Georges Masurel got wind of a link between his companion and a Libyan? “Yes,” says he, but from another fact. An amazing incident, which would have triggered the whole affair …
During the summer of 1942, when French forces struggling against the Italians and Germans at Bir Hakeim north-eastern Libya, Masurel and his fellow squadron learn that the plane piloted by Preziosi, which was to rally at Tobruk, did not arrive. “For us, he was missing for more than a month after he returned to the base. “
Surprise ! Shot down in full flight, the young Albert then told his comrades that he was rescued by a Libyan tribe who helped him recover and cared for him, while hiding from the Germans. “He lived well with them for at least three weeks . It is from here that some have begun to talk of an affair with a Jewish Libyan woman during his stay in the desert. “
And how was it that he was the main person who had heard these rumors? Georges Masurel modest response: “You know, it was war. They had other priorities.And Albert did not stay long when retracted. I lost sightof him for a while because he was very sick, and was referred to hospital in Cairo.... He was then found by the Normandie-Niemen in late 1942. “
A mixture of calendars
If based on the official date of birth of Muammar Qaddafi – 07 June 1942 – Albert Preziosi’s stay in a Libyan tribe would have effectively allowed the proud father to attend the birth of his son (and not just the conception), unless the official biographer of “The Guide” untangles the brushes between the Georgian calendar and the Islamic calendar …
And to make things worse, in November 1978 to mark the Muslim New Year, Gaddafi led a revolution calendar. He decreed that the Muslim calendar was not to begin in 622 AD (the date of the Prophet’s emigration to Medina as is the reference calendar in the Muslim world) but in 632, his death … This, According to scholars (and risky) calculations, could mean that little Gaddafi was born later. Even in 1943, nine months after Preziosi has lived in a Libyan tribe.
There is much speculation about why the old fellow squadron of bel Albert did not linger. And for good reason! At the hearing, the entire squadron knew and shared the secret.
When Major Pierre Lorillon joined Normandy-Niemen in late 1943, Albert Preziosi had already died as a hero five months earlier. He vividly remembers when he had discussions with other pilots in the group. For him, the descent Preziosi / Gaddafi is no doubt. “We all knew that Albert had a girlfriend” big tent “Libyan, that is to say, a noble daughter of the haute bourgeoisie. But it is a story that is not familiar.We just knew he had a child and this woman’s uncle took him in hand, and sent to study abroad to calm the spirits and protect the reputation of the tribe. He has always avoided talking about it.That Europeans make a kid of a Libyan, this could cause problems, including Albert. This kind of thing was anyway not well regarded by the English. “… A real good reason that, once established as a pretext, has allowed the Great Silence not to be opened ….
Descendants very cautious
We did not know what his family thought of the Preziosi certainties of his former fellow pilot prodigy. A difficult task when you consider that most Preziosi embraced a military career or bathed in the medium. Born to a policeman father, a native of Fontana Castagniccia who married a girl from Paoli Nocario just a few turns away, Albert had a brother, four years his senior. John had chosen the same path as his father, and attained the rank of General of police. His widow was [in July 28, 1997] at the first ceremony commemorating the death, fifty-four years earlier, Albert.
These commemorations were held in the Corsican village of Vezzani, on the initiative of the commander of Air Base 126 of Solenzara Ventiseri-bearing just the name of Captain Albert Preziosi. Members of the local chapter of the National Association of Reserve Officers of the Air Force (ANORAA) were particularly active in preparing the event. Especially one of them, a certain Francis … Preziosi.
Contact made, Francis is the son of a cousin of Albert. Reserve officer, he helped gather biographical information about his great-uncle to his association, identifying the documents available and open. “I have always know this story of descent with Gaddafi and tried to find out more»he admits. “I even asked an acquaintance to interrogate one of his old friends of 50 years who was then based in Fezzan for Indigenous Affairs “. Even for him, the answer fell without appeal: “professional confidentiality”. As if a veil of secrecy should continue to surround this case. François Preziosi remembers this scene, however, in the 70’s, Albert’s mother, mailed at the small screen, exclaiming: “But it’s Albert!” The video showed images of the young Libyan leader.
An industrialist and a senior officer of a Kind
“It was this physical resemblance between the two men who created this whole story,” relativizes Jacques-Antoine Preziosi, a nephew of Albert, a lawyer in Marseille. “There is no evidence whatsoever to prove this relationship.We have no document that speaks of it, and Albert left no mail. So for us, the direct descendants, it is a nonevent. “
BUT neither has he tried to get in touch with Muammar Gaddafi and his entourage? “We never asked for anything, it’s very immodest. And very moved. You see yourself; go talk to Gaddafi?Touch to the image of his mother? If I were her, I would take it very badly. And then there is something as risking imprisonment . “
Yet Jacques-Antoine recognizes that many people have contacted him, asking if his uncle was the father of Colonel Gaddafi. Among them, a few years ago, representatives of a manufacturer which he will not name. Jacques-Antoine then saw all red, “he thought of how his industry could use this story to win contracts?»“
These men were clearly not the only “big guns” to inquire about the father of Muammar. In 1999, a senior Frenchmen, questioned in writing, the Chief Historian of the Air Force, General Silvestre de Sacy, whether the track was a good corse. The Service has buried the application for Inquiry. [Reason given: during the Libyan campaign, the French officers had no contact with the natives, let alone with women. BUT, the survivors of the Normandy-Niemen show otherwise.]
The topic of Corsican ancestry for Gaddafi is not closed: Far from it; but, since evidence by a DNA test would be untouchable, [as one must draw blood from the Colonel] it seems impossible …
Kadhafi est le fils d’un aviateur corse au nom d’Albert Preziosi
Kadhafi, l’enquête corse
À gauche (et en médaillon) le capitaine Albert Preziosi, âgé de 27 ans, à droite le guide Libyen à 33 ans. Selon l’ensemble des témoignages receuillis, la ressemblance est frappante.
Le vénérable Guide de la révolution libyenne, Mouammar Kadhafi, a-t-il une filiation corse ? Selon une légende vivace dans l’Ile de Beauté, il serait le fils d’un aviateur corse, héros de la France Libre, envoyé en mission en Libye pendant la Seconde Guerre Mondiale. Pas de preuve irréfutable mais un faisceau d’indices très troublants qui ont même mobilisé ces dernières années des officiers de l’armée de l’Air.
« Vous savez que vous êtes dans le village natal du père de Kadhafi ? » Les rares « pinsouts » du continent faisant escale à Vezzani, charmante petite bourgade de Haute-Corse à flanc de montagne, sont d’emblée mis dans le bain. Pas peu fiers, les habitants se livrent volontiers : de mémoire de villageois, le colonel Mouammar Kadhafi, chef de l’État libyen, est le fils d’un aviateur corse répondant au doux nom d’Albert Preziosi.
Ah, Albert ! Son ombre plane encore sur Vezzani. Dès l’entrée du village, une plaque de marbre apposée sur le bâtiment de la Poste rend hommage à ce capitaine né en 1915 et mort en 1943 dans le ciel de Russie, aux commandes d’un appareil de l’escadrille Normandie-Niemen. Quelques virages plus loin, un monument aux morts commémore ce héros « tombé glorieusement au cours d’un combat aérien au nord-est de Karachev » et dont le corps n’a jamais été retrouvé. Même dans le bureau de la Mairie, la photo sous verre du jeune Albert en tenue militaire occupe plus de place que le portrait de l’omniprésident Sarkozy…
À l’instar de ses administrés, le maire de Vezzani, Jean-Pierre Pagni, n’est guère surpris lorsqu’on évoque devant lui la « légende » d’une filiation corse de Kadhafi. Il en a même « toujours entendu parler ». Mais, comme tous, il n’a jamais eu en sa possession « d’éléments permettant de l’étayer ou… de la contredire ». Montrant du doigt le portrait de l’aviateur, il ne peut s’empêcher de remarquer : « la ressemblance entre Mouammar Kadhafi, jeune officier, et Albert Preziosi est très frappante. Vous ne trouvez pas ? Cela, évidemment, ne prouve rien, mais c’est une belle histoire ». Et si la « légende » venait un jour à être confirmée, cela ne lui poserait aucun problème : « la commune est toute disposée à offrir un terrain à M. Kadhafi, où il pourrait planter sa tente, ou construire une maison » !
Souvenirs d’une rencontre au Niger
Comme les villageois de Vezzani, les notables de l’Ile, eux aussi, se passionnent pour cette « légende ». Et chacun voit midi à sa porte. Pour Alexandre Alessandrini, conseiller général du canton de Vezzani et conseiller à l’Assemblée de Corse, des faits politiques pourraient légitimer la filiation de l’ami Kadhafi : le soutien libyen aux nationalistes corses, au début de leurs actions violentes dans les années 70. Sans ciller, il affirme que « des nationalistes ont été invités à des stages d’entraînement au maniement d’armes et d’explosifs dans des camps libyens ». Preuve, pour le conseiller, que le Colonel aurait un petit faible pour ses cousins révolutionnaires.
Mais les temps ont changé. Kadhafi est aujourd’hui devenu persona grata sur le continent. Dommage, d’ailleurs, que « l’enfant du pays » n’ait pas « profité de sa visite officielle en France pour séjourner en Corse : il y aurait reçu le meilleur accueil ». Voire un meilleur accueil…
Mêmes convictions chez François Quilichini, retraité fringant des Renseignements Généraux à Ajaccio et ancien de la « coloniale » de 1967 à 1977. Il exerçait alors la fonction de chef du bureau renseignement-sécurité auprès du président du Niger. Et se souvient avec précision de la première visite officielle du jeune chef d’Etat libyen auprès de son homologue nigérien, Hamani Diori.
« En janvier 1974, le président Diori a reçu le colonel Kadhafi à Zinder (dernière ville saharienne du Niger avant la frontière libyenne). J’étais présent. Le soir, le président Diori m’a confié que j’avais serré la main d’un compatriote ! J’apprends alors que Kadhafi avait un père corse ». Sur le moment, « je n’ai pas cherché à en savoir plus, et je le regrette. Mais il faut bien reconnaître que l’hypothèse n’est pas dénuée de sens, au vu de la présence d’Albert Preziosi en Libye dans les années 40. Et puis, dans la coloniale, ceux qui frayaient le plus facilement avec les autochtones, c’étaient les Corses… ».
Des archives a minima
Vu de Vezzani, la légende d’une filiation corse de Kadhafi est si tenace qu’elle a fini par s’inscrire dans l’imaginaire collectif de l’Ile de Beauté. Pourtant, hormis une transmission orale, elle n’a pas laissé de traces écrites. A ce jour en tout cas. Pas une biographie d’Albert Preziosi ne mentionne la naissance d’un enfant, fruit d’une romance avec une Libyenne. Ou ne le dément.
Du reste, peu de documentation existe sur le pilote. Lorsqu’on contacte le service historique de l’Armée de l’air, situé à Vincennes (94), qui centralise l’ensemble des documents et sert de référence aux biographes et aux historiens de la guerre, force est de constater que le dossier « Preziosi » est plutôt mince : quelques éléments biographiques tirés de la presse spécialisée ainsi que des compilations de dossiers de l’armée. Même un article de l’hebdomadaire d’extrême-droite Minute, publié en 1977 sous le titre « Kadhafi serait-il le fils d’un capitaine corse ? », qui avait fait grand bruit dans l’Ile, n’y figure pas. Exit donc les archives de l’Armée de l’air, pour l’instant.
Seul espoir à ce stade de l’enquête : retracer par soi-même les pérégrinations d’Albert Preziosi en Libye. Objectif : vérifier si ces dates coïncident avec celle de la conception de Mouammar Kadhafi. Officiellement, le Guide est né le 19 juin 1942 à Syrte, dans une famille de bédouins de la tribu Senoussi, originaire de la région du Fezzan, à la frontière avec le Niger et le Tchad. Logiquement, il a donc été conçu entre septembre et octobre 1941.
Où se trouvait donc le bel Albert à ce moment précis ? Las ! Les quelques écrits existants sur le pilote (brochures sur l’histoire de l’escadrille Normandie-Niemen, dictionnaires de l’aviation, chapitres de manuels d’Histoire…) s’accordent certes sur la présence régulière du pilote en Libye mais avec des divergences de dates et de lieux.
Pour autant, parmi les nombreuses hypothèses d’itinéraires libyens de Preziosi, une piste sort du lot : que le pilote ait suivi la colonne Leclerc dans sa conquête du Fezzan. Les Français se sont en effet implantés dans cette région dans les années 1940, avant de l’administrer à partir de 1943 et ce, jusqu’en 1951. Les faits historiques abondent dans ce sens.
En effet, le Général Leclerc est parti d’Afrique pour couper les arrières des armées italiennes et allemandes. Le premier contingent de la colonne a embarqué, depuis l’Angleterre, le 30 août 1940, en direction du continent africain. Or, deux compagnons de route de Preziosi – Jacques Soufflet et Yves Ezanno – sont partis de France en juin 1940. La logique voudrait donc que, comme eux, Preziosi soit ensuite remonté avec la colonne Leclerc par le nord du Tchad, qu’il ait ensuite traversé la Libye par le sud, pour rejoindre l’ Égypte puis Rayak, où il arrive à la fin 1941.
Au vu de ces dates, le pilote a effectivement pu rencontrer une femme libyenne dans la région du Fezzan au moment de la procréation de Mouammar Kadhafi. Preziosi pourrait donc être l’un de ces aviateurs qui, en temps de guerre, plongent dans l’anonymat pour mieux assurer le succès de leurs missions.
Le père Libyen
Légende du Guide suprême de la révolution libyenne oblige, Mouammar Kadhafi a (aussi) un père libyen. Officiel celui-là. Ses différentes biographies mentionnent un certain Abou Meniar Al Kadhafi, bédouin éleveur de chèvres de la région de Syrte. Mais, mystère et boule de gomme, on ne retrouve pas de traces ni de la date de naissance d’Abou Meniar, ni de celle de son mariage avec Aïcha, la mère de Mouammar. Il n’est jamais précisé non plus si Aïcha a été la seule et unique épouse d’Abou Meniar. L’état civil dans la Libye sous colonisation italienne étant fort aléatoire, le flou entourant la famille Khadhafi n’en est que plus grand.
En témoigne le nombre, fluctuant, des frères de Kadhafi. Selon certains biographes, le leader libyen serait fils unique. Pour d’autres, il serait le dernier d’une nombreuse fratrie. Enfin, d’après le journaliste américain John Cooley, qui lui a consacré un ouvrage très documenté paru en France en 1982, Vent de sable sur la Libye, Mouammar aurait un frère, Sayed Kaddam…
Les compagnons de combat témoignent
Dans ce contexte, les témoignages des rares compagnons de combat d’Albert Preziosi encore en vie devraient apporter une aide précieuse. Ils sont après tout les seuls encore à même de raccrocher les chaînons manquants.
Le capitaine Georges Masurel est justement l’un des derniers Français Libres à pouvoir témoigner de leur épopée. Mécanicien devenu mitrailleur puis pilote, il a rencontré pour la première fois Albert Preziosi en Libye en 1942 au sein du groupe Alsace. Puis il l’a accompagné comme mécanicien au sein du « Neu-Neu », le groupe Normandie-Niemen dans le jargon des anciens.
Validant la thèse du paternel corse de Mouammar Kadhafi, il affirme que « Preziosi était certainement avec l’équipe de la colonne Leclerc » avant de rejoindre, fin 1941, la base de Rayak pour y assurer la formation des pilotes. « Le groupe Alsace provenait d’ailleurs pour beaucoup des hommes qui avaient “fait l’Afrique” et qui sont donc passés par la Libye ». Georges Masurel aurait-il donc eu vent d’une liaison entre son compagnon de route et une Libyenne ? « Oui », confirme-t-il mais à partir d’un autre fait. Un incident étonnant, qui aurait déclenché toute l’affaire…
Pendant l’été 1942, alors que les forces françaises bataillent contre les Italiens et les Allemands à Bir Hakeim, au nord-est de la Libye, Masurel et ses camarades d’escadrille apprennent que l’avion piloté par Preziosi, qui doit rallier Tobrouk, n’est pas arrivé à destination. « Pour nous, il était porté disparu. Et plus d’un mois après, il est revenu à la base ».
Surprise ! Abattu en plein vol, le jeune Albert raconte alors à ses camarades qu’il a été recueilli par une tribu libyenne qui l’a récupéré et soigné, tout en le cachant des Allemands. « Il a vécu ainsi avec eux pendant au moins trois semaines. C’est à partir de là que certains ont commencé à parler d’une liaison avec une Libyenne pendant son séjour dans le désert ».
Et qu’en disait le principal intéressé qui avait eu vent de ces rumeurs ? Réponse pudique de Georges Masurel : « vous savez, c’était la guerre. On avait d’autres priorités. Et puis Albert n’est pas resté longtemps une fois rentré. Je l’ai perdu de vue pendant un bon moment car il était très malade et a été renvoyé à l’hôpital au Caire. On s’est retrouvé ensuite pour le Normandie-Niemen à la fin 1942 ».
Un mélange de calendriers
Si on se base sur la date de naissance officielle de Mouammar Kadhafi – juin 1942 – le séjour d’Albert Preziosi au sein d’une tribu libyenne aurait en fait permis à l’heureux papa d’assister à la naissance de son fiston. Et non de le concevoir. A moins que les biographes officiels du Guide ne se soient emmêlés les pinceaux entre le calendrier georgien et le calendrier musulman…
Et, pour corser le tout, en novembre 1978, à l’occasion du Nouvel an musulman, Kadhafi a mené une révolution calendaire. Il a décrété que le calendrier musulman ne devait plus débuter en 622 de l’ère chrétienne (date de l’émigration du Prophète vers Médine et qui sert de référence calendaire dans le monde musulman) mais en 632, à sa mort… Ce qui, après de savants (et hasardeux) calculs, pourrait signifier que le petit Kadhafi serait né plus tard. Voire en 1943, neuf mois après que Preziosi ait vécu dans une tribu libyenne.
Autant de conjectures sur lesquelles les anciens compagnons d’escadrille du bel Albert ne s’attardent guère. Et pour cause ! À les entendre, toute l’escadrille était au courant et partageait LE secret.
Lorsque le commandant Pierre Lorillon rejoint Normandie-Niemen à la fin 1943, Albert Preziosi avait déjà trouvé la mort en héros cinq mois plus tôt. Il se souvient très bien des discussions qu’il avait alors avec les autres pilotes du groupe. Pour lui, la filiation Preziosi/Kadhafi ne fait aucun doute. « On savait tous qu’Albert avait eu une copine “grande tente” libyenne, c’est-à-dire une fille noble de la haute bourgeoisie. Mais c’est une histoire qu’on ne connaît pas bien. On savait juste qu’il lui avait fait un enfant et que l’oncle de cette femme l’avait pris en main, et envoyé étudier à l’étranger pour calmer les esprits et préserver la réputation de la tribu. On a toujours évité d’en parler. Qu’un Européen fasse un gosse à une Libyenne, cela pouvait causer des problèmes, y compris à Albert. Ce genre de chose n’était du reste pas bien vu par les Anglais ». Une vraie bonne raison qui, une fois érigée en prétexte, a permis à la Grande Muette de ne pas l’ouvrir…
Des descendants très prudents
Restait à savoir ce que pensait la famille Preziosi des certitudes des anciens compagnons de son pilote prodige. Une tâche difficile quand on sait que la plupart des Preziosi ont embrassé une carrière militaire ou baigné dans le milieu. Né d’un père gendarme, originaire de Fontana en Castagniccia et marié à une fille Paoli, de Nocario, à quelques virages de là, Albert avait un frère, de quatre ans son aîné. Jean a choisi la même voie que son père et a accédé au rang de Général de gendarmerie. Sa veuve le représentait le 28 juillet 1997 à la première cérémonie commémorative de la disparition, cinquante-quatre ans plus tôt, d’Albert.
Ces commémorations se sont déroulées au village corse de Vezzani, sur initiative du commandant de la base aérienne 126 de Ventiseri-Solenzara qui porte justement le nom du capitaine Albert Preziosi. Les membres de la section régionale de l’Association nationale des officiers de réserve de l’armée de l’air (ANORAA) s’étaient particulièrement mobilisés pour préparer l’événement. Surtout l’un d’entre eux, un certain François… Preziosi.
Contact pris, François est fils d’un cousin d’Albert. Officier réserviste, il a contribué à rassembler des éléments biographiques sur son grand-oncle pour son association, en recensant les documents disponibles et ouverts. « Je connais depuis toujours cette histoire de filiation avec Kadhafi et j’ai essayé d’en savoir plus » reconnaît-il. « J’ai même demandé à une connaissance d’interroger un de ses vieux copains de 50 ans qui était à l’époque en fonction dans le Fezzan pour les “affaires indigènes” ». Même pour lui, la réponse est tombée, sans appel : « secret professionnel ». Comme si un voile opaque devait continuer d’envelopper cette affaire. François Preziosi se souvient pourtant de cette scène où, dans les années 70, la mère d’Albert postée devant le petit écran, s’est écriée : « Mais, c’est Albert ! » Le reportage montrait des images du jeune leader libyen.
Un industriel et un officier supérieur s’en mêlent
« C’est cette ressemblance physique entre les deux hommes qui a créée toute cette histoire », relativise Jacques-Antoine Preziosi, un des neveux d’Albert, avocat à Marseille. « Il n’existe aucun élément d’aucune sorte pour attester ce lien de parenté. Nous n’avons aucun document qui en parle et Albert n’a laissé aucun courrier. Donc, pour nous, les descendants directs, c’est un non-événement ».
Soit, mais a-t-il essayé d’entrer en contact avec Mouammar Kadhafi ou son entourage ? « Nous n’avons jamais demandé quoi que ce soit, c’est très impudique. Et très déplacé. Vous vous voyez aller en parler à Kadhafi ? Toucher ainsi à l’image de sa mère ? Si j’étais lui, je le prendrais extrêmement mal. Et puis il y a de quoi risquer de se faire embastiller ».
Pourtant Jacques-Antoine reconnaît que de nombreuses personnes l’ont contacté pour lui demander si son oncle était le père du colonel Kadhafi. Parmi elles, il y a quelques années, les représentants d’un industriel dont il taira le nom. Jacques-Antoine a alors vu tout rouge : « il croyait quoi cet industriel ? Qu’il pouvait utiliser cette histoire pour décrocher des contrats ? »
Ces hommes n’étaient visiblement pas les seuls « gros calibres » à s’enquérir du paternel de Mouammar. En 1999, un officier supérieur français interrogeait par écrit le chef du service historique de l’Armée de l’air, le Général Silvestre de Sacy, pour savoir si la piste corse était la bonne. Lequel service a enterré la demande (voir l’encadré en cliquant ici). Motif invoqué : pendant la campagne de Libye, les officiers français n’avaient pas de contacts avec les autochtones et encore moins avec les femmes. Les survivants de Normandie-Niemen témoignent du contraire.
Le sujet de la filiation corse de Kadhafi n’est donc pas clos. Loin de là, même si la seule preuve intangible serait un test ADN. Et de là à effectuer un prélèvement sur le Colonel…
Gadhafi took power in a bloodless military coup in 1969 when he toppled King Idriss, and in the 1970s he formulated his “Third Universal Theory,” a middle road between communism and capitalism.
Gadhafi oversaw the rapid development of his poverty-stricken country, previously known for little more than oil wells and deserts where huge tank battles took place in World War Two.
One of his first tasks was to build up the armed forces, but he also spent billions of dollars of oil income on improving living standards, making him popular with the low-paid.
Gadhafi has poured money into giant projects such as a steel plant in the town of Misrata and the Great Man-Made River, a scheme to pipe water from desert wells to coastal communities.
He has dissidents, who include Islamists, and uses what he terms “purification committees” of army and police officers, joined by loyal students, tohelp keep control.
But he is also respected by most Libyans. He is a figure of real charisma, with an earthy popular touch; and has exploited the medium television unlike other Arab leaders.
Visionary and mystic, Gadhafi’s quirky style is unique.
His love of grand gestures is most on display on foreign visits when he sleeps in a Bedouin tent guarded by dozens of female bodyguards.
During a visit to Italy in August last year, Gadhafi’s invitation to hundreds of young women to convert to Islam overshadowed the two-day trip, which was intended to cement the growing ties between Tripoli and Rome.
The New York Times described Gadhafi’s insistence on staying on the first floor when he visited New York for a 2009 for a meeting at the United Nations. He refuses to climb more than 35 steps.
Sorry it is late, with a sincere apology from me
Adam King For those who don’t know me well, I’m sorry. I’ll try to be brief. I was a great friend and close to Mu’ammar for many years, since around 1982 and was last with him in September 2000.Since then, I have had no direct contact, although I have visited and was appointed by him as a director of the World Centre for the Studies and Researches on The Green Book and the Third Universal Theory, a few years later.However, for reasons I am only now starting to understand, I was cut off from him by persons which won’t be named here but who are already entering the dustbin of history. I was not the only one cut off from the Leader.It turns out that in the 1990’s we were asked our opinion about Libya establishing good relations with Britain and the USA and whether they could be trusted. We were asked individually one by one in private. I was one of those who said that no, they could not be trusted.As a result of this, and also other developments which later isolated the Leader and placed him “in prison”, we were cut off, and I for example, did not ever receive any salaries in my new position, nor any further invitations, and all communications were blocked.That is, until almost 2 years ago, when I received a message from Mu’ammar via an intermediary, who is also a non-Libyan. The old man, who I had not known before, in the time I got to know him I found him to be extremely honest, principled and gentle. His name is Haneef.Haneef, he has other nicknames, told me that Mu’ammar said to him to tell the world, that he is being held prisoner. He said this to Haneef to his ear in a low voice while hugging him. Mu’ammar also shed a tear which dropped onto Haneef’s shoulder, he felt the wet.I wanted to believe Haneef. But I could not truly understand how it could be that this Great Man could be held a prisoner. We discussed at great length for many days.
I remember that what he said was along the lines of “I can’t talk freely, they are always keeping me prisoner, tell the world I have not changed, I am still a revolutionary”….
Now the confession and apology I have to make is this. I wanted to believe Haneef as all I could see and know about this suffering man and his history spoke of genuine commitment to his people, so why would he pass that message to me and lie about it? There was no benefit to him.
Haneef was not looking for anything from me, and indeed I did not have much to give him other than a potential voice via Mathaba. So I offered Haneef to write and I would publish it. For whatever reasons, communications were lost, I faced many personal problems and became side tracked.
So I apologize now to Haneef for not doing something about it sooner. I just could not understand nor believe that Mu’ammar could be held a prisoner. And it is only in the past weeks that I have come to understand.
I also want to apologize to Mu’ammar. I carried your picture with me everywhere I went for more than 10 years. I was your loyal Truth soldier. I was abducted and tortured because of it, because there are those who fear the Pen, which is much more mighty than the sword.
I did try. I tried so many times to establish communications and try to find the truth. I had Saif’s mobile phone number and also another personal close friend of Mu’ammar’s. But I was shy to call, thinking they would not listen, and what exactly should I say, calling randomly on a phone to someone I don’t know.
I have met Saif’s staff, and all the experiences were negative: they were hopeless, admitted they had lost files, not passed on communications, and begged me not to tell him. Worse, a top advisor of President Museveni of Uganda conspired using my naivety and trust, with one of Saif staff, and ran off with $2 million.
That for me was the last straw, I did never meet Saif, but judging from those of his security and office staff that I met, and the little I had heard from him, I admit I did not trust him, on the contrary to his Father Mu’ammar and Bro. Abdussalam Ahmed Jalloud.
After this I made no further attempts, until one day a few months ago, near the start of the problems, I did try to call Sayf’s mobile but did not get through. I didn’t try again. I have not had any communications with Libya now for several years. And I had honestly resolved to have nothing to do with Qadhafi again.
But things have changed now in the past few weeks due to a big realization, and many parts of the jigsaw that I could not understand, now falling into place. And the biggest realization is the understanding that it really was true, Mu’ammar was being held prisoner.
I offer my sincere personal apology to Mu’ammar for ever having doubted him, even slightly. In my defense, I ask that it be considered, that I did not buckle even under torture in Sudan, and by the British, and even by the psychological terrorism carried out against me in 2001-2 by the Pentagon because of my creating mathaba.net and the Green Charter International, both of which they closed down but I refused to cower.
I only started to have doubts because I had been cut off, and thought it not possible for that to happen without Mu’ammar’s blessing. I now know better.
Allow me to explain. There are different types of prison. I myself have been in prisons of different types. There is the highest category where you are locked up 24/7 and in isolation. There are lower categories where you are locked up and physically confined but may have communications.
But there is an “open prison” where you can be locked up: imagine if you have got the best ideas in the world to solve some problems, or a wonderful invention or business idea, but you are a pauper. No one will listen and you cannot find any way to start, that is one prison.
Imagine if you are Mu’ammar. Since you were a youngster you feared none but Allah. Then, as you mellowed, people took advantage of your naivety and honesty. They surrounded you and made you rely on them. They tricked you and withheld information from you. They failed to pass on your instructions.
They encircled your children, certainly your six boys, and offered them the idea, that you bought into, to let them try to integrate with the high-life “western” society, rub shoulders with the global elite, get to know them, earn their trust, and make peace for the good of the world.
But, as condition for all of this you are told, for your own benefit, and the entire nation, we need you to keep quiet, stop talking about revolution for a few years, tone it down, let your sons gain confidence and ability, give them authority, and so and so authority, all will be arranged, and at the end you will be the one to give the final yes or no and then shake hands with Rice and Blair.
I met the key person who set up that meeting with Mike O’Brian, Blair’s Foreign Minister, which was the final stage before the British decided if they could trust Mu’ammar not to at the last second when Blair would arrive in Libya, scupper the entire thing and expose the British for who they were. And that key person, is that same Ugandan, who is perhaps the wealthiest man in Africa, and who stole $2 million from Saif!
Now I can also understand, why it is, that the Libyan delegation at the U.N. where Mu’ammar travelled for the first time, with immense courage, right into the lion’s den, in September 2009, why they were so unhappy with Mu’ammar’s speech. Ali Abdussalam Treiki even buried his head in his hands. The reason is, that Mu’ammar could not resist speaking Truth to Power.
This, and the other rare occasions where he refused to be silenced or took the opportunity to speak a little of his mind, worried not only those who had imprisoned him within Libya “for his own good” no doubt, but the globalist elite that occupy the U.S., Britain, France and Italy, the E.U. and many other countries of the “new world order.”
Now however, I saw Mu’ammar, even though just via video. At first he seemed very shaken and shocked in the first days when the reality of the treachery against him had hit him. His son Saif too, spent clearly many sleepless nights. But to Saif’s credit, he has rallied to his father, as he too was betrayed. But now Mu’ammar is finally free from the “prison chains” that were restricting him, and he is clearly much happier to be free.
So this brings me back to the point of Mu’ammar’s Message to the World. He had hoped that we would relay it. Due to extreme hardship that had been caused by those mentioned above who stole all budgets and salaries, and keeping this independent truth media running where everyone else would give up and close down to the stress and difficulties of working without income, sleep, rest, or any semblance of normal life.
Due to this, we missed it. Mind you, if we’d said it, maybe no one would have believed us. But now is now. Now, the communications are being re-established. We defended Mu’ammar’s web site his long-term repository of his voice http://www.algathafi.org when it was shut down by the Americans, until it re-opened in Russia. We re-opened our Libya News coverage even with a zero budget and more sacrifice.
But we have done so willingly as it is our duty, and we are pleased to see Mu’ammar is still with us, did not change, and is now rid of the evil and corrupt people who surrounded him. There are still difficulties, but with your help we will overcome them.
Mu’ammar wants us to share the Truth, nothing more and nothing less. To truthfully relay his words to the world. Not like Jazeera and the BBC. Like Mathaba. Mathaba was his creation of concept, which I brought to the Internet. He wants us to use it as a vehicle to spread the Word of Truth. The Green Book, The Green Charter, The White Book, his speeches, and the voices of those Truth soldiers around the world: writers, analysts, and researchers.
He wants us to read his entire U.N. speech, and other speeches at his personal web site algathafi.org. He wants us to network and form Mathabas around the world, to allow people to “Meet And Talk Helping All Become Aware”, to discuss the Third Universal Theory as a solution he is offering us, to share ideas, and above all to think globally and act locally, both on the Internet via Mathaba.Net and offline in the community.
Please join him and us in this important work. For example, have you noticed that in spite of all the many decades of (false) accusations against Mu’ammar regarding terrorism, too many to mention here, now that Libya is truly under attack and any other nation would demand a Holy Jihad to fight the Crusaders wherever you find them, attack France, Britain, USA and their interests, that not one single word of violence has been spoken?
Have you noticed that despite the allegations of massacres in Libya and even the “right” of a democratic government to restore law and order for the safety and security of her citizens, Benghazi was left alone from the start, rather than endanger a single human life? That Mu’ammar can still ride around city centres without any real armed security unlike those who are attacking him?
The more you will learn each day about Mu’ammar and Libya, the more you will realise that now is the time that all good (wo)men of the world must speak out and act, for all that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good (wo)men to do nothing.
‘Voluptuous blonde’ nurse
Gadhafi is also said to have had heavily relied on his staff of four Ukrainian nurses to groom and care for him; but he sent them back to the Ukraine when the uprising began.
Muammar Gaddafi’s nurse flees Libya for Ukraine
Miriam Elder in Moscow
Muammar Gaddafi‘s “voluptuous” nurse and close confidante has fled Libya for her native Ukraine. Galyna Kolotnytska arrived in Kiev early on Sunday morning on a Ukrainian defence ministry aircraft that evacuated 185 people from the country, Ukraine’s Segodnya newspaper reported. Kolotnytska, 38, was described in US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks in December as a “voluptuous blonde”, one of Gaddafi’s closest confidantes. “Libyan protocol staff emphasised to multiple Emboffs [embassy officials] that Gaddafi cannot travel without Kolotnytska, as she alone ‘knows his routine’,” read the 2009 cable from Gene Cretz, the US ambassador to Libya. … Kolotnytska was calm before leaving Tripoli according to her daughter Tatyana, who told Segodnya: “She spoke in a calm voice, and asked that we don’t worry, that she would be home soon.” Segodnya released a photograph of the nurse, showing a smiling rosy-cheeked woman, her shoulder-length blonde hair held back by sunglasses. The daughter said her mother had spent nine years in Libya as one of several Ukrainian nurses serving Gaddafi. “For some reason, he doesn’t trust Libyan women with that,” she said.
Gadhafi has a fear of staying on upper floors, and dislikes flying over water.
The Patriarch, Moammar al-Gadhafi and his wife Safyia
From the shadows into the Fame
Safia Farkash, Muammar GaddafiMuammar Gaddafi‘s wife, was born in” El Beda city” in the east of Libya from the tribe of Albrasp. She was a nurse when Gaddafi saw her for the first time, when he entered the hospital with an emergency Appendectomy in 1971. Gaddafi married her the same year.
At the beginning of their married life, Safia Farkash appeared in the media only rarely, but later she began different activities.
The first Libyan woman gave birth to one girl and seven boys to Moammar Gadhafi.
The journalist Barbara Walters, said in her memoir, that she was the reason why Moammar Gadhafi quit the atomic programs in 2003. After the death of Barbara Walters’ son, Walters saw Moammar Gadhafi. She writes: “When I asked him to do something to protect their children so as not to face the same fate,” Gadhafi immediately compliedand gave-up all atomic plans completely.
The Libyan first Lady practices lots of.activities in recent days. She appeared in the celebrations of the Libyan revolution with wives of other heads of State, and attended the graduation ceremony for the girls of the Libyan Revolution at the Police College, in 2010.
In mid-2008 and on the sidelines of the meeting of leaders of the African Union, which took place in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, Safia Farkash was elected Vice-President of the Organization of African women.
Safia Farkash was also seems to have had a private airlines company “Air Buraq”, compete with the company’s national airline, “Libyan Arab Airlines,” at the Mitiga airport.
The Political Theory of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi by Kieran Healy on 22 February 2011
THE fire that is burning in Libya will singe some surprising institutions in the West, from the Monitor Group, which provided the regime with consultancy, to the London School of Economics, which accepted a pledge of £1.5m from the Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation and which awarded Qaddafi’s son, Saif al-Islam Qaddafi, who controls the foundation, a PhD in political theory in 2008.
Here is his summary of his argument, which he advances with lots of references to John Rawls and other liberal worthies:
Saif al-Islam al-Gadhafi’s PhD thesis, was titled “The Role of Civil Society in the Democratisation of Global Governance Institutions” looks as if it is a classic of the genre.
Shehzad Nadeem, as it happens also accepted a pledge of £1.5m from the Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation, which Saif ran.
Saif al-Islam al-Gadhafi’s thesis, which you can read in its entirety if you like is titled “The Role of Civil Society in the Democratisation of Global Governance Institutions: From ‘Soft Power’ to Collective Decision-making?”
In it, he argues that,
inclusion of elected representatives of non- governmental organisations (NGOs) in tripartite decision-making structures could potentially create a more democratic global governing system. … the thesis argues that there are strong motivations for free individuals to seek fair terms of cooperation within the necessary constraints of being members of a global society. Drawing on the works of David Hume, John Rawls and Ned McClennen, it elaborates significant self-interested and moral motives that prompt individuals to seek cooperation on fair terms if they expect others to do so. Secondly, it supports a theory of global justice, rejecting the limits of Rawls’s view of international justice based on what he calls ‘peoples’ rather than persons. Thirdly, the thesis adopts and applies David Held’s eight cosmopolitan principles to support the concept and specific structures of ‘Collective Management’….
[He goes on to say that]:
The core aim of the thesis, then, is to explore the potential for the concept of Collective Management to develop a more democratic, morally justified system of global governance that recognises the rights of individuals … and is particularly focused on empowering civil society organizations (CSOs) to give a stronger voice to those currently under-represented in the existing system.
Gadhafi was perhaps born 07 JUNE 1942, the son Colonel Albert Preziosi (a Corsican airman), and a mother of Jewish ancestry, in a goat-skin tent near Sirte on the Mediterranean coast. (SEE ABOVE Corsican story).
He abandoned a geography course at university for a military career that included a short spell at a British army signals school. For al fuller early biography, read George Tremlett: “Gaddaffi the Desert Mystic” (Carroll & Graf Pres 1993).
Moammar al-Gadhafi embraced the pan-Arabism of the late Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser and tried without success to merge Libya, Egypt and Syria into a federation.
A similar attempt to join Libya and Tunisia ended in acrimony.
Col. Gadhafi, left, jokes with a group of British hippies in Tripoli in July 1973. (AFP – Getty Image)
However, GADHAFI was shunned by the West for much of his rule which accused him of links to terrorism and revolutionary movements. The U.S. sent war planes to bomb Libya in 1986. One of the 100 people killed was Gadhafi’s adopted daughter.
Photo: Baby Hanna killed by NATO in 1986.
Interview with Barbara Walters, 1989 :
It was cold in the desert at night. We set up and waited. And waited. No sleep, exhausted, hungry and freezing. A little boy enters the tent. He is dressed in full military gear, and carrying an automatic weapon. He sits next to me, gun on his lap, finger on the trigger. He says nothing for what seems like an eternity. So, I do what any respectable journalist does in this situation: I pull my chewing gum and offer him a piece.
I smile. He smiles a little. I’m just glad he used his shooting hand to take the gum. I ask him how old he is. He lays the weapon down on his lap. He shows me 12 fingers.
Do you like music? His eyes flash at me and he bursts into song.
In the tent, in the cold, armed to the teeth, in the middle of the night, he’s serenading me with “Thriller.” An older man yelled to him, and he threw his gun on his shoulder and stood at attention. Then he left immediately….
…The inside of the tent was decorated in large, bright triangles of yellow, red and green.
Gaddafi’s desk had a “map of the world” clock, a phone, and pad and pen. All he needed to rule the entire Arab world.
The sand was covered with beautiful hand woven rugs….Then it happened.
He drives up in a Volkswagen Beetle, gets out in a beautiful white silk suit, with a shawl over one arm, and kind of floats over to the tent.
His entrance was priceless. And he was charming! That’s exactly how rulers lull the people to follow them; it’s the smile, the gracious hospitality, and the polite manner of everyone in his entourage.
During the interview, Barbara asks him if he thinks the rumors are true — is he “unstable”?
He looks around the room, giggles, and stares at the ceiling, wiggles in his chair and then gives some canned answer. Is he crazy? I don’t know, but he sure is, well, kind of goofy…The interview went beautifully and then Gaddafi and Barbara tour the compound.He showed us his former home, which was now a bombed out shell, and used for mandatory field trips for school children. It was oddly lovely. A giant sculpture with a hand holding an empty American missile casing with the helmets of the two American pilots killed in the attack at the base.
We went back to the tent to meet his wife and children. No one smiled, except Gaddafi. The sons looked angry, the girls sad and withdrawn. Everyone said his or her goodbyes, and I left the tent first, hoping to get a picture of him as he left his tent.
He exited alone, and the look on his face said it all. “Click.”
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA – AFRICAN STUDIES CENTER
DRC: IRIN Background report on peace efforts 
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO: IRIN Background report on peace efforts
NAIROBI, 22 June (IRIN) 1999 – DRC peace talks this week in the Zambian capital, Lusaka, are expected to try to merge the various mediation initiatives aimed at finding a negotiated solution to the conflict.
The following provides background information on the principal peace efforts since the start of the conflict in August 1998.
The Lusaka peace process
The annual summit of the 14-member Southern African Development Community (SADC), held in Mauritius on 13-14 September, appointed Zambian President Frederick Chiluba to lead mediation efforts, assisted by Tanzanian President Benjamin Mkapa and Mozambican President Joaquim Chissano.
Under the initiative, several ministerial meetings have been held, but a heads of state summit originally scheduled for early December to secure a ceasefire was postponed several times. One of the problems has been disagreement over the participation of Congolese rebels in the negotiations.
Two committees under the Lusaka peace process have drafted “modalities” for the implementation of an eventual ceasefire agreement and collected information on the security concerns of the DRC and its neighbours. Meetings this week in Lusaka are expected to culminate in a heads of state summit on Saturday, at which Chiluba hopes a ceasefire agreement will be signed.
Presidents Mkapa and Chissano have held their own contacts with parties to the conflict to discuss peace prospects, but it is unclear how closely those efforts have been coordinated with those of Chiluba.
The Sirte agreement
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s diplomatic contacts with countries involved in the conflict began in September and intensified in December when he met separately with DRC President Laurent-Desire Kabila, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni and rebel leader Ernest Wamba dia Wamba. Official Libyan communiques have since referred to Gaddafi as the “Coordinator of the Peace Process in the Great Lakes.”
On 18 April, Gaddafi brokered a peace agreement between Museveni and Kabila, also signed by the Presidents of Chad and Eritrea, in the Libyan town of Sirte, which called for the withdrawal of foreign forces from the DRC. Subsequently, Chad withdrew its troops from the country and Libya sent some 40 military personnel to Uganda to prepare for the deployment of a proposed neutral African peacekeeping force under the Sirte accord. However, Rwanda and the other countries with forces in the DRC were not party to the Sirte agreement.
On 15 May, Gaddafi hosted a mini-summit of African leaders in Sirte to discuss peace efforts and the implementation of the Sirte accord.
CONGO CHRONICLE XXXI
May 10 1999 – October 24 1999
sources: NCN,ACP,Le Soir, De Standaard
May 14 1999
-Under supervision of the Libyan leader Khadafi a peace accord has been signed by Kagame and Kabila in Syrte (Libye). Several other African leaders were present, as Aferworki (Erytrea), Nyerere (Tanzania), Compaore (Burkina Fasso), Idriss Deby (Chad), Patasse (CAR), Jammeh (Gambia), Ben Bella (Algeria) and Niasse (on behalf of the UN). It was agreed that the rebel movements should also be present at the next peace conference at Lusaka.
(recalling that agreement in th eLUSAKA AGREEMENT: http://www.ucd.ie/ibis/filestore/LUSAKA%20AGREEMENT%20CEASEFIRE%20AGREEMENT%20PREAMBLE.pdf )
in original french: http://www.ua.ac.be/objs/00111074.pdf
Since a cease-fire was drafted in Addis Ababa on 10 September 1998, an OAU inter-African
force has been under discussion. However, Salim Ahmed Salim (secretary-general of the
OAU) announced that the OAU lacked the capacity to manage such a force. President
Museveni and President Ghaddafi met in Libya, where the two men focused on the idea of a
neutral multinational force to replace the UDPF (Union pour la Démocratie et le Progrès
Social) in the Congo. The international community generally supported the idea of such a
force and the UN sent one of Kofi Annan’s military advisers to the October 1998 Lusaka
meeting. At the Windhoek summit, the states involved in the war mandated Zambian
President Chiluba to request the OAU and the UN to work out modalities for a peacekeeping
However, although all parties apparently accept the need for some form of peacekeeping force
to oversee the implementation of any cease-fire or political agreement, many problems have
arisen. First, Ghaddafi’s association with the idea of a peacekeeping force meant that the
initiative had little chance of acceptance. As the Ugandan journal, The New Vision, put it:
“regional sources said an initiative by Libyan President Muammar Ghaddafi to pull together an
African force to move into the former Zaire and secure its borders had little backing and in any
case was a nightmare scenario for the west.”….
[ Feedback: email@example.com UN IRIN-CEA Tel: +254 2 622123 Fax: +254 2 622129 ]
[This item is delivered in the “irin-english” service of the UN’s IRIN humanitarian information unit, but may not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations. For further information or free subscriptions, or to change your keywords, contact e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org or fax: +254 2 622129 or Web: http://www.reliefweb.int/IRIN . If you re-print, copy, archive or re-post this item, please retain this credit and disclaimer.]
Editor: Dr. Ali B. Ali-Dinar, Ph.D
Sunday, June 13, 1999 Published at 16:49 GMT 17:49 UK
13 JUNE 1999: World: Africa
Mandela welcomes ‘brother leader’ Gaddafi
The two leaders have developed a close relationship
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is in South Africa as the last official guest of President Nelson Mandela, who is due to leave office in the coming week.
For Colonel Gaddafi, the visit is part of his first foreign trip since the lifting of international sanctions on Libya – an event which was made possible when President Mandela persuaded Colonel Gaddafi to hand over for trial the two Libyans accused of the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing.
Colonel Gadaffi and President Mandela’s developed a close relationship after Mr Mandela’s release from jail in 1990.
Mr Mandela acknowledged the Libyan leader’s initiatives in seeking a solution to the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, comparing these to his own efforts to resolve the Lockerbie dispute.
“We look forward with joy and anticipation to the full re-entry of Libya into the affairs of our continent and the world,” the South African president said.
He was speaking at a reception in Cape Town to welcome Colonel Gaddafi, whom he described as “my brother leader”.
Colonel Gaddafi bestowed the Libyan Decoration of Steadfastness on Mandela in appreciation of his “unlimited courage and prolonged steadfastness”.
Ahead of Colonel Gaddafi’s arrival in Cape Town, South African police seized about 30 guns and rifles from his security staff.
A government spokesman said they were allowed only five weapons – the rest would remain under guard at the airport.
The Libyan leader was earlier in Zambia, where he said he had persuaded President Laurent Kabila of the Democratic Republic of Congo to meet face-to-face with rebels at peace talks in Zambia later this month.
Colonel Gaddafi told the Zambian President, Frederick Chiluba, that the Congolese leader had agreed to meet the rebels and added that there was a chance for a ceasefire in the Congo.
Gadhafi abandoned his program of prohibited weapons in 2003 to return Libya into international mainstream politics.
In September 2004, U.S. President George W. Bush formally ended a U.S. trade embargo as a result of Gadhafi’s scrapping of the arms program and taking responsibility for Lockerbie. In 2004, the international embargo and sanctions that had been imposed on Libya for more than a decade were lifted by the UN Security Council when Colonel Muammar Gadaffi announced that Libya would give up its nuclear weapons. Further, Gada…ffi agreed to compensate the families of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing and the attack on the TWA flight that occurred in the late 1980s. This remarkable gesture showed Gaddafi’s commitment to seeing Libya rejoin the international community. In the sprit of reconciliation, Prime Minister Tony Blair flew to Tripoli, declaring that Libya was now an ally in the fight against global terrorism. How is this reversal explained? Born from conversations between Gaddafi and political expert Edmond Jouve, this book retraces the Libyan leader’s political and ideological journey.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy is welcomed by Gadhafi in Tripoli on July 25, 2007. Sarkozy arrived for a meeting with the Libyan leader a day after the release of six foreign medics from a Libyan prison. (Patrick Kovarik / AFP – Getty Images)
Four years later,in the beginning of June 2011, Nicolas Sarkozy was bragging that he would offer al-Quathafi either a “first” class or “third” class exit air flight. It’s clear that French voters will next year throw out the pint-size neo-elite warmonger of Hungarian bankers ancestry.
Libyan leaderColonel Gaddafi attends a wreath-laying ceremony in Victory Square in Minsk, Belarus
Qaddafi made concessions that were worth something to the West, to the region and to Libyans themselves. The greatest of these was to give up his nuclear programme and help to blow the lid on the nuclear black market centred on Pakistan.
of the U.S.’s great cover-ups and False-flag CIA Drug-running Operations
Please join me on Facebookto fight media propagandaADDITIONAL SOURCES:Full transcript of judgment: http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/library/lockerbie/docs/lockerbiejudgement.pdfAnalysis of judgment: http://www.david-morrison.org.uk/libya/lockerbie-perverse-verdict.htmWebsite of one of the victim’s father: http://www.lockerbietruth.com/Full documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAjso24ChXIView other videos on Libya and related issues: http://www.youtube.com/user/hhhpets
Analysis of judgment: http://www.david-morrison.org.uk/libya/lockerbie-perverse-verdict.htm
Website of one of the victim’s father: http://www.lockerbietruth.com/
Full documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAjso24ChXI
View other videos on Libya and related issues: http://www.youtube.com/user/hhhpets
Libya never sponsored any terrorism in the West, or in any part of the world.
Lockerbie Diary: Gadhaffi, Fall Guy For CIA Drug Running
By Susan Lindauer, Former U.S. Asset covering Iraq and Libya – Contributing Writer
04 March 2011
For years I was told the terrorist who placed the bomb on board Pan Am 103, known as the Lockerbie bombing, lives about 8 miles from my house, in Fairfax County, Virginia.His life-time of privilege and protection, gratis of high flyers in U.S. Intelligence, has been a reward for silence on the CIA’s involvement in drug trafficking in Lebanon during the 1980s.
As sources go, I was more than a casual observer. From May 1995 until March 2003, I performed as a back channel to Tripoli and Baghdad, supervised by my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz, who claimed from day one to know the origins of the Lockerbie conspiracy and the identity of the terrorists. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20000528/ai_n13949725/ He swore that no Libyan participated in the attack.
Armed with that assurance, our team started talks with Libya’s diplomats for the Lockerbie Trial, and I attended over 150 meetings at the Libyan Embassy in New York. After the hand over of Libya’s two accused men, our team engaged in a concerted fight to gain permission for Dr. Fuisz to give a deposition about his primary knowledge of the conspiracy, during the Lockerbie Trial. In a surprise twist, the U.S. Federal Judge in Alexandria, Virginia imposed a double seal on a crucial portion of Dr. Fuisz’s deposition. The double seal can only be opened by a Scottish Judge. In my opinion, that should be a priority, as testimony hidden by the double seal maps out the whole Lockerbie conspiracy. Most significantly, it identifies 11 terrorists involved in the attack. Dr. Fuisz’s testimony could put the whole matter to rest forever.
here’s good reason for my confidence. Much to my surprise, during the Lockerbie talks, Dr. Fuisz’s allegations of CIA opium running in Lebanon received unusual corroboration. One day, as I left the office of Senator Carol Moseley-Braun on my lunch break, an older spook caught up with me in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. From out of nowhere, he stepped in my path and invited me to lunch. With extraordinary candor, he debriefed me as to what motivated the CIA’s actions. I remember it as one battle-hardened old spook sharing the perils of fieldwork with a gung ho young Asset, anxious to get started on great adventures.
It was a morality tale for sure. According to him, the CIA infiltrated opium and heroin trafficking in Lebanon as part of a crisis operation to rescue AP reporter Terry Anderson and 11 other American and British hostages in Beirut, including CNN bureau chief Jeremy Levin and Anglican envoy Terry Waite. The hostage crisis was a legitimate CIA concern. The CIA Station Chief of Beirut, William Buckley, was also kidnapped by Islamic Jihad and brutally tortured to death, his body dumped in the street in front of CIA headquarters. The rescue was protracted and complicated by Lebanon’s Civil War—ultimately, Terry Anderson’s captivity lasted seven years. Many of the hostages suffered beatings, solitary confinement chained to the floor, and mock executions.
The older spook who refused to identify himself swore that the CIA considered it urgently necessary to try every possibility for recovering the hostages. The concept of infiltration into criminal networks cuts to the murky nature of intelligence itself. Drug enforcement frequently rely on the same strategies. Where the CIA went far wrong was in pocketing some of those heroin profits for itself along the way. The dirty little secret is that the CIA continued to take a percentage cut of opium and heroin production out of Lebanon well into the 1990s.
As for the hostage rescue itself, considering the operation took years to accomplish, it’s always been whispered that a corrupted CIA officer enjoying those opium profits might have swallowed reports on the hostages’ locations, or otherwise diverted his team in order to protect his narcotics income.
That appears to have become a serious fear at the time, among other U.S. officers jointly involved in the rescue.
In December 1988, infuriated Defense Intelligence agents issued a formal protest, exposing CIA complicity in Middle East heroin trafficking. When teams from both agencies got summoned back to Washington to attend an internal hearing, they boarded Pan Am 103. A wing of militant Hezbollah led by Ahmed Jibril, his nephew Abu Elias, Abu Talb and Abu Nidal took out both teams in order to protect their lucrative cartel.
Classified Defense Intelligence records show that Jibril and Talb had been toying with a conspiracy to bomb a U.S. airplane during the 1988 Christmas holidays anyway. They planned to bomb a U.S. airliner in revenge for the U.S.S. Vincennes, which shot down an Iranian commercial airliner loaded with Hajiis returning from Mecca in July, 1988. However the Defense Intelligence threat to expose their heroin network put the bombing plan into action. Islamic Jihad’s ability to discover actionable intelligence on the flight schedules would definitely confirm that somebody at CIA was operating as a double agent, keeping Islamic Jihad a step ahead of the rescue efforts.
That’s the dirty truth about Lockerbie. It ain’t nothing like you’ve been told.
Wait a darn moment—I anticipate your confusion. Libya got blamed for the Lockerbie attack. Daddy George Bush told us so! The United Nations imposed sanctions on Libya, demanding that Colonel Moammar Gadhaffi hand over two Libyans for trial. One of the two, Lameen Fhima got acquitted immediately. The other Abdelbasset Megrahi got convicted (on the most flimsy circumstantial evidence that overlooked endless contradictions). Libya paid $2.7 billion in damages—amounting to $10 million per family death— to make the U.N. sanctions go away, and expressed a sort of non-apology for the deaths—while never acknowledging its involvement in the conspiracy.
So Libya was innocent the whole time? In a word, yes…..
In 2004, the international embargo and sanctions that had been imposed on Libya for more than a decade were lifted by the UN Security Council when Muammar Gadaffi
announced that Libya would give up its proported nuclear program.
Further, Gadaffi agreed to compensate the families of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing and the attack on the TWA flight that occurred in the late 1980s.
QUOTE fro Susan LINDAUER:
“Libya paid $2.7 billion in damages—amounting to $10 million per family death— to make the U.N. sanctions go away, and expressed a sort of non-apology for the deaths—
while never acknowledging its involvement in the conspiracy….”
But the bottom line is that Libya had nothing to do with the bombing of Pan Am 103, which exploded over the town of Lockerbie, Scotland.
We should care about Lockerbie because of the serious problem that it exposed. Opium trafficking out of the Bekaa Valley provides a major source for global heroin production. In turn, the global pipeline of narco-dollars keep militant operations alive world-wide from the Middle East to Indonesia, Colombia, Burma and the Far East.
That’s something to fear. We don’t have to deploy soldiers to shut it down. With a little creativity, we could attack the bank accounts of these global heroin traffickers and cut off funds for the violence without damaging the local society through warfare. We could strike down two scourges—heroin and terrorism. And the U.S. would not require military action all over the planet to accomplish its goals. Thankfully, there are other ways.
In another ground breaking interview on The Intel Hub, former CIA Asset and 9/11 whistleblower Susan Lindauer discussed her visits to the Libyan Embassy in Washington this week, and revealed that she started talks for the Lockerbie Trial with Libya’s diplomats at the United Nations.
Lindauer dished on Gadhaffi, Libya’s vendetta culture and how tribalism might have inspired Gadhaffi’s recent desperate gamble for survival.
She also explains how the Lockerbie bombing was tied to the CIA’s involvement in heroin trafficking out of the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon during U.S. operations to rescue Terry Anderson and other hostages in Beirut.
Susan explains how infuriated Defense Intelligence agents became determined to expose CIA complicity in Middle East heroin trafficking, and how terrorists took out both teams to protect their lucrative cartel.
The Intel Hub
By Susan Lindauer, former U.S. Asset who covered Libya at the United Nations from 1995 to 2003
March 28th, 2011
Who are we kidding? The United States, Britain and NATO don’t care about bombing civilians to contain rebellion. Their militaries bomb civilians every day without mercy. They have destroyed most of the community infrastructure of Iraq and Afghanistan before turning their sights on Libya. So what’s really going on here?
According to the CIA, the following never happened…
Last October, US oil giants— Chevron and Occidental Petroleum— made a surprising decision to pull out of Libya, while China, Germany and Italy stayed on, signing major contracts with Gadhaffi’s government. As the U.S. Asset who started negotiations for the Lockerbie Trial with Libyan diplomats, I had close ties to Libya’s U.N. Mission from 1995 to 2003.
Given my long involvement in the Lockerbie saga, I have continued to enjoy special access to high level intelligence gossip on Libya.
Last summer that gossip got juicy!
About July, I started hearing that Gadhaffi was exerting heavy pressure on U.S. and British oil companies to cough up special fees and kick backs to cover the costs of Libya’s reimbursement to the families of Pan Am 103. Payment of damages for the Lockerbie bombing had been one of the chief conditions for ending U.N. sanctions on Libya that ran from 1992 until 2003. And of course the United Nations forced Gadhaffi to hand over two Libyan men for a special trial at The Hague, though everybody credible was fully conscious of Libya’s innocence in the Lockerbie affair. (Only ignorant politicians trying to score publicity points say otherwise.)
Knowing Gadhaffi as well as I do, I was convinced that he’d done it. He’d bided his time until he could extort compensation from U.S. oil companies. He’s a crafty bastard, extremely intelligent and canny. That’s exactly how he operates. And now he was taking his revenge. As expected, the U.S. was hopping mad about it. Gadhaffi wasn’t playing the game the way the Oil Bloodsuckers wanted.
The Vampire of our age—the Oil Industry—roams the earth, sucking the life out of every nation to feed its thirst for profits. Only when they got to Libya, Gadhaffi took on the role of a modern-day Robin Hood, who insisted on replenishing his people for the costs they’d suffered under U.N. sanctions.
Backing up a year earlier, in August 2009 the lone Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing that killed 270 people, Abdelbasset Megrahi, won a compassionate release from Scottish prison. Ostensibly, the British government and Scottish Courts granted Megrahi’s request to die at home with dignity from advance stage cancer—in exchange for dropping a legal appeal packed with embarrassments for the European Courts.
The decision to free Megrahi followed shocking revelations of corruption at the special Court of The Hague that handled the Lockerbie Trial. Prosecution witnesses confessed to receiving payments of $4 million each from the United States, in exchange for testimony against Megrahi, a mind-blowing allegation of judicial corruption.
The Lockerbie conviction was full of holes to begin with. Anybody who knows anything about terrorism in the 1980s knows the CIA got mixed up in heroin trafficking out of the Bekaa Valley during the hostage crisis in Lebanon. The Lockerbie conspiracy had been a false flag operation to kill off a joint CIA and Defense Intelligence investigation into kick backs from Islamic Jihad, in exchange for protecting the heroin transit network.
According to my own CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz, who’d been stationed in Lebanon and Syria at the time, the CIA had established a protected drug route from Lebanon to Europe and on to the United States. His statements support other sources that “Operation Corea” allowed Syrian drug dealers led by Monzer al-Kassar (also linked to Oliver North in the Iran-Contra scandal) to ship heroin to the U.S. ON Pan Am flights, in exchange for intelligence on the hostages’ whereabouts in Lebanon.
The CIA allegedly made sure that suitcases carrying heroin were not searched at customs. Nicknamed the “Godfather of Terror,” Al Kassar is now serving a prison sentence for conspiring with Colombian drug cartels to assassinate U.S. nationals.
Building up to Lockerbie, the Defense Intelligence team in Beirut, led by Maj. Charles Dennis McKee and Matthew Gannon, suspected that CIA infiltration of the heroin network might be prolonging the hostage crisis. If so, the consequence was severe. AP Reporter Terry Anderson got chained in a basement for 7 years, while 96 other high profile western hostages suffered beatings, mock executions and overall trauma. McKee’s team raised the alarms in Washington that a CIA double agent profiting from the narco-dollars might be warning the hostage takers whenever their dragnet closed in.
Washington sent a fact-finding team to Lebanon to gather evidence.
On the day it was blown out of the sky, Pan Am 103 was carrying that team of CIA and FBI investigators, the CIA’s Deputy Chief assigned to Beirut, and three Defense Intelligence officers, including McKee and Gannon, on their way to Washington to deliver a report on the CIA’s role in heroin trafficking, and the impact on terrorist financing and the hostage crisis. In short, everyone with direct knowledge of CIA kickbacks from heroin trafficking died on Pan Am 103. A suitcase packed with $500,000 worth of heroin was found in the wreckage. It belonged to investigators, as proof of the corruption.
The punch line was that the U.S. State Department issued an internal travel advisory, warning that government officials should get off that specific flight on that specific day, because Pan Am 103 was expected to get bombed. That’s right, folks! The U.S. had prior knowledge of the attack.
Unforgivably, nobody told Charles McKee or Matthew Gannon. But other military officials and diplomats got pulled off the flight—making room for a group of students from Syracuse University traveling stand by for the Christmas holidays.
It was a monstrous act! But condemning Megrahi to cover up the CIA’s role in heroin trafficking has struck many Lockerbie afficiandos as grossly unjust. Add the corruption of purchased testimony– $4 million a pop— and Megrahi’s life sentence struck a nerve of obscenity.
It struck Gadhaffi as grievously offensive, as well—The United Nations had forced Libya to fork over $2.7 billion in damages to the Lockerbie families, a rate of $10 million for every death. Once it became clear the U.S. paid two key witnesses $4 million each to commit perjury, spook gossip throughout the summer was rife that Gadhaffi had taken bold action to demand compensation from U.S. (and probably British) oil corporations operating in Libya. More than likely, Libya’s demands for kick backs and compensation extended to other European oil conglomerates as well—particularly France and Italy—who are now spearheading attacks on Libya.
I knew last summer there would be trouble. Payback would be a b—tch on both sides. You don’t lock an innocent man in prison for 10 years on bogus charges of terrorism, and expect forgiveness. The United States and Britain had behaved with remarkable selfishness. You’ve got to admit that Gadhaffi’s attempt to balance the scales of justice demonstrated a flair of righteous nationalism.
Alas, Gadhaffi was playing with fire, no matter how justified his complaint. You don’t strike a tyrant without expecting a tyrant to strike back.
And that’s exactly what’s happening today.
Don’t kid yourself. This is an oil war, and it smacks of imperialist double standards. Two articles by Prof. Chossudovsky at the Global Research Centre are must reading: “Operation Libya and the Battle for Oil: Redrawing the Map of Africa” and “Insurrection and Military Intervention: The US-NATO Attempted Coup d’Etat in Libya?”
There is simply no justification for U.S. or NATO action against Libya. The U.N. charter acknowledges the rights of sovereign nations to put down rebellions against their own governments. Moreover, many observers have commented that plans for military intervention appear to have been much more advanced than U.S. and European leaders want to admit.
For myself, I know in my gut that war planning started months before the democratization movement kicked off throughout the Arab world—a lucky cover for U.S. and European oil policy. Perhaps too lucky.
As Chossudovsky writes, “Hundreds of US, British and French military advisers arrived in Cyrenaica, Libya’s eastern breakaway province” on February 23 and 24— seven (7) days after the start of Gadhaffi’s domestic rebellion. “The advisers, including intelligence officers, were dropped from warships and missile boats at the coastal towns of Benghazi and Tobruk.” (DEBKAfile, US military advisers in Cyrenaica, Feb. 25, 2011) Special forces on the ground in Eastern Libya provided covert support to the rebels.” Eight British Special Forces commandos were arrested in the Benghazi region, while acting as military advisers to opposition forces, according to the Times of London.
We’re supposed to believe the United States, Britain and Europe planned, coordinated and executed a full military intervention in 7 short days— from the start of the Libyan rebellion in mid-February until military advisers appeared on the ground in Libya on February 23-24!
That’s strategically impossible.
Nothing can persuade me that Gadhaffi’s fate wasn’t decided months ago, when Chevron and Occidental Petroleum took their whining to Capitol Hill, complaining that Gadhaffi’s nationalism interfered with their oil profiteering. From that moment, military intervention was on the drawing board as surely as the Patriot Act got stuck in a drawer waiting for 9/11.
The message is simple: Challenge the oil corporations and your government and your people will pay the ultimate price: Give us your oil as cheaply as possible. Or die.
Don’t kid yourself. Nobody gives a damn about suffering in Libya or Iraq. You don’t bomb a village to save it. The U.S., Britain and NATO are the bullies of the neighborhood. The enforcers for Big Oil.
Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan have something in common. They have vast and extraordinary oil and mineral riches. As such, they are all victims of what I call the Vampire Wars. The Arab Princes get paid off, while the bloodsuckers pull the life blood out of the people. They’re scarcely able to survive in their own wealthy societies. The people and the domestic economy are kept alive to uphold the social order, but they are depleted of the nourishment of their own national wealth.
The democratization movements are sending a warning that I don’t think Big Oil, or their protectors in the U.S. and British governments understand or have figured out how to control. The Arab people are finished with this cycle of victimization. They’ve got their stakes out, and they’re starting to figure out how to strike into the heart of these Vampires, sucking the life blood out of their nations.
And woe to the wicked when they do! (END OF SUSAN LINDAUER’S TESTIMONY)
LESS than two years ago,
Muammar Quaddafi’s short stories and essays in this book are more revealing about his vision of the world than all of his addresses and the articles and reports that have been written about him during the last 25 years.
Moammar Gadhafi in Rome in August 2010.
Last month Gadhafi said he feared the change of power in neighboring Tunisia was being exploited by foreign intervention.
Professor Khaled Fouad Allam who explains it, in a commentary in “Il Sole 24 Ore,” the most widely circulated financial daily in Italy and Europe, on February 23.
(shown here with thinning hair) was quoted as saying in an address posted on GICDO’s website. “There is nothing of the sort. I have an excellent relationship with my family.”
Feb 23rd 2011, 13:40
Libya never sponsored any terrorism in the West. For Gaddafi, the “revolution” was the PEOPLE, and he was the “GUIDE” of the PEOPLE. His was an “Islamic theology” purified in the prophetic tradition of the Mujjadid, foreign to even the Sunna, which made him alien and distasteful to the bulk of the Sunni Muslim world itself.
Paradoxically, Gaddafi guaranteed the Catholic Church levels of freedom greater than in any other Muslim country of the region.
In his statement denying the rumored family feud, Saif al Islam Kadafi apparently also felt compelled to set the record straight about his links to Al Ghad. He denied that he owned the media group, emphasizing that he was “merely a supporter” and nothing else.
The publishing company was in the news again earlier this week when a Libyan news agency that is part of Al Ghad published a rare article criticizing the Libyan army.
The piece, reportedly written by the political editor of Libya Press, claimed the Libyan army was doing a bad job and said civilians should lead the defense ministry.
“The armed forces have taken over thousands of acres of land that were needlessly transformed into camps and barracks and later became sources of wealth for many,” the Reuters news agency quoted it as saying.
Aside from accusing the army of inefficiency, the piece also described some senior military officers as corrupt.
It’ was a daring piece by Libyan standards. Aside from the apparent escalating power struggle between moderates and the old guard, media reports have surfaced about protests being staged in several Libyan cities in the past week over corruption and lack of government-subsidized housing.– Alexandra Sandels in Beirut
Seif has often been put forward as the regime’s face of reform and is often cited as a likely successor to his father. Seif‘s younger brother Mutassim is the national security adviser, with a strong role in the military and security forces, and another brother Khamis heads the army’s 32nd Brigade, which according to U.S. diplomats is the best trained and best equipped force in the military.
Gaddafi’s son watched Zapad-2009 military exercise in Belarus (Photo)
11:06, — Politics
Khamis Gaddafi is a commander of a reinforced brigade of the Libyan army. Khamis Gaddafi, son of the head of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Muammar Gaddafi, was present at Zapad-2009 military exercise as an observer, the official news agency BelTA reports.
Khamis Gaddafi knows the military science firsthand. He graduated from the military academy in Tripoli and received a bachelor’s degree in military arts and science, then graduated from Frunze Military Academy in Moscow and Academy of the General Staff Academy of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Khamis Gaddafi is a commander of the special reinforced brigade of the Libyan army.
[We are reminded that Zapad-2009 drills involved more than 12000 service personnel and some hundreds of units of military equipment. 6000 troops from Russia entered Belarus, which has never happened before.The exercise used 103 airborne devices (including 63 aircrafts and 40 helicopters), around 470 armoured fighting vehicles, 228 tanks, 234 self-propelled and towed artillery units, mortars and multiple launch rocket systems.One of the aims of the exercises is armed conflicts liquidation.]
SAIF gave a televised address shortly after midnight, Monday, 21 Febr., saying:
“Our spirits are high and the leader Moammar Gadhafi is leading the battle in Tripoli, and we are behind him as is the Libyan army. We will keep fighting until the last man standing, even to the last woman standing … We will not leave Libya to the Italians or the Turks.*”
Wagging a finger at the camera, he blamed Libyan exiles for fomenting the violence. But he also promised dialogue on reforms and wage rises.
Saif Gadhafi (shown here with his head shaven) warned protesters that they risked igniting a civil war in which Libya’s oil wealth “will be burned.” He said that if protests continued, Libya would slide back to “colonial” rule. “You will get Americans and European fleets coming your way and they will occupy you. He threatened to “eradicate the pockets of sedition” and said the army will play a main role in restoring order. “There has to be a firm stand,” he said. “This is not the Tunisian or Egyptian army.” Protesters had seized some military bases, tanks and other weapons, Saif said, blaming Islamists, the media, thugs, drunks and drug abusers, foreigners — including Egyptians and Tunisians. He also admitted that the unrest had spread to Tripoli, with people firing in central Green Square before fleeing. Armed security forces were seen on rooftops surrounding central Green Square, a witness said by telephone, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. The witness added that a group of about 200 lawyers and judges were protesting inside a Tripoli courthouse, which was also surrounded by security forces. Crowds in the capital were throwing rocks at billboards of Gadhafi and troops were trying to subdue them with tear gas and gunfire.
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
TRIPOLI —SATURDAY: The U.S.-based Arbor Networks reported another Internet service outage in Libya just before midnight Saturday night. The company said online traffic ceased in Libya about 2 a.m. Saturday, but was restored at reduced levels several hours later, only to be cut off again that night by infiltrating insurgents.
A central government building in the Libyan capital Tripoli was on fire Monday, a Reuters reporter said.
“I can see the People’s Hall is on fire, there are firefighters there trying to put it out,” the reporter, Ahmed Sawalem, said. [That is the building is where the General People’s Congress, or parliament, meets when it is in session in Tripoli.]
During the day Monday, a fire was raging at the People’s Hall, the main hall for government gatherings where the country’s equivalent of a parliament holds its sessions several times a year, the pro-government news web site Qureyna said. [The system of rule created by Gadhafi — the “Jamahiriya,” or “rule by masses” — is highly decentralized, run by “popular committees” in a complicated hierarchy that effectively means there is no real center of decision-making except Gadhafi, his sons and their top aides.] Among the buildings attacked by armed insurgents was the Ministry of Defense headquarters on Omar El Mokhtar Street, which was on fire, he said. “The people use almost anything, they use rocks, sometimes knives, and some had rifles.
Early Monday, armed insurgents also took over the office of two of the multiple state-run satellite news channels, witnesses said. After midnight, the insurgents took over the main Tripoli offices of two state-run satellite stations, Al-Jamahiriya-1 and Al-Shebabiya, one witness said. Violence and looting could continue for several days, it warned.
There were fears of chaos as young men — including regime supporters — seized weapons from the Katiba and other captured security buildings. “The youths now have arms and that’s worrying,” said Iman, a doctor at the main hospital. “We are appealing to the wise men of every neighborhood to rein in the youths.”
After seizing the Katiba, protesters found the bodies of 13 uniformed security officers inside who had been handcuffed and shot in the head, then set on fire, said Hassan, also a doctor. U.K.-based opposition activist Ahmed Sawalem, who is keeping in touch with the armed insurgent militia in Libya, told msnbc.com that false witnesses reported six private planes taking off from a small airport on the outskirts of Tripoli on Sunday night.
“But no one can confirm who was on those planes,” Sawalem lyingly said, but it was “very likely” they were people connected with the regime.
He said he hoped it was Gadhafi, but added it could family members or even well-connected businesspeople.
Libyan leader appears briefly on state TV amid violence, unrest sweeping nation
Gadhafi: ‘I’m in Tripoli, not Venezuela’
TRIPOLI — Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi appeared for less than a minute Tuesday morning on state television and made brief remarks to say he was in the capital Tripoli and to deny rumors he had fled to Venezuela amid the violent revolt against his 41-year rule. Gadhafi was seated in the passenger seat of a small vehicle holding an umbrella up through the open door.
It had been raining in the capital for two days. His remarks were aired about 2 a.m. local time (7 p.m. Monday ET). In the rain, holding an umbrella and sitting in the cab of a truck. It was after midnight, already Tuesday morning. “I wanted to speak with the young people on Green Square and spend the night with them, but then this good rain came,” he said, according to the news agency dpa. “I am here to show that I am in Tripoli, not Venezuela. Don’t listen to reports by stray dogs,” he said, referring to media reports that he had left the country.
He said rain prevented him from addressing massed protesters.
Gadhafi spoke hours after reports that Libyan military aircraft fired live ammunition at crowds of anti-government protesters in Tripoli on Monday.
“We are all hoping. If we take control of the city (Tripoli), it means he’s out. We are worried about the foreign mercenaries. We don’t know how many of them are in the country,” Sawalem said.
He also said there were reports of planes bombing a weapons store south of Benghazi in Ajdabiya “so the protesters cannot get hold of them, to use them to fight.” He said a number of people in the area had been killed in the attack.
Mohamed Bayou — who until a month ago was chief government spokesman, called on Saif Gadhafi to start talks with the opposition. “I hope that he will … change his speech to acknowledge the existence of an internal popular opposition, to enter into dialogue with them regarding thorough changes in the Libyan system,” Bayou said in a statement obtained by Reuters.
French government spokesman Francois Baroin said on Monday that the international community must do everything it can do to prevent Libya sinking into civil war.
‘All appropriate actions’
“We’re extremely worried and shocked and we strongly condemn what’s happening, this unprecedented violence, which could descend into an extremely violent and lengthy civil war,” Baroin said in an interview on Europe 1 radio.
Ali al-Essawi, Libya’s ambassador to India, accused the government of deploying foreign mercenaries against the protesters. *The Turkish Foreign Ministry said that around 3,000 Turkish citizens had applied to be repatriated from Libya since Friday and the first plane was sent to Benghazi on Sunday morning, with more planes to be sent once permission was granted.
Al-Obaidi and lawyer Mohamed al-Mana told Reuters members of the “Thunderbolt” squad had arrived at the hospital with soldiers wounded in clashes with Gadhafi’s personal guard.
“They are now saying that they have overpowered the Praetorian Guard and that they have joined the people’s revolt,” al-Mana said by telephone. Tens of thousands in Benghazi, the region’s main city and Libya’s second largest, are said to have taken to the streets, torching police stations and besieging army barracks and the airport. It was not possible to independently verify the report.
Al Jazeera TV reported that Abdel Moneim al Honi, Libya’s permanent representative to the Arab League, had resigned his post over treatment of protesters. Libya’s ambassador to India also told the BBC that he had resigned.
The head of the Al-Zuwayya tribe in eastern Libya threatened to cut off oil exports unless authorities stop what he called the “oppression of protesters,” Al Jazeera quoted him as saying on Sunday.
Jamal Eddin Mohammed, a 53-year-old resident of Benghazi, said thousands marched Sunday toward the city’s cemetery to bury at least a dozen protesters. They feared clashes with the government when they passed by Gadhafi’s residential palace and the regime’s local security headquarters.
“Everything is behind that (Gadhafi) compound; hidden behind wall after wall. The doors open and close and soldiers and tanks just come out, always as a surprise, and mostly after dark,” he told The Associated Press by telephone.
The firm, based in Market Harborough, Leicestershire, has also been training the Libyan police on how to control riots. It has organized delegations of British companies to visit Libya to sell a wide range of military equipment at two arms fairs. NMS, whose directors claim to have sold more than £1bn worth of exports in the last decade, was also hired to train Libyan police officers to use so-called “non-lethal weapons” to contain demonstrators. He added that the weapons included guns which fire teargas.
The White House said on Monday that it was analyzing Seif‘s speech to see what offers of meaningful reform it contained, NBC News reported. Seif promised “historic” reforms in Libya if protests stop, and on Monday state TV said he had formed a commission to investigate deaths during the unrest.The last straw for many people was the speech Sunday night by Gadhafi ‘s son.
Fragmentation is a real danger in Libya, a country of deep tribal divisions and a historic rivalry between Tripoli and Benghazi.
“People here in Benghazi are laughing at what he is saying. It is the same old story (on promised reform) and nobody believes what he says,” a lawyer in Libya’s second city told the BBC after watching the speech. “He is liar, liar, 42 years we have heard these lies.”
“The people, they want freedom,” he said. “Maybe 10 years ago, 20 years ago they would have listened. But not now — I don’t think we can accept that anymore … his father is not welcome in Libya anymore.”
Libya and the Imperial Re-Division of Africa
The Imperialist Powers’ Odyssey of “Return” into Africa
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
In fact what the Pentagon and NATO have done is breach international law by intervening on the side of one of the combating parties in Libya in a civil war that they themselves have encouraged and fuelled. They have not protected civilians, but have launched a war against the Libyan regime in Tripoli and actively assisted the Benghazi-based Transitional Council in fighting the Libyan military.
Before the rapprochement with Colonel Qaddafi, for years the U.S., Britain, France, and their allies worked to destabilize Libya. Confirmed by U.S. government sources, Washington attempted regime change in Tripoli several times. According to General Wesley Clark, former NATO commander, the Pentagon had active plans for launching a war against Libya.
The U.S. and its NATO allies are now embroiled in a new war which has the patented characteristics of the wars and invasions of Iraq and the former Yugoslavia.
A large naval armada off the shores of Libya has been bombing Libya for weeks with the declared objective of ousting the Libyan regime. At the same time, Libyan internal divisions are being fuelled.
Misinformation is systematically being spewed. Like Saddam Hussein before him, the U.S. and the E.U. have armed and helped Colonel Qaddafi. It is, therefore, important to hold the U.S. and the E.U. accountable for these weapon sales and the training of Libyan forces.
Also, like in Iraq, another Arab dictator was befriended by the U.S., only to be subsequently betrayed.
Prior to Iraq’s rapprochement with the U.S., at the outset of the Iraq-Iran War, Saddam Hussein was a Soviet ally and considered an enemy by Washington.
The case of Colonel Qaddafi is in many regards similar. Ironically, Qaddafi had warned Arab leaders in 2008 at a meeting in Damascus under the auspices of the Arab League about regime change. He pointed to the U.S. government’s “bad habit” of betraying its Arab dictator friends:
At the end of the 1991 Gulf War, the U.S. deliberately encouraged open revolt against Saddam Hussein’s regime, but stood back and watched as Saddam Hussein put down the Iraqi revolts by force.
In 2011, they have done the same thing against Qaddafi and his regime in Libya. Not only was the revolt in Libya instigated by Washington and its allies, the rebels have been supplied with weapons and military advisers.
When the U.S. and its allies triggered the anti-Saddam revolts in Baghdad in the wake of the Gulf War, “no-fly zones” over Iraq were established by the U.S., Britain, and France under the pretext of protecting “the Iraqi people from Saddam.” For years Iraq was systematically attacked. The Iraqi Republic was bombed and its capabilities to defend itself were eroded.
Today, the U.S. and its allies have imposed a no-fly zone over Libya with the pretext of protecting “the Libyan people from Qaddafi.” If they wanted to protect the Libyan people from Qaddafi, why did they arm Qaddafi in the first place? Why did they enter into business transactions in the wake of the 2006 and 2008 anti-government riots in Libya? There is much more to this narrative, which is part of a broader march to war.
A New Imperial Re-Division of Africa: The London Conference
The London Conference on Libya reveals the true colours of the coalition formed against Libya. In a clear breach of international law, the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, and their allies are making decisions about the future of Libya ahead of any changes on the ground.  Democracy is a bottom-up process and Libyan governance is an internal matter to be decided upon by the Libyans themselves. These decisions can not be made by foreign powers that have been the staunch supporters of some of the worst dictatorships.
The nations gathered at the conference table in London have no right whatsoever to decide on whether Qaddafi must stay or go. This is a sovereignty right that only Libyans alone have. Their involvement in the civil war is a breach of international law, as is their siding with one of the camps in the civil war.
The London Conference on Libya can be likened to the Berlin Conference of 1884. Unlike 1884, this conference is aimed at dividing the spoils of war in Libya, instead of the direct carving up of an entire continent. Also, Washington, instead of staying away like in 1884, is the leading power in this new conference involving the affairs of the African continent.
The position of the U.S. and its Western European allies is very clear:
The London Conference on Libya, however, not only deals solely with Libya, but holds the blue prints to a new imperialist re-division of the entire Africa continent. Libya, which became a holdout when Qaddafi changed his mind, will be used to complete the “Union of the Mediterranean” and as a new bridgehead into Africa. This is the start of major steps that will be taken by the U.S. and the E.U. to purge the growing Chinese presence from Africa.
A New Imperial Re-Division of Africa: “Operation Odyssey Dawn”
The name “Operation Odyssey Dawn” is very revealing. It identifies the strategic intent and direction of the war against Libya.
The Odyssey is an ancient Greek epic by the poet Homer which recounts the voyage and trails of the hero Odysseus of Ithaca on his way home. The main theme here is the “return home.”
The U.S. and the imperialist powers are on their own odyssey of “return” into Africa.
This project is also intimately related to the broader military agenda in Southwest Asia and the drive into Eurasia, which ultimately targets Russia, China, and Central Asia.
Washington’s military agenda pertains to the African and the Eurasian landmass, namely a supercontinent known as the “World-Island.” It is control of the World-Island that is the object of U.S. strategies.
The U.S. and NATO have triggered a civil war in Libya, as their pretext for longstanding plans of military aggression. A systematic media disinformation campaign, similar to the one used against Iraq from 1991 to 2003, has been launched.
In fact, the media has led the way for the war in Libya as it did in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The U.S. and its cohorts have also used the atmosphere of popular revolt in the Arab World as a cloud to insert and support their own agenda in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
The Libyan Prize of the Mediterranean
There is an old Libyan proverb that says “if your pocket becomes empty, your faults will be many.” In this context, Libyan internal tensions are not dominated by breadbasket issues. This sets Libya apart from Arab countries like Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Morocco, and Jordan.  In Libya, the lack of freedom as well as rampant corruption has created opposition to the regime, which has been used by the U.S. and its allies as a pretext to justify foreign intervention.
Libya has come a long way since 1951 when it became an independent country. In 1975, the political scientist Henri Habib described these conditions:
According to Habib the state of poverty in Libya was the result of the yoke of Ottoman domination followed by an era of European imperialism in Libya.  Habib explains: “Every effort was made to keep the Arab inhabitants [of Libya] in a servile position rendering them unable to make any progress for themselves or their nation.”  He also explains:
Despite political mismanagement and corruption, Libya’s oil reserves (discovered in 1959) were used to improve the standard of living for its population. Libya has the highest standards of living in Africa.
In addion to its energy reserves, the Libyan state played an important role. Libyan energy reserves were nationalized after the 1969 coup against the Libyan monarchy. It should be noted that these Libyan energy reserves are a source of wealth in Libya that if fully privatized would be a lucrative spoil of war.
To a certain extent, the isolation of Libya in the past as a pariah state has also played a role in insulating Libya. As most of the world has become globalized from an economic standpoint, Libyan integration into the global economy has in a sense been delayed.
Despite having vast sums of money stolen and squandered by Qaddafi’s family and their officials, social services and benefits, such as government housing, are also available in Libya. It has to be cautioned too that none of this means that neo-liberal restructuring and poverty are not afoot in Libya, because they very much are.
Until the conflict in 2011 ignited, there was a huge foreign work force in Libya. Thousands of foreign workers from every corner of the globe went to Libya for employment. This included nationals from Turkey, China, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, the European Union, Russia, Ukraine, and the Arab World.
Neo-Liberalism and the New Libya: Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi and Rapprochement
From 2001 to 2003, a process of rapprochement began between Libya and the U.S. and its E.U. partners. What changed? Colonel Qaddafi did not stop being a dictator or change his behaviour. Rapprochement brought an end to Tripoli’s defiance to its former colonial masters. Libya had bowed to U.S. and E.U. pressures and a modus vivandi came into effect.
Qaddafi’s credentials as a democrat or a dictator were never an issue. Nor was the use of brute force. Subservience was the real issue.
The force used against the riots in 2006 and 2008 did not even faze the E.U. and Washington, which continued their “business as usual” with Tripoli. Even U.S. government sources implied that economic interests should not be jeopardized by issues of international law or justice; for example, BP pressured the British government in 2007 to move forward with a prisoner exchange with Libya so that a Libyan oil contract could be protected. 
Almost overnight, Libya became a new business bonanza for U.S. and E.U. corporations, especially in the energy sectors. These lucrative contracts also included military contracts of the order of $482 million (U.S.) in military hardware, training, and software from E.U. members (including chemical and biological agents). 
Yet, two more things were demanded by Washington, namely the imposition of an imperial tribute as well as the the opening up of the Libyan military and intelligence apparatus to U.S. influence. As a result Libya ended all support for the Palestinians and handed the U.S. government its dossiers on resistance groups opposed to Washington, London, Tel Aviv and their allies. This turned Libya into a so-called “partner” in the “Global War on Terrorism.” Washington would get involved in all aspects of Libyan state security:
Libya has also become active in global banking and finance. The U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of New York even made 73 loans to the Arab Banking Corporation (ABC), which is a bank mostly owned by the Central Bank of Libya, totalling an amount of $35 billion (U.S.).  According to Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont in a complaint to U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Benjamin Bernanke, the mostly Libyan-owned bank received over $26 billion (U.S.) in near zero interest rate loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve that it has been lending back to the U.S. Treasury at a higher interest rate.  The Arab Banking Corporation is currently exempted from sanctions on Libya and may serve in creating a fiscal link between Wall Street and Benghazi.
Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi was vital in this process of opening up Libya to trade with Washington and the European Union. In 2000 Saif Al-Islam graduated from a university in Austria and became heavily tied to foreign associates who became his policy advisors and friends.
Prince Andrew of Britain reportedly became a close friend of Said Al-Islam: so close that Chris Bryant, a senior Labour Party politician, demanded in the British House of Commons that Prince Andrew be removed from his position as special trade envoy at the start of the conflict with Libya. 
Western advisors to Tripoli played an important role in shaping Libyan policy. A “New Libya” started to emerge under Saif Al-Islam, who pushed for the adoption of IMF-style neo-liberal economic reforms.
Starting in 2005-2006, significant social and income disparities started to emerge in Libya. The Libyan Revolutionary Committees Movement was in large part disbanded by Saif Al-Islam. Had the Committees Movement remained, they would most probably have sought to prevent the present conflict from escalating.
Moreover, Saif Al-Islam went to London and established ties in Britain with Noman Benotman, a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).  He became friends with Benotman.
Supported by Saif Al-Islam, Benotman and Ali Al-Sallabi, a Libyan citizen based in Qatar (who was on Tripoli’s terrorist list), negotiated a truce between the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and the Libyan government.
It is also worth noting that all the ministers and ambassadors who defected or left Libya were chosen by Saif Al-Islam.
As in the case of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the neo-liberal reforms applied in Libya created social and income disparities which in turn contributed to political instability.
Rapprochement with Tripoli and Imperial Extortion
In late-2008, the U.S. government got Tripoli to pay what was tantamount to an “imperial tribute.” Libya capitulated and agreed to an uneven reparation agreement with Washington. The agreement is called the “Claims Settlement Agreement between the United States of America and the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab.” Under the agreement Libya would concede $1.3 billion U.S. dollars to Washington, while Washington would give the Libyans $300 million U.S. dollars. Article 4 of the agreement’s annex states:
Despite all this, Libya has remained a relatively wealthy country. In 2010, Tripoli even made an offer to buy a portion of British Petroleum (BP), one of the world’s largest corporations.  The National Oil Company of Libya also remains one of the largest oil companies in the world.
Even with the lucrative business deals that resulted from the rapprochement, the U.S. and the E.U. have always had an objective of furthering their gains and control. The E.U. powers and Washington merely waited for the right opportunity. Plans for taking over and controlling Libya and the Libyan energy sector were never abandoned. Nor could Washington and Western Europe accept anything less than a full-fledged puppet government in Libya.
Upheaval and Qaddafi’s Response
Even with the rapprochement with Tripoli, the U.S. and its E.U. partners continued to cultivated ties to so-called “opposition” figures and organizations with a view to implementing regime change at some future date. This is why the National Salvation Front of Libya has been mostly active in Washington. In the words of a timely Congressional Research Service (CRS) report (February 18, 2011):
Colonel Qaddafi has ruled Libya under a harsh dictatorship that has systematically used violence and fear. Yet, the level of violence that has put Libya in a state of upheaval has been distorted.  Many of the initial reports coming out of Libya in early-2011 were also unverified and in many cases misleading. These reports have to be studied very carefully. According to the same CRS report prepared for the U.S. Congress, initial reports all came from “local [Libyan] media accounts, amateur video footage and anecdotes, and reports from human rights organizations and opposition groups in exile.” 
Qaddafi’s objectives are to preserve his regime and not to undo it. After Qaddafi became aware of the growing foreign threat directed towards his regime, the use of force was on the whole restrained. The regime in Tripoli did not want to give further excuses to the U.S., the E.U., and NATO for military intervention in Libya.
Qaddafi had exercised restraint for the sake of preserving his dictatorship. The Libyan regime knew very well that a bloody civil war would be used as a justification for intervention under a humanitarian pretext. That is why Qaddafi opted to try to negotiate where he could instead of using force. The use of violence is not to the favour of the Libyan regime or Libya, but rather works in the favour of the U.S. and the E.U. states.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya specializes on the Middle East and Central Asia. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
1 Christopher M. Blanchard and James Zanotti, “Libya: Background and U.S. Relations,” Congressional Research Service, February 18, 2011, p.12; the source quoted are as follows: Joseph T. Stanik, El Dorado Canyon: Reagan’s Undeclared War with Qaddafi, (Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2003); Bernard Gwertzman, “Shultz Advocates U.S. Covert Programs to Depose Qaddafi,” The New York Times, April 28, 1986; and Clifford Krauss, “Failed Anti-Qaddafi Effort Leaves U.S. Picking Up the Pieces,” The New York Times, March 12, 1991.
|Global Research Articles by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya|
|Libya and the Imperial Re-Division of Africa
The Imperialist Powers’ Odyssey of “Return” into Africa
– by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya – 2011-04-26
The War on Libya – PART II
The Violence in Benghazi
The starting epicentre of the violence in Libya was Benghazi, which is located within the boundaries of the coastal region of Cyrenaica or Barqa. According to the U.S. government’s own sources:
On the evening of February 15,  the […] demonstrations began when several hundred people gathered in front of the Benghazi police headquarters to protest the arrest of attorney and human rights activist Fethi Tarbel. As the February 17  “day of rage” neared, protests escalated in Benghazi and other cities despite reported police attempts at dispersion with water cannons, tear gas, rubber bullets, and batons. There were multiple reports of protestors setting police and other government buildings on fire.
The maelstrom erupted in Benghazi after a group of protesters entered into a local barrack to take the weapons in the armoury. When this happened, the Libyan forces in the local garrison reacted by firing upon the protesters. From there, the situation in Benghazi escalated and things spiralled out of control.
A pause is in order and has to be taken here. This is where critical analysis is needed. There are two ways to perceive the events in Benghazi. One perspective is from the standpoint of a revolutionary and the other is from the perspective of the state and the soldiers. If all biases are put aside both perspectives will have their adherents.
It must be stated that the Libyan authorities for years have oppressed political opposition and that people have the right to resist tyranny. On the other hand, it has to be understood that in any country, including the United States and Britain, soldiers and security forces will fire on people who attack a military or police compound with the intention of acquiring weapons. In this sense the events in Libya are fundamentally different from those of Egypt.
The point is not the legitimacy of what happened when soldiers and security forces opened fire but rather the fact that the governments which have accused Tripoli are hypocritical. These same governments would have responded in exactly the same way.
There is no monopoly on violence at the level of the state. The Kent State University Massacre of May 4, 1970, when peaceful anti-war student protesters in Ohio were killed by the U.S. National Guard, is proof of this. One only needs to look at the reactions of the White House, London, and the E.U. towards the atrocities in Bahrain against an unarmed civilian population fighting for elementary human rights to see how phony their crocodile tears and postures are. It is also the U.S. that arranged for the Al-Sauds to intervene militarily in Bahrain and to militarily suppress the Bahraini people.
Double-Standards about Libya and Bahrain and other Arab Dictatorships
In Egypt, the U.S. and the E.U. called for restraint from both the protesters and the Mubarak regime and asked for both sides to negotiation with one another. The calls for restraint were pure hypocrisy. The U.S. and the E.U. made the calls for restraint to both sides even though the Egyptian protesters were unarmed and peaceful and the Mubarak regime was the side that was using violence and was the solely armed party. Calls of restraint should have been made only to the Egyptian regime and not to the peaceful unarmed protesters. The cases of Bahrain and Tunisia are in this regards similar.
A totally different attitude has been applied by the U.S. and the E.U. to Libya than the attitude that has been applied to Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Oman, Yemen, Jordan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and the corrupt Palestinian Authority. No sanctions were applied against the authorities in Bahrain by the U.S. and the E.U. when the Bahraini military without warning blatantly attacked peaceful protesters in Manama’s Pearl Square. The Bahraini protesters were completely peaceful, but this did not stop the ruling Al-Khalifas from ordering indiscriminate live firings on the crowds of Bahraini protesters.
In Bahrain a reign of terror and murder has been unleashed on the Bahraini people by the Al-Khalifas and the Al-Sauds, which has merely been ignored by the E.U. and Washington. A whole population is being systematically terrorized by an unwanted, hated, and foreign-imposed ruling family. Hospitals and children have been brutally attacked. Doctors and union leaders have been killed. Mosques have been bulldozed to the ground and an entire population has been put into detention. Bahrain is a second Palestine. Ironically, the Al-Khalifas have been thanked by Washington, NATO, and the leaders of the E.U. for joining the coalition against the Libyans. The Al-Khalifa regime has also been presented by the U.S. and the E.U. as a model Arab government.
In a blatant act of hypocrisy, the regimes of the Arab petro-sheikhdoms, which pushed forward an Arab League demand for a no-fly zone over Libya, have been presented as stewards and representatives of the Arab masses by Hillary Clinton and E.U. leaders.  How are they representatives of the Arab peoples, Arab choices, or even Arab popular opinion? The Arab Gulf (Khaliji) emirs are the anti-thesis of popular represenatation.
In reality these Arab sheikhdoms are a few individuals who act as they like and are not representative of any of the views of their own citizens in any way. So it is extremely phony and two-faced when Hillary Clinton, Monsieur Sarkozy, and David Cameron present these Arab sheikhdoms as representatives of the Arab people and of Arab positions. These Arab despots are not the representatives of the sentiments of Arabdom, they only represent themselves and repress real Arab sentiments.
In contrast to the verbal condemnations and sanctions against Libya, no actions were taken against the Al-Khalifas in Bahrain. While the jet attack claims against Libyans were fabricated, the evidence of indiscriminate firing on protesters – including by tanks – were verified by video footage from within Bahrain and by human rights groups. The reactions to Bahrain and Libya and the media reports about both Arab countries have been diametrically opposed.
Double-Standards about Mercenaries
Most of the forces used by the Al-Khalifahs in Bahrain are foreigners and mercenaries. This includes foreign military personnel from both Jordan and Saudi Arabia. As mentioned earlier, the Al-Sauds even sent military reinforcements to Bahrain to crush the civilian protests. Yet, there has been a systematic and exaggerated emphasis placed on Qaddafi’s foreign mercenaries.
Has the use of foreign mercenaries in Bahrain been highlighted by the media? The answer is no.
Moreover, the U.S., Britain, France, and their allies are not in any position based on moral grounds to criticize Tripoli for using mercenaries. All these powers actively and openly use and employ mercenaries – far more than Libya – under the terminologies of private contractors or security firms.
Britain even has a whole brigade of mercenaries, the Brigade of Gurkhas, which even trains with U.S. forces.
The French Foreign Legion is also a group of foreign soldiers employed by Paris. Washington itself is the largest employer of mercenaries and bounty hunters on the planet.
This is also the reason why the sixth section of the U.N. sanctions resolution 1970 (Peace and Security in Africa) passed against Tripoli by the U.N. Security Council specifically prevents mercenaries from countries that are not signatories to the International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) from being prosecuted.  Additionally, this is tied to British and U.S. plans to send an army of mercenaries into Libya as part of their future ground operations. Resolution 1970 Article 6 states:
Decides that nationals, current or former officials or personnel from a State outside the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya which is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of that State for all alleged acts or omissions arising out of or related to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council, unless such exclusive jurisdiction has been expressly waived by the State[.] 
The Daily Telegraph in Britain has also pointed this out in an informative news commentary which exposes the double-standards applied under the name of international justice and humanitarianism:
The key paragraph said that anyone from a non-ICC country alleged to have committed crimes in Libya would “be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction” of their own country. It was inserted despite Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, saying that all those “who slaughter civilians” would “be held personally accountable”.
Speaking to reporters outside the council chamber, Gerard Araud, the French UN ambassador, described the paragraph as “a red line for the United States”, meaning American diplomats had been ordered by their bosses in Washington to secure it. “It was a deal-breaker, and that’s the reason we accepted this text to have the unanimity of the council,” said [Gerard] Araud. 
Resolution 1970 also puts an arms embargo on Tripoli and makes a whole set of demands from Libya that none of the other Arab states that are oppressing their populations have been asked to comply with. Even when reports of killings by government forces were being made, nothing of the sort was applied to Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan, or Bahrain.
In another case of double-standards and a mockery, the Arab League has also suspended Libya from the pan-Arab organization due to its use of violence. The majority of the members of the Arab League, from the Palestinian Authority to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have brutally used violence against peaceful protesters even while they were criticizing Libya. When other Arab leaders are also using force to suppress their own citizens they are being given a platform by the U.S. and the E.U. to spurn Libya. Using a phrase used by Palestinians, Lebanese, and Iraqis to describe the behaviour of the Arab sheikhdoms and presidential dictatorships against their countries, it can be said that another “Arab conspiracy” is taking place. Libya is being betrayed, just as the corrupt heads of the members of the Arab League betrayed Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq.
Fuelling the Flames: Arming Both Sides
In Libya, the U.S. and its E.U. partners are fanning the flames of sedition. A prolonged civil war is in their interest. It allows them to weaken Libya as a state and it has allowed them to manipulate global public opinion in a managed discourse favouring interventionism. Both deception and the tactics of divide and conquer are at play. Simply stated, the U.S. and the E.U. are playing both sides. They have provided material support to both sides. They first supported Qaddafi through military hardware and training that lasted up until the start of 2011, while they now support the forces opposed to Qaddafi. If they refer to Libya as a “killing field” then it should be pointed it out that it is a “killing field” that they created and made possible.
Washington has had a hand in all of the violence in Libya. Neither the Bush Jr. Administration nor the Obama Administration have shied away from training the Libyan military:
For FY2010, the Obama Administration requested $350,000 in International Military Education and Training (IMET) funding for Libya to “support education and training of Libyan security forces, creating vital linkages with Libyan officers after a 35-year break in contact.” Participation in the IMET program also makes the Libyan government eligible to purchase additional U.S. military training at a reduced cost. The Bush Administration’s FY2009 request for IMET funding indicated that “the Government of Libya would pay for additional training and education with national funds.” However, no IMET funding was provided in FY2009, according to State Department budget documents.
The Obama Administration also requested Foreign Military Financing assistance for Libya for the first time in FY2010, with the goal of providing assistance to the Libyan Air Force in developing its air transport capabilities and to the Libyan Coast Guard in improving its coastal patrol and search and rescue operations. FY2011 FMF assistance is being requested to support Libyan participation in a program that assists countries seeking to maintain and upgrade their U.S.-made C-130 air transport fleets. 
London’s arms sales to Qaddafi’s government have also been significant: “According to the Department for Business Innovation [and] Skills (BIS), £181.7 million (Dh1.09 billion)-worth of arms export licences were granted from [Britain] to Libya in the third quarter of 2010 — up from £22 million in second quarter.”  On the basis of the agreements between Tony Blair and Colonel Qaddafi, Britain was even training members of the Libyan police force, including a major and a brigadier, at Huddersfield University in West Yorkshire during the start of the conflict in Libya. 
The double-standards being applied by these powers are visible in every nuance and fabric of their actions. The Associated Press (AP) unwittingly points this out in a report summing up the London Conference on Libya:
Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said negotiations on securing Gadhafi’s exit were being conducted with “absolute discretion” and that there were options on the table that hadn’t yet been formalized.
“What is indispensable is that there be countries that are willing to welcome Gadhafi and his family, obviously to end this situation which otherwise could go on for some time,” he said.
Frattini had said earlier that he hoped some nation would offer a proposal.
But the Italian diplomat insisted there was no option of immunity for Gadhafi. “We cannot promise him a ‘safe-conduct’ pass,” he stressed. 
While they condemn Qaddafi, saying that he will have no “immunity,” they also are talking about a “safe-haven” where he will be immune. Furthermore, while the British have said that they know very little about the Transitional Council in Benghazi, Admiral James Stavridis has told the U.S. Armed Service Committee that he is, either as the head of U.S. European Command (EUCOM) or NATO, very well aware of the composure of the opposition. This is contradictory; in this case London says one thing, but the head of military operations for NATO says something else.
At the same time the U.S., Britain, and their allies have left open an option to even betray the Transitional Council. This is typical foreign policy behaviour for London, Washington, and their allies. William Hague has hinted about this: “‘We [meaning Britain, the U.S., and their allies] must never be complacent about the way events like this could turn out,’ Hague said. ‘If things go wrong in the region on a sustained basis, there could be new opportunities for terrorism or extremism.’”  Thus, the spectre of Al-Qaeda and its ties to the Transitional Council is starting to emerge in the picture and discourse.
The Propaganda War: Media Distortion about Libya
Perception management has been used to start the war against Libya and to garnish support for the aggression against Libya. This is part of a tradition that the Pentagon and NATO have followed. All the major wars the U.S. has fought in have involved major media lies. In Vietnam there was the Gulf of Tonkin incident, in Yugoslavia the claims of ethnic genocide, in Afghanistan the tragic events of 9/11 (September 11, 2011) were blamed on the Taliban, and in Iraq the lies about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and cooperation between Baghdad and Osama bin Laden. The mainstream media has been the first line of attack in these wars of aggression.
In regards to Iraq, the U.S. government brought a false witness to the U.S. Congress who while pretending to be a Kuwaiti nurse testified that Iraqi soldiers threw 312 Kuwaiti babies out of incubators to die.  This was used to galvanize public opinion in the U.S. in order to go to war with Iraq in 1991. The infamous Nurse Nayirah testimony was given by Nijrah (Nayirah) Al-Sabah the daughter of the Kuwaiti envoy to Washington. She was even given acting lessons by a public relations (P.R.) firm before her false testimony, which George H. Bush Sr. referred to when justifying going to war with Iraq. 
Left: N. Al-Sabah under the alias of Nurse Nayirah telling the U.S. Congress that Iraqis killed Kuwaiti babies.
Right: Toppling of Saddam Hussein’s statue in Baghdad, a classical example of media distortion coordinated with the Pentagon.
The Fabricated Jet Attacks on Civilians
At the end of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was demonized after he put down rebellions that were instigated by the U.S. and its allies. Now Qaddafi is presented like Saddam Hussein as a monster killing his own people. The justification for establishing the no-fly zones over Libya, which in effect was a smokescreen for launching an undeclared war, was the media claims that Libyan military jets were attacking civilian protesters. The Financial Times is worth quoting to illustrate how fake media reports were used to argue for military intervention by NATO leaders:
“We must not tolerate this regime using military force [referring to the the jet attacks] against its own people,” David Cameron, [the British] prime minister, said. “In that context I have asked the Ministry of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Staff to work with our allies on plans for a military no-fly zone.” 
U.S. and E.U. officials made hard verbal condemnations against Colonel Qaddafi when these reports about jets firing on protesters were made. There is nothing that corroborates this. The reports turned out to be false like the claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. These types of criminal fabrications should not be allowed to go unpunished either.
The Russian military was monitoring Libya from space and saw no signs of jet attacks on civilians.  No satellite evidence even showed damage caused by jets. Nor was one piece of video evidence produced about this, while all sorts of footage had been coming out of Libya. The Pentagon, the E.U., and NATO all had access to the same satellite technology and intelligence to verify if such attacks were made, which means that they knew the reports were false.
Libyan military planes only got involved later on during the conflict during missions to bomb ammunition depots to prevent the rebels from getting arms. This was fairly later in the conflict and after the media claims were made that jets were firing on protesters. Libyan air power was also virtually non-existent before and after the foreign intervention. Admiral Locklear, who is the U.S. Navy commander that led the attacks at the onset of the war, even told reporters that “[Libya’s] air force before coalition operations was ‘not in good repair,’ and that [Libya’s] tactical capability consisted of several dozen helicopters.” Despite this reality, Libyan air power was systematically portrayed as a major threat to Libyan civilians.
Who is behind the Massacres and Acts of Brutality in Libya?
Stories were also presented that Libyan forces were killing individuals from within their own ranks that refused to fight. Video evidence from within Libya actually proved that video footage presented alongside these reports about Libya was spun. It was not the Libyan forces that killed these men, but elements within the Libyan opposition. Videos showing torture and brutal treatment of civilians, including a small boy, by elements from within the ranks of the rebel fighters are also appearing.
It was claimed by the mainstream media that these men were killed by Qaddafi loyalists, but video evidence proves this is false.
The Salvador option is being used in Libya. Speculatively, these rebel elements were probably working as foreign agents. Footage has surfaced of a small boy in a Libyan hospital being helped by doctors after he was tortured. The doctors are looking at the little boy who has a thin pole shoved through his body, going through from near his penis all the way through to his left shoulder. The video demonstrates something very important. What happened to the little boy was not the work of any laymen. These were individuals who had to be trained in torture, because of the way the pole was sent through the body of the little boy who was not killed by the incision. This points to actors outside of Libya. These cases of torture resemble the brutal cases and murders that were being carried out in El Salvador and later in Anglo-American occupied Iraq.
It has to also be emphasized that Britain sent commandos into Iraq that were disguised as local Arabs to bomb local mosques and areas with civilians in order to create sectarian fighting amongst the Iraqis.  It is not beyond the realm of possibility that this is also being replicated amongst the Libyans and other Arab peoples in order to divide them and to fuel civil strife. Nor should the doctored pictures made by Britain and the U.S. about Iraqis greeting Anglo-American forces as liberators be forgotten either.
Members of the British SAS caught and arrested by Basra police in Iraq for planing to detonate explosives in a public area dressed as locals.
The Racist Demonization of Black Libyans by the Mainstream Media
Although Qaddafi has used mercenaries from Europe and Africa, racist and exaggerated reports about mercenaries were inseminated globally about the so-called “African mercenaries.” Many members of the Libyan military and the Libyan general population were presented as foreigners from other African countries. In reality, many Libyans are black-skinned.
Being an Arab does not ascribe one to any particular phenotype or physical look, because it is the use of the Arabic language that defines the Arab identity. Arabs can be black-skinned or of a Mediterranean complexion or of a fair-skinned complexion with blond hair. The same is true about being a Berber. This is also very true of all Libyans and other North Africans.
In Libya many Libyans are black-skinned. They are not foreigners or mercenaries. Amongst the Negroid Libyans are the Haratins (Harratins) and the Tuareg people (Kel Tamajaq or Kel Tamashq) in the south. These Libyans are as Libyan as the other inhabitants of the country. Although there are foreign mercenaries in Libya, what the outside media managed to do was present footage of some of these black-skinned Libyans serving in the Libyan military and police forces under the label of foreign mercenaries. This was done to demonize Qaddafi and to create an atmosphere for intervention, because Qaddafi was presented as killing his people with a massive army of African mercenaries. In addition, the plight and murder of the scores of “Black Libyans” or foreign workers from sub-Sahara(n) Africa, which in many cases were barbarically decapitated and mutilated, have been ignored and not even covered by the same media outlets that talked about Qaddafi using African mercenaries.
One of the group of men whose murder was falsely blaimed on Colonel Qaddafi.
He happens to be a black-skinned Libyan and he appears to be the highest ranking person there.
Misinformation about the Momentum of Anti-Qaddafi Protests
Leading up to the war on Libya, all sorts of inaccurate reports were fabricated by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Sky News, CNN, and other major networks. For example Al Jazeera reported that Shokri Ghanem, a top energy official in Libya, had fled Libya, but Reuters confirmed that this was not true.  Ghamen protested to Al Jazeera’s misreporting in an interview with Reuters: “‘This is not true, I am in my office and I will be on TV in a few minutes’ Ghamen said by telephone.” 
At the very outset of the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq the Western media reported almost daily that U.S. tanks were near the gates of Baghdad. Something similar has been reported about Libya in regards to the anti-Qaddafi protests. Incorrect reports were also made about cities that had fallen, but in reality old videos were being aired or footage of other Libyan cities were being shown on network television.
Other reports claimed that there was major fighting in Tripoli and parts of the city had fallen, when Tripoli was actually peaceful for days. Later on, the words “claim” and “claimed” were systematically used when these reports were made in an effort to vindicate distorted or incorrect information. On February 26, 2011 reports were made claiming that all the main Libyan cities were no longer under the control of the Libyan government.
This was false. Cities like Sabha (in central Libya), Sirte/Surt (on the coastal mid-point of Libya), Ghat (on the southern border with Algeria), Al-Jufra, Al-Azizya (close to Tripoli), and Tripoli itself were all under the control of Qaddafi’s government.  Overall the original coverage of the events in Libya grossly blew the violence out of proportion in order to justify the agenda of foreign intervention. Like the case of Iraq, with time the people of the world will realize this, but will those who helped create these fabricated reports be held accountable for starting and supporting a war?
At the start of the NATO intervention in North Africa, the Libyan government in Tripoli reported that French and Qatari fighter jets were shot down. The Libyan government exhibited on Jamahiriya News what it claimed were three downed French and two downed Qatari pilots. The news came during the opening salvos of the war and it was brief and was never discussed subsequently. Additionally, the Libyan government and the Libyan Jamahiriya Broadcasting Corporation also tried to present the capture of an Italian civilian vessel as a military victory by Libya against Italy and NATO.
Despite what foreign media sources were claiming at the outset of the revolt, the Qaddafi government was in control of most of the country with the support of the majority of the population, specifically in the western and southern parts of Libya. Hereto, Qaddafi still has wide support within the security and military apparatus of his country, not to mention his own tribe, militias, and the common people of Tripoli.
What the war against Libya has done is widen Qaddafi’s base of support. Patriotism has been a huge factor. Many good people who opposed Qaddafi at one point or another have united and locked ranks with Qaddafi and his regime. They have done this, because they believe that they have to stand united to save Libya from falling prey to the U.S. and its coalition and becoming a new and divided colony. To them Qaddafi is not the real target, Libya and Africa are the real targets.
In a manner of speaking the good, the bad, and the ugly have been united under the Libyan regime’s ranks. This is also one of the reasons why the Pentagon and NATO are working to make sure that internal divisions in Libya continue to be fuelled. They will use the Libyan people against one another to divide Libya.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya specializes on the Middle East and Central Asia. He is a Research Associate for the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
1 Cyrenaica is a name that is being used more frequently now by the press and governments in North America and the European Union, including the U.S. government. It was a name used for Eastern Libya from antiquity. It was last officially used in Libya in the era of the monarchy.
2 Christopher M. Blanchard and James Zanotti, “Libya: Background and U.S. Relations,” Congressional Research Service (CRS), February 18, 2011, p.6.
3 Thus, citizens have the right to take up arms against any illegitimate authority that uses violence to maintain control over them, whether this is an occupying power or an oppressive regime. It is under the umbrella of this principle that resistance movements carry arms and that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was created. The protesters in Benghazi could be understood as exercising a natural right in achieving their emancipation. To justify this, however, their motives and their intent have to be known. If chaos or emancipation were goals has to be questioned and if the riot started due to external actors must also be taken into play.
4 This does not justify the action of any governments or authorities, but it has to be acknowledged that it is standard practice.
5 Nicole Gaouette, “Clinton Says Arab League Vote for No-Fly Zone Changed Minds,” Bloomberg, March 16, 2011.
6 United Nations Security Council, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1970 (Peace and Security in Africa), 6491st Meeting, February 26, 2011, S/RES/1970 (2011): <http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions11.htm>; the selection and wording of the name for Resolution 1970 was used as a means to disguise the violation of Libyan sovereignty.
7 Ibid., pp.2-3.
8 Jonathan Swaine, “Libya: African mercenaries ‘immune from prosecution for war crimes,’” The Daily Telegraph (U.K.), February 27, 2011.
9 Blachard and Zanotti, “Libya: Background and U.S.,” Op. cit, p.14.
10 Alice Johnson, “Fox Defend’s West’s arms sales to Libya,” Gulf News, April 3, 2011.
11 David Barrett and Rebecca Lefort, “Britain trains 100 members of Gaddafi’s feared police,” The Daily Telegraph (U.K.), March 6, 2011.
12 David Stringer, “Top envoys agree Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi must step down but don’t discuss arming rebels,” Associated Press (AP), March 29, 2011.
13 Ibid.; United States Senate Armed Services Committee, U.S. European Command and U.S. Strategic Command in review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2012 and the Future Years Defense Program,112th Congress, 2011, 1st Session, 29 March 2011.
14 Stringer, “Top envoys agree,” Op. cit.
15 To Sell A War, Martyn Gregory (Thames Television. 1992).
17 Daniel Bombay, James Blitz, and Roula Khalaf, “West casts military net around Libya,” Financial Times, March 1, 2011.
18 “‘Airstrikes in Libya did not take place’ – Russian military,” News, Russia Today (RT) (Moscow: March 1, 2011); the RT report was made by journalist Irina Galushko.
19 Karen Parrish, “Task force commander provides Libya update,” American Forces Press Service, March 22, 2011.
20 British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) News, “Iraq probe into soldier incident,” September 20, 2005.
21 Alexander Lawler, “Libya top oil official says still in office,” Reuters, March 31, 2011.
23 During the times of the reports, this was verified as incorrect through personal accounts from within Libya.
24 On a personal note, personal internal contacts in Libya tried to get the images of the pilots, which Libyan state-television had aired, and their information, but Libyan broadcasters would not release it. Security reasons were used to justify the decision. Libyan state-television also directed the personal contacts to the Intelligence Ministry, which would not release any of the information or the images. This was all preposterous, because the images were already aired and presented to the public in Libya.
25 David Zucchino, “The voice of Libya’s rebellion is up and spinning,” The Los Angeles Times, April 7, 2011.
28 David D. Kirkpatrick, “Hopes for a Qaddafi Exit, and Worries of What Comes Next,” The New York Times, March 21, 2011.
29 Russian News and Information Agency (RIA Novosti), “All five Russian journalists set free by Libyan rebels,” April 8, 2011; ITAR-TASS, “FM insists Russian journalists observe security rules in Libya,” April 9, 2011.
30 Kirkpatrick, “Hopes for a Qaddafi Exit,” Op. cit.
31 Liam Fox, “Liam Fox: Libya crisis shows why we’re right on defence reform,” The Sunday Telegraph (U.K.), February 26, 2011.
|July 6, 2011|
|NATO War Crimes: Depleted Uranium Found in Libya by Scientists http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25510by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya|
|Global Research, July 5, 2011|
War crimes and crimes against humanity have been and continue to be committed in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by NATO. Amongst these crimes, the Atlantic Alliance has been using depleted uranium against Libya, specifically civilians and civilian infrastructure.
Bombed sites in Libya have been visited by professional scientists working in the Surveying and Collecting Specimens and Laboratory Measuring Group. The scientists and trained experts have conducted field surveys looking for radioactive isotopes (radioisotopes) at bombed sites. The samples from these sites were then scientifically analyzed at the laboratories of the Nuclear Energy Institution of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
Analysis in Libya through inductively coupled plasma has shown that several sites contain even higher than expected doses of uranium. Holes caused by NATO missiles also have high radioactive measurements, as do the fragments of NATO ordinance. Sites analyzed by the teams of scientists include Bab Al-Azizia and Souk Al-Ahad.
The teams of scientists have found it hard to conduct their important work during the NATO bombings. They have put their health in jeopardy and their lives at risk. Moreover, many of these sites have been bombed numerous times and again on different days. This adds an extra dimension of danger to the teams.
The U.S. and NATO are using “dirty bombs” in Libya. These are the countries that claim that Iran and Syria are attempting to make nuclear weapons. So far, however, it is these very same countries that are using weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and use nuclear technology in an irresponsible and criminal manner. An international war crimes tribunal is in order. The Obama Administration, Nicolas Sarkozy, David Cameron, and NATO cannot be allowed to stand with impunity.
Examples of bombed civilian structures:
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Research Associate for the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is currently in Libya as an international observer and member of an international group of journalists and writers from Europe, North America and the Middle East.
|Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya|
Gearing Up For US/UK/FRANCE False Flag of Invasion For Libyan Assets/Oil/AFRICOM Expansion
You forgot the CFR… the CFR are the inciters and today’s world of evil motherfuckers. CFR is the “Contracted HITMAN for the CIA” It’s just that people, no matter where their origin and place be, are too ignorant to know how these groups and government agents work. Honsi Mubarak was going to purchase $4-5 Billion(With USAID money) in Russian advanced weaponry (Mig-29s, SU-35Ms, etc…) when the US refused to sell Egypt the F-15E Strike Eagle after Israeli agents infiltrated the Egyptian Air Forces and revealed their TOP GUN simulation war games were against Israel. Once the CFR/CIA/Mi6/DGSE ignited the rebellion, ousting of Mubarak, the CFR agents followed-up, they were on EVERY American news station, political dialog show… all of them. Additionally, the US State Department and their $60+ Billion in funds, use foreign nations to bribe nations governments and launder money back to US Military Industrial Complex, Oil, High Tech, Political corporations.
Bombing with depleted uranium huge-bunker busters that are contaminating the Great JAMAHIRIYA, the purity of the SAHARA water-way pipeline and killing and maiming thousands.
We’ve posted here on this problem happening in Libya… I personally put up former Congresswoman Cindy McKinney’s speeches by RT and US peace groups when she arrived back in the US last week. McKinney travel and spent 2 weeks with Independent/Freelance news sources, investigating and talking about this very problem. We all need to just communicate the usage of DU weaponry to everyone, to grow opposition to the destruction of a nation and it’s resources. Continue your communications on all the social networking avenues…
We are pleading for America to get out of this and stop the bombing. Is that too much to ask of the US Government?
Pleading to the Imperial Empire aka Washington DC is a waste of time. Their game plan conspiring with their usual accomplices/suspects was drafted long ago. Obama even purchased $1 Billion (first installment) in Russian HIND Mi/17/21 helicopters for the Afghani military for a UN abstention on 1973. China received lucrative contracts in both Afghanistan and Iraq for their abstention.
Who gave Obama the right to go against the law of his own land and bomb Libya?
Democracy is the false pretense to the people of choice. A Billion people protested around the planet on just one day, in opposition to George W Bush/Dick Chenney/etc invading Iraq. That didn’t stop them, there’s like 965 recorded lies on the pretense to invasion in Iraq, do you really think it will be any different with Washington DC telling the truth on Libya? Plea to the Africa nations, to allies to Libya, unfortunately, the global thugs, the banksters, and Money Masters have set the wheels in motion of what they want.
And now, Obama is planning a ground invasion as well? And you, COWSLEY are asking why we go to plea with American representatives? Do you know what is even occurring. IT IS MASS GENOCIDE!
We’re all aware what is going on in Libya… unfortunately, the American Corporate Media is the 4th Branch of the US Federal Government. They’re the Public Relations firms for whatever agenda the government desires. I’ll repeat it again, each week, executive representatives from all the major media outlets(TV/airwaves/print) meet at the White House to go over what news to push and what news to censor.
Here’s my favorite caption, pass it along, because this is how it all works, Germany did this False Flag Ops to Poland 1939. Obama just gave Chancellor Merkle the US Presidential Medal of Freedom… to keep her mouth shut and for Germany’s abstention from UN Res 1973:
Last edited by HOLLYWOOD; Today at 02:18 PM.
LiveLeak.com – New Bush Coins (joke) <===click
The American Dream, Wake Up People, This is our country! <===click
Thomas Jefferson June 1826
Rock The World!