To know the FUTURE, one must know the PAST:
Omar Mukhtar: Lion of the Desert
Omar Mukhtar fought the Italian occupation of Libya for 20 years
By Dennis South
Below are some lines from the movie, Lion of the Desert, that starred
Quinn as freedom fighter Omar Mukhtar (1858 – 1931).
Anthony Quinn. The scene takes palce when Sharif El-Kariani, accompanied by a delegation of other Libyans that had been pacified under Italian occupation, visits Omar Mukhtar for the purpose of trying to convince him to give up his fight against the Italians:
Sharif: Omar, why do you not surrender. Obtain the best terms that you can from the Italians. You can have safe conduct out of the country.
Omar: Safe conduct? Where to?
Omar: To Egypt–to hide with this brother? You are the only Senussi left in this country, and look at you. Just look at him.
Sharif delegate: But my people have fought.
Omar: To defend your own privilege. Where are you now?
Sharif delegate: Omar Mukhtar, the Italians have assured us.
Omar friend: Then head back to them.
Sharif: My friend, they are the government of this country.
Omar: No, they take this land by day. But, by God, we take it back by night.
Sharif: Omar Mukhtar, you are alone–cut off from the rest of the country; isolated from the rest of the world. In the League of Nations, they will not speak. And if they should, no one will listen. No one will care.
Omar: This battle is not being fought in the League of Nations. This battle is being fought here, on this land.
Sharif: Omar, you cannot win this war–your blood against their metal.
Omar: Every man has two days: his own day, and his children’s day.
Sharif: Your children are starving; dying in the concentration camps; dying because you persist in fighting.
Omar: Yes, they are hostages of war. But not one of them betrays me. Not one has asked me to surrender. Because they know and I know that if I surrender, I betray them.
Sharif: This may be the last chance you have of seeking an honorable peace.
Omar: They steal our land. They destroy our homes. They kill innocent people, and you call that peace. I won’t be corrupted by that man’s peace.
The spirit of Omar Mukhtar can be seen today in the men and women and children of the Libyan Jamahiriya who have steadfastly sacrificed everything for the sake of their dignity; for the sake of their sovereignity; for the sake over their land; for the sake of their way of life; for the sake of their God; for the sake of their religion and for the sake of generations yet to be born. They fight also for the Omar Mukhtar of this day; the current Lion of the Desert, Muammar al-Gaddafi.
NATO is pouring on the steam now because it knows that U.N. Resolution 1973 ends sometimes in the middle of September. So, they are going to create even more hell in Libya than they’ve created thus far. Omar Mukhtar is watching. He is standing on a hill, in Libya, and he is watching.
About Dennis South
I have been serving, for 43 years, the cause of helping to create a new, balanced and peaceful world.
For the original in Arabic:
more-on OMAR MUKHTAR, The GREAT LIBYAN HERO which forms the basis of all Muammar al-Gadhafi loves:
Text of al-Gadafi’s Leader’s Speech to Misrata Tribes in Tripoli and its Suburbs
23 JULY 2011 17:16:48
After that we had a major industrial plant ..the steel plant which changed the life of Misratans ..they have earned a higher standard of living and became a source of envy for other towns ..all the trucks used to carry steel from Misrata are those owned by Misratans..truckers from other areas complained of what they saw unfair treatment. Misrata has three Seaports ..some people protested that asking why not expanding Tripoli’s Seaport..why should Misrata be so privileged.. All goods unloaded at Misrata ports are transported to other regions in central and western Libya by means of trucks and cars owned by Misratans. Water was transported from Ain Tawega to Misrata.. water from the Man-Made River was made available to the people of Misrata. In fact Misrata became so blessed by those goods and services it was rendering to other Libyan regions that it became the envy of other cities and towns.. Misrata has an airport ..if the city’s population wanted to go Hajj they can travel from the airport of Misrata directly to Makkah. Misrata has become a booming economic hub. Personally I appreciate Misrata ..I was there at a particularly difficult time ..I found refuge in Misrata having been driven out from Fezzan ..I lived in Misrata ..Misrata was scene to major battles against the Italian occupation ..Misrata is the land of Qur’an, culture and wise men. But what happened that Misrata was obliterated so fast..it collapsed and rocked
In fact, I am not a believer of envy, however, I’ve become a believer now, Libya in general was hit by envy due to prosperity it was in and the freedom and security Libya was in. Here all of the sudden everything is spoiled, same thing for Musrata, it was like I described, and all of the sudden it burnt and destroyed, for who’s interest Musrata was destroyed? where those destroying Musrata are going, just tell us where are they going. A city isolated on the Libyan coast, from the front there is the desert and behind it the sea, what do they want to do with it. Even when one occupies it or stay in it permanently, where don one want to go? What’s your future? This is farce, this is a game of mad people, people fiddling with Libya’s potentials, come to Musrata and destroy it, come to Benghazi and destroy it, come to Derna and destroy it, if these people are from inside then they are cursed and from the descent of traitors and foreigners who settled here and who should return to their countries, as they are not guests who respect our hospitality, foreigners who came to Libya and want to destroy it, and which donkeys of the gulf took part in, because their concern is to pay and destroy Libya, despite the fact there is nothing between us, we’re in Africa and they’re in Asia, we’re Muslims and they’re atheists, we left them and went to Africa and told them farewell, and came and conspired against us with their dollars, gas and money to destroy our country, why? they will pay for it, the donkey gulf traitors will pay the price for killing the Libyans people by the hundreds and thousands, they’re funding the crusaders’ campaign, the campaign of Christians against a Muslim country, they’re paying money to kill Libyans, what’s left between them and us, but those who responded to them in Musrata and joined their ranks, taking dollars from them to destroy Musrata, where are they going? there is nothing left to destroy, here Khums, Zlitin, Tawergha, Beni Waleed, Tarhouna and Sirte.
What’s being destroyed is Musrata, is it Musrata’s enemy or dear those who are destroying it, those who put Musrata in this situation, where is the steel and iron factory? they destroyed it, dogs from abroad, they are not dogs, dogs are better than them, dog do not betray, somebody from abroad, they’re breaking iron and steel factory, and manufacturing armored vehicles, a modern industrial fortress, we wanted to develop it, they came and destroyed it. Is this someone who loves Musrata, is he a Muslim and nationalist? He is Satan, for whose interest the iron and steel factory in Musrata was destroyed? is this person in his state of mind, is he a nationalist, does he have any logic, does he have a religion, they entrenched themselves in the factory and began opening fire so the army would respond and destroy the factory. They destroyed the factory, Libya’s industrial fortress is destroyed, who did this? Is it Satan? Satan does not do such things, is it someone from you? Is he from Musrata? What’s the excuse? furthermore, the pictures of the children you’re lifting have been killed, they were killed in their homes and squares, what led us to this?
Did Italy come to Misrata ..so we need to liberate it.. did America ..did Israel ..never Misrata is free, and enjoys the authority of the people and wealth. They broke into the city ..wrecked havoc in it firing from its buildings ..fire returned and thus families died ..they used children and women as human shields.. They took more than 100 children whose whereabout we do not know…may be to Europe to be envengelized.. Who did this to Misrata children and why?.. they were playing happily in Misrata ..who did this was a satan ..but from what family ..waht tribe and for what? They destroyed the Seaport, the airport ..who can guarantee that an airport or a Seaport will ever be built in Misrata ..it’s over..
People admitted it before you, haven’t you seen them? one person said he killed 18 women from Musrata, he cut off their breasts and attacked two sisters, haven’t said before you, these are the actions of Satan, can a nationalist do this, is this Islam, are these the morals of Musrata, are these the morals of Libyans, what crime have the 18 women done so that their breasts get cut off, hasn’t he said it in front you, you must have followed his admission, 18 women from Musrata he said he slaughtered tem and cut off their breasts, why? he said because they were infidels, you’re the infidels, Musrata is the town of Quran, now they are entrenched in homes of the families, they go in with machineguns and rifles and impose themselves on the families, they eat and drink from the families, and they tell them we’re entrenched in the apartment or the villa and we will fight, and when they are told to leave, they reply if I leave I’ll kill you. How many families they’ve killed, families who said we’re not with you were killed, they say either you are with me or we’ll kill you. Is this democracy, this is the democracy of NATO, this is the democracy of Europe. Do the Europeans want us to do this? Is this peace, is this democracy, is this nationalism, the misery Musrata is in is the same as Benghazi.
Where are you going to go with the destruction of Misrata..even if became independent ..what kind of future will it have? a city of 100.000 where it is heading ? It is surrounded by Khoms Zlitan and Tarwerga ..if it proclaimed independence Libyans will deny it electricity and water ..they would say you are a hostile state ..and we will not give you electricity and water ..these are our resources ..and for the airport and the Seaport they will not be of any use since they will be under shelling. What does Misrata want..he who led this operation ..I do not know whether he was alive or dead ..all he wished for was to become the mayor of Misrata..come and be its mayor.. But Misrata should not be destroyed and its women and children should not be killed. What kind of battle is this ..if Misrata was invaded by the French or the Americans we will defend Misrata..either Misrata remains free in a sovereign state enjoying power and wealth..but to sacrifice 1000 of people from Misrata ..who the fool doing that ..where is Misrata heading? Even if Misrata became independent we will surround it from all sides.. this is not Kurdistan or south Sudan ..this is a city on the Mediterranean ..on the Libyan coast ..it has no future even if we said to her you are free.
What will you do ..was it a state that should fight for independent? this is a city of 100.000..the other towns will antagonize it. We said be independent ..we want each Shabia to become a Jamahiriya..we said make a small Jamahiriya ..but you cannot bring in Nato and fight in Misrata ..for what? Ok we leave Misrata but what will become of it? ask the scum in Benghazi..who deceived your children ..recruiting them to die in hundreds for nothing. This is tragic..where is the wise men..they ought to ask what should done to save Misrata..this is ridiculous ..the bastards who compromised Misrata.. we cannot accept a situation in which Misrata becomes under occupation, under the Crusaders..this is neither acceptable nor sustainable. The Libyan people will march on Misrata to liberate the steel plant..the Seaport and the airport..to free families who were locked up in flats they will march in millions. Lay down your arms ..you have no future in Misrata ..those bastards who come from Benghazi send them back ..those agents of colonialism ..those who associated themselves with the Crusaders and the same time shout Alluhu Akbar..Libyans will not wait anymore on Misrata.
No people in the world is pleased see a city of their cities in this way, only if they were silly people, and they do not deserve to live at all. Even enemies laugh at them. They, themselves are surprised, saying ”how the Libyan people did not crawl to Misurata till now?!”. Even NATO themselves say crawl to it and take it, because every day they cry ”O NATO… O NATO… O NATO”. They call for the crusader alliance… ”O crusader alliance… O crusader alliance”. NATO said ”Relieve us from Misurata troubles, O Libyans… take it. Those people are calling all day and night, O NATO O NATO, as if we were their servants , but we’ve got hundreds of problems from Afghanistan, China to Russia”. They suffer in North Korea and Iran and other places in the world. in addition to that they’ve got their internal financial and economic problems, falls and storms. After they enter it, they kill your children. They enter the buildings and homes to kill your children deliberately. They come to the families carrying weapons and impose themselves in the houses and kill who deny them. They have killed many families and stayed in their houses eating and drinking arbitrary. They threw the bodies out of the apartments. People of Misurata are not important for them. The important thing for them is this deviant group coming from abroad, or traitors from this Satanism category which is interested in sacrificing human beings. Now, what is unreasonable is that the notable people of Misurata are helpless in this way, that they cannot liberate the city of Misurata. No… No you should move unarmed to Misurata to get rid of this deviant group who control the city. And if you die you are martyrs. Will you live forever?! The rest of your ages should be devoted to liberate Misurata. No, No you cannot let Misurata so. It is your task to move to Misurata and gathered some of your wise people to move there. If they shoot you, tell them ”We want to save our city… get out of our city; and leave it a peaceful city like the rest of Libyan cities”. You must go alongside with your wise men. Sir, Ibrahim Ghuwayl and other sheikhs, even young men and women, you all should move to Misarata by your cars carrying the white and green flags then enter the city and tell them to get out of Misurata. Tell them ”We don’t need you. We do not need to fight”. Misurata should not remain in this way. Move two hundred kilometers. You must go, and enter Misurata. Say to them ”that is enough”, because their situation is hopeless. We crawl… crawl… the Libyan people crawl to Misurata. Their situation is hopeless. They should hand down their arms and run away to Turkey or to go to (Sharaxia), Nicosia, Chechnya or Benghazi. * The Leader addressing one of the participants: “Allah blesses you, dad, I can see the written words on your hands.”
Tell them ”you are hopeless” They are hopeless. They have no future. As it has been; (The enemy is before you and the sea is behind) or vice versa. What people is the sea, or who Libyans want to save Misurata? What is their future?! They must surrender quickly. The Libyan people are preparing themselves. And as I told you that NATO gets upset with them. They said ” Let’s get rid of this calamity by name of Misurata which are calling us day and night; Come…Come. Take it and let’s relieve. They said, ”What’s in Misutara? Is there oil, gas or a major strategic site, such as South of Sudan, Suez Canal, Straits of Gibraltar, Panama Canal, Hermes, or Strait of Bab?”. They said, ”what will we do with Misurata? It is not a strategic location. We have no need for it.” What I mean is that Europe doesn’t need Misurata. It needs unified Libya. Europe interests are in Libya not in Misurata. What will they eat there (Indian figs) or what? They have nothing to do with it. After they had occupied it a time ago, they left those wretches who manipulated, wasted and burnt the city. Every day, they shoot and kill people. They must understand that even the enemy who they depend on, (their Christian master), has no interest in Misurata. For them, it amounts nothing. Where does Misurata march? Where are you pushing it? You are hopeless. Hand down your weapons quickly. Run away to Benghazi. If you want to escape to wretches and traitors there, go to Turkey. We will give you a chance to escape. Throw your weapons on streets. Where are families I know, respect and appreciate? Where is the family of the Almuntaser? … Where is the family of Shalluf? … Where is the family of Gritah? … Where is Shanishah family which is from Warflla? Where are Kharraz, who are from Jawazi tribe? They must come out saying we would not stay in this stir. Jawazi, the Revolution is theirs, the Revolution of Libya. Al-Fateh Revolution is their revolution which would protect them and their future. They must get out proving their existences if they are exist. Where is Aljabu family? … Where is the family of Zebleh? … Where is Ben Gheza? …I know all of these families. Where is the family of Al- Ghwalat? And where is the family of Ajili? Where are Gannabeh and Hedaddah, who are from Warfalla? … Where is the family of Sadawi who are from Jawazi tribe? Where are families of Kabi, Bodbus and Faki? Where is Ma’daan familly? , Get out Ma’daan. What is this nonsense? Where are those? Zreik families are all from Ma’daan. Get out. The family of Ben Shatwan is a Ma’daan family. Where are they? Where is the family of Jalal which who are from Jawazi tribe? Where are they are they? … Get out. Zeglam is from Zeliten. Get out? … Shuwaib is from Warfalla … Where are they? … Get out. Alshawawah families are from Ma’daan. Where are all these families? Family of Alshawahedi, family of Darrat, Bozekok and family of Amsmir, where are they? Families of Alkhadam, Zarouk all those are from Hassoun tribes. They go there to Sirte. Where the family of Berrass Ali? … Where are the families of Bala, Aldradfah and Almqsba? Where is the family of Beit Almal? … Where are the families of Almangush, Alkhzorh and Baddy? Where are all these families I know? I mean these families are wise families. Where are families of Drnawi, Barouk, Hamir, Alkrama and Shanib? … Where is the family of Tarjaman? … Where is it, Mr Bashir? … Where are families of Alarbah, Alfortiah, Salaabi and Gaddafi? These are all respectable families and the families that I know. It is unreasonable to let Misurata this way. Where are the families of Boshahema, Kulaioan, Chklawon, Kerkom and Gaddah? Where are all those families which I depend on? … It is unreasonable to disappear and to let Misurata to an unknown handful of traitors and lunatics. Where are those crazy? … Wipe them out. – The Leader addressing a participant: “Yes, I can see you, dear … Long live.”
This cannot be happen Mr., Abrahim” and gentlemen who are with you. It is unreasonable. This is a decisive moment. It is a historical responsibility not an easy matter. People die every day. The enemy bombards us with aircraft and vessels. How can we leave?! Where is Bourguiba’s family? Where are those families? * The Leader addressing one of the participating girls: “Yes, I can see you mum … I can see henna on your hands … Long live”. This is a historical responsibility. No matter to die, but the disadvantage is to let Misurata under an unknown gang destroying the city while you still watch. What a farce is it! How can the Libyans run the port of Misurata of which they depend on the arrival of goods? It must be released. They also depend on iron and steel factory, how could it be destroyed? The factory was not built by Misurata money, but money from the Libyan people. This belongs to all Libyans. The ports are not from the budget of Misurata, but from the budget of the Libyan people. So, Libyan people should liberate supply stores and stores of goods in Misurata to distribute goods to other areas. Where are you who you were living in prosperity and affluence? Where are truck owners and iron and steel workers? Restore the city as it was. It is your duty. This farce should be ended. O People of Misurata, you are wrong if this farce continue. Very, very outrageous history would be recorded on you. You would not accept or allow it. It is a defect. Crawl to Misurata together without weapons. I love Misurata … My heart is torn apart to see Misurata in this destruction. Forward … Peace upon you”.
IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST AND NOT ACCOMPLISHED IF 15 YEARS AGO al-GADHAFI WAS ASSASSINATED BY THE BRITS AS PLANNED!
The Failed 1996 Assassination, taking the life of a bodyguard who fell on the grenade and others. The Brits also armed some in the crowd in hope that it would off-shoot a coup….
Referring to a secret document as a source of widespread
Internet in the United States, the Sunday newspaper
The Sunday Times reported that British intelligence services
MI6 British soldiers were involved in 1996 in a
failed to assassinate the head of the Libyan regime,
Moammar Gaddafi. And the British Foreign Secretary
Robin Cook, according to the weekly lied
publicly when, a year and a half ago, denied that
MI6 was involved in the conspiracy and called
“Pure fantasy” the news about it, appeared
British newspapers at the time.
16 April 2000. Add two images of beginning and end of original document. The original document is in 14 JPG or GIF images (total file size 2.2 – 2.9MB); for information e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org .
The Security Service is also known as MI5. “xxxx” indicates text censored by hand. “Cropped” means during copying, not by censoring.
[Original document beginning]
[Emblem] SECRET AND PERSONAL covering TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
THE SECURITY SERVICE
TEL: 0171-828 8688 EXT: 88300
FAX: 0171-630 1428
G9A/SOur Ref: PF690551/G9/0 Date: 1 December 1995 Dear xxxxxxxxx Libyan Intelligence Service activity in the UK Since his arrival as Head of the Libyan Interests Section in London in July 1993, we have been monitoring the activities of Khalifa Ahmad BAZELYA. We have concluded that he is actively engaged in carrying out tasks on behalf of the Libyan Intelligence Service (LIS). 2. In parallel to our investigation SIS and more recently, ourselves have cultivated BAZELYA as a potential source of intelligence. Although BAZELYA has provided some low-grade intelligence, we assess that his first loyalty remains to the Libyan regime. We consider the balance of advantage to lie in ending BAZELYA's hostile intelligence activities. We propose that he be declared Persona Non Grata in the immediate future. 3. Exact timing is of course a matter for your consideration. You will be aware of the overtures made through one of our sources by xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx regarding the delivery of the Lockerbie suspects into UK jurisdiction. This was discussed on 28 November at a meeting between xxxxxxxxxx (G9)and xxxxx xxxxxxxxx (G6), and xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (DICTD) and xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx (NENAD). We assess that the expulsion of BAZELYA will not have serious repercussions for our source. 4. I attach a written case against BAZELYA. It was discussed with xxxxxxxxxxxxxx of NENAD on 17 November. xxxxxxxxxx invited submission in a telephone conversation we had on 28 November. /...
Envelope for return [balance of boxed notation cropped]
SECRET & PERSONAL covering TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A [Emblem] 5. With regard to the murder of Libyan dissident Al Mehmet ABU SAID in London on 26 November, we have no reliable intelligence implicating BEZELYA. However, intelligence on a possible lead to Libyan regime involvement has been received and is being assessed. We will report further in due course although we do not believe that it would add to our submission on this matter. 6. Please contact me if there are any aspects of this proposal which you may wish to discuss. Yours ever [by hand] xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx [signature] Pxxxxx [Name or title] PD/SLH xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PUSD FCO Copied to: xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx NENAD DICTD F4 Division FCO FCO Home Office SECRET & PERSONAL covering TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A Khalifa Ahmad BAZELYA Head of Libyan Interests Section, London Cooptee of Libyan Intelligence Service Recommendation We recommend that Khalifa Ahmad BAZELYA, head of Libyan Interests Section in London, be declared Persona Non Grata for engaging in activity incompatible with his diplomatic status which we believe poses a direct threat to the national security of the United Kingdom. Summary 2. Our investigation of BAZELYA's activities since his [balance of page cropped.]
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A g. BAZELYA may be involved in a project to establish a Libyan Scientific Centre which will be used as cover for technology transfer to Libya. Background - Career Prior to Current Appointment 3. BAZELYA took up his appointment as replacement for Ahmad Omar AMEISH, Head of the Libyan Interests Section (LIS) London, on 1st July 1993. he is one of two Libyan diplomats currently en poste in the UK. According to a reliable FBI source, BAZELYA was not the Libyan MFA choice for the post. It was therefore assumed that he had obtained the post through patronage or intelligence connections or function. We later received collateral for this in October 1993. According to a reliable SIS source BAZELYA admitted that QADHAFI and BAZELYA's other intelligence patrons secured his appointment to London. 4. BAZELYA had previously been en poste in this country as cultural attache and then press attache between 1974- 1979, when he was responsible for liaison with Libyan backed extremist groups in the UK. We suspected he had an intelligence function, though this assessment was based mainly on BAZELYA's contacts rather than his actions. However, a reliable SIS source reported that he was one of QADHAFI's agents in the UK. Another source of unknown reliability reported having seen a revolver in the glove compartment of BAZELYA's car. 5. Separate sources reported that during this period BAZELYA had links with Sinn Fein in the Republic of Ireland. In January 1992 the FBI reported it had reliable source information linking BAZELYA with PIRA, although we have no further details or the date of the information. BAZELYA certainly visited Dublin on a number of occasions and was in contact with a number of Irish nationals. He was also in regular contact with the Irish-Arab Society in Dublin, then suspected of having close links to PIRA. An SIS source whose reliability is currently being reassessed, also reported BAZELYA's numerous Irish contacts and said BAZELYA had a bank account at Dublin airport. On one occasion the source was given a checque drawn on this account. 6. BAZELYA was posted to Addis Ababa in March 1981. Separate sources have reported that during his 11 year tour he was heavily involved in activities on behalf of Libyan intelligence. These activities resulted in the expulsion of BAZELYA and another Libyan official from Ethiopia in March 1991. A CIA source of unestablished TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A reliability reported that they were expelled for meeting anti-government rebel groups including the Eritrean People's Liberation Front and providing them with unspecified assistance. This supports earlier intelligence from a Kenyan liaison service. In 1985 it reported that BAZELYA was thought to play a major role in channelling Libyan funds to Libyan backed African groups. 7. Further collateral for this was provided recently by a reliable source, delicate and well-placed Security Service source, who reported that for several years BAZELYA provided munitions to the Muslim-backed Eritrean Liberation Front. Some of these munitions reportedly may have been used to assassinate an Ethiopian minister during the Ethiopian civil war. According to source, weapons were smuggled in the Libyan diplomatic bag via Libyan Arab Airlines flights and BAZELYA was expelled after one of these consignments was intercepted by the Ethiopian authorities. 8. The same source has also reported that in 1984 the Revolutionary Committee in Libya, of which BAZELYA was a prominent member, was directly responsible for ordering the hanging of 13 anti-regime student activists at Al Fatah University in Tripoli. Attempts to Recruit BAZELYA 9. BAZELYA has been a long standing target for recruitment by SIS and more recently the Security Service. Prior to his arrival in the UK in 1993 he had significant intelligence traces. However, he was granted a visa to come to the UK as it was assessed at the time that the potential intelligence dividends of recruiting him outweighed the likely threat he would pose to the security of the UK. Since then we have received further adverse information about BAZELYA's activities before he came to the UK. Although his cultivation has continued he had not provided intelligence of value and has continued to work against UK interests. Activities During Current Appointment Security Service Sources 10. Reporting from several sources has enabled us to build up a detailed picture of BAZELYA's activities in London. Much of our information comes from reliable, delicate and well-placed sources within the LIS (source 1), the revolutionary student community (source 2) and the TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A Libyan dissident community (source 3), who are in close contact with BAZELYA. Other Security Service sources, telephone intercept, surveillance, SIS sources, and liaison sources have provided substantial additional intelligence and collateral for these agents' reporting. BAZELYA's contacts within the Libyan Regime 11. Since his arrival in the UK BAZELYA has been in frequent contact with senior members of the Libyan regime, including the Libyan intelligence services. The most significant of these are: a) MUSA KUSA: KUSA is the head of the Libyan External Security Organization (ESO), the principal intelligence institution in Libya which has been responsible for supporting terrorist organizations and for perpetrating state sponsored acts of terrorism. He is also the head of Al Mathaba, the Libyan centre for anti-imperialist propaganda which has funded third world guerilla groups. KUSA is wanted by the French authorities for questioning about the UTA 772 bombing. According to CX report 93/35282, KUSA was instrumental in securing BAZELYA his posting to London. Their relationship is long-standing and close. Separate sources have commented that BAZELYA is KUSA's "puppet" or "right hand man". According to source 1, BAZELYA's loyalty to KUSA is unquestioned; BAZELYA considers KUSA the only person he can trust. The two are in frequent telephone contact. Telephone intercept on the LIS (telecheck) has indicated that on his trips back to Libya, BAZELYA visits KUSA at ESO headquarters and regularly receives and carries out instructions from KUSA. For example, in October 1995 telecheck and source 1 reported that BAZELYA was initially unhappy about extending the student status of Muhammad WARRAD, a hardline revolutionary student suspected of having links with PIRA during the 1980s. However, BAZELYA quickly changed his mind on the receipt of a fax from KUSA ordering WARRAD's studentship to continue. Similarly, BAZELYA, though not happy with the arrangement, is obeying KUSA's instructions to subsidise another revolutionary student, Muhammad MARWAN, a suspected Libyan intelligence officer, out of LIS funds to enable him to stay in the UK. TOP [Balance cropped.]
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A b) Muhammad NIAMA @ NAAMA: NIAMA is the ESO's General Secretary. Telecheck has revealed that BAZELYA is in regular contact with him, most notably in April 1995 when BAZELYA informed NIAMA that he had arranged for some papers to be faxed to KUSA at the ESO from a third country rather than from the UK. BAZELYA tasked Isa BARUNI, financial attache at the LIS. to fax the documents from Turkey, and instructed him to destroy them after faxing them. 12. According to an SIS source of unknown reliability, BAZELYA knows QADHAFI personally and has hosted him at his home in Libya. In October 1993 a reliable SIS source reported that BAZELYA had powerful patrons in Libya; in addition to KUSA these were Abdullah SENUSSI and Abdusalem SADMA, who at the time were de facto head and deputy head of the ESO. 13. BAZELYA is in telephone contact with other members of Libyan intelligence, including Khaled MABRUK, and ESO official close to KUSA. In July 1995 Mustafa ZAIDI, and IO with a history of violence in Europe, tried to contact BAZELYA at the LIS and left a number where BAZELYA could reach him. At the time ZAIDI was trying to come to the UK reportedly to co-ordinate Libyan regime activity against dissidents. ZAIDI was refused a UK visa. BAZELYA's Agent-Running Activities 14. Separate sources continue to report that the Libyan regime has increased its monitoring of Libyan dissidents and oppositionists abroad. This is largely a reaction to an aborted coup in 1993 which QADHAFI believes was orchestrated by oppositionists abroad. BAZELYA is actively involved in this monitoring. He runs a network of agents in the UK who report to him on the dissident and oppositionist communities. According to source 1, BAZELYA pays these agents £500-800 per agent per month form a "political" budget which is virtually limitless and unaccountable. The ESO in Tripoli simply requires regular intelligence reports and statements of how many agents/informants BAZELYA is running. We are aware of four agents. a) Mohammad Abdelhakim DIAB: DIAB is a UK based Egyptian [balance of page cropped.]
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A by BAZELYA on the latter's return to the UK in 1993. DIAB reports on dissidents, including Syrians, Egyptians and Libyans. In January 1995 telecheck reported that BAZELYA arranged to visit KUSA with DIAB. KUSA was keen to see DIAB and believed he might be "useful". b) Wasfi BIN ISSA: BIN ISSA is a UK-based Libyan businessman. Source 1 has reported that he was on the locally engaged staff at the Libyan Embassy in 1970s and knew BAZELYA. In April 1990 a reliable and well placed dissident source, reported that BIN ISSA was initially approached by Abdusalem ZADMA, then the de facto deputy head of the ESO and tasked with gathering information on dissidents. Telecheck has confirmed that BIN ISSA is in contact with BAZELYA and regularly arranges to meet him. I has also reported that BIN ISSA is known to KUSA and has visited him in Libya. BIN ISSA reportedly receives between £500-£700 per month from BAZELYA for his weekly reports on dissident activity. c) Nasr/Abdelnasser ABDRABAH @ AL ANAIZI: Nasr is a veteran of the Afghan war. In April 1994 telecheck revealed that Nasr volunteered to pass BAZELYA information on dissidents. Telecheck and surveillance have established that the two now meet and speak regularly. Nasr seems to have unusually good access to BAZELYA. Telecheck has indicated that Nasr regularly rings BAZELYA at home and on his mobile telephone and while BAZELYA was abroad recently Nasr made concerted efforts to contact him. In September 1995 Nasr passed information to BAZELYA by telephone about the identities of Muslim Fundamentalists involved in disturbances in Benghazi, who had been arrested by Sudanese security. One individual was resident in the UK. Nasr stated he had further information to impart when he met BAZELYA face to face. BAZELYA agreed to pay Nasr for his information. On another occasion BAZELYA advised Nasry that it would be better to speak face to face rather than by telephone. All this strongly indicates that this is a covert relationship between an intelligence officer and an agent. d) Abdelqader BRIFKANI: BRIFKANI is an Iraqi Kurd who has been in regular contact with BAZELYA since at least January 1994. He is also a contact of Abdelhakim DIAB. Source 1 has reported that BRIFKANI TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A has visited Libya on several occasions. Telecheck has provided collateral for this and has indicated that BAZELYA has assisted BRIFKANI with his travel arrangements on at least two occasions, in January 1994 and January 1995. Source 1 has stated that BRIFKANI is a "paid agent of BAZELYA" and reports on the activities of the Libyan opposition in the UK. 15. BAZELYA has attempted to recruit at least one other agent. In February 1995 source3, a reliable dissident source, reported that BAZELYA tried to recruit him that month to report on Libyan royalist groups in the UK and Europe who oppose the regime. BAZELYA told source he was interested in behind-the-scenes grass roots activists, rather than dissident leaders. BAZELYA wanted personal particulars, details of travel overseas, opposition groups' printing locations and general modus operandi. BAZELYA implied that he would pay the source for his services. The source declined the offer. 16. In January 1995, telecheck reported that BAZELYA had targeted someone he considered suitable to work for KUSA in the Sudan. This person was prepared to form a group to serve KUSA. BAZELYA implied that the person's suitability was enhanced by the fact that he was not known to other intelligence services. KUSA instructed BAZELYA to make appropriate arrangements and inform him of the details at a face to face meeting. BAZELYA's Alleged Threats to Dissidents 17. In February 1995 source 3 reported that, following his refusal to become one of BAZELYA's informants (see para 15 above), BAZELYA threatened him. The threat was reported to the police and BAZELYA was interviewed by the Diplomatic Protection Group on 16 February 1995. No further action was taken. 18. Also in February 1995 source 3 reported that Dr Salem Omar ISSA was threatened by BAZELYA at the LIS. When interviewed by the Security Service ISSA himself confirmed that he was subjected to harassment, though he stated that it was more of a stern warning than a threat. Nevertheless he took it very seriously. Source 3 later reported that ISSA told him that he had played down the harassment during the interview, out of fear that BAZELYA might somehow learn of his complaint. TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A 19. In April 1995 source 3 reported that a (fnu) IZZ AL-DEN had received money from BAZELYA as a sweetner after being harassed by BAZELYA. However, we have no collateral for this. BAZELYA's Contact with Suspected Libyan Intelligence Officers in the UK 20. Reliable reporting from agents and telecheck indicates that there are at least four Libyan intelligence officers (IOs) in the UK under student cover. Our intelligence suggests they are working to a ESO brief. 21. We would expect that legitimate students would deal directly with the financial attache, not with BAZELYA. However, source 1 has reported that the intelligence officers meet BAZELYA privately at teh LIS to report on the Libyan dissident and student communities in the UK. Source 2 has provided collateral for this and telecheck has confirmed their direct contact with BAZELYA. Source 1 has reported that these IOs also have direct links with Musa KUSA and send their reports to him via DHL courier service. These are reportedly entrusted to BAZELYA who personally oversees their ownward transmission to KUSA. The principal figures are: a) Mohammed MARWAN: MARWAN is a London based law student. Both Source 1 and source 2 have reported that he is a Libyan intelligence officer. According to source 1, MARWAN is a frequent visitor to BAZELYA and a close friend of Musa KUSA. Telecheck and source 2 have provided collateral for this reporting and has revealed that, during his fairly frequent trips back to Libya, MARWAN regularly visits KUSA at ESO offices, and has acted a messenger between KUSA and BAZELYA. Source 1 reported that, following a recent trip to Libya, BAZELYA met MARWAN daily for up to 3 hours at a time to discuss "Musa KUSA business". b) Yousef SHAKONA: SHAKONA is a London based student of international relations. He has significant intelligence traces. According to a reliable Security Service source, he was employed by the Foreign Ministry Intelligence Section in Tripoli and was responsible for letter intercept. Both source 2 and source 1 have reported he TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A is an IO. Telecheck has confirmed his contact with BAZELYA and has indicated that BAZELYA holds him in some regard. Source 1 has reported that SHAKONA's student grant has expired and that BAZELYA is helping him to survive with payments from his "political" budget to pay agents. c. Bulghasem MASSOUD: MASSOUD is a Bristol based student whom separate sources have reported as a Libyan IO employed by the ESO. MASSOUD has tried to contact BAZELYA by telephone, and, according to source 1, visits him at the LIS when in London. d. Abdelsalem RADWAN @ Abdulsalem MOHAMMAD: MOHAMMAD is a Colchester-based law student, whom we assess has an intelligence function. In August 1993, BAZELYA visited MOHAMMAD at his Colchester home, one of the few occasions BAZELYA has travelled outside London. According to source 1, MOHAMMAD is in a similar position to SHAKONA, surviving on payments from BAZELYA. BAZELYA's involvement with the Revolutionary Student Community in the UK 22. Libyan revolutionary students have in the past been responsible for violent anti-dissident activity in the UK and abroad. Since the student expulsions of 1986 there has been relatively little revolutionary student activity in the UK and recent reliable reporting has suggested that the Libyan regime has ordered a reduction in revolutionary student activity, at least overt activity, as part of its efforts to improve its image. However, separate reliable reporting has indicated that the students themselves wish to reactivate their activities, source 1 has reported that BAZELYA is colluding with the revolutionary student to help them begin their activities again. He holds frequent meetings with a hard core of revolutionary students who form the revolutionary student committee in the UK, and facilitates revolutionary student funding by personally arranging for the Libyan MFA to officially request the financial attache, BARUNI, to release funds, which BURUNI would otherwise be reluctant to do. 23. BAZELYA has been involved in setting up a new Libyan "club" on the Libyan school premises, which will, according to source 1, be used by the revolutionary students as TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A a meeting place to coordinate their activities. In May 1995 telecheck reported that BAZELYA advised Muhammad JIBRIL, leader of the revolutionary students in the UK, that they should remain in the background during the early days of the club, implying that they would be able to exert their influence at a later date. Source 1 has reported that since the club's opening BAZELYA has begun to meet the students there rather than at the LIS. After meeting the students he writes a report for KUSA. We believe that he has changed the location of his meetings to try to prevent our coverage of them. 24. In November 1995 source 1 reported that BAZELYA had put forward a proposal to transfer financial administration of Libyan students in the UK to an English limited liability company funded by the Libyan government. A firm of solicitors has reportedly been engaged to advise the LIS in this matter. If the proposal goes ahead, we believe BAZELYA will be able to deny responsibility for any actions undertaken by Libyan students in the UK. This could also potentially cause great embarrassment, as a British company could be held responsible for any violent or undesirable activity. Disruption of SIS sources 25. As part of his intelligence brief BAZELYA reports to Musa KUSA at the ESO. Source 1 recently reported that, following the Libyan National Day celebrations, BAZELYA sent a report to KUSA detailing individuals who had not attended. According to source the favored way of dealing with miscreants is usually to recall them to Libya where the individual can be dealt with appropriately, or to make life difficult for them, for example, by obstructing travel on business to Libya. The SIS Libyan agent runner, has pointed out that three of the individuals named are important SIS sources. He voiced great concern that BAZELYA's actions may disrupt these sources' reporting by affecting their ability to travel between the UK and Libya. HMG therefore stands to lose a great deal of important political intelligence. BAZELYA's Possible Involvement in Technology Transfer 26. Source 1 has recently reported that BAZELYA may be involved in facilitating a Libyan project which has technology transfer implications. He has had detailed discussions with Dr Abdul Majid ABDULRAHMAN, a Libyan researcher in High Energy Physics at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, about the latter's proposal to set up a Libyan Scientific Centre. The same source has reported that in May 1995 BAZELYA sent Musa KUSA a letter [Balance of page, probably only classification, cropped.]
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A outlining the proposal. KUSA approved teh project. The draft proposal indicates an implicit intent to use the centre as cover for technology transfer to Libya, and to disguise the centre's true purpose by using an unattributable name. Monitoring of the centre's members will reportedly be carried out by the revolutionary students who report directly to KUSA. BAZELYA's Commercial Activities 27. We are currently investigating BAZELYA's role in the transfer of Libyan funds through the UK to an unknown destination. Since 1993 large sums of money, which we assess originate from Al Mathaba, have passed through LIS accounts and from BAZELYA's personal account to a British journalist who has then paid some of the money to client accounts in the name of Kojo TSIKATA, a Ghanaian intelligence officer, held with a British firm of solicitors. Though we are uncertain for what purpose this money has been paid, the routing of the payments is highly suspicious, and efforts have been made to disguise the source. We continue to investigate this matter. 28. BAZELYA has also recently been heavily involved in promoting a Libyan PR campaign aimed at persuading the British public that the Libyans were not responsible for the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie. A British PR and lobbying company, GJW, is to carry out the work. Telecheck has suggested that BAZELYA intends to take a huge personal cut from the project's budget. Source 1 has provided collateral fro this, reporting that BAZELYA would get £1.5 million. We believe that the Libyan authorities are not aware of this activity which is incompatible with BAZELYA's diplomatic status (Article 42 of the Vienna Convention). 29. There is some evidence to suggest that BAZELYA has engaged in further commercial activities for personal gain, which would also contravene the conditions of his diplomatic status. For example, in late 1994 telecheck revealed that he was involved in arranging a deal to buy Flit insecticide. We assess that it is likely BAZELYA did secure a profit for himself but there is no firm evidence to prove this. Conclusion 30. Over the last year activity on behalf of the Libyan Intelligence Services, involving the monitoring of Libyan dissidents and oppositionists in the UK, has increased. While we assess that, as long as UN sanctions remain in [Balance of page, probably only classification, cropped.]
TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A place, the Libyan regime is unlikely to attack Western interests, we view the stepping up of Libyan intelligence activity with great concern. Though there is at present no firm evidence that the recent murder of Ali Mehmed Abu SAID is connected to Libyan Intelligence Services, we may have to review our assessment. What is clear is that, should the Libyan regime wish to resume its violent activities, it has a pool of individuals in the UK, headed by BAZELYA, who would be willing to participate, and an established structure for coordinating these activities. 31. BAZELYA is the focal point for Libyan intelligence activity in the UK and is becoming increasingly active in his own right. His continued presence in the UK can only serve to facilitate further intelligence activity. 32. BAZELYA's expulsion would severely disrupt the Libyan intelligence effort in the UK. It would also send a strong message to the Libyan regime that HMG will not tolerate Libyan intelligence activity on British soil. TOP SECRET DELICATE SOURCE UK EYES A
[Original document ending]
Transcription and HTML by Cryptome .
Jacques Borde pour Géostratégie : La Lybie entre normalisation et internationalisation
Jacques Borde, spécialiste des questions internationales et du Moyen-Orient, analyse la situation en Lybie pour Géostratégie.
Q – Où en est-on, aujourd’hui en Libye ?
Jacques Borde – Aussi bizarre que cela puisse paraître : entre un retour à la normale, sous le contrôle de l’administration Kadhafi, et un risque d’internationalisation. Retour à la normale dans la mesure où Kadhafi reprend progressivement la main, je développerai, par la suite. Et un risque réel d’internationalisation du conflit..
Q – comment expliquez vous ce risque ?
Jacques Borde – Oh ! Essentiellement en raison de l’incommensurable étroitesse de vue géopolitique des acteurs français du dossier. Nicolas Sarkozy et son chef de l’adiplomatie, Alain Juppé, pour que les choses soient claires. Le premier se prenant pour un mix de Jules Ferry et de Lyautey, le second, rêvant de briller internationalement comme l’avait fait Dominique Galouzeau de Villepin, sur le dossier irakien.
Q – En somme, vous regrettez Villepin ?
Jacques Borde – Absolument pas ! Villepin a toujours été creux, au plan international. Y compris lors de son discours devant le Conseil de Sécurité. Prestation sans grand intérêt qui ne sera suivi d’aucun geste fort, notamment vis-à-vis du peuple irakien qui, à l’époque, était victime d’un blocus génocidaire qui a fait, je vous le rappelle, UN MILLION ET DEMI de victimes civiles innocentes (dont plus de CINQ CENT MILLE enfants). Soit CENT MILLE de plus qu’à Auschwitz, si je me réfère (de mémoire, vous me pardonnerez) aux chiffres qui figuraient sur la plaque commémorative inaugurée lors de sa visite à ce camp d’extermination par Binyamin Nétanyahu (lors de son premier passage aux affaires). Notre si belle communauté internationale criminellement plus létale qu’Hitler ! Vous comprendrez pourquoi je me méfie des pulsions interventionnistes de certains. Or, Paris, Chirac et Villepin regnante, n’a jamais tenté d’interrompre la participation de la France à ce génocide. Seule, la participation des ailes françaises à la No Fly Zone (NFZ) au-dessus de l’Irak fut partiellement allégée. Pour cette raison, je suis également opposé à la plus petite NFZ au-dessus de la Libye. On sait comment ça commencera : pas de vols militaires, puis, pas de vols du tout. Y compris sanitaires. Avec, à la clé – un jour ou l’autre, si la crise devait perdurer, ce qui ne semble pas être le cas – des dommages collatéraux tuant, de plus en plus, de civils innocents…
Q – Sarkozy se trompe, selon vous ?
Jacques Borde – Il s’égare. D’ailleurs, vous aurez noté qu’il n’a pas été suivi par le reste des Européens, qui ont su raison garder. Du genre : « Cause toujours, on en reparlera dans quelques semaines ». Lorsque, tout sera réglé ou en passe de l’être. La mine enjouée d’Angela Merkel en disait plus qu’un long discours sur le peu de cas qu’elle compte faire des propositions belliqueuses du locataire de l’Élysée. En fait, seuls les Britanniques – qui ont joué, dès le début, la carte des insurgés, dans ce qui s’apparente plus à un coup d’État de putschistes minoritaires qu’à une véritable révolution populaire – font mine de suivre Sarkozy, en lui laissant occuper, à leur place, le rôle du petit roquet détestable au possible…
Q – Où se situe de le risque, alors ?
Jacques Borde – Dans la capacité de nuisance de Sarkozy lui-même. Tout de même, chef de l’État et des… armées. Le problème de Sarkozy est double. Il y a son (maigre) bagage intellectuel et son ego démesuré. Gépolitiquement parlant, Sarkozy n’est pas grand-chose au niveau du discours. C’est un pragmatique et un animal politique, plutôt doué. Pour le reste, il puise son inspiration autant à droite qu’à gauche dans des images d’Épinal qui lui servent de bagage géopolitique. C’est-à-dire, peu de choses. Il a souvent émaillé ses propos de références à Jules Ferry. Homme de gauche certes, mais fondateur de la vulgate du colonial-socialisme français. S’exprimant à la Chambre des Députés, Jules Ferry affirmait : « Messieurs, il faut parler plus haut et plus vrai ! Il faut dire ouvertement que les races supérieures ont un droit vis-à-vis des races inférieures. Je répète qu’il y a pour les races supérieures un droit parce qu’il y a un devoir pour elles. Elles ont le devoir de civiliser les races inférieures ». Et Léon Blum, autre personnalité de gauche qu’admire le chef de l’État, proclamait, encore plus près de nous, le 9 juillet 1925 dans (décidément) la même enceinte, « le droit et le devoir des races supérieures d’attirer à elles celles qui ne sont pas parvenues au même degré de culture ». Mélangez-moi ça à quelques pages de De Gaulle mal comprises, au souvenir brumeux de Lyautey, et vous obtenez de la bouillie pour chat…
Q – Mais, il y a tout de même des personnes pour le conseiller ?
Jacques Borde – Qui ? À la demande de Juppé – qui avait peur que l’homme, trop intelligent, prenne le pas sur lui – a demandé et obtenu que Jean-David Levitte soit remercié. Pierre Lellouche, l’un des meilleurs connaisseurs européens des questions de Défense n’a plus l’oreille du chef de l’État qu’au coup à coup. Comprenez-bien : que les choix géopolitiques de l’Élysée ne correspondent pas à mes vues, en tant que démocrate, c’est OK pour moi. Que la géopolitique de la France soit gérée par des incapables, des fumistes et des ignorants, là c’est plus grave…
Q – Selon-vous sur le dossier libyen, Sarkozy n’a écouté personne ?
Jacques Borde – Si, hélas ! Bernard-Henry Lévy. Autrement dit, un individu trouble dont les compétences en matière de relations internationales sont biaisées, parcellaires et vagues. BHL, je vous le rappelle est un essayiste, un pamphlétaire, un philosophe – d’ailleurs, j’en profite, au passage, pour lancer un appel : où puis-je consulter les mémoires et thèses qui fondent le statut « philosophique » de M. Lévy ? – mais en rien un géopolitologue, un hoplomaque, ni même quoi que ce soit d’autre. Avoir un avis sur tout ne fait pas de vous un spécialiste d’une chose précise. À la rigueur un – mais assez mauvais – journaliste. Rien, en tout cas, qui le fonde à conseiller ainsi le chef de l’État sur sa politique étrangère. Quelque part, BHL, ça serait une sorte de boussole indiquant le…Sud. En clair, ne JAMAIS le suivre là où il vous dit d’aller…
Q – Et sur la Libye ?
Jacques Borde – Sur la Libye, ce serait donc BHL, qui, de passage à Benghazi, aurait fortement conseillé au président français de recevoir les représentants du comité Thédodule local. Puis d’en faire les représentants « légitimes » (sic) du peuple libyen et, de prôner, dans la foulée, des frappes aériennes. Le problème, c’est que BHL n’a aucun bagage intellectuel, militaire, paramilitaire, scolaire, universitaire qui fasse de lui un spécialiste de la Méditerranée, de la Libye ou des questions stratégiques. C’est un phénomène typiquement français : contrairement aux Anglo-Saxons, nous n’avons pas (ou peu) de spécialistes, qui, de toute manière, sont bien moins écoutés que nos « intellectuels ». Ce qu’est, je le reconnais volontiers, M. Lévy. Or, c’est quoi un « intellectuel » ? En fait, quelqu’un qui a son avis sur tout, à commencer par les sujets qui dépassent totalement ses compétences généralement limitées. Vous connaissez l’adage sur la culture : « moins on en a, plus on l’étale ». Nos intellos, c’est du pareil au même : ils ne savent rien, ou pas grand-chose, mais ont un avis sur tout : le Darfour, la Libye, le Timor, le nucléaire, la fonte des glaces, le numérique, etc. Et, le pire c’est qu’il faut les écouter…
Q – Donc l’avis de BHL c’est cette bouillie pour chat dont vous nous parliez ?
Jacques Borde – C’est une opinion. Pourquoi pas ? C’est le droit de tout un chacun d’avoir son avis sur les sujets du moment. Mais de là, à avoir l’oreille du chef de l’État et des armées sur nos Opex futures ! Et si, même hypothétiquement, je vous disais que l’Otan va fonder sa stratégie sur le SEUL avis d’Amélie Nothomb, romancière brillante au demeurant, avant de tapisser de bombes Tripoli ou Abidjan, vous réagiriez comment ?
Q – Comment expliquez-vous cet égarement français ?
Jacques Borde – La praxis, permanente, depuis Chirac, pour nos dirigeants de s’entourer de personnalités dont ils savent n’avoir rien à craindre. D’une poignée d’intellos de cour, et de seconds couteaux, ternes, peu compétents mais obéissants (mais pas assez courageux pour dire la vérité au grand homme). Puis les places qu’on distribue en fonction des arrangements politiques. Avec Mitterrand, c’était différend. On a eu Dumas et Védrine aux Affaires étrangères. Et brièvement Michel Jobert ! Avec Sarkozy : Kouchner, MAM, Juppé. Et je ne vous parle pas de la Défense – Morin, gentil garçon qui n’y connaissait rien, maintenant Juppé – tout ça, en laissant Pierre Lellouche sur la touche. Affligeant…
Q – Vous citez souvent Pierre Lellouche. Vous en pensez beaucoup de bien, apparemment ?
Jacques Borde – Oui. Lisez son rapport sur les armes de destruction massives, vous m’en direz des nouvelles. Je l’ai vu en conférence de presse, travaillé au corps par de VRAIS spécialistes des questions de Défense… Brillantissime ! Le fait que Nicolas Sarkozy (dont Lellouche partage pourtant une large part des engagements) ne l’a jamais promu à la Défense, ou aux Affaires étrangères, restera une des questions sans réponse qui me troublera toujours sur le mandat de ce président. Mais qu’y puis-je ?
Q – Avec Lellouche, ça aura été différent ?
Jacques Borde – je ne peux pas juger des idées de Pierre Lellouche sur le dossier libyen. N’ayant rien eu à me mette sous la dent à ce sujet. Ce dont je suis certain, c’est que sa conduite des opérations aurait été professionnelle, rigoureuse et terriblement efficace. S’il fallait me lancer dans un kriegspiel, jeu de rôle ou wargame, avec la Libye comme théâtre d’opération, je ne jouerais pas la partie aux côtés des Kadhafi si Lellouche se trouvait de l’autre côté de la table. Fort heureusement pour eux, ça n’est pas le cas, dans la réalité…
Q – Donc Kadhafi est en train de gagner ?
Jacques Borde – Oui.
Q – Des raisons que cela change ?
Jacques Borde – Sans intervention extérieure, non ! Apparemment, comme le font les armées modernes en Opex, Kadhafi a constitué des task forces (une à quatre sans doute) regroupant ses troupes les plus expérimentées. Celles-ci ont reçu mandat de liquider les poches adverses, patiemment, une à une. Apparemment, cela se fait, pour l’instant, sans excès, sans débordements sur une population civile qui, de toute façon, se tenait à l’écart de l’agitation – conduite, on s’en rend de plus en plus compte avec le retour au calme, par des agitateurs instrumentalisés et des opportunistes – attendant simplement le retour au calme et au statu quo ante. Visiblement, les forces en présence ne sont pas très nombreuses. Et, les pertes journalières peu élevées. Internationalement, acceptables, en tout cas. On ne nous rejoue, ni d’un côté ni de l’autre, ni Stalingrad ni même Grozny !
Q – Quid de la thèse de mercenaires israéliens, coté Kadhafi ?
Jacques Borde – J’ai lui quelque chose allant dans ce sens sous la plume de Thierry Meyssan. Mais je n’ai pas creusé le sujet. Mais sérieusement, je ne voudrais pas sombrer dans la théorie du complot. Au vu des images, ce qu’on nous donne à voir sont des unités régulières… libyennes mettant en œuvre des matériels, essentiellement d’origine soviétique et russe, qui sont ceux en dotation depuis des décennies dans l’inventaire militaire local. À en juger de ce qui nous est donné à voir des tactiques sur le terrain : cela reste de l’école soviétique classique. Rien de bien « israélien ». Quant au fait de que des Sociétés militaires privées israéliennes (SMP) aient cherché (et, le cas échéant réussi) à se placer. Quoi de plus normal. Le terrain correspond parfaitement à leur expertise. En revanche, cette expertise n’apparait guère sur les images. Tout reste très rustique et très « écoles de guerre russes ». Pour ce qu’on en voit, bien sûr…
Q – Que pensez-vous des insurgés ?
Jacques Borde – Oh, pas grand-chose. Une certaine motivation, beaucoup d’agitation, d’opportunisme, je vous l’ai dit, et très peu de professionnalisme et de résultats… Leur problème est que, désormais, ils ont en face d’eux de véritables professionnels avec du VRAI matériel. Les antiques T-55 ont laissé la place à des T-72 et T-80. Les forces régulières se mettent à aligner des ZSU-23 Shilka. Redoutables en combat urbain (et très russe comme modus operandi). En revanche, le reste est classique : armement léger à base d’AK, RPK. Mais, les Libyens ne semblent pas adopter les techniques de combat nées lors des batailles de Grozny. Par exemple, on ne voit pas de fantassins suréquipés de RPG, utilisés à outrance pour nettoyer les positions adverses. Les insurgés, a contrario, sont équipés de bric et de broc et ne semblent même pas capables d’utiliser leurs FAL, une arme remarquable, comme de véritables battle rifles (comme les Marines US le font avec leur M14 en Irak et en Afghanistan), font beaucoup de bruits, mais s’accrochent assez peu au terrain. Être Boïviki [combattant tchétchène, NdlR] se s’improvise pas… Quant à l’aviation, les images montrent des Su-22 Fitter et Su-24 Fencer de plus en plus précis, face une défense antiaérienne au comble de l’inefficacité tactique.
Q – Cela devrait durer longtemps selon-vous ?
Jacques Borde – Si Kadhafi ne commet pas l’erreur de massacres à grande échelles de nature à provoquer une intervention extérieure – et, au train où vont les choses, patiemment et méthodiquement – quelques semaines, au plus. Probablement, AVANT la prochaine réunion européenne sur le sujet. Le gros problème va être Benghazi. Mais une bonne stratégie d’encerclement, et un siège en règle, à la soviétique, devrait régler définitivement le problème.
Q – Un siège à la Grozny ?
Jacques Borde – Même pas. Les insurgés (ni d’ailleurs les forces régulières) n’ont ni les moyens humains et encore moins matériels de nous faire un remake, même à échelle réduite, des batailles de Grozny.
Q – Et, au plan international ?
Jacques Borde – Arrêtons de nous faire des films. En dépit de l’onanisme médiatique de nos intellos parisiens, qui a vraiment envie de mourir pour Benghazi ? Certainement pas eux (et probablement pas les insurgés). Leur genre c’est plutôt : « Armons nous et partez ». Le seul problème, c’est que cette fois, personne n’a envie d’y aller. Il ne suffit pas de savoir tenir un stylo pour être Malraux. Tant mieux.
Pour finir, deux points positifs de cette affaire :
1. Elle aura permis à Seif el-Islam de s’affirmer, et de faire ses preuves comme homme d’État. Au pied du mur, il s’est révélé comme compétent, efficace et… mesuré.
2. L’État libyen qui, de toujours, montrait de grandes failles en terme de fonctionnement s’est réveillé et a su faire preuve d’une réactivité inattendue face à une crise grave. Apparemment, pour la Jamahiriya, les temps de l’amateurisme et d’une certaine nonchalance (même si elle faisait partie de ses charmes) appartiennent désormais au passé. Tant mieux pour la Libye et les Libyens…
CFR President: No Evidence of Impending Gaddafi Massacre; Soros’ Human Rights Watch Boasts of Ties to Rebels; US Senate Discusses Ground Troops While UK Suggests Use of Mercenaries
Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and a State Department official in the first two years of the administration of George W. Bush, rejected claims that military intervention was necessary to prevent a civilian massacre by Gaddafi’s regime. “First, it is not clear that a humanitarian catastrophe was imminent in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi,”
Tom Malinowski, Washington director of Human Rights Watch, boasted of his organisation’s activities on the ground in Libya, working with forces “who have since risen to prominence in the opposition…he insisted that intervention had indeed prevented a massacre.”
Human Rights Watch is funded by globalist financier George Soros, who is widely known to plan and support US-backed colour revolutions. Tom Malinowski was special assistant to President Bill Clinton, and senior director for foreign policy speechwriting at the National Security Council. Before working in the White House, he was a speechwriter for Secretaries of State Christopher and Albright (you know – killing 500,000 Iraqi children was ‘worth it’) and a member of the State Department’s policy planning staff.
In an article published Friday, the UK Daily Mail cited leading military figures who have proposed that Prime Minister David Cameron engage mercenaries “to train and lead the opposition forces towards the capital Tripoli in a battle to end the military stalemate.” The Daily Mail wrote: “‘It’s clear that we can’t win the war from the air,’ an impeccable military source said yesterday. ‘We will hit targets from the air and they [mercenaries] will do the work on the ground.’…“Arab countries would also pay for ex-Special Air Service men and former US Special Forces soldiers working for private security firms to train and lead the opposition forces. While serving SAS and Special Boat Service men would not be formally attached to the rebels, dozens could be given extended leave—allowing them to take lucrative private work fighting in Libya. They would act as forward air controllers, calling in allied air strikes to clear a path for a rebel advance to Tripoli.”
By Chris Marsden, 9 April 2011.
Gen. Carter Ham told the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Wednesday that US troops may have to be sent to Libya because there is little chance of the opposition Transitional National Council (TNC) defeating the forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.
Ham, who led the coalition air campaign in Libya before NATO took over, made clear that he was not personally in favour of such an outcome. He was responding to questioning from Republican senators, such as John McCain, who have been scathing towards what they call the half-hearted pursuit of the war in Libya by the Obama administration.
Asked about the chance the opposition could “fight their way” to Tripoli and replace Gaddafi, Ham replied: “Sir, I would assess that as a low likelihood.”
Pressed by McCain on whether the situation was either a stalemate or an “emerging stalemate,” Ham said, “Senator, I would agree with that at present on the ground.” A stalemate appeared “more likely” today than it did at the outset of the air campaign on March 19, he said.
McCain wants the US to drop the pretence that the direct aim of the air war is not regime-change. In his testimony, Ham said that the ousting of Gaddafi did not fall within the remit of the UN-mandated mission to protect civilians under Security Council Resolution 1973. The US wanted to rely on diplomatic and other means to force him to step down, he insisted.
But with a stalemate likely, he said, the US may consider sending troops to Libya as part of an international ground force that could aid the rebels. “I suspect there might be some consideration of that,” he told the committee.
He warned that US participation in a ground invasion was problematic, as it might erode support within the international coalition, making it more difficult, in particular, for Arab regimes to continue backing the war. “My personal view at this point would be that that’s probably not the ideal circumstance, again for the regional reaction that having American boots on the ground would entail,” he said.
Expanding NATO’s declared mission to ousting Gaddafi would necessitate a “pretty significant increase” in the military effort and “probably” require coalition troops and spies, he added. It would require “military forces to be able to act on very, very short notice.”
“We would find it more difficult to find willing partners,” he said, and it would “have a negative effect on the Arab League.”
Asked about arming and training the rebels, Ham said he had “some indication that some Arab nations are, in fact, starting to do that at present.” But he cautioned that the US needed to be sure of who would be getting weapons before it did the same. “We have some history in trying to apply military force to regime-change where we have been less than successful,” he warned.
He cited the danger that Al Qaeda militants could seize some of the estimated 20,000 shoulder-launched missiles in Libya, which was “a regional and an international concern.”
Ham’s testimony pointed to an escalation of the war, while reflecting the pressing concerns of sections of the US military and political establishment. Testimony given by others was more damaging to the US propaganda used to justify the bombardment of Libya—and received far less media attention.
Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and a State Department official in the first two years of the administration of George W. Bush, rejected claims that military intervention was necessary to prevent a civilian massacre by Gaddafi’s regime. “First, it is not clear that a humanitarian catastrophe was imminent in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi,” he said in his prepared statement to the committee.
“There had been no reports of large-scale massacres in Libya up to that point,” he continued, “and Libyan society (unlike Rwanda, to cite the obvious influential precedent) is not divided along a single or defining fault line. Gaddafi saw the rebels as enemies for political reasons, not for their ethnic or tribal associations… there is no evidence of which I am aware that civilians per se would have been targeted on a large scale.”
Turning to the demand for regime-change, he insisted, “American policymakers erred in calling explicitly early on in the crisis for Gaddafi’s removal. Doing so made it far more difficult to employ diplomacy to help achieve US humanitarian goals without resorting to military force. It removed the incentive Gaddafi might have had to stop attacking his opponents.”
The US had ensured that the civil war would escalate, Haass suggested. He added that “requiring Gaddafi’s removal actually makes it more difficult to effect the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 and stop the fighting.”
Haass warned of a public backlash: “Some humanitarian interventions may be warranted. But inconsistency is not cost-free, as it can confuse the American public and disappoint people in other countries, in the process opening us up to charges of hypocrisy and double standards.”
He spoke critically of President Obama’s contention that “it is acceptable in principle to intervene militarily on behalf of interests deemed less than vital” and to wage “wars of choice.” Haass said such wars could be justified, but they were clearly illegal.
Addressing how the war might be won, he said Obama “is clearly looking to our partners in NATO to assume the major military role and has ruled out the introduction of American ground forces.” But, he stressed, the record to date pointed to an escalation of US involvement. The no-fly zone was quickly augmented by “additional air operations designed to degrade Libyan government forces… Now there is apparent interest in arming opposition forces.”
Haass concluded: “The only way to ensure the replacement of the current Libyan regime with something demonstrably better would be through the introduction of ground forces that were prepared to remain in place to maintain order and build capacities in the aftermath of ousting the government.” He opposed such a course, arguing for a “diplomatic initiative” to bring about a ceasefire.
Dirk Vandewalle, author of A History of Modern Libya and professor at Dartmouth College, was pro-regime change. But his comments on the potentially ruinous impact of the war were revealing nonetheless. Libya has suffered terrible damage, he said, and there was a clear danger that it might “descend into a true civil war that would pit the western and eastern provinces of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica against each other.”
He warned against “unconditionally supporting” the opposition Transitional National Council. “Despite the claims that it represents the entire country,” he said, “the [TNC] so far is national once more only in its aspirations.”
He continued: “Only roughly 12 of its members are known. The remainder, claimed to geographically represent the rest of the country, are kept secret for alleged fear of retaliation by Gaddafi. Not surprising, in light of Gaddafi’s policies, none is a truly national figure who can command allegiance in all provinces and across all tribes.”
It was left to the liberal interventionists to line up behind the Republican neo-cons as the most fervent advocates of the war in Libya. Tom Malinowski, Washington director of Human Rights Watch, boasted of his organisation’s activities on the ground in Libya, working with forces “who have since risen to prominence in the opposition.”
He opposed any critical approach to the opposition, even declaring that “what we have seen unfold in Libya is not, as some have suggested, a classic civil war.” Arguing against Haass, he insisted that intervention had indeed prevented a massacre.
“When Qaddafi’s forces launched their counter-offensive against the rebels in the east in early March,” he said, “we feared that much larger scale atrocities might unfold if they reached the city of Benghazi and other opposition-held towns further east. But the Obama administration and its international allies acted soon enough to prevent this from happening.”
Turning to the question of Libyan rebel arms ending up in the hands of Islamic extremists, he said this was a “legitimate” concern, but added, “In our experience, the vast majority of people in this part of Libya want nothing to do with terrorism.”
The push to expand Western military intervention on the ground in Libya, despite an injunction in Security Council Resolution 1973 barring occupation troops, is gaining strength in Britain as well as in the US. In an article published Friday, the Daily Mail cited leading military figures who have proposed that Prime Minister David Cameron engage mercenaries “to train and lead the opposition forces towards the capital Tripoli in a battle to end the military stalemate.”
The Daily Mail wrote: “‘It’s clear that we can’t win the war from the air,’ an impeccable military source said yesterday. ‘We will hit targets from the air and they [mercenaries] will do the work on the ground.’
“Arab countries would also pay for ex-Special Air Service men and former US Special Forces soldiers working for private security firms to train and lead the opposition forces. While serving SAS and Special Boat Service men would not be formally attached to the rebels, dozens could be given extended leave—allowing them to take lucrative private work fighting in Libya. They would act as forward air controllers, calling in allied air strikes to clear a path for a rebel advance to Tripoli.”
The Daily Mail argued that inconvenient provisions of Security Council Resolution 1973 could easily be circumvented. It wrote: “Attorney General Dominic Grieve told a National Security Council meeting last month that the UK could justify assistance and even weapons to the rebels if it could be shown that they were helping to save civilian lives. The same would apply to small numbers of personnel as long as they did not constitute an ‘occupation force.’”
- 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…
- Security alert ties up US air cargo shipments By Patrick Martin. Air cargo shipments across the Atlantic and along the US East Coast were brought to a standstill Friday in a terrorism scare that included searches of cargo…
- No-fly zone: Clouding words of war By Tarak Barkawi. Phantasms from the 1990s are upon us: no-fly zones; the rhetoric of humanitarian war in Washington, Europe and the UN; guarantees that no US ground troops will…
The mainstream media has been hiding the facts and the realities on the ground in Libya. The Libyan people have been gathering in massive rallies across Libya. These rallies demonstrate the widespread support of the Libyan people for Colonel Qaddafi and their opposition of the Libyan people to NATO and the Benghazi-based Transitional Council.
Voltaire Network | Tripoli (Libya) | 25 July 2011
Friday of 01 July 2011 like many other Fridays has seen huge rallies in Tripoli’s Green Square. It is very hard to get an accurate number of the mass of people that have attended these rallies. Estimates have placed the size of the July 1st rally in Green Square at one million people or more. In Libya it is said that the rally reached about 1.7 million people. The rallies have been taking place almost weekly in Tripoli and other Libyan cities, including Sabha on July 8, 2011.
Public opinion in North America and Western Europe has been misinformed. People in Western Europe and North America are not even aware that these mass rallies have taken place. These massive rallies express the Libyan people’s patriotism and their firm opposition to NATO’s war of aggression on Libya.
The large majority of the Libyan population is opposed to the Benghazi-based Transitional Council. On the contrary the majority of the population supports Muammar Qaddafi. These rallies clearly indicate the significant popular support for Colonel Qaddafi in contrast to the standard claims of mainstream media. It has only been since July 15, 2011 that the mainstream media has begun to reverse this trend slightly, which is tied to agreement NATO is trying to secretly secure with Tripoli.
These rallies continue late into the night and have proliferated across Libya from Tripoli to Sirte. The mainstream media has either casually dismissed the significance of these massive public gatherings directed against NATO intervention or has failed to even report them.
The following are pictures of Libyans converging on Green Square on July 1, 2011. These pictures also show that the mainstream media was present and aware of these rallies. So what is preventing them from reporting the truth? Why are some of these journalists claiming that only a few thousand people attended?
It is important to note that the pictures were taken at the start of the event when the rally was not at full mass. People as far away as the Western Mountains travelled into Tripoli to participate in the event. Libyans headed throughout the day into the night towards Green Square. Highways and roads leading towards Green Square were packed. At the height of the rally, the number of people was significantly larger than what is conveyed in the pictures.
- The reports can clearly see all the Libyans going to Green Square.
- Representative of the U.S. and British press looking at the throngs going to Green Square.
- As can clearly be seen a large portion of Libyans are black-skinned.
- International press am.ong the Libyans
- The highways and roads towards Green Square are packed.
The Old Imperialist Project to Divide Libya in Three has been Executed
The War on Libya – Part 4
Voltaire, international edition
Meanwhile, the embattled Libyan ruler has once again rejected calls to resign and leave the country, saying that he will never leave the land of his ancestors who fought Italian and British colonialists.
This comes one day after officials from some 40 countries met in Turkey to discuss ways to force out Gaddafi and reinforce opposition fighters.
Press TV has conducted an interview with American Author and Historian, Webster Tarpley to further discuss the situation in Libya.
Press TV: Dr. Tarpely, first of all let’s start with the direction NATO has taken with regards to the War in Libya. If you can please open that up for us a little bit. It has been quite a while, but yet the opposition fighters still are not making advances in a more rapid fashion that might be expected of them.
Tarpley: I would have to take issue first of all by or with your terminology. You called the Benghazi Rebel Council ‘the revolutionaries.’
There are a lot of people in Tripoli area of Libya who would say that the current Gaddafi regime is the revolution and that these rebels that are attempting to overthrow him are actually the counterrevolution.
If you look at their support for monarchies and if you look at the support from imperialism and colonialism, I think there is a strong case but obviously the events of today above all, a very severe military defeat for those rebels in their attack on Brega, where their assault has been thrown back with heavy losses comes in the wake of this meeting of the contact group in Istanbul, Turkey yesterday which was the scene of really an astounding action, a real act of folly, I think, where the United States and thirty other countries have decided now that this Benghazi Rebel Council is the legitimate government of Libya.
They are going to try to loot the frozen Libyan assets for the purpose of convoying that money into the pockets of people like [President of the rebel council, Mustafa Abdul] Jalil, [the rebel’s military Chief of Staff Abd Al Fattah] Yunis, and [Head of the Council’s Executive Bureau, Mahmoud] Jibril, and [Senior Rebel Commander Khalifa] Hafter and the rest of the visible leadership of that group.
The problem that it raises is of course that it is very well known that in the military arm of the rebellion we have a very strong representation of Al-Qaeda terrorists.
People who according to the US officials definition of the US government are terrorists that would include somebody like [Abdel-Hakim] Hasadi of [the city of] Darnah, somebody like … also of Darnah and Borhani of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group [LIFG] and the United States has actually facilitated the arrival of lots of foreign fighters be they from Afghanistan or Pakistan, really the entire greater Middle East.
People have been streaming in there to join the rebel side and of course this has not escaped the attention of the opposition forces here in the United States especially in the House of Representatives you have a significant Republican majority who are extremely distrustful in particular Congressman Michael Turner, Republican of Ohio, has taken the lead in denouncing the US government decision to recognize these rebels yesterday saying it is totally premature because you still do not know who they are and of course you do not.
Of the members of the Libyan Rebel Council, the Benghazi Rebel Council only about one third of them are known, the rest of them are secret and the story is that they are threatened by Gaddafi but others would also argue [that] they are being kept secret because they are from Al-Qaeda, they are people who have been to Guantanamo Bay or prisoners of war.
Press TV: Dr. Tarpley, these are definitely perplexing details that you just mentioned. I want to talk to you about the issue of arms. Who is providing the opposition forces with arms, and is the issue of providing arms something that contradicts resolution 1973, or has that resolution just turned into a document that exudes various subjective interpretations as time goes by?
Tarpley: Well, the resolution itself of course violates the UN charter but that does not stop the French in particular but also the British and the US and other NATO countries from violating this resolution.
In particular we know that the French have set up kind of an airlift into these south western mountains, southwest of the capital Tripoli. They have been flying in and playing loads of weapons. That is a blatant violation of the UN Security Council resolution which provides for an arms embargo on everybody.
We also know that the US and the British have been shipping in weapons across the Egyptian border into that stronghold of Cyrenaica [an ancient region of northeast Libya bordering on the Mediterranean Sea] or the Benghazi, Darnah and Tobuk area.
So they are violating the US resolution. It is going to be interesting to see. The recognition of the rebels is designed to open the door to give them money but that will also violate the UN Security Council resolution.
So we are at a point now where the international anarchy could hardly be greater and I would just recall to [US Secretary of State] Mrs. Clinton [that] she may be in the position now of giving material support to Al-Qaeda and people have been impeached in the United States for less.
So Secretary of State can be impeached just like any other officer of the executive branch and there maybe some Republicans in the House who are thinking in those terms right now.
The Terrorists RAT- Gangs, the West’s so-called “REBELS”:
26 July 2011 11:18
Libyagate: NATO is the enemy of the youth
These NATO and coalition bastards working for the industrial – military complex and the bank-oil cartels are not just the enemies of the youth they are in themselves a crime against humanity just by their existence.
North Atlantic Terrorist Org (using F.U.K.-) helicopters and terrorist ground forces attacked civilians in Zliten.
Yesterday Zliten already knew that it was the focus of the military organisation, NATO entered even with Apache helicopters on the streets firing indiscriminately, while some rebels tried to enter by land.
The Libyans from Zliten took to the streets very angry by the terrorist aircraft, Apache helicopters to harass and land forces against the Zliten civilian population.
The people went out [on the streets] to protest against those governments’ support.
It is very important to see the great response from the Libyan town of Zliten after the terrorist attack on the population by the military organisation NATO with its bombs and helicopters to kill and destroy, The town was angry and out on the streets rather than the response they expected, that the terrorists would frighten the people.
Mercenary organizations forget that the Libyans defend their homes, their lives, their family. While all that those people [terrorists] fight for is money, and if they die, how will they enjoy the loot?
While the shops in Tripoli and western Libya have been instructed to reduce food prices to a token amount with the gov’t promising to reimburse the difference, in Benghazi the people were begging the terrorist leaders for money for food whilst the terrorist leaders in turn, rather than than touch their stolen, offshore banked millions, appealed for rich supporters to give money.
From early April, a letter demonstrating the close relationship between France and the council, the French intent to break international law from the get go, the division in the council even at that time and the 35% discount to France (Total) on the oil price in return for weapons.
- Libyagate: NATO is the enemy of the youth
July 26, 2011 11:18 am
- Libyagate: NATO Deliberately Bombing Civilians
July 25, 2011 5:56 am
- Libyagate: Grand Theft Nation by Satan’s Suppositories
July 24, 2011 9:17 am
- Libyagate: Unjustified – Manslaughter or Murder?
July 23, 2011 1:17 pm
- Libyagate: The Law. NATO cracked
July 22, 2011 11:25 am
Seems NATO is a bit T’d off at losing so it is taking it out on the civilians – as usual.
Perhaps Rasmussen is hoping the allied and Arab invasion forces can do what the Libyan insurgents can’t, get to Tripoli. The 2 biggest tribes have risen, that must be aroun 1.5 million lightly armed civilians. Will the NATO Nazis try to wipe them all out?Now that Jalil has sacked the Libyan tribes, all that is left is mercs and the invasion forces. Seems most of the mercs are all at sea.Has the Baroness issued a statement concerning the loss of the insurgent stronghold? About the flight of the insurgent leadership to Turkey?
Were any jets captured by the pro Gaddafis when the Benghazi airport was taken? Any word about the attack on the French aircraft carrier?
the Obeidi and Warfallah tribes have risen against the insurgents. The towns and Bengahzi between Brega and Tobruk are the most important. Once they are secured The game is finito. The emirates will be returned to regular towns, the terrorists will go back to killing US and UK soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, much better armed (Israel is complaining that arms purchased by Hamas from Libyan insurgents are arriving in Palestine…) and much wealthier ($150 mill between 15 al Qaedas for killing Younis).
“Eugene telephoned Larina in Tunisia”
So who killed Younis?
[…] – The U.S. in the face of Svoge CIA agent – he is a guide, “the Board” – along with Al-Qaeda militants. Yunis was charged that he allegedly led a double game: on the one hand, he commanded the rebel bands under Brega, on the other hand, he maintained contacts with the Libyan Government. He was killed by the mercenaries of the Al-Qaeda. Moreover, al-Qaeda militants beheaded, as they always do, Bole hundred people from the tribe Varfalla! That tribe and rose …- I think that Younis was against al-Qaida. I think he understood that the rebels have already lost, that we should negotiate with Tripoli, look out. The Libyans are now saying that he was phone conversations with Gaddafi about the conditions of the ceasefire. Leonor says – read it to you that received this morning – that “the troops, commanded by Yunis, went over to the Libyan government and fight with the mercenaries, al-Qaeda and Islamic extremists. Now part of the control Younis city, port and airport Benghazi. Al-Qaeda, mercenaries and others running in the Turf, the repressed parts of Younis. In Benghazi, the collision between the parts of Younis and the remaining mercenaries continue. Reported strong explosions in the buildings, which were the leaders of the insurgency.
[…] – Yes, it turns out, “multilayered cake”: As if all against all, but in fact the main division: for or against Gaddafi Gaddafi. So people find it easier to navigate in this mess. Therefore, one always carry a “green flag” and others … They used to be waving the royal banner, and now … And no al-Qaida militants do not recognize the flag, they have only one cry, a call …- So how will this end?- I think about that, Benghazi – in the hands of Younis parts, is confirmed. If you do not follow landing NATO …- Do you think it’s possible?- They lose! Lose! NATO members are capable of anything!
[…] – Consistently favorably. And here’s news that should be checked: Tuareg troops spotted 70 km south of Tobruk, they’re going to attack the rebels, who still is in Tobruk.In the port of Benghazi is the evacuation of foreigners. The building that housed the “Board” rebels in the fire. The ringleaders of the rebels fled to Turkey.The Libyan army moves, despite the bombing of NATO towards Benghazi.
You’ll notice when reading that Leonor is often quoted. She is a very trusted Spanish journo, often stays in Sabha and has many friends around Libya that she contacts with great regularity.
11.37am: Rebels who seized the government-held town of Ghazaia in Libya’s Western Mountains in a new offensive describe themselves as “liberators”, but there were no cheers when they rolled in, Reuters reports (thanks reader BrownMoses).
“Its estimated 5,000 residents, supporters of Muammar Gaddafi, had been transported to his stronghold Tripoli by his militiamen, leaving behind a ghost town. “We would have liked to have been welcomed here. These people all liked Gaddafi. They benefited from him,” a rebel named Majdi told the news agency, standing beside rows of houses built by Libyans aided by soft loans from the government.”
leonorenlibia.blogspot.com/ (and at her new place – Leonorenlibia.com )
Pavel from Russia informa…01/08
Hi, Eleanor! Our information
1. On Friday in Moscow there was a demonstration in support of Gaddafi. Photos: http://za-kaddafi.ru/node/2297
2.Lev Vershinin in his blog writes that the “rebels” in the mountains Nafusa move tanks and armored vehicles produced in Milan. `This is clearly not rebels driving tanks and vehicles, but the French. Now these tanks have approached Tiji, as they say, an important strategic military point, and promise to take it tonight. (As always they come with a fanfare). In the same way that a thousand times “have taken” Zliten. Last night they attempted to reach Zliten, but were defeated by the Libyan army. The rebels demand NATO to increase the bombing. They are angry that after the bombing of Libya TV, it is still broadcasting. Abdelbadr Аdel, a Nafusa rebel says that the French must understand that while Gaddafi speaks and people listen, they are impossible to beat. His words are magic because a witch living in a cave in Chad,500 years old, has bewitched.
3.This night saw NATO bombing Tripoli.
4.The Benghazi rats say they have arrested a brigade (which was released earlier from jail to 300 supporters of Gaddafi) that received orders from Mr. Shakir on TV (!?).
The NTC says it controls everything in Benghazi (!) Looks like a rave …
5.Norway withdraws its 6 aircraft from Libya. russisk.org/modules.php?name=N…—————–
Twitted last evening –
BREAKING! Gaddafi forces are surrounding Fashloom area from all entrances & preventing ppl from entering the area
[SE of Green Sq. Tripoli]
“Humorous” out-take, twitted -[LYING, STUPIDITY of the ISLAMIC_FUNDAMENTALIST REBEL-FACTION within the “OPPOSITION” ]:
“The government insurgents have gone mad, and says that Gaddafi supports African witches, so the revolution does not win”
i.e: from CLOTHCAP:
Especially angry that after yesterday’s attack on satellite dishes, Libyan TV still continue to broadcast. “The French must understand that while Gadhafi speaks, and people hear it, the victory of the revolution is impossible – said Abdelbadr Adele, 19, a rebel from the Apuseni Mountains. His speeches are charged with spells of a pagan witch from southern Chad. She is five hundred years old and she lives in the deep cave, so that we, with all our bravery, can not cope with this. But if he is silent, we prevail …”
Didn’t something like that happen in Iran, the president accusing Amadinejad of using magic to gain followers or some-such? Something in the water perhaps…
The real reasons why NATO refuses to do the right thing
Dennis South and Adam KingNATO has admitted that it has “lost hope” that its terrorists which are occupying Bengazi can defeat Libya’s valiant fighters. In addition, NATO has now become delusional, imagining that there exists, in Tripoli, “underground opponents” who will suddenly arise at the moment that NATO has sufficiently reduced “Gaddafi’s ability to defend himself.”On June 19th, the loyal and brave citizens of Libya organized a 1 million man, woman, and child gathering in Tripoli in support of their “Brother Leader” Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. That sound like a place where “underground opponents” are lurking to pounce upon Colonel Gaddafi.One observer from the Royal United Services Institute, a London think-tank, states:”I think there is … a realization that the rebels don’t really have a chance of breaking out from the east, making their way to Tripoli.”The point is, to those of us who are familiar with Libya and its leadership, we knew this from day one. The “intelligence” of NATO was based on “defectors” from Libya, from “Qaddafi’s inner circle”, and how do NATO know that those “defectors” were not leading them into a trap?The other point is that NATO has never had any intention whatsoever of “protecting civilians from Qaddafi”, because they know full well, as the Russians have revealed, from their own military spy satellites, that no massacres and no air force bombing of cities took place at all. This was mere “Tweets” on Twitter as a deliberate ruse to create confusion.NATO knew that, but wished to take advantage, not only to settle old scores, but because since the speech of Muammar Qaddafi on 23rd September 2009 at the United Nations, they decided they must silence him. Readers of Mathaba News or those who search Google will know that there are at least 8 big reasons NATO wish to overthrow the democratic government and occupy Libya.However, this one in itself, was reason enough for them to silence the one person in the world, who not only gave up power (as Nelson Mandela did in South Africa) but left behind the world’s first “Jamahiriya”, a self-governing direct participatory democracy, just 8 years after seizing power from a corrupt king in 1969.His voice calling for reform of the United Nations and abolition of the so-called Security Council, which is merely an international dictatorship tool of a few nuclear powers, was not allowed to be heard. Anyone watching that speech should observe the faces of the Libyan delegation including Musa Kusa: they were extremely unhappy, Qaddafi broke the deal with the US-UK to “shut up.”Now there is however something else preventing NATO from simply giving up and going home, after more than 12,000 flights and some 6,000 bombing and missile attacks, including hundreds aimed solely at killing Qaddafi. That something is now causing NATO to become so desperate that they are openly admitting their real intention to kill him, in the hope some locals take it up.The something that is preventing them, is pure and simple: it is a blind anger and arrogance and total frustration that the world’s biggest military alliance, with all its hi-tech weapons, can NOT kill one single man — who remains in the capital city refusing to flee his humble home — and who is still receiving international guests but NATO is unable to kill him.It really is like that: NATO cannot afford to lose face. Just as any huge bully armed with guns, knives and machetes who hates a little kid and takes a swipe at his head, and misses. He thinks it’ll only take a few swipes or shots to kill the boy, but is astounded when still 3 days later (in the case of NATO now 100 days) is still unable to hit the boy.Will he give up? NO. Because to give up means that he is not all powerful and has to accept that there is a more mighty power, God, which is Protecting the boy. No other way to explain it. But, as a die-hard disbeliever, he cannot accept that reality, cannot make amends, cannot apologize, and above all, cannot show his face ever again in the neighbourhood if it becomes known.Yet, the whole neighbourhood, and by now the whole WORLD is watching NATO and seeing, in spite of the compliant banker-corporation governments of the world and the controlled banker-elite media networks, that there is a very, very good man, a Saint even, by the name of Qaddafi, who refuses to fight back, but knows that God is on his side.
This is all well and good, because NATO in the end will be forced to start throwing larger nuclear bombs than the ones it is currently using, and in the end it will consume itself. Either that, or it has to pull out. The African Union long has had the face-saving way out for NATO and that is to simply obey AU resolutions. But again, it refuses to do that, out of racist arrogance and pride.
Take it or leave it NATO, you either say “The African Union has a road map for solving the Libya situation, we have done our job protecting civilians by bombing them, and so are now pulling out as Big White Heroes who have done our job so that the Africans can succeed in their peace and reconciliation mission”, or, you continue and not only lose your face but your entire body too.
And, by the way, do not blame Dennis South, Adam King, Mathaba, nor anyone else for your big loss. We all warned you right from the start, as did the Israeli DEBKA File analysts, that you were embarking upon a war that you could not win, even though 100 days ago we told you so, but you said “it’ll only take us two days.”
And, let us tell you this in front of the whole world, and this is confirmed by numerous Mathaba sources: you will NEVER be able to kill Qaddafi, even though you wipe out his family, so far 4 of his tiny babies and grandchildren all aged under 2, in 1986 and now again 25 years later, and his youngest son, who had no relation to politics nor business.
Not only will you not be able to kill him because he now lives in the hearts of millions and growing millions by the day, and because his works can never be shut down and are there for all to see at http://bit.ly/libyatruth at http://greencharter.com and http://algathafi.org but we also know from numerous spiritual sources that you will also be unable to kill him physically.
You don’t know Africa and Africans, and you don’t know Libya and Qaddafi. You never have and you never will. But you will see things that you will fail to understand, as you have been blinded. #
The Coalition of the Willing had come to Libya to spare civilians from Gaddafi’s murderous madness. Four months later, the Libyan crowds have deserted “Liberated Benghazi” and are staging gigantic anti-NATO demonstrations. Confronted with an unexpected political reality, the Atlantic armada has been left without a strategy. The Italians have started to pull out while the French are seeking an exit.
Voltaire Network | Tripoli (Libya) | 17 July 2011
- The Libyan Government was counting on the presence of 1 million people on 1 July 2011, in Tripoli, to protest against NATO. To the surprise of the authorities as much as for NATO, 1.7 million turned out.
111 days after the beginning of the intervention in Libya, no military solution is in sight and there is a consensus among experts that time is on the Libyan government’s side, barring a fluke or the assassination of Muammar Gaddafi.
On July 7th, the Italian cabinet halved their country’s involvement in the war effort and withdrew its helicopter-carrier. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi declared he had always been against the conflict, but was compelled by Parliament to participate.
On July 10th, French Defense Minister Gérard Longuet referred to a political solution that would involve Gaddafi’s removal to “another room of his palace with another title.” Considering there is no palace left, the first condition is purely rhetorical; as for the second, nobody can make heads or tails of it and it was probably a pathetic way out.
The political and social structures in Libya stem from the authoctonous culture and are beyond the compehension of many Westerners. They are composed of a one-chamber system of participative democracy – which is particularly effective at the local level – in conjunction with a tribal forum, which is devoid of any legislative power but serves to integrate clan solidarities into political life. To this structure must be added “Leader” figure who exerts no legal power, only moral authority. No one is compelled to obey him, but the majority of the people do, just as they would spontaneously obey a senior member of their own family. On the whole, the political system runs smoothly and people display no fear of the police, except on occasions such as a coup attempt or the Abou Salim prison riot, both of which were violently repressed.
Such clarifications ought to shed light on the preposterous character of the war objectives set forth by the Coalition of the Willing.
Officially, the intervention of the Coalition was carried out in compliance with a Security Council decision to protect civilian victims from a massive crackdown. However, at present, the Libyan people are convinced that such a crackdown never took place and that the Libyan air force never attacked any residential area either in Benghazi or in Tripoli. That portion of the population who believed at first the information relayed through international television networks now thinks very differently. In the meantime, people have had the chance to obtain direct testimonies from family and friends scattered throughout the country and have reached the conclusion that it was all a disinformation campaign.
On this and other issues, world opinion is divided between those who believe the US version and those who do not. As far as I am concerned, I currently reside in a Tripoli neighborhood reputed for its hostility towards Gaddafi, which allegedly revolted against him and was bombarded by the national air force at the beginning of the conflict. I am in a position to attest that there is absolutely no evidence of such events … except for a charred vehicle. The only signs of any bombings concern government buildings which were destroyed by NATO missiles at a later stage.
Be that as it may, the principal NATO leaders have openly evoked another aim of this war, which certain members of the Coalition appear reluctant to endorse: Col. Gaddafi’s resignation, a euphemism for “regime change“. This has opened the door to a realm of confusion. On one hand, such a requirement has no legal foundation under the relevant UN resolutions nor is it in any way linked to the declared objective of protecting civilian populations. On the other hand, Col. Gaddafi’s resignation is neither here nor there since he does not exercise an institutional function, but only a moral authority derived from the social, and not political, structures. Finally, by what right are NATO members standing in the way of a democratic process and pretend to decide for the Libyan people that one of its leaders must be removed?
This confusion in fact reveals that the war is driven by unavowed motives which are not shared by all the members of the Coalition of the Willing.
The principle of simultaneously attacking Libya and Syria was rubberstamped by the US Government in the week that followed the attacks of September 11, 2001. It was publicly announced for the first time by John Bolton, then Under-Secretary of State, in his 6 May 2002 speech entitled “Beyond the Axis of Evil“. It was also subsequently confirmed by General Wesley Clark during a famous television interview on 2 March 2007, during which the former NATO chief presented the list of countries slated for successive US attacks over the coming years.
Within the framework of their strategy for “Remodeling the Greater Middle East“, the Straussians  had planned to start by attacking Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran, then to extend the remodeling process to the Levant and North Africa by attacking Libya, Syria and Lebanon and, in the third stage, to take on Somalia and Sudan with a view to remodeling East Africa.
The attack against Iran having been deferred for obvious military considerations, they fast-forwarded to the second stage irrespective of the events in Benghazi, whether real or imaginary. The Coalition of the Willing is bogged down in an adventure that it did not want and which escapes its control.
The US strategy, put on track by France and the United Kingdom – again partners like in the good old days of the Suez expedition –, rests on a particularly acute analysis of the Libyan tribal system. Knowing that the members of certain tribes – particularly the Warfalla – had been barred from occupying high-ranking positions ever since the aborted coup of 1993, NATO was to fuel their frustrations, arm and use them as a lever to overthrow the regime and put in place a pro-western government. According to Silvio Berlusconi, during a meeting of allied members held on 19 March, Messrs. Sarkozy and Cameron allegedly stated that “the war would come to an end when, as was anticipated, the Tripoli population would rise up against the current regime“.
This strategy reached its zenith on 27 April when 61 tribal chiefs launched an appeal in favor of the National Transitional Council. It should be noted that already then it was no longer of question of massacres actually attributed to the “regime“, both in Beghazi and Tripoli, but of its intention to perpetrate them. The cosigners of the appeal thanked France and the European Union for having prevented a carnage foretold, not for having halted one in the making.
Since the appeal, in a continuous and uninterrupted manner, the tribes in the opposition have rallied around the government of Tripoli and their respective chiefs have vowed allegiance to Muammar Gaddafi in public. In reality, this process had already started much earlier and was showcased on 8 March when all the tribal chiefs went to pay tribute to the Libyan leader at the Hotel Rixos, in the midst of western journalists transformed into human shields and dumbfounded by this new provocation.
This situation can easily be explained : Gaddafi’s internal opposition had no motive for overthrowing the regime before the Benghazi incidents. The 27 April appeal was based on information that the authors now realize was tainted. As a result, each of them has joined the government in the struggle against foreign aggression. According to the Islamic culture, those rebels who demonstrated their sincerity were automatically pardoned and incorporated in the national forces.
For the purposes of this analysis, it makes no difference whether the repressive methods attributed to the Gaddafi regime is a historical fact or a fabrication of western propaganda. What matters is to know what is the stance of the Libyans as a soverign people at present.
At this point, a reminder about the balance of political power is called for. The National Transitional Council (NTC) has been incapable of constituting a social base. Its provisional capital Benghazi used to be a city of 800 000 inhabitants. In February, hundreds of thousands turned out to celebrate its creation. Today, the “city liberated by the rebels” and “protected by NATO” is virtually a lifeless agglomeration with barely 15 000 inhabitants left, most of whom are people who don’t have the means to leave. The Benghazis did not flee the fighting; they fled from the new regime.
On the contrary, the “Gaddafi regime” was capable of mobilizing 1.7 million people for a rally in Tripoli on 1 July and has recently pledged to get involved in the organization of regional demonstrations every Friday. Last week, more than 400 000 rallied in Sabha (in the South) and a similar crowd was expected to gather in Az Yawiyah (in the West). It should be noted that these demonstrations are staged against NATO which has so far killed more than one thousand of their compatriots, destroyed the country’s non-oil infrastructures and stopped all supplies through a naval blockade. They center around the support for Gaddafi as an anti-colonialist leader, but don’t necessarily signify a retroactive approval of all his policies.
In the final analysis, the Libyan people have pronounced themselves. For them, NATO did not come to protect them but to conquer their country. It is Gaddafi who protects them against Western aggression.
Under the circumstances, NATO is devoid of a strategy. Not even a “Plan B”. Nothing. NTC defections are so massive that, according to most experts, the number of “rebel forces” has dropped to between 800 and 1 000 combatants, armed to the teeth by NATO, but incapable of playing a significant role in the absence of popular support. It is very likely that there are more NATO Special Forces commandos on the ground than the number of Libyan combatants they are supposed to oversee.
The Italian retreat and the declarations of the French Defense Minister are not surprising. In spite of its military fire power without precedent in History, the NATO armada has lost this war. Not on the military level of course, but because it forgot that “war is the continuation of politics by other means” and that it was off the mark politically. The shrieks from Washington, which readily reprimanded the French minister who refuses to lose face, will not make the slightest difference.
 Note by the Editor : The disciples of Leo Strauss.
The Sorman massacre
One of the options discussed is that Gaddafi will stay in Libya but it is unacceptable that he should completely remove himself from domestic political life. He is the father of the great JAMAHIRIYA!
BUT the USA, by word of OBAMA, vows to continue fighting and bombing until all the Gadhafi’s are either killed or out of Libya:
How would Americans feel if they knew the Obama administration just agreed to hand people affiliated with a designated terrorist group a $30 billion dollar check and recognize them as the legitimate rulers of Libya?
By Tara Servatius
Things weren’t looking so good for the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group back in 2004 when they were designated a foreign terrorist group by the State Department. In chilling testimony, then-CIA Director George Tenet warned the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 that even if Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda was completely destroyed, “a global network of Islamic extremists bent on killing Americans had emerged.” Tenet listed the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) as one of those groups.
In 2007, the LIFG formally joined al-Qaeda, an event so well documented that even Reuters covered it. Its goals, which it is now close to achieving thanks to airpower help from President Obama and NATO, include killing Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, setting up an Islamic caliphate in Libya and waging international jihad.
The known leaders of the Libyan rebel forces on the ground are all former LIFG fighters, some with documented personal connections to al-Qaeda. The Transitional National Council, which the Obama administration recognized last week as the official government of Libya, is packed with pro-LIFG activists, lawyers who have advocated for imprisoned LIFG fighters, and Islamic scholars from LIFG strongholds.
Something smells strongly of jihad here.
What Americans have been told about Libya is that there were some protests, some people rebelled, and Gaddafi started killing them, so we had to intervene. The media never got around to explaining that the people behind the “Day of Rage” protests in Libya that kicked off the civil war were supporters of the more than 1,000 LIFG fighters who were killed in a prison massacre in 1995 by Gaddafi after they attempted an uprising. Gaddafi had jailed them to halt their jihadist takeover of the country and save his own skin.
The LIFG has waged jihad against American forces before. Documents captured by allied forces in 2007 show LIFG fighters made up the second-largest cohort of jihadists battling in Iraq, after Saudi Arabia. After that, it appears that many of their military leaders transferred their expertise to Libya.
Gaddafi is a brutal dictator with a long history of support for terror, but his ruthless zeal for taking out the LIFG and their fellow jihadists in the post-9/11 era was one of the reasons he was able to forge a relationship with the U.S. during the Bush administration.
But that was then. In a bizarre twist that defies explanation, under Obama, Gaddafi’s repression of LIFG sympathizers and allied jihadist rebel groups -the very people Tenet once warned us about- is now being used by NATO and the Obama administration to justify taking Gaddafi out and turning over the country’s wealth to the LIFG-connected leadership.
Over the past few years, Gaddafi made a series of fatal errors. As part of a goodwill gesture aimed at quieting civil unrest in the deeply Islamic eastern part of the country, the Gaddafi family released hundreds of imprisoned LIFG fighters. They immediately took up arms against his regime, declaring the eastern part of the county an Islamic caliphate. Gaddafi had largely beaten the rebels and their sympathizers into submission when the unthinkable happened and the U.S. and NATO decided to intervene on their behalf, not his.
Allegedly, this was to save some civilians or something.
Oddly though, one of the first things the U.S.-led coalition did when it invaded Libya in March was to help the rebels capture the oil fields. If Libya’s radical Islamists can get their hands on that oil revenue, they will control oil fields capable of generating $34 billion worth of black gold a year. You can sure fund a lot of jihad with that.
Earlier this year, a debate broke out over whether there were al-Qaeda fighters in the rebel ranks. The answer the Washington establishment settled on was that there were “flickers” here and there.
But everyone was asking the wrong question.
A better question would have been about the extent to which LIFG fighters were leading the ground battle.
It is well-documented that a handful of former Gaddafi military leaders oversaw the rebellion in Libya. But the actual training of troops and fighting on the ground was largely led by LIFG veteran fighters fresh from battling U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. Among them were LIFG veteran fighters such as Abdul-Hakim al-Hasadi, who has admitted to fighting allied forces in Afghanistan and was turned over to Libya by the U.S. after his capture in 2002.
His field commander on the front lines, Salah al-Barrani, is also a well-known LIFG fighter. Before serving as a Libyan rebel commander, former Guantanamo inmate Sufyan Ben Qumu, who was transferred to Libya in 2007, was named to the military committee of the LIFG in between stints training with al-Qaeda and fighting alongside the Taliban.
Fewer than half of the 33 members of the Transitional National Council (TNC), which the LIFG-led rebels now say they answer to, are even publicly known. The rest have gone unnamed, supposedly to protect their families. Several of those who are known have ties to or were supporters of the LIFG, did legal work for LFG fighters or advocated on their behalf when they were repressed by Gaddafi.
A graduate student at the Monterey Institute of International Studies who did an extensive technical analysis of the new Libyan leadership warned that the radical Islamists are now one of three groups vying for power among the Obama-recognized Libyan leadership, and that TNC members already sympathetic to them might ally themselves with the radical jihadists to grow their power.
At stake? Again, $30 billion in Gaddafi-frozen assets that the U.S. promised to turn over to the TNC, and Libya’s oil.
Senior militants in online chat rooms monitored by the West seem to know the score, and are urging a patient, long-term approach rather than a quick revolution, The Australian reports: “One forum leader warns that declaring an Islamic emirate in Libya would prompt a Western invasion, and stresses instead that they should build up their military forces, ‘educate the people’ on the need for an Islamic state, ‘and then declare the emirate, with weapons, economy and a people ready to fight for Allah.’”
That should be no problem with the billions provided by Obama and NATO to fund it all.
Tara Servatius is radio talk show host at NewsTalk 1110 WBT in Charlotte.
© REUTERS/ Zohra Bensemra
Yelena Suponina, Moscow News political commentator, for RIA Novosti
A chance to end the conflict in Libya appeared following talks in Moscow with Muammar Gaddafi’s envoy, Foreign Minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi. They lasted until late in the evening on July 20, and continued during the first half of the day on the 21st, up until the guest departed for the airport. Official reports about the results of his visit are not very informative, but certain details have come to light concerning the secret settlement plan for Libya.
The ruling five of the future Libya
International mediators, including Russia, have persuaded the warring parties to discuss the political future of Libya. This is what the guest from Tripoli discussed with his Russian colleague, Sergei Lavrov during his visit to Moscow. According to our information, the Libyan government and the rebels have agreed in principle to establish a kind of united transitional ruling council. It should include two reputable politicians from each side; these four will elect a fifth, a neutral, though influential figure that will head this transitional body.
The African Union and the United Nations — the main mediators in the settlement — suggested this scenario, and Russia supported it. On July 20, Lavrov had an urgent conversation with the Secretary-General’s special envoy to Libya, Abdel-Elah Al-Khatib from Jordan. Having visited Tripoli two weeks ago, he was pessimistic about the prospects of a settlement. He formed this impression following talks with the Libyan prime minister and the foreign minister.
But since then, the positions of the conflicting parties have improved. The Libyans have always expressed a desire for peace. The main task of the mediators is to help achieve this. It would be great if other international players did not interfere with these efforts. Unfortunately, it seems that among the NATO countries taking part in the war, there are those who would like it to continue until the complete annihilation of Gaddafi himself, and his regime.
GADDAFI HAS DONE NOTHING TO BE ARRESTED FOR
During his trip to Moscow, the Libyan foreign minister did not object to the suggested plan. He acted on instructions from Col. Gaddafi, although one of the opposition’s main conditions is that neither he nor his son Saif al-Islam should take part in the proposed transitional council.
Following the rules of the diplomatic game, the Libyan foreign minister has admitted that the departure of Gaddafi from the political scene is an issue that discussed rationally in open dialogue with an understanding of the Libyan State of the JAMAHIRIYA, what it is and how it operates. One must also guarantee al-Gaddafi’s safety. He told reporters that this issue had not even been discussed, and in this case he did not violate the truth, because these issues are more implied and read between the lines than discussed, more so now that the main goal is to end the war.
On 20 July, Western capitals made several statements to the effect that Gaddafi may be given guarantees for a “peaceful retirement”. “One of the options discussed is that Gaddafi will stay in Libya but only if he completely removes himself from domestic political life. We are waiting for this before starting the political process for a ceasefire,” French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said on 20 July. (This is unacceptable. al-Gaddafi has all the right to be heard and speak, as he is the originator of the Green Charter movement known as the JAHAMIRIYA!)
He even hinted that with luck, the problem of Gaddafi’s arrest with a warrant from the International Criminal Court may be resolved. “Certain procedures should be continued, but a decision on potential conclusions should be discussed during talks,” Juppe said. White House spokesman Jay Carney reiterated the need for Gaddafi’s removal from power: “He needs to remove himself from power […] and then it’s up to the Libyan people to decide.” (But Jay Carney still cannot comprehend that al-Gaddafi gave up all “power” in 1977 to the people of Libya, when the great JAMAHIRIYA began to be established ! This is celebrated every year on 02 MARCH within Libya.)
The best scenario for ending the war
The fact that talks between government forces and the rebels have begun is testament to this much sought-after progress. The Russian president’s envoy to Africa Mikhail Margelov said on 20 July that the warring factions had an important meeting in Ethiopia: “They have agreed to sit down at the negotiating table without any pre-conditions, and this is an indisputable sign of success. This is the result of several months of mediation by Russia and the African Union.” He confirmed that the warring parties had worked out “an optimal ceasefire scenario for Libya.”
It is worth noting that Moscow is now in contact with both sides. On 21 July, the Emergencies Ministry sent an aircraft with rice, sugar and canned fish to rebel-controlled Benghazi in the east of Libya. This is the third shipment since the start of the war. Earlier in July, goods were also delivered to Benghazi, and before that humanitarian aid was sent to government-controlled Tripoli.
It’s clear, though, that to stop the war in Libya it is necessary not only to reconcile the Libyans with each other but also to cool the hotheads at NATO headquarters, who are still bent on bringing the war to an unequivocal outcome, despite the emerging difficulties.
According to Anatoly Yegorin, professor of the Russian Academy of Science’s Institute of Oriental Studies and the author of the newly-released book, The Unknown Gaddafi, “In that scenario, hostilities may continue for a long time. The Libyans should decide for themselves what political line to follow. It is useless to impose something external on them.”
Al-Obeidi left Moscow for India in the afternoon of 20 July to continue consultations on a peaceful settlement of the conflict. The Libyan government believes influential Asian countries could join Russia and African states in an effort to persuade NATO to pursue a ceasefire.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
The Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Security Council, Ambassador Churkin and ask him to revoke UNSC 1973. The numbers are as follows: +1 212 861 4903 (His Secretary/Assistant) AND +1 212 861 4327 (the Press Office)
|The Eighth Wonder Of The World
The Great Libyan Manmade River Project
If NATO’s contribution to protecting civilians is bombing their water supply then the world community will respond to this heinous war crime, whether or not the politicians do.
by zhurnalistTimothy Bancroft-Hinchey
Pravda.RuA NATO terrorist attack has hit a water pipes factory in al-Brega, murdering six guards, this being the factory which makes pipes for the great man-made irrigation system across the desert which brings water to seventy per cent of Libyan homes, according to sources in Libya. The factory was hit after the water supply network was destroyed on Friday.Since when is a water pipes factory in al-Brega a legitimate target to impose a no-fly zone to protect civilians? Sine when is the water supply pipeline itself a legitimate target?NATO has committed another war crime, targeting a civilian water supply network which brings water to 70% of Libya’s population, according to Pravda.Ru sources in Libya. The general manager of the Man Made River Corporation which controls the pipeline reports it was hit in a NATO strike on Friday. In another clear violation of the law, a consignment from Italy of 19 000 AK-47’s was caught in Ajdabiyah by the Libyan authorities, according to Libyan military sources.The international community has two choices: to turn a blind eye like cowards and allow NATO to murder Libyan children, murder Libyan civilians and support terrorists with their strikes – we have received information that white phosphorous is being used against Libyan government positions now that NATO is getting desperate- remember Napalm anyone?? The second option is for the international community to use the proper channels to bring pressure on NATO itself and on the politicians in its member states to stop this murderous atrocity, this outrage against civilization and international law, now.You vote for this campaign? Then you are a child murderer, or sympathize with child murderers. Cameron, Obama and Sarkozy have the blood of hundreds of innocent people on their hands.#
A Mathaba Africa News Editorial on Libya and NATO
Dennis South and Adam King
Months ago, when I first saw Brother Leader Colonel Gaddafi speak at Bab El Aziziyah, I thought that perhaps he had lost his mind. I had not kept up with him over the years, as I once had. After I watched him speak, I said to myself, “Can this really be the Gaddafi I once read about?” Rather than assume that he had lost his mind, I began to catch up on my reading. Within a week, I discovered that, as usual (except on a much bigger scale) all of the media reports that I had seen were false.
I then began to understand why Gaddafi was speaking so angrily: He is a man! He is a Bedoin! He is not going to roll over for the northern white countries, just because they say that he must roll over.
I then began to read about the great progress that he had made for Libya: 90% literacy; free college; free housing; free land and seeds; No. 53 on the United Nations Index of Human Development; equality for Libyan women; a monthly oil-revenue-sharing stipend for each Libyan of $1000 a month in their bank accounts; highest standard of living in all of Africa, and on and on and on. How surprised I was!
Then I began to read about Gaddafi’s deep, deep, deep development projects in Africa. I read about how he increased profits by 80% for one country’s coffee industry, making it independent by providing machines that allowed that country to process its own coffee and coffee products, rather than sell the raw coffee to Europe, and thus lose a ton of money. I read about the rice fields in Mozambique, I think. I read that every time a rice field is created, 100,000 more jobs are created for Africans.
I read that Gaddafi saved Africa $500,000,000–half-a-billion dollars a year that Africa had formerly paid to Europe for satellite service. I read that Gaddafi put up the first serious sum of money for the purchase of Africa’s own satellite, and how furious Europe was in losing that $500,000,000 a year.
I then read about the African Central Bank with Lagos headquarters that Gaddafi was going to create, as well as an African Investment Bank in Sirte, and an African Monetary Fund with HQ in Yaounde, all to start business on 1st September 2011. And that now the U.S. and E.U. have stolen the $32 billion contribution from Libya for the $42 billion start-up fund, for this African economic project that would free the continent from the World Bank and the IMF. Along with a total around $200 billion stolen from Libya with the U.S. and E.U. freezing all Libya’s money abroad.
I read that Gaddafi was going to create a new currency called “The Afro,” which would be backed by Libyan oil, and that all of these economic ventures were designed to create a strong and independent Africa.
I then began to read how the northern countries were going bankrupt, and had become desperate to find ways to save themselves from economic and social ruin. It was then that it all became clear to me: “Africa must be subdued, and that Gaddafi guy had to be killed.” My surprise was not that Gaddafi was a revolutionary. I had known that for decades. But what I had not known was that
Gaddafi’s vision of a united, strong, and independent Africa was not limited to mere ideological rhetoric and posturing. Gaddafi had done it.
His words were being put into effect. He began building the dream of a United States of Africa, not simply just talking about it using revolutionary words.
Here is my message to any and all Libyan representatives that are engaged in, or will be engaged in, “negotiations” with the United States, France, England or any NATO country that is beginning to talk about “negotiations”: You cannot, and must not, “negotiate” your very soul. Who is Gaddafi? He is the very soul of Libya. Gaddafi is the war against Italy that lost 1 million Libyans. Gaddafi is the man that used the wealth of Libya for the people, and brought Libya up to be one of the most powerful countries on earth (Certainly the U.S. believes that, otherwise it wouldn’t be bombing Libya, obviously deeply afraid of Libya’s growing influence). Gaddafi is the man who gave you your form of government. Gaddafi is your soul.
It is difficult for me, sitting here in an air-conditioned office, giving my “advice” to you, while you, on the other hand, are faced with the satanic and barbarous bombardment of your country, daily, by the single most powerful and most brutal and beastly and heartless military alliance in world history, NATO. Nevertheless, despite my feelings in this regard, I have no choice but to “advise” that you tell France, the U.S., Britian and any other NATO country to go to hell, as the brave young Libyan woman on this video did: http://mathaba.net/news/?x=627621 (see more at www.bit.ly/LibyaTruth).
Is she braver than you? If she is, then I suggest that she be appointed as the chief negotiator of the Libyan Jamahiriya. [By the way, the reason that I have the word “negotiations” in quotes, above, is because, in truth, there is no such thing as negotiations in this matter. This is not as if two countries were arguing over water rights in an area of the world where it was difficult to see who owned which waters. That would be something to negotiate about. But, in truth, if NATO had any morals (it does not), it would simply leave, and apologize. It had no business attempting to force its will on Libya, and then, towards the end, proclaim, “Okay, now we must negotiate.” Libya was not bothering anybody before NATO stuck its vicious nose inside Libya, sniffing for money!]
Who is more brave? That Libyan young woman. That Libyan young lady would walk to Bengazi, if given any kind of gun, and attempt to solve this problem herself. What is she asking for? She is asking for her dignity and for the dignity not only of the people of Libya, but for all the people of Africa. In truth, she is asking for the dignity of all oppressed people the world over.
What did she say? Listen to what she said in that video. She said, “Obama, keep bombing, keep bombing, keep losing your money!!! We’re not afraid!!! We are with Muammar Gaddafi!!!”
If that “little girl” is ready to accept the continued bombing of Libya, then what about you, the grown men of The Revolution; of The Jamahiriya? What of you? Will you stand with her, and refuse the devil’s request that Gaddafi “step down?” And if you cannot do that, then you can at least tell the devils the truth: That Gaddafi gave up any seat of authority for himself in 1977. Tell them that. It is easy to simply tell the truth. Tell them that, since Gaddafi has already given up authority in 1977, then the issue of his “stepping down” does not exist. And you cannot “negotiate” about a non-existent issue.
Here is what they really want: They want you to stomp on Gaddafi’s right of free speech. That’s what they’re asking you to do. Yet, at the same time, they laud themselves, especially the U.S., as the greatest examples of free speech on earth. They tell the world that the West is the very center of free speech. But, when it comes to Gaddafi, they are telling you that you must never allow Gaddafi to speak again. And they have time and again censored and taken off the web Libyan news sites, and www.algathafi.org the web site of Gaddafi.
And can you really stand in front of that proud young Libyan woman and tell her, “I am so sorry, but we cannot allow Gaddafi to speak anymore in Libya. We cannot allow him to pump the Libyan people up with pride. We cannot allow his voice to be heard by you, little girl, ever again, no matter how much you love him; no matter how much we love him; no matter how much the people of the entire African continent love him; and no matter how much the world loves him. See, little girl, the United States has spoken. And when the United States speaks, we all have to listen, and we have to do what the United Stays says.”
Can you tell that to that young lioness? No, you cannot. And if you think that you can, then watch that video over and over again. It is better to die free than to live a slave. And that is the message that that the Libyan Lioness and a million others like here are giving to you and to the world: She would rather DIE than lose Gaddafi!
Is there a new Kalima? My understanding is that the Kalima says, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger.” Is the new Kalima, “Three is no God but Sarkozi, and NATO is his Messenger?” Is that the new Kalima? Or is it, “There is no God but Obama, and NATO is his Messenger?” I have not heard of these new Kalimas. Nor has that Libyan Woman.
I urge you representatives of Libya to ignore the U.S.’s mafia-request, and to stand with Gaddafi, and to stand with that young Daughter of the Revolution–that Libyan Lioness, who is prepared to die for Libya; for The Revolution; for The Jamahiriya, and for Brother Leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi!!
The northern countries must not be allowed to assume that they can get their way by bombing and attempting to terrorize the Libyan people. Believe me when I tell you this: Soon the people of the world are going to pour out into the streets. It’s already beginning to happen in the United States, especially the huge gathering that will occur in Washington, D.C., on October 6th. Let them keep bombing. Their continued bombing will, in time, destroy them and destroy NATO. Have faith in your God. Have faith in The Revolution. Have faith in The Jamahiriya. And have faith in what the leader of The Revolution, Colonel Gaddafi, said at Bab El Aziziya. Have faith and hold strong!
Libyan representatives, I am certain that your backs should be at least as strong as the back of that Daughter of the Revolution. I am certain that, because you are grown men and women, you have a stronger understanding of where Libya stands at this moment in human history: dead center of the next shift in human conciousness. You cannot let that Daughter of the Revolution down. You cannot let Libya down. You cannot let yourselves down. You cannot let Gaddafi down. You cannot let Africa down. And you cannot let the world down. STAY STRONG!!!
In every war comes a time when each side is tired. The one that will win, is the one that does not give up!
Information from the ground in Libya is very clear. Here is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth: no conjecture, no myths and no propaganda. The fresh news, crystalline pure. No hype, no lies. Ladies and gentlemen, the corporate media have been lying about Libya.
NATO’s remit is to protect civilians from being attacked by the Libyan Armed Forces. There is not yet a shred of evidence that such was happening, indeed the evidence is that the terrorists who NATO is supporting perpetrated massacres (Google up Libya rebels + massacre) and then blamed them on the Libyan Government.
Google up Libya rebels + images. Are these unarmed civilians?
Has any journalist who wrote or stated that the Libyan government is attacking civilians actually bothered to speak to people inside Libya? Erm…
Tell you what. Go to Facebook and ask America’s Cynthia McKinney, ex-candidate for the President of the USA, who has been there. And now today’s truth.
Why is NATO bombing Libyan Army positions so that the terrorists (whose main organization is banned by the UK) can advance? Why is the USA aiding Al-Qaeda terrorists? Why is David Cameron spending MILLIONS per day on slaughtering children in hospitals (what, your press hasn’t said?) and then his government says he cannot afford treatment for breast cancer?
Isn’t it illegal to take sides in an internal conflict?
The NATO bombing campaign has united the people of Libya in a bond of seething hatred and mutual support. Colonel Gaddafi could have launched horrendous strikes against NATO countries, but he didn’t. He said “Let us give them a chance”.
The Warfala tribe is moving to the Mountains in the West to dislodge terrorist elements there. Brega is firmly in the hands of Libyan Government forces despite western media lies it had fallen. The terrorists were routed, and many western mercenaries and soldiers were captured. They are being treated humanely, many are French and British.
In al-Brega 400 terrorists were liquidated, 900 wounded. There proceeds a conflict in Benghazi among groups of terrorists from different factions and the civilian population in Benghazi that is starting to revolt against the terrorists, who are supported by NATO.
It appears that Messrs. Cameron, Sarkozy and…what’s his name? The American chappie…have gotten way in over their heads for different reasons.
How about NATO pulls out now? Claim the no fly zone was successfully implemented and allow the Libyans and African Union to sort it out for themselves.
If not, ancient fault lines are going to be drawn up, tribal warfare will proceed (Gaddafi has stood against this), Al-Qaeda will take advantage of it and
as Muammar Gaddafi said, NATO will create a Somalia at the gates of Europe.
Maybe this would favour the USA in destabilising Europe and the Euro (after all the White House states clearly that NATO’s involvement saves the
US taxpayer money and US families lives…yes they actually said that) but what about Europe?
And do Cameron and Sarkozy speak for Europe? No? Did the people of Europe vote for NATO? No? Therefore it is unconstitutional.
..Colonel Qaddafi, who has so far repelled four months of Nato-led air strikes and a rebel campaign against his 41-year rule, has questioned the value of the movements in Egypt and Tunisia.
Delivering a radio address to Egyptians on the anniversary of the coup in 1952 that ended Egypt’s monarchy and paved the way for the late Gamal Abdel Nasser to take power, Colonel Qaddafi said: “Why did you undertake the revolution? Tunisia and Egypt, what did you accomplish? Substitution of one government regime for another?”
On the occasion of the birthday of Arab African hero Gamal Abdul Nasser of Egypt, the Libyan historic revolutionary leader gave a speech, the full text is translated here by Mathaba
You have seen the problems in America now and in Britain, and you have those problems too and they are present in every country, everyone wants to have a big share in the media which is funded from abroad, foreign countries make a TV station in your country, a newspaper in your country and a political party in your country.
That is not Democracy, demo-cracy means people sitting on the chairs, the word cracy was taken from the Arabic language or the Persian language, which we have taken from them, the chair was mentioned in the Quran, the word cracy (chairs) could be Persian, people on the cracy (chairs), when all the people sit on the chairs then it is called demo-cracy, and when people don’t sit on the chairs then it is not democracy, then it is called political party cracy, government cracy, class cracy, but not democracy.
Democracy means people on the cracy (chairs), so how can [all the] people sit on the chairs? People organize themselves into basic People’s Conferences, all of them, as the political system passed [historically] through the following stages: the monarch stage – this is prior or after the rudimentary stage – the first stage being monarchy, the king emerged, a person emerges who could own the land and what’s on it. This is monarchy. This ended, development ended it, it is no longer permissible for anyone to own the land and what’s on it, only in the Persian Gulf, since it is not Arab.
The second stage was the republic (Arabic: Jumhuriyah), Jumhur – plus iyah – means people appoint a king, a president of the republic, who is [in fact] a king appointed by the people for a short or a long period of time, the same thing.
The important thing is that the second stage was the republic is when people began to select who governs them, and the republic continued. The republic has become dull and failed and the world is suffering [under this system] and the masses destroyed.
The third stage was the Jamahiriya, Jamahir (masses) came, since Jamahir – plus iya – becomes Jamahiriya, the first Jumhur that became Jumhuriyah, and the second Jamahir which leads to Jamahiriya, and this is the final stage and the end of the road for the problem of power, the power becomes for the people, how?
It becomes the Jamahiri system with the basic people’s conferences, the people’s conferences appoint people’s committees, the conferences decide and the committees execute [carry out the decisions], there is the popular security, there is the armed people, the people’s control, and the inciting force we call it the revolutionary committees, or the movement of the revolutionary committees that incites the people to seize power until they practice authority.
Why did you take action that toppled Hosni Mubarak? Why? We were expecting the establishment of the Jamahiriya [self-governing masses society] whether in Tunisia or in Egypt, these are the people just as The Green Book calls for to seize power without weapons and without violence, just as the explanations of The Green Book indicate, that the masses reject the political system and stage a sit-in until the political system is toppled and they replace it.
This happened in Libya in the 1969 Revolution that was carried out by the army, and people heard that the monarchy political system was toppled, the government and representative council were cancelled and there was a void, people across Libya formed the people’s conferences [ مؤتمر] on their own.
We anticipated that when you toppled the people [earlier this year, that you would] replace them with a popular revolution, establishment of the Jamahiri [direct participatory democracy] system, following the disruption and destruction which you have carried out. But to put in place another president, you might have done better keeping the previous president [Mubarak] until he had finished his term then elected another president without demonstrations or sit-ins in the Tahrir square.
What does that mean? Do you want to bring a super-president? Will he be better than Mubarak? As for Mubarak, he does not deserve this maltreatment. We should not be an ungrateful nation. As Machiavelli said Rome was not an ungrateful nation. When Roman commanders lost a war they were honoured, rewarded and sent into retirement.
Who will be loyal to Egypt after this end of Hosni Mubarak [of Egypt] or even Zine El Abidine [of Tunisia]? Who will be loyal to Egypt? Hosni Mubarak was exposing himself at risk to defend you, and to die for you. He was a pilot fighting Israeli forces that attacked Egypt. Instead of being honoured, he is insulted. Who will sacrifice more than Hosni Mubarak?
Hosni Mubarak went to sacrifice himself for you and your country before you were born. He has got just two children because he was a pilot and may die at any time in battle in defense of Egypt, so he decided to have only two children to be raised by their mother, while other Egyptians have got ten or more. Every Egyptian family consists of ten, twenty or fifty. The wife is as a school followed by a queue of children. Is it reasonable?
This is the end of who sacrifice for you. I know Hosni Mubarak. He is a poor man, modest and loves you. I know him. If he did not love you I would have attacked him and exposed him like other rulers. But I know him. He begged. He came to me and asked me for ferries, when the ferry sank. He went to Saudi Arabia to beg for other ferries. He also asked me and others for train locomotives.
Who will travel on these locomotives? Will he travel in them? They are for you. Sometimes we have no morals, just as when we insult (Nasser). Abdel Nasser a hero of the Arab nation; leader of the Arab nation; a great man who struggled against colonialism and Zionism; who dared and removed the royal system, and cancelled a mistake of (Bakri) and the Egyptian people, who have brought the revolution and appointed an Ottoman officer from Albania to govern Egypt as if there was no men in Egypt to rule the country.
They came with Muhammad Ali. Muhammad Ali’s family ruled Egypt 150 years. The family owned the whole country till Egypt became a manor of Muhammad Ali because of this mistake. Then Nasser came and said ”this cannot be. It is nonsense. We, Egyptians, are we men to be ruled by an Albanian officer for 150-years generation after generation?!
Now, without plenty of space, military, economic and security power which country can live. The 53 African countries can’t live. No one of them can face the storms of this age only when the African Union becomes as the U.S, the European Union, or the Russian Federation. A European big nuclear state cannot live alone, not Germany nor France nor Britain nor Italy, but only in the European Union.
For the United States of America, if it was independent states, it would have been as weak as South America.
The Russian Federation is present, China is a giant, and India is a nuclear state and exists. A billion of ASEAN now is formed in a new country. Latin America may become a union. The Arab States will be divided between Africa, Asia and will disappear, only if the one Arab country or strong African Union is established [can they survive]. Now, whoever does not have the military, economic and security power in a large strong space [bloc], cannot live.
It is not possible to live. Egypt’s currency means nothing nor that of Libya, Tunisia or Malawi. What is the value of these currencies? Who knows them? You should have a power expressing a large space such as the euro, or dollar. You should have a military force to stand against big powers otherwise what has happened to Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan will happen to you.
Who of you can defend Egypt? It is not possible. You cannot defend it. Have you got an intercontinental missile, an atomic bomb or an aircraft carrier? Without those, they will trample you as you are watching now.
In Libya, the Libyan people from Benghazi, Tubruq, or in Tripoli or anywhere else, there is no struggle for power, absolutely not, yesterday in the first month we met, we had no problem, we have no problems, we’re practicing authority.
The Aggression is foreign, mercenaries made by France, the Arab Maghreb Al-Qaeda who escaped prison or who were expelled from the army. Each one took up arms and fought, not the Libyan people, here are the Libyans in the millions in the streets. In the end, I have 18 million Libyans, whom you call the Libyan tribes or the Arab tribes, who extend from Al-Minya to the desert to the west of Alexandria [in Egypt], forming a crescent until the Nile valley, we did not talk about these tribes during the Abdel Nasser era, they were third degree citizens, they had their own laws, they were Arab sheikhs and Arab tribes and they had their own system since Abdel Nasser, leader of the Arab world wanted to unite it and we did not speak.
During and after the Sadat era and due to our good relations with Hosni Mubarak, in the end we were embarrassed and never talked about them, but now enough! Everything has ended and each one is expressing himself in Egypt, we look at the Tahreer square there are 160 in a coalition, the Muslim brotherhood, libertines, our brother Coptics, nationalists and Egyptians all of them have entered [the coalition], everyone with a religious background has entered, hence the Libyan tribes, which include 18 million until now want to enter the arena, I, naturally, am afraid of them being marginalized again, and we will not accept for them to be third class citizens in Egypt, they cannot even join the army, or join politics or the army, they are marginalized, if Egypt was liberated by the popular revolution, these tribes, who are continuously calling me, should be accounted for, they cannot live marginalized from now on.
This is the era of the masses and each one wants to prove himself, naturally, we’ve Arab Bedouin tribes who are marginalized in Sinai and they are coherent with us in what’s known as the grand Sahara tribes, naturally they tried to link themselves with us, however, I am talking about the Libyan tribes who are known by name, who part of them are in Libya and the other [part] are in Egypt, all of these tribes are an extension of the Libyan people. If Egypt is Egypt and Libya is Libya this matter should be clear, and if we’re Arabs and want to be a single nation then this is another thing.
What’s before us is an obscure situation, we don’t know where are we heading, heading for division, disappearance, failed small states, dying nations then die. I am inviting you to meet with me, you who made the revolution in Egypt and in Tunisia, if it is a popular revolution then the people should seize power through the people’s conferences and people’s committees, if it were a prey and everyone wants a piece, then it is not a popular revolution! The era of the political parties has ended.
Now, it’s the era of the masses, political parties should placed in museums as they are old tools, they are old moulds that cannot accommodate the facts of this era, the era of the masses, the era of the masses is the end of the road in the struggle for the people’s authority, for democracy.
Democracy is people sitting on chairs, a Jamahiri system and not governmental, when one says a government in Libya they will laugh at him, this means an “antique”, what’s the government? Government means one governs and another who is being governed, this has no place in the era of the masses, no masses accept to be governed, they govern themselves.
No one can represent the masses, nor can anyone speak or think on behalf of another, they are there so let them think, talk, discuss and decide on their own in the people’s conferences, the only mean to realize direct popular democracy is the people’s conferences [aka popular congresses] and people’s committees. However, your people the Libyans are steadfast regardless of the ferocity of the attack, and you’re watching, may God bless you.
We know the ordinary Egyptian individual’s heart is burning and they are with us, as well as the Tunisians, and the all of the Arab world, we distinguish between rulers and the Arab people, today, we’re defending the honor and dignity of the Arab world, and if we surrender, this means an insult to the Arab world. For the sake of Arab dignity, we’ll not surrender, we’ll die standing.
We’re defending Africa, we’re the gateway of Africa, we’re the shield of Africa, all of Africa is behind us and with us, and the Islamic world is with us and defending Islam in front of the crusade declared by the French president, he said it, “I am leading a new crusade”.
This is the second crusade, and I think it’s shameful to sit and watch, counting the raids, how many raids and how many died and how many bombs were dropped on Libya. All of this will end, it will end and glory will be with the martyrs and freedom fighters, and for those who defend the Arab world, we’re defending the Arab and Islamic worlds and defending the African continent.
I hope everyone would ponder these words, each one who listens and reads it one his own and not with a group, then a group comes and we will discuss it, each one should see whether these words are true or not, without any influence from anyone. I am with you, my beloved Egypt and my beloved Tunisia, I love Egypt and I hope that Egypt would not be ungrateful, and I don’t want Egypt to be a failed country, on the contrary, I want it to be a leader country, now it went behind Tunisia and there is no harm, this means the leaders are the Tunisians and you followed them, however, there is no harm, even Tunisia is an Arab country.
I commend the soul of Jamal Abdel Nasser, hero of the Arab world in this day, I commend the Egyptian people. I commend the Egyptian youth, I hope that God may guide them to the path of the popular revolution and the people’s authority.
From: MathabaThe Libyan leader made reference to NATO, which he described as “crusaders” to be up because they “make an unjust war.”
OBAMA thinks it is all just “fun and games:
Photos de Fight for Your Country, for Our Freedom and Independence, Fight for Libya – SAVE AFRICA !
Photo 1 sur 1 Retour à l’article · Afficher toutes les photos
Why did the U.S. and E.U. steal around $200,000 Million ($200 billion) from Libya after launching an attack on that country under false pretext?
By Dennis South
Below is an excerpt from a July 20th, 2011 interview of Dr. Webster Tarpley that was conducted by Alex Jones. Over the years, Dr. Tarpley’s analyses of global geo-politics, as well as his predictions, have been astonishingly accurate. Dr. Tarpley is perhaps the foremost economist, historian, and investigative journalist of our times. In this interview, he reveals that the former head of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Khan, had planned to travel to Germany to speak to German Chancellor Angela Merkel to discuss setting up of an alternative currency to the dollar, for the world. From Germany, he was to travel to Libya to speak to Colonel Gaddafi about this new economic world order. His plans were halted when he was accused of raping a hotel maid.
Dr. Webster Tarpley: This is an interesting scenario, and I have this from a very good French source and from a good German source too. The week after his arrest, Strauss-Khan was going to fly to Berlin and meet with German Chancellor Merkel. And, depending on the outcome of that meeting, an envoy was going to go from Berlin to Libya–to Tripoli– to meet Gaddafi and his circle. And the goal of all of this travelling was to begin to set up another reserve currency for the world. That is, some alternative supplement, maybe, at the beginning, to the dollar. Something that would not replace the dollar immediately, [but] it would be the pilot project that would exist alongside the dollar.
Dr. Webster Tarpley: Yes, so this was what Gaddafi had—he had been talking about a gold-backed currency for Africa. There are all kinds of possibilities here. But, that was Strauss-Khan’s plan for the week that never was for him, because he was arrested before–he was arrested on the weekend, and that week never began for him. So it means that [Gaddafi had a plan that was] similar to [that of] Saddam Hussein, right. Saddam Hussein had shifted all of his money out of the dollar into the Euro. The oil for food fund went from the dollar to the Euro, due to the influence of Sadaam Hussein. So in this case it’s Gaddafi, but also joined by Germany, also joined by Strauss Khan. So, it seems that the…
Alex Jones: And the reason the banksters are developing the dollar [is because] they want an incremental dollar devaluation to drive down every other currency—the stated policy of global concerted, coordinated devaluation. They don’t want a move away from the dollar, and then other currencies to go up. They want a global hyper-inflationary depression to consolidate control. So, this is the key juncture for the Anglo-American elite, correct.
Dr. Webster Tarpley: Well, we need to get into that, because it’s a complicated situation
Résultats de recherche pour
Environ 9 résultats
Traduire les résultats dans ma langue
Essayez avec cette orthographe : Dr. Khaled Hamdi Inspirational Award
Dr. Khaled El-Hamedi is the first Arabian Inspiration Award winner to be recognized for his work in bridging the digital divide and has been …
de HORSAHLY | il y a 2 ans | 1 777 vue(s)
Khaled El Hamedi, chairman of Eng Holding and the first ever recipient of the Inspiration Award from the Middle East, discusses his plans for his …
de certiportcomms | il y a 2 ans | 1 271 vue(s)
An interview with Khaled El Hamedi, Champion of Digital Literacy. Inducted into the Hall of Fame at Certiport PATHWAYS 2009
de certiportcomms | il y a 2 ans | 892 vue(s)
قطاع غزة فلسطين 07/01/2010 : زار وفد المنظمة العالمية للسلم الرعاية والإغاثة المناطق المنكوبة في قطاع غزة وقد قام رئيس المنظمة المهندس خالد …
de 1sababa | il y a 1 an | 1 115 vue(s)
قطاع غزة فلسطين 6/1/2010 : تبرع وفد المنظمة العالمية للسلم والإغاثة والرعاية ظهر اليوم بالدم لصالح بنك الدم بمستفى الشفاء بقطاع غزة ، جاء ذلك …
de 1sababa | il y a 1 an | 1 901 vue(s)
de HORSAHLY | 3 vidéo(s) | 0 abonné(s)
Videos from Certiport Corporate Communications, featuring programs that …
de certiportcomms | 62 vidéo(s) | 85 abonné(s)
Arrived in Libya, less checkpoints on the way to Tripoli than the last time I was here at the beginning of June. Still long queues for petrol. Tripoli seems busier.
Yesterday (25/7/11) NATO bombed a wedding party and a hospital in Zlitan. NATO is bombing Tripoli as I write, I can hear the planes and the bombs dropping outside the hotel. Sukant saw smoke rising from the Bab Alziza compound. I saw just a few minutes ago on the TV that there were people at the compound taking part in their nightly get togethers and defiant celebrations of the Jamahiriya.
Went straight to the house of Khaled Hamedi, the brother in law of General Sadi Gaddafi. His dad (Khewildi) is one of Moammar Gaddafi’s close comrades and was involved in the 1969 revolution.
He runs an international NGO called the International Organisation for Peace, Care and Relief (IOPCR) which has done work in many countries including Gaza, and he acted as a mediator between the Palestinian factions.
His house in Sorman which was bombed over one month ago by NATO was in complete ruins, hit by 7 rockets. His entire family were martyred, his pregnant wife, his two daughters, his son, his cousins. In total 13 people were killed, including his chef from Sudan who has left behind his family nearby in Libya. An elderly gentleman from the same tribe as the family, Mustafa Mohammed Kazouz showed us around the bombed out house. Pictures of the victims were displayed in the sites that they died in the night. His wife died while shielding her daughter with her body.
A group of young black Libyan children from another part of the country had come (it seemed as part of some kind of boy scout group) to see the house and learn about what had happened. They chanted songs calling for death to NATO and the western nations aggressing their country and pledging their loyalty to Muammar Gaddafi and the Jamahiriya.
We stopped off at the Rixos Hotel before going to our hotel. There were less western journalists. We saw Dr Shakir who said he has been calling out the journalists for their shameful and criminal lies they have been publishing about Libya. One Libyan friend said the only thing the journalists are good for is stopping the Rixos from being bombed.
In the evening I interviewed Mr Hamedi, which was deeply moving. He is incredibly strong and it is almost impossible to understand what he is going through and how he finds the strength to get through each day. After the interview, Sukant, myself and some of our Libyan friends spoke with Mr Hamedi for a couple of hours about what is happening in Libya.
Mr Hamedi said one of the only ways he can go forward is with the hope that Libya will be victorious against the criminal NATO nations.
Bombs dropping in Tripoli, Khaled Hamedi, holds his child who was killed in a NATO air raid on 20 June 2011, during the funeral in the city of Sorman, Libya about 60 km west of Tripoli.
A very good letter to yet another lazy journalist, who should have his name entered into the record at #8WPC
By Dennis South,
Mr. Cloud, I read your article about NATO’s request for drones from the Pentagon. Why did you not even mention the fact that the Libya crisis has nothing whatsoever to do with “winning the war?” You, and other writers, have contributed to extending this conflict because you don’t even comment on this horrid shift.
It was supposed to be a no-fly zone, not a siding with “the rebels” to overthrow Gaddafi. There is nothing in resolution 1973 about winning a war; about siding with one side in a civil war.
In the future, the field of journalism will not be taught at universities. It will be taught at proprietary schools, as a specialty within the field of stenography. You do nothing but write what your editors say.
Your ignorance [When I say “your,” I’m speaking about U.S. journalists] is profound. You have no idea about what Gadaffi has done for Libya. Either that or you do know, but just don’t care. Either wittingly or unwittingly, you are an accomplice to war and aggression, and genocide.
You mindlessly, and without any research, mouth–over and over again–the words “brutal dictator” concerning Gaddafi. Are you evil? Or just ignorant. I would like to know something. What “brutal dictator” does the following things for his people?
1. Raise the literacy rate from 10% under King Idris (whom Gaddafi booted out in a bloodless coup) to 90%. By the way, look at the contrast. Gaddafi gained power through a bloodless coup. But our government is feverishly trying to overthrow Gaddafi by murdering Libyans, in our “humanitarian” method
2. Dump $1000 [dollars] a month into the bank accounts of every Libyan, through Gaddafi’s oil-revenue-sharing program
3. Erase homelessness in Libya, while, in the U.S., on any given night, 2,000,000 citizens roam the streets with no place to go
4. Achieve for Libya the rank of No. 53 on the United Nations Index of Human Development
5. Reduce undernourishment to 2%–lower than that of the United States
6. Provide free education for all Libyans, up through and including college to any college on earth
7. Create the highest standard of living on the African continent
8. Increase the life expectancy to age 76.
9. Provide free health care for all Libyans, while we in the U.S. live daily with the threat of our Medicare, Medicaid and other health care services being ripped away from us by our government.
10. Provide a direct democracy system of government–something I’m sure you had no idea about. The U.S. keeps insisting that Gaddafi “step down” from power. Well, he already stepped down in 1977. His title, “Leader of the Revolution” is honorary, that’s all. Why don’t you know these things? What happened to journalism? If you really want to see democracy stomped on something fierce, then let those “rebels” gain control.
11. Provide free land to anyone who wishes to farm, and also the seeds needed to begin farming
12. Provide equal opportunity for women. At this moment, the so-called “rebels” are disallowing the women of Bengazi to leave their homes unless they are wearing the Islamic veil over their faces–a practice that Gaddafi does not impose. Gaddafi is a Muslim socialist. He does follow Islam, even leading the prayers sometimes. But he’s just not into fanatical Islam. In fact, he mocks those fanatics, and calls them, “The bearded ones.” I’ll tell you something. Our country is just stupid. Gaddafi’s Jamahiriya should have been used by us, and supported by us as an example of moderate Islam. Now, again, we have gained nothing but hatred for ourselves, and also, like some crazed infant with a gun, increased disorder in the Maghreb, where guns are flying all over the place, and Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb has increased its ability to destabilize that area. It’s as if we’re doing it on purpose for some devious reasons.
How can you live with yourself? Why have you not questioned the fact that, despite Gaddafi’s constant call, from the very beginning, of fact-finding teams going to Libya, he was ignored? Fortunately, there have been about three fact-finding teams sent, one of which is a French-based group, and have discovered that we all have been sold a lie–just as we were lied to about “weapons of mass destruction” by Bush.
Either you are aware of what is going on, but are a coward, only concerned with keeping your job. Or, you have not done your homework, or you simply don’t give a care [or maybe all of the above].
Again: When I say “you,” I’m not directing this to you personally. I’m talking about the people of your profession, stenographers, who call themselves journalists.
Gaddafi is not the enemy. In fact, he was our friend. But I’m sure he very much regrets believing us. We told him that if he gave up his weapons programs, we’d be his friend and we would not attack him. That was the deal. Now look
I’m sure he’s now re-reading American history, and taking a cue from the Native Americans: “White man speak with fork tongue.”
The three most dis-honorable professions of the not-to-distant future (unless something changes):
You are prolonging this war. And now, when I say “you,” I mean you. I urge you to change and to go to Libya and find out what’s going on. But do not join your colleagues who are there now and, when they see precisely the real deal, simply refuse to report it. This has been witnessed by Dr. Tarpley, Mr. Lamb, and a number of others who are there on the scene. I urge you to go there yourself. And do not be a coward. Stand for something. Bring some dignity back to your profession.
This game that you stenographers are playing is more dangerous than bullets. You are prolonging the suffering of women and children and innocent people who, before this war, were minding their own business.
If you need some help in learning, just ask and I can refer you to people who can help you. But, I will tell you just who “the rebels” are. And for sure they are not democracy lovers–far, far, far from it.
What happened is this: They took advantage of the true democracy movements of Tunisia and Egypt. They very consciously knew that they could mask themselves as democracy lovers, and then go on with their plan to grab the treasure [the oil]. At first, they conducted fake marches. But marching just wasn’t their thing, and they very, very quickly put the real plan into action: they seized guns from police departments and army munitions depots.
You did not see that in the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Why didn’t “the rebels” stick to peaceful protests? The answer can be found at YouTube. There you will find videos of 5 protest gatherings that were held in Libya, 3 of which were held in Tripoli. And at those gatherings, over 1,000,000 (yes, 1 million) Libyans showed up in support of Gaddafi.
And that tells you why “the rebels” decided to take up arms, instead of call on other Libyans to join them in peaceful protests against Gaddafi: because they knew that the overwhelming vast majority of Libyans support Gaddafi, and that any attempt to organize the populace against Gaddafi would fail, due to the fact that Gaddafi is loved by the majority of Libyans–a fact that is being hidden by our government, and, I am sorry to say, the editors who edit the stories you write (or however that works). This is not anything that I invented.
Now to the composition of “the rebels”
1. Monarchists who are still pissed off because their king, King Idris, lost power in 1969. Some of them actually hope to bring King Idris’s son, who lives in Europe, back to Libya to “reign” as king again.
2. Al-Qaeda members–a charge that Gaddafi made early on at Bab El Aziziyah, and a charged that was mocked by the press and by governments. Well, Gaddafi turned out to be on target. Our own military academy, West Point, confirmed that Al-Qaeda members are a strong part of that mix. Gaddafi had kept an eye on them, particularly the ones that live in Bengazi and Darna and Tobruk. He had kept them under check. You might not be aware of something: Gaddafi was the first person–fist head of state–to warn Interpol of Al-Qaeda’s existence. It’s his territory, so he knows what’s up. We are funding Al-Qaeda. Why? Why does that not spur you to do some investigative reporting? Why does that not anger you?
3. Members of the Senussi Islamic sect, a branch of Islam that is even more oppressive, if you can believe that, than the Wahabi sect.
4. Racists. This is a well-known fact. There has always been a thread of racism amongst Arabs since even before the Prophet Muhammad came to try to wipe that it. Muhammad was somewhat successful, but actually failed in the long run. Gaddafi, miraculously, had managed to virtually wipe out racism in Libya, except for the people in Bengazi, Darna and Tobruk. They are livid that Gaddafi has used Libya’s wealth to create tons of projects in black Africa. Gaddafi has some kind of love for black Africans. He has even asked Libyans to marry black Africans. And he is the only Arab leader to have apologized to African people for the Arab role in the Slave Trade. As you know, he dresses more as an African than as an Arab. He has a vision of a United States of Africa. And I wish I had time, because I could reveal to you–very easily–what the real deal is about NATO intrusion into Libya: a beachhead for a projected plan of control of African resources.
So (and pardon my Arabic), this is all a travesty–this supposed war to “bring democracy” to Libya. It is all a smokescreen, and you–meaning you journalists–are allowing yourselves to be a part of this criminal enterprise and war of genocide and plunder.
There is an unconfirmed report–although Dr. Tarpley claims to have witnessed this–that Gaddafi handed out 1.2 million Kalashnikovs to Libyans. Dr. Tarpley claims that, while in Libya, he visited the home of a Libyan professional. That professional showed him 4 RPGs, a bunch of Kalashnikovs, and other weapons.
Now, does it make any sense that a “brutal dictator” would hand out weapons to 1.2 million Libyans that could be turned against him, if he was such as bad scoundrel? If “the rebels” are correct, then why haven’t those 1.2 million Libyans joined with “the rebels” to overthrow Gaddafi? How do you guys miss this? Do you perform any study?
I sometimes think that I should have been a journalist. Because if you guys are the example of what it means to be a journalist, then I could be a much better journalist than you guys.
Is money that important, that you sacrifice your own personal integrity; that you use journalism as a tool of psychological warfare for your government, rather than as a tool to enlighten people? Why have you guys never reported the other side? Why have you not reported what Gaddafi has done for his people? Why have you completely ignored the 5 marches in Tripoli, 3 of which were attended by over 1 million Libyans, all holding the green flag of the Libyan Jamahiriya, and one of which was attended by 2 million Libyans?
One-million people showing up for a pro-Gaddafi rally in Libya would be the same as if 51,000,000 U.S. citizens showed up for a rally in Washington, D.C.–its one-sixth of the population. And 51,000,000 U.S. citizens is more than the total number of citizens of the top 50 states of the U.S. You are hiding the fact that Gaddafi has deep and overwhelming support in Libya.
In this regard, ask yourself a question: Why has the war lasted this long? It was supposed to be a “3-day,” or a “3-week” war, remember? The reason is clear: Gaddafi has the support of the people. In short, we’ve been lied to again, just as we were lied to about “weapons of mass destruction.” And again, unfortunately, journalists have decided to be cowards, listening to their editors and owners, rather than following the honorable traditions of journalism. It’s disgusting.
You can go to mathaba.net, and other places, and easily find videos of these huge marches. So, why don’t you? And why don’t you report this?
You must tell the American public the truth; otherwise you will be living a lie within yourself. Do you have children? Do you have daughters? Can you look at your daughter’s face, at night, and continue withholding information from the American public? Your job is not to hide information from the American people..
And if it’s a matter of your job, then, in my humble opinion, you need to wake up and realize that no amount of income is worth you losing your soul–or possibly the respect of your children when they grow up. Do the right thing. Investigate; tell the truth, and then bravely stand with the consequences. Thank you.
evidence-based, independent and rigorous investigation of human rights abuses
NATO bombs health clinic in Zlitan, Libya
Posted on 02 August 2011 by HRI Mark
NATO jets have been attacking food stores and destroyed a health clinic in Zlitan. The CNN report by Ivan Watson and Jomana Karadsheh from Zlitan, a town half-way between Tripoli and Misrata provides further evidence of how NATO and the rebels are working together closely in a military campaign, not to protect civilians but to conquer anti-rebel areas for the National Transitional Council.
The report quotes local official Ramadan Mohamad Ramadan as saying:
“People here call NATO the crazy one which lost its sanity, it is waging wide-scale war on the people. They are destroying everything.”
Ramadan was standing in front of the rubble of a health clinic that he said had been demolished by a pre-dawn attack on Monday. Several bulldozers dug through wreckage strewn with medical supplies, including syringes, medication and even a microscope.
Government officials said they were looking for the bodies of three people believed to be buried underneath, and said the bodies of eight people had been pulled out earlier in the day.
This is a relevant tweet from Chief of Defence Staff’s Strategic Communications Officer and Ministry of Defence spokesman on military operations Major General Nick Pope:
As the rebels push forward, so loyalist forces and anti-rebel civilians concentrate forces to counter them – presenting targets for the NATO jets. The report from Zlitan indicates the RAF has no great compunction about bombing targets in urban areas (if anyone thought they might have). The fact the civilian population, which came out against the rebels in massive demonstations in Zlitan not long ago, has largely chosen to flee the rebel advance is significant.
It is obvious that dark-skinned Libyans and pro-Gaddafi civilians will want to avoid falling under the control of openly racist and murderous rebel brigades. Presuming the rebels do take control of a mainly empty Zlitan (as they have of empty towns in the Nafusa) it will be interesting to see how long for. As their supply lines become extended they are subject to counter-attack, particularly by the inhabitants of the towns they have conquered.
As is common with desert warfare, the main aim of the rival militaries is not so much control of territory (which is important for civilians and for propaganda purposes) but destruction of the opposition. In the unlikely event the rebels ever make it to the gates of Tripoli, the destruction which would be meted out to the civilians and defenders of that city can scarcely be imagined.