GADHAFI, A teacher/father exhorts to his fellow countrymen

Gadhafi has no official government function and is known as the “Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution.” 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 is outlined in Muammar al-Gadhafi’s “Green Book”.
FROM SANDRO MAGISTER: 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 23 February 2011.
Libya has never been a homogeneous nation. It is a tangle of Arab, Berber, and African tribes, for each of which group loyalty matters more than anything else. At the outbreak of the revolt, entire cities and regions were quickly made autonomous.
In Libya there are no real and proper state institutions, no parliament, no army that could assume power, as happened in Egypt.
For Gaddafi, the “revolution” is the Muslem society purified of the man-corrupted and interpreted traditions. The Sunna, Safi and Shi-ite consider him foreign. He is distasteful to the bulk of the Sunni Muslim world itself.
In 1976 Gadafi changed the country’s name to the Great Socialist Popular Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah (State of the Masses)and on the 2nd of MARCH 1977, gave all powers over to the Popular Congresses and the People’s Committees, so that the people rule themselves.

The Green Book

LIBYA: Islamic Body of Muammar al-Qathafi invites Vatican to help Find Peace

TRIPOLI, 18 March 2011 (CISA) –The World Islamic Call Society (WICS), founded and sposored by Muammar al-Qathafi,

is calling on the Holy See to contribute to finding a peaceful solution to the crisis in Libya, says the Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli Bishop Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli.

“Yesterday I had a fruitful meeting with the Secretary General of the World Islamic Call Society, an institution funded by Libya, which is involved in inter-religious dialogue and the promotion of Islam throughout the world,”

the bishop told Fides.
Bishop Martinelli said,

“The Secretary General of the WICS was grateful for the presence of the Catholic Church in Libya and particularly for the service by religious sisters in various hospitals.”
The Secretary General of WICS believes that the media have not always provided accurate information of the Libyan situation and this is not helpful in finding a solution to the problem, because the prejudices contribute to finding solutions that are not appropriate, Bishop Martinelli said.

“I reiterated to the Secretary General of WICS my opinion that we must find mediators to resolve the crisis. He replied that they are trying, even though it is not easy. Incidentally, hearts are wounded and to heal these type of wounds is not easy,’

Bishop Martinelli added.
According to the bishop, this week a mission from the African Union is expected in Libya.


Gadhafi : the Corsican connection

Investigation / mardi 19 février 2008 par Anne Giudicelli

Does Muammar Gadhafi, the venerable Guide of the Libyan Revolution, have Corsican ancestry ? According to a tenacious rumor on the Isle of Beauty, he is the son of a Corsican fighter pilot, a Free French hero on a mission in Libya during World War II. Although there’s no irrefutable proof, there is a not-insignificant trail of evidence, which Air Force officers have been looking into in recent years. « Bakchich » investigated.

Did you know you’re in Gadhafi’s father’s hometown ?” The rare mainlanders stopping off in Vezzani, a charming little village on a mountainside in Upper Corsica, are informed right away. Quite proudly, the townspeople offer up the information unprompted : if village lore is to be believed, Colonel Muammar Gadhafi, the Libyan head of state, is the son of a Corsican air force pilot by the name of Albert Preziosi.

Ah, Albert ! His shadow still falls over Vezzani. As soon as you enter the village, a marble plaque on the Post Office building honors the memory of the Captain, who was born in 1915 and died in 1943, in the sky over Russia, in the cockpit of a fighter plane in the Normandy-Niemen squadron. A few turns in the road later, and you come across the village monument to its war dead, which commemorates this officer, “who died a hero’s death during an airborne battle North-East of Karachev,” and whose body was never found. Even in Town Hall, a framed photo of young Albert in uniform takes up more room on the wall than the official portrait of omni-president Sarkozy…

Mu will always be in Libya

Drapeau à tête de Kadhafi
© Khalid

Like the citizens of his town, Jean-Pierre Pagni, the Mayor of Vezzani, isn’t the least bit surprised when you ask him about the “legend” of Gaddafi’s Corsican ancestry. Au contraire. He’s “always heard tell of it”. But, like the rest of them, he has never had in his possession any “documents that would prove it… or disprove it either.” Gesturing towards the airman’s portrait (see here some pictures), he can’t help pointing out that, “The resemblance between Albert Preziosi and the young Muammar Gaddafi is uncanny though, don’t you think ? That doesn’t prove anything, of course, but it’s a nice story.” If the “legend” were ever proven, it would be fine with him, “The town is prepared to provide Mr. Gaddafi with land where he could install a tent, or build a house !” !

An encounter in Niger

Like the locals in Vezzani, influential islanders are fascinated with the “legend” too. And they all want a piece of the action. In the opinion of Alexandre Alessandrini, Member of the General Council for the Canton of Vezzani and of the Corsican Assembly, certain political events could confirm good old Gaddafi’s Corsican ancestry : specifically Libyan support for Corsican nationalists, at the start of their violent period in the 70s. Looking you right in the eye, he states that, “Some nationalists were invited to Libyan weapons and explosives training camp.” Proof positive, as far as the Council member is concerned, that the Colonel had a soft spot for his revolutionary cousins.

But times have changed. Gaddafi is now persona non grata on the Continent. Which makes it all the more a shame that the “local boy” didn’t “take advantage of his official visit to France to spend some time in Corsica : he would have received a warm welcome.” Warmer than on the mainland in any case… The same sentiment is expressed by François Quilichini, a dashing retiree from the Security Branch of the French Police Force in Ajaccio (the capital of Corsica) and one-time “colonial officer,” from 1967 to 1977. At the time he was the security-intelligence bureau chief for the president of Niger.

He remembers in great detail the young Libyan head of state’s first official visit to his Nigerian counterpart, Hamani Diori. “In January 1974, President Diori met with Colonel Gaddafi in Zinder (a Saharan city in Niger that is close to the Libyan border). I attended the meeting. In the evening, President Diori informed me that I had shaken a compatriot’s hand ! That’s how I learned that Gaddafi’s father was Corsican.” At the time, “I didn’t look into it, and now I regret it. But you have to admit that the hypothesis makes sense, considering Albert Preziosi’s presence in Libya in the 40s. And in the colonial army, Corsicans were the ones who got involved with the natives the most…”

Minimal archives

Seen from Vezzani, the legend of Gaddafi’s Corsican ancestry is so tenacious that it has made it into the “Isle of Beauty’s” collective imagination. Yet despite all the whispering, there is no paper trail. Not yet, anyway. No biography of Albert Preziosi mentions the birth of a Libyan love child. Nor do any contradict it either. For that matter, there isn’t much documentation to be had about the pilot’s life.

If you get in touch with the Air Force’s history department, located in Vincennes (near Paris), which centralizes documents and is a reference for biographers and war historians, the fact is that the “Preziosi” file is pretty slim : a few biographical elements from the specialized press, plus his Air Force records. They don’t even have the article published in 1977 by the far-right weekly Minute, whose headline read “Could Gaddafi be the son of a Corsican captain ?”, despite the article’s impact on the island.

The Air Force official’s opinion

Although Albert Preziosi’s file, consulted in the Air Force archives, is slim, Bakchich did manage to dig up one gem : a hitherto unpublished exchange of letters between upper-echeleon French officers referring, in no uncertain terms, to Gaddafi’s Corsican ancestry. Proof positive that Bakchich isn’t the only one following this trail, because, as the document, dated March 15, 1999, attests, high-ranking officers in the French Air Force are taking it seriously.

This letter was written by the head of the department, General Silvestre de Sacy, on Air Force Historical Service letterhead, in response to a Colonel’s query about the veracity of the Preziosi/Gaddafi connection. In a pompous style, the General admits from the get-go, “I have myself heard [this issue] mentioned frequently” but “I have never consulted the archives to see if there could be a grain of truth to the rumors concerning Captain Preziosi.

Your letter was an excuse for me to delve into this business more closely.”All the more so in that the Colonel had clearly done the groundwork himself. “If we accept that Gaddafi was born in early 1943, as you have written,” the General goes on, “he would have been conceived in the second quarter of 1942. That period does indeed correspond to one in which the “Alsace” squadron, to which Captain Preziosi belonged before he joined “ Normandy”, was stationed in Fuka, in the northern part of the Libyan desert (…) The squadron left Fuka in late June.” So the time and place, confirmed by Air Force archives, would seem to support the Colonel’s theory, wouldn’t they ? Not at all ! The General begs to differ, and he has his reasons.

First of all, there’s the question of distance, carefully calculated. “Fuka is in Egyptian territory, at approximately 280 km. (175 miles) from the Libyan border, more than 600 km. (400 mi.) from the desert of Sirte, more than 1,000 km. (600 mi.) from the Sebha oasis [Fezzan zone] and more than 1,500 km (900 miles) from the Ghadames one.” Conclusion : “It would have been absolutely impossible for Preziosi to have been in those different places.” If the General says so…

In addition, “contact” would have had to have taken place in order for a child to have been conceived, and “Fuka is totally cut off.” Besides, war is serious business, and “Squadron personnel would not have been distracted by the presence of women” (sic). And finally, “a statement received from an [unnamed] comrade-in-arms of Preziosi’s, who shared his tent (re-sic)” definitively settles the question, because it “allows us to believe that these rumors are totally unfounded.” The conclusion to this brilliant demonstration reads like an order “Therefore, for my part, I am absolutely convinced that these rumors must be firmly denied.” Is that perfectly clear ?

Exit the Air Force archives, at least for the moment. The only hope at this stage of the investigation : retrace Albert Preziosi’s steps in Libya ourselves. Purpose : check if the dates really do coincide with those of Muammar Gaddafi’s conception. According to his official biography, the Guide of the Revolution was born on June 19, 1942 in Sirte, into a Bedouin family of the Senussi tribe, which originated in the Fezzan region, near the Niger-Chad border. Therefore, he must have been conceived in September or October 1941.

So where was handsome Albert just then ? Alas ! Although the few written accounts referring to Pilot Preziosi (historical accounts of the Normandy-Niemen squadron, aviation encyclopedias, history textbooks, etc.) do agree that the airman was stationed in Libya at some point, they diverge when it comes to precise dates and places. Nevertheless, among Preziosi’s many hypothetical Libyan itineraries, one trail stands out : that the pilot would have followed General Leclerc’s division in its famous Fezzan campaign. The French did in fact set up camp in this region in the 40s, before they began running it administratively, from 1943 to 1951. There is abundant historical data to back this up. General Leclerc left Africa to cut off the Italian and German army’s rear guard.

The first contingent of his division left England for Africa on August 30, 1940. As luck would have it, two of Preziosi’s fellow travelers – Jacques Soufflet and Yves Ezanno – left France in June, 1940. Like them, Preziosi probably hooked up with Leclerc’s division in northern Chad, then crossed southern Libya heading first for Egypt, then Rayak (Syria), where he is known to have arrived in late 1941. Taking those dates into account, the pilot could have met a Libyan woman from near Fezzan right around the time that Muammar Gaddafi was conceived. Preziosi might well be one of those airmen who dons mufti in wartime in order to increase their mission’s chances of success.

Mu w Green Robes

Kadhafi parachutiste
© Khalid

Comrades in arms tell all

In this context, whatever Albert Preziosi’s few surviving comrades-in-arms have to say should be very useful indeed. After all, they’re the only ones left who can still connect the dots. Captain Georges Masurel is one of the last Free French members around to tell their epic tale. A mechanic turned gunner turned pilot, he ran into Albert Preziosi for the first time in Libya, in 1942, as part of the Alsace squadron. Later, he was Preziosi’s mechanic in “Neu-Neu”, the Normandy-Niemen squad’s nickname.

Confirming the thesis of Muammar Gaddafi Corsican sire, he declares that “Preziosi was bound to have been with the Leclerc division guys” prior to late 1941, when he made his way to the base in Rayak to help train pilots. “The Alsace squadron had a lot of men who had “done Africa” and therefore had been through Libya.” So had Georges Masurel heard about a liaison between his traveling companion and a Libyan woman ? “Oui,” he declares unequivocally, but because of a different incident.

A surprising one, which may have started everything… During the summer of 1942, while the French forces were fighting the Italians and the Germans at Bir Hakeim, in north-eastern Libya, Masurel and his fellow squadron members found out that the plane piloted by Preziosi, who is supposed to be heading for Tobruk, never arrived. “For us, he was MIA. And then, over a month later, he made it back to the base.” Surprise ! Shot down in mid-air, young Albert explains that he had been taken in by a Libyan family, who rescued him, tended his wounds, hiding him from the Germans all the while. “So he lived with them for at least three weeks.

That’s when a rumor started going around that he had had an affair with a Libyan woman while he was in the desert.”And what did the subject of the rumors have to say about them ? Discreet reply from Georges Masurel, “There was a war on, you know. We had other things to worry about. And Albert didn’t stay for long after he got back. I lost track of him for a while, because he was very sick and was sent to the hospital in Cairo. We didn’t hook up again until the Normandy-Niemen in late 1942.”

Calendar confusion

If you take Muammar Gaddafi’s official date of birth – 07 June 1942 –Albert Preziosi’s spell with a Libyan tribe would have allowed the proud father to attend the birth of his offspring. But not to have sired him. Unless the Guide’s official biographers mixed up the Georgian calendar and the Muslim one… And just to keep everyone on their toes, in November 1978, on the occasion of the Muslim New Year, Gaddafi led a calendar revolution.

He decreed that the Muslim calendar shouldn’t start in the year 622 B.C. (the date when the Prophet emigrated to Medina, a reference for calendars throughout the Muslim world), but in 632, when he died… Which, according to some complicated (and somewhat chancy) calculations, could mean that little Gaddafi might have been born later. In 1943 for instance, just nine months after Preziosi was taken in by the Libyans. But handsome Albert’s fellow squadron members don’t sweat the details. For good reason ! To hear them tell it, the whole squadron was in on the secret.

When Commander Pierre Lorillon was assigned to Normandy-Niemen, in late 1943, Albert Preziosi had already died a hero’s death five months earlier. He remembers the discussions he had with the squad’s other pilots back then very well. For him, the Preziosi/Gaddafi connection is gospel. “We all knew that Albert had had a “Big Tent” Libyan girlfriend… (i.e. a noble young woman from the bourgeoisie). But we didn’t know much about it. The only thing we knew for sure was that he’d had a kid with her, and that the young woman’s uncle took care of things. He sent the kid to school overseas to calm things down, and for the sake of the tribe’s reputation. It was all kind of hush-hush. A European man having a kid with a Libyan woman could stir up trouble, including for Albert. And the English didn’t really approve of that sort of thing.” A valid reason that is also a good excuse for the French military hierarchy to follow its inclination to keep its mouth shut.

The Libyan Father and mother Mama AishaGadhafi and elder Hamedi, father(Gadhafi with the elder HAMEDI, co-leader of “The Revolution”)

For the sake of the Guide of the Great Revolution’s legend, Muammar Gaddafi (also) has a Libyan father. Officially,   Gadhafi’s father is Abou Meniar Al-Gaddafi, a Bedouin goat-herder from the Sirte region. Moammar Gaddafi always honored Abou Meniar as his father, and cared deeply about him until his death.Abu Meniar Gadhafi was married to Aisha,  believed to be Muammar’s mother. But Aischa could really be the sister of Moammar’s real mother who might have died in childbirth. Record-keeping in Libya during the Italian colonial period having been a somewhat haphazard business, the confusion surrounding Gaddafi’s origins is all the greater. Take, for instance, the number of Gaddafi’s siblings, which varies depending on the biographies. According to some, he was an only son. For others, he had as many as 12 brothers and sisters, he being the last. And according to the American journalist John Cooley, whose Libyan Sandstorm, a well-researched book about Gaddafi, was published in 1982, he has just one brother, Sayed Kaddam… Still, Moammar Gaddafi loved and recognised Abou Meniar as his only father, taking good care of him under the auspices of a Catholic doctor and nuns, up to his death.

Cautious descendants

We still needed to know what the Preziosi family thinks about their prodigal pilot’s comrades in arms’ beliefs. A touchy task, when you realize that most of the Preziosi men go into the service or are very close to the military. Sired by a policeman originally from Fontana, in Castagniccia, and married to a girl from Paoli, in Nocario, just a few sharp turns in the road away, Albert had a brother, four years older than he. Jean chose to follow in his father’s footsteps, and reached the rank of General of the Gendarmerie. On July 28, 1997, his widow stood in for him at the first ceremony commemorating Albert’s disappearance 54 years prior.

The commemoration took place in the village of Vezzani, thanks to the efforts of the Commander of Air Force Base 126, in Ventiseri-Solenzara, which, as it happens, bears the name of Captain Albert Preziosi. Members of the local chapter of the National Association of Air Force Reserve Officers (ANORAA) were particularly active in preparing the event. One of them in particular : a certain François… Preziosi.

As it turns out, François is the son of a cousin of Albert’s. A reserve officer, he helped collect elements from his great-uncle’s biography for the Association, which he is a member of, simply by methodically researching all the files available and open to the public. “I’ve been hearing about the Gaddafi connection for as long as I can remember, and I’ve tried to find out more,” he acknowledges. “I even asked an acquaintance to question some people he knew who had been working for the “Native Affairs” office in Fezzan 50 years ago.”

Even for him, the reply was curt and definitive : “professional secret”. As though a dark veil still shrouded the whole affair. But like his sister Laetitia, a Parisian lawyer, François Preziosi remembers the scene one evening in the 70s when Albert’s mother, seated right in front of the TV, suddenly shouted, “Look, it’s Albert !” It was a report showing images of the young Libyan leader.

An industrial baron and a high-ranking officer leap into the fray

“The whole idea is based on the physical resemblance between the two men,” according to Jacques-Antoine Preziosi, one of Albert’s nephews. A lawyer in Marseille, he tends to think the whole thing I much ado about nothing. “There is absolutely no physical evidence of any kind establishing family ties. We don’t have any documents mentioning it, and Albert didn’t leave any letters. So as far as we, the direct descendants, are concerned, there’s nothing to the story.” Fair enough, but did they ever try to get in touch with Gaddafi or his entourage ?

From Alsace to Russia

Created on March 15, 1941, in Ismailia (Egypt), the first air squadron (EFC1) was composed of airmen who had joined the Free French in June, 1940. In April, 1941, the squadron was engaged in defending Tobruk, which was under siege from the Afrikakorps (a German army corps sent to Libya to support the Italians against the British). After the allied withdrawal, the squadron became involved in ground attacks and protecting Navy convoys at sea.

In late 1941, it headed for Syria, where it was disbanded, in order to make way for the Alsace Squadron (GC1). Placed first under the orders of Commander Jean-Louis Tulasne, then underCommander Joseph Pouliquen, the new squad was originally responsible for convoying new planes. After having served in the defense of Bir Hakeim (June 1942), it participated in the defense of Alexandria. In September, 1942, Commander Pouliquen was put in charge of building a new airborne squadron to fight on the Eastern front in support of Soviet troops ; this was the group that would become the “Normandy” Squadron” (GC3). Composed, on a voluntary basis, of French pilots and mechanics, many of whom came from the Alsace squadron, it left the Rayak air force base in November, 1942, to head for Russia.

“We’ve never asked them anything whatsoever. It would be highly inappropriate. Totally out of line. Can you see yourself asking Gaddafi about it ? Casting aspersions on his mother ? If I were him, I would be very offended. It’s probably enough to get yourself locked up.” Yet Jacques-Antoine admits that over the years, several people have been in touch with him to ask if his uncle was Colonel Gaddafi’s father. A few years ago, their numbers included the representatives of an industrial baron whose name he won’t divulge. The whole thing made Jacques-Antoine see red. “What was that industrialist thinking ? That he was going to use our so-called connections to do business with Libya”

Clearly, the businessman wasn’t the only “influential person” to enquire about Muammar’s sire. In 1999, a high-ranking French officer wrote to the head of the Air Force historical service, General Silvestre de Sacy, to try to find out if the Corsican connection was legit. The service shelved the query (see box). Motif : during the Libyan campaign, French officers had no contact with the locals, and certainly not the local women. But surviving members of Normandy-Niemen stick to a different version of events. So the case for Gadhafi’s Corsican ancestry isn’t closed. Far from it. Even if the only irrefutable proof would be a DNA test. And as for asking the Colonel for a sample…

Translated from the French by : Regan Kramer

Times Online
Sunday, 17 February, 2008

Is Colonel Gadhafi a Corsican?

Times Online
17 February  2008

Is Colonel Gaddafi a Corsican?

Charles Bremner

Charles Bremner is Paris Correspondent for The Times
and has previously reported from New York and Brussels.

If Colonel Gaddafi was so eager to linger in Paris when he came last December, it was perhaps because the Libyan leader is half Corsican. His father was an air force pilot from Corsica. That’s him in the picture on the left.

This extraordinary claim has surfaced over the past few days after a report by Bakchich, a French investigative news site. They looked into a legend which has long circulated in Vezzani, a village of 600 people in eastern Corsica. According to this, a Vezzani gendarme’s son called Albert Preziosi was stationed in the Libyan desert with the Free French air force in 1941-42. He is said to have had an affair with a local woman at about the time that young Muammar would have been conceived.

Preziosi was killed when his aeroplane was shot down over Russia in 1943. As a member of the famous Normandy-Niemen squadron, he has been celebrated as a hero in his home village ever since. An air force base near the town of Solenzara, is named after him. Not a shred of evidence exists to stand up the Gaddafi legend but the physical resemblance is so strong that it has persisted.

Officially, the father of the Supreme Guide of the Revolution was Abu Meniar Al Gaddafi, a Bedouin goat breeder in the region of Syrte. His mother, a local tribeswoman, was named Aisha. The Italian occupation and the war destroyed all records of the couple, according the French investigators. Still, Moammar Gadhafi recognised Abu Meniar as his only OFFICIAL father, and loved hime dearly (taking good care of him ’til his dying day).

Preziosi is remembered by surviving comrades as a charmer. According to some, he talked about having a child in Libya. Pierre Lorillon, a Major who joined the squadron in Russia after Preziosi’s death told Bakchich that his wartime comrades had no doubt about Gaddafi’s paternity. “We all knew that Albert had had a girlfriend from the ‘big Libyan tent’, in other words a noble woman from the high bourgeoisie…We only knew that he had a child with this woman and that an uncle had taken care of her and sent her to study abroad”.

Members of Preziosi’s family were reluctant to talk or said they knew nothing about a child, according to the site and French newspapers which picked up the story this weekend. Jacques-Antoine Preziosi, a nephew who is a Marseille lawyer, said that the family had nothing to confirm the legend and had never thought of investigating it.

Jean-Pierre Pagni, the Mayor of Vezzani, told le Journal du Dimanche that Preziosi was the village hero. “We have no proof of this paternal link but nothing contradicts it either,” he said.

Bakchich dug up an exchange of letters between senior officers which showed that the air force History Service tried to investigate the story in 1999. A general concluded that the paternity was not possible because the Preziosi was based 600 kilometres away from Gaddafi’s reported birth place. The news site quotes other squadron pilots who contradict this.

Perhaps someone will end the mystery with a DNA check. In the meantime, some in Corsica are remembering that Gaddafi gave strong support to FNLC separatist guerrillas there in the 1970s. That is hardly evidence of filial attachment, since the colonel was handing out support and training to just about every freedom-liberationist outfit in those days.




The Leader’s Analysis of the current Crisis of Terrorism in the World
Print Download
The matter has two aspects:
  1. The attack on the US. The political capital, Washington D.C. and the economic nerve center, New York were both attacked in a pre-meditated, deliberate and thoroughly-planned spectacle of frightful violence. This aspect falls within US jurisdiction. It was an act of aggression against it. The US, like all other countries, has the right to self defense under Article 51 of the currently paralyzed UN Charter. It also has the right under other instruments. Self-defense is a legitimate right. The US is strong enough to exercise that right. It needs no help from anybody to defend itself or to pursue its enemies. It is also perfectly capable of justifying its actions by itself. To offer to help the US, in a matter that it can handle by itself, is tantamount to hypocritical boot-licking.
  2. The phenomenon of terrorism is not a matter of concern to the US alone. It is the concern of the whole world. The US cannot combat it alone. It is not logical, reasonable or productive to entrust this task to the US alone. It requires international cooperation and joint action on the world level.

Most regrettably, there has been wide-spread confusion and a profound misunderstanding of this matter. Cooperation to combat terrorism is not a service for the US. It is an act of self-defense for each and every one of us. It is a threat to us all whether or not the US was attacked on 9/11.

The US must not reward those who join the war on terrorism because fighting that evil is not a service for the US. It is an act that serves one’s own interests. Who of us likes terrorism? Who of us would wish to live, or see his children and his country live, in a world where terrorism has free reign? Terrorism is a horrendous scourge.

Regrettably again, there has been a great deal of duplicity, that has led to an equal measure of confusion on the world level. What is the purpose of our action? Is it aimed at helping the US defend itself, take revenge and punish those who attacked in on 9/11? Or is it aimed at the adoption of an international program to combat terrorism and, ultimately, eliminate it?

There is a clear difference between the two situations.

Hypocrisy, fear and greed are the causes of this confusion. Some have stubbornly refused to join the battle against terrorism because that battle was confused with defending the US or made synonymous to joining it in its war on Afghanistan. Some others have hastened to participate in the strike against Afghanistan. They did not do so because they are against terrorism. Rather, they are joining because they are against the Taliban for their own reasons. They might have joined for reasons of greed, fear or hypocrisy.

At this stage, we must be genuinely transparent. Those who wish to cooperate with, or ally themselves to the US in striking back at its enemies, must say it clearly.

This is not the first time, nor is going to be the last time when countries create an alliance to help each other. Every state has the right to make a sovereign decision to take the side of the US against Afghanistan or Bin-Laden despite the fact that the US does not need anybody’s help to defend, or to avenge itself as I said before. However, when it comes to terrorism, the matter is completely different.

To combat it, we need each other. To defeat it, we need international cooperation and a new, long-term international policy.

However, the question of terrorism is of such vastness and complexity that I think we would be deluding ourselves to think that we can come to terms with all its aspects.

Let us first take the question: what is terrorism? I am certain that we will disagree on its definition.

If it happens that we manage to reach freely a transparent definition of terrorism, we would thus lay the foundations of a new world free from it. That would be a veritable miracle!!

However, I am certain that we will not be able to agree on a definition of terrorism. The reason is clear.

What I might consider as an act of terrorism, could be viewed as a desirable on by my adversary. Proofs of this are plentiful. For instance; a young man was trained in Peshawar. Then, he became active in Afghanistan. Subsequently, the British Intelligence assigned him the task of assassinating Al-Gathafi in the belief that the liquidation of the Revolution would lead to Libya’s surrender.

It would then hand over the suspects in the Lockerbie case. He attempted to carry out his task, in full view of the whole world. However, the Almighty intervened and caused the bomb to freeze and fail to detonate. That was truly an act of God. Had the bomb detonated, a large group of people, including whole families, would have met their death on the reviewing stand.

The terrorist made a full confession of what I have just said. The British Intelligence officer also confessed to it. It was an act of terrorism planned against me by the British Intelligence, in cooperation with the returnees from Afghanistan.

Those who consider me their adversary would not consider it as a terrorist act. On the contrary, it is a desirable act that should be encouraged. I do not consider myself an adversary of Britain’s or that Afghani-Libyan young man. I see myself as a wronged victim of terrorism. The other party has its own justifications. So, we are in complete disagreement on the definition of terrorism.

I speak in all transparency because I have nothing to fear. I covet nothing and I am not a hypocrite. I am the voice of a genuine, internationalist conscience. I know that the world situation may shift but the world has not changed. It is our duty to change it into a good world.

Therefore, we must distinguish clearly between the preparations being made against Afghanistan, seemingly as a direct result of the horrendous act of 9/11 on the one hand, and combating terrorism on the global level, on the other.

The first question is the responsibility of the US. The second is the responsibility of the whole world. There is no excuse for any lack of cooperation, or even alliance, to combat terrorism once we agree on its definition and root causes. Failure, or even delay, to do so means putting the future of humanity at stake.

It also means a letdown of succeeding generations.

Terrorism is a fact. It is a justifiable act for those who commit it. This is the source of danger. If a satisfactory solution is found to the question of Northern Ireland, that will be the end of what Britain calls Irish violence and terrorism, and what the IRA calls legitimate struggle.

If a similar solution is found for the Question of Palestine, there will be an end of what the Israelis call Palestinian terrorism and what the Palestinians see as legitimate armed struggle. The enmity between the US and the Arabs will also disappear. But are these all the causes of terrorism? The answer is: “far from it”. There are many other causes. There are many other groups that resort to terrorism, not just in Palestine and Northern Ireland.

For example, there are groups with grievances in the Philippines, Chechnya, Kashmir, Tibet, the Basque Country, Corsica and the Tamils. This is not an exhaustive list.

How could Russia, America and Saudi Arabia agree on a definition of the situation in Chechnya?

Russia considers it terrorism and a plot against its unity. America sees it as a suppression of the right to self-determination and human rights. Mosques in Saudi Arabia describe it as holy Jihad and pray for its victory. I consider it a conspiracy against Muslims in Russia to isolate them, diminish their status and deprive them of the right to be citizens of a nuclear power. As Russian citizens who are entitled to occupying the highest posts in their country, Russian Muslims could one day rule that nuclear power. Separating them from Russia would mean depriving them of that possibility. The same happened to the Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They became a minority in their republic.

They used to be Yugoslav citizens. One of them, Jamal El-Din Padic, was the prime minister of Yugoslavia; the second man after Tito, by virtue of simply being a Yugoslav citizen. Now, Muslims cannot reach this high post, not even in Bosnia itself. Therefore, the separation of Bosnia was a conspiracy and a catastrophe for its Muslims. The same applies to Chechnya.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that those problems were solved. There would still be the groups that resort to violence and terrorism in North America, South America, Europe and Japan. Suppose we manage to eliminate those groups as well, the Mafia and drug gangs will still exist.

If somehow we succeed in overcoming them, there will be other evil groups. There are those to counterfeit money (more than $500 billion counterfeit are in circulation), those who do money laundering, and those that traffic in women and children. Then, how about the disgruntled ones like the Seattle protesters, the unemployed, those who were laid-off their work, and the poor?

There are also other causes such as the mushrooming populations, migration, minorities, the clash of religions and cultures, the rebellious scientists, the hackers and the electronic and biological virus warfare. The list is long.

Let us deal with Britain first. Some believe that the youth who were trained in Peshawar, went to Afghanistan, joined Bin-Laden then went to all corners of the Earth are the members of the so-called Al-Qaeda organization.

If that is true, we must state that Britain shelters the largest number of them. We have proof of that if the world wishes to cooperate. Are we really going to attack the bases of terrorism and the countries that harbor terrorists? I do not think so, unless we are going to say that we will attack all the countries that shelter terrorists with the exception of Britain.

Thus, we go back to double standards and disrupt the international consensus against terrorism. This is a sure way to lose the war on terrorism. Tony Ben, the elder statesman of the British Labor Party and its chairman, has said: “If the US supports Israel out of fear of the American Jews, we in Britain might take the side of the terrorists. Because we fear the more than seven million British Muslims”.

The Chief of British Intelligence said more than what Tony Ben said. This is what made Arab countries wonder if they could be closer allies of the US than Britain is. What is the difference between Britain and Afghanistan? Let us see what the US would do with Britain first.

The confusion of the right of the US to retaliate against a terrorist attack on it, and our collective right to combat terrorism will abort international action. So will the confusion of Bin-Laden, the Taliban, terrorism and Islam.

The haste to take steps against terrorism in an atmosphere overshadowed by the US’s right to defend itself, will render the international action meaningless and will abort the chance to adopt a global program to deal with the causes of terrorism and the way to combat it internationally. Terrorism is our common enemy. It is not the enemy of the US alone.

It is not in the interest of the US to confuse an international task and responsibility with its own national responsibility to its people. I believe the error lies in the attempt to clone the Second Gulf War. It cannot be cloned. What happened then is not applicable to the current situation. It is the result of the instigation of the long line of hypocrites who have encouraged the US government to confuse things. They have also encouraged it to be hasty in matters that should be postponed, and to postpone what should be dealt with promptly.

Any attempt to replicate what happened in the so-called Second Gulf War would be a mistake. What happened then was the occupation of one state by another. That action was not directed against the US. The US was not the occupied country. However, Kuwait beseeched the US and the world for help. Therefore, there was a need to involve the whole world morally and politically. There was also a need to involve the UN for reasons of the international law.

The premise was that the matter was of concern to the whole world. It was not the responsibility of the US alone. Now, the situation is different. The 9/11 attack was directed against the US alone. It has a right to retaliate and it is capable of retaliation. It is inconceivable for the US to beseech the world for help against Afghanistan or Bin-Laden. The war against terrorism is a global responsibility.

I cannot imagine a responsible state failing to join the war on terrorism. But today we hear about states that agree to join, and others that have declined. The reason is the confusion of supporting a single country against its enemies with the global fight against terrorism; our common enemy.

Are we against Islam? Are we, Arabs and Muslims, anti-Islam? Are all those who oppose Bin-Laden against Islam? Are all those who oppose Taliban against Islam? This erroneous view is the result of the confusion of the US’s right to self-defense, and the world’s duty to combat terrorism.

Not all those who oppose Bin-Laden or the so-called Al-Qaeda are against Islam. Not all those who oppose Taliban are against Islam. I do not even think that we are against Bin-Laden personally. Nor are we against his men who were trained by the foes of the former Soviet Union. Nor are we against Taliban as one of the Afghan factions. What we oppose is the heresy that was born in that region.

A heresy that is similar to the one that emerged in the time of the Guided Caliphs and caused three of them to be murdered; Omar, Othman and Ali.

We are the victims of the attacks, assassinations and terror perpetrated by those groups that sneaked out of our countries to go to Afghanistan as mercenaries. They went there to fight the Soviet Army on behalf of others. They did so, despite the fact that the Soviet Army went into Afghanistan upon the request of its pro-Moscow government. This is exactly what is happening now. Foreign armies are going into the region upon the request of its governments. That was the excuse invoked by Bin-Laden in his television interview.

Those groups came back to wreak havoc in our countries. They went on a rampage of killing all those who crossed their path. Even women and children were not spared. They wanted to advocate a call that subverts the Muslim faith, and spreads a wave of destructive behavior.

They brand all who do not share their beliefs as apostate. This, despite their indulgence in all manner of cardinal sins. All they want is to go inexorably towards the unknown. They have no doctrine and no well-defined objective. All they know is the insane torture and murder. All they can do is to parrot meaningless words that they do not understand such as the word “Taghoot”.

It is a vague word that means worshipping an entity other than God. They use it to describe persons while it cannot be used in this way in Arabic. They also use the words “Islamic Sharia”. It is yet another vague word. It is a signifier without a signified.

We are against those groups. We will fight them like they fight us.

We are stronger than them, because we are defending the civilized society and because we are defending the religion against the wave heresy and destruction they have unleashed. This is a necessary and legitimate act of self-defense.

We fight them also because we will not accept a new Caliphate.

We will not submit to the will of a caliph who will rule us by divine command. God has not ordered him to do that. He has no contact with God. We are no longer so naïve as to believe that the Caliphate is ordained by God.

The Caliphate is a deviation from the Faith. Every deviation is an aberration. Aberrations, and those who advocate them, are doomed to Hell. The Caliphate is an aberration, and so is heresy. The Prophet never designated a deputy or a successor. We never heard of a “deputy prophet”, Except for Aaron who was designated by God to help Moses. We oppose heresy and the aberrations of the Caliphate and terrorism. Where do Bin Laden and the Taliban stand on that?

God only knows. But that was a door that opened before the naïve, the ignorant and even the well-intentioned. Through it, they went to fight as mercenaries, believing they were Mujahideen. Now, the chickens have come home to roost. Now, a similar door may open before the same lost and easily-exploited groups. They may become disillusioned with it.

Then, they will return to their countries, and go to the US itself to perpetrate acts of terrorism and insanity, just like their predecessors. At that time, we will reap what we have sown, exactly like the previous time. I have done my duty and sounded the alarm.

We are faced with new, complex and all-encompassing challenges. Wisdom dictates that we view them from a civilized, human and objective perspective, free from religious, ethnic, linguistic and geographical bias. Chauvinist tendencies, outdated patterns, missiles and bombs are useless in combating those challenges.

We must review everything. We must not bet on anything. Because all we have at our disposal is nothing.

31 OCTOBER 2004

Speech Against Capital Punishment

The Brother the Leader of the Revolution addresses the heads and members of judiciary organs in the People’s General Committee of Justice, academicians, graduate and advanced degree students in the School of Law of al-Fateh University, The Seventh of April University, Al-Marqab, Academy for Graduate Studies, and the Green Auditorium
Print Download

I wish you well in Ramadan. How are you? I greet you in this Holy Month, and thank you for being here. I know you are fasting. Forgive me for the inconvenience.

I would like to avail myself of this opportunity to share with you my thoughts on some legal questions. You are Professors and students of law. I believe we are about to submit a draft penal code to the People’s Conferences. This new draft contains new amendments. We only make suggestions because the final decision has to be taken by the People’s Conferences.

The People are above the principles and above the law, because they lay down principles and make the law.

One may say principles take precedence; another says no, the law rules. We say the people rule. The people are above principles, and above the law. They make the laws; they lay down the principles of their choice that suit their circumstances and their lives.

The conferences of the people adopt the laws, and authority is the prerogative of the people’s conferences, which adopt the laws; the laws could be amended and rescinded. The People rescind and amend the law. Nothing that we say here is final because the People’s Conferences have the final word. However, as long as we have an opportunity to make our contributions to clarify these issues, we must do what we can.

The world calls for an abolition of capital punishment, but practically goes in the opposite direction.

The world, as you may be aware, declares that it will abolish capital punishment.

This is only a lip service. In reality, the world takes the opposite direction.

It expands capital punishment but declares that it is moving in the direction of the abolition of capital punishment. We must prove this to the world. We must not let any governmental or non-governmental organization insult our intelligence. If they fooled other people, they cannot fool us. We know that the world declares that it will abolish capital punishment or wishes to abolish capital punishment, but in practice it is expanding capital punishment. What is more dangerous is that the death sentence is carried out extra-judicially and collectively. This is dangerous.

The death sentence is carried out collectively and extra-judicially!!

Therefore, the call to abolish capital punishment in courts is naïve, and has no moral force particularly when it is seen in the context of cases of capital punishment carried out collectively and extra-judicially.

Furthermore, the countries that abolished capital punishment or that call for its abolition are the same countries that enforce the death sentence on a wide scale.

The states that are calling for the abolition of a death sentence handed down by courts are the same states that resort to collective wide scale extra-judicial capital punishment.

Therefore, arguments by international organizations or states against another state that did not abolish capital punishment in courts hold no ground. Those who declared that they abolished capital punishment and other major powers are still enforcing capital punishment collectively and extra-judicially. They call upon states that have not yet abolished capital punishment to do so; in return, those same states call upon them to stop imposing the death sentence extra-judicially. Under these circumstances, a death sentence handed down by courts is more legal, legitimate and humane than a summary execution that lacks due process and legal guarantees.

The Israelis have abolished capital punishment. Who believes them? If they themselves say that capital punishment is abolished, how then do they commit mass killings? It is easier if the Palestinians were to be apprehended and tried in Israeli courts and if they had access to counsel.

America sentenced me to death. It carried out the sentence, execution by bombs style, but my life was spared for reasons beyond America’s control.

America opposes the death sentence. It may have abolished capital punishment in some but not all states. Nevertheless, it still carries out a collective form of death sentencing. America handed down a death sentence against me; I was condemned to execution by bombs, but for reasons beyond its control, my life was spared. Which is better? Is it better to be tried, have access to council, and the right to appeal, or to face a death sentence without guarantees?

We need to make our position clear and reflect that position in our school curricula, and in the arguments we advance in international fora. Libya is in the lime light. There are those who fear Libya, who want to establish a relationship with Libya, who will invest in Libya, who come as tourists to Libya , who will work in the oil or gas field, or who will have something to do with Libya. There is Barcelona, the European Mediterranean [partnership]; Libya is in the spotlight, and Libya must therefore publicize its opinions, and chart the course it intends to follow in international fora. We do not want to become another Turkey, a county that has ambitions for admission to the European Union. The political, legislative and social particularities in Turkey would not qualify Turkey for membership in the European Union according to European standards. Therefore, Turkey’s behavior is random and is not compatible with its reality. The result is ludicrous, even humiliating. In the Turkish context, there are crimes that are serious, and unacceptable. Impunity is not an option.

They Europeans do not give weight to these considerations. They say, “The penalty for these acts must be abolished”. This approach however is untenable because if pursued, it will destroy the Turkish society. That society is organized around a given set of values. When those social, political and legislative values are eroded, the society will collapse. We must not be another Turkey. As we take center stage in this era, we cannot afford to be like Turkey. We must be backed by solid arguments to silence our detractors. For this reason, I requested to meet with law professors, students, and judges. It is important that we shed light on the issue.

The world today is divided into two camps: formal and informal. We fear the aggression of the mighty.

The world today is divided into two camps: formal and informal. The formal camp is comprised of governments and major powers. International organizations are part of the formal camp. The formal stakeholders could manipulate these organizations, so could the major powers that have veto rights and permanent seats in the Security Council as well as military and economic prowess.

The other camp is called the “informal” camp, which is made of non-governmental organizations established by groups and individuals. They are unrelated to states.

On the world map today, there are two camps: one formal the other informal. Both camps could call for an abolition of capital punishment. Nevertheless, their purposes are different. The formal camp has an agenda. The informal camp is the humanitarian establishment that may call for the abolition of this form of punishment for purely humanitarian reasons, unless they themselves fall victim to manipulation, or are controlled or exploited.

Major Powers like the United States, Britain or the Israelis may infiltrate one of the institutions of civil society and manipulate it. We correctly assume that these groups, the civil non-governmental organizations are informal organizations. When they appeal for the abolition of capital punishment in the world, we assume that their appeal is launched for purely humanitarian considerations. They do not have an agenda. They do not have political or economic interests that they want to advance; they are good Samaritans, decent and kind ordinary people who want to save themselves, their offspring, and humanity at large from capital punishment. For that reason, they established organizations that call for the abolition of this penalty and tried to pressure some states to abolish it too.

World intelligence services are pushing for an end to capital punishment to protect their agents.

The formal camp is advocating the same. It calls for an abolition of capital punishment and exploits the non-governmental organizations to divert the attention that could otherwise be focused on them. Their objective is different. The formal world headed by Major Powers wants to abolish capital punishment, but it has an agenda. Unlike humanitarian organizations, it is not seeking the abolition of capital punishment because it is a good deed, and as such, is its own reward. They are serving their own interests. Some states have agents in Libya, Egypt, Iran or India, who could be Libyan, Egyptian, Iranian or Indian nationals or could be nationals of other countries. Those states want to protect their agents from execution. They want to station their agents in countries where the death penalty has been abolished. This may encourage agents to work for intelligence circles. All those intelligence services have a stake in abolishing the death penalty in countries in which their agents are stationed because they fear for their safety. The agents themselves will be afraid to work in a country that still enforces the death penalty. The situation of the agent in that country will be different from his situation in a country that does not enforce capital punishment. The spy and the traitor will know that they will face death if their cover is blown. Therefore, the countries that seek the abolition of capital punishment are not concerned about the welfare of the people of this state, or the nation. They are doing this for the sake of their agents.

The abolition of capital punishment may be pursued to protect foreign agents.

This was the scenario at the security and intelligence level. Then we have smaller scale levels. Some states install puppets in other countries to govern on their behalf. Therefore, they want to abolish the death penalty that may be enforced against puppets and traitors. They want to keep them out of harm’s way, so that they continue working for them.

How could the call for the abolition of the death penalty through legal avenues be deceptive?

Governments, official circles, intelligence services, and foreign services are calling for the abolition of capital punishment that is still in force in Third World countries in defense of their agents. They want to guarantee that these agents would continue to work in these countries but not face the death sentence. The abolition of the death sentence encourages them. They will work knowing that beheading is not permissible; any other sentence, like a jail sentence, is fine. Therefore, the call for the abolition of capital punishment will not fool us. We are not naïve and we are not children. They cannot make a mockery of us.

What is the difference between handing down a death sentence through a legal system, or handing down a collective death sentence by firing rockets, bombing, starving or terrorizing people?

We call for the abolition of the death sentence that is carried out extra-judicially.

We wish to abolish capital punishment, but want to define what capital punishment we are referring to. First, we want the indiscriminate death sentences handed down to people extra-judicially by bombs, rockets and starvation abolished. We have ten numbers, from one to ten, we cannot chose one only and say number seven or number eight or three for that matter. The ten counts are all death sentences, so why chose only number seven and abolish the rest. All the sentences are death sentences, and they must be all abolished. They are death sentences executed by bombing, firing rockets, by planes even by starvation, terror, or disease. In the final analysis, a sentence handed down by courts is better. It is not a surprise attack like an air raid carried out while we are fast asleep, or like an inter-continental missile. A death sentence handed down by courts is ultimately better. States, which indiscriminately carry out death-sentences extra-judicially, will be found guilty, while those, which enforce capital punishment in courts, will be acquitted. This is what we have to say at the United Nations and the United Nations system, at human rights organizations or at Amnesty International. We can advance this logic. We are against executions and against the death sentence. A death sentence is a death sentence whether carried out by a laser bomb, a cruise missile, a firing squad, a rope, an electric chair, poison gas, or by lethal injection. These are all executions. Is it not better to bring the accused to court, guarded from any possible harm, with a defense lawyer, an opportunity to hear charges against him, to defend himself, appeal the sentence or have the sentence commuted even after it is handed down? A governor, when this post exists, usually hands down the sentence or signs of the death sentence. This is the case in the Supreme Judicial Council in Libya. The Council can commute the death sentence into a jail sentence. It is possible to file new evidence and the convicted could be found innocent. Given these circumstances, which do you think is better: this scenario or that in which you could be suddenly executed by an air raid, by tank fire, a cross continental missile or by other means that deprive you from your right to a defense lawyer? Who could be your defense lawyer against a Cruise Missile? Against a Cruise Missile, you may have a Patriot. However, you may not have a Patriot. It is impossible for every state, household, street and family to have a Patriot or an anti-missile defense device. As long as you do not have that, you do not have the means to defend yourself. As long as you do not have an anti missile defense device, you do not have a defense lawyer. You are in a big court that hands down indiscriminate death sentences. The victim does not have a lawyer and cannot defend himself against a nuclear bomb, an intercontinental missile, cluster bombs, or incendiary devices (Napalm). Neither does the victim have anti chemical and bacteriological devices, no masks or protective gear, no shelters. They went high-tech in executing the death sentence. They developed bombs and missiles that can penetrate protective barriers and hunt down the target. Therefore, someone can come to an ordinary court accompanied by a lawyer, a competent famous lawyer while another is unable to get this lawyer. You enter the shelter but they develop an anti-shelter bomb. They deprive you from the means for self-defense. These are the worst courts, courts where people get the death sentence but lack the means to defend themselves, protection, the opportunity to appeal the sentence, or the hope to be exonerated. They will be executed, extra-judicially. The shrill voices of the mighty began to resonate around the world about the death penalty, which continues to be carried out by courts around the world. Half of the countries of the world enforce the death penalty; the other half or even less abolished it. The campaign against capital punishment suffered a setback after the attacks against New York. It suffered a major setback. Torture, violence and brutality are tolerated. America declared that it will hand down death sentences against its adversaries and will, for that purpose, use all available means, including covert ones. These means could remain secret until kingdom come. The American President himself said that. What is a death sentence? What is the purpose of the death sentence? Society hands down a death sentence against a criminal because it wants to get rid of this criminal. The criminal is the enemy of society. A criminal disrupts and threatens society. Therefore, society hands down a death sentence against this individual in a court. Let us take the example of Bin Laden. He is the enemy of America. The U.S. states that if it finds Bin Laden it will kill him. It will also kill Al-Zarqawi if it finds him. Is this not what they say? Why does America say that? It does because America considers him an enemy. You kill your enemy. Why do they say society should not kill its enemy if the enemy endangers the welfare of society? What shall we do? We should agree at the United Nations or at other international fora that killing a human being is inadmissible, that we cannot spill blood neither in courts nor by jets, ships, cruise missiles, starvation, covert assassination or any other means.

The Israelis abolished the death penalty in courts. They, however, continue to execute Palestinians extra-judicially, on a daily basis and on a massive scale. What then is the value of the abolition of the death penalty in Israeli courts? This is a charade, but no one seems to notice. Are the Palestinians not killed on a daily, deliberate and premeditated basis? They track a Palestinian, plant a homing device in his car or house that emits signals to the Apache helicopter which hunts him down. Is that not a deliberate death sentence by a firing squad executed extra-judicially outside the courts?

The world watches the execution of the Iraqi and Palestinian peoples carried out outside the courts and without due process.

Human beings must be respected wherever they are.

We will not give in to this travesty. Human beings must be respected wherever they are; human life is precious and must not be wasted. They must put an end to wars, invasions, and colonialism. We, on our part, must do likewise. This does not only apply to the abolition of the death penalty in courts but to executions in general, executing individuals and peoples. In a court of law one person in executed. Outside the courts, an entire people are executed. A death sentence has been issued against the Iraqi people and against the Palestinian people in an extra-judicial context, without trial or due process.

Being serious about abolishing the death penalty means putting an end to blood letting anywhere, by ending invasions, aggression and wars.

I think that the abolition of the death penalty that is collectively enforced is more significant that the abolition of the death penalty handed down against individuals. The abolition of the death penalty outside the courts is more important than the abolition of the death penalty inside the courts. It does not mean that we support the death penalty. On the contrary, we insist on the abolition of the death penalty on a wide and not limited scale only. Opting for the latter will render the purpose meaningless. They abolished the death penalty in courts, but continued to strike at us outside the courts, killing us indiscriminately. You should stop executing us in public squares and streets. We are sincere in our desire to abolish the death penalty in the true sense of the word, in the judicial and extra-judicial contexts. Let us, however, begin with what is more significant. Let us put an end to executions outside the courts, indiscriminate massive scale executions, and death squads, otherwise called armies, which must stop executing people. Seriously, the abolition of the death penalty is civilized act. It should not be the result of pressure. Turkey is a case in point. Pressures are mounting on Turkey prior to its admission to the European Union; they can mount pressures against us in the process leading to the Mediterranean Partnership. The Third World could be pressured to enter into partnerships with Western societies.

The call to abolish the death penalty has become a bargaining chip in international relations.

Being civilized and enlightened does not necessarily entail abolishing the death penalty.

A backward country decides to abolish the death penalty to satisfy some, or reap certain benefits. Shockingly though, it continues to exact this punishment and liquidate its opponents through unconventional means – outside the courts and without legal counsel. The result is worse. This country did not abolish the death penalty due to enlightenment, sophistication, or culture. It did not do it because its society is so civilized it cannot fathom killing human beings. Not at all. They did not get there yet. They are extremely backward. People kill each other, and that is quiet normal! To enter the European Common Market, the European Union, the Mediterranean Partnership, Barcelona, the United Nations, this or that organization, to get assistance, to prevent them from staging a coup against you, out of courtesy you for example say, “I abolished the death penalty”. This act is not a proof of sophistication. The country that abolishes the death penalty is a country where no man stabs or shoots another man to death. How do you abolish the death penalty in courts then allow people to shoot, stab or club each other to death or run each other over by cars? When you speed in a car, you may be about to kill some one. If you are civilized, you will not speed because speeding up may be a prelude to killing passengers in another vehicle or pedestrians strolling down the street. You could be one of them. If you die, you would have committed suicide.

How could you abolish execution in courts but allow it to remain in force outside the courts?

When man is sophisticated and careful enough he controls the speed of his car because he knows the consequences of speeding. He knows better than to own a knife that he would use to kill a fellow man, or a shotgun that he may even use in self-defense. Why? Because the other party is sophisticated and civilized, and would not use a knife or a shotgun. Only then will the abolition of the death penalty be the result of a higher calling, a quid-pro-quo and not an act of intimidation, greed, fraud and hypocrisy.

I have always called for the abolition of the death penalty. Bahrain has abolished the death penalty. It was the only Arab country to abolish the death penalty. Are we to believe that Bahrain has already attained this high degree of sophistication and progress that it no longer needs the death penalty? This is not possible. Bahrain is like Libya and Morocco. We have the same mentality. When did they get there? Libya may be abolishing the death penalty tomorrow. More than once, I personally called on the People’s Conferences to abolish the death penalty. The Conferences did not endorse this proposal. The reason is that they are still not convinced. How could they be convinced if one may end up being stabbed on the street? If someone knows that stabbing me to death means the death penalty for him then he may not do it. This will deter others. In a way, my position and that of the People’s Conferences are the same. The Libyan people were prudent, and refused to abolish the death penalty. Moammar says the death penalty should be abolished. May be he wants to believe that we are a civilized nation. He wants to brag about us in Europe, the United States, the United Nations, Asia and Africa among others. Libya is a civilized nation. It abolished the death penalty.

Moammar thinks this way; we on the other hand think in a practical way, we will not abolish the death penalty. I heard them say that in the People’s Conferences. They debated the issue in seminars. I was satisfied that the people said no. They said, do you think the death penalty was easily instated? Our society did not yet reach the stage at which it can abolish the death penalty. Other parties should abolish the death penalty that they enforce extra-judicially and indiscriminately. The call to abolish the death sentence means ceasing manufacturing and exporting weapons. This is what the Libyan people said. We frequently called for the abolition of the death penalty but the Libyan people refused. They believed that we did not reach the stage that would justify this step. The world is largely barbaric; it continues to manufacture atomic bombs, aircraft carriers, chemical agents, artillery, tanks, anthrax and other germs in addition to other instruments of death. It manufactures all of the above then calls on you to abolish the death penalty. Everyday you sharpen a knife and everyday you manufacture a knife you do so to slaughter people. How could you ask them to abolish the death penalty? You must abolish knives, stop manufacturing knives, and destroy all weapon stocks. We will have a measure of confidence that Libya would not attack America, and America would not attack Libya. Iraq would not attack Kuwait and Kuwait would not attack Iraq. Pakistan would not attack India and India would not attack Pakistan, India would not attack China and so on and so forth. When we get to this stage, and when there is confidence, the world and we would have reached an advanced level of progress then we will be fully convinced.

Human life must be spared, and must be equally precious.

When we say we should have one African army in Africa, which is a proposal we submitted to the African Union, and we should disband individual African armies some may come and say, “how could you disband my army? Is it not possible that my African neighbor will mount an attack against me?” In response we say, “Your neighbor does not have an army. We simultaneously requested that it too disband its army. Be assured, so long as your neighbors do not have armies to commit an act of aggression against you there is no army that could attack you. Your situations are identical. Moreover, should you be victim of an external attack, an African army will defend you.” The day you decide not to execute me, to abolish the death penalty that could be imposed on me and I do likewise, when we have faith in each other, things will fall into place. This will be the end, and capital punishment could then be abolished. In other words, we should include in the curricula of the schools of law in the Jamahiriya, and we must say in our statements that we cannot be selective in exacting the death penalty. Wasting human life and bloodshed is the same everywhere. Life is equally precious, and must therefore be equally spared. A Libyan is not different from an American or an Iranian, Indian, Pakistani, Chinese, British or German. A human being is to be respected, and his life must be spared. He must not be executed by bombs or missiles, by hanging or bullets, by electric shock or poison gas. These are different methods of execution. We must agree on abolishing the death penalty and the means of carrying it out. This approach pursues a secular, civic and social approach that has no theological or religious dimension. If we were to introduce theology into this equation, we will end up in another controversy.

How was the issue of capital punishment, or the law of retaliation in killing addressed in religion, jurisprudence, and philosophy?

A Muslim would respond, religion ordered me to kill the killer. God mandated retaliation, ordered me to cut off the hand of the thief, and ordered me to flog. How can I disobey? Who is going to defend me to god on the Day of Judgment? Who would say, “God do not judge him for failing to apply your law [Sharia], it was me who ordered him to do so”. If they guarantee us that God will not find us at fault on the Day of Judgment because they were the ones who told to follow this or that path, and we carried out the orders and obstructed God’s laws, that is another thing. However, it is impossible. They cannot do that, nor are they sure it can happen this way. What would you say when you see manifest signs as God addresses you as “O ye who believe?” We should be attentive. It means that God addresses us, saying, “You, people” or “You, Citizens”, then we are the addressees “O you who have attained to faith, Just retribution is ordained from you in cases of killing” we listen to God. What do you want from us? “O you who have attained to faith”, he said. We are listening, Lord. We shall obey. He says, “Just retribution is ordained from you”, “the free for the free, and the slave for the slave and the woman for the woman”. What do we say then? This is ordained. There is nothing more to say. This is our fate. It is sealed. “Fasting is prescribed to you”. That is it. We therefore fast “as it was prescribed to those before you”. So we still fast, fasting is prescribed to us. Do we interpret that? Do we say, “No, we will not fast”? “Prayers are enjoined on believers at stated times”. This is it. Prayers have to be performed at stated times. So we turned our backs to the United Nations, Amnesty International, Human Rights Organizations, the thoughts of philosophers and intellectuals, then we came to turn a new page. Why did we turn to religion? We sought God’s advice and found that God expects us to submit to other demands. In retribution, it is “the free for the free”, for, “in [the law of] just retribution, O you who are endowed with insight, there is life for you”. “And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have empowered his heir with authority (to demand retribution or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). Therefore, man may demand retribution in killing, but must not exceed bounds in taking life. Therefore, if someone is wrongfully slain, those who are authorized to defend him can demand death for his slayer. His counsel cannot exceed bounds, so his maternal and paternal cousins may not be killed in retribution. “Nor take life – which Allah has made sacred – except for just cause.” This means that god proscribed taking life, which He has made sacred. We then go back to our earlier proposal. We said life is precious and sacred. God made it sacred, and it must not be wasted. No one says the God you worship sanctions killing. We are involved in bloodshed. “Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood? The angels said, Lord, you create Adam, a human being to make mischief.

“[God] answered: “Verily, I know that which you do not know.”” God knows better. He had a reason for creating us although we are involved in bloodshed. God proscribed taking life. They may answer, “The God you worship likes bloodshed in addition to the death penalty.” Absolutely not. Do not “take life – which Allah has made sacred, except for a just cause”. Therefore, the only exception to the prohibition of taking life is when life is taken for a just cause. When there is a just cause, one can take life. There are other verses in the Quran, stressing the sanctity of human life, followed by the word “except”. He sets the conditions for taking life, not through injustice, aggression, colonization, dictatorships, oppression and mutilation. This is dictatorship.

You are about to present a draft penal code to the People’s Conferences. In my opinion, you must take your time to study it carefully. Then you can submit it to the People’s Conferences. You should not hasten to adopt it; it must be thoroughly and extensively debated.

In this law, there is the crime against society, otherwise called haraba. Under this crime, the death penalty is permitted. Haraba is identical to terrorism. It applies to terrorism. The word Haraba is not God’s word. Jurists coined this word. They may have coined it from the verse: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land”. This is what you can use as a basis for the Terrorism Act. The counter-terrorism act is what you call haraba. It should not be called Haraba, because haraba is not a word used by God. God said, “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah”. They coined the word from the Arabic “yuhariboun”, i.e., wage war, against god and his prophet. What are the acts punishable under this concept? The include banditry, terrorizing people by threatening their security on the roads, at home, or just anywhere among other things. This is terrorism. They annihilate people under the pretext of combating terrorism. The result is that when we counter terrorism inside the courts and hand down death sentences some say, “Do not sentence a terrorist to death”.

The moment we discuss things from a theological point of view of, someone like Dr. Rajab Aboudabous may present a very different perspective. We do not know where it could take us, it may be right, and it could be wrong. I am confident that like Dr. Aboudabous, you may respond that the verse “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land” was revealed on a specific occasion. Therefore, he will refer us to the historical context of revelation of the surahs. “DOOMED are the hands of the Father of Flame! And doomed is he. What will his wealth avail him, and all that he has gained?” They are verses we recite with owe and respect. They however concern Abou Lahab, the father of the flame and his spouse. They burnt firewood on a road that Mohammad used to travel. God told them that they would both be burnt in a fire of blazing flame on the Day of Judgment. The story ends there with Abou Lahab and his spouse. God responded to an incident. “Allah has indeed heard the story of the woman who pleads with thee concerning her husband and carries her complaint to Allah”. This is the story of a woman who had a problem with her husband, and God revealed the solution in this Quranic verse. Aisha was accused. God exonerated her. God revealed this verse, said that she is innocent, and her accusers in Medina were liars. So one person was wrongfully charged, and god exonerated her. This applies to the spouse of the Prophet. Some went to the prophet and complained because they were poor. The Prophet gave them some camels and a shepherd and directed them to where they should go. This is one version of the story. The other version is that they went to the prophet, converted to Islam and fell sick in Medina, because there were many swamps in Medina. They complained to the prophet .The prophet told them “we have camels in the desert, stay in the desert, use the urine and milk of camels as treatment and you will get better.” Apparently, they did, but ended up killing the shepherd, stealing the camels and turning back from Islam. According to the narrative, the prophet asked that they be apprehended and brought back, which they were. Their hands and feet were cut off from opposite sides, they were crucified, and their bodies were mutilated. There were other stories. Some said their eyes were gorged out and were never given a second chance, God forgive us. The punishment was exacted. The question is did the prophet issue his orders after the revelation? Did he wonder what punishment he could inflict on people he treated well but who betrayed him in return? They were sick. They converted to Islam. He sent them to the camel shepherd. They slaughtered the shepherd and took the camels. Either God instructed the prophet to exact this punishment, or the prophet improvised and God seconded. When Dr. Abou Dabbous argues the case, he will tell you this is an incident that happened to a group of people in the past, and it has no relevance today. Dr. Abou Dabbous will refer you to the context of its revelation. Dr. Abou Dabbous who teaches philosophy will look at this story from that perspective. He will say, this verse was revealed because of a group of people who committed a heinous act, and were punished. This does not mean that every time a heinous act is committed peoples’ hands and feet should be chopped of. This argument applies across the board. A thief stole something. At that time, the punishment was that the thief, Male or female, should have their hands cut off. The question is shall we continue to cut off the hands of thieves? Should this punishment rather apply only to those people, at the time the crime was committed, and under the specific circumstances that prevailed? People steal all the time. Shall they remain without arms? Jesus said he who has not sinned should cast the stone. Is it possible that no one stole anything ever in his life? It is possible that everybody stole something one way or another. Does this mean we cut off the hands of everybody? God says we cut off the hands of thieves, males or females. If we start arguing about this, and we arrive at solutions, it will no longer be a religion but will become positive law. This is the case with Islamic Sharia (jurisprudence). Islamic jurisprudence is a positive set of laws with the seal of Islam. Islamic Sharia is a positive law, not different from Roman law, Napoleon’s Law and all other laws. They call these laws “Islamic Sharia” to give force to these laws so that the Caliphs and leaders would secure obedience from their people. Caliphs, governors and sultans are consistent; they want to control. How can they control the world and its people without holiness? Their laws are God’s laws. Therefore, they call the set of laws “Islamic Sharia”. Any breach of the laws would be a breach of Islamic Sharia. You will be running up against Islamic Sharia. This is a serious crime. What is Sharia law? It is interpretations. Malek said, Abu Hanifa said, they interpreted the law. Even Abou Dabbous said, and all what they said became Islamic Sharia. A Muslim interpreted the law and said something today. What he said is not different from what was said before. The only difference is the temporal dimension.

What crimes deserve to be punishable by the death penalty?

We come to the last or penultimate page. I asked for the record of crimes perpetrated in Libya, whose perpetrators deserved the death penalty. I found death penalty cases endorsed by the Supreme Council for Judicial Bodies. I found some of these cases to be questionable. I found it difficult to understand how they were endorsed. We shall refrain from naming the defendants, but will only cite the judgment. The defendant (sentenced to death) and the victim drank wine, may God preserve us, with others. God says “Satan seeketh only to cast among you enmity and hatred by drinking wine and gambling”. Sure, it is the drinking and the gambling that led to the crime. That is what happened. Animosity ensued when they were intoxicated, and a misunderstanding between the victim and the perpetrator led to the latter stabbing the former to death.

The motive for the crime was simply a misunderstanding between two intoxicated individuals. The judgment handed down was the death sentence. How could you pass down a death sentence in this case? Who among you could explain the sentence? The crime was not of the first degree. It was not premeditated. They were all intoxicated. Criminal intent is absent in this case. They could be friends. Is there a judge who can explain this to us?

Interventions and Exchanges of views:

[Intervention] in this instance, the victim was harassed.

[Leader] I have one comment to make. Distinguished Judges, should any one of you decide to take the floor, please do not disclose whether you were sitting on the Bench in this case. You may comment on the judgment, even if you were the sitting judge or the Chief Judge, please indicate your opinion only without further explanations.

[Intervention] I was not one of the judges sitting on the Bench in this case, but I read the case as a member of the Judicial Council that endorsed the sentence. The defendant and the victim were not Libyan nationals. They were partying. The victim sexually harassed the defendant. He persisted. The victim sexually abused the defendant. When he did not relent, the defendant stabbed the victim to death. The court found him guilty of murder of the first degree.

[Leader] The person was harassed. He acted in self-defense. How could he be sentenced to death?

[Intervention] He could have defended himself differently, even through passive resistance.

[Leader] What else could he have done?

[Intervention] I do not believe he was in a state of self-defense because the other person did not hate him.

[Leader] This is exactly why I had a question mark in the first place. How could a person like him be sentenced to death? They could have handed down a different sentence. He came with his friend and they were drinking together. They were friends and he did not intend to kill him. The other person sexually attacked him, and he defended his honor with the tool available to him. This act of self-defense led to the death of the victim. How could some one act in self-defense and end up facing a death sentence? Does that mean you must not defend yourself if you want to avoid the death sentence?

[Intervention] The perpetrator intended to kill.

[Leader] Yes, he did. He intended to escape harm, he deliberately sought defense.

[Intervention] He expressed a desire, and deliberately pursued fulfillment. In the documents that were available to the Court, he did not hold or coerce him. The comment that I wanted to make is that when the Judiciary Council is seized with these sentences, it does not debate the substance. It only considers the admissibility or inadmissibility of amnesty. The Council does not assess the crime or the evidence.

[Leader] What are the Council’s terms of reference?

[Intervention] From the Legislative point of view, the Judiciary Council must not have this authority. Pardoning a crime is a discretionary authority usually vested in society and its guardians. The mandate of the Judiciary Council is confined to supervising the judiciary in all matters that are of concern. These are discretionary matters intended to assess whether society is right in granting or withholding amnesty. The Judiciary Council must not decide on these matters.

[Leader] Who should decide then?

[Intervention] Any other authority must do that. The functions of the Judiciary Council are supervisory in nature.

[Leader] We do not have a president, a governor or guardian. We are a self-governing people. We chose the Supreme Judiciary Council because it is in charge of endorsing sentences.

[Intervention] The General Conference of the People must be able to do that. Any organ that can assess the social and political ramifications is in a position to do that.

[Leader] It is difficult for the General Conference of the People to do this. It is difficult for one thousand people to discuss this issue. They meet annually. Fine. On what basis does the Supreme Judiciary Council discharge its functions?

[Intervention] The Council’s mandate is legislative. This function was not in force. It was delegated to the Revolution Command Council. Later on, that function was assigned to the General People’s Committee. No one exercised this function, until it was later on transferred to the Supreme Judiciary Council. I personally believe that the Supreme Council does not think that this is one of its functions. The Council cannot decide whether clemency is or is not due. It administratively supervises the judiciary bodies, and has oversight functions with regard to promotions, mobility, and appointments. Is it better for society if the Council withholds or endorses the penalty? This is the question that needs to be addressed.

[Leader] Excuse me for asking, but let us take as an example a country that is traditionally governed by a president or a king, a person who is the Supreme Guardian of the people. This Guardian endorses decisions and signs off on death sentences. On what basis does he do that? Does he review the decision according to his whims? Someone on death row today may be pardoned today, but if I was in a bad mood tomorrow so be it, the other death row prisoner may die.

[Intervention] In fulfilling this function, we usually seek the assistance of local authorities.

[Leader] You strayed away from the answer. Fine, it does not matter. You did not answer me. Please continue.

[Intervention] I specifically stated that the Judiciary Council must not have this authority because it is in fact exercising it. Others must be brought in to assist.

[Leader] Excuse me, in any event, what is the Judiciary Council to do when death sentences are brought before it?

[Intervention] If the killing was retribution, the Judiciary Council would not accept the petition in the first place because the party that is eligible to grant amnesty is the family of the victim. If the killing was criminal, the Judiciary Council has the authority to grant amnesty if this amnesty would better serve society.

[Leader] This means that the council reviews the case.

[Intervention] No, it does not review the case. The case is only presented to the Council after the Supreme Court issues a ruling on it. The council can only issue an order of amnesty or execution.

[Intervention] It is the higher judicial level that reviews the case from a technical legal perspective. The sentence becomes final when the Supreme Court endorses it. The Higher Judiciary Council is concerned with verifying it according to observed laws and its jurisdiction. As the speaker before me said, there are issues of punishment decreed by religious law. The Council’s endorsement is no more than a formality because sentences issued in cases of religious penalty cases cannot be ruled on by law. The Council has the authority to lighten the sentence from a death sentence to imprisonment in the cases of other penal sentences if the death sentence was handed down in a case other than one of religious punishment. This practice is currently observed.

[Leader] How? Does it review the case?

[Intervention] The Council does not review the case from a judicial perspective. It is not a court of law.

[Intervention] It means that the Judiciary Council has no role to play in reviewing the factual aspects of the case. The Council’s role is a strictly technical one. It just makes sure that due process was observed in the preliminary stage and before the Supreme Court. This is the role it was accorded by law; namely, to consider the technical aspects of a case and make sure that due process was observed, including appeals. It is only concerned with these issues and its role is very simple and limited.

[Leader] I understand.

[Intervention] Authority over these issues was given to the Council by virtue of a special order as Professor Husayn said. The preliminary or secondary stages were ultimately placed in the Council’s scope because it is the closest thing to knowing the sentences and estimating them. This is why the privileges were taken from the People’s Assembly and General Popular Committee and given to this esteemed council.

[Leader] It is a better guarantee than a governor who may or not believe the argument, because this governor that you speak of — who might be a head of any state in the world or anyone tasked with reviewing death sentences — may or may not endorse these sentences. He does not review the court proceedings to verify that due process was observed as the Judiciary Council does. This person ultimately does not know all the details and endorses these sentences according to his mood. For example, if it is the birthday of the king’s wife today, he would issue an amnesty, and if he is having a bad day tomorrow, he will endorse the death sentence. The Higher Judiciary Council, however, is a guarantee as the professor explained. It guarantees that due process was observed. As long as procedures were followed soundly, the Council has nothing to do with the sentence. This sentence was issued by a court and it is the business of the appeals process and Supreme Court.

[Intervention] This is not an amnesty.

[Intervention] An amnesty is a discretionary authority left to the discretion of the highest ruler in the country, who may issue amnesties as he pleases. That is an amnesty. But this is about a review of the case when the need arises.

[Leader] We are on the right path. I guarantee it. There is a Higher Judiciary Council that reviews all the stages of the trial process, starting with the criminal court and including the court of appeals and the Supreme Court in order to verify that the process was sound. The council has nothing to do with the case or whether the suspect receives an amnesty or not, because that is up to the courts. This is very reasonable.

[Intervention] It reviews the cases when necessary.

[Leader] In any event, I was upset by the death sentence handed down in this case. Ever since I saw that sentence, I no longer feel confident about death sentences. You saw, from what the professor explained, that there could be two persons who are drunk, and who may be friends, and one person assaults the other, who defends himself and kills his aggressor. For the man who defended himself to be sentenced to death is disconcerting.

[Intervention] I have not viewed this particular case, but I have experience with similar cases, there was no attempted assault and despite that the person was sentenced to death. My colleagues the counselors and I see that entering a state of alcoholic intoxication is voluntary. With regard to the perpetrators, no one forced them to drink alcohol but they did and are responsible for their actions regardless of their claims that they were drunk and committed the crime unintentionally. This means that people will go unpunished. That person intentionally drank alcohol and intentionally committed a crime. A second point is the motive for the crime, which has no legal considerations. Let us take stealing for example. If someone says: “I am going to steal regardless of the consequences because I am in need,” then he might think he is justified. He will be treated the same way a person who steals to get rich or buy something will be treated because the motive does not have any considerations on the crime. When an intoxicated person kills, he is handed the death sentence because he drank alcohol of his own free will and was not forced.

[Leader] It is as if by drinking, he already took the first step toward the murder.

There is another case that is worthy of mention. The victim let his sheep graze in the farm of the perpetrator (who was sentenced to death). The perpetrator struck the victim on the head with a club. The victim later died of his injuries. The motive behind this crime is a misunderstanding that broke out because the victim let his sheep graze in the perpetrators’ farm. Now, who is the wrongdoer? Is it the man who grazed his livestock in the perpetrator’s farm? I wanted a judge to explain it to us. It might be the same judge that presided over the trial, but it is not necessary for him to say that he is the one who issued the sentence; we just want his opinion. I said from the start that it is not important for him to say that he is the one who issued the sentence and simply give us his opinion.

[Intervention] If the court found that the killing was intentional even if he only intended to beat him with the club and that led to his death, then the crime would be viewed as premeditated murder. The matter is up to the court to decide.

[Leader] This person has been the victim of injustice and had no intention to kill the other person, who came and grazed his sheep in the accused person’s farm. The latter wanted to defend himself or his property or wanted to take revenge on the person who trespassed into his farm and thus hit him with a club. The beating led to death but it was not intended to kill. Are you — the speakers — judges?

[Intervention] We beg your pardon, brother leader; this is a legal issue or one of strict jurisprudence called “criminal intent”. Criminal intent, under the law can be present even for a moment, so that the assault resulting from this intent is an intentional desire to kill, making it a premeditated murder. This is confirmed by the investigations conducted by the prosecutor’s office and the court and by the evidence and witness testimony. The matter is one of facts, documents, and investigations. Therefore, it would be difficult to answer your question. We must first return to the documents and facts in order to verify whether or not there was criminal intent that led to the assault. The evidence can be indicative. The murder weapon and location could have a role in formulating criminal intent and deciding that the incident was one of intentional murder and not one of manslaughter. It is a complex and sensitive case that are difficult to prove except by the prosecutor general, the defense, or another such body.

[Leader] But if the case is the subject of doubt and involves this much complexity, then the sentence must always be in favor of the suspect.

[Intervention] If investigations prove that the perpetrator’s intent was criminal and resulted in the assault that led to death, then we have before us is a case of premeditated murder.

[Leader] What drew my attention in this case is that I saw someone letting his sheep graze in someone else’s farm. The owner of the farm grabbed a stick and beat the shepherd with it. The victim died at a later time and not at the time of the assault. It is very clear that the assailant had no ulterior motives to kill the victim and that the events were dictated by unexpected developments. This man brought his sheep into another man’s land without his knowledge. In addition, he did not use a pistol or rifle, which can be viewed as a clear intention to kill; rather, a stick is an available tool with very simple uses, and is not meant for murder.

[Intervention] It is a series of events that lead us to conclude that the suspect intended to kill the victim, which entails criminal intent. The judge will consider the crime from every aspect and the surrounding conditions that led to the death.

[Leader] His intention was not to kill. His intention was revenge or to punish this trespasser who was grazing his sheep in his farm. It is clear that he is an ordinary person and that the assault led to death but that the intention was not primarily to kill.

[Intervention] Death is not the same as intentional murder or the intention to kill. We might have a fight with someone but not intend to kill him, but might throw a punch that could be said to have killed him.

[Leader] The first and second cases that we have viewed would cause people not to defend themselves anymore. The first one was defending a transgression against his honor and you sentenced him to death, which means that no one can defend his honor. The second man was defending his property and you sentenced him to death, which means that no one can defend his property…etc. We would arrive at a situation where no one can defend themselves.

[Intervention] A premeditated intent must exist. Issues deserving religious punishment in particular — be they thefts or feuds — are referred to the Supreme Court even without an appeal. The Supreme Court must review all aspects of the case. Procedures must be followed to prove the existence of intent, and the argument must hold. The court’s formation must also be sound and the process followed flawless. We have statistics that the Supreme Court has viewed half the appeal cases and overturned them for reasons. Out of 413 cases of theft, 300 were overturned and returned to the court in question. Approximately half the capital punishment cases were returned to the court in question. Arriving at a sentence in accordance with the law, the details of the case you mentioned must be examined. The court trying the case must prove that the suspect intended to kill the victim before actually killing him.

[Leader] You are the president of the Supreme Court, what do you say?

[Intervention] It is a matter of legitimate defense, which has its conditions, the most important of which is that something must be wrong. This wrongful situation must be immediate. In order for the person not to be sentenced to death, there must be wrongdoing and it must be immediate. In this case, if the person had directly assaulted the animal, then it would have been a case of self defense, but when he assaulted the owner of the sheep, the self-defense claim does not apply because the immediate threat no longer existed. It is necessary for there to be a continued and immediate threat, or else he would not be acting in self defense but as an attacker. In my opinion, the sentence is sound because if he was in a position of legitimate self defense, then he should have attacked the source of the threat; namely, the sheep. Had he done that, he would not have been prosecuted, but once he attacked the shepherd, the conditions needed for self defense were removed. The most important condition is for the threat to be present.

[Leader] Are you, the speaker, and a student?

[Intervention] I am a third-year student at the school of law at Al-Fatih University.

[Leader] You are very interested in and serious about your studies. Here is another case that caught my attention. Here are the facts: The suspect smuggled some drugs by hiding them in small spaces in the vehicles they were riding in with the purpose of selling them. The drugs were caught in their possession, examined by a court body and found to be hashish weighing thousands of grams. Investigations found that the suspects had smuggled other shipments of drugs and managed to traffic them throughout the Jamahiriya. The criminal court sentenced the suspects to death after finding them guilty of the charges rendered against them. What do we gain from executing these people? Their crime had no motives; they were simply people selling hashish.

[Intervention] We have a narcotics law and in reaffirmation of the efforts exerted to combat the growing phenomenon of drugs, it was amended to endorse the death sentence in narcotics cases. This, of course, is a punitive measure and in this case, the Higher Judiciary Council can lessen the sentence. It has the authority to do so because the sentence is not a religious ruling and does not have the circumstances of such a ruling.

[Leader] Why do you say it is punitive?

[Intervention] Because it did not break any religious laws.

[Leader] You put narcotics in the realm of religious cases.

[Intervention] No. The narcotics law is an individual law and the death sentence was added to apply to a special circumstance; namely, trafficking.

[Leader] Religious punishment and punitive measures are in Islamic Law.

[Intervention] No, we call it a punitive measure because it is outside the realm of religious punishment and it is not a form of retribution, which means that the laws of retribution and blood money do not apply. The Higher Judiciary Council has authority in these cases.

[Leader] Focusing on the case before it reaches the Higher Council, why did the court issue a death sentence?

[Intervention] In terms of the narcotics law, law number 7 of 1990 set punitive measures of imprisonment and life imprisonment. It was later amended after narcotics became viewed as a weapon of mass destruction. Article 169 of the penal code considered narcotics crimes as crimes against the state. The punitive measures were set out in three paragraphs:

The first paragraph stipulates imprisonment for using narcotics. The second paragraph stipulates life imprisonment and the third stipulates capital punishment for drug trafficking. The suspects brought large quantities of drugs into the country. It is illogical that they were intending to use them all, so the court concluded that they had the intent to traffic drugs and applied paragraph 3 of article 169 in its sentence, which applies to foreigners who take bribes against the interests of the state and political crimes against the state, all of which have high sentences according to severity. Paragraph three stipulated that the sentence must be the death sentence.

If you allow me, I want to return to the first issue; namely, accidental manslaughter, crimes of deadly assault, and crimes of intentional murder. All of them have one material element in common: That the victim is harmed, whether he is accidentally struck by a car or beaten to death with a stick even though the intent to kill him was not present. But when a car accidentally strikes a person, it is the result of reckless negligence and a lack of regard for the law, all of which is wrong in the first place. Article 63 sets out the punitive measures for this accidental crime. If someone delivers one blow, it is not the same as delivering several blows or multiple stabs. The frequency and the tool used determine the intent to kill.

[Leader] A dispute arose between the convicted person and his cousins, who are the children of the victim, and a fist fight broke out. The victim intervened to stop the fight between his children and his nephew and was stabbed with a knife by the suspect, causing him to bleed to death. The motive was the victim’s intervention in a fight between the suspect and his cousins in an attempt to break it up. Why must he be sentenced to death? The killing was not intentional. This is a family whose members were fighting amongst themselves and using the means available to them. Let one of the judges tell us.

[Intervention] Of course. The most important element in a case of intentional murder is criminal intent. It is important to verify the intention of the perpetrator to kill the victim. How can we prove this intent? We can prove it by different indications mentioned by the Supreme Court and which we will clarify in the criminal investigation conducted by the prosecutor’s office. If the tool of murder was a knife, then it is not the same as a club and if the blow was to a lethal area, then it is not the same as a blow to a non-lethal area of the body. Based on such evidence and witness testimony, we can determine the existence of criminal intent or lack thereof. If criminal intent was found and the result was the death of the victim, then the crime in this case is one of intentional murder, or else it would be deadly assault. The intent to kill is what separates a crime of assault leading to death from a crime of intentional murder. If the intention is to kill, then the act becomes a crime of intentional murder, and if the intention is otherwise, the act becomes a crime of deadly assault. How do we prove it? We prove it through investigations conducted by the prosecutor’s office and through specific indicators; namely, the tool of murder, the place of the murder, and other such facts.

[Leader] Thank you.

[Intervention] Brother leader, welcome to Al-Fatih University. If you would allow me, we want to return to the concept of “guardian” because it is an important theoretical issue. You are the proponent of this theory and are better able to explain it. I conducted a study on the concept of a guardian in Libyan society. From the Quran — society’s constitution — and the Almighty’s saying “those charged with authority among you” where reference is made in the plural and not the singular, I concluded that guardianship is not in the hands of one person, regardless of whom he is, and will not be in the hands of a group either. Since authority will not be in the hands of one group, then the Higher Judiciary Council will not qualify for jurisdiction. Jurisdiction must be given through convening the General People’s Congress. Just as the Congress’s approval is needed to ratify important and critical conventions, we need it to ratify the death sentence and the application of justice. Thank you brother leader.

[Leader] In this case, the suspect killed his wife after premeditating it by striking her with one blow to the head with an axe while she was asleep and suffocating her with a towel. After she died, he struck her with the axe twice to make sure she was dead. His motive was that he suspected his wife of having an illicit affair with someone else. I want to point out that this man is blind. Why did you sentence him to death?

[Intervention] Sir, I am a university professor, not a judge. Criminal cases are not the same as civil cases. In civil cases, the judge is obliged to issue the sentence based on the evidence presented to him, which may be an official or unofficial document. In criminal cases, the judge’s background, culture, and the environment he lives in play a role in the way he evaluates the suspect’s motive for the crime in arriving at his verdict. The sentence might be harsh because the judge might give weight to the fact that the man suspected his wife, or it might be a light sentence if this suspicion is not taken into consideration. In criminal cases, regardless of how strong the evidence is, there is evidence that — in the eyes of the law — might help convict the suspect, such as evidence proving that the person was present at the scene of the crime and showing criminal intent. The judge’s mentality, his personal background, his scientific interests and everything about his personality may play a role as well.

Therefore, you may differ with the judges over many verdicts and judges may differ among themselves in a particular case because penal law gives the judge the ability and a wide scope to arrive at his verdict in every case brought before him. Personal belief and the conviction that the judge reaches has been taken into consideration by the laws governing the process of appealing the judge’s verdict. This conviction may not be reached by the court of second degree or in the Supreme Court, whose jurisdiction authorizes it to view legal issues. The judge may be criticized for his interpretation of a legal concept or even for the extent to which he holds the suspect responsible for the crime. The judge employs everything that is related to his cultural, and ideological and even political affiliations in arriving at his verdict. Even in criminal cases that threaten state security or society, you might find sentences that are somewhat flexible because the judge does not see that this man committed a serious crime while another judge may find that the man committed a serious crime against society and may issue a stricter sentence. Thank you.

[Intervention] I would like to clarify a point. Penal courts do have a special character. There is no crime and no punishment without a legal code. The judge, while free to uncover the truth, is limited by legal code in addition to criminal code. A crime is identified in a particular code and so is the punishment. In addition, even circumstances — especially those involving alcohol and murder — have been identified in the code. The law considers drinking alcohol a felony and murder a felony as well and stipulates that if two felonies are combined they receive a death sentence. Moreover, leader, courts are indeed just because they comprise three or five counselors, not to mention the fact that it is strictly impermissible for the defendant to be present without his lawyer. The verdicts are based on certainty and conviction and not on premise and hypothesis. In addition, death sentences must be reviewed by the Supreme Court even with the attendance of the suspects. Therefore, genuine justice is almost absolute. Everything is clear and due process is observed. Thank you.

[Leader] Is there a judge to tell us about the case I mentioned and why this blind man was sentenced to death without delving into the explanations that the professor and the judge have offered? You, the student, may have the floor.

[Intervention] I am not a student, I am from the prosecutor general’s office. Criminal intent is deduced from the way in which the crime was committed. When the retribution and blood money law was issued, the legislators were influenced by Islamic Sharia considerations. All judges would consider killing with a sharp or pointed object an intentional murder. Stabbing with a knife, striking with an axe, or beating with a stick repeatedly is a clear indication of intent. The judge concludes this from the investigations, which are recorded on paper. We cannot know if intent was present or not simply from listening to an abstract description of the incident. We must review the documents in order to make sure that the judge concluded that intent existed, especially if the murder tool was a knife, a weapon or a stick and if the blows were repeatedly delivered. These factors may have led the judge to pass a death sentence.

[Leader] Thank you for this important clarification. This means that there are elements that are beyond the facts that we have before us. For example, there is the use of a sharp or pointed object to take into consideration.

[Intervention] Scholars have said that striking someone with a sharp or pointed object usually leads to murder. If the tool of the murder was not sharp or pointed, the killer’s intention may be deduced from the number of blows and his behavior during the crime. The judge examines the documents and verifies the presence of intent to be away from the scene of the crime when it is committed; as is the case with the last example you mentioned which does not usually lead to a death sentence. The motive to carry out this task is thus considered an accomplice because it instigated his actions. As for the two, three, or four blows, psychologically speaking, we find that a person experiencing extreme emotional distress would stab someone a hundred times but not have the intent to kill. When a person is experiencing emotional distress he does not know where he struck or how many times he struck. If the matter is one of three or four stab wounds alone that led to death, it means that there was criminal intent present. Frankly, I am uneasy about this issue. I just heard the speakers before me defining intent as an element that could happen at the spur of the moment. This means that that all crimes are intentional because they all exhibit intent and we know that this is not the intended interpretation. He did not contemplate or plan the crime, nor did he arrange for it to happen. An incident could develop suddenly between two persons getting drunk together and having a fight. Saying that the intent to kill was present in such a situation is very unsettling.

[Leader] Yes, yes. This is what unsettled me.

[Intervention] Peace be upon you. It is important to say something on defining intentional murder. There is simple criminal intent and there is premeditated criminal intent. Intentional murder cases only need simple criminal intent that may arise at the spur of the moment. I might be here to attend this lecture but might have an argument with my neighbor and kill him. I would have the desire to kill and direct it at this person so that my desire is to kill this person. This is criminal intent in a case of intentional murder. I would be accused of the crime of intentional murder and my sentence would be to be put to death in accordance with the law of retribution and blood money. However, if I had premeditated the murder, the old law — before the retribution and blood money law — would have been more severe. In the past, the punishment for simple intentional murder was life imprisonment or simply imprisonment, but if the intentional murder was premeditated, the punishment would be more severe and would entail a death sentence. This is because in the case of a premeditated murder, I had time to think and balance things and consider committing this crime or not but ultimately deciding to commit the murder. It means that I had a chance to take the right decision but despite that made a grave mistake.

With regard to the last case, we find that in article 70 of the penal code, under the title “crimes of honor,” the legislators set conditions that, if met by the defendant, would entail a prison sentence and not a death sentence or one of life imprisonment. This is stated in the text of the law, which states: “Any man who is surprised to find his wife, sister, daughter, or mother in the act of adultery or illegitimate sexual intercourse and kills her immediately in defense of the attack upon his honor, his punishment shall be imprisonment.” Imprisonment in Libyan law spans from one day to three years in jail. The judge has the discretion to set the prison sentence in line with the discretionary authority granted to him.

As for this incident, it is true that a provocation did take place but the conditions for the applicability of this legal text and for the husband to benefit from it are not present because the conditions include an element of surprise. The element of surprise is not created by hearing of the act but of witnessing the act, which could constitute extreme provocation that the legislator kept in mind when commuting the sentence. In this case, this man had the intent to kill his wife and the elements of an intentional crime were present, which disqualify the defendant from taking advantage of this legal text. I do not know if these events took place before the retribution law or not. If they took place after the retribution law was passed then the death sentence is a definite thing unless one of the victim’s blood relatives withdraws his complaint. If the crime was committed before the retribution law was passed, then it is up to the judge’s discretion to set the length of the sentence, be it the maximum or minimum length.

[Leader] Thank you, but all these matters are unsettling. The suspect is self-employed as a driver. He was provoked by the victim, who cursed and insulted him and his family. The suspect purchased a gun and premeditated his crime. He approached the victim and shot him twice. He also attempted to intentionally kill — but not with premeditation — another person who was accompanying the victim but missed. The motive was that the suspect was provoked by the victim, who verbally attacked him and his family.

[Intervention] If we clarify this idea, we might reach a semi-final solution to the issue. There are different types of criminal intent. There is immediate or direct intent, which is not justified by provocation. Following up on what Dr. Rajab said, the criminal intent might arise at the spur of the moment because of anger. This is called immediate or direct intent in criminal law and it does not exempt the suspect from punishment. Anger must not be used as an excuse for murder; therefore, the murder is considered intentional with criminal intent presence, even if the excuse of provocation is made. This is called immediate or direct intent. This is why criminal law differs from the retribution law in that it stipulates a life sentence. But in this case, there is no difference between intent, premeditated intent, planning, or any such thing. The new law places immediate and direct intent on an equal footing with premeditated intent. The previous law differentiated between immediate or direct intent — which it punishes with life imprisonment and provocation is not a mitigating factor — and premeditated and planned intent, which it punishes with a death sentence and defines as killing with the premeditated intent to kill. Intent in this case and under the new law be it immediate and direct as a result of provocation or anger or otherwise would be punishable by death.

[Intervention] Peace be upon you. Regarding the moral element of crimes of intentional murder or the general nature of regulations involving criminal intent, a difference exists. Direct criminal intent is a situation where the perpetrator intends to commit a criminal act. It is possible — as the professor said — that when committing this crime, more than one person may be killed. You would have accepted this possible outcome of your criminal act and thus exhibited criminal behavior. These laws are general and apply to every crime, be it a crime of intentional murder or a fight. Criminal intent is always the moral factor required in intentional crimes regardless of their nature or their legal classification. Whether the crime is an intentional murder or a fight, the moral factor must be determined. The cases that you have presented include many possibilities that may require lengthy discussion. If we were to view the fight, which was not sufficiently discussed, and see that a group of people were present and one person intervened to break up the fight. This, according to the description you gave, would make it a crime of fighting.

A person intervened to break up the fight and it led to the death of several persons. There is a legal text that governs fighting and any resulting death if the perpetrator did not intend to kill the person at the time of the crime.

There are many hypotheses governed by many issues. As for the moral aspect, it is very sensitive and is up to the judge’s evaluation of the situation and the facts. The matter may raise many questions but there are agreed general regulations, especially when we say the crime was premeditated. The retribution and blood money law stipulates that the perpetrator’s family must pay damages to the victim in return for withdrawing the case. The issue of intent to kill was not raised because the crime was not intentional under this law. But this crime might be under the scope of another law and qualify as a crime of deadly assault or accidental murder and so on. Thank you.

[Intervention] In the name of God, I am a student at the Graduate Studies School in Janzour. In order to solve this problem, I believe the draft penal code must be presented to the popular congresses. The first article of the penal code, which stipulates that “there is no crime and no punishment except as stipulated by a legal code”, must be amended. I do not blame a judge for applying Libyan law if he works in the judicial system. If the judge’s sentence is illegal, he would be appealed and his verdict would be deemed illegal, which means that no crime and no punishment can be set except as stipulated by the law. In the event the judge sentences the convict to a punishment that is outside the observed legal text, he is immediately in the red zone. I believe that it is necessary to amend article 1 of the penal code so that the legal texts would accommodate precedents.

[Leader] So, the rule “there is no crime and no punishment except as stipulated by a legal code” should be cancelled.

[Intervention] This would give the judge more freedom because the judge is now constrained to applying the punishment that is set by the code.

[Leader] If we were to cancel this rule, how would the judge issue his sentence?

[Intervention] When we ask why a death sentence was passed down, it is because the judge had no choice in the matter. This is the punishment stipulated by law. We cannot blame him.

[Leader] How can we issue sentences without a legal text?

[Intervention] We leave it up to the judge because he is now obliged to implement the text of a superseded article that needs to be amended.

[Leader] You are a good analyzer.

[Intervention] The text that the brother is talking about states: There is no crime and no punishment without a legal text. If this text is cancelled, it means that there is no crime and therefore there indeed is no punishment.

[Leader] No, no, this is not so. He is intelligent and did not mean it in this light.

[Intervention] A problem arose after the retribution law was passed. These problems and questions all arose after this law was passed, while matters were normal before it as the chief prosecutor of Tripoli said. We believe it is necessary to standardize legislation and I believe the draft penal code before you has taken these problems into consideration and tried to avoid them as much as possible.

[Leader] A fight broke out between the families of the perpetrator and the victim and after the victim attacked the perpetrator with a knife, the latter took the knife from him and stabbed him twice, once in the stomach and once in the chest. The motives of this crime show no intent to kill. Why was he sentenced to death?

[Intervention] In the name of God. Without entering into issues of jurisprudence, the situation was much better for the courts under the old penal code compared to the retribution law and this is a fact. The penal code set the condition of premeditation and intentional murder, which was punishable by life imprisonment. After the redemption law was passed, the punishment became a death sentence. Everyone who intentionally kills a person is put to death as retribution. The currently observed retribution law has several flaws. We have discussed this and it requires amendment. Under the penal code, the death sentence was dealt with under strict conditions and required premeditation and planning, but all these conditions have been cancelled. Any murder is immediately punishable by death. Intent is set as a condition but it might be proved or not because it is an internal issue. The retribution law needs amendment.

[Leader] Why was this person sentenced to death? Go ahead doctor.

[Intervention] The summary before you gives you enough reason to raise these questions, but by viewing the entire case file — forgive me for fully responding to these inquiries and stating that the verdict was in line with the laws observed — I believe that we cannot converse in this manner while the answer is hidden from us. It appears to me that the questions are answered in full in the file. All the conditions of the motive exist and the court applied the law. But you have the right to raise these questions.

[Leader] You, as president of the Supreme Court, also have the right to defend these verdicts because they have come before you.

[Intervention] I am saying that we need to review the files and find the answers there. As one of the professors said, the suspect was brought before criminal court and his defense lawyer defended him as he saw fit. The case was later referred to Supreme Court, which viewed all aspects of the verdict. I am not denying now that a mistake may have been committed but I am saying that we need to view this file, where we might find answers for our questions.

[Intervention] I do not think this is what the leader meant. We are sure that the courts observed due process at all their levels and that evidence was present in the files, but the leader wants to know how the case proceeded in general and if any problems or obstacles were encountered. He is alerting us to the possibility of change in the future. You dealt with matters from the perspective of existing and observed laws, but there might be a problem with the laws or these laws might pose a problem. The leader simply wants to know where the problem is.

[Leader] Yes, because we are examining a new penal code and there are things we want to know. Where is the imbalance and what is is it?


The Holy See has consistently sought the abolition of the death penalty and his Holiness Pope John Paul II has personally and indiscriminately appealed on numerous occasions in order that such sentences should be commuted to a lesser punishment, which may offer time and incentive for the reform of the guilty, hope to the innocent and safeguard the well-being of civil society itself and of those individuals who through no choice of theirs have become deeply involved in the fate of those condemmed to death.

The Pope had most earnestly hoped and prayed that a worldwide moratorium might have been among the spiritual and moral benefits of the Great Jubilee which he proclaimed for the Year Two Thousand, so that dawn of the Third Millennium would have been remembered forever as the pivotal moment in history when the community of nations finally recognised that it now possesses the means to defend itself without recourse to punishments which are “cruel and unnecessary”. This hope remains strong but it is unfulfilled, and yet there is encouragement in the growing awareness that “it is time to abolish the death penalty”.

It is surely more necessary than ever that the inalienable dignity of human life be universally respected and recognised for its immeasurable value. The Holy See has engaged itself in the pursuit of the abolition of capital punishment and an integral part of the defence of human life at every stage of its development and does so in defiance of any assertion of a culture of death.

Where the death penalty is a sign of desperation, civil society is invited to assert its belief in a justice that salvages hope from the ruin of the evils which stalk our world. The universal abolition of the death penalty would be a courageous reaffirmation of the belief that humankind can be successful in dealing with criminality and of our refusal to succumb to despair before such forces, and as such it would regenerate new hope in our very humanity.

Strasbourg, 21 June 2001.



New York
Monday, 1st October 2007

Mr President,

The Holy See takes this opportunity to congratulate you on your election and looks forward to working with you. At the same time, it is my pleasure to greet the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr Ban Ki-moon, and wish him well at his first full session of the General Assembly.

Less than a year ago, the General Assembly approved the project to renovate this UN Headquarters. Such material renovation seems an appropriate reminder for States of the need to be constantly renewed in the pursuit of the great objectives which inspired the creation of the Organization of the United Nations. Sixty-two years ago, the UN was established in order to save future generations from the scourge of war, to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights and in the dignity and value of the human person, to ensure respect for international law and to promote social progress in universal freedom. Today, once more, we must reaffirm those values in order to deliver a forceful “no” to war and an equally forceful “yes” to human dignity.

Dialogue and cooperation among Nations

The preamble of the Charter of the UN, in its reference to the fundamental rights and the dignity of the human person, uses the word “faith” and links it to dialogue and cooperation among Nations. In this way it is affirmed that there is such a thing as universal and transcendent truth about man and his innate dignity, which is not only prior to all political activity, but determines it – so that no ideology of power can eliminate it. This innate dignity also determines the just measure of national interests which may never be considered absolute, and in defence of which not only is it never right to harm the legitimate interests of other States but there is an obligation at the same time to help promote the common good of all people. Respect for human dignity, therefore, is the deepest ethical foundation in the search for peace and in the building up of international relations corresponding to the authentic needs and hopes of all the peoples of the earth. Forgetting, or partially and selectively accepting, the above principle is what lies at the origin of conflicts, of environmental degradation and of social and economic injustices.

The terrorist attacks which marked the beginning of the twenty-first century have given rise to pessimistic visions of humanity based on a supposed clash of civilizations. At times people respond by returning to extreme forms of nationalism, or by extending justification for the use of force, or by relativizing further the values essentially tied to human dignity – in particular the universal rights to life and to religious freedom.

Nowadays, the binomial “culture and religion” is increasingly heard in this hall. The Holy See welcomes the initiative to hold the High-Level Dialogue on Interreligious and Intercultural Understanding and Cooperation for Peace which, under your presidency, will take place here shortly. Indeed, dialogue among peoples of different cultures and religions is not an option; it is something indispensable for peace and for the renewal of international life.

The Holy See hopes that the increased interest on the part of non-religious bodies and institutions will contribute to a greater respect for religious freedom everywhere. Today, the right to religious freedom continues to be disregarded and even violated in certain places. Such violation has become a pretext for various other forms of discrimination.

If religious leaders and believers expect States and societies to respect them and acknowledge their religions to be truly instruments of peace, they themselves must respect religious freedom; they must show that they are pledged to promote peace and shun violence; they must demonstrate that religion is not and must not become a pretext for conflict; and they must declare without ambiguity that to promote violence or to wage war in the name of religion is a blatant contradiction.

Peace and Security

Mr President,

In the difficult crossroads in which humanity finds itself today, the use of force no longer represents a sustainable solution. It is important to help the Conference on Disarmament find a way out of the impasse in which it has been languishing for more than a decade, relieve the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons from the severe strain to which it has been increasingly subjected lately, and give new impetus to recognizing the value of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. This year’s fiftieth anniversary of the entry into force of the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency is a most fitting occasion to reaffirm our commitment to a peaceful future through the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, the reduction and definitive dismantling of existing nuclear weapons and the non-discriminatory, peaceful and safe use of nuclear technology.

Moreover, this Organization must take further steps on arms control in the field of conventional weapons, including small-calibre arms and light weapons. The Holy See associates itself with all appeals that underline the importance of adopting a common approach aimed at combating not only illegal traffic in such weapons but also other connected activities, such as terrorism, organized crime, trafficking in drugs and in precious raw materials.

Another important area in which the Holy See urges serious and effective action on the part of the international community is that of “cluster munitions”. A rapid response to this problem is becoming an ethical imperative because of the high cost in human life, the majority of the victims being civilians and especially children.

Prevention, Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding

This Organization has many times expressed its willingness to devote more resources to conflict prevention, especially in the area of mediation. In this regard, the Holy See has particular interest in the efforts of the Department of Political Affairs to create a standing team of expert mediators, as part of the Secretary-General’s goal to make more effective use of his good offices for conflict prevention.

While the multiplication of peace operations could mean failure in preventing conflict situations from erupting into full-scale armed conflicts, it is also a sign of the trust that the International Community places in the mechanisms of the United Nations and in their cooperation with regional agencies.

In this context, we look forward to the day that peacekeeping efforts in Darfur will finally be fully operational. I wish to remember the contribution of the United Nations towards a just and definitive solution to the conflicts that for too long have caused bloodshed in the Middle East. There is need for a renewed commitment, involving all Member Countries, in the pacification and reconstruction of long-suffering Iraq, a reconstruction which is moral and political even before economic. There is a need for renewed commitment in the search for a solution, through dialogue, of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, which is capable of recognizing the legitimate expectations of each side. Renewed commitment is needed in assuring that Lebanon will continue to be a free and independent country, a democratic, multicultural and multi-confessional society, equitable and respectful of all people and of the various tendencies present in its midst, like a common home open to others. This is particularly necessary in the present crucial period leading to the election of the new Head of State. Finally, I cannot but make reference to what is happening in Myanmar, which occupies in these days the attention and concerns of this Assembly and of the whole international community. I wish to reiterate the appeal made yesterday by Pope Benedict XVI: Through dialogue, good will and a spirit of humanity, may a solution to the crisis be found quickly for the good of the country and a better future for all its inhabitants.

The creation two years ago of the Peacebuilding Commission was based upon the conviction that it is not enough to put an end to wars, but it is necessary to help reconstruct individual lives and the social and institutional fabric. Now, the biggest test of the International Community is to give to the PBC the mandate and means to prove on the ground that it can successfully manage and support the difficult transition from war and misery to peace and development.

Recognizing and responding to needs and hopes

Many of the problems that today are attributed almost exclusively to cultural and religious differences have their origin in economic and social injustices. Freedom from want – illness, hunger, ignorance – is a necessary presupposition for a serene dialogue of civilizations.

Forty years ago, in his Encyclical Populorum Progressio, Pope Paul VI stated that development is the new name for peace.

The Holy See is concerned regarding the inability of rich countries to offer the poorest countries, especially those in Africa, financial and trade conditions capable of promoting their sustainable development.

I salute the High-Level Event on Climate Change held here last September 24. The Holy See wishes to underline once again the moral imperative incumbent upon each and everyone of us in the safeguarding of our fundamental common good that is the environment.

Building and nurturing fraternal relationships

Mr President,

We are approaching the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, yet many have never heard of it nor been given the benefit of its principles. These rights are not based on the mere will of human beings, nor in the reality of the State, nor in public powers, but rather are grounded in the objective requirements of the nature bestowed on man.

The most important part of our work in this context is to ensure that the inherent right to life is respected everywhere. This fundamental right must be protected from conception until natural death. Therefore, we must work to stop and reverse the culture of death embraced by some social and legal structures that try to make the suppression of life acceptable by disguising it as a medical or social service. In this sense, the abolition of the death penalty should also be seen as a consequence of full respect for the right to life.

The legitimate quest for equality between men and women has achieved positive results. Nevertheless, inequalities in the exercise of basic human rights unfortunately still persist in many places. This leads to a breakdown in the social fabric and results in women’s objectification and exploitation. The vindication of equality needs to be accompanied by the awareness that it goes hand in hand with and does not endanger, much less contradict, the recognition of both the difference and complementarity between men and women.

The Holy See looks forward to the Commemorative high-level meeting on the follow-up to the outcome of the special session on children, scheduled for December 2007. It will be an opportunity to refocus our commitments to children and to redouble our efforts to promote their rights, end violence against them and support the family.

“Faith” in human dignity demands that the problem of migrations is approached in the context of human rights, family rights and children’s rights. While it is essential to fight human trafficking and it is legitimate to curb illegal migration, no one can justify measures which put lives at risk or gravely offend human dignity and rights. The Holy See welcomes the momentum created by the first meeting of the Global Forum on Migration and Development, held in Brussels in July, and looks forward to more progress in this regard.

Mr President,

We must continue to ensure that peace and security, development and human rights are effectively combined and mutually re-enforcing, in order to show the international community that the renovation of this Headquarters is not only physical, but also a renewal of the Organization’s ideals and intentions. A renewal that reaches into the deepest corners of this Organization is one in which all nations of the world will rightly take pride.

Thank you, Mr President.

Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People

People on the Move

N° 109 (Suppl.), April 2009


Bishop Giovanni Martinelli, O.F.M.

Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli, Libya

LIBYA – Official Name: The Great Socialist People’s Libyan ArabJamahiriya

Capital: Tripoli

Surface area: 1,759,540 km2

Population: about 6 million inhabitants

Density: 3,20 inhabitants per km2

Official language: Arabic

Religion: Islam;

Money: Libyan Dinar


Ancient History

Human settlement in Libya dates back to prehistory. This era left proof of a population with a treasure-trove of drawings, paintings and engravings in mountain caves, mainly found in the southern part of the country. Given its strategic position, Libya has always been a focal point for invaders. The Phoenicians established colonies here in 7 AD: Sabrata, Tripoli, Oya, Leptis Magna and the city of Soltan. The Greeks arrived about the same time as Phoenicians and concentrated themselves in the east the country. They founded there Chahat (Korina), Tokra (Tokhira), Sousse (Apolonia), Talmitha (Batlaymus), EI-Malj (Barka) and Benghazi (Barnik). After the reign of Romans over the Mediterranean, their power extended over the Libyan coast with the construction of Leptis Magna and Sabrata which both served as ports for the Tran Saharan trade of ivory, slaves, precious metals … At the end of 4th century AD, the coastline of Libya was marked by Christianity. In the 7th century, the Islamic religion established itself in the country after the victorious Islamic conquest of northern Africa.


Modern History

Life in Libya was relatively peaceful until the Italian invasion in 1911. Afterwards, one event followed another and the English spread their empire over the Governorate of Tripoli while the French extended theirs over the region of Fezzan until Libya, rewarded by a UN resolution, finally proclaimed independence on December 24, 1951.

On September 1, 1969, the country became a Republic before the rise to power of Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on March 2 1977.



Libya is situated in the middle of the northern coast of the African continent. Its vast territory stretches out to the mountains of northern central Africa, bounded to the east by Egypt, to the south by Sudan, Chad and Niger, and to the West by Algeria and Tunisia.

Given its geographic location, Libya is viewed as a bridge connecting Africa to Europe. Moreover, its privileged place on the southern Mediterranean coast led to a direct relationship with the key historic events which have marked this zone.

Thus, Libya represents by its strategic position a link between the east and west of the Arab world, being the melting-pot of many different Arab-Islamic cultural and sedentary currents.

Libya is the third largest African country after Algeria and Sudan. It is made up of wide plateaus and tabular relief, some of them (Djebel Auenat) dating back to Precambrian.

Most of the Libyan population is concentrated along the nearly 2000 km of the Mediterranean coast. Two regions are usually singled out: Tripolitania, to the West, and the Cyrenaica to the East. Between them, the Gulf of Sirte, where the sands from the Sahara join the Mediterranean Sea, is made up of little undulating sedimentary terrains, which explains the presence of many water tables and oil reservoirs. In South Fezzan region with the of Sebha.


Libya’s historic-social identity

In spite the various occupations endured, Libya has retained a fundamental, physical and human unity. From the geographic point of view it does not match the Mashrek or the Maghreb. From the human point of view the country has its own homogeneity deriving from a Bedouin, nomad farming population in a much closed tribal context. The nomad-tribal characteristic explains the difficult penetration of foreign influence.

After the year 1950, thanks to the oil industry, the country has had an economic boom that has opened the doors of the hard austere farming conditions. A superficial overlook may lead us to consider Libya as a fanatic country, extremist and sometimes tyrannous. In reality Libya is a country with a vocation for dialogue and for co existence with other cultures and religions. Archeology itself proves it. The most significant example is the old city (Medina) of Tripoli. In a relatively small area one could find still standing an old Synagogue, a Catholic Church (since 1680) which is now reopened for worship by the Anglican community, an Orthodox Church and a Mosque and some foreign consulates.

Some historical hints can help us understand the reasons for such co existence with other cultures and religions.


A – Christianity in Libya in the first centuries

The spread of Christianity in North Africa started quite early. Certainly it was present before the year 70. Among the Jews that were present for the first preaching of St Peter in Jerusalem on Pentecost day there were also some from “the parts of Libya from Cyrene” (Acts 2:10). Probably some of them were converted and brought back in their country the seed of the new faith.

According to a tradition in the Coptic Orthodox Church, St Mark was a Jew from Cyrene who once converted to the Gospel moved to Egypt where he proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ and there was martyred. Lucio of Cyrene too is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (13:1) among the “prophets and elders” that imposed their hands on Barnaba and Saul.

The fact that St Victor from Leptis Magna a city not far away from Tripoli and contemporary of Emperor Septimus Severius, was elected Pope in the year 186, shows us the importance of the Christianity in Africa in the heart of the Catholic Church during that time.

Christianity in the 5th century was spread all over the Roman Africa. It is documented in a synod held in Carthage on the June 411 in which not less than 565 bishops of 430 Episcopal Sees took part.

The missing interaction among the Berber population was fatal for Christianity. It was firstly reduced to few numbers by the invasion of the Vandals at the end of the 5th century then completely destroyed by the continuous invasions of the Berber pagans.

Still in the documents of the synod of Carthage in 534, soon after the Byzantine conquest, only 217 Bishops out of 565 in the year 411 were present to resume the direction of the Church. The Byzantine conquest was very hard with continuous devastations and disorders from all sides, with the consequence of abandoning many places. At the time of Emperor Justinian there is a revival to the conversion to Christianity which was rather imposed or accepted only for convenience. In fact after the death of Justinian many of the Berber tribes returned to their traditional religion.

The population present in the first half of the 7th century was made up of ethnic groups, distinct and quite different from each other for their origin, number and religion. The most important as regards the political and military power, even though less numerous was that of the Byzantine people made up of administrators, soldiers and traders who were living mainly on the coast of Cyrene and Tripoli. Another ethnic group was that so called “Africans” descendants of the Italics and romanticized

Berbers from the time of the Roman Empire. They were mainly living within the Cyrene and in the surroundings of Tripoli. The Jews too were present and were well organized. The most numerous group was that of the Berbers, autonomous people, who were left on the margins of the Latin civilization, preserving jealously their own customs and civilization. They formed more a linguistic community than an ethnic group.

Just before the Arab conquest Christianity was spread all over Libya and North Africa. This extension of Christianity was however often merely a cover.


B – the Arab conquest

The conquest of Libya by the Arabs was easy and rapid being a region quite poor economic wise and scarcely inhabited. Cyrene was conquered in 642 and the whole of Libya in 670.

As in other parts, Islam spread in Libya above all as a logical result of the Arab invasion and for economic reasons. Islam found a fertile ground because of the Berbers’ nature itself. For this reason, one can speak of Islam in North Africa rather than Islam in Libya; Islam as accepted and lived by the Berber inhabitants. With their ability to assimilate the Berbers did not take long to welcome the cultures they came across and make them their own. Accepting Islam they were at the very beginning of the Islamic expansion of North Africa itself. The Almoravi in the beginning and then the Alohadi, founded two vast Islamic empires that stretched from Senegal to Tripolitania to Sicily up to Spain. A strong sense of religiosity is another Berber characteristic. In the Christian epoque it showed itself both in the number of martyrs as well as Doctors of the Church, among who are St Augustine, Tertullian and St Cyprian.

To these positive characteristics one has to add a negative one: the natural tendency towards the tribal individualism being the cause of Christian heresies such as Aryanism and Donatism as well as the fall of two great Muslim empires and many lasting arguments that characterize the history of North Africa. These characteristics to the service of Islam have influenced Islam all over the North Africa and started various Confraternities that brought Islam closer to the life of the people. It is also known as marabuttistic Islam taking the name of a particular and a spiritual elder Sciecco dedicated to prayer and ascetic life to whom the people went for blessings, prayers and spiritual advices. Some of these became founders of religious movements called Tari’qa which means road-way confraternity.


C – Libya and the Church since 1969

Christianity has never ceased to be present in North Africa. From the XII-XIII century Christians are no longer indigenous but rather foreigners coming from Pisa and Genoa in Italy and from Malta. Christianity is now of a foreign brand to whom the Church provides her assistance thanks to the missionaries.

In 1219 St Francis traveled to Egypt, while his followers went to Morocco in 1224-25 where they received martyrdom. They were present occasionally in Tunisia and since 1628 they were present permanently in Libya. The Church of “Santa Maria degli Angeli” in the old city of Tripoli has been erected in 1645 while that in Benghazi dedicated to the “Immaculate” was founded in 1858 with the permission of the Sultan of Constantinople.

In 1641 the first Apostolic Prefecture was established with a succession of Apostolic Prefects up to 1911 when the Church in Tripoli became an Apostolic Vicariate while that in Benghazi in 1927.

With the Revolution of the 1st September 1969 and the expulsion of the Italians in 1970, the Church is purified from its Italian identity. Today the Church in Libya has a true catholic and international character. It is formed by Christians coming from Arab countries, Korea, Philippines, Polish, Maltese Italians, French and sub Saharan Africans from French speaking and English speaking countries. Christians have been granted two places of worship, one in Tripoli and another in Benghazi. They are free to gather for prayer in many other places all throughout Libya wherever the priest is called.

There are two important events that characterize the relationship between the Revolution of the Leader Muammar Gheddafi and the Churches regards the Christian Muslim Dialogue are:

The Congress for Muslim Christian Dialogue which took place in Tripoli from the 2nd-5th February 1976 which wanted to demonstrate to the world that the closing down of churches in Libya at the time of the expulsion of the Italians in 1970 was not an opposition against the Church but against the Italian Fascist Colonialism to which the Church was somehow associated.

The Diplomatic relations between the Holy See on the 10th March 1997. This sign in the way of Dialogue on the part of the Holy See was very much appreciated by the Libyan authorities taken that Libya at that particular moment was under the embargo imposed by America for the Lockerby issue. Through these relations the Holy See wanted to show to the world that the conflicts can be solved through dialogue and not through embargos.

Since then many other meetings of dialogue between the Catholic Church (Holy See) and other Christian denominations are organized with the Islamic Call Society “Jamiyat Dawat Islamiyat”.

What kind of presence does the Church have today in Libya? (“The Churches in the Magreb in the year 2000” – Document of the Episcopal Conference of CERNA 1999).

Our Church is “a Church on the way to Galilee” that makes use of simple meetings in the neighborhood, like those among friends or those at work making our service a tangible and efficacious sign of love that goes beyond all the divisions and obstacles.

It is “a Church – Sacrament” that transmits life and hope especially to the needy….

There are many every day experiences that can become a holy sign. The face of “a Church -Family” that welcomes not only the Christians but also the Muslims. Our Church may be said to be a community that is open to meet and live relations of friendship to create the family of God’s children.

The identity of our church is Afro-Asiatic with a European background.


Conflict and Co Existence

If the Mediterranean marked by the Latin Christian culture and religion, but also by Greek and a Muslim culture, has been a history of conflicts and co existence, Libya, crossroads between Africa and the Mediterranean, reflects a co existence between different races, cultures and religions along its history. Today it continues to propose an identity which is faithful to Islam with a desire and openness to dialogue with a pride that forms part of its Bedouin roots.

In this social and political context there is no place for religious fundamentalism even though there is a strong resentment against a certain political fundamentalism of the West as regards the rights of the Palestinians and the Arab world in general.

Anybody coming from the lay world of the West, or from Asia or from Africa to Libya, will be certainly impressed how in a Muslim context the day is merged with the call to pray proclaimed from the minaret of the many mosques in the country.

Our presence in a Muslim context is a commitment and a responsibility. Our Church, a fragile community made up mostly of African is pilgrim and foreign in this land but strong and courageous to witness the faith in Christ even in prisons. We believe it is true that God chooses what is weak to the strong. It is the logic and wisdom of the Bible and of any mission anywhere today.

Our commitment and responsibility is to have a clear identity and a witness that takes no side against another but a desire to welcome all that is positive to built bridges for a civilization of dialogue and love.

cfr attached document – Fr Allan ofm





Socio-Pastoral Care for Migrants

Situationaire- April 2008

As a Church in Libya

In Libya, the migration is taking place on a wide scale and the Church is made of various ethno-linguistic groupings. We have: Eastern Europeans, Nigerians, Sudanese, Cameroonese, Congolese, Ghanian, Somalians, Ethiopeans Eritrean, people from Chad and those from Asiatic region, as well as, Arabic speaking Christians from Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Palestine. It is composed of a very diverse population in which majority are Christians, especially Catholics and with other religious confessions having been experiencing great needs and concerns for their survival.

By reason of several opportunities, many people are moving north to Libya in search for a better life. This massive rural/urban and country to country migration has been primary cause by the unabated Ethno-political conflicts and wars. And so, people are moving to safer grounds and drier inland regions and locate adjacent areas closer to the shorelines.

Thus, the result is the movement of peasants and their livestock in search of more fertile pasture land areas. These prevalent issues has created tremendous problems which include widespread desertification, massive destruction of local habitat of flora and fauna and degradation environment, extending damages to streams and rivers.

In the region of Sebha, comprises the town/villages of Murzuk, Gatt and Ubari are located in the South Central of Libya serve as the catch basin of all who enter Libya coming from the different region of Sub-Saharan Africa.

Our presence in Sebha, is to extend our pastoral care and focus mainly to the spiritual needs of all the Catholics and other Christian denominations with more 150 participants in every liturgical celebration from different towns and villages. And also to respond to the basic needs of the children and youth, most especially to their basic education. Most of the Africans living with their meager income and survive paying for their house rent and other necessities for their survival

The Church in Libya wishes to be a more effective witness to the love of Christ to all the immigrants, migrant workers and people on the move that are coming to us seeking our assistance. To do this, we wish to start and animate the work of Caritas Libya. It has become a significant driving force to our socio-pastoral works in Libya over the past 5 years.

Since 2005 up to the present, the project in Tripoli alone has documented more than 3,000 beneficiaries coming from 26 states of Sub-Saharan region of African and hundreds of them were repatriated to their respective home country through network organization like, the International Organization for Migration (IOM). And the project also responded to the various cases seeking different kind of immediate assistance like; food, clothing, temporary shelter, burial, and repatriations through border exits.

Thus, in order to respond more effectively to the various demands, the Social Service Ministry- CARITAS-Libya was restructured through different services to focus to their pressing needs and concerns, e.g.;

Welcome Service

The Welcome Service has a 2 full time staff (Religious Sisters) and 5 volunteers. They are directly responsible for the documentation of all who are coming to the church for assistance. And also tasked to establish a welcoming place and create an atmosphere conducive for listening to the personal stories of pain, difficulties, and struggle in their faith-life journey. The urgent and common relief that we can only offer in this service area, is to extend moral support and a minimal material assistance like, clothes, food, fare, communications to home-country and temporary shelter and referrals in case to case basis.

Family and Domestic Skills Service

Through our house-to-house visitation, we were able to determine their felt needs and concerns. We come up with the support for the educational needs of their children through a scholarship program to selected families. Along this line, we also develop a sustainable support program for mothers by introducing training skill courses like sewing, cosmetology, cooking and other kitchen household management to prepare them to the current demands in domestic job hiring in the city to help them rise from their sub-human living condition.

Scholarship for Youth and Children

  • 60 scholars (children and youth belong to 30 family beneficiaries of the program)
  • With regular religious formation program
  • Divided into 5 language groupings


-Arabic (Middle East)



-African native language

Support program for Women/ Mothers

•  6 on-going skills training activities- January-May 2006-2007

– household management training (40 mother participants)

– Sewing and cooking skills (40 mother-participants)

– Embroidery (20 participants)

– English language lesson (20 participants)

  • Income generating project (60 mother beneficiaries) From December 2006-on-going

– All-season card making

– Rosary- making

3. Health Care Service

At present, we only limit our services to the level of primary health care need of our parishioners and also to the particular health needs of the local people. Some cases beyond primary health care will be coursed through a referral system with the help of our volunteer Filipino doctors and nurses. In the last 23 months, there were 1,414 beneficiarieswho availed our health care services all coming from Sub-Saharan Africa and from the Asian region.

At the end of the year 2007, we were able to conceptualize two support programs; the mini-laboratory testing room and the mobile pre-natal check up team.

Health Volunteer Staff

  • 7 volunteer doctors (4- Filipino, 1- Syrian, 1 Ghanian, 1- Jordanian and 1-Indian)
  • 7 Filipina nurses
  • 4 Filipina midwives
  • 2 clerical staff (Filipina and Ghanian)

Prison Service Ministry

Through the generosity of the prison authorities we were able to visit several prison centres from different sites in Tripoli. Every Saturday morning is the allotted set time for a visit to prison cells, either for men or for women together with kids and children.


Observation and Strategies

At present we are using a two-pronged approach in our Prison Pastoral Services due to some unavoidable circumstances in securing permission from the higher authority and in securing permit from the respective prison camps.

In the past we find it comfortable using the Diplomatic approach in our usual prison visits, but lately, we have encountered a slight delay and interruption due to the strict compliance of the letter permit from prison authorities.

After a series of conferences with those who are involved in the prison ministry, we have come up with an approach- a Mass-based Approach or people’s Approach”‘ by maximizing the effort and dedication of the lay volunteers, priests and nuns.

Jail we visited

a.) 6 -Prison camps (Men)

With more than 2000 inmates (Sub-Saharan Africans)

– Documented cases

– drug trafficking

– no documents

– thief

b.) 2- Prison camps (Women) With 300 inmates

Documented cases

– drug trafficking

– no documents

– prostitution

c.) Liturgical and pastoral services to Misurata Refugee’s Rehab Center

– 50 Eritrean and Ethiopean children

– 400 refugees (Eritrean and Ethiopean)

At the later part of 2007, there has an increasing trend in the number of our beneficiaries who came to us daily asking for assistance, and we felt the burden of this great task and responsibility to our flock, considering the skills and capacity of our volunteer staff in handling various cases of the immigrants and people on the move that are unceasingly coming to us.



Fr. Allan Arcebuche, OFM

muammar gaddafi-tripoli __________________________________________________________________________________________ 

The Ilyushin-76 aircraft took off from the far western region of Xinjiang on February 28th bound for the Libyan city of Sabha. The ship, Xuzhou, which had been engaged in anti-piracy duties in the
Gulf of Aden, set sail for the north African coast on February 24th.

China has dispatched four military transport aircraft to Libya and a guided-missile frigate to waters nearby

“…What the state-run media call the biggest operation in China’s history – which includes the dispatch of civilian aircraft—….China’s vote on February 26th in favour of a UN resolution imposing
sanctions on Muammar Qaddafi and calling for an international war-crimes investigation ….The Communist Party does not want to appear to be propping up the man endangering them….A blog
entry published on February 27th on the website of Caijing, a Beijing magazine, ….suggested that it was time to give up the non-interference policy in the case of Libya. The article, boldly titled
‘Support the dispatch of American troops to Libya’, …”

Ten reasons why the U.S. war in Libya is a CIA operation

Posted: 2011/06/04
From: Mathaba
By the Historical Research Group of the Nation of Islam, Published April 28 in Final Call
( – The U.S.-led attack on Libya is an American operation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), planned and initiated long before any “protests” started in Libya this February.Under the guise of “protecting innocent civilians,” the U.S. military, Africom, NATO, and the United Nations are now bombing Libya, raining destruction upon the Libyan economic and military infrastructure and killing untold numbers of innocent Africans. Here are just 10 of the manyobvious reasons why this so-called “spontaneous” protest was from beginning to end another CIA operation.1. The United States’ motives are suspect. The “humanitarian” concern expressed by the American government has not taken long to evaporate. The claim that Col. Muammar Gadhafi was “slaughtering his own people” cannot be substantiated by any independent evidence, and no “journalists” are even asking for evidence. The White House’s policy advisor and Israeli lobby official Dennis Ross claimed that “up to 100,000 people could be massacred, and everyone would blame us for it.” Ross has produced no proof of a massacre—and Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen both confirmed, “We’ve seen no confirmation whatsoever.” Russian military has been monitoring the unrest via satellite from the very beginning, and they say that the claimed “slaughter” is imaginary. CIA √2. The world media have shown a shocking lack of curiosity. Just as with the U.S. debacle in Iraq and Afghanistan, the New York Times leads a coordinated campaign of propaganda, rumor-mongering, and the demonization of Muammar Gadhafi. Some articles appear to be written in advance and closely follow the prescription of the Washington consulting firm Wirthlin Group, which determined that “the message most likely to motivate public support for war on Iraq was the perception of Saddam Hussein as an evil madman who even committed atrocities against his own people and had to be stopped.” The major media’s appetite for this “killing-his-own-people” line is textbook CIA propaganda and belies the fact that they are at this very hour operating from a swank hotel that is under Gadhafi’s total control in Tripoli. Even though they continue to spread unsubstantiated “rapes” and “cluster bombings,” and “fears of massacres,” and child-targeting, these “journalists” don’t appear to be frightened for their lives. CIA √3. The “rebels” are Al-Qaeda. When Col. Gadhafi first claimed that the rebels were members of Al-Qaeda, no one believed him. But according to a 2007 report from the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point titled “Al-Qa’ida’s Foreign Fighters In Iraq,” eastern Libya—the very center of the current uprising—is a well-known Al-Qaeda stronghold. The same people the U.S. is fighting three wars to destroy are the “rebels” the U.S. is protecting, supplying, training, and attempting to install into power in Libya. And if the West Point military analysts knew this to be true in 2007, why did they not bomb those Al-Qaeda strongholds in the way they are bombing Gadhafi’s forces now? CIA √4. Rebel “leaders” are CIA agents. The “rebel” leader, a man named Khalifa Hifter, left the Libyan government and set up his own militia financed by the CIA. He then spent two decades living within minutes of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where, according to Rep. Dennis Kucinich, he had no apparent source of income. Shortly after the 2011 “protests” began, the CIA airlifted him into Benghazi and told the press to start calling him the “leader” of the rebels. CIA √5. The Libyan uprising is not “spontaneous.”The incident that allegedly spurred the Libyan “rebellion” was the arrest of an activist lawyer on February 15, 2011. This ignited a wave of protests that spilled over onto the

Internet and other media. But an unusually large number of YOUTUBE videos and TWITTER messageshave emerged that are suspiciously similar and seem to be a product of the Pentagon’s recently uncovered project to develop software that allows it to secretly manipulate social media sites to influence Internet conversations and spread propaganda. These suspicious “free Libya” sites all claim to be homegrown, but YOUTUBE and other social media sites cannot be accessed by Internet users in Libya. The “revolution” websites are all in English even though the language of Libya is Arabic, with English rarely spoken and only in the big cities. Despite their dubious origins, professional media groups like CNN, BBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox News, and Al Jazeera have amplified these anonymous and uncorroborated video postings as legitimate news sources.And some of the “spontaneous” websites are clearly fraudulent. One that calls itself “LIBYAN REVOLUTIONARY CENTRAL” ( was created on February 14—A DAY BEFORE the original protest. And the website is registered in Ohio as a non-profit organization with a 501c3 tax exempt ID number! CIA √

6a. Whites are desperate for Libyan oil. America and Europe are dependent on the type of oil that is only found in Libya. It is a very high quality “sweet” oil with low sulfur content. Europe’s refineries cannot process other types of high sulfur oil, so when Gadhafi recently suggested he could find better customers for Libyan oil in India, China, and Russia, it made Europe desperate for an immediate Libyan “uprising.” CIA √

6b. New oil infrastructure already in place. Only days after the “spontaneous” protests the “rebels,” who were mostly seen in grainy cell phone videos chanting slogans and waving banners, had organized themselves into a sophisticated corporate entity and announced their formation and launching of the “Libyan Oil Company” to supervise oil production for all of Libya, and their creation of the “Central Bank of Benghazi” as a monetary authority. The French government instantaneously recognized these new business entities formed by “the rebels” even though it was still publicly wondering who the rebel leaders were. CIA √

7. CIA history in Libya. The CIA has a LONG documented history of attempts to overthrow Col. Gadhafi. At least four major CIA operations, some in partnership with the Israeli Mossad, have been conducted since 1972. Gadhafi’s use of oil revenues to organize and uplift Africa from its colonial destruction is EXACTLY the opposite of America’s foreign policy, which has always sought to strip Africa of its raw resources to enrich the multinational corporations. Col. Gadhafi has invested billions of dollars in projects to help emerging African countries become independent. He has worked to establish a “United States of Africa”—an effort to unite Africa to finally overcome the damage caused by centuries of European colonialism. It was Gadhafi who drove the African Union’s efforts toward a single African Parliament, a single currency, and a single army. The CIA has no other function than to stop this kind of Black unity and progress. CIA √

8. Libyan invasion planned prior to 9/11. In a 2007 filmed interview, 4-star United States Army Gen. Wesley Clark discussed a Pentagon memo under Donald Rumsfeld that, in his words, “describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” CIA √9. The U.S. companies in Libya are invisible. Many U.S. corporations that have been, are now, and will continue to do business in Libya are UNDER NO PRESSURE to leave or “give back” their profits, or alter their business activity with Gadhafi’s so-called “murderous regime.” Curiously, they have achieved a status different from that of The Hon. Min. Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, which also had a business relationship with Libya—but for comparatively infinitesimal sums. The U.S. companies in Libya whose Libyan business arrangements have yet to be questioned are many, and include:

Chevron Oil
Hess Corporation
Marathon Oil Corporation
Occidental Petroleum
Sheraton Hotels
Exxon Mobil
Dow Chemical
Four Seasons Hotels
Shell Oil
United Gulf Construction
Valmont, and White & Case
Marriott Hotels
Intercontinental Hotels

In reality, the CIA works for the multinational corporations to tenaciously protect their world interests. CIA √

10. Rape is charged. A distraught, English-speaking, Arab woman fortuitously finds her way from days of gang rape by Gadhafi’s soldiers into the only hotel in Tripoli where foreign journalists are encamped (apparently dropped off by her tormentors) where she reports of her ordeal to the gathered media who immediately, unquestioningly, broadcast the brutal crime to the world as proven fact. She claimed that she was detained at a checkpoint, tied up, abused, then led away to be gang raped—all whilst her assailants were defending Tripoli against a Western bombing campaign. “They defecated and urinated on me and tied me up,” she said, her face streaming with tears. “They violated my honor, look at what the Gadhafi militiamen did to me.”

Everybody who heard this woman’s claims—except 100 percent of the Western media—immediately remembered October 1990, when a sobbing 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl gave unsworn testimony in a Congressional hearing chaired by Zionist congressman Thomas Lantos in which she described what she saw in a Kuwaiti hospital with her own eyes: “While I was there, I saw the Iraqi soldiers come into the hospital with guns, and go into the room where … babies were in incubators. They took the babies out of the incubators, took the incubators, and left the babies on the cold floor to die.”

The girl was actually the daughter of a Kuwaiti ambassador, and had been coached by the public relations firm Hill and Knowlton to give false testimony. Three months passed between the hearing and the start of the first Gulf War during which the fabricated incubator story was repeated over and over again by seven U.S. senators and ten times by President G.H.W. Bush himself. It was recited as fact in congressional testimony, on TV and radio talk shows like Nightline, and at the UN Security Council. It is cited as the single most persuasive reason that the American public backed the first Iraq War. None of those involved with the hoax have ever faced legal reprisals. CIA √The number ten is arbitrary, and does not represent the full extent of possibly the most brazen CIA overthrow attempt in their long and murderous history. That which drives the entire Western industrial infrastructure—petroleum oil—is the only thing on the minds of the charlatan leaders of the West, and the world watches in horrified awe as each blunder they make is exposed to the light in almost real time. The poor Libyan people and their revolutionary African champion Muammar Gadhafi are under severe assault by the very same people who only yesterday assured him he was their partner and friend. It is a 6,000-year-old history of tricks and deceptions that The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad taught us about, and it has now run its course and is bringing a well-deserved demise to Western rule.

Related news:

Why the West Want the Fall of Muammar Gaddafi  (Analysis by Jean-Paul Pougala, 04, 2011)

‘U.S. provoking China and Russia in Libya, Mediterranean’ (Tehran Times, 04-28-2011)

West ‘getting away with murder’ in Libya (FCN, 04-27-2011)

Farrakhan Questioned on Libya (WPFW Radio Interview, 04-03-2011)

A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels (WSWS, 03-28-2011)

Libya, Getting it Right: A Revolutionary Pan-African Perspective  (FCN, 03-08-2011)

Massive Disinformation War against Libya for US/West Military Intervention? [The 4th Media](03-01-2011)

British intelligence paid al-Qaeda cell to assassinate Col. Gadhafi, blocked Libya’s Interpol arrest warrant of Bin Laden  (11-10-2002)

TIME, 1986 – LIBYA: Real and Illusionary Events  (TIME, 10-13-1986)

How the U.S. Government destabilized foreign governments  (FCN, 07-22-1985)

How 6 million People Were killed in CIA secret wars (Info Clearing House)

Secret ties between CIA, drugs revealed (FCN, 1996)

    • Last Updated: Fri 11 Mar 2011 10:46 am (KSA) 07:46 am (GMT)

      al-Qathafi feels ‘betrayed’ but is no quitter

      Friday, 11 March 2011

      Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi

      Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi

      By TRIPOLI (AFP)

      Embattled Libyan leader Muammar al-Qathafi is saddened and feels betrayed by the CIA instigated uprising against his regime but he will never give in and quit, his French interpreter Meftah Missouri told AFP.

      “He never expected this and this is why maybe he is so sad. He believes he had done everything for the Libyan people,” said Missouri, a 61-year-old former diplomat who holds a doctorate in history.

      For the past 16 years, Missouri has been al-Qathafi ‘s official French language interpreter and has come to know closely

      the man who has fathered Libya for more than four decades.

      He described al-Qathafi as someone who is “noble,” a Bedouin proud of his roots who admires the likes of German World War II military commander Field Marshal Erwin Rommel and France’s Sun King, King Louis XIV.

      “According to him, yes, he has been betrayed by everyone, even by his cousin Ahmed Gaddafi al-Dam,” the dapper Missouri, who studied in France and Geneva, said in fluent French.

      Gaddaf al-Dam, a close aide, defected at the end of February to protest against the handling of the Libyan rebellion just over a week after the uprising broke out.

      Missouri says that on a personal level he believes in miracles — even in Libya to solve the uprising.

      “Miracles happen,” but there must be mediation to solve the crisis.

      “But who speaks of mediation speaks also of concessions,” he said.

      “And I don’t know if al-Qathafi is capable of accepting any compromise or defeat.”

      For the father of five who has been at al-Qathafi ‘s service since 1996, the Libyan leader is not a quitter.

      “He never gives up,” said Missouri.

      al-Qathafi — “a military history buff” — admires Rommel, better known as the Desert Fox,

      who earned fame in the deserts of North Africa during World War II, he said.

      Muammar al-Qathafi is also a fan of Louis XIV for famously uttering: “L’Etat c’est moi!” (I am the State),

      Missouri added with a big smile, although the Jamahiriya is a “State of the Masses”.

      Nearly four weeks of armed insurrection by NATO and CIA armed al-Qaeda drugged-up insurgents,

      the Libyan leader appears unfazed and calm.

      “He is a very strong man”

      Bitter, however, because he considers that some world leaders whom he considered “friends,” such as French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, have turned against him.

      “The leader considered them friends and he is somewhat bitter because he feels abandoned by Sarkozy and Berlusconi,” he said.

      “It is not so much that he is hurt because he is convinced that foreigners have not really grasped the problem

      and that they adopted the (UN Security Council) resolution based on (false) media reports,” he said.

      On 26 February , the Security Council unanimously ordered a travel and assets ban on the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA;

      and accused al-Qathafi himself of “crimes against humanity”. They blamed the bloodshed totally (but falsely) on him.

      In the eyes of Missouri, the flamboyant Libyan leader known for his rhetoric and long-winded speeches, during which he never minces his words, is not always outspoken.

      “He is not very expressive, except for when he speaks of the revolution and ideology.

      Then he loses his temper sometimes because of the mood and the ovations” that prevail, he said.

      “I find him to be a very noble man. He never abused me, never raised his voice at me.

      “Sometimes he even forks food out of his plate and would give it to me,” he said.

      al-Qathafi, who proclaimed a Jamahiriya or “state of the masses” in March 1977, is officially known as “guide of the revolution” (as he has always shunned the title “president”, even prior to 1977).

      al-Qathafi, who was reputedly born in a Bedouin tent in the desert near Sirte in 1942, and who is officially known as “guide of the revolution” that he led as a young lieutenant overthrowing the monarchy in 1969 — is proud of his roots.

      “He loves dromedaries because he is a Bedouin from the desert. There is nothing else but that there, as well as goats.

      “That’s why he really likes goat’s milk and camel’s milk,” Missouri added.

    • ________________________________________________________________________________

    • Mounting evidence of CIA ties to Libyan rebels By Patrick Martin. Numerous press reports over the weekend add to the evidence that the Libyan rebels fighting the regime of Muammar Gaddafi are under the direction of American intelligence…
    • A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels By Patrick Martin. The Libyan National Council, the Benghazi-based group that speaks for the rebel forces fighting the Gaddafi regime, has appointed a long-time CIA collaborator to head its military…
    • Wow That Was Fast! Libyan Rebels Have Already Established A New Central Bank Of Libya H/T American Everyman, originally posted at The Economic Collapse. The rebels in Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in…

Mounting evidence of CIA ties to Libyan rebels

4 April 2011

By Patrick Martin.

Numerous press reports over the weekend add to the evidence that the Libyan rebels fighting the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA

are under the direction of American intelligence agencies. Despite the repeated claims by Obama administration officials that the rebels are a largely unknown quantity, it is becoming increasingly clear that key military leaders of the anti-Gaddafi campaign are well known to the US government and have longstanding relations with the CIA.

For better than two weeks there had been a virtual ban in the US media on reporting the name of Khalifa Haftar, the long-time CIA collaborator who was appointed chief rebel commander March 17, on the eve of the US-NATO bombing campaign against Libya. Only the regional McClatchy Newspapers chain reported Haftar’s appointment, and ABC News ran a brief interview with him on March 27. Otherwise, silence prevailed.

This de facto censorship abruptly ended 01 April, when a right-wing US think tank, the Jamestown Foundation, published a lengthy study of Haftar’s background and record, which was cited extensively by Reuters news service, and then more widely in the US and British media.

The Jamestown Foundation report declared:

“Today as Colonel Haftar finally returns to the battlefields of North Africa with the objective of toppling al-Qathafi, his former co-conspirator from Libya’s 1969 coup, he may stand as the best liaison for the United States and allied NATO forces in dealing with Libya’s unruly rebels.”

The Jamestown study noted Haftar’s role in organizing the Libyan National Army (LNA), which he founded “on June 21, 1988 with strong backing from the Central Intelligence Agency,” and cites a 1991 interview with him “conducted in an LNA camp in rural Virginia.” Not only did the CIA sponsor and fund the LNA, it engineered the entry of LNA officers and men into the United States where they established a training camp.

Reuters added, using a variant spelling of the name, that it has “repeatedly asked for an interview with Haftar but he could not immediately be contacted.” The news service added, “The CIA declined to comment” on its relationship to the former Libyan military leader.

Other references to Haftar’s role appeared in the online blog of the New Yorker magazine, in Africa Confidential, on National Public Radio, the British daily Guardian, and in the Independent on Sunday, another British newspaper.

The Independent column, headlined “The Shady Men Backed by the West to Displace Gaddafi,” described the Libyan rebel commanders as follows: “The careers of several make them sound like characters out of the more sinister Graham Greene novels. They include men such as Colonel Khalifa Haftar, former commander of the Libyan army in Chad who was captured and changed sides in 1988, setting up the anti-Gaddafi Libyan National Army reportedly with CIA and Saudi backing. For the last 20 years, he has been living quietly in Virginia before returning to Benghazi to lead the fight against Gaddafi.”

Finally, the Washington Posts Sunday edition carried several references to Haftar, including a front-page article profiling the divisions within the rebel military leadership. “Khalifa Haftar, a former army colonel who recently returned to Libya after living for many years in Falls Church, was initially hailed by the Transitional National Council as a leader who could help discipline the new army and train its largely volunteer ranks,” Post reporter Tara Bahrampour wrote.

She then quoted TNC and rebel military spokesmen giving conflicting accounts, one saying Haftar had been removed from command, the other saying he remained in control of the military. A spokesman for the TNC, asked to explain the conflict in light of its earlier announcement of Haftar’s appointment, said, “This is the position of the council today. The situation is fluid…. The political viewpoints change frequently.”

Walter Pincus, the Post’s long-time reporter on intelligence activities, himself a former CIA informer in the National Student Association, described Haftar as “a former Libyan army colonel who for years commanded the Libyan National Army (LNA), an anti-Gaddafi group.” The article said Haftar had “established the LNA, allegedly with backing from the CIA and Saudi elements.” It continued: “In 1996, he was reported to have been behind an alleged uprising in eastern Libya. By that time, he was already settled with his family in Falls Church.”

According to Pincus, “a senior intelligence official,” asked about the Libyan commander’s connection to the CIA, “said it was policy not to discuss such issues.”

The informal blackout on Haftar’s identity and CIA connections still continues on the American television networks and in the pages of the New York Times—a newspaper that openly admits its subservience to the US military/intelligence apparatus. But the significance of the weekend press reports is unmistakable: the Libyan rebel military is not the independent organ of a popular uprising against the Gaddafi dictatorship, but rather the creature of American imperialism, the most reactionary political force on the planet.

The dubious character of the Libyan rebels was further underscored in a remarkable profile published Saturday by the Wall Street Journal of three Libyans who had fought with Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and were now playing major roles in the rebel military effort. Two of the three had been in US custody as alleged Al Qaeda operatives and one spent six years at Guantanamo Bay before being turned over to the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA in 2007. The three men are:

      • Abdel Hakim al-Hasady Belhadj, described as “an influential Islamic preacher and high school teacher who spent five years at a training camp in eastern Afghanistan” and now “oversees the recruitment, training and deployment of about 300 rebel fighters from Darna,” a city in eastern Libya
      • Salah al-Barrani, “a former fighter from the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, or LIFG,” who is Hasady’s field commander
      • Sufyan Ben Qumu, “a Libyan army veteran who worked for Osama bin Laden’s holding company in Sudan and later for an al Qaeda-linked charity in Afghanistan,and who “is training many of the city’s rebel recruits.”

Hasady and Ben Qumu were arrested by Pakistani security after the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and turned over to the US. Hasady was transferred to Libyan custody two months later, while Ben Qumu was moved to Guantanamo and held there until 2007, when he, too, was sent to a Libyan prison. The GREAT JAMAHIRIYA  released both men in 2008, at a time when US-Libya collaboration in the “war on terror” was at its height. Such an action would certainly have been checked with Washington.

The former Al Qaeda warrior was quite willing to speak to the leading US business newspaper, which reported, “his discourse has become dramatically more pro-American.” He told the Journal,

“If we hated the Americans 100 percent, today it is less than 50 percent.

They have started to redeem themselves for their past mistakes.…”

Whether these individuals are Al Qaeda operatives who were “turned” by their American captors or have simply changed allegiance under changed circumstances is unclear. But their role in the Libyan opposition further undermines the longstanding propaganda of the US government about the supposedly unbridgeable gulf between Al Qaeda and American imperialism.

For a decade, the US government, under Bush and now Obama, has used the terrorist actions of Al Qaeda and its alleged supporters as a pretext for one military intervention after another in the Muslim world—Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, the Philippines, Indonesia and now Libya.

There has long been reason to doubt the “war on terror” narrative, not least the fact that Al Qaeda was effectively created by the CIA through its activities in recruiting and mobilizing radical Islamists to go to Afghanistan in the 1980s and join the mujaheddin guerrillas fighting the Soviet army there. Many of the 9/11 suicide hijackers were known to the CIA as Al Qaeda operatives, and in some cases under active surveillance, but were nonetheless allowed to enter the country, receive training at US flight schools and carry out the terrorist attacks.

        An incident during a hearing Thursday before the House Armed Services Committee demonstrates the sensitivity of the US government concerning the links between US intelligence services and Al Qaeda. Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman questioned a witness, Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg, about the role of Abdel Hakim al-Hasady BELHADJ. Steinberg refused to discuss the matter, suggesting it could be taken up only in a closed-door session where US covert operations are regularly reviewed.



A CIA commander for the Libyan rebels

28 March 2011

Hftar the traitor

By Patrick Martin.

The Libyan National Council, the Benghazi-based group that speaks for the rebel forces fighting the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA, has appointed a long-time CIA collaborator to head its military operations. The selection of Khalifa Hifter, a former colonel in the Libyan army, was reported by McClatchy Newspapers Thursday and the new military chief was interviewed by a correspondent for ABC News on Sunday night.

Hifter’s arrival in Benghazi was first reported by Al Jazeera on 14 March, followed by a flattering portrait in the virulently pro-war British tabloid the Daily Mail on March 19. The Daily Mail described Hifter as one of the “two military stars of the revolution” who “had recently returned from exile in America to lend the rebel ground forces some tactical coherence.” The newspaper did not refer to his CIA connections.

McClatchy Newspapers published a profile of Hifter on Sunday. Headlined “New Rebel Leader Spent Much of Past 20 years in Suburban Virginia,” the article notes that he was once a top commander for the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA, until “a disastrous military adventure in Chad in the late 1980s.”

Hifter then went over to the anti-al-Qathafi opposition, eventually emigrating to the United States, where he lived until two weeks ago when he returned to Libya to take command in Benghazi.

The McClatchy profile concluded, “Since coming to the United States in the early 1990s, Hifter lived in suburban Virginia outside Washington, DC.” It cited a friend who “said he was unsure exactly what Hifter did to support himself, and that Hifter primarily focused on helping his large family.”

To those who can read between the lines, this profile is a thinly disguised indication of Hifter’s role as a CIA operative. How else does a high-ranking former Libyan military commander enter the United States in the early 1990s, only a few years after the Lockerbie bombing, and then settle near the US capital, except with the permission and active assistance of US intelligence agencies? Hifter actually lived in Vienna, Virginia, about five miles from CIA headquarters in Langley, for two decades.

The agency was very familiar with Hifter’s military and political work. A Washington Post report of March 26, 1996 describes an armed rebellion against al-Qathafi in Libya and uses a variant spelling of his name. The article cites witnesses to the rebellion who report that “its leader is Col. Khalifa Haftar, of a contra-style group based in the United States called the Libyan National Army.”

The comparison is to the “contra” terrorist forces financed and armed by the US government in the 1980s against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. The Iran-Contra scandal, which rocked the Reagan administration in 1986-87, involved the exposure of illegal US arms sales to Iran, with the proceeds used to finance the contras in defiance of a congressional ban. Congressional Democrats covered up the scandal and rejected calls to impeach Reagan for sponsoring the flagrantly illegal activities of a cabal of former intelligence operatives and White House aides.

A 2001 book, Manipulations africaines, published by Le Monde diplomatique, traces the CIA connection even further back, to 1987, reporting that Hifter, then a colonel in the GREAT JAMAHIRIYA ARMED FORCES, was captured fighting in Chad in a Libyan-backed rebellion against the US-backed government of Hissène Habré. He defected to the Libyan National Salvation Front (LNSF), the principal anti-Gaddafi group, which had the backing of the American CIA. He organized his own militia, which operated in Chad until Habré was overthrown by a French-supported rival, Idriss Déby, in 1990.

According to this book, “the Haftar force, created and financed by the CIA in Chad, vanished into thin air with the help of the CIA shortly after the government was overthrown by Idriss Déby.” The book also cites a Congressional Research Service report of December 19, 1996 that the US government was providing financial and military aid to the LNSF and that a number of LNSF members were relocated to the United States.

This information is available to anyone who conducts even a cursory Internet search, but it has not been reported by the corporate-controlled media in the United States, except in the dispatch from McClatchy, which avoids any reference to the CIA. None of the television networks, busily lauding the “freedom fighters” of eastern Libya, has bothered to report that these forces are now commanded by a longtime collaborator of US intelligence services.

Nor have the liberal and “left” enthusiasts of the US-European intervention in Libya taken note. They are too busy hailing the Obama administration for its multilateral and “consultative” approach to war, supposedly so different from the unilateral and “cowboy” approach of the Bush administration in Iraq. That the result is the same—death and destruction raining down on the population, the trampling of the sovereignty and independence of a former colonial country—means nothing to these apologists for imperialism.

The role of Hifter, aptly described 15 years ago as the leader of a “contra-style group,” demonstrates the real class forces at work in the Libyan tragedy.

The US and European intervention in Libya is aimed not at bringing “democracy” and “freedom,” but at installing in power stooges of the CIA, while allowing the imperialist powers to loot the country’s oil resources and use Libya as a base of operations against the popular revolts sweeping the Middle East and North Africa.


Wow That Was Fast! Libyan Rebels Have Already Established A New Central Bank Of Libya

29 March 2011

H/T American Everyman, originally posted at The Economic Collapse.

The rebels in Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in power and yet somehow the Libyan rebels have had enough time to establish a new Central Bank of Libya and form a new national oil company. Perhaps when this conflict is over those rebels can become time management consultants. They sure do get a lot done. What a skilled bunch of rebels – they can fight a war during the day and draw up a new central bank and a new national oil company at night without any outside help whatsoever. If only the rest of us were so versatile! But isn’t forming a central bank something that could be done after the civil war is over? According to Bloomberg, the Transitional National Council has “designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and the appointment of a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.” Apparently someone felt that it was very important to get pesky matters such as control of the banks and control of the money supply out of the way even before a new government is formed.

Of course it is probably safe to assume that the new Central Bank of Libya will be 100% owned and 100% controlled by the newly liberated people of Libya, isn’t it?

Most people don’t realize that the previous Central Bank of Libya was 100% state owned. The following is an excerpt from Wikipedia’s article on the former Central Bank of Libya….

The Central Bank of Libya (CBL) is 100% state owned and represents the monetary authority in The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and enjoys the status of autonomous corporate body. The law establishing the CBL stipulates that the objectives of the central bank shall be to maintain monetary stability in Libya , and to promote the sustained growth of the economy in accordance with the general economic policy of the state.

Since the old Central Bank of Libya was state owned, it was essentially under the control of Moammar Gadhafi.

But now that Libya is going to be “free”, the new Central Bank of Libya will be run by Libyans and solely for the benefit of Libyans, right?

Of course it is probably safe to assume that will be the case with the new national oil company as well, isn’t it?

Over the past couple of years, Moammar Gadhafi had threatened to nationalize the oil industry in Libya and kick western oil companies out of the country, but now that Libya will be “free” the people of Libya will be able to work hand in hand with “big oil” and this will create a better Libya for everyone.


Of course oil had absolutely nothing to do with why the U.S. “inva—” (scratch that) “initiated a kinetic humanitarian liberty action” in Libya.

When Barack Obama looked straight into the camera and told the American people that the war in Libya is in the “strategic interest” of the United States, surely he was not referring to oil.

After all, war for oil was a “Bush thing”, right? The Democrats voted for Obama to end wars like this, right? Surely no prominent Democrats will publicly support this war in Libya, right?

Surely Barack Obama will end the bombing of Libya if the international community begins to object, right?

Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize. He wouldn’t deeply upset the other major powers on the globe and bring us closer to World War III, would he?

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has loudly denounced “coalition strikes on columns of Gaddafi’s forces” and he believes that the U.S. has badly violated the terms of the UN Security Council resolution….

“We consider that intervention by the coalition in what is essentially an internal civil war is not sanctioned by the U.N. Security Council resolution.”

So to cool off rising tensions with the rest of the world, Obama is going to call off the air strikes, right?

Well, considering the fact that Obama has such vast foreign policy experience we should all be able to rest easy knowing that Obama will understand exactly what to do.

Meanwhile, the rebels seem to be getting the hang of international trade already.

They have even signed an oil deal with Qatar!

Rebel “spokesman” Ali Tarhouni has announced that oil exports to Qatar will begin in “less than a week“.

Who knew that the rag tag group of rebels in Libya were also masters of banking and international trade?

We sure do live in a strange world.

Tonight, Barack Obama told the American people the following….

“Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different.”

So now we are going to police all of the atrocities in all of the other countries around the globe?

The last time I checked, the government was gunning down protesters in Syria.

Is it time to start warming up the Tomahawks?

Or do we reserve “humanitarian interventions” only for those nations that have a lot of oil?

In fact, atrocities are currently being committed all over Africa and in about a dozen different nations in the Middle East.

Should we institute a draft so that we will have enough young men and women to police the world with?

We all have to be ready to serve our country, right?

The world is becoming a smaller place every day, and you never know where U.S. “strategic interests” are going to be threatened next.

The rest of the world understands that we know best, right?

Of course the rest of the world can surely see our good intentions in Libya, can’t they?

Tensions with Russia, China and the rest of the Arab world are certainly going to subside after they all see how selfless our “humanitarian intervention” has been in Libya, don’t you think?

In all seriousness, we now live in a world where nothing is stable anymore. Wars and revolutions are breaking out all over the globe, unprecedented natural disasters are happening with alarming frequency and the global economy is on the verge of total collapse.

By interfering in Libya, we are just making things worse. Gadhafi is certainly a horrible dictator, but this was a fight for the Libyan people to sort out.

We promised the rest of the world that we were only going to be setting up a “no fly zone”. By violating the terms of the UN Security Council resolution, we have shown other nations that we cannot be trusted and by our actions we have increased tensions all over the globe.


In the capital, Gadhafi repeated claims that al-Qaeda is behind the uprising, telling a gathering of supporters that a “sleeper cell” launched the protests.
Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi said on Wednesday that Libya would open its doors to an international investigation and said the United Nations had taken decisions based on false reports.
“How can the United Nations take decisions based on 100 percent false news?” he said in a speech.

He also said Libya must investigate events stretching from al-Bayda to Benghazi, both cities in the east and which are now in rebel hands. He blamed “armed gangsters” for the unrest.

He claimed reports of deaths were exaggerated, suggesting only 150 people had died. 

Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi arrives in Rome on June 10, 2009.

Moammar Gadhafi’s declarations

Saif al-Islam Gadhafi

Gadhafi’s son: Libyans have not been bombed

Egyptians cross from Libya to Egypt through the Salloum land port gate, background,Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2011. An estimated 5,000 Egyptians have returned home from Libya by land, and about 10,000 more are waiting to cross the Libya-Egypt border, an Egyptian security official said.

Live update: Graeme Smith reports from inside Libya

Men hold up posters of Libya's leader Moammar Gadhafi among a crowd gathered to view a burning fuel truck in Tripoli. Authorities said the incident was a road traffic accident. The posters were distributed when members of the media turned up at the scene. - Men hold up posters of Libya's leader Moammar Gadhafi among a crowd gathered to view a burning fuel truck in Tripoli. Authorities said the incident was a road traffic accident. The posters were distributed when members of the media turned up at the scene. | Chris Helgren/Reuters

Libyan rebels call on foreign governments to launch air strikes


Benghazi, Libya— The Associated Press
Published Wednesday, Mar. 02, 2011 5:25AM EST
Gadhafi’s son vows full-scale military action against Libyan rebels
Rockets are fired from rebels positions in Sidra, about 10 kilometres west of Ras Lanuf. - Rockets are fired from rebels positions in Sidra, about 10 kilometres west of Ras Lanuf. | Marco Longari/AFP/Getty Images

Gadhafi’s son vows full-scale military action against Libyan rebels


Ras Lanouf, Libya- The Associated Press
Published Thursday, Mar. 10, 2011 6:36AM EST
Last updated Thursday, Mar. 10, 2011 8:22PM EST
Libya is preparing full-scale military action to crush its rebellion and will not surrender even if Western powers intervene in the conflict, Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s most prominent son said on Thursday.
Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.
(Scott Nelson/The New York Times) Hide caption

Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries

for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were

questioned, searched and later released.

A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011. Libya's rebellious city of Benghazi has filled a political void with a coalition which is cleaning up, providing food, building defences, reassuring foreign oil firms and telling Tripoli it believes in one nation. Weapons used in bloody clashes with pro-Gaddafi forces were collected and African mercenaries the coalition says the Libyan leader used to fire on protesters were in jail awaiting trial.

(Hussein Malla/AP) Hide caption

A popular committee member, right, escorts a suspected mercenary soldier from his cell at the court in Benghazi,

Libya, Friday Feb. 25, 2011. Anti-Gadhafi forces said they had captured the men in their successful fight for control

of Benghazi, the country’s second-largest city, where mercenaries are being blamed for killing scores of protesters.

A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011.

(Suhaib Sale/Reuters) Hide caption

A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi

February 25, 2011. Libya’s rebellious city of Benghazi has filled a political void with a coalition which is cleaning up, providing

food, building defences, reassuring foreign oil firms and telling Tripoli it believes in one nation. Weapons used in bloody

clashes with pro-Gaddafi forces were collected and African mercenaries the coalition says the Libyan leader used to fire

on protesters were in jail awaiting trial

Libyan militia members from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi escort a man who they suspect to be a mercenary from Chad, center, after detaining him at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.

(Suhaib Salem/Reuters) Hide caption

A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011.

Back to article Gadhafi’s son vows full-scale military action against Libyan rebels
(Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

Libyan militia members from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi escort a man who they suspect to be a mercenary

from Chad, center, after detaining him at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.

In this Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011 picture, a militia member, left, from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi guards people who they suspect are mercenaries from Chad after detaining them at a roadblock near Marj in eastern Libya.

(Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

In this Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011 picture, a militia member, left, from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi guards people who they suspect are mercenaries from Chad after detaining them at a roadblock near Marj in eastern Libya.

Back to article Gadhafi’s son vows full-scale military action against Libyan rebels

In pictures

Held and interrogated, do these men look like Gadhafi’s mercenaries?

Published Tuesday, Mar. 08, 2011 1:39AM EST
Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 08, 2011 2:24AM EST
Scenes of rebels interrogating black Africans are playing out across Libya, as the uprising fuels friend-or-foe fears that resuscitate long-dormant tensions between mostly Arab citizens and foreign workers

10 of 10

  • A spected mercenary from Chad keeps his hands on his head after being detained by Libyan militia member from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.
    (Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

    A spected mercenary from Chad keeps his hands on his head after being detained by Libyan militia member from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.

  • Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.
    (Goran Tomasevic/Reuters) Hide caption

    Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.

  • Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.
    (Goran Tomasevic/Reuters) Hide caption

    Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.

  • Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.
    (Scott Nelson/The New York Times) Hide caption

    Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.

  • Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.
    (Scott Nelson/The New York Times) Hide caption

    Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.

  • A popular committee member, right, excprts a suspected mercenary soldier from his cell at the court in Benghazi, Libya, Friday Feb. 25, 2011. Anti-Gadhafi forces said they had captured the men in their successful fight for control of Benghazi, the country's second-largest city, where mercenaries are being blamed for killing scores of protesters.
    (Hussein Malla/AP) Hide caption

    A popular committee member, right, excprts a suspected mercenary soldier from his cell at the court in Benghazi, Libya, Friday Feb. 25, 2011. Anti-Gadhafi forces said they had captured the men in their successful fight for control of Benghazi, the country’s second-largest city, where mercenaries are being blamed for killing scores of protesters.

  • A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011. Libya's rebellious city of Benghazi has filled a political void with a coalition which is cleaning up, providing food, building defences, reassuring foreign oil firms and telling Tripoli it believes in one nation. Weapons used in bloody clashes with pro-Gaddafi forces were collected and African mercenaries the coalition says the Libyan leader used to fire on protesters were in jail awaiting trial.
    (Suhaib Sale/Reuters) Hide caption

    A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011. Libya’s rebellious city of Benghazi has filled a political void with a coalition which is cleaning up, providing food, building defences, reassuring foreign oil firms and telling Tripoli it believes in one nation. Weapons used in bloody clashes with pro-Gaddafi forces were collected and African mercenaries the coalition says the Libyan leader used to fire on protesters were in jail awaiting trial.

  • A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011.
    (Suhaib Salem/Reuters) Hide caption

    A suspected African mercenary sits in a room within a courthouse as he is held by anti-government protesters in Benghazi February 25, 2011.

  • Libyan militia members from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi escort a man who they suspect to be a mercenary from Chad, center, after detaining him at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.
    (Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

    Libyan militia members from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi escort a man who they suspect to be a mercenary from Chad, center, after detaining him at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.

  • In this Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011 picture, a militia member, left, from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi guards people who they suspect are mercenaries from Chad after detaining them at a roadblock near Marj in eastern Libya.
    (Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

    In this Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011 picture, a militia member, left, from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi guards people who they suspect are mercenaries from Chad after detaining them at a roadblock near Marj in eastern Libya.

  • A spected mercenary from Chad keeps his hands on his head after being detained by Libyan militia member from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.
    (Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

    A spected mercenary from Chad keeps his hands on his head after being detained by Libyan militia member from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.

(Kevin Frayer/AP) Hide caption

A spected mercenary from Chad keeps his hands on his head after being detained by Libyan militia member from the forces against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi at a roadbloack near Marj in eastern Libya, Sunday, Feb. 27, 2011.

“It’s time for liberation. It’s time for action. We are moving now,” Saif al-Islam Gadhafi said in an interview.

Asked if the government was preparing to step up its military campaign, he said: “Time is out now. It’s time for action … We gave them two weeks (for negotiations).”

Speaking in unusually tough language, the London-educated younger Gadhafi said Libya would defeat the rebels, even if Western powers intervened.

“We will never ever give up. We will never ever surrender. This is our country. We fight here in Libya,” said Saif al-Islam, who has been described as the Western-friendly face of Libya.

“The Libyan people, we will never ever welcome NATO, we will never ever welcome Americans here. Libya is not a piece of cake.”

Saif al-Islam described rebels determined to end Gadhafi’s 41-year rule as terrorists and armed gangsters and said thousands of Libyans had voluntered to fight them.

“Now it’s too late for them. We are so united, we are so strong. And Libya will be free and peaceful soon,” said Saif al-Islam at a Tripoli compound designed in the shape of a luxury tent, as Gadhafi supporters shouted defiant slogans in the background.

Libya’s opposition battled for military and diplomatic advantage against Col. Gadhafi’s regime on Thursday, winning official recognition from France but losing ground to government forces outside a strategically vital oil port.

Mr. Gadhafi’s forces advanced on the port of Ras Lanouf, hitting buildings with tank shells and driving lightly armed opposition fighters back into the city.

Shells fell near a hospital in the city and hit a series of residential buildings as Mr. Gadhafi’s tanks moved further along Libya’s main Mediterranean coastal road than they have been since the rebels seized most of the country’s east.

An opposition fighter with a Kalashnikov rifle said he had fled the frontline outside Ras Lanouf to move deeper into the rebel-controlled territory.

“We don’t have any heavy weapons,” he said. “There are people with heavier weapons.”

Another opposition fighter in civilian clothes stood at a checkpoint inside the city and called for those with heavy weapons to head to the front.

France became the first country to formally recognize the rebels’ newly created Interim Governing Council, saying it planned to exchange ambassadors after President Nicolas Sarkozy met with two representatives of the group based in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi.

“It breaks the ice,” said Mustafa Gheriani, an opposition spokesman. “We expect Italy to do it, and we expect England to do it.”

Germany said it froze billions in assets of the Libyan Central Bank and other state-run agencies. The U.S., UK, Switzerland, Austria and other countries have also frozen Mr. Gadhafi’s assets.

“The brutal suppression of the Libyan freedom movement can now no longer be financed from funds that are in German banks,” Economy Minister Rainer Bruederle said.

Both sides in Libya are lobbying for support from Western countries as their leaders debate whether to protect the rebels from Mr. Gadhafi’s air force by putting a no-fly zone over some or all of the country. Britain and France have backed the rebels’ calls for a no-fly zone, but the Obama adminstration has expressed deep reservations about involvement in another conflict in the greater Middle East.

NATO said it had started round-the-clock surveillance of the air space over Libya, and British Foreign Secretary William Hague said a meeting of EU foreign ministers would discuss how to isolate the regime.

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Thursday any NATO military action in Libya would have to be based on there being a demonstrable need and a clear mandate and with support in the region.

“Any operation we undertake needs to respect three key principles: firstly there has to be demonstrable need for NATO action, secondly there has to be a clear legal basis, and thirdly there has to be firm regional support,” he said, as NATO defence ministers met.

The Libyan government tried to stave off tough action, sending envoys to Egypt, Portugal and Greece.

The international Red Cross said dozens of civilians have been wounded or killed in recent days in grueling battles between Mr. Gadhafi’s army and the opposition movement trying to oust him.

The fighting intensified on the main front line between the Mediterranean oil port of Ras Lanouf and the city of Bin Jawwad, where the rebels appeared to be have established better supply lines bringing heavy weapons like multiple-rocket launcher trucks and small tanks to the battle.

Fighting between rebels and forces loyal to Moammar Gadhafi around Ras Lanouf set two oil installations ablaze Wednesday and inflicted yet more damage on Libya’s crippled energy industry.

A rebel source in eastern Libya said on Thursday that forces loyal Mr. Gadhafi were firing rockets from offshore oil tankers at rebel positions onshore at the oil port of Ras Lanuf.

“I see them with my own eyes. The oil tankers are rocketing the town,” Salem Magrebi told Reuters by telephone. “Planes are also bombing and rockets are being launched from the land.”

Mr. Magrebi said he was speaking from a residential section of the Libyan port, near a petroleum company building.

“I have seen several people lying dead in the street,” he said.

In the west, Mr. Gadhafi claimed victory in recapturing Zawiya, the city closest to the capital that had fallen into opposition hands. Western journalists based in Tripoli were taken late Wednesday to a stadium on the outskirts of Zawiya that was filled with Mr. Gadhafi loyalists waving green flags and launching fireworks. Libyan TV cameras filmed the celebrations as food, drinks and cooking oil were distributed.

Government escorts refused journalists’ requests to visit the city’s main square.; phone lines there have not been working during a deadly, six-day siege.

Red Cross President Jakob Kellenberger said local doctors over the past few days saw a sharp increase in casualties arriving at hospitals in Ajdabiya, in the rebel-held east, and Misrata, in government territory.

Both places saw heavy fighting and air strikes, he said.

Mr. Kellenberger said 40 patients were treated for serious injuries in Misrata and 22 dead were taken there.

He said the Red Cross surgical team in Ajdabiya operated on 55 wounded over the past week and “civilians are bearing the brunt of the violence.”

He said the aid organization is cut off from access in western areas including Tripoli but believes those are “even more severely affected by the fighting” than eastern rebel-held territories.

Two foreign correspondents have been missing since Sunday after travelling in the direction of Zawiya, their newspapers reported.

Britain’s Guardian newspaper said veteran correspondent Ghaith Abdul-Ahad was last in touch through a third party Sunday from the outskirts of the city. He was travelling with Paris correspondent Andrei Netto of Brazilian newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo, which said that until Sunday it had been receiving what it characterized as “indirect information” indicating Netto was safe.

The Brazilian newspaper said it received information suggesting Mr. Netto had been taken prisoner by Libyan government forces, and that a Libyan official said the information was “probably correct.”

Middle East Editor Ian Black said the Guardian has been in contact with Libyan government officials in Tripoli and London and asked them to urgently help in the search for Abdul-Ahad and to establish if he is in the custody of the authorities.

Mr. Netto entered Libya on Feb. 19 from the border with Tunisia and worked his way toward Zawiya, his newspaper said.

Brazil’s government, its embassy in Libya, the Red Cross and other groups are trying to find out more about Mr. Netto and to determine he is safe, the paper said.

The British Broadcasting Corp. staff said three of its staff were detained, beaten and subjected to mock executions by pro-regime soldiers in Libya while attempting to reach the western city of Zawiya.

The news organization said the crew, members of a BBC Arabic team, were detained on Monday by Moammar Gadhafi loyalists at a check point about 10 kilometres south of Zawiya.

Chris Cobb-Smith, a British journalist and part of the crew, said the group were moved between several locations, in some cases alongside civilian captives who had visible injuries from heavy beatings.

With files from Reuters

A popular committee member, right, excprts a suspected mercenary soldier from his cell at the court in Benghazi, Libya, Friday Feb. 25, 2011. Anti-Gadhafi forces said they had captured the men in their successful fight for control of Benghazi, the country's second-largest city, where mercenaries are being blamed for killing scores of protesters.

Held and interrogated, do these men look like Gadhafi’s mercenaries?

Back to article Gadhafi’s son vows full-scale military action against Libyan rebels

In pictures

Held and interrogated, do these men look like Gadhafi’s mercenaries?

Published Tuesday, Mar. 08, 2011 1:39AM EST
Last updated Tuesday, Mar. 08, 2011 2:24AM EST
Scenes of rebels interrogating black Africans are playing out across Libya, as the uprising fuels friend-or-foe fears that resuscitate long-dormant tensions between mostly Arab citizens and foreign workers
Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.
Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar
Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.
(Goran Tomasevic/Reuters) Hide caption

Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.

3 of 10    Western Libya 27 February 2011

  • A popular committee member, right, excprts a suspected mercenary soldier from his cell at the court in Benghazi, Libya, Friday Feb. 25, 2011. Anti-Gadhafi forces said they had captured the men in their successful fight for control of Benghazi, the country's second-largest city, where mercenaries are being blamed for killing scores of protesters.(Goran Tomasevic/Reuters) Hide caption

    Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.

  • Rebels hold a young man at gunpoint, who they accuse of being a loyalist to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, between the towns of Brega and Ras Lanuf, March 3, 2011.(Scott Nelson/The New York Times) Hide caption

    Libyan opposition rebels question a group of men from sub-Sahran Africa suspected of fighting as mercenaries for Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi at the edge of Ajdabiya, Libya, on March 3, 2011. The men were questioned, searched and later released.

    Today 7:35 PM Putin Tells Those Responsible For Civilian Casualities To Pray

    Reuters reports on Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s comments on Libya:

    [Putin] said on Tuesday that all those responsible for civilian casualties in Libya should pray for the salvation of their own souls.

    Putin urges all responsible for Libya deaths to pray

    Russia's Prime Minister Vladimir Putin listens to Governor of Sakhalin Region Alexander Khoroshavin, with a portrait of President Dmitry Medvedev in the background, during their meeting in the Far Eastern city of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk March 19, 2011. REUTERS/Alexsey Druginyn/RIA Novosti/Pool

    Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin listens to Governor of Sakhalin Region Alexander Khoroshavin, with a portrait of President
    Dmitry Medvedev
    in the background, during their meeting in the Far Eastern city of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk 19 March 2011.

    Credit: Reuters/Alexsey Druginyn/RIA Novosti/Pool

    VOTKINSK, Russia | Mon 21 Mar 2011 8:24am EDT

    VOTKINSK, Russia (Reuters) – Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin Monday likened the U.N. Security Council resolution supporting
    military action in Libya to medieval calls for crusades.

    Putin, in the first major remarks from a Russian leader since a coalition of Western countries began air strikes in Libya, said that Muammar
    Gaddafi’s government did not justify military intervention.

    “The resolution is defective and flawed,” Putin told workers at a Russian ballistic missile factory. “It allows everything. It resembles medieval calls for

    Putin said that interference in other countries’ internal affairs has become a trend in U.S. foreign policy and that the events in Libya indicated that Russia
    should strengthen its own defense capabilities.

    Russia, a veto-wielding permanent Security Council member, abstained from the vote Thursday in which the council authorized a no-fly zone over Libya
    and “all necessary measures” against Gaddafi’s forces.

    (Reporting by Gleb Bryanski; writing by Steve Gutterman; editing by Guy Faulconbridge)

    BRDO PRI KRANJU, Slovenia | Tue 22 Mar 2011 2:36pm EDT

    (Reporting by Gleb Bryanski; Writing by Steve Gutterman; Editing by Alexei Anishchuk and Thomas Grove)

    By Michael Georgy

    TRIPOLI | Tue 22 Mar 2011 2:59pm EDT

    TRIPOLI (Reuters) – Western forces are more interested in helping rebels advance than protecting civilians and they have made it clear they intend to assassinate
    Muammar Gaddafi, Libya‘s deputy foreign minister said Tuesday.

    “That’s the problem now we are seeing, the coalition forces they are part of the war against the legitimate government,” Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled
    told Reuters in an interview, adding that coalition forces were even striking soldiers in their barracks.
    It was “clear” from a strike that damaged a building in Gaddafi’s Tripoli headquarters that Western forces want to assassinate the Libyan leader, despite the officially stated
    position that he was not a target, Kaim said.
    Kaim said the Libyan army was not conducting any battle operations and was working to help bring life back to normal to cities hit by fighting.
    He accused Western forces of siding with rebels.
    “They are helping one party against the other which is illegal,” he said.
    “They are using air strikes to attack our troops even the stationary ones, even ones staying in their military barracks … I know the strategy is to give them the upper hand but I am sure that will not happen.”
    Kaim called on all sides to stop the fighting and repeated a plea for international observers to travel to Libya to see if the government was observing a ceasefire called last week.
    Libya hopes powerful tribal leaders will help bring peace, said Kaim.
    “This is the official policy of the government to encourage the dialogue and to have the dialogue start as soon as possible,” he said.(Reporting by Michael Georgy)

    There just came in the report that young Khamis Gadhafi has been killed at the Gadhafi home residence/compound in Tripoli by an English ICBM. He died at the hospital where he was rushed to.

    Shooting first – and hitting the people they came to protect
    22 Tuesday March 2011
    6:55 pm
    Lindsey Hilsum
    It was the sound of aircraft circling which brought the villagers out just after midnight. Then suddenly they saw a plane dropping from the sky.
    “I saw it fall down by itself, and after hitting the ground it exploded,” said Mohammed Braik, the farmer in whose field the American F15 Strike Eagle came down. “It caught fire but
    there was no shooting.”
    By the time we arrived this morning, people were climbing all over the wreckage – there’s a perilous disregard for basic safety here, which means that rebel fighetrs constantly shoot
    in the air, and no-one thinks twice about prodding and poking an unexploded rocket from a crashed warplane.
    “After the plane crashed, we moved to the site. We searched for the pilots, and found the parachutes and ejection seats,” said Colonel Omar Sayid, of the Military Police. Then they
    found one of the pilots.I wonder what that pilot thought was going on. A US pilot ejecting during such a mission would be prepared for anyone they encounter to be hostile. Yet I
    suspect that a mob descended on him shouting: “Welcome, welcome Libya“, because
    that’s always the first phrase you hear in the rebel-held east.
    Pilot number one, who was scarcely injured, was taken to the military authorities in Benghazi from where he was quickly handed over to the Americans. But a rescue mission was
    mounted for pilot number two, and this is where what could have been comic turned sour. Osprey aircraft came in, all guns blazing, assuming – as the American military tends to do –
    that this was hostile territory.
    We are disturbed about the shooting because if they’d given us a chance we would have handed over both pilots,” said Colonel Sayid. “This shooting created panic.”
    Worse than that, several bystanders were injured, amongst them 43-year-old Hamad Abdul Ati. We found him in Jala hospital in Benghazi, with multiple shrapnel and bullet wounds,
    and a broken arm. He didn’t understand why the Americans had been so aggressive in their rescue mission.
    “We consider that whoever is shot down or a prisoner of war, we should save him and hand him over,” he told me from his hospital bed. “But another plane shot at me and Hamdy
    my son. I have shrapnel in my hand.”
    Hospital staff told us that 20-year-old Hamdy’s injuries were far worse, and he was undergoing an operation to amputate part of one leg.
    Yet Hamad told me he wasn’t angry, just puzzled.
    “The whole eastern area is under the revolution, it’s well known. Why did this happen? My car is destroyed, my home is damaged,” he said, adding: “We would have just picked the
    second pilot up and put him wherever he wanted in a safe place. Even the other one, we had a celebration for him.”
    That’s what’s heart-breaking about the incident. The villagers did indeed shout: “Welcome, welcome Libya” and try to offer hospitality and gratitude to their American friends.
    But because the American military works on the assumption that anyone around could be hostile, it may be why it all went horribly wrong. Which is how the US airforce ended up
    injuring some of the Libyan civilians it’s supposedly here to save.

    from FIVE YEARS AGO:

    Russia: Putin’s Faith Raises Questions

    05 April 2007
    By Chloe Arnold
    Putin in Jordan (ITAR-TASS)

    Putin in Jordan (ITAR-TASS)

    MOSCOW, April 6, 2007 (RFE/RL) — Recent television images of Russian President Vladimir Putin have shown him lighting candles at the Vatican and praying on the
    edge of the Jordan River.
    The president has never disguised his Russian Orthodox beliefs, but are they becoming more conspicuous?
    Since coming to power, the Russian president has not tried to conceal his Orthodox faith. But, according to some, he was not always religious.
    Father Igor Vyzhanov, a spokesman for the department of external church relations at the Moscow Patriarchate, says Putin’s views on religion have changed.
    “I heard about a miracle with a small cross which he had experienced, and according to which he started believing,” Vyzhanov says.

    ‘As for the fact that the president goes to church at Easter, I think this is his personal matter, too.’
    Aleksandr Verkhovsky, the director of the Sova Information and Analysis Center, which monitors religious discrimination in Russia, says the president is undoubtedly
    a fervent believer.
    “Frankly speaking, I don’t see any dynamics [indicating his faith is becoming more intense]. On the contrary, I think it is less than during the first two years of his presidency.
    Then, it was really noticeable,” Verkhovsky says.
    “But at some point I think he was forced, or he took the decision, to distance himself a little from the church leadership. Because everyone had the impression that he
    was a man interested in the church, and the church leadership hoped that this would mean they would have very close relations. But, in fact, no one intended to propose
    close relationships, because that was not something the government needed.”

    Separation Of Church And State
    The Russian Constitution asserts that the church and the state must be entirely separate. Traditionally, Russia has had four official religions — Russian Orthodoxy,
    Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism. But there are fears that Putin’s obvious Orthodox faith means he favors one religion over the others.
    This week, the Russian government announced it would hand back land that was seized from the Russian Orthodox church after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.
    Aleksei Malashenko, an expert in religious affairs at the Carnegie Moscow Center, says the Orthodox Church isn’t likely to become Russia’s only official religion.
    “But at the same time, we have to recognize that the Russian Orthodox Church occupies a special position, and it has special relations with [the] state, and their
    ambitions are mostly political ambitions. They want to participate in the elaboration of the Russian way of development,” Malashenko says.
    A recent example of this was the decision made by schools in several regions of the country to introduce compulsory courses on Orthodox Christian culture.
    In response, the Council of Muftis of Russia raised its concerns about the growing influence of the Russian Orthodox Church, and announced it would pressure
    the government to expand the instruction of Muslim culture beyond the Muslim republics in the North Caucasus to other regions with large Muslim communities.
    Orthodox In Name
    The Sova Center’s Verkhovsky says there are two reasons the Russian Orthodox Church seems to have priority over other faiths in Russia.
    “Firstly, it’s connected to the traditions of the Russian statehood, which perceives itself, roughly speaking, as the heir to the Principality of Moscow
    and the Russian Empire, and not as an amalgam of the multicultured citizens that make up Russia today,” Verkhovsky says.

    Officially church and state are separate in Russia

    Officially church and state are separate in Russia

    “On the other hand, the Orthodox faith is, to some degree anyway, the religion of the majority of our citizens who called themselves Orthodox, even though they don’t entirely know
    what this means. Some don’t even believe in God, but they call themselves Orthodox Christians, and so the church indirectly speaks for them.”
    But Father Yakov Krotov, a religious commentator, is more skeptical. He believes the government and the president give preferentiality to the Orthodox Church over other faiths.
    “Putin has shown he is a believer, an Orthodox Christian, but when it comes to politics, he is a politician. That’s to say that he doesn’t support the Orthodox Church as a whole, he
    supports those Orthodox believers who were brought up by the Kremlin nomenclature over the past 60 years,” Krotov says.
    “He doesn’t even support the Orthodox faith in particular, he supports those aspects that are part of the religious elite. That’s to say he suppresses one group of Muslims, and supports
    another, he suppresses one group of Jews and supports another. It’s an old Soviet trick: selection. It’s a similar thing to what Hitler did.”
    But Father Vyzhanov doesn’t see anything as sinister in Putin’s faith: “As for the fact that the president goes to church at Easter, I think this is his personal matter, too. For example,
    when the president of the United States shows his religiosity, or points out to his church his confession, no one sees any problem in this. The presidents are human beings, too.”
    There has been speculation that Putin’s recent trip to the Vatican, to meet Pope Benedict XVI, might pave the way for an unprecedented meeting between the leaders of the
    Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic faiths — an indication, Vyzhanov says, that Putin welcomes and supports all denominations.
    The president’s press service says it will not disclose Putin’s plans for Easter Sunday, but it is likely he will mark the occasion — as he has for many years — by attending the service at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in central Moscow.

  • ____________________________________________________________________________

  • The West’s Obscene Demonization of Gaddafi

    Wed, 06/15/2011 – 00:48 — Glen Ford

    A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford

    The vilification campaign waged by the West against Moammar Gaddfi is just the latest chapter in a “massive U.S. psychological assault, a vast disinformation operation in which the corporate media act as megaphones for government liars.” In reality, there is no evidence for allegations that Gaddafi ordered his soldiers to rape hundreds of women, but “that does not seem to matter to a corporate media that are bent on glorifying the Benghazi-based rebels.”

skip navigation
Movie Poster Planning crisis in …
Jui 19, 2011 – 12:53
vues: 34

<input id=”title_12230143″ type=”hidden” name=”title” value=”Planning crisis in Libya

” /><input id=”createdby_12230143″ type=”hidden” name=”createdby” value=”pluskvamperfekat” />


132 thoughts on “GADHAFI, A teacher/father exhorts to his fellow countrymen

  1. A strange normalcy inside Tripoli
    NBC News producer Yonatan Pomrenze
    NBC News producer Yonatan Pomrenze has been reporting from Tripoli since the weekend. He was part of the group of foreign journalists allowed into the country by Moamar Gadhafi’s government ostensibly to show the government’s side of the story. In a phone interview from Tripoli, he reported on what is going on in the embattled capital.
    What is the scene like in Tripoli? Is it like a war zone? Are the shops shuttered?
    Since we arrived, most of the city actually looks more open. The first day when we drove around, we saw very few people on the streets and not even that many cars. Most people who we did see were lined up outside banks, trying to take out money. Or outside electronic stores, adding money to their cell phone cards.
    Libyan anti-government protesters wave their old national flag during a rally the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi on Monday.Click on the photo above to see a slideshow of the ongoing violence in Libya.
    But during the past two days, we’ve seen more cars out and more people out – but still very long lines at the banks.
    In the parts of the city we’ve seen, it feels tense, but calm. You don’t see a war zone happening.
    Can you see evidence of violence on the streets?
    Not in the center of Tripoli. Driving around the center, you don’t see it. We did see a few areas where we saw freshly painted walls – which some people said might have been anti-Gadhafi graffiti that had been painted over. But driving around the city center, we were lead to believe it is still very well under Gadhafi control. You don’t see at a lot of evidence of violence. Even the protests that happened at the beginning of the unrest, they have had time to fix or paint over anything that may have happened back then. The center is well under Gadhafi’s control.
    What is interesting is how close areas of the anti-Gadhafi movement are to Tripoli. For instance, Zawiyah, which is only 30 miles west of Tripoli, is held by opposition forces.
    How were you allowed into Tripoli?
    When the government decided they wanted to allow journalists in, we were in Tunisia, near the Libyan border, and were told that our names were on the approved list for journalists. We rushed to Tunis to catch the plane out and were met by government officials when we arrived in Tripoli. We were given visas, they arranged cars for us, gave us government minders, and they took us out of the airport.
    The first hotel we went to was bizarre – it was like a ghost town. It’s a huge towering hotel, with a cavernous lobby and when we walked in there was almost no one in there. Most foreign staff had left, trying to get back to their home countries. Only the Libyan staff remained and a lot of them are living in the hotel. Besides for that, there was almost no one in the hotel.
    Eventually we moved to the main hotel where most of the journalists are staying.
    What about the freedom of movement for reporters? Do you have a government minder with you all the time?
    Basically, yes. But it’s very chaotic, they don’t really have a central plan for us. Every day we sort of congregate in the lobby of the hotel. They tell us what they plan on showing you that day – but obviously what they think is important is not always what we want to see. So there is a back and forth. Then they have an organized convoy go out. On the side, you can try to grab a minder and a vehicle to go off somewhere else.
    But the problem is that we really need the minders to get around. There are checkpoints as soon as you try to go outside the city-center that are controlled by pro-Gadhafi forces – so it’s risky to go through the checkpoints without a government minder. On our drive to Zawiyah, we went through probably five or six checkpoints. Since we had the government minders with us, it gave us more freedom and less risk, but then we also have to take everything with a grain of salt because of what they will show you and what they won’t show you.
    But the minders have been saying, “We are here and want to show you everything.” And the trip to Zawiyah was the most surreal thing. We were sure we were being brought there so they could show us that there are no problems in Zawiyah – that the government really was in control – but what we saw was the exact opposite. We saw how the anti-Gadhafi movement was in charge in this area.
    Before we reached the center of town, we stopped near a roadblock and all of a sudden our minders said, “OK, there are guys with guns up there, you go up there. We’ve spoken to them and told them you are press – so it’s OK.” We only realized as we got closer that it was the opposition.
    As we started to walk toward them, we heard shots ring out. So a few of us, myself included, jumped for cover. Then some of the local people said, “No, no, no – these are welcoming shots! We are trying to welcome you!” I told them I prefer a handshake, but…
    The protesters were very happy to see foreign press. Everyone rushed up and was eager to tell us they had video of the violence here, video of when Gadhafi forces attacked them there. Some 60-year-old man dressed in very traditional garb took out his cell phone and kept saying to me “Bluetooth, Bluetooth” because he wanted to transmit the video to my phone. We were actually able to use the video in our Nightly News spot Sunday night. They very much wanted to get the word out about the violence against their protests and they wanted to try to facilitate it as much as they could.
    Then we crossed the no-man’s land of the roadblock back to our minders and they took us off to a pro-Gadhafi protest. So it was very bizarre to have them facilitate that.
    But they said it was because we want you to see the truth, we want you to see both sides.
    One minder said to us, “Listen, I’m neutral. I speak English and someone asked me to help out. So I came to help out. I want you to see the truth and this is the truth and the pro-Gadhafi protest is the truth. So we want you to see everything.”
    Have you seen or met any pro-Gadhafi supporters? Were they paid by the government?
    The pro-Gadhafi protests that we have seen did seem much more organized. There were people singing songs and women and children. They clearly had a lot of energy because when we left, they also got into cars and followed us for a couple miles – honking, ten people packed into a car and sitting on top of the car. So they clearly had a lot of enthusiasm. I didn’t get an opportunity to ask them if they were paid or not.
    But a colleague of mine was at another pro-Gadhafi protest and he was talking to one person who was saying all these amazing things about Gadhafi. Then at the end of the interview, the reporter asked him, “were you paid?” The person replied with a big smile, “Yes, I was paid to say this.”
    What is the situation with people trying to leave Tripoli?
    When we landed at the airport, we could see how chaotic the place had been. On the ramps as you walk into the airport, there was garbage everywhere.
    As we walked in, we passed one of the last U.K. chartered flights on its way out. Then once we came out of the airport, there was just a sea of people trying to get out. We later heard reports that there were up to 30,000 people trying to leave. It looked mostly like Asians and other North Africans – Libyans, Egyptians, mostly probably contract workers trying to get out. There were people waiting with a luggage cart, as if they are on line, but there were a thousand people in front of them, a thousand people to the their left and right and they had no place to go.
    Our government minder, I guess he wanted to put some sort of positive spin on it, said “we are bringing them free water.”

      • Albert Preziosi (25 July 1915 – 28 July 1943) was a Free French air officer and war hero, and rumored to be the father of Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi.
        Preziosi was born in Vezzani, on the island of Corsica. During World War II, he joined the Free French forces as an air officer. He first fought with General Leclerc in North Africa. He was shot down in the summer of 1942 and declared missing, but survived, and was taken in by a Libyan family. He stayed for a month before returning. He was later transferred to Russia, where, flying in the Normandie-Niemen squadron, he was killed after his plane was shot down in 1943. He is commemorated by a plaque in Vezzani, and his story is popular among locals.[citation needed]
        It is alleged that Preziosi fathered al-Gaddafi after an affair with a Libyan woman in late 1941,[citation needed] around the time Gaddafi was conceived. Preziosi himself was stationed in Libya at that time. Preziosi’s colleagues confirmed that he had indeed fathered a child with a Libyan woman, and that the child was looked after by the woman’s uncle and later studied overseas, and that the affair was kept quiet. It has also been noted that in his youth, Gaddafi largely resembled Albert. Albert’s brother François claimed that in the 1970s, his mother shouted “Look, it’s Albert”, after the television showed Gaddafi.

    • JANA, a traitor

      WHAT IS THIS? TOTALLY OPERATED OUTSIDE OF LIBYA JANA is a Communist organisation, operated out of Siberia with the sole intent of destroying the Jamahiriya and replacing it with a COMMUNIST STATE completely out of line the the ORIGINAL “GREEN BOOK” as outlined by Moammar Gadhafi.——————————————————————————–
      The Green Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms —Human Rights for the 3rd Millenium——————————————————————————–
      Inside Libya,
      cut off from the world, on 12th June 1988, 23 years ago today,
      people’s power reached what we as
      international observers and members of
      the International Scientific Committee of the World Centre for the Studies and Researches on The Green Book and The Third Universal Theory consider to be a highpoint of people’s power in Libya: the proclamation of the Great Green Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms in the Era of the Masses.
      The movement of Libyan revolutionary committees is lead by Muammar Qaddafi, cut off from the international revolutionary committees movement since many years while he was
      held prisoner in Libya, escaping for a moment before being imprisoned again
      after making the historic United Nations speech which his minders had not expected him to make, and which he had to scribble out on some papers that he had concealed from them.
      One needs only look at the face of Musa Kusa in the chamber, and Dr Ali Abdussalam Treiki behind him, to know their shock and dismay that Muammar spoke the truth and not what they had agreed he was allowed to say.

      Libyan RCM Problems
      —Infiltrated by opportunists and other failures?
      Some reports say the Libyan RCM was disbanded by his son Sayf Al Islam in recent years
      whilst foreign agents were planted into key positions over the heads of the people, those who are now behind the war on Libya.
      The movement of the “new stray dogs”, which lead to
      the current crisis in Libya,
      the so-called Libyan Revolutionary Committees Movement was coordinated by some joker with a permanent smile who died of AIDS some years ago unnoticed by the world.
      Its pathetic website publishes the Great Green Charter on Human Rights and Freedoms – or does it. No,*
      it publishes a mix of two entirely different documents and thus no wonder why only a handful of people in the world took up the wonderful charter: it replaced the actual preamble of the proclamation of the Great Green Charter, which evidences its formation by a million voices gathered in people’s conferences discussing human rights.
      Founded on a financial cost of $700,000 donated by those who work tirelessly at the Mathaba News Agency, it’s was given
      a budget donated by Sayf Al Islam of $2 million to expand its services, which never arrived
      , because
      Africa’s biggest kleptomaniac, a friend of Sayf and married to the Al Qaddafi family, one Habib Kagimu
      conspired to defraud Libya of the $2 million which was siphoned off to America.
      In lieu of the correct document with its pre-amble of 12th June 1988, it has the speech of Muammar Qaddafi on seizing power on 1st September 1969, without any explanation as to the two got mixed up. See the image at the top of this article, or the page on the shameful attempt at a website by
      the Libyan Revolutionary Committees Movement, which has remained stagnant for years.
      If the Libyan RCM was in fact closed by Sayf, one man managed to close a hopeless movement, good riddance. But it should have been replaced by a real and new E-volutionary Committees Movement which would have ensured an entire Libyan city of a million people would not have been lost to a handful of rats armed with knives.
      The indestructable website of the worldwide (r)evolutionary committees movement, and the International Green Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms,
      proclaimed 11 years ago on June 12th, 1999
      , by that handful of people who noticed the proclamation as it happened, on the very day in 1988, and who since then worked to further these rights around the world.
      That handful of people is gathering again today, to announce the formation of Green Charter International in order
      to ensure that the rights and freedoms of the Green Charter are revived within Libya and also around the world.
      Time will now tell rapidly whether those in Libya who claimed all along to be with these rights and freedoms are actually with us and were simply isolated by the rotten apples that surrounded them, and
      which we are told are now gone.
      The true Jamahiri News Agency, the Mathaba News Agency, which includes social media networks, news network, forums, email servers, the Green Charter and The Green Book, which operates on zero budgets: nothing but sacrifice, but is
      operated entirely outside Libya without a single Libyan being involved.
      Libya already lost $100 billion destined to African independence and is now being decimated by the most illegal immoral of wars which is aimed at the entire African continent. NATO will never get a victory, but at a huge cost to Libya: most of Libya will be destroyed.
      Libya must immediately free up a few million of its financial reserves, and put those into building upon the people’s news network, which is run by volunteers around the world, in order to strengthen its voice, allow for offices and salaried staff, and an expanded team of technicians, so that this already powerful and under-utilized platform can reach millions more than the current 3 million monthly readers.
      Then, we will see the world start to change, as all other news agencies and so-called independents such as Democracy Now! and Huffington Post, both of which and many more besides that we have known for the past decade to be neo-liberal soft-zionist pseudo-left publications, are as far away from the Third Universal Theory as the Pope is to giving birth to twins.
      Beware too of those who recently suddenly discovered The Green Book, but are not involved with its loudest most consistent and tireless voice, Mathaba, and are therefore merely chasing after money. When the Gaddafi family comes out into the light, along with other principled Libyans, funds must be allocated only to those who can prove at least one decade of dedication and real works that are already in place, and would multiply many fold.
      There is a very wise analogy that we will give here: If you water a plant that is young, and has huge potential and is already growing nicely on its own but would grow 100 times its size in a few weeks if it received some water, then water it. If you see a seed on barren land, don’t water it, as it’ll sprout and die immediately. If you see a grown tree that is offering shade, but is dying from lack of water, water it. This is the type of logic which appears to have been missing by those who manage Libyan funds.
      They prefer to water seeds on barren land: witness the many recent years and now the betrayal.
      Since 1980 as those closest to the ideology the Third Universal Theory we have had insurmountable difficulties in telling the world the truth. The greatest obstacle to this, was a name on the cover of The Green Book.
      Surrounded by opportunists and reactionaries, the leader of the revolutionary committees was unable to convey his message. All efforts by the pure and devoted disciples of truth were made worthless by the inability to show match between theory and practice.
      The entire problem was the contradiction between the pure theory and the actual practice in the state of Libya, which was the world’s first Jamahiriya, self-governing masses society based upon direct participatory democracy.
      *: the irresponsible activities of “the new stray dogs” who destroyed the Third Universal Theory in Libya in the name of revolution…
      It is worth mentioning in this context, that the term “stray dog” was given by the Libyan Revolutionary Committee members to all those who opposed the revolution…
      It was the International Revolutionary Committee Movement which coined the term “New Stray Dogs” to explain the reactionary elements INSIDE the Libyan RCM…
      The IRCM saved the reputation of Libya in the eyes of Africans in the wake of the massacres of Africans in Libya, by circulating an article called “The New Stray Dogs” which is still available on Mathaba, while the RCM stood by in silence for weeks without pronouncing on the horrific attack on the Revolution…
      This week, we shall expose and name JANA “Jamahiriya Arab News Agency” as contenders for the description “New Stray Dogs” or “Enemies of the Revolution” for the following reasons…
      1. JANA has remained in a fossilised state of
      Marxist bureaucracy and uses outdated terms. The very name Jamahiriya Arab News Agency shows how she remains in a past era of communism. The rest of Libya has joined the African fold, the true motherland, but not so JANA remains Arab.
      . JANA has consistently for the past 30 years painted a FALSE picture of Libya to the outside world of being a dictatorship run by one man Muammar Qadhafi.
      JANA reports every telephone call between Muammar and any other individual without the contents of the private conversation, nor when such conversation is relevant to other than the leader and his telephone partner.
      3. JANA has thrown Libya into turmoil time and again in relation to the outside world by
      painting a picture that Libya is not a people’s Jamahiriya but a Stalinist bureaucracy
      by never reporting names of Secretaries of People’s Committees nor the workings of
      the popular conferences and direct democracy
      , and by illogical and verbal garbage which appears to come from a different planet.
      4. Most recently in yet another completely contradictory and illogical article, JANA implied that Libyan Businessmen are not Libyans,
      the Libyan Revolution has been dissolved or the State and Revolution have suddenly merged as one, and similar confusion, contradiction and verbal acrobatics all in the space of one short article.
      5. The faithful international movement of revolutionary committees, the international green march, and the disciples of the Third Universal Theory worldwide are unable to gain anything of value from
      JANA bulletins except to either draw the conclusion that Libya is not a Jamahiriya, or that JANA is reporting from somewhere in Siberia.
      6. JANA offices abroad are full of corruption, scandals and paranoid control freaks who abuse non-Libyan staff, exploit them
      in contradiction to all the articles of the Green Charter and the dicta of the Green Book
      . Well-meaning individuals who happen upon their offices in pursuit of truth or to offer their services are suspected of being “spies”. What would be gained from spying on a JANA office other than insanity?
      The Green File calls upon the brother leader of the Universal Green Revolution, Moammar Gadhafi, to distance himself publicly from all association with JANA, by calling once again for this fossilised, corrupt and reactionary institution to be closed down once and for all. It is becoming increasingly difficult, O Leader, for us to explain to the world that
      these institutions have no relation with you, even though they use your name daily.
      We call upon the Brother Leader to reestablish contact with the Green Movement worldwide, who are far more able to give him a loud voice and interaction with the world masses who strive for peace and the defeat of terrorism to be replaced with tourism, and who are far more able
      to articulate the Third Universal Theory than JANA which never for one single day believed in its veracity.
      Until JANA is finally closed down and buried, Mathaba will continue its service to the world masses, the International Green March and all those who seek information on the cryptic meaning of
      JANA‘s intelligible garbage
      by cleaning up the formatting errors, english language and with accompanying explanations and analysis where applicable.
      Moreover, Mathaba provides this service to humanity free of charge, without any financial support from any quarter, neither Libyan nor Siberian. Nonetheless, sponsors are always welcome to assist us in improving our services in trying
      to bridge the obstructions placed between the Leader and the world masses by the enemies of freedom and democracy.
      Comments on, and contributions to, the Green File are always welcome. Send in your reports and analysis on those institutions, individuals or new stray dogs which have been responsible for preventing the spread of the Third Universal Theory internationally, to the Email address below.
      Next week,
      with the help of Our Creator,
      we shall examine the Green Book Center which is yet another contender for the prize of ultimate destroyers of the Third Universal Theory.We welcome information and contributions on corruption, obstruction, incompetence, negligence, nepotism, violence or any other violation of the articles of the [good] Green Charter by the [EVIL] Green Book Study and Research Center.
      Send reports by open Email to , or you may use CryptoHeaven and send your reports and information in complete untraceable confidence: send an Email to with your CryptoHeaven number.
      International Green Charter
      ~ Human Rights for the Third Millennium ~
      Inspired by the Proclamation of the Great Green Charter for Human Rights on 12th June, 1988, the first Human Rights Charter to be issued by the people gathered in popular congresses, signalling the end of the era of the republics and the dawn of the era of the masses, as well as a new advancement in the definition of human rights;
      Led by the Green Book , guide of humanity for the total deliverance from the power of individuals, classes, clans, tribes or parties, and the path towards the establishment of a society for all (the Jamahiriya) where all human beings are free and equal in the exercise of power and in the possession of wealth and arms;
      Convinced that the rights of Man, vicegerent of God on earth, cannot be the gift of a person nor exist in societies where exploitation and tyranny are practised, and can only be achieved by the victory of the popular masses over their oppressors and the disappearance of regimes which annihilate freedom;
      that the establishment of the power of the popular masses will consolidate their existence on earth, when the sovereignty of the people will be exercised directly through legislative popular congresses and executive people’s committees;
      that human rights cannot be guaranteed in a world where there exist governors and governed, masters and slaves, rich and poor;
      Aware that human misery cannot disappear, nor human rights be affirmed, except by building a world where the people hold the power, the wealth and the arms; a world where governments and armies will disappear, and where communities, peoples and nations will be rid of all danger of war, a world of peace, respect, agreement and co-operation;
      On the basis of the above,
      the Green Charter International was formed to link men and women around the world who wish to achieve, promote and defend the true Human Rights and freedoms of this new age, the era of the masses, which were proclaimed by
      the free people, gathered in popular congresses in the Great Green Charter of Human Rights as the following:
      1. Democracy is the power of the people, not only the expression of the people. We declare that power belongs to the people. It is exercised directly, without intermediary or representatives in the popular congresses and the people’s committees.
      2. We consider the life of the individual sacred and protect it. We forbid its alienation. Imprisonment can only be exercised against those for whom liberty constitutes a danger or a contamination of others. The aim of punishment is to renew society, to protect its human values and its interests. We proscribe punishments which attack the dignity and the integrity of the human being, such as forced labour or long-term imprisonment. We proscribe all attacks, physical or mental, on the person of the prisoner. We condemn all speculations and experiments of any kind upon prisoners. Punishment is personal and suffered by the individual following a criminal act on which it is necessarily contingent. The punishment and its consequences cannot extend to the family nor the persons close to the criminal. “One only commits evil to one’s own detriment and nobody will assume what he has not committed”.
      3. We are, in times of peace, free inall our movements and in the choice of our residence.
      4. Citizenship is a sacred right. Nobody can be deprived of it or have it removed.
      5. We forbid clandestine action and recourse to force in all its forms, violence, terrorism and sabotage. These acts constitute a betrayal of the values and principles of the Jamahiriya, which affirms the sovereignty of the individual in the popular congresses, guaranteeing the right to express opinions publicly. We reject and condemn violence as a means of imposing ideas and opinions. We adopt democratic dialogue as the only method of debate and consider any hostile relation towards the Jamahiriya linked to a foreign instance, whatever its form, as high treason against it.
      6. We are free to form unions, trade unions and leagues to defend our professional interests.
      7. We are free in our private acts and our personal relations. Nobody can involve themselves therein, except at a complaint from one of the partners concerned or if the act and the relation attack or are prejudicial to society, or if they are contrary to its values.
      8. We consider the life of the human being to be sacred and protect it. Our objective is to abolish capital punishment. To this end, the death penalty can only be exercised against an individual whose existence constitutes a danger or is deleterious to society. The person condemned to death may request that his sentence be lightened or, instead of his life, offer a personal tribute. The court may commute the penalty if this decision is not prejudicial to society or if it is not contrary to human values. We condemn the application of the execution of capital punishment by repugnant methods, such as the electric chair, the use of toxic gas or injections.
      9. The Jamahiriya guarantees the right to plead and the independence of the judicial system. Each of its members is entitled to a fair and complete trial.
      10. Our judgments are based on sacred law, religion or custom, the terms of which are stable, unchangeable and for which there can be no substitute. We declare that religion is an absolute belief in the divinity and a sacred spiritual value. It is personal to each person and common to everyone. It is a direct relationship with the Creator, without intermediary. We proscribe its monopoly and its exploitation for purposes of subversion, fanaticism, sectarianism, partisan spirit and fratricidal war.
      11. The Jamahiriya guarantees the right to work. It is a right and a duty for everyone, in the limits of one’s personal effort or in association with others. Everybody has the right to exercise the work of their choice. The Jamahiriya is one of partners and not one of paid employees. Ownership, the fruit of labour, is sacred and protected, it can only be attacked in the public interest and with fair compensation. The Jamahiriya is free from the slavery of salaries, stating the right of everybody over their labour and production. Only those who produce consume.
      12. We are liberated from any feudalism. The land is nobody’s property. Each person has the right to exploit it and to benefit from it by labour, agriculture or animal-keeping, throughout one’s life, that of one’s heirs, and within the limits of personal effort and the satisfaction of needs.
      13. We are free from any rent. A house belongs to the person who lives in it. It enjoys a sacred immunity in respect of rights of neighbourhood: “your close neighbours or distant neighbours”. The residence cannot be used to harm society.
      14. The Jamahiriya is united. It guarantees everyone a worthy and prosperous life and a developed state of health, so as to achieve a society of healthy people. It guarantees protection of childhood, motherhood, old age and of invalids. The Jamahiriya is the guardian of all those who do not have a guardian.
      15. Education and knowledge are natural rights for everyone. Any individual has the right to choose the education and the knowledge which suits them, without imposed constraint or orientation.
      16. The Jamahiriya is the society of goodness and of noble values. It considers ideals and human principles sacred. Its aim is a humanitarian society where aggression, war, exploitation and terrorism will be banished and where there will be no difference between great and small. All nations, all peoples, and all national communities have the right to live free, according to their options and the principles of self-determination. They have the right to establish their national entity. Minorities have the right to safeguard their entity and their heritage. The legitimate aspirations of the latter cannot be repressed. Neither can they be assimilated by force into one or several different nations or national communities.
      17. We affirm the right of each person to profit from the benefits, the advantages, the values and the principles which are obtained by the harmony, cohesion, union, affinity and the affection of the family, the tribe, the nation and humanity. To this end, we work to establish the natural national entity of our nation and support all those who fight to achieve this aim. We reject any segregation between men due to their colour, their race, their religion or their culture.
      18. We protect liberty. We defend it everywhere in the world. We support the oppressed, and encourage all peoples to confront injustice, oppression, exploitation and colonialism. We encourage them to combat imperialism, racism and fascism, in accordance with the principle of the collective struggle of peoples against the enemies of liberty.
      19. The Jamahiriya is a society of splendour and fulfilment. It guarantees each person the right of thought, creation and innovation. The Jamahiriya works for the development of the sciences, the arts and literature. It guarantees they will be disseminated among the popular masses so as to prohibit any monopoly on them.
      20. We affirm the sacred right to be born into a coherent family, where motherhood, fatherhood and brotherhood prevail. Fulfilment of the human being is only in compliance with his nature if it is assured by natural motherhood and feeding. The child must be brought up by its mother.
      21. We are, men or women, equal in everything which is human. The distinction of rights between men and women is a flagrant injustice which nothing justifies. We proclaim that marriage is a fair association between two equal partners. Nobody can conclude a marriage contract by constraint, nor divorce in any other way than by mutual consent or by a fair judgement. It is unfair to dispossess the children of their mother, and the mother of her home.
      22. We consider servants as the slaves of modern times, enslaved by their masters. No law governs their situation, and they have no guarantee nor protection. They live under the arbitrary nature of their masters, and are victims of tyranny. They are forced, by necessity and in order to survive, to carry out work which ridicules their dignity and human feelings. For this reason, we proscribe recourse to servants in the home. The house must be maintained by its owners.
      23. We are convinced that peace between nations can guarantee them prosperity, abundance and harmony. We call for an end to the trade of arms and their manufacture for purposes of exploitation. The arms industry constitutes a waste of wealth of societies, a burden on individual taxpayers, causing the spread of destruction and annihilation in the world.
      24. We call for the suppression of nuclear, bacteriological and chemical weapons and any other means of massive extermination and destruction. We call for elimination of all the existing stocks, for the preservation of humanity from the dangers represented by the waste from nuclear power stations.
      25. We undertake to protect our society and political system based on popular power. We also undertake to safeguard its values, principles and interests. We regard collective defence as the only means to preserve them. We think that the defence of the Jamahiriya is the responsibility of every citizen, man or woman. Nobody can have a substitute when confronted with death.
      26. We commit ourselves to the bases of this charter. We do not allow them to be infringed and forbid ourselves any act contrary to the principles and rights that it guarantees. Each person has the right to plead under the law for the purpose of reparation of any attacks on the rights and liberties that it announces.
      27. We offer the world The Green Book, the guide and path of emancipation for the acquisition of liberty. We announce to the popular masses the advent of a new age, when corrupt regimes will be abolished and from which any trace of tyranny and exploitation will be removed.
      If you would like to live in a world where the above principles prevail, please support or join the Green Charter Movement so that we can all ‘Meet and Talk, Helping All Become Aware’ (Mathaba) to promote, achieve and defend our human rights and freedoms in this new age, the era of the masses

  2. Richard Engel [joining us from Tripoli] .
    MSNBC (ANN): good morning.
    good morning, Ann.
    Gadhafi says his forces and all libyans would fight against any western-imposed no-fly zone. The rebels say they desperately need a no-fly zone for protection as Gadhafi ‘s troops continue to attack rebel strongholds. Tanks are closing in on the town of Zawiya outside Tripoli . Rebels inside have been cut off, isolated and, according to witnesses, relentlessly been attacked for more than a week.
    Despite isolation Gadhafi appears to have renewed confidence. Overnight on state television, he continued to blame Al-Qaeda for the revolt. They recruited juveniles under 20. They gave them pills and in some cases money, Gadhafi said.
    Gadhafi: Libyans will battle West over no-fly zone updated 1 hour 31 minutes ago
    MSNBC NEWS 09 MARCH 2011:
    The Libyan people will take up arms against Western powers if they seek to enforce a no-fly zone in their country’s airspace, Moammar Gadhafi said in an interview broadcast Wednesday.
    “If they take such a decision it will be useful for Libya, because the Libyan people will see the truth, that what they want is to take control of Libya and to steal their oil,” Gadhafi told Turkey’s state-run TRT news channel.
    “Then the Libyan people will take up arms against them,” Gadhafi said. The interview was conducted in Arabic and aired with Turkish subtitles.
    Gadhafi was responding to discussions by the U.S., U.K. and other countries about taking measures against his regime, including imposing a no-fly zone to prevent Gadhafi’s warplanes from striking rebels.
    Video: Rebels under siege plead for no-fly zone (on this page)
    On Wednesday, the exiled Libyan crown prince Mohammed El Senussi asked foreign powers to impose a no-fly zone and strike Gadhafi’s air defenses. He added that the Libyan people would not want international forces on the ground.
    “We need less talk and more action. This is not a crisis to be discussed in committees while men, women and children are being slaughtered indiscriminately, and action is needed as soon as possible,” he said from his exile in London.

    • Washington Could Invade Libya in October
      Posted: 2011/06/17
      From: Mathaba

      The information was confirmed by several calls and e-mails shared by military personnel, some of which indicate a large-scale deployment of troops in September

      Several sources at the US army Fort Hood, Texas have been sending signals about a possible large-scale US land attack on Libya next October. The military information refers to additional Special Forces heading for the African country in July.

      The possible transfer of army units to Libya would include the 1st Cavalry Division and other forces that would be in that country in late October and early November. The initial number of troops has been calculated at 12 000 active forces supported by another 15 000, some 30 000 troops in all.

      The information was confirmed by several calls and e-mails shared by military personnel, some of which indicate a large-scale deployment of troops in September, South media outlets reported.

      Some of the sources include an officer with the British Special Air Service, who confirmed that US rangers are already in Libya. This information, which could have contradictory details, also sparks the idea of a war that could be unleashed next fall, while Gaddafi continues to evade US attempts to get him out of power.

      A person, who identified himself as “the H specialist” and who works at the mortuary under USCENTCOM, said that some US casualties have occurred in Libya. He confirmed that at least two soldiers and three civilians had been killed in combat, something that has not been reported by the media.

      Geopolitical expert Doctor Webster Tarpley also said in an interview with radio journalist Alex Jones that a larger war is being planned for Libya, while the US-led simultaneous conflicts are now five: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Yemen. The existing potential for an expansion of this regional conflict could lead to the scenario of a Third World War, including other nations like Syria, Lebanon, Iran and as far as Saudi Arabia, according to Tarpley.

      Meanwhile, President Barack Obama has rejected demands that he respond to Congress for the continuity of the military action in Libya beyond the 60-day limit established by the War Powers Act. Obama had first said that the war would be finish in a few days, and he described the attack as a dynamic action instead of a war.

      Obama has also justified his responsibility on the US armed forces under a UN mandate, which is indifferent due to its own adoption with the will of the US Congress. With some kind of significant secret in the reports, we could confirm the apparent decision by Obama to support a larger war and a long-term US presence in Libya. #

      • Saturday, June 18, 2011(V) ALERT!!! Invasion of Libya in July 2011!

        by ALEX JONES

        Informational website, owned the famous American TV presenter Alex Jones received disturbing reports from military personnel on the basis of Ft. Hood in Texas, confirming the presence of U.S. plans to begin full-scale ground operation in Libya. Presumably the invasion to begin in October this year, after the deployment of troops in the region.
        The source said that more special forces will go to Libya in July, and the first division Calvary (heavy machinery) and the 3rd Corps rapid deployment of land in late October – early November. Initial troop level is estimated at 12 thousand soldiers and 15 thousand employees of logistics, that is, a total of nearly 30 thousand troops.
        This information is confirmed by numerous phone calls and emails from other soldiers, some of whom argue that the troop deployment will begin in September. According to these sources the operation will be supported by the British SAS. Also, there is evidence that the U.S. military assault of sabotage and reconnaissance units are already in Libya. Messages vary in detail, but in general the overall picture is pretty clear: as Qaddafi continues to shy away from trying to remove him from power, the fall will be a full-scale war.
        A informant, identified in reports as a “specialist H” morgue worker at U.S. Central Command, said that Americans already have a loss in Libya. He said that at least two soldiers and three civilians were killed by gunshot wounds, as reported by the media yet.
        The fact that Libya is preparing a full-scale war, the fifth, in addition to four already ongoing at the same time in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen, “Alex Canal” also told the geo-political analyst Webster Tarpley doctor. The desire to spin as much as possible the spread of regional conflicts could well trigger World War III, which will also cover Syria, Lebanon, Iran and even Saudi Arabia, said Tarpley.
        Meanwhile, Obama refuses to report to Congress regarding the continuation of hostilities after the allowed 60-day period, “the president of law.” First he promised to finish all in a matter of days, and now calls the events “Kinetic” and not war. In this case it is justified by the fact that is subject to a UN mandate.
        And on Saturday, June 18, it became known that Obama has decided to continue military operations in Libya, even if he fails to get Congressional approval, and despite the fact that the Pentagon lawyers and advisers were opposed to this plan.

        by Jazira Chuibekova on Saturday, 18 June 2011 at 14:09

  3. news services updated 10 minutes ago 2011-03-10T10:16:28

    There are indications that the defiant leader might actually be more open to dialogue than he appears. today he sent a number of emissaries from tripoli to reach out to international leaders, including a general that made a surprise visit to cairo and a number of officials to brussels to take part in conversations there with nato over the next couple of days.
    Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi is willing to start talks about a transition of power to someone else amid fierce fighting between loyalist forces and rebels, according to a report. The Portuguese daily newspaper Publico on Thursday quoted a diplomatic source as saying Gadhafi was open to the idea of negotiations. The report followed a meeting between Portugal’s foreign minister, Luis Amado, and Gadhafi’s envoy in Lisbon.The source told Publico that the message had to be taken with caution as it was given in response to Amado’s proposals for a peaceful change of power in the north African country. “The emissary of the Libyan leader told Amado that Tripoli would accept ‘to begin a negotiations process for a transition’,” Publico said. “It is too early, however, to evaluate the real intention of this message and to what extent it is not just a circumstantial declaration … the message was not presented at the start of the meeting,” it said. The ministry did not name the envoy and did not give further details of the meeting, saying only it was “part of the preparation of the extraordinary meetings of the European Union Foreign Affairs Council and the European Council to be held in the next few days.”
    A Libyan envoy, Mohamed Tahir Siala, was also due to meet with Greece’s deputy foreign minister, Dimitris Dollis, on Thursday as part of a diplomatic drive by Gadhafi ahead of talks by NATO and the European Union on a possible no-fly zone over Libya. The Greek ministry said the talks were arranged in agreement with European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton ahead of the meeting in Brussels.
    NATO said it could react quickly to any decision, but sounded a note of caution. “If requested and if needed we can respond at very short notice. There are a lot of sensitivities in the region as regards what might be considered foreign military interference,” NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told the U.K’s Sky News.
    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has made it clear imposing a no-fly zone is a matter for the United Nations and should not be a U.S.-led initiative. The White House Wednesday defended its response to the turmoil in Libya, insisting it had taken dramatic action and rejecting criticism that it had been too cautious. “There has never been a situation where the international community, with leadership by the United States, has acted as quickly as it has to respond to this kind of situation,” spokesman Jay Carney said.
    And despite Gadafi’s plea to please wait, and have possible dialogue, a senior U.S. general said the United States military was prepared to quickly establish a no-fly zone over Libya if the international community decided on that option. That would though require an act of WAR.
    “I believe within a couple days, we would probably be able to implement a no-fly zone,” General Raymond Odierno, commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command said.
    Russia and China, permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, are cool to the idea, which could entail bombing Libyan air defenses as a first step.
    However, Russia said in a statement Thursday that it was banning all weapons sales to Libya. An order signed by President Dmitry Medvedev “bans the export from the Russian Federation to Libya as well as the sale, delivery and transfer… of all types of arms and related materials, including weapons and ammunition, combat vehicles and military hardware,” it said.
    The NATO and European
    talks about a no-fly zone come amid some of the fiercest fighting of the three-week-old uprising against Gadhafi.
    IT IS THE OIL THAT EVERYONE IS AFTER, not Compassion upon humanity!
    The unrest has hit Libya’s oil output, causing world prices to rise.Libya told Chinese oil trading firm Unipec that its order for 2 million barrels had been canceled and asked its tanker to leave the port of Es-Sidar, a trading source said Thursday. Unipec will send the ship, the “Gulf Sheba,” to Algeria to load Saharan Blend for April loading instead, the source said. Oil prices rose to nearly $105 a barrel Thursday in Asia after Libya said its crude production has fallen more than previously estimated amid fresh battles near key oil installations. Benchmark crude for April delivery was up 41 cents at $104.79 a barrel at late afternoon Singapore time in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Libya’s oil production has been cut to 500,000 barrels a day from 1.6 million since the rebellion began, National Oil Corp. chief Shukri Ghanem said Wednesday. Ghanem had previously estimated the OPEC nation’s output had been reduced by about half.
    The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

  4. Gadhafi’s son vows military action against Libyan rebels
    PAUL SCHEMM Ras Lanouf, Libya— The Associated Press
    Published Thursday, 10 March 2011 6:36AM EST
    Last updated Thursday, 10 March 2011 8:22PM EST
    Libya is preparing full-scale military action to crush its rebellion and will not surrender even if Western powers intervene in the conflict, Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s most prominent son said on Thursday.
    “It’s time for liberation. It’s time for action. We are moving now,” Saif al-Islam Gadhafi said in an interview. Asked if the government was preparing to step up its military campaign, he said: “Time is out now. It’s time for action … We gave them two weeks (for negotiations).”

    Speaking in unusually tough language, the London-educated younger Gadhafi said Libya would defeat the rebels, even if Western powers intervened.

    “We will never ever give up. We will never ever surrender. This is our country. We fight here in Libya,” said Saif al-Islam, who has been described as the Western-friendly face of Libya.

    “The Libyan people, we will never ever welcome NATO, we will never ever welcome Americans here. Libya is not a piece of cake.”

    Saif al-Islam described the armed rebels as terrorists and armed gangsters and said thousands of Libyans had voluntered to fight them.
    “Now it’s too late for them. We are so united, we are so strong. And Libya will be free and peaceful soon,” said Saif al-Islam at a Tripoli compound designed in the shape of a luxury tent, as Gadhafi supporters shouted defiant slogans in the background.

    Libya’s opposition battled for military and diplomatic advantage against the governments Loyalist Forces on Thursday, winning official recognition from France but losing ground to government forces outside a strategically vital oil port.
    The Loyalist forces advanced on the port of Ras Lanouf, hitting buildings with tank shells and driving lightly armed opposition fighters back into the city.
    Shells fell near a hospital in the city and hit a series of residential buildings as Loyalist tanks moved further along Libya’s main Mediterranean coastal road than they have been since the rebels seized most of the country’s east.
    NATO said it had started round-the-clock surveillance of the air space over Libya, and British Foreign Secretary William Hague said a meeting of EU foreign ministers would discuss how to isolate the regime.
    NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Thursday any NATO military action in Libya would have to be based on there being a demonstrable need and a clear mandate and with support in the region.
    “Any operation we undertake needs to respect three key principles: firstly there has to be demonstrable need for NATO action, secondly there has to be a clear legal basis, and thirdly there has to be firm regional support,” he said, as NATO defence ministers met.
    The Libyan government tried to stave off tough action, sending envoys to Egypt, Portugal and Greece.

    The Leader of the Revolution (MOAMMAR GADHAFI) Speaks to the Supreme Council of Judicial Bodies and to the Chiefs of Judicial Bodie

    22.10.2004 Gadhafi lectures

    In his meeting with the members of the Supreme Council of Judicial Bodies in the Great Jamahiriya, the leader of the revolution made an important speech. In it, he called upon the Libyan people to annul all exceptional courts like the Special People’s Court. He also appealed to the people to abrogate the penal laws enacted by the Revolutionary Command Council before the establishment of the sovereignty of the Masses, and to return to the normal penal code and procedure.

    He also demanded that a definitive investigation in the case of the Abi Selim Prison be expeditiously carried out. He appealed for the cessation of any action such as arrest without warrant or extra-judicial punishment, should they exist.

    He said that no detainee or prisoner should be denied the right to see his family or meet with his attorney. He/she must have the right to choose his own counsel from outside the ranks of the People’s Counsel. Prisoners must continue to have the right to family visits outside prison on special social occasions.

    The Leader of the Revolution appealed to the Libyan people to swiftly ratify the anti-torture conventions. He strongly deplored the conduct of governments that have not done so. He condemned the countries that oppress detainees and those that allow such acts to be conducted, by their police forces or prison authorities, with impunity.

    The Leader expressed his heartfelt regret that some governments carry out such acts against their own citizens and against foreigners alike. That sad fact was stressed in the reports of Amnesty International that he put before those present in the meeting. He called upon the Popular Justice Committees in Libya to cooperate with Amnesty International and other human rights organizations. He commended the efforts made by those organizations. He demanded that Libya, by virtue of being the first state of the masses in the whole world, play a pioneering role on the world level in the defense of human rights.

    The following was mentioned in his speech:

    In the name of God.

    In meeting with this elite group of jurists in the Jamahiriya, my purpose was to address certain subjects that need reflection. In the early days of the revolution, certain legislation was made in response to the needs of that stage. All politicians and jurists are aware that a revolution must be accompanied by certain harsh measures. Those measures must be time-bound and of exceptional nature, like wartime legislation. Such measures cannot be permanent or else they would constitute a denial of justice. They must be reconsidered. It was our hope that Libya with its revolution would become a model of freedom, popular democracy, and the state free from oppression and injustice. However, with the measures I mentioned above, Libya became another conventional state, even a dictatorial or police state. This is deeply regrettable. We are not like that nor do we want to be like that.

    It so happens that we are in the Third World, in a region that is branded as backward. It was difficult for the world to distinguish between what happened here and any other Coup d’état that took place in Sudan, Iraq, Mali, Indonesia, or Argentina. All the events of the last year were purely superficial. They brought all sorts of oppression and injustice. This is perfectly normal since military generals carry out this kind of action in those countries. For us in Libya, it would be unfair to have us in this list. We are not generals who led a Coup. We led a popular revolution for which we used the army. This means we had a doctrine and an ideology. The Libyan revolution was a correction of the events in the Third World. Yes there was a military action accompanied by some injustice. Nevertheless at a very early stage, the power was returned to the people. The popular committees were established and they put before the peoples’ congresses their draft laws and policies. We, the leaders of the revolution, are witnessing the people creating their own committees and entities that are conducting the business of the society of the masses. There is no way for us to enact a law that runs counter to the will of the people. But some of the measures that were supposed to be temporary, somehow, continued to live with us. For example, the People’s Court was established at the beginning of the revolution. In each and every Third World country, when there is a revolution or a Coup, they establish a court named the “Revolution Court”. Its judges are military men and generals. That was the case in Syria, Iraq, and even in Egypt at the beginning of its revolution. For us, even the name would not stand. As we said, our movement was a correction of all the events that happened in other Third World countries. We called it the “People’s Court” because the Revolution was a People’s Revolution. The People’s Court was made up of a military man, a member of the police, a member of the clergy, and the civilian man of law. We could have composed it of young officers like all such courts in the Third World. But its composition was meant to ensure that it was a People’s Court. Anyway, this court continued with us until the year 2000. This should not have happened. Why should we have a special court when we are not in a state of war, anarchy, or upheaval? Human rights organizations and Amnesty International address this question and justifiably. The statute of the court was amended four times. This is proof that it is no longer fit for the new stage.

    The People’s Court was supposed to try the officials of the monarchy who exercised power before the revolution. After their trial, the court should have ceased to exist. Unfortunately, this was not the case. We started amending it and giving it additional powers. I was amazed to see that someone who sold his farm was referred to the People’s Court. Why? Because his farm was given to him by the state and selling it was a violation of the law. Another person slammed his car into a lamp post, and he too was referred to the People’s Court! Supposedly because the lamp post is public property and running into it is a violation of the law. This is a farce. It is laughable. Could the People’s Court be asked to look into such petty things? Its statute was modified four times in order for it to be able to deal with these new cases that are not within its jurisdiction. My hope is that you would draft a law to put before the popular conference in order to put an end to the existence of the People’s Court. Its mandate and jurisdiction should be transferred to regular courts.

    We are not the United States. They say they were subjected to a terrorist attack. They enacted special laws, created special courts, reestablished a ministry of the interior, they have Guantánamo and extra judicial measures. They say: “we are at a world war against terrorism; therefore, we must have special measures”. We are not like America. We are not at war. We don’t need special measures to face an outside enemy or to win a war. Why should we have these special measures in a calm and stable country like ours? There is no power struggle in our country. Power is in the hand of the people. Our men and women make the laws, make the decisions, determine the policy of the country, and set its budget. We have no civil war. We have no external war. We have no power struggle. Our society is homogeneous linguistically, religiously, and ethnically. It is a blessing from God that we have such a calm, stable, and content society. Why should we resort to exceptional measures? Because China did? Because Iraq did? Because Syria did? Because I don’t know who did? They have their problems. The US did that, and so did Britain because they are in a state of war. They are scared and terrified. Their fear makes them overreact to the smallest of emergencies and resort to exceptional measure. We don’t have that. Even if America enacts all sorts of exceptional measures, we will not do the same. Every society has its own circumstances. We are a coherent, stable, and calm society that has absolutely no problems. Why should we resort to exceptional measures? Just by way of imitation? Long ago people joked that Arab communists carried their umbrellas in Aden when it snowed in Moscow. Because communists mimicked what happened in Russia, even if they had never seen snow in their lives!

    What I need to say is that the People’s Court is no longer necessary. It’s supposed to have ended. We appreciate the efforts of its founders, and its efforts to hold to account those who exploited the Libyan people from October 1951to 1969. We should start a normal stage with regular procedures. In 1969, the Revolutionary Command Council adopted the law on the protection of the revolution. That was justifiable at that time. Today, after the establishment of the people’s power, we can no longer talk about the defense of the revolution. We could only talk about the protection of the power of the people and the maintenance of the system of the masses which constitutes the basis of our state. The law was necessary at the time of its adoption. Things were fluid and unpredictable. There used to be five American military bases and a number of British ones. Cyrenaica was completely occupied by the British. There were twenty thousand Italian settlers who controlled all economic activity in Libya. The remnants of the old regime were still active inside and outside the country. It was possible for all those to conspire against the revolution. Therefore it was necessary to adopt a law on the protection of the revolution that provides for severe punishments for any attempts against it. After a while Libya achieved independence and ended the military, economic, and settler colonialism. The revolutionary command council ceased to exist. It was replaced by the people’s power. The republic was replaced by the Jamahiriya. There is no longer a justification for the existence of that law or for us to continue to invoke it. There are other laws that should be sufficient to protect our system of popular direct democracy without resort to any special or exceptional measures.

    The establishment of the people’s court led to the establishment of the office of the special prosecutor for the security of the revolution. Now we have regular court system and regular offices of prosecutors so why should we need to continue to have that special office? It would have been possible at the time of the revolution, for us not to enact any special laws or provide for any special punishments. It could have been assumed that the old laws came to an end with the beginning of the revolutionary era. We could have run the country without those laws. However, I thought it was necessary for us to enact a law to protect the revolution and a new status. By their very nature, exceptional measures create fear and result in oppression. All Third World countries that established special courts, military courts, and adopted oppressive laws were not spared conflicts and upheaval. They never achieved stability. Those laws did not provide the solution. The real solution lies in a change in the nature of the people and the society. Normally, in every society there is a struggle for power, either among individuals, political parties, tribes, families, or social classes. The solution cannot be found in laws. To provide a radical solution for the problem, there is a need to end the power struggle. Not to frighten those who struggle for it. The struggle for power comes to an end when all the people exercise power, like the situation in Libya now. All adult Libyan men and woman, exercise power, and therefore there is no struggle for it. Anyone with an opinion can express it in the People’s Congresses and try to persuade others of it. The Office of the Special Prosecutor is no longer necessary.

    There is another law that criminalizes partisanship. There is no objection to the idea itself. My personal objection is to the severe punishments included in it. There is also the fact that with the establishment of the power of the people no such act could take place. If somebody suggests that a political party be established, what would be the use of it? Nobody will join it in a country where the people run their own affairs in direct democracy. Parties and partisanship are completely outdated. They belong in museums. This is the era of the masses. The world is full of parties that have never solved the problems of their societies. If I establish a party, people would think that it is simply lust for power and wealth. People will ask themselves if they should vote for us so that we can rule them and monopolize power and wealth. The ruling party in any country benefits only its members. Even within the party itself, the members charge its central committee of usurping the power of the party and monopolizing its money and that is shows total disregard to the members of the party. Then the central committee itself accuses the politburo of dictatorship and monopoly. So in the final analysis the party is made up of no more than five people who are the members of the politburo. Even the politburo itself usually accuses the chairman of the party of dictatorship and of showing no regard to the politburo. This is what happened with Brezhnev, Gorbachev and Suharto. So what parties are they talking about?

    The parties do nothing. When people have grievances, they take to the street and the members of the parties are nowhere to be found. People opposed to the war in Iraq, the unemployed, and the poor go out on the street to demonstrate. Violence spreads, and the parties do nothing. People will not establish a party in this day and age. Our people exercise power by themselves. Why should they hand over their power to a party or to a group of people to control them? Take the example of Lebanon. It is made up of many communities. Its political system is sectarian. The president must be Christian and the Prime Minister must be a Sunni Muslim. And the minister of the interior must be a Druze. In the seventies or the eighties a general whose name I don’t remember moved the army, went to the radio station, and broadcast a statement saying that the army has seized power in Lebanon. But nothing changed the following morning. The parliament remained with its sectarian composition unchanged. The general was not even tried. They just asked him what you think you’re doing. The communal and sectarian system is the basis of the government. Can you turn a Christian into a Muslim or a Muslim into a Christian? Nobody in Lebanon could possibly think of a military Coup because all communities are represented in the parliament and in the cabinet. Here we have our People’s Congresses and popular committees. What do we do with parties? They have no role in our system. Therefore, there is no need to give any importance to partisanship. It could be resisted or we could impose severe punishments for it. But in fact, partisanship is over in the whole world. This old model of political parties can no longer express the new reality. All old models like the rule of an individual, a party, or a family, have come to and end. We should not be talking about parties but rather about securing the fabric of the social institutions. All actions, conduct, and behavior must make sure that this fabric is unharmed. This is the very basis of all the constitutions of the world including those that claim to be democratic. Look at the French constitution for instance. It talks about the rights of the human being and the citizen. In order for these rights to be respected, the constitution must be preserved. All actions of the French citizens must not run counter to the constitution. If you infringe the constitution, you are in a collision course with the society and the whole establishment, you can be tried, imprisoned, and be faced with severe punishments. Like they say, the constitution must be preserved; we say that the purpose of all actions must be the protection of the Jamahiriya, the system of the masses and the power of the people. No one is allowed to infringe upon the social establishment. There is also the principle of the people’s sovereignty. That sovereignty is inherent in the people and nobody can exercise without their consent. No one can claim sovereignty for themselves. All the constitutions of the world state that sovereignty belongs to the people and it is exercised through their representatives. Why should it be exercised through representatives? The people can exercise their sovereignty directly. Why should they be denied that right in favor of a small group of representatives? In our system this is a sacrosanct principle. Anyone who challenges it challenges the very fabric of our society and does harm to our social institutions. Therefore, they must be punished to the full extent of the law. Everywhere in the world, people have the freedom to do what they wish, without doing harm to the society. The same applies here. If one attacks the Jamahiriya and the power of the people, he is attacking the whole social institution. This is an indisputable fact. The democratic constitution of the federal republic of Germany, states the Germans have the right of assembly, without need for prior notification, provided it is calm and unarmed. Public assembly requires prior notification. This clearly means that certain actions can only be carried out in accordance with the law in Germany, and other democratic countries. Same applies in France. No anti-republican group would be allowed to organize there. Now In certain Muslim countries, some people start organizing and following certain rituals. This runs counter to the law. They claim that their brand of Islam is better than ours. They change even the rules of prayer. They do not pray at home or in the mosque. They go and pray in public squares. This is undermining the whole religious system of the society. There is no provision in Islam for adopting this unusual form of prayer. If somebody wishes to fast for 40 days, it’s his choice. Nobody will prevent him from doing so or fasting his whole life if he so wishes. But, to start a party or an organization, and to start advocating this idea is an attack on the foundations of religion. It is unacceptable anywhere in the world. Not in France, not in Switzerland, and definitely not in Libya. French law states that it is forbidden to display religious symbols in public schools; no cross, no Star of David, and no Muslim head cover. They say you are free to exercise your faith at home or in a house of worship. It is not acceptable to create distinction among communities in the same society. You must be seen to be French only not followers of one Religion or the other. France is not a mosque or a Church. France is a secular state. When asked why the head cover was banned, the answer was: “At school, you must be seen only as a teacher. To be seen as a follower of a certain religion could put you against the followers of another religion.” In public institutions people must be seen as French, they must keep their faith to themselves, and exercise it in houses of worship. Otherwise, the country will be divided on religious basis. For us in Libya, we are all Sunni Muslims. Why should anybody adopt new rituals, new thought, or new distinguishing marks? This is unacceptable, it undermines the whole society. Anyone can stand on a street corner and preach good behavior and pious conduct. But what is the purpose of gathering a secret underground group? Is it to undermine the whole society? This is totally unacceptable, everywhere in the world.

    Under the constitution, Germans have the right to form organizations. It also provides for a prohibition of organizations whose purposes are unlawful or against the system of government or destroys the harmony of the society. This is included in the German constitution. Can anyone accuse Germany of being an authoritarian or dictatorial state? There is a consensus on the German system of government and its institutions. No one is allowed to attempt to undermine them. If you call for the establishment of revolutionary committees to rule Germany or to hand over the power to the people, you are undermining the society and committing an unlawful act. There is another article that is very clear. Anyone who abuses the freedom of expression with the purpose of undermining the basic democratic system shall be stripped of those fundamental rights. Even a phone call, if used to jeopardize what they consider a free democratic system, will lead to legal accountability and a denial of constitutional rights. What I mean to say is even in the countries that are considered modern and democratic; there are laws to protect the social institutions and the fabric of the society. A society is like a structure built on pillars. No one has the right to tear down one of the pillars because that will bring down the whole structure. No pretext, religious, political, economic or ideological would permit tampering with the basic structure of the institution. In Germany, the confidentiality of contacts, correspondence and phone calls is guaranteed. However, if any of them is used to fight against the basic free democratic system, that guarantee is annulled. One is stripped of those fundamental rights. That means that his phone is tapped. You could use your phone for any purpose you like; harass people, use foul language or even steal. But if you attack the social institutions, the right to privacy is annulled. Even your pets will be tapped. The right to property is also conditional upon respect for the basic free democratic system. If your house, store, vehicle or farm is used for the purpose of harming the social institution or the system of government, you would lose it. In the Western countries suspects have an electronic homing device implanted in their bodies. They are under surveillance every minute of the day because their activities threaten the society. Even the multi-party system has to observe those rules. The court can rule that any party is unconstitutional and ban its activities if its program is a threat to the free democratic system or to the existence of the republic. Therefore, no one can establish a political party in Germany if it is incompatible with its basic system. A call to regulate or change the party system in Germany would be accused of dictatorship. They say we have a democratic and constitutional order. These are two sides of the same coin. The society and its institutions are sacrosanct and cannot be tampered with. The laws are there to protect the society and its order. The order we have in Libya is the Jamahiriya of the people’s power. The faith is Islam and the doctrine is popular socialism. These are the pillars of the society. It is forbidden to attempt to shake or undermine them.

    In Germany you cannot establish a political party at whim. Haidar in Austria for instance, he established a party and was immediately told that his was a right wing, fascist party and that it would not be allowed to reach power. In France the same thing happened. So, while they speak of the freedom to form parties, they maintain that the parties that disrupt the established order are not allowed to come into existence. The system is free and democratic, but to attempt to destroy it and build something different in its place is not allowed. I have the German constitution in front of me. There is another article that deals with the freedom of worship. That freedom is guaranteed as long as it is compatible with public order and morality. In Switzerland it is forbidden to exercise a faith that runs counter to the public order and morality. In Switzerland where people seek asylum, measures are taken to protect the public order, social peace and to prevent the Church from infringing upon people’s rights. The Church in Switzerland cannot detract from the rights of the people or criticize the order of the State. Can someone call for German to be the sole official language in Switzerland? Of course not, because the constitution stipulates that the official languages are French, Italian and German. No archdiocese could be established on Swiss territory without the approval of the federation. The federal government lays down the rules that regulate radio and television and other mass media. The task of the media is to educate and entertain the viewers while taking into account the specific characteristics of the country and the special needs of the cantons. No radio station or newspaper can operate if it does not take the specific character of Switzerland into account. Switzerland is made up of four peoples that united together. German, French, Italian and Flemish peoples make up the country. It is forbidden to start a radio station that calls for the independence of the French or German part.

      The media in Switzerland must observe the public order and the character of the society. The freedom and independence of the media are guaranteed within the limits set in the article I just cited. Even in Switzerland, there are limits on the media.

      Citizens in Switzerland have the right to form political parties or associations provided that none of their goals or methods is illegal or constitute a threat to the state. The laws and regulations stipulate the measures necessary to deter the violation of these provisions. The Swiss constitution speaks of deterring anyone who might threaten the state. A Swiss citizen cannot receive anything from a foreign country. They cannot receive gifts, decorations or money. As a citizen of a state, it is forbidden to visit certain states. You have all heard of the case of Abdul Rahman Al-Amoudi; an Arab-American who is currently on trial. He is likely to be sentenced to one hundred years in jail because he visited Libya a number of times. A Swiss citizen cannot be deprived of his political rights unless he threatens the social institution. Some fools from the Third World go to seek asylum in Switzerland then proceed to demand things that are unheard of in that country. Of course they deport him immediately. He labors under the illusion that they will allow him to undermine Swiss institutions.

    lecturing 2

  5. France and Libya
    Sarkozy’s Libyan surprise
    Mar 14th 2011, 13:12 by S.P. | PARIS
    Sarkozy playing politics, power and greed?
    AS HILLARY CLINTON prepares to discuss Libya with President Nicolas Sarkozy this afternoon, she could be forgiven for a touch of confusion about what exactly the French are up to….. France has stuck its neck out over Libya. After initial hesitations, it has become the most vigorous advocate of a no-fly zone over the country, and is working with Britain on a UN Security Council resolution to this end. But its apparent decision last week to recognise the Libyan opposition—the first big western power to do so—surprised not only France’s allies but members of Mr Sarkozy’s own government.
    France’s more assertive stand began to emerge last week. The French were looking seriously at the military planning needed to establish a no-fly zone over Libyan airspace, which would take several weeks to make operational, said one official at the time. They would “far prefer” this to take place with UN backing, though they recognised that this would be difficult; they were sceptical about going in under a NATO umbrella because of the alliance’s image in the Arab world as an American tool. But would the French formally recognise the Libyan opposition? “France recognises states, not parties”, said a senior official on March 9th.
    Strange, then, that the very next morning, on March 10th, two representatives of the Libyan opposition emerged from a meeting with President Sarkozy at the Elysée Palace to announce that “France recognises the Libyan Transitional National Council as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people”. France, they added, would be sending an ambassador to Benghazi, their stronghold. Bizarrely, their meeting was facilitated by Bernard-Henri Lévy, a left-leaning philosopher and media celebrity, who has been urging Mr Sarkozy to intervene. Mr Lévy, who has no official diplomatic role, announced that France was considering targeted air strikes.
    Some of France’s European friends, who were preparing to meet in Brussels on March 11th for emergency talks on Libya, were taken aback. But they were not the only ones. Alain Juppé, the new French foreign minister, was, according to sources, totally in the dark. So was the diplomatic team in the office of the prime minister, François Fillon. Odder still, there was no official communiqué from the presidency confirming that France had offered the Libyan council diplomatic recognition. The wording of a letter, sent jointly by Mr Sarkozy with Britain’s David Cameron to European colleagues on March 10th, was far more measured. It did no more than “welcome” the formation of the Libyan council, and urged fellow Europeans to consider the council “to be valid political interlocutors”. Hardly the same as formal diplomatic recognition.
    What to make of all this? The unpopular Mr Sarkozy, who faces a presidential election next year, clearly wants to show voters that….

    • Iran's nextThe Libya Blitzkrieg and the Coming Iran War
      Posted on Pakalert on 21 March 2011 //
      France jumped to the tune of the fiddler to take the lead in the attack. Wonder what they were told to turn on a former friend?

      Gadhafi and Sarkozy shake

      Shareby Zen Gardner

      If you’re following the news on the Libya developments, it’s a master stroke of NWO control. The speed with which they’ve managed to supposedly get international concensus not just to create a so-called “no fly” zone, but to pound whatever targets they want, has been a diplomatic blitzkrieg.

      What took ages to convince wary NATO nations to sanction in the attack on Iraq, has only taken a couple of weeks for Libya.

      And the public is on apparently on board and trusting this “UN sanctioned” action. There isn’t a shred of protest or criticism to all this except in the alternative media. And even though Ghaddafi called for a cease fire, the press insisted the fighting continued so they’ve gone ahead and engaged and now it will unfold.

      Hillary Takes the Mount
      Something else that’s happening is the growing signal from the media that they are endorsing Hillary Clinton’s so-called ability to “take action”, while contrasting it to Obama’s clear lack of leadership. Like the dollar, Obama’s “leadership” is what you believe it to be, while actually he’s just a figment of the NWO’s imagination.

      (As we know, Obama’s image is only worth as much as the NWO mouthpiece MSM says it is. It’s apparent to any thinking person there’s not a leader’s bone in his cardboard cut-out body, as is the case of all placed NWO puppets.)

      But watch, it appears they may be positioning Hillary as the “mover and shaker” lately, while allowing more and more criticism of Obama. His publicized preoccupation with sports and now touring Latin America in the midst of all this it meant to be a disconnect for some reason. It’ll be gradual, but if this trend continues we could be seeing a new presidential candidate being promoted, or tested in the public arena. Even Drudge has been calling this “Hillary’s War”. But we have to wonder, why the posturing?

      Watch the Mainstream Programming

      It’s all about cover up, truth reversal and omission.

      Libya is a major signal in itself: they want us to know that “a new world order will be more effective than just letting the US police the world”. It also gets international involvement in whatever follows the Libya takedown. Very clever.

      More Media Misleads
      Those who are awake know we cannot believe the government’s downplaying of the radiation dangers–after all, look their post 9/11 “all clear” at ground zero that has led to the death and sickness of thousands. Or the downplaying and media silence over the Gulf disaster.

      The irony, as it so often is, is that the US will harshly accuse other nations of “human rights abuses” and “oppression of their people” or “not informing their public of the truth of the matter” while blatantly being the chief offender.

      Similarly, the media positioning of middle eastern events and who to “back” is complete smoke and mirrors. The assumptive language instructs the masses who is “good”, who is “bad” and “who needs to be replaced”. Try reversing just about everything the MSM is saying and you’ll get close.

      Again, it’s Orwellian.

      Incredibly enough, Americans eat this stuff up. Hypocrisy apparently makes good news, as long as it “pumps you up!”

      An attack on Ghaddafi is the perfect prelude to an attack on Iran
      The speed of this UN/Arab League (owned) imprimatur for an aggression on Libya not only indicates the huge progress the NWO has made in consolidating their hold on global powers, but it speaks of a profound ‘group think’ impression in much of the western world. The negative emotions regarding Ghadaffi have been carefully cultivated for 40 years now, giving the typical western media mush-mind the impression that “we can never get rid of these renegade bastards”.

      …Why? The cathartic release, as all wars precipitate, will provoke Americans and other hoodwinked and intimidated peoples to endorse the removal of other such long-standing “pests” and hindrances to a “peaceful, global society.”

      Just watch.

      Get their Game? It’s On.

      Be prepared, and stay on top of it.

      Love, Zen

  6. How can the FRENCH re-elect Sarkozy ? Everytime I see him, I get nauscious! Who did he think he was fooling when he ‘recognised “THE OPPOSITION” ‘? Sarkozy is in the click of the “power-hungry” (doing whatvere he thinks is “politicly correct”); and what “deals” did he make with “The OPPOSITION”? He thought he was getting a share-in the Bangazi oil???
    He did the same underhanded-dealings to get the Corsican vote: full of deceit and self-gain!

  7. Starting on page 9 of the Preface to “The Desert Mystic”, we read of “THE HIDEOUS CRIMES MOAMMAR GADHAFI HAS BEEN ACCUSED-OF! From George Tremlett (discussing the early 1980’s/Sicily) on pp.11/12 in his book we read: “…The American Government was looking for a fight, but first had to find a cause. Strange rumours began to circulate, all allegedly linked to the CIA. Military leave was cancelled at Signorello after the CIA claimed to have uncovered a Gadhafi plot to release a plague of ‘killer-flies’ to spread desease and pestilence among his enemies. Then Gadhafi was said to be planning to let loose ‘thousands of killer-dogs’ with sticks of dynamite strapped to their bellies to terrorize the towns of the Mediterranean. These astonsihing stories were cited as proof that the United States was facing a crazy, unpredictable foe, but were hardly credible reasons for the Sixth Fleet to commence a miliary attack upon Libya…and anyway, no ‘killer-flies’ or ‘killer-dogs’ were ever found.
    Media fantasies like these, or disinformation like the intelligence experts called them, may have made sense thousands of miles away in the White House Operations Room where Col Oliver North coordinated the anti-Gadafi campaign on the President’s behalf, ‘liaising’ with Admiral William Poindexter, Casper Weinberger and Robert MacFarlane, but in Sicily, on the spot, traveling around the island, I sensed a deep unease.’….”

  8. How a good, noble and honest man can be so maligned is hard to conceive….And yet, prior to the bombings and uprising this last month or so, Libya could be seen as a “model nation”: of what can be accomplished in a land once a baren waste with only nomadic tribes and foreigners occupying it.

    Gadhafi on horseback

  9. 11 MAY 2011
    Rebels in the Libyan capital Tripoli sacked state broadcast offices Sunday 08 MAY 2011, and set branches of the People’s Committees that are the mainstay of the regime, ablaze overnight, witnesses told AFP on Monday.

    “The headquarters of Al-Jamahiriya Two television and Al-Shababia radio have been sacked,” one witness told AFP by telephone on condition of anonymity.

    Broadcasts on both channels were interrupted on Sunday evening but resumed on Monday morning.

    A number of witnesses said REBELS had torched public buildings in the capital overnight, not only People’s Committee offices but also police stations.

    – AFP

  10. par pipard le 20 mai 2011

    Libya will drive a stake through the heart of the US, French and British Imperialists, doing the World a favor as they will defeat these bloodsucking parasitic Colonial Aggressors.
    Music Video from Libya State TV on May 19, 2011, showing massive public support for the Brother Leader, Col Muammar Al Gaddafi, Libya and Gaddafi are under a brutal military assault by the Evil US Empire, and their troll-like mini-gangster sidekicks, England and France. These three nations have, between the three of them, invaded, bombed, occupied and exploited virtually every single nation and people on the planet. The World will never enjoy Peace until England and France are Destroyed and until the United States is disarmed and dismantled and broken up into smaller , less dangerous mini-state components.
    Over the course of the last 20 years NATO has been revealed as the top criminal conspiracy of the world. It’s the mob boss of all mobsters. NATO, an imperialist military alliance led by the U.S., terrorizes whole continents. From Kabul to Tripoli, NATO is raining death from the skies.

    The actual bombings, deaths and destruction are, of course, more of a problem for humanity than the hypocrisy and lies NATO tells. The hypocrisy simply adds insult to injury. Thus NATO not only bombed and killed 11 imams in Libya, but it murdered these religious leaders — who were trying to negotiate an end to the civil war — in the name of “protecting civilians.”

    Now that there is no Soviet counterforce to hold their arrogance in check, the leaders of the imperialist powers — and NATO is their weapon of choice — have no shame. They no longer need to even think about a serious military opposition, although that doesn’t stop them from squeezing taxes out of the workers here, so the military-industrial complex can charge cost overruns for more doomsday weapons.

    Yet despite their overwhelming military might, NATO has won no wars nor stabilized any conquests lately. Their arrogance leads them to underestimate their enemy: the world’s people, who resist being recolonized. The imperialist armies have spent 10 years in Afghanistan and sent 150,000 troops there, but they still can’t get control of that country. The U.S. invaded Iraq and still has less control there than the ruling class bargained for. And although Libya has only 6 million people, the NATO big shots project it will take months of bombing to achieve their agendas.

    • The “strong fortress fence” of Europe is useless now that millions are fleeing the bombing in Libya and have to be allowed entry to Europe because of the NATO plan to destroy Libya and remove 98% of its population, so that only the 2% who do not love direct participatory democracy and the symbol of the Libyan revolution, Muammar Qaddafi, would remain.

      The colonial powers plan to take over Libya’s gold reserves, oil, and billions of liters of pure water, so that the western elite can survive the contamination of the food chain, poisoned by their nuclear blasts, Fukushima, chemical factories waste, and other disasters to come, whilst profiting from the sale of water at high prices for those who wish to have a chance to be cancer free.

      The obstacle in the way of the globalist elite’s plans is Muammar Qaddafi and the Libyan people, who do not believe in exploitative capitalism, with Libya’s resources being shared across Africa, often free of charge, and without any profit. #

  11. par pipard le 20 mai 2011

    English program on Libya State Television May 19, 2011 – Speaker discusses the impact of the NATO War of aggression on the Libya people and how the Libya people want Peace.

  12. Rand Paul to Anderson Cooper on Libya War – Obama a Law Breaker
    Obama is a Law Breaker for waging war on Libya without Congress Approval.
    Rand Paul, one of the only honest men in Congress, is calling Obama out for breaking the Law by going to War in Gross Violation of the War Powers Act. In actuality, Obama is a scummy crooked little criminal thug from Chicago, home of the dirtiest politicians in America, who is violating the US Constitution and he needs to be impeached and jailed for his Crimes against both Libya as well as against the US Constitution. More


        House Members Sue Obama Over Libya
        By Jessica Brady
        Roll Call Staff
        June 15, 2011, 12:03 p.m.
        A group of House lawmakers led by Rep. Dennis Kucinich filed a lawsuit against President Barack Obama Wednesday, asserting that the administration does not have Congress’ approval to continue engaging in the Libyan conflict.
        Kucinich later said the Obama administration now has to make its case in court.

        “They can tell it to the judge now,” Kucinich said. “They can’t claim this isn’t a war.”

        The lawsuit is asking the court to “declare that the war in Libya is illegal and order the White House to stop.”

        The goal of the administration and legislators who support the Libya mission is approval of a new resolution that backs U.S. participation, which would serve as an equivalent to congressional authorization.

        In his letter to Obama, Boehner complained that the administration has failed to address questions about the mission that were in the June 3 House resolution, which set a two-week deadline for a response.

        Boehner’s letter reiterated the Friday deadline and took the additional step of warning that a failure to respond could violate the War Powers Resolution.

        According to Boehner, a 90-day deadline for congressional authorization of the Libya mission expires Sunday.

        “It would appear that, in five days, the administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission,” Boehner’s letter said.

        The White House has previously said it was complying with the War Powers Resolution through frequent briefings on the Libya mission.

        Boehner’s letter contested that assertion.

        “Since the mission began, the administration has provided tactical operational briefings to the House of Representatives, but the White House has systematically avoided requesting a formal authorization for its action,” Boehner’s letter said. “It has simultaneously sought, however, to portray that its actions are consistent with the War Powers Resolution. The combination of these actions has left many members of Congress, as well as the American people, frustrated by the lack of clarity over the administration’s strategic policies, by a refusal to acknowledge and respect the role of the Congress, and by a refusal to comply with the basic tenets of the War Powers Resolution.”

        Such political wrangling over war powers is common in Washington, with presidents frequently seeking to expand their freedom to commit U.S. forces and Congress battling to exert influence on the process.

        Boehner’s letter said that, in this case, “the ongoing, deeply divisive debate originated with a lack of genuine consultation prior to commencement of operations and has been further exacerbated by the lack of visibility and leadership from you and your administration.”

        With his letter, Boehner raised the stakes on an issue that could prove politically embarrassing to Obama, with increasing numbers of Republicans and Democrats opposing the Libya mission.

        In announcing the mission in March, Obama said U.S. forces would take the early lead in establishing a no-fly zone over the country in order to enforce a U.N. resolution calling for the protection of Libyan civilians from forces loyal to leader Moammar Gadhafi.

        The U.S. forces eventually assumed a supporting role as NATO took over the mission.

        Congressional opponents of the mission say that its objective of civilian protection fails to match the stated U.S. goal of Gadhafi’s resignation or ouster and that the Libya situation could become a stalemate.

        The White House says incremental progress is occurring through increasing diplomatic, political and military pressure on Gadhafi to step down.

        In a coincidence of scheduling, Obama and Boehner are set to play golf together for the first time Saturday, a day after Boehner’s deadline for information from the administration and the day before he says it could be in violation of the War Powers Resolution.

        CNN’s Tom Cohen contributed to this report.
        Copyright CNN 2011

        Read more:

      • Sen. John McCain hammered President Barack Obama Thursday for claiming that U.S. military action in Libya does not rise to the level of hostilities governed by the War Powers Act. (WHAT? murdering and killing and bombing raids are not on the scale of War?)
        McCain Scolds White House on Libya : Roll Call News
        Sen. John McCain hammered President Barack Obama Thursday for claiming that U.S. military action in Libya does not rise to the level of hostilities governed by the War Powers Act…

        What does Obama think he was playing a Computer Game?

        From Cynthia McKinney: Libya – “I did not have war with that country!”
        .par Cynthia McKinney, jeudi 16 juin 2011, 20:33.Robert Oliver sent me the best line yet for President Obama’s defense of what he is doing in Libya–reminiscent of the now-famous words of one of our former Presidents, also caught in a lie: I did not have war with that country!” Cute, Robert.

        1. Read Ellen Brown on Libya; Read Ellen Brown on the Federal Reserve–just read Ellen Brown!

        2. Hear Michael Hudson talk about how President Obama’s economic predators are at work domestically and internationally – look up his videos online;

        3. And then, finally, view this cute little video sent to me by Ati; please take a look at the rest of the videos on the page that disclose Qaddafi’s vision of a United States of Africa and a gold-backed African currency – and we know who’s got the gold, and a one million person army to counter AFRICOM and European threats to African self-determination:

        And, oh yes, they bombed again last night a place where civilians gather every night. First of all, they know civilians are there because it’s broadcast on Libyan TV every night. Civilians gather there, and even get married there. There have been two weddings there since I have been here. The blast was so forceful, many, many kilometers away I felt it.

        I commend the Members of Congress who are upholding their Constitutional duties and forcing our President to abide by the U.S. Constitution and the War Powers Act. The American people can force this President to uphold international law, too. Targeted assassination, extra-judicial killing, targeting of civilians, collective punishment–all illegal.

        Now, for those who refuse to hear the cacophony of the NATO media wurlitzer, I sought out some Libyans and asked them some questions about the mysterious hit piece targeting me that appeared on twitter. Here are their responses to my questions (pardon me, this is the raw, unedited content):

        1. the name is not a common Libyan name

        2. the Green Book was implemented in March 2 1977; the economic aspects of the Green Book were gradually deviated from starting in about 1989; accelerated in the mid-90s and became totally absent in the service sector except banking, and not in security sector; the trend has been toward more opening at the behest of the United States and the Western countries

        3. he said that the system must be made more effective, starting about 10 years ago

        4. Tabouh are the free borders nomads with camels; Tabouh from Niger, Chad and Libya are recognized as Libyans.

        5. Janjaweed are a part of the culture of Sudan; always tried to work with US Congress thanked Libya for opening the humanitarian aid to the areas

        6. There are two cars in front of all of the houses; food is subsidized–basic foodstuffs 100% for last 20 years, water, elec is subsidized; everything is cheap; running water in housing, everyone has housing; no area is without primary care, streetlighting, electricity; those who complain want more for themselves and object to spend money on Africa

        7. the unemployed get a monthly stipend to live on with, but the jobs that need to be done, many Libyans don’t want to do that work

        8. 2 million guest worker laborers were evacuated, there is opportunity for work in Libya

        9. about 12,000 Libyan students on average every student is paid 1500 dinars per month plus family allowance, plus university fees, etc.

  13. ‘Military aggression’
    NATO has come under increasing criticism that it is overstepping the U.N. Security Council’s mandate, which provides for the protection of civilians but not for wider attacks. The Pan African Parliament, the legislative body of the African Union, plans an emergency session next week to discuss what it calls NATO’s “military aggression.”

    The latest reported NATO raids targeted the sprawling, heavily fortified Gadhafi compound Saturday, said government spokesman Ibrahim Uthman. The spokesman earlier said a NATO strike hit the port.
    Uthman said he believed four people were hit in the strike but the extent of their injuries was not immediately clear.


    Reuters Television pictures showed a column of smoke rising over the capital.

    On Friday, NATO also struck a facility near the capital Friday and a command and control hub near Sebha, a Gadhafi stronghold deep in Libya’s southwestern desert, a NATO statement said in Brussels. Three surface-to-air missile launchers were hit near the government-held town of Sirte, and three rocket launchers near the rebel-held town of Zintan in the mountains south of Tripoli.

    Also on Friday, NATO warplanes bombed seven Libyan small coast guard vessels, and one naval 100 meter frigate, the “al-Ghardabia“, in three ports, leaving ships partially sunken and charred and showering docks with debris in the military alliance’s broadest attack on Gadhafi.
    Commandant Omran al-Forjani, head of Libya’s coast guard, claimed the targeted ships were used to patrol Libyan waters for boats carrying African migrants trying to make the dangerous sea crossing to Europe and for search-and-rescue operations.

    A NATO task force has also boarded 47 vessels — including one on Friday — and seven ships filled with provisions of food and medical supplies, have been diverted to Bengazi Rebels, leaving Tripoli in dire shortage, since the NATO naval operation started in mid-March.
    The latest vessel to be boarded was identified as the MV Jupiter, NATO said Saturday. The tanker, whose registration remained unclear, was carrying gasoline and was instructed not to continue to Libya “because we had reason to believe it was intended for military purposes”, a NATO official said. Such turn-aways have left Tripoli with very little gasoline at the commercial pumps, creating a growing frustration of residents struggling to cope with rising food prices and gasoline shortages.

    In the coastal town of Zawiya, crowds apparently are outraged by dwindling fuel supplies. An attack on foreign journalists took place as their vehicle was caught in a traffic jam caused by miles-long lines of cars waiting for days for fuel, the journalists said.

    Several plainclothes security agents fired into the air around the bus to drive back the crowd. Another security man boarded the bus and pushed out the attackers. Police led the bus to a nearby station for the reporters’ safety.

    Libyan officials, meanwhile, have tried to portray the NATO attacks as hitting civilian and other non-military targets.

    Libyan officials in Tripoli took reporters to a civil-police building that was bombed earlier this week. The officials said the building’s offices were used to follow up on corruption cases, but NATO officials had described it as a “command and control center” — the standard description they have been giving for of most of their targets.
    The building appeared to have some civilian use. Strewn, charred papers shoved in an abandoned sack showed correspondence of officials trying to pursue small corruption cases.
    One paper dated Oct. 29, 2005, summoned a seller of expired medicines to give a statement to authorities. A paper from July 7, 2010, urges education heads to prevent cheating in exams. Another from Oct. 9, 2010, lists the problems that delayed the building of 52 units for seven years and noted other overdue projects.
    “In whose interests is it to fight people who fight corruption?” asked a government employee, Othman Baraka.

    On Saturday, London based “rights” group Amnesty International said hundreds of men have disappeared from Misrata, the rebels’ main toehold in western Libya, since 18 March 2011.

    In Paris, France’s Foreign Ministry said four Frenchmen held by Libyan rebel forces on suspicion of spying have been released and are now in Egypt.
    The four worked for a private security company and were detained by Libya’s rebel forces at a checkpoint on May 12 in Benghazi, the eastern Libya base for rebel forces. A rebel commander at the time accused them of spying. The fifth member of the group had died of wounds he suffered after being shot at the checkpoint.

    © 2011

    • Ron Paul: Disband NATO
      Eric Garris, 01 April 2008

      This is Ron Paul’s statement before the US House of Representatives on House Resolution 997, “expressing the strong support of the House of Representatives for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to enter into a Membership Action Plan with Georgia and Ukraine.”

      Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution calling for the further expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia. NATO is an organization whose purpose ended with the end of its Warsaw Pact adversary. When NATO struggled to define its future after the Cold War, it settled on attacking a sovereign state, Yugoslavia, which had neither invaded nor threatened any NATO member state.

      This current round of NATO expansion is a political reward to governments in Georgia and Ukraine that came to power as a result of US-supported revolutions, the so-called Orange Revolution and Rose Revolution. The governments that arose from these street protests were eager to please their US sponsor and the US, in turn, turned a blind eye to the numerous political and human rights abuses that took place under the new regimes. Thus the US policy of “exporting democracy” has only succeeding in exporting more misery to the countries it has targeted.

      NATO expansion only benefits the US military industrial complex, which stands to profit from expanded arms sales to new NATO members. The “modernization” of former Soviet militaries in Ukraine and Georgia will mean tens of millions in sales to US and European military contractors. The US taxpayer will be left holding the bill, as the US government will subsidize most of the transactions. Providing US military guarantees to Ukraine and Georgia can only further strain our military. This NATO expansion may well involve the US military in conflicts as unrelated to our national interest as the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia. The idea that American troops might be forced to fight and die to prevent a small section of Georgia from seceding is absurd and disturbing.

      Mr. Speaker, NATO should be disbanded, not expanded.


    • 10 congressmen sue Obama over strikes in Libya
      Posted: 2011/06/17

      AP) — A bipartisan group of 10 lawmakers is suing President Barack Obama for taking military action against Libya without war authorization from Congress.

      The lawmakers say Obama violated the Constitution in bypassing Congress and using international organizations like the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to authorize military force.

      The lawmakers want a judge to issue an order suspending military operations without congressional approval. They said they were filing their lawsuit Wednesday against Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

      The plaintiffs are Democratic Reps. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, John Conyers of Michigan and Michael Capuano of Massachusetts and Republican Reps. Walter Jones and Howard Coble of North Carolina, Tim Johnson of Illinois, Dan Burton of Indiana, Jimmy Duncan of Tennessee, Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland and Ron Paul of Texas.

  14. Pipard writes: “Obama is a Law Breaker for waging war on Libya without Congress Approval.
    Rand Paul, one of the only honest men in Congress, is calling Obama out for breaking the Law by going to War in Gross Violation of the War Powers Act. In actuality, Obama is a scummy crooked little criminal thug from Chicago, home of the dirtiest politicians in America, who is violating the US Constitution and he needs to be impeached and jailed for his Crimes against both Libya as well as against the US Constitution.”



      One of the “most professional” news networks in the world, it has to be cautioned that Al Jazeera is not a neutral actor. It is subordinate to the Emir of Qatar and the Qatari government, which is also an autocracy. By picking and choosing what to report, Al Jazeera’s coverage of Libya is biased. This is evident when one studies Al Jazeera’s coverage of Bahrain, which has been restrained due to political ties between the leaders of Bahrain and Qatar.[*]How come there are no calls for an intervention in Bahrain? Well, for one, it is a major base for the U.S. 5th Fleet.

      Reports by Al Jazeera about Libyan jets firing on protesters in Tripoli and the major cities are unverified and questionable. [1] Hereto, the reports that Libyan jets have been attacking people in the streets have not been verified. No visual evidence of the jet attacks has been shown, while visual confirmation about other events have been coming out of Libya. [*]

      Flag of Qatar, USA, France … Poters in English? Strange ? coincidene? NO
      Al Jazeera is not alone in its biased reporting from Libya. The Saudi media is also relishing the events in Libya. Asharq Al-Awsat is a Saudi-owned paper that is strictly aligned to U.S. interests in the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region. Its editor-in-chief is now running editorials glorifying the Arab League for their decision to suspend Libya, because of the use of force by Tripoli against Libyans protesters – why were such steps not taken for Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, or Yemen? Inside and outside the Arab World, the mainstream media is creating the conditions for some war intervention in Libya.
      Italia, France et Quatar
      More action?? perfect english?? flag of Italy, France and Qatar? coincidence? NO
      The Transitional Council too has been waging an intense propaganda war. With the help of Qatar, the Transitional Council has established its own television and news channel.[2] This is how the Los Angeles Times described the news sources run by the Transitional Council:

      It’s not fair and balanced media. In fact, as [Mohammed G.] Fannoush [the former librarian who runs the media for the Transitional Council] helpfully pointed out [in his own words], there are four inviolate rules of coverage on the two rebel radio stations, TV station and newspaper:
      -No pro-[Qaddafi] reportage or commentary (at least until the tyrant in Tripoli is deposed).
      -No mention of a civil war. (The Libyan people, east and west, are unified in a war against a totalitarian regime.)
      -No discussion of tribes or tribalism. (There is only one tribe: Libya.)
      -No references to Al Qaeda or Islamic extremism. (That’s [Qaddafi’s] propaganda.) [3]
      Moreover, Fannoush himself as the head of the opposition media acknowledged to the Los Angeles Times that the media in Benghazi serves as a mouthpiece for the Transitional Council. [4] The New York Times, which has predominately been supportive of the Transitional Council has been more blunt about the Transitional Council’s credibility: “[L]ike the chiefs of the Libyan state news media, the rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping propaganda, claiming nonexistent battlefield victories, asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Qaddafi forces, and making vastly inflated claims of his barbaric [acts].” [5][**]
      [1] Ibid.; I have been given two explanations for this. The first explanation is that government agents from Libya have been disseminating misinformation to Al Jazeera. This includes reports made to Al Jazeera that jets have been attacking civilians in the streets. Gaddafi has used this to try to discredit Al Jazeera internally in Libya by pointing out to the Libyan people that no jet attacks have occurred and that Al Jazeera is broadcasting misinformation. The second explanation is that Al Jazeera is simply spreading misinformation. Whatever the case, both explanations agree no Libyan jets have attacked protesters yet.
      [2] David Zucchino, “The voice of Libya’s rebellion is up and spinning,” The Los Angeles Times, April 7, 2011.
      [5] David D. Kirkpatrick, “Hopes for a Qaddafi Exit, and Worries of What Comes Next,” The New York Times, March 21, 2011.

    Libya: Britain’s £1bn warLibya conflict could cost UK taxpayers £1bn over six months as Gaddafi clings on and cost of involvement soars
    Richard Norton-Taylor and Simon Rogers, Sunday 22 May 2011 17.05 BST Article history
    the one disabled Libyan frigate that was bombed, al-Ghardabia
    Libyan navy frigate “Al Ghardabia” on fire after being hit by British Tornado bombers. Photograph: Darko Bandic/AP
    Britain’s involvement in the Libya conflict will cost the taxpayer as much as £1bn if it continues into the autumn as expected, according to expert analysis and data gathered by the Guardian.

    Two months after western powers began bombing Libyan targets to protect civilians in Operation Unified Protector, the cost to Britain so far of the dozens of bombs dropped, hundreds of sorties flown and more than 1,000 service personnel deployed is estimated at more than £100m, according to British defence officials.

    But defence economists have told the Guardian the costings are conservative. Francis Tusa, editor of the Defence Analysis newsletter, estimates that by the end of April Libyan operations had already cost the UK about £300m and that the bill was increasing by up to £38m a week.

    Military chiefs have acknowledged that the air campaign would last six months. At this rate, the Ministry of Defence’s own estimates will put the cost of war at about £400m, but the expert view is that the figure will top £1bn by September.

    Another defence analyst told the Guardian £1bn was probably at the top end of the scale, but that it would not be a complete surprise in Whitehall if this was the final bill for six months of operations.

    “A lot of what they are doing out there is a substitute for training that would have cost anyway,” he said.

    “The final cost will depend on whether the Treasury is prepared to pay for replacements for all the bombs and missiles that have been used so far.”

    British warplanes are increasingly involved along with the French and Italians. According to data collected by the Guardian for the six weeks of aerial operations up to 5 May, the British have flown 25% of nearly 6,000 sorties over Libyan skies – second only to the Americans. The US total was inflated by an early surge, and it has now scaled back its operations. For the five weeks to 5 May , Britain flew more sorties than any other country. But British planes have been dropping far fewer bombs than their allies, relative to the number of flights .

    So far, they have attacked about 300 targets, perhaps only 10% of the few thousands destroyed by Nato aircraft.

    Norway and Denmark have by some distance the highest ratio of bombs dropped in relation to population.

    The true cost of the operation will not be announced for weeks, according to defence officials. It is certain to be significantly more than the “tens of millions” stated in parliament by the chancellor, George Osborne, shortly after the bombing started. One other thing is certain: the cost of the bombs has been significantly more than the targets they have destroyed.

    The Nato operation was designed to implement a UN security council resolution authorising force to defend civilians. But after stopping Muammar Gaddafi’s forces wresting back chunks of the east of the country, the campaign has had little discernible impact in recent weeks on Gaddafi’s stronghold in the capital.

    Tripoli has been heavily bombed for the past 10 days, with all Libyan ships either sunk or damaged and many command posts and bunker complexes also hit. However, demonstrations in support of Gaddafi are still common and dissident groups are unwilling to engage his loyalist army, which still controls the west of the country. Defence chiefs in the UK and US are also said to be concerned that some Nato countries are unwilling to commit air power to the campaign.It is not only the cost that is worrying the Ministry of Defence, and, indeed, defence chiefs in the Pentagon.The reluctance of most countries to commit their air forces to action – Norway, which has dropped about 300 bombs, is to pull out at the end of June.– is causing serious concern among military commanders throughout the alliance about whether Nato countries have the political will and military capability to continue operations that now have the stated aim of removing power from Gaddafi, his sons, and closet advisers.

    For Britain, the Libyan conflict has also presented military commanders and ministers alike with an uncomfortable reminder of the perilous state of the defence budget. As Paul Cornish, head of the international security programme at the thinktank Chatham House, has observed, many of the military capabilities used in and around Libya – HMS Cumberland, the Nimrod R1 eavesdropping plane, the Sentinental surveillance aircraft, and Tornado jets – are among the first casualties to be scrapped or their numbers reduced (in the case of Tornados) as a result of last year’s strategic defence and security review.

    “The obvious question to ask,” Cornish writes in the latest issue of The World Today, “is whether Britain could have made a contribution to the intervention in Libya had the crisis developed later in 2011 when most of the decommissionings, disbandments, and retirements would otherwise have taken place.”

    The US led the assault, during the first week flying more than 800 sorties in Libya, of which over 300 were strike sorties. It fired more than 200 Tomahawk cruise missiles from its ships. Britain has fired fewer than 20 Tomahawks, costing an estimated £1m each, from the submarine HMS Triumph.

    Britain, which has accounted for some 25% of all sorties, was so worried about the gap left by the US when it ceded command to Nato, and stood down its aircraft – including low-flying A10 tankbusting “Warthogs” and C130 gunships

  16. From Cynthia McKinney: Frank Wisner’s Mighty Wurlitzer is Playing Now, But Nobody’s Dancing!

    .par Cynthia McKinney,
    dimanche 12 juin 2011, 23:32.

    Seems the “Mighty Wurlitzer” is running in overdrive. Only thing, it’s not making music, it’s making noise. Interesting this comes out the day after I met with the real leader of Libya, the chief of all of the tribal chiefs. In a recent vote, the tribal chiefs voted that Libya will not be divided, despite the best efforts of NATO and their “rebel” allies. And I also met the tribal chiefs in the eastern and southern parts of the country.

    See the latest from their disinformation campaign–clearly they are afraid of the truth: they want NATO to bomb their own country, and have rejected every peace proposal put forward, including one by the African Union. Interestingly, the contents of this misinformation message bear a striking resemblance to the tone set in the campaign used against Earl Hilliard, sitting Congressman defeated by the pro-Israel Lobby in 2002 for daring to be interested in Africa in general and Libya in particular, and encouraging the Members of the Congressional Black Caucus to do the same. I was told that the NATO allies have promised Israel recognition and a military base, among other things. I will produce a report on that once I’ve completed my interviews, readings, and have obtained the translation of the Hebrew document.

    Virtuous Gadhafi, loved by millions
    Democratic Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, targeted for assassination, survives recent attacks. – Photo: Getty Images


    Coming here and seeing for yourself is particularly important because everything that you think you know about Libya from the Western media is a lie. Once you arrive, you will learn. And then, what to do? We must confront our President with the truth. My experience has been that lies eventually wither in the face of the truth. So continuing these delegations is certainly something worth considering. We’ll revisit this after we see how the fundraising tour goes.

    Today, I’m sending a message that can be found at the San Francisco Bay View newspaper. Deborah Dupre compiled our DIGNITY Delegation missives into a very good newspaper article and the Bay View carried it. In addition, please find below, a link to a PressTV interview done by Don DeBar who has received all of our footage and put it online. Here’s the link to Don’s interview with PressTV:

    Yesterday, our journalist from Cape Town South Africa was allowed to film in a place where the bodies are still underneath the rubble. Remember New York’s Ground Zero? Hurricane Katrina? I did not attend with this member of our Delegation, but he told me that he had to kneel and cry, the scene was so powerful and moving. He owns a TV station in South Africa and after he gets the footage uploaded to his station, then he will share it with us and Don Debar will be able to post it at I will definitely let you know when we have received permission to post this material. I’m also hoping that before the tour, Don will be able to put a 10 minute video together that will only be unveiled at each of the tour stops.

    Finally, the list of articles I must write keeps growing and I want to write them before I leave here. Here’s hoping: 1. Mercenary story and the murder of Hisham; 2. How NATO treats the Libyans like Israel treats the Palestinians; 3. A backgrounder on the truth and lies about the beginning of this crisis; 4. Rape. In addition to these stories I want to also tell the story of (5) the many Judas kisses the Libyan people have received from trusted friends all around the world. I, too, know the sting of betrayal. I want to write about what Libyans have expressed to me about their friends letting them down.

    Here is Don Debar’s message with links and below it is the composite story from the San Francisco Bay View newspaper–they need a Pulitzer or better yet, a people’s award, for their contributions to the truth:

    Don’s message:

    It’s been a week since we first started passing on the information coming to us from on the ground in Tripoli, and you can see that the truth is quite a bit different from the picture being painted by US media, including by such “progressive” outlets as Democracy Now and post-coup Pacifica Radio. There are still remaining, however, some free spaces within Pacifica where the word has been getting out – more on that within.

    Some of the Dignity delegation has returned to the US – our first two pieces today are interviews conducted here in the US after their return.

    First is an interview done yesterday with Dignity delegation member Dedon Kamathi, a producer for Pacifica Radio’s KPFK-FM in Los Angeles. That interview, by Askia Muhammad, aired on Pacifica’s Washington, DC station WPFW-FM yesterday. You can hear it at

    Next is a piece written by Dignity delegation member Wayne Madsen, a Washington, DC journalist who specializes in intelligence matter. That piece, entitled “NATO’s ‘Alternate Universe’ in Libya” begins as follows:

    “The Pentagon and its NATO partners are engaged in one of the most obvious and intensive propaganda ploys in their military operations against Libya since the days leading up to the “Coalition of the Willing” attack on Iraq.” The entire piece can be found at

    I was interviewed by PressTV this past Thursday about the War on Libya, including the attempt by the US to present it as a NATO, and not American, enterprise, as well as how the cost of the US wars are impacting the US economic crisis – that interview can be found at

    I am waiting for some further information about some rather graphic video I received yesterday from Tripoli; when I receive it, I will forward a link and description of same.

    Don DeBar

    87 Ferris Pl

    Ossining, NY 10562

    914 374-2475
    And here is the Dupre article from the San Francisco Bay View newspaper:

    McKinney human rights fact-finders show Libyan deaths, injuries not ‘propaganda’

    June 9, 2011

    Powered by Translate

    by Deborah Dupre

    In the CIA kick-started war on Libya, The New York Times report Monday by John F. Burns, calling Libyan civilian casualties “propaganda,” does not square with a series of WBAIX in-hospital interviews (posted below) by Joshalyn Lawrence that show civilian victim survivors of U.S./NATO intensifying bomb raids, both witnessed by a human rights fact-finding mission including Cynthia McKinney and former members of parliament, who report it is NATO spin that mainstream media is reporting.

    “Sightings of civilian casualties have been rare,” reported Burns on June 6. “Visits to bombing sites, hospitals and funerals have produced a succession of blunders, including patients identified as bombing victims who turned out not to be, empty coffins at funerals and burials where some of those interred turned out not to be airstrike victims at all.”

    The Lawrence videos, on the WBAIX channel, of hospitalized civilians is evidence that, rather than injuries and killings by bombs being “rare” or reporting “blunders,” they are realities. Graphic images of the wounded are documented in the WBAIX videos created by Joshalyn Lawrence.

    In the videos, one after another wounded innocent civilian described atrocities to Cynthia McKinney, in a fact-finding mission with a team including a delegation of former MPs and professors from France, all now in Tripoli.

    The live-stream Lawrence videos on DeBar’s channel document the NATO attacks and the injured, showing their wounds and describing friends and co-workers killed.

    McKinney’s fact-finder team is seen entering one hospital room after another, each with the injured and the doctor explaining how the injury occurred and showing the injuries.

    Houses are “completely destroyed” and meanwhile, according to McKinney, NATO has its own psychological operation in progress.

    In a June 7 statement by McKinney, she refutes NATO claims about making “significant progress” in “protecting Libyan civilians” and “targeting military intelligence headquarters in downtown Tripoli.”

    The fact-finder team, of which McKinney is a delegate, planned a program to visit camps of internally displaced persons in the area but this could not occur because of U.S./NATO attacks.

    “[W]e are not able to complete our program while Tripoli is under attack. I will do my best to visit some of the areas bombed today when and if this attack lets up.”

    Like The New York Times, The Washington Post headlined “Libya government fails to prove claims of NATO casualties” and the Los Angeles Times headline was “Libya officials put a spin on a conflict.”

    “These bombs and missiles are not falling in empty spaces: People are all over Tripoli going about their lives just as in any other major metropolitan city of about 2 million people,” stated McKinney.


    “I don’t understand why they want to kill us,” said one young woman seen standing with others outside the Tripoli hospital room, explaining that the old are also being injured and killed.

    “Why?” is the question repeatedly asked by the injured who are able to speak.

    Political analyst Webster Tarpley answered that question Monday, June 6, on Press TV, stating that the “goal of all this all along has been to smash Libya into various parts to drive Qaddafi out of power and to seize control of the oil to re-impose the yoke of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in still more severe form than we ever had it.”

    “And I think right now desperation is growing, especially in London and Paris, that old Suez 1956 combination of unreconstructed imperialists,” said Tarpley.

    “They are desperate now because their methods so far are not working. They tried high level bombing, combined with this rebel rabble underground with a lot of al-Qaeda fighters included in it and that’s not working.”

    Wayne Madsen, who was among those in the hospital with McKinney and others, seeing the patients and witnessing the injuries, has reported that early mainstream media reports included photos of Libyan rebels waving weapons and discharging them into the air, while “NATO member nations were supposedly locked in debate as to whether or when to provide weapons to the rebels.”

    “Someone in the media finally pointed out that the weapons being waved about in the photos were NATO standard issue,” reported Madsen.

    Democratically elected Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, targeted for assassination, survives recent attacks. – Photo: Getty Images

    Foreign Secretary William Hauge has said that NATO’s almost three month long mission is intensifying and it could last many more months, according to Press TV.

    Tarpley speculates that the U.S. aggression on Libya could bring President Obama down. Republicans who have been long-time warmongers “are now seizing on the Libyan war as a means of attacking Obama.”

    The War Powers Act “would have required Obama to get congressional approval for what he is doing within 60 days, meaning by about May 20,” stated Tarpley. “At May 20, the second clock starts which gives him 30 days to pull out. If Obama does not pull out of the attack on Libya by about the 20th of June, he could be brought down by the Republicans in the House, who might use that as a vehicle to express their resentment so they build up some other issues.”

    African Americans in Harlem urged public support on Wednesday as they protest the U.S./NATO attacks on Libyan Africans and the targeting of Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qadaffi, the man praised by Nelson Mandela for supporting the anti-apartheid struggle and the man who has said No to the establishment of a U.S. military command (Africom) on the African continent to take African resources. (See “African Americans’ emergency gathering to stop Qadaffi assassination” by Deborah Dupré, National Human Rights

    McKinney asked June 7, “What were you doing today between 1:00 p.m. and now? The people of Tripoli endure the trauma of repeated bombings in their immediate environment.”

    Referring to “imperialist” Nuremberg crimes against humanity in Libya, Tarpley said that “undoubtedly,” depleted uranium and cluster bombs are being used, “and all the rest.”

    Investigations have revealed that the U.S. Navy used cluster bombs on Libyans that injured the innocent, including children.

    “[A]nd that’s what they call democracy these days.”

    Deborah Dupre holds American and Australian science and education graduate degrees and has 30 years experience in human rights, environmental and peace activism. Email her and visit her website, This story first appeared at

  17. “Recent abject failures by the United States to fool people have been the resurrection and killing of an old man passed off as Osama Ben Laden and then dumped out to sea, and even the birth certificate of U.S. president Obama, hosted on the official White House web site, which many managed to download and reveal the editing trail that had been left in the history of the fake document.”

  18. In his 02 MARCH 2011 speech, Gadhafi insisted he was not in charge and so there was no president to be ousted by the revolt, as happened in neighboring Tunisia and Egypt.
    He claimed the country was run by people’s committees. “It’s the people who exercise their own authority. The Libyan people are free to exercise power and authority in the manner they deem fit,” Gadhafi said.
    Peter Beaumont in Tripoli, Wednesday 2 March 2011 17.55 GMT
    Article history

    Muammar Gaddafi in performance: non sequiturs from the non-president
    Three-hour address at the Libyan People’s Congress enthuses the faithful but bemuses the world’s media
    02 MARCH 2011
    Colonel Muammar Gaddafi comes to the Libyan People’s Congress in an electric golf cart.
    His entourage, who box him in, arrive in half a dozen four-wheel drives. As he is mobbed by journalists on entering the hall, it takes his security detail 10 minutes to clear the platform. He stands in a brown turban and a long, white cloak to listen to the delegates’ applause and chants of support. Sometimes he raises a fist, with a gold ring, to punch the air.
    His face is puffy. His eyes squint to see beyond the flowerbed set into the carpet, its plants kicked over by the crowd trying to reach him, towards the first ranks of chairs. It is as if he is looking for someone, perhaps a face he knows to wave at.
    Sometimes a man in a dark coat and a black trilby steps from behind and whispers in his ear. Then the colonel raises two fists. He kisses his fingers in appreciation and, in a stifling hall, he sits down and removes first a red and then a white handkerchief with which to mop his brow.
    Gaddafi does not like the fact of the photographers sitting in front of him on the floor, so, with an imperious gesture, like King Canute ordering back the waves, he gestures one way with his hand and then the other.
    As the journalists are moved, a large television monitor is revealed behind them, in which Gaddafi can see himself reflected. He bounces slightly on his green leather chair for comfort and then stands again to greet cries of “Allahu Akbar”.
    When the speech begins, it is interrupted by chants of “God and Muammar, you are all that Libya requires”. You hear this on the streets in Tripoli and the surrounding towns at demonstrations organised by the regime.
    Gaddafi tells the delegates with a smile that he has never heard these chants before. He explains he does not watch television much.
    Then the real performance begins, almost three hours of it. He laughs sometimes, but not very much. Largely he reads from his script in a low bass voice, sitting behind a long, ornate desk whose facia is decorated with
    gold seals and on which sit three bouquets.
    From behind this construction he tries to explain that he is not a king or a prince or even a president. When he is asked to come to the congress it is as the “example of the revolution that he led”.
    The power, he insists, is with the people and their revolutionary committees. Sometimes, however, people ask him to intervene. And sometimes he agrees.
    The representatives of “the people” don’t say much. There are a few questions for which his sheath of paper seems to have the answers ready scripted. Over the hours a few fall asleep while others pop up enthusiastically
    on cue to start another wave of chanting.
    Instead, it is all about the man who is not a president or a king. He suggests he is the country’s father, like Paquale Paoli was in Corsica.. He talks about the country’s sons and children. He talks about his own children, too: Saif al Islam, whom he credits with telling him the country needs a constitution, and his daughter, whose charity, he says, has not taken money for personal use abroad.
    The non-president announces new policies and initiatives. He explains why his tone today is different from when he spoke in Green Square to the angry youth. Today he is speaking in the language of the world, not of the furious young people.
    There are the usual flourishes. Gaddafi says Libyans will “fight to the last man and woman” against foreigners. “We will enter a bloody war and thousands and thousands of Libyans will die if the United States enters or Nato enters,” Gaddafi says, laughing at points during his long address.
    “Do they want us to become slaves once again like we were slaves to the Italians? … We will never accept it.” There are jibes against David Cameron and the UN security council. Offers of aid, he says, are equivalent to invasion. He blames al-Qaida for the trouble.
    All of which you would expect.
    It is the unexpected things that stand out. He offers – twice – an amnesty to those who lay down their “stolen weapons”, and hints at an apology and investigation for those who died “on both sides”.
    There is money on offer, and a constitution, and a free press.
    A woman in a green, spangled headdress tries to reach the stage with a sheet of white paper, as all sense that the speech is coming to an end. She is blocked, but Gaddafi is mobbed again as he walks to his golf cart. He does not drive but is pushed from behind by his minders as journalists shout questions.
    Then he is gone. And it is over. The coaches come for the delegates. If there has been a vote on anything, or a debate, then we have not seen it.
    Another moment in Libya’s unique system of “pure democracy” – as the Colonel likes to call it – has reached its conclusion.

  19. Gadhafi plays chess with Russians
    AFP Update: June 13, 2011
    Libye: le régime refuse toute discussion sur un départ de Kadhafi Libya: the regime refuses any discussion of a departure from Gaddafi
    Le régime libyen refuse toute discussion sur un départ du colonel Mouammar Kadhafi, quatre mois après le début de l’insurrection dans le pays, alors que les combats entre pro et anti-Kadhafi ont repris de plus belle sur plusieurs fronts. The Libyan regime refuses any discussion on a departure of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, four months after the start of the insurgency in the country, as fighting between pro and anti-Gaddafi has flared up on several fronts.

    AFP/Archives AFP / File
    .”Je ne suis ni Premier ministre ni président ni roi. Je n’occupe aucun poste en Libye. C’est pourquoi je ne dois renoncer à aucune fonction”, a déclaré dimanche le colonel Kadhafi, selon les propos rapportés par le président russe de la Fédération internationale des échecs, Kirsan Ilioumjinov. “I am neither a prime minister or president or king. I do not hold any position in Libya. That’s why I do not waive any function,” said Colonel Gaddafi on Sunday, according to comments reported by Russian president the World Chess Federation, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.

    Les deux hommes se sont rencontrés à Tripoli où ils ont joué aux échecs, preuve à l’appui les images diffusées par la télévision libyenne montrant le dirigeant libyen, lunettes noires et abaya (longue robe), en pleine partie. The two men met in Tripoli where they played chess, evidence supporting the images broadcast by Libyan television showed the Libyan leader, sunglasses and abaya (long dress) in the middle part.

    “Kadhafi a dit qu’il n’avait pas l’intention de quitter la Libye”, a assuré M. Ilioumjinov à l’agence Interfax, en écho au message audio du colonel le 7 juin qui disait: “Malgré les bombardements, nous nous soumettrons jamais”. “Gaddafi said he did not intend to leave Libya,” assured Mr. Ilyumzhinov the Interfax news agency, echoing the audio message from Colonel June 7 that said: “Despite the bombing, we We never submit. ”

    Les déclarations de Mouammar Kadhafi de dimanche sont également une réponse à la “garantie” que lui a offerte la Turquie pour qu’il quitte son pays. Muammar Gaddafi’s statements on Sunday are also a response to the “guarantee” that he has offered him to leave Turkey for his country. Cette tentative de médiation d’Ankara s’ajoutait à celle de l’Union africaine et à la “feuille de route” de présenter Moscou. This attempt at mediation in Ankara was added to that of the African Union and the “roadmap” of Moscow. Le conflit a fait depuis le 15 février entre “10.000 et 15.000” morts selon l’ONU, et obligé près de 952.000 à prendre la fuite, selon l’Organisation internationale pour les migrations. The conflict has since February 15 between “10,000 and 15,000” dead according to the UN, and forced nearly 952,000 to flee, according to the International Organization for Migration.

    Sur le terrain, les combats se poursuivent de plus belle entre pro et anti-Kadhafi. On the ground, fighting continued with a vengeance between pro-and anti-Gaddafi. Dans l’Est, les rebelles tentent de gagner le site pétrolier de Brega, à 240 km à l’ouest de Benghazi, et dans les montagnes au sud-ouest ils cherchent à écraser les poches de résistance des pro-Kadhafi. In the east, the rebels are trying to reach the site of Brega oil, 240 km west of Benghazi, and in the mountains south-west they seek to crush the pockets of resistance from pro-Gaddafi.

    A 40 km à l’est de la ville stratégique de Brega se sont déroulés dimanche d’intenses affrontements à coups de roquettes Grad et d’obus, selon les rebelles. At 40 km east of the strategic town of Brega took place Sunday in intense clashes with rifle shells and Grad rockets, according to the rebels.

    Dans la région de Misrata, cité portuaire rebelle à 200 km à l’est de Tripoli, les forces pro-Kadhafi ont par ailleurs pilonné à nouveau samedi la zone de Dafniyeh. Misrata in the region, rebel port city 200 km east of Tripoli, the pro-Gaddafi also pounded the area again on Saturday Dafniyeh.

    Dans les montagnes berbères de l’ouest, au moins sept rebelles sont morts et ont été 49 blessés dans d’intenses combats visant à desserrer l’étau autour de Zenten, selon un décompte d’un correspondant de l’AFP à l’hôpital de cette ville. In the Berber mountains of the west, at least seven rebels were killed and 49 wounded were in intense fighting to loosen the noose around Zentena, according to a statement of AFP correspondent at the hospital of this city.

    L’insurrection s’est étendue par ailleurs à la ville historique de Ghadames, la “Perle du désert”, à quelque 600 km au sud-ouest de Tripoli, à la frontière de la Tunisie et de l’Algérie, selon des sources rebelles. The insurgency has spread also to the historic city of Ghadames, the “Pearl of the Desert, some 600 km southwest of Tripoli, on the border of Tunisia and Algeria, according to rebel sources

  20. The political leader of the Libya insurrection Mustafa Mohamed Abdel-Jalil, was Muammar al-Quathafi’s justice minister until early this year. In an interview with The Financial Times on March 14, 2011, he said new oil concessions would be granted based on the level of support each Western country provided the rebels in ousting al-Quathafi. Immediately thereafter Western countries led by France and Britain escalated attacks on Libya.

    It has now degenerated into a Western backed civil war.
    U.S. lawmakers should force a halt to American participation. The U.S. pays almost 3/4 of NATO’s bills and without Washington sustaining the war, the combatants in Libya would be forced to come to the negotiating table.

    On June 3, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 148-265 against a bill authored by Democratic lawmaker Rep. Dennis Kucinich–it demanded that the U.S. halt any involvement in the Libyan war.

    The Kucinich measure would have passed had it not been for a devious ploy by Republican House speaker John Boehner. When he realized that enough Republicans were willing to vote with Rep. Kucinich, a Democrat, Boehner introduced his own bill.

    Unlike Kucinich’s, the Boehner bill did not call for the withdrawal of U.S forces. It simply called for an accounting of the cost from President Barack Obama and an explanation from the president about the U.S. involvement in the Libyan civil war. So, lawmakers now had a face-saving option and many voted for Boehner’s watered down bill which passed 268-145.

    Still, 87 Republicans voted for Kucinich’s bill, more than the 61 votes that he garnered from fellow Democrats. Ironically, Democrats – the so-called party of liberals – have now become the party of warmongers. Democrats condemned George W. Bush as a war criminal for launching the Iraq war eventhough unlike President Obama, Bush, to his credit did seek lawmakers’ approval.

    At least Bush, at the end of the day, could argue that Sadam Hussein was a genocidal killer who gassed his own citizens.

    As a candidate, President Obama was most vocal in criticizing Bush and Republicans for the Iraq war–in fact, it’s the main reason why he defeated Hillary Clinton for the nomination and eventually won the White House.

    Now, President Obama is determined to pursue an unconstitutional war on Libya. NATO bombardments have destroyed billions of dollars of Libyan infrastructure and without a doubt, given the intensity, killed innocent people.

    Just as in the Iraq war, Western media outlets are not eager to assess or investigate the deaths of civilians in the Libya war. The war is also supported by newspapers such as The New York Times which became very critical of Bush’s Iraq war but whose editors now seem to have lost their minds and become cheerleaders promoting U.S. involvement in France’s and Britain’s imperial war on Libya. On this score the Times see eye-to-eye with the right wing editorial pages of The Wall Street journal.

    Only the United States Congress has the authority to declare war. Should the president engage U.S. forces in combat, under the War Powers Resolution, he is required to seek Congressional authority within 60 days. The U.S. has been in the Libyan war for 85 days now.

    Rep. Kucinich should revamp his bill and introduce it again. He will find many Republican allies who are outraged that President Obama has ignored the War Powers Resolution.

    One such prominent Republican lawmakers expressed his anger on the pages of the June 11 – June 12 issue of The Wall Street Journal.

    Rep. Dan Burton writes that President Obama “argues that he couldn’t consult with Congress because immediate action was needed to protect civilians from massacre. If true, a surgical engagement in Libya might be justified.”

    Burton continues, “But the president’s claim is false. He spent one month consulting with NATO, the Arab League and the U.N. Security Council. This fact is inescapable. The president sought permission from foreign leaders but not the U.S. Congress.”

    He continued: “On September 11, 2001, our nation was attacked. President George W. Bush still sought authorization from Congress before going into Afghanistan. Similarly, President Bush sought congressional authorization before invading Iraq. President Bush respected the authority of Congress and the limitations of the Constitution. President Obama does not.”

    Burton, the Republican from Indiana concludes, “The Constitution is not a list of suggestions; it is the law of the land.”

    Perhaps realizing that the U.S. Congress could eventually rein in the American military role, NATO has escalated bombing attacks on Tripoli and on al-Quathafi’s residence. NATO hopes to assassinate the Libyan before Congress can vote again.

    What makes the NATO bombardments, described by Russia’s Vladimir Putin as a call to a “medieval crusade” even more reprehensible, is the fact that the African Union has presented a viable peace plan. The proposal has been ignored by President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Western media.

    U.S. Congress Can End NATO’s Libya War Of Aggression

    Black Star News
    June 12, 2011

    U.S. Congress Can End NATO’s Libya War Of Aggression

    Opposition to the United States’ unconstitutional involvement in the immoral Western war of aggression on Libya being carried out through NATO continues to grow among U.S. lawmakers.

    Several Republican members of Congress recently sided with a Democrat on a bill that seeks to end an American role and one of those detailed the reasons for his objection on the pages of The Wall Street Journal this weekend.

    NATO, especially on behalf of France and Britain, is trying to instal a pliant regime in Libya and has ignored a peace plan on the table that would end the war and usher democracy.

    The plan calls for a ceasefire, humanitarian relief, negotiations involving all Libyans for a constitution and democratic elections. Ironically, al-Quathafi has accepted this proposal, delivered to Libya by South African President Jacob Zuma, even though it might involve his being defeated at the polls.

    NATO, the rebels in Benghazi and Washington have rejected the African Union plan – preferring war and more death and destruction in Libya.

    Rep. Kucinich in addition to reintroducing his proposal should also lead a fact-finding Congressional mission to Libya to see whether Libyans prefer the AU plan or NATO’s destructive war whose sole aim is to instal the pro-Western rebels.

    • NATO and Qaddafi: What All Friends of Africa Should Know
      Posted: 2011/05/05

      Anyone wishing to know the truth about what is happening in Libya and why it affects everyone in the world in this major and expanding war between Africa and the collapsing states of the West, should read and share this article.

      HeyU Quality Ads
      By Gerald A. Perreira

      We are fighting nothing other than al-Qaeda in what they call the Islamic Maghreb. It’s an armed group that is fighting from Libya to Mauritania and through Algeria and Mali.… If you had found them taking over American cities by the force of arms, tell me what you would do?
      – From a letter sent by the Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi to the US president Barack Obama.

      In the Theatre of the Absurd, anything is possible. However, this latest scenario in Libya has taken absurdity to a whole new dimension. A rag-tag bunch of armed, al-Qaeda affiliated tribesmen, being referred to as a ‘pro-democracy movement’ by British State TV (BBC) and other mainstream media outlets, are now being openly armed and trained by the French, British and American governments. This same Coalition of Crusaders, with the support of the Arab League, is fighting alongside the rebels, launching continual bombing raids on targets in Tripoli and beyond, including Muammar Qadhafi’s compound, in a brazen attempt to assassinate the man and re-colonise Libya.

      And what is the support inside Libya for this so-called ‘Libyan pro-democracy movement’? The answer is less than 2% of the entire Libyan population. One might have expected that the Western and Arab worlds would have offered Qadhafi and the Libyan armed forces assistance to deal with this al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) inspired insurgency. But no. Surprisingly, or maybe not so surprisingly, instead, Britain France and the US, the “F-UK-US Alliance” led by the clown Sarkozy, in what can only be described as a war mongering frenzy, launched an all out attack on Muammar Qadhafi, his family, and the Libyan people.

      As this article goes to press, the Coalition forces continue to savagely bomb targets in Tripoli and beyond, killing civilians and destroying vital infrastructure. They are pounding Libya with a force that was last seen when they invaded Iraq, doing their utmost to leave Qadhafi and his people defenceless against this insurgency. In fact, so brazen is the imperialist Obama, that he has announced an ‘overt operation’, sending in CIA operatives to train and equip the rebels. Rebels who the State Department admits are disorganised and untrained and unable to articulate a vision for Libya, beyond killing Qadhafi.

      These rebels however do have an agenda. Their leaders and ideologues, inside and out of Libya, are well known for misinterpreting verses from the Quran, quoting out of context, in an attempt to justify their so-called jihad and practices which are fundamentally alien to the Islamic spirit. The best the Libyan rebels, read counter-revolutionaries, can do, is to chant ‘From Tunisia, Egypt to Libya and on, we will spread Jihad!’

      Western Powers and al-Qaeda – On the Same Side
      As far back as the mid 90s, a former MI5 agent, David Shayler, testified that British intelligence employed the services of an al-Qaeda cell inside Libya, paying them a large fee to assassinate Muammar Qadhafi. The assassination attempt was carried out. A grenade was lobbed at Qadhafi as he walked among a crowd in his hometown, Sirte. He was saved by one of his bodyguards, who threw herself on the grenade.

      Shayler revealed that while he was working on the Libya desk in the mid 90s, British secret service personnel were collaborating with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which was connected to one of Osama bin Laden’s trusted lieutenants. The LIFG officially joined al-Qaeda in 2007. On an Islamist website in 2009, Ayman al-Zawahiri welcomed them to the fold.

      Over the past two years, the Libyan authorities have released scores of imprisoned Islamists from the LIFG into the custody of their families and communities in a humanitarian attempt to integrate them back into Libyan society. With a pledge that they would use the forums set up in the country, under the auspices of the General People’s Congress, to express their views. Many of the released prisoners had fought in Afghanistan and Iraq and been returned to the Libyan authorities as part of an agreement with the US. If Qadhafi was truly the ruthless man the West would have us believe, then surely these rebels, classified as terrorists by the US, would have remained in prison and their fate have been very different.

      One of those released in 2008 was the LIFG commander, Abdel Hakim al-Hasidi, now one of the leaders of this uprising. Over the last decade, al-Hasidi fought in Afghanistan, was captured in Pakistan in 2002, handed over to the US, and subsequently handed back to the Libyan authorities. In a recent interview with the Italian newspaper, Il Sole 24 Ore, al-Hasidi admitted that, “jihadists who fought in Iraq against the US are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Qadhafi.”

      Libya was the first country to issue an arrest warrant for Osama bin Laden. The Libyan authorities have for years tried to warn the world about the very serious threat posed by these Islamic deviants. According to David Shayler, Western intelligence turned a deaf ear to Libya’s warnings as far back as the mid 90s because they were actually working with the al-Qaeda group inside Libya, to kill Qadhafi, and roll back the Libyan revolution.

      True Religion versus False Religion
      The battle being fought in the Libyan desert today dates way back beyond the mid 90s. Today’s battle is essentially a battle between, on the one hand, the revolutionary Islam of Prophet Muhammad, manifest in the writings of Muammar Qadhafi and in the practice of the Libyan revolution. And on the other hand, the reactionary Islam of the Ikhwan al-Muslimeen (Muslim Brotherhood) and their off shoots such as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and its affiliate, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

      The Muslim revolutionary scholar, Ali Shariati, notes that, “the battle of history is the battle of religion against religion… true religion versus false religion.”

      The Islam of the Wahhabist/Salafi sect, adhered to by the LIFG, is a reactionary interpretation and practice of Islam that seeks to replicate the political and social structures of 7th century Arabian society. Although for the BBC, CNN and Al Jazeera cameras, the rebels are careful to present themselves to the world as a force fighting for ‘liberal democracy’ and to show their love and admiration for the West. Off camera, they are calling for what AQIM has named the ‘Islamic Emirate in the Maghreb’.

      Qadhafi, along with other progressive Islamic scholars, argues the message of the Quran and Islamic theology is incompatible with the idea of an emirate. They point out dynastic rule was imported into the body politic of Islam by the likes of Abu Sufyan Muawiyah, the governor of Damascus, in the period 642 to 661, who borrowed these anti-Islamic practices from the Byzantium Empire and the Persians. Qadhafi points out this particular system of governance has nothing at all to do with Islam.

      The central ideological concern of Muammar Qadhafi and the Libyan revolution was to redefine Islam in the context of modern knowledge and contemporary political systems and thought. This is a task that requires us to revisit and rethink previous political systems set up by Muslims, without losing any of the Perennial Truth that is Islam.

      The Third Universal Theory, outlined in Qadhafi’s Green Book, is a comprehensive worldview – a body of philosophical, political, economic, sociological and scientific principles, all inter-related. Together they form an alternative and largely self-sufficient intellectual structure. It is a guide for authentic Islamic revolution, and can be applied to non-Islamic, popular revolutions. It ushers in a whole new social and political practice, outlining an alternative model of democracy.

      Progressive academics worldwide have acclaimed The Green Book as a serious body of political thought, offering an incisive critique of Western parliamentary democracy, capitalism and Marxist socialism. In addition, there is no denying the system of direct democracy, posited by Qadhafi’s Third Universal Theory, offers an alternative model and solution for Africa and many other parts of the ‘Third World’, where multi-party ‘democracy’ has been a dismal failure, resulting in ethnic/tribal conflict, social fragmentation and political chaos.

      In his book Islam and the Third Universal Theory: The Religious Thought of Muammar al Qadhafi, the respected Muslim scholar Mahmoud Ayoub points out that, “the first part of the Green Book is an interpretation of one single verse of the Quran: ‘and their affairs are decided through consultation (shura) among themselves’… To others it means an assembly of jurists ruling over a traditional Islamic society strictly governed by Shariah. Only Qadhafi has taken the important Quranic precept seriously, understanding it literally, and applying it equally to every member of society.”

      Ayoub further states that, “Qadhafi sees Islam as a perpetual revolution against unnecessary and illegitimate wealth, exploitation and oppression. Qadhafi asserted that the Islam which both the East and the West knew was that observed by kings and princes, as well as mendicants (darawish) who live off Islam. Thus, people thought of Islam as a reactionary movement, a message which could never keep up with life. They considered Islam simply as a religious heritage which could be venerated but which had to be kept from the fields of action and human struggle.”

      This Islam, whose theology is primarily one of liberation, has been marginalised, distorted and co-opted to serve the interests of ruling elites throughout the Muslim world. Theirs is the Islam observed by kings and princes, the ‘feudal Islam’ of the Ikhwan al-Muslimeen (Muslim Brotherhood) and its Wahhabi spiritual leaders, such as Egyptian cleric, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who recently issued a fatwa stating that any Libyan soldier who can shoot dead embattled leader Muammar Qadhafi should do so “to rid Libya of him.”

      Qaradawi is a neo-feudalist, who has defended the practice of female genital mutilation, called for the death penalty to be applied to those who leave Islam and advocates separate systems of law for different classes of citizens. Qadhafi views Qaradawi and those like him as the spiritual heirs of the corrupt Umayyad dynasty (661-750) that transformed the revolutionary Islam of the Holy Prophet into a feudal dispensation.

      How does Qadhafi’s revolutionary Islam play out in practice? Why is this man and the revolution he has led such a threat? And why, over recent weeks, have people from every corner of the globe spoken out in support of Qadhafi and the Libyan revolution? Why have thousands of African freedom fighters (not mercenaries as the BBC, CNN and Al Jazeera would have us believe) poured into Libya from the Congo, Guinea, Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Niger, Chad, Mauritania, Southern Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia and Burkina Faso to fight to the death for this leader and Libya?

      Who is this man and this revolution that has the moral authority and power to draw an army of Africans from every corner of the continent and solidarity from liberation movements, political parties and progressive governments worldwide?

      A Libyan Jamahiriya
      On September 1st, 1969, the 27 year old Qadhafi, an army captain, carried out a bloodless coup overthrowing the corrupt monarchy of King Idris Senussi, who had ruled Libya for 18 years. Qadhafi established what he called the Libyan Jamahiriya or the State of the Masses. When asked what was the Constitution of Libya, he replied “the Quran.”

      Immediately after the 1969 coup, Qadhafi told Gamal Abdel Nasser to consider Libya a partner in his Pan-Arab project, offering Nasser access to Libyan resources in the struggle against Israel. From a young age Qadhafi understood the absolute necessity of unity if Western hegemony and colonialism was to be challenged effectively.

      Not long after the revolution Qadhafi earned the wrath of the imperialists by closing the British Naval Base at Tobruk and the American Wheelus Air Base on the outskirts of Tripoli. He nationalised key sections of Libya’s vast oil resources and used his influence within OPEC to negotiate fairer prices for oil producing countries. Qadhafi used the oil revenue to benefit the Libyan people, building schools, universities, hospitals and much needed infrastructure.

      During the reign of King Idris, fewer than one in five Libyans was literate and there was virtually no access to education for the majority of people. Today, Libya boasts a quality education system, free right up to university level, and the literacy rate is 83 per cent, the highest in North Africa and the Arab world. In addition, Libya has one of the finest health care systems in the ‘Third World’. All people have access to doctors, hospitals, clinics and medicines, free of charge. If a Libyan needs surgery that is unavailable in Libya, funding is provided for the surgery to be carried out overseas. Average life expectancy is now 75, during the time of King Idris it was as low as 44.

      Soon after the revolution, basic food items were subsidised and electricity was made available throughout the country. Huge irrigation projects were established in order to support a drive towards agricultural development and self-sufficiency in food production.

      Recognising that water, not oil, would be the most scarce resource of the future, Qadhafi initiated the construction of the Great Man Made River, which took years to complete. Referred to as the 8th world wonder, this river pumps millions of cubic metres of water daily from the heart of the Sahara desert to the coast where the land is suitable for agriculture. Any Libyan who wanted to become a farmer was and still is given free use of land, a house, farm equipment, livestock and seed.

      At the outset of the revolution, Qadhafi vowed to house every Libyan, many of whom were still living in tents and houses made out of flattened oil drums. He also vowed that his own parents, who lived in a tent in the Sirte desert, would not be housed until every Libyan was housed. He fulfilled that promise, his own father dying before he had the opportunity to move him into a home. Large scale housing construction took place right across the country, all Libyans being given a decent house or apartment to live in rent-free. In Qadhafi’s Green Book it states: “The house is a basic need of both the individual and the family, therefore it should not be owned by others.”

      Under the revolutionary leadership of Muammar Qadhafi, Libya has now attained the highest standard of living in Africa. Rated on the UN’s Human Development Index ahead of Russia, Brazil and Saudi Arabia. In 2007, in an article which appeared in the African Executive Magazine, Norah Owaraga noted that Libya, “unlike other oil producing countries such as Nigeria, utilised the revenue from its oil to develop its country. The standard of living of the people of Libya is one of the highest in Africa, falling in the category of countries with a GNP per capita of between USD 2,200 and 6,000.”

      Qadhafi believes that economic democracy can only be achieved when the GDP of a country benefits all of its citizens and when the country’s wealth is dispersed to every single citizen. Today, money from Libya’s oil revenue is directly deposited into the bank account of every Libyan.

      From the beginning, Qadhafi was dedicated to the emancipation of Libyan women, encouraging them to participate in all aspects of political life. The revolution ensured that women gained full access to education and has actively encouraged acceptance of female paid employment. Qadhafi has enabled women to serve in the armed forces, and as a way of breaking down stereotypes and taboos, he established a corps of female bodyguards, assigned to his protection. Libya is a very traditional society and these moves by Qadhafi have been met with stiff resistance, especially by the forces in Benghazi.

      From the outset of the revolution, Qadhafi channelled a great deal of effort and resources into continued attempts, following on from Gamal Abdel Nasser, to bring about Arab unity. At meeting after meeting of the Arab League, he condemned and exposed their ineptness at arriving at a unified position in relation to the Palestinian issue and other issues relating to neo-colonial control of the region. He became impatient as he realised that the Arab rulers of the day were more interested in protecting and preserving their own parochial interests in tandem with Western imperialism, and were only too willing to stab each other in the back behind closed doors, despite their rhetoric at the summits.

      He vehemently opposed the US led invasion of Iraq and condemned those Arab leaders who supported the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’, earning the wrath of the Saudi monarchy when he said that “the Kabah was under the yoke of American occupation,” and questioned “what meaning the Haj has for Muslims as long as the American occupation of the sacred House of God continues.”

      He worked tirelessly to encourage African-Arab unity, and built strong relationships with African leaders and the African streets. In October 2010, at the second African-Arab summit in Libya, Qadhafi was the first and only leader in the Arab world to formally apologise for the Arab role in the trade in captured Africans. He was highly critical of Arab leaders/elites condescending attitude toward Africans, and their despicable treatment of African workers, and in particular African domestic workers in their own countries. He stated:

      “I regret the behaviour of Arabs… they brought African children to North Africa, they made them slaves, they sold them like animals and treated them in a shameful way. I regret and am ashamed when we remember these practices. I apologise for this. Today we are embarrassed and shocked by the outrageous practices of rich Arabs who treat Africans with contempt and condescension.”

      This riled the Arab leaders and ruling elites and was an affront to their notion of Arab supremacy.

      Disgruntled with the arrogance of the Arab leaders, and a continual thorn in their side as he openly criticised their hypocrisy and servitude to Western imperialism, Qadhafi became isolated in the Arab world.

      Africa Called, Qadhafi Answered
      Meanwhile, Libya’s neighbours to the south were far more receptive to Qadhafi’s ideas. When African nations called, Qadhafi answered. He is passionate about the plight of Africans and Africa and longs to see the liberation of the continent and its people. He called on the African Union to give representation to Africans in the Diaspora – the US, Europe, the Caribbean and South America, and acknowledge the need to deal with the conditions of poverty, underdevelopment and marginalisation that continues to confront these communities. At a recent conference held in Libya in January this year, to address the needs and concerns of African migrants to Europe, Qadhafi stated:

      “From now on, by the will of God, I will assign teams to search, investigate and liaise with the Africans in Europe and to check their situations… this is my duty and role towards the sons of Africa; I am a soldier for Africa. I am here for you and I work for you; therefore, I will not leave you and I will follow up on your conditions.”

      Today, Qadhafi is seen by Africans on the continent and throughout the diaspora as a leading Afrocentric Pan-Africanist, articulating a vision for a United States of Africa – with one government, one currency and one army.

      One of Muammar Qadhafi’s most controversial and difficult moves has been his determined drive to unite Africa with a shared vision for the true independence and liberation of the entire continent. He has contributed a great deal of his time, energy and large sums of money to this project, and like Kwame Nkrumah, he has paid a high price.

      Answering Qadhafi’s call, Libya deposited $32 billion into a $42 billion fund for the creation of a national African Central Bank (HQ to be in Nigeria), African Monetary Fund (HQ to be in Cameroun) and African Investment Bank (HQ to be in Libya), to fund health, education and communications infrastructure projects across Africa. This money, along with 45 billion Euros and even yet more billions of dollars, was confiscated by the U.S. and European countries during the past month, to prevent the 2011 launch of Africa’s own non-private supra-national monetary system.
      In 2007, reports also indicate that Libya contributed $300 million of a total $377 million to launch Africa’s first and only communication satellite, saving Africa’s 53 states around $500 million in annual fees that used to be paid to non-African communication satellites. As a result, the cost of phone calls to and from Africa, dropped drastically, providing yet another dent in the coffers of her former colonial masters in the West.

      Many years ago, Qadhafi told a large gathering, which included Libyans and revolutionaries from many parts of the world, that the Black Africans were the true owners of Libya long before the Arab incursion into North Africa. Adding Libyans need to acknowledge and pay tribute to their ancient African roots. He ended by saying, as is proclaimed in his Green Book, “the Black race shall prevail throughout the world.”
      ‘Brother Leader’, ‘Guide of the Revolution’ and ‘King of Kings’ are some of the titles that have been bestowed on Qadhafi by Africans. Only recently Qadhafi called for the creation of a secretariat of traditional African Chiefs and Kings, with whom he has excellent ties, more than 200 of them nominating him as their King and bestowing upon him the title of “African King of Kings” to co-ordinate efforts to build African unity at the grassroots level. This bottom up approach is widely supported by Pan-Africanists.

      While the Libyan revolution has irritated the West since its inception, and although they never forgave Qadhafi for nationalising Libya’s oil, the most worrying move has been his call for the unification of Africa. After years of tireless effort on the part of Qadhafi and the Libyan revolutionary movement, the idea of a United States of Africa is gaining real momentum and support on the continent and amongst Pan-Africanists worldwide.

      Unity is something the imperialists fear and loathe. They are well aware that a united Africa would completely alter the balance of power globally. The well-documented fact is that if Africa stopped the flow of all resources and raw materials to the Western nations for just one week, the United States and Europe would grind to a halt. They are that dependent on Africa, and are therefore determined to maintain their ability to control events on the continent.

      The leader of the Nation of Islam in the US, Minister Louis Farrakhan, pointed out many years ago at a conference in Libya, “Europe and the US cannot go forward into the new century without unfettered access to the vast natural resources of Africa.” He added: “Qadhafi is one who stands in their way.”

      If they cannot maintain control, then at least they must try to maintain Africa’s divisions, thereby ensuring it is always in a position of weakness. African unity and true independence is something white supremacy, in all of its manifestations – capitalism, imperialism and neo-colonialism – will oppose with all its might. The French are presently spearheading a plan, with other southern European nations, to form a Mediterranean bloc, incorporating the whole of North Africa, to try to bring about the balkanisation of the continent, in an attempt to halt this unification project.

      Liberation Movements Worldwide Called, Qadhafi Answered
      In addition to his tireless efforts in the Arab and African worlds, in 1982 the World Mathaba was established in Libya. Mathaba means a gathering place for people with a common purpose. The World Mathaba brought together revolutionaries and freedom fighters from every corner of the globe to share ideas and develop their revolutionary knowledge. Many liberation groups throughout the world received education, training and support, including the ANC, AZAPO, PAC and BCM of Azania (South Africa), SWAPO of Namibia, MPLA of Angola, the Sandinistas of Nicaragua, the Polisario of the Sahara, the PLO, the Moro National Liberation Front of the Philippines, the Pattani National Liberation Front of Thailand, the Dalits of India, Indigenous movements throughout the Americas and the Nation of Islam led by Louis Farrakhan to name but a few.

      Nelson Mandela called Muammar Qadhafi one of the 20th century’s greatest freedom fighters, and insisted the eventual collapse of the apartheid system owed much to Qadhafi and Libyan support. Mandela said that, “in the darkest moments of our struggle, when our backs were to the wall, Muammar Qadhafi stood with us.”

      Having examined not only the words and writings, but also Qadhafi’s life time of unwavering revolutionary action dedicated to the liberation of humankind, it is not difficult to answer the questions posed above regarding how Qadhafi’s revolutionary Islam has played out in practice? Why this man and the revolution he has led is such a threat to Western powers, and why freedom fighters from all over Africa are willing to fight to the death for him and the Libyan revolution.

      The Final Act – Imperialism’s Last Hideous Gasp
      As neo-liberalism and neo-colonialism plunges the world deeper and deeper into chaos, Western imperialism is in crisis. As people revolt in every corner of the world, their ability to influence global affairs is challenged. Even in the economic sphere, their power is decreasing, as China, India and Brazil emerge as vital new trading partners in Africa and South America. In the words of Kwame Nkrumah, “Neo-colonialism is not a sign of imperialism’s strength, but rather of its last hideous gasp.”

      As the capitalist crisis worsens, the imperialists will become more and more desperate in their attempts to regain their influence and direct events as they are used to doing. Events which they are increasingly incapable of comprehending – not only because of the speed at which these events are occurring, but also because of the complexity of the events and the paradigm shifts taking place, that are, quite simply, far outside the Western imagination.

      Furthermore, they have lost all credibility as the Iraq and Afghanistan debacles continue. The Emperor is naked, and the hypocrisy of the Empire has become so transparent, that even the least informed observers are finally realising that something is horribly wrong.

      Imperialism is experiencing its ‘last hideous gasp’ and it is imperative for progressive movements and decent minded citizens worldwide to seize this moment and to oppose this current assault on Libya with all of our collective strength. Those who still struggle to see the wood from the trees will remain enablers of the reactionary and destructive forces that have arrested the advancement of humanity, subjugating and enslaving us since the beginning of time.

      GERALD A. PERREIRA is from Guyana and a founding member of the Guyanese organisations, Joint Initiative for Human Advancement and Dignity and Black Consciousness Movement Guyana (BCMG). He lived and worked in Libya for many years and served in the Green March, an international battalion for the defence of the Libyan revolution, and was an executive member of the World Mathaba based in Tripoli.

      The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 126 (May-June 2011).




    NATO Wars Lead To Near Quintupling Of U.S. Arms Sales In Past Decade

    Agence France-Presse
    June 10, 2011

    US foresees $46 billion in 2011 military sales

    -[W]ith the war in Afghanistan and a higher operational tempo for many armed forces, clients are seeking quicker access to purchased progress, which explains the rise in the value of American exports, according to the admiral.
    Several nations participating in the NATO-led air campaign on Libya have thus contacted the DSCA [Defense Security Cooperation Agency] to replenish their stocks of ammunition depleted by the operations.
    -In all, over 13,000 contracts are currently underway with 165 countries for $327 billion…

    WASHINGTON: The United States plans to export $46.1 billion in weapons this year, nearly doubling its 2010 figures, officials said.

    During the fiscal year 2011, which ends September 30, Washington expects the sales of equipment and military services through its Foreign Military Sales process to grow. About 79 percent of these exports are financed by client countries and organizations, with the remainder funded by US aid programs.

    US military equipment sales, confined to about $10 billion in the early 2000s, tripled to around $30 billion after 2005.

    “From 2005 to 2010, we have delivered through the Foreign Military Sales process $96 billion worth of equipment, goods and services to partner countries,” said Defense Security Cooperation Agency Director Vice Admiral William Landay.

    Libya: 10,686 NATO Air Missions, 4,050 Combat Sorties

    North Atlantic Treaty Organization
    June 12, 2011

    NATO and Libya
    Allied Joint Force Command NAPLES, SHAPE, NATO HQ

    Over the past 24 hours, NATO has conducted the following activities associated with Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR:

    Air Operations

    Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 10686 sorties, including 4050 strike sorties,have been conducted.

    Sorties conducted 11 JUNE: 116

    Strike sorties conducted 11 JUNE: 51

    [W]ith the war in Afghanistan and a higher operational tempo for many armed forces, clients are seeking quicker access to purchased progress, which explains the rise in the value of American exports, according to the admiral.

    Several nations participating in the NATO-led air campaign on Libya have thus contacted the DSCA to replenish their stocks of ammunition depleted by the operations.

    Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Norway and the United Kingdom are all participating in the attacks on Moamer Kadhafi’s regime.

    The rise in exports has led the DSCA to revise its procedures to ensure faster deliveries by determining what type of weapons or other military equipment should be delivered to which country before even being contacted by a client, and purchasing the equipment before it is sold.

    In all, over 13,000 contracts are currently underway with 165 countries for $327 billion, according to Landay.

  22. US intel: No evidence of Viagra as weapon in Libya
    UN Ambassador Rice reportedly had said drug was being used in systematic rapes

    NBC News and news services updated 4/29/2011 1:52:00 PM ET 2011-04-29T17:52:00
    UNITED NATIONS — There is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas, US military and intelligence officials told NBC News on Friday.

    And on Friday, military and intelligence officials, speaking anonymously, said there was no evidence that that was true.
    This report from NBC News’ Jim Miklaszewski includes reporting from Reuters.

    • The Gay Girl in Damascus hoax, ‘mass rape’ in Libya, and press credulity
      Have our propaganda detectors been dulled?

      By Dan Murphy, Staff writer / 13 June 2011

      If you don’t follow NPR‘s Andy Carvin on Twitter, let me be the first to tell you that The Gay Girl in Damascus is actually a 40-year-old American guy with a beard. Through the efforts of Mr. Carvin, Ali Abunimah, and a few others, Thomas MacMaster was unveiled as the hoaxster. Mr. MacMaster said today that his wife, Britta Froelicher – an American listed as an associate fellow at St. Andrew’s Center for Syrian Studies – was involved as a consultant. One of the better roundups on how MacMaster was forced into admitting his lies is on Ali Abunimah’s Electronic Intifada blog.

      But while MacMaster appears to be a garden-variety Internet troll, the Amina persona was boosted by the willingness of the conventional press (The Guardian, CNN, New York Times) and bloggers with major followings, like Andrew Sullivan, to accept what they were being told at face value.Propaganda and disinformation making their way into the press is as old as the printed word, but in an era where newsrooms are thinner and there are fewer experienced reporters on the ground internationally, extraordinary claims get repeated in news reports with paltry efforts – if that – to confirm them. We’re also chasing Internet “traffic” like never before. The early bird gets that traffic worm, though sometimes at the expense of getting it right.
      The Amina story was a doozy, and provided immediate grounds for skepticism. But even though no one had ever spoken to or met her (all communications were by e-mail) and no Syrian activist could identify her, “Amina” quickly became a cause célèbre, and some journalists were hitting her up for quotes on what it’s like to be a lesbian in Syria. US diplomats wasted time trying to track down a supposed American citizen in trouble.

      Which brings us to another story that I’m skeptical about that’s being reported with entirely too much certainty: the claims that Muammar Qaddafi sent out thousands of soldiers with pockets full of Viagra and condoms to mass rape Libyan women. (There is also evidence that the story was a fabrication invented by an overzealous CIA employee in Colorado.)

      It isn’t a hoax of the nature of Amina; it’s being disseminated by Luis-Moreno Ocampo, a prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, who clearly believes it’s true!!

      Yet it’s an extraordinary tale that has little hard information to back it. I was told the story repeatedly when I was in Libya in February and March, but could never verify any of it, so didn’t report it. I’ve also heard the mass rape claim with the odd Viagra detail before: about seven years ago in Iraq, and in multiple small wars in Indonesia before that.
      In each case, it couldn’t be confirmed, and my presumption was that it was the sort of story that captures the imagination of traumatized publics. It’s true that in some third world godless countries, rape is commonly carried out by soldiers in the field, particularly irregular units with weak or nonexistent command and control. It’s an easy leap from one or two instances of rape to seeing a mass, systematic campaign complete with gaudy claims of pills turning soldiers into sex-crazed maniacs.

      Mr. Ocampo
      is already seeking separate war crimes warrants for Qaddafi and his son, and clearly has some prosecutorial zeal for the Libyan “Guide”. He didn’t provide any evidence for his claim beyond referring to reports that a few hundred women “may have been raped”. Yet here’s how Ocampo’s claim was handled by The Guardian last week: “Libya mass rape claims: using Viagra would be a horrific first” is the headline. “Reports of the distribution of ‘Viagra-type’ pills to troops add an unprecedented element to Gaddafi’s alleged war crimes.” This paper also took Ocampo’s claims at face value. “ICC: Evidence shows that Qaddafi ordered rape of hundreds.”

      None of this is to say that perhaps evidence won’t be provided that, in due course, shows that the such a planned crime was carried out. It’s just that the press, much as with Amina, is accepting unproven claims. We may be simply putting it in the mouth of Ocampo, but very rarely do we point out that we haven’t been shown or allowed to examine the alleged evidence ourselves.

      One man who says he has is Cherif Bassiouni, a United Nations investigator of human rights abuses in Libya. Mr. Bassiouni told a press conference that he’d heard the Viagra rape claim during his fact-finding mission to Libya – both from rebels against Loyalist’s troops and from Loyalist’s officials against the rebel militias. He says he found no evidence in either case.

      “What it is, at least my interpretation of it is, when the information spread out, the society felt so vulnerable … it has created a massive hysteria,” he said. Bassiouni also said that the source of Ocampo’s information was a woman who says she sent out 70,000 questionnaires to Libyan families. That woman, in his telling, says she received 60,000 responses, of which 259 women reported sexual abuse at the hands of soldiers.

      A response rate like that to a questionnaire asking for explicit information of sexual abuse would be stunning, not least in a conservative country like Libya. It’s also not clear how the questionnaire was distributed so widely, since the Libyan postal system isn’t functioning. Bassiouni says he doubts the story. “But she’s going around the world telling everybody about it … she got that information to Ocampo and Ocampo is convinced that here we have a potential 259 women who have responded to the fact that they have been sexually abused.”
      But I also heard over-the-top demonization of the man and his forces – absurd rumors that chemical weapons were being used, that secret guns with poison bullets had been distributed, that, yes, soldiers were being sent out with pockets full of Viagra. Misinformation and rumors, either disseminated as propaganda or in good faith by people willing to believe the worst about about those they dislike.It’s also common on the Internet. The job of traditional reporters is to head that sort of thing off, not provide a megaphone for it.

      Follow Dan Murphy on Twitter.

  23. Deadly NATO raid hits Libyan university
    Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:49AM
    Students and professors murdered from NATO bombs at NASAR U.
    People who were reortedly killed in a NATO strike on Nasser Univresity on Sunday, June 12.More Libyan civilians have reportedly been killed and injured after a NATO airstrike hit a university in the capital, Tripoli.
    NASAR U. hit again by NATO bombs

    New images have emerged showing the aftermath of an alleged NATO air raid targeting Tripoli’s Nasser University. The attack reportedly left many university staff and students dead.

    Libyan state television says dozens of others were also injured.

  24. <a href="”>NATO Reportedly Bombs Libyan University

    Kurt Nimmo
    13 June 2011

    The New York Times also reported that aluminum tubes were sighted in Iraq. Due in part to the widely reported lie that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, the United States invaded the country and subsequently killed over a million Iraqis.Tripoli bombed
    A NATO air strike in Tripoli, a city of 2 million people. NATO and the New York Times would have you believe civilians do not die in such raids.

    According to Pentagon figures allegedly released by Wikileaks, the invasion of Iraq resulted in the death of 66,081 civilians. The U.S. installed Iraqi Iraqi Health Ministry put the number at 87,215. In 2007, a ORB survey of Iraq War casualties put the number at 1.2 million.

    On May 31, Libya accused NATO of killing 718 civilians and wounding 4,067 in 10 weeks of air strikes. “Since March 19, and up to May 26, there have been 718 martyrs among civilians and 4,067 wounded — 433 of them seriously,” said government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim, citing health ministry figures which the AFP said cannot be independently verified.

    Joshalyn Lawrence filmed Libyans wounded during NATO air strikes. “The Lawrence videos, on the WBAIX channel, of hospitalized civilians is evidence that, rather than injuries and killings by bombs being ‘rare’ or reporting ‘blunders,’ they are realities,” writes Deborah Dupre for Bay View. “In the videos, one after another wounded innocent civilian described atrocities to Cynthia McKinney, in a fact-finding mission with a team including a delegation of former MPs and professors from France, all now in Tripoli.”

    “Interestingly, the efforts of the Washington Post, New York Times, Associated Press and others to portray Libya’s claims on the bombings as ‘absurd’ are patently false and are merely efforts to defend in the court of public opinion the indefensible bombing of civilians going about their lives in a heavily populated area,” the former Georgia Congress woman wrote on June 7.

    The blood-thirsty neocons, of course, called McKinney’s fact finding mission an act of terrorism. “McKinney is part of a long Western leftist tradition of progressive sycophants traveling to adversarial lands in an effort to undermine America,” writes FrontPage Mag, the mouthpiece of former Marxist David Horowitz, who received money from the known CIA operative Richard Mellon Scaife.The corporate media mostly ignored McKinney’s trip and her reports of civilian deaths and continued to follow the Pentagon script as it has now for decades.

  25. US Congress votes against Libya funding
    (AFP) – 5 hours ago

    WASHINGTON — The US House of Representatives voted to prohibit the use of funds for American military operations in Libya.

    Lawmakers adopted the amendment to a military appropriations bill by a vote of 248 to 163.

    A number of members of Congress have recently expressed their dissatisfaction at President Barack Obama’s decision to go ahead with operations in Libya in March and to continue without congressional authorization.

    The amendment, introduced by Democratic representative Brad Sherman from California, invokes the War Powers Resolution, a 1973 law that limits presidential powers on sending troops abroad into combat zones without the consent of Congress.

    Sherman’s text states that “none of the funds made available by this act may be used in contravention of the War Powers Act.”

    According to the War Powers Resolution, the president must seek congressional authorization to send US troops into combat and must withdraw American forces within 60 days if Congress has not authorized the military action.

    The same measure was presented in another bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security but failed to pass on June 2.

    Lawmakers must still approve the appropriations bill as a whole and the measure must still be approved by the Senate.

    The White House has been under rising pressure from congressional critics demanding details about US goals in Libya and questioning the likely costs and duration of the campaign, in which Washington now has a supporting role.

    The House of Representatives recently passed a symbolic resolution chiding Obama for not seeking congressional approval for US involvement in Libya and giving him until June 17 to respond.

    Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
    Related articles
    US House votes to block funding for Libya – 2 hours ago
    Communication not Obama’s strong point
    OneNewsNow – 1 hour ago
    James A. Baker III and Lee H. Hamilton Op-Ed: Breaking the War Powers Stalemate
    Across the Aisle (blog) – 12 hours ago
    More coverage (1) »

  26. A midshipman asks: Before it is too late, should I refuse orders to continue the unconstitutional attack on Libya?
    Posted By Thomas E. Ricks Monday, 13 June 2011 – 10:33 AM
    US NAVAL  Fighting vessel in Libyan waters

    By “A Midshipman”
    Best Defense guest correspondent
    I’m a Midshipman at the Naval Academy and have been talking with officers from the submarine that launched most of the American cruise missiles into Libya. We’ve had some interesting discussions about the legality of the operations at this point and whether the personnel still engaging the enemy there are breaking their oath to obey only legal orders.

    President Obama’s decision to avoid seeking Congress’s permission to continue America’s role in the Libyan conflict marks one more step in the long march toward a balance of power within the federal government that is more Napoleonic than democratic. Since the Vietnam War, President’s have not felt obliged to seek a Congressional declaration of war before committing American lives to conflicts abroad. Every sitting President since Nixon has ordered the military to battle without going through the channels prescribed in the Constitution.

    In their decision to place the power to declare war with Congress, the writers of the constitution sought to limit the ability of the president to use military force as an autocrat. Unfortunately, the founding fathers had never seen an undeclared war and didn’t foresee the emergence of such a beast. We are left to deal with this oversight.

    The conflict in Libya has now continued for more than 60 days without congressional approval. Not only is this unconstitutional, but it is in direct opposition to the War Powers Act, passed in the wake of the Vietnam War.

    Officers of the United States Military take an oath to obey only lawful and constitutional orders and refuse all others. The servicemen and servicewomen who are currently fighting over Libya took that oath. It is their professional obligation and ethical duty to disobey their orders until constitutional and legal requirements are either changed or met.

    The pressure that a refusal of orders would place on the President would be impossible to ignore. Even if the ensuing legal debate were inconclusive, no President would likely venture to take action which could result in a similar response. The constitutional balance of power would be restored because a professional precedent would have been established within the military, if not a broader legal one.

    Congressman Abraham Lincoln once remarked, “Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object. This our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us.” By giving only Congress the power to declare war, the constitution takes out the personal element that was so often a cause of war in the era of Kings. While President Obama is certainly no oppressor, the trend that he is reinforcing opens up the possibility that the time will come where we will have to contend with a leader who is.

    The author is a third year student at the U.S. Naval Academy who has decided not to be identified more precisely.

  27. Libya Qadhafi
    INT. bi-Daily Prayer for Libya and the Gadhafi Family
    World Unites in Visualization, Prayers For Free Libya and Muammar al-Qadhafi
    Posted: 2011/06/14
    From: Mathaba
    Gadhafi is Loved by Millions

    Collective visualization of peace in Libya and the Victory of the Libyan people and Muammar Al-Gaddafi, is taking place in a new era of spiritual defence

    Spontaneously through the power of thought, hearts, bodies, minds and souls around the world have come together with a positive visualization initiative to bring
    about Peace and Victory for the Libyan people and Muammar Qadhafi who is held in the hearts of millions worldwide.

    A similar worldwide unity was displayed in 1986 when NATO attacked Libya and targeted the Qadhafi humble family home, killing his tiny baby daughter.
    25 years later, in 2011, a now 3-month vicious attack again by NATO on Libya and targeting the Qadhafi home has killed his 3 baby grandchildren and youngest
    son, and thousands of Libyans in the most unjustified and illegal aggression by the United States, France and Britain, along with other NATO allies from Europe and Qatar.

    Never before has such worldwide unity among people of all faiths, races and ideologies, been been so manifest against a war with evil motives, under the amazing
    pretence of protecting and against its perpetrators, nor so united in support of what many believe is the most benevolent world leader during the past century,
    Muammar Qadhafi. His democratic movement and ideas have gained traction around the world, and he has become known and loved like never before.

    Prayers, thought and visualization is being done by people around the world at exactly the same time each day at midnight and midday Libyan time, for 5 minutes
    duration, in order to have a positive effect on protecting Muammar Qadhafi, bringing Peace to Libya, and a resounding defeat to NATO and its local ignoble allies.

    It is well known and proven by scientific experiments that synchronous thought has great powers. During the Lebanon war, an experiment was conducted which
    showed that no fighting, bombings or attacks took place during the times that the positive thoughts were concentrated.

    At readers can place their mouse over Libya on the map to find the current time there, and the following list gives the local times when it is midnight
    or midday in Libya for selected countries and states around the world:

    Location Libya 12:00 Noon
    Libya Midnight

    For further information, questions, or to share with others, visit the Facebook page at or join

    Atul Aneja. AP

    In this photo taken on a organised government tour smoke rises from debris as foreign journalists take photographs next to a damaged truck at the Hadba agricultural area, outside Tripoli, Libya, on Wednesday, which Libyan officials claim was a target of a NATO air strike on Tuesday night.

    The strikes, which hit on Tuesday afternoon, continued overnight. Early Wednesday, some 10 explosions shook the Libyan capital. It was not immediately clear what was hit.

    The NATO has markedly stepped up its aerial bombardment of Tripoli in a fresh effort to hasten the fall of the Qadhafi regime, which refuses to throw in the towel despite a spate of recent defections.

    Since Tuesday morning, Tripoli was subjected to relentless bombardment which appeared to pause only at dawn on Wednesday. The attacks, with heavy “bunker buster” bombs that can easily rip through concrete structures or destroy underground complexes, smashed large parts of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi’s Al Aziziya compound.

    Witnesses said a large area of the compound had been devastated. Six to seven buildings lay in smouldering rubble of concrete and mangled steel. The wrecked buildings included one which had a reception centre for foreign dignitaries, and housed a VIP guest house as well. Some of the other ruined structures were used for administrative purposes, said local officials. Libyan authorities said 31 people had been killed in the bombing spree. Officials claimed around 10 to 15 people were buried in the rubble of one building.

    Stung by the air strikes, Mr. Qadhafi struck a defiant note, declaring that in no way was he fading away. In a nine-minute audio address amid the bombardment, he said: “You are setting fire to the sea, you are setting fire to the desert, and you are chasing a mirage. What do you want? What do you want? Did we cross the sea and attack you? Why this consistent bombing? Are you trying to force us into submission? You will not; we will never submit.”

  29. Boehner Wants Libya Answers by FridayBy John Stanton
    John Boehner
    Roll Call Staff
    14 June 2011, 4:35 p.m

    Updated: 7:07 p.m.

    Speaker John Boehner warned the White House on Tuesday that it is about to run afoul of the War Powers Act and set a Friday deadline for the administration to provide him with a legal justification for continued military action in Libya.

    In a terse letter sent to President Barack Obama on Tuesday afternoon, the Ohio Republican wrote, “In five days, the Administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission.”

    The letter represents the harshest criticism of the administration’s Libya policy to date, and Boehner pulled few punches. The Republican leader argued that Obama’s handling of the civil war “has left many Members of Congress, as well as the American people, frustrated by the lack of clarity over the Administration’s strategic policies, by a refusal to acknowledge and respect the role of the Congress, and by a refusal to comply with the basic tenets of the War Powers Resolution.”

    Boehner goes on to tell Obama that either “you have concluded the War Powers Resolution does not apply to the mission in Libya, or you have determined the War Powers Resolution is contrary to the Constitution. The House, and the American people whom we represent, deserve to know the determination you have made.”

    National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor responded Tuesday evening that the administration is “in the final stages of preparing extensive information for the House and Senate that will address a whole host of issues about our ongoing efforts in Libya, including those raised in the House resolution as well as our legal analysis with regard to the War Powers Resolution.”

    The House approved a resolution this month questioning the administration’s involvement in the Libyan civil war and demanding detailed explanations of the administration’s justification for becoming engaged in the conflict.

    • On June 15, 10 congressional members (3 Democrats, 7 Republicans) sued Obama in the US District of Columbia District Court for unilaterally waging war on Libya.
      by Stephen Lendman
      Calling for “Injunctive and Declaratory Relief,” the complaint said in part:

      …All Washington’s wars are illegal. International law permits them only in self-defense. Constitutional law only lets Congress, not the president, declare or wage them overtly, covertly or any other way for any reason unless America was attacked….Moreover, so-called “humanitarian intervention” is modern-day colonialism dressed up in rhetorical mumbo jumbo to justify aggression. As a result, when America intervenes, it’s for policy goals, not human rights, civil liberties, democratic values, or humanitarian priorities, presidents and lawmakers don’t give a damn about and never did, abroad or at home.

      …Moreover, claiming War Powers Resolution authority is a red herring. It applies only to legal wars in self-defense as defined under international and constitutional laws. No exceptions apply. Presidents can’t subvert them. Congress can hold them accountable by cutting off funding and impeachment for usurping illegal executive supremacy.

      In fact, failure to do so violates the Constitution’s Article VI, Clause 3 Oath of Office provision. The first Congress instituted a binding pledge, stating:

      “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.”

      In April 1861, Lincoln expanded it to include all federal civilian employees. In 1884, the modern version was enacted, stating:

      “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

      Virtually all congressional members violate constitutional law, governing contrary to this oath, rendering it null and void, thus making them complicit in presidential crimes, their rhetorical posturing notwithstanding.

      ….This measure challenges “Defendant Barack Obama, President of the United States, (for) go(ing) to war in Libya and other countries without the declaration of war from Congress required by Article I, Section, 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution.”

      It further challenges his violation of the War Powers Resolution, requiring congressional authorization, as well as “commit(ting) the United States to a war under the authority of (NATO) in violation of the express condition of the North Atlantic Treaty ratified by Congress.”

      In fact, rhetorical posturing, toothless congressional measures and ineffective lawsuits aside, most members of Congress support wars by passing defense authorization bills and supplemental appropriations with comfortable margins.

      In addition, since WW II, they never challenged presidential war making authority without congressional approval, as well as for failing to follow international and constitutional law. Nor have they demanded domestic accountability for fundamental democratic rights they, in fact, also spurn with impunity.

      Instead they support imperial wars and corporate privilege for their own self-interest. As a result, they benefit greatly at the public’s expense, especially during hard times when federal aid more than ever is needed, not austerity cuts leaving millions on their own sink or swim.

      A Final Comment

      America’s media wholeheartedly support US imperial wars, no matter how lawless, mindless, destructive and counterproductive. In fact, they revel in them, cheerleading daily slaughter, mostly affecting non-combatant men, women and children, defenseless against American-led terror bombing.

      In Libya, for example, non-military targets are struck, including ports, schools, hospitals, houses, civilian infrastructure, a university, a Brega peace conference killing 16 imams and wounding dozens, Gaddafi’s personal compound to kill him, instead murdering his son and three grandchildren, as well as daily attacks killing and injuring hundreds of Libyans.

      Nonetheless, a June 16 New York Times editorial wants more, headlined “Libya and the War Powers Act,” saying:

      “It would be hugely costly – for this country’s credibility, for the future of NATO and for the people of Libya – if Congress were to force (Obama) to abandon military operations over Libya.”

      The Pentagon planned, leads, and directs the war for an estimated $1.1 billion through September, yet The Times calls America’s involvement “limited,” adding:

      “We support the Libya campaign….(W)e have no doubt that if NATO had not intervened, thousands more Libyan civilians would have been slaughtered.”

      In fact, clear evidence shows America and other Western powers recruited, funded, armed, and support Libyan mercenaries to help oust Gaddafi’s regime. Moreover, no humanitarian crisis existed until NATO intervened.

      Nonetheless, The Times said, ending America’s involvement would cause NATO’s campaign to “unravel.” As a result, “relations with Europe and the unity of the military alliance (would be enormously harmed), likely felt all the way to Afghanistan,” another illegal war The Times supports, urging Obama to fight on, adding:

      “Congress….needs to authorize continued American support for NATO’s air campaign over Libya,” no matter the body count it causes. America’s entire corporate media establishment agrees.

      Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

      • FROM Alhoda Noor:
        18 Juine 2011
        The Financial Times wrote that intelligence analysts… The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) sought the help of their operations in Libya in the Al-Jazeera channel country to help them in the identification of potential targets of Libyan air strikes and assess the extent of its success, officials confirm in NATO countries that in…telligence sources open images via the Internet be used side by side a wide combing operation of existing channels of information from unmanned planes to TV news channels, especially the Al-Jazeera channel, which he described as analysts intelligencers in Britain the unknown soldier in their battles against Libya, saying that its services beyond imagination. Earlier this week, said a wing of the Commander of Royal Air Force, spokesman Mike, volcanoes of military operations on behalf of Libyan-was that the site of one of open sources that were used to form a picture of the situation there. He added that they will take information from all available sources. The newspaper said that NATO needs to take advantage of the information obtained from the Al-Jazeera channel and-because its special forces on the ground less than to formulate a detailed map of how the use of smart weapons. The lack of these eyes in the field make it difficult to rule on how to move the objectives of the Libyan regime and confirmation of possible damage after hit the target from the air. She added that although the media social enabled people in Libya to develop immediate updates on the Internet, its credibility debatable. An expert said that the West was found in the Al-Jazeera channel Sindh reliable ally of the West in achieving its objectives, but this channel will find itself at the earliest opportunity part of history where it notes that the confidence of the people there are now zero.

  30. South Africa Says NATO Must Stop Libya Regime Change, Assassinations, Bombings, Occupation Plans Posted: 2011/06/15
    From: Mathaba

    Gadhafi and Zuma
    While NATO does not know Muammar Qaddafi’s whereabouts and claims he is hiding, it was very easy for South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma to meet with him in Tripoli (photo)
    NATO is abusing a United Nations resolution which was set up to protect Libyan civilians from Muammar Gaddafi’s forces, something that has been shown meantime to be false as no evidence of massacres has been forthcoming, and Russian military satellites, also therefore NATO satellites, have shown no Libyan air force flights too place as claimed as a justification for the resolution.

    The UN resolution expires tomorrow, and NATO has far exceeded its mandate, “in order to pursue regime change and political assassinations”, South African President Jacob Zuma said on Tuesday.

    “We have spoken out against the misuse of the good intentions in Resolution 1973,” Zuma said during a budget speech in parliament.

    “We strongly believe that the resolution is being abused for regime change, political assassinations and foreign military occupation.”

    South Africa had abstained on the resolution, as had Russia, China, Germany and Brazil, and it is unlikely an extension will be given to it in the light of blatant daily violations of the resolution for the past 90 days by NATO.

    Libya in turn is the only state that has enforced the resolution, by shooting down 4 NATO helicopters which were conducting aggressive raids over Libyan no-fly air space.

    NATO prevented that African Union Peace and Security Council and a half dozen African foreign ministers and other African government officials from arriving in Libya to follow up a peace deal struck between the AU and the Libyan government as well as opposition groups.

    NATO brought forward attack plans and enforced the no-fly zone one day earlier than initially planned, in order to scupper the AU deals, and prevent the arrival of the Africans to Libya, which is the wealthiest member state of the African Union.

    The South African president told the house of parliament that the NATO aerial operation in the North African country was undermining African Union efforts to find political solutions to problems on the continent.

    “It also flies in the face of all efforts to promote the sanctity of international law,” said Zuma, who has headed two AU delegations to Libya, in failed efforts to strike a ceasefire agreement due to the intransigence of the Al-Qaida allied rebels which take orders from the U.S., French and British intelligence services, which wish to see Libya’s revolutionary spokesman, Muammar Qaddafi silenced.

    The South African president said the AU, founded in 2002, needed to strengthen its institutions, to better serve its 53 members’ interests.

    AU ministers will present their own plan to the UN Security Council on Wednesday (today), Zuma said, to push for a non-military approach to the conflict in Libya.

    “We are concerned about the ongoing conflict in Libya, which is resulting in the loss of innocent lives, the destruction of property and a deteriorating humanitarian situation,” Zuma said.

    South Africa, along with Brazil, Russia, India and China, all nuclear powers although South Africa says it has abandoned its nuclear program that was conducted in secret with the cooperation of Israel, exposed after nuclear blasts in the ocean, are all opposed to the French-US-British-led NATO American-European aggression against Libya.


    • Ron Paul: Disband NATO

      Eric Garris, 01 April 2008
      Email This | Print This | Share This | Comment | Antiwar Forum
      This is Ron Paul’s statement before the US House of Representatives on House Resolution 997, “expressing the strong support of the House of Representatives for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to enter into a Membership Action Plan with Georgia and Ukraine.”

      Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution calling for the further expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia. NATO is an organization whose purpose ended with the end of its Warsaw Pact adversary. When NATO struggled to define its future after the Cold War, it settled on attacking a sovereign state, Yugoslavia, which had neither invaded nor threatened any NATO member state.

      This current round of NATO expansion is a political reward to governments in Georgia and Ukraine that came to power as a result of US-supported revolutions, the so-called Orange Revolution and Rose Revolution. The governments that arose from these street protests were eager to please their US sponsor and the US, in turn, turned a blind eye to the numerous political and human rights abuses that took place under the new regimes. Thus the US policy of “exporting democracy” has only succeeding in exporting more misery to the countries it has targeted.

      NATO expansion only benefits the US military industrial complex, which stands to profit from expanded arms sales to new NATO members. The “modernization” of former Soviet militaries in Ukraine and Georgia will mean tens of millions in sales to US and European military contractors. The US taxpayer will be left holding the bill, as the US government will subsidize most of the transactions. Providing US military guarantees to Ukraine and Georgia can only further strain our military. This NATO expansion may well involve the US military in conflicts as unrelated to our national interest as the breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia. The idea that American troops might be forced to fight and die to prevent a small section of Georgia from seceding is absurd and disturbing.

      Mr. Speaker, NATO should be disbanded, not expanded.


  31. From Cynthia McKinney: More NATO “Humanitarian Intervention:” The Bombing of Al Fateh University, Campus Bpar Cynthia McKinney, mercredi 15 juin 2011, 07:19
    Cynthia McKinney

    More NATO “Humanitarian Intervention:” The Bombing of Al Fateh University, Campus B

    14 June 2011

    Since coming to Tripoli to see first hand the consequences of the NATO military operations, it has become clear to me that despite the ongoing silence of the international press on the ground here in Libya, there is clear evidence that civilian targets have been hit and Libyan civilians injured and killed.

    This Tuesday morning I was taken from my hotel across the city through its bustling traffic to the Al Fateh University.

    On 9 June, Dean Ali Mansur was outside in the parking lot. The sky was blue like Carolina blue. The clouds were white–no chemtrails in sight. Puffy and white. Dean Mansur was visibly upset. It seems that some of the young men at Al Fateh University, Campus B were fighting over girls. He explained to me that Libyans are hot blooded. With a gleam in his eye, he whispered to me that girls are important to young men.

    Yes, that was clearly evident today as I approached the campus of Al Fateh University, Campus B, formerly known as Nasser University. Under the trees, throughout the lawn as we approached the campus gates, I could see young men and women talking to each other, talking on cell phones, walking to and fro, assembled, probably talking about the latest campus news–whatever that might be. Today, on the Al Fateh campus, life was teeming. Student life seemed vibrant. This feel and ambiance of this university was not unlike the hundreds of other universities that I have visited in the US and around the world.

    Libyan boys and girls are like ours. My son would easily fit into the life of this university.

    The campus seemed vibrant, too. Cranes everywhere indicated a healthy building program, adding new buildings to enhance the student learning environment. Despite the students’ fracas, Dean Mansur had everything to be happy about as he saw his university becoming bigger, better, and stronger. Her told me that they had even signed an agreement with a British university to begin programs in the English language. Not English studies, Dean Mansur emphasized, but an entire curriculum of study taught in the English language! Of course, he entoned, that’s all disappointingly ended now.

    Al Fateh University, Campus B consists of about 10,000 undergraduates, 800 masters degree candidates, and 18 Ph.D. students; 220 staff, 150 ad hoc professors, 120 employees. It has eight auditoriums, 19 classrooms, 4 extra large classrooms. It also has a rural campus at Al Azizia where 700 students are taught and are a part of the university system. Dean Mansur compares himself to a mayor because he has so many responsibilities presiding over a large community of students engaging in a rich and vibrant academic life.

    Dean Mansur told me that life at the university and, for him personally, changed forever on the afternoon of Thursday 9 June, 2011.

    He recalled that the university opened as usual around 8:00 am and was to close later that evening at about 8:00 pm.

    Thursday, 9 June, he thought, was going to be just like any other day, except for the fracas over the girls that had cleared the campus of many of the students who didn’t want to have any part in the fighting. So, outside in the campus parking lot, Dr. Mansur told me he was preoccupied thinking how he would deal with the disciplinary issue before him.

    Then, out of nowhere and all of a sudden, he heard something loud up in the sky.

    He said it began out of no where, a loud roar. Then a frightful high pitched the hissing sound. He said he looked up into the sky and couldn’t hardly believe his eyes: something shiny up in the sky appeared dancing in front of him. He said it moved about like an atari game or something. It danced and zig-zagged all over the sky. He said he was transfixed on the object for what seemed like minutes but in truth must have only been seconds.

    Up and down and sideways it raced in the sky and then, without warning, it just came crashing down into the ground nearby. It was a NATO missile.

    Tragically it had found its target: Al Fateh University, Campus B.

    Dean Mansur said he saw one missile, lots of fire, lots of different colors all around it, and then a huge plume of smoke. He saw one missile, but heard what seemed like many explosions. He said he now can’t honestly say how many.

    Dr. Mansur said the force and shock of the blast held him frozen in his place. He said his heart stopped for a moment. He wasn’t afraid, just frozen. He didn’t run away; he didn’t cower; he said he just stood stupefied.

    The force of the blast cracked thickened concrete wells, shattered hundreds of windows and brought numerous ceilings down in lecture halls.

    Whether it was a wayward Tomahawk Cruise Missile or a misdirected laser guided bomb, no one knows.

    His immediate thoughts were for the thousands of his students in the university and for his own three children who study there.

    After about 30 minutes, the Libyan press came to see what had happened. the University President and other officials of the school all came. But to Dr. Mansur’s surprise not the international press.

    And what did they see?

    The media saw the widespread structural damage to many of the buildings, all of the windows blown out in every one of the eight auditoriums. Doors blown off their hinges. Library in a shambles. Books and debris everywhere. The campus mosque was damaged. Glass heaped up in piles. Some efforts at cleaning up had begun.

    Dr Mansur says that they have kept the university, wherever practicable, in much the same condition as it was on the day of the attack. Except that the main classroom area that students work in has been cleaned and will be renamed the Seif Al-Arab auditorium complex in memory of Muammar Qaddafi’s son murdered on April 30, 2011 in his home by NATO bombs.

    On Thursday, NATO missiles. Friday and Saturday are considered the weekend here. Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday, the students are back to school undaunted by the bombing. In many of the classrooms I saw today, students were taking final exams amid the debris. As I walked around the campus, one male voice shouted out and spoke to me in Arabic: “Where’s Obama?”

    Good question I thought.

    I’ve always wondered if the politicians who regularly send our young men and women away to war and who regularly bomb the poor peoples of the world have ever, themselves, been on the receiving end of a Cruise Missile attack or placed themselves and their family at the mercy of a laser guided depleted uranium bomb. Maybe, just maybe I thought, that if they had experienced first hand the horror of a NATO attack on a civilian target they might just stop and question for a minute the need to dispatch our armed forces to attack the people of Libya.

    I didn’t want to disturb the students taking exams so I found some students standing outside not taking exams to talk to. I asked them if they had anything to say to President Obama. One professor, a woman, spoke up readily and said, “We are working under fire: physical and psychological.” One student spoke up and said that President Obama should “Free Palestine and leave Libya alone.” He continued, “We are one family.”

    More on that later, but briefly, every Libyan is a member of a tribe and every tribe governs itself and selects its leaders; those leaders from all of the tribes then select their leaders, and so on until there is only one leader of all of the tribes of Libya. I met that one tribal leader yesterday in another part of Tripoli and I am told he is the real leader of this country. He presides over the Tribal Council which constitutes Libya’s real policymakers. So when the young man said “We are one family,” that is actually the truth.

    Dr. Mansur, trained in the United States and spoke fondly of his time in the US and the many friends he made there. He is proud of his students and the richness of his university’s community life. He was just like any University Dean in the United States.

    In my view God intervened on Thursday 9 June, 2011.

    On the day that the missile struck, not one student was killed. It could so easily have been different. It could have been a catastrophe taking the lives of hundreds of teenagers.

    I am told that in the surrounding area immediately outside the university others were not so fortunate.

    Reports are that there were deaths in the nearby houses.

    It’s a funny thing about war. Those who cause war become oblivious and removed from its consequences; they seem happy to inflict harm on others and become numb to its ill effects while war’s victims find a way to normalize the abnormal and live with the constant threat of death and destruction.

    After visiting Tripoli, I remain as opposed to war as ever before.

    The students at Al Fateh University continue their studies despite the siege that their country is under.

    And oh, that second group of students that I randomly spoke to? I asked them how much they pay for tuition. They looked at me with puzzled faces even after the translation. I asked them how much they pay for their books. Again, the same puzzled face. Tuition at Al Fateh University is 16 dinars per year–about $9. And due to the NATO embargo on gasoline imports, the school now has started 10 free bus lines to its surrounding areas in order to make sure that the students can get to school, free of charge.

    I told them that I was about to enter a Ph.D. program in the US myself and that I needed tuition and book money costing tens of thousands of dollars. I continued that my cousin is in debt $100,000 because she went to the schools of her choice and received a Master’s degree.

    They said to me, “We thank Muammar Qaddafi. Because of Muammar Qaddafi we have free education. Allah, Muammar, Libya obes!”

    Well as for NATO, they still cling to the chimera that their strikes are against military targets only and that theirs is a “humanitarian intervention.”

    I’m still waiting to find evidence somewhere in the world that bombing poor civilian populations of the Third World from the air is good for their voting rights, democracy, medical care, education, welfare, national debt, and enhancing personal income and wealth distribution. It seems clear to me that complex life issues require more complex intervention than a Cruise Missile could ever deliver.

    Here is video of Michel Collon about western wars and the media lies that accompany them (thanks to Rosemary Tylka for sending this to me for forwarding):

  32. The Obama Doctrine: Lawless Imperial Aggression
    Posted: 2011/06/15
    From: Mathaba
    Obama’s Libya terror bombing

    America’s permanent war agenda, culture of violence, imperial lawlessness, daily atrocities, blood-drenched history, glorification of killing in the name of peace, and support for the world’s worst despots, as well as contempt for democratic values, rule of law principles, and human and civil rights abroad and at home.

    Obama continues the odious tradition, governing repressively while waging global imperial wars, brazenly claiming humanitarian intentions he doesn’t give a damn about, never did, and won’t tolerate.

    Washington provides financial aid, weapons, munitions, and political support, Obama more generously than any of his predecessors, showing his contempt for Palestinian liberation, moral values, and rule of law justice. Orchestrated and controlled by Washington, innocent Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis, and now Libyans are being slaughtered under the bogus “humanitarian intervention (HI)” doctrine.
    In fact, since mid-February, when nonviolent protests began, Obama and America’s media largely stayed silent about daily human rights abuses, including murder, torture, mass arrests, bogus accusations, and show trials, convicting innocent civilian men and women for courageously wanting democratic rights in a nation without them.

    On March 29, eight New York Times contributors asked “Is There an Obama Doctrine,” preceded by an introduction saying his previous day America’s role in Libya speech asserted unilateral authority to intervene abroad “when our interests and values are at stake,” an illegal position under international and constitutional law, unmentioned in the debate.

    On April 13, Times writer Peter Baker headlined, “Obama Puts His Own Mark on Foreign Policy Issues,” saying:

    “If there is an Obama doctrine emerging, it is one much more realpolitik than his predecessor’s, focused on relations with traditional great powers and relegating issues like human rights and democracy to second-tier concerns.” In fact, no US president in recent memory gave a damn about either or anything humanitarian.

    Unmentioned was Obama’s belligerent lawlessness, waging four imperial wars and numerous proxy ones, spending record amounts on militarism while homeland needs go begging. In fact, former White House chief of staff (now Chicago mayor) Rahm Emanuel calls it being “cold-blooded about the self-interests of your nation,” no matter the death, destruction, and misery toll taken to achieve them.

    They, not major media boilerplate, define his doctrine, an out-of-control agenda for American dominance, using missiles, bombs, ground troops, and assassination squads to indiscriminately slaughter civilians, including women, children, and elderly, virtually anyone in raging wars he opposed as a candidate.

    In addition, he endorses torture and extraordinary renditions as official US policies, as well as backing the world’s worst despots, ones not fit to be in polite or any other company.

    Washington, preoccupied with terror bombing Libya daily, murdering civilians ruthlessly, perhaps planning other regional wars, a topic for a follow-up article.

    Washington’s Imperial War on Libya

    On June 7, reporting from Tripoli, former Congresswoman/Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney said at least 29 bombs struck the capital from about 11AM to 1:10PM, as NATO intensifies efforts to inflict mass casualties, claiming its being done to save lives.

    In response, America’s media mock the carnage, calling Gaddafi’s reports propaganda. Notably on June 6, New York Times writer John Burns sounded more like a Pentagon press agent than reporter headlining, “Libya Stokes Its Machine Generating Propaganda,” saying:

    “The Libyan government has a growing record of improbable statements and carefully manipulated news events, but (after four months of conflict, it’s) showing signs of desperation and disorganization. The loyalist locker seems increasingly bare.”

    In fact, McKinney and independent journalists say sustained bombings don’t hit empty spaces. They kill innocent civilians daily, Washington slaughtering them for another imperial conquest and its spoils once hostilities end, something Burns and other corporate types airbrush from reports, effectively endorsing their crimes. As a result, McKinney asked:

    “What were you doing” on June 7? “The people of Tripoli endure the trauma of repeated bombings in their immediate environment.” Many don’t survive, nor are they immune from large areas contaminated with toxic depleted uranium because NATO bombs, missiles and and shells proliferate it daily.

    In fact, in the 24-hour period alone from June 7 – 8, over 60 sorties struck Tripoli night and day, terrorizing and contaminating wide areas. At least 31 were killed, dozens wounded, targeting homes, hospitals, schools, government buildings and Gaddafi’s compound again or close to it.

    Yet according to AP, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen asked member states for more help, saying they haven’t participated to their full potential. He wants those who’ve contributed least to use “assets at their disposal” to inflict greater punishment than so far caused, no matter how lawless and indefensible, perhaps aiming to turn all targeted areas into rubble, including the capital, no matter the body count to achieve it.

    Bogus Humanitarian Intervention

    Orchestrated and controlled by Washington, innocent Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis, and now Libyans are being slaughtered under the bogus “humanitarian intervention (HI)” doctrine.

    Claiming it, in fact, violates UN Charter provisions, including Article 2(4) stating:

    “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

    Moreover, claiming HI conceals illegitimate war-making reasons, the usual self-interest ones for power and profit, never for humanity, democratic values, moral principles, or rule of law justice.

    In addition, international law prohibits interfering in other nations’ internal affairs for any reason except self-defense, and even then, only until the Security Council acts.

    Further, selective intervention exposes hypocritically doing it against some states but not others, including far more serious instances where doing so can save lives.

    For example, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Libya threatened no other state, including neighboring ones, America or Israel. Yet Washington attacked them all, citing bogus reasons for doing so.

    In a proper tribunal, Boyle wants it “prove(d) to the entire world” the way Nazis were held accountable decades earlier.

    In 2009, Boyle wrote: “…In contrast, “humanitarian intervention” is duplicitously argued when Western interests are at stake, not when one of their allies commits grievous abuses, including crimes of war, against humanity, and/or genocide. The hypocritical double standard is obvious, outrageous, ruthless, and lawless….”

    This article considers prospects for more war, notably in the Middle East against Yemen, Syria, and perhaps Iran, possibly escalating into general war that could, in fact, spin out of control with nuclear weapons introduced openly for the first time since WW II.

    At stake literally is humanity and/or a fit world to live in – militarized, repressed, terrorized, and impoverished except for the privileged few running it their way, a prospect too dire to imagine but possible unless committed grassroots pressure stops it.
    On June 6, New Yorker writer Seymour Hersh headlined “Iran and the Bomb,” asking:

    “Is Iran actively trying to develop nuclear weapons?” Bush and Obama officials say so despite “highly classified intelligence assessments” refuting accusations of Iran’s “military capacities and intentions.”

    In fact, the most recent National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) affirm “no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any effort to build the bomb since 2003.” It’s nuclear program is commercial. IAEA inspectors found no illicit weapons development.

    Israel also calls Iran an existential threat. Yet most of its nonproliferation experts say it has no nuclear weapons program. As IAEA head for 12 years, Mohamed ElBaradei recently said:

    “I don’t believe Iran is a clear and present danger. All I see is the hype about the threat posed by Iran.”

    On June 9, London Guardian writer Richard Dalton headlined, “Iran is not in breach of international law,” saying:

    Iran doesn’t threaten peace. “In principle….nothing in international law or in the non-proliferation treaty forbids uranium enrichment.” Every country with commercial reactors does it “without being accused of ‘threatening the peace.’ ” Some, like Israel, do it secretly without accusation or threats of sanctions or harsher measures.

    Unfortunately, the IAEA is an industry and political tool, manipulated to act outside its mandate, serving the wrong interests for the wrong reasons. As a result, it threatens world safety by letting America and Israel operate belligerently while cracking down unjustly on other nations endangering no one.

    However, no matter now grave its abuses, Western moral outrage is absent, let alone legitimate actions to deter what no state should tolerate another, especially for decades.

    Instead, imperial aggression targets nonbelligerent states, including Libya to exploit its resources, other material wealth and people under US control, not help them for humanitarian reasons Washington never gave a damn about and doesn’t now.

    Saying so is one of many Big Lies, ones major media reports regurgitate but never explain, providing managed news instead of truths too disturbing to reveal.

    At risk is more war, perhaps a general one involving Russia, China, and other major powers globally engaged in the unthinkable, a possible nuclear confrontation endangering humanity. The time to stop it is now. Afterwards is too late.

    Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
    Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at


  33. Chavez: U.S. Action on Libya shows “imperial madness”10.06.2011
    Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Tuesday (7th) that the United States suffers from an “imperial madness” which, he says, is demonstrated in the attacks on countries like Libya.

    “Rarely have you ever seen or experienced a bombing of a country to, quote, ‘protect civilians,’ when the bombs precisely hit everybody,” Chavez said to the press upon his arrival early on Tuesday in the Ecuadorian city of Salinas, where he will meet with President Rafael Correa.

    Chavez has questioned the strategy of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to indiscriminately bomb Libya and denounced that the they have sent helicopters to hunt down and kill the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

  34. live event Webcast
    live press conference: Wednesday 15 june 2011 @ 11am EDT /5 PM ROME/LIBYAN Time
    Minister Louis Farrakhan to Address United Nations on June 15, 2011 (
    The US-sponsored, NATO-led assault on Libya and its dire consequences
    Nation of Islam on Libya and Letter to Qaddafi: Message to the World
    ( – The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, of the Nation of Islam, held a morning press conference, Wednesday June 15 to address the U.S.-sponsored, NATO-led bombing of Libya, UN-sanctioned military strikes and operations against the North African nation. Also present were, Ramsey Clark, Former U.S. Attorney General and International Activist Cynthia McKinney live from Tripoli, Libya.
    Posted: 2011/06/16
    From: Mathaba
    Louis Farrakhan letter to Muammar Qaddafi:
    June 14,2011
    Brother Leader Muammar Gadhafi
    Tripoli, Libya
    Dear Brother Gadhafi,
    May this letter find you, your family and the faithful people of the Libyan
    Arab Jamahiriya in the best of health and spirit in spite of the prevailing
    Please accept on behalf of myself, my family, the members of the Nation of
    Islam and all in America who you have helped, our deepest sympathy on the
    loss of life of your son and three grandchildren. It is written in the Holy
    Qur’an that “no soul dies but with the Permission of Allah”. We may not
    know Allah’s purpose in permitting what is happening in Libya, but again
    Allah says in the Holy Qur’an “whenever a misfortune befalls the Believer,
    He says, ‘Allah is my Patron (Friend, Protector, Supporter) and to Him is my
    eventual return”.
    I am deeply deeply troubled over what I see happening to our Beloved Libya
    and our Brother Leader Muammar Gadhafi. We are drinking of the bitter
    cup of betrayal which is prophesied to come to us in the last days of this
    wicked world to separate from among us those whom Allah (God) will use
    in the building of His Kingdom and those who are marked for severe
    chastisement and utter destruction.
    4855 South Woodlawn Avenue CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60615
    Page 2
    I observed those whom you trusted: Prime Minister Berlusconi of Italy,
    President Sarkozy of France, Prime Minister Cameron of United Kingdom,
    and President Obama of the United States of America, who have joined
    forces with the weak Arabs from the Arab League and others to join the
    enemies of Righteousness and Justice to destroy you and the Revolution that
    brought about the rise of Libya into her present strength and greatness.
    These betrayals hurt deeply, but probably not as much as the betrayals from
    your inner circle. To hear that Russia and China supposed friends are now
    asking you to step down; and the President of Russia promising you their
    protection and a place for you to go, this to me is laughable. Anyone who
    will ask you to step down, step aside and leave the country because of what
    America, NATO and others are doing does not understand the resolve of a
    true Muslim. Allah warns us in the Holy Qur’an “O you who believe, take
    not My enemy and your enemy for friends. Would you offer them love,
    while they deny the Truth that has come to you, driving out the Messenger
    and yourselves because you believe in Allah, your Lord? If you have come
    forth to strive in My way and to seek My pleasure, would you love them in
    secret? And I know what you conceal and what you manifest. And whoever
    of you does this, he indeed strays from the straight path.” Allah and Allah
    alone, is your and my Protector. The Holy Qur’an teaches, “Only Allah is
    your friend and His Messenger and those who believe,” We know that Allah
    and His Messenger are our true Friends, but we do not know who the
    Believers are until they have been tried and found to be true.
    My dear Brother Leader, in the general orders that we were given by the
    Honorable Elijah Muhammad whose desire was to make us brave fighters,
    willing at any time to give our lives for Allah’s sake and righteousness, it
    states in general order number five “do not quit your post until properly
    relieved.” Allah put you on your post and neither NATO, the President of
    the United States or the Arab League or anybody else has the power or
    authority to tell you to quit your post. Elijah Muhammad told me “die on
    your post”.
    Page 3
    These next few words again from the Holy Qur’an are for the Believers. It
    is written in the Holy Qur’an, “surely I am going to try you with something
    of fear, hunger, loss of property, loss of life, and diminution of fruit, but give
    good news to those who are patient and steadfast under trial”.
    Again, Allah asks the question in the Holy Qur’an, “Do men think that they
    will be left alone on saying, we believe, and will not be tried? And indeed
    We tried those before them, so Allah will certainly know those who are true
    and He will know the liars”.
    In the life of Prophet Noah, he was under such great strain he asked Allah
    when will my help come and Allah answered your help is nigh. Your help
    Brother Leader is nigh. Be patient and be resolved that it is Allah, and Allah
    alone who will deliver you and me as he delivered those before us from the
    wicked evil intentions and harm from our enemies.
    I know that what you are suffering will soon come to me and the Nation of
    Islam and I pray that the guidance that I give to you that Allah will make me
    strong enough to be that as Allah asked the Believers to be.
    In closing, the last two surahs of the Holy Qur’an are called the chapters of
    refuge and my plea to you is to seek refuge in Allah and know if it pleases
    Allah, He will deliver you and with you the Libyan Jamahiriya.
    My dearest of Brothers, know that no death can touch Muammar Gadhafi for
    it is written in the Holy Qur’an “And speak not of those who are slain in
    Allah’s Way as dead. Nay, (they are) alive, but you perceive not”. The
    great work that you have done will live regardless to what happens. The
    work you have started by Allah’s Grace will be furthered by those who love
    you and those who know the value of what you have contributed to Libya,
    Africa and the World. Remember Brother Allah says He will never waste
    the work of a worker.
    I will do all that I can to help, but Allah’s Help is Sufficient.
    Page 4
    Thank you for reading these words and I pray that in these words you will
    find comfort, solace, guidance and strength In the Words of Allah, the Lord
    of the Worlds.
    Give my greeting to your beloved wife and family, and to the faithful ones
    whose faith is being greatly tested.
    With much love I greet you again in Peace, Wa-Alakium Salaam.
    I Am Your Brother and Servant
    The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan

    Download Minister Farrakhan’s open letter to Col. Muammar Gadhafi (PDF) #

  35. leonor: a spanish blogger in Libya says:
    I just talked with people who have returned from Misratah and say that now the city is completely under the control of the population and its government.
    Communications are being repaired and families were in hotels in Tripoli and had fled to other places, it helps them to return.
    Those houses hav…e been destroyed by NATO bombs were relocated to other houses because the Libyan government now has thousands of houses were being finalized when the conflict began to be delivered to the population.
    The armed rebels were about 80-100 km near Bin Walit Misratah, but lately no longer hear or talk about them.
    I make the Libyan government continues to grant amnesty to all rebels who return their weapons because they want the council of the tribes.

  36. David Rothscum Reports
    Gadaffi took control in a bloodless coup from a sick monarch away for medical treatment 41 years ago.

    If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire… Al Qaeda.
    How did Al Qaeda start? Al Qaeda grew out of the Afghan Arabs in Afghanistan that the CIA trained at Camp Peary. Amongst these men were many Libyans. These Libyans who had fought in Afghanistan eventually created the Libyan Islamic Fighting group. As explained on Wikipedia and in my earlier report on Libya, they were funded by MI6 to assassinate Gadaffi in 1996. Great Britain funded an Al Qaeda cell in Libya, in an attempt to assassinate Gadaffi.

    So, Gadaffi holds a speech and says that Al Qaeda is behind the uprising in his country. And the West then considers him to be a schizophrenic autistic nutcase of course. Gadaffi says that he will fight until the end, and the West automaticly considers him the next Hitler. Gadaffi holds a speech to a massive group of people clothed in green, and the West contrives the idea that they were simply being bribed.

    Make no mistake, the United States IS using Al Qaeda to overthrow governments, yet again. As reported by CNN:

    “Al Qaeda’s North African wing has said “it will do whatever we can to help” the uprising in Libya, according to a statement the militant group posted on jihadist websites.
    The statement by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was posted Thursday, said SITE, a terrorist-tracking organization based outside Washington.

    In 2006, al Qaeda documents found by U.S. forces in Iraq showed that per capita, Libya surpassed other Arab nations in the number of citizens joining al Qaeda. The regime’s fear was that the terror group would bring its fight back to Libya.”

    We saw the same thing in Kosovo, where Al Qaeda was being used to terrorize the Serbs. As reported by the National Post:
    Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terrorist network has been active in the Balkans for years, most recently helping Kosovo rebels battle for independence from Serbia with the financial and military backing of the United States and NATO.
    The claim that al-Qaeda played a role in the Balkan wars of the 1990s came from an alleged FBI document former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic presented in his defence before the Hague tribunal last week. Mr. Milosevic faces 66 counts of war crimes and genocide.
    Although Hague prosecutors have challenged the veracity of the document, which Mr. Milosevic identified as a Congressional statement from the FBI dated last December, Balkan experts say the presence of al-Qaeda militants in Kosovo and Bosnia is well documented.

    Today, al-Qaeda members are helping the National Liberation Army, a rebel group in Macedonia, fight the Skopje government in a bid for independence, military analysts say. Last week, Michael Steiner, the United Nations administrator in Kosovo, warned of “importing the Afghan danger to Europe” because several cells trained and financed by al-Qaeda remain in the region.
    “Many members of the Kosovo Liberation Army were sent for training in terrorist camps in Afghanistan,” said James Bissett, former Canadian ambassador to Yugoslavia and an expert on the Balkans. “Milosevic is right. There is no question of their participation in conflicts in the Balkans. It is very well documented.”
    The arrival in the Balkans of the so-called Afghan Arabs, who are from various Middle Eastern states and linked to al-Qaeda, began in 1992 soon after the war in Bosnia. According to Lenard Cohen, professor of political science at Simon Fraser University, mujahedeen fighters who travelled to Afghanistan to resist the Soviet occupation in the 1980s later “migrated to Bosnia hoping to assist their Islamic brethren in a struggle against Serbian [and for a time] Croatian forces.”

    The parallels are striking to what is happening in Libya, with veterans of the Afghan war against the Soviet Union popping up again, this time leading the charge against Gadaffi:
    The main opposition group in Libya now is the National Front for the Salvation of Libya. This opposition group is being funded by Saudi Arabia, the CIA, and French Intelligence. This group unified itself with other opposition groups, to become the National Conference for the Libyan Opposition.

    It was this organization that called for the “Day of Rage” that plunged Libya into chaos on February 17 of this year. As I explained earlier, the “Day of Rage” was called for by an organization that is funded by the CIA. Seems like a bit of incredible coincidence that the day of rage was planned to be on the same day that violent nutcases would be released who wanted to turn Libya into a second Afghanistan.
    Unlike the US that keeps you in prison forever without even receiving a trial, the Libyan government made the mistake of showing mercy. They released 90 members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting group in 2008. It gets weirder. On the day of the “Day of Rage”, Libya had released 110 rehabilitated members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting group. These were men, part of an organization linked to Al Qaeda who plotted to overthrow the Libyan government.
    It did this in Benghazi, a conservative city that has always been opposed to Gadaffi’s rule. It should be noted that the National Front for the Salvation of Libya is well armed. In 1996 the group tried to unleash a revolution in the eastern part of Libya before. It used the Libyan National Army, the armed division of the NFSL to begin this failed uprising.

    Why is the United States so opposed to Gadaffi? He is the main threat to US hegemony in Africa, because he attempts to unite the continent against the United States. This concept is called the United States of Africa. In fact, Gadaffi holds all sorts of ideas that are contrary to US interests.
    The United States and Israel however have no interest in a strong Arab world. In fact it seems that elementary to the plan is bringing Libya to its knees through chaos and anarchy. In late 2010, the United Kingdom was still propping up the Libyan government through lucrative arms sales. Nothing is a better guarantee to destroy Libya than a bloody civil war. The tribal system that is still strong in Libya is useful to exploit to generate such a war since Libya has historically been divided into various tribal groups. Tribal allegiances go before allegiance to the government, especially in Benghazi, and thus the central government has little control over the eastern part of the country. Tribal ties play a far greater role, and thus the conflict will unfortunately be bloodier.
    The chaos in Libyan consists of a mixture of tribal conflicts, conflict over oil revenue (since most oil is in the east of the country), old kingdom Monarchists, radical islamists opposed to Gadaffi’s Jamahiriya system of government, and outside destabilization by Western funded exile groups.

    The country is more than twice the size of Pakistan, but with 6 million inhabitants. Endless deserts divide many of the cities in the nation.

    Gadhafi claims that the 9/11 hijackers were trained in the US; but he also urged Libyans to donate blood to Americans after 9/11.

    Whatever way you want to put it, Libya is a thorn in the eye of our globalist elite. It has been claimed that there are 5 countries on the planet left without a Rothschild controlled central bank: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya. I don’t necessarily think you can boil the conflict down simply to having a Rothschild controlled central bank or not. However, considering the fact that by now, Sudan has split in two, America is trurning Libya into going under mob rule, and South Korea is upping it’s propaganda offensive against the North Korean government where demonstration are breaking out for the first time in the history of the nation, the list is at least a little unnerving.
    It’s important to note that Libya was in fact recently beginning to introduce Islamic banking to the nation. In Islam, usury is illegal. Banking families like the Rothschilds and the Warburgs of course derive all their wealth (except for the wealth they’ve simply stolen) from usury. Islam has the concept of Musharakah. It abolishes the idea of a fixed interest on a loan. Instead money is paid back only if the enterprise makes a profit. Seems like an excellent idea, regardless of your religious beliefs.

    Big oil is watching a dream come true as oil production in Libya (where no foreign companies have a hand in oil production) plunges, and anxiety drives the price up even further. Ships are of course already in the area, and have been for a while. It’s all incredibly convenient. Reuters has reported that Venezuela’s foreign minister said it looked like some western powers wanted to break up and occupy the Mediterranean nation for its oil. Fidel Castro has said the same thing.

    After invading, the USA can then choose to leave the country in ruins with no oil production at all, or you can occupy the country and hand the oil to your buddies. Oil companies are predatory entities. In fact the United States overthrew the government of Iran for simply nationalizing the oil.
    The Brzezinski clique currently in control of the United States has found a far more effective way of dealing with its enemies. Instead of directly fighting them, they create anger in these nations, and then use the people themselves to sow chaos. The first attempt in Iran failed. Now the US has chosen to create examples in vulnerable countries first, to help mobilize the people in less vulnerable nations.
    It’s the most genius solution to defeat your enemies with. Contrary to the neoconservative approach, the whole world now supports your operation. If the carnage gets excessive enough, people around the world will beg their own governments to intervene in these 3rd world nations. If you thought that after Iraq further military intervention in the Middle East had become impossible due to a lack of popular support, it seems you were wrong. The Brzezinski approach has opened up this possibility again.

    Uranium bombs are being used in Tripoli. Is Tripoli going to be another Fallujah? Only time can tell. The world will probably praise Obama as Tripoli is contaminated for generations to come. In fact, getting rid of Gadaffi by turning Tripoli into another Fallujah could even ensure that Obama is re-elected.

  37. Gadhafi at Hotel
    AFP Update: June 16, 2011
    Libye: le fils Kadhafi veut des élections
    Kadhafi’s son wants elections

    Un émissaire russe rencontrait jeudi à Tripoli des responsables du régime libyen en vue de tenter une médiation dans le conflit, alors qu’un fils du dirigeant contesté Mouammar Kadhafi s’est dit prêt à accepter des élections sous supervision internationale. A Russian envoy met Thursday in Tripoli, the Libyan regime officials to try to mediate in the conflict, while a son of leader Muammar Gaddafi has challenged his willingness to accept elections under international supervision.

    Les présidents russe Dmitri Medvedev et chinois Hu Jintao ont de nouveau souligné, dans un communiqué commun à Moscou, leur hostilité à toute ingérence étrangère dans les crises dans les pays arabes et appelé à la fin de la guerre en Libye. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Chinese President Hu Jintao has again stressed in a joint statement in Moscow, their hostility to foreign interference in the crisis in Arab countries and called for the end of the war in Libya.

    Cette déclaration a coïncidé avec l’arrivée de l’émissaire spécial du Kremlin pour l’Afrique, Mikhaïl Marguelov, à Tripoli, bastion du régime, où il s’est entretenu avec le chef du gouvernement Baghdadi Mahmoudi. This statement coincided with the arrival of the Kremlin’s special envoy for Africa, Mikhail Margelov in Tripoli bastion of the regime, where he met with the prime minister Baghdadi Mahmoudi.

    Selon son porte-parole, M. Marguelov doit également rencontrer le chef de la diplomatie Abdelati al-Obeïdi lors de sa visite d’un jour mais aucun entretien n’est prévu avec M. Kadhafi, dont Moscou réclame désormais ouvertement le départ. According to his spokesman, Mr. Margelov must also meet the foreign minister Abdelati al-Obeidi during his visit for a day but no interview is scheduled with Mr Gaddafi, which Moscow now openly calling the start.

    Russia, who traditionally has opposed any interference in Libyan affairs, and was a close ally of Libya, changed course in late May: claiming openly now to distancing itself from Gaddafi; but is still posing Russia to be a mediator, now that the Western-war is in danger of sinking.

    Le régime libyen avait alors rétorqué qu’il rejetait toute médiation en dehors de celle de l’Union africaine, qui ne prévoit pas un départ de M. Kadhafi. The Libyan regime had then replied that he rejected any mediation from outside the African Union, which does not provide a departure of Mr Gaddafi.

    Mais Seif al-Islam Kadhafi, qui avait été présenté comme un successeur possible à son père, a dans une interview au quotidien italien Corriere della Sera, affirmé que le régime était prêt à accepter des élections “dans les trois mois, au maximum d’ici la fin de l’année”. But Seif al-Islam Gaddafi, who had been touted as a possible successor to his father, in an interview with Italian daily Corriere della Sera, said that the regime was willing to accept elections’ in three months, maximum of By the end of the year. ”
    “La garantie de leur transparence pourrait être la présence d’observateurs internationaux”, at-il ajouté. “The guarantee of transparency could be the presence of international observers,” he added.
    “Nous ne nous formalisons pas sur lesquels (observateurs). Nous acceptons l’Union européenne, l’Union africaine, l’ONU, même l’OTAN, l’important étant que le scrutin soit propre, qu’il n’y ait pas de soupçons d’embrouilles”. “We do not formalize on which (observers). We accept the European Union, the African Union, UN, even NATO is important is that the election is clean, there is no suspicion of shenanigans. ”
    Seif al-Islam ajoute qu'”un mécanisme devra être mis en place” pour garantir l’intégrité des chefs de l’opposition pour le scrutin. Seif al-Islam said that “a mechanism should be established” to ensure the integrity of the opposition leaders for voting.

    The hotel Wenzrik in the center of the capital, was destroyed in a bombing at dawn, according to an AFP journalists on the spot. L’émissaire russe ya été emmené brièvement par les autorités. The Russian envoy is briefly taken away by the authorities.

    • Latest update: 16/06/2011 – Libya – Muammar Gaddafi
      Tripoli (17 Jun ,2011),(pti).
      Gadhafi talks with rebels
      Muammar Gaddafi’s regime is in direct talks with Libya’s rebels, a Russian envoy has indicated, as the “Guide’s” son said the way out of a months-long conflict is the staging of elections.

      Russia’s Mikhail Margelov, in Tripoli for one day after visiting the rebels in their Benghazi stronghold last week, made the remarks following a meeting Libyan Prime Minister Baghdadi al-Mahmudi.

      “I was assured at today’s negotiations that direct contacts between Benghazi and Tripoli are already underway,”Margelov said on Thursday,
      quoted by Russia’s ITAR-TASS news agency.

      “The Libyan prime minister told me that a round of such contacts concluded yesterday in Paris,” he said, adding French President Nicolas Sarkozy
      “has been informed of the outcome of these contacts.”

      He did not disclose the nature of the talks, which could not be confirmed by the rebels’National Transitional Council.

      Mahmudi said Gaddafi’s departure from power was a”red line” that cannot be crossed.

      “Of utmost concern to us in any dialogue is the unity of Libya,”Mahmudi told a news conference in Tripoli.

      Tripoli ‘ready to accept immediate elections’ says Seif al-Islam
      Tripoli is ready to accept immediate elections with international supervision, according to an interview with Seif al-Islam, that appeared in the Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera on Thursday.
      By News Wires (text) AFP –
      The Libyan “Guide” Kadhafi is ready to accept internationally supervised elections within three months, his son Seif al-Islam told an Italian newspaper on Thursday.

      He said the elections could be supervised by bodies including the European Union, the African Union, the United Nations or even NATO, which has been bombing Gaddafi’s forces.

      “The important thing is that the election should be clean, that there should be no suspicion of vote-rigging,”

      he said.

      “I have no doubt that the overwhelming majority of Libyans stands with my father and sees the rebels as fanatical Islamist fundamentalists, terrorists stirred up from abroad, mercenaries on the orders of (French President Nicolas) Sarkozy.”

      He said his father would be ready to step aside if he lost the election but would not go into exile.

      “He will never leave Libya. He was born here and intends to die and be buried here, alongside those he holds dear.”

      Read more:
      The following countries have recognised the Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC) as Libya’s sole and legitimate representative since the beginning of the conflict on 17 February 2011.

      • France – 10 March
      • Qatar – 28 March
      • Maldives – 3 April
      • Italy – 4 April
      • Kuwait – 4 April
      • Gambia– 22 April
      • United Kingdom– 12 May
      • Jordan – 24 May
      • Senegal – 28 May
      • Malta – 1er June
      • Spain – 8 June
      • Australia – 9 June
      • United States – 9 June
      • UAE– 12 June
      • Germany – 13 June
      • Canada – 14 June

      “Elections, immediately and with international supervision. It’s the only painless way to break out of the impasse in Libya,”

      Saif al-Islam told the daily Corriere della Sera em></strong correspondent in Tripoli.</

      >”We could hold them within three months. At most by the end of the year. And the guarantee of transparency could be the presence of international observers,” said the 68-year old Kadhafi’s eldest son .

      Saif al-Islam said the elections could be supervised by the European Union or African Union, the United Nations or even NATO as long as a “mechanism” was put in place to ensure there were “no suspicions of vote rigging.”

      “Let’s go to the polls, and may the best man win,”

      he told the reporter, who had turned up at the Radisson Blu hotel in Tripoli for an interview with the Foreign Minister Abdelati al-Obeidi, but had found Saif al-Islam there instead.

      Gadhafi will sede to elections

      NATO pre-dawn raids pound area near Gaddafi base

      • BLAIMING SAIF for Libya’s Woes !

        Mathaba News Agency Cut Out From Libya News Coverage
        Posted: 2011/06/18
        From: Mathaba

        No Libyan news sites offer regular and up to date English language news coverage. Photo: Sayf-al-Islam, seen by revolutionary committees as responsible for the current state of affairs in Libya

        HeyU Quality Ads
        Mathaba is being deliberately side-lined from covering Libyan news although it is the only news agency providing accurate and timely reports in English, it’s Editor in Chief Adam Musa said today.

        “We are always the last to be told anything, we have to rely on a correspondent who has several other jobs and lacks anything approaching adequate resources to do his job properly”, the Editor said.

        Today we received reports that our correspondent was in attendance at a meeting of Baghdadi and the United Nations in Tripoli, a press conference in fact, but that he could not report as he had been asked by authorities to perform other duties.

        The news agency, the only independent news agency to operate an English language Libya news coverage since 1999, has been waiting several months for its international correspondents to be located to Libya in order to improve the frequency and depth of its coverage.

        “The suspicion is arising that the reason Mathaba is not being allowed to do its job properly and on the other hand all manner of hostile western media are being housed in 5 star hotels and write false reports, is because of our criticism of Sayf-al-Islam al-Qaddafi”.

        Mathaba, which also provides a voice for the international revolutionary committees movement founded and led by Sayf’s father, Colonel Muammar al-Qaddafi, had given coverage to articles by adherents to the Libyan leader’s theories which were critical of Sayf-al-Islam’s ties with foreign agencies, which has resulted in the current rebellion in Libya.

        Among the articles published that were critical of Sayf were exposes of his links with western capitalist elites, interference in the democratic process in Libya in which he allegedly installed ministers over the heads of the people bypassing the basic people’s conferences, calls for changing Libya’s constitution and other violations of the principles of The Green Book.

        Revolutionary committees blame Sayf-al-Islam al-Qaddafi for closing down their publications and meeting places, for appointing several ambassadors to Libyan embassies and several ministers, all on the orders of Washington, and all of which defected to the pre-planned take-over of Benghazi and resulted in a coup d’etat and reign of terror in Libya’s second largest city.

        An analyst close to Mathaba who is familiar with the situation across North Africa and has inside intelligence from Sayf’s circle, said that the “whole system and administration is riddled with foreign plants doing their bidding” and that “daddy Gaddafi is the only loose canon at the moment.”

        He said that the end result will be a tri-partite partitioning of Libya.

        The source said that he has observed all the major political and trade representatives of Libya, whilst continuing to be paid from “frozen funds” held by the Bank of England and others, have already switched sides to the opposition, ready to carry on as before when “victory” is declared.

        He said that the western central banks release money as necessary for paying salaries and expenses of Libyan embassy staff, trade bodies etcetera so they can continue functioning.

        The analyst said that the US is “definitely trying to stop more countries aligning themselves with China, more so if they are strong countries, and making countries ungovernable is a first step to ensure that they remain dependent on US support” and added that there is “the issue of resources for which both US and China are competing, and Sudan and Libya are relevant in this regard.” #
        MY POST SCRIPTUM: I am sure that Saif has learned the bitter way, from so easily trusting some people. As long as he has learned from those unfortunate mistakes, I am sure we can trust Saif to make better and more thorough investigations before hiring or accepting the offers of those Claiming to want to help Libya. Did not Moammar make the same mistake in trusting Sarkozy and Berlusconi?
        Blaming Saif for Libya’s Woes:

      • NATO’s “democratic” terrorists reject free elections for Libya
        Posted: 2011/06/20
        From: Mathaba

        NATO attacks hotel while the Libyan government makes peace offer

        Representatives of the Libyan government and the opposition met on Thursday (16th) to discuss the crisis, said Mikhail Marguelov, diplomat sent to the country by Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. Meanwhile, the rebels and U.S. officials said they will not accept the election campaign proposed by the Libyan leader’s son, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi.

        Marguelov said the Tripoli authorities admitted they were in “direct contact” with the National Transitional Council (NTC), which represents the opposition against the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

        No shortage of Ghaddafi supportersThe Russian remained for several hours in the Libyan capital, in dialogue with Prime Minister Baghdadi al-Mahmoudi, and the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, to articulate a mediation of the Kremlin to establish a ceasefire pact and further negotiations with the rebels.

        According to the Russian, “the prime minister said that the last round of negotiations had taken place in Paris on Wednesday (15th),” with the knowledge of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, according to the diplomat.

        Both Al-Mahmoudi and Marguelov agree that the dialogue with the Libyan government does not include discussion on the exit of Gaddafi from power. “This is an inviolable border,” explained the Prime Minister while rejecting the pressures and conditions the West is trying to impose on Libya.

        The Russian envoy was in Benghazi last week, meeting with terrorist leaders of the NTC, and declared, before arriving in Tripoli, that he believes that the Libyan opposition does not desire the death of Gaddafi.

        democratic unarmed darlings of NATO know they would lose an electionLibyan television reported the stay of the Russian envoy and his evidence on the NATO air bombings, which hit in 44 attack missions, of which only 13 were supposedly military targets.

        Foreign correspondents affirm that one of the places destroyed was the Wanzirik Hotel, situated in the center of the capital, near the complex of Bab al-Aziziya – where Gaddafi used to reside – causing at least 12 civilian casualties.

        On the other hand, the local press reprinted excerpts from an interview with Saif al-Islam Gaddafi to an Italian newspaper in which the son of the Libyan leader said his government would accept elections in a period of three months or up to the end of 2011.

        Saif expressed the conviction that his father would be victorious in any vote because “He is very popular in the country.” He even proposed that these hypothetical polls be monitored by international authorities in order to put an end to the armed clashes.

        “The European Union, the African Union, the United Nations or even NATO can monitor the voting process,” said Saif, who also defended a new constitution and independence for the media.

        Speaking to Al Jazeera, after being informed of the interview, the U.S. backed terrorist rebels and U.S. officials said they will not accept the election campaign proposed by Saif.

        In other words, it’s all a farce, a scam, total utter lies and deception from beginning to end. NATO and their terrorist cronies are just interested in stealing everything from the Libyan people, using Libya as a doorway to Africa to colonize the entire continent once again and establish a base of operations.

        They know they can NEVER win a free and democratic election in Libya. Their end game is to supplant the African Union (free movement of people and goods, affordable public services for all Africans) by AFRICOM.

        NATO will not accept the elections and the terrorists will not support the elections for one simple reason: they know clearly that Gaddafi would win and this gives legitimacy to his Government and totally removes any iota of right and reason NATO claimed to have for their terrorist imperialist assaults on Libya.

        They are nothing but totally corrupt, rotten, dishonest and most of all genocidal murderers. May their ugly, rotten black souls be damned to hell and may they get sent there as soon as possible.

        As has been said before in this space, they are truce breakers and cannot be trusted, not under any circumstances whatsoever. They make Hitler and his SS look like Mother Theresa and a choir of singing nuns.

        Source: Prensa Latina

        Translated from the Portuguese version and appended by:

        Lisa Karpova


  38. Libya – France – Article published the Tuesday 14 June 2011 – Latest update : Tuesday 14 June 2011
    Libya’s anti-Kadhafi rebels no democrats, report claims
    Sarkozy meets Jalill the ruthless  former-judge of capital punishement
    TNC chairman Mustafa Abdul Jalil meet French President Nicolas Sarkozy
    Reuters/Philippe WojazerBy RFI
    The anti-Kadhafi uprising in Libya is neither democratic nor spontaneous, according to a delegation which visited the country last month.

    Their report, published by two French-based thinktanks, claims the rebel Transitional National Council (TNC) wants to impose Islamic sharia law and that the uprising is motivated by regional resentment and vindictiveness.

    The group, organised by French thinktanks Ciret-AVT and CF2R, visited Tripoli and Tripolitania, under the control of Moamer Kadhafi’s forces, and rebel-controlled Benghazi and Cyrenaica in April. It included former French intelligence chief Yves Bonnet, former Algerian minister Saida Ben Habyles and Franco-Bulgarian writer Roumania Ougartchinska.
    Battle for Libya

    While condemning Moamer Kadhafi’s regime, the group says that “true democrats” are a
    minority in the TNC, which has been recognised by France and a number of other countries.

    The democrats are working alongside monarchists, radical Islamists and Kadhafi regime defectors, like the council’s chairman Mustafa Abdul Jalil, a former justice minister who twice confirmed the death sentences passed on five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor for allegedly deliberately infecting 400 children with HIV.

    And, the observers point out, only 13 of the 31 TNC members’ names have been made public, with representatives of the west of the country, most of which is under Kadhafi’s
    control, kept secret for “debatable” reasons.

    Despite its dubious past, the Kadhafi regime may have been trying to reform, according to the report, thanks largely to Kadhafi’s son Saif al-Islam. It points out that a new constitution was being planned with the help of well-known intellectuals who were members of the Kadhafi Foundation, including US academics Francis Fukuyama, Joseph Nye and Benjamin Barber and the UK’s Anthony Giddens.

    The movement is “an armed uprising of the east of the country … which tries to present itself as part of the Arab ‘spring’, with which it has nothing in common”, their report says.

    The report seems most concerned at the threat of establishing a base for Islamists in the region.

    Article I of the CNT’s National Charter states that sharia should be the basis of the country’s laws and the report claims that the Libyan Islamic Combatant Group and Al-Qaeda both claim to have fought against Kadhafi’s forces during the uprising.

    The revolt has inspired three to four million migrant workers to flee the country, “at a time when their own countries are suffering a high level of unemployment”, it says, adding that “all blacks in eastern Libya were considered to be mercenaries in the service of Kadhafi”.

    And it dubs the Western intervention in the country “adventurist”, threatening to destabilise Africa and the Middle East by providing a base for radical Islamism in the region.

    Nato air strikes have hit a hospital in Mizda, wounding about 40 civilians and Korean doctors, and other non-military targets in Misrata and Ziaouia, the report adds.

    Accusing France, the UK and the US of going much further than the UN resolution authorising air strikes allowed, the delegation says that secret services were operating in the country before the motion was passed and continued to do so afterwards.

    France, in particular, could lose business and influence in Libya if Kadhafi is not overthrown, thanks to an “exaggeration” of its role in supporting the rebels both in Paris and Beghazi, it claims.

  39. Friday, June 17, 2011
    US Congressman Kucinich Backs African Union Plan to End Libya War Obama loves oil
    The U.S. imperialists are attacking the North African state of Libya in order to seize the oil-rich country and establish a military beachhead inside the region. Thousands have died in the imperialist war., a photo by Pan-African News Wire File Photos on Flickr.

    Congressman Kucinich Backs Africa Libya Plan; Says ICC Investigate NATO On Possible War Crimes

    “Dropping bombs on Tripoli — if any country had 2,000 flights over the united states, which is how many sorties the US flew above Libya, bombing us, we would say that’s an act of war.”

    By Milton Allimadi

    Congressman Dennis Kucinich says in an interview with The Black Star News that he’s determined to support the African Union’s peace proposal to end the Libya war and even willing to travel to the war-torn country to meet both Muammar al-Quathafi and the rebels seeking his ouster.

    At the same time, the Congressman denounced NATO’s bombing campaigns and said he’s contacted the International Criminal Court about investigating its commanders on possible war crimes charges.

    “You can’t just talk the talk,” when it comes to seeking peace, Rep. Kucinich (D-Ohio) said, in an exclusive wide-ranging interview with this newspaper. “You have to be willing to walk the walk.”

    Kucinich urged President Barack Obama to “seize the opportunity” for a peaceful resolution to the Libya war and stalemate even as challenges mount from Congress to the U.S. role.

    The longer the U.S. continues supporting attacks on Libya through NATO, the more weaponry flows into north Africa, destabilizing the entire region. He says Africa must be allowed to take the lead in ending the conflict. Western involvement in Africa is always clouded by economic motives, he said.

    Rep. Kucinich said he had built on the African Union (AU) plan, being promoted by South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma, in drafting his own proposal. He said his own peace plan calls for reparations for Libyans killed and injured “on both sides.”

    He said Libyans needed reconciliation and to come up with a government that reflected the aspirations of the people. He said he has been in touch with people in contact with both sides in the conflict. Kucinich said the bombing campaign was preventing Libyans from reconciling.

    Rep. Kucinich said he’s written a letter to ICC to ask that NATO’s commanders be investigated for possible war crimes in Libya. “If civilians were killed NATO needs to be held accountable,” Rep. Kucinich said, in the telephone interview today. “If you kill people, there has to be consequences.” He said such an investigation would not involve all NATO member countries but only the commanders now in charge of the attacks on Libya.

    Kucinich, together with nine other lawmakers, yesterday filed a lawsuit against President Obama seeking to have a U.S. District Court Judge declare the U.S. involvement in the Libya war unconstitutional. He says President Obama is in violation of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution which holds that only Congress can declare war and involve “our young men and women in harms way.”

    Kucinich also dismissed President Obama’s defense that his Administration is not in violation of the War Powers Resolution of 1973 because the U.S. supportive role in the current war in Libya doesn’t fit within the definition of “hostilities” as envisioned in the resolution.

    “Dropping bombs on Tripoli — if any country had 2,000 flights over the united states, which is how many sorties the US flew above Libya,” Kuchinic said, referring to the initial attacks involving U.S, pilots before the handover to NATO, “bombing us, we would say that’s an act of war.”

    He added, referring to Rep. John Boehner, “As the Speaker said, it doesn’t pass the straight face test. This attempt at verbal gymnastic over such serious issues is very disappointing coming from an Administration which is run by constitutional scholars.”

    Asked about the prospects of the lawsuit he filed together with nine other members of Congress –seven Republicans– given that the Courts typically sided with the White House on such matters, kucinich sounded confident. “If we can get standing and the court gives us the ability to go forward with this, I think we have an excellent chance to win on the merits,” he said, adding trhat the constitution made it absolutely clear that only the U.S. Congress had the authority to declare war.

    “It has nothing to do with the personalities; it has everything to do with the Constitution,” he noted, adding that if the court agreed that “we raised the question of separation of powers and the court will rule in our favor and reinstate the constitution.”

    Kucinich denounced NATO’s and the U.S.’s position that the attacks in Libya was about protecting civilians. “Of course it became about regime change and we know there have been several efforts on Quathafi’s life.”

    He added: “We need to ask ourselves what kind of nation are we? Are we a nation who believes in the rule of law? We think we can just assassinate the head of another government because it’s our privilege?”

    Kucinich said NATO had exceeded it’s authority, not only in Libya but in Afghanistan as well. The organization had become a “global cop” and it was time to ask whether the organization has outlived its usefulness.
    Posted by Pan-African News Wire at 2:08 AM

  40. Facing the Bombs of America and NATO in the Libya Jamahariya
    Wed, 06/15/2011 – 00:21 — Randy Short
    McKinney Libya fact-finding mission | Attack on Libya
    Printer-friendly version

    by Randy Short

    Just back from a fact-finding mission to Libya, the author reports that Moammar Gaddafi enjoys widespread support among the people. “All along the roads, people were chanting to those in their cars driving east to Tripoli and west to Tunisia that they supported the Jamahariya government.” Poor Black Libyans have a huge stake in this government. Despite the fact that western media are present on both sides of the war, “the atrocities committed against the Black Libyans and guest workers remains an under reported phenomena of the ‘humanitarian intervention.’”

    Facing the Bombs of America and NATO in the Libya Jamahariya

    by Randy Short

    “The western media are not telling the world that the corporate punishment of the Libyan people is failing.”

    The public and the people of the world need to know that the corporate media is fabricating a massif of lies concerning the on-the-ground facts of the illegal war against the people of Libya by the American and NATO forces. The grossly distorted news reports paint a picture of a besieged regime about to collapse at any second. Further, the spiritual leader of the Libyan Revolution Muamar Gadafi is represented as a hated and unpopular leader. I want to take this time to disabuse all that read my report.

    As a member of the Dignity Fact- Finding Group headed by the Honorable Cynthia McKinney, I was able to travel across the western littoral of Libya, and see for myself what was happening in the country. Once we drove past the Tunisian frontier, the evidence of support for the Jamahariya and Muamar Gadafi was everywhere. As we drove for six hours, the vast majority of homes had the green flag of the Jamahariya. Unlike the slick factory-made red, black, and green flags that we see on the news for the western-backed “opposition,” the green flags of the people were off all types—clearly made by ordinary people wanting to show their support for the Jamahariya. These flags were on stores, shops, cars, in windows, some people wore green head wraps and armbands and patches.

    What I wished the world could see was the universal support of the young people for their government. Living in the United States, we have young people who are often self-centered and apathetic. The opposite was true in Libya. About 100 kilometers from Tripoli, our cars were almost forced to stop because there was a spontaneous march of defiance of scores of young people and women chanting, “God, Muamar, Libya we love you.” All along the roads, people were chanting to those in their cars driving east to Tripoli and west to Tunisia that they supported the Jamahariya government. Our delegation was curious about this gathering, so we drove back to get a better view of the protest. We drove back to look at the demonstration, and we did not see adults or government officials scripting their actions. From the time that I witnessed these young people along the road, I saw countless instances of the spontaneity of the Libyan people defying the bombs and perfidy of western aggression.

    “Once we drove past the Tunisian frontier, the evidence of support for the Jamahariya and Muamar Gadafi was everywhere.”

    The western media are not telling the world that the corporate punishment of the Libyan people is failing. I had opportunities to speak to Libyans of various ages and class backgrounds, and the sentiment was they did not fear the bombs and the attacks had made them believe more in their Brother Leader Muamar Gadafi, and they did not want him to go into exile. One Libyan man who I got to speak to in the El Khader Hospital asked, “Why don’t people accept the fact that we love Muamar!”

    I was standing next to a man named Hashim in a hotel when an explosion took place, and the young man like all the others chanted “Allu Akhbar” and continued along with their activities. Their faith in God and belief that they are right gives them the courage to face the bombs determined to fight on. The bombing only prompts more contempt and disgust at those attacking them. In addition to resentment of the US and NATO, I heard more than one time Libyans express a willingness to fight to the bitter end. One young man told me that if the ground forces of the West were sent to Libya it would be Vietnam II for America and its allies.

    The western media fails to relay to the public that the so-called humanitarian intervention has imposed corporate suffering on Libyans and hundreds of thousands of guest workers. In January, Tripoli was as clean as a whistle. There was no trash in the gutters and sidewalks, because there were plenty of guest workers from other countries in Africa willing to do maintenance work, but western-backed rebels and supporters murdered, raped, and robbed so many guest workers that scores of thousands fled. Now, Tripoli, which was preparing for a grandiose makeover with a rapid rail, renovated beachfront, plazas, malls, and sparkling new office buildings and flats, has an acute trash collection challenge. However, the Libyan people have formed brigades to kept their capitol clean. One of the greatest ironies of the corporate punishment of the Libyan people is that, as their oil is stolen by the rebels and sold to foreign nations, they have to endure marathon queues to secure gasoline for their cars. I witnessed cars in rows three across and a mile in length waiting to purchase gasoline.

    “The so-called humanitarian intervention has imposed corporate suffering on Libyans and hundreds of thousands of guest workers.”

    The Libyan people remain proud and In spite of the suffering and bombing, I did not see any homeless people. I did not see hungry people. Tripoli and nearby shops and stores were full of goods and clothing, and there appeared to be meat, fish, fruit, and vegetables for sale. Despite the war, I did not witness people picking through the rubbish. People were in the streets and sitting in cafes, and with the exception of the occasional sound of a bomb explosion life continued. The war has given the people of Tripoli a new nightlife activity: protests of defiance. Despite the fact that Libyan drivers endured hours of waiting to get a tank of gas, they get together with friends and drive all over the waving flags and chanting slogans of defiance. Nightly, thousands gather at Colonel Gaddafi’s Bab Al Aziziya compound to celebrate their freedom and to show their defiance against the rebels and the American and NATO bombers. The people that I saw there were from all sectors of the Libyan society.

    What the media does not tell people is that Muamar Gaddafi and the Jamahariya have struggled harder than any western leader to champion the rights of the poor and abolish racism against Black people. Our media has failed to show that the rebels have systematically targeted Black Libyans and non-Arab Africans for acts of violence, rape, and murder to recreate racial divisions in that society that the Jamahariya brought together. The atrocities committed against the Black Libyans and guest workers remains an under reported phenomena of the “humanitarian intervention.” Perhaps the media wants to make sure that few Americans know that Libya has a considerable Black population, and it does not help the warmongers just war for people to know that the Jamahariya has lifted Libya from of the poorest nation in the world to one with the highest standards of living in the world. The poorest of Black Libyans have everything to lose if the opposition takes power. This writer believes that the war of Libya would be far less popular in the United States if the African American population knew how much many Libyans resemble people them. If any of ant-Vietnam War sentiment expressed by Muhammad Ali ‘s refusal to fight other people of color in the 1960s exists among African Americans today, the favorable public opinion this war is doomed.

    “Our media has failed to show that the rebels have systematically targeted Black Libyans and non-Arab Africans for acts of violence, rape, and murder.”

    Libya’s people have resisted foreign invaders over the centuries of history. In every epoch Libyans have made their domination by would be conquerors more than difficult. The American public should know that the Libyans share a history for either successfully defeating foreign armies or waging a tireless resistance. They are not a people given to fear or intimidation. From Pharaoh to Obama, the Libyans have an innate desire to be free from outside interference. What we must consider is that the internal affairs of Libya are best left for them to solve themselves. The shock and awe approach to the Libyan people is passé. Almost a century ago, Libyan freedom fighters were the first people in history to be bombed from the air by the Italian military. The Libyan people want to be at peace and free from political, economic, cultural imperialism, and allowed to choose their own heroes and system of governance that suits them whether or not the nations of the West like it or not. For this precious liberty of self-determination, the Libyans in Tripoli defiantly join the heroic peoples struggles Guernica and Hanoi that defiantly faced the bombs of fascistic militarists who sought to strip them of their dignity.

    Randy Short is an independent researcher who holds a doctorate in African studies from Howard University and a masters of divinity from Harvard University. He is just back from a delegation to Libya that included Cynthia McKinney

  41. AFP Update: June 17, 2011
    Libye: message audio de Kadhafi qui ne fléchit pas, Gaddafi’s audio message, which does not flex, Le dirigeant libyen Mouammar Kadhafi a averti vendredi, dans un message audio, que l’Otan serait vaincue et ne réussirait pas à contraindre son régime à introduire des changements dans son pays. Libyan Brother-leader Muammar Gaddafi warned Friday in an audio message, that NATO would be defeated and would not succeed in forcing the regime to introduce changes in his country.

    LibyanTV/AFP/Archives LibyanTV / AFP / File
    .”Ils seront vaincus, l’Otan sera forcément vaincue”, a dit le “Guide” dans son message diffusé par la télévision.

    “They will be defeated, NATO is bound to be defeated,”

    said the “Guide” in the message broadcast by the television. “Nous sommes décidés à ne rien changer dans notre pays si ce n’est par notre propre volonté et loin des avions de l’Alliance”, at-il ajouté.

    “We are determined to change nothing in our country if not by our own will and not because of plans made by the Alliance,”

    he added.

    “Nous résistons, nous combattons, s’ils descendent au sol, nous les attendrons, mais ce sont des lâches, ils n’oseront pas”, at-il menacé sur un ton de défi, en référence aux forces de l’Otan qui commande depuis fin mars l’intervention militaire menant des raids aériens sur mandat de l’ONU.

    “We resist, we are fighting, they descend to the ground, we will wait, but they are cowards, they will not dare,”

    he threatened on defiantly, referring to the NATO forces that control since the end of March the military intervention conducting air raids on a UN mandate.

    Le colonel Kadhafi a appelé les Libyens à se préparer à libérer leur pays: “Préparez-vous hommes et femmes à libérer la Libye tout entière”. Colonel Gaddafi called on Libyans to prepare to liberate their country:

    “Get ready men and women to liberate the whole of Libya.”

    Jeudi, le Premier ministre, Baghdadi Mahmoudi, avait répété que “Mouammar Kadhafi est le leader de ce pays”, c’est “une ligne rouge dans tout dialogue” sur un règlement du conflit. Thursday, Prime Minister Baghdadi Mahmoudi, had repeated that “Gaddafi is the founder of this country”; and is “a red line in any dialogue” on a settlement.

    Gadhafi plays chess w Russian

  42. Qadhafi’s Angels: Four Pillars of the Libyan Leader’s Impenetrable Defense
    Posted: 2011/06/17
    From: Mathaba

    Gadhafi's Angels Some of the secrets of the Libyan leaders invincibility are his visible and invisible Army of Angels

    Many are those wondering why Libya is not firing back at NATO, other than the occasional pot shot at helicopters, and waging a defensive fight on the ground against the “stray rats”, and why Muammar Qaddafi is not calling for retaliation and striking at the hearts of European capitals in response.

    NATO themselves are wondering why they are still fighting after more than 90 days and having to plan for another 180, in an operation they thought would take only two.

    Some of the answers lie in the universal defense forces of Muammar Qaddafi, which rest on 4 firm pillars: Warriors, Builders, Angels and Callers.


    Not one nation has come to the defence of Libya via any traditional method, neither by supplying military weapons, nor military soldiers. That is not to say there is any shortage of soldiers wishing to join the battle against NATO, but because Qaddafi does not need to give orders. Soldiers around the world are on stand by.

    The Truth Warriors, know that “the pen is mightier than the sword”, and also that Truth is a most powerful weapon, which easily defeats falsehood.

    For this reason, while NATO is using all manner of conventional and lethal physical weaponry, the defensive battle is being fought on the Internet, via Mathaba media.

    As the world’s only jamahiri (masses) news network, Mathaba implements a novel form of news production and distribution, that scales on the basis of volunteers around the world, who embrace the concept of a people’s media.

    The Mathaba News Agency is the No. 1 independent news agency out of 84 million independent news agencies according to Google, and is the tool of choice for Qadhafi’s Warriors.


    Muammar Qadhafi’s own name “Mu’ammar” is Arabic for “One who builds up” — a Builder. He built the world’s first Jamahiriya, he built a foundation for worldwide peace, democracy and development, the (R)evolutionary Committees Movement, he built the African Union, he built the Great Man Made River, and more besides.

    The Builders around the world are defending Muammar and making sure that his words, movement, and works take hold, with the spread of direct participatory democracy everywhere via the foundation of People’s Conferences.

    In September this year, 8 World People’s Conferences on Crimes Against Humanity are slated to last for the entire month of September, one in each region of the world.

    These Conferences will ensure that all those who have aided, abetted, perpetrated, encouraged, condoned, facilitated or allowed crimes of war, health, energy, drugs, media, environment, and other fields of life, to the detriment of mankind and future generations, will be held accountable.

    The tool of choice for the Builders is with the powerful weapon of the Green Charter of Human Responsibilities.


    With the second pillar built on the solid foundation of the first, Truth, the 3rd pillar – Qaddafi’s Angels – are those who defend the first two pillars by way of prayer, visualisation, positive thought, or by donating of their wealth to sustain, defend and support the Great Work of the Warriors and Builders and their Leadership.

    The Angels do this by supporting, subscribing to or making financial contributions to ease the path of the Warriors and Builders during the transition from the collapse of exploitative societies to the building of the Universal Jamahiriya prophesied by The Green Book which heralds the Era of the Masses.

    The Angels communicate sometimes by way of Mathaba Social Media networks and other times by thought or vision.

    They are spontaneously gathering strength as a selfless and altruistic effort of those with good and pure hearts who feel called upon to rally around the Truth and it’s Servant, Muammar Qadhafi, Leader of the world (r)evolution, who resides in the hearts of millions.

    Not one African village does not know of, speak of, and pray for, Africa’s King of Kings.

    NATO is facing a resounding defeat brought about by the sacrifices, thoughts, prayers, and protection offered to the Leader of the Builders and Warriors, Muammar Al-Qadhafi.


    The callers are those who spread the word so that every one shall have a chance to hear it and participate in defending it. They post simple links and messages such as around the internet, or from person to person, so that all have the downloadable collection of the Works of the Warriors and Builders, who are Sustained and Protected by the Angels.

    In conclusion, every supporter of Muammar Qadhafi around the world, belongs to at least one of the Pillars of his invincible Universal Army and conducts their work accordingly, whether news editing, activism building, sustaining, or calling and promoting the words and works of the revolutionary leader. #

    • Жена Змај 18 juin 10:46

      Gaddafi Speech today Translated by اسكندر بيك
      We are in our country we have to stay until the end
      We do not want a reconciliation with them and do not want negotiations with them
      We are steadfast
      you can bomb us with atomic bomb
      We are provoking them and force them to come on ground
      We are in our country has not offending you
      We were safe, comfortable in our country We enjoy our goods
      they Want to take our goods and our oil And they want to enslave us
      For the first time they face the armed people they Face a million and one million ,for The first time involved in this mess
      Even in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban are only and In Algeria they faced the Algerian Liberation .and In Lebanon they faced Hezbollah
      and in Palestine Faced Hamas only
      But here in Libya they are facing an armed people one million ,a million and a million ,For the first time they are facing an armed people who can enter the battle men and women .
      In the past we used to say men defend women, but women surpassed the men in Libya to defense of the homeland and for the challenge and steadfast
      they Will be defeated, we resisit that we do not have to change anything in our country We will not change anything only by our own will and far away from your bombing .
      Who has the manhood to carrying the flag of shame ? Who has the manhood to fighting his brothers ?
      This is not the effeminate man who fights with the Red Cross
      Royal flag which was flying with the American flag and the flag Elfrinswe
      Who carries the flag have manhood?
      Shame on him and his tribe
      Benghazi will rise up will explode
      Look O Look Benghazi to Tripoli
      Look to the masses under the bombardment
      Everywhere in all villages they come to Tripoli
      As for you in Benghazi, are you afraid of a handful of weapons ?
      These men and women united in Tripoli under bombing from aircraft
      You are in Benghazi and you can not challenge the rifles and machine guns?
      Shame shame! Where manhood?
      Where are you?
      Where Alawaqier tribe where Alafajr tribe where the population of Benghazi ?
      Do you fear a handful of weapons , gangs which is steal you ? make you homeless ?
      Eat from donkeys of Qatar and the Gulf donkeys?
      Where is dignity?
      You die. You have to do duty
      We are not interested in death
      And are not interested in life
      Life to hell
      Dignity is to do duty
      Will not betray the past, will not betray the parents and ancestors and the sacrificed fathers , Grandchildren will not fail them .
      we want they come on the ground And this happy day if they come on the ground, we are waiting
      those are cowards , but those are cowards can’t come to the ground
      who still have faith? who still say I’m Muslim? or say I’m Arabian or Libyan and he fight under the flag of the shame? that was undergo

      • Gaddafi: NATO will be Defeated, They will not Change Libya </strong>
        Posted: 2011/06/18
        From: Mathaba

        Gadhafi against NATO
        Gaddafi at his residence in Tripoli, after meeting with an African Union delegation. It is one of the first public appearances of Gaddafi since the conflict began. AFP, Joseph Eid.

        Libya´s leader Muammar Gaddafi said, in an audio message aired on local TV, that NATO will be defeated and that the Alliance will not force his government to change anything in Libya.

        “We do not want any reconciliation, or dialog with them; we are in our own country and we will stay here until death,” said Gaddafi.

        The state-owned channel aired Gaddafi´s statement while running images of thousands of people backing the Libyan leader at the Green Square in Tripoli.

        In a high tone, Gaddafi said that those who defect his government “are as coward as those who have taken arms against him,” in direct reference to Libyan opposition.

        “We are unyielding; let them bomb us, NATO will be defeated; we are determined to not change anything in our country on the will of their warplanes,” he pointed out.

        Gaddafi called on the Libyan people to get ready to “free their country” and like in other occasions he urged them to “fight the enemy.”

        NATO warplanes attacked Tripoli again today, particularly a southern neighborhood as well as an area near the Kikla locality, some 150 kilometers from the capital city.


  43. Stossel: Ron Paul Is Right About Everything | LRC Home | LRC Blog | Next: Learn Why the Worst Rise to the Top »

    June 17, 2011
    Libyan Rebellion Neither Democratic nor Spontaneous
    Posted by Michael S. Rozeff on June 17, 2011 05:05 AM
    A new 44-page report on Libya (but in French) is available. The source includes several think tanks. One is headed by Yves Bonnet (International Center for Research and Studies on Terrorism and Support for Victims of Terrorism). Another intelligence Study. A team of six persons visited Libya in March and April. The report concludes “Nevertheless, the study of the facts leads us to affirm that the Libyan ‘revolution’ is neither democratic, nor spontaneous. We are in the presence of an armed uprising organized in the eastern part of the country, in a spirit of revenge and dissidence. This movement is largely impelled and supported from abroad. We need only see the number of flags French, American, Qataris…in the streets of the towns of Cyrenaica to call into question the ‘national’ character of this ‘revolution.’ Especially, it is an insurrection whose leaders hide themselves. The situation thus does not have anything comparable with the popular Tunisian and Egyptian revolts.”

  44. French lawyers sue Sarkozy over crimes against humanity in Libya
    By Antoine Lerougetel
    17 June 2011
    Two high-profile French lawyers, Jacques Vergès and former Socialist Party minister Roland Dumas, have announced that they plan to sue French president Nicolas Sarkozy on charges of crimes against humanity committed in the on-going NATO military intervention in Libya. They are acting for some thirty Libyan families who have lost family members in the NATO bombings.

    At a press conference May 29 in Libya they declared that they would initiate legal proceedings in the French courts on Monday, May 30. There has been an almost complete blackout of the announcement in the French media. Only the Socialist Party-leaning newsweekly Marianne commented, attacking Dumas and Vergès for “a grotesque accusation against the president of the Republic.”

    At a press conference in Libya on Sunday Dumas said, referring to the NATO bombing, “this mission, which is supposed to protect civilians, is in the process of killing them.” He said the war in Libya was “a brutal aggression against a sovereign nation.”

    Calling the NATO alliance nations “murderers”, Vergès denounced “a French state led by thugs and murderers … We intend to break the wall of silence.” He said he had seen several civilian victims at a hospital and had been told by one of its doctors that there were as many as 20,000 victims.

    Dumas said he was ready to take the defense of Gaddafi himself if he was to appear at the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague. On May 16, acting at the behest of the major Western powers, the ICC prosecutor requested an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity against Gaddafi.

    Dumas questioned the authority of Sarkozy and NATO to conduct bombing based on UN Security Council Resolution 1973, calling it “the artificial—very artificial—cover of the United Nations.”

    The lawsuit comes at a time when the NATO allies have stated that the war will be extended for at least 90 days, until September, and when Britain and France have announced the stepping up of the military bombardments, which have already involved several attempts at targeted political assassination through the bombing of homes of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s family.

    British ex-SAS elite troops and other mercenaries employed by NATO are helping identify targets in the Libyan port city of Misrata, They are there with the blessing of Britain, France and other NATO countries, which have supplied them with communications equipment. They are likely to be providing information for the pilots of newly deployed British and French attack helicopters.

    The French government was the main protagonist of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, a flimsy legal cover for the naked neo-colonial, imperialist intervention supposedly to protect civilians from the Libyan armed forces. In reality, it is part of the scramble for Libya’s oil and gas resources and the imposition of a pliant pro-imperialist government being assembled and groomed in Benghazi.

    Other lawyers acting for Aïcha Gaddafi, the daughter of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, have reportedly filed charges against NATO in a Belgian court. They declared, “The decision to target a civilian home in Tripoli constitutes a war crime.”

    The charge concerns a NATO air raid on April 30 that killed Gaddafi’s youngest son and three of his infant grandchildren. The two lawyers are also suing for the annulment of the EU ministers’ decision to freeze the accounts of the Libyan regime in the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.

    It is not clear whether the octogenarian Vergès and Dumas, with long and close ties to the French state, are directly working with sections of the French state but certainly serious doubts have emerged in French ruling circles on Sarkozy’s decision to embark on the military intervention in Libya.

    The TTU defense information web site commented on an unpublished 50-page report issued after a three-week visit to Libya by intelligence experts headed by Yves Bonnet, former chief of the French national intelligence agency, the DST. According to the TTU site, the intervention is overstepping resolution 1973 and “the control of energy resources is at the heart of the current strategy. The US would like to overthrow Gaddafi in order to kick China out of the country. Egypt, which has never accepted the attachment of Cyrenaica and its oil reserves to Tripoli, can see nothing but advantages from the partitions of the country.”

    The site adds: “The report expresses alarm at this ‘thoughtless’ involvement by Paris, which plays into the hands of the American administration, which has taken care not to show its hand and let France take all the risks.” It expresses serious doubts as to whether the Benghazi transitional council could “preserve the interests of the powers involved,” implying most especially those of French imperialism.

    The military commentator Jacques Borde has also suggested that, while France is futilely overreaching its military capacities, its Arab and Western allies will be reaping the rewards in terms of the share-out of the spoils. There is also the danger of the “Somalisation” of Libya – that is its disintegration into warring tribes and warlords.

    The two aging lawyers have long political and legal histories. Dumas, born 1922, was a close collaborator of François Mitterrand, Socialist Party (PS) president of France from 1981 to 1995, and served as a minister in several PS governments. He has never been a policy-maker, but rather a trusted errand boy for the executive.

    He was part of the corrupt relations of French imperialism with African governments known as Françafrique. In 1983 he was Mitterrand’s special envoy to Gaddafi. His task was to persuade Libya not to invade Chad in support of a rebellion in the north of the country against the pro-French government. Finally, with the complicity of Gaddafi, the government was kept in power thanks to France’s intervention.

    In 1995 Dumas was nominated President of the Constitutional Council, the French constitutional court, by Mitterrand. He resigned in January 1999 because of the Elf corruption affair.

    Vergès was born in 1925 of a Vietnamese mother and a Réunionese father. Dumas has admitted that he and Vergès were approached by the Gaddafi régime to take the case. Whatever their motivations, however, there is no doubt that the indictment they are making of French and Western imperialism’s criminal action against the Libyan people is a source of some embarrassment for the Sarkozy government and its imperialist allies. So it is also for the PS, the PCF, and the fake lefts of the NPA in France, who have peddled the lie that the intervention is “humanitarian” and designed to protect the Libyan people.

  45. Tripoli welcomes the expulsion of U.S. air base
    Posted: 2011/06/16
    From: Mathaba

    NATO expanded and intensified their operations with the introduction of British and French attack helicopters.

    13.06.2011 (

    Amid the imperialist attacks by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) against Tripoli (capital) to force the departure of Libyan leader, Muammar Al Gaddafi, the people of this city celebrated on Saturday 41 years since the expulsion of the U.S. from their air base, Wheelus Air Force Base. The people said that this was an act of sovereignty and independence.

    “Tripoli today celebrates the expulsion and closure of the U.S. air base, Wheelus Air Base, June 11, 1970, reported through their Twitter TeleSUR special envoy to the city, Rolando Segura.

    For the Libyans “the expulsion of the foreign military base was an act of sovereignty and independence,” said the reporter.

    “As in 1970, Libya today returned to raise their flag again at the former U.S. military base,” indicated Segura, after reporting that “as Tripoli celebrated removal of the U.S. air base, unmanned U.S. aircraft were patrolling the area.”

    Wheelus was originally built by the Italian Air Force in 1923 and known as Mellah Air Base, used during the Battle of North Africa.
    Of the recent conflict:

    Imperialist attacks by NATO and its allied forces against Libyan territory have left thousands dead and has forced the exodus of nearly 900,000 people, according to agencies of the United Nations.

    Translated from the Spanish version by:

    Lisa Karpova

  46. Libya Sites Broke the Blockade of the Internet Posted: 2011/06/18
    From: Mathaba

    This contribution appeared on a Russian forum in Russian language, translation by Mathaba News Agency

    Lawyer Vitaly

    Since the beginning of the aggression by the American empire against Libya, almost all Libyan sites of Internet media have been blocked, as happened too in the war on Iraq. Bourgeois (even Russian) media have arranged a global information blockade of Libya.

    However, the Libyans still broke into the Internet, so that, for all who care, I believe it necessary to point links to the information first hand. So:

    1) Site of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has moved to a Russian server and is available at — This is not an information site, but a collection of publications Gaddafi (including a Russian language and other language versions), showing his views on various matters.

    2) — site of the Libyan news agency Mathaba, now is the most important source of objective information about what is happening in Libya. Mathaba has a page on Facebook:
    For feedback there is a Mataba forum:
    and the page: for publishing readers.

    3) Sites of Libyan television stations were immediately frozen at the beginning of the war against Libya, but their page on Facebook works and some sites are open to new servers. TV program “the sons of Libyan” has three sites: , ,
    Page on Facebook: and e-mail
    Libyan satellite channel Al-Libya TV (Allibiya TV) has a page on Facebook:
    Website: and e-mail:

    4) News Service Al-Shabab has a page on Facebook: and e-mail:

    5) The organizers of the resistance against the aggressors who attacked Libya, Mohammed Wizards (he lives in Tripoli) has a page on Facebook:

    6) In these left side of these pages Facebook in the “like” section are displayed links to other Facebook pages, many of whom belong to the Libyan patriots, patriotic organizations and the media.


    News taken from here:

    Mathaba Note: as can be seen, from the above, a few conclusions may be drawn:

    1) so long as things are on the CIA platform of Facebook they are allowed to continue: so that the CIA can spy on every comment and every visitor and also know who all their contacts and circles of friends are.

    2) Libyan media are too incompetent, lazy and unprofessional to do anything other than set up a Facebook page (which anyone can do, even an 8 year old kid), and free emails such as hotmail. They don’t know how to keep servers running and secure in the face of attack.

    3) Only Mathaba runs a professional service on the Internet at ALL levels except 24/7 live video broadcast, which Libya Sons TV takes care of (in Arabic).

  47. by Zen Gardner

    will they blame Gaddafi? Doesn’t matter.

    Gadhafi against the West

    Here’s how it works:

    All that is necessary for success of “false flag” or “black ops” events is for the government to have its story ready and to have a reliable and compliant media. Once an official story is in place, thought and investigation are precluded. Any formal inquiry that is convened serves to buttress the already provided explanation.

    An explanation ready-at-hand is almost a give-away that an incident is a “black ops” event. Notice how quickly the U.S. government, allegedly so totally deceived by al Qaida, provided the explanation for 9/11. When President Kennedy was assassinated, the government produced the culprit immediately. The alleged culprit was conveniently shot inside a jail by a civilian before he could be questioned. But the official story was ready, and it held. The media busy imprinting the possibility and sanitizing the horror by directing your fear and anger at a pre-determined, demonized distant enemy for the sake of “homeland security”. Last year it was Obama and other stooge politicians warning us, then Homeland Insecurity:
    The “mini-nuke terror threat on America” war drums are pounding louder by the day.

    Time magazine

    nuke attack

  48. A family was killed in Tripoli in another of over 4,000 NATO air strikes on Libya, so far killing thousands, in the “2-day” war that has already lasted more than 3 months.

    (mathaba) Witnessed by BBC reporters who rushed to the scene, rescue workers and residents were frantically trying to remove tonnes of rubble from the NATO bombing raid.

    A three-storey house was hit in the city’s Suq Al Juma residential area.

    This atrocity coming in the wake of dozens of others which have killed innocent civilians will raise more questions about NATO’s mission in Libya, which began in March.

    There has been no response yet from NATO, which has claimed it is bombing Libya in order to “protect civilians from Colonel Qaddafi”, but it has acknowledged “mistakenly” hitting civilian areas in previous bombing raids.

    International news reporters went to a Tripoli hospital where they saw the bodies of a dead woman, a dead man and a dead baby, members of a family killed in the NATO air strike.

    However, news reports filed by the journalists were edited by the BBC to say “alleged”, “apparent”, “NATO strike”, in quotation marks, to cast doubt on what was witnessed by all on the ground, and was reported by foreign news reporters.

    Libyan media spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said: “Nato is planting the seed of hatred in the hearts of Libyan people for years to come. They won’t allow foreign armies to decide their future.”

    Sunday’s attack, in one of the city’s poorer neighbourhoods, happened shortly after midnight.

    Correspondent who rushed to the scene saw another two dead bodies – one being pulled from the rubble and another being placed in an ambulance.

    Scores of men were working alongside the emergency services, pulling at sections of rubble and looking for bodies in the wreckage of the homes that were decimated by the NATO bombs.

    NATO aircraft have been piloted by “heroes” flying at 10km height and dropping bombs, and “heroic” navy vessels firing cruise missiles, and “professional” computer operators in the United States directing unmanned “drone” aircraft to fire missiles on anything they consider to be a “target”.

    Locals at the scene said an entire family had been killed, and it was evident the house had been completely destroyed without any chance of survival.
    A family was killed in Tripoli in another of over 4,000 NATO air strikes on Libya, so far killing thousands, in the “2-day” war that has already lasted more than 3 months.

    HeyU Quality Ads
    (mathaba) Witnessed by BBC reporters who rushed to the scene, rescue workers and residents were frantically trying to remove tonnes of rubble from the NATO bombing raid.

    A three-storey house was hit in the city’s Suq Al Juma residential area.

    This atrocity coming in the wake of dozens of others which have killed innocent civilians will raise more questions about NATO’s mission in Libya, which began in March.

    There has been no response yet from NATO, which has claimed it is bombing Libya in order to “protect civilians from Colonel Qaddafi”, but it has acknowledged “mistakenly” hitting civilian areas in previous bombing raids.

    International news reporters went to a Tripoli hospital where they saw the bodies of a dead woman, a dead man and a dead baby, members of a family killed in the NATO air strike.

    However, news reports filed by the journalists were edited by the BBC to say “alleged”, “apparent”, “NATO strike”, in quotation marks, to cast doubt on what was witnessed by all on the ground, and was reported by foreign news reporters.

    Libyan media spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said: “Nato is planting the seed of hatred in the hearts of Libyan people for years to come. They won’t allow foreign armies to decide their future.”

    Sunday’s attack, in one of the city’s poorer neighbourhoods, happened shortly after midnight.

    Correspondent who rushed to the scene saw another two dead bodies – one being pulled from the rubble and another being placed in an ambulance.

    Scores of men were working alongside the emergency services, pulling at sections of rubble and looking for bodies in the wreckage of the homes that were decimated by the NATO bombs.

    NATO aircraft have been piloted by “heroes” flying at 10km height and dropping bombs, and “heroic” navy vessels firing cruise missiles, and “professional” computer operators in the United States directing unmanned “drone” aircraft to fire missiles on anything they consider to be a “target”.

    Locals at the scene said an entire family had been killed, and it was evident the house had been completely destroyed without any chance of survival.

    The BBC edited report included the passage “level of damage, our he adds, looked like the aftermath of an air strike, with concrete floors blown out on to the street.” [Sic.]

    NATO, the military forces of the western elite regimes, has flown more than 10,000 sorties since launching the war against Libya in an attempt to kill Africa’s most popular leader and destroy it’s leading democracy, including almost 4,000 strike attacks against thousands of targets across Libya.

    Academic institutions including the Green Book Studies Centre and universities, as well as several hospitals have been hit, resulted in thousands of casualties and hundreds of civilian deaths, with an undisclosed number of Libyan soldiers deaths.

    On Saturday, NATO, which western media have started writing as “Nato” in an apparent attempt to endear the name into popular vocabulary rather than stick to its correct abbreviation, said one of its aircraft had mistakenly attacked rebel forces in eastern Libya during an air raid on Thursday.

    The rebel forces are a coalition of former government officials appointed by Sayf-al-Islam Qaddafi on the instructions of western intelligence during the period in which Libya’s intelligence services were merged with the CIA under Musa Kusa, officials who were under investigation of corruption, Al-Qaida islamist terrorists and criminals freed from prisons by the rebels in February.

    Concern is mounting in NATO allied countries, including Australia, over the support being given by NATO forces to the jihadists who have returned from Afghanistan and Iraq hardened by battles against NATO, are now fighting alongside NATO as allies in the war to take control of Libya.

    The 53-African state African Union, the Non-Aligned Movement, the BRICS alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, with over 120 countries are opposed to NATO’s illegal war on Libya and the United Nations failure to address the violations of resolutions that the aggressors had themselves passed, to implement a “no fly zone” over Libya without taking sides.

    The Libyan historic revolutionary leader, Muammar Qaddafi, who was declared to be King of Kings of Africa in a conference of most tribal and national chiefs, elders and traditional leaders, and is widely regarded in the Muslim world as the “leading imam”, for his colossal achievements and works carried out in the fields of human rights and African development, was targeted.

    Western leaders, infuriated by Qaddafi’s speech at the World General Assembly of the United Nations in September 2009, in which he called for urgent reform of the international body and for its headquarters to be moved outside the United States, as well as for the dissolution of the UN Security Council which he called the “Terror Council”, have sought to kill him by aerial attacks.

    At first they had claimed that it would “take 2 days” to “remove” Qaddafi, but after close to 100 days of non-stop bombing and with Qaddafi refusing to leave his home in Tripoli, even after a heavy NATO assassination attempt on May 1st had killed his three baby grandchildren, each under 2 years of age, as well as his youngest son Sayf-al-Arab, NATO has failed in all its objectives.

    Observers note that whilst Qaddafi has for decades been a household name across the entire African continent even in remote villages, as a legendary hero, but was little known by younger generations outside Africa where news media has sought to disparage him and failed to report accurately on his words and deeds, he has become exponentially popular around the world.

    Hundreds of Facebook pages have sprung up with hundreds of thousands of fans, and many around the world have offered up “visualisations” and prayers in his defence and support, and even to go to Libya to fight against NATO, widely seen as an unjust aggressor working for the re-colonisation of Africa.

    Libya has however turned down all offers of material help, and instead called for fact-finding missions of neutral and credible specialists to visit the country and report on what they see, and in particular to find any evidence of the claims of NATO that Qaddafi had committed “massacres” and ordered attacks of the military against civilians and cities.

    Many have taken up the call and the Internet is now awash with YouTube videos about Qaddafi, as well as reports from many observers and fact finding missions, which confirm the Russian military position which revealed satellite imagery showing that no flights took place within Libya and so no air force bombings took place as had been claimed by western media outlets.

    NATO meanwhile has extended its “two day” operation by a further 3 to 6 months, whilst Libyans have taken to the streets daily in increasing numbers to display their green flags, the symbol of their direct participatory democracy (“Jamahiriya”) government, which came into being in 1977 after Gaddafi left power which he had seized from a corrupt King in 1969. — mathaba #
    The BBC edited report included the passage “level of damage, our he adds, looked like the aftermath of an air strike, with concrete floors blown out on to the street.” [Sic.]

    NATO, the military forces of the western elite regimes, has flown more than 10,000 sorties since launching the war against Libya in an attempt to kill Africa’s most popular leader and destroy it’s leading democracy, including almost 4,000 strike attacks against thousands of targets across Libya.

    Academic institutions including the Green Book Studies Centre and universities, as well as several hospitals have been hit, resulted in thousands of casualties and hundreds of civilian deaths, with an undisclosed number of Libyan soldiers deaths.

    On Saturday, NATO, which western media have started writing as “Nato” in an apparent attempt to endear the name into popular vocabulary rather than stick to its correct abbreviation, said one of its aircraft had mistakenly attacked rebel forces in eastern Libya during an air raid on Thursday.

    The rebel forces are a coalition of former government officials appointed by Sayf-al-Islam Qaddafi on the instructions of western intelligence during the period in which Libya’s intelligence services were merged with the CIA under Musa Kusa, officials who were under investigation of corruption, Al-Qaida islamist terrorists and criminals freed from prisons by the rebels in February.

    Concern is mounting in NATO allied countries, including Australia, over the support being given by NATO forces to the jihadists who have returned from Afghanistan and Iraq hardened by battles against NATO, are now fighting alongside NATO as allies in the war to take control of Libya.

    The 53-African state African Union, the Non-Aligned Movement, the BRICS alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, with over 120 countries are opposed to NATO’s illegal war on Libya and the United Nations failure to address the violations of resolutions that the aggressors had themselves passed, to implement a “no fly zone” over Libya without taking sides.

    The Libyan historic revolutionary leader, Muammar Qaddafi, who was declared to be King of Kings of Africa in a conference of most tribal and national chiefs, elders and traditional leaders, and is widely regarded in the Muslim world as the “leading imam”, for his colossal achievements and works carried out in the fields of human rights and African development, was targeted.

    Western leaders, infuriated by Qaddafi’s speech at the World General Assembly of the United Nations in September 2009, in which he called for urgent reform of the international body and for its headquarters to be moved outside the United States, as well as for the dissolution of the UN Security Council which he called the “Terror Council”, have sought to kill him by aerial attacks.

    At first they had claimed that it would “take 2 days” to “remove” Qaddafi, but after close to 100 days of non-stop bombing and with Qaddafi refusing to leave his home in Tripoli, even after a heavy NATO assassination attempt on May 1st had killed his three baby grandchildren, each under 2 years of age, as well as his youngest son Sayf-al-Arab, NATO has failed in all its objectives.

    Observers note that whilst Qaddafi has for decades been a household name across the entire African continent even in remote villages, as a legendary hero, but was little known by younger generations outside Africa where news media has sought to disparage him and failed to report accurately on his words and deeds, he has become exponentially popular around the world.

    Hundreds of Facebook pages have sprung up with hundreds of thousands of fans, and many around the world have offered up “visualisations” and prayers in his defence and support, and even to go to Libya to fight against NATO, widely seen as an unjust aggressor working for the re-colonisation of Africa.

    Libya has however turned down all offers of material help, and instead called for fact-finding missions of neutral and credible specialists to visit the country and report on what they see, and in particular to find any evidence of the claims of NATO that Qaddafi had committed “massacres” and ordered attacks of the military against civilians and cities.

    Many have taken up the call and the Internet is now awash with YouTube videos about Qaddafi, as well as reports from many observers and fact finding missions, which confirm the Russian military position which revealed satellite imagery showing that no flights took place within Libya and so no air force bombings took place as had been claimed by western media outlets.

    NATO meanwhile has extended its “two day” operation by a further 3 to 6 months, whilst Libyans have taken to the streets daily in increasing numbers to display their green flags, the symbol of their direct participatory democracy (“Jamahiriya”) government, which came into being in 1977 after Gaddafi left power which he had seized from a corrupt King in 1969. — mathaba #

    • NATO Bombs Civilian Residence in Libya Killing Inhabitants
      Nato bombing
      A British fighter jet bombed the Libyan city of Sirte on May 8, 2011. The imperialists have been bombing the North African state since March 19., a photo by Pan-African News Wire File Photos on Flickr.
      18 June 2011
      Last updated at 21:55 ET

      Two killed in ‘Nato strike’ in Libya

      At least two people have died in an apparent Nato air strike that hit a house in the Libyan capital Tripoli.

      The BBC’s Jeremy Bowen was at the scene and he said rescue workers and residents were frantically trying to remove tonnes of rubble.

      Our correspondent says a three-storey house was hit in the city’s Suq Al Juma residential area.

      He says it will raise more questions about Nato’s mission in Libya, which began in March.

      There has been no response yet from Nato, but it has acknowledged mistakenly hitting civilian areas in previous bombing raids.

      Libyan officials say the attack happened at around midnight.

      Our correspondent was taken to the scene where he saw two dead bodies – one being pulled from the rubble and another being placed in an ambulance.

      He adds that local people said an entire family had been killed

  49. ANOTHER 15 are dead in Sorman today, 20 JUNE 2011, from NATO MISSILE ATTACK
    also:NATO LYINGLY “claims” that these were the “First Civilain casualties” inflicted since the “uprising” in February and NATOS airstrikes!
    Sorman house destroyed of 1969 REVOLUTIONARY leader Khuwildi Hemidi, including 3 of his grandchildren and passer-bys
    THREE children were among 15 people killed in a new NATO air strike in Libya today, government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim told reporters during a tour of damaged buildings in Sorman, west of Tripoli.
    The new allegation of civilian deaths in a NATO-led raid came just hours after the alliance acknowledged it was responsible for deaths in a residential area of the capital early yesterday.

    Ibrahim said the strike, which hit the home of Khuwildi Hemidi, who served on the Revolution Command Council which Muammar Gaddafi established when he seized power in 1969, was a

    “cowardly terrorist act which cannot be justified”.

    A second Libyan official said Hemidi’s home and two adjacent ones were hit by eight missiles in the 4am (11am AEST) strike in Sorman, 70km from the capital.

    Most of the dead were members of Hemidi’s family. They included two of his grandchildren, the official said.
    Rescue teams were still searching the wreckage for survivors as journalists were shown around the site.

    VIDEO: NATO weapon failure to blame
    NATO probes claims of civilian deaths
    Herald Sun, 1 hour ago
    NATO admits causing Libya civilian deaths
    The Australian, 3 hours ago
    Nine dead in ‘NATO raid’: Tripoli
    Courier Mail, 20 hours ago
    NATO planes hit Libya opposition
    Adelaide Now, 1 day ago
    NATO drops leaflets, attacks Tripoli again
    The Australian, 5 days ago
    searching the wreckage for survivors as journalists were shown around the site.

    Earlier today NATO said it regrets its first civilian casualties in Libya and its second misfire in 24 hours, as strains emerged within the alliance and rebel forces failed to make progress on the ground.

    In a statement, the alliance acknowledged responsibility for civilian deaths in a Tripoli bombing raid that left nine dead, including two toddlers.

    “NATO regrets the loss of innocent civilian lives,” said Libyan mission commander Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard.

    “Although we are still determining the specifics of this event, indications are that a weapons system failure may have caused this incident,” he added.

    These first established civilian deaths come as an embarrassment for the alliance whose bombing campaign under a UN mandate is to protect civilians.

    The incident also comes a day after NATO said its aircraft mistakenly hit a Libyan rebel column in the area of Brega on June 16, one of several misfires against opposition forces.

    After investigating claims of civilian deaths early on Sunday by the Gaddafi regime, NATO said it appeared a weapon had failed to strike its intended target.

    Journalists had been taken to the Al-Arada district of Tripoli in the dead of night, to see rescue teams and bystanders desperately searching for survivors among the wreckage of a two-storey block of flats.

    An AFP correspondent saw two bodies pulled from the rubble.

    Press were then taken to a Tripoli hospital and shown the bodies of a woman and two toddlers who officials said were members of the same family and had died in the raid.

    Government spokesman Ibrahim said four passers-by were also killed, bringing the death toll to nine, with 18 people wounded.

    Accusing the alliance of “deliberately targeting civilians”, Ibrahim insisted there were no military targets anywhere near the residential neighbourhood of the capital that was hit.

    “Every mission is planned and executed with tremendous care to avoid civilian casualties,” said NATO, which has conducted 11,500 sorties since it took command of the campaign three months ago.

    On Saturday, NATO said that after looking into reports that an airstrike hit opposition forces in the Brega region on Thursday, “NATO can now confirm that the vehicles hit were part of an opposition patrol”.

    “This incident occurred in an area of conflict between (Muammar) Gaddafi forces and opposition forces,” a statement added.

    “We regret any possible loss of life or injuries caused by this unfortunate incident,” NATO said.

    The statement said a column of military vehicles including tanks was observed in an area where Libyan strongman Gaddafi’s forces had recently been operating.

    Four months after the start of the Libyan uprising, Gaddafi has not loosened his grip on power despite his diplomatic isolation and the NATO campaign.

    Insurgents in the eastern desert have not advanced an inch for weeks while the Western alliance is beginning to show signs of strain, with Norway already announcing an end to its participation and criticism mounting in the US.


    • Evil NATO in denial:
      NATO denies new claim of civilian deaths
      From: AAP June 20, 2011 10:20PM
      NATO has rejected a new Libyan government claim that an air strike killed civilians, as the alliance denied that it conducted any raid in the Tripoli suburb of Sorman.
      “We strongly deny that this thing in Sorman is us,” a NATO official said today on condition of anonymity. “We have not been operating there.”

      These were 8 cruise missiles: The evidence is there for everyone to see. NATO is obviously LYING again…Nothing new, except the extent of the murdering HORROR….Wonder who the real terrorists are? It certainly is not Muammar Gadhafi, who has proven himself to be a man of peace.

      GADHAFI with K. HAMEDY, co-founder of the Jamahiriya, who whole family was wiped-out by NATO in Sorman

    • 02/07/11
      La masacre de Sorma desde Libia (Red Voltaire) The slaughter of Sorma from Libya (Voltaire Network)
      KHALID al_HAMEDI!/profile.php?id=100000650726348

      por Thierry Meyssan by Thierry Meyssan
      Thierry Meyssan nos envía un texto muy diferente a los que acostumbra a entregarnos. Thierry Meyssan send us a text quite different from those used to deliver. No se trata esta vez del frío análisis de una situación geopolítica sino que nos relata hechos de los que ha sido testigo. It is not cold this time of geopolitical analysis of a situation but tells facts which has witnessed. Nos narra la historia de su amigo Khaled K. Tells the story of his friend Khaled K. Al-Hamedi, una historia de sangre y de horror con la OTAN como protagonista del regreso a la barbarie. Al-Hamedi, a history of blood and horror with NATO as the protagonist’s return to barbarism.

      RED VOLTAIRE | TRIPOLI (LIBYE) Voltaire Network | TRIPOLI (Libya) | 2 DE JULIO DE 2011 | 2 July 2011

      valour award />La International Organization for Peace, Care and Relief (IOPCR) es una institución muy activa en países como Argelia, Irán, Sudán y Palestina. The International Organization for Peace, Care and Relief (IOPCR) is a very active in countries such as Algeria, Iran, Sudan and Palestine. Su trabajo consiste en auxiliar a las víctimas de catástrofes y conflictos armados. Your job is to assist victims of disasters and armed conflicts. Muchos reconocimientos le ha valido su ejemplar acción en Gaza y Cisjordania. Has earned many awards its exemplary action in Gaza and West Bank. En esta imagen, Khaled el-Hamedi recibe la medalla al valor de manos del primer ministro Ismail Haniyeh. In this image, Khaled el-Hamedi receives medal of valor from the hands of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. También fue condecorado por Mahmud Abbas. He was also honored by Mahmoud Abbas. Era una fiesta familiar como tantas otras que se celebran en Libia. It was a family party like many others held in Libya. Toda la familia se había reunido para celebrar el tercer cumpleaños del pequeño Al-Khweldy. The whole family had gathered to celebrate the third birthday of the small Al-Khweldy. Sus abuelos, sus hermanos y hermanas, sus primos y primas se agolpaban en la propiedad familiar situada en Sorman, 70 kilómetros al oeste de la capital libia, un amplio terreno donde los miembros de la familia habían ido construyendo sus casas, pequeñas, sobrias, de un solo piso. His grandparents, brothers and sisters, cousins ​​crowded family property located in Sorman, 70 kilometers west of Libyan capital, a vast area where members of the family had been building their houses, small, sober, one story.

      Sin lujos superfluos, en un entorno caracterizado por la sencillez de la gente del desierto, rodeado de un ambiente de calma y unión, el abuelo, el mariscal Al-Khweldy Al-Hamedi, criaba sus pájaros. No luxuries in an environment characterized by the simplicity of the people of the desert, surrounded by an atmosphere of calm and unity, the grandfather, Field Marshal Al-Al-Hamedi Khweldy, kept his birds. Es un héroe de la Revolución. He is a hero of the Revolution. Participó en el derrocamiento de la monarquía y la liberación del país de la explotación colonial. Participated in the overthrow of the monarchy and the country’s liberation from colonial exploitation. Todos están orgullosos de él. Everyone is proud of him. Su hijo, Khaled Al-Hamedi, presidente de la IOPCR, una de las organizaciones humanitarias más importantes del mundo árabe, criaba ciervas en aquel mismo lugar. His son, Khaled Al-Hamedi, president of the IOPCR, one of the largest humanitarian organizations in the Arab world, raised deer in the same place. Unos 30 niños correteaban y jugaban en medio de los animales. About 30 children ran and played among the animals.

      Los presentes estaban inmersos también en los preparativos de la boda de Mohamed, hermano de Khaled, que se encontraba en el frente luchando contra los mercenarios extranjeros dirigidos por la OTAN. Also present were immersed in preparations for the wedding of Mohamed’s brother Khaled, who was at the front fighting the foreign mercenaries led by NATO. La ceremonia iba a celebrarse en aquel mismo lugar, unos días más tarde. The ceremony was to take place in the same place a few days later. La novia se veía radiante. The bride looked radiant.

      Nadie se percató de que, entre los invitados, se había infiltrado un espía. No one noticed that among the guests, had infiltrated a spy. Parecía estar enviando mensajes a sus amigos a través de Twitter. He seemed to be sending messages to their friends via Twitter. En realidad, había situado varios dispositivos de referencia dentro de la propiedad y estaba utilizando la red social para vincularlos al cuartel general de la OTAN. In fact, had placed several reference devices inside the property and were using the social network to link them to the headquarters of NATO.

      Al día siguiente, en la noche del 19 al 20 de junio de 2011, hacia las 2:30 de la mañana, Khaled está regresando a su casa después de haber visitado y prestado auxilio a grupos de compatriotas que huían de los bombardeos de la OTAN. The next day, at night from 19 to 20 June 2011, at about 2:30 am, Khaled is returning home after having visited and provided assistance to groups of compatriots fleeing the NATO bombing . Se halla lo suficientemente cerca de su casa como para oír el silbido de los misiles y las explosiones. Is close enough to home to hear the hiss of the rockets and explosions.

      La OTAN utilizó en total 8 misiles, de 900 kilogramos cada uno. NATO missiles used in total 8, 900 pounds each. El espía había situado en cada una de las casas dispositivos que debían servir de guía a los misiles, precisamente en las habitaciones de los niños. The spy had been at each home devices that should guide the missiles, just in the bedrooms of children. Los misiles cayeron en intervalos de unos pocos segundos. The missiles fell every few seconds. Los abuelos tuvieron tiempo de salir de su casa, pero ya era tarde para salvar a los hijos y los nietos. Grandparents have time to leave home, but it was too late to save the children and grandchildren. Cuando el último misil alcanzó su propia casa, el mariscal tuvo el reflejo de proteger a su esposa con su cuerpo. When the last missile hit their home, the quarterback had the reflex to protect his wife with his body. Acababan de pasar la puerta hacia el exterior y la onda expansiva los lanzó a los dos a unos 15 metros del lugar de la explosión. Just passed the door to the outside and the blast threw them both about 15 meters from the explosion. Los dos sobrevivieron. Both survived.

      Khalid hamedy residence
      La casa de la familia Al-Hamedi, bombardeada por la OTAN. The home of the Al-Hamedi, bombed by NATO. © Franklin Lamb / Red Voltaire © Franklin Lamb / Red Voltaire A su llegada, Khaled no encuentra más que desolación. Upon arrival, Khaled finds only desolation. La mujer a la que tanto amó y que portaba un nuevo hijo en su vientre había desaparecido. The woman he loved and carrying a new child in her womb was gone. Sus hijos, por los que hubiese estado dispuesto a hacer cualquier sacrificio, murieron despedazados por las explosiones o aplastados por el derrumbe de los techos. Their children, who had been willing to make any sacrifice, were killed by the explosions shattered or crushed by collapsing roofs.

      Cada una de las casas es ahora un montón de ruinas. Each house is now a heap of ruins. Doce cuerpos destrozados yacen bajo los escombros. Twelve bodies lay crushed under the rubble. Varias ciervas alcanzadas por la metralla agonizan en su corral. Several deer dying hit by shrapnel in his back yard.

      Los vecinos que corrieron al lugar buscan en silencio algún signo de vida entre los escombros. Neighbors who rushed to the scene in silence seeking some sign of life from the rubble. Pero no hay esperanza. But there is hope. Los niños no tenían la más mínima posibilidad de escapar al impacto de los misiles. Children did not have the slightest chance to escape the impact of the missiles. Logran recuperar el cadáver decapitado de un bebé. Able to recover the decapitated corpse of a baby. El abuelo recita el Corán. The grandfather recites the Quran. Su voz es firme. His voice is firm. No llora. No crying. El dolor es demasiado profundo. The pain is too deep.

      En Bruselas, los voceros de la OTAN dicen haber bombardeado la sede de una milicia favorable a Kadhafi para proteger a la población civil de la represión del tirano. In Brussels, NATO spokesmen said they had bombed the headquarters of a pro-militia Kadhafi to protect civilians in the repression of the tyrant.

      Nadie sabe cómo se planificó aquello en el seno del Comité de Objetivos. Nobody knows how it was planned that within the Target Committee. Tampoco se sabe cómo siguió el Estado Mayor el desarrollo de la operación. It is not known how the General Staff continued development of the operation. La OTAN, sus pulcros generales y sus diplomáticos adeptos del pensamiento correcto decidieron asesinar a los niños de las familias de los líderes libios como recurso sicológico para quebrantar su resistencia. NATO, its generals and diplomats neat followers of right thought decided to murder the children of the families of the Libyan leaders as a means to break the psychological resistance.

      Khalad Hamedy kneels before the fresh grave of his wife, children and grandchildren
      Khaled Al-Hamedi ante las tumbas de sus hijos y de su esposa. Khaled Al-Hamedi at the graves of his sons and his wife. © Franklin Lamb / Red Voltaire © Franklin Lamb / Red Voltaire Desde el siglo XIII, los teólogos y juristas europeos prohíben el asesinato de familias. From the thirteenth century, theologians and jurists prohibit murder of European families. Es este un principio de base de la civilización cristiana. This is a basic principle of Christian civilization. Sólo la mafia ha sido capaz de ignorar ese tabú… la mafia y, ahora, la OTAN. Only the Mafia has been able to ignore the taboo … the mafia and now NATO.

      El 1º de julio, en momentos en que 1,7 millones de personas participaban en Trípoli en una manifestación a favor de la defensa de su país contra la agresión extranjera, Khaled se fue al frente para socorrer a los heridos y refugiados. On 1 July, at a time when 1.7 million people participated in a demonstration in Tripoli for defending their country against foreign aggression, Khaled went to the front to help the wounded and refugees. Varios francotiradores lo estaban esperando y trataron de matarlo. Several snipers were waiting for him and tried to kill him. Fue gravemente herido pero, según los médicos, ya está fuera de peligro. He was severely injured, but doctors say, is now out of danger.

      La OTAN no ha terminado su trabajo sucio. NATO has not done his dirty work.

      Thierry Meyssan Thierry Meyssan

      Intelectual francés, presidente-fundador de la Red Voltaire y de la conferencia Axis for Peace. French intellectual, president and founder of the Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace conference. Sus análisis sobre política exterior se publican en la prensa árabe, latinoamericana y rusa. His foreign policy analysis published in the Arab press, Latin and Russian. Última obra publicada en español: La gran impostura II. Last work published in Spanish: The Big Lie. Manipulación y desinformación en los medios de comunicación (Monte Ávila Editores, 2008). Manipulation and misinformation in the media (Monte Avila Editores, 2008).

      Bajo las bombas, Trípoli no claudica Under the Bombs, Tripoli does not compromise
      Libia, Gadafi y la OTAN neocolonial Libya, Gaddafi and NATO neocolonial
      Emmanuel Ratier: «Le Siècle» es la matriz del pensamiento único Ratier Emmanuel: “Le Siècle” is the matrix of thought only
      Elites que aspiran a ser los amos del mundo Elites who aspire to be masters of the world
      El plan de desestabilización contra Siria The plan to destabilize Syria
      Ver videos de las gigantescas manifestaciones en apoyo al presidente Bachar el-Assad Watch videos of huge demonstrations in support of President Bashar al-Assad
      Oriente Medio: la contrarrevolución en marcha Middle East: the counter-running
      Obama, la guerra financiera y la eliminación de DSK Obama, the financial war and the elimination of DSK
      Escándalo del patrón del FMI Pattern IMF Scandal
      Los artículos de esta autora o autor The articles of this author
      Enviar un mensaje Send a message
      The Sorman Massacre
      For once, Thierry Meyssan is not offering us a clinical analysis of geo-political developments. He is reporting on facts that he witnessed firsthand: the story of his friend, Engineer Khaled K. Al-Hamedi. A story of horror and blood where NATO embodies the comeback of barbarism.

      By Thierry Meyssan

      July 03, 2011 “Voltairenet” — It was a family celebration, the Libyan way. Everyone had gathered to celebrate the third birthday of little Al-Khweldy. The grand-parents, the brothers and sisters and cousins were crowding inside the family house located in Sorman, 70 Kms West of the capital: a big garden where small houses had been built for the various members of the family, plain, one-floor houses.

      No big luxury, just the simplicity of desert people. A quiet and harmonious atmosphere. The grand-father, Marshall Al-Khweldy Al-Hamedi, used to raise birds here. – He is a hero of the Revolution who took part in the overthrow of the monarchy and in his country’s liberation from colonial exploitation. All are very proud of him. – The son, Khaled Al-Hamedi, President of IOPCR, one of the most important Arab humaitarian associations, used to raise does. About thirty children were running around among the animals.

      They were also preparing the wedding of his brother Mohammed, gone to the front lines to fight against NATO-trained foreign mercenaries. The ceremony was to take place here in a few days’ time. His fiancee was already beaming.

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

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

      NATO fired eight of them, of 900 kilos each. The spy had placed markers in each house, including the children’s bedrooms. The missiles were dropped a few seconds apart. The grand-parents had time to get out of their house before it was destroyed. It was already too late to rescue the children and grand-children. When the last missile hit their house, the Marshall had the instinctive reaction to shield his wife with his body. They had just stepped out of the door when they were flung fifteen meters away by an explosion. But they survived.

      When Khaled arrived, there was only devastation. His wife, whom he loved so much, and the child she was bearing were gone. His children, for whom he would have given anything, were crushed by the explosions and collapsing ceilings.

      The houses were left in ruins. Twelve mutilated bodies were lying under the rubble. The does, hit by fragments, were agonising in their pen.

      The neighbours who rushed to their rescue silently searched through the debris for any sign of life. Unfortunately, there was no hope. The children didn’t stand a chance of escaping the missiles. The corpse of a beheaded child is extracted. The grand-father is reciting verses of the Coran. His voice is firm, he does not cry. His pain is too strong.

      Meanwhile, in Brussels, NATO spokespersons declared to have bombed the headquarters of pro-Ghaddafi militia in order to protect the civilian population from the tyrant who is repressing it.

      It is not known how the whole thing was planned by the targets committee, nor how the chiefs of NATO’s general staff followed the unfolding of the operation. What is clear is that the Atlantic Alliance, with its spruced-up generals and right-thinking diplomats, has decided to murder the chidren of Libyan leaders to break their psychological resistance.

      Since the XIIIth century, European theologists and jurists have prohibited the assassination of families. Only the mafia has broken this absolute taboo. The mafia and now NATO.

      On 1st July, when 1.7 million people were demonstrating in Tripoli to defend their country against foreign aggression, Khaled went to the front to bring relief to refugees and the injured. Snipers were waiting for him. They tried to kill him. He was seriously injured; however, according to the doctors, his life is no longer in danger.

      NATO’s dirty work is not yet finished.


      Voltaire, edición Internacional Voltaire, international edition

      Enfoques Approaches

      En breve In short

      Controversias Controversies

      Hoja Diplomática Diplomatic Sheet

  50. Red Cat:
    The only reason NATO admitted to the one earlier bombing, with the lame excuse of ‘weapons system failure’, is to make the world believe they are prepared to admit to their ‘mistakes’. By acting in this disingenuous way they are denying all responsibility for the hundreds of civilians they have already murdered and most of those still to be murdered. Hence today they have denied having any planes dropping bombs in this area of Tripoli. They are not making mistakes but purposefully attacking infrastructure and areas where people live, both to degrade the country and to attempt to terrorise the population into over throwing Colonel Gaddafi. How many command and control centres and military installations do they expect people to believe one country the size of Libya has? As we know, from the very beginning they have been intent on regime change and killing Gaddafi. Since they have not succeeded they are becoming more and more angry and vicious with the people of Tripoli and Western Libya

    @Cat: only your logical explanation makes 100% sense. NATO is evil for sure. As Gadhafi has over and over said to the acquisations against him:

    “How can I hurt my own people, my very own children? They love me & I love them. I have and will give them everything!”

    … The world is truly becoming so WARPED!! If it were elsewise, where are Gadhafi’s palaces, and why does he pray? Why has he not bombed other nations? The answer is, he is a man of Peace; not vengence. He easily forgives; though his heart is broken. He is a man of many sorrows; but he never gives-up on hope for a moral future mankind. He will not permit his life to be taken for vain. He has accomplished much; and he wishes to acomplish yet even more. His name is “BUILDER”; and he will rebuild the Jamahiriya–even if NATO makes it into ashes….

    Red Cat:
    NATO has changed its story again and is now saying it was conducting operations in the area earlier today, but denying this family home was a target. It just happens to be the residence of Khweildyal Hamidy, one of Colonel Gaddafi’s inner circle since the 1969 coup. They have murdered fifteen people, including three children and their pregnant mother. Perhaps they had reason to believe Gaddafi was there or they are now attempting to assassinate all the top men and their families.
    pulverised Hamidy estate
    Libya says air strike ‘killed 15’
    Libyan officials say 15 civilians – including three children – were killed in a Nato attack on a building west of the capital, Tripoli.
    Dusko Detlic:
    Red Cat:
    This sick and dehumanizing term ”collateral damage” to describe the murder of men, women and children says everything we need to know about their inhumanity and fascistic agendas.
    This time it was 19 civilians and three children murdered in yet another precision attack by NATO terrorists. The terrorists targeted a civilian house in Sorman, a western suburb of Tripoli, the home of El-Khweldi el-Hamedi, who holds a senior position in the Libyan Government working with human rights, for which Colonel Gaddafi was about to receive a United Nations Award when the armed terrorist groups started running amok (See the photos).

    strike after terrorist strike after terrorist strike, demonstrating a cold-blooded, callous streak of sheer unadulterated and pure evil which runs through every fibre of NATO and the murderers who run its policy. The demonology which goes hand in hand with NATO is chilling.

    20 June 2011 Last updated at 16:00 GMT
    NATO ‘killed 15 civilians’ in Sorman air strike
    NATO air strikes have been hitting Tripoli for three months
    Libya CrisisCould Nato mission unravel?
    ‘Haunted by deaths’
    Libyan officials say 15 civilians [later reports read 19] – including three children – were killed in a NATO attack on a building west of the capital, Tripoli.
    NATO has said its planes struck “a key Gaddafi regime command and control node” to the west of Tripoli.

    A BBC correspondent taken by the Libyan government to see a compound in the western area of Sorman says the Estate home has been pulverised. At the site, rescue teams in red suits worked with dogs to search for victims buried in the rubble.

    Mohammed Nouri Khweldi, a cousin of Hamedi, told reporters he rushed to the compound after the bombing and found the remains of his 6-year-old daughter, Salam. She and others had stayed over after a birthday party, he said.

    “I hope NATO has enough of my blood and the blood of our children,” Nouri said.

    Nearby, women shrieked as more remains were pulled from the wreckage.

    Journalists were later taken to a hospital in nearby Sabrata, where the remains of perhaps 10 people, including several children, lay on gurneys. All were covered in dust; many had suffered horrific injuries.
    Hammidy  home

    (On Sunday NATO said one of its missiles struck a residential area in Tripoli.

    It admitted a “weapons failure” may have led to civilian casualties.)

    BBC Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen was taken to see the remains of the country estate of Khweildy al-Hamidy, a member of the Libyan Revolutionary Command Centre, the inner circle of government.

    Libyan officials told him that eight rockets slammed into the place at about 0400 or 0500 on Monday morning (0200 or 0300 GMT).
    There are shell holes and craters in the houses in the Estate, our correspondent says, after what was a very comprehensive attack.

    AFTER REPEATEDLY DENYING NATO finally has confirmed it carried out operations in the area of Sorman, which lies halfway between Tripoli and Zawiya to the west.

    “In the early hours of Monday 20 June, Nato warplanes carried out a precision air strike against a key Gaddafi regime command and control node in the vicinity of Zawiyah to the west of Tripoli,” Nato said in a statement.

    “Nato carried out rigorous analysis and conducted persistent information surveillance reconnaissance over a prolonged period of time in the area prior to the strike.”

    Funding for rebels

    Mr Hamidy has been part of Col Muammar Gaddafi’s inner circle since the 1969 coup that brought the Libyan leader to power. Officials say Mr Hamidy himself escaped the air strike unharmed.

    At the scene

    Jeremy Bowen

    BBC Middle East editor, Sorman

    The Libyans say that in the attack, 15 people were killed, among them the two grandchildren of Khweildy al-Hamidy – a six-year-old and a boy who was either three or four

    – as well their mother who, we’re being told, was pregnant. Not long after I arrived here, they brought out the remains of the boy.
    Khlil KHLIL
    Hannifah HANNIFAH
    This is Nato striking at the very heart of the Libyan establishment, sending a clear signal after what happened in Tripoli [on Sunday] when civilians were killed. It is sending a clear signal that their campaign continues.

    But I think there will be questions asked once more by critics of NATO, about whether the alliance is acting within the terms of its mandate. Its mandate, of course, is to protect civilians. Here once again, though, civilians have been killed.
    On Sunday, Nato admitted “a weapons systems failure” may have led to civilian casualties in an air strike that morning on Tripoli.

    The alliance said the intended target was a missile site, but “it appears that one weapon” did not hit it.
    The Libyan government earlier said NATO had bombed a residential area, killing nine civilians, including two babies.

    Moussa Ibrahim, the government spokesman, described Hamedi, 68, as a man of principle who took in orphans, loved animals and helped negotiate a peaceful end to the February uprising that shook the city of Zawiya, just west of Tripoli. One of Hamedi’s daughters is married to one of Kadafi’s sons, Saadi. Ibrahim confirmed a connection between the two families.
    Hamedi appears to have a passion for falconry and Arabian horses, as well as eclectic art. In one well-appointed circular structure, huge vases of Chinese porcelain, now smashed, shared space with African ebony sculptures of elephants and other wildlife. Photos of Hamedi showed him as a young officer meeting luminaries such as former Egyptian President Gamel Abdel Nasser, the hero of Arab nationalism.

    Among the many animals kept at the complex are several fenced-in deer, one of which had a broken antler and was bleeding from the nose. Songbirds chirped Monday afternoon, even as smoke still rose from the rubble.

    Meanwhile, rebel leaders said their administration had run out of money as donors’ pledges had not materialised.

    They told a news conference in the eastern city of Benghazi that they were still waiting for funds that should have been deposited by last week.

    EU foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg have agreed to tighten sanctions on Col Gaddafi’s government. The assets of six port authorities will be frozen, the EU said in a statement. “The EU acknowledges the urgent financial needs of the TNC/INC in order to ‘serve’ the Libyan (REBELS) people,” the statement said.

    And the EU said that the “mobilisation of international resources, including, where possible, through the use of Libyan frozen funds… is key to support an inclusive transition process.”

    But speaking on the margins of the meeting, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini warned that NATO was endangering its military credibility by many mistakes in targeting which lead to civilian deaths.

    NATO‘s credibility is at stake, you can’t run the risk of killing civilians, this is something that is absolutely unacceptable but neither can you have this continued lack of communication,” Mr Frattini said.

    “We are not properly informing [Libyan] public opinion which can’t compete with Gaddafi’s ‘daily media propaganda’ and NATO needs to think about that.” [BULL: THEY ARE THE PROPAGANDISTS!]

    Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has frozen the assets of 19 Libyan individuals and institutions in compliance with UN sanctions adopted on 27 February.

    NATO‘s “mission” – to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya “to protect civilians using ‘all necessary measures’ short of a ground invasion” – began in March. The intervention was mandated by the UN, and led by France, Britain and the US until the end of March, when NATO took over.

    Having initially been given 90 days – which would have run out on 27 June – “the mission has been extended for a further 90 days!

    Reported from Tripoli that police have found the three “journalist” men disguised as woman, who twittered in the co-ordinates of the KHALED KHWELDI Hamidy Estate for bombing.

    First NATO denied the bombing. Then when there was clear evidence that 8 missiles struck the residence, they admitted to bombing a “command and control Center”; [like everything else they have been bombing] but have denied the civilian casualties. And only count on thier fingers those they acknowledge to have “acidentally killed”. No, this is “not a war”!
    NATO has a young army of brainwashed young students who are infiltrating many of the web pages supporting the Jamahiriya and Moammar Gadhafi. They are given information on what to say; and lies to be propagate—all nonsense like: mass graves, killing citizens, rapes, Lockerbie, terrorism, dictatorship, “mad-dog”, drinking-blood, etc.—because they think most people are not well informed and will not question what they lyingly write to confuse people. When the Sunday strike occurred, and then the horror of MONDAY, what did these youngsters proporte online: “That Gadhafi himself sent the bombs to make NATO look bad! ” (They could care less about the senseless loss of life–and continued in the unfound accusations, saying “they have proof” [just like the ICC, mass-media, and Barack Obama/greatest liar in history].)
    NATO claims that they sometimes have a missile defect—ehe, excuse me? or call it “collateral damage”! No one is being fooled, NATO. If modern technology can send back clear digital images from the Casini Spacecraft of the moons of Saturn, for sure, NATO sees quite clearly what they are bombing.
    As I said once before, they have done something mentally to those who hit the buttons to launch the bombs, and to the pilots who fly their “bombing missions” ! It is obvious. In the beginning a few pilots came back without dropping their bombs; so since then, NATO had to do something.
    The newspaper reposts are all slanted and twisted. If anything is against their propaganda, they make sure that they insert the words “The Gadhafi Regime said” or “so-and-so claims”. They will not admit their true agenda. The NWO must cull the world of all who do not partake of their NAZI philosophy; and the rest keep DUMB & BLIND. Therefore, most things are left out of the PRESS & TV NEWS reportings. Games are devised to brainwash and numb emotions. Suggestions and words are used repeatedly, to dig deep into human-psyches. What cannot be destroyed though “natural” disaster—(most of which are their creations) they will kill in WAR…
    Yes, WAR:The great money machine of the West. Billions upon billions of revenues come in the manufacturing and production of weapons and its trade. Without war and weapons, the capitalistic econonomies would collapse;…and it is an easy means to “cull” the population and their dispensible young men.
    It is truly terrible that a man of PEACE must be used in all this insanity. But this world would be totally lost if it were not for great men like Moammar Gadhafi. Despite great grief and sorrow for what is now presently occuring, Moammar Gadhafi still perseveres and wishes to fulfill the calling of his name: BUILDER.
    With the help of the Angels and God himself, Moammar Gadhafi and the Great Jamahiriya will prevail. We must be strong with him. We must never give-up hope. We all must continually pray, remain pure, and never stoop to the tactics of the RATS and their ORC-ARMY, known as NATO.
    The world must eventually see the truth and the light. The bombing must stop. The Jamahiriya will be rebuilt.
    Libyans be steadfast, bear all the hardships and filthe the NWO is dishing-out, and you will be Victorious—You have Guardian Angels watching over you…Of those who have fallen, because of the Great Enemy, know that their blood does not go unnoticed on High….But for yourselves, it is meant to have Mercy and keep love burning within your hearts…because HATE ONLY CONSUMES the SOUL.
    Be like our Brother Leader and “GUIDE”, the builder, Moammar Gadhafi.
    forgot to mention that the police in Tripoli found three male “reporters” dressed as women, who were responsible for TWITTERing the co-ordinates necessary for the NATO bombings of the Hamidy Estate. Somehow, all the spys and assassins must be found and caught; and their “life-line” (OR I SHOULD SAY “BLOODLINE”) broken. These people have been trained in spy-Ops and are being paid by the CIA and MI6 also–as has been “gayfully” reported, at a million £s per day! This training did not come “overnight”. These things have been in preparence for many, many years….

  51. Qadhafi’s Libya Knows How the Global System Really Works AB
    Posted by admin on May 13, 2011 at 2:44 PM in English
    by Adrian Salbuchi Salbuchi

    …the system of elected parliaments is based on propaganda to win votes. It is a demagogic system in the real sense of the word. Votes can be bought and falsified. Poor people are unable to compete in the election campaigns, and the result is that only the rich get elected.

    – The Green Book by Col. Muammar Qadhafi

    At a news conference in Tripoli on 7 March, former Libyan Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa accused the Western powers of trying to split his country by supporting separatist rebel forces: “It’s clear they are getting in touch with the defected people of eastern Libya. It’s clear there is a conspiracy to divide Libya. The English are yearning for the colonial era of the past as the first nations who started getting in touch with the secessionists were the English, as well as the French and the Americans.”

    This statement shows just how aware part of the Libyan leadership is of the bigger agenda that the Global Power Elite have regarding their country and the region as a whole. People like Mr Koussa know only too well that what drives the sudden civil strife in his country that served as an excuse for an all-out attack by France, the UK and the US against Libya, is not any concern over “human rights,” or “democracy,” or “protecting the civilian population.” Rather, what is really on the globalist agenda is their need to subdue, weaken and control Libya, mainly because under Col. Muammar Qadhafi’s leadership the Libyans never bowed to the Global Power Elite.

    Libya may have shown pragmatic willingness to negotiate suspension of its weapons technology in 2004, agreed to sell its massive “sweet crude” oil wealth to the West, and defined a political solution to the Lockerbie incident, yet under Qadhafi they never succumbed to Western arm-twisting, as the leaders of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Bahrain, Dubai and Qatar have. Other non-aligned countries in the region such as Iran and Syria hold similar views.

    A Libya (or several splinter-Libyas) under friendly caretaker regimes1 as they achieved in so many countries throughout the world, would be a heaven-sent for American and British oil companies, for US-UK interests in the region, and for Israel…

    Double Standards:
    UN Resolution No. 1973

    Libya is not yours. Libya is for all Libyans. The resolutions of the Security Council are invalid because the Security Council is not authorized according to the U.N. Charter to intervene in internal affairs of any country… You have no right ever to intervene in our internal affairs. Who gave you the right to intervene in our internal affairs? You will regret it if you take the step toward intervening in our internal affairs, the affairs of our country. It is indeed our country; it is not your country.

    – From a letter sent by the Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi to the French president, British prime minister and UN Secretary General.

    In country after country, the Globalist agenda seemed to be faring well, except in Libya where their interventionist plans were not on schedule. Forces loyal to Col. Qadhafi were putting secessionists forces centred on Benghazi up against a wall. So, “emergency action” had to be taken. All of a sudden the mainstream media began noisily echoing French, British and US hysteria regarding the need to immediately “protect” East Libya’s “civilian population” against Qadhafi’s attacks. A “concern” most surprising, when you consider that the UK, France and the US had no qualms when Hosni Mubarak was killing Egyptians earlier this year, or when authoritarian Saudis invaded (or were sent in by the US?) Bahrain a few weeks ago2 whilst Yemeni leader Ali Abdullah Saleh gave his police shoot-to-kill orders against anti-government demonstrators.

    Clearly, the “good guy/bad guy” rationale depends on whether the ongoing “guy” is willing to subordinate to the Global Power Elite or not. This brings to mind an anecdote from the nineteen-forties when one of US president Franklin D Roosevelt’s aides pointed out to him his moral concerns over US support of Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza whom he considered to be an “SOB”; to which Roosevelt candidly replied by saying, “Yes, you’re right; he is an SOB; but he’s our SOB!”

    Over seventy years later, the US has systematically backed – and still backs – a veritable army of SOB caretaker presidents, prime ministers, sheiks and military strongmen. Trouble only starts for ruling SOB’s if and when they cease honouring explicit or implicit political agreements with the US-UK-Israel, as happened to Panama’s Manuel Noriega in 1989, and to Saddam Hussein first in 1991 and then in 2003.

    The fact is Qadhafi never cozied up to the US, the UK and Israel, however global oil cartel interests in Libya won him a lease of life. The time has come, however, when the Global Power Elite objectives now go far beyond oil: they need to redraw the geopolitical map of the Middle East and North Africa, which entails eroding all Nation-States in the region in preparation for the coming World Government. And Qadhafi’s Libya is clearly not ready to go along with that.

    Ergo, Resolution No. 1973, giving the Global Power Elite’s hand-picked “leaders” in France, the UK, the US and puppets in Italy, Spain and elsewhere their much needed “cloak of legality” to unilaterally attack Libya with their military forces. As expected, Resolution No. 1973 was quickly passed on 17 March, ordering a “no fly zone” over Libya and authorising “air strikes.” The mainstream media obediently lent PsyWar coverage to Western incursions to the limit of irrationality, as their war-mongering is centred on a “Qadhafi must go” cry, and yet Qadhafi does not even hold any formal government post in the Libyan State. He does not need to; his prestige amongst his followers is sufficient, and that is what is making it especially difficult for the West to oust him…

    The UN vote was not unanimous, however: of the five permanent Security Council members, France, the UK and the US voted against Libya, whilst Russia and China abstained. The two other BRIC countries – Brazil and India – also abstained, as did Germany.

    It is indicative of the perils all countries run today when we see Russia and China reluctant to veto such UK-France-US manoeuvring over the UN. Either one could have blocked unilateral military action, just as the US systematically blocks dozens of UN Resolutions condemning Israeli attacks against Palestine and its outrageous behaviour in the Middle East.3 China, most likely, abstained in order not to irritate their pro-US-UK Saudi Arabian trade partners who now sell more oil to China than any other country. Russia, in turn, has complex ethnic issues of its own.

    Here, in a nutshell, we have a brief snapshot of how Global Power works, the speed with which they were able to align the support of “the international community” to their goals and interests, naturally having the entire global mainstream media superstructure willing to oblige “justifying” their attack on Libya and silencing all other damning questions and evidence.

    Our Kind of “Democracy…”

    The extensive carve up and revamping of all of North Africa and the Islamic Middle East is very much in the forefront of the Global Power Elite’s plans, of which the attacks on Qadhafi’s Libya are but a chapter. In their march towards “democratisation” of the region, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made it abundantly clear what this means when, prior to her visit to Tunisia and Egypt at the end of March, she declared that the US has “an enormous stake in ensuring that Egypt and Tunisia provide models for the kind of democracy that we want to see.” Elsewhere, she added that the US wishes “to be a partner in the important work that lies ahead as (the region) embarks on a transition to a genuine democracy.”4 (Emphasis mine)

    And what is that “genuine” democracy the US, the UK, France, Spain, Italy “want to see”? Simple: a mechanical vote-counting system fully dependent on the Money Power that feeds and controls political parties, politicians, journalists, anchor newsmen, universities, NGO’s and other public and private players. The practical effects of the brand of “democracy” that Hillary and her friends “want to see” are the “erosion piece by piece of Sovereign Nation-States” as planned by the Council on Foreign Relations. Increasingly, the remnants of “democratic states” are given the role of lending lip service to the Global Private Power System by spraying a thin, shiny layer of “legality” on it. Again in Hillary’s own words, she stressed “the difficulties of nurturing the institutions that support democracy, including robust political parties, a free media and the rule of law.”5

    Déjà vu: Their Fingerprints
    are all Over the Place

    Writing from Argentina, I would point out some poignant parallels in this story with my country, on the diplomatic, military and PsyWar stages.

    On the diplomatic and military side, three decades ago – during the heyday of Thatcher and Reagan – Argentina’s US-backed ruling Military Junta led by General Leopoldo Galtieri suddenly somersaulted and wrenched the Falkland-Malvinas Islands in the South Atlantic from British hands. That was on 2 April 1982 and, again the US and Britain manoeuvred with unheard of speed, rallying the support of “the international community.” Within 72 hours, UN Resolution No. 502 had been passed allowing the UK and US to “legally” take the islands back by force. Argentina’s sole option: unconditional surrender.

    After a British nuclear submarine sank the Argentine destroyer “General Belgrano” outside the UK war exclusion zone, Argentina’s air force quickly reacted and sank or damaged over two dozen British ships, shot down scores of RAF jets, and heavily damaged both Britain’s aircraft carriers forcing them to withdraw from the war theatre, notably using French-made “Exocet”6 air-to-sea missiles, some of which were generously provided on very short notice by Col. Qadhafi’s Libya Arab Jamahiriya. For the UK, overwhelming defeat of Argentina was the sole option, and here lie the roots of our country’s present-day weakness and decadence.

    On the PsyWar and political stages, the Global Power Elite threat to split Libya up into two or three new “democratic” countries would tie in with their agenda bent on eroding national sovereignty everywhere. We can also see their “fingerprint” if we compare Libya today with Argentina nine years ago, when at the height of our country’s almost total financial, banking and monetary collapse triggered by the Wall Street banksters which forced Argentina to default on its massive Foreign Debt, the New York Times published a high-profile article whose title said it all: “Some in Argentina see Secession as the Answer to Economic Peril.”7 In it they recommended that the immensely large and rich Patagonia Region in the south of the country, should secede from the rest of Argentina and then be traded with the Global Power Elite’s banking cartels to cancel the country’s foreign debt.

    Clearly, territorial break-up is very much on the globalist agenda, whether in Argentina or Libya.8

    A split up Libya would facilitate control of its massive oil wealth and strategic North African and Mediterranean geopolitical position. The logic is always the same: on the “hard road to world order” it is always easier to control a myriad of smaller, weaker and bickering countries than it is a few large, more powerful and coherent political entities.

    How Do They Do It?

    If asked to identify the Global Power Elite’s most powerful weapon, one might be tempted to respond saying it is their military fire power, or their money power, or their political prowess. But on a grander scale, their overriding main advantage – their “secret weapon” so to speak – is of a much more subtle nature: it is their uncanny talent and ability for very Long-Term Planning; and by “long-term” I mean not just decades but centuries. This entails a powerful capability of ensuring that their global plans are promoted generation after generation, and this requires, amongst other things, a very powerful, consistent and loyalty-based succession and communication system.

    Long-Term Planning is probably their “best kept secret” not because they hide it from the public (which they don’t), but because the better part of mankind just cannot see it, for the simple reason that mass education in all countries in the world has increasingly shifted towards and focused on short-term thinking, modelling and planning. Whether in elementary school, high school or college, our basic training is centred on “learning to do things in our lives”: i.e., learning a trade or profession, in order to “earn a living and get ahead in life.” “Life,” in today’s world, is being constrained to having a work career, marriage & child-rearing, “fun & entertainment,” and then as the decades go by, retirement and, finally, “game over”…

    Short term thinking people are much easier to control, because they are intrinsically egotists in that, as I say, they have been reared just to “do things with their lives” (in a manner that is useful to the ongoing social system). Except under truly exception conditions where their personal lives and livelihood are threatened, people for the most part are reluctant to become involved in the greater picture of Man’s predicament on Earth. Mankind’s evolution (some might say involution) into what it has become today is the product of a very extensive chain of highly complex long-term processes, which 99% of the population cannot see simply because the subtleties of Long-Term thought and planning elude them. They have just plain not been educated for that.

    The Global Power Elite – Deciders, Planners and Do-ers – however, are all “Long-Termers.” This is a key result of their inheriting vast power and wealth from their family, social and financial/industrial environments and networks, which quickly make a point of selecting their “best and brightest” and ensuring that they get a “proper education,” which basically means that Elites are trained in Long-Term thought, vision, and scenario modelling.

    All nations today should understand that the only guarantee for national sovereignty lies not so much in maintaining powerful armed forces – which for countries in the Middle East, North Africa, Latin America and elsewhere is clearly impossible when confronting the US, UK, and EU firepower – but rather in understanding the Global Power Elite’s key strengths and weaknesses. Then counter-PsyWar and PsyOps can be designed to mitigate and neutralise their hold over people’s minds everywhere. This requires understanding why they want us all to think and act in certain ways, and why they do not want us to think and act in certain other ways…

    And one of those “other ways” they despise is when countries are truly Non-Aligned. When they retain the power to think and act independently, even if within cultural frameworks that may appear different from our own and even difficult for many of us to understand.

    Clearly, Non-Alignment – whether in Nasser’s Egypt, Peron’s Argentina, Chavez’s Venezuela, Tito’s Yugoslavia, Assad’s Syria, the Ayatollah’s Iran, or Qadhafi’s Libya – is very much hated by the globalists, for the simple reason that beyond all local differences, Non-Alignment to the Global Power Elite inevitably leads to people valuing their own national sovereignty and independence above all other considerations, which in turn leads to the strengthening of Sovereign Nation-States.

    And, the Sovereign Nation-State is the Global Power Elite’s Public Enemy Number One.


    1. See my previous article “Global Elites Behind Chaos in Arab World” published in this issue of New Dawn magazine.

    2. George Friedman, publisher of Stratfor Global Intelligence expressed these double standards most eloquently when he stated: “We’re not going to mess with Bahrain because we’re not going to get into a fight with the Saudis who support the current structure, and because it is where the United States keeps its (Indian Ocean) fleet.” See “US, UN won’t step in Bahrain mess say experts”, The Boston Herald, 21 March.
    3. From 1982 to 2006, the US vetoed 32 UN Security Council Resolutions condemning Israeli policies and behaviour and systematically blocked Arab efforts to put the subject of Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal on the International Atomic Energy Agency’s agenda, the State of Israel being the sole country in the Middle East that has atomic Weapons of Mass Destruction and a proven track record of its willingness to use them.

    4. “Clinton to stress democracy in Egypt, Tunisia trip” by Andrew Quinn, The New York Times, 10 March.
    5. “Clinton to tell Egyptians democracy takes time” by Arshad Mohammed, The New York Times, 14 March.

    6. So concerned were the British over their losses at the height of the Falklands-Malvinas War in 1982, that then French President Francoise Mitterand confessed to his psychoanalyst that “The Iron Lady” Margaret Thatcher had threatened to drop a nuclear bomb over Argentina’s second largest city of Córdoba if Mitterand did not hand over to her the secret air defense codes of the French “Exocet” missiles in the hands of the Argentine military. See Rendez-vous: The Psychoanalysis of Francois Mitterrand by Ali Magoudi, the French president’s psychoanalyst from 1982 to 1993.

    7. Article by Larry Rohter, The New York Times, 27 August 2002.

    8. The Coming World Government: Tragedy & Hope?, chapter 7 – “Territory in Jeopardy: The Patagonia”, by Adrian Salbuchi, available at

    Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio talk-show host in Argentina. He has published several books on Geopolitics and Economics in Spanish, and recently published his first eBook in English: The Coming World Government: Tragedy & Hope? which can be ordered through his web site, or details can be requested by E-mail to Salbuchi is 58 years of age, married, with four adult children, and works as strategic consultant for domestic and international companies. He is also founder of the Second Republic Project in Argentina, which is expanding internationally (visit:

    The above article appears in New Dawn 126 (May-June 2011). NWO

    “The Coming World Government: Tragedy and Hope?” offers a unique perspective on how the Global Power Elite operates, what its interests and long-term objectives are, and how they have repeatedly collapsed a country like Argentina using it as a Testing Bench for future actions they then take on a much wider, global scale. Argentina thus has had first hand practical experience on “practical globalization”,

    “The Coming World Government: Tragedy and Hope?” addresses the following specific topics:

    •Introduction – Do Cry for Me Argentina
    [Some lessons in “Practical Globalization” learned the hard way in recent decades by Argentina, after undergoing repeated artificially instigated financial, economic, political and social collapses]

    •Chapter 1 – The World’s Mastermind: Globalization’s Hidden Face
    [A Brief description of how the power structures of Globalization really work. I.e., through Think Tanks, Money Power, NGO’s… What they want and how they maneuver long-term to get what they want]

    •Chapter 2 – Global Power: Whence does it come? Who has it? Where is it going?
    [First and foremost, the true nature of Power must be grasped. Total Power has been privatized on a global scale. Private versus Public, where “private” is in no way “democratic” nor does it focus on the Common Good. The Erosion of the Nation-State’s Sovereignty, as the key structure to serve “We, the People…”]

    •Chapter 3 – Democracy: True or False?
    [Republican Institutions have been hi-jacked by Money Power through false “democracy”, which is under full control of the Global Power Elites. Thus, political leadership function as “Public Managers” for and on behalf of the Elite. See things as they are: all our presidents and prime minister are nothing but Country CEO’s… ]

    •Chapter 4 – Historical Lies as an Instrument of World Domination
    [PsyWar. Identifying fabrications in contemporary history and politics. Seeing through gross lies and deception, when real events are distorted and exaggerated so they serve political interests and objectives. Nothing more dangerous than a half-truth! Two practical examples of Political Myth: The “Holocaust industry” and the “Desaparecidos” in Argentina]

    •Chapter 5 – Death & Resurrection of the US Dollar
    [Essay written in 2006 which envisions why and how the US Dollar will be collapsed to the benefit of International Finance. On a smaller scale, this happened repeatedly in Argentina with its local currency, the Argentine Peso]

    •Chapter 6 – How the Debt Model Works and How to Beat it
    [Public Debt as a key weapon of domination over entire nations. Argentina is kept in bondage through the enormous weight of an artificially generated, illegitimate (and for the most part illegal) Public Debt. Forty years of Caretaker Governments have increased it exponentially. A simple proposal to overcome the Debt Model, applicable to most every country]

    •Chapter 7 – Territory in Jeopardy: The “Patagonia”
    [Describes how the immensely rich Patagonia Region in Southern Argentina is being taken over – literally privatized – by the Global Power Elite. This is happening in many parts of the world, even in America…]

    •Epilogue – What we can all do together…[When you understand how the global power structure really works, why it has made us all bite the dust, then… the way to fight back is: do/think exactly the opposite of what the Elites want! This means taking your country back: founding a Second Republic]
    You can also help us raise funds to continue building our Second Republic Project, both internationally and locally in Argentina.

    For 2011, we have an ambitious Action Plan for our Argentine Second Republic Movement (Movimiento por la Segunda República Argentina) to consolidate it here so that it will function as a rallying point, raising Citizen Awareness throughout the Americas.

    If you purchase “The Coming World Government” and, add a donation to it, you will be helping Second Republic grow as a viable Project, that will serve to overcome the problems all our nations are facing.

    Second Republic is poised to become the first virtual Internet Nation, enabling people from all countries to come together to pool our efforts, capabilities, synergies and knowledge. From this work, Second Republics will arise in each of our nations…

    I invite you to visit our site (under construction),

    Your donation will not only help us to promote this vital Project, but will also entitle you to receive our guidance and responses to any inquiries you may have where our team´s knowledge and experience can bring value to the table.

    I hope you will join us in building a Second Republic today that will carry us all to a better world tomorrow…

    Adrian Salbuchi,
    Second Republic Project,
    Buenos Aires – Argentina

  52. Four-Member Syrian Family Killed by NATO Raids in Tripoli, Libya
    HeyU Quality Ads
    Syrian Arab News Agency

    R. Milhem, R. Jazaeri

    TRIPOLI, Libya: A four-member Syrian family was killed in an air raid launched by NATO on the Orada neighborhood, Tripoli, early on Sunday.

    Libyan Official Spokesman, Mousa Ibrahim, told journalists that the raid claimed the lives of the Syrian citizen Abdullah Namr Shihab, his Libyan wife Karima al-Gharari and their two children.

    He pointed out that a rocket fell down directly on the family’s house in al-Orada neighborhood.

    Ibrahim said that many people were injured as neighboring houses were also damaged by the rocket, stating that this sort of bombing shows that NATO military operations have entered a new phase which is devastating residential and populated areas. #


    Libya’s civilian casualties have silenced Sarkozy’s crusadeFrance’s president has gone quiet following speculation it was a French missile that killed civilians in a Tripoli housing block

    Nabila Ramdani,
    Monday 20 June 2011 16.02 BST
    “Collateral damage”

    bomb destrution and death
    … civilians were reportedly killed by Nato in a strike on this housing block in Tripoli. Photograph: Adam Schreck/AP
    It’s now just over three months to the day since Nicolas Sarkozy invited the world’s press into the Elysée palace to announce that his bombing onslaught on Libya had begun. United Nations security council resolution 1973 – which sanctioned the “protection of civilian lives” – had only just been passed, and western leaders including David Cameron and Hillary Clinton had congregated in Paris to refine the details of military action, but there was no stopping “Speedy Sarko”.

    Striding purposefully through double doors and into one of the Elysée’s grand salons, the French president offered journalists a determined grimace, telling them unequivocally that “even now” (portentous voice, shoulders back, chin up) French top-guns were blasting the life out of Gaddafi’s tanks and soldiers on some godforsaken road west of Benghazi.

    The Rafale jets doing the damage might have been the kind Sarkozy had been trying to sell to Gaddafi during his state visit to Paris just four years earlier, but no matter: this was a moment to celebrate Gallic martial initiatives, not failed commercial ones. Listening to Sarkozy, you would have thought he was talking about General Philippe Leclerc and his 2nd Armoured Division spearheading the liberation of Paris in 1944. A giant American military machine might again be underwriting the assault, but the real heroes leading the line in Libya were doing so under the tricolor of sacred France.

    The French press lapped up such allusions, looking forward to a brutal but swift military adventure that would topple [supposedly] a “tyrant” and stop him “killing his own people”. Sarkozy, meanwhile, could make up for his appalling domestic record with an honorable crusade against a one-time ally.

    How strangely silent the same French press is today as speculation mounts that it was in fact one of their missiles that ploughed into a housing block in Tripoli, killing at least nine civilians, including young children, and seriously injuring dozens more. While authoritative journalists, including British ones, working in Libya point to the “weapons systems failure” (Nato jargon) being the fault of the French military, Paris has effectively imposed a news blackout on the subject. The day after the lethal attack, there was not one word in the French press, on TV, or on radio about those potentially responsible.

    “It doesn’t matter whose missile it was,” a source at the French Ministry of Defence told me. “It’s a combined operation – we’re all in it together.” Asked directly if a French missile had killed the civilians, he replied: “No comment.”

    More sceptical commentators tell me that the campaign is costing France alone the equivalent of more than €1m a day, that aircraft and naval crews have been stretched to the point of “dangerous” exhaustion, and that Gaddafi’s bunker strategy is working. Just as pertinently, military analysts evaluate a scalp, the kind of French air-launched cruise missile that may well have caused the loss of life, at costing up to €800,000 a hit. But the real cost of this lengthening and increasingly squalid war is, as Sarkozy and his generals are now discovering, proving to be a great deal more.

  53. Libya: NATO continues with terrorist attacks
    Posted: 2011/06/21

    “There cannot be a single sane human being on this planet that feels any sympathy for NATO at this moment in time”, says news journalist Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

    HeyU Quality Ads
    Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey


    NATO, the most hated organization on Earth, has proved once and for all that it is a terrorist entity, has no respect for international law and even less for human life. It is time for right and reason to speak out: might is not right.
    NATO has fallen into a trap in Libya. It was not a trap sprung by the Libyans, it was a trap of its own making: in its own admission regarding the strike this weekend (which slaughtered nine civilians in their homes, and wounded a further eighteen). NATO admitted that this was the first accidental strike against civilians, thereby admitting by omission that the terrorist strike against the home of Saif al-Arab al-Qathafi, in which three innocent children were murdered by a NATO pilot along with other civilians, was perpetrated on purpose.

    In admitting this, NATO is admitting it has perpetrated a war crime. You do not go into someone else’s country illegally, you do not take sides in an internal armed conflict, you do not strafe civilian structures with military hardware, you do not target civilians, you do not commit acts of attempted and actual murder, actual and grievous bodily harm and criminal damage with impunity.

    Under international law, NATO and its leaders are liable for criminal prosecution under the terms of the UN Charter. The conditions which gave rise to UNSC Resolutions 1970 and 1973 (2011) do not exist and therefore everything pertaining to those Resolutions is void. There has been no sanction to this action by the UNSC Military Commission, there has been no declaration of war, and therefore the enforcing of a no-fly zone with the occasioning of civilian deaths and criminal damage is a travesty of international law, quite apart from being an insult to human decency.

    The proliferation of petitions around the Internet and the legal action already implemented against the leaders of this criminal clique of terrorists has been set in operation, as the people of the world stand together in seething white-faced hatred against the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization and the murderers who formulate its policies.

    NATO was supposed to police a no-fly zone protecting civilians from attack. It was patently obvious from the beginning that there were no civilians being attacked, rather gangs of marauding terrorists, Islamist fanatical racists who started this conflict with a massacre of black Africans in Libya and black Libyans, then strafed pro-Government supporters and blamed these for starting the attack. A trigger-happy Cameron and that sickening little Napoleon, Sarkozy, did the rest.

    This is not only an outrage against Libya, it is an outrage against Africa, it is an outrage against the Negro race, it is an outrage against international law and it is an outrage against humanity, for NATO and its leaders have taken the side of Islamist terrorists in Libya – the same terrorists who, led by Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, were fighting against NATO in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    But this does not end here. As we speak, there are strong indications that NATO is preparing for a ground invasion in Libya over the next two or three months. For this, it would be necessary to have another resolution at the UNO but did this stop them in Iraq? No, it did not.

    It is time for the citizens of the world to unite against NATO and say NO! Nobody wants to belong to a criminal and terrorist organization which slaughters children and strafes civilian targets with military hardware. Nobody voted to be a member of NATO and so how therefore does a supra-national organization control its member states’ foreign policy? It is as unconstitutional as it is an anachronism and serves as a clique of sycophantic snivelling cowards crawling around the feet of the arms lobby which in turn gravitates around the White House.

    It is high time the war criminals guilty of these crimes in Libya are brought to justice, if indeed international law exists. For those of us who still care about these things, take action, NOW!

    Look at this savage here on the right. Now tell me, is this an unarmed civilian? And why do Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama take the side of these Islamist terrorists, the ones who probably decapitated their boys in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is he holding a feather duster? Do our readers know what he has just done with that machete? No, and you don’t want to either.


  54. Open letter to Twitter on Legal Liablities of Allowing Twitter For Directing Attacks on Libya
    Posted: 2011/06/21
    From: Mathaba

    On June 19, a group of twitter users sent an open letter to Twitter titled “Stop NATO from using Your Domain for their Killings in Libya!”

    This letter was sent to Twitter by email and fax and was tweeted to at least 100 accounts belonging to twitter founders, media and politicians. The letter still gets “retweeted” a lot. These are the contents of the letter:

    June 19, 2011

    During this past week a number of articles have reported on the use of Twitter to provide Target Acquisition information to NATO:

    “How social media users are helping NATO fight Gadhafi in Libya” *1)
    “Libya air strikes: Nato uses Twitter to help gather targets” *2)
    “NATO draws on Twitter for Libya strikes” *3)

    This means NATO is using YOUR DOMAIN to target civilian sites to destoy and cause mass casualties and deaths of Libyan civilians!!!

    A random check made clear NATO gets their information, i.e. latitude and longitude information of Libyan government forces and other strategic/logistic information, from tweets like these:

    which information is tweeted to: @NATO, @NATOpress, @NATOlibrary, @NATOchannel, @NATOSource, @AndersFoghR, @SteveMcCluskey, @UKMilOps and/or @HMS_Nonsuch.

    The war on Libya is widely regarded as ILLEGAL, both under international law and under US statutes including the War Powers Resolution. (see

    Therefore, anyone collaborating in acts of violence connected to this war is arguably a criminal conspirator; his/her actions are analogous to those of a gang member using online communication to inform a contract killer of the location of his victim.

    Under US federal law, transmitting information containing threats of injury or death is a criminal offense:

    “Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing … any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”
    18 U.S.C. § 875 (c)

    Courts have held that this statute applies, not only to the person sending the illegal communication, but also to any Internet Service Provider that transmits the communication. See

    Simply by transmitting bombing coordinates posted by its users, therefore, Twitter may be in violation of federal criminal law.

    Moreover, Twitter’s Terms of Service – the so-called “Twitter Rules” *4) – clearly state:

    “You may not publish or post direct, specific threats of violence against others”
    as well as
    “You may not use our service for any unlawful purposes or for promotion of illegal activities.”

    Therefore Twitter appears to be in VIOLATION, not only of the law, but also of its own Terms of Service.

    We therefore urgently request you to take action against twitter accounts that directly contribute to the destruction of Libya and the casualties and deaths of thousands of Libyan people.



    *1) (June 14, 2011)

    *2) (June 15, 2011)

    *3) (June 16, 2011)



  55. NATO achieves “zero” results after 3 months of non-stop bombing, other than killing thousands of civilians including babies and children as well as Libyan defence personnel

    NATO has admitted civilian deaths during an air strike against Tripoli, a report said on Sunday. The air strike was carried out “in celebration of” 90 days of the alliance’s operation in Libya.

    NATO has acknowledged civilian deaths in Libya for the first time since it launched an illegal bombing operation against the country three months ago under the incredible claim of “protecting civilians”. A total of nine civilians were killed and 18 were injured during a raid on Saturday night. A family of five was buried under the rubble.

    As at the end of last week, 856 people died in coalition air strikes, according to Libyan Health statistics.

    Talking to the Voice of Russia, Andei Volodin, Director of the Oriental Research Center, describes the Libya operation as a fiasco:

    “As regards Libya, the campaign has proved utterly abortive. The NATO command never thought that it would last that long with zero results.”

    The “celebration” of three-months-long bombardments of Libya over the weekend was clouded by NATO’s so-called “friendly strikes” at the rebels which killed 16 people. A rebel convoy near Brega came under attack having been mistaken for Gaddafi troops. Russia’s former Ambassador to Libya Alexei Podtseraba has this opinion:

    “There is clear evidence of the West’s failure in Libya. If NATO launches a ground operation, it will openly breach the UN Security Council resolution. A failure in Libya will leave NATO with two options – either to acknowledge defeat or ramp up its military presence. Given the circumstances, Russia’s current mediation attempts are more than welcome and could prove instrumental in reaching a settlement.”

    However, international human rights lawyer Dr Curtis Doebbler points out that the attacks on Libya are already illegal and have been so since the outset. He is supported by other expert legal opinion. The “mandate” of the UN Security Council also expired mid June, but NATO has carried on as if nothing has happened.

    The African Union has incessantly called on for all foreign non-African forces to cease their attacks on the sovereign African state of Libya, but its peace efforts and directions have been sidelined by NATO and the UN.

  56. Libya Condemns NATO Raid On Residential Neighborhood
    Posted: 2011/06/20
    From: Mathaba
    Libya’s democratic government slams NATO raids on civilian neighborhood
    (mathaba) A Libyan government spokesman on Sunday condemned NATO air raids on a civilian neighborhood, calling the attack another “barbaric” crime “deliberately targeting civilians.”

    Moussa Ibrahim said the leaders of the United States, Britain, France and Italy in charge of the military actions in Libya should take the moral and legal responsibility for the attack, which targeted a residential area with no military facilities or weapons installed nearby.

    NATO warplanes struck the neighborhood early Sunday morning, killing 9 people, including five members of a family, and wounding 18 others. As a Xinhua reporter saw at the scene, a three-story building was reduced to a crumbling wreck, dozens of homes and scores of vehicles nearby damaged or destroyed, and windows of a school building shattered.

    NATO warplanes were circling overhead for more than one hour after the raids, causing great panic to local residents.

    In a statement issued later on Sunday, NATO admitted that civilian casualties were caused during the airstrikes – in the first such acknowledgement since the alliance began its air operations in March.

    This has lead NATO media, including some Australian television networks, to even mention Libya for the first time in main news bulletins for over a month.

    On Monday again more civilians were killed, including from a NATO strike against the house of a historic figure of the 1969 Libyan revolution, killing his wife and son.

    NATO already has killed close to 1,000 civilians in 3 months of bombing from 10km high in the air, cruise and other missile attacks, and remote-controlled drone aircraft which are piloted by computer operators on the other side of the world in the U.S.A.

    Deaths include the 3 baby grandchildren of Libyan revolutionary symbol Muammar Qaddafi, and his youngest son, Seif-al-Arab.

    The African Union has repeatedly called upon NATO and the UN to bring to an end attacks against the sovereign African state of Libya, but has been sidelined and snubbed for 3 months.

    African Union Peace and Security Council (AU-PSC) efforts to bring peace to Libya would have succeeded since March, however NATO and the UN refuse to consider the AU peace plans.

    As a result there are demands that the African states, led by the AU, withdraw from the United Nations which has lost all credibility, unless several conditions are met: the cessation of attacks on Libya, the withdrawal of all foreign forces from African land, sea and air space including the Gulf of Sirte, the firing of Britain and France from the UN Security Council and their replacement by a single European representation, and a permanent seat with veto powers on the UN Security Council for the African Union.

    During the 1990’s when Libya was unjustly subjected to a decade of sanctions and no-fly zone by the same colonial powers and the USA, it was African countries that broke the deadlock by refusing to recognise the UN resolutions because those who sponsored them, the usual culprits, had not taken up any initiatives to resolve the issues.


    Hamedy carries the remains of his daughter after the remains of his wife and young child were finally dug-up! NATO is show no recognition or remorse. To them, this was a “good thing”….How unbelievable all this is! 18 beautiful lives, plus an unborn….wiped out by mere agresssive HATE!
    May the Good Lord somehow comfort Khweldi Hamedy …P.S.: I AM CORSICAN; NOT FRENCH—It pains me every day to know that bombing missions are going out from Solenzara daily. Corsicans never mandated this at all, in Any manner what-so-ever.


    The “political rape” and REDACTED The International Criminal Court has requested an arrest warrant for Colonel Gaddafi and his sons for “crimes against humanity”, accusing them of ordering, planning and participating in illegal attacks on civilians. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, International Criminal Court Prosecutor, said, “Based on the evidence collected, the prosecution has applied to pre-trial chamber one for the issuance of arrest warrants against Moammar Muhamad abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah al-Sanoussi.”

    Gadhafi in Uniform
    Colonel Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi – Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

    But what is the evidence? The press release on the website of the International Criminal Court makes frequent reference to “direct evidence” but fails to cite any of this evidence in detail. In order to try and clarify the grounds for the prosecution, I emailed the ICC:
    I’m looking into the ICC Prosecutor allegations of war crimes against Col. Gaddafi and his sons and am struggling to find the evidence on which these accusations are based. Referring to the press release issued on 16th May 2011 ( there is frequent reference to “direct evidence” obtained by the ICC but nothing in the way of the actual evidence itself. Can you point me to a comprehensive analysis of this evidence so I can refer to it in my article?

    A secondary point of which you could be assistance relates to the following passage: “The Office will further investigate allegations of massive rapes, war crimes committed by different parties during the armed conflict that started at the end of February, and attacks against sub-Saharan Africans(PROVE) wrongly perceived to be mercenaries” Given that some of the parties involved in these rapes and attacks (PROVE against sub-Saharan Africans were armed and funded by Western powers via their proxies in Egypt and Saudi Arabia,(PROVE :Libya War evidence about Al Qaeda) will NATO-affiliated forces also be under investigation for their part in these atrocities? Are NATO forces being investigated for the deaths of civilians(prove) as a consequence of Operation Mass Appeal, in addition to covert actions carried out by special operations forces prior to the NATO-led bombing campaign?

    I look forward to your response and clarification.
    The ICC promptly responded, providing me with a document entitled, PUBLIC REDACTED Version Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar GADDAFI, Saif Al‐Islam GADDAFI and Abdullah AL‐SENUSSI.
    Needless to say, “redacted” is the operative word.

    Sources backing up the frequent assertions in the document regarding crimes against humanity carried out by Gaddafi and his sons are notable by their absence. For example, the document states, “In the early days of the demonstrations, GADDAFI transmitted orders through his Secretariat to “discipline” civilians, by killing them and destroying their property, who had openly rebelled against the regime. Further, AL‐SENUSSI, upon GADDAFI’s instructions, directed and coordinated the operation of the Security Forces in Benghazi and expressly ordered the shooting at civilians. Demonstrators were attacked by members of the Security Forces who opened machine gun fire on them in different areas of the city, such as the Juliyana bridge and Jamal Abdun Naser Street.”
    The sources for these alleged transmissions and subsequent attacks are not provided. Further, the report uses vague generalisations concerning the history of Libya in an attempt to bolster its case.

    “Direct evidence of the plan to use extreme and lethal violence is corroborated by the scale, scope and duration of the attacks; the pattern of the attacks in various cities; the speeches and statements of GADDAFI, SAIF AL‐ISLAM and AL‐SENUSSI; the history of the regime’s response to any political opposition within Libya; and the complete authority exercised by GADDAFI and his subordinates over all important security decisions.”

    Again, the “direct evidence” is not sourced, while appealing to a state’s prior human rights record is not proof by any measure of the current crimes of which they stand accused.

    The report continues, stating, “On 20 February, SAIF AL‐ISLAM spoke on Libyan state television, refusing to recognize the Libyans’ demands, blaming the unrest on “foreign agents” and threatening the country with a “civil warʺ “worse than Iraq and worse than in Yugoslavia” that would cause “thousands of deaths”. No mention is made of the presence of the SAS and CIA in the country prior to this point, validating the claim that “foreign agents” were in fact involved in the unrest.
    You can see PROVE Libya Rebels had OTAN Weapons from Day 1
    Nor does the report concede the rather obvious point that a “civil war” cannot by definition be waged without more than one party, thus implicating forces backed by foreign powers in the “thousands of deaths” that Saif Al-Islam hinted might follow.

    The document again makes the claim that Gaddafi opened fire on peaceful protestors without providing any sources for this claim, stating, “During that night, massive demonstrations against GADDAFI took place in different areas of Tripoli after the sunset prayers. GADDAFIʹs Security Forces opened fire as soon as they met groups of peaceful demonstrators that were walking towards the Green Square. Similar incidents were replicated throughout the day mainly in the areas of the Green Square and city center, Mojam’a Al‐Mahakem Court compound and Al‐Dribi. The protesters set on fire government buildings, including the General People’s Congress, and at least one police station and one ministry.” The report provides no video, photographic or any other evidence for these assertions.

    Perhaps the following point is intended to provide such evidence: “On 22 February GADDAFI spoke on State television from his headquarters in Bab Al‐Azizia, Tripoli. He refused to acknowledge any legitimacy of the demonstrators’ demands and did not regret the crimes committed by his Security Forces. On the contrary, GADDAFI called the protesters ʺratsʺ, “garbage” and “mercenaries” and threatened “to clean Libya inch by inch, house by house, small street by small street, individual by individual, corner by corner until the country is clean from all garbage and dirt”.

    “Clearly, threatening such actions is not proof by any measure that such actions were indeed carried out – if that were the case, one must present a prosecution for war crimes against the State of Israel, since shortly before Operation Cast Lead the deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai threatened a “shoah”. The slaughter that followed proved that this was no empty threat – yet the ICC has made no effort to present a case for prosection against Israel for the killing of Gazan civilians, which included over 300 children in the death toll.

    The report continues with more unsupported assertions, stating, “On 25 February, Friday, one week after the beginning of the attacks and a day of prayer for the Muslim community, GADDAFI issued further instructions to attack civilians. He learned that demonstrations were scheduled that day after the prayers and instructed the deployment of Security Forces throughout the city. Snipers strategically placed awaited the crowds to leave the mosques. Multiple sources describe how civilians were shot at throughout the city when they were pouring from the mosques after the prayers. On this day alone GADDAFI’s forces killed up to one‐hundred civilians in Tripoli in the areas of Green Square, Souq al‐Jomaa, Arada, Zawyet al dahmani, Tajoura and Fashloom, among others.” Despite refering to “multiple sources” not a single one of these is cited.
    The document then continues. “In sum, the evidence demonstrates that GADDAFI conceived a plan to quell the popular demonstrations of February 2011 by all means, including through the use of extreme and lethal violence.” Unfortunately, as appears to be self-evident from the frequent unsourced assertions combined with the proliferation of redactions throughout the document, it is perhaps fair to conclude the there is very little evidence to demonstrate the central claims of the International Criminal Court’s prosecution against Colonel Gaddafi and his sons.
    This is perhaps best highlighted on page 17 of the document: (


    Following on from this I emailed the ICC once again:
    Many thanks – it would seem that the evidence is flimsy and circumstantial at best (that is, the evidence that hasn’t been redacted) – most of the key claims (use of snipers against civilians etc) appear to be completely lacking sources. Will a version of this be released for public consumption without the redactions?

    Can you respond to my second point with regards to prosecuting OTAN forces for civilian deaths/attacks on hospitals and civilian infrastructure and the repeated use of depleted uranium? Also, is a case going to be brought against Israel for the recent killing of protestors as well as the attack on the humanitarian ship Spirit of Rachel Corrie in international waters?
    The evidence for these crimes against humanity is certainly overwhelming in comparison to the evidence provided by the ICC in their case against Gaddafi, yet the ICC has remained steadfastly silent when it comes to the crimes committed by OTAN and Israeli forces, both recent and historical.
    The crimes of which Gaddafi and his sons are accused by the ICC may indeed have occurred, although the paucity of evidence provided seems to cast some doubts on this.

    No conclusive video or photographic evidence has been provided by either the ICC or the mainstream media who have made similar accusations. If it existed, there is little doubt that it would have been broadcast to the world constantly across the private news channels.
    Contrast this with the strong evidence of war crimes committed by Western powers such as the US, UK and Israel, and the corresponding absence of prosecutions against these nations by the ICC, and it seems fair to say that the institution has a conception of justice which appears to be one-sided at best.
    by Andy Dilks.

    Behind the Phony ICC ‘Rape’ Charges
    by Sara Flounders
    Without presenting a shred of reliable evidence, NATO and International Criminal Court conspirators are charging the Libyan government with conspiracy to rape — not only rape as the “collateral damage” of war, but rape as a political weapon.

    This charge of an orchestrated future campaign of rapes was made at a major press conference called by the lead prosecutor of the International Criminal Court on June 8, 2011. The even wilder unsubstantiated ICC charge that Libya plans to mass distribute Viagra to its troops confirms this as the most tawdry and threadbare form of war propaganda.
    BUT In a 42-page federal class-action suit, 17 active duty members and veterans sued the Pentagon for “condoning, ignoring and implicitly encouraging sexual abuse” in the military on February 15, 2011. Two of those involved in this complaint were men.US Military’s Rape And Sexual Assault

    It is important to understand that NATO countries with the full complicity of the corporate media and the ICC are spreading this Big Lie in order to win support for and close down all opposition to a ground assault of Libya, something that would otherwise be unpopular both in Europe and the United States. This wild charge adds to the evidence of a massive escalation in bombing urban targets in Libya, the use of British and French helicopters that give close support to ground troops and the positioning in the Mediterranean off Libya of U.S. warships that can quickly land troops. The NATO alliance is desperate to put Libya beyond all discussion or defense and raise the NATO war to the level of a Holy Crusade to defend women.
    BUT The Department of Defense statistics are alarming – one in three women who join the US military will be sexually assaulted or raped by men in the military.US Army Cover-Up of Rape and Murder?

    The charge of rape as a political weapon was spread — without evidence — against Serb forces to justify U.S. plans for the first NATO bombing campaign in the history of the military alliance in 1994 in Bosnia and was used again in 1999 in Serbia in the first NATO occupation. The rape charge was used to soften up the U.S. and European population for the criminal war against Yugoslavia. Now a similar plan is in the works for Libya.

    All too often widely fabricated lies are spread to justify imperialist wars. In 1991 the first war against Iraq was justified by outrageous charges that the Iraqi army had grabbed Kuwaiti babies from incubators and smashed the babies to the floor. This was presented as reliable “testimony” to in the U.S. Congress and in the UN. Months later it was confirmed as a total fabrication. But the lie had served its purpose. In 2001 the corporate media and U.S. politicians claimed that they had to bomb and then massively occupy Afghanistan to win rights for women that the Taliban taken away. The situation for women in Afghanistan and for the entire population has deteriorated further under U.S. / NATO occupation.
    BUT Photographs have emerged showing American troops supposedly gang-raping women in Iraq. These photos, you see, show some nice American GI’s just taking an Iraqi girl on a ‘VIP tour’ of a prison. They were totally NOT gang-raping her just for the hell of it. In March 2006 four US soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division gang raped a 14 year old Iraqi girl and murdered her and her family —including a 5 year old child. An additional soldier was involved in the cover-up.Rape of Iraqi Women by US Forces as Weapon of War: Photos and Data Emerge

    Despite video and photo evidence that the entire world has seen through WikiLeaks, the International Criminal Court has never considered for a moment filing criminal charges against U.S. British, French or German troops.

    The pictures, videos and reports in major newspapers of sexual torture and humiliation at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq by U.S. soldiers, the testimony by the U.S. soldiers involved in rapes, tortures, mutilations and executions in Iraq and Afghanistan confirms the brutal reality of U.S. wars. These wars have never been to ‘save’ women.

    As an African country, Libya can hardly expect a fair hearing or any form of justice from the ICC. The International Criminal Court created with high hopes of international justice in 2002 has been used against 7 countries – all in Africa. Meanwhile, the ICC has never examined U.S. drone attacks on defenseless civilians in at least 8 African, Arab and South Asian countries. Nor has it even touched U.S. invasions and occupations. Israeli bombing of the Palestinian people is “off limits”.
    This is an essential time to remind all people concerned about the rights of women that U.S. intervention or any imperialist intervention has never protected women. Even women serving within the U.S. military machine are not “safe”.
    According to a study published by the Journal of Military Medicine, 71 per cent of women soldiers have been sexually assaulted or raped while serving in the U.S. military. Women who have been assaulted consistently report poor medical treatment, lack of counseling, incomplete criminal investigations and threats of punishment for reporting the assaults. In 2009 the Pentagon admitted that approximately 80 per cent of rapes are never reported – making it the most under-documented crime in the military. In addition U.S. military bases are all too often surrounded by an entire sex industry of abused women forced by hunger, dislocation and lost families into work in bars and clubs.

    Rape in every society has little connection to sexuality and desire. It has always been about imposing power and domination.

    The “political rape” charge in this case makes no sense and has no basis beyond the U.S.-NATO desire to justify expanding the war against Libya.

    BUT women support Gaddafi not only in Libya
    There is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas, US military and intelligence officials told NBC News on Friday.

  58. Lies, Damn Lies, and Liberating Wars
    Posted: 2011/06/22
    From: Mathaba

    America’s entire major media establishment is culpable. They not only betray loyal readers and viewers, they’re complicit in America’s worst crimes of war and against humanity by misreporting or silence on what everyone most needs to know.

    Serbian Pro-Gadhafi Video:

    by Stephen Lendman

    America’s imperial wars are for wealth, power, and unchallenged dominance, never for humanitarian concerns or liberation, notions Washington contemptuously spurns.

    Yet rhetorical posturing claims otherwise. In April 1986, Ronald Reagan arrogantly said US air and naval forces “launched a series of strikes against (Gaddafi’s) headquarters, terrorist facilities, and military assets, (carefully) targeted to minimize casualties among the Libyan people with whom we have no quarrel. From initial reports, our forces have succeeded in their mission.”

    Wrong! The BBC reported “at least 100 people died after USA planes bombed targets in” Libya. In fact, over 100 were killed, mostly civilians, including Gaddafi’s infant daughter when his personal compound was bombed, trying to kill him.

    In addition, dozens were wounded, including two of Gaddafi’s young sons. The French, Swiss, Romanian and Iranian embassies were damaged. So were Japanese and Austrian diplomatic residences. Dozens of residential buildings were also damaged or destroyed. Libya’s Central Hospital reported up to 100 people needing treatment for serious injuries, including infants.

    Planned months in advance, the mission was one of many Reagan war crimes. Moreover, it succeeded only in arousing mass anger according to an April 17, 1986 Los Angeles Times report, saying:

    Washington’s attack “sparked worldwide protests….that erupted into violence as demonstrators burned American flags and effigies of President Reagan in Pakistan and attacked US facilities in several capitals.”

    Today, Obama is attacking Libya, committing far greater war crimes than Reagan, yet arrogantly claimed last March that he:

    “ordered our armed forces to help protect the Libyan people from the brutality of (Gaddafi with an operation of) limited scope and specific purpose,” adding “it’s in our national interest to act. And it’s our responsibility.”

    In fact:

    — it’s lawless aggression;

    — the supreme crime against peace;

    — targeting another nonbelligerent country;

    — the same criminality committed against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and other nations attacked to advance America’s imperium globally.

    Its longstanding goal is conquering, colonizing, dominating, terrorizing, and exploiting nations politically, economically and militarily – America’s real “national interest.”

    Obama is just the latest hired hand, furthering Washington’s rogue agenda – pressuring, intimidating and/or terror bombing countries to comply, slaughtering civilians to protect them, destroying their countries for their own good, while lying about America’s good intentions that, in fact, seek only to make the world safe for capital, not people.

    As a result, many outraged Americans and others globally denounce him, including Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in a stinging June 15 indictment, saying:

    “Why….is NATO….using (UN) Resolution 1973 as a pretext to assassinate (Gaddafi) and create regime change….NATO and America are trying to recolonize Africa through AFRICOM….Look at the arrogance of Hillary Clinton (in) Addis Ababa, the capital of the African Union. That’s some gall, to go right to us and tell us like children what she wants us to do.” Calling NATO a “coalition of demons,” he accused member countries of lawlessly promoting regime change in Libya.

    Earlier, Farrakhan said America lacked moral authority to attack Libya, denouncing Obama’s hypocrisy, asking:

    “Who in the hell do you think you are” deciding who may or may not lead Libya or any other country. Growing numbers worldwide agree, including Hugo Chavez last March, accusing Washington of “imperial madness,” saying:

    “We don’t support invasions or massacres, or anything like that no matter who does it. A campaign of lies is being spun together regarding Libya. The US government is behind the campaign to remove Gaddafi. They are the masters of war….They want to seize Libya’s oil. The lives of Libya’s people don’t matter to them at all….It is deplorable (that) the United Nations” supports the “warmongering….Yankee empire, (inflicting) more suffering for the people, more death.”

    In fact, four months of terror bombing caused mass casualties and destruction, including at least nine civilians and two infants, murdered on June 19 when a three-story Suq Al Juma residential structure was destroyed.

    On June 1, Reuters reported that “NATO’s bombing campaign has killed 718 Libyan civilians, government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim said on Tuesday.” Another 4,067 were wounded, 433 seriously. The figures were current through May 26.

    With intensified terror bombing continuing day and night, the total may now approach or top 1,000 killed and thousands more injured, the same civilians Obama promised to protect.

    NATO, of course, denied the accusation, insisting care is taken only to strike military targets, when, in fact, it’s bombed schools, a university, a hospital, other medical facilities, a medical factory, civilian ports, airports, basic infrastructure, and residential areas, knowing non-military targets were struck.

    On June 15, the London Telegraph headlined, “Libyagate: Rabid NATO Bombed Benghazi Civilians, 90 Killed,” saying:

    “Now that NATO has bombed Benghazi, there is no possible way that the organization can be allowed to continue its pretense of protecting civilians from the Libyan forces. The organizers of the bombing have displayed symptoms of rabies.”

    In fact, another 100 were wounded, 20 seriously. According to one resident:

    “(Was) this an execution or a terrorist act? The killings by NATO are so many that no definition is possible. NATO is performing the most degrading and perverse role I never thought it could do, no respect for anything or anyone. History will never forget this mass murder nor (its) perpetrators….”

    “One has to ask how has it come to this, where the terrorists occupy the seats of government in the western world?”

    Terror weapons are also freely used, including killer drones, low-flying attack helicopters, depleted uranium, so-called “mincer” anti-personnel missiles containing 80 5-inch-long flechette steel darts (able to penetrate to the bone and cause horrific injuries), and perhaps others yet to be identified.

    In all its wars, America tests new weapons in real time against real targets, including innocent civilians to learn how many mass casualties or destruction can be caused per strike.

    On June 17, Reuters said thousands rallied in Tripoli for Gaddafi waving green national flags. Video, in fact, showed massive Green Square crowds, expressing solidarity and support, while denouncing NATO’s terror bombing.

    Earlier in June, journalist/activist Lizzie Cocker reporting on the ground from Tripoli said:

    “One million people marched in support of Brother Leader Colonel Gaddafi in Tripoli in response to Al Jazeera reports that there would be anti-Gaddafi protests after Friday prayers. Their aims were:

    1. To show the world that the Libyans are against the invasion.

    2. To show that the Libyan people support their legitimate government, legitimate power of the tribes and their leader Moammar Gaddafi.

    3. To show support for the Libyans living in Benghazi,” being terrorized by mercenary cutthroats, murdering anti-NATO residents and gang-raping women for sport, what Western media won’t report.

    Speaking for many, one angry Libyan said:

    “Who are these countries to dictate who our leader should or should not be. We will pick our own leader. We ask for a vote. Let us vote and then you will see who should be our leader,” adding Libyans won’t tolerate NATO dictating to them, imposing their puppet leader, and plundering the country of its resources and material wealth.

    America’s Next Imperial Target?

    Planned months or years in advance like all US imperial wars, Washington, Israel, and several regional allies armed mercenaries to destabilize Syria since January, mainly since mid-March when uprisings escalated. In fact, in mid-June, US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said:

    “We started to expand contacts with the Syrians, those who are calling for change, both inside and outside the country.”

    On May 19, America’s global Voice of America propaganda arm headlined, “Obama Tells Syria’s Assad to Lead Transition or Leave,” saying:

    “In his Middle East policy speech,” he told him either to initiate change or get “out of the way. The comment came a day after the US administration imposed sanctions on the Syrian leader and key aides,” one of its many imperial policies, dictating how other leaders should govern, demanding they obey or leave, and arrogantly asserting Washington’s right to impose its will globally, backing it up with an iron fist.

    At the same time, America and other NATO allies are provocatively conducting Black Sea naval exercises off Ukraine’s coast near Russia’s Sebastopol Black Sea Fleet headquarters. As a result, Russia’s Foreign Ministry expressed concern about the USS Monterrey’s presence, an Aegis class attack ship equipped with sophisticated SM-3 interceptor (offensive) missiles, as well as powerful computers and tracking radar for first-strike capability.

    An official Moscow statement said:

    “While leaving aside the unsettled issue of a possible European missile shield architecture, Russia would like to know, in compliance with the Russia-NATO Lisbon summit decisions, what ‘aggravation’ the US command meant by moving the basic strike unit of the regional missile defense grouping being formed by NATO in the region, from the Mediterranean to the East?”

    “We have to state that our concerns continue to be ignored and under the guise of talks on European missile shield cooperation, efforts are under way to build the missile shield configuration whose consequences are dangerous and about which we have numerously informed our US and NATO partners.”

    This provocation accompanies Western intervention in Syria, perhaps heading for more war against a Russian ally, home for its Tartus Mediterranean port naval supply and maintenance facility, being modernized to accommodate heavy warships after 2012.

    As a result, Russia (and China) won’t support anti-Syrian Security Council resolutions, perhaps facilitating war the way Resolution 1973 initiated Libyan terror bombing. The Syrian base is Russia’s only Mediterranean location, important to protect for its Black Sea Fleet.

    At the same time, Washington, Israel, and their regional allies plan regime change to delink Syria from Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran by replacing Assad’s regime with a pro-Western one. The familiar strategy involves armed insurgents killing civilians and security forces. Assad’s military and police responded the way Gaddafi did in Libya, Washington accusing him of initiating conflict America and its allies began.

    Syrian expert Joshua Landis said the Bush administration sought an Assad replacement, “hop(ing) to end Syrian influence in Lebanon, gain (its) support for its occupation of Iraq, and extend its agenda for ‘Reform of the Greater Middle East.’ ”

    Specifically, they wanted an Alawi ruling minority general to oust Assad “while maintaining stability.” Today, Syrian opposition leaders and perhaps Washington and other Western powers believe dividing Alawis is key to regime change.

    Syrian intellectual Bassma Kodmani, in fact, said:

    “Alawite leaders have sought to establish contacts with Sunni imams to seek guarantees for the community in return for abandoning the Assad regime. This, rather than defections in the army, could herald” its unraveling.

    Author/poet Mohja Kahf also believes that “four of the seven major Alawite clans (Nuwaliya, Kalbiya, Haddadiya, and Khayyatiya) issued statements dissociating themselves from the Assads.”

    Landis, however, disagrees, saying on June 1:

    “This cannot be true….I don’t know where (Kahf) would have gotten this intelligence. Alawite tribes hardly have any integrity anymore and don’t have ‘leaders’ who can speak for ‘the clan’ in order to dissociate them from the Assads.”

    In fact, there’s no Nuwaliya tribe or clan. “She undoubtedly means the Numaylatiya” one. It has no known leader. For generations, “tribal affiliation has become quite weak among many Alawis….” It’s also unclear “whether an Alawi ‘clan’ could be an operative social unit in today’s political climate.”

    What is clear are Washington’s imperial ambitions to gain an unchallenged chokehold on the Mediterranean Basin and beyond from North Africa through the Middle East into Central Asia, as close as possible to Russia and China’s borders, then perhaps target them for regime change.

    Post-9/11, America’s longstanding 1990s plan was launched, first against Afghanistan, then Iraq and Pakistan, now Libya and Yemen besides covert campaigns in Somalia, Sudan, and elsewhere, heading for confrontations with Syria, more against Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, as well as Iran to remove all independent threats to Washington’s dominance. Israel’s also as the sole regional hegemon.

    Though many Syrians want change, large masses support Assad as evidenced by a March 29 rally Reuters said included “tens of thousands.” Others also show internally divided feelings about an authoritarian regime, one, in fact, avoiding sharp social inequality and poverty, unlike Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Tunisia, Jordan, and other regional states.

    Not Libya, however, because Gaddafi shared its oil wealth with his people, providing generous social services and jobs for everyone able to work, the reason millions support him against Western intervention.

    Assad also provides mostly free health care, education, and housing assistance, as well as socially just labor laws based on solidarity, not exploitation. In addition, unlike Lebanon and Jordan, Palestinian refugees have full citizenship rights, including access to the same social services.

    As a result, despite legitimate grievances among many, today’s turmoil is externally generated to oust him for allying with other anti-imperial regional governments. Washington wants them replaced by internal subversion, financial, or military conflict, facilitated by international media manipulation, misreporting events through malicious disinformation, including The New York Times, withholding and distorting facts to misinform readers.

    On June 17, its latest editorial foray headlined, “Syria’s Nightmare,” contemptuously saying:

    “With thousands of Syrians being slaughtered, jailed or forced to flee their country, (Obama) and other leaders need to….punish and isolate (Assad) and his cronies.”

    In fact, who empowers Washington anywhere, and by what authority do Times editors demand it, as well as backing Washington’s extremist domestic and foreign agenda.

    Nonetheless, says The Times, “(Obama) should make clear that the Syrian strongman has lost all legitimacy (and with) his cronies (must) pay a high price for their abuses….The only way to end Syria’s nightmare is for (Assad) to go.”

    In fact, Washington caused North African/Middle East/Central Asian “nightmares,” reigning terror throughout the region. In contrast, Assad attacked no one. Neither did Gaddafi.

    Only America and its complicit allies wage wars, ones The Times and America’s major media wholeheartedly support, no matter how much death, destruction and human misery they cause.

    Expect no editorial mea culpas, now or ever. Instead they endorse perpetual conflicts globally to satisfy Washington’s insatiable imperial appetite.

    Moreover, America’s entire major media establishment is culpable. They not only betray loyal readers and viewers, they’re complicit in America’s worst crimes of war and against humanity by misreporting or silence on what everyone most needs to know.

    How else can America literally get away with murder against one nation after another endlessly, maliciously mischaracterizing leaders threatening no one.

    Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

    Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. #

    Social media users help NATO fight Gadhafi
    Tweeting Libya
    By The Globe and Mail, 15 June 2011 at 2:27

    A Twitter exchange between Globe reporter Graeme Smith, and an account that provides unofficial Libya updates from a British military perspective.

    Every morning at 7:30 a.m., in the picturesque woodlands of rural Ontario, a retired auto shop manager named Janice Clinch helps her grandson get ready for school and fires up her computer for another day of battle in the Libyan desert.

    The 59-year-old has never met anybody from Libya. She has not visited the Arab world; chronic pain makes it hard for her to get around. But from her home near Seeley’s Bay, 40 kilometres northeast of Kingston, she joined a committed cadre of social media users who have become, in effect, volunteer intelligence analysts. On Twitter, Facebook and other services, they discuss satellite images, vessel tracking data and the latest gossip from their sources inside the country.

    In the past few days, NATO officials have acknowledged that social media reports contribute to their targeting process – but only after checking them against other, more reliable, sources of information.

    A Twitter account with apparent links to the British military has even taken the unusual step of asking users to submit the precise co-ordinates of troops loyal to Colonel Moammar Gadhafi.

    Ms. Clinch was among the first to respond. Months of online activism earned her a role as administrator of the Libyan Youth Movement page on Facebook – the only non-Libyan honoured with the job, she says – and on Monday she noticed that a regular member, somebody located in western Libya, had pinpointed a gas station converted into a temporary headquarters for Col. Gadhafi’s forces. She tweeted the co-ordinates, along with the longitude and latitude of a few other targets passed along from the same source, asking NATO to “clean up” the government troops.

    Ms. Clinch was not sure whether NATO had bombed those locations, but she continued to scour the Internet for more leads.

    “I don’t believe in dictatorships,” she said. “It’s inconceivable to me that people could live in these conditions.”

    Twitter is no replacement for the forward air controllers who have guided bombs from the ground since the Second World War. Canadian and U.S. forces now call these specialists Joint Terminal Attack Controllers; some elite foreign troops are rumoured to be among the advisers helping the Libyan rebels, but they apparently do not include JTACs. This leaves an important gap in NATO’s view of the war: for all its sophisticated eyes overhead, the alliance suffers a shortage of real-time intelligence from below.

    This shortcoming is part of the reason why air power has never succeeded in overthrowing a regime, analysts say, a historical record that fuels skepticism about the campaign.

    Those precedents may not be entirely valid in the new age of social media, however. In a press briefing on June 10, Wing Commander Mike Bracken, a NATO spokesman, described the so-called “fusion centre” that pulls together intelligence.

    “We get information from open sources on the Internet; we get Twitter,” Wing Commander Bracken said. “You name any source of media and our fusion centre will deliver all of that into usable intelligence.”

    Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, the Canadian who commands the operation, ultimately decides whether to trust what he’s hearing.

    “He will decide, ‘That is good information and I can act on it,’ ” the spokesman said. “Where it comes from, it’s not relevant to the commander.”

    Some online activists have been contacted directly for their input. NATO staffers also appear to have set up unofficial accounts to solicit information; one user selected the name “HMS Nonsuch,” a term sometimes used by the British navy to indicate a hypothetical ship during exercises. That account describes itself as “unofficial, not run by the Royal Navy,” and offered assurances that Twitter is only a method of gathering tips that will be corroborated with other sources.

    Robert Rowley, 48, supervisor of a Dairy Queen in Arizona, said he has already seen results from his Twitter activism. He was among the first to notice fuel tankers slipping past NATO warships and docking at ports controlled by Col. Gadhafi, which led to NATO interdictions.

    He also wonders whether his tweets might be connected to the bombing of a Gadhafi communications centre in Tripoli. Combing through satellite images, he noticed that a property listed as a commercial warehouse had a yard containing what appeared to be military vehicles. He published his observations; 10 hours later, the spot was hit by a NATO air strike.

    “I’m 5,000 miles away,” he said, in an interview before his shift at the ice-cream parlour. “It’s a very weird feeling.”

    That woman, CINCH, does not know a thing about Libya, Gadhafi or the Jamahiriya and she has the nerve on her scantily acquired knowledge, to KILL and eletronically assasinate people!!!!
    (QUOTE):Ms. Clinch was not sure whether NATO had bombed those locations, but she continued to scour the Internet for more leads.
    The 59-year-old has never met anybody from Libya. She has not visited the Arab world. she joined a committed cadre of social media users who have become, in effect, volunteer intelligence analysts. On Twitter, Facebook and other services, they discuss satellite images, vessel tracking data and the latest gossip from their sources inside the country.
    A Twitter account with apparent links to the British military has even taken the unusual step of asking users to submit the precise co-ordinates of troops loyal to Colonel Moammar Gadhafi.
    Ms. Clinch was among the first to respond. Months of online activism earned her a role as administrator of the Libyan Youth Movement page on Facebook – the only non-Libyan honoured with the job,
    “I don’t believe in dictatorships,” she said. “It’s inconceivable to me that people could live in these conditions.” (UNQUOTE)

    That word was “passtime”—meaning something just to fill her hours (behind a home computer). She is being used and does not even care. All the blood and gore mean nothing apparently to her! and she surely does not, and cares not to, know the real Moammar Gadhafi.

    Red Cat writes:

    Don’t you think it very odd that the CIA created Libyan Youth Movement would make her an administrator because ”of months of online activism”? Maybe she is a CIA keyboard pusher herself, trying to make people think everyday tweeters are p…laying a vital part in fighting a ”dictatorship”. It seems like a way of saying, ”look all ordinary people around the world are against Gaddafi.” Either way, she is one ignorant and shameful excuse for a human being. Don’t you think it very odd that the CIA created Libyan Youth Movement would make her an administrator because ”of months of online activism”? Maybe she is a CIA keyboard pusher herself, trying to make people think everyday tweeters are p…laying a vital part in fighting a ”dictatorship”. It seems like a way of saying, ”look all ordinary people around the world are against Gaddafi.” Either way, she is one ignorant and shameful excuse for a human being.

  60. Libya: Bishop of Tripoli: NATO bombs playing into Gaddafi’s hands
    NATO airstrike targets home of a loyalist of the Rais, killing 19 people according to regime. Archbishop Martinelli points out that the population wants an end to the bombing and is tightening around their leader.—Bishop-of-Tripoli-NATO-bombs-playing-into-Gaddafis-hands
    Tuesday, 21 June 2011

    Tripoli – “The Libyan population wants an end to air raids. If NATO continues to drop bombs and cause casualties among civilians they will play into the hands of Gaddafi, who is returning to be a reference point for people who right now feel the need for a leader. ” This is what Mgr. Giovanni Martinelli, Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli tells AsiaNews,. “NATO despite admitting to killing civilians, continues bombing – he stresses – the population is disgusted by this attitude, which solves nothing.” Yesterday, in the town of Sorman (70 km east of Tripoli) raids have destroyed the home of Khouildi Hamidi, among the most faithful supporters of the rais and much loved by the people according to local sources. The regime has claimed that the raid killed at least 19 civilians, including 8 children. So far NATO has admitted the bombing, specifying the military and strategic nature of target and denies any casualties.

    Monsignor Martinelli explains that these facts distance any possibility of a diplomatic agreement before September, the deadline set by NATO for an end to military operations. The prelate said that “if the leaders of both parties do not resort to diplomatic means the future of Libya will only grow even more uncertain.”

    Earlier this month, Abdel Al – Obeidi, Libyan Foreign Minister visited China to discuss the possibility of a ceasefire. (Sc)
    » 16/06/2011 12:13
    More bombs on Tripoli. Msgr Martinelli: hopes for an end to the conflict
    Local sources report signals of an opening of the Libyan regime. The high cost of the mission are a challenge to the governments of Great Britain, the United States and Italy.

    Tripoli (AsiaNews) – NATO bombings on Tripoli continue. Overnight air raids hit the Gaddafi bunker and other areas of the capital, but there are no reports of deaths and injuries. Archbishop Martinelli, Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli, confirms to AsiaNews that “all night we heard the bombs, which continue to fall unabated in various parts of the city”. The prelate says, however, he is confident in a positive change in the situation. “Yesterday – he says – I met some influential members of the World Islamic Call Society (WICS) who have asked for our cooperation to discuss a possible peaceful solution to the war.”

    According to local sources, the regime is making overtures of a possible opening for dialogue with NATO forces, who would be willing to stop the bombing. “But the important thing is to continue to pray for the end of the war – says Martinelli – only prayer in recent months has given me the strength to go forward and to have hope.”

    Meanwhile, a further 90 days of mission to Libya is placing pressure on the governments of the United States, Britain and Italy, as they attempt to grapple with cuts due to the economic crisis.

    A few days ago a bipartisan group of parliamentarians considered the700 million dollars spent on the war against Gadhafi, initiated without Congress approval, excessive. President Barack Obama will have to address the House tomorrow on the legality of the mission, in order to seek further funding.

    Yesterday, Admiral Mark Stanhope, Commander of the British Royal Navy, denounced the high costs of the mission in Libya, but was immediately contradicted by Prime Minister David Cameron.

    Criticisms are also being voiced in Italy, where the Interior Minister Maroni asked for a review of the nation’s participation in the war, which has so far cost more than 600 million Euros. (Sc)
    01 APRIL 2011
    Friday, 01 April 2011
    Bishop Martinelli of Tripoli on Libya Conflict
    VATICAN CITY (CNS) — The Vatican observer at the London conference on Libya said the situation in the North African country is forcing the international community to examine its obligation to intervene when the lives and rights of civilians are being threatened.

    Meanwhile, the bishop in Libya’s capital, Tripoli, said it appears to him that people just want the fighting to continue.

    “They want to continue the war,” said Bishop Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli of Tripoli. “Arming part of the Libyan population against another part other doesn’t seem, to me, to be a moral solution,” he told Fides, the news agency of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.

    Archbishop Antonio Mennini, the Vatican nuncio to Great Britain and observer at the London conference March 29, told Vatican Radio that the discussions by three dozen participating countries and international agencies “seemed to raise again the question of the fundamental vocation of the international community to respond to the basic needs of a population that is extremely exhausted.”

    Archbishop Mennini told the radio March 30 that he believed participants really were concerned about “safeguarding civilians’ human rights and safeguarding human lives.”

    In the piece aired by Vatican Radio, the archbishop did not discuss the military operation launched by the United States, France and Great Britain, and he expressed no judgment about the London conference’s call for a “regime change” in Libya, other than to say that Italy and several other countries seemed to be looking for a way to help leader Moammar Gadhafi go into exile.

    Bishop Martinelli, on the other hand, continued to express hope that the African Union would be recognized as a mediator in the crisis, and he questioned the real precision of the military action launched by the United States, Great B